168. Answering T's Questions - 2

Answering T's Questions - 2

"Also I have female friends, and I'm still on friendly terms with a couple of lovers from years ago even though there is zero chance for a romantic reunion.  I feel flattered to not be hated by women who once loved me.  How can you completely stop loving someone you once loved, if you parted on good terms and that love never turned to hate? "

This question indicates the complete and fundamental difference in attitudes as a consequence of how someone is determined by instinct.   A person, who automatically gets bonded by getting involved in physical intimacy, and a person, who does not, cannot understand each other, they do not have empathy for their different perception of the same activity.  

I value a man predominantly as a companion, bonded with emotional ties.   This means, there can never be good terms with someone, whom I have loved once, unless we continue to be together.   As long as there are good terms, there is just no reason to end the relationship.   If he would end the relationship in spite of being on good terms, I would call this dumping and a transgression, and it would destroy the good terms beyond repair.     The only valid reasons for me to end a relationship are, when I get hurt by the other's behavior, or when he behaves in a way, that I cannot longer respect and appreciate him.   For me, the reasons to end a relationship are exactly the same reasons, for which I do consider someone as not worth being in contact.    Therefore to me to end a relationship and still be on good terms is as logically impossible as is eating the cake and have it.  

When a man keeps contact with a deactivated intimate partner, this indicates me a fundamental and incompatible difference between the meaning and significance of a partner for him and for me.

1.  For that man, physical passion is a main criterion, enough to enter and to end a relationship.    Such a man would be a high emotional risk for me.   When such passion fades, he would dump me, while I feel bonded and get hurt, because I would perceive him as a companion.   For him, physical passion is a condition for a relationship, while for me it is only an extra benefit, that is not vital as a condition to share life.  

2.  Men have some spot in their brain, which determines, how they experience and perceive sexual contact with women.    A minority gets automatically emotionally bonded, when entering physical intimacy with a woman, as I have described already several times in previous entries, as it is for me and as I need it to be also with my mindmate.   
For the majority of instinct-determined men, unfortunately a woman's body is just like a toilet.   This sounds drastic, but that is how I see it.    Men use a ceramic installation in the bathroom for body waste number one and two without getting emotionally bonded with that installation.    Instinct-determined men use a woman's body to deposit waste number three without getting emotionally bonded with her.   
If such a man perceives a woman as not different from a platonic friend, even though there is a history of physical intimacy, this means logically, that he did perceive this intimacy as not more than she being a toilet for him.   He did never get bonded with that woman.   Had he been bonded, he would still be in a relationship with her as her companion.   Had he been bonded, she could never ever be a platonic friend again.  
A man, for whom a woman's body is a toilet, and a woman, who automatically gets bonded by physical intimacy, are a mismatch, because their relationship is very asymmetrical.   For the bonded woman, her partner is her bonded oneandonly, while she perceives herself as degraded to only be one of a bunch of other equally bonded women in his life.    She feels devalued, because he does not honor her with a symmetrical relationship.   For him, she is his actual toilet and he cannot see anything wrong in this, and he has no clue, what she is missing.  

That logically means, that a man's continued contact with deactivated intimate partners tells me clearly, that in that man's brain, a woman is only a toilet and I would only be a toilet too.   He is bonding-disabled.  But I deserve bonding, I refuse to be abused as a toilet, therefore I reject such men.   

3.  I have no illusion whatsoever as to having a chance to be given a unique meaning in a man's entire life.  At my age, that is not available anymore.  Anything that he does to me or feels for me, he has most probably done and felt before.  Anything, that a man has done in the past to another person, he is also capable to do to me.  At my age nobody has waited to consider me as the best thing that has ever happened to him.  I will never be any more special or important or better than all the others had been at some moment in the past.    Would I be with a partner and one of his deactivated intimate partners would also be present, the only difference between her and me would be the moment in time.   At that moment I would not be more special or more important than she had been once.  
While I cannot be special in a man's entire life time, I need the appreciation of being made special and unique during the time of the relationship.    I can never be special as only one more in a system of polygyny, where he is equally bonded forever with the entire crowd of deactivated intimate partners, who continue to be a part of his life.   

The only way to honor me with making me special is to remove all the others, who had been equally special, by ending all contact with them.  
If I cannot be special and the only bonded partner at the same time for a man, if he wants to continue the polygyny with his deactivated intimate partners, the man is not suitable for me.  

I am looking for a mindmate, for whom a woman is more than a toilet, who gets bonded and does feel the special bond created when entering physical intimacy, and therefore he has no contact with deactivated intimate partners.   

Unfortunately polygyny with deactivated intimate partners is a very widespread habit of men.   I have been in mail contact with men already too often, who appeared superficially as matches on dating-sites, until I discovered that their polygyny made them unsuitable.   This is my reason for explaining this extensively.