Posts by Sandra Parker3

Hannah White2 said:When you’re out there playing the seduction game, you’re basically trying to steer someone down a specific path. It’s like, every time a guy starts flirting, he's dropping those little double entendres, right? They’re all just trying way too hard to look cooler than they actually are. Sure, the guys who are smooth talkers—the real silver-tongued devils—might actually get you into bed, but for most of us, that’s where the whole thing hits a dead end. Once the physical part is over, the interest just craters. It doesn't matter who he is—could be some guy acting like a saint or a preacher—it happens to everyone. I know this because, honestly, I talk to them.

If you actually want a guy to give a damn about you, try getting to know him before things get physical. Give it some breathing room, and you won't be stuck spinning your wheels with these kinds of questions.
Nowadays, everyone tries to build their house starting with the roof, which—let's face it—totally defies the laws of physics.

Look, I'm not saying you personally act like this, feralhound55, I'm just throwing my two cents out there like I was talking to a friend who came to me venting.
------------------------------
Besides, when we read a woman's suggestive messages, we interpret them through our own lens. You show up in a short skirt and a low-cut top:
"She's gonna be an easy win..." meanwhile, she's just a poor soul trying to look her best because that's what society tells her she needs to do to be noticed.

When someone tries to flirt with you, they usually just drop some blunt, one-dimensional line like, "I want you."
It could mean "I want to screw you," or it could be that other thing... honestly, it just depends on who you're talking to.
The only exceptions are those few people I mentioned earlier—they play both sides on purpose, making it impossible to tell what they’re actually after until it's too late.

A woman isn't some object you can just drag into bed. 🙄

That whole thing with the curve... honestly, it all just depends on how things actually went down. 😁
It’s a minor point and honestly, we aren't even at the summit right now, so it’s not really worth the debate, but I just don't see where the ambiguity is supposed to be. 😕

If you actually want to know if someone cares about you, try getting to know them before jumping into bed. Give yourself some breathing room, and you won't be stuck overthinking everything like this.

I don't get it—if you actually get to know someone before sleeping together (which is how things are supposed to work), the whole trajectory of that connection changes completely. 🤷

Sex is really just one small part of the whole picture; it’s basically the same deal with any kind of casual hanging out—some people are totally laid back about everything, while others are constantly overanalyzing what it all actually means.

I guess I just tend to read between the lines when it comes to women's ambiguous messages. Like, if she shows up wearing a short skirt and a plunging neckline, I'm definitely interpreting that through my own lens.
This one’s going to be an easy target... she was just some poor soul trying to present her best self because that’s what modern society tells us we have to do.

These aren't even ambiguous messages from her if you actually bother to look at them.
A short skirt and a low neckline send a clear message—one person, one message. You get what I mean... any ambiguity is just something people make up in their own heads.

Why are you only focusing on men?
Women send ambiguous signals too,
hell, they can be downright cryptic

but from what I can tell, you're more interested in...
Everything is actually pretty straightforward, except for two cases:

- when you just don't like what was said, so you start hunting for some hidden meaning
- when the other person isn't being clear because they have no clue what they want—let alone what they want from you (not that I'm talking about you, obviously)

And then there’s that whole cliché about women overanalyzing every little detail🤷
I have no idea how much truth there is to that, wouldn't bet on it

Nicholas Edwards10 said:I stopped by the school today to talk to my son's teacher. I laid out exactly what’s going on and asked if they could just move them to different classes, but she had this whole other take. Apparently, she’s noticed this kid tries to boss everyone around to act like the leader, but she claims she hasn't seen him actually get physical with anyone. She promised she’d keep a closer eye on how he and my boy interact from now on. 🙄

Reading through all your comments really gave me pause. To be honest, I don't want my son to end up looking like some little snitch or a total mama's boy. If that happens, he’ll just become an even bigger target for bullies, and I can't have that. I'd much rather handle this indirectly—working through the teacher or a school counselor... 🤷

I'm also taking it to heart when people say I need to tell my kid to stand his ground if things get ugly again..

Look, I'm not teaching him to go out and look for trouble or use force just because he can. But if someone decides to swing first, he needs to be able to hit back...

And if that kid keeps pushing the limits and things escalate, I won't hesitate to have a very serious word with both that brat and his parents..

Thanks to everyone for the advice. It really helped me figure out my next move. 🙂

Just remember, when you go through the teacher or anyone else, someone had to tell *you* about it first—and your kid could easily get labeled a "mama's boy" or a "tattletale" for doing the exact same thing.
Look, kids can't always fix everything on their own without help from adults, and how are we supposed to support them if we teach them not to speak up because they're afraid of being called names?
If your son hadn't told you, and you hadn't stepped in, the teacher might have noticed something was off, but she wouldn't have known the full story.
So, teach him who to talk to and when, but also teach him when he needs to handle it himself instead of running straight to you or his teacher every single time. Teach him balance: knowing how to deal with stuff independently while still knowing there's a safe place to turn. There's a huge difference between standing up for yourself and tattling, and honestly, other kids pick up on that distinction too, especially when they're going through the same thing..... etc.........

