Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
Poll
It's because:
They don't have the stomach to tell you to FOAD. 7%
They are already over you and want to resume being casual friends... 0%
...because they're soulless, inhuman monsters. 21%
...seeing as how you must already be over it as well. 0%
...because you appear interested in details of their new sex lives. 14%
...because you're probably just in the closet anyway. 21%
They want to keep their options open. 0%
They are blazingly ambivalent, and are basically untethered emotional wrecking balls. 0%
You're so desperate for even the slightest affection that you're willing to take it like the bitch you've become. 35%
Other (please specify) 0%

Votes: 14

 tangential point off h.a.'s recent diary

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Oct 31, 2001
 Comments:
Why do people say they 'want to be friends' when they break up with you?
diaries

More diaries by nathan
Bartok violin concerto
religion has failed us.
addition to previous diary (sorry)
Why girls are better than boys
why boys and girls are different
new job!
objectivist club
Another Friday night
some light reading
the opposite sex
hey, alprazolam,
jerkcity
g**k math is not hard.
liberalism
why?
hedonism
should women?
a new threat
wiccan woes
is Christianity theistically monistic?
complaint
give me advice.
Canada rules!
Burma Shave!
do some atheists hate religion?
Context: my ex-GF broke up with me on the 11th, and started dating my best friend on the 27th.

       
Tweet

i've heard that one (none / 0) (#1)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 03:03:24 PM PST
and she was serious. she had issues which prevented her from dealing well with any form of severance of relations.

of course that empowered me greatly and i didn't speak to her for five years.

your ex is a bottom-feeding, soul-sucking algae-eating pile of filth. and you can tell her i said so.

They . . . (none / 0) (#2)
by FreemoreJohnson on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 03:20:41 PM PST
. . . want to dissipate some of the soul-sucking guilt they feel. By the way, you're not still talking to your shitpile of a friend, are you?

I know I'm in for it, but... (none / 0) (#7)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 03:57:50 PM PST
Why does dating Nathan's ex two weeks after they broke up constitute a breach of friendship? Nathan may still be feeling wounded over the breakup, but does that mean his friends (and even his ex) are obligated to forego their own happiness on his behalf?

For that matter, what does this now ex-friend's relationship with Nathan's ex have to do with Nathan?



A troll's true colors.

because (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by alprazolam on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:12:18 PM PST
it's obvious that she was with him because she was interested in his friend. Probably hooked up with him the first time before the break up. Probably been doing it for forever. What a fucking whore.

Really? (none / 0) (#9)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:29:24 PM PST
Golly, and here I was thinking that people made their own choices. But it's obvious, you say? What gives it away? Clearly, I must have missed simething.



A troll's true colors.

 
I'm not sure (none / 0) (#15)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:47:51 PM PST
I'm thinking Nathan's ex wanted a threesome with him and his friend, and didn't know how to apporach him.

 
fortunately (none / 0) (#10)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:30:11 PM PST
i think the sixties have finally been put out to pasture. the "my happiness is all that matters" attitude is starting to dissipate away. even moreso since sept. 11, i think.

there are greater things to aspire to than instant gratification.



Instant gratification (none / 0) (#13)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:38:21 PM PST
As opposed to long-term misery and breast-beating over archaic sexual and social mores?

I still don't see how Nathan's friend betrayed Nathan, as suggested. Does anyone know for a fact that this friend sabotaged the relationship to get the girl?



A troll's true colors.

I still don't see how Nathan's friend betrayed... (none / 0) (#14)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:42:45 PM PST
That doesn't surprise me.

Perhaps... (none / 0) (#16)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:52:54 PM PST
But nobody has yet answered my question. If the answer is that obvious, how come nobody knows what it is?



