Wow, listen to this bullshivt I heard from her. I need your advice...

Slickster · Sep 22, 2010

"When someone tries to fukk with you, you fire back"

That just lets them know they "got" to you. It shows weakness.

In fact it is happening right now in this thread.

Some people have said things that upset you and you have taken offense to it and "fired" back. You allowed yourself to get riled up by others comments when you should be taking the high road and staying cool and calm.

Falcon25 · Sep 22, 2010

Like I said, it got out of control. You start a thread and get called names. People would never talk like this to each other in person. They know they would get knocked the fuvk out. It was an opportunity for the jerk offs to come out of the wood work and call me names, when they weren't even there. To me, standing up for yourself is not a weakness. It's amazing how one can think he's a tough guy behind a computer screen.

Igetit! · Sep 22, 2010

Falcon....man,this just doesn't seem like you. I read some of the things you said and done considering you and this girl and man.....I don't know,something just seems off. You give pretty good advice to other members when replying to their threads and for some reason,I keep trying to image what you'd say in response to this thread if someone else had posted it.

YOU screwed up man. You did. You act as if this girl did something wrong,but you can't blame a woman for being a woman,like you can't blame a vulchure for eating a dead carcass. It's just what they do.

She did NOTHING WRONG,the failure here was on YOUR part.

Look at this....

Falcon25 said:
Third, I never pursued her. I don't pursue married women. This is the third time I have to write this.

This woman was married,but YOU SAID that you don't pursue married women.....and you said that that was the THIRD TIME you had to tell us that.

Ok,we get it. You don't pursue married women. So when you asked this girl why she slept with this other guy instead of getting with you,she said..."You didn't ask me out or PURSUE me enough".

SHE SAID that you didn't pursue her enough,and YOU TOLD US (3 times) that you never pursued her.

What the fudge dude?

You call her reason for sleeping with this other guy and not you "bullsh1t",yet you and her BOTH said EXACTLY the same thing.

Come on man,at least be fair.

Trust me,I know how you feel,I've been in situations similiar to this....BUT this was YOUR FAULT. You DIDN'T PURSUE HER the way you'd pursue a girl who was single because of her marriage. Well this other guy didn't do that.

He went after her as if she had never been married. Hate to say this,but the mistake you made was sort of rookie-ish. You tried to apply LOGIC to here.

You thought,"Ok,I like her and all,but she's married. So I'll wait until her divorce is final,then I'll go full force and pursue her". Can't do that man. There's no "pause button" on attraction. You can't put it "on hold" or on some type of schedule until a more convinant time come along.

You're supposed to strike while the iron is hot. But you say,"Well I couldn't strike while the iron was hot because she was still married". Hey....dude...I get it,but women are emotional. You can't pencil attraction in on a calendar. You can't be like,"Ok,her divorce with be final on the 24th,so I'll just flirt,tease and play around until then,then I'll get serious and really go after her. You decided to wait. Well the other guy didn't. So the iron cooled down on you,while the other guy got the booty,lol.

Falcon25 said:
Second, I am no longer interested in you. I have high standards with women. You just don't measure up to them." THANKS JOPHIL! haha

Come on now Falcon,who you trying to kid here.

You told this girl that you have "high standards" and that she just doesn't measure up. Falcon....she's not stupid. She knows that you were upset with her because of her sleeping with this other guy. And if you're upset,then that means you care. And if you care,then that means you're emotionally invested. And why would you be invested in something that has no value to you?

She knows what's up. If you had said that line to her IN THE BEGINNING instead of getting emotionally invested to her for 2 months,then it might have had the desired effect,but she knows that you only said that out of HURT/ANGER. You didn't have these "high standards" while you were flirting with her,teasing her about other guys,and telling her how much fun she'd have with you for the past two months.

I understand you being upset with her,but it was YOU who set YOURSELF UP for things to play out the way they did.

iqqi · Sep 22, 2010

^^It talks like VU, it walks like VU....

