57 ms·
I had a relationship in which I attempted to maintain separate social circles as much as possible for this very reason - we had overlapping friends, but I encou
by presidentender 16y ago
I had a relationship in which I attempted to maintain separate social circles as much as possible for this very reason - we had overlapping friends, but I encouraged her to keep a separate group of "her friends" with whom I would not go hang out, mostly girls. She'd invite me frequently, and this became a major bone of contention... This was a contributing factor to the downfall of that relationship.
On the upside, I didn't lose any friends. On the downside, she lost many.
- pkulak 16y agoSounds like if you had just not tried this little experiment you'd still be with her and have double the friends.
- presidentender 16y agoI do not disagree.
- Goosey 16y agoThis thread reads like an 'A Softer World' comic. :(
- okaramian 16y agoI believe this is the "George Costanza World's Colliding" philosophy of relationships and friendships.
- CWuestefeld 16y agoHedging against the failure of the relationship is not the best way to achieve a successful long-term relationship.
- philwelch 16y agoIn general, hedging against the failure of X is not the best way to successfully achieve X, if X is something within your control. Extreme example: when the Spanish conquistadors landed in the Americas, they immediately burned their ships, so they would have no way of escaping back home to Spain in case things didn't work out. They would either conquer an empire or die. Obviously, there are situations where burning your ships isn't warranted. But frankly, gambling on the success of the relationship is not the best way to keep your friends, either. It's a tradeoff. Sometimes in life you have to burn your ships. I hope everyone finds someone worth burning their ships for.
- HeyLaughingBoy 16y agoI seem to remember reading that this is a myth. Even if I hadn't read that, it wouldn't make sense. Ships of any era represent large capital expenditures. No navy would give up a ship unless it's unusable or can't be defended; worst case, they'd sail home empty with a skeleton crew.
- philwelch 16y agoI checked Wikipedia. Evidently, Cortez had gotten in trouble with the governor of Cuba, Then: "Those of his men still loyal to the Governor of Cuba conspired to seize a ship and escape to Cuba, but Cortés moved swiftly to quash their plans. To make sure such a mutiny did not happen again, he decided to scuttle his ships, on the pretext that they were no longer seaworthy. There is a popular misconception that Cortés burned the ships to prevent further mutiny, instead Cortés scuttled all but at least one, which were simply ran aground. This misconception has been attributed to the reference made by Cervantes de Salazar in 1546 as to Cortés burning his ships.[7] This may have also come from a mistranslation of the version of the story written in Latin.[8] With all of his ships scuttled except for one small ship with which to communicate with Spain, Cortés effectively stranded the expedition in the so-called New World and ended all thoughts of loyalty to the Governor of Cuba. Cortés then led his band inland towards the fabled Tenochtitlan."
- presidentender 16y agoCortes' burning of the ships was to make discipline among his men a non-issue, not the discipline of his own mind. Your point remains untainted by the imperfection of your analogy. As you say, gambling on relationship success may cost friends; I chose my friends and believe I am happier for it.
- mkramlich 16y ago> They would either conquer an empire or die. funny thing was, they mostly did both!