Wuv, Twue Wuv -- and Mawwiage!

[Avra]

Wow. Haven't posted in forever!
I have a problem that's been bothering me and I wanted to get some perspective from fellow Christians.
I've been single for the majority of my life (and I'm twenty three). I guess I'm a bit what you might call romantically inept...I've had dates and one accidental boyfriend of two months, but on the whole I prefer to be single. I joke that I'm in a committed, monogamous relationship with the book I'm writing and married to my work as a CNA.
Any way, this guy that I know slightly (he's worked at the nearest Taco Bell for two years) asked me out. I said yes and we swapped phone numbers. In between him asking me out on Tuesday and the date on Thursday, I received 200+ text messages from him. Random chit-chat, details of his personal life, etc. I'm getting rather tired of hearing my phone beep!
Then there was the date.
He had a great time. I did not. I mean, he's a sweet guy and all, but I just didn't feel any kind of attraction.
He is rather obviously over the moon and I'm...not. I agreed to a second date but if I still feel the same way after it, I'm think I'm gonna have to find a way to let him down gently. And I really don't want to hurt his feelings because he's a sweet guy and just so obviously excited about me.
Am I just being to picky and hard to please?

[Ithilwen]

Am I just being to picky and hard to please?

Not at all. If you're not attracted to him, then nothing can (or rather, should) come of it. If you do continue it, you'd be doing yourself wrong, and perhaps doing him even more wrong.

Think of it from his point of view. Imagine being in a relationship with someone (or even married, if that's the guy's eventual goal), and then finding out that person didn't really like you that much, and just stuck with you because they were afraid of being too picky. It wouldn't end very well. Unrequited love is just as painful - perhaps more so - if the person is going out with you despite their lack of feeling for you.

Relationships are for two people who genuinely adore and love each other. They're not something you have to have, that if there's no one around that you like, you simply settle for what is available. I think it's definitely one of those things where it's best to take an "All or Nothing!" attitude. If there's no one out there you genuinely love, stay single (at least for now). And most of all, adopt the attitude of Jane Austen's heroine of Pride and Prejudice:

I am determined that only the deepest love will induce me into matrimony.

Good luck with everything!


~Riella

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

Avra, I've never dated before but I do understand the guy's perspective in this situation. As guys we don't want the girl beating around the bush, we want her to be blunt with us, but in a caring way. "Sorry, this isn't going to work out. I'm not attracted to you" - that works far better than a second date when you're not interested. It sends him the wrong message and makes you feel bad for not feeling attracted to him. Please, just tell him straight up that you're not attracted to him. He'll be hurt for awhile but it's a lot better than him being psychologically manipulated/strung along because the girl is too 'caring' to let him know. I'm not accusing you of this, but it can quickly head in the direction if you're not careful.
Be honest. Good luck!

[Avra]

Thanks for the great advice, guys. Sometimes you just need to hear it from others...

[RubyGamgee]

I don't believe I have ever posted on this thread before. If I have, I don't remember when I did or what I said.

I would be in the category of adults who have never been in a relationship before. However, I am only nineteen years old and I am not really anxious to be in a relationship right now. My older sister, however, is getting married a week from Friday! Eeek! I can't wait and I can't believe this date is already upon us all.

Looking over this thread, I'm really encouraged by everything you all have to say. I think it's so cool that there are a lot of people who actually think deeply about this kind of thing instead of just casually and somewhat blindly follow the social norms. However, there are a few things that I find quite puzzling on here...and maybe it's just a terminology thing. Let me explain and see what you all think.

The first thing that I find a little bit odd is the concept of attraction. Not that I don't think attraction between a young man and woman is a very real thing, I'm just not sure how much of an instigator it should be for our dating/courtship/marriage relationships. What do you all mean when you use the word attraction? Do you mean romantic feelings? Or do you mean simple admiration and realization of someone's good qualities? Because one sounds exceptionally relative, exclusive, ambiguous, and...well, dangerous. And the other seems far more general, practical, and objective to me.

