Someone recently mentioned Dr. Pheg's advice about being the other woman and I have to say it made me think much less of him when I read it.

Why do people depict interrelationships as being so simple and easily resolved? One of the frustrations I have with Dr. Pheg's advice is that it is very general and oversimplistic. People who have not faced the dilemma of a new relationship while in an old one have no idea what they're talking about. It takes a unique person to simply say to their spouse, "you're no longer meeting my needs, bye." Those of us who have done it are generally unable to do it without a lot of pain, heartbreak and waffling. Many of us need someone new on the horizon to offer hope when there seems to be only darkness around us on the casting couch.

I met someone I felt very strongly for befor I was married in my teens. It gave me the strength to believe that my marriage was wrong, no matter how I justified it, and the strength to leave it in the hope that one day I'd find the love I seek. I ask you: is it cheating to fall in love with someone before leaving your spouse? No? Is it cheating to have sex with someone before leaving your spouse? Yes? Which is more important and long-term, and why make that kind of distinction?

One of the worst phrases I hear is "once a cheater, always a cheater." I believe there are people with no moral fiber who don't care who they sleep with or why. But I believe there are many, many more who have a sexual relationship outside their marriage after many heartwrenching hours of arguments with the spouse, forms of self-denial, deliberations about divorce and affecting the world of a spouse and children among others, and perhaps even meeting someone that they fall in love with on their own merits. If I cheated on my husband, am I doomed to be unfaithful to a man I fall in love with who treats me with respect and affection? I would hope not.

Each relationship is made up of two unique people who often grow and change throughout the duration of the relationship. During that time, they build a unique bond. Many relationships atrophy into a situation of neglect which one partner may be unhappy with. I do not believe that one partner should sacrifice himself to a future of denial. But I think it is myopic of society to tell that person, "no matter what you or anyone in YOUR life thinks, Casting Couch Teens it's right to leave your marriage."

I am learning that even in situations where there is no passion or true love, where both partners agree they should no longer be married, there is still intense pain at ending it and moving on. Even when there are no children, there is still much time and money spent at the division of what they've built together. Even when they think no one is hurting but themselves, there are friends and family who are torn apart by the divorce in taking sides and ending their own relationships.

Who can say that it's right to go through that simply because of the ideal of love, an ideal which may never be met?

As for being the other woman … well, I've done that too. When Dr. Pheg says, "You may feel that he's your soulmate, but think again. A real soulmate would not set you on the sidelines. He wouldn't allow it, let alone entice it," I think it's also myopic. If it's really love, true love, it withstands any kinds of obstacles. If it's not about love, then it will run its course anyway. It almost seems as though he wants to encourage the other woman to demand the man's choice, when that impatience and self-righteousness seems to me the antithesis of love.

Do I seem contradictory in terms of the role sacrifice plays in a love relationship? Perhaps. I think that there will always be an element of sacrifice, but I think it very important that it never FEEL like a sacrifice to either party.

hmmm... it all seems so simple when we write it down..
and yet some of the topics are actually quite mind-straining.

at least they are for me, when i think about them.. and try to figure them out.

that's what is so puzzling.. do things really become simple or complex ? are there really concepts that are more difficult to comprehend than others ?

comprehension.
it's such an ambiguous word.
and yet, we can very rarely explain everything that we comprehend.

there is a theory that says that the universe tends to get more simple.
now define 'simple'.
and anyway, who ever said that the world is incredibly complex in the first place ?

'ah, he's slipped up.' - i'm guessing that's what you are thinking right now.
the world is complex. else why would we be trying to explain it ?

my only explanation is that the world is essentially simple. its our minds that have managed to complicate it.
we look for patterns where they may be none. we devise theories and solutions to problems that essentially do not exist anywhere except in our brain.
we've all gone completely crazy !

now that's a simple explanation.
and it's something that we deny ourselves. and something that's probably the reason for all the 'progress' that we've made in the last hundred years or so.
but it just may be squirty..

this is where one applies a 'what is more likely test' (again - from scott adams)
what is more likely ? that the universe is this place that requires improvement, and that our meddling is allowing it to get better ?
or that we have just got to concentrate on exploring; and try to stop improving nature ? to stop trying to prove that we are superior ?

you tell me.
to me, it doesn't make sense. for every matter in which we've progressed, we've managed to destroy something.
and we don't realise it.

i do not say stop progress. that's not possible for man.
i do say stop complicating everything so damn much !

make sense ?
no ? well.. we've done it again !


hmm.. dreams...
what does that one word bring to mind ?

not sleep.(!)
imagination.

something that the world is sorely lacking.
the days gone by... (sigh!)
when a piece of pink cloth was enough to transform one into superman.
when a chair could be faster than schumi's ferrari.

when a piece of string could enthrall one for hours.

the fertile imagination of a child is probably the world's most amazing playground.
better than disney's theme parks.
streets better than a 10cm x 3 cm piece of electronics that plays music.
miles better than a 15" screen on a 2" box containing equipment unimaginable a century ago.

imaginable. that word again.
i have already said that the spirit of man is what allows him to progress. especially in the face of adversity.
add to that - a mind unafraid to cross boundaries.

imagine. one word. which can convey so much.
or so little.
'the matrix' had an important concept. very hidden.
break free.
the world is bound by laws and rules. supermen are those who cannot see them. rather know how to manipulate them to uses not recognized.
yet.

i am not telling you to go jump off a window or see her squirt. that's impractical.
i am telling you to design a jet-propelled flying kit.

and yet.. one must recognize that imagination is closely linked to two.. things.. let us say..
'thinking' &...
'craziness'

the crazier the imagination, the more amazing the idea.
the better the idea, the more thinking is going to go into figuring it out.
and weirdly enough, the more chance that a crazier idea is going to supersede it just as fast.

could it be that people harnessing their potential are those who dare to dream ? rather, dare to dream big crazy things ?
doesn't make sense.
yet it's true.

yet again, the point of the matter arises. unless one recognizes the inherent nature of craziness in thinking, one can never actually 'go crazy' thinking.

think about it.
i'll go think on imaging devices..

laterz