Wednesday, 15 August 2012


THE TESTOSTERONE VERSION OF THE ''ANTI-P''
                It would not be entirely fair if we didn't let oestrogen see the testosterone view of the ''ANTI-P'' now would it? Let's get started then, shall we?
                If making an effort to Provide something I think will make her haPPy; irresPective of whether it did or not is her idea of zero effort and she will not be aPPreciative; that at least I had her haPPiness in mind; then not aPPreciating my effort = I might as well not do it again.
                If Protecting her is her idea of obligation, and she won't consider the fact that it is because he cares that he is even going through the trouble of doing it in the first place, then doing something he is suPPosed do; if it is no big deal = he just won't do it then; it's still all the same to him.
                He can only show something He feels only in a way that He can. If not showing Possessiveness in the way she wants him to makes his love questionable, then his love being questionable = what else must I do for her to understand(which by the way, is synonymous to frustration).
                Not every man is an evil villain you know and Probably the theory that they are hunters who turn into zoo keePers is true, but if she isn't going th give him the benefit of the doubt and at least some credit for wanting to know more about her in the first Place, then no chance + no credit = how in the world is he suPPosed to know what she likes without she telling him?(Again, frustration).
                He gets the concePt that not showing that he is interested can be interPreted as him not caring. But if she won't consider the other side of the coin which could be that he actually does but is just Playing safe by not showing it, then not showing = what Prevents her from showing that she also cares?(which by the way, may be an abomination for oestrogen since she does not want to be the one to make the first move).

No comments:

Post a Comment