Fake (revised [for no reason])
someone posted a rather well exemplified discussion on pseudo-relationships.
her “pseudo” thesis did solicit a lot of smirks and nods from me, not to mention 10 fingers itching for the keyboard for a smartass-ish commentary.
the writer tried to establish this school of thought: a pseudo-relationship is not a valid relationship. a pseudo-relationship is the substitute for the real thing.
in her lengthy enumeration, she pointed out that the absence of and/or a deviation from one of the many socially-established elements of a relationship invalidates one. she calls them pseudo-relationships.
like that of mary’s… been keeping the same boyfriend for years but is in-love (and sleeping) with someone else. there’s john… a husband and father of four but lives in a makati flat with his boyfriend. or that of rachelle’s… former miss melbourne last seen dating her first runner-up.
i have nothing against the innocuous zeitgeist of “pseudo” things. but indulge me to wonder: are pseudo-relationships fill-in for the supposedly real ones(are they unreal? fake?) even if we throw ourself in this “pseudos” with conscious choices?
i am bryan anthony, 26 (a.turning 27 this September, b. whose personal life has nothing to do with this particular blog, c. just violently reacting, d. might masturbate later). tell me about life.
15 August 2006