A troll's true colors.

even though i really need to get back to work (none / 0) (#18)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 05:27:05 PM PST
you claim that your idea of "free love" (sorry, i don't know what you call it, so i have to use terms i'm familiar with) is evolved thinking. that the outdated "long-term misery and breast-beating over archaic sexual and social mores" (though nobody has said anything about marriage, as far as i can see) that would shed a negative light on his friend's actions are beneath you.

you have further claimed (elsewhere on this site) that people are driven, in part, by ancient biological impulses, or something to that effect. in fact, it is in our nature, as males anyway, to seek out multiple partners. of course, this would help insure the survival of our species.

what i don't understand is what is so fucking evolved about devolving back to behavior that may be good for lesser animals, but is not good for a somewhat more complex species.

people have emotions and i submit your free love philosophy is, in the end, going to hurt someone. personally, i've been with women who i were so into, that i wasn't even aware another woman existed. i've been in the position where i noticed everything in a tight skirt even though i was dating someone. that's an indication it's time to move on.

so, to answer your question directly: his "best friend" is fucking with his emotions and that isn't cool. jesus and people think IM a heartless bastard.

now i'm going to go back to work. being serious makes me sick.

Okay... (none / 0) (#19)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 05:59:43 PM PST
Granted, I accept that not everyone can embrace "free love" or "polyamory" or however you want to label it. I'm not even trying to advocate such a thing in this case. Trying to have a three-way relationship doesn't work for everyone, and I don't suggest it if you can't separate deed from emotion. What I'm asking is how Nathan's friend is fucking with Nathan's emotions. Because Nathan misses his ex, this means his friend is morally obligated to avoid the girl as well, even if Nathan's friend and Nathan's ex are possibly more compatible and capable of happiness? Nathan is therefore justified in demanding that they stay separated for his benefit?

I've had women break up with me over another guy. I've had women cheat on me. I discovered that the problem isn't that a woman I love wants someone else. I only get hurt when it becomes obvious that she doesn't want me. It's a very fine distinction, but an important one.

As far as I can tell, Nathan's friend did nothing but follow his own path. I can understand Nathan being upset over his ex leaving him, but why begrudge his friend (and even his ex, if he really cares about her) a chance at happiness?

There, now was that so hard?



A troll's true colors.

Hey Nathan, (none / 0) (#20)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 06:06:24 PM PST
You're not hurt because your girlfriend want's somebody else. You're hurt because she doesn't want you. Feel better about your "best friend" now?

Feeling better (none / 0) (#23)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 07:25:11 PM PST
Feeling better is a separate issue. He's going to have to work that out for himself. The question is why does he need to hate his friend for trying something that didn't work out for him? Do people think the girl is a belonging? In which case, why not just call the police and report a case of theft?

I don't deny Nathan's right to feel bad about the situation. What I question is why people expect Nathan to hate his friend for something he can't control. Nathan's friend can choose not to date the girl for Nathan's benefit. Why is it acceptable for Nathan to expect this?



A troll's true colors.

Oh. (none / 0) (#24)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 07:36:30 PM PST
initially you were imploring the more enlightened readers of adequacy to help you understand why Nathan should feel betrayed. now that this has been explained to you in several different ways, you say that's not what you were asking. Take your overrationalizing bullshit to kuroshin. they get off on that stuff there. i'm bored with this.

 
slow down, SpaceGhoti. (none / 0) (#26)
by nathan on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 07:45:13 PM PST
I don't have a post on this yet. I mostly said I'm upset because she broke up with me and tried to be friends. The fact that she and my closest friend hooked up immediately afterward salts the wound, to be sure.

I never said that I hate her. I said that I got hurt. I draw your attention to the difference. For the record, my ex is an amazing person whom I truly admire in all kinds of ways. That doesn't mean that I don't feel like I've been put through a trash compactor.

I don't have any right whatsoever to demand that they don't date. I do have a right to feel hurt by the haste with which they did so. The two of them are in the same city and have been close friends. Because I'm in school, I have spent long periods of time away from her, and I feel as though the whole situation might have had been a little indecent.

Polyamory sexuality has nothing to do with this. Physical infidelity is not the issue here. Fucking with my head, as it was put elsewhere on this thread, is the issue.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

Hate (none / 0) (#28)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 08:22:32 PM PST
If I accused you of hating either your ex or your friend, I sincerely apologize. I tried to avoid saying whether or not you did, because you hadn't said. I was responding to alprazolam's comment about your friend being your now ex-friend. My question to the public is why it's understood that you should ostrasize him. It's one of those knee-jerk human reactions that I like to call into question. When people think instead of merely react, I find that they learn all sorts of interesting things about themselves.

