A Lump of Coal?

[The Gamer]

Rollo is on point here.

What I would do though is get the present to her but don't let her know who it's from at all. Just let her get a piece of coal and mabye then she might think about it on a introspective level like you want and not have the feeling of superiority that comes with knowing your still thinking about her. If you really want to send it I would consider this.

 

[Mr. Me]

True. But she already knows that. Other downsides?

Yes. That you'd enjoy doing something negative.

You're showing that you haven't enough self control.

You're showing that you are capable of acting immaturely.

It's not when things go well for us that we show what we are made of. It's when we're kicked around and beat up a bit and how we respond to that, that shows our metal as men.

well, I've been indifferent to her for a month, Rollo.

Indifferent means you really don't care. As in, "who?" "oh, her?" Like knowing there was a sweater you wore in third grade, but it's such a distant memory you don't think about it let alone wonder about it. You don't remember what color it was. You don't care whatever happened to it.

If you didn't have an emotional attachment still to her anymore, you certainly wouldn't be entertaining ideas about sending lumps of coal in anticipation of what her reaction would be.

You're also still venting in your posts about her. You're not indifferent. You know what it's really about?

I'm not letting this shlt go unanswered

This shows it's all about: your ego.

How dare she do this to me. Who does she think she is that she'll get away with this?

I'll show her.

 

[STR8UP]

I disagree. A lump of coal is not going to strike fear, or even shame, in her heart. She's done with this guy, she doesn't CARE if he thinks she's a slut; it's irrelevant because her interest in him is nil.

Guys just don't seem to get this concept.

"I'm gonna let her HAVE IT. I'll teach her!"

They say this about a woman who, in her mind, has placed you somewhere between pond scum and dog sh!t.

And they want to get REVENGE on this woman?

She's LONG since forgotten who you are and is busy sucking her co-worker's c0ck in between her girl power Sex in the City marathons with her girlfriends (who also hate you).

I know why you WANT to try to get under her skin, but I can't for the life of me understand how you could possibly think that it would have any effect other than causing her to disdain you even MORE, and giving her a feeling of superiority that she still holds power over someone she could care less about. And in my experience it makes ME feel like sh!t for just having handed her my last bit of dignity.

 

[cordoncordon]

Please for the love of all that is righteous DO NOT send her sh1t. Don't even spend another moment thinking about her.

Switch it around and lets say you dumped her and she sent you a lump of coal...what would you think about her and her mental state?

Exactly.

 

[guru1000]

Departed, how long did you date this girl before she dumped you?

 

[Atom Smasher]

Here is precisely what will happen if you send that coal: She will say to herself, "Omg, I certainly did the right thing dumping that loser." You will cement in her mind that you are a chump. You will also erode your own self-respect.

 

[KontrollerX]

"I've waited a month, and I'll wait more if necessary. but I'm not letting this shlt go unanswered, that is unacceptable"

Your coal idea is absolutely hilarious but yeah I agree with the others that it would just be laughed at with her girlfriends and it'd be a win for her and a loss for you and either come off as immature or just hilarious but in either case you'd remain a non issue to her and your intended message would not get through to her.

Now if you do want your message to get through to her replace coal with dog sh!t wrapped up nicely in a beautiful Christmas box addressed to her and now we're getting somewhere. :rock:

 

[thedeparted]

Four mo's Guru. I thought it was three but just checked a calendar.

Dog shlt. Well, see, I didn't want to be crass or mean. I just wanted to casually neg her. I mean, women at this point expect they'll NEVER be called on their shlt. We are all complicit in letting them do whatever they want to us and just turning the other cheek. They can stand you up, cheat on you, divorce you for profit, break your shlt, or even beat you up (I know cases of all of these things) and we are trained in the idea that doing nothing at all is the right response. To me, that is like a 1950's wife that gets beaten in silence. Unacceptable. I'm shocked how all of the guys here have internalized this wussy do-nothing response as "the right thing to do." We are all enablers of female malfeasance, imo.

But I'm not sending her anything now. Too much trouble and everybody thought it was stupid. I'll just bide my time and wait for a better opportunity to even the score. Good things come to those who wait...

 

[thedeparted]

P.S. I like your reading list Kontroller. Nietzsche and Dawkins in particular. If you want to start a review thread for those books I would be a contributer for sure. You seem like you have the intellect to keep up.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

"When a man steals your wife, there is no better revenge than to let him keep her."

