AFriendlyFace

Welcome to the world of posting then! It's fantastic to have you amongst our chatty ranks -Kevin

We don't think you're lying, Tim; we just wonder how it is that you've managed to be a member for approximately 127 years (*Snickers and avoids pointing out his own post count and occasional prolonged absence*) Welcome back, Will! It's great to see you back around! I've been wondering what you were up too. Whatever it is I hope it was fun! All the best Kevin

Scott and I went to a housewarming party for some friends of ours, a straight couple, recently. It was a fresh change. I don't socialize with straight people very often anymore, and when I do it's usually in some type of "gay" setting and they're the minority. So it was weird to go to a party at which Scott and I were the only two gays. It was fun though, I really like the couple and their friends were nice. There were a couple of small kids there. A four year old girl and her baby brother. So anyway, it's later in the evening and several people have already left and we're just sitting around in smaller groups chatting and I'm on the couch. So the little girl, Savannah, comes up and starts talking with me, telling me all about the tricks she's learned in gymnastics, and what she's going to do for her next birthday party, and about her friends and brother. Anyway while I'm chatting with her Gregory, the little brother, crawls over and starts trying to climb up on the couch, so I pick him up and hold him while Savannah keeps telling me her stories. A little while latter Charlie, the dog, comes over and starts nuzzling for attention. Just around that time Scott looks at me, laughs, and remarks that I've got a whole little crew. It's funny, I hadn't even really thought about it. I love kids and dogs, so when the little girl wanted to talk I just naturally started listening. When the baby crawled over I picked him up. When the dog started pushing for attention I just started playing with him. It was nice though. Predictably it got me thinking. I mean, it would be nice if it had been my own two kids and dog, and if I'd just been sitting around on my own couch enjoying their company. I just find it all so odd though. I don't think of myself as a "traditional" sort of person. I'm really not, not at all. I want to travel, come and go as I please, perpetually be in school and bouncing around careerwise. I don't want a house and I yard in the 'burbs, I want a condo in the city and I want to spontaneously move whenever I feel like it. I really enjoy being single and "free." I love that I can go out whenever I want and not have to come home at any certain time - or at all - if I don't feel like it. I really don't know how two kids and a dog fit into this picture. Heck, the reason I don't have a dog already is that I don't think I have the time and don't want something that high maintenance. With my cat I just fill up her giant feeder and waterer once a week, throw away her litter box and buy her a new one every couple of months (yeah I don't scoop or actually change litter, I just change the whole box ) and she's pretty much set. That's not really a huge time or effort investment. Yet, if I were going to have kids, I'd want to be a really attentive parent. I'd want to really enjoy them and nurture them and be a big part of their lives and have them be central to mine. How would that work? How would I fit all these pieces together? It would feel right though, having the kids. I feel like I've re-evaluated - and rejected - the majority of "values" that society has tried to indoctrinate me with, yet I really don't think the raising kids thing is an external pressure. I really think it's something that has always been a strong, compelling, internal drive. Oh I guess that's why this whole "two kids and a dog" thing is the stereotype. I guess it's because it really is something a lot of people truly want for themselves. Despite having always wanted it...I'm still kinda surprised I want it though. I mean the "husband to share it with" part is pretty negotiable. I don't feel like that's an especially big issue though. I mean I'm sure it is easier to raise kids in a two (or more) parent home, but I think I could be a pretty damn competent single parent. Anyway, who knows, maybe I will have a partner; it's just no big deal either way. The kids though...well that is kind of a big deal. I think I'd really regret it and, yeah, maybe even feel like something is "missing" if I don't have them. *sigh* I just hope they like faced paced urban life and don't mind being in college (or at parties ) with their dad.

Well, I think that's the other side of it. Not only does there seem to be a desire for attention in sympathy IMO, but there's also that general "talking about it is easier than doing it" thing. I guess taking that first step is pretty tough sometimes. I know I'm guilty of talking about how I want to go back to school and how I have all these degrees I want to get, and how I need to look into it and start applying....but then I never actually do. I just keep talking about it periodically. No, it wouldn't be hard to fill out a few applications, look into what sort of Master's programs the universities around here have in my areas of interest....it's just easier not to. I just always seem too lazy to actually do it. I really do want to though, I just kinda want someone to hand it to me on a silver platter. Like do all the leg work for me and tell me exactly what each school has, and hand me the forms I need to fill out. LOL, don't guess that is going happen though.

