Your Perfect Mate

[paul]

Okay gang, Valentines day inspired me...if you are feeling brave, lets have some honest openness.

Describe your 'ideal' mate?

[Zerbie]

:l ove:
Bill.
:l ove:

[pnggrad79]

Well, knowing no one is perfect, let's just say I like someone who challenges me, who isn't all bent out of shape over my imperfections and someone who builds me up and makes me feel good about my imperfections. My wife is someone I was immediately attracted to because she is everything I am not. (except the female part)

I love her because even though we may fight sometimes, who doesn't, she loves me and I can look objectively at her and can honestly say I not only love her, but I admire her. She has a tremendous work ethic and determination and persistence that makes her want to succeed. She pursued me with that type of vigor and finally got me, which was a testament to her tenacity. She is also beautiful inside and out. She jumped in and decided to help me raise my two girls, when she could have just said, "Uh no thanks" and she has done a magnificent job of it. All I can say is "What's not to love?"

[Pablo Rafael]

The perfect mate? When I finally do find my "perfect" mate, he will probably be totally different, but from where I stand now:

1. Kind and sweet without malice towards anyone.
2. Non pretentious and without arrogance.
3. Honest and transparent.
4. A man with a strong Christian faith.
5. A person who just likes hanging out with me.
6. Who likes to touch (anyone up for a backrub?)
7. Smart who thinks for himself.
8. Willing to go off the prescribed path and challenge preconceptions.
9. Independent who will allow me some space.
10. Athletic and into mountain biking.

Please submit your resume via PM and I will get back with you.

[Zerbie]

Wayull, Paul probably had in mind that we discuss the qualities and traits that would make for an "ideal" partner, as PNG and Pabs did, rather than just type our partner's name, huh?

Reflecting back on things I considered and looked for before I met hubby, there were certain characteristics that seemed necessary for my partner to have, all but one of which my husband embodies:

strong sense of self - knowing who he/she is and being authentic to that person

confidence/strong personality - I can be assertive at times, and need to have a partner who can also be assertive when need be in order to match that. I noticed in my dating history that dates who were not very confident in themselves, their opinions, their talents, etc., tended to, errrr, dim the flame of passion and draw out non-sensual sides of my personality, whereas people who were unafraid to voice their ideas and opinions, stand their ground, and believed quietly in their talents and inherent 'awesomeness' tended to really turn me on. Purrrrr.
That's provided confidence and strength are expressed in balanced ways, that confidence in ability is based on *having* some skill or knowledge or other, and respecting, valuing the contributions of those around him/her.

caring, compassionate, loving, values living things - these traits are super-high on the list. They are more important to me than book-smarts or academic accomplishments/career acheivements, though as it turned out I ended up with a partner who possibly qualifies as 'genius.'

It's critical that a relationship teach us to better ourselves, to love our partner, love ourselves, and bring those increased strengths out into the larger world. A relationship that erodes one or both partners is causing harm to both participants and deprives the world of the potential wonders of love those two people could, in better circumstances, gift to the world outside.

religious item - seeing mostly eye-to-eye on the cosmic significance of life was really important, though not necessary as long as he/she would in every way support me in my pursuit of a more cosmic understanding. Ideally, my partner would participate with me in ways designed to teach both of us the deep significance of life.

I was open to a partner of any religion or none (having deep regard for atheists) as long as s/he would uphold mine. Hubby does not practice any particular religion in terms of church attendance or affiliation, though unlike me he was raised in one and is intimately familiar with the Bible and that church's traditions. DH has a worldview that I suppose could be described as universalist, tho funny, I never asked him if he would call it that way. I think he does still consider himself Christian. And he not only supports, but enjoys my appreciation of Sanskrit mantra and certain observances based on a Hindu tradition, and sometimes participates.

lifestyle - I thought I wanted someone who was into fitness, nutrition, being physically active (walking, hiking, biking, weight lifting, etc.) but as it turned out, my guy is not into fitness. The reason I rated it high on the list was I thought it would be a pursuit we could enjoy together, y'know, time off, let's go for a day-hike and bring the home-made trail mix sorta thing. But as it turns out, we have so many other things we enjoy doing together, (most of it work!!) that fitness and activity has ended up being something I mostly pursue on my own, or go to group classes and make friends outside the relationship. DH wants to sit at home and watch TV? Fine, I'll go to the community center, take a yoga class, hang around and chat with the gang.

