'tis the Bearded One

Active Members
  • Content count

    812
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 'tis the Bearded One

  1. Teaching Techniques

    What age group and competency are we looking at?
  2. OCD people: I'm disappointed in you.....

    Another convert
  3. Sexual Prowess: Personal and Social Status

    Interesting. In a sad way Ha....*light bulb* hehehehe: new topic Revealing? Yes. Depressing? Yes... Well, who really would want to be open to the world that their marriage is "dead"? That might be denial talking there. If external perception is taking precedence to internal reality then that sucks! I would take out "communicate that perception" from above and replace it with "be a good wife". Does that fit with your intention? That is unhealthily contradictory, isn't it....It's like saying being a great student is good but studying is bad. I'll get back to your last questions and I have some material I want to bring in regarding sex and femininity but don't have the time right now. Someone should have been in bed 2 hours ago... smh
  4. OCD people: I'm disappointed in you.....

    You mean they'll spray me with dettol and punch me an even number of times...? I know, right? Finally the Aussies are the ones ahead of the times! Thank You.
  5. Random Thoughts

    If you come for a visit i`ll make you a big bowlful, @Naturally and i can guarantee it will not have any *you know what* in it! If you cut them up beforehand it is fine. Just when you're trying to pull the flesh off with your teath...
  6. Relationship

    Welcome Punkin I hope you enjoy the site and the community. Its pretty great
  7. Random Thoughts

    Let me help you @Naturally. They are stringies but oh my! The taste! Awhawhaw so good! They are getting frozen for smoothies and mango sorbet
  8. Changing Standards for Displaying Affection/Interest?

    So brave! So sad...May I ask how you approached them? Please... Curious...Might have been a good thing. Did you have your WTM convictions at that stage? Ahhhh *sigh*. I had 3 girls (that I know...) put the moves on me in high school. The first I was oblivious to the fact that moves were being made, innocent homeschooler that I was . The second was express but sent another girl to deliver the message. The third was quite indirectly overt but by the time I was sure I wasn't misreading the situation and was puzzling as to how to let her down easy, she either lost interest or realised she wasn't going to get what she hoped for. But I wasn't beset by anything from peers grade 10 and onwards. Me not being interested in any of the girls wouldn't have helped and years later I learnt that they might also have thought I was gay since my best mate and I hung out together all the time at school and he also didn't date anyone! hahaha ah, good times
  9. My first romantic interest that I approached to pursue said that I was the first guy to tell her that he liked her in person. She was in her mid 20s at that point.... My younger brother (who is in high school) recently had a female classmate (who actually drives him crazy sometimes ; described as uber emotional and will vent/snap on him for no reason;...maybe she likes him? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ) who was having a tough time for some reason (couldn't tell me/confidential) so he bought her her favourite drink, drew some flower on it (maybe some words too;can't remember) and put it in her locker. She broke down crying. The other girls told him that "No one does that kind of stuff". Anyone have any stories to share where you've done (or seen things done), that you would consider relatively standard or decent, receive what "should" be an unusual reaction? How do you find the standard for how one displays romantic or other kind of affection has changed? For those who have been approached with romantic intent, has this mostly been face-to-face or through a "safer" medium such as call, text, email, facebook, etc? Was it practical to do it face-to-face instead?
  10. Random Thoughts

    The spoils of my brother and I raiding public lands: mangoes.... [sorry about the bad quality cheap phone camera]
  11. Virgin Therapists: What would you do?

    None of these negative circumstances are the direct result of a choice. She wouldn't want to choose any of them. As we covered elsewhere, how long she takes to recover and her willingness to recover would be the issue. This comes the closest to a choice since she probably chose, or could at least refuse, the family visit. Are the family staying for 2 months? Is she enabling others being lazy by possibly overburdening herself? If this is supposed to be a holiday, shouldn't her spouse ensure she is also getting enough time out? Family staying over would have been most probably discussed prior to it taking place. If acts of service is her love language towards family, can one reasonably compare this to making $? The family connections that are enabled by her "busyness" could also very reasonably be considered beneficial and valued by both parties and I think can't really be compared to some more income which presumably they don't need in exchange for disconnection and damage to the wife's health.
  12. Virgin Therapists: What would you do?

