Going out

[miloice]

Did you reply to my post before I added more word? No. So, what is this ambiance you are talking about?

My comments are not on other forumer's comments but in response to you. What others are replying while I was adding more comments to you changed nothing. As sm and vios reply weren't in response of my post either.

 

[miloice]

This is really getting very dumb. Its pretty clear where this is heading. If you would not want to discuss about your issue, i am fine with that.

 

[watching]

Milo,
Tell me what I am twisting about my Facebook comment. Which entire statement?

I meant you added the last few paragraphs that changed your refine mode back to what you call "frank" mode after SM and Vios's replies. Technically, I don't need to reply to you for you to set a different mode.

If you think this is dumb, you are not obligated to reply.

 

[miloice]

Alternatively, I can also point out how dumb it is.

 

[simpleman]

watching,

You seem able to write well but do you understand simple English?

I was saying you cannot say you know he does not have a Facebook account unless you are with him 7 x 24. Don't refute this fact.

Yes, you can believe that he as no facebook account because when he is seen using the computer, he is with you. What about when he is not with you?

I don't care what sort of life he has. Whether he is the average joe or not. I am just alluding to the fact you CANNOT know someone has and is using a facebook account unless you are with that someone 7 x 24 hrs. You are not with him 7 x 24 and therefore you can only say you think or you believe to know but you cannot say for sure YOU KNOW.

As for the photos, now you rephrase it to use "asked". After my disagreement with the word "insist" you changed it to "asked". Why you did not use "asked" in the first place - just to paint a picture of someone unreasonable insisting on photographs?

As you said, whatever for. It is her perogative to ask. And we have a right not to respond to that or to ignore. Why must we look too much beyond that? Even strangers on the internet can ask for photographs - it is up to us to respond accordingly.

As I said, people from PRC are different from us - they style and habits and speech are different. There is no need to over-analyze.. but if you want to - that is your perogative. Just that I find your stance to be self-centered. always from your point of view and not from others. I asked that you for a moment to think in your hb's shoes. About you insisting on going on the boat trip. And can't he accept invitation to bring the PRC women for dinner?

And about editing of posts. It is common.. and as long as it is not twisting of facts.. addition to it does not change anything. And you are wrong about whether it is bro or not.

We don't mince our words when we crossed swords. There is no bro in this forum - even for some of them I have met them personally. We argue about the points.. and not because we are bro, we will mince our words.

 

[thommy]

I pity your SO really. I'm serious.

 

[kittenpie]

being woman better not be shrewish. the most charming types are those who are extremely high IQ but package it in demure conduct, and shoots little pearls of sweet-sounding but witty and ironic chatter. this is the art of feminine allure.

laugh daintily, smile kindly and frequently. be gentle but humorous ... all these is an art.

forcing things down people's throat? Fail. demanding like a bankruptcy bailiff? Fail. Taking matters into own hands believing it is a form of taking charge? Fail. Confrontational instead of being subtlely compelling? Fail. Virago vs maiden-like? I guess the man would turn to stone as if beholding Medusa.

i once read a short story about a henpecked husband who attends to his wife every single whim and even her command to perform the most menial household chore. outwardly, he is submissive. inside, he was indulging in sadistic fantasies on how he would like to torture his wife. just because you think that he has no Facebook account, doesn't mean he does not. in fact, i won't be surprised if he intentionally does things he otherwise could not care much about, just so that he could have an alter ego untainted by you.

give your special ones freedom. let them roam, do not interrogate like a police officer. do not interfere, just let it be. it is the same principle as giving and receiving, as letting go in order to gain something bigger and better. this can be trust, this can be sincerity, this is called faith, which hails higher than any form of cold, calculative and manipulative control.

all these i learnt the hard way. just dropping by to air my thoughts.

 

[powder]

Well watching, I gave u my point of view, I'm not sure how much of a guys' pov u need cos I have a lot of views that most guys may not share and vice versa...

I'm just wondering how u'll look, when actually that lady was launching a new wave of products that requires pple's image, and she requested your foto to have one specially made for u n bfren. I'm wary by nature, but I draw the line at being overly Suspicious.

Honestly, it Is networking, but I guess when it's the opposite sex, some pple will be suspicious. It's good u stopped it, but it's not great u're continuing to dig into it.

 

[miloice]

"you read selectively, coveniently leaving out, "Maybe you weren't, maybe it's just your way of bringing messages across."