When talking with my sister and her fiancee and when discussing relationships with my parents, I have never once heard them council us to base our decisions and judgments of young godly men on whether or not we think we are attracted to a guy. They have always counseled us to base our relationship decisions off of our friendships with the young man in question, whether or not we are compatible together, whether we can work and balance each others' strengths and weaknesses. Ultimately, the question of whether or not we could marry such and such a young man is based on our friendship, not whether we feel attracted to him or not. Marriage, I believe, is primarily based off of a mutual love for Jesus Christ and a reciprocating friendship, not off of romantic feelings. I think that romantic feelings should be the result of a committed relationship, not the instigator.

Am I just stumbling over terminology? Because, like I said, this is definitely not a concept or a term that I have heard frequented in my family. I have heard some of my Christian friends talk this way, but it always makes me a little bit uncomfortable. We will be discussing relationships with each other and someone will say that love is a decision and not based on how we feel and then in the next sentence say that a certain relationship attempt of their's didn't work out because they didn't feel like they were attracted to someone or he didn't feel like he was attracted to her. It just seems slightly contradictory in my mind, but maybe that's just because I don't really understand what they mean...

Let me know what you all think, because I might just be clueless and if that's the case, I would appreciate the input.

Thank you and God bless!

[Ithilwen]

The first thing that I find a little bit odd is the concept of attraction. Not that I don't think attraction between a young man and woman is a very real thing, I'm just not sure how much of an instigator it should be for our dating/courtship/marriage relationships. What do you all mean when you use the word attraction? Do you mean romantic feelings? Or do you mean simple admiration and realization of someone's good qualities? Because one sounds exceptionally relative, exclusive, ambiguous, and...well, dangerous. And the other seems far more general, practical, and objective to me.

When it comes to attraction vs. friendship/admiration in romantic relationships, it's important to remember that it's not an either/or situation. It's both/and.

When teaching about relationships, most people stress the importance of the friendship side and the inner, spiritual qualities of the person, because many young people today are going around dating whomever they find to be "hot", regardless of who the person is on the inside. In other words, many young people are basing their relationships on attraction alone. This is what's dangerous. It's very important to find someone who is spiritually grounded, responsible, kind, loving, etc. However, that doesn't mean the attraction aspect should be completely ignored.

What do I mean when I use the word attraction? Do I mean romantic feelings, or do I mean simple admiration and realization of someone's good qualities? I mean both! If someone has romantic feelings for someone, but that person doesn't have any good qualities that the other admires, then that relationship isn't based on much, is it? But reversely, if there is a guy whose inner qualities you admire, but you don't have any romantic feelings for him, then how is your relationship with him going to be any different than the one you have with your pastor, your brother, your cousins, your guy friends, or even your girl friends? There are lots of guys whose inner qualities I admire. There are lots of guys who I believe would make perfect husbands. But they won't end up being mine! Because I don't feel that way towards them. They're just friends. We need to find someone whose inner qualities we admire, but toward whom we feel something special, something different than we do toward other people we know.

Not all feeling is shallow. Just because some people abuse feeling doesn't make feeling in itself a bad thing. It's not feelings themselves that make people shallow, irresponsible, or dangerous. It's when people follow only their feelings, in situations where their feelings are leading them down the wrong path; that's when it's dangerous, irresponsible, and shallow. Feelings are God-given things, and they have a purpose. They aren't there just to serve as some test or temptation that we must overcome.

Take for example physical attraction and outward looks. Everyone knows that "looks don't matter" and "it's what's on the inside that counts". People who base their relationships only on who they find physically attractive, of course, are doing it wrong and are being shallow. You wouldn't want to be like them. But at the same time, if you asked your boyfriend/fiance/husband if he thinks you're beautiful, and he answered, "No, I think you're rather ugly/average looking. But what's on the inside is great", then (although I'm sure you'd be glad he likes what's on the inside of you) I doubt you would find it a satisfactory answer. No one wants to be considered ugly or average looking by the person with whom they're in a relationship. And no one wants to consider the person with whom they're in a relationship to be ugly/average looking, either. Physical attraction alone shouldn't be the basis for the relationship. But it still has to be there for there to be a proper relationship. Again, God created it for a reason.

