Jump to content

Can romantic feelings develop over time?


Tarfeather

Recommended Posts

Tarfeather

I don't really understand why you assume that the situations she has experience getting away from, have to do with her intentionally leading people on. I think for most fairly attractive and extroverted women there are plenty such opportunities even without that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

I'm assuming it from the context she said it and the way it sounds almost like a boast. Most women manage the situation so they don't have to 'get away' in the first place, or at least not very often. They understand that if you don't fancy a man, don't get undressed in front of him, for instance. People read motives into actions because that's how social animals learn to function as groups and it's reasonable to take that into account when you choose your actions. 

 

Obviously at the extremes this can shade into victim blaming, but most every day interactions are far more evenly balanced in terms of responsibility. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather

... well

 

I learned via a "side channel", that apparently she's not interested in me at all. This struck me hard. Not the her not being interested in me part, I already suspected as much. But the fact that she couldn't simply tell me this herself. When I told her about my feelings, she said to me "I'm very direct, I say what's on my mind". Shouldn't the fact she already knew she had no interest in me, be such a direct thing to say? Don't I deserve to know, when I put myself out there and make myself vulnerable? Instead of giving me hope by saying things like "It's too early, we don't know each other well enough yet" and "I don't have enough time, it's not about you, I wouldn't have time for anyone"..

 

It hurts that I misjudged her so much. I really did believe her to be a honest person, someone I can trust fully.

 

It's also a huge turn-off. All that sexual desire for her I had, it was in large part founded in the notion of emotional intimacy, of trust, of being special to each other. Without that, the idea of sex with her, physically attractive as she may be, it just feels.. empty.

 

This.. really isn't helping my trust issues. At all. I really wanted to trust her. I really didn't want my bad experiences with other women to cloud my judgement. And then all my worst fears come true, once again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

... I  learned via a "side channel" ...

I never put my trust in ‘side channels’.  I’d ignore that.   I’d go back to what she actually said.

 

On 03/05/2018 at 11:11 PM, Tarfeather said:

... I explained that I "wanted to be with her". Her response was that she didn't know what I meant by that, which is fair really, since I don't know myself.

Her question is clear, she wants to know what your intentions are.   So I think you first of all need to find out for yourself what it is that you actually want from her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whispers this is kinda why i said give up immediately, Tar... ;;;; 

 

IMO if you build up expectations based on assumptions or entertain notions that are not confirmed, you will get burned.

 

Edit to say i feel like I was very much like this girl when I was younger - not out of maliciousness or enjoying confusing men, but because I genuinely genuinely didn't know what I was doing - and I think I am also very good at "getting away".

 

I now have trust issues myself, because I thought I was just being friendly with guys and they always took it the wrong way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

Shouldn't the fact she already knew she had no interest in me, be such a direct thing to say? Don't I deserve to know, when I put myself out there and make myself vulnerable? Instead of giving me hope by saying things like "It's too early, we don't know each other well enough yet" and "I don't have enough time, it's not about you, I wouldn't have time for anyone"..

Letting someone down easy is pretty common and often seems like the best idea... right until it isn’t. :(

 

Sorry, Tar!  Whatever the back-story... getting one’s hopes dashed sucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
1 hour ago, gaogao said:

if you build up expectations based on assumptions or entertain notions that are not confirmed, you will get burned

And if you never build up expectations, you have nothing to push and make happen. Sometimes getting burned is just the cost of trying stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s no universal right answer there.  Some people would rather get burned than potentially miss out, others would rather avoid the risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...and I probably should have added “and neither side understands the other.”  :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

And if you never build up expectations, you have nothing to push and make happen. Sometimes getting burned is just the cost of trying stuff.

But if you're like Tar and develop "trust issues" because of getting burned, then it doesn't make sense to set yourself up for getting burned. Building up expectations to act upon only works if you accept that expectations aren't always going to be met. Having expectations is fine if you are happy to take that chance and accept that your expectations were wrong without developing issues or being overly disappointed - and honestly, that's definitely healthier - but if Tar isn't going to be able to do that, then it's better for him not to expect anything from the girls he likes.