I hadn't really thought about it in terms of divorced people. Whenever I think of divorced people I usually think of my mom, and I don't think she's like that at all. I guess you've got a point though; I suppose it is something that some divorced people do as well.

LOL, thanks

I think that's a wonderful point! Sometimes I feel like I'm "enabling" people by always trying to help or being predictably sympathetic and supportive whenever a problem comes up. Maybe I am conditioning them to hold on to their problems by reinforcing this behaviour with my attention. That's why I have been trying to take a firmer stand when it's apparent the person isn't really "trying" to make the situation better for themselves, but it just makes me feel like a big jerk a lot of the time.

I think that's a really good, sad point Sometimes it does seem like people are creating drama just to have something to bitch about. I do think the primary motivation is sympathy or general attention.

Very thought-provoking conversation! I have indeed considered things from many new angles because of it. Changing the direction my own line of reasoning had been going, I will say that I think the specific case of Dennis and his (bi)sexuality are certainly different from the situation of being (bi)sexual in a more general sense. I think it's hard to say how Dennis himself will react to the same sex side of his sexual attractions. Certainly I think he comes to the table with more baggage than a lot of bisexuals. I think it's also the case that both psychological and physical characteristics play a role for Dennis. On the one hand I think he's legitimately attracted to both males and females and I also think he just generally enjoys the activities and experiences that go along with a sexual relationship. On the other hand, I think part of his attraction to Travis is definitely psychological. I think Dennis is able to relate to Travis differently than he relates to girls (and other guys for that matter) because I think he feels like there's a "kindred spirit" thing going on. Dennis and Travis are both loners who don't really "let anyone in" at least not very often and not to a very complete extent. I think they also have a lot in common with how they view life and themselves. Yet there are tons of differences as well and I think they can each understand the differences because they see enough of themselves in the other person for the differences to make sense and generally "work." I think the essential "paradigm" that Dom is using here (and of course I'm totally speculating and may be completely wrong) is similar to that of the classic "accidental couple." The individuals who weren't interested in a relationship but spent time together and partook in certain recreations as a matter of convenience. The relationship just sort of crept up on them, and I don't think either one really knows what to do with it, or even whether or not he wants it to last. I think they're both OK without having a lot of commitment or expectation from the other person. I think they're both OK with sex for sex and spending time with each other just for kicks. However, I think it's precisely all these similarities, differences, and a good dose of external events (Travis' mom, Dennis' dad, etc.) that has kind of caused them to unintentionally deepen the relationship and care and invest in it more than they meant to. Of course, this might all also be their undoing. It's tough to make a relationship work when neither party really knows what he wants or how to handle what he's got. I think they may very well "accidentally" brake up in the same fashion that they got together. Anyway, is Dennis "bisexual?" Depends on how you define it I guess. Does he enjoy sexual stuff with both genders? I'd say so, but I don't think he gets too bogged down in the "whys" and their significance. Of course now I might be projecting. Does it really matter though? The whys and labels? It can be stimulating to think about, but when it comes down to it I think it's just about existing in the context. Here I am, with this person and I'm having fun, and I'm getting something I want and/or need, so isn't that enough? Does the other person's genitals really make that big a difference - either in what they've got or what they're doing with it? Personally I don't really think so. People might say then that I am espousing this "love the person not the gender" sort of view. Maybe I am to some extent, but that's actually not really where I'm trying to go with this. Enjoy the dynamic and relationship, the interaction you've got going, and enjoy the simple activity of "sex" (whatever that becomes in the context). One common view of bisexuals/bisexuality that I think is often taken very negatively, may indeed have an element of truth to it. I think it very often is the case that bisexuals are more "sexual" in general, that they often just sort of "go with the flow" when it comes to sex and sexual contexts. I don't think this mean they're "slutty" or "promiscuous" per se, but I think it does mean that they don't really respect the "boxes" of sexual identification and "expected" sexual behaviour. I think in a lot of instances they are more willing to just go with it and see what happens. I think this is the case, by and large, at all levels of "sexualness," be it simply enjoying 'lust' and good old fashioned attraction - physical, psychological, emotional, and fantasy based - as well being willing to enter into and negotiate new and varying romantic relationships, and finally being open to exploring new forms of sexual expression itself. Anyway, just some more of my thoughts Kevin