Putting such a disclaimer changes nothing your suggestion that is total bull. Surely not changing the ambiance at all. The response have consistently further strengthen my point : opinionated, confrontal and strong headed. And also blind to your own issues.

The wit you are trying to portray is working against what you are trying to achieve. In any relationship, it is never about how smart you are. Its matters of the heart not wit.

 

[sgbabydoll]

Actually, what is the purpose of this thread?

You have a bf who bestows you with respect and admiration, and the two of you are ok that you are the boss in the relationship. It's already a "perfect" situation. You cannot expect other women to be scared of you also and obey your rules lah.

 

[thommy]

doll, hope u are not like her...

 

[sgbabydoll]

Thomas, no need to hope lah because I am not like Watching at all.

I already feel tired to read her analysis of her bf and the PRC female colleague. I don't know how one can process so much data of another person and related people. I admit I don't have that kind of inherent talent or gift. I am very switch-off when it comes to relationship because being in one shouldn't add stress to me.

 

[thommy]

lol...well said.

 

[sgbabydoll]

I hope no woman will revolve her life around just one man, worse if it's a wrong man. It's bordering obsession. Don't they have other things to do in life?

 

[kittenpie]

I hope no woman will revolve her life around just one man,

=========================================

how about many men, Doll? haha ...

 

[kenturik]

Wow... A high maintenance lady with good looks, career and a taste for finer things in life....Only to be threaten by a PRC lady whom we sometimes deemed as husband snatcher... spooking around her well secured and entrenched relationship with a man with lesser in look and social life...
Die lah... our land being overtaken by PRC ladies....

 

[sgbabydoll]

May, as many as possible! Besides my bf, I have a brother, 2 nephews, 1 male dog, and some good male friends. Too bad my dad passed away two years ago.

 

[tulipzz]

watching,

Don't bother replying them. If you read other threads in this forum, they are the same bunch of kakis who go attacking the thread starters, read selectively and comment out of context and then point the finger at the thread starter saying she (usually) is all of what they are.

It makes me wonder what kinda life they are leading. No life perhaps. They spend all their time in a forum, fighting with others in the virtual world and apparently, enjoying it. Warped I would say.

This forum has become what it's not started out to be. It used to be one that gives good advice but now, it's left with people like them who are only capable of twisting and playing with words, and they seem to pride themselves on such an activity. I suspect they have lots of problems in their own private lives and so they are reflecting their quarrelsome persona here.

Take my advice instead, don't reply them.

Oh, and don't let them bother you one bit. Words are cheap. You know what? They'll come attacking me after this post. And guess if I care?

 

[sgbabydoll]

Tulipzz, you are one naive soul. You expect the whole world to change for one person?

Even though her henpecked husband is afraid of Watching and succumbs to her threats, you expect this PRC colleague or other women out there to be afraid of Watching and touch her husband not? No, they will do what they want to do. You can condemn, complain, lament, whatever. You can analyse until you go crazy. Who cares? Basically, there are no rules outside.

This is why we wanted her to take a look at herself too, not just other people. She can't fix other people to suit herself.

As for you, Tulipzz, I am amazed you are attaching so much importance to yourself. People will attack you? Excuse me, who are you??? What do I gain in attacking you for the sake of attacking you???

 

[simpleman]

tulipzz,

You made some silly allegations.. accusing other people without substantiation.. You are also enjoying such activities and priding yourself in being quarrelsome?

Let's be specific. What "twisting and playing with words"? Comments out of context?

Please give some specific examples to substantiate your statements. Otherwise you are just behaving what you are accusing us of..

And no. It is not an attack on you. This is fair comment in response to unsubstantiated allegations .

 

[koala82]

I also agree to what doll says. after trying to catch up with this thread, I am left sick and weary plus tired.

Watching, I would suggest, you shd have have a robot as your SO. The robot will do everything as you say and will not feel disgruntled.

 

[miloice]

Entertaining!

Go on and assert your 'right' to expose more of your total lack of EQ. The forum is serving exactly what is intended for. Exchanges and discussions. Just some would like to apply 'selective' rights.

 

[simpleman]

People not only know their spouses have no facebook account.

They also know other forumers have no lives!

Omnipotent.

 

[simpleman]

Milo,

What! you are again editing and adding after posting! You changed the whole ambience!!

How dare you!