 

[jophil28]

Although, there's another Christian tenet, "If your bretheren transgesses against you go to him and tell him.",

The whole quote can be found at Luke 17. 3,4

Jesus was talking to Luke about forgiveness and how he wanted people to practise it.
Depending on your version of scripture, Jesus said more fully, " If your brother sins against you , give him a REBUKE. If he repents, then you must forgive him...."

Jesus was laying out the procedure for simple resolution and forgiveness. Forgiveness was to be conditional, and was to be preceded by the victim protesting about the "sin" to the perpetrator and then IF the "sinner" repents and makes amends, forgiveness MUST follow.

IM not sure that modern women will co-operate with this plan when they screw up !!

AS for "turning the other cheek.."
This was meant to apply when someone physically struck you in anger or as a provocation/ challenge to fight to the death. Striking a man across his cheek was a challenge to engage in mortal combat. Turning the other cheek was an ultimate display of passive resistance.
Jesus recognized that and discouraged his followers from attacking their attacker in rage or revenge. He knew that it takes two to play the game of violence and if one refused to play the game is over, albeit fatally occasionally.
Self defense was permitted however.

 

[guru1000]

Four mo's Guru. I thought it was three but just checked a calendar.

Dog shlt. Well, see, I didn't want to be crass or mean. I just wanted to casually neg her. I mean, women at this point expect they'll NEVER be called on their shlt. We are all complicit in letting them do whatever they want to us and just turning the other cheek. They can stand you up, cheat on you, divorce you for profit, break your shlt, or even beat you up (I know cases of all of these things) and we are trained in the idea that doing nothing at all is the right response. To me, that is like a 1950's wife that gets beaten in silence. Unacceptable. I'm shocked how all of the guys here have internalized this wussy do-nothing response as "the right thing to do." We are all enablers of female malfeasance, imo.

But I'm not sending her anything now. Too much trouble and everybody thought it was stupid. I'll just bide my time and wait for a better opportunity to even the score. Good things come to those who wait...

Departed, one can make an argument that you should not be emotionally invested in a girl you dated for 4 months.

She left but I can assure you there was a time previous to her leaving that would have shown you the frame was damaged. It certainly wasn't a PERFECT 4 months of respectful behavior and out of the blue, she leaves.

Rather than taking revenge, take it as an awareness lesson. Next time the frame is compromised for whatever reason, WALK AWAY. You will NEVER be blindsided again but most importantly it will keep you in control of the CONTEXT.

 

[omkara]

Four mo's Guru. I thought it was three but just checked a calendar.

Dog shlt. Well, see, I didn't want to be crass or mean. I just wanted to casually neg her. I mean, women at this point expect they'll NEVER be called on their shlt. We are all complicit in letting them do whatever they want to us and just turning the other cheek. They can stand you up, cheat on you, divorce you for profit, break your shlt, or even beat you up (I know cases of all of these things) and we are trained in the idea that doing nothing at all is the right response. To me, that is like a 1950's wife that gets beaten in silence. Unacceptable. I'm shocked how all of the guys here have internalized this wussy do-nothing response as "the right thing to do." We are all enablers of female malfeasance, imo.

I had a girl recently that I met on the internet... she appeared to have a high IL but then we went on a date and two days later she sent me an email saying that she's seeing a bunch of other guys and she wanted to be exclusive with one of them. She didn't even give me the option to be friends. She was just like, good luck with your life. We actually got along really well on the date and seemed to have a lot in common, so I was kinda surprised. I also made the dumb move of focusing in on her and forgot about the other two chicks I was talking to, so when she said no I was left with no options.

So what I did was, I wrote her back right away and told her I was completely devastated. I figured that I had already lost her, so there was no point in trying to gain her favor in any way. By speaking honestly, I made her aware of the emotional toll that it takes on people to treat them as disposable decorations for one's own ego. Of course I probably lost a little dignity, at least in her eyes, for writing all that neurotic s*** that I wrote. But I felt that I just couldn't remain silent, and in this way I got to have some closure.

I know that it was "weak," and AFC, and would make her lose any attraction that she had for me. But I just didn't want to remain silent and let her think that she can do whatever she wants without any repercussions. So yeah, I kinda agree with what you said.

peace

 

[Mr. Me]

Yeah, I guess Gone With The Wind would've worked less wussy like if Rhett Butler gave a piece of dog sh1t to Scarlett O'Hara instead of telling her he didn't give a damn and walking out of her life.

