I can honestly say that I understand the reason for our rapid break-up, and as much as it hurts me, I think it is the right thing to do.
Throughout the nearly 3 years there were periods of ups and downs, which I attributed to normal moodiness on both of our parts. It turned out to be a deeper issue than that, however, and looking back it seems to make sense.
In many ways Kathryn is a very mature person - she could easily have been living on her own for the last couple of years and she is capable of taking on many simultaneous commitments. In other ways, however, her immaturity is really apparent. It takes her a really long time to truly open up to anyone, and as I recently discovered, she is not yet able to determine why she experiences many of the feelings that she does.
Since the beginning of our real relationship, her feelings for me have gone up and down in cycles (unexplainable by her). During the down times, I was often confused, hurt, and angry because my feelings for her never really wavered. But when the up times rolled around, I seemed to instantly forget how the downs made me feel.
In the aftermath, I can now look back and say that I was unfairly treated during those times and our breakup will be good in the long run for many reasons. (This is something that Reid has been pointing out for a long time - thanks dude and sorry for not listening).
For one, being single and even dating different people will give both of us a better perspective on the future and the past. In Kathryn's case (and ideally), she will be able to figure out why she only loved me part of the time and if it really had anything to do with me. I don't think it really had anything to do with me as a person and I hope she can figure out what it is about herself that keeps her from experiencing true love. For her sake, I truly hope that she can let go of that part of herself.
In my case, letting go of Kathryn will be the hardest thing I've ever had to do emotionally. I truly loved her and I would have done so as long as we were together. Right now it's too early for me to start moving on, but I'm certainly not going to sit on my thumbs hoping she'll come back to me. I still don't know how I'm going to deal with not seeing her family or her dogs yet.
At the moment, this decision is for the best. The timing was as good as it could have been and my future self will thank my current self for allowing this to end gracefully. I can just imagine how hurt I would have been if this happened even one or two more years into the future. And I don't want to think about how hurtful it would have been after getting married.
As I told her the last time we spoke, she will forever be in my heart and I only want the best for her. Funny, I never thought I believed it, but now I think it's true: If you do truly love someone, you have to be able to let them go.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Saturday, January 28, 2006
They do say that all good things come to an end, and over the last 6-7 months I really learned that the hard way.
If you recall, Kathryn and I almost broke up last summer, but we were able to patch things up and start over. Not so this time... the breakup is going to stick.
Neither of us are saying "I never want to see you again" or "there's no chance we'll ever be together again." We're also not saying, however, "lets get back together in a month." As far as I'm concerned we've broken up and are both on the market again, but if we happen to find each other on the market, we can start over.
I'm not going to lie to myself and wait for her to come back to me. I'm going to start moving on with my life and keep in light contact with her as she does the same.
Since we weren't really close friends before we started dating, I will be able to say the following at some point in the future (but not today because I'm still depressed): "I now have a friend whom I was once in love with, and whom I will always love. Regardless of where we are and who we're with, she will have a special place in my heart as my first true love."
Sunday, January 22, 2006
I was watching the Hour of Power on TV for a brief moment this morning and I heard the minister dude asking everyone to please continue donating to the Hour of Power. His reason was that in 2005 the Hour of Power came close to being cancelled because it didn't receive the donations it needed. He wanted it to change in 2006.
This is what he was really saying: "Hi suckers. Last year, I couldn't afford to give money to the Republican Party to keep George Bush (AKA God Jr) looking favourable to the American Race (ie: Evangelists). Therefore, I am asking you to donate $600 per year of your hard-earned money so that I can keep asking you to donate $600 per year of your hard-earned money for years to come. If you don't, you'll pretty much be going to hell, along with everyone else in the entire world except for the Evangelical 'Christians'. Peace out, suckers."
Here is what's wrong with Evanglists: everything. They are all pretty much 100% certifiably INSANE.
First of all, the idea of young-earth creation is scientifically disprovable, yet they cling to the "fact" that the Earth is 6000 years old because the Bible told them so. Right. Second of all, they can't possibly believe that a person will go to hell if they don't accept Jesus as their Lord. It's just so freaking rediculous.
If you ask me, they're the ones going to hell, if there is such a place (which there probably isn't).
Here are some links related to Pat Robertson and all that is his idiocy:
- Pat "apologizes" for his remarks to Mr. Sharon. Pat is suck a motherfucker.
