DJ's RELATIONSHIP THEORY The following is an email dialogue about relationships between DJ Chuang and Christine , which has been edited down to focus on the topic which now is being commonly known as _DJ's Relationship Theory_. Copyright reserved. Permission is granted by both parties for general distribution provided the text remains intact and unaltered. May you glorify God in how you relate with all. From: Self To: CBeanie1@aol.com Subject: Re: teen counseling Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:43:21 On 16 Jan 97 at 0:49, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > I remember growing up and my mom constantly questioning me as to why I > didn't have "more friends." I learned at an early age that I treasured the > quality of friendships rather than the quantity. Here, I find myself to be a both/and rather than either/or.. i have both quality deep friends, and quantity of superficial ones :) > but rather finding in someone a "complement" to ourselves. We > admire the qualities in others that we may not find in ourselves. My > closest friends are those that I've shared the deepest with. This is > tricky, though, when it comes to guy/girl friendships. I don't believe that > a guy and girl can share that deeply without deciding to develop a closer > and deeper relationship with one another I find myself so drastically different than most (if not all) people I meet, that I find it hard to discern chemistry or complement, so my working thesis now is that I'll start a relationship solely on commitment. If they want it and I want it, we have one that grows deeper, and sometimes quickly. I share deeply with many people (maybe a dozen?), I find, and would have a hard time to have to pick out who are my "closest" friends.. on the guy/girl relationship, I think it is possible to develop closeness without getting tangled into emotions and courtship; it simply takes mature individuals committed to each other as friends. I've experienced a few of these, though most people aren't so open to developing cross-gender relationships as such. This is not to say that close cross-gender relationships will come to a point of needing "DTR" (define the relationship), but when that point comes, if it culminates with dating/marriage or not, both are committed enough to not break the "closeness", which was the unwritten contract for such a close cross-gender relationship to begin with. Now I know others disagree with my "radical" theory here, but it is still my theory :) DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 18:03:50 -0500 (EST) To: djchuang@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: teen counseling Have you not run into people whom you just "know" that you and that person would never be especially close? And how are you able to discern whether or not a person is "committed" to getting to know you better? What a radical theory! I think you're one of the few who believes that a cross-gender relationship could work (one that also includes closeness without the entanglements of emotions and courtship). Because I've experienced that so rarely, it's hard for me to see that as a reality, or even a possibility. The times that I've just wanted to develop a friendship with a guy, they get it into their heads that this must develop into something MORE. Then the inevitable DTR comes. And the dreaded "I just want to be friends" comes up. So many cross-gender relationships define themselves as "friendships" but their thoughts (perhaps even actions) suggests more than that. It can be very confusing to both parties. I can't imagine the same "closeness" after a DTR, if one person has feelings and the other does not. No matter how committed either person is to the relationship, it is bound to be awkward to continue at that same level if feelings aren't reciprocated. My brother calls the next stage- "strategic non-talking" - where one feels awkward and uncomfortable around the other person because s/he doesn't have the same feelings. My own theory on this particular subject is that in the closer cross-gender friendships, at one point or another, one (if not both) of the party will develop feelings (whether conscious or subconscious). I only say this out of my own limited experience. Christine -- End -- From: Self Subject: cross-gender relationships Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:20:03 On 16 Jan 97 at 18:03, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > Are you pretty good in keeping up with your relationships with others? (in > spite of distance) I find that for some, distance is what "ends" the > friendship because one or the other stops corresponding or keeping in touch. I do okay, I keep up, especially if it's available on email. I love email! :) Distance does affect the dynamics of a relationship, no doubt there, and that's okay, for me, because as I understand relationships, God gives them to you for a limited time, and we're to treasure them and be grateful with them, rather than to resist them if they don't come with a lifetime guarantee, or to bicker when one ends. When one "ends" or "changes", it doesn't make the friendship any less meaningful or genuine when it was "up close & personal". > Have you not run into people whom you just "know" that you and that person > would never be especially close? And how are you able to discern whether or > not a person is "committed" to getting to know you better? I guess there are those types of people, and I spot them thru their relational dynamics, but not on first impressions (I don't like first impressions, and find them usually wrong anyways)... what I mean by that is that some people are more "lone ranger", and some are more "I only want my 3 close friends, and no one else is allowed".. when I discover those tendencies, I respect their distance.. with others that aren't so clear, I give it a shot, to see if they're committed or not.. usually vulnerability, honesty, and transparency is a quick gauge to check "committed"-ness, because to give those aspects openly implies trust.. most people don't open up unless they're willing to trust you.. > What a radical theory! I think you're one of the few who believes that a > cross-gender relationship could work (one that also includes closeness > without the entanglements of emotions and courtship). Because I've > experienced that so rarely, it's hard for me to see that as a reality, or > even a possibility. Well, I didn't say it was easy, nor common, nor easy to find.. it is within the realm of possibility, but may be hard like finding a needle in a haystack, perhaps even more so from the female side. But it _is_ possible, at least for me :) > I can't imagine the same "closeness" after a DTR, if one person has feelings > and the other does not. No matter how committed either person is to the > relationship, it is bound to be awkward to continue at that same level if > feelings aren't reciprocated. Sure there's awkwardness, but commitment can overcome that, that's all I'm saying.. yeah it hurts on both sides, and perhaps hurts a little more on the one who was wanting more, but hurts can be healed, especially by the commitment of relationship, if that was genuine to begin with in the first place.. now it may be that the relationship can't get too much deeper up to that DTR level, depending on the depth of the relationship; or it could be that the relationship can still go deeper platonically, but of course it will hit a limit.. the absolute reality (in my model) is that a cross-gender platonic relationship will hit a limit, and then beyond that it has to be a cross-gender romantic relationship (if I may introduce that vocabulary). > My own theory on this particular subject is that in the closer cross-gender > friendships, at one point or another, one (if not both) of the party will > develop feelings (whether conscious or subconscious). Well, this is true in many (or even most) cases; but the consequence of that doesn't have to be "end the friendship". Commitment to the platonic relationship can still hold things in dynamic equivalence :) DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 01:42:22 -0500 (EST) << I do okay, I keep up, especially if it's available on email. I love email! :) >> I can tell. :) E-mail helps me keep up-to-date with my friends. But I also realize that I can spend an enormous amount of time e-mailing so I need to watch my balance. How do you know when it's time to "let go" of a relationship- I'm talking about friendship here. When do you know that it's time to move on? You mentioned in your last e-mail something about "not bickering" when a relationship ends b/c they don't necessarily come with a life-time guarantee. At present, I'm trying to figure out what to do with one of my friendships- I'm torn between doing something to try to make things better or doing nothing and just realizing that I can't change anything. In other words, I care on the one hand but on the other hand, I feel powerless and apathetic. Does this make sense? In a message dated 97-01-17 11:37:20 EST, you write: >Well, I didn't say it was easy, nor common, nor easy to find.. it is within >the realm of possibility, but may be hard like finding a needle in a >haystack, perhaps even more so from the female side. But it _is_ possible, > at least for me :) Along the same lines, do you believe in "the one."? Or do you believe that we can choose from several possibilities rather than God choosing any ONE person- just as long as he/she falls in God's moral will. [I'm taking this from Friesen's book Decision Making and the Will of God] >"hit a limit.. the absolute reality (in my model) is that a cross-gender platonic relationship will hit a limit, and then beyond that it has to be a cross-gender romantic relationship (if I may introduce that vocabulary)." So, what does that "limit" look like? Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:56:50 > But I also realize that I can spend an enormous amount of time > e-mailing so I need to watch my balance. Balance is the delicate challenge of all of life.. hope you find a happy medium that your conscience is okay with :) > How do you know when it's time to "let go" of a relationship- I'm talking > about friendship here. When do you know that it's time to move on? You > mentioned in your last e-mail something about "not bickering" when a > relationship ends b/c they don't necessarily come with a life-time The "intensely" close friendships that have had to transition into a more "normal" friendship, for me, has ended because of physical movement, as in 1) my moving from Dallas to Raleigh, 2) their moving from Dallas to elsewhere, 3) their moving from dorm to off campus, 4) my getting married, 5) my graduation; it is usually a significant change in circumstance that redefines the dynamics of a said relationship. In theory I suppose you could come clean to the table and recognize that the relationship is changing in the friendship dynamic, and have a healthy "farewell" celebration to bring closure to it.. that's what farewell parties and graduation parties are for.. to bring closure, and to celebrate the treasured relationships that are now going to change. > At present, I'm trying to figure out what to do with one of my friendships- > I'm torn between doing something to try to make things better or doing > nothing and just realizing that I can't change anything. In other words, I > care on the one hand but on the other hand, I feel powerless and apathetic. > Does this make sense? You're making sense; Christine, I've enjoyed this conversation for the very reason that you are coherent, and are willing to be honest in talking out these issues.. the theory (and practice) that I talk about (and believe in) are not easy to do, by no means, but those are the principles that govern my life and relationships.. there are lots of feelings and emotions to sort thru, but over time, hopefully you'll be able to make progress in sorting thru what's important to you, what's valuable before God, and make progress in all that you do here.... you should feel the freedom (and perhaps need to pray for the courage) to make a relationship better, that's very worthwhile... with some other relationships (particularly those in the family category), there's a lot of learning to be patience and acceptance, because those are ones where changes are hard to come by. > Along the same lines, do you believe in "the one."