In the end, it is not just one thing that forms the basis of a relationship. It is all things working together to create something meaningful. And if you take one aspect away - even if it's an aspect that's often taught to be unimportant - the whole thing starts to come apart. When it comes to the different kinds of love and attraction - physical, emotional, spiritual - they all have a purpose and are necessary.


~Riella

[PrinceCor004]

I think Ithy pretty much nailed it in her well thought out response.

I would like to add that yes, you should consider what the person you are interested in is like on the inside (ie, are they a christian? Are they a "good person"? etc) but don't get too stuck on that aspect and completely shun anyone you find physically attractive. As Ithy said above, both sides work together for a common goal. Just focusing on one or the other can be a problematic and lopsided outlook on things.

On a side note: CONGRATS to your elder sister and her soon-to-be husband!

[Avra]

I agree that attraction is a tricky word. There's the physical attraction, yes and there's also a, for lack of a better term, an emotional attraction; a wanting to get to know a person that goes beyond casual friendship.
I'm sure feelings can grow out of a relationship, if they weren't there to start and that's partly why I was conflicted about this guy. But then, we humans are a wonderfully adaptive species; we can get used to almost anything. As everyone pointed out, that doesn't necessarily make it a good idea to try, because it would be settling NOW in the hopes of something growing LATER.
This guy I mentioned, I wasn't physically attracted to him, but I also just plain wasn't excited about spending a lot of time with him. I didn't mind talking to him, but I won't miss it.
Maybe humans are just creatures of thought, talk and touch. In any relationship, we want to be stimulated, mentally, emotionally and physically

[The Old Maid]

Avra, just a quick note which the others can probably expand upon. From your post I had three insta-reactions.

1. Anyone can make a poor first impression, but intuition sometimes can see through it. If you don't enjoy your second outing, trust your intuition. I wouldn't go so far as to link intuition to the "still, small voice" since I've seen examples where those seem to conflict. But if you don't really want to be there, every voice inside of you will say so.

2. Be courteous but firm; be firm but courteous. You want to balance the fact that "other people have a right to not be attracted to you" (i.e., you have a right to not be attracted to someone) ... against the fact that someone took a chance and possibly made a dork of himself in the asking.

See also: the TV series "How I met your mother," for a character named Ted who would have invented the word Dork-for-Twue-Wuv if it didn't already exist. Particularly the pilot episode and the episode "The Wedding Bride."

So, for the beginner's phase of this, try something like, "I had a nice time, but I'm not feeling any sparks." For those of you who may have gone further down the road and are making the decision that you & your companion don't have a future together, "you're a lovable person with many lovable qualities, but I don't love you." It's even okay to say, "I do thank you for the time we had together" if you're dealing with a strong and stable person and you did have some good times.

3. Like the song says, "one of these things is not like the others; one of these things just doesn't belong." The fellow texted you 200 times? That's not cool.

You know this fellow better than we do, so you know if he's a mad texter because he's a stalker-in-training or merely immature and doesn't know that this is not grown-up behavior. Technology such as texting phones will always run ahead of laws, ethics, and maturity/common sense. By the time we teach people not to text-and-drive, they'll be glassing-and-driving, or something. (Glass=Google's internet in a pair of eyeglasses.)

A good rule for many behaviors is, Would you do this to a strict boss? It doesn't have to be a mean boss, just a professional boss. If the boss doesn't appreciate dirty jokes, name-calling, practical jokes, selfies (pics of you), gossip, tattletales, too-much-information on your social media accounts, or endless texts & phone calls, well, think about why that is. Maybe it's because the boss is a grown-up?

You deserve to be treated like a grown-up. Also, you would probably only want to date grown-ups. When you let him down, you need to make it clear that there isn't really anything that he can say or do or be that would have changed the fact that there aren't any sparks, that sometimes sparks just don't happen -- but by the way, the texting is a turn-off.

[Avra]

The Old Maid, it's funny that you mentioned a boss, because my boss walked in the break room while I was telling a coworker/friend about my experience and she told me "get rid of him this instant". She said he sounded like a stalker in training and she didn't want me messing around with a guy like that.
Also, I told him I wasn't interested in pursuing a relationship with him and he did not take it at all well. "Please don't do this to me, I've waited a long time to go out with someone."
I told I didn't appreciate the guilt trip after I had been honest with him.