 

I still think it's better for him to just focus on being friends with girls without expecting anything or trying to read into anything they say/do - feelings absolutely do develop over time, but don't spend your life waiting for it because you'll just be disappointed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

But Tar clearly wants more. A little carefully managed setting himself up for potential disappointment is the only way to avoid never having a relationship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The key words here are "carefully managed" though Tele...

 

It's not wrong for him to want something to happen, but he definitely needs to manage his expectations way better so that he doesn't feel this betrayed when some "side channel" casts doubt on whether she likes him or not. Whether the side channel is right or not doesn't matter, IMO... he's already feeling burned by it because she didn't reject him outright and that made him entertain all sorts of weird notions.. which I honestly think is unreasonable (though ymmv I guess).

 

Honestly, if he continues on this pattern, he's just going to repeatedly fall into the trap of liking a girl and agonizing over whether she likes him back, before finding out she doesn't like him the way he wants and feeling horribly betrayed over things that he's massively overthought - it's a recipe for bitterness and loneliness.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather
6 hours ago, gaogao said:

Whispers this is kinda why i said give up immediately, Tar... ;;;; 

 

IMO if you build up expectations based on assumptions or entertain notions that are not confirmed, you will get burned.

That's rather irrational. What do you mean by "giving up"? Hiding away my feelings? If I had done so, not only would I feel ashamed of myself right now for having these feelings in the first place, I would also have remained under the impression that she's trustworthy. It would actually be a worse situation for me in every way.

 

4 hours ago, gaogao said:

But if you're like Tar and develop "trust issues" because of getting burned, then it doesn't make sense to set yourself up for getting burned. Building up expectations to act upon only works if you accept that expectations aren't always going to be met. Having expectations is fine if you are happy to take that chance and accept that your expectations were wrong without developing issues or being overly disappointed - and honestly, that's definitely healthier - but if Tar isn't going to be able to do that, then it's better for him not to expect anything from the girls he likes.

I don't know why you think these things about me, but they're certainly not true. I have trust issues because of a long history of women being untruthful to me. That literally has nothing to do with my expectations, and everything to do with the kind of people I end up putting my trust in.

 

5 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

And if you never build up expectations, you have nothing to push and make happen. Sometimes getting burned is just the cost of trying stuff.

Well, yeah, I mean, I did have the chance of like, not trying to get to know her at all. Then I wouldn't have been burned. But honestly, I don't regret it at all. I really enjoyed this experience, and I enjoyed my time with her. By trust issues, what I mean is that I'm getting to the point where I can't anymore just believe in the good of people, and assume that if I don't have a reason to distrust someone, I can trust them. It's getting to the point where I will always suspect people of dishonesty until I know them extremely well and they've proven themselves to be honest to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

I would also have remained under the impression that she's trustworthy. It would actually be a worse situation for me in every way.

I can’t speak to this woman in particular because I don’t know her at all but, at least in parts of the US, women are heavily socialized (and also warned, from a self-defense standpoint) to “let people down easy” with vague, noncomittal statements.  It’s not necessarily a marker for general dishonesty.

 

Obviously you do know her, so by all means go with your gut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather
3 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

I can’t speak to this woman in particular because I don’t know her at all but, at least in parts of the US, women are heavily socialized (and also warned, from a self-defense standpoint) to “let people down easy” with vague, noncomittal statements.  It’s not necessarily a marker for general dishonesty.

 

Obviously you do know her, so by all means go with your gut.

Sure, I'm not saying she's an above average dishonest person, just that I can't see myself trusting her. The people I do trust generally have earned that trust by being exceptionally truthful toward me in situations where lying would have been more convenient for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

Sure, I'm not saying she's an above average dishonest person, just that I can't see myself trusting her. The people I do trust generally have earned that trust by being exceptionally truthful toward me in situations where lying would have been more convenient for them.

