Not pukin', part two

The first response to Tuesday's letter (from the guy finding himself in his first long-distance relationship and unsure of whether to visit his girlfriend when he's not feeling the strongest about her) came from my buddy Richard McRichardson, because I thought it would be good to get a man's point of view, just to see if it would be all that different from mine. I said I'd come up with my reply today, and here it is:

At different times in my life, I’ve looked around at the situations of others for some clue as to how to proceed with my own, because I hadn’t found myself in them before. Sometimes you fear you don’t know enough to be dissatisfied, and that’s actually legitimate. A few times I’ve stayed in dumb relationships because I was too young to realize I had a right to expect more, or I didn’t realize the treatment I was getting wasn't fair, for example, with only a faint idea that things weren’t going right.

That said, I suspect that much of the fear people feel that they’re settling for something that is just pleasant, and the suspicion that passion equals desperation and if you’re not sighing your face off or puking your guts out or shitting your pants you’re missing out on something way better with someone else, is in big part rhetoric that people internalize through shit like television and movies. Love definitely doesn’t always happen overnight, sometimes it’s the result of really getting to know a person over a period of time. This is why longtime friends end up together, and this is why people date casually… trial basis and whatnot. So yeah, you’re right, it’s possible to be just fine with the no butterflies because they might be along.

BUT. While it’s fine when you’re not super lovesick over a girl you’ve only been with for what’s basically been a few weeks, it’s a little surprising, to me, that you embarked on possibly THE HARDEST dating circumstance, the long-distance relationship, with someone you don’t seem to have felt all that strongly about in the first place. While dramatics aren’t essential to the start of an important relationship, you need ways in which to see if strong feelings will develop, and without a super strong initial attraction, you don’t have the greatest foundation for a situation in which you’ll only get a full experience of a person kind of gradually (over e-mail and Skype, on brief visits).

If you’re not seeing your girlfriend all that often, your relationship risks becoming stagnant. It takes you a lot longer to figure out how you feel about someone you never see. When you think about it, long-distance is probably remarkably easier to put up with when you’re not super invested in the person. But when you’re not super invested… what’s the point, you know? You might as well go with someone local.

Though I am apparently not a fan of the long-distance model, it’s actually not my policy to encourage people to dissolve relationships already in progress just because they’re long-distance, and Monday, you seem only to be apprehensive about yours on principle. So, that’s why I hope you went on your March break trip with her; see her as much as you can.in order to get to know her better. I think you need to put some effort into learning more about her and getting a better idea of whether you want to be with her.

So I pretty much agree with what Rich said on Monday. Except, I want to comment on one thing.

On his suggestion about changing your behaviour and hoping that your feelings will follow: meh, I guess so. It makes sense, and acting a certain way is one way towards feeling and believing a certain way, but is it necessary to really connect with this person, to the extent that you’re playing mind tricks on yourself to achieve that? Try it, by all means, if you really want to give this relationship a chance, but if it feels stupid, you’ll know why: you’re not into this girl enough.