If we want intimacy why pick unavailable lovers?

women love it when you don’t cooperate and open up, share your feelings, although they say they want more. They can love more that way. When you become cooperative, and feeling-sharing, they can’t love you as much and it’s over. So why bother. Life is so strange, even people like Tom Green belong here.

Arg. Another one hits home… thanks for the insight, and your notes, Nunzio the 103 year old, from Red the Infant

hmm…hauntingly direct. Would it be late to ask if The Course In Miracles offers a solutions to its…obserbation?

I apologize for the in-direct question. The Course In Miracles, I assume, is a…book or article? I was asking if, with its observation to the nature of being available or not, it also offered a way in which to be…open to/with those who are “available,” to perhaps see them as…a lesser threat? I have not come across such an observation before…

this is like male sex and the city and you are carrie lol lovin’ it

Okay, so… if I’m veering to far from the usage in the entry that got us to here, feel free to reign me back in. See, this is my… quandry, I suppose, people who rail on about being nice, but looked over for relationships have, thus far, in my realm of experience, proven to not actually be nice. They just aren’t obviously bad choices. (cont.)

Sort of how a candy bar is obviously not a “health food” type snack. But a granola bar may not be all that more beneficial if it’s loaded with trans fats and sugar. But, if you don’t read the label, and go based on appearances only, the granola bar looks like the better choice. And, again, it may be a semantics thing here, but I do so love clarification.

I suppose what I’m getting at here may pretty well be summed up in your closing line, but from a slightly different perspective: “Nice” people pursuing people who seem to have a whole “bad boy (or girl)” thing going on are the ones pursuing the unavailable person. Which sort of brings me back to my original note of quandry: I still don’t think genuinely nice people get overlooked by people (cont.)

…who are an earnest relationship possibility. Maybe I should really throw “well-adjusted” into the “nice people” part. It doesn’t seem healthy or wise to pursue someone who can’t see your value. And I would think someone who meets this definition of nice would be aware of themselves and others enough to tell the difference between someone who was capable of being emotionally available (cont.)

…and someone who most likely isn’t even ready to get on the path of healing and growth. And this may be oversimplifying and/or harsh, but, from my perspective, nice guys don’t get overlooked by the people that matter. Which isn’t to say that rejection in any form doesn’t sting. It’s just that if someone is the kind of nice described in this entry, I don’t see them being all that (cont.)

…knowingly overlooked from a relationship standpoint. Basically, “nice” and “overlooked/brushed aside” aren’t really compatible from my perspective. I do get the point of this entry, and it’s valid. But this is addressing it from the side of someone overlooking what most would consider a “healthy” choice. And the reason they’re overlooking that person is because they still have things to (cont.)

…work out. Whereas, this nice person that is getting overlooked in this scenario, I wouldn’t think such an unbalanced partnership would last were they to get together with the overlooker, unless there was some serious change afoot. Does this make sense? I know it’s getting into the sphere of minute definitions, and some could call it over analyzing. I just find these things (cont.)

…important enough to get into that kind of detail. And I’m enjoying the insight, by the way. Thanks for indulging me. 🙂

I feel the need to better state my own note. Heh. “Nice” people pursuing people who seem to have a whole “bad boy (or girl)” thing going on are the ones pursuing the unavailable person. That should be, “Nice” people pursing people who seem to have go for the “bad boy (or girl)” type are the ones pursuing the unavailable person. And now I will stop with the minibook in your notes. 🙂