Shared publicly  - 
 
HIM: Where are you?
ME: I once knew a man who asked me that all the time.
HIM: What happened to him?
ME: I divorced him.
93
2
A.V. Flox's profile photoBenjamin Rice's profile photoCamilla Slotfeldt's profile photoBrandon Partridge's profile photo
90 comments
 
That certainly sets the tone of a conversation. I guess the tone of the question does it really.
 
I know this feel, boy do I ever. There is a thing like too much, unfortunately.
A.V. Flox
+
1
2
3
2
 
+Mark Kremer, I am thoughtful -- I don't want people to worry. But there is wanting to know and then there is that sort of entitlement with regard to everything about you and the constant, unspoken suggestion that you are failing as a human being because you're not with a person, entertaining them. It makes me insane.
A.V. Flox
+
1
0
1
0
 
+Dede Craig King, I'm with +Mark Kremer on this, though -- it's in the context, the how something is asked. I don't mind sharing coordinates (in fact, I think it's safest to do that), but the notion that all your information belongs by right to someone else? Next. 
 
+A.V. Flox, that's what I thought. Some people seem to think that marriage or a steady relationship is some form of ownership... weirdness.
 
I had a discussion yesterday with one of the other teamleads - he was asking if I used the 'find your friends' app on my phone.
I don't - i find stuff like that borderline stalkerish. But he said he and his wife used it and loved being able to see where the other one was... he said it was most useful when he was late home from work - she could see that he was on the way, and not at the pub.
It still makes me feel icky.
But then - I expect punctuality from myself and others. If I'm running late I will let you know - and it drives me nuts when others don't do that.
 
+A.V. Flox I'm of the same mind. I always consider context, character, motivation etc, but yep, exactly as you said, the 'how' matters just as much.
 
+Kristin Milton my wife and I tried using something like that, it didn't work that well on the technological side though (as in: it was inaccurate or did not function most of the time). If it would work properly I would share my location with my wife (and she would with me) like that in an instant because of its practical benefits. The important aspect here is trust, and I trust her completely (we've been together for over a decade, so the trust has had a long time to grow).
 
::sigh:: Yet another in a long line of Posts Christina Should Not Read While Eating. 
 
I think location sharing that is automatic should only be between folks who would never say "none of your business" - spouses that are trusting and of course the kids. That said, I'd never use it against someone unless I asked if the data was wrong first. I have had instances of my kids showing up 40 miles away from where they really are.
 
+Mary Rysdale that's what I mean with unreliable, it kind of defeats the point of having it.
 
I can't help but think that the "him" in your conversation here clearly knew what your answer was going to be regarding the man :)
 
+A.V. Flox is better if I ask "Where are you....more important are you having fun?"
 
Any clever sort will see that +A.V. Flox resides in a quantum potentiality, and therefore doesn't "belong" in any particular place. This makes her ex's inquiry both trivial and nonsensical 

I've encountered AV on multiple occasions. (Actually, this may have been a trick of the quantum state; it may have been a single encounter that I've placed in multiple time slices in an attempt to contextualize the experience and save my sanity). 

Anyhow, during these rare encounters, I might say, "AV, you're so X" and find her suddenly Y. Then again, if I said, "AV, you're so Y," I'd find myself looking at an X version of AV, frowning as if to say, "You don't get me at all!" 

Or this may be a property of all women. The boys in the lab are still running the numbers, so I really don't have an answer yet.
 
+Ellis Booker So you're saying that encounters with +A.V. Flox require special rationalization in order to preserve your sanity?

Dammit, I knew it. +A.V. Flox is secretly an Elder God.

Ia! Ia!
 
An elder god?  Or just somebody who belongs on the Spaceship Bistromath?

(because the numbers dance on a waiter's pad in a restaurant, and the mathematics of all of that can make anything improbable, probable.)
 
+Yonatan Zunger If you've ever gone sky diving while taking a math test while doing shots of chilled vodka, it's a lot like that. 
 
Oh My! i had nearly the exact same exchange recently +A.V. Flox  which was too bad because I liked her. Unfortunately I've learned the hard way  that that particular question asked in the way that it was is the opening of Pandora's Box. The other unfortunate thing about it is that I'm a really open guy about where I am and what I'm up to. I don't have anything to hide, quite the contrary, I enjoy being open about that. But when there's that openness and still I get that question said that way? That's when it's time to head for the nearest exit.
 
+Ellis Booker, somehow, I don't think people's experiences with me match. It's part of the fun. 
 
+Fred Fifield, it's that tone. They say it's a feminine thing, this business of how things are said, but it's not. Tone betrays expectation and expectation is, more often than not, something thrust upon us instead of something we explicitly agree to. I refuse.

I'm very agreeable and capable of working with others -- but I must be notified of expectations and must agree to them. If they're thrown around my neck, I'll retreat immediately.
 