LGBT equality and 'the bisexual question" - Obviously, whoever it was had to be cool with me being me, attractions to both sexes and all. Or it couldn't last 5 minutes.

If it wound up being a guy, which it did, he had to be in unreserved support of lesbian/gay equality, or it would mean he did not fully love and respect ME, too. Besides which, why would I want to hitch my stars to some person who believes that some loving couples are second-class, or that some persons are inferior based on inherent, value-neutral characteristics? Yuck! So of course he got the third degree about all this when we first started getting serious. I point blank asked him if he thought he would be comfortable spending the rest of his life with someone heavily invested in LGBT activism. Only a few years later, and he's on the radio interviewing with me on a progressive Christian show, about Soulforce and the 7 Straight Nights project!

career - I'm in such an atypical field of endeavor, it is immeasurably valuable to be married to someone in the field who knows its ins and outs intimately. What a blessing! We understand each other's time commitments at work, and while it sucks that sometimes we don't see much of each other, we know from the inside out exactly WHY sweetie is never home, and why when sweetie IS home, sweetie doesn't want to do anything but lie down. And hey, when we're working on a project *together,* life is never better.

[pnggrad79]

Well, my ideal mate is my beautiful wife. What can I say? She embodies everything I would like in a mate, in this imperfect world. I can't imagine my world without her in it.

If I did "settle" on her, imperfect as she is, why settle into a life with her and invest so much time, effort and love? The point is, as imperfect as we both are, she is perfectly imperfect for me! Does that make paradoxical sense?

[Daniel]

Paul- While you used the word 'perfect' in this thread title, one poster responded with another word: ideal.

I find this interesting, none-the-least for the fact that the two words are often interchanged. That said, I think there is a world of difference between them.

Perhaps I'm being a bit semantic about the matter, but as I (honestly ) see it, 'perfect' implies a beneficial connection between two parties that reflects not only an emotional response, but one that is reciprocal in nature.

Now. Whether the relative matters, such as how the toothpaste tube is squeezed, is something else entirely. You seem to be asking about characteristics, not actions.

The ideal person? That word gives me the willies. Why? Because the very word implies something, someone, set apart- on a pedestal as it were. Once put there, they always manage to disappoint, fall, crash and burn.

You've asked for honesty. Here's my story in short:

I've had three major relationships with men during my life. The first one was idealized in the sense that I hardly knew what I was getting into, much less who the other person really was, but imagined all sorts of things. But being young, gay and rather naive, I entered where Angels Fear to Tread. I made my mistakes. But I can also say that there were - in retrospect now- unseen benefits. Good things came out of that relationship, as painful as it was.

The second relationship was with a man who embodied everything I wanted and desired in a man: all my bells and whistles went off. Boy- was I in love with the sheer physicality of the guy! Was he in love with me? Good question. It lasted about two years until I got it through my head that commitment meant something different to him than it did to me. And of course, he might say I wasn't his perfect partner. So it goes both ways. When I gave up craving him, my current beloved materialized unexpectedly after a space of time- time spent sorting out my head and heart.

Now I've been with the my third beloved for a very long time- at least in gay years. There is a connection between us that to this day amazes and befuddles me. Why? Because- to be honest - what looks good on paper (what the mind can imagine and thinks it wants) isn't what can show up and knock one's socks off.

Perfect? I'm not sure what that looks like anymore, but I do know how it feels. We are perfect for each other in the sense that we have the same issues, challenges and joys to deal with- want to deal with. Mutuality is involved.

I think we compliment each other pretty damn well. That said, we've had to work hard at learning to communicate with each other ie- the dance of relationship. And that is something I'm proud of, considering that I grew up in a family which- relationally speaking- is hobbling on one leg.

What am I trying to say here? Perhaps several things.

