Social Security- not what you are thinking

How to pass, fit in, eventually set an example, and ultimately lead the way.
7Wannabe5
Posts: 9369
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

I know most members of this forum are more security oriented than me, so I want to preface this by indicating that I don't mean to push anybody more into that corner with this thread.

Due to recent and past unfortunate events in my life, I am wondering what strategies you guys have in place for dealing with the possibility of previously very well trusted member of your social circle suddenly going rogue? Some examples might be:

1) Your business partner starts gambling on penny stocks with company funds.
2) Your teenage daughter becomes addicted to pain-killers and starts pawning your belongings.
3) Your spouse runs away to Tahiti to paint naked teenage girls and leaves you to cover the mortgage.
4) Your Aunt who is a member of your Sprint Framily is lapsing into senility and keeps changing the password to the account and then forgetting it.
5) Your boyfriend does not take his medication for bi-polar disease and shakes you awake at 3 in the morning and asks for your car keys.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9369
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

The best strategy I have been able to come up with so far is to be aware of the MBTI types of the people in your social circle, and know the descriptions of what worst functioning for those typse looks like, and then plan accordingly.

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by BRUTE »

7Wannabe5 should not let herself get attached to anything she is not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if she feels the heat around the corner.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by IlliniDave »

Those sorts of things happen. I've learned the hard way to be careful screening those I voluntarily let far enough into my inner circle that their issues are apt become my issues (e.g., spouse/SO or a business partner). When it comes to family, I think you have to take them on a case-by-case basis as they arise. My approach is to maintain an agile and somewhat autonomous posture rooted in FI with a modest superabundance of resources. That allows for resilience and for me to be happier on a day-to-day basis than I would be if I tried to analyze everyone, speculate on worst-case outcomes, and then try to plan for those individually.

The follow-up I anticipate is, "What if you plan wasn't to maintain an agile and somewhat autonomous posture rooted in FI with a modest superabundance of resources?" I can't answer that because it is essentially the same as asking me, "If you weren't you, what would you do?"

Attachment to other people is a risk/reward scenario not completely unlike investing. To get the reward you have to take the risk. The key is to avoid taking risks you can't afford to endure if they manifest. Emotion is an important consideration (arguably the most important) in either endeavor (investing or building a network of social interdependence) and limiting risk limits potential rewards. Nevertheless, that is the philosophy of the screening I employ. There are some risks you are stuck with unless you completely refuse to play the game (and even then they can affect you indirectly). For those, even in investing, I tend to look to my overall position to endure, rather than a menu of individual actions to to take in anticipation of or in the face of the subset of potential outcomes I could anticipate. From a social interdependence network perspective, that could suggest broadening (diversifying) the network as a prudent tactic. Unfortunately my introversion does not allow me to do that so I have to lean in the self-reliance direction. A both/and approach is probably the optimum.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9369
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@BRUTE@IlliniDave:

I hear you on the autonomy, but how do you determine the proper placement or balance of your external resources.

For instance, for reasons having to do with some bad experiences, I do not like leaving all my stuff locked in a car or domicile to which I do not personally hold a set of keys. However, it is often inconvenient to carry the entire contents of my purse or pack or case with me when out and about, so I have a tiny purse and a tiny pack in which I will keep maybe 3 things I might need to rescue myself.

So, there are all these sorts of things that provide some degree of security or access, like passwords, car keys, moat and bridge, jacket pocket with zipper, and then there are all these resources to which you may hold access and/or ownership which you keep nearer or further away from you in more or less real or virtual form. I guess what I am asking is what sort of arrangement makes most rational sense?