 

[miloice]

What ambience? You need wine & music to enjoy the setting with?

 

[simpleman]

oOPS.. We got no life! What ambience to talk about?

 

[koala82]

Milo...

You are NOT ALLOWED to change the whole ambience!!! You know that?? LOL.

Wine and Music where got enuff? We need some jokers as well LOL

 

[thommy]

who wanna attack u tulipzz? we are not that free...and its not like u are some big shot or something.

u got out from the wrong side of bed this morning?

 

[ariel84]

Watching,

Maybe the woman just want to see how you look like, what kind of woman your SO dates. Or maybe she want to do Gong Tao on you? Just kidding!

Actually, why worry about the digital photo thing. Just treat it as she wants to know who's the pretty lady having a hold on the guy. Anyway, the important thing is your SO loves you and is with you, right? If you trust him, there's no need to worry so much what other parties do. If he wants to stray, he will do it no matter how.

 

[babystorm]

You just have to be wary about this PRC. That's about it. Move on!

I think your SO is being honest and upright about this issue. Will you know if he does not share? This is better than him screwing her behind your back.

I feel tired reading this thread.. Too analytical. I need my brain cells for other stuff.

 

[powder]

tulipzz,

sounds like u are caught up in your own emotional need to fight your own agenda, than to be bothered with Watching's problems...

if so, u shouldn't need to make it sound like u're actually bothered, when your agenda is so obviously vindictive and self-serving? nothing beats a liar calling others liars to cover their own lies.

i took slight offence when u say "It makes me wonder what kinda life they are leading. No life perhaps. They spend all their time in a forum, fighting with others in the virtual world and apparently, enjoying it. Warped I would say."

coming from u... seriously, do think abit... perhaps if u want, name pple. instead of using general terms... i'm pretty sure i achieved more in my life and concurrently contributed more in this forum in 1 week, than u do in 1 year... so pls dun use the same measuring scale. u are obviously still stuck somewhere in the past and so far up in denial, that u lie constantly to stay in denial and feed your insecurities.

sounds like u really living it up in your real life submerged in denial.

 

[watching]

sm,
My apologies for diving into why he doesn't have a Facebook account. Pertaining to knowledge about anyone, no one could know anything for sure about anyone unless they are conjoined Siamese twins with heads facing the same way. I´ve used `insist`, `ask` and even `request` in regards to the photo issue. It boils down to the same thing. I was dwelling on it because Milo made it sound normal, to paint the picture it is not normal (my prerogative). This should have been directed at him.

Are you so sure I am only seeing it from my point of view, sm? I could just as easily preach you about reading selectively. Didn't I say I acknowledged she may not know what is proper conduct coming to our environment from another culture? Reading me the only way you want to. I did reply to Vios saying, `Totally agree. I may be reading too much into it, admittedly there is a tinge of jealousy.` You see, the bottom line is the same between you, Milo and Vios. While you have expressed your views with a bit more nuance, you were fixed at making me out to be self centered. Milo has been frank to the point I find thunderous (again, my prerogative), breaking through the clutter to get his core message heard was more hampering. Vios effectively sums up his post without jumble, hence don't some people call this high e.q.?

There is an unspoken alliance among the regular buddy forummers, whether any newbie likes it or not and whether any buddy forummers will admit it or not (not addressing forummers who don't think independently). The buddy forummers speak to each other with honor, even when they disaccord. They don't go around knocking at doors of other forummers to sneer synchronously or to tally. Their credibility don't go to waste at such times. They fight their own battle. Natural courtesy is a world apart from snobbish mannerism when those; who aren't regular contributors; who did not form kinship; come to the picture.

"We argue about the points.. and not because we are bro, we will mince our words.". I think you meant "not mince words".

May,
I agree I should learn state of the art femininity.

I've said it more than once, my S.O. comes to me on his own for my thoughts and views, whether big or small. For example, he has been thinking for the longest time to get a car. He could very well afford it but he wants me to give him the green light. I listed pros and cons to having a car, he's paying for it, I said he should do what he wants. He's still not content with my answer.

 

[simpleman]

watching,

Now you are writing more sense when you don't drag your hb into the picture.

But don't get too philosophical here. I am just referring to the facebook issue.

Pertaining to knowledge about anyone, no one could know anything for sure about anyone unless they are conjoined Siamese twins with heads facing the same way


I have talked about the facebook issue - not knowing spouses having facebook because personally I know of a lot of people not letting spouses know their facebook account? They may even have different facebook accounts for different purposes. This is a reality.