Seriously, why didn't you just ban them in the first place?
I honestly don't get this, just like I don't get the whole ignore feature.

So ":yess:" 🙄, yeah, sounds like you really went through hell there. 😁

I have no clue, maybe some settings got messed up

hehe, if you see it written somewhere, just jump into the thread and let us know—you know, try to keep it polite and civil 🙂

edit:
get this, I just noticed the part where it says "staying silent makes you rude"
I don't think that's true 🤣

If he hasn't been banned yet, look at him turning gray
then he shouldn't be getting anything

Oh, come on, are you actually trying to tell me you guys already wiped out all the geniuses 🤣

Look, I’m not against having rules—God forbid we descend into total anarchy—I just think everyone should pull their own weight here.
I mean, when it comes to a signature of this caliber, there really isn't any reason for someone else to step in and play the warning label.
Honestly, whenever I see something like this, I can't help but laugh; it's such a slap in the face to suggest someone needs help even recognizing text this obvious.😍

Whatever, fine. It doesn't matter.🙂

mistymoose57 said:Why not? Rules apply to everyone equally, right? Why should I waste half an hour scrolling just to find some genius who decided to write an entire poem in their signature... 😕

🤣
Alright, look, those massive walls of text bug me too, but honestly, I feel like the moderators should at least be able to spot this themselves. You can't really use the "we don't read everything" excuse when they clearly lack both the time and the motivation 🙄
How much longer are we going to keep doing their job for them? It’s just not right. 😍

boldhound8 said:Please. Who on earth would even care about something like that?😍


🤣

this isn't our 🙂

silentsailor5 said:I recall a conversation I had with my former colleague Matt back when he was moderating and I was just starting out on this forum. He asked me, "Why on earth are you reporting posts? They all go to the entire moderation team." Now, I am genuinely curious if any moderator or admin would care to clarify: does a reported post alert every single moderator on the forum (😕) or is it limited strictly to the moderators assigned to that specific sub-forum?

I have learned my lesson and make sure not to take anyone's word at face value anymore. 😢

Just to the mods on that PDF, but hey, don't just take my word for it—go ask around. Third time's a charm, or whatever they say.

edit: just saw this, Sashinko beat me to it.😢

Donna Wood52 said:It’s honestly wild how many moderators on here I absolutely cannot stand. I’m not going to call anyone out by name, though.

Oh, hey there, genius. Missed you! There's only one moderator here anyway, so no need to go naming anyone.

Look at you, still hanging around. 🤔 😁

Go ahead and report a post if you think someone crossed the line, but just report the signature 😵

Why not? Just head over to "EDIT Your Details" and do whatever you want.

You can just keep lying to yourself if you want. 😁

(remove "hide")

Steven Carter74 said:I find myself in complete agreement with this observation. Primarily, I would argue that infatuation is merely a fleeting state of being captivated by someone—or perhaps more accurately, by the idea of them. It occurs largely due to our internal, subconscious perceptions which, in a short window of time, effectively "cloud" our judgment and somewhat distort our rational thought processes. This could be explained in much greater detail from a biological standpoint, which is actually what Miss Dea touched upon at the beginning of our discussion.

Now, true love for another person requires a significantly longer duration. It involves a sustained period during which we consciously establish our own "criteria" and rationally shape our perception of the other individual. Ultimately, it is this deliberate process that allows us to sustain feelings of love over a long-term period.
While I believe that love can indeed cease after some time, this typically only happens if our internal "criteria" undergo a shift—specifically, if the image we hold of the person we loved changes or becomes disrupted (and I am certainly not referring to physical appearance here).
Thus, we arrive at the conclusion that "eternal love" can only exist if, during the initial stages of getting to know one another, we presented ourselves with an accurate image of the other person. In other words, did we truly "read" the character traits that attracted us? Or was all of it simply a byproduct of infatuation, causing us to overlook certain red flags early on, which eventually leads to disillusionment?

In essence, love is an abstract feeling that we construct by setting certain "conditions" under which we subconsciously accept another person into our lives. Because of this "subconscious" element, it lasts for a long duration; however, because of that same subconscious nature, the consequences of its end are far more profound. Infatuation, on the other hand, is purely biological in nature, influencing our psychological state temporarily, yet once that biological influence wanes, the feeling of infatuation also vanishes quite rapidly.