That’s certainly fair.  I just meant it’s the kind of situation not everyone (who’s doing/saying it) recognizes as lying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

I have trust issues because of a long history of women being untruthful to me.

Tar, unless you're talking about other experiences which I haven't heard about (feel free to elaborate), nothing you've ever posted on AVEN has ever sounded to me like women being "untruthful". The things I've read sound like what @ryn2 was talking about - girls trying to let you down softly, both to preserve your friendship and because of socialization -- and in at least one other case it really sounded as though the girl in question really liked you as a friend until the friendship was ruined by your overthinking (despite everything she said) that something romantic was going on because she was trying to connect with you emotionally. I just see a pattern here where you continuously over-analyze what girls say/do around you and see "wanting to remain friends and being comfortable with you despite not having feelings for you" as "being untruthful" and "telling lies" when it's nothing of the sort.

 

I don't see any contradiction in what Rapunzel said at all when she rejected your confession vs what you found out from your "side channel". I understand being hurt but I don't understand how what she said would give you any "hope" at all unless you were massively overthinking what she said.

 

21 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

What do you mean by "giving up"? Hiding away my feelings? If I had done so, not only would I feel ashamed of myself right now for having these feelings in the first place, I would also have remained under the impression that she's trustworthy.

By "giving up" i seriously mean not overthinking. There's no guilt in having feelings for someone. You have no control over that... what you CAN control is how you react to those feelings, and if it doesn't seem like she's interested right now, then stop trying to analyze her and just accept that your feelings are unrequited and will probably never be requited. Don't bother holding on to "hope" that you're pulling from some overanalysis of what she said. It's better to just focus on yourself and the other people in your life while still cultivating a friendship with her that has no romantic intention.

 

You said in OP that you didn't think there was any attraction on her side. I agreed that I didn't see any attraction, so I told you to give up on those feelings and just be friends with her. My thoughts were that many women (though not all) connect with each other emotionally, get changed in front of each other, send each other selfies, etc. even if their relationship isn't necessarily romantic, and that naive girls might try to do this with guys in a very misjudged way. I understand why you and others like @Telecaster68  might read her initial behavior as potential romantic or sexual interest... but regardless of how she presented in the past, she rejected you unequivocally while trying to keep the channel open for you to remain friends. Admittedly she was letting you down softly, but I don't understand where you're getting any hope from what she said. Are you expecting women to tell you point-blank that they are absolutely not interested and definitely never will be? Very few people are blunt enough to burn bridges like that unless they really don't care about what you think and no one knows for sure what their feelings will be ten years from now... so I don't think saying "I'm not ready for a relationship" is a particularly unreasonable rejection. 

 

I would understand feeling like she was leading you on, I would even understand @Telecaster68's assertion that she was teasing you and being a little malicious about it, but I don't understand why you expected her to say anything more than what she said when she rejected you. I don't know what you're understanding when a girl says "we don't know each other well enough" or "I'm not ready for a relationship", but it sounds to me like you're overanlayzing and i want you to give up on that. I think you should have just taken it at face value that there's no future in anything romantic with her because in my opinion what she said was not a lie.

 

What on earth did your "side channel" say that made you mistrust her so badly? Why do you trust this side channel so much? What did you think "We don't know each other well enough" means and what hope were you seeing? 

 

21 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

I did have the chance of like, not trying to get to know her at all. Then I wouldn't have been burned.

Why are the only two options "not getting to know her" and "getting to know her and getting burned"?

 

It's weird because as an asexual lesbian who hangs out with a lot of other lesbians and bi/pan/gay people, we can say "I'm not looking for a relationship right now" or other soft letdowns and we all get what they mean. We still get to know each other and have fun with each other and become super close friends despite accepting there's very little chance the person we like might like us back. It hurts, we try to move on, but no one gets that burned.