Want we think we want is not always what we need. And my sense is that the universe is gracious and seems to give us what we need before we get what we want. I know this may sound like metaphysical mumbo-jumbo, but I say this after reflecting on the evolution of 'being in relationship'.

Having a list and checking it twice is only for Santa.

My sense? Love has her own Rules. And she can be pretty tight-lipped about the matter if one is too busy looking and grabbing.

[Zerbie]

Mmmmmm, nice one, Danny.

Funny. This is my third time in love, too. And I'm his third really significant relationship.

Must be something about the third time. . . .

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

Must be something about the third time. . . .

A charm?

[paul]

There is some really good stuff here. I'm glad you came back and wrote something besides "Bill" Zerb. As romantic as that answer was, I was hoping for more, especially from thinking Zerbie, and you didn't disappoint.

I made my question fairly simple in form because I wanted to see how the reader would define and answer it, open ended, as it were.

Thank you for responding, it's going to take a little time for me to respond to each thoughful response with an attempt at equal thought. Meanwhile...it's fair for me to give my own answer.

openness/vulnerabilityThis attracts me to a person more than any other attribute. Some of the other stuff I list feeds openness, I think.

couragefits right into the openness/vulnerability attribute. It often takes courage to be open/vulnerable, to risk rejection of ones very essence.

believes in the principle of love When we're kids (not physically, but emotionally and intellectually), we put a lot of emphasis on "falling in love." Like "love" is a mud puddle or something that we should "fall" into it vs. a moment by moment choice of effort that we make.

gracious A willingness to give others the benefit of the doubt, which is really a willingness to question oneself.

humilityHas a balance between knowing who they are and who they aren't. Can be equally honest about what they are and what they aren't.

mature Taking all the above and realizing those things are a daily journey, not a destination one has reached, but is very focused on the journey.

[Zerbie]

"Love is a mud puddle"

Omigosh, well I guess at some times, it is!

Paul, dude, you could get a job writing song lyrics.

[paul]

Originally Posted by pnggrad79

Well, knowing no one is perfect, let's just say I like someone who challenges me, who isn't all bent out of shape over my imperfections and someone who builds me up and makes me feel good about my imperfections. My wife is someone I was immediately attracted to because she is everything I am not. (except the female part)

I love her because even though we may fight sometimes, who doesn't, she loves me and I can look objectively at her and can honestly say I not only love her, but I admire her. She has a tremendous work ethic and determination and persistence that makes her want to succeed. She pursued me with that type of vigor and finally got me, which was a testament to her tenacity. She is also beautiful inside and out. She jumped in and decided to help me raise my two girls, when she could have just said, "Uh no thanks" and she has done a magnificent job of it. All I can say is "What's not to love?"

Png,

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, no one is perfect . The thing I find most outstanding in you response is your comment My wife is someone I was immediately attracted to because she is everything I am not.

I have watched and smiled at the EHarmony.com commercials. All these people dancing together (how come they're all dancing?) talking about this profile they fill out so they can find someone just like them . Honestly, I don't know if that is the goal of the "profile" or if that is just how the commercial comes across. There are two different notions floating around out there: 1) opposites attract. 2) Similar attributes equal compatibility.

The first notion seems better to me only because it seems to present the most opportunity for growth vs. having someone who is just like you and you remain where you are. The first option is a lot more work but seems to me to offer the most potential for all concerned...if there is love.

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by paul

Png,

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, no one is perfect . The thing I find most outstanding in you response is your commentMy wife is someone I was immediately attracted to because she is everything I am not.

I have watched and smiled at the EHarmony.com commercials. All these people dancing together (how come they're all dancing?) talking about this profile they fill out so they can find someone just like them . Honestly, I don't know if that is the goal of the "profile" or if that is just how the commercial comes across. There are two different notions floating around out there: 1) opposites attract. 2) Similar attributes equal compatibility.

The first notion seems better to me only because it seems to present the most opportunity for growth vs. having someone who is just like you and you remain where you are. The first option is a lot more work but seems to me to offer the most potential for all concerned...if there is love.

I'm wondering if it isn't even more complicated than that. my partner and I seem well-suited for each other, and I don't think we're opposites, but we are significantly different and thus seem to complement each other. Yet without some similarities, we would not find any common ground, an entry if you will, to begin that romance we started years ago.

I also tend to believe that people who are very much alike do not get along. I've experienced that with my own kids; my daughter and I are very much alike, and tend to get into some heated arguments. That has lessened as she has become more mature, but I've noticed that my son and I rarely got into those kinds of arguments. I think it's because his personality is significantly different than my own.

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by keltic63

I'm wondering if it isn't even more complicated than that. my partner and I seem well-suited for each other, and I don't think we're opposites, but we are significantly different and thus seem to complement each other. Yet without some similarities, we would not find any common ground, an entry if you will, to begin that romance we started years ago.

.

Yes. Some things need to be similar - such as lifestyle choices and value system. A couple needs to agree on major priorities, such as where to live, whether to raise children, whether both pursue careers and to what extent, especially if the careers involve travel or odd hours.

But it's good if the persons have complementary personality traits. DH is an incredibly strong, 'well-rounded' person who is knowledgeable and talented in many diverse areas. What's nice is, I am strong where his skills or talents are weak. He is strong where I am weak. We make a killer team on Trivial Pursuit, because he is educated where I'm clueless, and vice versa. In Europe, we never worry about communicating because if we run into people who don't speak much English, well, he has excellent German and I have excellent French. We supply skills and strength to each other in a lot of little ways like that.

[paul]

Originally Posted by Pablo Rafael

The perfect mate? When I finally do find my "perfect" mate, he will probably be totally different, but from where I stand now:

1. Kind and sweet without malice towards anyone.
2. Non pretentious and without arrogance.
3. Honest and transparent.
4. A man with a strong Christian faith.
5. A person who just likes hanging out with me.
6. Who likes to touch (anyone up for a backrub?)
7. Smart who thinks for himself.
8. Willing to go off the prescribed path and challenge preconceptions.
9. Independent who will allow me some space.
10. Athletic and into mountain biking.

Please submit your resume via PM and I will get back with you.

Hey Pab,

That is a well thought out list, I'd be curious to see the response you'd get if you posted this on a site where they match people. I found myself nodding to most of what you wrote, cept the Christian thing...like Zerbie, mutual respect in that area is more important to me than similarities. Then there was the mountain biking thing . Those two things seem personal while the other things seem like universally important qualities...but then, that may just be my own bias coming through.

BTW, let me know who PM's you with their resume'.

[paul]

Originally Posted by keltic63

I'm wondering if it isn't even more complicated than that. my partner and I seem well-suited for each other, and I don't think we're opposites, but we are significantly different and thus seem to complement each other. Yet without some similarities, we would not find any common ground, an entry if you will, to begin that romance we started years ago.

I also tend to believe that people who are very much alike do not get along. I've experienced that with my own kids; my daughter and I are very much alike, and tend to get into some heated arguments. That has lessened as she has become more mature, but I've noticed that my son and I rarely got into those kinds of arguments. I think it's because his personality is significantly different than my own.

Stever,

I believe you are quite right, it is more "complicated." That's probably why EHarmony uses an exhaustive list of over 40 points of compatibility . I think Zerbie nailed it when she points out the importance of similar "value system[s]," for instance vs. different skills, talents or knowledge. In truth, I think it's a good idea to have some similar interests for the reason you state, i.e., the "common ground." That common ground is not only "an entry" for romance, but also serves as ground for continued romance. There's plenty of hard work in a relationship, no? It's kind of nice to have areas where both people enjoy doing the same thing and one or the other is not having to always sacrifice. Finding balance...

I find your second point interesting. I get along great with my artist, writer musician son...we both seem to live in the ether. My wife and nuclear engineer son get along great, they're very concrete in thier approach (way oversimplifying here). Anyway, my experience with the kids is exactly opposite of yours, I wonder why?

[Vanessa White]

My girl is it for me, and I for her. We just KNEW, and we knew very early on. Not at first sight, or anything, which is how I had always "imagined" it, just the movies!!! LOL But it was after hours of heartfelt phone conversation- that clinched it. What was and still is the attraction?