👍

The idea of "eternal love" isn't just about the other person; it’s just as much about ourselves. You can lose that connection by misreading someone else, sure, but you can also lose it by losing sight of who you are, or simply because both people evolve in different directions over time.
It’s way more complicated than just whether or not we missed a few signs early on. I mean, let's be honest, we always miss something, and there's no way anyone can predict everything perfectly from the jump.

I’ve always found bitter people to be incredibly difficult to deal with

I wouldn't go so far as to say you're a mean person, or at least... that isn't exactly why you're sitting here alone instead of out at a bar with your friends🤷

Donna Wood52 said:Yeah, call me antisocial if you want—I don't really care. It’s become my lifestyle at this point, and honestly? I've grown to prefer it.
I've just been burned by people far too many times; I'm jaded, plain and simple, and I feel most at peace when I'm flying solo.
That’s actually why I started this thread—I'm curious to see how everyone else perceives people who live like this...

No, what I meant was whether you consider yourself one of the bad guys too.

Do you have an actual diagnosis, or are you just assuming?

Donna Wood52 said:Yeah, call me antisocial if you want—I don't really care. It’s become my lifestyle at this point, and honestly? I've grown to prefer it.
I've just been burned by people far too many times; I'm jaded, plain and simple, and I feel most at peace when I'm flying solo.
That’s actually why I started this thread—I'm curious to see how everyone else perceives people who live like this...

I wouldn't exactly want to hang out with you either; I've had enough of "difficult" personalities for one lifetime.🤷

but then again, you probably wouldn't enjoy my company much either.😍

Are you guys counting yourselves in here too?

What on earth does "putting on an act" even mean? 🤷

It’s not about feeling sorry for anyone; it’s just that when you’re staring down a sick or disabled person on one side and a healthy individual on the other, most people are going to instinctively side with the first person without a second thought—completely ignoring the fact that they could easily be a total fraud or just putting on an act for sympathy.

I honestly think there's some kind of moral cleansing happening here.
Having actually been in the shoes of the "other" person myself, I realized how incredibly difficult it is for people to separate a physical handicap—whether it's an illness or a disability—from the actual person and just see them as a human being.

The truth is, I just wasn't starting from a level playing field.

Ryan Wood98 said:I suppose so... but then again, you could have a paranoia where you worry your own relatives might try to poison you over an inheritance... which might be totally unjustified, yet still feels like a grounded fear.

Then there's the paranoia that people—like lizard people—are spying on you using electromagnetic waves. 😲

Or even the idea that some secret society is INTENTIONALLY poisoning us through jet contrails. 😲

give me a break....

Explain to me why only the first example counts as a "realistic fear" 🤷

lizard people —that's real, and spying—that's real too (even if it gets twisted when people claim their spies saw things they didn't, and everyone plays along just to stay in the loop or fight the wars, though there's never any proof of what wasn't seen, but that's a whole other conversation)

poisoning via exhaust, secrecy, organization, cover-ups, intent .........

What I'm trying to say is that every single fear has its own roots in reality.

1.

Ronald Rogers27 said:A frog meets a Scorpion by the edge of a lake. The Scorpion asks the frog:
"So, any chance you're heading across?"
"I am," the frog replies, keeping a safe distance. "Why do you ask?"
"Well, could you give me a lift too?"
"Do I look stupid to you? You'd sting me!"
"Honestly, you're being naive if you think that. Why would I sting you just to drown myself?! Just carry me across, and maybe I can return the favor sometime. Say, protecting you from snakes, hawks, or other predators!"[
The frog realizes she might have been too cautious and decides to give the Scorpion the ride she asked for. She thinks to herself:
"Maybe having a Scorpion as a friend isn't such a bad idea. Who knows, I might actually need her help one day!"
The Scorpion climbs onto the frog's broad back, and our two heroes set off on their long journey across the deep lake...
...Right when they hit the halfway point, where the water is at its deepest, the frog feels a sharp sting in her lower back. She turns around to see the Scorpion clumsily trying to hide her stinger from view.
"You crazy thing, now we're both going to die!" the frog screams, unable to believe what just happened.
"Sorry, but dammit! I know better, but I can't fight my own nature..."
_______

Question for the group: Are you the frog or the Scorpion?

Ronald Rogers27

2.

I guess I could actually be useful to you once in a while.

3.

maybe I'll actually need her help at some point!"

4.

... the frog shrieked, unable to wrap her head around what had just happened.

😵

The lesson here: self-interest clouds everything.

Nah, not really. Honestly, the only part I took issue with was her saying it would be "for a while." 🤣
I mean, she probably meant "until he gets his act together, sorts out his mess, and processes everything," so she could eventually tell him straight up that she isn't looking for romance—just friendship and being there for him. 😢
But let’s be real... 😲
yeah, right.