It never would've occurred to them to do that back then, because that was an era when men acted like men.

From Wikipedia:

"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn." is a line from the 1939 film Gone with the Wind starring Clark Gable and Vivien Leigh...

The line is memorable not only because it contains a swear word (which was generally not allowed in films of that time period), but because it demonstrates that Rhett has finally given up on Scarlett and no longer cares what happens to her.

This quotation was voted the number one movie line of all time by the American Film Institute 2005.

Indifference has a very long lasting, strong effect.

I had a girl recently that I met on the internet... she appeared to have a high IL but then we went on a date and two days later she sent me an email saying that she's seeing a bunch of other guys and she wanted to be exclusive with one of them. She didn't even give me the option to be friends.

There's so much wrong in what you wrote I'll take it bit by bit, because it's a good textbook example of where guys need to work on.

The key word here is "appeared". Women can feign attraction and/or interest. It's almost like a survival mechanism for them. Rather then letting you know on the spot that she's not into you and possibly have some sort of altercation where you make a scene and/or get upset or angry, they play along and then disappear afterwards.

We actually got along really well on the date and seemed to have a lot in common

Again, either she played along or you're not good at reading women. I've observed guys talking merrily to women while the gal is looking around the room, looking at me, looking at her watch, yawning, looking away from him, turned slightly away from him, and he's in his own world chatting away a mile a minute not even aware that she's bored and not interested because every once in a while she'll answer him with a smile. So he's thinking: "she's talking to me, she likes me!"

So what I did was, I wrote her back right away and told her I was completely devastated

"Completely devastated" after one date. That's sad, I hate to say.

A had a female friend whose son recently disappeared. They found his body a month later. He had committed suicide. She was very strong and endured the tragedy, though she had her moments of weeping. She has another son in Iraq. Another son in a wheelchair paralyzed for life after a motorcycle accident. Save "devastation" for something more then just a stranger who doesn't want a second date.

By speaking honestly, I made her aware of the emotional toll that it takes on people to treat them as disposable decorations for one's own ego.

Sure, you taught her a lesson! She'll never do that again.

Actually you communicated no such thing to her. What you communicated to her is that you're insecure. And prone to anger. Nobody likes to be lectured to, especially by people you barely know, and especially by people you don't give two sh1ts about.

Of course I probably lost a little dignity, at least in her eyes, for writing all that neurotic s***

More then "probably". You know you sent her "neurotic s***". There's no two ways that losing dignity is a maybe. You only proved to her that she was right for not bothering with you again, and you lost dignity in your own eyes, because you can't hold your head up high when you know you're sending someone "neurotic s***".

But I felt that I just couldn't remain silent, and in this way I got to have some closure.

You "felt". You reacted to your feelings rather then having composure. And yes, you could've remained silent, it was your choice, unless you have absolutely no control over your actions, like a puppet on a string attached to your emotions.

I know that it was "weak," and AFC, and would make her lose any attraction that she had for me. But

No "buts". No excuses. Don't minimize your behavior. The important part in that sentence of yours is everything before the "but". Focus on "I know that it was "weak, and AFC" instead.

Also what you should focus on, is what your part was in her deciding that she didn't want a second date. A ruthless, honest self examination to determine how you may have turned her off. Chances are if you do things that you acknowledge as weak and chumpish, then in all probability you're conducting yourself on dates with those traits.

So yeah, I kinda agree with what you said.

You would, because in essence he wants to send "neurotic s***" too.

 

[thedeparted]

Show us by example, Mr. Gable... um, I mean, Mr. Me...

 

[reset]

Departed, one can make an argument that you should not be emotionally invested in a girl you dated for 4 months.

Damn I have a lot to learn. Are you guys made of steel or something?

 

[ketostix]

Yeah, I guess Gone With The Wind would've worked less wussy like if Rhett Butler gave a piece of dog sh1t to Scarlett O'Hara instead of telling her he didn't give a damn and walking out of her life.

It never would've occurred to them to do that back then, because that was an era when men acted like men.

Fair enough, but most people here were saying don't even tell her you don't give a damn-Just ignoring her, sort of like how a girl would do. That's not exactly how men acted in that era. Telling her you're indifferent and why doesn't make you any less indifferent. It just sends the message sooner and clearer.

 

[ketostix]

How does one get another a lump of coal for Christmas and successfully communicate that one is indifferent while doing it?