? Or do you believe that > we can choose from several possibilities rather than God choosing any ONE > person- just as long as he/she falls in God's moral will. I've read Friesen's book.. I don't believe in "the one", because I believe in "commitment" more. For a person in the single phase of life, you simply pick & choose the idiosyncracies and strengths and weaknesses and feelings and romance that you can live with in a marriage, and then make the commitment. The commitment drives the relationship and provides its stability, and will result trust and security. (and the lack of it will harbor bitterness, jealousy, pain, and insecurity). Feelings and romance will change, that's a given for me. Lust will always be a battle.. the sad part of this dating dynamic that I saw at seminary, was that people would be dating each other, but would not be committed [partly] because they were waiting for the next best deal to come along.. this is such a "using people" thing, and borders on "emotional rape".. and you know what, this reflects our lack of commitment to God, because we don't trust that He's committed to us and He's got our best interest in mind. Another dynamic I saw was dating avoidance, because people would be waiting for "the one" to show up first before getting into cross-gender relationships.. this to me showed some ingratitude of what God sovereignly brings into people's lives.. and reflecting God-man relations in that some don't want to become Christians until they're sure that God is going to do something for them.. > >"hit a limit.. the absolute reality (in my model) is that a cross-gender > platonic relationship will hit a limit, and then beyond that it has to be a > cross-gender romantic relationship (if I may introduce that vocabulary)." > So, what does that "limit" look like? Relationships being the dynamic thing that it is, and each one different, the "limit" will look different for each person, and each relationship.. some factors one needs to consider are: 1) know your own emotional/ relational limit, 2) be willing to be honest, 3) be committed to friendship, 4) know if you can handle DTR when you approach the limit, and if the other person can [if the other person can't, draw the "limit" on friendship a little more on the shallow end for that person], and 5) be open to romance if this may be that sovereign grace of God. DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 17:41:13 -0500 DJ, You were talking about how close friendships may have to transition to more "normal" friendship. Do you think that there are gender differences as well? I have some close girlfriends who don't live here, but I still feel "intensely" close to them- via e-mail and visits from time to time. I've enjoyed your honesty with me and I'm trying to learn more about how all these relationship dynamics work. It is one thing to discuss and to read about (or even to be taught), but it's quite another thing when I have to apply it to my own life. :) What sounds good in theory is complicated in practice. Because emotions are so tied into everything, sometimes I find that it clouds the issue. I used to believe in "the one" but after someone gave a talk based on Friesen's book about a year and a half ago, I began to have doubts. I'm still trying to read through the book- it stirs up a lot inside of me when I read it. My thinking is that I want to choose "God's best" for me. I don't want to settle for anything less than His best. My fear stems from thinking that perhaps I'll choose poorly- but this reflects my lack of trust that God is sovereign. How and when did you know that Rachelle would be the woman you would marry? You saw quite a bit of the seminary "dating" life. I liked your commentary on it. In fact, already, I've talked to 2 different guys who have similar stories- dating a woman for quite some time and are still unsure whether or not to marry the woman. To me, indecision probably means "no." But I never really saw it as waiting for a better deal to come along. That's sad. What I detest, though, is when the guy "spiritualizes" his excuse for breaking things off even though it's for some very human reason. Instead he says, "God says..." How can a woman argue with that? :p I've seen plenty of dating avoidance though. :) For different reasons of course. It's almost as if dating was some sort of disease to be avoided at all costs. Most of all, I am coming to the realization that God is in control of relationships (friendship and romantic ones as well). I've never really thought about that. I trust God in many other areas- but what about my relationships? That gave me a lot to ponder upon today. Ever thought about writing a book? :) What are your thoughts on DTRs? Is it okay for the woman to initiate one? How "honest" should one be? (in other words, why should I lay out all of my feelings if he does not reciprocate?- but then again, honesty implies a risk to be hurt as well) Where is the balance between waiting on God and taking matters into my own hands? Christine -- End -- From: Self Subject: pure honesty Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:49:35 On 24 Jan 97 at 17:41, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > You were talking about how close friendships may have to transition to > more "normal" friendship. Do you think that there are gender differences > as well? I have some close girlfriends who don't live here, but I still > feel "intensely" close to them- via e-mail and visits from time to time. Depending on you, there may (or may not) be gender differences.. when a close cross-gender relationship needs to transition to a more "normal" friendship, this is for the keeping of fellowship between brother and sister, which includes genuine best interest of the other, even after DTR.. > What sounds good in theory is complicated in practice. Because emotions > are so tied into everything, sometimes I find that it clouds the issue. Depending on how much emotions affect your thinking, it definitely clouds the issue; and again, my theory is the ideal, I know in practice, perhaps few people strive for it, nor is able to attain it. We have to be realistic with our sin nature and lust, and though the ideal is a good thing, don't "break your head" over it. :) Again I do say it is difficult to achieve it in practice, b/c few people understand nor are committed nor are able to uphold the ideal. It's not easy (if it were easy, it'd be more common)! > How and when did you know that Rachelle would be the woman > you would marry? I'm not so "spiritual" when it comes to these theories, my theology and spirituality informs my decision making and ideals & theory forming, but well, for it came down to: was I willing to commit to Rachelle in a lifetime faithful marital relationship? That's the main question, in my theory and practice; but on the practical level, I considered various things: - could we communicate openly about our ideas & thoughts - could I live with her idiosyncracies, and could she with mine (we all have them) - did we have parental support on both sides (this is a big bonus, and makes life much much easier) - did we have a decent spiritual life individually and together - could she fulfill my emotional needs (did she have an emotional dimension? Though my thinking is very dominant, I also have lots of emotions, and marriage is the only legitimate way to have your personal emotional needs met, not absolutely, but sufficiently.. intellectual stimulation or ministry satisfaction could happen outside of marriage, but not emotional/sexual). - did we have the blessings & support of those who knew both of us And take all of this, which I would package under the category of "wisdom", pray over it, discern, and the Lord has affirmed it and brought it to pass. Here's a radical theory, outside of this, but also in my thinking, it doesn't matter who you marry, in God's sovereignty if you've made that holy matrimony commitment, then that is the person you're married to, and you have to make it work. (it's a lot better, of course, if both are working together, with this same mindset) To say it another way, whoever you marry is God's will, or becomes God's will. > You saw quite a bit of the seminary "dating" life. I liked your commentary > on it. In fact, already, I've talked to 2 different guys who have similar > stories- dating a woman for quite some time and are still unsure whether or > not to marry the woman. To me, indecision probably means "no." But I never > really saw it as waiting for a better deal to come along. That's sad. Right! As Dr. Laura would say, indecision means NO. :) (I listen to her radio talk show lots!) How did you interpret the lack of decision or commitment? Of course, I'm not saying all delays were waiting for a better deal, but some of it seemed to be. > What are your thoughts on DTRs? Is it okay for the woman to initiate one? > How "honest" should one be? (in other words, why should I lay out all of my > feelings if he does not reciprocate?