Different people has different ways of putting across their messages... you may mention EQ or whatsoever, and I am not going to debate that. But you are right about the observation that I perceived you to be "self-centered" mainly because you can go on a date with a guy on a boat and yet you "want" to deny your hb's opportunity of the dinner date with the PRC lady. And your "veiled" threats of going out with other guys if hb insisted on the dinner date..

And for heaven-sake, there is no "unspoken alliance" - at least to me. I don't have any alliance at all - spoken or otherwise. I respect those who are consistent and when they speak sense. Period.

As to your hb's seeking of your views.. he just want your affirmation. Isn't that what you want? Or you delight in not giving him that affirmation?

 

[sgbabydoll]

"I agree I should learn state of the art femininity."

Watching, you can learn femininity but you may not be able to apply it with your husband. Do you find that you become more and more domineering?

I have an ex-bf who is really soft in character and I thought he complements my strong character. But I couldn't be more wrong. In that relationship I felt I was the one wearing the pants and with a "weak" partner you are even stronger in contrast.

I felt very masculine in that relationship and I didn't like myself to be that way.

 

[simpleman]

On another note, since your SO comes to you for everything.. presumably everything.. than what is there to worry about him having a dinner date..

so, even if he wants to have a fling with the PRC, he will ask your permission?

think about it. You seem so cocksure of yourself about your husband, and yet you worry about a little dinner date...

 

[miloice]

hi watching, its not making it sound more normal than it is. I'm really telling you it isn't that uncommon. Maybe in your world, its a big deal and unheard of. With that assumption, that would only suggest that your context is probably not as relevant with the current.

Also, I disagree with this unspoken aliance. My tone and disagreement is pretty much the same be it sm or watching. Nothing much in this forum is ever is removed unless deemed required by the moderators or under the specific request of the TS. You would have read numerous discussions that has been on-going. And on how people disagree regardless so called regulars or newbies. But each time, whenever there is a newbie involved, the common suggestion is the same one.

About the car point you just shared with May. It again point out the fact the what couples need in their everyday conversation isn't long analytical reports. He just need you to be involved, to feel and share his excitement with him. If he would need car information, there are so many other alternatives.

Analyze less and empathize more. Use your analytical skills only when appropriate and not your everyday conversation.

Allow me to add : When you frequently over-analyze, you are going into details and refuking things more than necessary. The only message that would bring across is arrogance. And it can be highly irritating. When done to a spouse or partner, that can be really painful to bear.

 

[sgbabydoll]

What is the exact point of your discontent, Watching?

You have your way with your husband. But the outside world does not obey your rules. You need to know that.

Somehow I feel that you do not like yourself to become more masculine in the relationship.

 

[miloice]

hi watching,

let me bring up my answer to your question again...

"Do you ask for a digital format of their significant other´s photo?
No, we exchange FB account and we can see all the photos online. Does it matter?? What's the problem with that?? "

Despite everything said and your point about having limited access of FB in china, I don't see how it is not normal it is. FB isn't the only social networking site available either. The main focus of my answer is that it isn't so weird or strange to share photos in today's context. Be it FB or other forms of media sharing.

 

[powder]

watching,

there is no alliance here. if u fall for that belief, it is more your mind denying the general consensus of which has been put forth in front of u, than actually accepting the views shared.

i have a personal dislike for pple who agree for the sake or it, and disagree for the sake of it. those who believe in sides - often take sides themsevles...

u should not insult your own intelligence by accepting simplistic explanations put forth by your mind... think deeper. a little self-exploration doesn't hurt when u're having problems... enough to put forth in a forum.

it's actually painful to see pple start threads and then start arguing every single option... especially when we gotta know that the world is made up of many opinions, it is up to u to pick and choose what to adopt. Whateveru're adopting now, obviously isn't the best... else u wouldn't post.

u just need to surf abit on tulippz to know she has her own agenda and peeve, and u should discount from there. abit of surfing on individual nicks will tell u where each person is at - mentally.

if u're a leader, u have to assess why your followers follow u. and not just point out that u have followers to lift yourself on a pedestal... having a submissive bfren is nothing great... i see him more as a guy needing a motherly gfren, than a man needing a woman. so what does that make u?

and since u're so certain, it'll hardly fall into place with the starting of this thread... so which is it? sure or unsure? need advice or dun need? need opinions and alternate views?

decide before asking, open your mind before asking, dun ask and standby to argue...