1. Family connection- one that is strong and significant. Before we even decided to have a child together, we both expressed significant connection to our families of origin, in terms of time spent and emotional investment. That was essential.

2. Care for others, including all living things and the earth- we are both very connected to our pets, which we have several, and have great respect for them. We also have great appreciation and respect for trees, land, sky, stars, earth. We are both native american blood lines and I think that influences it a bit.

3. Loyalty- we are fiercely loyal to one another, and I had already been in relationships, as had she, when the person was unfaithful and were at the receiving end of the betrayal. That is unwavering in my book, and hers.

4. Soul connection- how do I describe THIS one? I mean, I am definitely the more expressive one of the two of us, in terms of affairs of the heart, but have us look deeply into one another's eyes, and we can see each other's soul. I am not joking- for real. Talk about being totally vulnerable, yet totally secure at the same time. I NEVER experienced that with another person on this earth.

5. Honesty- We had this in the beginning, but it got lost along the way with parenthood, and not wanting to hurt each other, and resentment building, etc. We had to work at what that meant, weird as that may sound. We had to learn to speak our honesty openly, so we can clearly....

6. Communicate- I had my share of noncommunicative relationships also, and they failed from the word go. Again, we had it in the beginning, but stalled about halfway through. We have relearned, and even learned more effectively, how to do this and do it well.

7. Humor- I need a person that will make me laugh, even at myself. I tend to be too serious a lot of the time, and she makes me laugh until I weep! And, she is about one of the only people that can tell me to "lighten up" and I know she is right.......

8. An open heart- She is one of the most open hearted people I have ever known, but she doesn't let that on to many people. I feel priveledged to be among those that know that about her.

Besides our daughter, she is the only person in this world I would lay my life down for.
When we hit the wall and split for a year, I was lost. I missed her so terribly that I needed to figure out if it could be repaired. And, it could and it is.......

[paul]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

Wayull, Paul probably had in mind that we discuss the qualities and traits that would make for an "ideal" partner, as PNG and Pabs did, rather than just type our partner's name, huh?

Yeth. When you first did that I said, hmmm, she can't do that...glad you self corrected .

Reflecting back on things I considered and looked for before I met hubby, there were certain characteristics that seemed necessary for my partner to have, all but one of which my husband embodies:

strong sense of self - knowing who he/she is and being authentic to that person

confidence/strong personality - I can be assertive at times, and need to have a partner who can also be assertive when need be in order to match that. I noticed in my dating history that dates who were not very confident in themselves, their opinions, their talents, etc., tended to, errrr, dim the flame of passion and draw out non-sensual sides of my personality, whereas people who were unafraid to voice their ideas and opinions, stand their ground, and believed quietly in their talents and inherent 'awesomeness' tended to really turn me on. Purrrrr.
That's provided confidence and strength are expressed in balanced ways, that confidence in ability is based on *having* some skill or knowledge or other, and respecting, valuing the contributions of those around him/her.

One and two seem very similar to me Zerb. To me this says that you are a person in your own right and need at least an equal. It says that you respect a person and understand the great value of them respecting their self. You put this so well, understanding the need for "balanced ways." I would have to question how secure a person is if they cannot, or don't have listening/hearing "skill or knowledge." It takes a secure person to acknowledge and affirm anothers value.

caring, compassionate, loving, values living things - these traits are super-high on the list. They are more important to me than book-smarts or academic accomplishments/career acheivements,

ditto.

It's critical that a relationship teach us to better ourselves, to love our partner, love ourselves, and bring those increased strengths out into the larger world. A relationship that erodes one or both partners is causing harm to both participants and deprives the world of the potential wonders of love those two people could, in better circumstances, gift to the world outside.
Gee, do I agree with this. I think of relataionship as a mirror. The better the quality of mirror, the cleaner the mirror, the clearer the reflection. A great "relationship" is where the 'reflection' is mutual ad infinitum.
religious item - seeing mostly eye-to-eye on the cosmic significance of life was really important, though not necessary as long as he/she would in every way support me in my pursuit of a more cosmic understanding. Ideally, my partner would participate with me in ways designed to teach both of us the deep significance of life.