 

I don't know if it's a queer people thing but it's so common for people in my circle to just hang out as friends with each other for ages despite any one-sided romantic tension that might be in the air. I mean, my gf and I were friends for five years while she was nursing a crush on me and she dated other people before I ever developed feelings for her. At around the time I met my future gf, I had a pretty big crush on a girl who was studying here temporarily and when I confessed that I think I might like her she hugged me SUPER tight and said "that's very sweet but honey I am kind of straight" and it was like nothing ever happened. Two guys in my circle are best friends who call each other every night and even though one of them doesn't want a relationship right now and the other is VERY OBVIOUSLY head over heels for the other... it's not that big a deal?? I know that he even confessed and was rejected, but they still call each other every goddamn night and play games/watch movies together until 5am. Who knows if they'll eventually get together? I wouldn't hold out hope, but they enjoy each other's company platonically and value their friendship. It's cool.

 

You're probably gonna say I'm projecting (again), but I'm just trying to share my insight and tell you why it's so damn frustrating for me to watch you continually overthink this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Actually, I largely agree with @gaogao. My only point of difference is that Rapunzel would have to be monumentally naive if she thought there wasn't a good chance Tar would at least entertain the possibility she was interested given her actions, and probably more. Her comment about 'I'm good at running' or whatever it was made me think she was fairly aware of the effects of her actions. There are plenty of people who enjoy the attention of their preferred gender too much to have too many scruples about the effect, or expect someone with Tar's combination of overthinking, keenness to be in a relationship and diffidence. If she thought about it at all, I think she'd just assume what happened was the normal traffic of human relationships for her - that men show interest in her and she politely declines. I'm not entirely buying what she says at face value.

 

And people do sugarcoat things, not because they're trying to deceive, but out of consideration for not being rude to their face. It's just a socially acceptable fiction - no more morally culpable than asking someone how they are when you really don't want to know the details of their health. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

And people do sugarcoat things, not because they're trying to deceive, but out of consideration for not being rude to their face. It's just a socially acceptable fiction - no more morally culpable than asking someone how they are when you really don't want to know the details of their health

Sometimes they’re reasonably sure it’s true at the time they say it, too, and it only becomes untrue over time.  E.g., the person who says “I don’t date coworkers/students in my program” but then, a few weeks or months later, ends up head-over-heels for a newcomer and suddenly finds bending that rule a whole lot easier.

 

There’s less long-term pain and confusion in “hearing” those soft turndowns as “I don’t want to date you”/“I don’t like you that way.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

My only point of difference is that Rapunzel would have to be monumentally naive if she thought there wasn't a good chance Tar would at least entertain the possibility she was interested given her actions, and probably more. Her comment about 'I'm good at running' or whatever it was made me think she was fairly aware of the effects of her actions. There are plenty of people who enjoy the attention of their preferred gender too much to have too many scruples about the effect, or expect someone with Tar's combination of overthinking, keenness to be in a relationship and diffidence. If she thought about it at all, I think she'd just assume what happened was the normal traffic of human relationships for her - that men show interest in her and she politely declines. I'm not entirely buying what she says at face value.

I think that's fair. Being a monumentally naive person I tend towards believing in other people's naivety - but this interpretation is certainly believable as well.

 

Whichever interpretation you take, Tar,  what we are saying is that there is far too much overthinking going on here. Rapunzel is probably is used to men showing interest in her and having to decline them politely, and this definitely isn't the first time it has happened. It's a standard rejection.

 

Whether her behaviour is stemming from naivety or from intentionally cultivating male interest because she likes the attention, I think it's pretty clear that she wasn't lying when she said that she isn't ready for a relationship at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather
On 9.5.2018 at 2:01 PM, gaogao said:

I don't know what you're understanding when a girl says "we don't know each other well enough" or "I'm not ready for a relationship", but it sounds to me like you're overanlayzing and i want you to give up on that. I think you should have just taken it at face value that there's no future in anything romantic with her because in my opinion what she said was not a lie.

"face value", exactly. I take statements to mean what they say. No "say one thing, mean another". For instance, when we got to know each other, C. told me that she "didn't have time for a relationship". I took that at face value. I never took it to mean "I'm not interested in you", and it didn't mean that, as evidenced by the fact that we got together pretty shortly thereafter.

