Permission to Post

[manker]

Or not.

I mean, you already said that you were incredibly close to the girl for five years. I'm taking this to mean that she lived up to your almost imperceptibly high standards for this long. She must have been a good egg. But then she lied and, omfg, ALL WOMEN ARE BITCHES!!!1

No it means she lied, she is a very good liar. In fact so good that the extent of her lies over the entire five years is still becoming apparant to me. Better yet, I'm not the only person who thinks this of her, I have had other people tell me that they too consider her to be someone who can't and shouldn't be trusted.

I've admitted I was stupid to not realise she was lying to me the entire time, I knew full well she lied to her best friend, and to everyone else. She admitted it to me. She "compartmentalised" (her term) people, feeding them whatever lies she wanted them to have. My stupidity was in not realising I was just another compartment, in her warped little mind/life.

The emo thing is the bit that provides me with the most amusement here, I can see why it looks like that to you, but as I've just explained she was just the final straw. There have been a lot of nasty shits along the way, some men, some women. There has been more than one lying deceptful woman along this path I've walked.

I don't think there is anything wrong with compartmentalising people.

I know I do it. I treat people differently based on my perception of them. Even on here, I talk to different people in different ways. I think we all do to a certain extent. As for lying. I just lied a moment ago, I'd never let you borrow my car. I bet the last thing you drove was a tonka in Salisbury. It just wouldn't be safe.

I think, and I get the impression that most other people think it too, that your reaction to a few fibs is entirely disproportionate.

[manker]

He wouldn't block you.

Survey says that your posts are epicentre of 76% of his forumular enjoyment over the past 4 months.

Well as he is the "object of my desire", I have no idea what you're going on about then.

Who is it you think has blocked me then?

You just talked about her in the post above the one I'm replying to

There's being deliberately disingenuous for comic effect, and then there's looking like a mentalist.

[NotLettingItGo]

I don't think there is anything wrong with compartmentalising people.

I know I do it. I treat people differently based on my perception of them. Even on here, I talk to different people in different ways. I think we all do to a certain extent. As for lying. I just lied a moment ago, I'd never let you borrow my car. I bet the last thing you drove was a tonka in Salisbury. It just wouldn't be safe.

I think, and I get the impression that most other people think it too, that your reaction to a few fibs is entirely disproportionate.

A few fibs? What makes you think it was a few fibs?

She knew my history with lies, she knew how damaged I had been by lies in the past. She knew that the only thing I ever required of her was that she was honest, she even lied that she would always be honest with me. The reality was completely the opposite, she was (as far as I've been able to work out so far) completely dishonest. I can now pin down nearly everything she ever said as a complete lie. Proven by her own behaviour, and words.

Was I stupid, absolutely. Do I have the right to take her complete betrayal as an indication of what people are like... well you've just answered that, by admitting that you too cannot be trusted to be honest. So having self admitted that no one can be trustedm why do you think I should be willing to trust anyone, or to put myself out for anyone? Why shouldn't I behave like a lying cunt as well? Why shouldn't I use people too? It's OK for her, it sounds like you think it's OK for you.

[NotLettingItGo]

You just talked about her in the post above the one I'm replying to

There's being deliberately disingenuous for comic effect, and then there's looking like a mentalist.

That would be the one where I pointed out to MBM that responding to your posts about a subject isn't whinging, would it?

Is it MBM? Has he blocked me?

You're the one claiming the "object of my desire" has blocked me, so you must know who you meant. Who did you mean?

[manker]

I don't think there is anything wrong with compartmentalising people.

I know I do it. I treat people differently based on my perception of them. Even on here, I talk to different people in different ways. I think we all do to a certain extent. As for lying. I just lied a moment ago, I'd never let you borrow my car. I bet the last thing you drove was a tonka in Salisbury. It just wouldn't be safe.

I think, and I get the impression that most other people think it too, that your reaction to a few fibs is entirely disproportionate.

A few fibs? What makes you think it was a few fibs?

She knew my history with lies, she knew how damaged I had been by lies in the past. She knew that the only thing I ever required of her was that she was honest, she even lied that she would always be honest with me. The reality was completely the opposite, she was (as far as I've been able to work out so far) completely dishonest. I can now pin down nearly everything she ever said as a complete lie. Proven by her own behaviour, and words.

Was I stupid, absolutely. Do I have the right to take her complete betrayal as an indication of what people are like... well you've just answered that, by admitting that you too cannot be trusted to be honest. So having self admitted that no one can be trustedm why do you think I should be willing to trust anyone, or to put myself out for anyone? Why shouldn't I behave like a lying cunt as well? Why shouldn't I use people too? It's OK for her, it sounds like you think it's OK for you.

You see, I think you deal in mainly hyperbole. That's (one of) your problem(s).
There is no way that nearly everything she ever said was a lie. It's inconceivable during your cosy 5 year duopoly of each other that could have been the case. It's most likely just a few things. Things that hurt you.

I'm going to make a leap and suggest that she inferred that you may have a romantic future together if circumstances were favourable, circumstances then altered so as to be favourable, and then she was all like; 'um, actually I'm not going to let you anywhere near my lady garden - but we can still be friends'.

It must be maddening but I can see it from both sides, I understand your fury (although not the level of it), and I can understand why she wouldn't want to get romantically involved with you cus of the damaged goods thing.

Some things are just not meant to be

[manker]

You just talked about her in the post above the one I'm replying to

There's being deliberately disingenuous for comic effect, and then there's looking like a mentalist.

That would be the one where I pointed out to MBM that responding to your posts about a subject isn't whinging, would it?

Is it MBM? Has he blocked me?

You're the one claiming the "object of my desire" has blocked me, so you must know who you meant. Who did you mean?

I've highlighted a particularly pertinent part of my earlier post for your edification.

You're welcome.

[NotLettingItGo]

...
I'm going to make a leap and suggest that she inferred that you may have a romantic future together if circumstances were favourable, circumstances then altered so as to be favourable, and then she was all like; 'um, actually I'm not going to let you anywhere near my lady garden - but we can still be friends'.
...

Then it would seem you missed the post where I stated that it was me who was saying that she couldn't expect the intimate friendship we had to continue as it had... that we could be friends, but not close intimate friends.

[NotLettingItGo]

I've highlighted a particularly pertinent part of my earlier post for your edification.

You're welcome.

You can call me a mentalist all day, the fact remains, you made a specific claim, and yet cannot answer the only pertinent question which arises from that claim. Are you chavis? He does a lot of that.

[manker]

I've highlighted a particularly pertinent part of my earlier post for your edification.

You're welcome.

You can call me a mentalist all day, the fact remains, you made a specific claim, and yet cannot answer the only pertinent question which arises from that claim. Are you chavis? He does a lot of that.

Finally.
The penny drops.

[manker]

...
I'm going to make a leap and suggest that she inferred that you may have a romantic future together if circumstances were favourable, circumstances then altered so as to be favourable, and then she was all like; 'um, actually I'm not going to let you anywhere near my lady garden - but we can still be friends'.
...

Then it would seem you missed the post where I stated that it was me who was saying that she couldn't expect the intimate friendship we had to continue as it had... that we could be friends, but not close intimate friends.

I didn't miss it.
I just decided that it was probably disingenuous. Like when you said you had a wife and three kids.

What I wrote is a much more likely scenario.