topup:

Urm. . you might just have to be a lot more specific than that, don't get me wrong, useful advice and everything, but can you answer the question?

Thanks

JJYOU:

our minds is our personally properties.  you can control your mind if you know how to and want to for that matter.  only the guy can answer that question.  don't you 19yrs old is to young to ask for such level of commitment from?  some people have the inner eye. they can see what others don't see easily.

if you are in the midst of people putting presures on you it would be wie to change location.  people can change church, work or states to run away from people they don't want to be around. it is sometimes good.

25%more:

i think the first one is true, they sense then block it either cox they are scared of loosing their free single lifestyle, or they want some thing else

topup:

That to me sounds like there was nothing in the relationship to begin with, if they want something else, surely they are not emotionally tied to you in the slightest, right?

topup:

Yes, the best time to be single is when you are young, but he doesn't have to be single at all, I guess some people don't like being in a relationships, but I just think he had wandering eye syndrome, the grass always looks greener on the other side, for us singles, we can dance with whoever, kiss whoever, with only a little guilt, but he has to think about never being able to kiss another girl again.

I think that is what is daunting him, he is trying to control 'this urge' you guys talking about, how your body naturally wants to propagate and sow the seeds. . .

Hmmm

topup:

Is it possible to catch yourself before you fall in love?

What do you think? Is it possible for a guy to detect incoming 'love' and to block it so that he can do what he has to do, such as move to a different location, marry another girl to please his family, obtain freedom so he can chase his career dreams, obtain freedom so he can focus on becoming successful (without the baggage of a girlfriend he 'so dearly loves').

Or do you think that the guys never truly loved the girls, they simply were just very fond of them and just snapped out of the whole daze of pretending that the relationship would last 'til marriage?

What's the verdict?

Ujujoan:

You might think that people don't have to be single at all, but you are very wrong. Life is a stage. You have to learn to crawl, walk before you run. If you skip any of these stages, you must have lost an important stage in your life which would have great psychological consequences. I don't see what a 19 year old wants to do with a serious relationship.

I agree, we don't all have to be in relationships, but I thought I didn't have to explain the fact that everybody would have already experienced single life at some age or the other, I for example spent 19 years of my life, without a single kiss, touch, NOTHING, that was by choice and it suited the phase I was going through and the people around at that time too.

But do we have to put an age limit on things? Should we now be pressuring a 22 year old man to consider having his first girlfriend or should we wait until he is a 'spinster' at 40? I believe everyone's different, and I understand that I may have not made that clear in my initial post.

However, my main question deals with reasons why people refuse to commit. I believe these are the same people who realise that once they achieve whatever they set their goals on, eventually the ugly head of relationships will rear itself at them, my theory is that these people are check box types. Certain things MUST come first, now I have a checkbox, I think we all should, it has academics, relationships, marriage and children, in their rightful order, but I think what makes me different to the people I have described in my previous post is that, certain things can happen in my life, in which I will change the order, I mean what if I find my ideal guy in the first year of university, will I leave him behind, because I sorted that to come after my graduation No, that's not me, but that is what I believe a person who can 'block love' is able to do, basically we are dealing with people who are able to RATIONALISE EVERYTHING.

GsUp:

@Poster:

The 'love blocker' mechanism comes into play for the following reasons:

1. When the guy does not want to lose the freedom of choice that goes with being single

2. He wants to focus on his career. Sometimes men do feel that a committed relationship can be a distraction in the 'building phase' of one's career. Emphasis on building phase

3. He has[b] 'Provider Mentality.'[/b] Even if the girl loves him unconditionally, is prepared to build with him and isn't materialistic, he does not feel confident about relationship until he is financially comfortable with himself. Please Note being 'financially comfortable' in the case of such a man does not refer to middle class comforts - car, house, stable job. Such men will not be confiident enough commit themselves to a woman until they are rich. I have heard several contemporaries say 'until I am rich, I will continue to play the field' - even if the woman is not even asking them for marriage, just a relationship.

4. He is not emotionally ready for a relationship, and does not want to destroy the friendship with the girl by messing things up taking into account the fact that he isn't ready.

Most of the guys I know fall into at least two if not all categories.

