Time: Sat Nov 02 15:16:06 1996
To: marmstrong <marmstrong@snowcrest.net>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Re: around today?
Cc:
Bcc:
At 01:44 PM 11/2/96 -0800, you wrote:
>At 10:25 AM 11/2/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>Hi Marcia,
>>
>>Are you going to be around today,
>>and on the Internet, by any chance?
>>When I finish my "work" chores, I
>>would like to get back to your most
>>recent, and most beautiful, letter.
>>It deserves a careful and considerate
>>response, because I could tell you were
>>anxious for feedback.
>
>Yes, will be around the house today
>swabbing the decks and doing research.
You seem to have things
in the right order. :)
>
>>In the meantime, please don't be hard
>>on yourself. I picked up just a little
>>bit of self-depreciation. Am I right?
>
>It is my way of pre-apologizing for
>unintented relationship faux pas.
I did not feel that way at all.
That is why I said what I did;
you are doing this to yourself.
Had too
>many surprises in my life charging
>onward, oblivious to things going on
>with the other person. Guess I need a new
>technique in my bag of skills.
I have often been criticized
of "rushing" things in relationships.
Maybe a better model is organic
biology, in which flowers bloom
in their own good time. Do you
like flowers? I love daffodils
and plumeria, in any order.
That one
>hasn't worked too well over the years.
>Just think of it as trying to say that
>you are important to me and I don't want
>to take you for granted.
You are wonderful, and kind,
to be so honest. Please do not
let yourself feel vulnerable
for saying these things, because
they are generous too, most
undeserving of any negative results.
>
>Maybe I need a code word like "bookmark"
>- meaning, taking care of business will
>get back to you.
check.
"Reality check" -
>meaning, hold on there you're going too
>fast and we need to straighten out
>a miscommunication or assumption.
We call it "pushing the stack"
in computer science; this means
that you hold the current routine,
and branch to a different routine,
and then return when you finish the
latest routine. "Returning" is called
"popping the stack". Imagine an
in-box placed on a scale, and each
new document pushes the lower ones
down by equal amounts, so the top
documents is always at the same
elevation.
Conversations rarely are so structured,
however.
One structure I like is to strive
for 50/50 time: you get 50% of the
clock time in a conversation, and I
get 50% of the clock time in a
conversation. The one whose time
it is, can yield to the other, but
only by choice. Wanna play?
>"Sallright" and "Ok" -meaning, Marcia
>need reassurance she's not "f"ing up.
One philosophy of life says that we
are born to screw up and nobody is
perfect (except One). Much of our
relationships are negotiations to
accept foibles or not. Each new
relationship is a source of much
change, both good and bad. The key
is to chart a course whereby both
can grow in love and trust. It is
an enormous challenge, however, with
a government marching to orders which
require that they destroy families,
and relationships, in that process.
So, we must be stewards of our time
and space, and defend both jealously
against all invasions privacy, no
matter what the source.
I saw a fantasy picture of you in a
clothing advertisement in today's
local paper. Would you mind if I
were to scan it and email it to you?
Bear in mind that the model is
a bit younger than you, but I did
feel your influence in my dreams last
night. Did you send me any mental
pictures on purpose, or were these
pictures of my own making? This is
a reality check for me. Also, I am
probing you about your taste in
clothes. You will find that I am
a rather direct person, so you should
not be afraid to say that you do not
like something. Process of elimination
is very very effective, even though
it does take extra time. We have lots
of time, Marcia: you were conceived
into eternal life, you know.
>(No more ellaboration needed. Ok will
>suffice and all is well.) :-)
Ok
>
>>You sound to me like a wonderful woman,
>>with equally wonderful children, and
>>an important place in life: nurturing
>>non-monetary values. Those are the only
>>ones which really matter.
>
>You forgot georgeous, intelligent, sexy
>and desireable. :-))
I most certainly did NOT; I was
saving those, and they are all
wrapped up in a visual communication
I want to send to you, but only
with your permission, because it is
somewhat idealized (she has no gray
hair, or hers is colored like the
hair of someone else I know). Well,
maybe not ALL wrapped up, not yet, at least.
Pictures cannot always convey intelligence,
but words certainly do, and you have
already convinced me in that department.
So, I am now onto an exploration of (all)
other facets of this precious stone I now
know as Mar.
>
>>Later, okay?
>>
>>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>
>Signing off till later to get down to
>swabbing the home decks.
I love it when everything
is squeeky clean. I am not
exactly meticulous about these
things, but I do enjoy a long
hot shower, after doing laundry,
sheets, towels, then a careful
shave, and everything takes
on a completely different feel.
It's a little bit of heaven to
know that nothing is then off-limits
to the gentle touch of all hands.
>
>Mar
<snip>
>>
>PS: Sorry about tardiness of response. My local server
>must be swamped. I keep getting a Cause "time out" on
>Eusora and Netscape won't connect. I'll keep trying
>periodically.
>MHA
Our server had more trouble spots
in Arizona than I have heard before
on a single tech support call.
I wonder what's going on? I do know
that the CDC is going to come under
some heavy fire for their complicity
in the Gulf War Illnesses. This is
a red light alert for the entire nation,
because these illnesses have been
discovered to be contagious. So,
please take appropriate precautions.
I am still trying to find time to get
back to your previous email. Will you
mind if I take some time later to go
through it carefully, and give you
feedback? I will try to be as loving
and constructive as I can, with the
hopes of helping you see how you were
unnecessarily hard on yourself.
I am standing by.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail