Monday, January 15, 2018

David Eddie dating advice/ Gordon Hecht

Mar.  6, 2017 "My boyfriend has two kids. Am I selfish for thinking I should come first every so often?": Today I found this article by David Eddie in the Globe and Mail:

The question

I have been with my boyfriend for a year. When we started dating, he made it clear his two teenage daughters, of whom he has custody, were top priority and that his job as an air force pilot was his next priority. I believe his immovable position on his priorities are largely the result of an ex-wife who was controlling and demanding.

But this past week was our one-year anniversary. We were supposed to celebrate Sunday, but on Friday he announced his 18-year-old was suddenly coming home for the weekend.

He decided to spend Sunday with her. The situation has left me feeling hurt, confused and a little hopeless. When can I count on him when he consistently chooses the wants of his kids over the needs of his partner? Am I selfish or wrong for thinking that every so often I should come first? I know he loves me and he shows it in many other ways, but this has been a big issue in our relationship.

I should add that the girls like and approve of me and are understanding of our relationship and what it entails. But he seems blind to this and irrationally fearful that our relationship might drive a wedge between him and his daughters, who adore him and want him happy.

The answer

Of course he should have observed your anniversary. Of course there are times when you should come first. Of course he should make an effort to make you feel special.

But before I go any further I want to focus on one word in your question: “Needs.”
Once I asked a friend of mine with three kids if he wanted to get a dog. I thought his answer was funny: “The last thing I need is another set of eyes looking up at me, full of unmet needs.”

(He’s since acquired a dog, by the way.)

In any family, naturally there are going to be all kinds of ways you need each other. But you have to be careful with that.

I say this as someone who has run afoul of it many times with my spouse, and elsewhere: you do not want to be someone with “needs.” You don’t want to be the one who “wants to talk.”

I learned this in university. I yearned and pined for my incredibly sexy girlfriend Francesca . Beautiful, voluptuous, Sophia Loren-like – whereas I, well (see accompanying column picture). At first it was equal, but somewhere along the way I got the lower hand and became the one who always “wanted to talk.”

And of course the more I “wanted to talk,” the less interested she became in me. She started to flirt with a BMOC (Big Man On Campus), this hot actor guy.

And the terrible gnawing feeling in my gut got even worse! To the point where I found myself in the bushes outside her dorm room, sick with unrequited desire for my own girlfriend, as her laughter, prompted by Mr. BMOC actor, floated out the window like the tinkling of tiny bells.

It so happened in one of my classes we were reading both D.H. Lawrence’s Women in Love and Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina. Both are about the terrible consequences of getting the lower hand in love. In Anna Karenina, the titular character gets the lower hand with Count Vronsky and commits suicide by throwing herself in the path of a railway train; in Women in Love, Gerald gets the lower hand with his lover Gudrun and winds up lying down in the snow and freezing to death.

Reading these books, 20-year-old David Eddie realized: “This is serious! I have to get my mojo back, or at least pretend to.”

So I “faked it until I made it,” pretended to be all disinterested with Francesca – and it worked! She started coming to me more and more, and our relationship became more equal.

Sad but true, at the heart of many relationships is a power struggle, and that sounds like the case here. You have to get your (female) mojo back. Stop “wanting to talk.” Stop talking about your needs.

Once you definitively have your mojo back, then, and only then, should you have a heart-to-heart talk to him. Tell him you were hurt he blew off your anniversary (justified). Tell him you appreciate he’s a good father to his daughters, but every once in a while you would like to feel special and like a priority.

I can almost give you my Dave Eddie Guarantee™ he will pay you more attention. But realize also some people are just constituted that way: not so ceremonious. You say he shows you he loves you in other ways. So let him do that. It might just turn out to be enough.

Jun. 5, 2017 "Should I intervene in my friend’s flip-flop flings?": Today I found this article by David Eddie in the Globe and Mail:

The question
I have an ex who remains a business partner and good friend. He’s a friendly person and well-liked. He is also a 30-year member of AA and acknowledges he has an addictive and impulsive personality. In the past five years, he has gone out with two different women.