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15906
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by jacob »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Thu Aug 03, 2017 7:04 pm
The best strategy I have been able to come up with so far is to be aware of the MBTI types of the people in your social circle, and know the descriptions of what worst functioning for those typse looks like, and then plan accordingly.
http://oddlydevelopedtypes.com/post-apo ... al_by_type

Tyler9000
Posts: 1758
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:45 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by Tyler9000 »

BRUTE wrote:
Fri Aug 04, 2017 12:44 am
7Wannabe5 should not let herself get attached to anything she is not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if she feels the heat around the corner.
Just wanted to say I immediately recognized the reference. Still one of my all time favorites.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by IlliniDave »

7Wannabe5,

I dunno that I can answer as I don't have a systematic approach. I live alone in a relatively crime-free neighborhood so I consider the inside of my house day-to-day secure. I do have all my important passwords written down and hidden somewhere it is extraordinarily unlikely anyone else would find them. For important passwords I practice using strong passwords that I change frequently. I don't have any physical possessions that holding on to is a life-or-death matter to me. I carry homeowners and auto insurance with an umbrella policy over the top. I have a spare car key hidden in the vehicle that probably won't be found until/unless it's in the chop shop. I have a spare house key buried in the yard. When I go on my wilderness mini-forays I count on my experience and the collective experience of the people I learned the ropes from. Anywhere else, having a good stash means most all things are replaceable with no more consequence than inconvenience.

Being FI and sorta wealthy (not in the league of some of the men you run with) means I have a lot of ability to come to the aid of family members. Being a bit of an old-school hardass (I was strongly influenced by the WWII generation) I'm less susceptible to falling victim to manipulative people or being an inadvertent enabler. I'll give someone a fish, and gladly teach them to fish, but after that I expect them to be beating the water until their arms fall off. Don't come to me for a second fish until you are armless.

What makes most sense? In the most general sense you would need to identify your most significant vulnerabilities and prioritize addressing them as best you can. And make it a habitual ongoing process to do that. Multipurpose solutions are good. Although you are trying to be independent of it, money is a good example. In the vast majority of situations it can feed me, shelter me, get me medical care, clothe me, and countless other things. Redundancy is good. Besides money I have some ability to hunt, fish, forage, and grow food. I have some other skills and physical abilities that I can swap (alas, no, not that. I would wind up a beyond destitute gigolo or prostitute). So metaphorically: money is my police force and standing army, autonomy is my hardened position, and my (hopefully growing) knowledge and skills are my special forces. Alliances are fluid, even family, and should those I do have fail, that's what I've got left.

I suspect that doesn't answer your question because I'm not 100% sure if I'm understanding it. I'm just throwing stuff against the wall based on where you've meandered around the topic.

Riggerjack
Posts: 3180
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by Riggerjack »

1) Your business partner starts gambling on penny stocks with company funds.
2) Your teenage daughter becomes addicted to pain-killers and starts pawning your belongings.
3) Your spouse runs away to Tahiti to paint naked teenage girls and leaves you to cover the mortgage.
4) Your Aunt who is a member of your Sprint Framily is lapsing into senility and keeps changing the password to the account and then forgetting it.
5) Your boyfriend does not take his medication for bi-polar disease and shakes you awake at 3 in the morning and asks for your car keys.
1. Don't partner with someone who has so little idea what being a partner is.

2. Just two more reasons why dogs are better than kids. Dogs don't do drugs unless I give em to her. And my dog still likes me even though she's a teenager.

3. Fuck the mortgage! I'm going with my wife to paint naked chicks in Tahiti!

4. Why would I give the password to my aunt, senile or otherwise?

5. I'm married, to a very stable woman, she already has the keys.

My point is all your scenarios came from your choices. Different choices lead to different scenarios. I can't see being in any of those situations, as I'm no longer in my 20's, and have been making better decisions for about 15 years. I tend to think about all my decisions in longer terms, nowadays.

I'm an introvert, which means I really only have a limited amount of energy for friends and family. I seem to have more people who want to be friends than I have time or energy for, so I am picky about who I share my time with. My friends have faults, but none would cause the drama you describe.