- Here are most of the recent controversies that Pat "Motherfucker" Robertson has been involved in. Praise to Wikipedia.
Friday, January 20, 2006
The JGoz.net seal of approval goes to this teacher in Ohio who gave his students a homework assignment, asking them to "research porn online and list eight facts about it." I mean, this man is literally the best teacher living today. He is so amazing that I created the JGoz.net seal of approval just now for the sole purpose of awarding the first one to him (or her?).
I bet I could do that assignment in my head, but it wouldn't be nearly as fun.
Monday, January 09, 2006
Well, the holiday season is over, so I guess it’s time to get back to work. Bleh. Work Sucks.
My holiday was nice and relaxing, despite the lack of recording (and blogging). I’m hoping to get some more blogging done this year if I finally get a laptop. I’m waiting for Steve Jobs to possibly announce an Intel based iBook in his keynote speech tomorrow at MacExpo before I buy anything. If he releases a 13.3” widescreen iBook as reliable sources have predicted, that particular product will be going on my post-Christmas list.
Since I’ll be saving money on textbooks this year by not having to buy as many, and with the inclusion of the $400 present we’re getting from Uncle Ralph, I can justify paying $1400 for an overpriced but reliable piece of machinery that will save me from fighting with campus computer labs during my 5 hour-long breaks. I’m bitter about my schedule.
Another thing – I have no idea who to vote for in the upcoming election. I watched most of the debate tonight and I’m still not inspired in any direction.
Stephen Harper was well-spoken, but his plans are deeper than what he allowed to surface tonight. I want to find out what he really thinks and has in store for Canada. He still scares me a little bit…
Gilles Duceppe would be an attractive candidate if he wasn’t a separatist and intended to implement many of Quebec’s programs and policies in the rest of Canada.
Paul Martin was the most passionate of the leaders tonight and he took the abuse fairly well. I still don’t know if I am willing to support the Liberals, just because I’d be interested to see the results of a change in government.
Finally, Jack Layton was the best self-promoter of the evening and did a good job of separating the NDP from the other major federalist parties. Based on the debate alone, his party appeals to me the most, but I haven’t researched anything beyond the debate at this time.
The most important issues to me, at the moment, are lowering tuition and implementing proportional representation. I am definitely a political minority in Alberta, in that I don’t subscribe to the Conservative point of view – at least when it comes to the non-economic policies. So I would love it if my votes would actually count for something, instead of merely decreasing Jason Kenny’s blowout victory by a fraction of a fraction of a percentage.
This is where proportional representation comes in. With that in place, all of the Liberal, NDP, and even Green supporters in Alberta would have their voices heard in government for the first time. Instead of only sending the winning party in each riding to the House of Commons, all of the parties that ran in each riding would have as many votes as was proportional to the number of votes they received. This would be a major improvement over our current system, which discriminates against political minorities in regional areas of political concentration. I’m sure the Tories in the east would appreciate this as well.
The major downside to proportional representation is, of course, that a minority government is pretty much guaranteed. This could, however, be a blessing in disguise. My reasoning is that the public generally hates voting, as was demonstrated by the aftermath of the recent vote of non-confidence. Politicians know this, so to avoid non-confidence votes, they would be forced to work together for a change in implementing policies.
Yes, this notion of “working together” would generally slow down the already tedious decision making process, but overall I think it would be better for our country.
And now for the fun stuff kiddies:
- This men’s washroom idea would freak me the hell out. You can figure out why.
- "I've got to think it's UFOs. That's the only thing logical…." Wow. I guess the UFOs got bored with cows, so they moved on to mutilating horses. It’s a shame what constitutes logic nowadays.
- Speaking of logic, check out this “seminar” on Creation, and scroll down to the heading entitled “The Watchmaker.” If you don’t feel like reading, I’ll summarize it for you: Someone in Japan made my stopwatch; therefore, everything in the universe has a creator. Now, you don’t need to have taken Logic I in order to realize the logical fallacy here. “There exists an A such that A created B, therefore, for all D, there exists a C such that C created D” is NOT A VALID ARGUMENT. In logic, it is known as a Hasty Generalization.
- A perfect promise ring for your girlfriend – if he happens to like goatse, that is (don’t worry, it’s not a link to goatse, nor is it disgusting).
Love Johnny