:wave:

teacha · Sep 22, 2010

haha these kind of threads are what keeps me around, pure gold.

I always find it hilarious when im playing Madden 11/Street Fighter 4 and some people keep telling i should have done this or that but when its their turn to play, they look like a deer caught in headlights.:crackup: :crackup:.

Slickster, IgetIt +1rep.

vatoloco · Sep 22, 2010

Slickster said:
"When someone tries to fukk with you, you fire back"

That just lets them know they "got" to you. It shows weakness.

This is one of the most difficult things for people to understand. With time, it will come. With time...

PokerStar · Sep 22, 2010

its seems that the TS really wanted to nail this one but yet he took the "good guy" route and figured that it would be best for him and his morals to stick with that path.

but we all know that logic is thrown out the window with women.

I understand the TS and I understand what other posters in this thread is trying to say.

It just makes me sad to know that good intentions sometimes lead to bad results.

oh well.

on to the next one.

vatoloco · Sep 22, 2010

PokerStar said:
It just makes me sad to know that good intentions sometimes lead to bad results.

"No good deed goes unpunished" as they say...

Life ain't fair. If you're a person with "good intentions," people will take advantage of you. You gotta be a Selfish Bastard™ in this world if you wanna make it.

Trader · Sep 22, 2010

Falcon25 said:
I made her feel like a sluvt. I am really pissed at this.

Relax, she really is a slut, just calling a spade a spade. Too easy, like shooting fish in a barrel

Trader · Sep 22, 2010

vatoloco said:
"No good deed goes unpunished" as they say...

Life ain't fair. If you're a person with "good intentions," people will take advantage of you. You gotta be a Selfish Bastard™ in this world if you wanna make it.

Are you really 35 or have you just been living in a cave throughout your entire life?

You can be a person with good intentions but cover yourself so no one can take advantage of you.

If you are a selfish bastard, you will always get taken down in the end by an even more selfish bastard because you screwed him over. As they say, live by the sword, die by the sword.

vatoloco · Sep 22, 2010

Trader said:
Are you really 35 or have you just been living in a cave throughout your entire life?

I happen to find caves quite appealing.

You can be a person with good intentions but cover yourself so no one can take advantage of you.

I go through life doing no evil but I don't go out of my way to be good to people. I only have good intentions towards myself and my family.

If you are a selfish bastard, you will always get taken down in the end by an even more selfish bastard because you screwed him over. As they say, live by the sword, die by the sword.

I was given this great advice many years ago: "You come first, then you and lastly, you."

Has worked great for me.

Trader · Sep 22, 2010

Danger said:
Anyone who claims you are selfish is really just saying "You should give up your desires so that I can lay claim to them".

Very crass generalization.

Obviously when someone asks you to give up your desires, they are often doing it to take advantage of you. So it's up to you to use discernment as to whether you ought to or not, sometimes you actually are better off doing what is not in your interest, *sometimes*

Danger said:
You should always do what is in your best interest, aka....be selfish. The problem is, most people have no idea what is in their best interest.

I'm sure you didn't mean *always*

Warrior74 · Sep 22, 2010

Trader said:
Very crass generalization.

Obviously when someone asks you to give up your desires, they are often doing it to take advantage of you. So it's up to you to use discernment as to whether you ought to or not, sometimes you actually are better off doing what is not in your interest, *sometimes*

Read a little excerpt from Mark Twain's "What is a man?"

Old man to a young man (O.M. & Y.M.)

O.M. Yes. This is the law, keep it in your mind. FROM HIS CRADLE TO HIS GRAVE A MAN NEVER DOES A SINGLE THING WHICH HAS ANY FIRST AND FOREMOST OBJECT BUT ONE--TO SECURE PEACE OF MIND, SPIRITUAL COMFORT, FOR HIMSELF.

Y.M. Come! He never does anything for any one else's comfort, spiritual or physical?