    That's a little hyperbolic. Is it too much to ask for her to tell her boss: 'I am so grateful for you offering me this opportunity. Could I please sleep on it. This is a major project and I want to make sure I am up to it!' The term "landed" to me also indicates that she may have been actively trying to get that project in which case she could have discussed it with Adam well before starting it. On a sidenote, I'm sure bosses are aware of the influence spouses hold over success in the workplace even though it might not seem PC to say directly "let me check with my husband/spouse first". Even so, as a smart boss who would you rather have: someone who checks with their spouse and hence you know will have the support/commitment to flourish in the fulfillment of the job ["This job/project is important enough to me for me to address all potential impediments to its success; I want to make sure I'm the right person to take this responsibility"] or someone who thinks they can do it on their own and potentially has an unhappy spouse interfering with their work performance? She will most likely be judged by her performance than by any request to wait/check things out before commitment - unless she does this in an unfortunate way that might communicate that she isn't normally committed to her job. People value someone being able to meet their commitments. If it's the kind of workplace that doesn't respect its employee's out-of-work life, its probably best to find a different workplace. Unless that fits with your career first perspective. Are we now all assuming she is a career woman? Sure, but this raises the question: who is valued more highly in my wife's life: me (her husband) or her workplace? All the more reason for her to start addressing how her work is interfering in her marriage and how best to handle that if this is to be a common thing. If my wife purposefully got herself pregnant when we agreed we wouldn't have any further kids and as a result I need to work a lot more to meet our financial needs, and postpone whatever plans having another child destroys, then yes, I would be annoyed. I think anyone would be. Is the wife entitled to say "I want a baby so I will have a baby. I don't care about how you feel about it. I don't care about the added responsibilities and obligations that will bring for your. You will just have to deal"? Certainly there is a place for the argument that once Adam realised Jane will not respond to his expressed need, to drop the issue and not expect anything until the pressure time is over. It seems that he has at least continued to do the house chores etc till the end. HOWEVER does this mean that Adam should not have expressed his need whatsoever in the first place? Should he have expected that Jane won't do even the little things so no need to bring that up and the potential conflict and pressure that raises? As @PhotoGirl and others have pointed out. It doesn't take much time to give little affections that can mean a lot. Maybe Adam would have been happy with that until the pressure time is over but he reacted poorly when even those little things seemed too much to ask for. If you were in Jane's position, too stressed out to consider how your husband may be feeling or maybe you are assuming that he is fine with the situation but your spouse is feeling unloved/disrespected/neglected wouldn't you want to them to raise the issue? How would you feel after 2 months when he says, "I felt terribly neglected and unloved the whole time" wouldn't it be "Why didn't you tell me?? I would have made the effort to give those little attentions/affirmations even if I couldn't have had sex". Wouldn't you feel bad about yourself that your partner couldn't come to you about that issue in a timely manner? Certainly to the immature part. We don't want a transactional marriage. My point was that if Jane is absolutely outside the standard of passionate giving during the two months then there would be no need/expectation of her "compensating"/restoring for the 2 month's neglect. The expectations from her would be exactly the same as just before she took the project. Nothing wrong with that. But that can only be his interpretation of her actions if/when they occur. Nothing in the scenario indicates that she has responded in such a way. Nothing indicates that she sees a need to temporarily re/over-invest in the relationship to restore the rift caused by the 2 months. If after neglect, spouses don't see the need to re/over-invest in order to completely heal the rift that that neglect has caused in their relationship, that marriage will automatically deteriorate over time. How would you feel if your spouse came out of such a 2 months and treated your relationship as if those 2 months never took place? In the other thread, the respective importance of the spouse's jobs wasn't the prime issue. The issue wasn't "what decision was made" it was "how was the decision made". As I, and you, pointed out there are various factors that may influence on the importance of the spouse's jobs - separate from issues that influence the decision too such as family/friendship proximity. In regard to this scenario I stated: Is a job [which economically, they probably don't need to justify such a level of stress and withdrawal from the marriage; it is fully her "choice"] a good enough reason not to be measured against the same standard? It is not that her job may be less important than his job. It's that her job [or better saying her project] is interfering significantly with the marriage and not his job! You can have 10 scenarios where the wife's job is in fact less important/the problem and that still wouldn't mean that it is for all wive's jobs...In regard to the justifying bit above I was referring to her project not her overall job because there was no indication that her job was an issue before this project or would be afterward - granted, I should have expressed this more clearly. There is no mention that they were in any financial need let alone such need that might require taking up such an intense project temporarily or as a common occurance. Of course, this is assuming that Jane could have passed on the project without getting fired. Again, there was no indication that this was non-voluntary. If she couldn't pass on the project because it would mean losing her job and especially if they needed her job to meet mutual financial obligations then this of course changes things. With significant information holes it becomes necessary to make assumptions - and I did state those assumptions. If you want to argue that those assumptions may be invalid and therefore the conclusions on which they were based should change, go right ahead! But there is nothing wrong with making assumptions, and stating them, when we tease apart these scenarios. And when they occur, it should be addressed and not treated like its a non-issue. Her father having cancer - clearly not her choice. If that turns our marriage into a sham and I didn't sign on to that or am not okay with that: yes. If she wants someone to prepare the food, clean the house etc while she's off saving lives then she can stay single and get a maid. If she want companionship, she can get a flatmate or a dog. If she wants a marriage then she can get a marriage partner with the responsibilities and benefits that entails. I don't mean to come across as heartless, but there will always be people hurting and dying wherever you are and however much time you spend on the issue. In regard to surgery, certainly there are many instances that involve damage by third parties. However, most of it will be as a result of the person's own lifestyle choices or just a natural process of growing old. Why should I force myself to be content with a neglectful marriage because some person doesn't like the consequences of their choices or natural processes? Do you want to give up your marital happiness [and watch your spouse effectively killing themselves] so your spouse can chronically try and protect another from the consequences of their own choices? Is a pastor free to neglect his own family because he spends all his time "helping save lives for eternity"? Unfortunately, pastor's kids frequently have a bad reputation for a reason... Certainly, you can have a happy couple that spends a minimal time relating because they are so caught up and mutually committed in the meritorious work that they are doing. That's okay! But if one spouse isn't okay with it and is being unreasonably neglected, that is not okay. If we can't have a reasonable proper God-intended marriage as long as someone is suffering somewhere, something is wrong. Ooops, have to go...
  13. Your pleasure = Spouse's responsibility?