Jealousy is one of my pet peeces, and alprazolam gave me a beautiful lead-in for discussing it. I truly do believe that it's a huge waste of time and energy, and whatever osm thinks, I was trying to get people think about why they do it. As for the issue of property that you brought up below, yeah. I believe that jealousy makes people treat each other as property, and that always bothers me. People always swear they're not treating each other that way, and yet...

I honestly do not challenge your right to feel upset or wounded or disappointed with the way things worked out. There are women I've separated from that I find it painful to see or talk about as well. It's human nature. Whatever happened, it's between you and her and nobody can tell you how you should feel. All I ask the world in general is why you're supposed to feel a certain way. I think that if we try, we can find a better way. We don't have to be slaves to our impulses.



A troll's true colors.

We don't have to be slaves to our impulses. (none / 0) (#29)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 08:27:44 PM PST
thanks for the most hilarious thing i've read all night. coming from a "polyamorous" person, that is truly funny.

you sound like that dumb little goth girl that hangs around here. how frustrating it is to live in a world where people need to be enlightened by you.

and you dare speak of the Editors of Adequacy (Infinite in Their Wisdom) (tm).

grow up.

Yes, I dare. (none / 0) (#30)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 08:36:50 PM PST
The contradiction is only in your mind. The fact that I choose not to accept monogamy as a healthy way of life is based on a decade of self-examination. The fact that I reject monogamy does not mean that I choose to chase tail wherever I can find it. It means that I think about what I do and who I do it with, but that I don't try to fool myself that there's only one person that I can love (at a time). I don't let my impulses rule me; nor do I ignore them. I try to find balance in what I do and who I'm with and if I'm not perfect, I challenge you to find anyone who is.

You don't have to choose it, nor have I said that anyone has to. People like yourself who aren't willing to think that way can only hurt themselves by trying. At this point, all I ask is that people question why. It's very simple, and if you're honest about it and think past the automatic answers, you might find some surprising results.

Then again, maybe not. You are, after all, Infinite in Your Wisdom.



A troll's true colors.

ok (none / 0) (#32)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 09:17:45 PM PST
in all honesty, i really don't care what you do. i suspect you realize that. it's not for me, but whatever makes your boat float.

on the other hand, i still think you're full of shit.

especially when you say things like "fool myself that there's only one person that i can love (at a time). implying that's what us lesser beings do.

you're not as self-analytical as you claim to be. it seems to be some sort of inferiority thing with you, maybe i'm wrong, i'm no shrink. but the "Infinite in their Wisdom" bit kinda lends to that. maybe you should think about why people might not take you so seriously when you speak down to them like you seem to consistently do.

i could spout more. but why bother? i'm officially going back to not caring.


 
Simple reason (none / 0) (#31)
by John Milton on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 08:53:37 PM PST
One of the qualifications of being a friend is that you don't deliberately hurt your friend. If Nathan's friend doesn't know that seeing her is going to be painful for a while, he's retarded. Yes, I think a true friend would step away from that situation. It has nothing to do with property or jealousy. It shows a hostile disregard for his feelings. It wouldn't be quite so bad some months later, but at this stage, it's just tactless.


-John Milton

 
Empty friendship (none / 0) (#41)
by FreemoreJohnson on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 09:19:01 AM PST
All I ask the world in general is why you're supposed to feel a certain way.

Why are you supposed to feel a certain way? Because he is your fucking best friend and he is now sleeping with your ex-girlfriend. You figure out who his priority was. This is the guy who is supposed to be looking out for you, and he has, as Milton said shown "hostile" disregard for your feelings. That is why you're supposed to feel a certain way.

And by the way, if the guy is as clueless as you were, the best kind of friendship wasn't there to begin with. Doesn't this kind of moral relativism leave you feeling a little empty? I know I would.

i think if you read through spaghetti's posts (none / 0) (#42)
by osm on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 09:27:19 AM PST
you will find his moral relativism doesn't leave him feeling empty. after all, he can be in love with more than one woman at a time. what's so empty about that?