+Sonny Mikeal, not really. The question cheapens the sentiment expressed in regard to fun. Plus -- aren't you ever worried you might interrupt the fun? I'd rather hear about it later -- if the person wishes to share at all.
 
+Mark Kremer, oh, I learned from my marriage. This exchange happened with an acquaintance. 
 
I'm the same, +Kristin Milton. I appreciate the update when people are running late -- a personal update. Those apps are useful in emergencies, though, I wouldn't entirely write them off. And if both partners are okay with that level of constant knowledge, then, hey. Good for them. For me, though ... no.
 
+Mark Kremer, I do find something a little limiting and unpleasant about +Kristin Milton's retelling of the story -- "so she could see he was on the way, not at the pub." Why isn't he allowed to sometimes make a last-minute decision to go to the pub?

I'm calling my parents to ask them what they think, one moment. 
 
+Mary Rysdale, I'm okay with putting a tracker on my kids until they are able to defend themselves.
 
I think the only time I appreciate the question is when it's in the context of 'where are you?  This awesome thing is happening, right here, right now, and you totally need to be here and be part of it'
 
+A.V. Flox those were his words, not mine.
Well, actually, he said the pub, or Fyshwick, which is the light industrial area near our work where most of the red light stuff happens.
 
I've never been a fan of possessiveness. It wasn't fun when my parents did it, and it sure as hell isn't fun when a significant other does it. I knew one relationship was doomed when the girl flipped out because I wanted to take a walk completely by myself without texting or calling her while I was doing so. Secretly I had the ulterior motive of forcing some private time because she had a habit of demanding my free time be spent with her. She couldn't handle me not paying attention to her every chance I got. 
 
+A.V. Flox I pretty much agree with your sentiment. I would never tell anyone (or accept from another) that location sharing must be. When you share your location you share a very intimate piece of privacy, which must not be abused... or it could truly destroy your relationship.

My wife is my life partner. I am intent on spending the rest of my life with her, and she is one of the very few whom I trust with anything. This what makes me comfortable with sharing my location with her, I want her to be able to always find me.
 
That's enough to drive anyone crazy, +Douglas Wake. I find I can't have relationships or friendships with people who require a lot of stimulation. I'm an internal person and need a lot of time in my head (outside of the time I'm in there for work). If I can't have it because another person requires me for their general well-being ... well, that goes catastrophically wrong very fast.
 
So I called my father to ask what he does and this is what he he told me:

Your mother and I spent the first years of our relationship and our marriage in a dangerous country, so as a general rule we made a habit of telling one another where we were going to be. Not because we felt the need to know where our spouse was at all times to govern each other's lives and movements, approve or disapprove, but because we wanted one another to find us if something went wrong.

This was so instinctive that it's continued even now that we live in the U.S. Even now it's not a bad idea. If she is aware I'm playing futbol and I don't come home, she knows to check the hospital or police station! In all seriousness: It's a good practice, so long as you let your relationship have enough space where the request for such information doesn't feel like a mechanism of imprisonment.
 
If I don't trust you sufficiently to be where you say you are we probably shouldn't be together. If you don't trust me (especially as I've never broken that trust) you can officially GTFO. 
 
+A.V. Flox it can be, however it can also be endearing depending on the context (like a your date being nervous because they're insecure about whether you'll like the food they cooked). The type of insecurity that makes people possessive and obsessive is a definite turn-off.

I'm pretty sure everybody is insecure about something, just not everybody admits it to themselves or others... and a lot of people are good at hiding their insecurities.

I know I'm insecure about a couple of things in life, and I am fortunate enough to have a life partner to share these feelings with whom helps me overcome them.
 
+Mark Kremer, I don't know -- if you're unsure about whether I like something, why not ask me to collaborate on the decision? I do rather like people who take the initiative and show me new things, though. It's a great way to discover things! 
 
+A.V. Flox sometimes people want to surprise others, you can't ask to many questions without ruining a good surprise.
 
+A.V. Flox I do see your point though, any good relationship requires communication.
 
Why would you marry someone you didn't truly know or understand? 
 
+Stephen Wakefield life is rarely so simple. Many people may think they do and then find out they don't. Or perhaps the person they married changes...
 
You never really know who you're marrying unless they truly are a simpleton. Intelligent people are complex with complex motivations and behaviours. They will react differently as situations change. 
 
+John Poteet, and as they change themselves.We're not static beings, after all. Change will happen. The key is having a foundation that is sufficiently sturdy to hold a relationship steady, and sufficiently flexible to sway with the quakes. Basically, love shouldn't be a fortress, but an apartment building in Tokyo. ;)
 
+Mark Kremer, blind dates should allow the surprise be discovery of another human, not that plus a game of culinary Russian roulette. What if someone hates a food? Or is gluten intolerant? The surprise element is covered, take no chances! 
 