    I know that video... You'd have to look at how in-depth those Bible studies are and if they are touching on those heavy issues. Unfortunately, not everyone teaches (or interprets) the Bible correctly. Certainly, you would expect someone interested in going to Bible studies to live what they learn but sadly there is a difference between knowing what is right and doing it. You don't need to be particularly spiritual or committed to go on mission trips. It can be something done more to do with friends/travel than doing hard work for the service of others. If you have someone who professes to believe in the Bible but doesn't have a moral problem with pre-marital sex, maybe study yourself into this topic and ask for a Bible study on it See how it goes...hehehe I don't know how many church experiences you have had but I notice the different levels of Bible content in sermons across and within denominations. This can be very stark sometimes. Some independent seventh-day adventist churches I've been too most of the sermon is quoting Bible verses while in the mainstream it can be far fewer. Not that quantity matters but it can be an indicator of where the emphasis lies. In some circles you have a Bible camp and you are sitting in sermons/workshops hour after hour [your butt gets sooo sore] and in others you have far less and don't know what to do with all the free time! As a practical example, I help run the sabbath school youth group in my church. The previous week I explored some of the Bible verses that describe the glory and power of God as a bit of a reminder who we really are approaching in prayer. The next week I explored it in a more practical basis of how should that influence how we pray to God: are we uber casual, giving a "shout out" to our "bro" in heaven - and at what point do we lose out in not showing sufficient respect and reverence; how do we balance who ALMIGHTY GOD is with His desire for a deeply personal friendship with us? - are we too formal/pompous (particularly in public prayers trying to one-up each other on how many titles and adjectives we can use in addressing God) - are they too long [in church] - are we adulterating prayer with sermonizing - what should our posture be during prayer ie slouching around, sit, stand, kneel, prostrate. We explored that we can pray to God whenever in whatever position but scripture does indicate that a kneeling or prostrate position should be taken when praying in worship [public or private]. My church doesn't kneel for every prayer during the worship service and I don't really like it. [I'm surprisingly conservative in some ways ] In youth group we sit. I asked the question, should we start kneeling when we pray in youth group? None of them expressed supported for the notion. None of them had a Bible based reason for why not (granted there were only 5; granted they didn't have the opportunity to conduct their own study on it). One under 20 spouted a knee problem. 1st I've heard of it! We've got 70 year olds kneeling to pray and you spritely person can't?? Another said that they felt fine praying with God sitting (so why bother kneeling?). At our closing prayer my fellow leader and myself were the only ones kneeling . Afterwards, I discussed it a little with the team leader and my surprise at how the lesson turned out. To me, unless you can present a Bible-based argument why you shouldn't, your feelings on an issue are largely irrelevant. If you have discovered how GOD wants to be worshiped (and this can extend to other things such as music) who are you to effectively say "Well, God might like it this way (and let's face it, as God He would have his reasons...right?), but I prefer to worship God my way so He'll just have to deal". Doesn't that defeat the entire point of worship? I wouldn't give a friend chocolate, knowing that they don't like chocolate, simply because I like chocolate [unless it's for their own good and I'm giving them some tough love but it's pretty arrogant to have such an attitude towards God...]. How did this end up in a thread about masturbation and handjobs?? If you have more questions [or any Bible questions in general] don't hesitate to PM me!
  14. MUSIC!