I didn't say sending a lump of coal was indifferent. It's an insult. But calmly telling someone you aren't interested (indifferent) in them BECAUSE of their behavior is indifference for all pratical purposes. Do you really want to communicate you are indifferent about how people TREAT you? That's called being a pushover. Of course getting irate or upset or showing that isn't indifference. There's a middle ground. We've been through this so many times but ignoring a girl doesn't necessarily communicate that you're indifferent and not mad either. The girl in Str8up's story assumed he was mad despite him not saying anything.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Indifference has a very long lasting, strong effect.

Amen.


It's unfortunate that most guys never appreciate the best tool in a DJ's toolbox - a woman's imagination.

 

[Mr. Me]

Damn I have a lot to learn. Are you guys made of steel or something?

Even when you're in a relationship, you're better off if you're not "emotionally attached". Let me explain:

First off, emotional attachment isn't about being loving or about having loving feelings for another person. Don't confuse the terms, those are completely different things.

Emotional attachment is when your sense of well-being is "attached" to another person's words or actions. It's when your happiness is dependent on the outcome of events beyond your control. And since you can only control yourself, your happiness is always completely out of your control when you're emotionally attached. Another person (or event) controls your happiness.

If you find yourself saying things that start with, "I'll be happy when (or if)... ", then you're emotionally attached.

You'll be happy when or if she says yes.
You'll be happy when or if you get that promotion.
You'll be happy when or if you graduate college.
You'll be happy when or if you buy that car.

You'll actually never be truly happy.

In a relationship, you can continue to be your own source of happiness by being "emotionally detached", which is about not being affected by what another person does. Sure, she can, people can and situations can influence your happiness to some degree, either plus or minus, but should she break the relationship, you wouldn't become a weeping pile of devastated man, crippled and traumatized, finding it difficult to cope, needing a therapist, needing to vent, because she couldn't take your happiness away as she will if you're emotionally attached to her and dependent on her to fill your happiness needs.

This is why the previous poster could feel "completely devastated" by someone not wanting to see him again. He was emotionally attached to the outcome over a near-perfect stranger. He rendered control of himself over to this near-perfect stranger. When the outcome wasn't in his favor, he had negative emotions over it. That's not good management of one's life.

Were he "emotionally detached", he wouldn't feel devastated. He'd still prefer that it worked out of course (and maybe he's lucky it didn't! Just ask Phil Hartman) but it wouldn't get to him, he wouldn't feel the need to let her know 'the emotional toll she takes on people', rather, he'd assign its proper place in his life, which is: it didn't work out. Too bad. Next. He gave himself that emotional toll, not her. She only triggered it in him, it was there already.

This is the "mature man's" forum. An immature man is dependent on others for his happiness, like a child is likewise dependent on his guardians, literally for his life. But when we grow up, and we're no longer children, we become independent, not needing anyone to provide for us, we provide for ourselves. We no longer fear abandonment because we can take care of ourselves.

Same goes for growing up emotionally. We can become emotionally mature, and in so doing, are not dependent on others for our happiness. Others only either enhance our happiness or dull it, in which case when it's the latter, we don't keep them in our lives. Again, we are responsible for the quality of our lives and our happiness.

Some guys mature in age but never regarding their emotional maturity, they remain childish and stuck.

Is this emotional maturity about being made of steel? Not really, but it does mean that you respect yourself enough so as to make the hard changes you need to make to grow up. It gets easier with practice.

Fair enough, but most people here were saying don't even tell her you don't give a damn-Just ignoring her, sort of like how a girl would do. That's not exactly how men acted in that era. Telling her you're indifferent and why doesn't make you any less indifferent. It just sends the message sooner and clearer.

True. Indifference would mean you probably wouldn't even bother telling her you're indifferent. Just like she shows she's indifferent by not ever calling again or seeing you again. That would be absolute indifference. In needing to send the message orally or written, the inferred message is that you still felt a need, but that need could be about ego repair or insecurity rather then indifference. So it's still not a good message to send because you're only proving that you're not quite emotionally healthy. Why do that? That is to say, an emotionally healthy person just wouldn't do it.

But being a movie, they had dialogue to clue the audience in knowing what's going on in the characters' minds. Even so, it had an impact on the public and it serves to make the point in this discussion about how powerful indifference is.

Walking out, or we could say, demonstrating indifference by one's ACTIONS, however, speaks volumes and sends the correct message: when you cross my boundaries, I'm out.