One off-and-on for 3 1/2 years, and one off-and-on for two years. The difficulty is he keeps breaking up with one to be with the other and vice versa. He has split with each of them at least five times to be with the other.

A month ago he retired and moved to a smaller town with one of the women, who also wanted to move there. They seemed to be having a great time and I thought all was well. It turns out he is constantly texting the other woman and this weekend he came to town to see her under the guise of visiting his daughters.

Early on, I found it mildly amusing but now I am sick of it. He could be close to abandoning his lease and moving back to town to take up with the first one again. Is it attention seeking, ADHD, just impulsivity or is it an addiction? I have told him I don't want to hear about it any more and to see his AA sponsor. Aside from counselling do you have any ideas?

The answer

Fret not: I am the last advice columnist on earth ever to say to you or anyone “seek counselling.”

Whenever an advice columnist says “seek counselling” I think: “The person did seek counselling! You! And you failed them as all other so-called counsellors no doubt will.”

My other thought: once upon a time there were “philosophers.” Self-proclaimed, also, doubtless, but nevertheless: Socrates, Epictetus – purveyors of wisdom, in their minds anyway, for better or worse.

Now we have “life coaches,” counsellors and (no offence to me/others in my profession) advice columnists, all probably hanging on by an even thinner thread than you are, telling you: do this, do that. Beware!

Your question raises another question and that has to do with “sex addiction.” I suppose, with a gun to my head, I would be forced to agree it’s possible there’s such a thing. David Duchovny – of a) X-Files b) Californication fame – was supposedly a “victim” of this dread affliction.

But personally, I feel highly skeptical about it.

I of course believe and understand and respect, if that’s the way to put it, addiction in its many forms. I have known many people addicted to all kinds of things and it’s serious and it’s real and, of course, it’s no joke. You can ruin your health and career and sanity and family and everything else you have going for you.

But everything in this life, despite what many might say, is not a “syndrome” or a case of some treatable affliction or addiction or disease or something ending with suffixes such as “–chosis” or “–pathy” or “–ism.”

Some things are just moral choices. And this strikes me as one of those.

It’s not clear to me you need get involved in your friend’s wishy-washy back-and-forthing. But if you do want to (and, to be honest, in your shoes, I would, and I think it’s the right choice, the strong choice, and if you do I think you’ll be doing him a favour), I would sit him down and say:

“You’re embarrassing yourself.” Furthermore: “You are wasting at least one of these other people’s time and that’s a sin.”

This has always been a big thing for me. At the age of 27, I lived with a woman in New York. I knew

I had to leave her eventually – no sexual chemistry – but felt guilty and therefore dragged my heels.

Until I had what I felt was an important realization: “I’m wasting her time.”

I told myself: “Use the counter-guilt of wasting her time as a springboard against the guilt of leaving.”

So I left – rather abruptly, it must be said. But I could’ve wasted another 10 years of her life – so happened it was her child-bearing years – and she could’ve then pointed to me and said: “There goes the guy who ruined my life.”

Basically, she’s not sending me any thank-you cards, but I did her the favour of not wasting more of her time than I had to. She met some dude named Bob and they have two kids together – teenagers, by now, I suppose.

My point? Tell your friend to stop wasting one or both of these women’s time, because it’s just wrong: We only get so much time in this life. Figure out what he wants, stick with it and let whoever he’s not interested in get on with her life.

My week:

Jan. 8, 2018 "Hope is a call or text away": I found this article by Donna St. George in the Edmonton Journal.

It mentions this site umttr ( you matter).

Jan. 10, 2018 Feed Opportunity: I saw a commercial for this:

The Maple Leaf Centre for Action on Food Security (“the Centre”) collaborates with other organizations and individuals to advance food security. We are seeking to raise the profile of this pressing social issue, advocate for critical policies and invest in programs required to make sustainable improvements.!page=who-we-are

Safecheck Advanced Food Safety Certification: I was in this class for my restaurant job.  They paid for it.  I was there for a day and at the end of it, there was a test.  I passed and now I can put that on my resume.