O.M. No. EXCEPT ON THOSE DISTINCT TERMS--that it shall FIRST secure HIS OWN spiritual comfort. Otherwise he will not do it.

Y.M. It will be easy to expose the falsity of that proposition.

O.M. For instance?

Y.M. Take that noble passion, love of country, patriotism. A man who loves peace and dreads pain, leaves his pleasant home and his weeping family and marches out to manfully expose himself to hunger, cold, wounds, and death. Is that seeking spiritual comfort?

O.M. He loves peace and dreads pain?

Y.M. Yes.

O.M. Then perhaps there is something that he loves MORE than he loves peace--THE APPROVAL OF HIS NEIGHBORS AND THE PUBLIC. And perhaps there is something which he dreads more than he dreads pain--the DISAPPROVAL of his neighbors and the public. If he is sensitive to shame he will go to the field--not because his spirit will be ENTIRELY comfortable there, but because it will be more comfortable there than it would be if he remained at home. He will always do the thing which will bring him the MOST mental comfort--for that is THE SOLE LAW OF HIS LIFE. He leaves the weeping family behind; he is sorry to make them uncomfortable, but not sorry enough to sacrifice his OWN comfort to secure theirs.

Y.M. Do you really believe that mere public opinion could force a timid and peaceful man to--

O.M. Go to war? Yes--public opinion can force some men to do ANYTHING.

Y.M. ANYTHING?

O.M. Yes--anything.

Y.M. I don't believe that. Can it force a right-principled man to do a wrong thing?

O.M. Yes.

Y.M. Can it force a kind man to do a cruel thing?

O.M. Yes.

Y.M. Give an instance.

O.M. Alexander Hamilton was a conspicuously high-principled man. He regarded dueling as wrong, and as opposed to the teachings of religion--but in deference to PUBLIC OPINION he fought a duel. He deeply loved his family, but to buy public approval he treacherously deserted them and threw his life away, ungenerously leaving them to lifelong sorrow in order that he might stand well with a foolish world. In the then condition of the public standards of honor he could not have been comfortable with the stigma upon him of having refused to fight. The teachings of religion, his devotion to his family, his kindness of heart, his high principles, all went for nothing when they stood in the way of his spiritual comfort. A man will do ANYTHING, no matter what it is, TO SECURE HIS SPIRITUAL COMFORT; and he can neither be forced nor persuaded to any act which has not that goal for its object. Hamilton's act was compelled by the inborn necessity of contenting his own spirit; in this it was like all the other acts of his life, and like all the acts of all men's lives. Do you see where the kernel of the matter lies? A man cannot be comfortable without HIS OWN approval. He will secure the largest share possible of that, at all costs, all sacrifices.

Y.M. A minute ago you said Hamilton fought that duel to get PUBLIC approval.

O.M. I did. By refusing to fight the duel he would have secured his family's approval and a large share of his own; but the public approval was more valuable in his eyes than all other approvals put together--in the earth or above it; to secure that would furnish him the MOST comfort of mind, the most SELF- approval; so he sacrificed all other values to get it.

Y.M. Some noble souls have refused to fight duels, and have manfully braved the public contempt.

O.M. They acted ACCORDING TO THEIR MAKE. They valued their principles and the approval of their families ABOVE the public approval. They took the thing they valued MOST and let the rest go. They took what would give them the LARGEST share of PERSONAL CONTENTMENT AND APPROVAL--a man ALWAYS does. Public opinion cannot force that kind of men to go to the wars. When they go it is for other reasons. Other spirit-contenting reasons.

Y.M. Always spirit-contenting reasons?

O.M. There are no others.

Y.M. When a man sacrifices his life to save a little child from a burning building, what do you call that?

O.M. When he does it, it is the law of HIS make. HE can't bear to see the child in that peril (a man of a different make COULD), and so he tries to save the child, and loses his life. But he has got what he was after--HIS OWN APPROVAL.

Y.M. What do you call Love, Hate, Charity, Revenge, Humanity, Magnanimity, Forgiveness?