[Aslanisthebest]

Arva, along with the excellent advice everyone has given you... well, firstly I should mention that I'm a teenager, have absolutely no experience in this area, and so I don't exactly have accredited insight. That said, I do want you to know that I sympathize with you and understand you're in a tough spot.

Like TOM said, I think that the 200 texts was :S .
Either he's a stalker or immature. And if he said, "please don't do this to me, I've waited a long time to go out with someone." That kind of evinces the immaturity. I'm glad you said what you did. None of us know him, so you probably are the better judge about this, but his statements at wanting to go out with someone and the 200 texts seem to show perhaps a problem of needing fulfillment... and if he's not particularly attracted to just you and is just interested about being with someone (of course, just inferring this from his statement), that is definitely not something you want to involve yourself in. And also, given that you do not return his feelings and do not find him to be even a good friend. Is it over with him then, or in limbo?

Ruby, congrats to your sister and future brother-in-law! How exciting!

[Avra]

Over like the eighties. And he's not taking it well...though I don't feel guilty at all. Just relieved. Also, no, this guy didn't text me 200 times. He's texted me 200 times a day for several days. I told him to quit texting me while I was at work and he didn't stop. So, I broke it off. I just don't have time for that.
Technology in romance is such a tricky thing. How much is too much? On the date I felt like we had already exhausted all the things you talk about on a first date...and a second date...without having decided if we were attracted to each other beyond a first glance.
I know there are people who have meet through technology who have since gotten married. How do you balance words on a screen with romantic feelings?

[IloveFauns]

It is soo much easier to type something than it is to say it. You are hidden behind a screen or what ever. I seem to put forward my views more online off line I just fell awkward and fear of being attacked by um tony abbott supporters.

[The Old Maid]

Avra, I'm sorry he gave you a hard time when you let him go. There are 7+ billion people on the planet; it's not your job to assume responsibility for his difficulty in connecting with them, unless he hires you as his shrink and that's your actual paying job. Which, by the way, never go to a shrink you've dated or wish to date.

Also, much praise to your boss.

Avra wrote:

Technology in romance is such a tricky thing. How much is too much?

I like the Dave Barry rule. It only sounds Luddite because it addresses the recipient's reaction (something a lot of people fail to take into consideration).

In "I'll mature when I'm dead," Dave Barry wrote:

"In the old days, the closest you could come to Twitter was to send dozens of postcards, every day, to everyone you knew, each with some trivial message such as, "Just had a caramel cappucino. Yum!" The people receiving these postcards would have naturally assumed that you were a moron with a narcissism disorder. But nowadays if you do it electronically, you are Engaging In Social Media."

So, if you wouldn't do it with postcards, maybe you're overdoing it with other methods. If the recipient starts sending out telepathic and/or real tirades all containing sentences such as "Lose my number!", you're definitely overdoing it.

But if your grandparents saved all of their love letters, try something in that vein, whether or not you use the same tools they did.

The reason I mentioned immaturity and not just Stalker-Default is that nobody is born knowing how to do things. If you grow up among people who do X, you'll assume that X is how things are done. That can be a good thing ("my parents took me to church, so I'm taking my children to church") or a bad thing ("the genius who taught me to drive drove on the sidewalk, so maybe I should drive on the sidewalk"). And technology tends to be defined by the people who use it most. If adults don't play Angry Birds, then the market will be defined by the people who do, much as the construction crane market will be defined by the workers who use cranes.

Technology is just a tool, like a hammer or a forklift. This young fellow is behaving both immaturely and inappropriately. His use of technology made things harder and worse for him (and for you) than they needed to be. And with his pre-existing personality/persona situation, it's an unfortunate combination.

...

Also, a quick note on this "attraction" idea. A lot of people "fall in love" with people they never would have chosen as friends. Try to avoid that.