Have a nickel. (5.00 / 1) (#43)
by tkatchev on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 09:32:27 AM PST
You'll find out when you grow up, kid. Meanwhile, try to find a grown-up woman to talk to.


--
Peace and much love...

listen, vodka boy (none / 0) (#44)
by osm on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 09:53:18 AM PST
if you can't understand sarcasm as written in english, then don't fucking reply to my posts.

Oh, I am so dreadfully sorry. (none / 0) (#45)
by tkatchev on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 10:34:15 AM PST
D00d, your sarcasm machine must be broken.


--
Peace and much love...

it must be (none / 0) (#46)
by osm on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 10:44:36 AM PST
sorry.

 
It's a thing among men. (none / 0) (#21)
by FreemoreJohnson on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 06:45:02 PM PST
You don't go out with your best friend's ex. That is a basic tenet of male friendship, and if you don't get it, you're not in the loop.

U get it (none / 0) (#22)
by SpaceGhoti on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 07:19:30 PM PST
I just don't buy it. Why buy more trouble for yourself? What isn't yours to begin with can't be stolen, right?



A troll's true colors.

property (none / 0) (#25)
by nathan on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 07:44:06 PM PST
I think you're a little stuck on women as property. I never said I got to determine her future social life. I'm just upset that I got dumped for, it appears, someone else, without any discussion or warning I might add. We'd lived together over the summer, and I felt as though we'd made a significant commitment (I was going to ask her about becoming engaged as soon as I could scrape some money together.) All this is about emotional betrayal rather than ownership.

If there's no commitment in a relationship, that may be fine for you, but those weren't the terms under which I entered into this one.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

Your best friend's ex (none / 0) (#40)
by FreemoreJohnson on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 09:08:58 AM PST
"All this is about emotional betrayal rather than ownership."

Of course. That's the origin of the value. You do not date your best friend's ex-girlfriend. Why? Because it is emotionally damaging to your best friend. Of course, there are exceptions to this. If you love the girl so much you are willing to cut ties to your friend, you are free to do so, but you have to pay the consequences.

It has nothing to do with property or even the identity of the woman, it has everything to do with friendship.


 
Well, (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by poltroon on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 05:26:47 PM PST
For that matter, what does this now ex-friend's relationship with Nathan's ex have to do with Nathan?

Nothing. That's why if I were in such a situation, I'd want to sever myself from it. He's not obligated to remain interested in people who make him feel awkward. Splitting would be like taking a good dump, er, of emotional baggage.

 
because... (none / 0) (#36)
by otak on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 01:49:35 AM PST
...it means that Nathan is going to be denied the only comfort available to the newly-dumped - avoiding the dumper for the rest of their natural life. Either that or he has to avoid his friend.

 
i did recently (none / 0) (#11)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:32:48 PM PST
i got one of her friend's phone numbers and went on a pseudo date with her, after which she never returned my calls.

then i got a prescription refill through her dad.

after that, i haven't talked to her. i find her rather boring now. probably because she's significantly younger than me.

 
agreed. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by poltroon on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 03:47:28 PM PST
It may make a dumper feel less guilty to say lets be friends, but it certainly doesn't make the dumpee feel any better about it. So I agree the dumpee will feel empowered if they completely give up on attempts at contact, at least for a good long while. Most likely the dumper won't make many honest attempts to keep contact going either. To me the friend thing only seems possible if there is no dumpee/dumper, and it's a thoroughly mutual split.

 
But... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by tkatchev on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 03:26:36 PM PST
...I thought we all already agreed that you are gay?

(Sorry if this is off-topic.)


--
Peace and much love...

 
The Supremes said it best... (none / 0) (#4)
by FifthVandal on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 03:35:28 PM PST
...'How can we still be friends, when seeing you only breaks my heart again, (and there ain't nothing I can do about it)'
--- I was the fifth vandal on the grassy knoll!

 
They? (none / 0) (#5)
by alprazolam on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 03:40:19 PM PST
I think you mean

Why do women say they 'want to be friends' when they break up with you?

Which is why I voted for
...because they're soulless, inhuman monsters.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm going to have to be in the same city and possibly same house as my ex. Might have to talk to her. The fucking crazy shit people do for drugs.

