Mark Arbour

Well, the real Lady Elgin was most likely not this big a shrew, but she did suffer from seasickness, and made them stop several times on the way to Constantinople.

I'm certain he can. It must really be a conflict for him, since he is certainly chivalrous and has good manners. I suspect she is sorely tempting Granger's patience.

Thanks Leon! You'll have to wait a while before we can work out Caroline's issues. :-)

October 16, 1799 HMS Valiant Near Cape Finisterre Granger stood on his quarterdeck, looking at his ship. He was pleased with her crew and her condition, but he was most definitely not pleased with her passengers. Each of them had their strengths and weaknesses, but a common flaw in all of them was their inability to grasp that just because he was on deck, did not mean that he wanted to converse with them. Granger cringed internally as one of the more annoyin

Perhaps.

MIZ...

This whole debate on monogamy and promiscuity has been interesting. I will say that I have been a bit frustrated, but that stems from my academic background, and from our deviation from solid research methods. When you write an academic paper, definitions are important, which is why we tediously describe the variables we're including. We see that here in our different definitions of monogamy. I'm glad you guys have identified what you mean by that term, because I think that matters in this context. For me, I've always thought of monogamy as being sexually committed and emotionally involved with only one partner. That doesn't mean it's the right definition or the only definition, it just means that's where I'm coming from when I talk about it. The other thing we should do is remember that our own experiences, while totally valid, are also anecdotal. For our hypothesis, that most gay guys are promiscuous, we need more than stories. We need data from a broad enough spectrum of people to draw that conclusion. Those studies are out there, and sometime when I have some spare time, maybe I'll try to find them. In the meantime, I'm going on the assumption that gay men and lesbians are not different than heterosexual people when it comes to being promiscuous.

I don't think Alex is after Wade for a free place to live. Based on what we've seen, his family may not have enough cash to be jet setters, but they certainly have enough to support Alex in a relatively generous way in Boston. I've been thinking about this "have his cake and eat it too" viewpoint on Wade, and as I did, it dawned on me that Wade is modelling how he wants to set up this relationship with Matt based on how their relationship has been in the past. They've never been monogamous before, and once Wade pulls his head out of his ass about Alex, he could feasibly have a relationship with Alex much like he had with Sean (or could have had). It seems that Wade's just falling back into what they've done before, so to say he wants his cake and eat it too, you'd have to acknowledge that Matt was that way for their entire relationship.

Thanks Maarten. The truth of the matter is that both Matt and Wade are pretty flawed, and they've both screwed up their relationships at various times. That's why I think them writing off their past sins (Matt's post 9-11 behavior and Wade's conduct on their vacation) is a nice solution. It lets them both assuage their guilt so they can move on.

Sorry your review got truncated, but thanks for posting it in the forum!

Thank you very much! I try to avoid putting multiple narrators in a story who are involved with each other romantically. That's why in 9.11, I didn't have Matt's POV, because I didn't want to do a lot of back and forth with him and Wade. With this story, I thought that it was important that we get a cameo appearance by Wade, so I broke my rule.

I'm sorry the review system blanked out your review. I can see why you'd think that Matt and Wade are the younger version of Robbie and Brad, but I think there are some stark differences in their personalities that make them significantly different.

OK, didn't you just point out a few posts ago that we don't always get to see the interaction with the kids because it's boring? If that's the case, it's hard to conclude that Wade doesn't see himself as a father figure to Maddy. I think Wade will try to be as involved with Maddy as he is with Riley, but I think he'll fail, because the genetics are important to Wade, even though he probably wishes they weren't. Regardless, I think that whether Cody, Matt, or Wade step up to the plate and try to be a father figure for Maddy, their impact on her life will pale in comparison to the influence Will is going to have. That being said, you're right, in that I should have mentioned women's sports too. That really is a big deal. And I think there's a decent chance that if Maddy or Riley show any great athletic talent, that Matt will be a pretty driven parent. I don't see him being negative like Wally, but I do see him pushing the kid pretty hard.

You may be right, but I doubt it. I think that Matt was able to slide that whole part of their initial relationship aside, and write it off to part of Wade's molestation experience, and how that forced him to stay in the closet. If you notice, Matt never brings that up, but Wade does. I think it weighs heavily on Wade's mind, but isn't an issue at all for Matt. Carl Haupt. Refresh my memory on this one. As I said before, I'm kind of acting like Snopes for this thread, trying to bring different points of view into things. In actuality, the last chapters are already written, so you'll find out in the next six chapters which way I went with this.

