RSVP Blog

Marcus @ 2.36 pm.
I actually walked in on a big dog situation once, never been much of a big dog lover since, (maybe I should rephrase that). Yes I thought Perth was a feisty woman and would not capitulate like that, I used the TW shot at her, but if the truth is to be know I had a quite smile, at her "self serving" shot and looked forward to Bill's reply, (once he got his teeth from the back of his throat), I cannot imagine a woman like that is not watching from the background and sincerly hope she comes back with a renewed determination not to be dominated by a mongrel like you (or Bill) lol
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 15, 2008 4:03 PM

and TW haven't they all jumped on it.

Of course there was those American "lifter shoes" they advertised back in the fifties. They would lift you 2 1/2 inches. Most expensive, I got a pair but when you wore them they had a tendency to make you run every where, most sloppy in a pub. and hard to stop sharpish.
Be more careful next time. lol
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 15, 2008 3:45 PM

oldergent at April 15, 2008 2:26 PM

My mistake, i asummed TW was refering to circumference so thought him a bragger....silly me. I'm now feeling quite tall amonst this crew which is just as well given my other shortcomings....despite what Ww says.

laughsandtalks at April 15, 2008 2:36 PM

I consider myself a balanced personality as I dress to the left but lean to the right.

Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 15, 2008 3:32 PM

I hate to say it, WnW, but I think troy may well be right, that it is indeed a brush off line.
I met someone through rsvp recently who knocked me back (how is this possible? :) )
and was very honest and forthright in saying he would like to pursue a friendship, but didn't see anything else developing. Much as I appreciated his honesty, there was an instinct to go just down that line that you mentioned, troy - "Why? What did I say or do that you don't like?" Of course I quickly knocked that one on the head, because it's absurd. There may have been something specific, but most likely it was just his general instinct that there wasn't anything there for him, something undefinable that he had absolutely no need to attempt to explain. So whilst I still prefer the honest and direct for me, I think you may have to pick your audience. Someone else may well give you third degree about it all and a "softer" less direct approach may be appropriate at times.

Nice to see what used to be such a
female-dominated forum now shared with a lot more men - good change of dynamic.

Posted by: malsie at April 15, 2008 2:55 PM

timewarper - waht are you talking about ..... wanting an extra two and a half inches .... haven't you heard? Size isn't everything!

Posted by: woodnwine at April 15, 2008 2:40 PM

Warped.
Hmm. I like mine about 5' 2".
I'm told by my study group (all mothers) that member's height is not that important but girth most certainly is.
Enjoyed your comments earlier about the direction that old bulls might charge from.
As a natural leftie, left dressing, left handed, left field and so on I need to watch the blind side.
OG. I couldn't believe it either when I read Iampert suggestion that she was passive. I was hoping she would have picked up on my comments about women and their relationships with big boy dogs.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 15, 2008 2:36 PM

Troy.
Well I'm bloody sure they don't go for a 5'6" bald ugly little fella no matter how much my personality shines. I'd settle for 5'10. lol

TW, what does that make it then 4 and a half inches, that bit in the sleeve? use it, 5 inches is getting respectable. Not like you to leave yourself that open. LOL

Posted by: oldergent at April 15, 2008 2:26 PM

Aliane @ April 14, 1.55pm...

"Happened to be picked a wrong girl, she have extravagance green thumbs.." etc..

Certainly, an interesting post.
..athough difficult (for most) to understand I would think. I'm sure further clarification would be appreciated.

Posted by: decoratress at April 15, 2008 2:11 PM

Troy @ 1.28pm: All my adult life I've wished for that extra two and a half inches.

It would give me the reach that the 5 foot 5 girls (the size that I like), mostly say they need. And a half inch up my sleeve, so to speak.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 15, 2008 2:01 PM

Cripes OG, do you really thin girls go for guys because they're 6'6", as woody would be. Not much chance for me at 5'10'....and a half hehe.

Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 15, 2008 1:28 PM

Woody, Troy.
Both right, I have had that used on me and have used it on some, not on this site.
I am very open in my profile that I do not, will not get married again. I am enjoying some mails with people that are more pen friends and look forward to their mail. Some that think we could accomodate each others wishes are interstate so that rules that out, as I have no wish to relocate and neither do they.
But Woody I think if you got a face transplant to look something like Robert Redford,grow 6 inches, talk like George Sanders, have a pocket like Gates and the brain of Wells, you would come pretty close to attracting a lady looking for her ONE, of course feet like Daffy Duck for walking in the sand would be an advantage (kind of).
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 15, 2008 1:16 PM

troyohboy - that's a fair point and I'm sure it happens.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 15, 2008 1:12 PM

woodnwine at April 15, 2008 12:07 PM

Mate, I in know way wish to give offence, but have you considered that these women who tell you they don't have time for a bloke are giving you the politest brush ever as they wish to limit your hurt. Only say it 'cause I've used it. Please don't start on the honesty thing everyone. Sometimes, someone is very nice, just not for you, you don't want to hurt them, it's just taken a bit to realise it and you just can't pinpoint what's wrong. So the question will be asked, "I thought everything was good so why".......and there just isn't any answer you can verbalise.

Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 15, 2008 12:37 PM

troyohboy - I think this starts to cross over into the other blog about what men and women actually want. I've met several women through RSVP who say they want a relationship but when it comes to crunch time they say .... "you know what, I really think I'm too busy ... busy job, kids to look after, friends to see. I'm not so sure I actually have time for a man in my life."

Hello, why did they get on RSVP then and seek a relationship? And that's when some of them decide to just settle for a FWB arrangement ... or maybe stay with one they already had going.

It seems to really get down to ... what is it you want? If you don't have that clear in your head before you join RSVP, you are just going to cause drama to others and possibly to yourself as well.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 15, 2008 12:07 PM

woodnwine at April 15, 2008 7:57 AM

I don't think you get that, to my understanding, FWB relationships just happen, they are not planned, usually, and until you find yourself in that particular circumstance you are unable to understand how it evolves...I think. For myself, as previously described, it just happened and it wasn't until later I realised it for what it was. I'm not really into the FWB thing and can't see myself in that type of relationship again, but you never know what will happen and the different feelings you will have for someone you may meet.

Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 15, 2008 9:22 AM

WnW

My experience with FWB followed seamlessly from a 4 year relationship with the same person, it was totally momogamous and very few people knew it was FWB assuming it to be the relationship continuing.

This put both of us outside the possibilities for relationships with others.

Our grieveing period for the relationship did not begin until I left WA.

So this was in fact quite a different FWB to what has mostly been described d here.

Posted by: virgil at April 15, 2008 8:37 AM

Malsie - that's right, people need to be able to feel comfortable that they can put forward their viewpoint on something without fear of being attacked. These are blogs .... we're not running for Parliament!

Come on all you lurkers ... give us your thoughts too.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 15, 2008 8:27 AM

Thanks virgil ... it's nice to see that someone at least "gets it". Everyone has their perfect right to do what ever they want as consenting adults (so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else) but why come on RSVP if you aren't actually looking for a relationship? Have your FWBs if you want, but just don't involve others ..... or are you just using us to "make up your mind"?

"Gee, I thought I wanted it all but you know what, my life is just so ditzy at the moment I think I'll just sleep with (whoever) as it's easy and uncomplicated .... so, goodbye". What the?

Posted by: woodnwine at April 15, 2008 7:57 AM

hinterlandlover, I see a lot of truth in what you say there about anyone "lurking", reading but not contributing. So many people tentatively commenting for the first time sounding almost apologetic for doing so, pleading for people to be "gentle" with them as it's their "first time". They shouldn't have to feel that way - it's a public forum; nobody "owns" the blogs, or has any kind of seniority (even if they think they have).

Presumably this tentative approach is brought about by witnessing the way some people get systematically shredded to pieces every now and again - frequently for no apparent reason, it seems to me.

Posted by: malsie at April 14, 2008 10:43 PM

WnW

I can now see your side of the FWB debate. to miss out on relationships because of it would be upsetting to me also.

Posted by: virgil at April 14, 2008 10:05 PM

Kaz @ 5.10pm on 13th: Please re-read a bit of my post @ 4.34pm on 12th. With your glasses on. Point 2 is the relevant bit.

And then tell me where I've said anything against the right to choose the sex of your beloved in a mutual relationship.

Hinter @ 3pm on 14th: Yes, I saw you personally copping some flak from the right flank, for breaking cover on the left, early on.

So did I inexplicably from Kaz, despite my similar position on the subject to yours (see above.)

I'm now tempted to believe that I made such a good case for my values as displayed in that piece, that I've converted all the righties to our way of thinking.

THEY're safe from old bulls charging down the hill at them from the right, so I believe they must be keeping silence either because I've convinced them as I said, or else they don't want to seem politically incorrect, and too chicken to take a risk with the doberman sisters.

On a lighter note: Amber @ 12.30pm on the 13th: You are a mean-spirited woman, blowing his cover like that.

He wasn't just boringly scrapbooking stuff that we'd already read in the blogs, like some others used to. He brought us some good stuff from over the next hill, and ably decorated it with his own drolleries.

Good work Wyatt!

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 14, 2008 9:44 PM

I've read with some interest that many of you agree with the idea of FWB ... keep an open mind and all that. Fine .... but keep it away from RSVP, after all this is a dating site for people wanting a relationship. In the last 5 months I've met two delightful women who ended up deciding their lives were just too busy for a full on relationship so decided it was just easier to sleep with their friend and send me packing. Come on women, get real or get off RSVP.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 14, 2008 8:01 PM

TW@11.28 on 13th:
Why would anyone who's been reading these blogs as a so-called "lurker" want to blog, unless they enjoy being personally attacked for stating their opinion? The sand pit analogy is far too benign. Fortunately, there are lots of intelligent, well-educated, sophisticated and tolerant bloggers here, but there are also the angry old bulls in the paddock. They seem to spend a good deal of time waiting to charge anyone who dares challenge their less-than-liberal views, and this can make it a most unpleasant place to be at times too, would you not agree?

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 14, 2008 3:00 PM

Happened to be picked a wrong girl, she have extravagance green thumbs, picturesque drawing of enlargement of estate milestone, a mighty that's what got to do she's doing....resources.

Posted by: aliane at April 14, 2008 1:55 PM

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 14, 2008 12:02 AM
Good question. There are lots of women who are prepared to explore their sexuality rather than be content with the vanilla flavored one of social expectation.
I find it amusing rather than hideous.

No doubt you are familiar with this excruciating bit of canine behaviour. A male dog gatecrashes an outside function somewhere and trots around then at the key moment thrusts his sniffing nose into the crutch of a female dignitary (I think it happened to HRH somewhere). The extrapolations are straightforward.
Haha.
Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 14, 2008 12:00 PM

Resent yesterday riversong - computers are a pain but a means to an end.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 14, 2008 8:59 AM

WoodnWine and Weta - apologies for not responding to your emails yesterday - I seem to be having some trouble with my computer.

Posted by: riversong1 at April 14, 2008 5:43 AM

Marcus, What were the odds on someone like that??

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 14, 2008 12:02 AM

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 13, 2008 12:30 PM
Go Amber.
MS xx

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 13, 2008 11:40 PM

It's what you get used to Virgil. I've lived in Vic since 78 so am well and truly used to the all nighters now. Was ok when I was just back in the west for a few days but I really did notice it when I spent longer there. Like everything else in life though, you soon adjust or adapt or whatever else you want to call it..
Cheers.."G"

Posted by: amdoingit at April 13, 2008 11:30 PM

Seems SA is a bit between WA and Vic in the shopping, we have a 24hr (almost) Coles in the city, and I think one in Kurralta Park as well, but normal trading till 9pm week nights and 5 on Sat & Sun and independents open after that.

When I was in WA it never bothered me, I just knew what was open, when it was open.

Posted by: virgil at April 13, 2008 10:59 PM

thelynathdiary at April 13, 2008 12:28 PM
Thanks for the compliment regarding my curls Chris.
OK. I've had a long association with a property out of Tatyoon - turn left at Maroona and head towards Streatham. I worked unwittingly as a black leg rouseabout on another property out of Bolac in early '76. I was paid farmhands wages and remember pocketing $78 for two weeks work.
The Dolly and Molly stories I refer to would be found in the 70's archives of The Ararat Advertiser. Even though I can throw a fleece I do not feature in any of them.
J Ward, the prison hospital for the criminally insane was closed in the early 70's. It is now a museum.
Unusually, and unless I'm encouraged I have decided to be self censorious on the canine FWB Woman's Best Friend stories.
I will however offer an equine anecdote. As she approached the important moment on first consumation, a lover of mine said "when I hit you on the side I want you to rear up and to neigh". As you do I said "pardon" and she repeated her riding instructions. I duly did as requested at the winning post. All I ever received as an explanation was "I have a horse thing"
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 13, 2008 7:50 PM

Thanks Timewarp. I did actually mean "and" in that we can still be right in our beliefs while adjusting them as more information comes to light, but "or" would have been better grammatically speaking.

And I hear you amdoingit. Those moving West I can see having a horrible time adjusting thinking they have all the time they are used to.

But we have had the referendum on it and the majority of voters don't want it. Yeah it sucks but it is done. Time to accept the umpire's decision and get on with our archaic trading hours :)

Posted by: stoic at April 13, 2008 7:31 PM

Ohla.
yes time to let Rex go to a more appreciative home. He may find a home, that will keep him warm at night ( after reading Ricardos posts) but not necessarily safe. As with Ricardos prefference they can both go in front of the tree. Rex may not be much of a cook but Ricardo not being Italiano would probably appreciate the culinary skills of Rex. then Rex may not care whether he does.

Ohla, loved your riposte, and your non offence at my previous.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 13, 2008 6:58 PM

Oldergent I am thinking now that Rex is looking at me amorously and that perhaps he has to go. He should now be Ricardos new traveling companion. He will keep him very safe and warm at night. He will do his business in front of the gum tree. in fact anywhere he has an urge. He is not much of a cook but he does enjoy his food.

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 13, 2008 5:25 PM

Kaz @ 9.48: I am hurt. Please do me the courtesy of being very much more specific in your criticism, so I'll know what you meant.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 13, 2008 10:12 AM

Timewarp more a comment regarding your thoughts on homosexuality is all....
Not a criticism at all just a comment........K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 13, 2008 5:10 PM

Ohlala @ 1.39 pm
Imagine how the poor dog would feel. lol
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 13, 2008 4:34 PM

OohLaLa

I don�t like going into personal details in public, but be assured that Her Majesty is basically interested only in regularly visiting Londinium to see if the German imposters on the throne have vacated in her favour, being of course, better entitled through Plantagent lineage to claim the Crown jewels than the descendants of Mad George. Hyacinth Bouquet III, Queen of the Colonies and all rightful dominions that once were red on your Atlas.

But when it comes to travelling this wide open land of ours, damn these descendants of Convicts and Bushrangers and their love of escaping to the Bush to flee the redcoats and the tasks assigned by Overlords- fix this, fix that, or suffer thee fifty (tongue) lashes on the triangle when I get home.

Curiously there are considerable benefits to women travelling solo to hook up with a male, basically safety considerations, although the Peter Falconio saga does demonstrate some fallacy in that approach. Conversely the male tends to get a better class of company than his boofhead mates, not always a better cook, but better company.

Just to illustrate, some blokes won�t even go behind a gum tree to defecate; a woman does.

Generation Z have no qualms who they travel with; they just pack their bags and go. The older generation of women, by contrast, are a pain in the

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 13, 2008 3:46 PM

Stoic..I spent considerable time back over in WA nursing my father till he passed away and I never did get used to the no late trading. Was forever running out of door at night to slip off to grab a few things at the supermarket. Was a right pain in the old proverbial to not have the all night, never mind late night, trading. What about the sunday trading? Like what trading?? Made me appreciate just how lucky we are over here.
I work all hours and at times find myself arriving home in Geelong (usually from Melb) very late at night and even early hours of the morning after a late night out so it's great to be able to call in and shop enroute to home. Saves having to go back out later. Amazing how many people are out shopping in the wee hours..

Cheers..."G"

Posted by: amdoingit at April 13, 2008 2:46 PM

Amber @12.23.
Our national Sevice intakes during the 50's did not go to war, that fell on the the National Service and Regular personell during the Vietnam war.

There was a manifesto written in the mid 1800's in Russia on how to become a dictator, It basically boiled down to two necessities.
1. Disarm the people.
2. find some other method of trade & payment apart from gold.

Switch forward 150 odd years and what do we have.
1. The public are basically disarmed.
2. We have a society that largely relies on the spastic plastic.
Prognosis.
How long before some aspiring dictator decides to switch off the computers.
1 week of not eating, no guns to shoot the mongrel with, capitulation. Keep the cash.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 13, 2008 2:22 PM

Lynath the more I read of Marcus and his many absurd experiences the more he is looking to be one gigantic red flag blowing in the wind:))
Poor old Rex he would not do such things. I could not look at him again in the morning.
Must not stray anywhere near Lake Bolac.

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 13, 2008 1:39 PM

RichardK @ 11.30am: Thank you for sending me off to see my dying friend this arvo with a great big smile all over my dial. Needed that.

Add yourself to my "thanks for the clever comedy" post in the other blog.

Especially enjoyed 'I am spoken for." Took me back 45 years. Got a phonecall to come over to Delma's place after dinner Friday because Joan was down from teaching in the sticks, for a long weekend in Brizzy, staying briefly with her, in between nightly parties.

Walked in and was literally struck dumb. For nearly 2 hours. Joan was looking so gorgeous it literally took my breath away. Could hardly move my ribs or diaphragm.

They both wondered what was wrong with me - usually have something to say for myself. Told Delma the next day, and she was impressed. "So Mills and Boon are right" she said. "It can happen." Blissful days ...

Fast-forward 45 years - where the hell is Ms Right-Enuff? Sent out another 8 kisses yesterday, and so far only 2 replies - both knockbacks. I wait in hope.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 13, 2008 1:23 PM

Amante Ricardo, bad pong, you have a beloved and a bedmate and perhaps a better half but still you are looking for a date, a flame, a squeeze, a partner, a soulmate, a travelling companion and a Valentine, but I suppose not necessary to be all the one person?
Your lessons have taught me much these last few days:)

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 13, 2008 12:42 PM

lynath

in the days before ATM's and eftpos we spent what we had, and no more.

Imagine gambling without ATM or eftpos, people would spend all they had, then go home and eat baked beans till monday.

These days with the wonder of modern technology, people can spend all they have, then rack up massive credit card debt to finance their gambling habits.

Posted by: virgil at April 13, 2008 12:36 PM

Wow Richard!
A lot of work put into that one with some very amusing descriptions!
No more articles from the Weekend Australian have taken your fancy?

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 13, 2008 12:30 PM

Marcus, Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 12, 2008 9:09 PM

Those stories are of the type that used to appear in "Adult" movies and mags under the heading of Fantasy....
Where have you moved now the Ararat Home for the Dangerously Insane has closed?
I have had a life long association with a property not far from Lake Bolac and have not heard any such stories. Can you point us to the listing or reporting of the conviction(s)?

I think it more likely that what you heard was some sort of rumour put about by the Ararat Football team or similar in order to discredit the Lake Bolac boys....although you on the other hand do have curly hair.....

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 13, 2008 12:28 PM

Friends with Benefits, people sneaking around screwing their friends.......seriously does anyone really give a toss...........

Posted by: iaminperth at April 13, 2008 12:27 PM

oohlala , yes it would be interesting regarding the credit card comparisons.

Some shopping centres close the smaller shops and just leave the supermarkets open all hours.
Extended shopping hours does provide a lot of employment for students, so it is helpful in some ways.
Can't imagine how we survived when physically going to the bank to get cash , with no access on the weekend was all there was. Planning and budgeting was much more important although many people still got paid with cash in an envelope!

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 13, 2008 11:51 AM

• Friend with Benefits: A sexual partner with whom you may or may not be friend. This term implies a fear of commitment and a purely sexual, contractual relationship.
• Other useful terms on dating and relationship sites include-
• Amante: “lover” in Italian.
• Mi Amante: “my lover” in Spanish and Portuguese.
• Amore: “my love” in Italian.
• Mi Amor: “my love” in Spanish.
• Mon Amour: “my love” in French.
• Amoureux, Mon: “lover” in French.
• Bang pong: A Klingon term of endearment which is useful only for die-hard Trekkies (or if the woman you are banging, also pongs)
• Bedmate: Indicates that you sleep in the same bed and hints at other things you may do together in bed, includes teddy bears and hot water bottles
• Beloved: better call your spouse that, or you’re out
• Better Half: Indicates an adoring relationship, but can imply self-esteem issues.
• Better Quarter: that’s all she gets of the matrimonial bed; you take all the rest
• Complement: Indicates a closely jointed, interconnected relationship.
• Companion: Conveys a deep sense of monogamy and enduring love.
• Couple, They Are a: Two people in any sort of relationship. Also “an item”.
• Courtier: Slightly old term for one soliciting marriage. Conveys the image of a romantic, chivalrous lover.
• Crush: A superficial (but often powerful) attraction for someone. Infatuation.
• Darling: spouse, darle, darhle (Kath and Kim talk)
• Date: Another person with whom you who have gone on several dates. May or may not indicate a monogamous relationship; subspecies for rsvp- coffee date- the date you're having when you're not having a date
• Dear: Normal substitutions for spouse, but also acceptable substitutions for boy/girlfriend. Also refers to the cost of engagement rings
• Destiny: conveys an enduring, pre-ordained love.
• Dream: A slightly old-fashioned synonym for a crush or infatuation.
• Endeared: A sweet term for a spouse or loved one.
• We are Entwined: Indicates a closely interwoven relationship; or an inability to get out from the bed sheets
• We are Going Out: Two people dating each other.
• Heartthrob: A crush or a deeply infatuated date.
• Honey (bunch): An endearing, somewhat cutsie term for a loved one.
• Fiancé: Widely used term for a person intended to marry or become civilly united.
• Flame: A crush or a lover. Conveys a sense of passion, but a lack of permanence.
• Loved One: A sweet romantic term for your partner.
• Love: An endearing term which may be annoying to other people.
• Love of My Life: Emphasizes the permanence, deepness and intensity of your relationship.
• Lover: Conveys a more sexual relationship, may not be appropriate in all situations. eg marriages.
• Match Made in Heaven: A connected couple who are deeply enamored.
• Match made in Hell: When a connected couple get married
• Main Squeeze: Indicates a relationship, but subtly hints at an open relationship or a fear of commitment.
• Mate: Term for a spouse or loved one that hints at a solid friendship.
• Meine Liebe: “my love” in German.
• Other Half: Endearing term which conveys a more permanent relationship so entwined that you view yourselves as one entity.
• Partner: This is the most commonly used alternative, although it is ambiguous as it can refer to anything from casual dating, to a steady relationship, to marriage, to business associates, as in “I was screwed by my partner”
• I am Romantically Involved/Engaged: Indicates a romantic or sexual connection between two people who may or may not be in a formal relationship.
• Romantic Partner: More specific and tender than simply “partner”.
• I am Seeing Someone: You are happily in a dating relationship.
• Significant Other: a generic term for a boy/girlfriend or spouse;
• Soulmate: Conveys a long, deep, connected relationship. Holy Grail for rsvp-ers
• I am Spoken For: Shows to others that you are in a relationship. Also if you are dumbstruck and she has to do the talking for you
• Spouse: A generic term for a husband, wife which may also be applied to a legal union partner.
• Squeeze: A term for a more casual dating relationship; ideal for bigger girls with more to squeeze
• Steady: Substitute for boy/girlfriend. Also conveys a monogamous relationship.
• SugarBabe: a babe who knows where the sugar container is on a coffee date
• Sweetheart: A bit old-fashioned, but a cute alternative for boy/girlfriend.
• I am Taken: Indicates that you are in a relationship.
• True Love: An enduring term for deeply connected, engaged or married couples.
• Valentine: A sweet term for a boy/girlfriend, crush or a date, especially pertinent for Valentine’s Day or a sweet way of asking for a first date; also how to annoy a Sheila by sending an rsvp kiss asking her to be your valentine

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 13, 2008 11:30 AM

Stoic @ 10.23am wrote "it is only by hearing alternate opinions and questioning them and working up a logical defence of our opinions that we become secure in our own and" (but I think you meant 'or') "can make adjustments, when we see that something we believe doesn't hold up."

Thunderous applause from me for that philosophical gem. And I had been delighted by your fair-dinkum initial political post at 5.58pm on the 11th.

Others had picked up my initial post at 5.42pm on the 7th, but you cranked up the debate to a much higher level.

..................................................................

I tried to follow your lead and do the same thing for the current sexuality debate, with my wide-angle thought-starter at 4.34pm on the 12th.

But it seems that sexuality is a completely logic-tight subject, where people don't dare to take out their prejudices for or against any particular style and examine them, in case they might then find that they need to "make adjustments (to our values) when we see that something we believe doesn't hold up." Which would be scary for some.

I'd hoped for a useful intelligent reasoned debate, with people looking at my construct and discussing the ramifications of different opposing attitudes to my various points.

Maybe (like politics for WnW), it's all too hard.

If so, I'm disappointed with you lot, because I believe that that attitude springs from blind knee-jerk defence of your current prejudices. Which is not growthful for you, or for the world.

Who'll join me in getting real about this subject, which, after all, is why we're on RSVP?

Let's pretend we're not in Afghanistan or Utah, take our head out of the sand and see what happens!

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 13, 2008 11:28 AM

Thanks amberlight.

I love playing in the sandpit and let's be honest - it is only by hearing alternate opinions and questioning them and working up a logical defence of our opinions that we become secure in our own and can make adjustments when we see that something we believe doesn't hold up.

oohlala1:

I know what we are missing out on over here. More than once I have had a tv/dvd/computer monitor etc go bust on me on a Saturday night (and usually always before a public holiday Monday) and it has annoyed me greatly I couldn't pop round the corner and get a replacement.

The last referendum on trading hours here was only a few years ago. I voted yes, most voted no, and so to my mind that should be the end of it.

No it wasn't the result I wanted, but as I said in a previous post, I have a real problem with shopping centres requiring the stores inside to open for those extended hours (and apparently so did a majority of business owners) regardless of the wishes of the individual owners.

The only politicians we need to change (on this issue anyway) are those that would keep bringing this issue up.

Cheers

Posted by: stoic at April 13, 2008 10:23 AM

WnW @ 9am: And then you vote how the newspaper tells you to?

But how do you choose which paper to believe?

The Manchester Guardian has a good reputation ... better than News of the World, I believe.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 13, 2008 10:19 AM

VDU @ 9.45am: Yes, just teasing you.

Kaz @ 9.48: I am hurt. Please do me the courtesy of being very much more specific in your criticism, so I'll know what you meant.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 13, 2008 10:12 AM

Posted by: misterygirl at April 12, 2008 12:00 PM

Wake up girl ..... I used to think this too but was sadly mistaken. Women it seems have certainly changed their outlook and approach to love and sex. Men ..... beware.

Richardwhatever .... good on you for trying to get this blog back on topic and injecting some new ideas. Politics ..... I leave that to the newspaper thanks.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 13, 2008 9:00 AM

Stoic the shops are open here in melbourne every day and late on Thursday and Friday and with many supermarkets and McDonalds 24/7.
Many mothers and workers are doing their weekly shop in the wee small hours. What you are missing out on. Best to change your politicians:)) It would be interesting to see if there is more credit card debt in these places with all this trading.

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 13, 2008 8:17 AM

WoodnWine, I seem to be having trouble with my computer - could you please re-send the email you sent me last night (12 April 7.29pm)? Thanks kindly.

Posted by: riversong1 at April 13, 2008 7:53 AM

Hi Timewarp,
I THINK I agree with most of what you wrote!

I have really enjoyed the very recent debate.

Stoic, your first post (for a good few months?) scared me for a while, but your responses to mine and others' points clarified your position and I can understand and respect your opinion on a lot of things, even if I don't completely agree!

Marcus as usual I enjoyed your contributions and opinions (particularly as they are quite close to my own!)

OG,
Well, we may never agree on a lot of things, particularly moral and social issues!!
But as someone who went to war on behalf of our country, you deserve my respect and appreciation (even if we NEVER actually agree!!)
Same with Timewarp, although his opinions are a lot closer to my heart!!

Kaz,
Excellent explanation on what I believe the majority of unions are about.
My 22 yo son (who I always thought would be very much a conservative!) is a Union Rep at his workplace at a large winery in the Barossa.
He felt compelled to do so after what happened to him when he was injured while still only a casual worker, the company's response to workers after complaints were made about chemicals (later found to be carcinogenic) that were being used that were affecting his fellow workers, and the noises made about an impending AWA and cuts to worker's conditions.
Sometimes big (and small) companies need to be reminded of their obligations!

To everyone else who contributed great stuff.
So political opinion is not such a terrible thing to debate as long as we respect each other's right to their opinion, (even if we don't agree!) and don't become too personal!!

The "sand pit" isn't really such a scary place after all :)

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 13, 2008 12:33 AM

Kaz, right again on both points...

I often don't leave work till after 6.00 or 7.00 at night and would be stuffed if the shops shut at 5.30!!! Remember the old days when the shops shut here at 5.30 on weeknights and noon on a Saturday? Times have changed to accommodate the working Mums - thank goodness!!!

Posted by: victoriadownunder at April 12, 2008 9:54 PM

Zoiks, where l am supermarkets are open til midnight every night.

And yes, Virgil, the Weagles are headed for a mighty shellacking at this stage of the game.......

Timewarp, a little tolerance goes a long way my friend.................K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 12, 2008 9:48 PM

Bill, nice to be back - you've caught me out on a technicality, but you are indeed correct. There are many things that I wouldn't do that I would indeed condemn others for - murder, rape, pedophilia, domestic abuse etc

I was referring in the more general sense to intimate expressions of consensual adult sexuality, but I think you know that :-)

Posted by: victoriadownunder at April 12, 2008 9:45 PM

Merryl Merino eh? Dolly the Dorset? What about Rommel the German shepherd?
Pedophilia, hebephilia, even taboos are understandable. Why are the taboos also so strongly held against animals?
Sheep stories (and the odd bestiality prosecution) were common when I lived in rural, wool growing Ararat. For some reason a lot of them emanated from a place called Lake Bolac.
Friends With Benefits obviously has to include womens best friend. I have had a couple of personal experiences and the benefit of reliable anecdotes to now raise a cocked brow at girls who have close relationships with their large male dogs. ;-]
Cheers Marquis

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 12, 2008 9:09 PM

Kaz
shops open at 11am is SA on Sunday
supermarkets stay open till 9pm weeknights
6am to 5pm Saturday

Posted by: virgil at April 12, 2008 8:55 PM

Nope, Kaz.

Shops close here promptly at 5:30pm on weeknights and 5pm on Saturday (except for late night trading night - Thurs in the burbs, Fri in the city - when the shops close at 9pm)

Posted by: stoic at April 12, 2008 8:41 PM

VDU @ 8.03pm: Welcome back!

But I disagree with you. There are a lot of things on my 4.34pm list that I wouldn't do either - but I'd certainly condemn those who do. And I did.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 12, 2008 8:24 PM

We may all be adults VDU, but methinks that some act in rather a childish manner........
So Stoic and Virg, aren't the shops open late in WA and SA???
Not til 12 midnight??
What, they shut after 11am on a Sunday??
God, l would never get any shopping done if that was the case here...............K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 12, 2008 8:18 PM

Thanks Kaz. I was starting to think I'd done half a day's really hard work (posted at 4.34pm) all for nothing. Which would be a pity, with such an important and emotive subject.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 12, 2008 8:13 PM

Well said Kaz - as adults, we are entitled to make our own choices and be respected as fellow human beings. There are plenty of things I'd never do but I'd never condemn those that would...

Bill, that was an epic post!!

Posted by: victoriadownunder at April 12, 2008 8:03 PM

Timewarp, that may hve taken all arvo to write but sure did my head in....
I am neither a homophile or homophobe, but believe that sexual preference between consenting adults is the the business of those involved.
That is sure to crack troyboy up and may possibly bring a few others out of the woodwork so to speak.
Empty your minds of thoughts of "dirtyness" and "unnatural" and see it for what it is. .........................K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 12, 2008 7:40 PM

i like daylight saving in the spring and early summer till the end of Feb.

It is quite handy to be able to go to Coles and the big stores up to 9pm on weeknights nights and on a Sunday after 11.00am.

Looks like the Eagles are going to get flogged tonight.

Posted by: virgil at April 12, 2008 7:29 PM

Virgil, I will be voting no on daylight savings.

If it were only Dec-Feb, then I would give it more thought but as it is, March is too f'ng dark to be getting up an hour earlier in the mornings.

It has ended now but I am sick of getting up at what is really 5am to get to work. Other than that I didn't mind it and would take to task the idiots going on about fading curtains and the like. If you are going to complain about it, complain for a real reason.

Not too fussed either way.

Similarly for extended trading hours. I would very much like to be able to do some of my shopping on Sundays but could sympathise with shop owners in the big shopping centres who would be forced to open for extended hours even if they didn't want to.

I think the option should be there for shops to open whenever they want, but if those store owners voted against it and being forced to open - well again I am not too fussed and to my mind, the issue has been decided and should be dead and buried.

Posted by: stoic at April 12, 2008 6:30 PM

Oh wow. What a devastating riposte by blondebiped, using a typically lazy left wing technique of "Fox News is bad because I don't agree with it"

How can anyone argue with logic like that? It must have taken him/her seconds to come up with it.

I could retort to blondebiped in kind with "Stop watching the Communist News Network or the Communist Broadcasting Service" (get it - because I don't like their bias so I will imply they are evil communists and/or stupid) but instead I will try to implore them to consider some independent thought and inquiry. I don't know about blondie but I don't need my opinions force fed to me by television.

Fox, CNN, CBS - they are all as sensationalistic and unprofessional as each other. From what I can gather C-SPAN is the only media organisation that is interested in more than grabbing 10 second sound bytes and reporting that as news.

The only difference between Fox and CNN and CBS and NBC et al is their particular bias, with Fox being the most open about theirs. Still doesn't make them any better or worse.

And Kaz - not related but infinitely more entertaining I reckon :)

Posted by: stoic at April 12, 2008 6:22 PM

Stoic

What do u think of daylight saving in WA?

I know it ghot knocked back after 3 referendums.

I dont know what happened in the rest of the country?
maybe some can enlighten me on that?

If stoic u are saying that it doesnt seem right that they will keep on trialling it and having referendums till the yes vote gets up, well they probably will.

What about extended shopping hours in WA?

That got the knockback, although my experience of it in SA is that it hasnt faded the curtains yet. On Sunday shops dont open till 11am, presumably to allow the faithful to attend Church. Although if attending Church you would have to get your skates on to be at work by 11.00am

Posted by: virgil at April 12, 2008 6:03 PM

blondebiped at April 12, 2008 4:47 PM

I reckon even good 'ol Rupert Murdoch blushes at some of the political content on Fox. I'm sure he looks up from the advertising revenue bottom line sometimes.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 12, 2008 6:01 PM

Hey Stoic, put down the remote and slowly back away from Fox News. That's dangerous.

Posted by: blondebiped at April 12, 2008 4:47 PM

Well there you go stoic, one thing l totally believe in the workplace - solidarity, as united we are strong. Don't employers HATE that??.
My current employer was not paying a group of us an allowance as middle managers. They were manipulating the wording of the award to avoid paying what was a very clearly defined benefit.
We held several meetings with HR about it and yes they ultimately paid it.....backdated 12 months. Silly boogers should have just paid it in the first place
Anyway, so not related to the topic it aint funny.............................K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 12, 2008 4:35 PM

Homophobia/ homophilia: Everyone's right, from their own standpoint. Or they'd have to take their deepest values out and scrutinise and re-evaluate them. Which can be very unsettling, if you're honest about the results.

Here are a few arguments which may suggest what my values are in this whole area:

1) Sex is often about power, and power is often about sex. Go see current movie "The Kite Runner" before you dare to contribute to the current discussion. I gave it 5.1/2 out of 5. Take a hanky and a good friend, and plan a long sleep that night, to recover from the emotional ordeal.

Bloody do it anyway, to help qualify yourself to be a voting citizen of the world. (Tut tut! I'm getting passionate! Cool it Bill, and get back into your left brain.)

..............................................................

2) I start my thinking with an initial classifying question: Does A hope to enjoy joyful consensual enthusiastic sexual activity with B, where ensuring that B has at least an equally good time and happy memories as A, is a key goal for A?

If so, A is usually motivated by love, and if B has the same attitude, the resultant act can be called lovemaking, whether they're in a marriage, an informal relationship or just FWB.

And I for one couldn't care less if it's 2 women, 2 men, one of each, or a couple of hermaphrodites. Their unselfish love/ friendship, shown both in and out of the bedroom, makes them both happier, and the world a better place.

Who am I to presume to deny them hetero or homo happiness with someone that their genes - yes their genes - and/or their conditioning point them towards?