My work has also paid for my ProServe.

Mon. Jan. 8, 2018: Job interview at a fast food place.  I like it and would work there if I got hired.

Tues. Jan. 9, 2018: Social event.  It was fun.

Wed. Jan. 10, 2018: I went to a job interview at an eye clinic at around 8am in the morning.  It was 2-3 min interview.  I would work there if I got hired.

I then went home.  I then went to the bus stop and met a young woman named Victoria who was a student and worked at a homebuilding company.

I then did a 2nd interview at a law firm.  It was like 25 min. long.  I would work there if I got hired.

Mid-season TV shows: Now onto the fun stuff.

Mary Kills People: This show came out with a 2nd season

"Single mother Mary Harris is an ER doctor by day, but by night she and her partner, a former plastic surgeon, moonlight as underground angels of death who help terminally ill patients slip away on their own terms."

My opinion: I saw the season 2 premiere and I was surprised 4 times in it.

The X-Files reboot: I saw the season 2 premiere and it was average.  It came out in elementary school and my sister and a couple of my friends watched it then.  It was not until summer 2000 when I was 14 yrs old I saw a few episodes.  I did watch the reboot when it came out last year.

Burden of Truth: This show came out this week and I just saw the pilot.  I will record all the episodes.  It was solid.

"Big city lawyer Joanna Hanley returns to her hometown to take the case of a group of girls suffering from a mysterious illness."

Peter Mooney (Nick from Rookie Blue) is in it.  I follow him on Twitter and there are these bloopers where he's promoting the show with Kristen Kreuk (Lana from Smallville).

25 seconds in:

Mooney: You're in wardrobe and I'm in civies.

Cardinal: I saw the season 2 premiere last week.  A red- haired woman gets shot in the head and survives.  She has no memory of what happened.

Cardinal struggles to right past wrongs that could derail his investigation and end his career, as the case grows more violent and twisted, and the clock ticks down on the killer's next victim.

Gordon Hecht: I was watching Cardinal, and I saw this good- looking guy at the bar scene 5 min. into the episode.  I watched the ep and deleted it.  I went to to find him, but he wasn't listed in the ep.

I go to TV on Demand on my Telus (you can't fast forward).  I can play the episode and have the TV off.  I wrote down the names on the closing credits.  I the recorded it again on Sat. night when CTV re-aired it.  I then looked up the names on the closing credits.  The name Gordon Hecht was by the character name Luke, though in the episode they never said his name.  

On imdb, the credit wasn't on it.

I went on Google and I really had to study his face.

Here it is:

These pictures do not do him justice.  He has different hair on Cardinal:

This is him on Murdoch Mysteries and is a average picture:

Here is a 2014 YouTube video of him singing:

Jan. 10, 2018: I made this comment on the video:

To Gordon: Hi, I saw you on "Cardinal" and I thought you were really good.  You need to create a website and get on Twitter to get more publicity for yourself.  You need more pictures and videos of you on the internet.

Then today he "subscribed" to me so he read my comment.

Facebook: He is on Facebook and we have a mutual friend, MADTV actor Ron Pederson.  I have never met Pederson.

Mark Walberg donates money to Time's Up: I just posted this article by Elaine Izadi
onto my blog.  It's about how women actors are not getting paid the same as male actors on the same projects.

Then I found this article:

Mark Wahlberg and his agents at WME have spun hard into damage control mode today, announcing that the actor—who was recently blasted in the public sphere for negotiating a $1.5 million reshoot fee on Ridley Scott’s All The Money In The World, while his co-star, Michelle Williams, was paid only a few thousand dollars for the same rushed work—will be giving the entire paycheck to Time’s Up, as a donation in Williams’ name. This is per The Hollywood Reporter, which quotes a statement from Wahlberg: “Over the last few days my reshoot fee for All The Money In The World has become an important topic of conversation. I 100 percent support the fight for fair pay and I’m donating the $1.5M to the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund in Michelle Williams’ name.”

No comments: