Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5552471" data-attributes="member: 18280">No disagreement.....It is incumbent upon someone in a long-term relationship to be &quot;good, giving, and game&quot; (as Dan Savage says).But, suppose that this guy (let's call him Charlie) feels more than a little pressured to show up, give the game a chance, and make a PC.&nbsp; Should he be upfront about not wanting to do so?&nbsp; Yes.Was he upfront about not wanting to do so, and then cajolled with the old &quot;Take One For the Team&quot; talk?&nbsp; We don't know.Dan Savage places limits of being GGG.&nbsp; Because one should be GGG doesn't mean one should be open to everything.&nbsp; And the idea that one should be GGG isn't intended to be used as a stick to poke someone into agreeing to something they really don't want to do.&nbsp; Part of being GGG is to back off and let the other person choose what they are willing to do.So, yes, I grant that it was disruptive the first time he changed his mind.&nbsp; But, once that was a known factor, why should it continue to be a problem?If you're looking for an excuse, as a group, to DTMFA, then just DTMFA.&nbsp; You don't need an excuse.Is it worth doing something about?&nbsp; Yes?&nbsp; Then do it.&nbsp; No?&nbsp; Then don't worry about it.&nbsp; You have to take people, or leave people, as they are.&nbsp; You can't force them to be what you want them to be.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5552471, member: 18280"] No disagreement.....It is incumbent upon someone in a long-term relationship to be "good, giving, and game" (as Dan Savage says). But, suppose that this guy (let's call him Charlie) feels more than a little pressured to show up, give the game a chance, and make a PC. Should he be upfront about not wanting to do so? Yes. Was he upfront about not wanting to do so, and then cajolled with the old "Take One For the Team" talk? We don't know. Dan Savage places limits of being GGG. Because one should be GGG doesn't mean one should be open to [I][B]everything[/B][/I]. And the idea that one should be GGG isn't intended to be used as a stick to poke someone into agreeing to something they really don't want to do. Part of being GGG is to back off and let the other person choose what they are willing to do. So, yes, I grant that it was disruptive the [I][B]first time [/B][/I]he changed his mind. But, once that was a known factor, why should it continue to be a problem? If you're looking for an excuse, as a group, to DTMFA, then just DTMFA. You don't need an excuse. Is it worth doing something about? Yes? Then do it. No? Then don't worry about it. You have to take people, or leave people, as they are. You can't force them to be what you want them to be. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification