From: rwarren@vax2.concordia.ca (Rosemary from Montreal)
Subject: Re: how to get to root of strange behavior
Organization: Concordia University, Montreal, Canada
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:50:00 GMT

>I would invite her to email me if she feels
>	offended by what I wrote
here i am ramon.  boy when i asked for someone to pick me apart you took it 
literally!

In article <1992Dec16.222906.13086@news.eng.convex.com>, ramon@convex.com (Ramon Dominguez) writes...
>=>It doesn't cost a lot to have someone "checked up on"...You should be able
>=>to get a credit check, and/or criminal records check for less than $50.
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
>	Illegally, of course, unless you happen to be a corporation that
>	is a creditor of his.
as i mentioned to someone privately a few messages ago, if i do any 
investigation of sunday's relationship to concordia (and he has claimed to 
have studied here and even tried -- unsuccessfully -- to find my office)  
i can lose my job and bring down any "accomplices" with me.

>	It's hard to believe how you all are taking rwarren's side on this.
>	You are inventing stuff that wasn't even implied in the original post.
actually, poor rosemary warren needs someone on her side right now.  she's 
going through something awful in her life right now, between her 
"boyfriend", being kicked out of (an anglican, not catholic) church for 
questioning the beliefs and actions of the clergy and parishioners and 
trying to stop being (mentally) abused by the minister (it's a 
long story worthy of another article), juggling work and night school 
(tonight is the end of the first of 4 semesters, and i've already screwed 
up my jcl final because i've been so upset), listening to my mother talk about 
my father (and if i call him "that creep you married" she starts 
boo-hooing) and whatever else life throws at you.  she has literally no one 
to turn to and hoped that someone in silicon heaven could help.  (another 
THANK YOU to the _nice_ people out there who took time to write.)

>	I've included the original post below for quick reference, read it.
>	Nowhere does she even imply that he has used her for ANYTHING.
have you read the followup(s)?

>	"Lower form of life"?  Oh yes, I get it: male.  All together now!
>		MAN   BAD!
>		WOMAN GOOD!
if more people thought this way perhaps there would be less oppression of 
women worldwide.
> 
>=>Of COURSE you love him. You fell in love with him honestly. But he doesn't
>=>love you now...IF he ever did. Some men know a "free ride" (no, I'm not
>=>talking about sex, here, though that may be a part of it, too), and some
>=>men are very, very good at finding these free rides.
> 
>	A free ride?  Reread what she wrote and show me where he's looking
>	for a free ride.  What he obviously wants is to have her off his
>	back.  On the other hand, she wants him to pay for expensive dates
>	although she makes more money than he does, while he is working three
>	jobs and goes to school.  Oh yeah, he's a real bastard for not blowing
>	all his money on her.
forgive me for being old-fashioned and wanting a gentleman (and a gentle 
man) to love me and spoil me rotten.  and it doesn't have to be the most 
expensive place in town -- red lobster (the restaurant, not necessarily the 
meal) is fine, the nearest smoked-meat joint even better (and cheaper).

>	It certainly sounds like you're projecting your experience with your
>	ex-husband onto the present situation.  Nothing in rwarren's post
>	suggested that this man was taking *any* kind of advantage of her.
>	If anyone is taking advantage it is rwarren.  Just imagine, she has
>	the nerve to state that if he has time to work three jobs and go to
>	school then he should have time to be her chaffeur!  Hell, he
>	probably has no time to sleep!
champlain college is on the south shore, more than an hour from home and 
involves walking 
beside a very dark and busy road that leads to one of the bridges to the island.  
i leave between 9:30 and 10 p.m., the earlier of being tired or finished my 
lab.  (recall that i have already put in a full 8-hour day at concordia.)  i 
walk the 20 minutes to the subway station, where (after paying $41 
at the beginning of the month for a bus pass) i am obliged to put in a 
second fare to come home.  (it is not worth springing for the $69 pass, as 
i can get out on my regular pass and it is only twice a week.)  the course 
i take (mainframe systems Applications) is unique in quebec, perhaps in all 
of canada, so switching schools is not possible.

if sunday were to pick me up after classes (LIKE HE PROMISED BEFORE I 
STARTED), i would be whisked home in comfort in half an hour tops, and we 
could talk without mothers overhearing and screaming at us and trying to 
cut the connection.  and i would be saving those wasted bus tickets.