 

[watching]

Doll,
I am not getting more and more domineering, on the contrary actually. My S.O. is not afraid of me, does not succumb to my whims, not like how you painted it to be earlier on (henpecked husband?). The gist some of the forummers got is that I am this tyrant and he'd tremble the moment I cast a look at my whip. Generally, he is very loving to me, he massages me to sleep, sometimes, when he wakes up in the morning, he'd smile, saying, he loves me most in this world (cross fingers his mother never finds out), even after so many years.

He is academically speaking and career wise more advanced than I am (on contrary to what some people here were thinking), knows heck a lot more about certain topics and he is actually the backbone of our relationship. To say I'm wearing the pants because he's considerate to me is incorrect. I steer him because I know I can, he's not good at personal disputes but he argues like a lawyer when it's work related. I fought for him in his family bussiness behind a thin veil, like empress dowager, instructing him what to do. He hates family-upheaval. I sometimes marvel I how I can put forth my reasons and win. So you see, it's not just in my interest what I do but also in his.

I am a far cry from the typical princess type and certainly don't expect to outside world to obey my rules. My discontentment is his grouch if I don't always support his stance, yes, he can form a stance too.

Sm,
I seem cocksure of S.O. probably because of my style of writing. Putting my ego aside, I agreed with you all along on my veiled threat. The keyword is veiled. Just that the "ambience" (pardon the pun) took a turn when Milo an I started squabbling.

Milo,
Yes I have seen "newbies suggesting regular forummers ganging up on them". I have seen some very sound arguments coming from the regulars in other threads and here but undeniably there are regulars who sneer synchronously as seen today; but speak with integrity when they have disputes with the certain regulars.

Spot on to say couples need more time relating than analyzing, (the car issue which I am not really interested about). Just like how excited you can get while doing your bridal photo shoot, not all men can share this type of excitement with his partner.

To me, exhibiting my photo online without my consent is infringing on my privacy. I don't appreciate being tagged even if I could remove them thereafter. There have been privacy lawsuits on Facebook, I am one of those who are against breaching privacy laws. Even if it seems like the most normal thing to put up your photo online in today's world.

Powder,
I expected someone to insinuate he wants a mother as a girlfriend. I am a leader in certain areas in our relationship, mostly domestic stuff. I don't claim authority, it is falls on my shoulders because S.O. is not keen on handling personal stuff. For example, he told me to phone his mother on mother's day on his behalf. What kind of request is that?

I asked and got some opposing views. Like I mentioned earlier, I was agreeing with Vios already yesterday but the conduct of some postings hampered breaking through the clutter to get to the core of similar messages.

 

[powder]

The choice of the word "insinuate" is very much the choice of your subconscious.. Just explore your use of this word.

Exactly isn't it? U're the leader, mostly in Domestic Stuff. The generic mums as I know it are mentioned towards this inclination, certainly not of the Ho Ching mould.

Yup, most of the domestic stuff in a man's life falls on mum before he's married... Or does it fall on dad? I do wonder what u're telling me.. It sounds like an argument, for the sake of it... But seems more to re-iterate my Insinuation.

Oh ya FYI, mentioning that u had a sort of agreement with vios, doesn't make u a more agreeable person.. U just picked the most agreeable within your threshold to demonstrate u're not always argumentative. But it doesn't exactly exonerate u from some displays which betrayed u.

 

[powder]

U know... U started the thread asking...

"I was wondering which of the term applies to me: paranoid / insecure / rightfully on guard / something else? "

But seems it's asked in jest. Cos u certainly dun think u're anything above, and the 'something else' doesn't even get a chance to be explored.

Dun mind me, but I'd assume same sort of attitude is likely to occur with your bfren, how u're treating some forummers here.. U simply dismiss... This is probably how u treat him. And u probably think. It's justified by virtue of what u do for him... Which no matter how u'd like to call it, Is sort of a mother's role as far as the description of mum-roles go for me.

 

[miloice]

Hi watching, while I respect your need to preserve your privacy, it aren't going to stop anyone from asking your bf for your photo. It isn't going to be something completely unheard of and it's pointless to be offended by it. Rather, your bf would have understand u enough to decline the request. There is really nothing to be offended about that.

