Long term relationship with Rin? Be honest...

[slagman5]

And do you think she has to go to some "disabled people" school? Both my middle school and my high school had a few people missing limbs who attended there. I never met one missing both arms, but I think that's more to do with chance than them not ever going to a normal school... The girl in my highschool was missing both her legs, but she didn't wear prosthetics like emi, but had a motorized wheelchair...

Well I was never specific on where, cause it really doesn't matter too much.

And the point I'm making is like, with the girl in the wheelchair, would you have considered dating her honestly? You haven't gotten to know her yet, but you see her, would you over look the fact she was missing her legs and bother to get to know her, despite the options to date others who aren't in the same boat as her?

I know I wasn't asked, but personally I'd say yes. I can't know for sure, but I think I'd hate myself if I was that put off by a wheelchair that I threw out what could potentially be one of the happiest times of my life just because I didn't want to deal with her annoying handicap. There are plenty of people not in wheelchairs, sure, but most of them suck and if she doesn't then that weighs in her favor, not theirs.

And okay, good to know with the age, I suppose.

I agree man, a good woman is hard to find. Well, a good SINGLE woman, lol. I find really nice women all of the time who are already taken. All of the single ones are always either really annoying or have something else that just makes me not able to stand them, lol. So it would be a real bummer to turn down someone just because of that and miss out on knowing a really cool girl. Unfortunately, the girl I'm talking about in the wheelchair in my highschool was extremely annoying, like a complete B****... So she had nothing going for her, lol.

[slagman5]

Well in the long run, if a person can weigh it out in a realistic manner, rather then seeing the drawn image and use that as a basis for their decision. Thats all really the ends of it. (Based on the original criteria of the question.)

And I apologize to Slag in sense. My "point" does comes off as somewhat antagonistic (though there is no intention with that.) I can understand something that can be described as a deep-rooted desire is not something anyone wants tarnished in any manner.

Rin isn't my number one, but I can say she isn't anywhere near the bottom of the list. (This list being of all girls, not just the main route ones.)

She is very interesting on both an emotional and mental level, even with some form of abrasion with her conversations. But I don't find her physical attractive. So she would make a great friend, at best for me.

No need to apologize, just wanted to squeeze you for your opinion of my original question. I'm not "disagreeing" with anything you've said. It makes perfect sense if you personally can't see yourself dating someone who is physically disabled. I am not knocking you or going to say you're insensitive, everyone's different and have different wants and desires in life. No problem at all. I was just pushing you since that wasn't really the point of my original question and I wanted to get that out of you.

[brythain]

Honestly, and this might come off as an insult to somebody so please don't take it that way, but if you want to get to know somebody, yet the thought of having difficulties dealing with their physical limitations makes you turn away, then you probably don't actually care all that much about them and you shouldn't ever even start a relationship with them, let alone try for the long term.

*grin* let me rephrase that:

1) I am saying that I'm not sure if I could in fact deal with such limitations, never having been in that situation before.
2) I am saying that you're right; if you can't you should not.
3) I am saying that you're not totally right; it is certainly something you should be thinking about after you've perhaps fallen in love.
4) See, to follow your line of argument, you must think about it. If you don't think about it, you'd never decide if you should start a ship or not
5) In fact, if you don't think about it, you shouldn't start a ship. And if you do think about it, it's not something to be taken lightly.
6) And after all that, if you've had your difficult thoughts and have decided to commit to making it work, you should stay for the long term.

Better?

That's me being honest. I don't think I've ever entered a relationship without thinking about the consequences of marrying the person involved. It's the way I am…

The other problem I have can be phrased like this: a person in a wheelchair is distinctly different from a person who has no arms; town planning tends to take the former into account much more than the latter. If you live in an urban environment, you'll notice this. Of course, the armless-from-birth person is already very capable, and hasn't 'bad' reflexes on that score. But the armless-from-birth person requires a different, and I would argue less kinetically stable, skill-set than one in a wheelchair or with prosthetic legs. It's hard to have your primary locomotion AND manipulation in the same limbs AND not have problems in a typical city.

[Zykes]

No need to apologize, just wanted to squeeze you for your opinion of my original question. I'm not "disagreeing" with anything you've said. It makes perfect sense if you personally can't see yourself dating someone who is physically disabled. I am not knocking you or going to say you're insensitive, everyone's different and have different wants and desires in life. No problem at all. I was just pushing you since that wasn't really the point of my original question and I wanted to get that out of you.

That isn't true, at worst, i'd say that anyone with more moderate to severe levels of amputation would be my limited point, however very minor levels of it, or someone being deaf or blind is not an issue for me (Well, I do like to talk in conversation and I'd feel I wouldn't get the full effect with a girl who is deaf, or mute. but that isn't a physical problem I suppose.)

[SpunkySix]

Honestly, and this might come off as an insult to somebody so please don't take it that way, but if you want to get to know somebody, yet the thought of having difficulties dealing with their physical limitations makes you turn away, then you probably don't actually care all that much about them and you shouldn't ever even start a relationship with them, let alone try for the long term.

Better?

I don't think so, to be honest.

I've been trying to hold this back because it's going to sound mean, but bluntly, if you aren't willing to work around their physical issues, then you are not their friend. At that point, the state of the relationship is irrelevant and you probably just don't care about them. You are not in love if you question your desire to care for them despite their issues... you aren't there for them and you aren't passionate about them.

I mean... think about what you're saying in plain terms without sugar coating it:

"I like you, but wow your handicap is annoying and all that effort just isn't worth it. Sorry. We can still be friend as long as I don't have to deal with you though, right?"

[Zykes]

"I like you, but wow your handicap is annoying and all that effort just isn't worth it. Sorry. We can still be friend as long as I don't have to deal with you though, right?"

That is human nature, you can take out that one word and put something else, its all the same

"I like you, but wow your friends ares annoying and all that effort just isn't worth it. Sorry. We can still be friend as long as I don't have to deal with them though, right?"

"I like you, but wow your family is annoying and all that effort just isn't worth it. Sorry. We can still be friend as long as I don't have to deal with them though, right?"

"I like you, but wow your job is annoying and all that effort just isn't worth it. Sorry. We can still be friend as long as I don't have to deal with that though, right?"

[slagman5]

Honestly, and this might come off as an insult to somebody so please don't take it that way, but if you want to get to know somebody, yet the thought of having difficulties dealing with their physical limitations makes you turn away, then you probably don't actually care all that much about them and you shouldn't ever even start a relationship with them, let alone try for the long term.

Better?

I don't think so, to be honest.

I've been trying to hold this back because it's going to sound mean, but bluntly, if you aren't willing to work around their physical issues, then you are not their friend. At that point, the state of the relationship is irrelevant and you probably just don't care about them. You are not in love if you question your desire to care for them despite their issues... you aren't there for them and you aren't passionate about them.

I mean... think about what you're saying in plain terms without sugar coating it:

"I like you, but wow your handicap is annoying and all that effort just isn't worth it. Sorry. We can still be friend as long as I don't have to deal with you though, right?"

Hey man, like I've said though, don't start judging people based on their opinion on this. I personally don't think there's a right or wrong answer here. It's all personal preference/opinion/priorities, whatever you want to chalk it up to, he has his reasons why he feels the way he does and it makes sense to him and that's what matters. I don't want this to turn into an argument where everyone is getting defensive. We should be free to express our opinions.

[SpunkySix]

All I'm saying is that in that case, it isn't love and you aren't friends. That too is reality.

Friends are there for each other regardless of circumstance. This isn't an insult, it's a fact. You either love somebody, or you don't; there's no, "I love you but X is too bothersome". That instead means, "I WANT to love you, but X is too bothersome so I can't/won't" which is okay, but different.

As for the different words, a handicap is part of a person that can't be helped in the slightest or avoided no matter what they do. Friends, family and jobs can all be worked around and are not directly part of a person like missing limbs are.

[Zykes]

All I'm saying is that in that case, it isn't love and you aren't friends. That too is reality.

Friends are there for each other regardless of circumstance. This isn't an insult, it's a fact. You either love somebody, or you don't; there's no, "I love you but X is too bothersome". That instead means, "I WANT to love you, but X is too bothersome" which is different.

you have quite the black and white view on how friendship works.

[SpunkySix]

All I'm saying is that in that case, it isn't love and you aren't friends. That too is reality.

Friends are there for each other regardless of circumstance. This isn't an insult, it's a fact. You either love somebody, or you don't; there's no, "I love you but X is too bothersome". That instead means, "I WANT to love you, but X is too bothersome" which is different.

you have quite the black and white view on how friendship works.

How the heck can you be a good friend and tell somebody that their bodily limitations outweigh their personality and are too cumbersome to deal with?

[slagman5]

Honestly, and this might come off as an insult to somebody so please don't take it that way, but if you want to get to know somebody, yet the thought of having difficulties dealing with their physical limitations makes you turn away, then you probably don't actually care all that much about them and you shouldn't ever even start a relationship with them, let alone try for the long term.