I think the things that happen to you are less important than what you do with them. Today a friend of mine kept sending me texts about this article he was reading. Basically the article, and hence the texts, were about how royally F-d up his life was destined to be because his family hadn't been supportive of his sexuality when he was younger. Now don't get me wrong, I care about my friend very much and I'm deeply sorry for all the painful things that have happened to me, but one strong message kept coming through again and again in each of his texts, "I'm a victim!" It's not just this, if it were I'd probably have more patience with it. He also plays the victim because of health problems. Also financial problems. As well as on-going problems with various friends and family members. Basically it's victim, victim, victim! I swear sometimes I just want to shout, "GET OVER IT!" I have repeatedly done the much nicer equivalent of letting him know that if the situation is something he can change he should work toward it and if it isn't he should accept it and make peace with it. See, that sounds way nicer than "Fix it or deal with it, but quit the damn whining!" I think it all pretty much boils down to the same thing though. It's just the perpetual helplessness that gets tiring. I'm all for acknowledging, analyzing, and expressing one's feelings. Indeed, I've talked with him in depth about these things many times, and exclusively made the focus of my efforts sympathizing and simply listening. It's just that, it doesn't seem to get better after we're done. Instead everything just keeps getting dragged back out again and again and I feel like I'm supposed to act shocked and terribly supportive and sympathetic every time. I kinda feel like I've done all I can here. I've offered a hell of a lot of emotional support and a hell of a lot of advice, several times, sometimes separately and sometimes together. I don't know what else to do. I don't think there is anything else I can do. I think at this point it's up to him to quit being a victim and do something about the situation (or accept that it will always be what it is and that dwelling and complaining aren't going to help). I think it's primarily an attitude thing though. For example he dwells on my problems more than I do. A couple of months ago we went out to a club to meet some friends, I was driving, and on the way we got pulled over and I was given a ticket for doing a rolling stop at a stop sign. For the remainder of the night, every hour or so he'd bring it back up and ask if I was okay, or sympathize. It was nice, and I know he was trying to be supportive, the thing is, I was really fine. I was pissed and disappointed for like fifteen minutes, I bitched about it to all our friends, then kinda brushed it off. At that point I decide all I could do was pay it and get on with my life. The first time he brought it back up that evening I was having a lovely time and when he asked, "are you okay with what happened?" Or something to that effect, my reaction was an honest, perplexed, "what happened?" By the same token, I feel like very often he spontaneously brings up my problems and then sympathizes. As I said, I'm sure it's his way of being supportive, but the majority of the time I wasn't even thinking about my problems. It's not really just him though. I mean, not just him. I know lot's of people who seem to use their problems almost like a crutch, at the very least as a permanent excuse. I think this sort of thing is often very prevalent in the GLBT community. There's almost a "culture of victimization." Homophobia is the scapegoat to everything isn't it? If someone doesn't like me, it's bound to be because he/she is homophobic. Couldn't be that they simply don't like my personality. Didn't get a promotion? Homophobia. Slow service at the restaurant? Homophobia on a plate please. Of course it's not really just the GLBT. One of the only prejudices I've ever had against minorities (and pretty much all minorities) is that I half expect them to be walking around with this victimized chip on their shoulder, hypersensitive to the tiniest, most unrelated thing. I think prejudice is a really terrible, ugly, horrific thing, but it's nasty little brother is most definitely casual, unsubstantiated accusations of prejudice. Of course I think it goes beyond minorities too. I think that in many ways the whole country has a culture of victimization. It seems like everyone's just sitting around waiting for things to go wrong, and then as soon as they do they look for excuses instead of solutions. It's even better if the person is "blessed" with two or three problems that create a lovely cycle of defeat. That way if someone offers a viable option to one of the problems you still get to whine and say, "but that won't work because of..." The psychologist Martin Seligman proposed the theory of "Learned Helplessness." Basically, the way it works is you get this dog, put him in a metal pen with short wall diving his pen from the neighbouring pen, then run a mild electrical shock through his pen. The dog will jump out over the wall and into the safe pen thereby solving his problem. In the second part of the experiment both the dog's staring pen and the neighbouring pen are electrified, or else a roof is placed over the pen so that the dog can't get away from the shock. Initially the dog struggles, eventually he just gives up and lays there whimpering. Next the roof is removed, or the neighbouring pen is safe or whatever. Guess what? The dog still just lays there whimpering instead of solving his problem which he could now do if he tried. The dog has learned helplessness. I suppose my friend, the minorities, and America as a whole, have all just hit their respective heads on the roofs of their cages one too many times, and now they don't even try to hop out. When I was a kid whenever we would go any sort of store or restaurant or something, even if the lights were off or the sign said "closed" I would insist on getting out of the car and pulling on the door. It frustrated my mom a lot, but after a few years she just gave up and allowed me to do it because taking the extra 30 seconds for me to jump out, tug on the door, accept that the place was truly closed and then shut up about it, was far easier than listening to me bitch and nag all the way home. On a few occasions I found that the door did indeed open; it only looked closed because it was poorly marked, badly illuminated, or just not very busy. Didn't happen often mind you, but even though I grew to expect that the door probably would be locked, I still felt better after I'd given a good hardy yank just in case. Sometimes I wish I could convince the people around me to pull on a few doors they expect to be locked. You never know when one might open unexpectedly for you.

Tough situation! I've had this sort of thing happen to me before too. I think it depends very much on the individual and your dynamic with her. One strategy that has worked well for me in the past is to make the effort to be emotionally attentive and affirming at a juncture that works for me. If I'm at a party having a nice time, then unless it truly is a crisis then in all honesty it isn't too convenient to stop what I'm doing, shut everyone else out, and focus all of my emotional energy on my own Sad Sally. On the other hand, if it's just a relaxing Sunday afternoon and I'm just tidying up the house, then it isn't such a penance to pick up the phone, call Sally, and encourage her to vent while I listen, support, and clean. I find that by and large, this helps Sally feel better and she's less likely to interrupt while I'm doing something else if it's something that can wait. If she still tries to waylay me with something that isn't pressing then I apologetically, yet firmly, say something to the effect of, "I'm sorry, Sally, I already have plans tonight" or "I'm sorry, Sally, but I need to catch up with Fun Faye right now; I haven't seen her for awhile." Then I finish with, "But let's have lunch tomorrow" or "I'll call you after work tomorrow." Then I really do. Basically, my approach is to try to give Sad Sally some of what she needs, but not totally give up my life in so doing. It probably depends on your relationship with Nellie though. My strategy works with several of the Sad Sallys in my life, but it's an utter failure with a few of the Suffocating Sams. Give 'em an inch and... well, they close the distance, wrap their arms around you, and don't let go! Anyway, good luck! -Kevin

Indeed. I can't imagine the clam was particularly bored attending all those coronations.

No need to apologize to me (but thanks for the thoughtfulness ) If I were in an irritable mood I'd have probably gotten ticked off, but as it was I was trying to be more rational and was feeling cheerful so I wasn't actually upset. I just wanted to clarify my own position Anyway, as I said, I think differences of opinion can spur on some really good debates and discussions, and I think this one certainly has already, and I'm really looking forward to hearing what everyone else has to say Also, I think Celia and Toneils made some very good points that I hadn't thought of or properly expressed. Anyway, great conversation, Kevin