 
This is an easy one. (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by RobotSlave on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 04:37:15 PM PST
First, we observe that the party who "wants to be friends" is always, without exception, the one who did the dumping.

Next, we observe that two parties in all liklihood have quite a few friends in common.

The translation is now easy: "can we still be friends?" means "could you please not tell our mutual friends that I am a piece of shit?"

There is a continuation, in many cases: "...because, you see, I really want to fuck one of them, or maybe I already did, even though I just dumped you yesterday (or last week, or six years ago, or whatever)."

The only humane way to rid oneself of a potential spouse who has failed to live up to expectations or evinced an inadequate degree of sexual compatibility is to dump and then disappear. Anything else is selfish and craven. If you lose friends, then either they were never your friends to begin with, or you deserve it. Suck it up.

If you really do think there was anything redeeming in the dumped, beyond spousal potential, then wait at least six months (or several years, in the case of a longer entaglement) before writing a letter (no phone call-- far too pushy) to the dumped, containing a brief summary of your present situation, an apology, and an outline of the imagined basis for camaraderie that has prompted you to write. Whatever you do, do not propose "getting together for coffee," or anything else that might be construed as a "date." If there is indeed some basis for friendship, the dumped will contact you.

Now.

Could we please get back to discussions of software ethics, thrash bands, and foreign policy?


© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

Thank you! (none / 0) (#35)
by kwench on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 01:19:39 AM PST
I see so much clearer now.
I'm starting to think that I might understand the deeper psychology of relationships someday.



Hey kwench-- (none / 0) (#47)
by RobotSlave on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 05:07:52 PM PST
Free advice:

If you want to be insulting here at the worldly-net's most controversial address, you're going to have to learn to be a lot less stupid about it.


© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

Insulting? (none / 0) (#48)
by kwench on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 12:13:32 AM PST
This was a honest comment.
No offence was intended.

I'm sorry if you mistook it for an insult.



Too late. (none / 0) (#49)
by RobotSlave on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 01:29:11 AM PST
I'm already on to you.

Keep working on it. Your overall strategy is sound, but you need to refine the technique into something a little more cohesive. You're not in the farm leagues anymore.


© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

 
wow... (none / 0) (#27)
by nathan on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 07:48:12 PM PST
24 posts in like three hours... I mean, it's really touching. Thanks, everyone; I appreciate the discussion a heck of a lot.

Much food for thought.

All the best,
Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Isn't it remotely possible (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by chloedancer on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 09:19:43 PM PST
that the ex simply doesn't want to continue the romantic/sexual relationship with you, but still values your existence and the qualities in you that they found to be attractive in the first place?

Mind you, I am not advocating this insanely optimistic hypothesis without reservation. My romantic history, so to speak, more closely resembles a Boschian nightmare than anything else. I can honestly say that I long ago decided to live by Edith Piaf's words with regard to these situations: "I say drown all my ex-lovers; what a tidal wave that would be!"

However, even with that peculiar edict in mind, I've curiously managed to salvage decent ongoing friendships with three former co-conspirators. They are rare and cherished allies. In retrospect, I can only say that these individuals managed to survive the customary fallout because in each instance we were able to continue to be simply a man and a woman enjoying each other's company.

a man and a woman enjoying each other's company. (none / 0) (#34)
by osm on Wed Oct 31st, 2001 at 09:23:05 PM PST
no such thing. i couldn't possibly imagine enjoying a woman's company. i like my cats.

OMG -- say it isn't so! (none / 0) (#37)
by chloedancer on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 07:40:17 AM PST
This would indicate that you and I share a point of commonality, osm.

In certain instances I have made it known to the "guy du jour" that he is but a temporary element while my cats are the cornerstone of domestic continuity in my life. There's something to be said for unconditional love, regardless of the form in which its expressed.

yeah (none / 0) (#39)
by osm on Thu Nov 1st, 2001 at 08:17:09 AM PST
There's something to be said for unconditional love, regardless of the form in which its expressed.

yeah. nothing like a cat rubbing on your leg while you sit on the crapper.

p.s. it ain't so. go away.

 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.