I leave that to third parties like churches and nations who seek to increase both their income and power bases by requiring everyone to hurry up and marry the opposite gender, and then breed unrestrainedly.

Finally, in this world of terrifying exponential overpopulation, the more couples who are vasectomied, tubes-tied, contraceptive-using or post menopausal - or same-sex of any age, the better for us all.

................................................................

3) If A is wanting sex with B for A's benefit only, without caring much whether B enjoys it hugely, slightly or not much at all, then I classify A in the 21st century as a selfish lover, worthy only to go to a brothel or gigolo for what I call a f**k, and pay there dearly for A's lack of a loving nature.

Or to spend a lot on a gold-digger/ toyboy, which I see as the same thing done informally, ie. without a printed pricelist.

And if that applies to well over half the men in our society, tough. They don't deserve to be here in RSVP, looking for freebies they don't plan to earn.

Unless like some, their profile honestly reads something like "Be nice - I'm rich" or "Looking for mattress for 4-month overseas holiday, all expenses paid." That's not a bad offer, if you're not too choosy a mattress.

.................................................................

4) Unloving cheapskates are referred to the nearest sex shop, for some free-to-use DIY gear, or if they're too tight even for that, to Mrs Palmer.

................................................................

5) Next classification has power as the primary motivation, not sex.

A wants the sex mainly to humiliate or at least subjugate B, and the f**king is a fringe benefit - the chosen modus operandum (way it's done).

Some antagonism is involved, and usually some cruelty.

For me, the key is B's attitude.

B might welcome it, eg. if it reassures B's damaged-child predominent ego state (Games People Play, Dr Eric Berne) that someone is actually noticing B, and prepared to spend time playing together on an ongoing basis.

Unhealthy stuff bordering on S and M, but if B believes she is the better for it, and her emotional state does not deteriorate, I'm not going to interfere.

But if B hates it and wishes it would stop, but can't make it stop, we're into sex slavery to some degree. And I'm dead against that, whether it's homo sodomy in Afghanistan, or hetero incest in Toorak.

6) The above presupposes that the 2 sexual partners are from the same generation, give or take a bit - or take quite a lot if she's pink aged 65, paying him (brown aged 25) to stir her with a satisfyingly large copper-stick - or he's brown aged 65, paying her (yellow, aged 25) to try to breathe some life back into his bellrope.

................................................................

7) On to paederphilia. People really go off pop about it. Just about everybody does. And I wonder why? Here are some possible reasons:

* Sex is dirty. Necessary for procreation, but you should bite the blanket and think of England. Childhood should be a time of innocence, so we need to insulate our innocent children even from knowledge of sex. Perhaps till their wedding night, to seriously sabotage it.

I vividly remember at 9 seeing my one-year old younger brother crawling after our neighbour's same-age daughter, rising up behind her and humping her like mad through 2 nappies. Their mothers giggled their heads off, and mine said "They know from the start, don't they?"

* Receiving sexual attention from an adult when a child, will give the child a wrong idea about sexuality, and scar its psyche for life.

I clearly remember sexual advances from a woman about 70 when I was just 2, from a man in his 50s when 6, a same-age boy at 15 and a same-age young man at 22. Then 2 women in their 60s, when I was too. (And from my wife once - led to the destiny-destroying 3rd child.)

At the time (including when I was 2), I recognised every one of them as type 3 above - they wanted to use me for their own gratification. And each time I coolly chose whether to go along with it or not.

The result? All of it combined to give me such an abhorrance of incest that I wouldn't even change my baby daughters' nappies, let alone bath them - and such an appreciation of randy women that I wish the next one would hurry up and find me, so I can get back to my favourite hobby of winding her up till she goes off a few times.

* Sex is only for deeply-loving same-age, opposite-gender married couples who want children, and the further away from that you get, the more depraved the "perpetrator".

So July-December is bad, and he's a "dirty old man" or she's a witch, for stealing their partner away from the breeding paddock.

Dike is bad for the same reason - they ought to be bearing children to 2 men. (Interestingly, Queen Victoria enjoyed being rogered so much that she personally removed females from the anti-homo Act that caught Oscar Wilde. Couldn't believe they'd actually get anything enjoyable out of it. Little did she know ...)

* Puftas are even worse, because they're not only removing one another from the breeding paddock - you can imagine the disgusting way that they do it. Yuck!

I went on a Dabblers bus day trip last month, and this is the haiku I wrote at our mid-morning comfort stop:

No Hiding Place

Caboolture park toilet.
Door lock burst inwards
to get at the contents.

OG would relate to that.

I just hope the fugitive was an adult and that it was one-onto-one.

* Paedophiles are the worst, because of all the above.

I classify paedophiles into 2 groups:

a) Molest children. Incest by a stranger. Yuck yuck yuck.

b) Sit at their computers and look at pornography (which is Loser City, whether you're using Mrs Palmer or a Sex shop contraption, and whether what turns you on is Brigitte Bardot, a Cleo centrefold, Merryl the Merino or a naked child.)

The worry is when you decide to get a life, and actually go do it in 3 dimensions, instead of ineffectually looking at it in two, in your stick-book or on your monitor.

That's more than enough from me. Took me most of the arvo.

PLEASE TELL ME SOME MORE OF THE RELEVANT FACTS OR EMOTIONS.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 12, 2008 4:34 PM

Fair point Kaz, but I don't like people not joining and getting the benefits.

Myself, if I ever got into a situation where I thought I needed representation (in my current job) I would have held my nose and paid my dues for the year and called the union in.

I never would have had the union come to my side and not pay membership.

But I am principled like that :)

Posted by: stoic at April 12, 2008 4:18 PM

Thanks for proving my point about selective left wing outrage. Howard is bad to saying they threw their children overboard (which they did when they scuttled their ship - only one place for everyone to go when the ship is sinking) to show his toughness on border security for the election but Rudd is ok for saying he and his family were evicted from the farm he grew up on (which they weren't) to show how he did it so tough and is an Everyman for the election.

Neither of those birds fly.

And again, I had a post that didn't get up about leftists their inability to accept decisions they don't like - eg the Republic debate and I also mentioned Daylight Savings here in WA.

There are many valid criticisms of the Howard government (like taking too long to sack those guilty of indiscretions) but this whole AWB affair was put to bed. Same with leftist and the 2000 election in the US. Gore lost by every single count they did and yet leftists are still trying to argue the outcome.

Though I would have hoped the best thing to come out of it was to show that even government based monopolies are a bad idea.

Time to move on. If leftists would put the same effort into scrutinising this government as they do still harping on about the last one, I could not be happier.

You are right however in that liberty is there provided it does no harm. I don't have the liberty to break into your house and steal your stuff. I don't have the liberty to drive however I want and risk injury to you or others.

However, just because you might have kids and want taxpayer funded childcare, or parental leave or whatever, the government not providing that is not doing harm. Stealing that money off me to provide it (and to give as a gift for having kids - I'm looking at you, Baby Bonus) is doing harm to me because I need that money for my mortgage and rates and bills. I know how better to spend my money than the government. If other people don't know how to spend their money well too bad for them. That is for them with their freedom to deal with, not me or mine. I don't demand anyone else pays for any of my things, why do leftists seem to have no problem with demanding that I pay for other people's things?

Freedom means the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail.

And quite frankly how dare you imply I (or anyone else) will be irresponsible with my carte blanche economics and liberty.

Now don't get me wrong. Some taxes are inevitable. I like having a military to protect the borders and police and customs and courts to keep society moving. I like having maintained roads that are safe and enable goods to be transported where they need to be. I like having my garbage collected each week and like having my sewerage lines flowing away from my house.

I have no problem contributing for any of that but most other things I consider an optional (at best) extra.

Not to stand on the common ground for a bit - education in those communities will be excellent and is the only long term, permanent fix. The intervention can only be short term until things can get back on track so the children can dedicate themselves to learning and not have any of the other horrors to deal with.

I can freely admit that I had no idea how bad things were in some of these Aborigine communities. I was completely ignorant, much like the majority of the population I think. Now is the time to start doing something to turn the situation around. Something all Australians should agree with.

Cheers

Posted by: stoic at April 12, 2008 4:10 PM

Posted by: oldergent at April 12, 2008 2:34 PM

OG, this is why most of the PC brigade are also lefties, in this instance the generalisation accurate, so personal opinion is welcome so long as you agree with their views. For goodness sakes OG don't mention any negative aboriginal issues as you are sure to be branded a racist!

Wishful, men generally have no problem with two women doing their thing as we harbour the fantasy of an invitation to participate.....yee haa

Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 12, 2008 3:02 PM

oldergent at April 12, 2008 2:34 PM

What about male gerontophilia Ogre?
That is the abominable practise that some young women have of grooming, seducing and having sex with ageing men.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 12, 2008 2:55 PM

Hey Stoic, no problem with sitting in on disputes between employees and management on my part, and would certainly not expect payment for it either.
Some staff are intimidated when having to deal with management and have the right under our award to have someone with them.Dealing with manamgement is not an issue for me and give far better than l get in terms of debate / discussion.
One thing l have learnt is that managers generally do not like to be confronted with someone who knows their rights and will try to call the bluff of those who are unfamiliar with those rights.

Having dealings with an billionaire businessman in a major company has given me an excellent grounding for handling myself in such situations...................k

Posted by: auntykaz at April 12, 2008 2:49 PM

Hinterland.
You see yourself as a liberated, modernista espousing your brand of equality and attacks anybody that dares to voice an opinion contrary to yours, go back to my reply to amber 11/4@1.58pm I clearly stated what I thought. Hinter you are a homophile and I am a homophobe, you enjoy watching the freak's parade and glory in that sort of thing, I would not be opposed to them banning it, nor would I walk 10 yards to see it. But try to explain, if a male engages in sex with a young boy how he is not a homosexual, and also a paedohpile, you try to distinguish between the two abominable acts to justify your position. I will live very happily with my position on the subject, and let every other like minded male on these blogs judge you, You are welcome to make your bed with the rest who agree with your "principles"?

Wishfull you may like to check that out too. I made the statement that Lesbians pose no threat to men, Please give me the post I made on the "different". you have gone off on a tangent never esposused by me, into your idea of what you find acceptable,so should we remove the words Immoral, moral, from the language, sure to make the PC exponents happy.
You classify Homophobia a disease, I consider Homophilia a moral disease.
This is also a public forum, so in what sense are you not "foisting" your opinion as you claim I am. That you are also showing your bigotry would be a fair comment. Pots should never call kettles black.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 12, 2008 2:34 PM

Stoic.
I'm happy to acknowledge that Howard sacked ministers when the light became to intense. These were blokes who should have been scrutinised from the outset and tossed. That is the point of Rudd's probity requirements.
Howard didn't resign, or sack his henchmen Downer and Vaile when it became quite obvious that his government was complicit in undermining a UN aid project the 'oil for food' and thereby supporting financially a regime he had pledged to overthrow by force.
Rudd being thrown off the farm, and whatever 'thrown' means, has much more creedence than Howard's jihad on refugees throwing their children overboard to make a major election issue.

My simple point about the apology was that it was an attempt by the government to acknowledge what was very widely regarded past injustice. Logically it can have no bearing on future developments. I am apolitical about this.
As a matter of interest I have visited a few permit only communities in Central Australia and also been to Kalumburu in NW WA. You alluded to this place but did not mention it by name. I have friends and aquaintances in shades from white to black up there and have a reasonable idea of what goes on. As usual there is only one thing that can lift the situation. Education. The means for it to be delivered have to be the major long term strategy.
Re the left being "the antithesis of individual liberty, economic freedom, and personal responsibility. The left today is the surrendering of individual rights to the grotesque monster of government."
Err Hello. Individual liberty in your 'liberal' definition says provided that freedom does no harm. Giving people carte blanche economically and in terms of their personal responsibility is highly unlikely to result in an egalitarian society. Australia, indisputably has amongst the highest indicators for social health because we have systems that check and balance social responsibility against a still very high level of freedom.
The USA which has greater levels of 'individual freedom' (for some) is quite disfunctional in many ways directly because of this. I'm sure you are not advocating anarchy and would rather live in a setting where you had, say, basically free medical care because you surrender a few 'liberties' to your grotesque monster.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 12, 2008 2:02 PM

I hope you don’t bugger OohLaLa. It is extremely annoying.
In the 14th century, a bug was “an object of terror, usually an imaginary one”, and may have been derived from a Welsh word bwg (hobgoblin or scarecrow).
By the 17th century, the meaning of “insect” had superseded the earlier meaning, though that sense has persisted in words like bugbear and bogyman.
Other senses include “to annoy”, as in “certain bloggers bug me.”
From this you could assume, came bugger, one of whose meanings is “nuisance” (fill in bloggers names in the enclosed box (…)
But despite this apparent connection, the words are apparently, etymologically unrelated.
Bugger has a variety of other meanings, as noun, verb and interjection. These include “sodomite”, and “damn”.
The word “bugger” got into English via 14th century French (bougre, from Latin Bulgarus) as the name of a sect of heretics who had come from Bulgaria in the 11th century. It later was used to describe the Albigensian heretics and even heretics in general, especially those suspected of indulging in “abominable practices”.
A derived phrase well known to Australians is bugger-all — meaning “absolutely nothing” (1930s). Today reams and reams of blogs are filled with bugger all.
Rumpole of the Bailey:
The Judge addresses the Accused: “Do you have anything to say before I pass sentence?”
Rumpole (under his breath:) “Bugger-all, My Lord.”
The Judge (addressing Counsel for the Prosecution:) “What did he say?”
“Ahem. He said ‘Bugger-all’, My Lord.”
“That’s strange. I could have sworn I saw his lips move.”
So, OohLaLa, ask whether his lips are moving.

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 12, 2008 1:56 PM

Thankyou for the correction laughsandtalks.
You know your stuff.

Posted by: enrepres at April 12, 2008 1:32 PM

Or Troy from this ESL lady it could have read- I dont bugger:))

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 12, 2008 12:45 PM

And thanks Kaz

And I agree that union membership should be a choice. Yeah it is not right that you had to sit in on non-member negotiations for nothing. Perhaps the union could set up a "negotiating fee" at a commercial rate for those non-members who then decide they want someone sitting in. They don't have to join but the union rep - i.e you in your case, would still get compensated for your time.

Just a thought but that strikes me infinitely better and fairer than any sort of compulsion.

In my current job I don't have the right to negotiate my agreement with my employer individually but thankfully I am not forced to join the union and they have no right to steal any funds off me - not yet anyway.

Plus they have proven themselves pretty useless. They were all fire and brimstone "Vote NO on the upcoming agreement a few years back - whatever it was. Vote no" (and I was going to because it was a shitty proposal) and then just before the actual voting period began suddenly the union decides it will vote yes - much to the chagrin of many of its members.

However I am looking at changing jobs very shortly and I will absolutely be joining the union in my new job. I have family members in that union and they are well supported. That is a union that actually seems more concerned with its members than with political power - something I can't say for the union at my current place of employment.

Posted by: stoic at April 12, 2008 12:42 PM

Did you get it....don't give a bugger.....haha I crack myself up!!!

Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 12, 2008 12:32 PM

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 12, 2008 7:06 AM

Yep, goes to show people love a freak show.
I don't want to go anywhere near the homosexual thing, especially when the topis is FWB, eeeuuuwww however it is very trendy these days and those who wish to be seen as 'current' espouse it as normal. Well, until more blokes are boinking blokes than are boinking women it 'ain't normal. It is gross, should be kept in the closet between consenting grubs and go ahead, call me homophobic, I don't a bugger.
Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 12, 2008 12:31 PM

enrepres at April 12, 2008 9:37 AM
Gareth Evans

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 12, 2008 12:30 PM

Yeah but Marcus - since when does time to enact policies translate to the right to lie and not be scrutinised?

You raise some valid points ministerial responsibility but seem to miss the point that they were eventually sacked. Time will tell if Rudd is so keen to sack his ministers and I think given the union influence on the party, he is not going to have that ability.

Where is your criticism of Rudd's staff abusing and threatening various journalists over his lies about being thrown off the farm as a child and the fake ANZAC service?

So far this current government has not shown they are any better than the previous one. Why the selective outrage?

As for Bin Laden - sorry but left wing lies, innuendos and baseless conspiracy theories do not count as evidence. Bin Laden could irreparably damage the US by saying they gave him money. He hasn't - must be his deep friendship for Bush right?. And I believe his comment about never taking money from the US was made around the USS Cole incident in 2000 - well before Sept 11 and before Bush became president.

And indeed with an election coming up, I can't think of a better climate for him to do it.

Now I did not explain myself re the intervention and apology properly - I will clarify and you will see you have proven my point admirably.

When I heard about the government intervention, I was horrified. Governments going in and taking control like that? No way.

However, then the stories started coming about how bad things really were. I dated a woman for awhile who had been out to and worked in those settlements and heard the horror stories from her about the conditions.

Then we had the case here in WA where ten people were arrested in one of these settlements for child molestation. The people arrested were most of the town council/elders, the truant officer, the police liasion officer, a teacher - basically everyone in a position of authority was in on it. Those children had nowhere to go and nobody to report to. And thanks to the permit system, they remained closed off from outside scrutiny.

I began to change my mind. It is a blight on our supposed enlightened society that we allow those sorts of conditions to exist and do nothing about them. And it was the NT government doing absolutely nothing with the report on how bad things were that finally prompted the Howard government to start acting.

Now I am sure you would remember the case in Queensland where the judge ruled that the nine year old abuse victim "probably agreed" to be gang raped. What is not so well known is that before that incident, after some earlier abuse, she was removed from that environment and placed with a foster family. Then some snivelling left wing bureaucrats took her from that family saying "We fear for another Stolen Generation" and so she was sent back and raped again - all because of the lie of the Stolen Generation.

Now thanks to Rudd saying 'Sorry we removed children from such horrible conditions. We won't do it again', and the backing away from the intervention and reinstating the permit system (gee I wish I could have a system to keep people I don't want out of my suburb) another generation of Aborigines are going to grow up in those conditions. All thanks to worthless symbolism.

Now a bunch of morally bankrupt leftists from around the world having a big group toss session about how good our moral standing is by making such a worthless gesture at a very real cost does not make it so.

Indeed if those sorts are saying how good we are, then that only proves to me that we have taken a huge step back.

And as far as I am concerned there is no welcome move to the left. The left today is the antithesis of individual liberty, economic freedom, and personal responsibility. The left today is the surrendering of individual rights to the grotesque monster of government.

"Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."

Posted by: stoic at April 12, 2008 12:13 PM

FWB we all know that women are not that easy with this term...most of them make love, and for men its just sex....different stuff. About 4 years ago i met a guy in here i thought he was looking for something serious as me, big mistake, without even noticed it, i became his FWB, even if he knew that in every single sexual encounter i was leaving my heart with him, this didnt make any difference, the only reason to him to rang me was just sex, and nothing more than that, i wasn't happy about it but i couldnt stop my feelings to develop, sorprisely one day i woke up and refused to kept going like that, i realise i deserve better, dont get me wrong he's still in my heart but he cant use me whenever he feel like it, NO MORE ..i would love to tell to all women out there, open your eyes and never let nobody playing for a fool.
Love yourself thats the key.
Dora

Posted by: misterygirl at April 12, 2008 12:00 PM

Wow...when did friends with benefits, ie. bonking buddies turn into a political debate. Great to see you firing up on all cylinders Stoic. Such insight from one so young :)

OG...I have NO idea how you can equate homosexuality with paedolphilia. They are vastly different, one being a sexual preference between consenting adults, the other based on victimisaton and control, a sense of power if you like, over an innocent child. Paedophiles do not purely target boys so how can it be even considered homosexuality? Homophobia is a very nasty disease and one you should get over, each to their own without the likes of you, a generational gap maybe, fausting your views upon the masses.

Odd how you see lesbians as being "different" to homosexual men. Why is it any different - still same sex couples?

Oh well..I suppose difference is what makes the world an interesting place, however, there is little room for bigotry.

Posted by: wishfulthinker03 at April 12, 2008 10:58 AM

Remember Gareth Brown? He had a FWB
What about Cheryl Kernot? She also had a FWB.

Posted by: enrepres at April 12, 2008 9:37 AM

I do have many friends who are bonkers so perhaps I am heading towards having FWB.
I may even have Friends who Blog.
I know from experience that many young Aussies also go overseas to London and Europe to travel around hitting on all the loccal girls in the hopes of a bonk at the honkey tonks. This has been happening for many years and not likey to stop.
Funny thng is that these young people dont count what they do as being quite real. It happened overseas so you can forget your morals from home and it is open season on the local girls. Noone is looking over there to tell you it is wrong. They get the travel bug.
I'm beginning to think after all this reading that Friends with Benefits is just a politer name for casual sex but not SWS sex with strangers.

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 12, 2008 8:49 AM

The term “friend with benefits” appears to be of fairly recent origin.

A lot of subdivisions, as witness my attempt to accumulate a few, have appeared since.

Same with the term “bonk.”

The word can be traced to 1975

It’s use in the context of “to hit” appears to be dated from as early as 1919.

Then “to bang or to bump” from about 1960.

Then to have sexual intercourse, first appeared, it would seem, in 1975, where a reference appeared in a football magazine to some girl named Rita bonking or having sexual intercourse with the entire Aston Villa football team.

There is a school of thought that opines that “bonk” was corrupted from “honk” as in “honky tonk” but the earlier use of hit (later “hitting upon someone”) then bang (“banging a woman”) appears a more natural progression.

It is now said that Young Britons avoid any contact with local culture when abroad and concentrate on bonking broads, booze and brawling

The term “to bonk" should be distinguished from “bonkers” which means, basically "crazy."

The term “bonkers” seems to have first appeared in 1957 as British slang, perhaps from an earlier naval slang meaning "slightly drunk" (1948), or from the notion of a thump on the head.

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 12, 2008 7:18 AM

OG @ 4.30pm: Lived in Sydney for 25 years, know Oxford Street well, worked nearby for a time. Often went to watch the Mardi Gras parade, along with hundreds of thousands of other Sydneysiders.

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 12, 2008 7:06 AM

stoic at April 11, 2008 10:44 PM
The Australian electorate has held the government accountable, by removing it recently.
The new government has a different mandate and is entitled to a reasonable amount of time to settle and implement their policies.
I'm not sure who sets the standards for accountability in your mind but the first term of the Howard government was remarkable for the number of ministers sacked for breaches of guidelines and corrupt behaviour. Howard himself later set new standards for lying (remember the 'lying rodent' attack by Brandis?) and deceiving us and attacking and intimidating public servants over the Tampa affair. He was pilloried by people from his own party for the lack of liberalism in his approach
Without going into lengthy detail of the last federal governments transgressions, if the current mob only have to better their predecessor's behaviour, accountability should be a breeze.
BTW. The Rudd apology had no connection to the previous governments somewhat gimicky intervention. It has allowed Australia to start to regain some of the moral standing in the world we once had.
Bin Laden. Plenty of evidence that he was a recipient of US largesse directly and indirectly. Their agencies policy of plausible deniability is a coverall. BL is not going to admit receiving it in the current climate.

oldergent at April 11, 2008 11:21 PM
Ogre. Costello is another swinging Liberal carcass. Not yet maggoty and unlike Howard still with his seat. He is now seen as a pathetic weakling by his party, because he did not have the ticker to take the leadership. Your mate Keating had the balls to roll Hawke in the same situation.
Fraser was much more in the Menzies mould than Howard, who he hated. I'd rather a Fraserite with no pants than a Costello with no testicles. If Turnbull does get elected as leader perhaps the party will once again become liberal and we will see a welcome shift to the left across the whole Australian spectrum.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 12, 2008 5:21 AM

Oh and by the way Stoic....so good to see you back....................K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 12, 2008 12:20 AM

Stoic, some years ago l was a Union Rep at the company l worked for.
We had most emloyees as members AMWU it was, and when it came to re negotiating our EBA's those who were non union members got every benefit that we got.

Now not sure about the ALP in the last election, but you most certainly cannot have union representation without being a member of a union. They won't even talk to you and rightly so in my opinion.

Where l work now, Union membership is a minority, and l get pissed off when employees who have a grievence with the company come to me for advice and ask me to sit in on any discussions that they may be required to have with management.

I have done this on several ocassions, and in one instance persuaded management to not sack one of the staff, as we were in dispute about our award and its very ambiguous wording, versus the company policy and procedures, wherein the award takes precedence.
Like it or not there are many employers out there who will screw their workers if they are able to. And that is wrong...............K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 12, 2008 12:19 AM

Richard K @ 7.32pm: Well done, sir. A far better classification than I could ever have come up with, and amusing to boot. Good stuff. And on that positive note I'll hit the hay.

PS Karina - thanks for rostering someone so late tonight. Appreciated.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 12, 2008 12:18 AM

Amber.
Turnbull for PM, that is a scary thought, I equate him with Frazer, with the same wonderful understanding of the working man, not. That is one thing I have never been able to find out, what happened to his (Frazer) pants? Well Amber I am happy to have a drink on Costello, never been to the Laid, hope to make it one day. Still don't agree with you but appreciate the thoughtfull and nice way you put your case.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 11, 2008 11:21 PM

Tis ok amberlight :)

I deliberately did not mention any names because I wanted to address what was said more than who said it. All my points were responding to different posts so please do not feel singled out.

And this is a free country. Anyone is free to have the most stupid and misguided beliefs they wish, just as I free to them how stupid and misguided their beliefs are, and in the case of my profile, to stay the hell away from me with those beliefs. Freedom of speech and freedom of thought cuts both ways :)

As I said, I didn't vote for the Coalition in the last election because they took their eye of the economic ball and started spending money like drunken sailors and oversaw continued increases in the size and cost of government.

No not every criticism is bigotry, but when it is based on lies, that is a different matter.

As for the union influence - I believe the ALP policy before the election was something along the lines that if a majority of a business's workforce (51%) wanted union representation or were union members, then the union would have sole authority to negotiate salary and conditions for the entire business - even for the 49% who didn't want union representation. They would have no choice in the matter and to make things worse, the union would be allowed to steal a negotiating fee off that 49%.

This might have only applied to specific industries and I have no idea if this is still their policy but even if that is only partially true it is abhorrent.

But I am glad you are one who hates the spin that Rudd is proving himself to be a master off. Now let's see other lefties hold him to same standard they demanded of Howard and maybe we can get some accountability back into government.

And that is something all sides should be coming together for

Posted by: stoic at April 11, 2008 10:44 PM

Hi all. Think I'll pass on the politics. Several of you are saying what I think, a lot better than I could.

And it was I who thought this blog was dying, untill we got into one of the 3 topics that used to be banned, because they caused people to get real and say with passion what was in their heart, instead of rabbiting on about the weather, like proper uncommunicative Poms.

"SPENDING THE KIDS' INHERITANCE" is what I want to pick up on. Thank you Amber at 10.39am for:

"We are a greedy generation (unlike .... own parents which is why so many baby-boomers are so well off themselves) where the "spend your kids' inheritance" ideology is seen as quite reasonable and even funny....Sadly we have exactly the same attitude to the world our kids will inherit!! "

Then virgil at 12:12 pm: "... whilst I agree that the idea of spending our kids inheritance sounds wrong, I am glad you have brought that up, because it might be just perception that it is the kids inheritance.

In reality it might be our moderate living expenses, so we can live out our years in relative comfort."

My contribution: I remember Bob Menzies buying another term in office by promising to give the age pension to everyone over 70, so you wouldn't need to save for your old age from 45 to 65, as soon as your kids were off your hands.

But I disagree that he was mainly a leftie in disguise - I reckon he was just pork-barreling his own constituency in a new way. Might be wrong. Am I?

My mum took it straight away, but my slightly-richer aunt said she didn't need it, and only took it 20 years later, when she moved from her house into a retirement home with bigger expenses - to let her leave something to her beloved nephews.

We gave our kids a private high-school education and uni for the girls (the boy wanted to be a working blacksmith in a historical village, and was at metalwork TAFE when he died.)

He'd had trumpet and scouts, and the girls had what they fancied - ballet to 16 and then dancing in 42nd St and other Xmas vacation Musicals for one, violin for the other, and a 6-week tour of Europe and the UK with the school in year 11. Her mother paid her $6000 fare, and I gave her a $500 camera and $1500 spending money - 10% of my after-tax income that year. Joan earned a lot more than I did, after 1983.

She said she'd fund them for full-time uni as long as they liked, but if they were ever so stupid as to want to get married, they could pay for that themselves. Every cent.

They did well for themselves. One had 37 subordinates when she left her job in her mid-30s, to have her first child a week later.

The other was up to level 7 in the public service before she was 30, while doing a third (Masters) degree by correspondence in the evenings.

They'll get a bit more when their mother dies - what her house and enormous library fetches. Very much less from me - I rent, have no investments except a small annuity from my Super, and can't save on my meagre income.

I believe you should spend whatever you need out of your life savings for a reasonable standard of living, and applaud people who've taken out a reverse mortgage to give them a reasonable life after they can't work.

If there is an inheritance, I believe it should be trusteed to give young children a good education, and no lump sum till they're 30, used to living within their income, and a bit less likely to splurge it on unnecessary luxuries.

I got a small sum from my grandmother's estate (a year's income) at 40, which covered Joan being out of the workforce for 5 years, due to the 3rd child. That was really helpful, but we didn't need any more than that, to get by.

I could do with $10,000 now for working capital to expand my business so it feeds me better, but am looking to myself to earn that. Better get back to it now. Seeyez.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 11, 2008 10:20 PM

Wow Stoic,
And I call myself opinionated!!

I read your profile and I imagine that only someone who actually agrees with your view of the world would be comfortable expressing a political opinion (or any opinion!) in your presence! Despite the fact I am some 20 years older than you, I would be intimidated!

However, your comments about anyone crticising America as being just anti-American bigotry is rubbish.
Even Americans themselves have not always been proud of the role their country has enacted in various countries around the world.

As far as the economy is concerned, I never said that the Liberals did nothing.
However, the country was well on the mend by the time Keating was voted out and Howard and his government benefited from this.
I did say that the Liberals were so busy patting themselves on the back in the last few years they didn't notice that the economy was overheating until it was too late, which is fair comment.

As far as the unions are concerned, I thought that it was no longer legal to deny someone a job because they aren't in the union and had been that way for several years.
There is no way that Rudd would overturn this, he is far too conservative. In fact for anyone to say that the current Labor Party is anywhere close to left of centre is quite erroneous.

Regarding the Liberals being gagged, just to corrrect you there, in my post I stated both sides of politics are guilty of insisting their MPs only opine the party line, not just the Liberals.
I may be a "leftie" but I hate the spin that goes with both sides of politics these days; no side can claim the higher moral ground when it comes to populist politics.

Regarding your comment about Rudd and Departmental press releases, in my state of SA this has been the case with the Rann Labor government for quite a few years.

As far as union support for Labor, things have certainly not been rosy between the Rann Goverment and the union movement for a very long time. And they are about to get worse with our recent WorkCover changes.

Not everyone who disagrees with you talks BS, Stoic. There is room for everyone's ideas in this world.

I disagree OG! Costello missed his opportunity. Both sides will be jostling for the middle-ground and Turnbull will be the next leader simply because Peter Costello is too disliked by the public in general and Turnbull is liked.

Re the Republic,
As an avowed Monarchist, John Howard did more to advance the case of the Republican cause than any other Prime Minister in Australia's history.
When did we ever see the Governor-General? He was completely side-lined.

Everything the GG would have once been involved in was done by John Howard, unless of course he thought it wasn't important enough (e.g. not enough TV cameras!)
As a Prime Minister he did a pretty good imitation of a President.
If Australians now think the GG's role is a waste of time, is it any wonder?

Gosh Richard,
A full thesis on Friends of all Descriptions! Never realised there were so many categories!

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 11, 2008 10:01 PM

Stoic,
As much as the other did unfortunately. It never ceases to amaze me the resilience of this nation to overcome the idiocy of the governments we occasionally have to endure. Costello is the only one strong and smart enough to pull the one ringed circus into disarray, they could not touch him in opposition and must be thanking their lucky starts he did not stand. Let Nelson stay till Costello can muster the troops, then when the time is ripe move in.
Already we are seeing the comittee mentality coming in, the endless talkfest's that achieve nothing except stoke the ego's of the already ego infested. I was very interested in a Chinese friends reaction to Rudds visit, he was a great admirerer of Rudd, then when he found out that he was an ex diplomat and his wife was a Millionairess he was disgusted that he was the leader of the workers party. But what about the about face on the Rebublic, another untruth told during an election, more discent among the people, how many times do we have to put that to rest.
OG
Ps Karina, in my previous post to Stoic I used the term Holy Duck excretta Batman the S..t was cut out yet Richard can use the F word several times with apparent impunity, that smacks of discrimination against Dinosaurs. lol

Posted by: oldergent at April 11, 2008 8:59 PM

I enjoyed your FWB post of around about 7 pm, richard-whoever you are now... most entertaining, as usual.

Posted by: malsie at April 11, 2008 8:57 PM

Listen up to richardzkruspe at April 11, 2008 7:32 PM.

Now that is age old experience.

Posted by: justsaying at April 11, 2008 8:49 PM

Posted by: stoic at April 11, 2008 5:58 PM

Hear, hear.

Posted by: auntykaz at April 11, 2008 6:00 PM

Absolutely correct however the unions should not control government.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 11, 2008 6:45 PM

There is no more interest in this topic so another has been made up.....your other blogs have been interesting though.

Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 11, 2008 8:20 PM

Yeah but OG - how much damage is going to be done before the media decides to start doing their job?

No government should be given a free run or a "honeymoon" period for any amount of time.

I would welcome Costello as a leader if he would stop sulking and start taking the government to task over its performance. He could be playing a game on a Nintendo DS and still demolish Swan in any debate, and I think it is fair to say he enjoys his time in front of the media as much as Rudd. But if he is content to continue sulking and then leave Parliament, then we are better off without him.

With the media being sycophantic lapdogs, the well-being of Australia depends upon a good, robust Opposition.

Nelson is utterly useless (another one who should be calling out the 2020 summit as the utter bullshit it is instead of going along with it) and has been totally ineffective.

There has been a lot of opportunity already to take this government to task and he has done nothing.

Posted by: stoic at April 11, 2008 8:15 PM

When you begin a relationship you are usually not in love with the other person. You continue to see them and enjoy their company and then after a month or two or three you have sex with them. Or if you are Virgil date three because the relationship is only to last for three months.
You are still not in love with this person but are likely fond of them and wish to continue to see them. Are you not the Friends with Benefits until you do fall in love or not and go yor different ways?

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 11, 2008 8:02 PM

Stoic @ 5.58.
Holy duck Batman, I'm glad I'm on your side. But do not worry about the media, when they decide that they want a new govt. they will turn on the show pony and look for another Clydesdale, then I would not be surprised if Costeelo jumps in just to get up the virg's nose.

Yeah Virg, never had the opportunity to go to Uni, but found that when I needed one of that type I could usually afford to hire one.

Kaz,
Typical of any govt. of any ilk, if we dont like it we will form a comittee to report when the kerfuffle dies down, then we will do nothing, which we always intended to do, but in the meantime our mates got a Quango.
Who said this one was dead?
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 11, 2008 7:50 PM

Friends of Pluto?

Just when you think Scientology has reached the depths of idiocy... :)

Posted by: stoic at April 11, 2008 7:49 PM

Friends with Emotional Benefits

Friends with emotional benefits or FWEB (pronounced "feb") is a relationship between two people similar to the more common friends with benefits arrangement, except without the physicality. Benefits include being able to whine, pamper, understand, defend, help, talk, whisper, use inside jokes with each other, etc... Hallmarks of such a relationship are two people who talks about sex, but never have sex. One person in the relationship is typically sprung. The other person is typically "looking," "still young," or "not sure." They bear every semblance to a real couple, except they are not one.
An ex-couple which stay close, uncomfortably close, friends. Typically, sprung guys/girls have a Friends with Emotional Benefits relationship.

"You guys are such fwebs. Quit being fwebs and just get back together."

Friends with Potential

Friends that have the potential to become fuck buddies or boyfriend/girlfriend in the future.

Frank and Allison went to a rock concert as friends with potential. They agreed to keep it casual and friendly, but if they both got shitfaced and fucked each other, neither would complain the next day (sorry about the language but Klay and his ilk talk like this)

Friends in which have 'benefits,' but also have potential of some day being together as boyfriend/girlfriend. These friends do stuff together, but for more than just fun. They actually have feelings for each other, and usually want a relationship eventually; however, they often cannot yet due to a 'sticky situation.'

Friends with Intentions

Similar to friends with privileges and friends with potential, but implies that you are keeping friendship with a guy/girl with the goal of making a relationship with him/her, rather than just randomly hooking up. Friends with intentions are more then regular friends, but they can never be BFF.

"How are you and Jennifer doing?"
"Nothing too exciting, she is my friends with intentions."