 

Same with this case. If Rapunzel says things like "we don't know each other well enough", she's explicitly not saying that she's not interested in me at all, so why would I assume that? On the other hand, if she already clearly knows she's not interested in me, it would be rather disingenuous of her not to tell me.

 

Quote

Are you expecting women to tell you point-blank that they are absolutely not interested and definitely never will be? Very few people are blunt enough to burn bridges like that unless they really don't care about what you think and no one knows for sure what their feelings will be ten years from now... so I don't think saying "I'm not ready for a relationship" is a particularly unreasonable rejection.

No, and why would anyone say that? As you say, it would be untruthful to do so, because nobody can know for sure. But if someone confessed to me, and I knew that I'm not really interested in them, I would say that, as opposed to trying to find excuses that have nothing to do with my actual reasons for turning them down. Something like, "Sorry, you're not my type" is also a very polite and soft way to turn someone down, for instance.

 

 

I'm just really averse to the whole "Say one thing, and mean another" phenomenon. I know that it's a very widespread thing in society, and it, along with other implicit social rules that make no sense to me, is also a big part of the reason why I don't like interacting with people in general. I don't want the people I take close into my life to behave like that also, it's very stressful and unhealthy for me.

 

 

And don't think I'm not considering what you're saying. I've thought about it. I've come to the conclusion that I wanted to see both myself and Rapunzel in a way that we would make a suitable couple, and I've been twisting reality as a result. I can recognize truth when confronted with it. It's okay, I'm completely fine with continuing to get to know her, and not expect anything romantic to happen. It'll allow me to be myself and see whether we can actually be friends.

 

At this point, I do think I've overreacted, and I am hoping that it was a misunderstanding, and that she wasn't at all clear that she's not interested in me, and that's just how it came across. But if it turns out, it wasn't a misunderstanding, then yeah that's kind of a deal breaker to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

But if someone confessed to me, and I knew that I'm not really interested in them, I would say that, as opposed to trying to find excuses that have nothing to do with my actual reasons for turning them down. Something like, "Sorry, you're not my type" is also a very polite and soft way to turn someone down, for instance.

Unless that’s the actual reason, though, it’s not really any different from “I don’t have time.”

 

Don’t get me wrong - I applaud the fact that you know exactly what does and doesn’t work for you in terms of straightforwardness and insist on holding out for it.  I’m just confused as to what makes certain sorts of “easing the blow” dishonest and others okay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather
26 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

Unless that’s the actual reason, though, it’s not really any different from “I don’t have time.”

Yeah, the assumption was that in this example it would be the actual reason. And I'm not saying you have to state the reason, either, by the way.. Like just saying "No" and leaving it at that is fine, too. But if someone states a reason, I would want them to be truthful about it, not try to come up with a false reason that's convenient for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
1 minute ago, Tarfeather said:

a false reason that's convenient for them.

It's not that it's convenient for them, it's that they're trying to be the least hurtful possible. They don't expect you to believe it necessarily, it's just making an awkward moment less awkward.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

Something like, "Sorry, you're not my type" is also a very polite and soft way to turn someone down, for instance.

If a girl you liked told you that you weren't her type, and you knew what her type of guy was, what would stop you from trying to be that type? What if her type was guys who have huge muscles and she really connects with you and is friendly with you but you just, really don't have huge muscles? Would you work out?

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

Yeah, the assumption was that in this example it would be the actual reason. And I'm not saying you have to state the reason, either, by the way.. Like just saying "No" and leaving it at that is fine, too. But if someone states a reason, I would want them to be truthful about it, not try to come up with a false reason that's convenient for them.

Ah, okay, gotcha.  To me “not my type” is just another polite letdown phrase.  Agreed that “no thank you” is probably the most straightforward.