I don't know how an extrovert would be good at filtering out friends unworthy of the name. Extroverts seem to place more value on new and different in friends than I do.

steelerfan
Posts: 127
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:33 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by steelerfan »

@7W5

A couple of observations from an introvert (like Riggerjack):

In the 4 years you have been here, I have seen this cycle play out a couple times. Highs and Lows. You are now at a low. In a month or two you will likely be back on the upswing - so hang tight. There is a fair amount of chaos in your life. You either like it that way or that is only way you know how to live at this point. Some of it with your perma-family, some with the temporary NPCs that you inject in with your poly adventures/relationships. You seem to be energized by these new people and how you can play the game to juggle them and get the most benefit for the least effort. Truthfully, I find you fascinating, although I am not smart enough to follow some of your thought process. It makes my head hurt! But I still enjoy your antics - as much as you seem to enjoy confessing them! It's better than a cheap book on the Kindle.

If you really want advice (which you don't), I would tell you to ditch them *all* - especially the NPCs as they are playing you as much or more than you are to them. They have the money and you are their slave (willing or unwilling - it makes no difference). I would leave the area. At this point if you have any possessions worth keeping, rent a storage for the stuff you can't take and leave with the minimum baggage. Do not tell them where. Reinvent yourself - do not talk or dwell in the past. Create a new identity. You are smart and witty enough to attract high dollar men. Maybe focus on finding one that is less "transactional".Just do it.

Of course, I do not think you will take advice given from strangers. I sure as hell wouldn't. I will tell you if my kid stole from me, I would change the locks and meet them offsite. I would help them and love them but they would have to demonstrate they were worthy of my trust.

Good luck. It will get better. If you really want things to change, you will have to change the way you deal with your environment. I honestly do not think you want to change, this post was more a statement of self pity. You don't need my sympathy. I have seen the self reliant 7W5 before. As well as this one...

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by BRUTE »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:48 pm
1) Your business partner starts gambling on penny stocks with company funds.
2) Your teenage daughter becomes addicted to pain-killers and starts pawning your belongings.
3) Your spouse runs away to Tahiti to paint naked teenage girls and leaves you to cover the mortgage.
4) Your Aunt who is a member of your Sprint Framily is lapsing into senility and keeps changing the password to the account and then forgetting it.
5) Your boyfriend does not take his medication for bi-polar disease and shakes you awake at 3 in the morning and asks for your car keys.
if brute were to take a step back and look at these scenarios, they all seem to stem from a tight coupling to uncertain, uncontrollable entities - i.e., too much risk taking.

what should brute do when his penny stocks fall to zero? what should brute do when his crypto coins on that chinese fly-by-night exchange disappear forever?

wrong question.

brute should not take risks that he cannot bear.

User avatar
Sclass
Posts: 2791
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:15 pm
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by Sclass »

BRUTE wrote:
Fri Aug 04, 2017 12:44 am
7Wannabe5 should not let herself get attached to anything she is not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if she feels the heat around the corner.
Unless it is Ashley Judd. :lol: Wait, I guess Val Kilmer did leave her at the end of the movie.

I've tried really hard to steer clear of trouble types. I regrettably left two women that I loved simply because I saw storm clouds on the horizon. I mean I dumped them before they were a problem because it was obvious that things were going to get problematic. sometimes you have to pick your battles.

Getting stuck with family is another story. As much as I'd like to bail on mine I'm still floundering to try to hold my little pile of marbles together as they roll around.

slowtraveler
Posts: 722
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 10:06 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by slowtraveler »

+1 RiggerJack

I haven't had any of these experiences.

Below is a short story of how I learned to have less people in my life but people I admire rather than accepting whoever.

I had a childhood friend I had to let go of. He was always a little off but I took it as human and that he'd grow out of it. As I became a teenager, I noticed would go out at night stealing, breaking into houses/cars and shame me for not trespassing or stealing. He would shame me for not wanting to smoke (or even smoke more as if it was a competition). He was always getting into trouble and was trying to drag me along. I've let go of these people before so I simply stop responding.