In response to this, I believe the psyche behind it suggests that the person is very rationalistic but is quite synical, but also realistic too. He doesn't have faith in love or give it too much credit, because if all his efforts go into building a relationship, he believes he cannot put all his effort into attaining his career goals. This way if love just suddenly disappears or falls apart, he is left with nothing, vulnerable, and believes it will be harder for an older man/man of his age to find love with 'nothing'. He believes that at least if he builds himself up to be rich and successful not only will that increase the chances of women coming to him (not necessarily love, but he may believe so), that at least if they leave or if it breaks, he still has his empire to fall on, however, he must be extremely financially stable for him to bear the catastrophic effect of a separating relationship. He wants to know that even if she takes everything, he'll be able to stand on his own two feet.

What do you think of that analysis guys n gals?

19 is too young in my book to be in serious relationships. learn not to make your friendships last longer than they are necesary.  some are seasonal.

Fizzlle:


and may i ask why 19 is too young and how to make your friends not last too long and whats wrong with having a relationship at 19 . Oh um i hope I'm not intruding , looks like this is a female Forum but id really appreciate a friendly reply from any or every one here .

Nope, this isn't a female forum, maybe it's 'the pink' that's given you that idea, anyways

I don't believe 19 is too young, but I am around that age range so I have seen many serious and genuine relationships work, equally as many older people. I guess when you're older you may not be able to relate anymore, or maybe it's that thing we all go through, when as soon as we turn 13 we think we are teenagers, we think we are cool, we can romance, date and some even engage in sex. I mean wasn't it Jojo who sang 'Leave/Get out' about a cheating boyfriend, and most older women must have laughed as her song about tears and heartbreak couldn't possibly compare to having a husband for 25 years who's walked out on you with your sister or colleague. Do you see where I am going, a person at the age of 19 might believe they understand what love is, but that is just their perspective (and as far as I'm concerned, I don't see anything wrong with it), maybe through a more mature/experienced perspective, you can see the infatuation or lust instead, I don't know. But my opinion, is that everyone's different, I believe I matured at a very early age, that is why I had the bigger picture with me all along, all my friends wanted to try out so many things, with so many people, but I knew it'd look bad especially in the eyes of the person I eventually want to be with, for the rest of my life. So yes, for a period of my life, I was SO NOT COOL!!

Tatase:

Sidenote:
I always thought a "love blocker" was the friend whose constant presence prevented a guy from reaching his targeted chick.

topup:


However, my main question deals with reasons why people refuse to commit. I believe these are the same people who realise that once they achieve whatever they set their goals on, eventually the ugly head of relationships will rear itself at them, my theory is that these people are check box types. Certain things MUST come first, now I have a checkbox, I think we all should, it has academics, relationships, marriage and children, in their rightful order, but I think what makes me different to the people I have described in my previous post is that, certain things can happen in my life, in which I will change the order, I mean what if I find my ideal guy in the first year of university, will I leave him behind, because I sorted that to come after my graduation No, that's not me, but that is what I believe a person who can 'block love' is able to do, basically we are dealing with people who are able to RATIONALISE EVERYTHING.

topup:


In response to this, I believe the psyche behind it suggests that the person is very rationalistic but is quite synical, but also realistic too. He doesn't have faith in love or give it too much credit, because if all his efforts go into building a relationship, he believes he cannot put all his effort into attaining his career goals. This way if love just suddenly disappears or falls apart, he is left with nothing, vulnerable, and believes it will be harder for an older man/man of his age to find love with 'nothing'. He believes that at least if he builds himself up to be rich and successful not only will that increase the chances of women coming to him (not necessarily love, but he may believe so), that at least if they leave or if it breaks, he still has his empire to fall on, however, he must be extremely financially stable for him to bear the catastrophic effect of a separating relationship. He wants to know that even if she takes everything, he'll be able to stand on his own two feet.

What do you think of that analysis guys n gals?

topup:

That's a 'cock blocker'.

Busy_body:

BRB, after christmas of course, I have asked Santa i want only want a dictionary this christmas, so that i can be able to tackle this thread and do it the justice that it deserves

Tgirl4real:

Iyalode,

I think say na only me o. Na so so grammarians fool this thread. I just post so that it won't be like i don't understand grammer. Ha, santa, me need a dico too