I was having a very sensitive conversation with Tracy the other night even if our boyfriends were in front of us. It's okay, whatever they find out we could always defend anyways. So, we were talking about my theory of the so-called 3rd Party.
To narrate a brief background, we could say that these two guys came at the right place and at the right time. Tracy even thought, that with my expectations and non-sentimental demands, it would be harder for me to fall in love. In fact, I don't fall in love. High school and in college, falling in love was with Powerbooks and Anime. But apparently, one night, while I was waiting for my ride to work he was there in front of my gate introduced by a common friend. It was 7 months of toiling ever since. He was persistent. He was charming. I believe I was ready.
He proved himself worthy and it was blissful ever since, ask him. He might be too extroverted for my taste. He is very charming and very MA-PR (as Tracy would put it), as I have none of those traits. I was so secure with myself that I just let him be. Some of his friends, that are now my friends, confessed that they were surprised that we lasted this long. Don't expect me to say how. I figured that some things just flawlessly work. That was until we hit a couple of bumps and bruises here and there, and it all centered with one reason represented by the "3rd party fling-wannabe."
Tracy in the meantime always had a glorious love life ever since college. She is more extroverted than I am. She is more of like Mitch in various ways. She is charming, friendly, but she has always been the "ideal" girlfriend. She may go to parties with lots of friends, but she never fools around. In her first relationship, a strong one and a perfect one at so many ideals, it was the guy who fooled around and he did it in such a "homerun" state. It wasn't an exaggerated fling, but it was really "FOOLING around." They broke up, but they're still friends I heard. The important thing is that she's happily with GG whom Mitch and I orchestrated on a blind date last April 2008. (See the resemblance of April) In truth, she has more experience with relationships than I am, but it seems we're always in the dark with certain issues.
It led me to open up a discussion about something I picked up from my random musings. I shared with her a theory that I developed early this year. I was able to tinker with the idea when I spoke to a couple of friends who contributed their own relationship stories. My theory goes that in every relationship, THIRD PARTY ISSUES just happen in varying degrees. Even with couples who are together for 7 years, 8 years, who are sturdy as a rock and close to getting married, at one point in time encountered or will face this challenge. It is like a prerequisite. Not all couples have "business or money issues," not all couples have "health or life-threatening issues," but rely on THIRD party issues to strike a familiarity to anyone who has been in a relationship. Not all people might undergo surgeries in their lifetime, but certainly everyone has had colds. 3rd parties are like that in my opinion.
Tracy uttered: "Why do they have to do it?"
I have no clear answers to that except that maybe it's one of their ego trips. Men like women, whatever kind of personality, meet lots of people outside of their circle. They might at some point get attracted or develop a certain rapport with someone. I don't mind this because it's human nature. As humans, we interact and we can't choose if we somehow find ourselves connecting with a person. However, this connection in some attached men may provide an opportunity to fool around. It doesn't matter if he's secure with his current gf or that he's happy, it's just that possibility anyways, a flicker of excitement. He will take it as long as he can manage, but at the end of the day, he knows what's real or not. It's an ego trip, coupled with men's known nature to fool around and prove themselves indispensable. When certain confrontations ensue, they DO NOT KNOW why they did it in the first place. Charge to experience, and execute poor foolish girl.
Tracy even mentioned that it hits the best, straight men, like a COLD VIRUS.
True. It doesn't matter if the guy is so perfect. I have two friends whose guys literally adore them in every sense of the word. They're "straight" and responsible guys. They're not the type to fool around. But then certain issues with another "wannabe girl" resulted in surprising confrontations and realizations. I was surprised when I heard their tales. I couldn't believe them. But they're still humans. They're not invincible. There are just some girls that cling to them like VIRUS, and like humans they fall prey. These two friends that I know, made up with their guys and sorted it out. The other couple is already married. Anyways, it's just a COLD anyways, and like any cold, it can be remedied. I feel sorry for the 3rd party girls though, their existence is deduced to a VIRUS.
But we both agree that it takes 2 to tango.
True. Of course. The guys may not know consciously that what they're doing to a girl is already a form of taking advantage. According to someone I know who described this recent VIRUS "we" had was: "She was already dangling the bait." That may be true, but I'm sure she had enough reasons to.
I wouldn't solely credit those "Simpleton Virus of a women" for the fiasco, though. Men had their own contributions. May it be prolonging the CHUWARIWAP feeling of the girl, or even encouraging it by sending false signals, and even to a point of befriending the "VIRUS'" agents in a way that they're actually promoting interest and doing necessary moves to make that "dance" work. At the end, when everything is exposed, it's the guys' easy way out to end the dance and move on. The Foolish girls end up crying, clinging and in truth, being headaches and proclaiming that the "dance" will never end. It may take two to tango, but at the end of the day, the other one is just dancing for the fun of it, while the other wouldn't let go. Whatever those men did, it's important that it's being discussed with their significant others, and after that let their loyal women decide the terms to fix it, even if it means cleaning the VIRUS' SHIT or ending the relationship there and then. There are some things worth fixing and there are some best left to rot. At the end, it's always the righteous who will win.
If this THEORY should happen in every relationship, is it necessary to fight or prepare for it?
Prepare, yes. No matter how you view your relationship to be clear and flawless, there's always room for preparation for certain disasters. Time, places and people change. Variables, things we can never control. Whatever this theory is saying is that "do not for one second, think, that you'll be spared with 3rd party issues." It just varies in certain degrees, but they all fall under one umbrella. There might veer from petty scenarios to worst scenarios. Always prepare for that possibility, and you'll thank yourself for it.
Fight, yes or no. There are battles worth fighting for even if you know that you'll end up getting hurt. But there are battles that you know one has fought before and there is no reason why one should fight it again. It ends up pointless.
I told Tracy especially with the recent part that I fight for the truth and stay with the excruciating moments just to squeeze out every reason why I think he is worth fighting for. I fight those people who attack me with their ignorance and stupidity. I don't feel pity, not one second. I do not deserve any of their shit (it's damn smelly in my yard) and as much as possible, I fight to teach them a lesson. It's for their own good to know not to mess with women like me, especially in their compromised positions. I especially fight if he fights with me. In a relationship, it's always two people who clean up the mess of the other. It's different if he lets me fight for something that isn't worth it anymore, love, loyalty, happiness, all that jazz. To throw it all away seems effortless and easy. In the end, whatever the outcome, the fight always ends up with the HERO and the VILLAIN, nothing in between, and in my case, the hero always wins.
I know this theory needs tweaking, but experience tells me it's worth knowing. In fact, it's already serving me well.
No comments:
Post a Comment