I changed my number, he got it from a friend's phone. I caved and hung out with him one last time after that to catch up and see if he'd improved. He told me a story of having to rob a store to get out of trouble since he'd already screwed over everyone willing to get him out of that situation. I listened and engaged. Then, I told him a story of this girl I'd fallen for. He didn't care at all and was rather rude about anything around her. I found her gorgeous but he didn't and he described her with some words I wouldn't tolerate.

I wondered why I ever spent more than a minute with him and when he wanted to add me on facebook, I sent him a long message detailing why I wanted no contact. He said something along the lines of denial, then hurt/anger and I never heard from him again. Life has been more pleasant without him.

All that said, I think steelerfan also has a point. You're a tough badass and you'll bounce back.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9369
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@jacob: That is a funny because true article, but I was thinking more about the ways in which different Types break down under stress over time. For instance, this is a description of what might happen in a relationship between a 7 (roughly ENTP) and a 5 (roughly INTJ) if both were at their very worst.
Potential Trouble Spots or Issues

Fives tend to minimize their needs and their expectations of life, particularly whenever they are under more stress. They tend to see things in terms of scarcity and of being personally unprepared to meet the demands of the world. The result is that as pressures on them increase, Fives tend to withdraw and detach emotionally from everyone around them, and ultimately, even from themselves. They become more reclusive, isolated, disembodied minds who are difficult to break through to, much less to engage in constructive action. This pattern is very difficult on Sevens for whom quick action and having multiple escape routes is the norm. As pressures increase on them, Sevens go into hyper-drive, going more places, doing more things, talking more, getting more advice, gossiping about their relationship problems, and possibly turning to substance abuse to control their mounting anxiety and sadness. These problems only make Fives withdraw further and become frightened of someone who they see as out of control.
But, at higher functioning levels, 7s and 5s (and all other Types) are much more alike. So, if you knew the Types of the people with whom you are in frequent and/or intimate relationship, and you knew how they were most likely to break down under stress, it would be like knowing what sort of particularly bad weather events you might anticipate in some region. Then you could proceed in alignment with "There's no such thing as poor weather, only poor choice of clothing."
IlliniDave wrote: Multipurpose solutions are good. Although you are trying to be independent of it, money is a good example. In the vast majority of situations it can feed me, shelter me, get me medical care, clothe me, and countless other things.
Yes, but money can only do all those things for you within the context of trade with other humans. So, really what you are saying is that even in the Land of Strangers you can trade with money for much of what you need or want.

I am thinking a lot in terms of maps these days. So, if I were to trace a path on a map of human movement or interaction within the boundary of your house, it would mostly only be you, like an adult male bear pattern. You could probably legally rent out or share rooms with other humans at occupation rate of 6 or 7, so you are de facto "paying" for your privacy or security or lack of hassle dealing with living with other humans. As Jacob wrote in the book in the section on the chapter on Shelter "Sharing things as in dorms, communes, or families represents enormous savings." However, there are also expenses associated with sharing with other humans, inclusive of greater complexity of maintaining security. Simple example being the odds of a door being left carelessly unlocked if you share your home with 6 other key holders. So, hugs vs. hassles being held neutral, where does the financial risk of security issues balance the financial loss of facilities not fully occupied? Expand calculation with countless variations on this theme.