Usually, the reason I speak up in this forum (besides it being fun) is to inject some context and objectivity into the discussion. That's what I'm doing with Wade. Or perhaps Wade is just trying to look at things factually and logically, which actually makes sense for him, since he just came out of his infatuation-induced haze. It actually plays no factor in this at all. Tying the series together was convenient and interesting, but not part of my master plan. That is even more true when I consider that I don't even have a master plan. You make a very good point here, and I think that if I were Matt, I would feel the same way. I can see how Matt would fall into that "second best" mindset, and how it would make him very insecure as he moves forward with Wade. Matt voiced this pretty clearly to Wade, when he told Wade he felt like he was just a dick to get Wade off (more or less), and Wade's answer wasn't overly compelling. In this situation, I'm going to agree with you, in that this is probably just you. I don't think it's reasonable to expect that people adhere to someone else's definition of love, or what is a proper relationship. If monogamous works for you, that doesn't mean it will work for a different couple. And that doesn't mean that monogamous love is stronger or more beautiful than non-monogamous love. Wade has every right to be skeptical of Matt's assertion/offer to be monogamous. He's actually done that, for the most part, in his relationship with Matt, even when it was OK for him to mess around with other guys. In the past, Matt has flat our rejected that kind of committed relationship. When Matt made that proposal to Wade, Wade was unwilling to trust his battered psyche and emotions to Matt. He was seeking some distance, probably trying to give Matt a chance to evolve into a post-college adult, and trying to give both of them a chance to recover from their post 9-11 wounds. Casey pointed out to Matt that he basically needed to stand on his own before he could be part of a couple again, and I have to believe that was driving Wade's attitude. Their progression as a couple, from Wade's point of view, must look something like this: They started out as two guys who had broken up and weren't even really friends; they re-kindled their romantic attachment and tried to work back into that friendship; the friendship expanded as their romantic feelings reemerged; and then the love they felt for each other blossomed again. And now Wade is essentially back to the same kind of relationship they had prior to 9-11, where they are committed to each other emotionally, but allowed to have other partners/relationships. Matt told Wade he was ready to go to the next step long before Wade even got to this point. He made a huge leap across a couple of those steps, which is typical of Matt, but completely out of character for Wade, who is much more methodical.

I think it's important to put that into the context of their entire relationship. They have been together more or less, for almost 4 years now, and that is the first time Matt has offered to be monogamous with Wade and meant it. Wade, on the other hand, had been more than willing to be monogamous. It is worth revisiting the part of Paternity where Wade had to force distance between him and Matt, and start seeing other people, in order to try to adapt to the non-monogamous relationship that Matt was adamant they have.

Great review! I really pondered your comment about Brad:Will vs Brad:JP. I think that where Will is different is that he usually tries to do the right thing, and back it up with as much logic as possible. Brad usually tries to use logic to justify that his point is right. A subtle difference, but I'll bet it's very apparent to JP. That's probably why he has such an affinity toward his grandson.

Ah, that's the thing about this whole series. Seemingly irrelevant past fact can pounce out at you at any time. (SMILE)

Maybe. :-)

LOL! I think your comments about Wade's description of his relationship with Alex are key. Wade has been pretty clear to Matt about why he didn't want to get back together with him, something Casey outlined for Matt just as clearly. Wade wants stability and reliability. So when he talks to Matt about Alex, those things come through, because it's not about passion, it's about partnership.

There are six chapters left. I think you should see how things work out before you get too upset. Having said that, Matt and Wade have never had that kind of relationship (monogamous), so to pin all your hopes on that suddenly happening is a bit risky.

I was probably that guy. I was never very good at posting. My friends used to give me a bad time, telling me that I either had the horse walking or at a cantor, with no in-between.

I don't see it that way at all. When they were in college, Matt and Wade both were able to see other people. In fact, Wade had a mini-relationship with Sean, his lawyer. If that would have blossomed, I think it would have been somewhat similar to what Wade is experiencing now. So what is Wade really doing wrong? He's telling Matt that he loves him, but they're destined to be apart for two years. So for that two years, or as long as Wade and Matt don't have any formal commitments, Wade and Matt can maintain their long-distance bond, but still have someone closer to home for companionship. In Wade's case, it will probably be Alex. Matt may or may not settle on Cam, but he's a possibility. So I don't see why Wade is the one who wants to have his cake and eat it too, when he's just living within the boundaries of their relationship, and he's not doing anything that Matt isn't (or won't be) doing. If they had a formal commitment, this would be different, but they don't.

That is an excellent point, one that us career dads appreciate! I was thinking that when Riley goes to baseball practice, Matt's more likely to be in the stands than Wade is, although I'll be Wade makes it to the games. There really isn't anything quite as boring as watching a little league game of 5-6 year olds.

I'm glad I could help distract you from your insomnia. Planet Alex...LMAO. The way I remember this stuff is that periodically I re-read these stories. In this case, when I knew Matt would be narrating, I went back and read Bloodlines again, just to get a feel for him.