I was open to a partner of any religion or none (having deep regard for atheists) as long as s/he would uphold mine.


Me too. I think there is more belief in life then there is knowledge, so a little self doubt seems simply honest to me and definately beneficial. I appreciate a person who can be faithful to "God" while being able to entertain questions about their particular perceptions of that "God."

lifestyle - I thought I wanted someone who was into fitness, nutrition, being physically active (walking, hiking, biking, weight lifting, etc.) but as it turned out, my guy is not into fitness. The reason I rated it high on the list was I thought it would be a pursuit we could enjoy together, y'know, time off, let's go for a day-hike and bring the home-made trail mix sorta thing. But as it turns out, we have so many other things we enjoy doing together, (most of it work!!) that fitness and activity has ended up being something I mostly pursue on my own, or go to group classes and make friends outside the relationship. DH wants to sit at home and watch TV? Fine, I'll go to the community center, take a yoga class, hang around and chat with the gang.

People who love and trust each other can live as a couple and as individuals. That's really nice.

LGBT equality and 'the bisexual question" - Obviously, whoever it was had to be cool with me being me, attractions to both sexes and all. Or it couldn't last 5 minutes.
sigh, makes sense.



career - I'm in such an atypical field of endeavor, it is immeasurably valuable to be married to someone in the field who knows its ins and outs intimately. What a blessing! We understand each other's time commitments at work, and while it sucks that sometimes we don't see much of each other, we know from the inside out exactly WHY sweetie is never home, and why when sweetie IS home, sweetie doesn't want to do anything but lie down. And hey, when we're working on a project *together,* life is never better.
I can see where having a similar field of endeavor makes for instant understanding

this is the sentence to lengthen my message to at least 10 characters

[paul]

Originally Posted by Daniel

Paul- While you used the word 'perfect' in this thread title, one poster responded with another word: ideal.

Yeah, actually I used the word perfect in the thread title and 'ideal' in the body question. Note how I quoted 'ideal' in single quotes. I'm with ya. more later when you comment further.

I find this interesting, none-the-least for the fact that the two words are often interchanged. That said, I think there is a world of difference between them.

Perhaps I'm being a bit semantic about the matter, but as I (honestly ) see it, 'perfect' implies a beneficial connection between two parties that reflects not only an emotional response, but one that is reciprocal in nature.
Meeting the perfect person would be ideal???
Now. Whether the relative matters, such as how the toothpaste tube is squeezed, is something else entirely. You seem to be asking about characteristics, not actions.
yep, with the understanding that sometimes actions are born out of character
The ideal person? That word gives me the willies. Why? Because the very word implies something, someone, set apart- on a pedestal as it were. Once put there, they always manage to disappoint, fall, crash and burn.
That is an excellent point. Who does that? Our "inner child" (giggle)? Maybe. That person seeks a god or, at least, a parent instead of a mate, and equal. Inherant in such a relationship is the selfishness of wanting to be taken care of without reciprocating, which is childish/selfish.
You've asked for honesty. Here's my story in short:
thanks. I'd be surprised by anything less from you .

I've had three major relationships with men during my life. The first one was idealized in the sense that I hardly knew what I was getting into, much less who the other person really was, but imagined all sorts of things. But being young, gay and rather naive, I entered where Angels Fear to Tread. I made my mistakes. But I can also say that there were - in retrospect now- unseen benefits. Good things came out of that relationship, as painful as it was.

The second relationship was with a man who embodied everything I wanted and desired in a man: all my bells and whistles went off. Boy- was I in love with the sheer physicality of the guy! Was he in love with me? Good question. It lasted about two years until I got it through my head that commitment meant something different to him than it did to me. And of course, he might say I wasn't his perfect partner. So it goes both ways. When I gave up craving him, my current beloved materialized unexpectedly after a space of time- time spent sorting out my head and heart.

Now I've been with the my third beloved for a very long time- at least in gay years. There is a connection between us that to this day amazes and befuddles me. Why? Because- to be honest - what looks good on paper (what the mind can imagine and thinks it wants) isn't what can show up and knock one's socks off.