+A.V. Flox that's a good point, I hadn't considered that risk. When I was in the dating game those things weren't as common issues as they are now.
 
+Stephen Wakefield, I don't believe one ever truly knows someone else. I think the assumption that one does or that one just "understands" opens one up to misunderstanding, assumptions and creates a template where change isn't really an option. Surely if someone "knows" you, you're something that is static and unlikely to change. What happens when you do if not an outright betrayal of everything your partner thought s/he knew about you?

No, I don't want to marry someone who claims to know all of me or understand me. I do however, plan to marry one who knows that the less he pries, the more I'll give him. 
 
+Mark Kremer, I hail from L.A., so everyone has eating issues. Vegetarians, vegans, gluten-intolerance, dairy-intolerance, GMO-intolerance, organic-only ... it's become so complex that if you don't state your preferences outright, it's bound to become a nightmare. 
 
"...the less he pries, the more I'll give him." Good god, +A.V. Flox, you have such an interesting POV.  
 
+A.V. Flox I remember sitting in a coffee shop in LA (I can't remember the street) and was in awe at the sheer number of menu options that catered to every intolerance imaginable. I'm a white meat only eater, my sister in law refers to me as a chicketarian, but I can't imagine having that many food issues. Their RSVPs to parties must be quite the sight.
 
+Dede Craig King, yeah -- number one reason so many people do drink things. It's so much easier to manage.  
 
+Dede Craig King, I have a pretty non-L.A. diet. I tend to consume whatever is set before me with the exception of Mexican and fast food. I tend not to like sushi in the U.S., because it's filled with so many weird things (like cream cheese!). I'm very judgy of Thai food, too, because I grew up with the real thing. Until recently, I hated pizza but I have found some places that have really good pizza, so it's not a dealbreaker unless it's, I don't know, Pizza Hut or something obscene like that.

Buffets make me scrunch up my nose. I don't like the idea of people reaching into my future food. (And you'd best pray you've reached status of Really Good Friend before you try to grab some from my plate, because I will kill. I am very territorial.) I'm open to try all of the above, though, if the person I'm with believes it's worthwhile. With the exception of food-grabbing, unless you're my partner, +Jason Goldman or +Jessica Janson. ;) 
 
Best Practices for the Husbandry, Maintenance, and Conservation of Homo Floxiensis
 
How could you not mention escargot, +A.V. Flox? I'm crushed, truly. If you wanted me to go on a two-day bender in Vegas. Well, mission accomplished! <sob> 
 
+Jason Goldman, move over, Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands by Laura Schlessinger!  
 
I'm more L.A. in other ways. Like, what! Beaches and parks in the Bay don't have valet? HOW UNCIVILIZED IS THAT?!
 
I agree with you +A.V. Flox . Some people can express "care", but when you probe into hidden motives, you'll find a desire to control or manipulate.
 
I think if the intention is concern, particularly if the context is a dangerous place or an unexpected tardiness, it's acceptable, though phrasing that concern within the message helps make it clearer that it comes from a place of care rather than ownership.

On the other hand, I've found that people that have the most paranoid & possessive responses tend to be the ones that have the issues. It probably comes from self-reflection and super-imposing themselves into the other's situation.

The internal reasoning being something along the lines of:
"If I was working with someone that hot & staying late in the office all the time, I'd make a move & tap that shit."
therefore, that must be what my partner is doing. 
 
+John Fanavans, I don't know you well enough to comment and I am by no means a professional, but it sounds to me as though there is a level of insecurity in that behavior pattern and that's something that can only be addressed internally, not by finding people who are even less secure with whom to have casual relationships. 
 
I don't need to know everything about your day.  I'd love to hear what you want to share, but by no means do I want a blow by blow account.
It worries me when people think that's necessary to tell me.  Not least because the holes do become obvious.
 
+Kristin Milton, I had an ex who'd phone me and tell me everything he was doing at that precise moment in excruciating detail. Once we got in a fight because he'd called from the market and put me to sleep deliberating about three totally unremarkable American brands of marinara. Why, God, why.
 
+A.V. Flox Psycholgists will tell you people fall into one of five categories in terms of relationship interaction, from total co-dependents to Scandanavian extra aloof. You and your ex seem to fall into conflicting types.
 
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/583715?uid=3739256&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101594928711
 
http://family.jrank.org/pages/1113/Marital-Typologies-Using-Scientific-Methods-Create-Typologies.html
similar in principle to the first but with a different emphasis

On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Benjamin Rice <****@**> wrote:

>
> http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/583715?uid=3739256&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101594928711 >
>
 
these links apprximate what I was  descriding. undoubtedly it has changed since my courses, The gist of it is different people have different needs  emotionally for levels of interactivity with their partner. Matching conflicting types will always make for a struggle. If you like to see your partner at dinner time only but he is the type that calls 20 times a day and folllows you into the  bathroom  etc you have good potential for contention.does that help?
Add a comment...