O.M. Different results of the one Master Impulse: the necessity of securing one's self approval. They wear diverse clothes and are subject to diverse moods, but in whatsoever ways they masquerade they are the SAME PERSON all the time. To change the figure, the COMPULSION that moves a man--and there is but the one--is the necessity of securing the contentment of his own spirit. When it stops, the man is dead.

Y.M. That is foolishness. Love--

O.M. Why, love is that impulse, that law, in its most uncompromising form. It will squander life and everything else on its object. Not PRIMARILY for the object's sake, but for ITS OWN. When its object is happy IT is happy--and that is what it is unconsciously after.

Y.M. You do not even except the lofty and gracious passion of mother-love?

O.M. No, IT is the absolute slave of that law. The mother will go naked to clothe her child; she will starve that it may have food; suffer torture to save it from pain; die that it may live. She takes a living PLEASURE in making these sacrifices. SHE DOES IT FOR THAT REWARD--that self-approval, that contentment, that peace, that comfort. SHE WOULD DO IT FOR YOUR CHILD IF SHE COULD GET THE SAME PAY.

Y.M. This is an infernal philosophy of yours.

O.M. It isn't a philosophy, it is a fact.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you didn't mean *always*

http://classiclit.about.com/library/bl-etexts/mtwain/bl-mtwain-whatisman.htm

http://grammar.about.com/od/classicessays/a/cornponetwain.htm

Trader · Sep 22, 2010

Danger said:
Show me a situation where someone should not doing what is in their best interest, and I'll show you a situation where "self-interest" is a muddy concept.

Fighting for your country in war.

Let me guess, you are going to twist around into, 'Well it really is in your own self-interest to fight for your own country, blah blah'

Then why do politicians never actually fight the war if it is in their own self-interest

Trader · Sep 22, 2010

Warrior74 said:
Read a little excerpt from Mark Twain's "What is a man?"

Old man to a young man (O.M. & Y.M.)

Quote:
O.M. Yes. This is the law, keep it in your mind. FROM HIS CRADLE TO HIS GRAVE A MAN NEVER DOES A SINGLE THING WHICH HAS ANY FIRST AND FOREMOST OBJECT BUT ONE--TO SECURE PEACE OF MIND, SPIRITUAL COMFORT, FOR HIMSELF.

Y.M. Come! He never does anything for any one else's comfort, spiritual or physical?

O.M. No. EXCEPT ON THOSE DISTINCT TERMS--that it shall FIRST secure HIS OWN spiritual comfort. Otherwise he will not do it.

Y.M. It will be easy to expose the falsity of that proposition.

O.M. For instance?

Y.M. Take that noble passion, love of country, patriotism. A man who loves peace and dreads pain, leaves his pleasant home and his weeping family and marches out to manfully expose himself to hunger, cold, wounds, and death. Is that seeking spiritual comfort?

O.M. He loves peace and dreads pain?

Y.M. Yes.

O.M. Then perhaps there is something that he loves MORE than he loves peace--THE APPROVAL OF HIS NEIGHBORS AND THE PUBLIC. And perhaps there is something which he dreads more than he dreads pain--the DISAPPROVAL of his neighbors and the public. If he is sensitive to shame he will go to the field--not because his spirit will be ENTIRELY comfortable there, but because it will be more comfortable there than it would be if he remained at home. He will always do the thing which will bring him the MOST mental comfort--for that is THE SOLE LAW OF HIS LIFE. He leaves the weeping family behind; he is sorry to make them uncomfortable, but not sorry enough to sacrifice his OWN comfort to secure theirs.

Y.M. Do you really believe that mere public opinion could force a timid and peaceful man to--

O.M. Go to war? Yes--public opinion can force some men to do ANYTHING.

Y.M. ANYTHING?

O.M. Yes--anything.

Y.M. I don't believe that. Can it force a right-principled man to do a wrong thing?

O.M. Yes.

Y.M. Can it force a kind man to do a cruel thing?

O.M. Yes.

Y.M. Give an instance.

O.M. Alexander Hamilton was a conspicuously high-principled man. He regarded dueling as wrong, and as opposed to the teachings of religion--but in deference to PUBLIC OPINION he fought a duel. He deeply loved his family, but to buy public approval he treacherously deserted them and threw his life away, ungenerously leaving them to lifelong sorrow in order that he might stand well with a foolish world. In the then condition of the public standards of honor he could not have been comfortable with the stigma upon him of having refused to fight. The teachings of religion, his devotion to his family, his kindness of heart, his high principles, all went for nothing when they stood in the way of his spiritual comfort. A man will do ANYTHING, no matter what it is, TO SECURE HIS SPIRITUAL COMFORT; and he can neither be forced nor persuaded to any act which has not that goal for its object. Hamilton's act was compelled by the inborn necessity of contenting his own spirit; in this it was like all the other acts of his life, and like all the acts of all men's lives. Do you see where the kernel of the matter lies? A man cannot be comfortable without HIS OWN approval. He will secure the largest share possible of that, at all costs, all sacrifices.

Y.M. A minute ago you said Hamilton fought that duel to get PUBLIC approval.

O.M. I did. By refusing to fight the duel he would have secured his family's approval and a large share of his own; but the public approval was more valuable in his eyes than all other approvals put together--in the earth or above it; to secure that would furnish him the MOST comfort of mind, the most SELF- approval; so he sacrificed all other values to get it.

Y.M. Some noble souls have refused to fight duels, and have manfully braved the public contempt.

O.M. They acted ACCORDING TO THEIR MAKE. They valued their principles and the approval of their families ABOVE the public approval. They took the thing they valued MOST and let the rest go. They took what would give them the LARGEST share of PERSONAL CONTENTMENT AND APPROVAL--a man ALWAYS does. Public opinion cannot force that kind of men to go to the wars. When they go it is for other reasons. Other spirit-contenting reasons.

Y.M. Always spirit-contenting reasons?

O.M. There are no others.

Y.M. When a man sacrifices his life to save a little child from a burning building, what do you call that?

O.M. When he does it, it is the law of HIS make. HE can't bear to see the child in that peril (a man of a different make COULD), and so he tries to save the child, and loses his life. But he has got what he was after--HIS OWN APPROVAL.

Y.M. What do you call Love, Hate, Charity, Revenge, Humanity, Magnanimity, Forgiveness?

O.M. Different results of the one Master Impulse: the necessity of securing one's self approval. They wear diverse clothes and are subject to diverse moods, but in whatsoever ways they masquerade they are the SAME PERSON all the time. To change the figure, the COMPULSION that moves a man--and there is but the one--is the necessity of securing the contentment of his own spirit. When it stops, the man is dead.

Y.M. That is foolishness. Love--

O.M. Why, love is that impulse, that law, in its most uncompromising form. It will squander life and everything else on its object. Not PRIMARILY for the object's sake, but for ITS OWN. When its object is happy IT is happy--and that is what it is unconsciously after.

Y.M. You do not even except the lofty and gracious passion of mother-love?

O.M. No, IT is the absolute slave of that law. The mother will go naked to clothe her child; she will starve that it may have food; suffer torture to save it from pain; die that it may live. She takes a living PLEASURE in making these sacrifices. SHE DOES IT FOR THAT REWARD--that self-approval, that contentment, that peace, that comfort. SHE WOULD DO IT FOR YOUR CHILD IF SHE COULD GET THE SAME PAY.

Y.M. This is an infernal philosophy of yours.

O.M. It isn't a philosophy, it is a fact.