- but then again, honesty implies a risk > to be hurt as well) Where is the balance between waiting on God and taking > matters into my own hands? Since one of my core beliefs (I'll send you my list of beliefs, if I haven't done so already) is egalitarian relationships, either party in a cross-gender relationship can initiate a DTR. How honest and how much you divulge will take your discernment, as to how your relationship can take it, how much honesty & openness has been fostered in the relationship, and discerning as you start the DTR to see if there's room for dialogue & negotiation... and if the DTR doesn't go well, and say you were the one with the feelings, then you'll need to be mature enough to transition to the "normal" relationship, go to God and same-gender friends for healing. The balance between waiting on God and initiative is one of those things.. no simple answer, and I don't like simple answers.. if your personal tendency is passive, initiative is often more required; if your personal tendency is aggressive, waiting on God is often more required.. how's that? :) DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 00:11:42 -0500 Okay, I'll try not to "break" my head over your theory. :) But to tell you the truth, reading your e-mail truly makes me think. There's always something in there that just strikes out and I have to sit back and re-evaluate my own stance on certain issues. Thanks for the stimulating e-mails! And what we've been talking about correlates really closely to what God has been teaching me as well so within this past week, I've striven for more honesty in my present relationships- meaning, I have actually talked open and honestly in my "cross-gender" friendships. ;) Now, what I hope to do is to do the same with one of my girlfriends- that's a little trickier.... Could you clarify some more on what you mean by "fulfills my emotional needs." You explained it some- but I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Also, in talking about "who you marry IS God's will"- would that mean that whichever guy that I'm willing to be committed to (and who fits the criteria of your list) would be God's will? But what if (this is hypothetical) there are several pretty decent choices out there- how would you know which one? You just choose and trust God? How did I interpret the indecision or lack of commitment? For some guys, I think it's because they're honestly "not ready" for a relationship (but many seem to get into one anyways). Another part may be fear. Fear of being "known." Fear of failure. Fear of choosing poorly. It could be anything. But I just know when I hear the guy say that he's not sure whether he's going to marry his girlfriend (and they've been dating quite some time)- that just sends up a big, red flag. It makes me wonder how these women must be feeling. I know that I probably would have quit the relationship quite some time ago. Why waste the time? I've heard it said that you can tell in about 6 months of dating (some say 3) intensively whether or not you're going to marry that person. When I was younger, I used to think, "I have to date AT LEAST two years and then AT LEAST a year-long engagement." I'm beginning to think otherwise. :) One girlfriend told me that it was best to have a quick engagement (however long it takes to plan a wedding). I liked your answer on the balance between taking the initiative and waiting on God. I figured that was the answer. :p I tend to be passive- so sometimes I'm waiting for that huge neon sign that says "GO THIS WAY" or "DO THIS" or for the finger of God to nudge me in a certain direction but that seldom happens- so I'm left feeling anxious and wanting to wait and pray- wait and pray (which is good, too but there's a balance). Fear definitely immobilizes you from acting in faith and obedience. Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:39:29 On 28 Jan 97 at 0:11, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > Okay, I'll try not to "break" my head over your theory. :) But to tell you > the truth, reading your e-mail truly makes me think. I'm glad they've been thought provoking; I do take life a bit more seriously than the average joe, because its the only one I got, and I'll be answering for it before the Lord one day, so I try my best.. (but then again, I'm ready to go any time.. it would be much better to be with the Lord than to be here.. :) ) Now as I strive for honesty in all things, and confess to you that this is a recent development in me only in the past 5 years or so (and I'm 30 yrs old now), I've found it valuable and the Lord has honored it.. guess one of the attributes of God is truth & honesty :) > Could you clarify some more on what you mean by "fulfills my emotional > needs." You explained it some- but I'm not sure exactly what you mean. For me this means that my emotional & sexual needs have to be met in my wife (or a spousem, generically), because getting emotionally & romantically (and sexually) involved with someone outside of marriage is wrong before God. I speak of this in the marriage sense, and in the context of courtship (I prefer this word over "dating"), there is some room to foster emotions and romance, but not the fullness of it, which must be reserved for marriage. So in this concept, marriage for me does have to have an emotional component, because that's the only place one can legitimately meet it.. I can't have an emotionally close cross-gender relationship once married because that 1) risks temptation toward romance and lust and adultery, 2) I'd be depriving emotional intimacy with my wife. Some may feel they need to have "love" or "passion" in a marriage, and without love or passion, marriage would be miserable.. I would tend to agree, but I don't use the words "in love" or passion, because those are fleeting.. I choose the word "emotion", because emotion can be fostered with anyone.. (this is a corollary to my concept- that I can be attracted to anyone of the opposite gender; I don't have to checklist against 7 C's as B__ [jokingly] does; women are simply and plainly attractive to me, that's how I'm wired, and I'm honest with that). This is to say that when someone says that they don't feel passion with their spouse, my response would tend to be: well, you can, and you will if you want to.. you might not have passion all the time, but you can certainly have it some of the time if you want to. I'm not sure how much more I can explain this, that's about all I can say about it; perhaps if you have some questions about this concept, that would clarify my explanation some more? > Also, in talking about "who you marry IS God's will"- would that mean that > whichever guy that I'm willing to be committed to (and who fits the criteria > of your list) would be God's will? But what if (this is hypothetical) there > are several pretty decent choices out there- how would you know which one? > You just choose and trust God? Right, whoever you're willing to commit to, and whoever is willing to commit to you, thus a mutual commitment, can be God's will. There are indeed many decent choices.. and when given that, you just choose one, and the way it works, it's the one that chooses you too :) We really have freedom in this, and the sovereignty of God is a far greater factor in all of this than we'd imagine or try to figure out.. The thing of it is, if you pick the "wrong" person, and get married, are you then permanently outside of God's will? I'd have to say, no, because that marriage then automatically becomes God's will, because God's will is for two flesh to become one, and marriage is that. Done deal, do your best with it, and honor each other before the Lord. Along the traditional theory of "the one", if you marry the wrong one, you not only mess up 2 lives, yours and his, but you mess up many lives ad nauseum, because you married out of God's will, he married out of God's will, and the person that you were supposed to marry is out of God's will, and the person he was supposed to marry is out of God's will, and there's no reconciling it! What dread! :) > How did I interpret the indecision or lack of commitment? For some guys, I > think it's because they're honestly "not ready" for a relationship (but many > seem to get into one anyways). Then at least have the courtesy to not get into one, and not go on misleading dear sisters (brothers).. that's what I would say (now).. > Another part may be fear. Fear of being "known." Fear of failure. Fear > of choosing poorly. It could be anything. Sure, we all are human, and have some aspects of fear.. but let's grow up, let's be mature, let's strive for maturity.. I know in counseling, there are so many immature people, and so many that are afraid of being known.. wouldn't it all be a better world if people would just be honest?? > beginning to think otherwise. :) One girlfriend told me that it was best > to have a quick engagement (however long it takes to plan a wedding). Well, hmmmm... I'm still for longer courtships.. but the engagement portion I suppose should be shorter in duration, as in planning the wedding; and this implies that engagement is not taken lightly. Longer courtship I would expect supposedly 1 or 2 years (of "dating", to use those words) in order to see the potential spouse in a variety of contexts, and hopefully within that time, to see your skills in conflict resolution and dialogue and dreaming and planning together.. I find 3 to 6 month courtships to be unfair, too driven by emotion (which leaves out reason and wisdom), and also if one can know in that short of a time, then that couple is probably isolating themselves from healthy group interaction with others. And yes, you read it right, I'm not for isolated coupling, which tends to be needed for high-maintenance couples. That brings up another aspect of courtship/marital relationships.. each person has a certain level of maintenance, or emotional needs.. high maintenance people need to have lots of "couple time" to do things together and be alone, and they tend to be goopy and gooshy and mushy (and sometimes extreme ones are velcronians- they can't function apart from their partner); and low maintenance people don't need so much "couple time", and they function quite normally in group situations while not neglecting each other. Rachelle and I are the latter (if you can't tell), and what's hard on a relationship is if a couple is mismatched (1 hi-maint, 1 lo-maint), b/c one would feel smothered while the other feels neglected.. both should be on the same level.. and then for the high-maint couple, they have to be humble enough to say that they aren't able to serve God much, b/c they need each other too much; and they need time for God to work on them before they try to serve in ministry, or else they'll get frustrated with ministry robbing their personal time, or they'll do poor quality ministry. (more food for your thought) DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:07:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: high vs. low maint. relationships DJ, I've been talking a lot about honesty lately with several of my girlfriends. It seems that they are all in these "relationships" where the guy (by his silence or actions) is acting in ways that are very confusing. Before, I would have advised, "Don't say anything. Let him initiate the DTR. Pray. Wait. If he doesn't say anything, then just accept and go on with your life." During these past years and especially in these past few months, I am beginning to think that honesty pre-empts the male/female initiative thing. What are we trying to hide? It's just frustrating sometimes because I want to shake these guys up and ask them if they realize what they are doing to my girlfriends?! I do believe there's a time and place for waiting- but there's also a time to let our guards down and be honest with one another. I've been praying that God will give me the right attitude and motivation in talking with one of my friends. It's time to be honest and I'd like to deal with our core struggle/issue. There can be no real reconciliation until the source of the quarrel is taken away. (something I read recently in Dr. Pyne's soteriology notes) So in the "ideal" cross-gender relationship, would you say emotional closeness is a part of that or should it be something "reserved" for cross-gender *romantic* relationships? I totally agree with you on not having emotionally closs cross-gender relationships once married. Thank you for your honesty in admitting the attractiveness of women (even after one is married). Would