Perfect? I'm not sure what that looks like anymore, but I do know how it feels. We are perfect for each other in the sense that we have the same issues, challenges and joys to deal with- want to deal with. Mutuality is involved.

I think we compliment each other pretty damn well. That said, we've had to work hard at learning to communicate with each other ie- the dance of relationship. And that is something I'm proud of, considering that I grew up in a family which- relationally speaking- is hobbling on one leg.

What am I trying to say here? Perhaps several things.

Want we think we want is not always what we need. And my sense is that the universe is gracious and seems to give us what we need before we get what we want. I know this may sound like metaphysical mumbo-jumbo, but I say this after reflecting on the evolution of 'being in relationship'.

Having a list and checking it twice is only for Santa.

My sense? Love has her own Rules. And she can be pretty tight-lipped about the matter if one is too busy looking and grabbing.

I agree that Santa is a childhood fantasy. "Mutuality" is not.

I am going to steal from what little knowledge I have of Daniel, pieced together from other things you have said over the months I have been reading your comments. I know you believe in what I call "love," and I am guessing that you beloved does also. You are both involved in making an effort of giving that goes beyond getting. It sounds to me like you both know how to give, and further, that giving is a hallmark. Many relationships settle into mutual exploitation till they implode or explode because one or both people are focused on getting. What I hear you saying is that relationship is all about mutual giving?

[paul]

Originally Posted by Vanessa White

My girl is it for me, and I for her. We just KNEW, and we knew very early on. Not at first sight, or anything, which is how I had always "imagined" it, just the movies!!! LOL But it was after hours of heartfelt phone conversation- that clinched it. What was and still is the attraction?
This sounds better than first sight because it went beyond "sight" to heartfelt.
1. Family connection- one that is strong and significant. Before we even decided to have a child together, we both expressed significant connection to our families of origin, in terms of time spent and emotional investment. That was essential.
Wow...so many LGBT are estranged from their families. Do both of your families accept you as individuals and a couple? Do you have their continued support and love?
2. Care for others, including all living things and the earth- we are both very connected to our pets, which we have several, and have great respect for them. We also have great appreciation and respect for trees, land, sky, stars, earth. We are both native american blood lines and I think that influences it a bit.
Really?? This is something new I didn't know about you. What kind of pets to you have? I think you do some kind of social work? How about your wife?
3. Loyalty- we are fiercely loyal to one another, and I had already been in relationships, as had she, when the person was unfaithful and were at the receiving end of the betrayal. That is unwavering in my book, and hers.
security?
4. Soul connection- how do I describe THIS one? I mean, I am definitely the more expressive one of the two of us, in terms of affairs of the heart, but have us look deeply into one another's eyes, and we can see each other's soul. I am not joking- for real. Talk about being totally vulnerable, yet totally secure at the same time. I NEVER experienced that with another person on this earth.
Is this innate or something that you developed or some of both?
5. Honesty- We had this in the beginning, but it got lost along the way with parenthood, and not wanting to hurt each other, and resentment building, etc. We had to work at what that meant, weird as that may sound. We had to learn to speak our honesty openly, so we can clearly....
no, that is not "weird" at all.
6. Communicate- I had my share of noncommunicative relationships also, and they failed from the word go. Again, we had it in the beginning, but stalled about halfway through. We have relearned, and even learned more effectively, how to do this and do it well.
This is great. It seems to me that the goal of honesty to oneself then to others is at the core of communication. Communication feels risky, but very rewarding when their is love.
7. Humor- I need a person that will make me laugh, even at myself. I tend to be too serious a lot of the time, and she makes me laugh until I weep! And, she is about one of the only people that can tell me to "lighten up" and I know she is right.......
Gee, I have always pictured you as a person who can laugh at their self. You seem like a very together person to me. My mental picture of you is someone with laughing eyes.
8. An open heart- She is one of the most open hearted people I have ever known, but she doesn't let that on to many people. I feel priveledged to be among those that know that about her.
yeah, this one is a prize to me also.
Besides our daughter, she is the only person in this world I would lay my life down for.
When we hit the wall and split for a year, I was lost. I missed her so terribly that I needed to figure out if it could be repaired. And, it could and it is.......

Thank you Vanessa.