  15. Virgin Therapists: What would you do?

    Yes. But this was chosen by Jane without input or discussion with Adam. So it's okay not to give as long as I somehow make myself busy enough? She's not in forced labour, right?....Granted, she's made a commitment that one would want to keep but she has not even given Adam an indication that she will try her hardest to avoid such circumstances in the future. One of the big problems is the issue that Jane doesn't seem to have a problem with her behaviour over the last 2 months... There is no mention in the scenario that they both entered the marriage with an understanding that her/their careers will be prioritised. Even so, it is one thing to prioritise a job [in which case one would still expect Jane to be understanding of Adam's position and address this to a degree] and effectively discarding marital responsibilities for 2 months while reaping benefits; "prioritise career" doesn't meant "treat the marriage like dirt"... Unless it is mutually expressly and explicitly rejected, do you think that people should be generally able to assume that a marriage should be prioritised over careers? Might be a little presumptuous. Also, if she was not expected to give in the 2 months, how come she has some kind of debt/imbalance to work off? "Adam supported while being neglected for 2 months; now it's Jane's turn to make up for it". On a different note, one sleeping bag! Bad enough sleeping alone in a sleeping bag lol. That's quite the gamble.
  16. Random Thoughts

  17. Sexual Prowess: Personal and Social Status

    Certainly, that double standard exists in society though I see that in regard to premarital/extra-marital sex. Maybe the "unfettered" female sexuality outside of the "chains of monogamy" poses some kind of threat [it does as much as the male's but that is another issue]. Do you see this as applying to strictly monogamous women enjoying a rich sex life with their husband? Would a circle of married women shame each other [or single women to married women] for asserting they love/greatly desire to have sex with their husbands, and only their husbands? Would you say a certain feminine value exists of "taking care of" your husband in non-sexual ways such as cooking? If so, why wouldn't this extend to his sexual needs?
  18. Virgin Therapists: What would you do?

    While it seems a valid question. Allow me to suggest that it isn't because answering it shouldn't change much if anything. Are you going to try and suppress your need to cry if you think your husband might find it manipulative? Unless you hide it perfectly, might it not have the same effect? If you are not crying when you want to, I'd say you are doing your husband a disservice because it is a valuable indicator of your state of mind. You are being real with him. That is a way of showing respect. Unless I'm really into/lost in the confrontation (in which case I might be tempted to try and keep pushing through regardless of tears), my wife starting to cry indicates a break is most likely needed - or a significant slowing down. She is overwhelmed. Rational argumentation at that point is likely fruitless. At this point emotional probing and empathising is probably best. Once things have calmed down, we can revisit the issue. If you cry in order to manipulate him. Well, not supporting that! If I detect my wife doing that, boy oh boy girl oh girl you better backpedal something fierce because I will either be eating your face off or withdrawing and closing myself off [probably both at the same time actually...], giving you a foretaste of the capabilities of an INFJ doorslam. Expect pretty much everything post-facto being filtered through a potential manipulation filter. It's not fun for me, trust me. I'd say do whatever comes, ah, naturally in the circumstances. Pun intended
  19. Virgin Therapists: What would you do?

