Shows O's amorous interactions since 1993.
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
| | | | | |
jfmamjjasondjfmamjjasondjfmamjjasondjfmamjjasondjfmamjjasondjfmamjjasond
| | | | | |
---------kkkkkkkkkkkkkk-----------mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm-----[J][m][c]---[s]
| | &&| | & &&&&& |
-----------------------j---------------------K--eeeeeeeeeee-------------
| | | | | |
{notes}{0} {00}{1} {1.1} {2}{3} {4}{5}{5a} {6}
1999 2000 2001 2002
| | | |
jfmamjjasondjfmamjjasondjfmamjjasondjfmamjjasond
| | | |
aaaaaaaaaaaa---aaaaaaaaa----aaaaa-------
| | | |
----------------------------------------
| | | |
{7} {8}
Legend:
-------
2001 <-- year
|
jfmam <-- month
|
nnn <-- initial of "primary" amorous interaction (a.i.)
|
NNN <-- initial of "secondary" a.i. (If two a.i. share first initials,
| a.i. who comes second chronologically is majuscule)
{9} <-- reference to a footnote, below
[x] a "hook up" with x
& simultaneous a.i. with initials on primary and secondary lines
Notes: ------ 0: The first person I kissed, around 1984, was named [j], and if I ever publicise a timeline from my first kiss, I would have to include [j] in 1984. This would complicate my simple binary minuscule/majuscule scheme, since I would have three J's. In the same vein, there should be a different [m] -- perhaps [m'] -- in about 1987. But that's really getting picky. October 1989, if shown, would have a minuscule "L". It has been omitted for reasons of space. This was fifth grade. We broke up the day before halloween, when I acknowledged publicly that minuscule-L was a "bitch". I did not see this acknowledgment as an impedance to our continued involvement, but minuscule-L did. We went trick-or-treating together anyway. Some things I remember about L: Some playground game (presumably Truth-Or-Dare) led me to kiss L on the cheek, whereupon I received a mouthful of makeup, an experience I found singularly unpleasant, though in a giddy way, of course. A couple of years later, L had an a.i. who gave L a perfume-sampler vial filled with the a.i.'s own blood; it caused a minor scandal at school, (a teacher said it was dangerous to play with others' bodily fluids) which I thought was ridiculous (presumably they played with plenty of other, non-vial-contained bodily fluids on a regular basis). 00: To clarify readers' logistical questions: every time I was with two people during the same period they were in different locations, hundreds of miles apart: I was at boarding school from September 1993 to may 1997, then in college. 1: I was inexperienced in breaking up with people, and thought it would be easier for k if I did not tell k there was someone else. I was wrong, of course. It's funny the things one remembers and the way one justifies one's actions: I long credited Kevin Smith's "Clerks" with giving me the motivation to break up with k. The more I think about it, the dumber that seems. But I haven't seen the movie since then. 1.1: Two [b] should appear somewhere between the last k and the first m, but I'm really not sure where to put them. It's weird that I can so accurately place everyone but [b]. Maybe I should ask [b]. 2: m and K knew about eachother; I thought this made my practice less problematic. m didn't mind, but K did; K quickly lost patience with the arrangement. K and I talked on a fairly regular basis until we went to college; one day I got an email from K saying K was in my college town (K had a friend at a neighboring college) and that we should hang out. I don't remember whether I responded to the email, but I remember that K also left me a voicemail message while in town, and I definitely did not respond to it, because I am chickenshit. I've been thinking about emailing K. K: if you read this: email me. Just to say hello. And as step 9 of my Amorous Inconsiderates Anonymous recovery: Make direct amends to persons I have harmed, except when to do so would injure them or others. There was a neat thing in Jane magazine the other year, presumably a yearlong feature on the twelve steps of getting over a relationship. The only one I saw was step nine, making amends: Make amends to all the friends you ditched to be with the ex-a.i. 3: m and e knew about eachother and again m didn't really mind, but e did. I broke up with m to be with e within a couple of weeks of graduating from high school. I obviously couldn't pretend that there wasn't someone else, but as I recall I downplayed the importance of e to the breakup, quite inaccurately. Is the reader surprised to hear that of the two, the one with whom I remain in much closer contact is m? The e breakup was hard, and made things weird between us. The m breakup was hard, but did not make things weird between us. Maybe because e was the first person to break up with me, rather than vice-versa. But maybe for other reasons, like that I was such a weirdo in the e relationship, and made things unnecessarily hard and weird. 4: e and J causally unrelated, except that the J hookup was pretty much under the influence of the e breakup and so not very nice to J. The J hookup was my worst-handled a.i. ever: J had been planning on leaving the college, and we hooked up a day or two before that, and then I didn't see or speak to J again, except once when J came back to the college for a day or so. 5: This is the same m (i.e. the same as the nineteen consecutive ms in 1995-1997. The J and m hookups taught me that I can't handle hooking up with people. I really don't know how to do it, but I don't particularly want to know how. It's not a skill I value. I mean, clearly "hooking up" with someone you'd gone out with for nineteen months is different from "hooking up" with someone who lived across the hall from you for a semester, but in the end they both made me feel sad, lonely and inconsiderate in different ways. 5a. I hooked up with [c] sometime after [m] and before June of 1998. I can't remember exactly what month, and I can't fit it on the chart. We also almost hooked up in November of 1999, but didn't. 6: It occurs to me that I kind of hooked up with [s] in December 1998, but the level of contact was significantly less than that in the other two listed, so it has been omitted. Perhaps I should add another line to the chart, for these minor, low-contact hookups. That is, everything currently on the chart is either a single episode of high contact, or of longish duration, with a level of contact that is also, presumably, high. This third line would be reserved for low-contact, short-duration a.i. Let me know what you think, imaginary interlocutor. Hey, wait a minute: there are maybe two such instances. That's not worth a whole line. That's what these notes are for. 7: These things happen. 8: As do these.
If the timeline just a big unreadable jumble, your have your browser set to use a non-monospaced font for material that should be monospaced. This is dumb, and will make many things look crappy. Go to "Preferences" or "Properties" or whatever, and pick a font that is monospaced, like Courier or Monaco. It's really important. It's not like I'm asking you to download a new browser or something.
Last modified: Thu Feb 21 10:17:28 CST 2002