How often do u see a colleague placing family photos in their cubicles and computers. Same with group photos etc. You see, it's really not something so offending to many people. And people that do not even know u wouldn't expect to know your sensitivity towards your privacy. Again, its really your bf discretion to decline. Seriously, u would be very easily offended this way.

 

[miloice]

Another point, for sure photos that I upload of my spouse are with her consent. And it's the responsibility of the account holder to ensure they maintain the right level of access. For gamers, all they see on my profile photo isn't even a photo but some pix I created. The point is, the one that can infringe your privacy isn't the requestor by the one distributor, be it intentional or carelessness. In this case, it would be your bf not that Chinese national.

 

[miloice]

U wrote : Yes I have seen "newbies suggesting regular forummers ganging up on them". I have seen some very sound arguments coming from the regulars in other threads and here but undeniably there are regulars who sneer synchronously as seen today; but speak with integrity when they have disputes with the certain regulars.

the forum is made up of a complete mixture of all kinds of people. No one has the influence to control what others are going to write. Anyone could have sneered at anyone else.. Do u quickly identify those that are more regular and come with that conclusion? Bear in mind that many has made remarks against you, of which it's again a mixed group. Why did so many others spoke against you. Has it to do with your theory of unspoken regulars code or the basic fact about the way u were responding and writing in here? There is no unspoken code. Nothing. Everyone has a mind of their own to voice their own opinion. That perception of regulars code is really a selective interpretation that ignores indicators suggesting otherwise.

 

[sgbabydoll]

Watching, I didn't paint a picture of a henpecked husband but you did. Re-read your posts and your choice of words; you have set the "ambience" yourself. May I remind that you have also painted a picture of yourself as a "paranoid/insecure/rightfully on guard/something else" wife.

Henpecked husband vs domineering wife. Picture perfect!

OK, since you have clarified that you are not so and he is not so, so be it. But, don't blame us for being misguided.

 

[watching]

Powder,
You were talking generic; most of the domestic stuff in a man's life falls on mum/dad before he's married......but you don't happen to know, he started doing chores since 8 for allowance, ran a family business since 16 years old, took over domestic chores when his mother left the family. Unlike some men who have their mothers to run the household, who are molded into domestic-helpless people, who don't change bed sheets until a girlfriend comes along.

Suppose you have serious conflicts with your family (the clan), who do you turn to; when you have a significant other; when you emotionally need support? You don't support your spouse Powder? "It's justified by virtue of what u do for him... Which no matter how u'd like to call it, Is sort of a mother's role as far as the description of mum-roles go for me." So, that's it? So everything I say would be dismissed? I wonder how often, when you're expecting opposing views, you counter the next reply by, "No matter how you'd call it...". It terminates anything put forth to you.

No, mentioning my agreement with Vios indeed doesn't make me a more agreeable person. I specifically said, "breaking through the clutter to get his core message heard was more hampering", you were reiterating what I was already saying.

Milo,
S.O. didn't give her my photo, he doesn't know in which file I store them at home. (I take the photos usually.) He could send it to her if he goes looking for them though. The people who put up their family photos in their cubicle, that's quite all right by me. I myself won't do that.

O, I do recognise who the regulars are. I've been here before my current nickname.

 

[sgbabydoll]

"My discontentment is his grouch if I don't always support his stance, yes, he can form a stance too."

Do you want suggestions on how to deal with his grouch, or how to offer better support so that he doesn't get into a grouchy mood?

After quite a fair bit of exchange of info I still have no idea what you are looking for here.

 

[miloice]

watching,

which brings to the point that your reaction to her requesting your bf for your photo is probably not because of how much you guard your privacy at all. Because, it is your bf that should be protecting your privacy and her. And there is absolutely nothing really to be angry with that alone.

Your anger has more to be linked with your jealousy and discomfort. And your conclusion you have drawn over her intentions of it all.

 

[powder]

well watching,

how does telling me all that actually negate my 'insinuations' on him needing a mother-figurish gfren?

"I wonder how often, when you're expecting opposing views, you counter the next reply by, "No matter how you'd call it...". It terminates anything put forth to you. "
- well u can do a search, prob less than 3 times. but last check, i'm not the dismissive one leh...

i support my spouse of cos, but i'd know if i'm in a fatherly-husband role. i'd reflect and it's either yes or no. i dun think i'd be typing alot to refute why i'm not... good enough to know if i'm certain i'm not.