Sunday, February 13, 2011


i have read a few blogs(waiting on a sister missionary and the singles ward, i think)talk about leagues. who is in yours and who isnt. i have always dismissed this way of thinking-i mean, really-leagues?
i am thinking more and more if its a fact of life. dick wasnt the first guy who in his own way told me i was too good for him.
again-i dismiss this kind of talk, but as i continue to go over every detail of our short relationship with a fine tooth comb, maybe there is something to it.
not that i think i am better than him. i dont.
i wonder if it comes up with these guys because i am a woman without a past. no skeletons in my closet. no cheating, no drugs, and no church court. i am being a little flip, but i am boring that way. i tell humorous versions of my jerry springer divorce story and cute anecdotes of my crazy dating life, but...
not sure what i am trying to say here, but i am thinking of how mr jack mormon said i needed to be a bishops wife because no other kind of man would be good enough for me. i still laugh at that one.
i have never been a gold digger or a social climber-just not my style. i want a man who will make me laugh and towers above me. even that is negotiable. the tall thing. not the laughing.
i am rambling here, but guys...if a girl you think is too good for you tells you that she loves you(didnt jake over at the mormon bachelor pad go through this with andrea?)wouldnt that be a reason to be happy, not shut down and run away?


  1. Not that I know much about your past or experiences but I wonder if the combination of having a squeaky clean past with a jerry springer divorce/dating life is what is "intimidating?" It almost feels like a weird place of is she the good girl or not, and if she is how did she end up with a Jerry Springer divorce and dating life? Does that make any sense? I find myself thinking that sometimes when I read about things here. Or it could be that they have put you on a "pedestal" that you were "good" before your marriage and endured such a crazy experience after despite being so good.

    I don't really buy into "leagues" either if the people are being real and authentic. But I do believe in having good boundaries. I would probably go on a date with almost anyone at least once but make sure I had good boundaries and know how to face the hard stuff that might come up. But that is me and my confidence level. I have had those hard discussions with people before and its really great and sometimes actually works for the better where you get to see a different side of a guy. Sometimes guys do things just because they think they have to/are supposed to.

  2. you might have a point. many men have expressed some confusion or disbelief that a "good" girl such as myself married such a bad boy. i guess we all look for the tricks and maybe they are thinking that despite appearances and what i say, i must be really messed up.

  3. PLEASE don't hear from me that I'm judging you or saying you are messed up because I really don't know you at all to make that sort of judgment. But what I am saying is that I feel a disconnect even as I acknowledge that bad things happen to good people.

    You have the power to make changes in your life and do whatever it is you want. You have the strength to have the relationships you want and need. That strength and power comes only from Heavenly Father. I know, I've been there. It really sucks sometimes when our "natural man" battles it out with our real "celestial" self. But I promise you the benefits far outweigh the costs. And Heavenly Father will show us our weaknesses and how to overcome them if we are humble enough to ask.
    And if we feel like it is helpful, we can seek help from others around us who are supportive and encouraging.

    I think we are all "messed up" to some degree. We just need to be able to look at it, because once we can see it, we can change it.

  4. It's all a matter of perception. When I dated Liz I thought she was out of my league. Even though now I look back and see that she was not, and is not, I thought she was, and that was the problem. Because you're dating someone who's out of your league you feel like you have to "up your game" to feel worthy of them, and eventually you just burn yourself out.

    It's probably likely that you intimidate guys because of how you carry yourself. There are guys out there that aren't intimidated, or ignore that. After high school my "type" just ended up being the intimidating girls. Liz had never had a boyfriend, even though half the building was trying to get in her good graces, until me. Hannah was similar.

    Hearing that is a reason to be happy, but at the same time, in my opinion, it piles on a bit more stress.

  5. lots to think aobut guys. i do have some scars, like we all do, but i manage them pretty well. they flare up in crisis, bu are subdued rather quickly. i didnt feel judgment, so dont worry.
    i definitely want a man that thinks enough of me to give his best "game", but not to the point that he burns out. i want a good relationship, not someone to perform for me.
    sometimes i think i make it too easy.

  6. I think there is some substance to the idea of leagues, just as I think there is some substance to the older idea of classes. There is a limit to how different somebody can be from you in some ways and still be a match for you. The problem is when you start thinking that one league or class is better than another in an absolute sense -- they aren't. They just might be better suited for you (or me) in one league or class than another.

    But when it comes to the standards by which we rank people, those are relatively clear. By and large, men want women who are pretty/sexy, and women want men who can take care of them. In Mormon circles, Mormon rank (bishop track guys, spiritual women, etc.) can also be a factor which is not entirely separate from those standards -- there are no poor General Authorities. How those things are understood can vary, but I think we all have some basic understanding of where we rank on the standard for our gender, and that gives us some idea of where we can expect to be able to reach on the scale for the other gender when seeking a mate.

    I've mentioned before that I'm thinking about this quite a lot as I continue to prepare to join the MMM (already in progress), and I'm definitely not going to be the guy that has all the ladies fighting over him when that time comes. And I'm okay with that. I'm not entirely certain that, if we met in real life without knowing who the other is, that I'd be someone you would consider a future with (with all the possibilities that you've already determined I'm not such a person acknowledged without resentment should that be the case -- I'm not fishing for an answer to that, iow). I am often boring, confusing or uncomfortable in conversation. I am not bishop track -- probably not EQP track for another year or two at least -- and I'm familiar with the world of formal Church discipline in a non-academic fashion. I'm not a dress-for-success guy -- I wear 501s and a button up shirt almost every day for work or just being out in public.

    I bring that up just to point out that we may not know who would be a good match at first site, but we do know at first site people we won't consider, and people we aren't very likely to consider very long. They may seem to be great friend material, but sometimes the qualities we find friend-worthy are the result of them pursuing us for more-than-friend purposes.

    I'm rambling a little bit -- taking a break from (procrastinating a bit) from packing for moving tomorrow -- but this is where my mind went from what you said.

  7. i always love when you post a comment. :) never boring and always thoughtful.
    cant go wrong with 501's! always a classic.
    this league thing is making my head hurt. it seems to be a fact of life. i know i have been considered in a league above(not that i deserved it), but i dont think i have been considered out of someones league. i never did the pretty in pink thing-where i went for the rich-preppy kid. now i am rambling. just thinking out loud a little. wondering if men i choose is in an effort to stay in my "league". i am decidedly in the neutral zone. not a rich snob, but not a wrong side of the tracks girl. sigh. as always, you have me thinking.

  8. I don't know. I guess part of the reason that I don't buy into the leagues thing is that it in essence says that people can't change. It says that if you have had church discipline, you'll always be on the edge of the gospel or that if you are on the "bishop track" that you can't be anything other than that. I just don't buy into that. I've seen plenty of people change both for the good and for the bad out of their "league." It also makes for a really crappy marriage because you are marrying someone for what they do and not who they are. So if the guy on the bishop track doesn't "make bishop" does that mean you will love him less? What happens if the guy on the edge of the gospel decides he needs to more actively participate in the church? Its all about marrying someone because of outside behaviors, not inner motivations and relationships. Yes, I realize that it can be hard to pull apart behavior and motivations which is why its important to date for a long time and not have horribly short dating and engagements like we Mormons like to do. Its no wonder the divorce rate even for temple marriages is going up.

    OH and I'm curious, maybe I'm out of it but what does MMM mean?