Learning to Love Without the Hero Complex
Organisé par
Le Mouvement associatif
Public cible
Dating
Type d'événement
Réunion de travail
Description de l'évènement
Rediscovering Love on My Own Terms
Single Men Who Want More Women
Open Letter To Men Who Want More
For Men Who Love Poly Dating
Progressive Love Applauds Too $hort
Is Love the Most Feared Emotion?
Love Kills Self Love & Self Esteem
Are Nagging & Cheating Equally Damaging?
Why Do We Fall In Love? Is It Healthy?
Why Master Monogamy
Getting home was also a bit of an ordeal. Since I (understandably) didn’t want to sit on the seats in my car, I ended up getting a few plastic grocery bags that were on a table near where I was parked, spread them on my seats, and sat on them. I have no idea where these bags came from, who put them there, or what was in them before I sat on them. But, when you’re walking around with a half cup of diarrhea dripping down your leg, you’re not exactly in a place to be making rational decisions.
I didn’t really touch on this yesterday, but one of the more peculiar (and by “peculiar” I mean “ridiculous”) lines of thought permeating today’s prevailing professional sports narratives is the idea that, regardless of what a person accomplishes in their career, it’s practically meaningless unless he (or she) has at least one season where their team happens to be the team that wins the last game of the season.
While I do believe that a championship should be the ultimate goal for anyone playing any sport, the danger in believing that a ring validates everything while the lack of a ring makes everything invalid is that it makes us assign disingenuous characteristics so that people can fit our preconceived narratives. Since only “winners” win championships, anyone who wins one — regardless of how often their poor effort and/or attitude may have sabotaged their team’s success — automatically becomes a “winner,” and anyone who doesn’t win — regardless of their positive effort and/or attitude, is deemed a “loser.”
Anyway, this topic — whether the end always justifies the means — was addressed during MANifest last weekend, but in a much different context. Jermaine Spradley (“Mr. Spradley” from Single Black Male) brought up the point that pretty much every man currently in a happy relationship/marriage has left a trail of played, jilted, rejected, and hurt women in his wake. As Dave Hollister states in “One Woman Man”
I couldn’t care less about
Someone gettin’ hurt
I’ve done my share of dirt
But I done wised up
That these women feel a certain way isn’t always the man’s fault — shit, shit happens sometimes, and most relationships, even most good ones, end — but if a man’s path to matrimony/monogamy is filled with relationship casualties, does the end justify the means? Can he be called a “good” man if he did some “not-so-good things” before he decided to get good? What if doing the “not-so-good things” was the only way he would have even had the wherewithal to be “good?”
Single Men Who Want More Women
Open Letter To Men Who Want More
For Men Who Love Poly Dating
Progressive Love Applauds Too $hort
Is Love the Most Feared Emotion?
Love Kills Self Love & Self Esteem
Are Nagging & Cheating Equally Damaging?
Why Do We Fall In Love? Is It Healthy?
Why Master Monogamy
Getting home was also a bit of an ordeal. Since I (understandably) didn’t want to sit on the seats in my car, I ended up getting a few plastic grocery bags that were on a table near where I was parked, spread them on my seats, and sat on them. I have no idea where these bags came from, who put them there, or what was in them before I sat on them. But, when you’re walking around with a half cup of diarrhea dripping down your leg, you’re not exactly in a place to be making rational decisions.
I didn’t really touch on this yesterday, but one of the more peculiar (and by “peculiar” I mean “ridiculous”) lines of thought permeating today’s prevailing professional sports narratives is the idea that, regardless of what a person accomplishes in their career, it’s practically meaningless unless he (or she) has at least one season where their team happens to be the team that wins the last game of the season.
While I do believe that a championship should be the ultimate goal for anyone playing any sport, the danger in believing that a ring validates everything while the lack of a ring makes everything invalid is that it makes us assign disingenuous characteristics so that people can fit our preconceived narratives. Since only “winners” win championships, anyone who wins one — regardless of how often their poor effort and/or attitude may have sabotaged their team’s success — automatically becomes a “winner,” and anyone who doesn’t win — regardless of their positive effort and/or attitude, is deemed a “loser.”
Anyway, this topic — whether the end always justifies the means — was addressed during MANifest last weekend, but in a much different context. Jermaine Spradley (“Mr. Spradley” from Single Black Male) brought up the point that pretty much every man currently in a happy relationship/marriage has left a trail of played, jilted, rejected, and hurt women in his wake. As Dave Hollister states in “One Woman Man”
I couldn’t care less about
Someone gettin’ hurt
I’ve done my share of dirt
But I done wised up
That these women feel a certain way isn’t always the man’s fault — shit, shit happens sometimes, and most relationships, even most good ones, end — but if a man’s path to matrimony/monogamy is filled with relationship casualties, does the end justify the means? Can he be called a “good” man if he did some “not-so-good things” before he decided to get good? What if doing the “not-so-good things” was the only way he would have even had the wherewithal to be “good?”
Début de l'évènement
17.12.2022
Fin de l'évènement
20.12.2022
Lien Visio
http://google.com
Lien d'inscription
http://google.com