Also, sometimes people find a promising candidate and figure they can find a way to like this person. This is where the "You're a lovable person with many lovable qualities, but I don't love you" crowd try to force their way past this problem. A lot of people "fall in love with love," not in love with each other. Try to avoid that too.

Finally, one form of attraction is lust, which is why all forms of attraction get a bad name. But it's good to have the best form of attraction. It's hard to describe, but it feels like ... joy.

[RubyGamgee]

Thank you for all the input, everyone! This really has kind of cleared some of the muddy water for me, at least in knowing where you're all coming from. I'm still not sure if I really agree with the whole concept or not, but I'll muse on it for a while before I come to any conclusions...

Here is where I'm kind of at right now. I had a recent experience with a guy who was interested in me, and I guess it was a little similar to Avra's, though minus the creepy stalkerish part. This guy is in fact a very godly young man and a good friend of mine. And for a while, I thought we would work out together. I knew that I wasn't ready for a full throttle relationship, but I was tentatively hoping that we could give it time and see how it worked out.

As time went by, it was clear that he wasn't sure where I stood. He didn't understand that I wanted to simply focus on our friendship because I wasn't ready for a romantic attachment and Lord knows, I'm not ready to get married any time soon, at least not as soon as he would have wanted. I was distracted with school and work and frankly, I didn't feel grown up enough. I soon realized that he didn't know me enough to realize that he was pushing too hard and this was not what I needed and that I couldn't offer him what he wanted. He also didn't really trust my parents or understand their expectations. All of these things combined sort of scared me and turned him off. And thus nothing really came of it.

Was I attracted to him? Was I not? I never really considered that. I'm not sure how much relevance attraction had in the situation and I'm not sure if it ever will for any relationship situation I'm in. Maybe he thought he was attracted to me at one point, but he rapidly became very un-attracted when he realized that things weren't going to be so simple...which sort of just solidifies in my mind the fickleness of basing decisions off of attraction. I think attraction sways and changes as rapidly as emotions do. That's not to say that attraction isn't an essential result of a healthy, godly, committed relationship...but ultimately the instigator and foundation needs to be a decision to love the other person no matter how unattractive they might become in our eyes.

When it comes down to it, if someone turns me off by their behavior, their speech, or their beliefs...if I witness immaturity and a lack for love and obedience to Jesus Christ within a young man, then I'm not going to really become good friends with him in the first place. And if I'm not good friends with a young man already, then I'm not going to consider marrying him or courting him for that matter.

[Ithilwen]

Was I attracted to him? Was I not? I never really considered that. I'm not sure how much relevance attraction had in the situation and I'm not sure if it ever will for any relationship situation I'm in. Maybe he thought he was attracted to me at one point, but he rapidly became very un-attracted when he realized that things weren't going to be so simple...which sort of just solidifies in my mind the fickleness of basing decisions off of attraction. I think attraction sways and changes as rapidly as emotions do. That's not to say that attraction isn't an essential result of a healthy, godly, committed relationship...but ultimately the instigator and foundation needs to be a decision to love the other person no matter how unattractive they might become in our eyes.

Hmm... it still doesn't sound like we're on the same page when it comes to how we define attraction. Maybe I can explain further.

But first, about the guy you mentioned. If he started showing interest in you, but then backed out when things weren't going quite the way he hoped or expected, then it probably means one of three things. And it mostly depends on how long/well he knew you. Depending on which situation it was, it may or may not qualify as the sort of attraction I was talking about in my post. I'll write all three examples below, and how they do or do not relate to the sort of attraction I'm talking about. If he only knew you a short time before seeming interested in you, see Situations One and Two. If he knew you a long time and knew you well before seeming interested in you, see Situation Three.

Situation One: He saw you and thought you seemed generally attractive, kind, and godly. And since he found you interesting and wondered if he might one day fall in love with you/if you'll be "the one", he decided to get to know you better. However, once he got to know you slightly more, he found out you weren't right for him, and that he wasn't in love with you, nor would he ever be. If this is the case, it doesn't count as the attraction I was referring to in my post because he's not actually attracted to you in this example (other than the mild "attraction" of liking your looks and what little he's seen of your general personality). He doesn't even know you well enough to be genuinely attracted to you. Rather, he's just curious about you. And once he gets to know you better, it turns out to be nothing after all. The kind of attraction I was talking about is the kind that only comes through getting to know that person through time. Curiosity based on first impressions doesn't fall into that category.