 

Agreed with Tele, though, that it’s not about convenience.  A lot of people - women, especially, but not women exclusively - have been raised with pressure (“if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all”) to spare people’s feelings, and that’s what they habitually try to do.  It likely would not occur to them that the customary sparing of feelings (which is like “have a nice day” and “how are you?”/“fine, thanks; you?”/“fine”) is actually less comfortable for you than the honest truth would be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather
2 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

It's not that it's convenient for them, it's that they're trying to be the least hurtful possible. They don't expect you to believe it necessarily, it's just making an awkward moment less awkward.

Yeah, no. This is just one of those "common sense" things, where I don't think it's common sense at all, but rather just cultural norms which I can't relate to. When I say "I don't know you well enough yet", this in the literal sense implies that this might change somewhere down the line. How am I supposed to know that this is not what it means? Even if I know what it's supposed to mean, what is gained by using this code, rather than just literally saying what you mean?

 

2 hours ago, gaogao said:

If a girl you liked told you that you weren't her type, and you knew what her type of guy was, what would stop you from trying to be that type? What if her type was guys who have huge muscles and she really connects with you and is friendly with you but you just, really don't have huge muscles? Would you work out?

Yeah, I just got over that. The whole, trying to figure out what she wants in a partner, and to be more like that. At the current point in time, I can answer with an emphatic no to that. Although I would consider it for other reasons. For instance, if I knew that by working out, she'd find me more pleasing to look at, and would enjoy her time with me more? Sure, I might be more inclined to work out then.

 

1 hour ago, ryn2 said:

Agreed with Tele, though, that it’s not about convenience.  A lot of people - women, especially, but not women exclusively - have been raised with pressure (“if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all”) to spare people’s feelings, and that’s what they habitually try to do.  It likely would not occur to them that the customary sparing of feelings (which is like “have a nice day” and “how are you?”/“fine, thanks; you?”/“fine”) is actually less comfortable for you than the honest truth would be.

Some people resist that pressure, however. From the very limited data I have (the other people of this kind I've found), this is actually a core aspect of one's personality that forms very early in life. Most of my close friends have already had this intrinsic desire to be authentic around age 5 or so, and found themselves marginalized or entirely excluded as a result from that early age. It's something I deeply crave in the people I'm emotionally close to. I would find it very hard to develop real trust in someone who's not like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

You have a choice Tar - go with the same cultural norms as everyone else which don't really do any harm, or spend your life railing against how everyone else does things. 

 

You know what it means because it's common usage. Presumably you don't give people a run down of your health issues when they greet you with 'how are you?' 

 

And as we've both said a couple of times, what's gained is social easing of an awkward moment, which most people value over honesty when honesty doesn't really affect anything beyond abstract principles. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Tarfeather said:

From the very limited data I have (the other people of this kind I've found), this is actually a core aspect of one's personality that forms very early in life. Most of my close friends have already had this intrinsic desire to be authentic around age 5 or so, and found themselves marginalized or entirely excluded as a result from that early age. It's something I deeply crave in the people I'm emotionally close to. I would find it very hard to develop real trust in someone who's not like that.

That’s certainly possible.  I became a pleaser very early in life as a way to “manage” otherwise-unworkable things about my parents (looking back, I mean... as a tiny child I’m sure I was just doing what I had to do to survive) and that definitely permanently shaped my sensitivity and reaction to the types of social customs you mention.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

You have a choice Tar - go with the same cultural norms as everyone else which don't really do any harm, or spend your life railing against how everyone else does things. 

 

You know what it means because it's common usage. Presumably you don't give people a run down of your health issues when they greet you with 'how are you?' 

 

And as we've both said a couple of times, what's gained is social easing of an awkward moment, which most people value over honesty when honesty doesn't really affect anything beyond abstract principles. 

Agree but disagree... if not being on the same page over social customs is something that really grates on Tar and/or makes it hard for him to trust people, perhaps the early weed-out is a good thing.

 

I have a good friend who finds everything about smalltalk abhorrent.  He’s also (from my perspective) quite judgmental about those who do engage, as he finds it shallow and banal.  Ultimately he found a partner who (is on the autism spectrum, and) struggles with smalltalk and it worked out well for both of them

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...