you say that physical attraction must play a part in deciding who is to be your spouse? What if he met every quality but I'm not "attracted" to him? Is "spark" important? Also, what about vision? Is it important that two potential mates have the same vision? I've heard complaints from DTS guys that the DTS women seem "too set" in their ways and accomplishing their own vision, rather than opening themselves up to other possibilities. Someone has always said that you "marry the man, not his vision." I agree with that because a man's vision could change. However, hypothetically, if I know straight off that this particular guy wants to work on the mission field in Africa but that my heart lays with the Asian-American family in the local church- wouldn't it be unwise for me to start a relationship? (it would be different if I was willing to go to Africa though and God could always change my heart) Yes, I remember someone's elaborate sketch of marrying the wrong "one" (following the traditional model) and how it messes everyone else up ad nauseum. I've always believed in "the one", but I'm changing my thinking to believe that whomever I marry will be "the one". Okay, DJ, how would you explain all the quick courtships that have been occurring? I think it has left many questions in many people's minds how two people can decide so quickly that they want to get married. Could there be other factors as well (besides the "driven by emotion")? If I remember correctly, studies have shown that the couples who stay together longer or those who dated for a longer period of time. I agree with you wholeheartedly in the high-maintenance and low-maintenance relationships. I've seen so many couples mismatched on this area. I liked your term- velcronians. EW! I tend to stay away from those people- it always makes me feel so uncomfortable. I really wish I could have seen you and Rachelle more and how the two of you functioned in a group, but I do see that you fall into the latter group. It is encouraging to see a couple who exudes Christ in their relationship with one another and also, who is able to function in groups as well. That's what I strive for in any future romantic relationship- a partner in ministry. I don't know if you got a chance to really know my brother but the way we minister together is what I'm aiming for. The teens are able to see our relationship in action and how close we are (this is a plus especially in a church with many single parent families). He's very gifted and we complement each other very well.(he is more of the leader, I'm more of the administrator and we're both relational- in different ways) In fact, his running joke is that I need to marry someone like him. :) Another couple that comes to mind is my brother's fellowship advisor and wife. I haven't seen them together but from what I've heard, they minister beautifully together. I find it sad that God's work is affected so much when there's a mismatched couple---- the teens pick up on that type of thing very easily. Is it possible for a high-maintenance couple to become low-maintenance? What would it take? On an unrelated note, just yesterday, one of the teens was asking me if it was a "counselor thing" for us to keep so "mum" about our personal *potentially romantic* relationships. :) Christine -- End -- From: Self Subject: personal maintenance levels Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:57:51 On 31 Jan 97 at 2:07, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > It seems that they are all in these "relationships" where the guy (by his > silence or actions) is acting in ways that are very confusing. And that's the thing, relationships shouldn't cause and add to confusion, particularly among Christians.. we should be able to be mature, to relate fairly and peacefully.. God is not a God of confusion, why should Christians struggle so badly and so emotionally in confusing cross-gender relationships? For some people, they say that this "confusion" is just part of the chemistry and the romance, but I think that's got its risks, and is not healthy overall. Now on the initiative issue, I think it is the guy that should take initiative, as demonstration of male servant-leadership, which is a precursor to how it would be in the marriage relationship, that if there is romantic interest, the guy should initiate (and get rejected :) ).. but when things are getting confusing, and guys are dragging their feet, I think the woman has a responsibility to clear the confusion. Of course, timing is important. Tact is important. Ignorance and hiding, not so much. (can you tell I enjoy Mad About You?) The thing about cross-gender relationships is that mixed signals can go both ways.. some girls unintentionally send signals to guys, just as some guys send signals to girls.. all the more reason to be clear in communication and honest in relationships. Each person has different backgrounds and different signals, and that has to be ironed out in relationships, rather than thrown into the nebulous mix of so called romantic confusion. > So in the "ideal" cross-gender relationship, would you say emotional > closeness is a part of that or should it be something "reserved" for > cross-gender *romantic* relationships? In the platonic cross-gender relationship, emotional closeness is proportional to personal closeness and depth of a relationship, I would say, but the point is, it has to be kept in check. When emotional closeness borders on romance, the parties in the relationship have to honest and come to the table for that DTR, to reaffirm the bounds and lines, and reaffirm the relationship (or transition into a courtship). > Would you say that physical attraction must play a part in deciding who is > to be your spouse? What if he met every quality but I'm not "attracted" to > him? Is "spark" important? Also, what about vision? Is it > important that two potential mates have the same vision? I've heard > complaints from DTS guys that the DTS women seem "too set" in their ways Physical attraction, "spark", "chemistry", "attracted" are a personal decision.. I can't make a call on it, but for me, it's not as important as commitment [remember, I'm attracted to a lot of women of all kinds :) ]. Commitment is the only thing that has to be there.. the problem on this arena is that some people define their "attractiveness" too narrow- as if they have to have Miss Chinatown (or Mr. Chinatown) for a spouse, and the "average looking" wo/man is just not good enough for them. On the vision thing, some guys are too set in their way for God (perhaps thru the woman) to mold and shape him, it goes both ways.. there should be a similarity of spiritual goal, in the sense that there must be spiritual harmony, that's why Christian must marry Christian, but outside of that, the woman will probably need to submit to the man's vision.. like someone says, marry the man, not the vision.. if you marry a vision, you'll be personally disappointed (because that would say to me that the man may neglect the family and wife.. work and ministry over romance and family). Now if that's the kind of marriage one can live with, and some women can, more power to them :) > Okay, DJ, how would you explain all the quick courtships that have been > occurring? I think it has left many questions in many people's minds how > two people can decide so quickly that they want to get married. Could there > be other factors as well (besides the "driven by emotion")? If I remember > correctly, studies have shown that the couples who stay together longer or > those who dated for a longer period of time. I can't think of too many other reasons than "emotionally driven" (or sexually driven) for the hasty courtships & romances.. it's mostly chemistry and mostly sparks.. the only other "minor" factors that might come into play is a matter of timing perhaps, say, if both are finishing school and are looking to move on in life, would get married soon after graduation, move to their workplace together... start new life together.. again, if 2 people can courtship so quickly, they're 1) neglecting other relationships in order to know each other, 2) probably high-maintenance types, 3) less likely to be accountable to others as a couple. > It is encouraging to see a couple who exudes Christ in their relationship > with one another and also, who is able to function in groups as well. > That's what I strive for in any future romantic relationship- a partner in > ministry. : > In fact, his running joke is that I need to marry someone like him. :) And you'll be tested on how well you hold that 'conviction', so in your potential romances, be sure to voice your desire of healthy group interaction along with healthy romance in the couplehood. And you know what, there's a lot of truth to that- you might very much need to marry someone like your brother!! :) (isn't there studies that say people tend to marry someone like their opposite-gender parent anyways?) > Is it possible for a high-maintenance couple to become low-maintenance? > What would it take? The straightforward answer to that is yes, it is within the realm of possibility, and the way to transition from hi-maint to a more low-maint is to put one's security and trust in God. The hi-maint person needs to learn that their needs are already met in God, and they can be independent and be a blessing to others and not just to their spouse; not take so much and to give out more.. that can only comes from feeling secure in God first and more completely. [the psychology of the hi-maint person is this- that they feel neglected, feel needy, enjoy couple alone time so much more than other people, feel jealousy if spouse interacts with others... so basically hi-maint may be being too needy] Now it'll take a lot of time to get close enough to a hi-maint person to say this truth to them, and perhaps more time for the truth to sink in, and hopefully motivate them to change and grow thru it. The thing is, tho', there's no optimal "maintenance" level, God did create each person unique, so to be hi-maint isn't a sin, but it could foster sinful tendencies (that of neglecting other people outside of the couplehood). The latter, sinful behavior, is what one needs to guard against. DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 23:58:07 -0500 (EST) DJ, In a message dated 97-01-31 14:08:37 EST, you write: >Now on the initiative issue, I think it is the guy that should take >initiative, as demonstration of male servant-leadership, which is a precursor >to how it would be in the marriage relationship, that if there is romantic >interest, the guy should initiate (and get rejected :) ).. but when things Okay, I'm thinking even more now. Are you saying that in relationships where things are confusing (and the guy is dragging his feet) - then it's okay for the woman to initiate a DTR; however, if things in a cross-gender relationship are okay-- and the guy hasn't overtly demonstrated any romantic inclinations- then the woman should not initiate a DTR (she should just assume that the guy is not interested?). If I remember- in a previous e-mail, you mentioned how it didn't matter whether or not a man or woman initiated the DTR- am I talking about 2 different things now? My personal experience in "reading" signals is to make the assumption that the guy is just that way with everyone- rather than to single myself out as "special." This has gotten me into some trouble when I'm the last one to figure out that a guy is interested. On my part, I realize that I do this to "protect" myself from getting my expectations up only to be disappointed when they are not realized. I think I'd rather err on this side rather than to think that every signal is an "I'm interested in you" signal. :) I think that attraction is different for each person. I may be attracted by physical looks [to admit that I'm not is to go against human nature :) ], but more often, I am attracted when I see a man "after God's own heart." One who truly loves the Lord and desires to follow Him wholeheartedly. >marry the man, not the vision.. if you marry a vision, you'll be personally >disappointed (because that would say to me that the man may neglect the >family and wife.. work and ministry over romance and family). Now if that's Good point. I think I will definitely be tested in my convictions over the years. It's almost easier to talk about it in theory than to put into practice. I find it much easier to apply to my friends' situations rather than my own- I have more objectivity then. Our adult group at P__ have had discussions on relationships in the past and they've always been rather interesting. What will be even more interesting is the fact that for 2 "fellowship meetings" in February, we plan on listening to Tommy Nelson's "Song of Solomon" teachings (just the first 2 tapes). I'm sure that will spur even more discussion- problem is that no one seems to be as interested in this (at least not outwardly) as I am. Actually, my professor says that we tend to marry someone most like the parent that we've had the most unresolved conflict with (a slight twist on the "marry a person most similar to your opposite-gender parent"). It's interesting because when my brother first started dating his current girlfriend, I asked who was she like (out of all the people we knew) and he remarked that she was similar to me. Christine -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 01:40:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: Risk DJ, In a message dated 97-02-03 16:35:30 EST, you write: >You're following very very closely... :) um, guess i'm not clearly consistent >here.. I think that confusion is reason for either gender to initiate DTR, however, in >romance, the man should initiate. So if a guy is interested in gal, guy > shouldinitiate DTR What's the difference between a "romance" (where the guy ought to initiate) and a potential cross-gender relationships crossing over to romance (where either party can initiate a DTR)? To be more specific, if there was a cross-gender friendship and there are possible feelings on both sides, then according to your views, it would be okay for the woman to intiate a DTR? The woman, then, would have to be willing to lay out her feelings on the line and risk the guy not returning those feelings and still be willing and committed to just friendship. Am I applying this correctly? :) So, how does one keep from giving off signals? Or should we commit ourselves to not "reading" signals. :) Ooo! It frustrates me that part of the Asian mentality is that hardly anything is "outward." We have to maintain "face." Bleah. I was listening to the first tape of Nelson's Song of Solomon series tonight (to make sure it would be okay for fellowship) and I was just thinking that perhaps some of the group might think it's too "risque." (e.g. the frank talk about sexuality). :p I'm fine with it, but I'm not sure others are. I will be praying for the 'volatile' church situation that you face there. "Funny thing" is that I believe that our church is going to cross some pretty rough waters as well-- I would appreciate your prayers, too. It seems that it is only at the crucial times that things like this tend to happen. I feel hopeful though that God will see us through this time. Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 10:00:57 On 4 Feb 97 at 1:40, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > What's the difference between a "romance" (where the guy ought to initiate) > and a potential cross-gender relationships crossing over to romance (where > either party can initiate a DTR)? Direct romance skips the cross-gender friendship, but friendship that transitions to romance has already established a good foundation of communication and mutual commitment, and my feeling is that things would go better in the latter than the former. Rachelle and I were in the latter. (your "application" is right; anyone who initiates will risk that rejection) > So, how does one keep from giving off signals? Or should we commit > ourselves to not "reading" signals. :) Beats me.. certainly don't read into things that aren't there! yeah, and.. give off fewer signals :) ; I often put on my "game face" here at church, it really messes up people that need a lot of body language in order to interact.. I always thought flirting was a fun thing to do, and I still like to do it (!), but as a Christian now, I'm not sure I can do it with a clear conscience :( I'm going to compile my responses in our conversation to pass along to a few others, that have just begun their journey of wrestling with this stuff.. I don't suppose you would be comfortable putting our dialogue into a "novel", but I'm okay with my part of the responses being compiled and posted "public". DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 02:41:52 -0500 (EST) DJ, I think that at last, we are talking on the same wavelength! Not that we weren't before, but I feel that we are clicking on this cross-gender relationship thing-- and I could apply it correctly too!!! (yes, it holds special significance for me since I'm pondering the status of some of my cross-gender relationships) I'm glad for the distinction between strict romance and the cross-gender friendship-- I've always thought two people ought to be friends first before crossing over into the romantic realm. But how does one keep oneself from giving off signals? :) Is it just innate? Honestly, I feel that I'm being very neutral but to some guys, I'm like a beacon that says, "come!" Can I help that? So- what are your views on flirting and what exactly constitutes flirting (versus friendliness or kidding one another)? I think a lot of people would benefit from what you've been sharing with me. In fact, I've shared quite a bit of your views with some of my girlfriends. Once you do compile your responses, would you mind e-mailing a copy to me? (so I could pass on to some of my friends who might be in a state of confusion regarding relationships) Honestly, I would be very comfortable with putting our dialogue into a "novel" - I've always enjoyed writing: problem is-- I didn't keep a copy of most of my e-mails to you though. :p [though I do have the snippets that you copied out and pasted into your responses] So- if my portion of the dialogue can be of any use- go ahead and use it. I don't think I said anything too risque. :) Christine -- End -- From: Self Subject: Flirting Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:26:22 On 6 Feb 97 at 2:41, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > But how does one keep oneself from giving off signals? :) Is it just > innate? Maybe you're more attractive than you think!! :) Some people read into every little thing, some people may be attracted to you just because you're a girl! How about that for basic sexuality!? :) Thirdly, I think people can take signals and non-signals any way they want to, that is, they're going to see what they're going to see. If you say "hi", they could take it to mean, maybe there's potential here; if you DON'T say "hi", they could take it as you're-playing-hard-to-get-because-they-saw-you-looking-away. it's sorta sickening and fun at the same time?! :) > So- what are your views on flirting and what exactly constitutes flirting > (versus friendliness or kidding one another)? Ahem.. *blush*.. um.. I thought I closed discussion on this topic already, when I said "as a Christian I can't do it with a clear conscience any more".. flirting is a bit more than friendliness, or kidding.. it's more of a worldly thing that guys and gals do, sorta more along the lines of smiling a certain way, a glance, some touch, some giggles.. (don't you ever watch Oprah when they have the flirting experts, teach others how to flirt??) *this is embarrassing for a pastor to talk about* *LOL* I'm forwarding to you a copy of my portion of messages that I've sent out to you; feel free to forward it to others freely. If we can help some people to be more secure in Christ (those hi-maint people), and promote more honest relationships, praise the Lord!! DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 19:12:36 -0500 (EST) Subject: Basic sexuality DJ, I liked that simple yet profound comment on basic sexuality. :) It reminded me of a talk I once had with someone in which I was making some comment about how I never imagined a Christian guy would have such a lack of self control! He commented that all guys think a certain way- that some are just more self-controlled than others. Oh- sorry for bringing up the closed topic of flirting. ;) When you say it's a worldly thing, do you not think that Christians do it (unwittingly at times) as well? It's interesting that we will talk about sexuality but not about what flirting is exactly. Yes, I don't want to embarrass a pastor. :) LOL I have already forwarded some of what you've said about relationships to one of my girlfriends who is about to have a DTR this weekend. :) And I've talked with another girlfriend about your views- she had a semi-DTR last weekend and is probably going to try to clarify this weekend. What makes me so angry is the fact that these guys will not assume any responsibility for how they are treating these women! Sometimes, I just want to go up to them and shake them up! [of course, I would do no such thing but I feel like doing that] And the *excuses* my friends come up with for rationalizing his behavior: "Oh...he's just not good at communicating." "He's just really busy now." I was sharing in class how it's difficult for women now because men are not fulfilling their God-given role of leading and initiating. So some women wait whereas others take the reins and start leading! Okay, I'm finished with my little speech- I'll get off of the band box now. :) Do you think it's rational to *know* even before a person asks you out whether you want to go out with the person or not? (it's a given that the person is a Christian and growing in the Lord) I've been accused in the past of "shooting the guys down before they get close." Some have advised me to at least go out with the guy once- then turn him down for other dates. But I think if I already know deep down that he's not right- then why not turn him down on the first date rather than give him a false hope? What are your views on this? Here's something else too: if a guy friend of yours was interested in a girl, but the girl wasn't interested in him and it turns out that *you* are interested in this girl---> would you ask her out? (or would you defer out of respect for your friend?) This is a classic question. Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 12:20:00 On 6 Feb 97 at 19:12, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > Oh- sorry for bringing up the closed topic of flirting. ;) When you say > it's a worldly thing, do you not think that Christians do it (unwittingly at > times) as well? It's interesting that we will talk about sexuality but not > about what flirting is exactly. I think the best of flirters wouldn't be able to give you an exact definition.. everyone has their own style, and each with their own motivations and motives too. In the conservative evangelical context, they tend to portray "flirting" as a "worldly" thing, so I've weened myself off of the habit.. not to say that I was any good at it, but I still do think it's a fun thing and fun part of life and gender bantering.. and for the so-called less-mature more-worldly Christians, sure they would do it! :) Have you ever been on online chats? Flirters do the *wink* and *hug* and some even go on to *kiss* and *holding hands* and other innocent stuff.... (distinct from cybersex, which is very very bad). > so angry is the fact that these guys will not assume any responsibility for > how they are treating these women! There you go.. and of course, it goes Both Ways.. cornerstones of my personal theory is commitment, honesty, and responsibility. (you really ought to find Dr. Laura on talk radio there in Dallas... you'll see some of what I'm talking about!) > Do you think it's rational to *know* even before a person asks you out > whether you want to go out with the person or not? : > I think if I already know deep down that he's not right- then why not turn > him down on the first date rather than give him a false hope? What are your > views on this? Sure it's possible to know that a person is one that you won't marry.. and you're entitled to your reasoning (IF not a person I could possibly marry, THEN no date). But I think dating in the sense of going out one-on-one for an isolated event (dinner, movie) can be done in a healthy cross-gender friendship manner; but dating in the sense of establishing and exploring a cross-gender romance should be reserved for genuine potential marriage. This second sense may be termed courtship. Dating is also a very fuzzy term, like flirting :) Of course, a healthy cross-gender friendship presumes a mutual understanding of my relationship theory :) > Here's something else too: if a guy friend of yours was interested in a > girl, but the girl wasn't interested in him and it turns out that *you* are > interested in this girl---> would you ask her out? (or would you defer out > of respect for your friend?) This is a classic question. First come first serve? :) I haven't thought about this, the 2 guys interested in 1 girl, or mismatched interest, other than that this is the messy part of relational dynamics in a group (which is fostered in Christian fellowship groups which haven't addressed these things in a healthy manner-- read that as, they haven't addressed it at all, so there's tons of second guessing). I vaguely recall someone's method of the 2nd guy asking permission from the 1st guy... but in your scenario, how do you know that the girl would be interested in the 2nd guy? Does this girl who wasn't interested in the 1st guy make it clear to the 1st guy, or obliges to the first guy for a date (but inwardly regretting the decision), or would she go out with 1st guy, and then 2nd guy next week, since she doesn't have a "steady" dating relationship, or she only goes out with guys that she's interested in? (you see how messy this gets!) DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 01:03:52 -0500 (EST) More distinctions. Is gender-bantering different from flirting? Are jokes considered flirting? What about teasing? I did use online chats quite intensely for one week during college but I realized it was addictive so I stopped using the service. :) Actually, Dr. Laura will be in Dallas (don't know when) to give a seminar I think. I'll see if I can find out what radio station she is on. She's on TV as well, right? I remember seeing her. Also, the Dallas Morning News prints her column every Thursday. BTW, Larry Crabb will be in Dallas in March to give a seminar on the "Power of Connection" His focus is more on the "healing potential of true community." (i.e. the local church) I printed out your relationship e-mail and am planning on giving it to a girlfriend of mine. I'm interested to hear her reaction to your views. :) Oops! Let me clarify the situation and I'll be a little more concrete: Guy A and Guy B are friends. Let's say that Guy A is interested in me and Guy B knows about this.. However, I am not interested in Guy A at all (and I have told him so). I'm interested in Guy B and I sense that he's interested in me as well. If Guy B came to you for advice about what to do, would you advise him to not pursue anything with me out of respect for Guy A's feelings? It is confusing, is it not? I'm dying to ask you another scenario question but I think I better think about it first before asking. Because it's something I'm in the middle of right now. :p [and I would like a male perspective on it] Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 09:59:19 On 11 Feb 97 at 1:03, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > More distinctions. Is gender-bantering different from flirting? Are jokes > considered flirting? What about teasing? Flirting is a personal style thing, (and thus opens one to confusion and misunderstanding), but all of the above you mentioned could be part of one's repertoire of flirting. :) > Actually, Dr. Laura will be in Dallas (don't know when) to give a seminar I > think. I'll see if I can find out what radio station she is on. She's on > TV as well, right? I think I've heard that she's been on some TV interviews, but don't know of a TV show of her own.. she's #2 in national popularity as far as talk shows go, Rush Limbaugh is still #1. > Oops! Let me clarify the situation and I'll be a little more concrete: Guy > A and Guy B are friends. Let's say that Guy A is interested in me and Guy B > knows about this.. However, I am not interested in Guy A at all (and I > have told him so). I'm interested in Guy B and I sense that he's interested > in me as well. If Guy B came to you for advice about what to do, would you > advise him to not pursue anything with me out of respect for Guy A's > feelings? It is confusing, is it not? Not too confusing, I mentioned a possibility along these lines, didn't I? Let's try it again.. Guy A likes Girl 1. Girl 1 doesn't like Guy A. Guy B is friends with Guy A. Guy B maybe likes Girl 1. Girl 1 maybe likes Guy B. What should Guy B do? (your question) But you also need to ask 2 other questions: What should Guy A do? What should Girl 1 do? In all maturity, ideally, Guy A should relinquish his feelings upon Girl 1's clear disinterest. Girl 1 is freed from any obligation, no obligation was established in the first place. Guy A has no right to hold onto a non-relationship, though he may have feelings and wishes, but it's not happening in reality, grow up, let hurts be healed, let God move. Guy A should honor his friendship with Guy B, regardless of what happens with Girl 1. Guy A should rejoice with Guy B and Girl 1 working out, allegedly. Guy B can ask for Guy A's blessing and support as he takes initiative toward Girl 1, in order to honor their friendship. In reality, Guy A and Guy B can both competitively court the favor of Girl 1. Girl 1 may be indecisive, and let the 2 guys duke it out, compete it out, and the better courter wins her favor, Guy A and Guy B lose their friendship, so be it. :) But this would be dishonoring to Christ, in my opinion. > I'm dying to ask you another scenario question but I think I better think > about it first before asking. Because it's something I'm in the middle of > right now. :p [and I would like a male perspective on it] Think about it if you'd like; or just voice it and we'll hash it out together, either way if fine with me. I'm comfortable with either :) don't know about you :) But the problem is, with my perspective, it's not a distinctly male perspective.. I don't fit very well with typical male thinking!! (can't you tell by my relational theory??) DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 00:01:22 -0500 (EST) Hmmm...good answer to the hypothetical situation. Too bad that it doesn't always work out that way. It seems that guys who are in Guy A's position tend to "stake out territory" and tell all the other guys to stay away from Girl 1. And it's frustrating for Girl 1 because she doesn't really have a choice; she's not interested in Guy A but his "interest" is blocking other guys from acting. :p How about physical boundaries in a relationship? In a romantic relationship, should they be "set" at the beginning or should it be an understood thing? Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 13:46:58 On 12 Feb 97 at 0:01, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > Hmmm...good answer to the hypothetical situation. Too bad that it doesn't > always work out that way. It seems that guys who are in Guy A's position > tend to "stake out territory" and tell all the other guys to stay away from > Girl 1. And it's frustrating for Girl 1 because she doesn't really have a > choice; she's not interested in Guy A but his "interest" is blocking other > guys from acting. :p The thing is, what you described is not so hypothetical, and it is actually quite common in real life. :( To go hard-nose at it, if Guy A is so selfish and immature (in wanting to stake territory), then his feelings deserve to be hurt! Girl 1 needs to have courage to be open to other guys! And others (Guy B, Guy C) act in more mature manners than his. > How about physical boundaries in a relationship? In a romantic > relationship, should they be "set" at the beginning or should it be an > understood thing? It may not have to be set right at the very beginning, but it does need to set early in the romance; the truth is that it ISN'T an understood thing, a guy may enjoy lip-to-lip kissing and close hugging, or mouth-to-mouth kissing, but the girl may need to keep a more modest boundary, or vice versa. Both need to have honesty before emotions get too involved, in order to maintain purity in their relationship. Believe you me it's all too easy to get physical and sexually active. DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 02:07:11 -0500 (EST) To: djchuang@ix.netcom.com Subject: Impressions DJ, So- do you have a repertoire of "personal quotes?" :) You shared one in your last e-mail- I was wondering if you have any more? I just handed a good friend of mine your e-mail on relationships-- we're going to discuss your views on our way to Houston this weekend. I'll let you know if we come up with some more questions... Well, tonight's study was quite interesting. We did the second tape in Tommy Nelson's series on Song of Solomon. After we finished listening, K__ and L__ get into this detailed discussion on the text and were so engrossed in it- that I really felt that they missed the whole entire point!! But they did get off of that and we began to speak practically. Y__ and I were taking turns espousing our views on how men should take the initative, etc.... and K__ and L__ were talking about how women need to indicate to the men their interest, etc...