Situation Two: He might have been "attracted" to what he thought was you, but what was really just something he had hoped you would be. Sometimes we'll see someone we find physically attractive, and who seems nice. And from there, our imaginations will carry us away, until we have "fallen in love" with our own fictional version of that person in our head who we think is real, and who we think is "the one". Then, once we get to know the actual person a little better, we find they don't match the version in our head, and we're disappointed. If this is the case, then that doesn't qualify as "attraction" as I defined it in my post either. In my post, I did warn against the shallow kinds of "attraction" that are only based on looks and/or not based on anything solid. The necessary kind of attraction I was talking about is attraction to the actual person, as they actually are.

Situation Three: He knew you for a long time, got to know you, and genuinely fell in love with you. But other circumstances arose that showed that it was not meant to be. If this is the case, it may qualify as the sort of attraction I was talking about in my post, and may not be bad or unhealthy in and of itself. But of course (as I said in my post!) other things besides attraction are also needed to make a relationship, and those things were not present in this case.

Was I attracted to him? Was I not? I never really considered that. I'm not sure how much relevance attraction had in the situation and I'm not sure if it ever will for any relationship situation I'm in.

It doesn't sound to me like it got far enough to even matter anyway. No matter what the case was, it doesn't sound like the two of you were compatible. Although, you do have me curious when you say you don't think attraction will have any relevance in any future relationships. What do you mean by that? If you plan on marrying, would you marry someone that you don't find attractive? Not just when it comes to looks, but in any way? Would you marry someone toward whom you feel only friendship?

~

Back to the topic on how I define attraction. I suppose that when I say the word "attraction", what I'm basically talking about is being in love. Not shallow, passing crushes. Not thinking someone is "hot". But actually being in love. And being "in love" has two sides. Most of the time, I've noticed, each person in the world has been told more about one side than the other. Usually (especially in non-Christian circles), people hear about the attraction side - the special tingly feelings you get when you're around them, finding them physically attractive, wanting to be around them all the time, liking their personality, etc. But on the other hand (especially in Christian circles), some people only hear about the other side - admiring the theology and spiritual aspects of the person, willing to be devoted and submissive to that person, willing to stay with that person no matter what as part of your godly duty, etc. And in some cases, the people who focus on the latter side tend to demonize the former side, saying it doesn't matter. In actuality, both sides matter. If you have one without the other, then it isn't true love.

If you have the tingly-feelings and attraction toward someone, but don't have the godly devotion to them nor are you spiritually compatible, then it's a shallow, (perhaps dangerous) crush. If you admire that person as a spiritual leader or admire their theology, but feel nothing other than friendship or even apathy toward them, then again I ask, how is your relationship with them any different with those you have with your father, brother, or pastor? And if you are willing to marry them and stick with them for life out of godly duty, even though you feel nothing but apathy toward them, I would have to wonder why you're marrying them in the first place. If a person did something like that, I would wonder if maybe they thought they had to get married, and were just settling for whichever man seemed to be the most godly. And marriage is meant to be so much more than that.

ultimately the instigator and foundation needs to be a decision to love the other person no matter how unattractive they might become in our eyes.

Here's the thing.

If someone said that attraction should ultimately be the instigator and foundation of the relationship, I would disagree with them (although I do believe attraction has to be there for the relationship to be genuine).

Similarly, when you say "a decision to love the other person no matter how unattractive they might become in our eyes" needs to be the instigator and foundation, I disagree with you too (although I do believe that decision has to be there for the relationship to be genuine).

In fact, every time someone says "This one thing should be the instigator and foundation of a relationship", I am going to disagree with them. Because a healthy relationship never has just one thing as its instigator and foundation. Healthy relationships are formed by many things all coming together equally. Sitting down and figuring out which of those many elements is more important than the others just isn't necessary, as long as you're sure all of those elements are there. They're all important, and they all need to be present and considered.


~Riella