@Riggerjack@steelerfan@Felipe

I didn't mean to imply that all these scenarios have happened to me. I was just trying to come up with examples of the sort of thing I meant. I was down in the dumps with self-pity for a little while, but not anymore. I am more in the time-out puzzle-solving, plan-making INTP mode of my XNTP personality. As an XNTP, I am pretty neutral in terms of my needs for sociability vs. solitude, so I have some freedom in the sense that I can afford to consider the upside/downside of any/all social options. For instance, live in a cabin in the woods by myself vs. live in a hostel-commune with 20 other people are both options I would consider as possibly happiness generating for a time. I also don't tend towards suffering very much or for very long from any sense of overwrought loyalty or sunk-cost fallacy in my relationships. What I am trying to get at is more like an insurance or investment calculation in alignment with
BRUTE wrote:if brute were to take a step back and look at these scenarios, they all seem to stem from a tight coupling to uncertain, uncontrollable entities - i.e., too much risk taking.

what should brute do when his penny stocks fall to zero? what should brute do when his crypto coins on that chinese fly-by-night exchange disappear forever?

wrong question.

brute should not take risks that he cannot bear.
IOW, it is my observation that I do have a tendency to take risks on forming relationships of various forms with individuals who do carry some red flags, but also otherwise have much of value to offer. So, maybe the question I am attempting to ask is maybe something like how does one best hedge long-shot bets in the realm of social relationships?

Yesterday morning I met a man who did 3 tours in Vietnam as a member of special forces and has a pet bear and a pet lion, and I thought it might be interesting or fun to become his friend. So, I think it is pretty much hopeless to advise me to stick to associating with only very sober, sedate citizens.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by IlliniDave »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:31 am
Yes, but money can only do all those things for you within the context of trade with other humans. So, really what you are saying is that even in the Land of Strangers you can trade with money for much of what you need or want.
I don't get the reference to "Land of Strangers". What I'm saying is that in the environment I live in, I can trade money for much of what I need or want.

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:31 am
I am thinking a lot in terms of maps these days. So, if I were to trace a path on a map of human movement or interaction within the boundary of your house, it would mostly only be you, like an adult male bear pattern. You could probably legally rent out or share rooms with other humans at occupation rate of 6 or 7, so you are de facto "paying" for your privacy or security or lack of hassle dealing with living with other humans. As Jacob wrote in the book in the section on the chapter on Shelter "Sharing things as in dorms, communes, or families represents enormous savings." However, there are also expenses associated with sharing with other humans, inclusive of greater complexity of maintaining security. Simple example being the odds of a door being left carelessly unlocked if you share your home with 6 other key holders. So, hugs vs. hassles being held neutral, where does the financial risk of security issues balance the financial loss of facilities not fully occupied? Expand calculation with countless variations on this theme.
Probably don't need the "de facto" qualifier. I quite openly and deliberately pay for my privacy. And yes, a lot of "security" risks are mitigated by very closely managing who I allow into my personal space and when. I don't typically have an explicitly transactional mentality. One could come up with an equation though, I suppose, and it might be of the form:

How much I value privacy = marginal utility to me of expense avoided through sacrificing privacy.

which is highly subjective. Both sides of the equation could contain several rolled up considerations. For me it's inherent to my definition of FI that I can financially afford to maintain my own residence. So it's taken for granted and I don't reassess on an ongoing basis. It's an option I want and I went out and cobbled up the money to keep it viable.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9369
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

IlliniDave wrote:What I'm saying is that in the environment I live in, I can trade money for much of what I need or want.
Yeah, it's kind of cool in a way. We're not very far from being able to trade money for what we need or want without any other human having to be directly involved in the process. Planetary vending machine. Since robots use less energy than humans, some equilibrium ideal could be achieved.
For me it's inherent to my definition of FI that I can financially afford to maintain my own residence. So it's taken for granted and I don't reassess on an ongoing basis. It's an option I want and I went out and cobbled up the money to keep it viable.
Gotcha. My observation of my own pattern is that I never choose to live by myself, but with the exception of my child-raising years, I am not very likely to maintain residence with others for very long either. I am also likely to form other types of partnerships. For instance, I had no intention to take on a partner when I started my book business or when I started my permaculture project, but overall I benefited from both of those partnerships. Maybe I'm not explaining very well, but there are a lot of contracts we enter into that involve other people that are more likely than not to fail in some manner eventually, but it is still the case that the sum of these entered into, worked upon, and then failed contracts over time is better than doing everything in a more self-reliant manner. So, what I am trying to figure out is how to best plan for failure rather than suffer the losses associated with planning to avoid it?