Unfortunately for you, your fatal mistake was that you made Mark Twain your God and assumed everything he said was infallible

Stagger Lee · Sep 22, 2010

It sounds to me like this girl was trying to friend zone you (either because you didn't pursue sexing her enough and/or she wasn't interested), then like often happens when you are a girl's "friend", she tried to rub it in that she fukked some other guy and then to top it off put the blame on you. Pretty classic piss poor female behavior. This scenario plays out a lot when you are "friends" with a girl. I faintly remember you early in the thread saying that she rebuffed you, and then later tells you she fukked someone else. Why did she even tell you that? To stick it to you. So at that point I can see why you were pissed at what she was doing.

Obviously she was just a slvt that couldn't wait till her divorce was finalyzed before hooking up with someone. Your reward for waiting till she was divorced was her sticking it to you.

Warrior74 · Sep 22, 2010

Trader said:
Unfortunately for you, your fatal mistake was that you made Mark Twain your God and assumed everything he said was infallible

I made Mark Twain my God? Really? I have an alter and I pray 5 times a day to his photo? Fatal? I just died from Twainism? hahahaha. LOL you are ridiculous.

SoldMySoul · Sep 22, 2010

Hey!!!!!!!! You fvckers need to play nice with one another!!!!

Why has this post turned into a bash session? Even with some of the seasoned posters!

Rollo, basically told Falcon the hard core truth and Falcon in return tells him that he could hit his wife and to go fvck himself. We all were pre-programmed for AFCism and if Falcon thinks about it, he will see it is true!! That is when a light SHOULD come on in your head and you learn to be unprogrammed.

It really does start with you. Once you learn the errors of your ways, YOU CHANGE!!! Change for a lot of us is hard and a never ending process.

Now you boys arguing go stand in a corner!

Bluntmaster · Sep 22, 2010

iqqi said:
^^It talks like VU, it walks like VU....

:wave:

Hey look, iqqi needs attention.

Robert28 · Sep 22, 2010

Falcon25 said:
I posted a week ago about the girl that was getting divorced. I had been talking to her for about two months and I tried to get her number and told her once her divorce was finalized that maybe we would go out and hang out. In comes this guy two weeks ago, they start talking and I guess he is more aggressive (and doesn't care that she is married) and tells me that she fuvked him last night. I guess her divorce finalized the day before. Then says that I didn't ask her out or didn't pursue her enough. Which is complete BS. And she knows it. I went off on her. I said I really don't care who she fuvks, I'm not her husband or bfriend, but please save the guilt trip that I did something "wrong" when she refused herself because she was married. Pretty much told her to go fuvk herself. I made her feel like a sluvt. I am really pissed at this. She apologized and said she didn't mean it that way but that it was just the timing. Whatever. She really disgusts me. I told her just be honest and say she liked someone more. Not, "hey, you didn't try hard enough!" Even though I did, considering she was still married. I'm thinking I'm no longer going to talk to her after this. Any thoughts???? I'm no longer attracted to her either. I saw the guy she fuvked and he is nasty. She insists that she was just horny and all that. But I know better, she gave him her number not to me. Then she has the audacity to blame me. Any thoughts??? I couldn't help going off on her. I just thought it was rude and totally fuvked up that I get a guilt trip for nothing. It's more like she was interested in him more.

don't worry about it too much, man. i've been getting similar b.s. happening to me lately. there was this 38yr old chick who acted all into me, we went out a couple of times and out of nowhere i get the line of "i'm just not comfortable with the age difference. it makes me feel awkward." i thought "ok so why didnt you tell me that BEFORE we went out......TWICE?" she couldn't give me a good answer. keep in mind this chick was "seperated" and was used to dating men alot older then her(think 44 and up). i said pretty much oh well have a nice life. well i see her a few weeks later draped all over some guy who was one year older then me(im 28 hes 29)lol. she looked at me but i wouldnt make eye contact with her at all, and im glad she didnt come speak to me because i had nothing to say to the hoe. watch out for women who are "seperated" or "just got divorced". they have alot of issues and dont know what the hell they want.

Wow, listen to this bullshivt I heard from her. I need your advice...

Master Don Juan

Banned

Moderator

Master Don Juan

Senior Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Banned

Master Don Juan