Friends with minor benefits

These are two individuals, usually a male and a female, who occasionally engage in non-coital sexual behavior (most often masturbation but possibly other forms) without being lovers or having any long-term commitment. Usually this is done on an infrequent basis if one or the other is in need. Think of this as one possible and occasional outcome of a strong friendship between a man and a woman.

“While Tom and Jennifer's relationship was usually Platonic, sometimes theirs devolved into that of 'friends with minor benefits"

Friends with privileges

An acquaintance with whom a person has consensual sexual interests, sex partner.

“Do you really like Danielle?”
”Are you crazy, we are just friends with privileges.”

Friendsex

Casual sexual activity with no emotional strings attached. people who engage in friendsex are friends with benefits

Friendship Divorce

A clean break and end to a friendship, much like a divorce or separation, but between platonic friends.

“He was being an asshole, so I had to friendship divorce him.”

Friends that Fuck:

A friend with which you occasionally engage in sexual activity ranging from mutual masturbation to oral sex to intercourse. A true "FTF" relationship seldom involves kissing. If your kissing, its probably more than just a friend.

Friends Zone

The point at which you can no longer date a girl. She has told you too many secrets, or you took too long to make your move.

You are now in the friends zone, and there is no return.

He “I've been thinking, we've been getting along pretty good now and I want to take you out on a date, I really like you.”

She “Awwww I think you're a really nice, sensitive, understanding guy, but I love you like a friend. So, just friends?”

He (thinks) Damn I'm in the friends zone

Friends Shelf

Usually pertaining to guys, the friends shelf is when a girl labels you a friend, disallowing you to be anything more then "just friends".

“I am on the friends shelf because this girl hangs out with me and we get along great but I will never be more then a friend to her.”

Friendship Horizon

Point at which it becomes impossible to pull/shag your friend because you've become too familiar to each other.

“So how's it going with Samantha?"
”She farted in front of me today. Twice. I guess we're well over the friendship horizon and into the comfort zone.”
”Oh dear”

Friends with Benefits

Two friends who have a sexual relationship without being emotionally involved. Typically two good friends who have casual sex without a monogamous relationship or any kind of commitment.

A safe relationship, that mimics a real partnership but is void or greatly lacking jealousy and other such emotions that come with a serious relationship.

A physically involved relationship, where both partners enjoy some comforts of sitting on the fence between serious relationship and simple friendship.

Any relationship that can only be categorized as being between Friends and Partners, also referred to as more then friends

Two people break up over complications of a serious relationship and decide to continue their relationship a step down, but not far enough as to have physical boundaries.

After so much utter crap, how about these refreshing definitions:

Friends of Jesus:

Hippies, teenage dirtbags.

That’s ME.

"Eleven long-haired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus" (Convoy, CW McCall)

Friends with Dorothy

A way to describe a homosexual man.

My first girlfriend was named Dorothy. Now I’m worried!

Friends of Pluto

Church of Scientology and dedicated to the idea that Pluto is the so-called "Clear Planet". They strive tirelessly to found missions to the dwarf planet, to research its cold and icy wastes, to plunge to very pith of its being and to sell a collection of pro-Pluto propaganda videos titled Pluto: Paradise!

Should concentrate on Mars and Venus if you ask me and/or stick to hotdogs- pluto pups are so yesterday

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 11, 2008 7:32 PM

mmmmmmmmm Politics.
I must have entered the wrong blog.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 11, 2008 6:45 PM

OG

I dont know what point you are trying to make here, but the facts of the matter are that most people tend to approach their accountant for bookkeeping, and then pay possibly $80 per hour for bookkeepimg services, whereas approaching a bookkeeper directly they will pay around $45 per hour, or less.

Many accountants are leaving the profession particularly due to the introduction of IFRS (moving from Australian Accounting Standards to the international accounting standards.)

Posted by: virgil at April 11, 2008 6:01 PM

Here in Victoria we had the Looking Glass Premier.....everything raised was met with ..."we will be looking into that"...or so it seemed anyway......

Unions... well as a card carrying ANF member l would never be without union representation, having seen people shafted by employers in the past and not having a leg to stand on...
And have also been a Union Rep.
Without Unions we would all still be earning pittance, or close to it.......
Afair days pay for a fair days work and all...................K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 11, 2008 6:00 PM

So much BS so little time.

Now to shoot down some of the coming criticism, let me state a few facts

I am Libertarian in the Classical Liberalism sense. Individual liberty and economic freedom and a minimum of government interference, leaving people as free from coercion as possible.

Leave me the hell alone to live my life as I see fit and I will do the same for you.

I didn't vote for the Coalition in the last election because I was sick of their excessive spending and "Big Government as the solution to all problems" philosophy.

I despise the Left for much the same reason. Scratch a the surface of a lefty pretending to care about anything hard enough and you will find a totalitarian dog willing to use the full force of government to impose their will on individuals for their messed up world view.

I hate socialism in all its forms - National, economic, or Christian (for those who will try to tie me in with the religious "right" - or Moralistic socialism if you prefer)

Now to some of the BS being thrown about.

RE: Bin Laden - the US never funded him. Typical left wing BS.

Bin Laden himself says he has never taken money from the US and never would because of their support for Israel.

There were two resistance groups in Afghanistan vs the USSR. One was the local Afghani tribes in the North (the Northern Alliance). Did none of you wonder how only a month after Sept 11, the US was working with these tribes in operations? Hint - they had a working relationship from the 80's.

The Northern Alliance received intel, training, and money from the CIA against the Soviets - but the most significant contribution to them (supplied by both the CIA and MI6) was the Stinger Surface to Air Missiles - which seriously hampered Soviet air operations.

A second "group" comprised of non-Afghan Muslims volunteered to go fight against the Soviets as well. This volunteer force had nothing to do with the US. A major organiser and financier of this group was Bin Laden, with the assistance of the Saudi and Pakistani governments.

Now to the typical left wing anti-American bigotry of the US being too stupid to recognise Iraq in the Iran-Iraq axis.

Yeah - that is why when the Iran-Iraq war started turning against Iraq and they looked like losing, the US provided Iraq with funds to keep fighting - specifically so Iran would not overrun Iraq and become a major power in the region.

It is fair to say the current administration did not have the foresight or vision to see that - no arguments here - but again, never let the facts get in the way of some anti-American bigotry.

The recession we had to have? Absolutely. Caused by Hawke and Keating's excessive spending since 1987.

As for the all the BS about the previous government doing nothing? Yeah sure. They did nothing to get us through the Asian meltdown and pay off some $96b in government debt (after being told it was closer to $15b). This all was made easier by Hawke's reforms which were recognised as good for the country and thus supported by the then Opposition but to say they did nothing and just cruised through - more left wing lies. In the last few years they took their eye off the ball - see my initial comments about not voting for them because of their big spending.

Rudd's economic credentials - HA! He is going to ease prices and interest rates and everything else, while pushing the big Global Warming and Kyoto lies that are going send energy prices (and thus the price of everything else that relies on energy i.e everything) through the roof. Any of you complaining about that or questioning that?

Kyoto - yay. Worthless symbolism. Now Australia is going to pay billions to much larger economies like Russia (who lied about their industrial output in 1990) and all for absolutely no effect on the climate. Symbolism over substance (and of course the symbolism is going to cost all of us so leftists can feel good about themselves)

The Sorry debacle - more worthless symbolism which will condemn another generation of Aborigines to misery and poverty (and I say this as someone whose natural distaste for government intervention had him utterly opposed to the announced intervention). In another 10-20 years there will need to issue another apology.

Someone also suggested that Liberal members were gagged from speaking out. So I take it there is equal criticism of Rudd's announcement that any government department press release must be cleared through his office first, thereby gagging individual departments until they have been told that what to say?

The union influence on the ALP is an affront to democracy. That they can steal member fees and use it to push a political agenda is a disgrace. Union membership should be there as a choice for those who wish to join a union. Unfortunately under the ALP, that choice will be removed. Either you join or you don't work.

But again, lefties don't see a problem with that because it suits their view.

OG is right - the media did everything in its power to give Rudd an easy run - and they are still doing it. Every government needs to be held to the utmost scrutiny. The media is not doing it. But again, I don't expect any criticism from any lefties.

It is disgraceful the media has involved itself in the 2020 summit. Any journalist with a shred of integrity would excuse him/herself from any involvement except for reporting on it. It is nothing but a bunch of ivory tower fascist social engineers wanting to rule by diktat and the media should be giving it the utmost scrutiny - not joining in with it.

Depending on how long this comment takes to appear, I may address some of the other BS I may have missed.

Cheers all

Posted by: stoic at April 11, 2008 5:58 PM

Virgil - but some people mightn't have finished bonking their friends yet.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 11, 2008 1:20 PM

You have been present during both FWB dabates WnW, so maybe might expect you have a more reasoned view.

In many cases FWB is what is left after a traditional relationship cannot be sustained. This is very different to just having sex with a mate of the opposite sex.

Posted by: virgil at April 11, 2008 5:42 PM

Just to lighten the mood in here a bit..

Two guys, one old and one young, are pushing their carts around Bunnings Hardware when they collide.
The old guy says to the young guy, 'Sorry about that, I'm looking for my wife and I guess I wasn't paying attention to where I was going.'
The young guy says, 'That's OK. It's a coincidence. I'm looking for my wife too. I can't find her and I'm getting a little desperate.'
The old guy says, 'Well, maybe we can help each other. What does your wife look like?'
The young guy says, 'Well, she is 24 years old, tall, with blonde hair, blue eyes, long legs, big boobs and she's wearing tight white shorts, a halter top and no bra. What does your wife look like?'
The old guy says, 'Doesn't matter – let's look for yours.'

Posted by: enrepres at April 11, 2008 5:33 PM

hinterlandlover - what was that about?

Posted by: woodnwine at April 11, 2008 5:30 PM

Hinterland.
Wrap yourself up in your righteous indignation, fullfill yourself with your liberal thoughts, and enjoy your unfortunate friend. Your experiences are different to mine, I equate them that are preditors no better than you would regard a rapist. I have heard people defend rapists as being unfortunates who cant help it, "give me a break". Yes and when I go over seas I also say, thank God I'm Australian. My only other advice to you is to get yourself down to Oxford street in Sydney and see your gay community as it really is. I am glad I mentioned in my profile my dislikes too. I've read your profile, have a read of mine.
OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 11, 2008 4:30 PM

I have to say I had a FWB.
Started off as a date then i didn't pursue it,contacted her a few months later,she was mad keen,I had never met anyone so insane for me.
then after a year i thought this is stupid , I need to say something,I want more than this and she will really go for a committed relationship.
i asked, she thought about and then said goodbye "friend"

Boy, I thought if I was a friend then what doe she do with her enemies !!!!

Posted by: magellan2 at April 11, 2008 3:57 PM

Ogre. Lately and today.
The measure of compassion and cohesion in a society is how well we can care for those who for whatever reason are unable to properly do it themselves.
This applies to 17 yo single mothers and, even to 77 year old farmers who for whatever reason now find themselves in a marginal situation.
The roots of this egalitarian and prosperous society were laid by the unions fighting for rights in the 1890's Australia, was then the worlds most wealthy country per capita after our gold rush. Almost every persons relatively high wages and conditions stem from that time and the equitable distribution of the money generated. Hopefully the same thoughts will prevail in our current minerals boom (and some of the revenue will be used to save our natural assets like the dying southern river eco systems). We don't want a real banana republic where 5% have everything and the rest struggle.
Some of the strident feminist ones are a bit of a worry. There is a breed of them who want to post-modernise, narrativise, semioticise and remove phrases like the engineering expression 'rigid body' from texts because it masculinises.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 11, 2008 3:38 PM

On reading recent entries, I am reminded of why I mention in my profile some dislikes - homophobes, xenophobes, philistines - in order to deter ageing men with social attitudes I thought we left behind in the 50s from contacting me! No matter how handsome, tall, rich or generous he may be, a man without a sense of social justice, without compassion for the less fortunate, and without a strong belief in the necessity for all members of our society to be treated equally before the law, will never get past first base with me. Amongst my friends and colleagues past and present these values are taken for granted, but not here it appears in this so-called real world of internet dating.
If as a consequence I never meet Mr Right, or Mr Right Enough, so be it. Far better than compromising myself for the sake of some [dubious] company. Interesting though, my profile comments have actually attracted a couple of potentials.
Oh, and when I travel overseas later this year and stay with my gay [male] friend who will generously go out of his way to make my stay enjoyable, for the first time in years, when asked where I'm from, I'll feel proud to say Australia!

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 11, 2008 2:47 PM

Amber.
I think you know me well enough now to know the reference to the single mother did not refer to all single mothers, just those that deliberately set out to have children and never work, let the state support them.

Again you know that I was only refering to male homosexuals. Lesbians pose no threat to any male, by definition, if you mean by am I homophobic "yes" because I do not see any distinction between a homo' and a paedophile attracted to boys I have had some in a debate admit that they could be tempted in certain situations, others said never, but admited that they had started sexually with men at around 10 years of age. To the true paedophile, again they are an abomination. Bi-sexual woman, great teacher.

That 80 yo, my point, how do they do it and get away with it. There is a Epost going around called "Stupid Aussie" you should read it if you get the chance, but amber I don't think you would like it, a bit too close to the bone for a lot of liberal thinkers.

Yep I agree, AMA, Farmers, they have no right to get involved in politics either, I have the book "Great Australian Rorts" worth a read if you can get you hands on it

Yes Virgil,
Then go and talk to the workers who lost their jobs because they were too expensive to keep on with the incessant demands of the unions running the Government. That is first hand experience. It was also an economy measure that we went to bookkeeper instead of Accountants, saved a lot of money too. Dont tell me your clients have not complained to you about it in the course of your dealings with them. Now I would like you to come back to me on that point.
OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 11, 2008 1:58 PM

Virgil - but some people mightn't have finished bonking their friends yet.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 11, 2008 1:20 PM

OG,
*Not all single mothers are 17 year olds never planning on working! I am a single mother and so are many of the working women on RSVP!

*Howard's attitude to refugees (and illegals; and sorry weren't the Vietnamese refugees in the 70s technically illegal as well? There were many thousands more than the numbers of people coming to Australia in recent years; they were just not demonised and used as an election issue!!) has helped to make life for even "legal' refugees much more difficult in Australian society.
Unless you're white, of course!

*You don't suffer from Homophobia do you OG? There will always be those who do things some of us may consider "immoral" or cruel OG whether homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual. Homosexuals include women too!
I hope you aren't mixing up Homosexuality and Paedophilia! So ver ydifferent and quite unrelated. (this is a common mistake)

*Unionists. As in all sections of society there have been power and corruption issues and the union movement is no different. Past unionists are the people who helped change our workplaces for the better including OHSW and helped raise the life expectancy for working men. Anyway, aren't the AMA and the Farmer's Federation also unions? Bet you'd have nothing bad to say about them?

You have every right to your opinion OG but it's not just "illegal refugees" and sinlge mothers who rort the system.
I can give you an example of a man who brought his 80 year old mother from the UK (who had lots of health problems; I'm really surprised she got to come here as I thought there were quite severe restrictions on health).
She had sold up everything she owned in the UK to come and live with him. She was here six weeks became ill and ended up in hospital. He refused to take her home again and she ended up being placed in a Nursing Home ahead of someone else who had paid taxes here in Australia all their lives!

I am sure we all could find many examples of peope rorting the system, including aged pensioners, but does that make it true for everyone?

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 11, 2008 1:16 PM

While on the subject of bonking our mates, workchoices was the best thing Howard did, because it motivated all Australians to boot him out.

Without work choices, we would be sitting here probably with Costeelo as PM now.

I saw the spelling mistake, but liked it

Posted by: virgil at April 11, 2008 12:19 PM

Karina

As we seem to have this bonking our opposite sex friends issue fairly sorted, I wonder about a topic on "spending the kids inheritance".

This might bring many new and valuable insights

Posted by: virgil at April 11, 2008 12:15 PM

I like Marcus' analogy of the fertile pastures of deregulated markets and a floating dollar, and inflation kept in check by payrises funding super.

Where Howard determined to drive Australia back to the 1950's plowed in the fences.

Amberlight, whilst I agree that the idea of spending our kids inheritance, sounds wrong I am glad you have brought that up, because it might be just perception that it is the kids inheritance. In reality it might be our moderate living expenses, so we can live out our years in relative comfort.

Also, as I have never been out of Australia, a couple of overseas trips before I die would not be too much to ask for either.

Posted by: virgil at April 11, 2008 12:12 PM

Marcus and Troy
I couldn't argue with your posts in the main, but I am sure that you will agree that War is money, it keeps some countries economies bouyant, although some in America are starting to wonder and have the Iraq conflict estimated at over $5000 us a second.

Amber, on your marginalisation of sections of the community I must take issue, personal experience-single mothers I have a relative, single mother 2 children,2 fathers 17 years of age, no intention to ever work and will have other children if she wants more money, will not listen and can't be told, tell me thats not a drain. Nothing against refugees, everything against illegals, I have friends that want to migrate and I want to migrate, they do it the hard way, now answer me how do poor "refugees" get the exhorbinant amounts of money to pay the filth that move them? Then have the gall to make us pay the parasites through the courts to get to stay here.

Homosexuals, I can understand how women can tolerate them, they are no harm to women, I have worked in a lot of rough camps and jobs, I can give you book and candle on some of the things I have experienced and seen personally. (Troy spot on re brown) to me odium is the word.

Unionists, big joke, read would be political parties, argue how they can spend $30 mill of their funds to fight for labor, do you think that every unionist votes labor, I know a lot that dont, but have to pay their union dues, they don't have to pay, but if they dont their life is a misery at work. They are never asked if they want to contribute to the Labor party. Also how could that money help the needy in tough times.

Unemployed, yep been there and done that, but never starved or lost my home, and was thankfull for that.

As to each having differing views always, and I am wise enough to know neither party will change the views of the other. But there are some old stagers who would vote for Hitler if he came back as a labor candidate, so entrenched is their hatred of any other party.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 11, 2008 12:12 PM

OG,
Actually I tend to agree with you, political parties do tailor their platforms to what they think will be popular. Which makes it a huge "con" game and ensures the major political parties and not the people remain in control.
However, I don't agree that the media gave the election to Rudd, I think Howard gave the election to Rudd.

People just got sick of Howard's bloody-minded ideaology, his refusal to moderate his policies and had (it took a damn long time I have to say!!) finally caught onto the way he used the marginalisation of certain sections of the community (e.g. single mothers, refugees, homosexuals, unionists, the unemployed, to name but a few) to divert the media's attention away from himself and his Government when they should have been made accountable for their policies and actions.

Marcus,
I agree, but who is going to have the guts to try to change the way the system works and concentrate on a sustainable world and tailor the economic policies to match?
Rudd immediately started back-peddling on the environment once the touchy subject of the jobs that rely on these unsustainable industries was broached.
We are a greedy generation (unlike their own parents which is why so many baby-boomers are so well off themselves) where the "spend your kids' inheritance" ideaology is seen as quite reasonable and even funny and something to make amusing(?) advertisements out of.
Sadly we have exactly the same attitude to the world our kids will inherit!!

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 11, 2008 10:39 AM

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 11, 2008 9:07 AM

Marcus, Iran/Iraq balance did offer 'stability'. The existence of the USSR offered much the same to those states it had under it's control. It's existence offered stability to, well, us, not to those affected of course, most of whom where innocent people trying to live their lives but, much like Iraq, other side of the world, not our problem. Have to say mate, I love that term odious, what a way to describe Saddam's regime, maybe a tad understated. I digress, Certainly the USSR, prior to it's breakup offered the west many benefits. Bin Laden was their problem just as Saddam would have remained Iran's problem. Additionally, all these nasty former USSR problems would have remained their problem. I agree with you Marcus, odious or not, these regimes dealt with the issues in ways the west cannot. So it is the breakup of the USSR that has created the majority of the interculural/religeous issues facing the world today. Oh, and I reckon Bob Brown is a wanker :-)
Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 11, 2008 10:19 AM

Afganistan - another good example of FWB.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 11, 2008 9:47 AM

amberlight58 at April 11, 2008 12:07 AM

Consumer capitalism, continuous debt financed and unsustainable exploitation= money and it will be the reason for the ecological and social destruction of our little planet.
Saddam's reason for claiming to have WMD was hubris especially after the Israeli's destroyed his reactor at Osirak in '82. What is not sufficiently realised is that this implicit threat kept the peace between warring neighbours Iraq (20 million) and Iran(80 millin people) in the toughest neighbourhood on the globe. Iraq had learnt from Israeli nuke deterent theory. Of course the stupid Americans (and JWH) could not see this and did the truly dangerous, mad theocrats in Iran a huge favour and damaged their own interests even more by destroying an odious but relatively very stabilising regime.
The CIA also actively supported and armed Bin Laden in Afghanistan when the Soviets were there.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 11, 2008 9:07 AM

Amber.
An interesting post, not that I agreed with a lot of it. Agreed with the American bit. But if memory serves me right it was Hawke who pinched the Liberals platform to win one election, the furtherest move right from the Labor party. Hewson gave Keating his. Howard pinched Paulines policies to win one of his. The media gave Rudd his, for it is a fact that people do not think (en masse) any more and take the 15 second tv grab as gospel. The ideology of any political party is only governed by what they think the great unwashed will swallow to win the election for them. After they have won, who cares if they break promises, start counting the promises already broken by the incumbents and keep counting.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 11, 2008 9:01 AM

Karina - I think this one has ground to a halt. Do we still need 3 tomorrow?

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 11, 2008 1:29 AM

Yes I too see the irony that we discussed politics on a "friends with benefits" blog. Friends with Benefits, a bit like politics really!!

Sorry Troy must disagree. If we invaded every country in the world that had "genocide being committed by a lunatics regime" we would be at war with a very large number of countries!

Iraq had nothing to do with Saddam being a lunatic, he was a nasty despot when he was on the payroll of the Americans, but America turned a blind eye because he was THEIR nasty despot.
Saddam's biggest mistake was thinking he could survive without remaining sufficently grateful to the Americans for putting him there.
He seriously misjudged Bush Jnr's bunch of war mongers who felt affronted about the previous Gulf War and the fact that he stuck his finger up at George Bush Snr.
America doesn't easily forgive such transgressions!

Anyway at the time, the reason given for invading Iraq was the threat to the free world from WMDs. Saddam's genocide only became the main reason, once it was realised that the WMDs may not exist.

Troy our economy depends on us being a consumer focused society. We are encouraged to buy more, more, more so that we keep people in jobs. If people suddenly stopped buying and spending in a big way, then we'd see a huge loss of jobs in retail, the car and the hospitality industry. It's a no win situation really.

I agree with your sentiments re politicians. Both the Labor and the Liberal Parties complain about needing new blood within their ranks but then bright people enter politics with idealism and altruistic ideals and end up only being allowed to spout the party line because "disunity is death" .
The Liberals have always promoted themselves as being a party of individualism, yet we have seen over the past decade, the last thing they wanted was their politicians saying what they really thought! Which is why the Libs are currently infighting and in such a mess now.

As far as left-wing is concerned, the only way the current Labor Party can be mistaken as being left, is because in the past decade the Liberals moved so far to the right!
Bob Menzies was a loony leftie in comparison to Howard's version! The Labor Party have now moved to take the position that the Liberals once held, slightly to the right.
It will be interesting where the Liberals end up from here!

Sorry everyone for being "boring" but talking about the same old, same old over and over again is boring too!
Promise not to raise the dreadful "P" issue again!
Nothing like sex, religion and Politics to stir up the masses!

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 11, 2008 12:07 AM

Ahh Marcus my Lad,
There are more things twixt the cup etc.

Ohlala, I am back, I have just been finishing off the Spare Ribs sauce,( the authentic New Orleans one, with a couple of my twists) needless to say I don't want to kill you so NO. I must say I have noticed a change in you since your first posts, you are a much more confident and composed lady.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 10, 2008 10:04 PM

quiet tonight

Posted by: virgil at April 10, 2008 9:49 PM

Where is everyone here? Are you out looking or new friends?

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 10, 2008 9:31 PM

oldergent at April 10, 2008 1:00 PM

And you back to your Runes old son..

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 10, 2008 1:31 PM

Marcus.
Seems to be the mentality of people of your persuasion to think it is the right of a publicly funded organisation to enter into political campainging. Count the number of media political aspirants who attempted to get on the gravy train, and those that did. I bet if the other side of it did the same at the next election you would be screaming your Titties off.

Come to think of it last time I looked at your photo's you could probably do with a Bra yourself, wonder what you would think if somebody snapped your strap, that will get the Ladies thinking lol. Also I have seen some of the illuminaries you so obviously admire in action personally, and have had other people with first hand information give me stories, If I went any further this would not get posted, want more, stamp me. As to Costello, I don't think your description is quiet right, political savvy, he will be back when the time is right, that is unless he sells out like the rest of them and goes private for the money. Once again I have lived the life of it, I'll let you return to your books and googling.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 10, 2008 1:00 PM

Posted by: woodnwine at April 10, 2008 11:40 AM
Interesting that we are now talking about politicians on a topic dedicated to f..king your supposed friends.

Hmm. Fortunately no one is bringing up Milton Orkopoulos.
MS

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 10, 2008 12:24 PM

Sick Marcus.
You obviously havent benefited from any tips given to you, your still here, and much longer than me, might I add.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 10, 2008 12:20 PM

lonelyheart44 at April 10, 2008 11:23 AM

Regarding FWB and government.
Australian governments are in favor of FWB and have in many ways worked to allow us to preserve and exercise our freedoms.
Please don't include me in your 'why we are so painfully on here'. You have been given plenty of tips by nice men and women on how you might more quickly find a partner and disappear.

oldergent at April 10, 2008 11:28 AM
The wider media rightfully helped Rudd because they could see a fresh approach is needed. Howard became a maggoty political carcass but still lead because his annointed heir, Costello, didn't have the balls to take over.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 10, 2008 12:07 PM

Marcus, we might not agree on 'The world's Greatest Treasurer'....although he did enter politics with nothing and exited an extremely wealthy man...so he is obviously very good with his own wealth creration. I just hope you are correct in your judgement of Rudd and co.

Posted by: troyohboy at April 10, 2008 11:46 AM

Interesting that we are now talking about politicians on a topic dedicated to f..king your supposed friends.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 10, 2008 11:40 AM

Thank you Troy.
I have refrained from comment on the political side of things, but you have expressed my sentiments more eloquently than I ever could and a lot more politely. I voted for the great God Goof, once, for the pantsless one, once, for Blubbering Bob, once, for cheating keating, never. Lets get it right, it was the media that put Rudd into power, particularly the ABC branch of the ALP, along with the unions. If any of the out of NSW people want to see how bad Labor can get visit us for a while, and pay the price we pay for a govt. of incompetent fools, and no I did not vote for them either.
Not a cheerful OG.

Posted by: oldergent at April 10, 2008 11:28 AM

Do we have to talk about politics now, we would get crucified if we start talking religious beliefs. The two subjects have so much history, differing from one extreme to the other.
FWB has many different ideas from so many people, whether we believe it suits us or not is an arguement of its own.
Maybe we should look at the government issue with more to do with the subject of FWB, do they exist?.
No offence to anyone! Just think the subject about politics/government could get too sticky and complicated and get no where for any votes to better our life or why we are still so painfully on here.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 10, 2008 11:23 AM

troyohboy at April 10, 2008 9:45 AM

We have a reasonable center left state goernment in Victoria. My issues are that there is nowhere near enough attention given to the environment.
Regardless of what you think about partisan politics Hawke and Keating did what had to be done with our highly protected, overly regulated, inward looking 1950's economy.
That laid the groundwork for the current boom.
Rudd is a conservative and wealthy man and the richest bloke in Federal politics might be Garrett rather than Turnbull. I think you will be suprised by them as managers.
Infrastructure projects will get a big move along.
BTW. I didn't vote for them. No environmental credentials.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 10, 2008 10:40 AM

Unfortunately, the previous federal government were so busy patting themselves on the back that they didn't seem to notice the economy was actually overheating, hence the continuing interest rate rises and correction in the share market.
Not exactly what I would call "good economic management"!

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 10, 2008 12:50 AM

With the greatest respect amberlight, do you have any idea what you are talking about or are you just repeating, parrot fashion, the drivel put out by left wing media.

Trouble is amberlight, that Rudd has inherited a poisoned chalice, economy, high interest rates going higher, sharemarket uncertainty, particularly due to the sub prime crisis in the US, megabucks being sucked out of the economy to fight Howards war in Iraq.

The electorate is not that highly intelligent so that when in 3 years time, the commodities boom is running out of steam, China has bought up all of BHP, etc the Liberals will come along and say look what a wonderful economy we gave you, and you stuffed it up, and enough people will believe them, so out Labor will go.

Posted by: virgil at April 10, 2008 8:55 AM

Virgil, I am aware of your left leaning tendencies however you just make me arc up big fella. Rudd will determine his own fate, just as previous labour governments have, all of whom turned the economy into a cot case. Your poison chalice was also inherited by the previous liberal government however they managed to govern responsibly (if that term can be used for any of the bastards). You can't have your cake and eat it too virg, if the libs weren't responsible for the resources boom then you can't hold them accountable for the resultant heating of the economy, which is, at the end of the day, due to you, amberlight and I buying news cars and tv's.
Don't get me started on Iraq and that little gem 'Howards War'....what is your solution virgil. Easy look down from on high with the benefit of hindsight. Yep it has turned sour but I agreed at the time that we should not sit and watch genocide being committed by a lunatics regime. You obviously have the solution, please share it.
You are correct however with regard to the intelligence of the electorate. They voted in Rudd whist the Labour state governments concern themselves with factional politicing in-lieu of good governance.
Just to finish, I'm not a liberal hanger on they are not much better than labour. I just am amazed with the ability of labour to find charismatic leaders the unwashed are prepared to follow without question.
Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 10, 2008 9:45 AM

Trouble is amberlight, that Rudd has inherited a poisoned chalice, economy, high interest rates going higher, sharemarket uncertainty, particularly due to the sub prime crisis in the US, megabucks being sucked out of the economy to fight Howards war in Iraq.

The electorate is not that highly intelligent so that when in 3 years time, the commodities boom is running out of steam, China has bought up all of BHP, etc the Liberals will come along and say look what a wonderful economy we gave you, and you stuffed it up, and enough people will believe them, so out Labor will go.

Posted by: virgil at April 10, 2008 8:55 AM

Re the recession we had to have

Isn't it a well-known fact in financial circles that after a recession you usually have several good years before the cycle of boom and bust starts again?
Howard et al inherited those good years and took the credit for the good times. I thought the idea of good economic management is to ensure that the 'boom" times don't get so out of control, that a "correction" and the financial pain that involves is inevitable.

Unfortunately, the previous federal government were so busy patting themselves on the back that they didn't seem to notice the economy was actually overheating, hence the continuing interest rate rises and correction in the share market.
Not exactly what I would call "good economic management"!

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 10, 2008 12:50 AM

greatadvice at April 9, 2008 10:26 PM
Amusing and informative profile greatadvice, you will go well. Photo would be nice.
Do you need to limit yourself with the star signs though?
Fair comment about FWB. It is often about satisfying sexual curiosity for men. FWB's I have experience with have usually worked after a relationship was given a try but resulted in amicable separation.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 10, 2008 12:48 AM

thanks for responding, Virgil...

Posted by: greatadvice at April 9, 2008 11:05 PM

welcome greatadvice

we had a discussion on FWB before this topic, then all had a pretty fair go at the topic, with many agreeing to disagree.

I currently dont have any FWB.

not always a large turnaround sometimes can be a few minutes.

Posted by: virgil at April 9, 2008 10:52 PM

gee...just read the small print...12-24 hour turnaround time to post the blog??? Is it worth it?

Posted by: greatadvice at April 9, 2008 10:38 PM

Hi...first time blogger here....go easy guys!
Friends don't have sex...
really bugs me that a guy makes out that they are just after friendship after 'the event'...
especially when it was damn good.
My bad?

Posted by: greatadvice at April 9, 2008 10:26 PM

I agree with you woodnwine.....friends are friends...not bedfriends.

Posted by: aliane at April 9, 2008 9:39 PM

I thought that was b..k your friends Woodnwine.
I thought it was the talk of politics that had killed this blog but perhaps posters are busy with their friends in real world:))

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 9, 2008 8:58 PM

Dead and buried. My opinion .... don't f..k your friends .... they are friends.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 9, 2008 7:49 PM

Ogre.
That recession allowed the Australian economy to move forward and stabilise. Not generally recognised here as good but in world terms it was regarded as extremely good long term management. It set the scene for much of the prosperity we are now enjoying.
Cabinet documents have a 30 year no disclosure restriction. The 'truth of time in office' would have to be interpreted and relayed by journos and historians. Who is going to choose them?
Cheers MS

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 8, 2008 11:08 PM

Marcus.
Yes the paddocks were soft and moist, mainly because of all the tears of the farmers who lost all because of the inflation your two Fergies had to have. If I had one wish in a political area I would ask that the no disclosure of our illustrious PM's be abolished forthwith and all the truth of their time in office be revealed. That is ALL the PM's
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 8, 2008 9:18 PM

TW
Didn't take up the Hansard job. But in my time I have been involved actively and would be one of the few people in Australia to be threatened with 7 years jail for being a senior union member involved in a strike in a declared defence area. Research the old Brisbane Truth in the mid 50's they were the only newspaper in Australia game enough to print about the strike at Rum Jungle. Then it was only for one edition before the clamps were put on. How I vote, against the sitting member.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 8, 2008 9:03 PM

Marcus.
As I said to Virgil, debatable but lets not go down that Path, unless of course it becomes an official blog, if is does become one then I will be more than willing to oblige.
OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 8, 2008 7:43 PM

OG @ 3.34pm: Sounds like you were working in the public service, Robert (Hansard reporter etc?) so if the blues kept you employed and the maroons put you out to grass now and then, I guess they both knew (like us) how you vote, and treated you accordingly. Nicht wahr?

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 8, 2008 7:18 PM

Ogre
The problem with your Clydesdale was he didn't know when to stop. The paddock was fertile and damp and soft after those two redoubtable Fergie tractors Hawke and Keating organised the good rains of dollar floating and financial deregulation and the wages accord had all the farmhands happy and productive.
Howard managed to plow in fences that had been carefully mended and get barbed wire wrapped around all sort of parts that had previously been working smoothly. He kept going and made a fair job of demolishing the Liberal farm house and rose garden. It is going to take us ages to fix the septic tank of social issues he burst.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 8, 2008 4:17 PM

Strike me Marcus you are starting to shatter more conceptions about you than plates at a Greek wedding, self loathing? That is sure to be cut and pasted to every PC in blog land. Still I find this self flagellation exciting business wise, I still have a special going on the "cats" not really cheap to a man that can afford so many stamps. LOL
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 8, 2008 4:04 PM

WnW,
understood, I make sure my profile is 100% complete and accurate and up to date, as I feel sure that most of the regulars take pride in theirs do.

As to Virg, Wait till the ineviatable honeymoon is over with the press, I can only go on my personal experience, but I was never out of work under one government had to wait for the workers party to put me out for long spells. Virg, lets not go down that path.
OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 8, 2008 3:34 PM

Posted by: woodnwine at April 8, 2008 10:52 AM
I've just been pondering .... how does someone go to bed with someone they don't find appealing in a sexual way, someone they feel no lust towards? I don't get it.

A primeval urge takes control of some peoples sexual functions and propels them bedwards. I can admit to doing it but nowhere near as often as I've learnt about myself
After a few good doses of self loathing and perhaps partner loathing, you realise that attraction is important to bonding.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 8, 2008 3:27 PM

OG - I was "waffling on" about music as one example of people not taking the extra 30n seconds to actually fill in their profiles so people can find common interests. Maybe some people should list arguing in "other interests"?

Posted by: woodnwine at April 8, 2008 1:33 PM

ahh
we are nearly done with our FWB topic.

It is interesting what we have achieved.

We could be a committee.

There are some fairly strong ideas around FWB

From F***buddies, to the tail end of relationships.

We are commenting on war here because someone had the nerve to suggest that if women were in charge of the military, there might be less wars.

Last time I checked, Our PMs were people, one sat by and did nothing for 11 years on an economy created by the Keating Govenment's freeing up the trade and floating the dollar, saying figjam (f**k I'm great, just ask me) the other has ratified Kyoto, said sorry, and is now building great trade links.

Posted by: virgil at April 8, 2008 1:01 PM

Post by: laughsandtalks at April 7, 2008 12:31 PM

So, did you have sex with her or not ?

Posted by: femalepersuasion at April 8, 2008 12:43 PM

Wnw,
why are we commenting on war.
Probably for the same reason you are waffling on about music, doh. sex with out lust, Exercise?
OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 8, 2008 12:12 PM

Marcus@3.03am
hear, hear, on the wars bit, let the peaceniks tell me how long it would be before we were subjugated if we were not strong and known to be strong and prepared to back ourselves. As to the lips bit the ladies cannot roll their lips back on themselves like the monkeys. Probably explains the face to rump bit
TW,
Your a farm boy, what would you rather work with, a Clydesdale (Howard) or a show pony (Rudd).

Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 8, 2008 11:47 AM

timewarper - I don't think it was me who commented about dog minding .... that's what friends are for, not for sleeping with.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 8, 2008 11:30 AM

Woodnwine - There still has to be an attraction there. Definately! I mean who could go there unless there was 'something.' Hey, you wouldn't have the friendship unless there was some click on some level. Jen

Posted by: jenniferhi at April 8, 2008 11:29 AM

I've just been pondering .... how does someone go to bed with someone they don't find appealing in a sexual way, someone they feel no lust towards? I don't get it.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 8, 2008 10:52 AM

WnW @ 8.36am: For a topic change from worrying about the results of future world-wobbling aussie rules battles perhaps?

I tried to explain the connection in the fine print in my 5.32pm post. Was it you or Virgil who'd rubbished HerinPerth early on in this post, for including dog-minding as an aspect of FWB?

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 8, 2008 10:24 AM

Why are we talking about war on a FWB blog? Ironic really.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 8, 2008 8:36 AM

oohlala1 April 7 5:20 PM

Had a smile at your comment on the Angelina Jolie effect N. I though we might have a nature moment.

Lips have an important subtle function as sexual signalling devices (as well as the other obvious and not so obvious uses).
Some women enlarge their lips with surgery, most women redden their lips with coatings as well as 'painting them bigger' to look visually more exciting.
Human lips are strongly rolled out, the mucous lining which in other species is small and hidden is visible and smoother and darker allowing for better visual and facial expression.This might be important for a performer.
Women's lips are bigger than mens and during erotic arousal they swell, become redder, more sensitive and much more protruding. These changes mimic closely what are happening with the other lips, the genital labia. Makes sense to signal sexual arousal from the face as we now tend to mate face to face rather than rump to face.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 8, 2008 3:33 AM

Amberlight April 7 8:27.

Ordinary citizens prevent wars by paying taxes that allow their government to maintain a self defence force.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 8, 2008 3:03 AM

amberlight @ 8.27pm: Good on you for that. I have to admit that I haven't been politically active since the mid-50s, when I was heavily involved in trying to block Vince Gair's government from taking control of the University of Queensland, to curb its independence.

To answer your question: Where is John Howard now? It takes a while, enough committed people and a big enough fighting fund, but it is possible.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 7, 2008 10:55 PM

Hi Timewarp,
How do ordinary taxpayers put the brakes on war?

I was one of the 100,000 peope who marched peacefully in tiny little old Adelaide against the invasion of Iraq.
It was amazing the differences in ages, and appearance of people marching and how the unlikeliest people watching from the sidelines would just suddenly join in.
As you would remember, these marches took place all over Australia, yet John Howard took no notice at all.

How does the ordinary person & taxpayer prevent wars in the first place? When we have no power?

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 7, 2008 8:27 PM

I still go back to the same boring analogy....if you aren't yourself how does anyone get to know you ? Try being yourself and forget the rest, you never know you may be an attractive vibrant human being and remember, please remember to smile.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 7, 2008 8:09 PM

Bush or Thatch? Why bring sex - sorry PC Police, 'gender' - into it? And don't tell me going Brazilian will get rid of the Fuzz - look what they're doing to the Amazon ecology! Shaving off dense protective rainforest and leaving exposed stubble....

War results from greed, and that's not gender-specific. I see war as the ultimate case of friends with benefits.

Under capitalism, the two friends are the government and the military/industrial industry. Over 20% of all the money spent in the USA is spent on "defence." That's in a no-war year.

The government gets the benefit of power (the ultimate aphrodiasiac), the armourers get the benefit of money, and third parties get shafted, if not nuked or napalmed.

I see taxpayers as the only segment of society that might be able to put the brakes on war.

The peaceniks tried, but they only had hearts, not chequebooks. And they frightened the chooks with their noisy, lurid Kombi vans and their inyerface insolent civil disobedience on TV.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 7, 2008 5:42 PM

I forgot to add in dealing with the evolutionary development of Australian women, that the expansion in mouth size, in order to stack on the kilos, has been accompanied by a corresponding diminution in brain capacity, so much so that the pre hominoid ape ancestors are being seriously challenged by modern regressive developments.Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 5, 2008 12:47 PM

I beg to have adifferent opinion Ricahrd. I htink it is the Angelina Jolie effect. Look at teh lips of Kylie and Nicole and all those other stars. they get bigger by the day.
Do men like the big lips? Is that why the collagen is selling so well? They look funny to me. Like the big fish lips. I would htink you would like them. All the better to. Ah no that would take longer than three minutes.
I agree with Justsaying that you are not the best advertisement for the older man here.
Virgil at least was sparing thirty minutes before the game started and the lady had to go out to do her own thing:))

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 7, 2008 5:20 PM

What Virgil, like Margaret Thatcher?

Posted by: woodnwine at April 7, 2008 11:16 AM

Some women have more peacable qualities than some blokes, but you have a good point WNW

Posted by: virgil at April 7, 2008 1:27 PM

Mad wriggler. April 6 8:18 PM
Last time I thought about it more than 99% of the women I have met on RSVP 'liked cars' and showed this fondness by owning one.
I have yet to meet a women who didn't enjoy some positive aspect of sport (not including rubbishing it). Some girls play sport right up into their 50's and beyond.
I spent yesterday with a FWB. I started work on a garden retaining wall and elevated vegie garden bed I'd promised to make. We spent the rest of the afternoon promenading and antique shopping. Had a nice Asian meal and retired to her home to watch Little Fish and Brokeback Mountain.
I had a monogamous social-couple relationship this woman for 2 years. We had a few differences on key issues and separated. Since then, 7 years ago, we now see each other every couple of months or so and enjoy each other immensely; without the tensions that familiarity once brought.

Mad, I would suggest to you that this sort of relationship is not uncommon; it is not often discussed candidly and in the first person here. That is probably because many women have been trained to believe 'admitting' such behaviour will have them labelled promiscuous.
Given that you are obviously wrong about cars and sport perhaps you need to have another look at FWB- and get your sex hormone levels checked.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 7, 2008 12:31 PM

Lynath you are a wise person and I love your posts. OG and Timewarp, well said. Troy I think what you mean is that people are sometimes their own worst enemies, not just women. This one obviously can't stay away from the lolly jar but men are prone to that failing as well as women, in all kinds of ways. And by the way I don't agree that avoiding her was at all brave. Telling her straight out to her face would have been far braver.

Posted by: madrigal75 at April 7, 2008 11:54 AM

Posted by: virgil at April 7, 2008 11:00 AM,

>"Here's a thought, put women in charge of the Military in all the industrialised countries, particularly the midddle east, then see if there is a corresponding reduction in wars etc."

I agree.
Women, once upset, would annihilate everyone.

Posted by: justsaying at April 7, 2008 11:50 AM

What Virgil, like Margaret Thatcher?

Posted by: woodnwine at April 7, 2008 11:16 AM

WW, no, no bad encounter for me however there was a time since my divorce 4 years ago that I found my self in a FWB relationship. Really lovely lady I met through sport, it just happened one night after a function, yes lots of wine involved. Neither of us discussed the relationship being more and we did sleep together 3 or 4 more times over a period of 4 months. Seems unbelievable but it just happened. Then I detected, yeah, yeah, blokes can be dumb, that she seemed more keen, told me she told her old mum she was seeing someone nice. So I did the brave thing and avoided her. That hurt her a lot which I discovered when i couldn't take the guilt anymore and had a coffee with her. She unloaded, fair enough and we cleared the air. She had some issues too let me tell you. I went away representing my region at the National Touch Football titles, so did she, more grog at the end of the carnival and she proposed a resumption of our affections. I declined for obvious reasons and have to ask if women are sometimes their own worst enemy.
Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at April 7, 2008 11:10 AM

I forgot to add in dealing with the evolutionary development of Australian women, that the expansion in mouth size, in order to stack on the kilos, has been accompanied by a corresponding diminution in brain capacity, so much so that the pre hominoid ape ancestors are being seriously challenged by modern regressive developments.Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 5, 2008 12:47 PM

Hey Jolly, Richard/Roger whatever
Marcus has a good saying for situations like this "check your fly".

Women today are at least as smart as us blokes, and in many cases, smarter.

Here's a thought, put women in charge of the Military in all the industrialised countries, particularly the midddle east, then see if there is a corresponding reduction in wars etc.

Posted by: virgil at April 7, 2008 11:00 AM

troyohboy - I just wasn't sure if he was for or against the diabolical FWB thingy.

Sounds like you've had a bad encounter.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 7, 2008 10:42 AM

WW, I think Gaz is frustrated as he has to retrace his steps to find a dictionary that includes the word liberence. It also seems he was under the impression prior to his travels that FWB's did not exist in Australia. Now he must travel the world recanting. There is a negative patten to my recent posts, for which I apologise, but....what tha?

Posted by: troyohboy at April 7, 2008 10:11 AM

gaz1971 - I know it's Monday morning but I don't totally follow your post. What are you saying?

Posted by: woodnwine at April 7, 2008 9:17 AM

Amberlite 2:27 PM

Was going to get back to you on the reception stuff. Steel frame houses make excellent FM radio antennas (but not AM).
I suggest you speak to a local TV antenna installer about other issues.

I'm sure Chris can cope with my gentle chiding and offerings of food for thought. She gets good support from the girls and has her two male septuagenarian bodyguards as well.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 7, 2008 5:42 AM

madrigal75 @ 8.18pm: You are too hard on Marcus.

I'm sure his semenical vesicles never get a chance to overflow in the night - the focus on certain bodily fluids and their quantities that you mentioned, tends to go hand in hand with harvesting them under controlled conditions.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 7, 2008 1:41 AM

Madri.@8.18p
would you be refereing to water on the Brain, could be from all those wet dreams do you think?.

Aliane.@5.08pm

Sorry I thought you had composed it that way on purpose, must be my weird sense of humour. Red light noted lol
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 6, 2008 11:44 PM

Amberlight,Timewarp and Oldergent, thanks for your kind posts.

With every post Marcus demonstrates his fury at not being able to control women in the way he thinks is his entitlement.

I wonder if, as he does all his 'crash test dummy sex' routine (rootine) ,prior to passing judgement along with his sticky bodily fluids on some poor woman, whether the thought may occur that their are two people to decide about the relationship and not just himself.??

The outstanding thing about Marcus is that if his idea or thought is a benefit to himself then it is just "evolutionary" and based in scientific fact; if on the other hand there is an idea or thought expressed by a female which is to his detriment(real or perceived) then it is "shrill, feministic, Victorian, " or whatever other labels he can find to attempt to discredit...very sexist and chauvinistic behaviour from someone who believes he is broadminded and open to ideas.
The only clash with Marcus which has fule his wrath is the fact that long ago I rejected his contact. My intuition once again proving right... his stated talent of coconut playing would have driven me crazy!

Iaminperth...love Jools Holland. Particularly "I'm in the mood for love" with Jamiroquai..fantastic!

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 6, 2008 9:55 PM

>"Then tell us what you base your perception on, his written word!"
Posted by: oldergent at April 6, 2008 3:58 PM.

Awww, gee whiz. Are we getting the idea here of simply responding to what is written???
And not one's own (mis)conceptions, misunderstandings and irrationalisms?

But at least there is a person (amongst a few others,) oohlala1 at April 6, 2008 2:16 PM, who can respond in a logical and fair manner.

I also happen to agree with this lady's stated opinion about not having sex with friends.

Also, not about going out to find more appealing ones. (Which she said humorously, of course.)

This is where I think the word "Friend" in the Topic should be changed to "Bonk Buddy".

Then there's no misunderstanding what it is all about.

Posted by: justsaying at April 6, 2008 9:27 PM

When I got back to Sydney after a long time traveling I came across this F##k Buddy business. I was very disappointed, having travelled the world telling everyone how brilliant Australian's are. At least a few years ago people still had the guts to call it what it was;
A desperate need for sexual release without the commitment and moral courage that a long term, quality relationship requires to succeed.
Do any of you gutless hippocrites who play the FWB game understand what the word LIMERENCE means.
NO ? then go get a dictionary and learn something about yourselves. I can see that I'm going to have too retrace my steps and explain to the rest of the world that I was mistaken. Australian's now seem to be as gutless and immoral as the rest of the world. How fahked is that?

Posted by: gaz1971 at April 6, 2008 8:49 PM

LOL Timewarp @4.02pm & Oldergent @3.58pm, well said both, though I think 'teenage wet dream phase' & 'obsessed with bodily fluids' would be more fitting.

On topic a friend of mine has an on-off FWB relationship with an ex boyfriend. I couldn't do it myself but she appears to be able to keep the sex separate. But she has always been a real tomboy and likes sport and cars, so maybe she has more male hormones than the average woman? Just a theory.

Posted by: madrigal75 at April 6, 2008 8:18 PM

OG, is that sounds too obvious reason, I won't explain further would cause a traffic jam. Ok red light is on...full stop Aliane.

Posted by: aliane at April 6, 2008 5:08 PM

amber @ 2.27pm: My pennyworth (obsolete coin of negligable vatue):

Marcus is an obsessively-dedicated iconoclast, timelocked back in his teenage rebel phase.

Reminds me of simplistic late-teens mates at Uni in the 50s who'd chosen the predictable simplicities of the physical sciences, rather than the harder-to-navigate complexities of the behavioural sciences.

If he could get a win over TLD, the woman whom I believe to be our wisest and most moral counsel, that would make his nine years. (I almost said 'day', but every dog has his day. Not such a big deal.) He just has to keep trying to prick her.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 6, 2008 4:02 PM

Amber.
Dont you think for there to be a personality clash, one has to have one, I think lynath has one that is normal.

Ohlala,
Check out the profile of that astute gentleman you are defending. Then tell us what you base your perception on, his written word! But don't be surprised when he wants to he will target you with his venom. You sound too good for a person such as that. Then again you do not show your picture?
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 6, 2008 3:58 PM

I just purchased a wonderful Jules Holland CD with guests like Norah Jones, Sam Brown Eric Clapton to name a few. I had it playing in the car as I drove to Guildford to have a wander around the antique stores. So good, could have just kept driving.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 6, 2008 3:58 PM

Thank you, Marcus re April 5, 2008 3:11 PM

I don't believe that Chris deserves to be derided by you for what she says.
She is sincere in what she believes and says, whereas you are often just hoping to get a rise from one of us! :)
I really don't think her opinions are that radical or misandrist at all.
Do you think that maybe you and Lynath simply have a 'personality clash'?

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 6, 2008 2:27 PM

You are all so cruel to Justsaying. I think he is an incredibly astute gentleman. Just because he highlights contradictions and agendas why do you you all criticise?
I still do not want to have sex with my friends no matter what you l say. Ewwwww. Maybe I need to go out and find some more appealling friends

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 6, 2008 2:16 PM

justsledging at 8.43pm Sat: Keep at it, mate. Practice makes perfect - if you put artistry ahead of aggro.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 6, 2008 12:29 PM

YouareinPerth @ 3.10pm: You are right of course. Always. I guess I'll have to confess - I tried to give you up. I really did. Tried hard. But you're addictive, and I just can't.

Please forgive me - and respond to my post in the marriage-readiness blog a couple of days back about my secret threesome with OG and Kianee. And have a red first, so you won't be too hard on me. Pretty please.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 5, 2008 11:22 PM

sunrise - I agree, self esteem is very sexy.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 5, 2008 11:05 PM

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 5, 2008 12:47 PM,
>"Do not let the Neanderthal female regressions in anyway intimidate your right to express your opinion without breaching basic internet security."

Then out-of-date oldergent at April 5, 2008 1:17 PM,
>"Richard.
Last time I looked you at least had the guts to have you photo and profile showing."

and then,

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 5, 2008 1:50 PM,
>"Officer Krupke, you're off form today. Lost your zap somewhere. ....

Wasn't much more entertaining than my stuff mate".
----------------------------------------------
Warped again mate. Trying to equate yourself with fish crust is an insult (much as I hate to say it,) to him.
Also, take a look. The said profile is now invisible.

Therefore, does that make TW a,

>"Neanderthal female" (Richardzkruspe at April 5, 2008 12:47 PM),

who has prompted the now invisible state of the other Krusty one?

Like iaminperth at April 5, 2008 3:10 PM says:

>"I'sn't it a laugh that one old bloke, although he thinks like a 62 year old...what the ?? who has stated he will not bother with me any more includes my name in his condescending comments in nearly every one of his blogs. Amazing really being so busy......I don't really think so."

Posted by: justsaying at April 5, 2008 8:48 PM

Hmm ok some interesting posts have been placed on here today. I'd just like to add that no matter what a person looks like, if they can "love themselves" others can too. Self-esteem is a very valuable item, and can be hard to possess. However, as I think I've posted previously, you either have to accept what you've got and get on with life, or you have the power to change it. Life is too short to be unhappy, been there done that....

Posted by: sunrizesiesta at April 5, 2008 8:10 PM

Enrepres April 4 10:28 11:58 AM

The three photos posted are from 2005.
I am working on some updates. In the next fortnight perhaps. Any particular poses you prefer?
I am happy to post my weight and BMI; just a moment after you do yours.
Seriously, it is a good topic and worth consideration. I have legion stories about others and have copped fair comment as well.
Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 5, 2008 6:59 PM

Amberlite. Today at 10:10 AM
You are an authentic person without the unbecoming reactionary conservative shrillness and misandry that accompanies Chris's comments on social mores and men.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 5, 2008 3:11 PM

Isn't it a laugh that one old bloke, although he thinks like a 62 year old...what the ?? who has stated he will not bother with me any more includes my name in his condescending comments in nearly every one of his blogs. Amazing really being so busy......I don't really think so.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 5, 2008 3:10 PM

Limpfish @ 11.16am and 12.47pm: Officer Krupke, you're off form today. Lost your zap somewhere. Minding at a crook performance last night?

Wasn't much more entertaining than my stuff mate, and we've got used to a lot better class of entertaining put-downs of women than your efforts today.

Have you ever considered getting together with justsledging, and co-writing something really devastating to the fair sex? You're both in Brisbane, and it could be the kick-start for some good together time with a like-minded bloke over a drink or five. Just an idea....

Off to work, as just explained in the still-open marital readiness blog, which has a nice newbie, BTW. Don't want to keep her just for myself. That would be selfish, wouldn't it? Seeyez.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 5, 2008 1:50 PM

One would've thought "due to evolutionary processes" (richardzkruspe at April 5, 2008 12:47 PM) the female's trebled mouth size would be in part, due to a lot more FWBing.

After all, most menkind haven't changed at all in their preference for having a mouth where their heads are.

Posted by: justsaying at April 5, 2008 1:24 PM

Richard.
Last time I looked you at least had the guts to have you photo and profile showing. I think I have only agreed with one of your posts, However we have another blogger who is too gutless to show any part of his profile.. That puts you above him, (but only by a little bit). He has that right but I have the right not to read or reply, that right I excersise rigorously. Now if people start to not respond to your stirings there goes all your fun, and you will and all like you and the reincarnation of the viper just fade away to the obscurity your ilk so richly deserve.

Marcus it did cross my mind that this was a great amount of weight to lose, but seeing that subby was having a bad time of it I let it go, Us males can cop hidings enough without us doing it to a bloke going through a hard time.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 5, 2008 1:17 PM

I forgot to add in dealing with the evolutionary development of Australian women, that the expansion in mouth size, in order to stack on the kilos, has been accompanied by a corresponding diminution in brain capacity, so much so that the pre hominoid ape ancestors are being seriously challenged by modern regressive developments.

This is best illustrated by women who get on the blogs and demand that no-one blog without a visible photo.

Internet security guidelines arte clearly set out on this site. You have a right to internet security just as much as you have a right to blog.

Do not let the Neanderthal female regressions in anyway intimidate your right to express your opinion without breaching basic internet security.

AS I said previously, a lot of people on this site would fail the Rorschach test (spelled out s-l-o-w-l-y- you used never to be able to fail the Rorschach test but there are those who now do due to evolutionary processes)

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 5, 2008 12:47 PM

Really Rickyboy?
You actually read that article and that's what you got out of it?
How disappointing, and here all this time (apart from the misogynist cr*p you eliminate, oh so frequently) I actually thought you might have had a highly developed brain between your ears!!

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 5, 2008 11:55 AM

Interesting article in today’s Weekend Australian.

Dwells upon the evolution of the Australian woman from a 50kg lightweight to a 120 kg thunderdome.

The interesting part was not so much touching upon their weight problems but the fact that their mouths have expanded trifold.

That evolutionary development is for two purposes:

1. Input- to stack in as much food as possible in order to add kgs to their bums;
2. Output- what you see on these blogs;

Then you get their male counterparts, balding, guts on them like Nebuchadnezzar, geros who think they can score with the young chicks instead of the Nursing Homes waiting list (which is their natural partner material)

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 5, 2008 11:16 AM

Once again a great post Lynath/Chris, and so true!
Too many of us focus on the negatives about ourselves, instead of the positives.
I know weight has always been a big one for me. It started in my childhood and continued right through my marriage and in a much smaller way, continues on still today!

The advice you gave to subzero is first rate. Yes he will find someone else who will appreciate him for who he is, and who will love him no matter what he looks like in the future.
He has learned a hard lesson early in his life, that sometimes people are so scared about their image (who they are with and how that looks to others) and their own appearance, that they are not really capable of actually liking or loving themselves for WHO they are (not what they look like).

If you can't like, accept or love yourself, then you are not capable of really loving anyone else.
Which is why people can be so cruel to those who love them.
As someone loving such a person, no matter how much you love them, you can't give them self-worth, that has to come from within themselves.
You can't fix their pain, they have to do it themselves.
That may take years, sometimes it never happens. However, until it happens, they usually keep on hurting the people who love them the most .

Chris,
You are such an authentic person (which is probably why Marcus feels so threatened by you!) keep saying what you feel; you make sense and I for one, enjoy and respect your comments!

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 5, 2008 10:10 AM

Ogre. Today 7:27
Fly check please...
The bloke Chris is counselling claims to have lost 25 Kg in a month- only possible including decapitation. I would suggest some circumspection be applied about the rest of the case.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 5, 2008 10:00 AM

Lynath,
Usually the sequel is a shadow of the original but you nailed it again beautiful lady.
Cheers OG.

Posted by: oldergent at April 5, 2008 7:27 AM

Hi all. Too busy all week to read this blog till tonight, and so much good stuff in it, especially TLD's essay and FemPers's research paper.

YouareinPerth: You remind me so much of my Ex. Usually criticising someone for something, or anyone for anything, but after a couple of reds, charming and delightful and really good company.

Pity she suddenly went on the wagon, and hope you never do. "In vino veritas" (= authentic after drinking.)

I also see you've brought your identity concerns about me across to this blog (@ 10.06pm on 2nd.)

I took you to task about that in the marriage readiness blog, and hoped for a reply.

Posted by: timewarp1 at April 5, 2008 3:57 AM

Thankyou all who liked my story..and I left out the bits that got quite gory!
Of course it leaves room for a sequel...will be about finding a man who is an equal

Okay enough of the rhyming..and sorry for the lack of editing, spelling keeping in first person etc......too late at night ...and refuse to wear glasses for reading! Yep..still vain! .Day job stays

I suppose the moral of the story is that sometimes the real issues and causes for unhappiness are overlooked when we can blame something else such as weight or height or self perceived lack of attractiveness for life not working out as we wish, or for our 'putting life on hold' until everything is perfect.
. eg "When I lose a few kgs I will live a fabulous life with not a care in the world." "I can't particiapte in. ... .until I lose some weight."
I discovered the most attractive and empowering thing is self confidence and self esteem and it is up to the individual to work out what that translates to for them,(maybe they will lose weight, maybe they won't, it should be decided by them and no one else) and then accept that not everyone will approve but it doesn't really matter .and time does not stand still and wait so don't waste it ,and 'perfect' never or rarely arrives.

Subzero, I am very sorry that you have experienced what you have. You say your GF is a model so you should realise that her world is based on fantasy and the illusion of perfect(which we discover doesn't really exist)
It seems she wanted to fit you into the fantasy as the perfect boyfriend, which has caused you damage and pain as you have tried to please her in a game that you could never win.
There is nothing wrong with you, you just got caught up in the hype.

You say "So the million dollar question is what will i do to look better, feel better, more desirable"

A. Do whatever builds your self esteem and confidence, but first work through and clear out the negative ideas and thoughts she put into your head. Look at each comment she made and then try to see it from the side of reality. Eg if she said you were overweight,was she saying it because her own mind was distorted by the unreal expectations of the world in which she worked? In reality you
were not disgusting at all ,but probably quite a normal weight range.
You believed what she said and were deeply hurt because you loved her. but it does not mean she was right. You did what you could to please her but discovered she was not satisfied and became more critical.
Remind yourself daily that you were not the one with the problem...she was. One you realise that you will feel better.
You can find someone who really loves you . Nothing wrong with your current looks.
Cans of TaB.(that was the logo)..showing my age. TaB was Coca Cola's first low calorie cola.
I think it launched Elle Macphersons career. There are whole weird cult like websites for the product. and the Elle ads are on You tube. Years after I drank litres of the stuff it was declared a cancer causing cocktail of chemicals and withdrawn...to reappear in different versions as diet coke.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 4, 2008 11:25 PM

Hmm ok I think I know who you are referring to...

Posted by: sunrizesiesta at April 4, 2008 9:10 PM

Very nicely written, Chris/thelynathdiary at April 3, 2008 10:06 PM.

Posted by: justsaying at April 4, 2008 8:48 PM

The profile less one that never has a pleasant thing to say about anyone or anything.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 4, 2008 8:07 PM

OG - Hmm ok - remind me - who is the faceless sniper again?

Posted by: sunrizesiesta at April 4, 2008 6:54 PM

Sunrise, no need to stress the point. lol, I know your mob are always kidding around.
Cheers OG.
ps I have not seen the faceless sniper for a while.

Posted by: oldergent at April 4, 2008 6:30 PM

Ahhh oldergent - I beg to differ - why Capricorn is the best star sign of all.... >:)

I also have found over the years that most of my close friends are also Capricorns - we're a friendly bunch.

Posted by: sunrizesiesta at April 4, 2008 5:48 PM

Ahhh oldergent - I beg to differ - why Capricorn is the best star sign of all.... >:)

I also have found over the years that most of my close friends are also Capricorns - we're a friendly bunch.

Posted by: sunrizesiesta at April 4, 2008 5:47 PM

Thank you for the 2 kisses..you may think my response answer was unusual considering the distance involved, except for the fact that I will be in your neighbourhood in a couple of weeks time for several days :)

Posted by: femalepersuasion at April 4, 2008 4:39 PM

Kaz = not your average Virgo then, Virg, esp not the first three points.....Kaz = extremely organised at work, hopeless at home, extrovert to the max, and the term "money burns a hole in my pocket" was coined especially for me.......

I am more like Marcus (good grief) in that astronomy is a far more interesting and amazing study.............K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 4, 2008 3:33 PM

sunkissed - very true.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 4, 2008 2:59 PM

Mirror, Mirror on the wall, "What is the best star sign of all"

"Why Sagitarius on the cust with Scorpio" if you dont want them tall.

Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 4, 2008 2:55 PM

'FWB' or 'bonk buddies' only work when there are no emotions involved. Once one of the FWB partners starts to have emotional ties to the other person, it is time to move on. There are also boundaries which cannot be crossed. These ground rules must be set before any 'action' takes place. Respect for the situation, yourself and your bonk buddy is paramount. Bonk buddies are alot of fun and the times you can have are some of the best of your life. Note, it is best that you don't have a bonk buddy situation with a close friend - always ends in hurt! Enjoy!

Posted by: silver0805 at April 4, 2008 2:48 PM

Kaz,

My understanding of a virgo, gained from knowledge of myself, and my ex-wife, would be that a virgo is mostly an introvert on the Myers briggs scale, careful with money, basically tidy, my ex was always tidier than me probably more of a home body than some of the more social signs,seem to have a tendency to get along with other virgo's, pisces taurus.

Some people have a deep belief in astrology, and study it etc, I dont, in fact I feel I doubt it because there seems no basis not to doubt it, but like I said, backwards analysis seems to suggest some connections.

Posted by: virgil at April 4, 2008 2:26 PM

woodnwine....we can have all the boxes you like on a profile...but whether its in KG or general size people have to be honest...like with their relationship status ...single ( but married)...45 ( was 10 years ago now 55)....brown hair ( but bald) ...live in brisbane ( but actually in sydney) so many ways to avoid the truth at least by making it vague there is less chance of being dishonest? Sure this has been discussed before? Maybe we should have BS meters on profiles as well?

Posted by: sunkissedqldr at April 4, 2008 2:19 PM

Marcus

All I can say is kind of backwards analysis, and that is, as you say, know the person, then the star/sun sign then kind of just leave that in the memory bank, till the next person, who seems to behave in a similar sort of way, and I might find that person to be same star/sun sign, when this seems to have some pattern, I think there is maybe something I dont understand here, but it seems to work.

very much like the quote you gave, yesterday about something working in practice, now see if we can get it to work in theory.

I dont feel that much invested in the theory, its just that the practice seems to work for me.

Posted by: virgil at April 4, 2008 2:10 PM

Just on the weight thing again ... what is average anyway? That has always perplexed me.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 4, 2008 2:01 PM

Woodnwine, great suggestion but people would still lie as they do now. What criteria would we use to 'judge' ourselves as slim, average et al? Our BMI?
That would make a good topic-Karina

Posted by: enrepres at April 4, 2008 1:56 PM

Virgil, when someone says to me l am a typical Virgo, l usually answer "and what's that??

I have little or no interest in astrology and never have, l prefer to not ascribe to to stereotype previews of what a person will or won't be like, based on that.
It would however be an interesting topic for discussion l agree, especially with a beer in hand...........

Lynath, that was a fab post, loved the story !!!

"G" have you got the mangoes organised and soaking yet???................K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 4, 2008 1:46 PM

Thanks woodnwine..I will check the local video store this evening to see if they have a copy... :-)

Posted by: sunkissedqldr at April 4, 2008 1:42 PM

enrepres - personally, I think we should all list our weight on our profile as choosing between athletic, slim, average, slightly overweight etc is very subjective and open to individual interpretation. I did see one dating site that does this but can't remember which one.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 4, 2008 1:37 PM

amberlight - yes, many people don't read profiles, they just look at the photos but I think you have to find someone attractive if you want to be more than friends. This may mean a nice face, a good body or just someone similar to yourself. Similar values and interests can form friendships but attraction takes it beyond that. That is why I would never sleep with a friend, because there is no attraction. Boy, how on topic is this?

Posted by: woodnwine at April 4, 2008 12:59 PM

sunkissedqldr - I can never remember movie names but recently saw Fracture on DVD and enjoyed it.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 4, 2008 12:55 PM

Pastor Eagle.
If you know what someones 'sign' is it is much more likely that you will ascribe them the characteristics you believe are typical.

Experiments have been performed on big samples of people. Astrologers are given the sort of information on people they claim will allow them to identify their star sign (or more correctly sun sign) but not told their birth dates. Results from these tests are no better than chance; self proclaimed astrologers are unable to divine what sign someone is any better than you or I.

Astrology is not a science and it cheapens and demeans the proper and vastly more interesting science of astronomy.

Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 4, 2008 12:16 PM

Wading in on this weight issue, I have just looked at your profile laughsandtalks and with the exception of 1 photo dated 2005 the others are undated. You list yourself as 'average' would you be brave enough to post a recent photo and list your weight?

Posted by: enrepres at April 4, 2008 11:58 AM

You are probably right WNW, but it seems some people are targeted no matter what they say!

It seems looking at profiles that many people (more particularly men) are more focused on looks and body types rather than values and similar ideals and interests.

I agree with you that there needs to be some kind of "spark" as far as romantic attachments go for things to really get off the ground to start with. Even if it is only a tiny "spark" if people are alike in their values/ideals then surely this can be built upon, if you are looking for a relationship that has the potential to be long-term?

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 4, 2008 11:27 AM

thelynathdiary at April 3, 2008 10:06 PM
That was one of the most, inspiring stories, I have read in a long time.

Yes The world's best diet.
I lost 25kg in one month,because she said i looked disgusting,When i was invited to go to the Christmas party 3 months latter, she commented on how sick i looked. LOL how funny was that....Not really.

Least i found out you don't have to eat food for a month and still live...

So yes, love one, comments, can make you do crazy things for self improvements.
In my defense that was 3 years ago

The only thing i don't know, cans of Tab?
going through the same phase again,

So the million dollar question is what will i do to look better, feel better, more desirable?

As for her, she was/is a model, perfect in every way. every mans dream... whatever and i was/am @%*%&*$*^%#$(&$

I haven't spoke to, family friends anyone ever before so at least you million readers are the first ever to know.

Subzero

Posted by: subzeroelite at April 4, 2008 10:59 AM

Hi Woodnwine - Yes I certainly agree. Most things are better with some good company. But......Any suggestons for a movie for my friday night session? Any good ones out lately?

Posted by: sunkissedqldr at April 4, 2008 10:28 AM

Re astrology as well.

Marcus, I agree with you, with my rational brain, however what I cannot seem to reconcile, is why people of various star signs display similar characteristics.

Some of my more new age reading material suggests souls choose when they are to be born, what sort of parents etc, to select a certain basic set of life experiences.

If this was the case, the fact that aquarius people usually act in a similar way, and virgo people act in a different way.

This means that certain starsigns connect well with others, and certain ones dont.

I am usually sceptical of most things, until I can find a basis to believe them.

I recently had coffee with a "Leo" and while all the right things were said, there just didnt seem to be a connection.

My most recent long term partner is aquarius. That worked very well for a long time, thus if I meet an aquarius, there is much residual goodwill from my part.

I thought there was a risk with a leo, but as unproven was worth a try. This does not mean I wont date another leo, but just that my "due dilligence" checking will be more comprehensive, than it would be for pisces, or aquarius.

If I date a Taurus, I feel that relationship will be mostly friends only.

As I say, I am mostly sceptical by nature, but when certain things tend to repeat, I wonder if there may be something there.

So Karina, I would second Perth's motion for an astrology theme.

Posted by: virgil at April 4, 2008 10:20 AM

oohlala - good idea for a blog topic but will people be game to be honest ... for fear of being persecuted?

Posted by: woodnwine at April 4, 2008 10:06 AM

sunkissedqldr - enjoy your evening, nothing like a good DVD, a glass of red wine and some dark chocolate. Yum ..... better with company though.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 4, 2008 10:05 AM

Hi oohlala1,
Thank you for your suggestion. I will add to my list of topics.
Cheers,
Karina

Posted by: rsvpproducttest at April 4, 2008 9:48 AM

thelynathdiary beautiful words, well put. And the same reason I am taking a break from dating for a while. I have become obese in dating terms ie now a size 14 and am tired of reading all these male profiles who are after young,attractive, slim and athletic....and they are mostly fat and balding and want someone 10-15years younger.

I've settled for some chocolate and a dvd for my evening entertainment and pleasure for the time being....oh and reading the blogs ;-)

Posted by: sunkissedqldr at April 4, 2008 9:48 AM

Hi Chris/Lynath,
What a great story. Triumph over adversity. I am so glad you have got over such a soul destroying experience and have moved on with such aplomb!

I remember my ex, very soon after we were married, saying "You know, you would be really beautiful if you lost a few kilos"
It was really hurtful.
I was never skinny/thin, and because of this I had always seen myself as fat (my father had told me from the time I was 13, I had "Child-bearing hips" and my mother who saw herself as beautiful, and was always going on about how all these men were after her, nagged me all the time about how no man will ever look at a fat woman!!).
So I guess I had more than a few hangups about my weight.
Strangely, my older boys who saw some of the photos of me in my 20s &30s (when I was moving house late last year) were horrified that I saw myself as fat back then.

It is interesting how children see things though. A couple of years ago my son who was 9 then, wrote about his family to a pen pal he had met at another school. When describing his family he told his new friend that I have a big bump on my nose (yes I do from breaking my nose as a child going over the handlebars of my bike, but I actually didn't think it was that big or THAT obvious!) and that his dad has lots and lots of wrinkles!
(My ex is 3 years older than me and would have been horrified as he still sees himself as a bit of a "stud")
He also described his brothers and sister, but focused on their work and sporting abilities etc, not their looks!
I showed it to my daughter and we laughed until we cried.
I can't imagine how his friend must have pictured my son's parents!
(I was quite happy though that it wasn't me he had described as having "lots and lots of wrinkles"!!)
I didn't ever show it to his dad though, he would NOT have seen the funny side.

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 4, 2008 9:38 AM

Lynath,
and my admiration too, it puts a very human side to you, and should soften anyones ideas that you may be bitter about lifes knocks. It does not sound like your first prose either?

Karina,
Maybe once in a while an open forum would be of more interest, just look at the range of topics that abound in this blog, if we had not strayed off blog we would have missed that oyster receipe and Chris's prose, Perth's cooking hints and so many other good things. It's your job to keep the ratbags away from the rest of us nice people, warn them privately and publicly and if they don't behave chuck them out for a while till they learn some manners. I don't think you would have any complaints from 99.999% of the posters.
Cheers OG.

Posted by: oldergent at April 4, 2008 9:30 AM

Hi Perth,
This is how FWB's can work, the benefit is a friend sharing advice and experience. You sound like you have been taught to cook by my mother and the Home Ec's teacher I had. Even when I had the resraurant I cooked with that method, the only difference is the final cooking was done with a pressure cooker, I then seperated the meat from the liquid and put both in the fridge till next day, by the time the fat had sodified and easy to remove then the whole lot reboiled ready to serve. Also when cooking stews do you seperate the fat before cooking and cook it with the meat, the fat gives most of the flavour to the meat, the mobile garbage unit next door loves me as he gets the fat. The same procedure with the stews and curries. Have you ever tried the really slow cook for your roasts, especially if you have injected the marinades into the joint? I know we will never be FWB, how about we just settle for "friends" Cooking friends, Ohlala, for the Italian side, come to think of it she won't share LOL, love to meet you one day over a griddle and plate, especially with a nicely chilled Lambrusco (red).
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 4, 2008 9:09 AM

Karina what about a blog about what we women and men are really looking for in a new partner. Is it values looks what is it really. Sometimes you have to really look at yourself and think about this question to know what you are looking for in another person.

Iaminperth I always use ghee to cook the curry spices first then to brown the onion and garlic and when onion is clear I add the meat to cook and coat in spices. Very flavorsome.

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 4, 2008 8:30 AM

Thats fantastic Chris. Just what i needed with my morning coffee!

Posted by: hiddensparklegeek at April 4, 2008 8:22 AM

This is for thelynathdiaries, You are AWESOME and obviously very intelligent. Any man who has not appreciated you needs his head read. You are an inspiration to all us women who are trying to sort out our crap and the crap from our lives. You go girl !!!!!!!!!

Posted by: ckeen at April 4, 2008 8:22 AM

Thelynathdiary that was such a lovely rhyme it brought tears to my eyes. I am plump and have been a yoyo for many years to try to please other person for what. They dont do things to try to please me.
Now I enjoy healthy foods some wine and chocolate work hard but dont worry about those extra pounds. They are me and I am them. The men they can take it or leave it.

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 4, 2008 8:14 AM

Hey guys,
I have been seeing some not so nice comments on the blogs so I'd like to remind you that it is important to respect other people's views and beliefs on the blogs. Also, I can understand that conversations can be broad but I think we are going way off topic here. If you have been married already why no talk about things like whether you would marry a second time, someone suggested that a day or so ago and I think it is a good idea.
I'll try to post another either today or Monday
Cheers,
Karina

Posted by: rsvpproducttest at April 4, 2008 8:02 AM

Iampert 10:34 PM Yesterday
Re astrology. Can you explain what the connection between the position of various planets in the Northern hemisphere sky a couple of thousand years ago your personal characteristics and events in your life are, please?

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 4, 2008 7:40 AM

Naughty girl, Lynath! Foot is fine, ta, but have a lingering distrust of hot water bottles now....!!!
Glad you're not too upset about the relationship not working out, riversong:)

Posted by: malsie at April 4, 2008 7:39 AM

Hey Chris, I am the other Jewels, but your weight story come poem was really funny and soooo true.
I have met many men who luv my curves, actually a lot more than I thought I would as I still think like a skinny person, as I was a skinny teenager and bride....So being on here/rsvp for the last 16 months has been a bit of an eye opener re the men!!!

Jewlz31, you stick to your profile, as there will be men out there that will love you, and one will be the right one for you.

BB, thank you for the lovely words, but we have met a few times, (bloggers meets) and the others that haven't, just don't know what they are talking about re me!!

Bob, the lady that dropped you because of your job, is off her rocker...she did not meet you and for one doesn't know about the sexy voice!!!! plus the sensible, sane person that goes with it. Sooo put it to expierience, which I know you have, and keep playing in the sandpit.

Have a lovely day all....its FRIDAY.....jewels

Posted by: junebaby57 at April 4, 2008 6:30 AM

IaminPerth, I think you're onto something. As practically every profile professes a passion for cooking, I think RSVP should start their own "Dinner for Two" recipe site. Or at the very least Karina should load it up as a blog topic. I once told a friend what I was planning to cook my beau that night and he flat out said, 'Honey if you don't get laid after that, he doesn't have a heartbeat', to which I said, 'That's the whole idea'.

Fire and Ice Oysters for 2 people (Entree)

2 birdeye chillies
1/4 cup vodka
1-2 doz freshly shucked oysters depending on appetite
sea salt
1 cup crushed ice.

De-seed and finely chop chillies, add to vodka and infuse for an hour or two. Add a little salt to taste, mix a spoonful of the vodka with some crushed ice and spoon over oysters and serve immediately. Great on a hot day with beer. Garnish with a friend, naked or otherwise.

Posted by: guiltypleasure at April 4, 2008 5:02 AM

Virgil - I'm not really sure what you're on about, but I'm talking about the blog topic - ie that stuff up above beneath the picture: "...Friends with benefits (FWB) or "hookup buddies" are friends who hook up with each other but don't have an "official" relationship...."

Anything that IS a relationship - whether "perfect", or "genuine affection and closeness", or "fails after a while" or whatever, is by definition NOT what we call FWB/FB as per up above - it's the other hook-up stuff that's NOT a "relationship".

Yes, there are MANY different types of relationships - not all perfect, not all lead to marriage or happy-ever-after or living together, but they are relationships, nevertheless. We seem to be completely crossing wires somehow!

Posted by: riversong1 at April 4, 2008 1:17 AM

Hey All,

It seems an ongoing theme here is the number of relationships that fail after a while; then the jilter is every sort of lowlife, angst ridden SOB. Maybe the solution is not to judge them, but to look at ourselves and accept that we may actually be driving these people away by our actions and attitudes - its easy to blame the other person all of the time.

I beat you all because a few months back I made contact with a woman and everything was going well (well, as well as everything can go with a couple of emails to and fro). Anyway, I mentioned to her that I worked part-time in a TAB......because of her profession she found that my casual JOB was something of a reflection on me........check ya later !!! Now, getting dumped (without any sleezy behaviour on my part) before you actually meet....now that has to be some sort of record!!!

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at April 3, 2008 11:46 PM

Virgil and sunrizesiesta: "genuine affection and closeness that could transform into love" I would definitely call more of a "relationship" than a F*ck buddy!

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 9:53 PM

Riversong a Fu*k buddy is not what I ever wanted, I had a FWB with a girl I loved deeply and it was mutual, but it went from a normal relationship to FWB, as our life goals differed in fairly major ways.

My defence of FWB's has always been on the premise that it wasnt a fu*kbuddy, as I would find that type of situation bad for my ongoing self esteem, and I dont think it would be good for the woman either.

Posted by: virgil at April 3, 2008 11:45 PM

OG forgot to say, do all this cooking stuff in the same pot, separately but in the same pot as all the gooey stuff in the bottom tastes delicious and adds to the flavour. Just have a dish sitting there on the side to put all the stuff in before returning to the pot. OMG, Yikes, does this mean we are now "Friends with Benefits", oh perish the thought. No, I really don't want a bonk but you can cook the soup, I'll supply the bread and the wine. Ta ever so and ymbo yumbo

Posted by: iaminperth at April 3, 2008 11:17 PM

and Ladies and Gents. If you don't like the person you are with get rid of them. Why should anyone have the power in a relationship to dictate and control the other person. Get rid of them, throw them back for someone else and find someone you are in tune with, you can be who you are with , and they accept you for that warts and all.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 3, 2008 10:51 PM

Malsie...and what were you doing with the "hottie" at the time that caused you to be left with a wet spot?
Sorry about the burnt foot, not too bad I hope?

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 3, 2008 10:40 PM

Hey Guys, What about a new blog topic "Star Signs and Behaviour". I am not into star signs at all but I am Aquarius. Even down to the straight hair and the green eyes. My mother had brown eyes, my father blue and I don't know if I was adopted but don't think so. Apparently we are freedom loving people and don't connect easily and although I admit it I am not a dependant person. I work and I have a really inquisitive non judgemental nature. However, in relationships I am a bit of a disaster, I am independent, I like to cook and create inside/outside, whatever depending on the weather, I love the beach with my dog, I like to walk, love good wine, don't understand it but know what I Iike. Love to entertain and have a good laugh. Love my freedom [Aquarius] have lots of points of view, not stuck on any. Where's my equal guy who enjoys this too.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 3, 2008 10:34 PM

bm1960.@ 4.31pm. Long time no hear.. Just popped on for a quick look and glad I did.. Welcome back... Still a few of us oldies here (as in bloggers not necessarily ages) but lotsa newbies which is good. It's reffered to as the sand pit now (by most) and is soooo different. Some play nice while others throw lotsa sand so to speak. Can be entertaining at times...You'll see for yourself and form your own opinion... Look forward to your input "again"
Cheers ...."G"

Posted by: amdoingit at April 3, 2008 10:21 PM

Sorry OG the typing is a bit funny but I think you have the gist, one or two too many red wines, not for any reason, just feel like it and have work tomorrow at 7a.m. instead of 6.30.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 3, 2008 10:18 PM

iaminperth - I think I like the sound of this recipe better than the other one!

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 10:10 PM

and OG if you are cooking a curry, don't forget to cook the spices prior to adding or they simply don't open and then you don't get the flavour. Cook meat, take out, cook spices, take out, cook veges take out and then start the recipe putting things together. Trust your nose it's easy to tell when things are cooked they smell delicious, when spices open they release the fragrance, and smell delicious, veges the same. When you have all these things cooked then and only then can you put your recipe together. Why don't we have a blog on "Cooking easily for Singles" and "What to do when someone turns up unexpectedly". What do you reckon guys.
Thanks Riversong, you are lovely. It is honestly the way I feel< I honestly don't care what people do, but please don't hurt each other, that's not what life is about,

Posted by: iaminperth at April 3, 2008 10:08 PM

For Jewlz

The 10kg Curse

This story starts in '73 of how this curse affected me..of how it ruled and changed my life , but did it really, I wonder, now older I see so much more clearly.

The fashions then were teensie ,tiny and so was I, or so I thought, until someone said 'if you just lost 10kg you could be perfect, it would change your life. You could be a supermodel or if you are really lucky someone's wife"

So I lived on apples and cans of Tab,
I had no breasts, but I looked fab.
Supermodel I was not, but I met a man who married me!

It was a beautiful wedding for all to see
I wore a size 8 wedding dress,
He was a handsome Officer from the Mess.

I played the glamourous skinny wife, making sure all was right in his life. Was I happy ? Was I loved? I 'm not so sure, I was too starved!

Put back the 10kg... not a chance, and yet I began to notice his furtive glance, at women walking by with breasts in their bra's and hips in their pants!

A couple of babies duly arrived and I found to my surprise with them came a few more kilo's

I had boobs at last and just as well, by then the 70's had gone to hell.
Was I happy? Yes I was, even though I had begun to grow.

"I would love you no matter what, you could gain another 50 it would matter not" my young husband said...just in time for bed!!

A lot more years came and went, some happy times, some tears were shed. My weight went up, my weight went down, Jenny Craig turned up in town. She built her business on my fat..I am very sure of that.
Was I happy? I can't deny it..nothing really depended on my diet.

One fateful day in early Spring,
I was feeling a little fat, I couldn't find a thing to wear, and while searching through the laundry basket I found a big surprise...a never to be forgotten thing.
A classic lipstick on the collar, I began to cry and holler "You must be joking!" I may be fat but still quite vain, "Whoever owns that ghastly colour? It is definitely not mine!".
Was I happy? No, was not!

"Are you leaving me because I'm fat?" "No, of course not, it's not that.
I love you still , I always will, but this is something I just have to do"
"Please don't go, I love you so. This marriage can be saved, It's not too late. Why are you leaving? Is she thin?I'll lose 10kg in weight or more" I shouted at the closing door.

!0kg and more dropped off in month, loss of love the world's best diet.
Don't try it!

At the court with different eyes she began to see her husband was no longer such a handsome prize, his hair was receded(almost bald) and no longer so well built, his blue, blue eyes were dull with guilt.

She looked fabulously in fashion, size 12, the day they officially dissolved their passion
She hoped he would say he had changed his mind,but no, it did not seem to matter whether she was thin or fatter.
'Why did you refuse to unstack the dishwasher the one time in 20 years I asked? It was such a tiny task!
The answer came back loud and clear"It annoyed me that you asked,..and by the way I told my Barrister that their are 10kgs of you I never married legally...it could affect the judgement you see"

More years pass and the kgs come the kgs go, but something changes.a peaceful acceptance comes, and now she looks just right she thinks, at last!

Nigella has come to show the way to the world of real women soft beauty.
The time has come to choose between body or face, and she decides to accept with grace, a healthy look -rather than more like a old scrawny chook!
Was I happy. Yes I was because now I'd had a chance to grow and the real me I'd come to know.

On joining RSVP(maybe someone will like me) she thought I'll diet again, but just a bit, no more biscuits with cups of tea.
She met a man, and had a romance, It was great and so was he, but for various reasons could not be. He told he loved her soft and womanly, not too fat and not too thinly.
Was I happy? She indeedy!

Back she went for another turn.
Just last week she met a man. She looked radiant as can be, a little curvaceous with shiny hair, his hair was grey and he slumped in his chair.

The very next day she looked at his profile and notice to her amusement he had made a change, he had removed the word average and left slim and athletic...how pathetic!

Was she happy? She she was. She new herself and was not affected, as she once would have been if rejected.

The irony of the 10kg curse is the fact that men like breasts, but don't like fat.

They don't like this, they do like that!
The plastic surgeons dream life -thousands of malnourished girls with plastic boobs to be your wife.

Being thin or being fatter, in the end it does not matter,
I look back and see quite clearly life is lived , time goes by, and love mayl come and go, life is what you make it. Don't meet other people's expectations, just your own, and happiness is there for you if you just
go out and take it!
Chris

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 3, 2008 10:06 PM

OG If you want to make a good soup or choose ingredients you like and then cook then before adding the fluid. Browning the meat brings out the flavour, the caramel. Then cook any vegetables, either roasting or grilling to bring out the sugars and the flavours then and only then when this is done add the liquids. It's the cooking of the ingredients first that is the 'secret'. Browning, grilling or roasting brings out the sugar and the sugar caramelises, you know like the smell of onions that have been cooked for a long time. Once these flavours have been brought out only then add the liquid and any other tastes you like to add. Be very careful though because cooking in this way, sometimes absolutely nothing needs to be added. It doesn't take more time in preparation, it simply means using your nose more and taking a little bit more time at the start.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 3, 2008 9:55 PM

Ha haha ha! I'm still laughing from iaminperth's post on the "adventure" page - it seems so relevant here:
.."I don't really care who consenting adults bonk so long as it's consentual and doesn't involve me..." ha hahah ha iaminperth!
Ditto!

No, Malsie, it was not a "bummer" - he was a complete waste of time. It was just a bummer taking so long to find out!
(rsvptestproduct - you really do need some more tick boxes - maybe "time waster" for another one!)

Virgil and sunrizesiesta: "genuine affection and closeness that could transform into love" I would definitely call more of a "relationship" than a F*ck buddy!

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 9:53 PM

Hey everyone, Think I've caught up - just one quick comment before I head off to bed... In response to: "I would not be holding out, waiting for the "perfect" relationship, but would want a relationship where there was genuine affection and closeness". Posted by: virgil at April 3, 2008 7:03 PM

I take my hat off to you Virgil and I agree, I think that waiting for that "perfect" relationship may never happen (call me optimistic).. therefore what you said is very true. After all... genuine affection and closeness can transform into love.. :-)

Night everyone.

Deborah

Posted by: sunrizesiesta at April 3, 2008 9:36 PM

laughsandfantasizes, I have no idea what you are referring to (as usual).

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 9:23 PM

>"Oldergent if I give the recipe I will have to kill you."
Posted by: oohlala1 at April 3, 2008 6:39 PM.

Only segueing with your comment oohlala. There is, however, some relevance to the non-recipient.

Old ones were left behind to starve by Australian tribal aborigines, when they became useless and therefore a burden.
Much like our modern day Medicare system.
Grow old and move to the end of the queue or, never be offered a costly remedy to prolong life and comfort.

Saves so much time and energy.

Much like FWBs, who also, can be discarded when irrelevant.

Or, given the Kiss of Life if needed again.

Posted by: justsaying at April 3, 2008 8:09 PM

Hey, I am guilty of not reading all the blogs as I get up early to walk my dog and you guys blog until the wee hours when good boys are in bed :-) I have however had a look back through this one and notice the emphasis is always that the man is the big beneficiary of FWB. That a man will take the sex and not appreciate the relationship whilst the woman is giving that indefinable special something bestowed when they feel a deep emotional bond. I can honestly say that when I entered the RSVP experience I was overwhelmed with the number (100's) of women kissing and emailing. Surely this has been experienced by others here as I'm no different and certainly no alpha male model. I did meet with, well, lots and was never the one to get the whole sleeping together thing out there...never, I'm too insecure, hate the thought I would force my attentions on someone who didn't want me to. My convoluted point is this; I met so many women and they were very keen to jump in the cot, I didn't call the next day it's true but none of them, to my knowledge, were looking for something altruistic. When I think about it, is that a slight on me?

Posted by: troyohboy at April 3, 2008 7:16 PM

Marcus, given that i have read the previous apparent thoughtfull comments from you... Your dribble does not make me feel special.
I never mentioned giving unconsentual sex to anyone... and regardless of wether sex is consentual or not, fbuddies in my opinion is not displaying the kind of behaviour I would like my children to grow up and paticipate in.

Posted by: lostcountrygirl at April 3, 2008 7:13 PM

theLynathD, I trotted off to bed with my trusty hot water bottle the other night (having seen the light and given up on men - well, for now ;) - and the bloody thing burst on me, soaked the bed and burnt my foot.... sometimes you really just can't win....

Posted by: malsie at April 3, 2008 7:04 PM

In the previous discussion on FWB, one of the women here told a story of an elderly aunt who had a fwb relationship with a gentleman a few doors down the road, where they would spend the nights together, then she would return home and spend the day at her own house.

I cant remember whose auntie this was, but it is an example of 2 adults going about their business quietly.

Personally, I am looking for one woman to spend the rest of my life with, maybe getting married.

I feel this might be an unrealizable goal, never the less it is still a goal. I would be happy with a 3 or 4 year relationship, or a 3 or 4 month relationship.

I would not be holding out, waiting for the "perfect" relationship, but would want a relationship where there was genuine affection and closeness.

Posted by: virgil at April 3, 2008 7:03 PM

riverschlong.
Paradox.
Somebody attempting to define others behaviour as weird and unhealthy by her yardstick is doing just that: engaging in weird and unhealthy behaviour.
Haha Marquis

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 7:01 PM

oohlala - yep, the lead up was hard, and took a bit of getting used to. But when I got there - wow - I looked back at all I have to be thankful for; looked ahead at all I have to look forward to; looked at all I have experienced, learnt and become... it was quite an amazing view. I'm a much better person now (in all ways) than I ever was at 20 or 30. Hey - guess what - it's not so bad after all!

With regard to those who get some wierd pleasure from taunting - well, I just don't get the joke - why they believe they are superior because they are a few years behind us!?

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 6:57 PM

riversong, "weird and unhealthy behaviours" as defined by whom, though? There may be some that the "majority" of people would agree on if you did a survey, but it's still an area that's up to an individual's perception, I believe; one person's "unhealthy" could well be another's "normal". Does anyone have the right to dictate that? (and not including people or beings - ie animals! - who are not consensual and need to be protected).

By the way, sorry your relationship didn't work out. Mine of 6 months also didn't either - bummer, eh?

Posted by: malsie at April 3, 2008 6:50 PM

lostcountrygirl April 3 6:15 PM.

Can you explain what the connection between consensual adult sex and morals is please?
In my experience of consensual sex, women choose their partners and always have the right of veto. If you have friends who 'use you' without permission then that is statutory rape. If you get so drunk and are incapable of giving informed consent to sex it is still rape. And they are not you friends and there is an ethical issue.
Cheers Marcus

Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 6:45 PM

Marcus
I am not going to post my magazine name on here for privacy reasons for my own sake.
If you genuinely want to see it because you are genuinely interested, and not to just test to see if Im full of hot air, (because some are on here), then I will if you provide me with your email, and I will send you a PDF.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 3, 2008 6:40 PM

Lostcountrygirl imagine the wedding when you do meet man of your dreams and as you walk back down the aisle there on your side are all your FWBs smiling back at you and there with them are their new FWBs your girlfriends. One big happy family. A little bit incestuous and maybe dont serve wine at the reception. Who knows what may happen. This is ridiculous but could happen no? Makes me laugh when I think of my friends.
Riversong I am not bothered too much about being fifty but only just turned in March. I am not quite used to it yet. Give me time:))
Oldergent if I give the recipe I will have to kill you. Or my family will. Experiment with the meats you use. try a little pork skin or feet. Use different sausages prosciutto bacon whatever and make sure you make your own tomato sauces. You can then add the tinned tomatoes. Old recipes dont even use tomatoes. Use variety of beans or a little rice. Experiment with vegies too. I use same bases but vary beans and vegies and meats. Depends what I have got fresh at time. always good and hearty. If you are vegetarian dont use meats. Just as good. serve with good Ciabatta bread or what you like:))

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 3, 2008 6:39 PM

On that last point re the kids lostcountrygirl, from what I see, a lot of the younger kids are a lot clearer about friendships and relationships, than the previous "anything-goes-so-long-as-it-feels-good-what-the-hell" mixed up crew!! Perhaps they're learning from their role models what NOT to do :)

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 6:38 PM

I think the whole idea of FWB is a little off. Sex should make you feel good about yourself, and maybe I am a bit old fashioned to believe that the best sex is with someone you love... but no amount of quickies can give you that satisfaction of lying in someones arms and just feeling safe and "home"... Yeah, a five min Fbuddy can give you a quick orgasm, but so can a vibrator with a porn flick. I would rather go 2.5 years without sex (yes i DID) then just jump into the sack with someone on a drunken night out just to get laid. And I would hope that any of my friends, would not use me in such a cheap way and think so little of me that I am just there for a quick nookie when the need arises. How can I look my child in the eyes and teach her morals if I don't practice what I preach? (no i am NOT a god botherer... ) I can see why society has come down to its lowest points when people throw their legs apart for no real reason. FWB? The only benefit I can see is that you gain a bad reputation.

Posted by: lostcountrygirl at April 3, 2008 6:15 PM

Spot on mystiemuse (3.46pm): ” Its not immoral its simply a potential for heartbreak.....”

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 6:11 PM

Lonelyheart44 Today 4:08 PM
I'd love to see a copy of your women's magazine. What is it called and where can I get it?
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 5:56 PM

brilliantblue 4:45 Today.
Who are you talking about BB?
We have a jewlz31 and jewels aka Junebaby57
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 5:49 PM

They may be casual attitudes to you lonelyheart, but not to everyone.

I do not understand the problem some have here in that people have the right to choose to do what they do within their relationships, as long as BOTH parties agree to it. Now that may be a marriage situation, a FWB, a F*** buddy, Girlfriend / boyfriend situation, whatever it is.

If it suits the people involved and no one gets hurt, then l don't have a problem with any of them.
If it is not working to both peoples satisfactory expectations then work it out...
What l am trying to say here is each to their own (groan) .
Of course it won't suit everyone, just as marriage doesn't suit everyone...............K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 3, 2008 5:03 PM

I am a goose...keep hitting the preview button and loosing my comments/posts.
Just want to say hello to all, new and old on here....
Cheers,
B.

Posted by: bm1960 at April 3, 2008 4:51 PM

Marcus....you really have no idea?
Have you met Jewels in real life?
No I don't think so!
Well I have, and she is an incrediably gorgeous sexy woman with a great personality!
Men are very attracted to Jewels in real life...she never has a shortage men attracted to her....she looks fanastic just the way she is!
BB

Posted by: brilliantblue at April 3, 2008 4:45 PM

Oh My Goodness! Did someone mention the F word. Today we put up with pornography, murder, road rage, wars torture violence inequality and every other horrific thing but mention the fat word and the world falls apart. I am a bit chunky at the moment but very very active, however, I think maybe the couple of glasses of red each evening with a lovely steak and perhaps mushrooms or the chicken with wine and cream sauce and maybe the big breakfast on Sunday morning followed by a drink at the local pub with lunch maybe have something to do with the problem. It's not rocket science energy in/energy out and we all know it so getting your knickers in a twist about it doesn't help it stops you from moving your butt.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 3, 2008 4:38 PM

To lonely heart's various posts:
This is a public blog for people with a profile on the rsvp website, nothing more and nothing less. It is a forum to express opinions, exchange ideas, and often engage in heated discussion. It is not a church pulpit. On this topic, as with the others, there are many differences of opinion, with no correct or incorrect answers. Noone's opinion here is more or less worthy than the next blogger. We are entitled to our opinions just as we are entitled to live our own lives the way we choose, as consenting adults.

Personally I revel in and celebrate the vast differences of opinions expressed here, and thank the universe that I live in a society where this sort of openness is possible, a society which in fact breeds such diversity. Acceptance and tolerance are wonderful values, worth aspiring to.

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 3, 2008 4:29 PM

Just an added bit of info to junebaby and Marcus.
I own and run my own women's magazine.
The info I provide is tips on meeting points etc.
I did do an article on internet dating, and the points were about how to meet a guy for a relationship, not a FWB.
So if my readers have read my article and follow it well enough they will be protected from such casual ideas as some do have.
My recommendation to use internet dating was a way to meet a guy and have the opportunity to get to know the person and give time to find out what their pursuitors intentions were.
Gladly I gave the right tips to protect them from wasting their time on such casual attitudes.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 3, 2008 4:02 PM

Marcus, Marcus..... insulting jelwz by commenting on weight is a very unpleasant thing to do.....you may see it as offering advice to her and if so should have possibly emailed her to give said advice rather than commenting here....
Is everything really so cut and dried to you??

Come on Marcus, play nice in the pit... when you do make positive comments your halo begins to glow ever so slightly.........K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 3, 2008 3:53 PM

"""Gee Marcus, now you've upset all the fatties. It was always on the cards as women who are carrying lots of weight and find they are unattractive to the opposite sex always blame the shallowness of men. Yeah right. They don't want to look at themselves, well, neither do we. It can be a struggle for some to keep weight off, I have to train plenty but it's about self respect. If you don't respect yourself how can anyone else.
Posted by: troyohboy at April 3, 2008 10:12 AM """"""

well troyboy, you have shown your true colours......well actually......you haven't as no profile to look at!!!!

But we are all entitled to an opinion and picking on peoples appearance is extremely bad manners. That is what annoyed me about Marcus's post this morning, but yours was actually worse.

And I may be a big girl, but I have NOT experienced the particualr problem you so confidently mention "find they are unattractive to the opposite sex", life is not just about weight, it is about whether a person likes/loves themselves, the confidence and happiness they exude, thier intelligence, how they present themselves, and true beauty is in the eye of the beholder (sorry marcus, couldn't think of anything better on the spot)...Troy you should try it sometime...
have a lovely evening all...jewels

Posted by: junebaby57 at April 3, 2008 3:53 PM

junebaby57
I understand where your coming from and I do agree that if Im to be ridgid in my way of thinking I am not going to be comfortable with this site.But what is this site offering then?
I have tried out another site as well and I met too many people with too many casual ideas of what they were on there for.
My experience has been that the world is their oyster, or their play ground.
So for my own sanity I will stick to what protects me from the many expereinces I may have endured with so many if I didnt live by my own values.
And believe me, there have been too many meetings for me on the internet dating sites that I have encountered with men that just wanted to sample the goods and test out the rest on the net.
So if it makes me ridgid not to be so casual with every guy I meet, then so be it, because I have saved myself from a lot of wasted time.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 3, 2008 3:47 PM

To all and sundry....although I have never been sure why sundry got a mention all to themeselves, but anyway. Friends with benefits only works if the both of you can see no long term benefit, in the said "friend". Because take it from one who has trod that path and lost badly.....either have the benefits, or the friend, but not both. There is of course nothing wrong with being friends with your lover, as long as the relationship is real and commited. Its not immoral its simply a potential for heartbreak......

Posted by: mystiemuse at April 3, 2008 3:46 PM

afternoon to those in blogland

catching up and reading the posts this arvo, lonely, you need to realise that RSVP is a public dating site, which has males and females on it looking for....well looking for whatever works for them.

There is no right or wrong way to have a relationship...people will choose what suits them best, and what they are ready for, what they think they want in thier lives.

It doesn't mean that life is going to end in chaos. You choose, you say no if it isn't right for you.

I have an open mind, so have tried a few things in the last 16 months, the result being that I really know what I want in my life.

FWB is not a bad thing, neither is an affair or a short term relationship...but if you are offered these things and they don't suit, that is fine too, it doesn't make everyone else immoral or without values if they want to try these thing out to see if they suit them.

My dad came out of Holland in the 50's, he went thru the war as a child, he brought me up to question things, get information and work things out and then make a decision .....Plus you can never put all your trust in anyone in charge or with power.......often what you have been told as a child may not be right for you as an adult in an ever changing world.

From my experience, I agree that there are a lot of men seeking sex only, I have experienced a few of these, just say no....there are also married men, after the same thing, just sugar coat it differently. But they are all entitled to be on the site , well maybe not the married men, but most of us will find what we are looking for eventually.

If you don't have an open mind, this site will really get you down and play with your head. Something to think about, if you are going to continue on.

Posted by: junebaby57 at April 3, 2008 3:30 PM

Hey Marcus,
Maybe its not policing, maybe its just nursing, or being doctor?
Whatever you choose fits your bill, but it is different on ours.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 3, 2008 3:29 PM

Lonelyheart44.

I'm sorry your PM post was not presented, not all of mine are either. It is very important to have right of reply. That is a fundamental aspect of the liberal democracy we enjoy.

Not everybody sees things in such clear cut black and white terms as you. Me, I am rather fond of nuanced shades.
There are no 'facts' when it comes to relationship politics, only subjective opinions.
The sort of societies that do enforce the rigid adherence and policing of what you are suggesting are totalitarian theocracies. In the modern age usually Islamic.
I don't think we want a moral police here on the blog or at large.
Cheers Marcus

Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 12:51 PM

Hey Marcus,
I posted a response to your poke at thelynathdiary last night but it didnt go through on to here.
Maybe my post didnt follow the rules of this site. Maybe a few others didnt get put on here either because they too probably responded the same way as my post was.
Too bad you cant follow the rules of values, morals and the norms of life as we were brought up to believe.
A friend is a friend, a date is a date and a relationship mate is a relationship mate.
Thelynathdiary cleary stated a clear fact and her post was very clear and based on facts.
Unfortunately you did not see it as fact and chose to defend your own conscious.
Everyone has a choice to believe or not to believe, that is societies choice these days. To live by individualism knowing that their own choices could be detrimental to their own well being.
If we stuck to the rules of dividing what is what and not try and create our own rules then this world would be a better place to live in.
Unfortunately too many people are living by their own created rules and this creates chaos, not just for the practicing but also it inflicts unwholesome productivity on others.
If people want to live by FWB then thats their sad scenario for confusion, no stability and a never ending false hope.
If people want to seek a real relationship and know it has more predictions of certainty, then dosnt that sound like they are living by the norms, values and morals that we were brought up with?
The people who choose to go with the later, are not just concerned about their own lives but are also concerned for others.
No one want to see you suffer Marcus, they only want to see you live a long and happy healthy life, and if their opinion dosnt get your approval then it is your loss.
We just dont want to have people contacting us who have such casual ideas of spending time with someone.
FWB isnt what we want in our lives, and thats a safe gaurd against wasting our time.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 3, 2008 12:02 PM

Marcus - presentation. Think about it.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 3, 2008 11:19 AM

notgodsgift - like I said - each to his own - if that's all you want - fine - good luck to you.

It's not "judgemental" to tell it like it is (about the complications of FWBs for those looking for normal relationships), for the benefit of the younger people (not bloggers), both male and female, who are reading this and keep peeking at my profile :)

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 11:08 AM

There is a joke on the French in my industry. They say about making changes 'we know it works in practise but does it work in theory?'
Cheers Marcus
Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 10:22 AM

Very interesting take on a well known phrase, Marcus.

To compare that to footy teams, Fremantle has arguably the best list in the AFL, but struggles to win games, St Kilda also should have won premierships a few years ago.

As the day goes on, no doubt I will think of better things that work in practice, but not in theory.

Again to football, and theory is that Adelaide should be in rebuilding/struggling mode, but I am sure that what they did to the Eagles last weekend, they could do to most, if not all teams.

Posted by: virgil at April 3, 2008 10:59 AM

Marcus,
After your poor attempt at humor in your previous posts regarding the alter boys... I am absolutely convinced I know why you are still single. You may need to work on you ability to socialise in more appropiate manner. If you dropped that joke at me on a date, I would walk out. The only benefit I would find in you is to use you as a good excuse to leave a venue, and give me another "what i dont want" line in my profile.... CHEERS

Posted by: lostcountrygirl at April 3, 2008 10:56 AM

I have seen from posts to this topic, that there are many different types of FWB. from the functional arrangements enjoyed by Marcus, and myself and our partners, and OG, to some really bad situations where there is no equality.

In a way, the bad situations remind me a bit of the Howard govt AWA's where one party with all the power, says to the other party with no power, lets have an agreement, and it works my way, or the highway.

Unlike a pair of socks, FWB's are not one size fits all.

I dont think people go into FWB's with the idea, "lets have a FWB, on the contrary, its more like sex happens, then the participants think about how to go forward from there, and maybe sometimes a relationship results, and other times it is an FWB. But at no time should the person with the lesser bargaining power be disadvantaged.

Posted by: virgil at April 3, 2008 10:32 AM

jewlz31 April 3 9:48 AM.
Glad to hear that your fit and active. I can read as well as look at pictures. I don't always believe what I read though.
That little jibe you used is borrowed from Winston Churchill who on accused of being drunk said "Madame I'll be sober in the morning you will still be ugly". You have done exactly what you are criticising me for doing attacked; my appearance. I'm not the one in the crook relationship either..
Luv, honestly, I don't mind if you line up with all the other girly girls who object to my directness, but you might want to consider my thoughts and the experience I related about my sister. Seriously.
Another platitude. If you always do what you have always done you will always get what you have always got.
There is a joke on the French in my industry. They say about making changes 'we know it works in practise but does it work in theory?'
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 10:22 AM

By the way groundhogday, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Your vitriolic tirades against men generally has Marcus well and truly covered in the nasty stakes.

Posted by: troyohboy at April 3, 2008 10:19 AM

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated though as it would certainly guide/assist me in making the best possible outcome.
Posted by: jewlz31 at April 2, 2008 10:56 PM
I have 2 suggestions, the first is to sit quietly, some call this meditating, clear you mind of thoughts, and see what comes up.

Particularly in the way of feelings, a feeling of lightness around the heart area would to me indicate go forwards in direction you are going. A churning turbulent feeling in the stomach, to me indicates the time is right for change.

The second idea is more immediate, and is my idea in conjuction with Lynath, and that is to talk to your family, tell them the whole situation, then kick him out.

This will give you control of the situation, and be great for your self esteem. The price for acting courageously is always worth paying.

It is possible he will really miss you, so you may want to let him back, but if you do, then not as FWB but full monogamous relationship, with the understanding that any straying, and he is out.

Posted by: virgil at April 3, 2008 10:15 AM

junebabe
I'd credited you with a bit more awareness than Lynath. I agree with some of what she says too. She makes motherhood statements dressed as though they are deep original insights.
OF COURSE we love and protect our children. Of course social cohesion is important, blah blah. I don't need to be told things I and most other sentient males understand intuitively. I am suprised Lynath has not put out a proposal to have all penis' registered as dangerous weapons and tatooed with a serial number. She is so Victorian.
I think you can do a bit better than the unsophisticated books, covers and people analogy you used.
Perhaps you cannot. Perhaps you object to my implied criticism? How dare I tell it like I see it and have experienced it.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 10:05 AM

junebaby57....

I appreciate your kind words and thank you. I also took Marcus' post as rude and condescending... but then who is he to talk. He can condescend all he likes it just shows his true character and the more people he shows that to the longer he will be on here.

I know what I look like but it is something I dont have much control over. I am an intelligent, caring, kind, loving and loved woman isnt that all that matters..??? Not a question for your to answer Marcus we all know your opinion.

Posted by: jewlz31 at April 3, 2008 9:53 AM

Hi Marcus

All I will say here is......

Hey Jewlz31. Dont be too taken in by 'laughsandtalkscrap. He is rather a nasty little creature under all that errr nastiness. Oops did I say that out loud

Posted by: groundhogday2 at April 2, 2008 8:47 PM

As I said all I will say. I judge people by how they treat me and honestly you aren't very nice....and by your profile I see why!!
OOPS did I say that outloud. (thanks groundhogday2)

As I said in my previous post I try to be non judgmental and to me things like what I weigh and what other people weigh dont matter to me because as the saying goes.... "I can lose weight but you cant get rid of your ugliness".

Marcus you cant judge me because you dont know me... You go on about losing weight and not eating as much tucker and walking a little more...yet if you had read my profile instead of looking at my pictures you would see what I do. I am an active person and I eat a regular healthy diet. I have a friend who is a physical instructor and she says that she couldnt keep up with my lifestyle if she tried.

I dont have to explain myself to you and by the sounds of other peoples opinions I shouldnt bother trying.

To reiterate my point UNLESS you know a person you cant judge who they are

Posted by: jewlz31 at April 3, 2008 9:43 AM

Bob, thtat is soooo true. I believe that FWB will work for those that are open to the idea, If it is not for you, don't do it. We live in a changing world, relationships are NOT the same as they were when my parents got together in the 50's.

Really guys, keep an open mind, and don't knock the different type of relationships unless you have tried them. ( I for one have done heaps of research on relationship types in the last 12 months, and I now know what will work for me!!!)

If you decide that a type is not for you, there is no need to be derogatory or rude about what others are open enough to talk about on this site.

And FWB is not random, as waterbombe has pointed out, there is caring and sharing, but no major committment!

Waterbombe, you are spot on about the children, except the committment is for a lifetime. My 22 year old is with the army in Iraq and I worry constantly about him. My dad is in his 70's and still worries about me!!! "why aren't you with someone"" well obviously he has'nt been on RSVP!!!!!!

And Marcus, your post to Jewlz31 was really rude and condescending....pretending to give caring advice, but soooooo shitful....I am with Lynath, I think that really you don't like intelligent women, who have seriously good opinions.
And you have reached the age you have, and you still judge a book by its cover, when we all know that the really good stuff is BEHIND or UNDER the cover!!!

Just my thoughts...jewels

Posted by: junebaby57 at April 3, 2008 9:23 AM

"Woody, It doesn't bother me one way or the other what you think, you are entitled to your opinion as is everyone else; if FWB doesn't work for you....thats OK...but it does for some....what bothers me is that people are derogatory of those that do find something in these types of relationships.

I dont read your profiles but bet all have written "non judgemental' somewhere in there. Bob"

Posted by: notgodsgift at April 3, 2008 1:59 AM

Bob ... I am usually pretty careful not to judge others but have commented that I think people in FWB arrangements shouldn't get involved with others before they have left the FWB behind or at least decided to. This has happened to me and it's not good when you start dating someone and they say BTW, I have a FWB arrangement with someone. Well hello .... why did you start dating me then? If that's being judgemental then so be it.

Woody

Posted by: woodnwine at April 3, 2008 8:52 AM

Atlantis girl (2 April 8.48am): re: “when someone else comes along I hope things will sort themselves out?!”
Yeah, right. Here are the scenarios (foresight):

1) One or other just suddenly dumps their buddy, who by this time has become mutually dependant on this relationship and feels alone, hurt and rejected.

2) One cuts off the “benefits”, but continues to be “friends” – difficult to contstruct new boundaries, and easy to slip back into occasional benefits, especially when the other still wants to, and on occasions such as when drinking, or upset with new boyfriend/girlfriend etc. This complicates the new relationship. New boyfriend/girlfriend may be (justifiably) jealous and or suspicious of the sus “friend”.

3) Don’t tell the new one, and just keep the triangle. Yes – something will “sort itself out” and give in the end ie new potential boyfriend/girlfriend walks away from the mess!

4) Don’t bother looking for anything more – just settle for the FWB as an ongoing substitute arrangement for what you really want and need :)

Think ahead.

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 8:06 AM

Seems to me a lot of people on RSVP are terrified of the “L” word (love), and just settle for the little “l” (lust). The “friendship” label is often misused to camouflages everything to make it seem OK for those not capable, willing or able to have a normal physically and emotionally intimate relationship.

Yep rsvptestproduct – we need another tick box to screen those out FWBs as well as the flesh-eaters. “Short-term” or “long-term” doesn’t really say anything (how long is a piece of string?) You need something to describe the QUALITY, not just the QUANTITY. Could I suggest a tick box for:

“looking for a genuine relationship”?

Lets keep it simple ;)

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 7:27 AM

The argument “it’s OK if it’s between consenting adults” is used to legitimize all sorts of weird and unhealthy behaviours.

Then there’s the issue of whether both actually ARE consenting.

In my last year’s attempted slow-grow-not-based-on-romantic-illusion-but-based-on-a-solid-basis-of-friendship attempted relationship last year, considering all the flowers and beautiful dates and full-on courting, I was under the mis-impression that it was a “friendship with possibilities”, (silly me!) I didn’t realize his sights only went as high as “friends with benefits” and that he “wasn’t ready for a relationship” (his words). I’m NOT talking living together or getting married, just sharing love and emotional intimacy in a normal boyfriend/girlfriend relationship.

It may have had “benefits” for him, but it was a total waste of 6 months for me!!!
I think people like that should wear a T-shirt saying “Heart Closed -
Dead End Road”.

By the way ladies – he’s back on RSVP advertising as “a lonely generous heart with lots to share”! (Don’t believe everything you read!) Those looking for a genuine relationship - beware. Those saying you would be happy with the arrangement to just have the flowers and dates, but not the heart in return for your favours - good luck to you. Not for me!

Posted by: riversong1 at April 3, 2008 7:13 AM

Someone wanted to know where the images at the intro of each blog were obtained? Most are from a site called Glam.com

Posted by: femalepersuasion at April 3, 2008 6:56 AM

Hey Jewlz, I can relate to your family problems and it does make life uncomfortable. I have a relo who invites my ex to my father's birthdays etc. Should I add that I split with my ex after finding him cheating on me after I spent 5 years looking after him following a brain anneurysm.And that my father is a breed unto himself where he thinks that all females are stupid and not capable of doing as much as males. Am thinking that a FWB is more preferential than some of my relos.Guys-that does not mean you are all tarred with the same brush.I have quite a few male friends and I enjoy male company just as much as female company.

Posted by: blueeyes1955 at April 3, 2008 6:46 AM

Lynath, I think you missed the point when you said an FwB relationship was "Having sex with random supposed friends". An FwB is not random. On the contrary they are someone you know well. Also, they are a genuine friend, as shown by the continuation of the friendship when one party calls a halt to sex. This kind of arrangement suits some people at some stage of their lives....I don't hear anyone recommending it as an ideal for everyone.

Marcus...all that evolutionary claptrap about men "spreading their seed" and women's need for love getting in the way.......don't you have any more sophisticated arguments than that? Clearly not. Well here is a thought. I agree that it is important for the embryo to be concieved, and for there to be diversity in the gene pool. But even more important is the need for said embryo to grow into a baby, child, teenager, young adult, and adult who can procreate and have young of their own. And what sustains the offspring through the 20 or so years until this happens? It is the care provided to it out of love by skilled and knowledgeable parents. Twenty years of love, care, work, parenting skills, communication, support, and social education makes chucking a few million sperm in someones' direction for a second look rather a pale effort by comparison, don't you think? For the human race to continue, I agree that it is important for blokes to contribute sperm, but I think YOU should realise that far more important is the many years of effort parents contribute to raise the child until it is an adult and can responsibly raise it's own children. Without that effort you can spread all the seed you like and the offspring will never reach adulthood. If that happens, you can say goodbye to the human race.

Posted by: waterbombe at April 3, 2008 5:54 AM

jewlz31
I hope you are getting some benefit from other peoples insights here in the sandpit.
One of my younger sister's marriage broke down 3 years ago and her husband moved out quickly.
She has been overweight most of her adult life. In 12 months or so she went down to her figurative and healthy BMI (body mass index)
She found a lot more time for her self and her interests, became closer to her kids (and struggled financially).
Losing weight raised her self esteem enormously and improved her health and energy. She was again interesting to men and a bit interested in them too. Importantly she has a range of choices and options that did not exist before.
From your photos you are more than overweight, more likely obese. Obese women are almost invisible to men and often low value and more likely to be taken for granted by partners who are not deeply involved. My suggestion is to seriously look at losing weight- a little less tucker -a bit more walking etc. Your self esteem will start to rise from day one and you will have a lot more options and probably but not certainly, more positive attention from your man.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 5:51 AM

Riversong,

Your post of 10.25...agree completely....my issue is that FWB is definitely not for everyone....but why do those for whom it is not an option feel obliged to be derogatory in their comments....OK its not for you....but for some it does work.

Whilst I dont know others, I have seen your posts over a period of time and my disappointment in your comments comes from a perception that you have been open in good debate....never made cheap shots previously, even though you might have disagreed.

Woody,

It doesn't bother me one way or the other what you think, you are entitled to your opinion as is everyone else; if FWB doesn't work for you....thats OK...but it does for some....what bothers me is that people are derogatory of those that do find something in these types of relationships.

I dont read your profiles but bet all have written "non judgemental' somewhere in there.

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at April 3, 2008 1:59 AM

I may have previously posted that thelynathdiary was entitled to your opinion (marcus)...however of course I meant that she is entitled to her opinion. sorry lynathdiary about that.

Also I am bewildered as to why Marcus has to always go on about male genitalia, all the time.
We know you have one Marcus but do you have to talk incessantly about it. I do of course wish you dating success, if you can fit in some coffee meetings to your schedule.

Posted by: slightsynchronicity at April 3, 2008 1:39 AM

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 2, 2008 7:22 PM

Marcus,
thelynathdiary is entitled to your opinion and personally, I enjoyed her post. If you can not say something constructive, why bother to post a comment. Given your claimed intellect, it is disappointing that you are so negative so frequently. Contribute to this blog can't you, instead of paying out people ad nauseum. That is so great that your various FWB situations work so well for you and hope its mutually rewarding.There is no point criticising someone elses moral compass or conscience, we are what we are and not everyone wants to change. I have no idea why your inflammatory and immature comments are allowed on this blog. thelynathdiary is more than entitled to your opinion and I wish you would shut up unless you have something interesting to say. Not only is this blog not in real time but you are just saying the same old thing, so there is not much impetus for me to post more regularly.

I have friends who are friends only that I would not have sex with and had a marriage which ended up loveless that was like being with a stranger in the end. Oh and yes I did have sex with someone while the relationship was ending. Was sort of for sentimental reasons. Due to the timing of that, I missed out on the chance to go out with someone who was single, and eligible. They were interested in me but i was busy having goodbye sex and a prolonged goodbye. So there is a reminder to me of an opportunity to start with a guy I had heaps in common with and liked. My energies and focus were elsewhere. So i turned a date down with him to have one last date and sex with the guy I had been seeing for 2 years.The guy who only asked once and never again, well I do see him around and it was years ago, but deeply regretted that I was not available to go out with him, for years.

Seems that there is a lot of varied ideas of what a FWB is on this blog. I would not judge anyone for having a FWB but I hope for more and of course wont settle, and therefore am alone but not lonely : )) I feel no moral superiority and maybe the opportunity has not presented itself anyway but it certainly is not what i am seeking. I think a person in a FWB could miss out on someone they could have a future with.

Good night all
SSC

Posted by: slightsynchronicity at April 3, 2008 1:21 AM

onesoulonajourney March 2 8:05 PM

At the rate of blood production suggested you would starve to death each time you have your period.
As for leaving the building- well no. Most sperm are resorbed and never sea the light of day. The Catholic Church used to put it about that if males masturbated they would go blind. As usual their science was way out. The better line would have been: Look boys, all that semen is mostly high value protein, you will suffer malnutrition if you dont stop it.
* * *
Two choir boys overhear the priest give a parishioner 50 hail marys for confessing fellatio.
The younger one asks "Eamon how much does he give you for a head job"? Eamon, " a Mars bar and a can of coke"
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 3, 2008 12:26 AM

Hmm...

Hey Jewlz31. Dont be too taken in by 'laughsandtalkscrap. He is rather a nasty little creature under all that errr nastiness. Oops did I say that out loud

Posted by: groundhogday2 at April 2, 2008 8:47 PM

Not sure how to respond to this one... Thank you for the warning... i am a naieve little creature at times and tend to take people at face value...they way I see it is that I am nice so why wouldnt people be nice to me. I tend to be one of those people that trust and believe 100% up front until someone gives me a reason to not believe or trust them.

Virgil in repsonse to your post

ohh jewlzz

you seem to have a problem there, with him enmeshed in your family etc.

I dont know what to suggest, but maybe some of the women here could offer a solution.

Posted by: virgil at April 2, 2008 9:37 PM

I appreciate the empathy and your query for help on my behalf. If there is one thing I have learned though what's best for my fragile self confidence (little one at that) I need to help myself. That way I actually learn lessons from whats happened. Unsure what I am going to do yet, I have a little while though because he is currently away and wont be back until mid may.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated though as it would certainly guide/assist me in making the best possible outcome.

I believe I am a good person with a kind heart and take people as they come.I try not to be judgmental but cant claim to be 100% perfect on that front. When it comes to my relationships with friends and partners I do not expect much but the things that I do expect I hold very dear. Honesty, Loyalty and respect.

Posted by: jewlz31 at April 2, 2008 10:56 PM

Well Marcus you have fogged up your glasses tonight haven't you.?

Last I checked Australian Law was still firmly based on British Law and the original Marriage Act of 1753 was therefore also transported to the Colony and as I stated forms the basis of Marriage as we know it today. Once again you have failed to comprehend what I have written.
Let's check together shall we.....
"Ceremonies acknowledging sexual union and hopefully the imminent arrival of a baby are common" yes that is what I said

"to all cultures and as old as mankind"
yes, you are right but since I was referring only to the Australian experience that is irrelevant.

Can you tell me which part is the garbage?

Marcus you are 49 years old and a most unhappy person behind all the false, mostly inappropriate and disturbing 'cheers' which end your posts.
Your underlying hatred of women is really the cause of your inability maintain a lasting relationship I would guess. While you can use women in this way and hide behind FWB (while no doubt secretly likening them to whores and blaming them for all the bad things in your life) you don't have to face some realities.
Your 'joke' about your composite wife is very sad. You seem very aggressive about your right to personal freedom and expression and trying to prove how different you are,whether it is trying to discredit beliefs in religion, the ancient science of Astrology or anyone in general who challenges you. You do not seem to accept that everyone else also has the same rights. Some people however do have the maturity to choose the benefit of the group over just 'the benefit of me"

Part of your profile and some of your posts here reflect your true attitude and lack of respect for women.

Do you think this has any bearing on the fact that you have never married at 49?

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 2, 2008 10:46 PM

I agree that if a women is being used it probably is her own fault.The comment I made was from an 86 year old woman who had been widowed a number of years. I myself was not used in my marriage, just can only relate what other people tell me about their experiences. But no doubt the "using' happens equally on both sides.As to FWB, I am open to discussions on this at a personal level and think you can't knock what you haven't tried.But I certainly wouldn't go announcing it on this site as something I was doing if at the same time I was setting up a prospective date.

Posted by: blueeyes1955 at April 2, 2008 10:26 PM

A topic that brings very diverse and thought provoking comments this is......

The FWB, do we categorise it as being a solely sexual relationship, or are there other elements brought into play.....

Surely the solely sexual one needs to be referred to as a F*** buddy to separate the men from the boys so to speak.......
A relationship that encompasses sexual and other things such as helping out with tasks would then be considered a FWB arrangement woud it not??....Jjust another darned opinion to throw into the mix..........K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 2, 2008 10:24 PM

Jen 57
No good talking to OHlala, she won't even share her minstron recip, even for a compadre with a stamp. Then OHla, having thrown off the shackles of traditional servitude would be a wonder to hold, even though she admits to having a "friend" while still attracting all us old liberated "compardres"on the blogs with her charms. No wonder the Roman empire ruled for so long.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 2, 2008 10:21 PM

jenjen57 - sounds like a lot of benefits in not doing "benefits"!

oohlala - what's your problem with being 50?

Posted by: riversong1 at April 2, 2008 10:21 PM

sincrolad, I am wondering why you refer to "profane desires" ?

Your approach may spare you some pain but also spares much effort to.
Experience teaches that more good pleasure and benefit is likely to output in direct proportion to input of effort.

Jewzl31 I think you are answering your own question.."Does loneliness have a price?" You have a choice and you are chosing the role of helpless victim to someone who does not treat you well. The price you could pay for loneliness(no doubt temporary) is the reinstatement of your dignity and self esteem. Get a hot water bottle.
fsw1 - get a hot water bottle and a vibrator
kim30's while young men have no need for any form of commitment, women will be the ones paying the price.
There has to be some balance . Thankfully not all men are thinking this way..some still want the security of commitment. FWB schemes just make everything more difficult.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 2, 2008 10:10 PM

jewlzz I think sometimes you just need to recognise the reality of the situation and get on with your life. It's not going to change, so stop stressing, that's the way it is, go forward and do what you need to do to make yourself happy.

Is Oldergent also Timwarp, he seems to be saying exactly the same things to Marcus as TW says to me. Condescending, I've just deleted over 100 lines - why would you bother same as I won't respond in the future - thank goodness for that. Same people me thinks.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 2, 2008 10:06 PM

Marcus.
All I think you would need to do is to lift your head above the gutter and there would be a que a mile long waiting to slap you in the chops. But then such is the price of fame, Yeah I can relate to your male relos, my mother ( bless her) would have said much of me.
Cheers OG(re)

Posted by: oldergent at April 2, 2008 9:51 PM

What really are the chances that this is going to happen for the million people on RSVP and especially for the over fifties.
Posted by: oohlala1 at April 2, 2008 2:47 PM

Is that a question oohlala ??

Judging from the experiences among the circle of friends I have made from RSVP (thats friends NOT friends with benefits !!) I reckon the chances are good.

Probably around half of this group of friends are now a happily in a relationship (not FWB) with someone they met on RSVP.

These are all people in their 40s and 50s so I reckon there is hope for the rest of us in this age group yet :))

Posted by: jenjen57 at April 2, 2008 9:42 PM

Marcus.
before coming back to you.
faw1@601. not even Marcus could argue or denigrate your post, from the heart. Then followed by sincrolad @ 6.08, one new and one relatively new blogger. Maybe the rest should listen to the newcomers.

Now young fellow, she quoted the families act as legislated, correctly. That we know the ceremony was a church requirement of control by the misogonmist of the papacy,

Marcus I have just deleted over 100 lines of trying to reason with you with the realisation that I nor I suspect minds greater than mine will ever get through to you.
OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 2, 2008 9:40 PM

ohh jewlzz

you seem to have a problem there, with him enmeshed in your family etc.

I dont know what to suggest, but maybe some of the women here could offer a solution.

Posted by: virgil at April 2, 2008 9:37 PM

Be careful, there are rsvp fundamentalist type insurgents out there that have nailed themselves to a cross & are secretly building one for any potential unsuspecting partner, should they not conform to their zeolotry relationship ideals.
I strongly suspect that when driving on the road, anyone going slower than them is an idiot and anyone going faster than them is a d*ckhead, right?

Posted by: sincrolad at April 2, 2008 9:11 PM

Blueeyes, I think what Marquis de Sade is saying, if women are being used, it’s their own fault for allowing it :)

Posted by: riversong1 at April 2, 2008 9:09 PM

The statement about men being users is quite funny. My current FWBship uses the line as a guilt cleanser for himself "I don't want you to think of me as using you". Hell I don't seem to care whether he thinks I'm using him. We have a friendship and friends do things for each other, don't they? We can get together for a meal, a drink, we may leave it there, we may not.

If its true that women are "wired" to only want commitment, then somewhere during my 36 years, I might have been rewired. I should get that checked out, because, its becoming quite apparent by some of the comments on here, that I might just be faulty.

There's a time and place for everything and while not in a committed relationship, I don't see a drama with it.

Posted by: kim30s at April 2, 2008 9:04 PM

Ogre. Today 7:54
What have I done now to be wacked about the chops?
My old man who is your vintage would say 'strike me pink lad'. His father would say 'by Jove'. Mum would probably say 'is that all he did'
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 2, 2008 8:58 PM

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 2, 2008 7:22 PM,

>"I will be making a garden retaining wall for one FWB this weekend."

You're working cheap, mate.

-----------------------------------------
I agree with your statement waterbombe at April 2, 2008 6:44 AM, >" Justsaying, FWBs never become stalkers", if you were commenting on your own and other's experiences you have seen.
I will repeat: I once had a FWB and ending up being stalked.
Perhaps the other person didn't consider it a FWB, as I did.
But it doesn't change how I always perceived the relationship and what subsequently happened to me.

Posted by: justsaying at April 2, 2008 8:57 PM

Hey Jewlz31. Dont be too taken in by 'laughsandtalkscrap. He is rather a nasty little creature under all that errr nastiness. Oops did I say that out loud

Posted by: groundhogday2 at April 2, 2008 8:47 PM

Posted by: sincrolad at April 2, 2008 6:08 PM

Well said...pity more people didnt take an each to their own attitude!

Cheers to all :)

Posted by: picklessister at April 2, 2008 8:43 PM

OG.
Lynaths contention that 'Marriage as we know it' originated in England is palpable garbage. A man and a woman holding hands and meeting eyes under a gum tree with a few rellos and friends has more meaning and dignity than the state sanctioned and church overlaid circus' we often see.
Ceremonies acknowledging sexual union and hopefully the imminent arrival of a baby are common to all cultures and as old as mankind.
Cheers MS

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 2, 2008 8:20 PM

Hi anyone reading this (first timer). I have read much of the comments on this blog and appreciate them all. I relate very much to this situation and have recently been pushed away from a thirty year FWB, with my daughters' father. Thank you for giving me an allround clearer, BIG picture of how I have been dealing with this for the past three months, and putting some of the harder decisions and responsibilities (to and by myself) aside and how much stronger I have grown on a daily basis since.

Posted by: readyornot2 at April 2, 2008 8:10 PM

Marquis-Evolution?! it takes about 8 mouthfuls of food to produce 1 drop of blood... 16 drops of blood to produce just 1 sperm... so the '3000' a sec is a hell of a lot of minerals etc 'leaving the building' so to say... hence why men are tired sex... do men really want 'waste' on a FB and call it evolutionary necessity?! (I'm wondering if this is almost a rhetorical question...)

Posted by: onesoulonajourney at April 2, 2008 8:05 PM

Women in my experience which is largly based on women in my family and work only start to say the man has used them later when it does not work out in their favour. Until that time they are in love and having the time of there lives. This could go both ways as usual for the man too.

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 2, 2008 8:00 PM

Strike me Marcus, why do you do this every time I give you a pat on the back, are you being misandrist, or maybe you hate to think a woman or women may be your intellectul equal. I'll bet you have touched those parts you mentioned in the past and got your chops slapped.
OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 2, 2008 7:54 PM

Blueeyes.
Men don't just 'use' you.
Many women mix and drink their potent oxytocin/estrogen plus a few neuro transmitters hormone cocktail after a few conversations let alone sex. There is little help for such women if their nipples or cervix are touched. They don't understand their own physiological and emotional chemical processes and blame men for their feelings.
How much responsibilty are we supposed
to take for the unwanted emotional dependance that results from sex with such women. After all males humans with their relatively prodidgious genitalia and 3000 sperm a second germ cell capability are only doing what evolutionary imperatives say they should.
Cheers Marquis

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 2, 2008 7:36 PM

Hi Marcus,

Thanks for the welcome.
No I guess its probably not what most people would regard as a FWB. It is the only way that I could describe it. Yes I have found cohabitating really hard but it helps that I am not the only one living in the house. What doesnt help is that my family have taken him in as another family member. He now gets invited to all family occassions, goes out with my father, brother and uncles.
I know I have accepted some pretty mean and indecent behaviour from him at times but I sometimes wonder does loneliness have price. I have had partners before but they have been few and far between. I am happy with the things in my life. I have a great job, wonderful friends, a fantastic family and exciting hobbies and interests. I just seem to always be the ultimate 3rd wheel and never have anyone to keep me warm on those cold long nights or share my day with.

As I said does loneliness have a price?

Posted by: jewlz31 at April 2, 2008 7:36 PM

Thelynathdiahorea. April 1 11:00 PM
If these comments had come from somewhere else I would have thought, ha ha April fools joke. You really do need to get some help with your continence management. You have got it everywhere this time including all over riverschlong and lonelyfart.
I can see you sitting there at the keyboard with your candle burning clear in front of you, your compass set hard right. Moral panic is rising as you type and little flecks of foam appear at the sides of your mouth. Your language becomes more mangled and reasoning more distorted...
HOW DARE people want to experiment and learn from a range of different relationship experience and opportunities. How dare they HAVE SEX and learn about what may constitute their best interests emotionally and physically. What right have they to do things that do not benefit society? Don't they see that everthing must be sacrificed in allegiance to society; even the right of self expression and individual freedom.
Of course you have had no experience what so ever with matter at hand and consequently minimal right to offer your shrill judgement.
I have and have had a number of FWB relationships that have worked and are working extremely well. One has lasted about 30 years. I like to joke about my composite wife. Some are stand alone others are and have been situations that started as monogamous comitted relationships but did not have the legs to work that way. I will be making a garden retaining wall for one FWB this weekend.
We get along well and sex is occasional but still satisfying and meaningful. A socially cohesive and cooperative arrangement.
So it goes.
Honestly if I ever read a post of yours that is sensible and not indicative of your moral panic at things you have no insight into I will be astonished.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 2, 2008 7:22 PM

Lyanath,
I thought it was imposed much earlier than that, the act of 1753 legitiamised it, in that country as to estates and titles, ( to the males advantage) and has been the cause of so much injustice and agrevation since, till modern times. As to the rest of your thoughtfull essay. There will always be those who chose to be the victims and those the victors, with those that choose to let the past be dead and get on with what may be, and those incapable of letting the past go. The disisive and the deluded. I have a book written by a US stock market guru that expounds the theory of the "Cyclical" it translates very easily into life. Lyn it would be very nice to be in love again. Hopefull we may attain it in our own way, As always I look forward to your posts. OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 2, 2008 6:42 PM

In reference to OG, 2ndApril:1:29pm

No OG, the human race wont stop lying&decieving each other, ( usually starts by lying and decieving oneself). If anything, deception is waxing worse as the world becomes more desperate&greedy.
Whats interesting is how some say FWB aint no good cause it didnt work for them. For others it works just fine.
Why all this relationship pigeon holing BSh*t anyway? Just form the relationship that suites you and dont call it anything, ¬ necessarily based on anything that general society,parents or grandma expects.
How long any relationship lasts is anyones guess. Those folk with their sanctimoneous(almost unatainable,and mostly so) stds of realtionship,have no guarantee that their situation will last any more than a FWB situation,and often causes them more grief when it does disolve cause they had such high mental picture hopes.
ITs very easy to become a victim &or prisoner of ones own profane desires.
Often the less one demands, the more you enjoy,and that makes me wonder how many people want to enjoy anything, ie: are they buiding a model life outer shell to outwardly impress society/family/friends that they have "seeming success" or what a"good moral person" they outwardly appear to be,...instead of simply being true to their own heart as to what really satisfies&fullfills them?

Posted by: sincrolad at April 2, 2008 6:08 PM

i am a single mum of 3 children under 7yrs, i work fulltime shift work, i have tried many 'normal' relationships but because of limited spare time they continually fail. i wont give up my time with my kids nor will i give up the income that provides well for them. but i have needs too, i crossed to FWB and it works for me. i dont want to live my whole life this way but for now it works, there are no expectations, pressures or anything negative about it if you are open and honest in telling the other party exactly where they stand and be respectfull about it towards eachother.

Posted by: fsw1 at April 2, 2008 6:01 PM

lonelyheart - a canoe? Now that's impressive!

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 6:00 PM

Virgil that was more along the lines of habitual sex and a long goodbye.

OG the idea of legal marriage as we know it today only came into being in 1753. Prior to that people lived in commtted relationships quite happily for the original purpose of nature to match and hatch and the emotional purpose of mutual support in order to exist and survive. There was romantic love involved and the unions were celebrated and acknowledged by friends and families, often with the first pregnancy..(No stretch limos required!)
The Marriage Act of 1753 in England
was really a legally backed up control measure brought in by the wealthy to control money. property and inheritances and bloodlines.

Iaminperth..it takes most people a long, long time to come to terms with the end of a long relatiionship. There comes a point at some stage though when they need to make a choice for themself and their future. The choice is 'Do I choose to continue to allow this to rule the rest of my life and prevent me being happy/" or
"Do I choose to take responsibility for myself and start making choices which will ensure my happiness?"
If you choose the first then you will forever remain a victim, unhappy defined by one event.
If you choose the second then you choose not to waste a moment more of your precious time grieving for something which is gone and for someone who probably doesn't care.

It is not easy but once you move a mindset away friom the negative and onto the positive and realise that you do have control and the ability to make a new life again then things can
start to get pretty exciting. Every achievement big or small after that adds to the rebuilding of self esteem.
When that is back, then you are ready to look for a new partner with a chance of success.
Having sex with random supposed friends is more likely to prevent the self development needed to grow as a person and discover who you are again post relationship, as it is really a rejecting, using type of connection.
As lonelyheart(Hi!) said it has no hope and nothing is built from it. and onesoulonajourney(Hi!) is right it can be an excuse for not addressing real issues.

My current concern about this trend is
the devalueing of commitment and the absence of romantic love.
I wonder if it is because so many people are now disconnected from any sense of belonging, trust and love which traditional extended family models , neighbourhoods and communities of the past demonstrated.
Everything is so transient now including jobs, homes and relationships that a lot of people would never have known long term commitment. Is sex now just recreational with none of the bonding it should bring?

I hear from my daughter and her friends that they can't seem to find men who want to settle, and that if they ever do that they will feel unable to enter marriage or relationship with the idea of permanency.They are seriously wary of having children because they believe it is the norm to be left at some stage. The fairytale of happily ever after might not be realistic, but it sure beats this current depressing scenario.

Meanwhile, documentaries abound about either sex no konger needing a permanent partner to have children.
Men can use a surrogate and women can use sperm donors. It seems that the idea is self sufficiency and cutting out the need for a mutually supportive relationship.

Everything is cyclical.I have no doubt that changes will continue to occur in behaviour and moral views and acceptable living arrangements, and sex and relationships and love just as they have done forever. I hope whatever the changes they include a provision for experiencing the warmth of real love.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 2, 2008 5:26 PM

Gosh ... these blogs make you stop and analyse yourself I guess. Earlier comments seem to indicate that one must be selecting Option 1 OR option 2. I'm not sure that one can't select Option 1 AND Option 2. While in some situations both options may run simultaneously, I'm not condoning an overlap where relationships are involved. For example... I am obviously a member of RSVP, and YES I am looking for a long term relationship. Does that preclude me from having FWB "relationships" in the meantime?

I bristle at the sweeping generalisation that women can't have FWBships, somewhat related to their wiring for commitment? This, in my humble opinion, may be a dark ages theory before women were pemitted to actually enjoy sex.

I'm sure that moving a friendhip into a FWBship changes the landscape somewhat as well and as long as each party has checkpoints in place individually to ensure they are still comfortable with the current state of play, then I say whatever floats your boat.

Posted by: kim30s at April 2, 2008 4:59 PM

I think its not something most people would go into by choice, its like sex on a first date, generally not well thought of, but it happens. Usually its good because it is spontaneous.

But usually upon reflection, somewhere we probably didnt really want to go.

I would have another FWB, but never a fu*k buddy situation, only where there was a genuine liking, maybe loving.

For all the righteous moralising and posturing here, FWB is more something that happens, than it is a planned occurrence.

Posted by: virgil at April 2, 2008 4:57 PM

Isn't it interesting how many are so against having sex with a friend yet so many people ( and dare I say women) have sex with their spouses simply because they may feel it is their duty and they really don't enjoy it at all.
I know a few elderly (over 80) women who since widowed etc have told me -quote- "men just use you".
Note this is not necessarily my opinion but just a comment taken on board during conversations.

Posted by: blueeyes1955 at April 2, 2008 4:43 PM

Woody.
As usual I've got it A about, that is a different matter. I think then, one is saving money and the other is serving an apprenticeship. But none of my business, I must admit though, when a young man I did not ever refuse an offer or a chance, my libido was an awesome thing, as I know most young mens were, but it seems the young men of today do not have to work as hard as us oldies did, plus that the girls and ladies of today are better dressed, coiffed and more beautiful (in general), had to add that for my own well being.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 2, 2008 4:20 PM

I Agree woodnwine.
I wouldnt want to be around a friend when they're horny.
Gosh, it sounds like I shouldnt trust any of my friends anymore these days.
Always wondered what that glint was for in my male friends eye was for when I was around them.
Maybe I should have looked down a bit further and not just at their face.
Maybe then I would have discovered that they had a canoe in their pocket, and I would have run. Eeeeeeeek!

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 2, 2008 3:45 PM

oohlala - I tend to agree .... to me, friends are friends ... not bonk buddies. Maybe I'm on the wrong track because I'm still on here, who really knows. I get back to that settling for 2nd best idea ... not looking for soemone who is perfect, just perfect for me and not just a friend I happened to be around when I felt horny.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 3:11 PM

Lonelyheart44

A traditional relationship for several years, then FWB for about a year, when it was realised that there were some issues, particularly around interests not shared by both partners.

Posted by: virgil at April 2, 2008 3:07 PM

Virgil
Was that a relationship you were talking about or a freindship? Sounded like a freindship FWB.
Also it sounds like it ended up just like all FWB end up.
The only thing missing in it was the word respect. "I will do the right thing by you if you do the right thing by me, because I think you are special; and I want to spend a lot more time with you that is meaninfull to both of us. I just couldnt imagine us not being together for as long as we can be".

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 2, 2008 2:59 PM

FWB is really friends who bonk eh woodnwine? That is so funny. I laugh and laugh.
Sex is such an intimate thing between two people that I really can't imagine doing it with a friend. It would be to awful to even think about and then to see them again. I would always have ared face. And you haven't seen my friends even.
Better if you need it to have sex with a stranger and you know what I think of that. Better still to have self control and wait till you meet someone you think you could make arelationship with and get to know them and then the bonking:)) and hope to heaven that is is good and worth the wait.
What really are the chances that this is going to happen for the million people on RSVP and especially for the over fifties.

Posted by: oohlala1 at April 2, 2008 2:47 PM

OG - I think you missed the basic point of FWB. FWB is not two people who have fallen in love but choose to live apart. FWB is two people who are not in love but just bonk ... simple as that. What you describe is something totally different as you said in your last paragraph ... but that is not FWB.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 2:29 PM

Boyd

I have not ever seen the sort of criticism and attacks on a new person, as I have seen directed against you.

Whether it is from jealousy, or the tall poppy syndrome I dont know.

Is it expectation? I dont know, but to all the knockers, both men and women, I say please give the bloke a fair go.

Posted by: virgil at April 2, 2008 2:19 PM

There are many people here who have a very narrow definition of FWB that say it doesnt work with no real idea what FWB is.

Those morally outraged by the concept see FWB as just Fu*kbuddies, which ios as far from my experience of FWB as you can get.

My experience was totally monogamous, at the end of a traditional relationship, where both of us realised that we could not sustain the normal couple relationship, going forward into the years.

Posted by: virgil at April 2, 2008 2:09 PM

riversong - isn't it amazing what people will settle for? Then they complain that their life isn't what they would like it to be. What's that old saying ... quality not quantity.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 1:59 PM

It is about time someone defined "Love" what obligations it entails, there is so much said about it being more than just an emotional state, what is the mores you expect, marriage seems to be the biggest one, till death us do part. Now a lot of ladies I have respect for have got quite heated about the FWB and have postulated long and hard against it, what is a de-facto "marriage" nothing more than "if I want to walk I will", how many of you ladies are still married? Men for that matter too. What happened to the santcity of that? Will the human race ever stop lying and decieving each other? Not bloody likely. What is wrong with two consenting adults agreeing to fall in love and live in seperate houses and in all respects be as a couple, for the long haul? We have all proved that the scrap of paper is just that when push came to shove and we wanted out, then most of you want to rush into the same scenario thinking I am older an wiser and I won't make the same mistake again. Now I will have a couple of bob even that if it does happen the same way again, no one will hesitate to get out as quick as they can. The only two certanties "Death and Taxes" So maybe there should be another catagory above the Sex with friends, to "Partners with distance and respect between them"
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 2, 2008 1:29 PM

onesoulonajourney@ 10.16am
FWB is proabably an excuse for some people that just cant handle committment. Unfortunately it is usually one person participating in a FWB that has the problem and in most cases the other suffers.
Very unhealthy set up, very damaging to some.
In contrast a relationship is a clear goal and course of committment or course of action. It has no confusion and has a life expectancy.
Whereas a FWB is a short term fix to a dead end situation.
The way I see it, is some peope just dont like using the (R) word (aka) relationship.
Therefore, FWB is a casual way of getting attention with out any hard work towards a committment.
Can be a very big waste of time and very degrading.
However, a real committment (aka) relationship has meaning and allows for self esteem and respect for each person.
If a relationship dosnt work over a long period then at least each should walk away knowing they did the right thing by each other and tried.
But FWB takes no effort, has no hope, is a waste of time because it is going no where. Dosnt build anything out of it and leaves someone who participated in it feeling like it was for nothing.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 2, 2008 10:51 AM

No, I don't write under another name.

This would go, totally, against who I am and what I believe.

One of the things I promote, strongly, on here is being ones self.

Cheers,

Boyd.

Posted by: himagain at April 2, 2008 10:38 AM

iaminperth - yep people who are damaged, lonely, hurt and in a rebound mess often go for FWB - better than being on their own? hhhm... have to agree with WNW:"sounds awfully like 2nd best to me". What's wrong with getting support from good old real "friends"? Do they have to pay for the service with "benefits"?

enrepres, just be sure you keep them in check for when you meet someone new!

Notgodsgift, everyone has the right to choose what they do and how they want to live. If their transitional dysfunctional relationships suit them for whatever reason, that’s up to them – SO LONG AS THEY KEEP THE REST OF US (looking for normal relationships) OUT OF IT PLEASE!!! :)

Posted by: riversong1 at April 2, 2008 10:25 AM

Today is my day off work as I am working Saturday this week so I am having a lie in. My little cat is curled up next to me with a very contented look on her face purring contentedly, so I guess she is my friend......with benefits of course....lol

Posted by: iaminperth at April 2, 2008 10:20 AM

Hmm... is a FWB just an excuse for not sorting yourself out one way or another? Or just a different type of addiction? Any thoughts guys?

Posted by: onesoulonajourney at April 2, 2008 10:16 AM

I can't think of any friends I'd like to have sex with. If I could, I'd be having a relationship with them rather than just being friends. Some people think this is old fashioned I know but there you go.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 10:12 AM

Great post Lynath but have to say who knows how damaged, how hurt some people are when a long term relationship breaks up. I know a couple of people who are still grieving the loss of a marriage breakup and will never really recover it is so sad. They are either unwilling or unable to face a reality and the hurt overwhelms them and too afraid to try again having their self esteem shattered. If they find a little solace or comfort with a fwb good on them so long as it's not extending the hurt and preventing them trying to face real life again.

Posted by: iaminperth at April 2, 2008 9:08 AM

thelynathdiary@ 11.00 pm
Hear Hear! Totally agree!
Nice clear Post.
Great to know that someone like me sees this FWB thing clearly through all the fog and confusion, and sees how it really is!

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 2, 2008 8:51 AM

I had 2 FWB for a few months. One was a friend of my ex husbands (yes I admit it was a revenge hook up) and the other was my high school sweetheart (a nostalgic hook up). Both 'benefits' have ended but both men are still in my life. I see them both socially as we have mutual friends and also 1 is still sometimes my running partner. Emotionally, it was a mess for a while as I just wanted intimacy and they wanted more. I realised that FWB's is not what I want.

Posted by: enrepres at April 2, 2008 8:49 AM

Hi Guys,
This is the first time I have posted a comment and ages since I even logged on for that matter. It seems funny that the day that I do log on I find the topic is FWB, which is why I have not bothered to log on.
I have tried before to have just the "sex thing" and it did not work, but I have matured and the right circumstances have come up and so have jumped in. Sure I would prefer to have a real loving relationship but that has not been possible and wanting that closeness that sex gives you, could not stand to miss out anymore. On saying that there was no verbal agreement on this arrangement so when someone else comes along I hope things will sort themselves out?!

Posted by: atlantisgirl at April 2, 2008 8:48 AM

Woodnwine- It wasn't my intention to give the impression that they were all the same thing, but related. The names used to define human interaction, and the countless possibilities of defining any relationship is dependent on cultural, gender and personal subjectivity-cheers

Posted by: femalepersuasion at April 2, 2008 8:07 AM

"Riversong. If both parties are honest, open and communicate the rules, it's not really being used; in my book."
Posted by: himagain at April 2, 2008 12:57 AM

I really wonder how many people in FWB "relationships" are actually completely honest with the other person. I would suspect that in most cases one party actually wants more from the "relationship" and the other is using them to fill a need ... be that sex, companionship, assistance with domestic issues, boosting self esteem etc etc. There is great opportunity, I think, for one party to get hurt or for one party to have to settle for much less than they would really like in an ideal "relationship". Sounds awfully like 2nd best to me.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 8:06 AM

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 1, 2008 11:00 PM

lynath - I tend to agree with you although I have to say I have never tried a FWB thing so can't comment first hand. I can comment second hand though as I have been involved with people who have decided sleeping with a "friend" is less risky emotionally although probably also less satisfying sexually. Very confusing.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 7:57 AM

"If its not for you....fine....nothing wrong with that, but to make derogatory remarks about those that are really is self-righteousness in the extreme, and a pretty poor reflection on the person that makes those remarks.
Bob"
Posted by: notgodsgift at April 1, 2008 10:00 PM

Bob - I agree that everyone should be free to make their own choices ... so long as those choices don't hurt others. I can tell you that there are people on here supposedly looking for a traditional relationship but are currently enjoying a FWB and haven't made the decision to leave the safety of that casual and non-committal "relationship". Where does that leave the poor "sucker" they start dating? Up shit creek without a paddle, I'd say.

Obviously Bob, this is not directed at you, I'm just picking up on your thread and running with it.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 7:50 AM

"Himagain...don't change your ways just to see if it makes a difference..if you are not into casual sex, then so be it - who are we to judge that? (But you can bet your last dollar many will). My guess is you may engage in a one-night stand and be left feeling very unfulfilled and wondering why the hell you just did that...stick to the way you are, even if others don't find it "genuine". At least you know what you are like!!!"
Posted by: wishfulthinker03 at April 1, 2008 9:40 PM

I had a one night stand once, in my 20s, and I found the experience to be very shallow (particularly physically). Probably wouldn't do it again.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 2, 2008 7:45 AM

FWBs...I have had one...it was with a friend who was lovely in many ways, and not appealing at all in some ways ...so I couldn't have lived with him... I knew it wouldn't last, the negative stuff would have got me down in the end. But the appealing side of him was enough to keep it going for a while ...he had intelligence, humour, and almost the same values...and he was very attractive physically, hence the 'benefits'. What he didn't have, it turned out, was emotional maturity. I had hoped the FWB thing would turn into a relationship - It took me some time to look beyond all the good stuff to see his lack of emotional depth. When I finally saw that, I tossed the benefits and now just have the friendship, although we don't see oneanother much...the lack of an ability to talk about feelings in any serious way impacts on friendship too.

Boyd, I don't know you, but your comment "I do hope that, one day, I will be seen for who I am" and your name "himagain" makes me think you write here under another name as well...is that so?

Justsaying, FWBs never become stalkers, they just don't have the emotional investment. It's the person who hits you full on with emotional intensity, talk of "instant love" etc at the start of the relationship who can turn into a stalker...watch out for that.

Posted by: waterbombe at April 2, 2008 6:44 AM

notgodsgift @ 10.00pm: Beautifully put. My sentiments precisely.
Too bad 2088 is so far from 2480, or I'd be cheeky enough to invite you out for a drink!

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 2, 2008 6:39 AM

Morning Guys

lots of reading to catch up.

I think thet FWB is a relationship, of sorts, it is just not a traditional one. It is NOT a one night stand. You have to have the friends bit, that is your common interests, a spark or some chemistry, or else the benefits won't work!!! But you also have rules, about what you are doing, how often, and what to do to save the friendship if one friend falls in love or gets to emotionally involved.

You have to know in your head that this is the right thing for you...no one else...but you and your friend need to know what is at risk, and if you can do it, GO for it and enjoy!!!

i did it 2 years ago for a few months, and it was fun, the sex was good, and we were both horny...not a natural state to be in long term!!!. When I broke it off, we stayed friends...truly, he was my partner at last years work Xmas party, we have coffee ocaisionally, and we call each other to chat about kids and stuff. Bit we don't do the FWB thing any more, and seem to have survived it all intact!!!

Soooo, if you this world is made up of lots of types of relationaships, if you are so inclined, it seems right for you, give it a go. If it isn't right for you, don't do it!! have a lovely day at work all....jewels (the original one!!)

Posted by: junebaby57 at April 2, 2008 6:32 AM

Jewlz31 April 1 8:26 PM

Welcome to the sandpit Jewlz.
Your relationship doesn't easily fit my definition of FWB.
Cohabiting is not one of the criteria I would be comfortable with. A certain distance from the friends life, rather than the unavoidable closeness living together implies, makes it a lot simpler and more congenial.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 2, 2008 1:12 AM

Riversong. If both parties are honest, open and communicate the rules, it's not really being used; in my book.

Wishful. You're probably right; I believe I would think and and feel exactly as you describe. What I did was ask myself a question in public; well, e-public. I really knew the answer would come back to my core, as it always does, but one can't help but wonder.

Malsie. Yeah, I'm sufficiently mature and wise enough to know that I don't have to prove myself to anyone. It's my passion for truth that has driven me to prove myself; or, who I am. I detest assumptions, particularly about myself, as, for the most part, they are untrue. If it wasn't for my passion for the truth then, sure, I'd let these things slide. My need to prove who I am is not so much for others, as it is for me; so I can relax, knowing the truth is known. Complex, I guess, for such a simple guy.

OG. I appreciate your comments. Yes, my persona on this blog is, somewhat, different to the previous. This is because it's a different topic. I'm more relaxed with this topic and far less passionate about it; but interested.

Kaz. A different tone for a different level of passion for a different topic. Plus I'm an old hat at this now............hehehe.

Virgil. I have been myself from day one and stand by all my contributions 100%. Let's hope we all end up in better, more enlightened state huh.

Cheers gang.

Boyd.

Posted by: himagain at April 2, 2008 12:57 AM

notgodsgift - I'll ignore the slings, and just answer the "whys" - see my post of 31 March 11.04pm :)

Posted by: riversong1 at April 2, 2008 12:19 AM

HI Virgil
Thanks for your words. I didnt think that you or anyone would be malicious in what you said I was more concerned with what I said offending anyone. I am new to RSVP and computer blogs. This is actually my first attempt at anything like this.

I do agree now that yes he was and is probably still taking advantage of me, its very hard to explain, I guess I am the only one that knows what goes on around me but for a considerable time he was also a great support and confidence boost to me.
I guess my beliefs go along the lines of no matter who you meet and how long you meet them whether it be for 2seconds or 2 decades you meet that person for a reason. I believe he was and is in my life to teach me something. I also believe I have taught him some things as well.

In regards to comparing my sexual needs to other womans that comes from the conditioning and things I have been brought up to believe. A lot of guys I have been around and the few that I have been with have told me I have a voracious sexual appetite that is beyond what they thought was normal.

I am sure there are other women out there like me but sorry I havent met any of them yet.. haha!!!

Posted by: jewlz31 at April 1, 2008 11:41 PM

Sorry, I've been awol again... Doug, is my reservation at the lodge still valid?? If I remember correctly my preference was for a room with a door opening onto the verandah!!! Not far to stumble when I need to retire!!!
If so could I hitch a ride in your van K? I'm happy to share both costs and the driving. Plus you know I have treats!!!!!

Do you think we could somehow manage to get a hot tub sunk into verandah??? Bliss!!!!
K..Imagine lazing in the tub, sucking on those treats and having my healing hands do their work.. Stop dribbling woman!!!!

Check you all tomorrow... "G"

Posted by: amdoingit at April 1, 2008 11:03 PM

RSVP marketing opportunity...new relationship category "Mammals" comes with accompanying send -a -song by Bloodhund Gand "Ain't nothin but mammals"

Is this the level to which we as a society have sunk? How sad.

What sort of robotic , idiotic seekers of instant self gratification have we become?

Of course there have always been one night stands and short lived sexual encounters, but they were that and nothing more. This idea of keeping someone 'in reseve' to be used at will is not nice at all.

The promotion especially to young people that this shallow, cold and damaging behaviour is ideal, trendy or fun is very sick. Giving it a name with the word Friend in it attempts to make it acceptable.
All it does is prevent any sort of seeking of commitment to detrimental effect elsewhere, and creates anxiety.and unhappiness.It wastes time that could be spent looking for a real partner . It engineers our young people down paths which will lot lead them to happiness, nor benefit sociaety.

Not many people can have a sexual relationship with someone without at least one of them forming a strong emotional attachment.

Anyone who allows themself to be used in this manner must have very little self esteem and a big sense of unworthiness.

I would consider the suggestion degrading and an insult.
In the same way that I can never understand how women who are chosen as candidtates for affairs with married men feel thrilled,instead of absolutely insulted that any man would view them as dishonest and low moraled enough to do it,
This has the same undertones as having an affair. A little bit sleazy, a little bit hidden and someone always gets hurt. Good enough for sex and maybe the movies, but not good enough for a relationship? what is wrong with this picture

Friends are friends and respected and loved and allowed into all areas of one's life. FWB are none of the above.

Ewwwwwwww!

Posted by: thelynathdiary at April 1, 2008 11:00 PM

Boyd

You dont have anything to prove to us, and surely consistency is not a pre-requisite for being on the blogs, all you need to do, is be yourself, as we all do, we are on a journey here, and no one knows what state we will be in at the end.

If you feel like trying other things, and it doesnt hurt anyone, then its no-ones business but your own and your partners.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 10:58 PM

Just your different tone is all Boyd....quite a bit removed from last week...........K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 1, 2008 10:50 PM

Hi Jewlz31
Welcome to the bloggs, often people posting their first post ask us to be nice, I suppose this comes as a bit of a surprise, but then maybe not because it gets heated here, this though is rarely taken out on new people.

What you talk about where he lives with you, and has had 2 other women sounds like you were being taken advantage of, and not at all what I see as how FWB should work. I think the important thing here, is to maintain your dignity, your self esteem.

I dont know why you compare your sexual needs to that of other women, but to me I feel if you take care of your self esteem, the other will follow, and in a much more genuine form.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 10:48 PM

Hi River,
It seems that I have a different conception of the FWB debate. To me it would not be a casual affair with sex the main benifit for me. It is no different than being married and living in 2 seperate houses, the monogamy is there the commitment to the lady is there, The domination is not there the control aspect of the dominant is not there. The claims of property is not there. My skills at maintaince is there as is the other things she cannot do for herself. The other thing that is missing is the peice of paper that spoils a good relation ship. Yes I too am looking for the one, the one who can see the benefit of such an arrangement.

GANG.
I have had communication with Boyd and can vouch that what he said is true. I explained to him why I took the tack I did and he has accepted that as I have accepted his opinion, having said that Boyd I do not think it would be a good idea for you to change your personna
but if you do get the good gen from the expert lol.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 1, 2008 10:20 PM

Riversong,

Any communication you have with another can be termed "a relationship"....you have relationships with you children, parents siblings....whoever, so of course FWB is a relationship. The difference is it is a relationship between two people where a friendship and connection at some level is already established....as compared to dating someone whom you do not know, but feel you might like to.

Whilst I agree that these are not for everyone, why do those that would obviously not be comfortable feel so self-righteous in putting down those that may find something in such a relationship? Whilst I have never been in such a relationship myself, I have a couple of friends that are, and they are extremely happy and make no demands on each other.

If its not for you....fine....nothing wrong with that, but to make derogatory remarks about those that are really is self-righteousness in the extreme, and a pretty poor reflection on the person that makes those remarks.

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at April 1, 2008 10:00 PM

Music really does something to the soul.
Soothes the soul of a savage beast, all that

Different music tonight, Neil Young, its funny about songs that were favorites 30 years ago, that I havent heard much in the meantime, they seem to be like time capsules, taking me back. I wish I had Willow's literary skills, I could create an atmosphere of Chardy Lodge, set the scene.

There is something really special about a group of people sitting around a fire, on a September night.

We used to go away to the country on the Grand Final weekend, cause there was a public holiday in WA that weekend, after tea and plenty of red wine, we would sit in a circle singing the old rock classics, with a few guitars, bongo drums, till the early hours of the morning.

Transpose that to current day, Neil Young songs are mostly easy to play, harder to sing, easier for girls to get the high notes.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 9:59 PM

We are all here Virgil
Just waiting for the moderator to keep up, is all :)

Posted by: jenjen57 at April 1, 2008 9:57 PM

"There are many related terms to FWB include casual relationship, casual sex, one night stand, a fling, hook up, extended hook up and f**k buddies,"
Posted by: femalepersuasion at April 1, 2008 6:48 PM

FP - I personally think that FWB is very different from a one night stand or a hook up. To me the notion of a FWB is a friend who for one reason or another you decide to have sex with on an ongoing basis without the intention of ever forming a relationship.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 1, 2008 9:53 PM

himagain, don't worry about trying to "prove" yourself in any way to anyone in this forum, is my advice. People believe what they want to believe. Let them get on with it, I say. You know who you are and what you're about, and that's all that matters in the end, same for all of us :)

Posted by: malsie at April 1, 2008 9:48 PM

Doug, the Neil Young CD l had on was a best of........no Chardy on a week night..well not a Tuesday, anyway....maybe by the weekend..... Favorite Neil Young song.....Cinnamon Girl, At the moment.

Saw him on a special on Foxtel a few weeks ago at the Ole Oprey...bloody fantastic it was....Ooopps Where was l??

Posted by: auntykaz at April 1, 2008 9:42 PM

Himagain...don't change your ways just to see if it makes a difference..if you are not into casual sex, then so be it - who are we to judge that? (But you can bet your last dollar many will). My guess is you may engage in a one-night stand and be left feeling very unfulfilled and wondering why the hell you just did that...stick to the way you are, even if others don't find it "genuine". At least you know what you are like!!!

Posted by: wishfulthinker03 at April 1, 2008 9:40 PM

Been there... ruined a long running friendship... in this particular case, the benefits did not outweigh the risk.

Posted by: inherelement at April 1, 2008 9:36 PM

seems to be slow here tonight.

I recently got a current Neil Young DVD from the library, many new songs and the old favorites.

For Chardy Lodge to be open for business, we need communication, but its not happening, a party for one.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 9:21 PM

Virgil – “care deeply”,
OG – “if it could’ve continued I wouldn’t be on RSVP”,
even notgodsgift “..people in these types of relationships...”
even though not living together, they sound like “relationships” to me!

WnW, I have no problem with people having other friends of either sex. And it wouldn’t be so bad if they were honest about things. But it’s not nice when they tell you once your are already IN the relationship: “er, by the way, I have this “friend”…”
by which they mean some ongoing unresolved on/off shifting boundaries unfinished thing with an ex that’s still physically/emotionally dependent, I wouldn’t exactly call just a “friend”. :) X-files belong in the past, I think.

himagain:… no, I don’t think so. What’s mushy and fun about using and being used?

Lonelyheart44 – agree – I think it’s more needy and desperate to fill-in as someone’s F*ck Buddy, than to look for a normal healthy relationship.

Hinterlandlover – perhaps there are so few success stories because there are too many FWBs!

OG – don’t know about this notion of “the ONE”, but I have certainly had RELATIONSHIPS with people I have met on RSVP. I agree with WnW – there is certainly more than one person that might be a contender for a possible relationship worth exploring out there! Ruling out the F*ck Buddies of course ;)

Posted by: riversong1 at April 1, 2008 9:04 PM

zorrodiego, I too have never had a problem with the concept of relationships that have their time and then are over, rather than something has to last "forever" in order for it to have any sort of validity or value. I regard friendships like this too. They may end up lasting for many years, a few weeks - whatever, who can tell. They all have their value and a chance to learn and enjoy things through them and with them.

I like the idea of "growing old" with someone - developing the sort of intimacy that I've read about, but never experienced. However, I accept that may never happen for me and is not the Holy Grail. It doesn't make anything short of "forever" irrelevant and meaningless, in my eyes.

Posted by: malsie at April 1, 2008 9:03 PM

K
I will pick up the Adelaide bloggers, in my van from 98, we can get the fire started, outside, like a BBQ and accoustic instruments around a fire, portable CD Neil Young blasting.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 8:52 PM

Posted by: notgodsgift at April 1, 2008 7:22 PM

As usual Bob you say it so well.
I have two very close long term male friends that I hang out with all the time, and despite them occassionally suggesting the odd night of other "benefits" I have never been tempted to go there.
For one although I really like them both I don't fancy them in the slightest. Plus from my experience sex can really mess things up sometimes, it changes relationships, despite your best efforts to stay not emotionally involved.
I know I dont have the emotional fortitude to have casual sex with a close friend.

Posted by: jenjen57 at April 1, 2008 8:47 PM

Gang,

Some of you obviously question my genuineness. beyond consistency, I really have no idea how to better demonstrate who I am.

I do have a business website which I built, and wrote the copy, myself. I'm a passionate person and my clients constantly confirm that they can see this when reading my site.

My profile here, my comments on the blog and my business website may paint a clearer picture for you. The personality links are there.

If you'd like the address of my site, just ask.

I do hope that, one day, I will be seen for who I am.

Cheers,

Boyd.

Posted by: himagain at April 1, 2008 8:44 PM

Troyboy,

I know we touched on this last week; but what was it you were going try? Being yourself?

Not being funny; just seeing your comment raised the question in my mind. I don't recall any specific tactics.

Cheers,

Boyd.

PS: Would be so much easier to chat on the phone in some circumstances.

Posted by: himagain at April 1, 2008 8:32 PM

Hi All. I am really new to this site and would like to say first up I only wish to protray my opinions and not wish to upset anyone with anything I have to say.

This subject hits very close to home for me. I am in or was in??? (not sure on this) an FWB relationship. It started out as innocent flirting with someone who bestowed upon me the things most women would want in the beginnings of a relationship. He is someone who regularly went away so as you can imagine the whole "absence makes the heart grow fonder..." came into play. For about 6 months this whole "relationship" thing continued. Then one day he decided to tell me that I wasnt the woman he could see himself with in 75 years. I have since found out it is because of the way I look but that is an entire other story. For 18 months up to now I have been accepting a whole friends with benefits relationship. We share every aspect of our lives with each other even to the point that he has lived with me for the past 8 months. Sex never played a huge part but it was there. There was one time when I was aware of another woman and although it hurt me I was happy that he might have found "the one"....He felt that he couldnt tell me about it until quite far into the relationship because he felt guilty...but he thought we should stop having sex because it was becoming serious with her. That relationship failed sometime soon after and he came running back to me. He is still around now but has again found someone else to occupy his time.

I have realised that although I have basic sexual needs (probably more than most women) I deserve to have the rest to go with it. It was great while it lasted and I love this person very much I dont believe for me that FWB relationship work any longer.

Everyone has the right to do whatever is best for themselves....as long as they arent fooling themselves into believing thats what they want.

Posted by: jewlz31 at April 1, 2008 8:32 PM

open up the lodge to all people here, see if we can bring some of the previous residents in. see what musical instruments we all have?

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 8:26 PM

Hi gang,

Nope, no wearing a different hat, not a fake, and no, Virgil, not "material".

My views, as expressed in previous posts, have not changed. The circumstances under which I engage in sex remain the same.

Did anyone pay attention to the question marks? I'm open minded enough to accept that my views and beliefs, whilst at the core of my being, may bend or change based on new information, opinions and thinking.

Never have I said that casual sex is a bad thing; and I don't look down on the people that engage in it. It's, historically, just not me.

However, I can't help but wonder if my opinion would change if I actually took the plunge and had a one night stand.

Questioning ones self and being open minded doesn't change who I am as a person, it simply demonstrates that I'm open minded.

If anyone has a specific point, where you believe I have contradicted myself, please raise it with me.

Cheers to all.

Boyd.

Posted by: himagain at April 1, 2008 8:20 PM

I had a FWB once.

It ended up with me being stalked.

Posted by: justsaying at April 1, 2008 8:19 PM

Normal beer Kaz, we can open for business shortly, see who the guests are crank the music up.

Redgum CD is playing ATM, I will find Neil Young maybe even get the guitar out.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 8:19 PM

Troyboy, what is it that you tried last Saturday. Have read so many blogs I'm wondering if it was the one night stand someone suggested?

Posted by: blueeyes1955 at April 1, 2008 8:17 PM

Doug, l'll bring the beer. You want light or heavy????......K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 1, 2008 7:58 PM

Blueeyes, you have made it so clear to me now. I seriously was starting to think I�m getting sex mad, but it�s not that. All these relationship issues are now just more prominent because I�ve opened my mind to it and I am certainly willing to discuss and learn.
And groudhd2, I also liked what you said and that will guide me too.
Thanks

Posted by: winterstale at April 1, 2008 7:39 PM

K

Redgum blaring singing of a land visited in a van from 63, where a sportcar is next to useless, the country's last frontier, flexitme behind you like a bad dream, we went looking for Australia, cause the ABC just couldnt make it real.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 7:33 PM

You're in big trouble Boyd, the cat's out of the bag haha. You really had the girls going however, as I said previously, you have some great material. Tried it last Saturday night, didn't work, perhaps I lacked your sincerity?

Posted by: troyohboy at April 1, 2008 7:24 PM

Hi All,

The key word in the term Friends with Benefits is......"Friends". In order for this type of relationship to be successful there has to be a mutual understanding of what the relationshop means. No....it wont lead to anything permanent in the conventional sense, nor is that the intention. Truly, the relationship revolves around two friends getting together as normal for drinks, meals, movies whatever, but with no expectations from each other either way....the "Benefits" are just something that may or may not happen (as may or may not happen on any type of date).

People that have been and are in these types of relationships successfully will always come over as relaxed and happy when together....they dont get together in order to have sex....they get together because they actually like and care for each other and enjoy being together....the sex part is incidental, not contrived.

Also, there is always the understanding that the relationship will finish should one or the other meet someone and form a relationship....each person knows and understands this....but their friendship is not tested by this.

I pose the question; how many of you stayed together "for the kids"....or whatever other reason, but were unhappy with that and their partner (with whom they still were still engaged sexually), and it was a relief to escape? How is that a better option than being with someone who actually cares for you.....even if they cant live with you because of other issues (like being long term together, you might actually drive each other insane)!!

As I mentioned previously, of course the situation is frought with danger.....if you are in it with the wrong person and for the wrong reasons.....these are not contrived relationships (as is the old Fuckbuddy), they are best built on a very solid personal relationship where both parties fully understand each other (including personal insecurities). You would be absolutely insane to enter into such a relationship if it is not in your nature to cope with the realities of what is involved.

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at April 1, 2008 7:22 PM

You're in big trouble Boyd, the cat's out of the bag haha. You really had the girls going however, as I said previously, you have some great material. Tried it last Saturday night, didn't work, perhaps I lacked your sincerity?

Posted by: troyohboy at April 1, 2008 7:21 PM

There are many related terms to FWB include casual relationship, casual sex, one night stand, a fling, hook up, extended hook up and f**k buddies, the common denominator being that they do not necessarily demand or expect a formal relationship as a goal.

There are significant gender & cultural differences in acceptance of and breadth of casual relationships as well as in regrets about action/ inaction within these liaisons. They may be part-time, or full time for a limited time and may or may not be monogamous.

Whatever label you give them they are generally focused on fulfilling sexual rather than romantic or emotional needs. It is generally acknowledged that a frequent cause for the termination of such a relationships is the development of a one sided romantic attachment.

Motives for casual relationships vary, as do motives for committed long term relationships. The reasons are complex and complicated simply because human beings and how they relate are Relationship definitions are thankfully changing to meet the needs of all individuals. Thank goodness!

References
1.Chara PJ Jr, Kuennen LM. Psychol Rep. 1994 Feb 74(1):57-8. Links diverging gender attitudes regarding casual sex: a cross-sectional study. CM Grello, DP Welsh, MS Harper 'No Strings Attached: The Nature of Casual Sex in College Students' The Journal of Sex Research, 2006 [2]
2.Gwen J. Broude, 'Male-Female Relationships in Cross-Cultural Perspective: A Study of Sex and Intimacy' Cross-Cultural Research, Vol. 18, No. 2, 154-^ Roese, NJ 'Sex Differences in Regret: All For Love or Some For Lust?' Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 32, No. 6, 770-780 (2006) Abstract: within romantic relationships, men emphasize regrets of inaction over action, whereas women report regrets of inaction and action with equivalent frequency
3.casual - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
4.casual sex - Definitions from Dictionary.com

Posted by: femalepersuasion at April 1, 2008 6:48 PM

I'll second that Kaz. Why the change of heart Boyd?

Posted by: groundhogday2 at April 1, 2008 6:26 PM

When I left my marriage 10 years ago, I was in no way interested in jumping into a relationship. I met my FWB via a mutual friend who was also not interested in a relationship. We were a perfect FWB match. That friendship worked because we were on the same track. Now Ive moved on and am ready for a real relationship not just one of mutual convenience but not going anywhere..

Posted by: groundhogday2 at April 1, 2008 6:25 PM

Loneheart,
Far be it for me to try to change your opinion, having seen the results of the ones I reported on, having had such a relationship for personal experience and not ever being liable to be in a marriage again, At least I have had a positive experience. I wish you luck in your search, as always to each his own.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 1, 2008 6:23 PM

Virgil,
If one person considers the relationship a FWB and the other doesn't, then it seems that they haven't really discussed exactly what kind of relationship they have! The potential for one person to be hurt is high in this case.

OG,
It is not surprising if the (formerly FWBs) marriages failed, if one person was only marrying to keep the other person happy. Surely, to have a chance at a successful marriage you both need to be committed to the relationship, and WANT to be married to each other?
One partner being resentful because they didn't actually want to get married is not a good start. Resentment has a habit of growing and eventually poisoning a relationship.

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 1, 2008 6:16 PM

Virgil don't forget the deck out the side to sit on and enjoy a few drinks in a comfy chair, with some Neil Young playing in the background...............K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 1, 2008 5:19 PM

Boyd you are sure wearing a different hat to last week......................K

Posted by: auntykaz at April 1, 2008 4:37 PM

Marcus. It was 14 Sept 07. You selected the kiss that said you thought we had a lot in common. So whatever you say about me has got to reflect back on you:)))

Posted by: groundhogday2 at April 1, 2008 4:36 PM

I'm sure winterstale that most of us had never even dreamt of thinking about all these sex topics when we were happily married. Since marrying at age 22 I thought that would be my life for evermore. It amazes me now the convervation topics I am involved in with ,with single people in my age group and how most of us have changed our views of what is right and how we should behave.Life is a constant learning curve,including learning about oneself and trying things that we never thought we would do. I for one have had a few firsts since divorcing and am certainly willing to discuss possible alternatives.

Posted by: blueeyes1955 at April 1, 2008 4:29 PM

A first time for everything and I’m having a lot of firsts lately…

I’m about to embark on new adventures. Not sure if this thing kicked in because I have found myself after 3 years, escaping from a looooong relationship or because I’m over 40? The blog about ‘Should you have sex on the first date’ has made me think about a lot. I got as many opinions as I could; including reading that blog from top to bottom, well the other way around. Interesting outcome, most of my women friend said go for the one night stand and most of my men friends said no. Maybe this is telling us something about women. Anyway, so since I’m pondering about a one night stand, obviously as I have never done it before as I get to attached and all emotionally involved and end up in total shambles, I’m now thinking maybe I should go for the one night stand, as Boyd said ‘you can't knock it until you try it…’ I like that point, why did you not include that before? Let me try the FWB as well. If the sex is great I might as well suggest the FWB. Or do I have it the wrong way around? Do you become friends first and then later add the benefits? As I said I’m a person that will get as many opinions but at the end I’ll still make up my own mind and yes then have to live with the consequences!

Sorry I’ve made my profile invisible, I can’t face anyone now. I’ll report back about the experience or lack if it…

Posted by: winterstale at April 1, 2008 3:38 PM

hinterlandlover - following on from my last post ... I know of a few couples who met on RSVP and are doing quite well. As I said, I believe there has to be more than "one" for everyone and some of them may be on here if you are prepared to be patient. Unfortunately some aren't patient ... they either jump into bed with the first person they find remotely attractive or they meet someone, find them attractive and probably compatable but expect ebverything to be perfect immediately so don't give things a fair go. Mr or Ms Right enough could very well turn into Mr or Ms Right with a bit of patience, communication and understanding.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 1, 2008 3:20 PM

I am sure there is more than on "one" out there for everyone. I am sure there are many people out there we could all get along fabulously well with and hopefully we will all meet one of those "ones" on RSVP. There is no such thing (presumably) as the perfect person but if we can all find someone that "gets" us and who we "get" and each finds the other reasonably attractive then surely a strong relationship can be formed from that good match if we put in a bit of an effort and give things a fair go. We all have our problems, failings, past dramas, quirks etc, so no one is perfect but close enough can become perfect in our eyes.

It is my belief that this match will be fairly obvious after a few meetings so doubt it will be with someone you have gone out with for a long time and suddenly found the spark (either it's there or it isn't). Therefore I believe that a FWB will rarely, if ever, turn into a great relationship and most people probably don't want that ... they just see a FWB as a stop gap.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 1, 2008 3:16 PM

yes sunrizesiesta

The word rut just doesnt sound nice, and also the c word is also not nice, on the other hand, the f word is ultimately usable, to describe a missed goal, mostly as an adjective, to add power to many nouns, like ripper, beauty, idiot, but then it has its place. More so in single sex gatherings, and younger people.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 3:15 PM

oldergent@11:40
FWB leading to marriage? To me that actually sounded like those people were in a relationship to start with before marriage, not just FWB.
I think those people were just unaware of the difference between real friends and a relationship. Maybe they didnt like using the word relationship and thats why those marriages split because they became sick by the word.
hinterlandlover@12.40. Although it is easier to believe that some people are so ridgid about conforming to more casual ideas by the way they have grown up to think and it leaves them to be unimaginative.
The truth is I wasnt brought up with any particular way of thinking. In fact my parents were swingers.
Therefore, my lifestyle was based on my parents openess to live it how you feel it.
Unfortunately I met too many players, too many selfish people that had no consideration for others feelings, and experienced more hurt from being told that they were more interested in having FWB.
Been there and done that, think it is a selfish act if thats all it is going to be, and a waste of time I found, time wise as well as emotionally.
What are you left with, NOTHING. There is no investment made in the FWB, its just a dead end.
So for me I would rather just play it safe, and save it up for someone special and along the way go out with my girlfriends for a drink, or take up an invite to an exs party, wedding etc.
A date is a date. A friend is a friend. A relationship mate is a realtionship mate.
I just see it the way it is, each one has its purpose and each one has it own role.
Its pretty well black and white to me. I just couldnt make a freind, (as I consider a freind) into a FWB.
The only way a friend would get anything from me is for an investment in to a relationship, not some dead end thing when I know they dont give a toohoot about me being their ideal future partner.
Unfortunately, I have met too many of these type of people. More of them than the ones who are serious about the meaning of a real companionship.
I definately dont invest all my time seeking out the ONE. I just know better to use the little precious time I have to not waste it on FWB.
In saying that, this is why Im on this site looking for a person who dosnt waste my time and I hope I dont meet people who just do that.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 1, 2008 3:14 PM

I wonder how many of the people looking for the ONE have been on this site for what length of time without success. How many have given up and are just blogging, how many are just wasteing others stamps, and how many have come to the conclusion that the different sexes may be looking for the same ONE, that mythical being and bringer of all the hopes and dreams, that may be looking for their ONE without success too.

Karina, this may not go to post, but what a subject for a topic.

Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 1, 2008 2:50 PM

Hi everyone, I must say I am really enjoying "the blogs" it's great to hear other people's opinions on different topics - some interesting, some strange....

Anyhow, I agree with woodnwine @ 9.55am - I too am not after a fling, and am more than happy to wait for the right person to come along, not Mr Right Now!

I also to a certain extent agree with Marcus @ 9.28am - yes it is in my opinion best if you are friends first.

Quite a few years ago I did have a FWB he was someone I went through primary and high school with and we had been girlfriend/boyfriend off and on. We mutually decided to become FWB and this worked marvellously well for about 1 year. I ended it in the end and thought I deserved to have the "whole package" and not just the *wink wink* part. It was amicable and we are still friends - just no more *wink wink*.

Virgil @ 10.07am - hmm I agree, are we all rutting like animals? I don't like the word "rut" similarly I do not like the four letter "C" word either.

So there you have it, some interesting views yet again. Take care everyone. I'll continue to drop by now and then and see what's happening here on the blogs.

Deborah :-)

Posted by: sunrizesiesta at April 1, 2008 2:01 PM

To play the devil's advocate for a moment, perhaps the concept of FWB may be the only way to go! Just joking, but really, my thoughts when opening up the rsvp website this morning and once again seeing those same two sets of flashing faces in the Success Stories on the home page makes me wonder how many, or would it be more appropriate to ask how few, people actually meet their "one" this way? Those same two couples have been there for a long time, six months, maybe longer, so do we assume they don't have any to replace them with? Or are they all just reluctant to have their photo on a internet dating site, which I guess is fair enough. But really, I wonder how many success stories there are, given there are supposedly over a million of us on the site? I'm no statistician, and I don't know what stats are publicly available - maybe an interesting blog topic, who knows anyone who actually met their partner here - but I suspect the probabilities for most of us are not exactly high.

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 1, 2008 12:55 PM

To lonelyheart44 @ 9.05am:
To answer your question and to clarify, earlier I said … when people give off that sense of being totally focussed on their search to find “the one� … they can appear just too needy, even desperate …
Note that I said “totally focussed� by which I meant, thinking of little else and having little else in their lives other than searching for that person, obsessively. Haven’t we all known people like that, to whom we’d like to suggest they might cool it and get a life, stop looking so hard, that perhaps they appear too “keen�, and that they could actually be turning off potential partners by giving off that vibe?
Note also that I said “can� appear. I didn’t say that they always appear that way, or even often. It was a comment based on observations of people I’ve known.

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 1, 2008 12:40 PM

Laughsandtalks 2.05am , thank you for your welcome and comments. Hinterlandlover 6.23am, I appreciated your thoughts on the subject. lonelyheart44 9.05am Whilst you are defending your position on the matter of FWB, I wonder if you have ever questioned your stance in so much as it is the one you were no doubt raised to believe. To be needy is to be human, although I,m not too sure about desperate. I don't think many would choose a FWB as an ideal. It could be , however that those seeking the ONE ,rather than being patient and independant, may be just unimaginative and responding to their training.

Posted by: zorrodiego at April 1, 2008 11:50 AM

I think Friends with Benefits, might depend also on the level of intimacy of the friendship.

It should also be very separate from acquaintances with benefits, which more rightly is covered by the term f***buddies.

In my version of FWB there is significant emotional involvement, possibly leading to a full on relationship or maybe after a relationship.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 11:50 AM

Loneheart, Amber, and the like minded.

It seems that on your side the argument is that a FWB is a tempory, non loving (in the full sense) thing that will be discarded in a whim. It may be in certain age groups, but in the same age groups marriage seems to be too. As Marcus has said and I believe him it can happen with respect and continuity for a long period of time.

I know of several such liasions that exist between people that started in later life and have been going on for several years, completely faithfull to one another. Two of such relationships resulted in a partner insisting on marriage. Neither marriage lasted more than 2 years, despite the fact that one of them had been a FWB for 8 years and the other FWB for nearly that long. One couple have resumed the FWB and are happily in love again.

Humans are funny creatures?

Virg.

The "Rut" is the season when the animal speciec (female) come on heat, then the .males compete for the right to breed with all the females that they can attract.

Seems to me a pretty civilised and efficeint way to propagate,lol compare it to the human system where the female is always available, and the males are always competing.

Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 1, 2008 11:40 AM

Amberlight

The retirement village with a difference, Chardonnay Lodge, my understanind of it was an old farmhouse, with many rooms maybe a really nice barn (like Clarks barn in Smallville) where the instruments have a permanent home.
Lots of rooms, maybe multiple FWB's. Foxtel for the footy, space for Willow's kids to play.

Last time I heard from Decoratus, she was looking up the Real Estate section in the Dandenongs.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 11:30 AM

Nothing wrong with being patient woodnwine.
This is safer to be patient because there are no destractions, no baggage of hurting anyone else like a FWB, and at least by being patient you are in a better position to be on the outlook for the ONE, a compatable partner.
FWB is just a fill in for peoples time, and it seems there is no patience involved in the activity, but rather it sound like people that have to do it just cant be on their own and are more needy for company and possibly desperate enough to have the company of a friend intimately at any cost and consequences of another persons feelings.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 1, 2008 11:18 AM

woodnmine@ 9.55
You asked does it mean your fussy?
No it doesnt mean we who are looking for the ONE to be fussy, as in picky.
It means we are particular to what we get ourselves in to and are pateint enough to take the time seeking out the ONE, meaning compatible partner, rather than bonking our friends when we see no future.

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 1, 2008 11:07 AM

I have seen the word "rut" used here firstly by Richard, then by others.

It sounds a bit degrading and animalistic, is a rut the same as a root? or is there a large or small difference

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 10:07 AM

lonelyheart - I agree that some of us have been on here for a while and that's because we are looking for a genuine, lasting relationship ... not a quick fling. Does that make us fussy? Maybe, but at least I for one am not off sleeping with every woman who sends me a kiss, I'm trying to find someone who I am truly compatable with.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 1, 2008 9:55 AM

Woodnwine 9:14 AM.
Not to mention for her if he had one of his famous mid coitus pangs and stopped in remorse because he remembered she had a hard childhood, or one too many cordials.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 1, 2008 9:46 AM

Hi all,
Yes Jen, this was absolutely thrashed to death in one of the previous "live" blogs. And the same thing happened, some people got hostile because they felt "judged" for their opinion, some of the guys used it as a forum to "have a go" at the women aged 40+, while others tried to simply state their feeling/thoughts without being judgemental and got mauled in the process!

I feel that "Friends with Benefits" probably works quite well, if both peope are honest and straightforward with what they hope to gain out of the relationship. If they really do care about each other and suspect that one person may be getting emotionally overwhelmed or hoping for more, then perhaps they need to gently "check in" with each other, and re-assess the relationship. If they are truly "friends" then one would hope that the preservation of the friendship would be paramount and the person not so "involved" could help the one who has invested more that was expected, through the situation in a loving and caring way. Maybe that is what you have had Marcus, in your 30 years + relationship.

However, having seen some people in these relationships, that seems to be a very rare response and more usually, the person not so "emotionally invested" panics and runs, or even becomes hostile, devastating the friendship and leaving the other person in severe pain and in an emotional wilderness.
I would suggest that most "Friends wth Benefits" relationships are more like the post by femalepersuasion at March 31, 2008 4:07 PM, and really have nothing to do with friendship at all.
"Friendship" is just a term used by the person less emotionally invested, to justify their total lack of committment to the more vulnerable person.
It justifies the person not emotionally involved to feel "not responsible" for the pain of the person who becomes so "Well, they knew what they were getting into...." " I never promised them anything.....", etc.

I couldn't ever enter into a "Friends with Benefits" relationship because I am an emotional person. I know I would get "too involved". It wouldn't be fair to myself or the other person who just wanted a casual friendly sexual relationship. I know my limitations!!
Whether or not in some people's eyes that makes me a "head case" so be it.
"To thine own self be true", if I have learned anything out of my life's experiences that is one of the most important; no point in trying to convince yourself you are capable of something you are not!.

As far as long-term relationships are concerned, well no one can know if a relationship is going to last. Things could be wonderful and then fate takes a hand and as I see frequently as a nurse, young people living their lives happily in their 20s, 30s, 40s and early 50s suddenly get sick and are fighting terrible illnesses. Quite often no matter how good the medical intervention is, they don't survive. Accidents also happen, so no one knows what is around the corner.
However, I am looking for a long-term relationship, that is true and I think that is only fair for anyone who reads my profile to know this.
I ticked the friendship box because I am quite happy if that starts as a friendship first!! (Maybe that is something that RSVP could consider Karina, a box with "Looking for a Long-term relationship but happy to have a friendship first and see what happens...."? or something similar)

I am happy to wait until someone this may be possible with, comes along. That may or may not be through RSVP.
And it make take years.
But I'm happy as I am (I do keep looking at ways of keeping on "growing" though) and if I end up old and alone (in a romantic relationship sense) so be it. Hopefully, I will be the kind of old person that people like, so I will never be short of people who care about me and me about them!
(Now don't forget about "Chardonnay Lodge" people, my kind of retirement village!)

Posted by: amberlight58 at April 1, 2008 9:44 AM

FWB in my ongoing experience is a lot more low key than others are owning up to.
If I was part of a regularly social couple she would be my girlfriend.
No, workable FWB, is a low frequency, but fine grained thing that might happen every other month or so. It works on honesty but not necessarily full and detailed disclosure.
It only works when I am candid about my reasons for not wanting to couple with her in the full time sense. It is not always fair and equal either but always consensual.
I can say to a woman "I cannot commit to someone a lot older". Or "you are a religious nut and I will eventually shag the nonsense from you". Or "we dont share the same values but our humour, entertainment and food taste" means we have a good time together. Or she says "I know you don't find me attractive enough to be seen out but I love the intimacy"
Sometimes there is a cross to bear and it might come quite close to self loathing. Other times it is an act of charity that no bones are made about. Mostly it is good if you are friends first.
So it goes...
Cheers Marcus

Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 1, 2008 9:28 AM

Boyd - I don't think FWB would work for you. It could be very hard to sleep with someone without becoming emotionally involved.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 1, 2008 9:14 AM

hinterlandlover@ 6.23am
In regards to your comment about peoples profiles on here mentioning they are looking for the ONE.
If people say they are looking for the one then they must be stating they are looking for stability.
Re: Your comment; that if they say they are looking for the one, then you say they must be desperate and needy?
In my opinion, if people are content to just be FWB then they must be desperate and needy.
I think the peole looking for the ONE are fussy with their own outlook of what they need in their life.
FWB is complicated and dosnt send a message for stability, but rather confusion and nothing but a rut.
As for the people seeking the one, they are pateint, independent, comfortable in themselves to be on their own till they find the ONE. There are no complications with their choice.
Dont see how this would be interpreted as needy and desperate?

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at April 1, 2008 9:05 AM

Blueeyes,

I also remember those of my parents generation, who had one love, for life, and when that person died, they stayed alone, till they died.

Our generation has never been like that.

With a much more compartmentalsed idea of life, like you say, chapters.

I feel I am ready to start a new chapter in my life, both work wise and relationship wise.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 9:03 AM

River,
I had the FWB with the ex, it was good and practical, had genuine affection, respect and true fidelity, but WE could not live together. But once the contesting of the will thing came up, I had to protect my kids inheritance at all costs, so I divorced, this protected her kids too, though she would not have thought of that. She told me if I went through with the divorce she would never acknowledge me again. A pity because I would not be on this site if she had agreed to the continuing relationship.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at April 1, 2008 9:02 AM

Buoyed: 11:03 PM
Plutonian chameleon.

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 1, 2008 8:51 AM

Virgil - 8.18 and 8-28.
That is exactly how it can be. Jen

Posted by: jenniferhi at April 1, 2008 8:50 AM

Gee, hasn't Boyd's position changed in the course of a week. He's now considering f*ck buddies. Give him another week and he'll be up for some swinging :-)

Posted by: troyohboy at April 1, 2008 8:38 AM

Once enmeshed in FWB, it's a sticky situation to get out of - can't ditch the friend, not officially "a couple", but "couple enough" to deter anyone else (unless they lie about it, with all the ensuing problems lies cause).
Posted by: riversong1 at March 31, 2008 11:04 PM

that is very true riversong, especially if the FWB had been a couple in every sense of the word for a few years prior to the FWB, the fact they are often together, still get invited to things together, could prove confusing to others.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 8:37 AM

Those who can, or do have an FWB, are they more heartless, cold, selfish people? Or simply more practical? Can a mushy male, or female, participate in the FWB thing, successfully?

Boyd.

Posted by: himagain at March 31, 2008 11:03 PM

A mushy male and mushy female take to this arrangement very well, Boyd, in a previous post I have stated reasons why a FWB can work really well.

it can basically come down to 2 people loving each other to bits but know in their hearts that some other important life goals make a full time permanent relationship unworkable.

Doug

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 8:28 AM

This is a blogger's special:

Went to the cemetery the other day and saw 4 men carrying a coffin,

3 hours later I saw the same 4 men with the same coffin.

Thought to myself - they've lost the fu#king plot

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 1, 2008 8:26 AM

an FWB fulfils far more than just sex....they actually care about you, but cant live with you...at least thats the way I perceive it.

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at March 31, 2008 7:15 PM

Well said Bob, thats the way I see it as well., in possibly a situation where the 2 participants feel they care very deeply for each other, and sex is a part of that, but they know, for whatever reason that they will not be the final relationship, each will have, they may love each other deeply but some other needs might not be being met within that relationship. For instance one partner might love nature, bushwalking while the other loves footy, there might be significant age difference, or other things.

Posted by: virgil at April 1, 2008 8:18 AM

riversong - I can empathise with you as I was recently shelved in favour of a "friend" as it was easier and less risky (emotionally) and am now left hanging while another woman decides if she actually wants a relationship or whether she will stick with her "friend" instead. Why do these people come on RSVP if they already have "friends"? Yes, it can be very soul destroying when you are actually looking to form a relationship with the people you meet.

Maybe FWB works for some people but don't mix it with dating. Some people it seems want to have their cake and eat it too.

Posted by: woodnwine at April 1, 2008 8:09 AM

Funny - Boston Legal covered this as one of the story lines last night. Love that!

Thought this subject got covered pretty well only 2 or 3 weeks ago. Is simple really - works for some and not for others. If boundaries are set and both are quite clear on them I think it can work quite well.

Guilty Pleasure - Your rendevous sounds quite romantic actually.

Posted by: jenniferhi at April 1, 2008 8:04 AM

Hi Virgil,
We are looking into this and will take the feedback on board. Everyone has different definitions of what a long/short term relationship is so if they have any suggestions that use other terms we are happy to consider. E.g Dating, Friends, etc. Its unlikely we would go with something like One night stand.
Cheers,
Karina

Posted by: rsvpproducttest at April 1, 2008 7:27 AM

We have been fed the myth of romantic monogamous love ( and by monogamous I mean one partner for life)
Posted by: zorrodiego at March 31, 2008 8:30 PM
I know I have changed my views. When 21 I dreamed of and thought I had my partner for life and did have over 20 happy years before the demise began.Now I feel that the possibility of a few wonderful relationships in a lifetime is more likely even if some are only short.Each is a chapter in my own book. Yet the older generation of elderly(mainly women) in a nearby retirement village have all only been married once and many widowed for years and never have wanted to look for a partner again.People's attitiudes are changing. More equality in relationships today make the thought of more relationships more acceptable.

Posted by: blueeyes1955 at April 1, 2008 6:46 AM

Friends with benefits? Yes, it can work. Depends on the people and where you're up to in your life. I enjoyed such a situation for a couple of years, with a very attractive man, and no, he wasn't married and having a bit on the side! [Though I suspect now I wasn't his only lover though didn't at the time.] It was one of the best relationships I've had. Some who read this may dispute the use of the term "relationship" to describe a once weekly/fortnightly get together for dinner and sleepover. It's not what I'd settle for now, but it suited me then for reasons I won't share.

At least there was clarity about what was going on, our arrangement, and no pretense that it was any more than what it was. It was refreshingly honest, actually, unlike the situation here where I never know what to think or where I stand. There seem to be so many confused men on this site. I imagine there are just as many women, but my experience is with men. I receive a kiss, reply positively, and never hear again. Or send one, receive a positive response, send an email and then no response. [Yet another wasted stamp!] Or people who disappear after a few emails, telephone conversations, or meetings, without any explanation, when I've felt we'd made a positive connection.

To zorrodiego at 8.30pm, no, it's not just you. I absolutely relate to what you're saying about the myth of romantic monogamous love. Romantic love is wonderful if and when it happens, something worth searching for, and something I too would like to find again. But sometimes we can do ourselves a favour, think and act a little creatively, laterally, and entertain alternative possibilities to that one standard relationship model, the one that's been rammed down our throats all our lives. Seems to me that when people give off that sense of being totally focussed on their search to find "the one" with whom they want a conventional relationship, they can appear just too needy, even desperate, which is not at all attractive. I find it interesting and even a little sad when reading their stories the way people appear to be wanting to put themselves straight back into a relationship situation just like the previous one that's caused them so much heartache!

Posted by: hinterlandlover at April 1, 2008 6:23 AM

Sometimes I wonder whether there are people on here not just with a screw loose but whole bolts have come off.

The scene in the Mothman Prophecies where the bridge collapsed shows what can happen when too many bolts come asunder.

I am not going to mention names as I have previously opined that what this site desperately needs is an onboard consulting psychiatrist rather than a vent your spleen bulletin board.

Posted by: richardzkruspe at April 1, 2008 6:18 AM

zorro March 31 8:30 PM
Well posed questions and postulation. Welcome.
I thought that the primary purpose of a marriage was to breed and if the offspring were raised to be healthy and independant it was succesful.
That is the real social contract too, so the youngsters can make their way, not necessarily the other cultural stuff that has been superimposed so weightily buy church state and often family.
Groundhog. March 31 3:51 PM
With a profile name that refers to a movie (rather than your likeness to a burrowing rodent I assume) do you think perhaps you are showing a slight lack of imagination?
That particular movie,with its theme of endless repetition, makes it all the more ironic and funny given your attitude to that all men must state their intentions clearly (as if they knew them) because the only real relationship is a long one. Perhaps if you losen up a bit you might get an a nice suprise.
Funny, I have had low key FWB relationship that has lasted about 30 years and is characterised by openess, candour and a good mutual appreciation. It is not predicated on sex, though once was and yes, the balance of emotional power is in my favor. It was never going to be a formalised relationship. Sometimes 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at April 1, 2008 2:05 AM

People are talking about so long as it's consenting and doesn't hurt anyone, each to their own, F*ck Buddies is OK.

Well, could I digress laterally and give a third person's point of view?

Having just broken up with someone recently because of his "friend", yes, it hurt me, probably her, and probably him too.

FWB is definitely detrimental to any attempts at developing a new relationship. While the "friend" takes up someone's time, mental, emotion, physical energy, they are not free to give that to someone else.

Once enmeshed in FWB, it's a sticky situation to get out of - can't ditch the friend, not officially "a couple", but "couple enough" to deter anyone else (unless they lie about it, with all the ensuing problems lies cause).

For me - keep things simple - "Friends with Potential", or "Just Friends" if that fizzles, and leave a vacancy for "Possible Boyfriend". Otherwise no room for when he comes along :)

I think F*ck Buddy is a poor pseudo substitute for proper relationship, and Girl, boy and FWB makes an awkward triangle that's difficult to find a way out of.

Posted by: riversong1 at March 31, 2008 11:04 PM

Ooooooooo, FWB.

I love the idea of FWB; and I believe it's great for those who can make it work, and work well.

There are the obvious attachment issues though. As I'm sure most of you are aware, I'm a softie and just can't bring myself around to doing the one night stand thing. The FWB thing, for me, would fail for the same reasons. I'd simply become too attached. I must have, at least, some kind of warm, fuzzy feeling for the girls I sleep with; obviously, this would need to apply to any FWB buddy too.

If I had a FWB I'd stuff it up completely. I'd call her, wonder why she hasn't called me, I'd think about here and, kabooooooooom!!!!, suffed. And I'd lose a friend too.

Having said all that; I'm kinda thinking I should really try the one night stand thing. As they say, you can't knock it until you try it. Maybe I'm just fearful. Maybe I should just go out on a limb and give it a shot. I'm not opposed to it, nor those that participate, it just goes against some, long standing, beliefs. But hey, I used to believe in Santa too!!!

Anyhooooooooo, as we keep saying, time after time, after time in here; each to their own. There is no right or wrong here, it's a personal choice; and I'm certainly not judgmental about choice. I guess it's about communicating the rules very clearly and being aware of the associated risks. It's certainly placing the friendship at risk, no doubt about that. There's also a risk of becoming too attached and getting hurt.

Having said that, I'm sure we're all aware that , without risk, we're not living; we're existing; and that's no fun.

As for having a FWB; I'm not sure I could stick to the rues.

Those who can, or do have an FWB, are they more heartless, cold, selfish people? Or simply more practical? Can a mushy male, or female, participate in the FWB thing, successfully?

Boyd.

Posted by: himagain at March 31, 2008 11:03 PM

Maybe the abbreviation of (FWB)-Freinds With Benefits should be remashed in to (FBW)-F**k Buddies Woes.
Eeeeeek!!!!!!

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at March 31, 2008 9:09 PM

Oldergent yep that was sort of my point in disguise l guess....

Notgodsgift, hey you !!! A interesting explaination that !
Maybe we shouldn't talk about sex, some people may take offence...after all it aint like we are all adults here... oh hang on we are.................K

Posted by: auntykaz at March 31, 2008 8:52 PM

Posted by: femalepersuasion at March 31, 2008 4:07 PM –exactly. Well detailed too.

Something our "rut"less RSVPer richardzkruspe at March 31, 2008 7:09 PM, could take some cold comfort in, also.

Posted by: justsaying at March 31, 2008 8:47 PM

There seems to b be a great deal of moralising and judgement going on re this topic. Personally, I would rather believe that we are all human beings with needs and weaknesses. So many people presage their remarks with stuff like " everyone has a right to choose what suits them" and then proceed to push the same old 1950s/Victorian attitudes that I feel have been rammed down my throat all my life. We have been fed the myth of romantic monogamous love ( and by monogamous I mean one partner for life) and when that doesn't work, which I'm fairly sure applies to most of us on RSVP, it has always been the fault of the individuals involved ie. their commitment wasn't strong enough etc. when in fact it may well be that the myth is the problem. Am I alone in thinking this? l know that I have a need for intimacy and don't always achieve this via a lifelong relationship with someone. Is that really so strange? There is a certain sense of legitimacy that some express regarding finding or even just searching for "the one" which I find offensive, Again, is this just me?

Posted by: zorrodiego at March 31, 2008 8:30 PM

K.
not the point, some just need to let their moral indignation loose from time to time, then really let rip when someone tries to impose their beliefs on them in return.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at March 31, 2008 7:25 PM

iaminperth at March 31, 2008 5:46 PM

Sure you can have a friend that you'd do things for like looking after house and pets - but I bet neither of you would drive two hours for a midnight rendezvous in a country town with minimal notice and spend the next day driving back with an insane grin on your face and his smell on your body. Now THAT'S a great arrangement that works wonderfully.

It's not for everyone, all of the time, but it is recommended as a wonderful dish in the sexual banquet of life. Partake as and when you feel like it.

Posted by: guiltypleasure at March 31, 2008 7:15 PM

Friends with Benefits.....I posted this articles at "The Dating Games" and No alteration of what I've wrote in my concept.

Posted by: aliane at March 31, 2008 7:15 PM

Hi All,

FWB is definitely not for everyone, but those of you that have been in a relationship with someone that you love dearly....but just cant live with (for any number of reasons) would probably understand the concept best.

A true FWB is someone who fits this....not a Fuckbuddy.....that is somthing completely different.....anyone that satisfies you sexually only is just that.....an FWB fulfils far more than just sex....they actually care about you, but cant live with you...at least thats the way I perceive it.

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at March 31, 2008 7:15 PM

FWB - the benefits are sex, not house minding or dog sitting. It is a pretty sensible idea really. Why miss out toally on sex??? just cause you are not in a relationship.
You either like the idea or you don't. It has also been around for a few years now, mentioned on TV shows like Boston Legal...so it isn't new.
I have tried it, it worked for a while, but then I started to get attached to the guy, so I ended the sex part, we are still friends though, as in, still do phone calls and meet up for coffee.

FWB doesn't work if one of the friends starts to want more and emotions start to get involved.

The FWB has to be mutual, you need to follow the rules and not get too involved.

If it is working for you, go for it. If it is not your cup of tea, don't play that game...simple really..have a lovely evening all...jewels

Posted by: junebaby57 at March 31, 2008 7:14 PM

Normal friendships take hard work to maintain. Striking up a friendship is only the beginning. Maintaining it requires constant attention and due diligence.

Often more work is put into a friendship than the rubbish that goes for “relationships” on here, as witness someone I knew, in a so called “relationship” who was taken out twice in a 6 month period.

The rest of the time was just rutting like dogs.

So what’s the difference between “relationships” rsvp style and Friends With Benefits.

Neither seems to require hard work or effort. Just rut away.

Posted by: richardzkruspe at March 31, 2008 7:09 PM

Karina, how about extra tick boxes that follow on from the current options available so Ideal Partner you have Long Term Relationship, Short Term Relationship, Friends only, FWB, One night stand. That way there will be definately no confusion. Mind you, I still am suspicious of people who tick both the LTR and the STR boxes. In my world, your either looking for long term or your not!

Posted by: groundhogday2 at March 31, 2008 3:51 PM

My understanding of a short term relationship is that it might be anything from a few months to a year, and it was on that basis I would be OK with that.

This might be a piece of string kind of question, but I wouldn't call anything under about 2 months a relationship anyway.

So a one night stand or a few naughty nights dont qualify as a relationship, they are more of a fling.

Posted by: virgil at March 31, 2008 6:38 PM

Well known by who? Do people actually spend their lives trying to find out who sleeps with who and why they sleep together, etc., etc., etc., old washing machine around and around and around, don't they have anything else to do except discuss other peoples sex lives.

Posted by: iaminperth at March 31, 2008 6:34 PM

iaminperth - the person you wrote about is a friend. A FWB is a friend you sleep with, simple as that .... not our interpretation at all. I have plenty of friends who will look after my dogs when I go away but no FWBs. I don't do that either but believe me, many women do. Perhaps you should get over it because it is a well know fact .... well known.

Posted by: woodnwine at March 31, 2008 6:19 PM

"RE:woodnwine@2.50
Eeeeek! Dont think the question exactly meant a sex buddy.
You could look at the whole description of FWB under the title above. I dont think it was about going all the way to just be a FWB.
Well lets hope not! I sure wouldnt want to have sex with someone who I considered just as a friend. What a waste of time and Eeeeek!!!!"

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at March 31, 2008 4:05 PM

That's exactly what it is and nothing less. That's why they are also referred to a f..k buddies, sorry to tell you.

Posted by: woodnwine at March 31, 2008 6:12 PM

Karina, a can full of worms this one l think.......We had this discussion some weeks ago and it got a bit heated.

What l will say is each to their own, if you don't like the FWB thing then don't do it. Simple really...no need for argument or vitriol...............K

Posted by: auntykaz at March 31, 2008 6:08 PM

Get over yourselves ladies. I have a friend with fabulous benefits. When I go away he housesits, looks after my dog, sleeps with my cat and feeds the budgie. When he goes away I sleep with his pug, who snores like mad by the way and look after his guinea pig. It's a wonderful arrangement as we have keys to each others houses and trust each other completely. Neither of us has any need to involve stranger or worry about animals if either feels a weekend or a week away. It's a great arrangement and it works wonderfully. We are not huge socialisers togethr but both know each others friends and families and it's a wonderful arrangement that works well for both of us. Don't any of you ever think about anything else but sex, who wants it, who needs it, who's getting it etc., etc., etc., you are like old clothes dryers going around and around and no wonder you're on your own because it's so boring !!!

Posted by: iaminperth at March 31, 2008 5:46 PM

RE: femalepersuasion@4:07
Nice Post: Thankyou for clearing the subject up of FWB. You have very nicely explained the process and consequesces.

Personally for me everybody, I just couldnt do the FWB thing.
As femalepersuasion has pointed out. It really comes down to the care factor, and to me it seems like a selfish gain on ones behalf.
For me it is better to be with someone that I have feelings for and if the other person dosnt feel or want to return the same feelings then I feel it would just be hurtful.
I dont think that would feel very beneficial for me, but rather leave me feeling worthless, and out of control.
Therefore, the only person that benefits is the person who dosnt care enough and wont get hurt because they probably are using you as a fill in till they find an updated model or something they think would do them better.
So it is Eeeeekkkkkk!!!!!!!

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at March 31, 2008 5:31 PM

Groundhog- like your idea of the extra tick boxes,especially with ones saying FWB or one night stand. As long as people were honest ,it would save me from having to read between the lines and wasting stamps on those who really are not after a long term relationship. I could name a couple of people whose idea of long term starts with sex on the first date and no intention of taking it further.

Posted by: blueeyes1955 at March 31, 2008 5:27 PM

Woodwine- I also thought that as discussed in a previous blog, that FWB means having sex with them .From discussions I have had with friends of both genders, the concensus was FWB was more acceptable by males than females .Females tend to get emotionally attached once sex is involved whilst men can keep it at a purely physical level.Both participants really need to lay their cards on the table beforehand before proceeding further.

Posted by: blueeyes1955 at March 31, 2008 4:47 PM

woodnwine Today 2:50
:-} Nice and easy, she is from Tassie after all.

Posted by: laughsandtalks at March 31, 2008 4:09 PM

In case you haven't heard the term before or aren't exactly sure what it means, "Friends With Benefits" is the so-called agreement
between a man and a woman that they will exhibit all of the BEHAVIORS of a full-fledged couple - talking on the phone, spending time together, and sleeping together - without actually having any of the privileges,such as monogamy or the committment of a fully-fledged couple

In other words, you act like FRIENDS but also have the benefit of physical intimacy. Some swear that it can work for them, but I believe it is far more detrimental than it ever is beneficial, mainly because an arrangement of this nature is designed specifically for instant gratification without emotional attachment.

In theory, the idea sounds deceptively appealing because people who enter into this “Claytons” situation are either

1. feeling emotionally vulnerable (perhaps from
a recent breakup) and decide that they are not
ready for a relationship, so convince themselves
that sleeping with someone without any strings
will be simple and fun. Until things
start to get complicated & emotions involved.

or 2. A guy/girl that you're interested in suggests
the idea of a "FWB" arrangement
and you decide that you'll take what you can get
for the moment, all the while hoping that they'll
eventually come around or that you can convince
them to turn the F.W.B. into a REAL committed
relationship.

If You agree to participate in a "FWB" situation in the hope that it will eventually grow into a committed relationship, it usually doesn’t work because you weren't true to your feelings and desires up front.

If You didn't think enough of yourself to believe that you deserve a completely fulfilling, male/female relationship you could be settling for the emotional equivalent of table scraps.

When you get involved with any person without putting your self-respect first or setting any boundaries for your own emotional safety, it can be VERY hard to get your footing back once you start to feel used and hurt.

This is not the kind of situation that will magically transform into a happily-ever-after because when someone says "Let's be Friends With Benefits," what they are REALLY saying is: " I like having sex with you, but I don't care enough about you as a person or respect you enough to be your partner."

It's nothing more than a creative way of telling you that they want to keep their options open in case someone better comes along.

What I can’t work out is why the name ‘FWB” came to be used so universally..Isn’t it just a booty call?
( taken from acollation of articles recently read on the WWW)

Posted by: femalepersuasion at March 31, 2008 4:07 PM

RE:woodnwine@2.50
Eeeeek! Dont think the question exactly meant a sex buddy.
You could look at the whole description of FWB under the title above. I dont think it was about going all the way to just be a FWB.
Well lets hope not! I sure wouldnt want to have sex with someone who I considered just as a friend. What a waste of time and Eeeeek!!!!

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at March 31, 2008 4:05 PM

Karina, how about extra tick boxes that follow on from the current options available so Ideal Partner you have Long Term Relationship, Short Term Relationship, Friends only, FWB, One night stand. That way there will be definately no confusion. Mind you, I still am suspicious of people who tick both the LTR and the STR boxes. In my world, your either looking for long term or your not!

Posted by: groundhogday2 at March 31, 2008 3:51 PM

Karina,
Just as well it's not the same as the lad's. lol.
WnW,
I did not think it was that alone, more that it was a mutal support thing with limlted emotional attachment with the sex as a fringe benefit. Then I could have misunderstood the whold thing.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at March 31, 2008 3:25 PM

lonelyheart - I presume from your post that you may not realise that the benefits in FWB is sex. Sorry if I'm wrong.

Posted by: woodnwine at March 31, 2008 2:50 PM

One of my mates regards me as a Friend With Benefits.

He can always count on me to bring along an esky full of beer.

A lovely lady I know also regards me as a Friend With Benefits.

She can always count of being able to find and access my wallet at crucial moments.

Posted by: richardzkruspe at March 31, 2008 2:05 PM

I am starting to form the opinion that women go for the FWB option because it is the easy option - no risk of heartbreak and no need for commitment. Take a chance ladies ... isn't that why you are on RSVP?

Posted by: woodnwine at March 31, 2008 1:33 PM

I know this might sound meaningless too some, but I find the FWB thing to be a waste of time.
Im on an internet dating site to find love, a companion, and along the way will make some friends I guess. Maybe an invite to their engagement party, wedding, a party etc, or just an email to say hi, after we met and didnt pursue it any further or waste their time so they could get on with their search for someone for them.
However, Im the type of girl that dosnt have much time to spend on pleasing everyone with my precious little time available.
So what Im saying is, after meeting everyone that has me curious enough to put out my time, and yet they dont end up getting my attention enough to pursue it any further; would it suit me to engage in further personal outings with them? I think not!
I guess its about not wasting their time with me as well as much as my own.
Therefore, I just couldnt do it, it would mean too many FWB and no time for seeking Mr Right.
Additionally, I couldnt handle having to ward off the other person if they became too attached to the idea that it could lead to something else with me, while I dont feel something for them or dont think they would make a suitable partner for what I know for sure suits me.
I would only give up my time for someone I felt was going to do it for me, and I would like that person to be the only one giving me their time, because they think I am what they want to know better as well.
Doing it this way; no one gets the wrong idea or has the wrong intentions of where it might be going.
At least it takes out all of the confusion.
Why waste someones time being a mystery and why not just get to the point instead of all the guessing work going on.
How annoying!
Anyway, just trying to answer the question on here?

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at March 31, 2008 1:24 PM

Jen Jen,
I thought the one you posted on "sex" was a beauty,
I always remember the oldie,
"you dont lose your sense of humour when you get old, you get old when you lose your sense of humour".

Aliane,
and you a nice Cat holic girl too, loved it but.

Malsie.
When push comes to shove I agree, it is better than nothing, as long as it consensual, then it becomes no one elses business.

Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at March 31, 2008 1:04 PM

Hi laughsandtalks, if you must know I have a photo library where I get all my pictures from, as for the topics, I have a very good imagination... HAHAHA
Cheers,
Karina

Posted by: rsvpproducttest at March 31, 2008 12:50 PM

Well, I think this is an interesting topic and know of several women who think FWB is a good idea. I have never tried it myself but I am starting to feel like the odd on eout actually.

Posted by: woodnwine at March 31, 2008 12:18 PM

I think the FWB concept makes sense at times, and have tried it a couple of times myself. It generally hasn't lasted long, though, for me, because without the added commitment or "romantic love", for want of a better term, I've simply got bored with it. If it works better for others, then why not. At least it's sex with someone you care about on some level, rather than totally "meaningless".

Posted by: malsie at March 31, 2008 12:18 PM

Aliane, another little gem at March 31, 2008 11:51 AM -laughing at yourself too,

"Gosh, I can be Mary Mad Max-Magdalene, pardon me>."

Posted by: justsaying at March 31, 2008 12:16 PM

Posted by: jenjen57 at March 30, 2008 10:16 PM on Sex, should we have it sooner or later?
Seniors sex guide -goodonya! I love laughing at myself.

Timewarp's aka our Dinosaur1, subsequent expression of being so "disappointed" with you,
(Posted by: timewarp1 at March 31, 2008 10:01 AM,
"JenJen @ 10.16pm: I am very disappointed in you, for the first time ever.
That wasn't funny - it was blatantly and offensively ageist, and I would have chopped it, Karina. Far more inyerface to seniors than our misenthropes are to women.")

strongly indicates a failing (or falling apart?) besides thinking he can still order a female about (Karina this time,) don'tcha think?

Seems like SOME senior cits not only lose parts of their physical attributes but their sense of humour too.

Certainly no hope of them,

"If it works, call everyone you know with the good news."

and then having a FWB.

Posted by: justsaying at March 31, 2008 12:14 PM

I think this topic was talked about in great depth a few weeks ago. I might be wrong. Because of cocktail as marcus said of oxytocin and oestrogen is dangerous mix for women to be a friend with benefits. She is wired to become attached to the man.
A man probably dreamt up the concept to have his cake and eat it. Nice idea but the woman wants to keep the cake all to herself. It is not for me but if you can do it with no emotions involved then go for it and enjoy. Make sure noone gets hurt because is just physical needs after all. they are not important enough to do damage to someone else.

Posted by: oohlala1 at March 31, 2008 12:01 PM

Gee...I got heaps of male friends some married, some are single, some are Bi-*, to set-up with benefits...Gosh, I can be Mary Mad Max-Magdalene, pardon me>.

Posted by: aliane at March 31, 2008 11:51 AM

OK Thanks Karina.
Back to the future with this one.
I'd love to know where you get your topic pictures from-perhaps an
American Christian dating guide?
Warped.
Gerontophile is the term for someone who enjoys 'hooking up' with the elderly.
Perhaps we could belabour jenjen for being gerontist.
Cheers.

Posted by: laughsandtalks at March 31, 2008 11:14 AM

What about peoople in a relationship, where it is evident the realtionship is going nowhere, so, they decide to be friends, as sex had been a part of the relationship, it then becomes part of the friendship, hence FWB

Posted by: virgil at March 31, 2008 11:09 AM