    To me your post seems a little contradictory. You get up Adam for not giving passionately but Jane gets of scott free?? Is a job [which economically, they probably don't need to justify such a level of stress and withdrawal from the marriage; it is fully her "choice"] a good enough reason not to be measured against the same standard? I'm all for passionate giving, but unless you are getting your "love tank" filled somewhere (God, friends, family) at a point, passionate giving will become unsustainable and due to a lack of boundaries you will be enabling your own abuse. You may argue that passionate giving for 2 months without any receiving [apart from extra $ which he probably doesn't value enough] isn't too long, but you haven't even suggested a healthy timeframe to unreciprocated passionate giving.... Not sure if you're getting the scenarios mixed up. The withholding for 2 months is in this scenario.... Unless we aren't holding Jane to the same standard, why would this make you less stressed? As Jane you have utterly failed to live up to this standard. Am I missing something?
  20. Character Crush

    Hugh Glass - The Revenant Ben - Seven Pounds Oh wait! Crushes.... This is hard! I actually had to peruse through my watched movie list. Then I rediscovered some Elizabeth Bennet - Pride and Prejudice (1995) Yeah man!! Totally, especially earlier in the series. She got a little less weird, more mainstream later on hahaha. I only discovered that series because of someone on this forum Juli Baker - Flipped Adaline Bowman - The Age of Adaline Cinderella - Cinderella 2015 Catherina Sforza - The Borgias (TV)
  21. Random Thoughts

    Twice now I've unintentionally pressed the "Mark forum as read" button! Why is there a tick in the box? It makes you want to remove it!!!! argghgghh (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻)
  22. Your pleasure = Spouse's responsibility?

    It is a very sad issue. Check out this article: Thom Rainer in his book The Bridger Generation notes that believers are no longer Bible-based. He has made the following chart to illustrate this: Builders (born 1927-1945) – 65 percent Bible-based believers Boomers (born 1946-1964) – 35 percent Bible-based believers Busters (born 1965-1983) – 16 percent Bible-based believers Bridgers (born 1984 or later) – 4 percent Bible-based believers This is alarming! However, it is also alarming that few believers today hold a biblical worldview. The pollster, George Barna notes that only 7 percent of Protestants hold a biblical worldview. Non-denominational Protestant churches score only a little better at 13 percent. These figures are distressing and bewildering. Barna says, “The primary reason that people do not act like Jesus is because they do not think like Jesus.”
  23. The other meaning I was thinking of is when we treat Virgin synonymously with Novice/yet-to-be-broken in therapists...
  24. Yes. I do hope they don't feel excluded..."Virgin Therapists" just has a better ring (and double meaning) than "Waiter Therapists". Technically most are probably "born-again virgins"...
  25. Fair enough. Let me rephrase, since as I've discussed with @Naturally the conflict itself needn't create the disconnection. At what level of emotion would you, ladies be inclined to withhold? Do you equate level of negative emotion with level of disconnection or can you feel a strong negative emotion but still feel sufficiently emotionally connected*? * the concept of a love-hate relationship is the closest I can come up with as an example. [feel free to create your own emotion list]: Neutral, indifferent, uncomfortable, annoyed, irritated, frustrated, exasperated, disappointed, insulted, aggravated, upset, angry, irate enraged... The emotions are a bit mixed above but afterwards I found this: an anger thermostat: 12 infuriated; raging; rageful; boiling; explosive 11.5 fuming; smoldering; inflamed; outraged 11 incensed; enraged 10.5 seething; livid; “hot” 10 bitter; irate; inflamed; rancorous 9.5 heated; wrathful; vengeful 9 hostile; belligerant 8.5 riled; galled; agitated; pissed off 8 indignant; insulted 7.5 disgusted; fed up; exasperated 7 perturbed; piqued 6.5 upset; antagonized; cross 6 resentful 5.5 provoked; irritated 5 miffed; irked; chagrined; disgruntled 4.5 vexed; “hot under the collar” 4 irritable; irascible; grumpy: grouchy 3.5 peevish; petulant; testy 3 offended; provoked 2.5 frustrated; uptight 2 annoyed; chafing 1.5 impatient; edgy; distressed 1 bothered; troubled 0.5 displeased; disappointed 0 completely calm and cool; peaceful; tranquil; fully in control—both emotionally and cognitively https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201401/the-anger-thermostat-whats-the-temperature-your-upset