*grin* let me rephrase that:

1) I am saying that I'm not sure if I could in fact deal with such limitations, never having been in that situation before.
2) I am saying that you're right; if you can't you should not.
3) I am saying that you're not totally right; it is certainly something you should be thinking about after you've perhaps fallen in love.
4) See, to follow your line of argument, you must think about it. If you don't think about it, you'd never decide if you should start a ship or not
5) In fact, if you don't think about it, you shouldn't start a ship. And if you do think about it, it's not something to be taken lightly.
6) And after all that, if you've had your difficult thoughts and have decided to commit to making it work, you should stay for the long term.

Better?

That's me being honest. I don't think I've ever entered a relationship without thinking about the consequences of marrying the person involved. It's the way I am…

The other problem I have can be phrased like this: a person in a wheelchair is distinctly different from a person who has no arms; town planning tends to take the former into account much more than the latter. If you live in an urban environment, you'll notice this. Of course, the armless-from-birth person is already very capable, and hasn't 'bad' reflexes on that score. But the armless-from-birth person requires a different, and I would argue less kinetically stable, skill-set than one in a wheelchair or with prosthetic legs. It's hard to have your primary locomotion AND manipulation in the same limbs AND not have problems in a typical city.

Thanks for your honest opinion. While I may not share the same view, I respect your opinion and your clear explanation of why you feel that way. I think it's a perfectly logical way to think about it. But with me personally, when it comes to love, all logic goes out the window. Yes, in a way, that's a bad thing. But I'm a bit of a hopeless romantic in that way.

[brythain]

"I like you, but wow your handicap is annoying and all that effort just isn't worth it. Sorry. We can still be friend as long as I don't have to deal with you though, right?"

Well, we aren't communicating too well on this point. I've not said that. What I'm saying is that if you're going into a relationship, it's your responsibility to make sure you can see it through to the end. It's not about whether the effort is worth it, but whether it will be sufficient for the other person. It doesn't matter what the situation is. In Rin's case, I've never encountered the difficulties directly, so I don't know if I can be sufficient. All the desire or effort on my part is no use if I screw up someone else's life because I didn't think about it first.

To turn the problem slightly for a better look: are you saying that you would plunge into a relationship without considering anything except your own perception of your own passion for the subject?

You are also conflating friendship in general with what is implied by 'long term relationship'; I'm assuming the sense meant here is something like marriage, because otherwise it's too vague. Also, friendship ≠ love, depending on what kind of love you mean.

EDIT: To make it clear, I don't think of SpunkySix as judging me, personally, whether or not this is in fact the case. I'm just looking at my thoughts and trying to clarify them.

[SpunkySix]

To turn the problem slightly for a better look: are you saying that you would plunge into a relationship without considering anything except your own perception of your own passion for the subject?.

I may have misunderstood, but I'm also replying to a few different people here so I'm getting a little cluttered. I apologize for that and I hope I didn't say anything too rough.

I'm saying that if I was truly in love with a person, then I would go to extensive lengths to make it work, because that's what lovers do. To me, there's no, "Oh gosh can I do this?" it's "I will do this." To me, that's what love is. It's also probably why it surprises me that people are considering whether or not they could handle it... as far as I'm concerned, once love is involved, that's not even a question.

[brythain]

How the heck can you be a good friend and tell somebody that their bodily limitations outweigh their personality and are too cumbersome to deal with?

Well, let me offer a scenario group:

1) You see this person in school a few hours a day, and you accept everything that person needs and provide it where desired and/or necessary.
2) You make every attempt to see this person all day, and you accept everything that person needs and provide it where desired and/or necessary..
3) You live with this person, and you accept everything that person needs and provide it where desired and/or necessary.
4) You are married to this person and have children with this person, and you accept everything that person needs and provide it where desired and/or necessary.

I think the levels of provision are certainly different.

However, I would say that you can be a good friend without being in a long-term relationship of romantic nature. Also, what has personality got to do with it? Or encumbrance? It's just a question: can you provide what that person needs or wants? It's not a question of whether you want to offer it—that, I assume, would be true for all your friends.

I also think it would be reckless to say "I will do this" without considering the likelihood that I -could- do this. I would certainly think, "Damn, I want to do this!" but I'd still ask myself to be honest about it.

[Zykes]

All I'm saying is that in that case, it isn't love and you aren't friends. That too is reality.

Friends are there for each other regardless of circumstance. This isn't an insult, it's a fact. You either love somebody, or you don't; there's no, "I love you but X is too bothersome". That instead means, "I WANT to love you, but X is too bothersome" which is different.

you have quite the black and white view on how friendship works.

How the heck can you be a good friend and tell somebody that their bodily limitations outweigh their personality and are too cumbersome to deal with?

Well consider that many variables exist on how friendship is seen.

I know quite a few people who are good friends and talk a lot of crap about each other. I know quite a few people who hang out and have fun, as friends, but dont get in their friends personal business.

Not all friendships are built the same, there is a lot of Gray area when it comes to that.