(trivia:  when i took night classes at mcgill university in may, out of 4 classes 
and 4 requests to be picked up he came twice with very little fuss.  and 
mcgill is downtown, almost beside the metro, which can get me home in 40 
minutes.)

as for sleeping, i suspect it's in anyone's bed but his.

>	It certainly sounds like this guy has tried to get the message across
>	that he doesn't want to have anything to do with her anymore.  Given
>	the fact that she doesn't sound like the most well-adjusted personality
>	in the world, I'm not surprised that he hasn't tried the more direct
>	approach of simply telling her to leave him alone.  Given the tone of
>	her post and the request for simple and effective espionage techniques,
>	this really sounds like a "Fatal Attraction"-esque case and her "friend"
>	may actually be afraid of the consequences if he were to give her the
>	"decent goodbye" that she claims she would be satisfied with.
while i have been ticked off enough to threaten to make Rocky Mountain Oysters 
(see rec.food.cooking or take a guess 
which part(s) are involved) or "sunday pot roast" (using his name as a pun) 
out of him, i do not feel like trading my nice comfy bed for a jail 
cell or losing my job.  have you ever heard of a relationship without one 
single disagreement?!?  not me!

while i do expect cultural differences, i also expect to be treated like a 
lady.  i expect that if a man is romantically interested in me, he will 
spend time with me, get to know what i like to do and where i (would) like 
to go, and WANT to do all this even if it means squirming through a 
computer show once in a blue moon or missing the cosby show.  (yes i know 
it's off the air now)  and that should transcend all cultural boundaries.
i would also like to know what interests HIM (besides the front portion of 
my upper body) and share in that.  i also do not want to give up totally 
what i believe in -- like not sleeping together till marriage, or leaving 
your (politically strained but so far peaceful) homeland to go to a country 
halfway around the world with a different 
culture, different climate (weather/political/social), and torn apart by 
civil war.  (background:  at some point, sunday expects to return to 
nigeria -- and take me with him!)  when you give up your core beliefs, that 
is when love becomes stupidity.

btw, i saw fatal attraction.  remember, however, in that story a married man 
was cheating 
on his wife -- sunday is single.  (behavior to the contrary)
> 
>	rwarren is the one with the "strange behavior" in this case.
is it too much to ask for someone to treat me like a human being, instead 
of their cheap slut?  and to 
go out on dates and have fun like a "normal" person instead of being by 
myself all the time?

>  I wouldn't
>	be surprised if the reason this guy changes address so frequently is to
>	try to drop out of her sight.  I feel sorry for him, she sounds like a
>	real creepy person to have on your case.
it has only been the last year or so that sunday has deliberately hidden 
his "real" (street) address and phone number from me.  before that, he has 
been quick to supply a street address (or bring me to it) and his "real" 
phone number (unlisted until this year) where i could reach him or leave 
messages without worrying about whether his pals would pass them along.
remember, it was SUNDAY who came up to me that magical evening 4 years ago, 
kissed me,  and changed my life.  i didn't go chasing after him -- i didn't 
have to (then).

>Please take the time to reread
>	the original posting and then tell me where the man has committed any
>	crime other than dropping heavyhanded hints that he is not interested
>	in a relationship with rwarren.
as you are reading it, remember that i have left out a chunk for 
clarity and brevity.  remember also that i have been hurt before by other 
people (sweethearts and otherwise).  love for me equals a long-term 
commitment, not a dalliance of a couple of years or less.
> 
>	However it is outrageous that all you others blame the man because
>	he's male.
there are at least 3 people to blame for the demise of our relationship:  
sunday himself, for being such a jerk; my mother, who has used the n-word 
more in the past 4 years than in the past 23, always loud enough 
for him to hear, and for gradually refusing me out of the house to see him 
or go out with him; and myself, for 
being old-fashioned, fussy, and not giving in to his demands (financial, 
sexual). 
> 
>	Men do not exist for the pleasure of women, nor vice versa.  You
>	are not entitled to a relationship with a particular individual
>	because you want one, to do other than to accept that fact gracefully
>	is childish, immature, or worse.
why don't you just come out and say what i've been told from day one about 
anything and everything by everyone:

		WHAT YOU WANT DOESN'T MATTER.

a typical MCP comment.   if nothing else, you have shown us all a 
different (and flawed) perspective on the situation.

"I just want you to recognize me in the temple ..."
	Michael Jackson, "Jam"

Rosemary Warren         rwarren@topaz.concordia.ca
Montreal's Favorite Jacksonmaniac !!!
Newsgroups: soc.couples