[which is difficult when you come across men who are clueless]. When asked how a woman could convey interest, the most concrete answer K__ could come up with was : warm vibes. We had a good laugh about that. :) My question to you is (and you knew this was coming, right?): how did you know Rachelle was interested in you? How did you convey interest in her? (based on your relationship theory, you straight out told her right?) The feeling I got tonight was that a little bit of guessing is okay rather than to come straight out and say, "Hey- I'm interested." :p You have a nonsensical side as well as a subtle humorous side. :) There's some irony in what you say, but you also say things as they are. No cutting corners or beating around the bush. I respect that. I've been so used to having friends tell me what I want to hear- rather than what I *need* to hear. I've had to learn in the past few years how to handle the "sharpening" that came from friends. Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 10:08:08 On 27 Feb 97 at 2:07, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > So- do you have a repertoire of "personal quotes?" :) Yes I do, I call it my personal beliefs; I'm sending it to you in a separate message... just checked my outgoing mailbox.. had already sent it to you about a month ago, in a message titled "My Beliefs". But I re-sent it.. > My question to you is (and you knew this was coming, right?): how did > you know Rachelle was interested in you? How did you convey interest in > her? (based on your relationship theory, you straight out told her right?) I didn't know off the top, I just knew we had a good solid cross-gender friendship.. several of my friends had egged me on about her, but I was committed to a healthy cross-gender friendship from the very beginning and was committed to that; but when my feelings were more "real", I told her straight out, and I think the chronology was that she (with her intuition) saw it coming, and backed away in our friendship, citing that she needed more equidistance in her relationships, and I reaffirmed my commitment to the friendship, and she really appreciated that; although it took me a few days (I think it was no more than a week) to let the feelings subside.. tho' of course, one of them will give you another spin on this.. and the evidence of my feelings subsiding is that I started being enamoured with another gal, with whom I had no cross-gender friendship, just all out desirous romance, and that messed me up for a number of months, and Rachelle knew about it.. I don't know the time frame, I would guess at least 6 months later, Rachelle was on her way out to California "for good" and on our parting dinner and evening, we both expressed our openness to God's will and openness to explore our mutual interest.. the rest of the relationship developed over long distance email.. and it was a 2 year courtship, culminating with our wedding on Apr 30 '95. DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 17:02:41 -0500 (EST) It just took you a few days (no more than a week) to let your feelings about Rachelle (after that first talk) to subside?!?! Most guys stew over that for quite some time. You mentioned someone giving another spin on it-- how did he see it? Or do I need to ask him myself? What was the transition point of cross-gender friendship to desiring a romantic cross-gender relationship? In other words, when did your feelings change from "just friends" to wanting something more than that? And this second romantic relationship that "messed you up for a couple of months"- was it because it wasn't based first on a cross-gender friendship? Or were you rebounding from Rachelle's initial desire to just remain friends with you? Also, would you recommend long-distance relationships/courtships to others? (or would you say that your courtship was an exception) Christine -- End -- From: Self Subject: food for thoughts Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:00:28 it's such a stark contrast to talk with a non-Christian, honest with life and where they're at.. Christians often seem to be "wearing masks".. > It just took you a few days (no more than a week) to let your feelings about > Rachelle (after that first talk) to subside?!?! Most guys stew over that > for quite some time. You mentioned someone giving another spin on it-- how > did he see it? Or do I need to ask him myself? About a week.. my feelings were just that.. feelings.. I don't want to entertain feelings for that long, or to have had brooded on them for such a long time that they're like a big fantasy and dreamy romance, that they're so intense that I can't let it go.. now granted, you can't control feelings, but you can control your behavior.. so for me, given a closed door and lack of reciprocation, I had to choose to let it go, and to move on.. I'm no master of feelings, mind you, but in this particular instance, I recognized and reaffirmed my commitment to the cross-gender friendship, and was not going to stew over my feelings which would jeopardize the real foundation of the relationship, which ever way it was leading.. you may ask him about it, I'd guess he'd say that I never lost those feelings (evidence being that I _did_ marry her later), or that I had mopey feelings for a month or two longer.. but the thing is, I always have mopey feelings!!! :) > What was the transition point of cross-gender friendship to desiring a > romantic cross-gender relationship? In other words, when did your feelings > change from "just friends" to wanting something more than that? That's sort of intangible, but when the transition point came, for me, I was honest with them, owned up to it, and brought it to the table for discussion.. when my feelings changed and developed, and checking it wasn't just fleeting one-day-here-and-one-day-gone type of feeling, I brought it up.. > And this second romantic relationship that "messed you up for a couple of > months"- was it because it wasn't based first on a cross-gender friendship? Well.. it wasn't based on a cross-gender friendship; and the feelings were more romantic off the top, and I just had a harder time shaking feelings on this one.. and I would guess it was harder to shake because there wasn't a committed friendship to uphold, so it was more a all-or-nothing romantic fantasy.. > Also, would you recommend long-distance relationships/courtships to others? > (or would you say that your courtship was an exception) I would say that a courtship can be done short-distance or long-distance, I wouldn't so much recommend one over the other.. it's a simple matter of counting the cost, and knowing how each partner is able to handle the relational growth process... long distance relationship probably work easier for low-maint people; hi-maint people can prob only do short-distance courtship.. there's advantanges and disadvantages to both, of course; so count the costs, and be honest before each other.. advantage of long-dist relat is that you're more involved in verbal communication, and have less temptation aroused by being near each other and the PDA stuff (public display of affection, and private ones too). I have to wonder how many short-dist long-term courtships become impure because sexual arousal can be checked only for so long.. DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 22:12:56 -0500 (EST) Wow, DJ- I'm amazed by your ability to control your behavior so as to not let the feelings take over. If I were in a similar position, I can picture myself getting all mopey for a long period of time. My tendency is to fake others out (i.e. pretend things are okay) and then to get all upset and sad on the inside. Not the most healthy thing to do- so I'm learning to express my feelings in a more beneficial and honest way. I think I am almost finished with my "being angry" phase. (in dealing with my present situation). How important is "being with the person" (i.e. physical presence) in developing a good, healthy romantic relationship? There are benefits as you pointed out to maintaining just verbal contact, but aren't there things you learn about a person just from seeing them and being around them? And here's another can of worms to open: how can a non-married person (single or dating) keep a "check" on sexual temptations? In discussing Song of Solomon, K_ and L_ seemed to think that the woman was portrayed as having all these *passions* and the man as some sedate sort of guy. (at least in the first 2 or 3 chapters) ;) Christine -- End -- From: Self Subject: controlled Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 14:54:42 On 3 Mar 97 at 22:12, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > Wow, DJ- I'm amazed by your ability to control your behavior so as to not > let the feelings take over. If I were in a similar position, I can picture > myself getting all mopey for a long period of time. My tendency is to fake > others out (i.e. pretend things are okay) Well, in this particular case, I controlled my emotions well, but like I said, it wasn't as overwhelming as the infatuation that followed, when I didn't control my feelings so well, so that's the only reason that it was more manageable.. now I am also mopey, have a strong proclivity towards those genre of feelings, so I am mopey whether due to unrequited love (is that what they call it?) or just the normal daily grind of life.. :) now being driven on honesty and truth, I refuse to "fake others out" or "pretend things are okay", when things aren't okay, I'm not going to hide it because of my relentless desire for honesty. (and this, this, is where I get into the problems with other people's perception and impression of me :) esp. when they expect a smiley face regardless of circumstances) > How important is "being with the person" (i.e. physical presence) in > developing a good, healthy romantic relationship? There are benefits as you > pointed out to maintaining just verbal contact, but aren't there things you > learn about a person just from seeing them and being around them? In my relational theory :) physical presence isn't so important toward developing a good romance; this is to play off the theme of movies like "Sleepless in Seattle" and "One Fine Day" (we just saw the latter yesterday).. there are things you can learn from being around a person, certainly, but if people are honest, they can be learned without physical presence.. for me, non-verbal communication is unreliable, although in communication theory, non-verbals account for 60% or more of what is actually communicated, but what is intended and substantive still needs to be verbal.. of course, this is not to be taken to extreme, where no physical presence is factored into the courtship; but then again, arranged marriages do happen, and many of those have worked okay.. arranged marriages are a case-in-point for relationships built only on commitment (or vow).. > here's another can of worms to open: how can a non-married person (single > or dating) keep a "check" on sexual temptations? In discussing Song of > Solomon, K__ and L__ seemed to think that the woman was portrayed as > having all these *passions* and the man as some sedate sort of guy. Maybe a can of worms, but here's the same question asked another way-- how can a married person keep a "check" on sexual temptation? The thing of it is, _regardless_ of marital or courtship status, one has to keep a check on sexual temptation! I know the struggle is the same, or at least very similar, on both sides of the fence, for me... perhaps I'm honest with my struggles here, and can't imagine one who doesn't have such struggles, and for those that don't, those are the sedated men. :) How does one respond sexual temptation? That's the typical workshop at CLR or CCR, right? :) Flee temptation, resist the devil, stay out of tempting situations, use the 12-inch rule if it helps, quote 1 Cor 10:13, blah blah blah, blah.. DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 17:24:44 -0500 (EST) DJ In a message dated 97-03-04 15:52:31 EST, you write: >How does one respond sexual temptation? That's the typical workshop at CLR or >CCR, right? :) Flee temptation, resist the devil, stay out of tempting >situations, use the 12-inch rule if it helps, quote 1 Cor 10:13, blah blah >blah, blah.. I've never been to CLR or CCR. :) I've been having a really good conversation with a friend about physical attraction- why it is that you can get along really well with some people (but have no notion of wanting to be more than friends) whereas others there is "chemistry." Are there any factors in determining chemistry? I'm learning to be more honest with where I'm at in regards to others. What makes it difficult is trying to balance honesty and tact when teens ask how I am. Before, I would have said nothing-- now, I will admit to having struggles but also say that I'm not at liberty to divulge details (especially if it affects other people at church). Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 17:21:16 On 5 Mar 97 at 17:24, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > conversation with a friend about physical attraction- why it is that you can > get along really well with some people (but have no notion of wanting to be > more than friends) whereas others there is "chemistry." Are there any > factors in determining chemistry? Chemistry depends on the individual; for me, for example, I have physical attraction toward a lot more people (esp. of the opposite gender), so to me, they have broad appeal.. no pun intended.. but for some others, they're only attracted to certain characteristics or certain personalities or whatever.. for me, I don't hold a big "chemistry" parameter for my friendship neither; the problem is that other people have this big "chemistry" hang up about how to befriend others and to let others into their lives.. for some, I have heard, it's just a feeling or intution.. for others it's shared interests.. or similarities, or same age, or same ethnicity, or personality.. et al. > I'm learning to be more honest with where I'm at in regards to others. What > makes it difficult is trying to balance honesty and tact when teens ask how > I am. Before, I would have said nothing-- now, I will admit to having > struggles but also say that I'm not at liberty to divulge details honesty with feelings doesn't mean having to divulge details; i was going to say there wasn't so much a tension between honesty and tact.. but then thought of Z__, and his good old hearty honesty, and how sometimes it comes across "hurting feelings", tho' that is far from his intent.. um, well, maybe there is a mix of honesty and tact... and prob should add timing and wording.. it's good that you can share some feelings now, because when I grew up as a young Christian, I got this picture of Christians having to say everything is okay all the time, and wear a big smile all the time, and that just seemed to me to be so unreal and "fake".. when I finally found some real Christians with real struggles and real feelings, it freed me up to be real with myself and my God.. DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 22:18:33 -0500 (EST) Subject: Chemistry Well, our adult group got into a huge discussion last night about attraction. The guys were quite vocal- I was amazed. :) They were telling us that we were analyzing it too much, and that "sparks" just happen. Anyhow, the question came up about mission and mate. Should a woman's burden/vision be taken into consideration when choosing a potential mate? For example, especially if the two have different "missions." It's interesting because as I look back, most of the "chemistry" I feel towards particular guys is usually for those who aren't "good" for me. (i.e. non-Christians, irresponsible Christians, etc...) Maybe there's a little truth to the belief that women aren't necessarily looking for Mr. "Nice". Christine -- End -- From: Self Subject: open door Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 15:20:04 On 6 Mar 97 at 22:18, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > Well, our adult group got into a huge discussion last night about > attraction. The guys were quite vocal- I was amazed. :) : > For example, especially if the two have different "missions." I thought we already talked about this one :) that's so great that people are opening up there to talk about these things.. I'll be the first to admit that I have done my homework and analyzed some things, mostly because people aren't honest to begin wth :)... it's too simplistic (you can tell them that! *grin*) to just think sparks happen.. sure sparks happen, but when sparks happen, does that make it right? Nosirreeeeebob, I still have sparks as a married man, and every one of those sparks is wrong in God's eyes, right? > It's interesting because as I look back, most of the "chemistry" I feel > towards particular guys is usually for those who aren't "good" for me. (i.e. > non-Christians, irresponsible Christians, etc...) Maybe there's a little > truth to the belief that women aren't necessarily looking for Mr. "Nice". Depends on the woman.. some do look for a good one, some are looking for other things like sparks and chemistry :) I won't elaborate further :) there's a myth out there that the church guys (or girls) are boring and uninteresting or whatever like that.. uh huh.. DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 02:05:00 -0500 (EST) Subject: push and pull DJ, I think we have effectively exhausted the topic of relationships (at least for now). No new questions or ponderings have popped up so I will give this topic a rest (for a little bit). :) Christine -- End -- From: Self Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 16:48:52 On 12 Mar 97 at 2:05, CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: > I think we have effectively exhausted the topic of relationships (at > least for now). No new questions or ponderings have popped up so I will > give this topic a rest (for a little bit). :) I'm glad we gave it all our best! :) I hear Y_ wants to get into it a little bit now.. :) Rachelle is getting into some conversations too :) DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 18:59:51 -0500 (EST) Yes, Y__ and I have always talked about relationships quite a bit but Rachelle's latest e-mail will keep us talking for even longer! I think I need some time to go back and absorb your relationship theory again and then I'll probably have some more questions or comments. How would you advise singles to approach relationships? Would it be different advice for men? women? When you first approached Rachelle about your feelings and she didn't reciprocate at the time, did it occur in the back of your mind that perhaps it would eventually work out? Did you have "hope" that it would? How can one "affirm" commitment to a cross-gender relationship when one party is clearly uncomfortable by the other party's "liking" them? Christine -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 22:38:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: relationship sequel DJ, If a guy does not "initiate romance"- does this mean he isn't interested? Also, what are the signals a guy gives to indicate his interest? (how could Rachelle tell that your feelings for her had changed? from friendship -----> romance) Christine -- End -- Subj: relationship sequel III Date: 97-03-17 21:48:31 EST From: djchuang@ix.netcom.com (DJ Chuang) CBeanie1@aol.com wrote: >If a guy does not "initiate romance"- does this mean he isn't interested? there are many possiblity, but that certainly is one of 'em.. let me see what I can think of: 1. not interested; 2. can't decide (interested in more than one); 3. don't have the courage; 4. don't want to risk rejection; 5. afraid of commitment; 6. other priorities; 7. doesn't know how [but this is a cop out answer]; 8. too passive; 9. wants the girl to initiate (bad theology :) ); 10. thinks he's not good enough for her; 11. thinks Guy #2 is interested already :) see, how important communication is? and how bad it is to read into things too much? :) >Also, what are the signals a guy gives to indicate his interest? (how could > Rachelle tell that your feelings for her had changed? from friendship -> > romance) There are no standards or conventions about signals, that's the whole _problem_ with non-verbal communication; I prefer and rely on verbal communication much more... Rachelle told me her feelings changed, when it changed.. or actually, a little while after it changed.. and after she had consulted with some others about her change in feelings.. when she told me about the change, it was on the night of, when she was heading to California, so it became a matter of prayer and long distance communications... DJ -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 00:35:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: relationship sequel IIIa DJ, Good list of possible reasons why a guy might not initiate romance. Gave me quite some food for thought.(chew...chew...) It really is too bad that there isn't more open communication between men and women. Then there would be less room for reading (or misreading) verbals and non-verbals. Christine -- End -- From: CBeanie1@aol.com Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 02:14:03 -0400 (EDT) Let's say a woman was interested in a guy and they've been "friends" for awhile. He has not shown any romantic inclination or taken any initiative to be more than friends. Would it be unwise for the woman to share how she feels with the guy? (should she interpret his lack of initiative and silence as his not being interested) I'd appreciate your thoughts on this matter. Thanks. Christine -- End -- From: Self Subject: conversations Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 10:08:02 -0500 about your question, well, it may be unwise to share based on 2 factors- 1) timing, 2) if the friendship cannot sustain such a discussion in the open. I'm not sure how to interpret this guy's silence; to help one get a better read on it (again, not reliable, but a possible guess) is to understand the guy's character, does he communicate in a silent manner as such, esp. with regard to his romantic feelings.. b/c if he's somewhat open about his feelings toward others, or open about his relationships in general, the silence would _tend to_ connote lack of interest, but again, no guarantee until the dreaded DTR. DJ -- End -- POSTLOGUE: The conversation concluded in April, and we're both amazed at the length and depth and breadth of our dialogue. Rachelle and DJ are married, and now have a new baby boy Jeremiah (http://members.aol.com/jerryboy97/).