Wow! I completely disagree with you on almost all points! No harm done since civil discord can breed very enlightening conversations. I think it's difficult to guess. It would be much easier and more reliable to simply ask Dom, but I think guessing creates too many unknowns. For example in my own stories I very often take views that are antithetical to how I actually believe and present them in a favourable light. However, sometimes I don't. I think many/most authors do this and without knowing more information about Dom's history and private life I don't think we can make reliable guesses. I find it very difficult not to be offended by that statement, but I'm going to see if I can pull it off nonetheless. I find it offensive as a bisexual and as a gay person (and yeah, I identify as both. :wacko: ). It seems to presume a couple of pretty negative things about both groups. Let me tackle the gay side first. It seems to imply that no one would be gay if they had a "choice." I find that very offensive and untrue. I find gay life, gay culture, and gay existence in general to be extremely rewarding and satisfying and consider it to be one of the biggest (indeed perhaps the biggest) blessing in my life. I wouldn't dream of trading it to live some cookie cutter heterosexual existence. My life as a gay person has provided me with a wealth of friends, interests, hobbies, life goals, philosophies, and ethics that I strongly doubt I'd have had as a completely straight individual. A strong part of my identity is as a non-conforming, egalitarian activist who challenges homophobia and gender roles. Basically all of my main educational, career, and intellectual ambitions are related in some way to being gay. Nearly All of my friends are GLBT/Allies and most of the social and recreational activities in which I partake are in some way related to GLBT life. To think that I would trade all of that so that I can conform straight, heterosexist society is unthinkable for me. However, I find those comments completely untrue, and bordering on offensive, as a bisexual as well. I'm a very sexual person with a very wide range of tastes and desires and a pretty strong drive. My interests don't feel neatly into any boxes. There are lots of things about women that I find very sexually appealing. I'm certainly predominantly homosexual but there is certainly a notable degree of bisexuality as well. I've changed my identification from "gay" to "bisexual" and back many times over the course of my life. Right now I consider myself culturally gay, but sexually bisexual. Regardless, I feel that bisexuals are some of the least understood, more feared and hated segments of the population. Gays and lesbians as a whole don't like or trust them; straights as a whole don't like or trust them. To make matters worse bisexuals don't have a very strong community of their own. I think life as a bisexual can be extremely difficult and it's precisely this attitude of "well he'll leave me for a woman" or "well he'll cheat on me with a man" that makes things so difficult and painful. The majority of bisexuals I've encountered have been of the attitude that the gender is less important than the person and that any number of things about an individual are sexy. Are you attracted to more than one type of guy? If so then does that mean that if you were dating type X you'd inevitably have to leave him for, or fool around with, type Y? As someone who could easily enjoy sex and a relationship with a woman, let me assure you that I have no intention of opting for this option "because it's easier." That's subjective anyway. As immersed as I am in gay life and gay culture it would be much harder for me to date a woman. Regardless, I'm not crossing any options off my list. Most likely I shall either remain by myself or settle down with a guy. I'd be perfectly happy doing either. I see the possibility of settling down with a woman as far less likely, but it's fine if it happens and I'm sure I could be happy that way as well. In all of the three scenarios though I intend to maintain my identity and involvement in gay life as a culturally gay male. I think that's a pretty narrow view of sexuality as well. Perhaps I'm in the minority, I get the impression that the whole Top Vs. Bottom thing is a big deal to most guys who have sex with guys, but I think that's just silly. My attraction and involvement with a guy is certainly not based on this one sexual act. I don't need to "top" or "bottom" to feel sexually satisfied. Honestly my preference truly is for versatile intercourse, but I can easily enjoy either of the other two possibilities as well. Indeed, I can enjoy my sexuality without any of these three. There are so many ways to be sexual and find sexual release with another person that I think keeping this focus exclusively on penetrative sex is tragically limiting. If Denis frees his mind to his sexual expression he can enjoy his penile or anal desires regardless of his partner's penile/vaginal/anal configuration or preference. Obviously it depends on your definition. I would say yes. That is your "sexuality journey" but I think other people's is often very different. Personally, when I was first becoming aware of my sexuality it was very heterosexually oriented. I had no template for same sex sexuality or expression because as a young child in the conservative south it isn't something that was readily visible to me. I did have some attraction to females so I was fine with expressing my interests in them. By the time I was older, preteen and early teenager, I was beginning to understand that there were other options, but the social pressure to conform to heterosexuality, combined with the abundant hormones of youth, meant that I had no trouble focusing on girls. By the time I was a mid-late teenager, I considered myself pretty bisexual and my interests gradually tapered from mostly girls to mostly guys. By the time I was in my early twenties I considered myself exclusively gay and "forgot" that girls were an option as I enjoyed and explored my homosexuality. Recently, I've accepted that while my lifestyle is very gay, and while interest in girls only confuses things, I'd be lying, and not being true to myself, to pretend that I didn't have some heterosexual interest and desire as well. It most definitely is not as strong, frequent, or diverse as my homosexual interest and desire, but it's still there, and I'm not going to deny it when I'm sure that embracing it can be a positive, enriching experience. Personally, my own sexuality is heavily influenced by my sociopolitical interests and ambitions. I won't pretend that being gay/bi doesn't conform nicely with my general values, concept of self, and broad social agenda. I see sexuality as occurring on (at least) two separate scales one for interest in males and one for interest in females. I think it's possible to be extremely interested in both, not particularly interested in either, or any other combination and configuration. Again, I find that sad and fairly offensive. It implies that there is something intrinsically inferior about being gay, and as I said, I find that pretty unpalatable. I think that quite on the contrary, without all the damn baggage and prejudices that existed in society most people with any degree of bisexuality would happily express it. I think that it would create a boarder, richer, more fulfilling sexual experience. It also simply makes sense to pursue the possibility of life with either males or females since this greatly increases the pool of possible suitors and the wealth of experiences available. As things stand, I think many bisexual are forced to choose between gay or straight life and I think that's really sad. Don't get me wrong, I think it's completely fine, normal, and desirable for a bisexual to settle down with either a male OR a female and to remain true exclusively to that person. That's great. What isn't great is denying one's sexuality in itself. I don't think being bisexual means you have to engage in sexual activity with both genders. What it does mean though is that you should enjoy the full range of sexual feelings, fantasies, and identifications, even if the sexual activity is confined to only person. This is comparable to how any other individual settles down with a partner of their preferred gender but continues to acknowledge and experience attraction to other similarly gendered people even if they don't act on their attraction. It would be ludicrous to pretend that a partnered straight guy doesn't find other women attractive and interesting or that a partnered gay male doesn't find other males attractive and interesting. In that way I think it's pretty sad when a partnered bisexual male is forced to pretend that they don't find the gender they aren't partnered with attractive or interesting. Well, personally I generally find older women more attractive than older men. A lady over fifty probably does more for me than a guy over fifty. I am hoping that with guys "maybe when I'm older" will be the case, but in all honesty it seems less likely than with the lady. On the other hand, I male under thirty does a lot more for me than a female under thirty. I'm assuming it's a moot point. By the time I'm older if I have a partner - regardless of their gender - I'm confident that I'll be able to continue to be faithful to them and to enjoy my sex life with them while still acknowledging attraction to younger people (but not acting on it). If I'm older and I don't have a partner, well then chances are I'll pursue younger people, and probably guys. I think that would be my prerogative as a single person. Of course that might all change as I get older, but that's what I suspect would happen as things stand now. I think I've said enough Fascinating topic -Kevin

