NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/romance/16288

Text File | 1993-01-21 | 1.6 KB | 32 lines

Newsgroups: alt.romance
Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!bogus.sura.net!jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu!fmsrl7!lynx.unm.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!marcia
From: [e-mail] (Marcia)
Subject: Re: Taking SO's for granted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: The Dolphin Conspiracy, Phase II
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 03:29:30 GMT
Lines: 21

In article <[e-mail]> "Paul S. Hrynko" <[e-mail]> writes:
>I want to know what other AR's think of physical vs. emotional
>involvement...whether if the emotional ties are strong enough in a
>relationship, if a relationship more platonic or more physical with
>someone at school is possible.

It doesn't matter if the ties are strong enough: it matters what you have
agreed to with you SO as being the parameters of the relationship. If you've
agreed that you can be with other people, then fine. If not, that's fine.
So long as you BOTH know where you stand.

>If one relationship is meant to be, can another develop?

I don't believe in "meant to be". Relationships happen and grow and stay
strong because you want them to, because you believe in them, and because you
work at them. If you feel that more than one is right for you, then you
deal with that, and if not, you deal with that too.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcia Bednarcyk                                  ADDRESSES: [e-mail]
"Sweaty Snugglebunnies."                                     [e-mail]