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by BRUTE »

just being aware of the pattern is a good start, isn't it? as an analogy, brute has observed he's a terrible market timer. he just doesn't keep up with all the minutia, and he has the wrong temperament for it. thus, he tries to avoid timing the market too much.

if the observed behavior is "getting into relationships with risky, but otherwise rewarding humans", maybe the strategy could revolve around minimizing the downside (=not leaving car keys with said humans), hedging (sounds like 7Wannabe5 is on top of this one), never relying on just one human for any specific important factor (=internet password), not getting into mortgages or similarly tightly coupled relationships with them, not sleeping overnight when human is off medication..

NPV
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:41 am

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by NPV »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:51 pm
So, what I am trying to figure out is how to best plan for failure rather than suffer the losses associated with planning to avoid it?
Diversification?

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9369
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@BRUTE: Yes! The examples you offered are what I have been trying to do, but haven't been doing very well. For instance, the practice of polyamory was meant to simultaneously prevent me from getting too tightly coupled on the level of something like "mortgage" or "marriage", but keep me well-covered for the factors of sex and entertainment, without the risks or expenses or lack of benefit inherent in serial monogamy.

I have also been thinking about this from the other side of my relationships. Believe it or not, IRL I am generally judged to be quite trust-worthy and calm-center. I currently hold the keys to 5 homes to which I do not hold deed or lease. If I couch-surfed with IlliniDave on a bike trip down South, he would probably not suffer any net losses unless he keeps count of how many cookies were in the box :lol:

When I started dating my current BF-ish-person, he was still post-divorce camped out in the spare room of his best friend's house. So, when I stayed with him, I was borrowing half of an already borrowed bed for the night. For some reason I like finding myself in this sort of situation for the same reason I like shopping at thrift stores. Even if you find a person in some kind of used-up, rough shape, on the side of the road, it is possible to make good use of what they still do have to offer for a while. I don't like shopping and living like everybody else shops and lives.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9369
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Social Security- not what you are thinking

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@scriptbunny: My entire life has become a consistently stocked overnight bag. I never gave anybody the keys to my camper, although that did not stop one of my swains from riding his bike over there and hanging out when I was not around. I always live with other people, so would not give out key to residence. My method for stalk-prevention is to gain 10 lbs. and then make some very specific needy demands. Then three months later, the guy might start thinking "Why did we break up?", but too late for stalking.

I'd ship it. Clearly the best ERE OTP.
lol- I actually tend towards thinking of fellow members of internet groups like this as being like characters in the Peanuts comic strip. For this particular forum, I also imagine everyone is sitting around a table in a Victorian Gentlemen's Club smoking cigars in well-worn leather chairs, while ensconced in BIFL silk robes with velvet lapels. As in "That 7WB5, bit of a cheeky bounder, angling for an invite on such short acquaintance. "Resource conservation", my foot."

For some reason, I am fascinated by human patterns that seem arbitrary, or are unquestioned, but maybe should be. For instance, in the realm of housing why is it so uncommon for two couples of similar age to share a residence? In the realm of dating/mating, I once came up with the notion of doing a human primate experiment which would require me to enter a bar wearing a red t-shirt and then approach variety of men with request to brush my hair. I am actually too shy to do that myself, but would be very curious to witness the results. When I choose to engage in casual relationship, I call the series of behaviors I enact to disengage afterwards "brushing my own hair." My belongings all checked and packed back neatly into bag, last twist of hair neatly plaited and secured with band, I smile and say "Are you ready to drive me home?" and then "Thank you for a lovely weekend. I had a fun time." and then I am free again.

Post Reply