Happy Birthday pitchan!! I hope you have a terrific day! -Kevin

Oh wow! That's terrible! I hadn't heard about that.

I found this interesting and thought others might as well: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1567562/Clam-405-is-oldest-animal-ever.html Imagine, a 405 year old claim! I do think it's quite terrible and tragic that they killed it by dragging it up to the surface. Seems like quite a sacrilege after all this time Thoughts and comments?

Happy Birthday! I hope it's fantastic!

Welcome to the forum, guys!! It's awesome to have you here -Kevin

Hey! LOL, maybe it's just because I personally have mild forms of those first two mentioned fetishes, but I don't think they're all that odd! Fingers can be really adorable as can a great set of toes/feet. LOL, and for the record I only like both if they're freshly washed. Anyway, I've heard lots of people say that they found hands attractive and foot fetishes are like the ultimate example of a fetish so I think it's say to assume lots of people have that one! This is the first I've heard of sneeze fetishes though. Anyway, as a mild germophobe I can safely say I don't have that one -Kevin

Awesome pic, Corvus! Lookin good

I just wanted to wish Robbee a very happy and special 18th birthday! I hope you have a fantastic day and an awesome year! -Kevin

Why be with someone on Independence Day? Actually, my way of celebrating this year really was to spend the whole day peacefully by myself. I still responded to texts and even a couple of phone calls, but I happily refused to go anywhere or do anything. It was lovely and relaxing -Kevin

I very much agree. Ideally it should be something optional that each user can decide for themselves. Since Myr indicates currently there is no way to make it optional and it's either on or off, I would have to say my preference is for it to be off. I also agree with WriteByMyself that a better option (which I'm sure isn't possible as of yet) would be to move it underneath the main board. Personally speaking I would most like to see it there and would probably leave it there if I could move it. As is, I'd probably turn it off because it's annoying where it is; however, I do kind of like having it, just not there. So yeah, moving it would be best, but either way I think having the option of having it on or off would be an improvement. As I said, since none of these things are likely realities my (conflicted) vote is for off. Take care all Kevin

Thank you everyone. I appreciate all the kind words and the support very much I am feeling a bit better and coping ok I think. It's just all so strange though...I mean I really only had five immediate family members to begin with and I'm not as close with or in as frequent contact with my aunt and cousin. Now that my grandfather is gone and my grandmother is deep into Alzheimer's I sorta feel like my mom is the only close family I have left It's not that we ever had big family get togethers to begin with, but it's sort of odd that now my "family get togethers" can take place at a table for two.