Bit of a late reply. Oh well.
I'm going to be honest: I didn't anticipate that as a response. I sort of assumed that no one would be asking why guys weren't interested in them while simultaneously admitting to being spontaneously and frequently violent.
Let's say you have one of your fights, it was entirely mutual, and you both had a great time. The next day, you go out, and you look like you lost a UFC match. You've got plenty of visible bruises, and maybe people will be inexplicably nicer to you, ask you whether or not everything's okay in your love life. It's completely irrelevant whether or not he's got marks, too, because people will assume that he's abusive.
And I don't mean random people you pass on the street when you're together. I mean people that you/he might've known for years. Because people don't date everyone they've ever known, so they have no way of knowing whether or not the otherwise perfectly nice guy they work with beats his girlfriend when he gets pissed off.
So yeah. You can't get a steady boyfriend because you're dissatisfied if he isn't doing something every moral fiber of his being, not to mention societal imprinting, is screaming at him not to do.
That, and you also described yourself as 'outspoken,' which when paired with 'violent' usually just means 'loud.' So I guess I gave my bottom line near the start of this post: you are loud and violent, and even getting past that, most guys have nothing to gain and potentially everything to lose from indulging your wishes.
It's one thing to tell me, and it's another thing to show me. From what I saw, you didn't seem to, but I'll read the rest of the post and see if you show me otherwise.IrisEver said:No, I don't think I have a skewed idea at all. I know what assertive is, I know what aggressive is.
*facepalm*IrisEver said:No, I'm saying both outspoken and physically violent. I'm not confusing anything.
I'm going to be honest: I didn't anticipate that as a response. I sort of assumed that no one would be asking why guys weren't interested in them while simultaneously admitting to being spontaneously and frequently violent.
...well now. This is going somewhere horrifying.IrisEver said:Violent and aggressive. I never once described myself as assertive. You're the one who threw that word on me just now.
I thought 'aggressive' was meant to be 'assertive' because I didn't think it was possible for someone to post "I'm loud and violent, why don't people want to date me?" without any trolling intent.IrisEver said:I said it fine. I'm not jumping around. You're the one who made it seem so when you took my word 'aggressive' and replaced with with 'assertive'. If I meant 'assertive', I would have said 'assertive'.
I can be assertive also, however, but that's not what this thread is about.
The contents of a single sentence in a larger body can be very, very significant. It only takes one Holocaust denial to ruin an otherwise lovely dinner party, even if you were a picture of etiquette before and afterward.IrisEver said:There are many more sentences in this thread.
Not really, no. But when you "get a rise from it," that's sadism, for the same reasons why S&M isn't called a 'hobby' and building model planes isn't called a 'fetish.'IrisEver said:You seem to think that being aggressive and having a like for violent playfights is the same as being a sadist. I can understand where your confusion comes from, but it's not my problem.
Right...but I'm guessing that most people don't want that. And if you're constantly driving at it, they're going to be rather put off.IrisEver said:As long as "assaults" were something mutual, something expected, something wanted and with someone I trusted.. then why the heck wouldn't I? If I had a relationship dynamic like that with someone and I enjoyed it, then yes.
Okay, let me put it this way: for most people, physical violence is the opposite of romance. They don't want to brawl with their significant other for a variety of reasons, not the least of which being the social consequences.IrisEver said:If you mean "Would you enjoy being with someone who abuses you in ways you are not comfortable with in the least?" then no, I wouldnt like it. But that's also not what I'm talking about at all. To imply that this is what I'm talking about is to imply that I want someone to be terrified of me, that I want them to cower. If I wanted that, I wouldn't be bothered about finding a relationship with someone who had the same desires. I'd just go out and abuse some poor sap, and we wouldn't be discussing it on this thread.
Let's say you have one of your fights, it was entirely mutual, and you both had a great time. The next day, you go out, and you look like you lost a UFC match. You've got plenty of visible bruises, and maybe people will be inexplicably nicer to you, ask you whether or not everything's okay in your love life. It's completely irrelevant whether or not he's got marks, too, because people will assume that he's abusive.
And I don't mean random people you pass on the street when you're together. I mean people that you/he might've known for years. Because people don't date everyone they've ever known, so they have no way of knowing whether or not the otherwise perfectly nice guy they work with beats his girlfriend when he gets pissed off.
So yeah. You can't get a steady boyfriend because you're dissatisfied if he isn't doing something every moral fiber of his being, not to mention societal imprinting, is screaming at him not to do.
That, and you also described yourself as 'outspoken,' which when paired with 'violent' usually just means 'loud.' So I guess I gave my bottom line near the start of this post: you are loud and violent, and even getting past that, most guys have nothing to gain and potentially everything to lose from indulging your wishes.