why did she break up with me??

[Mike Dura]

Wow, you're good! Lol. I don't think it's a great idea to post a thread like he did with all the oafs floating around....no what I mean? You should. Anyway, at least you got the better of me! You've got great powers my man!

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR ps, if he knew his girl, he wouldn't be asking a bunch of guys he never met for advice Maybe I'll change my title to "AR's Dr. Phil" or maybe "AR's relationship advice expert" or just for those who want to own me "Ar's bull shlter" Take your pick.

[Mike Dura]

In light of your posts, that's an ironic name you chose!

She doesn't want anything to do with him, she's a ho
PS GOODCENTS IS THE NAME!! (That sounded so odd just typing it ) Mr. Goodcents to you (In case anyone didn't get the joke, mr. goodcents is a sub restaurant in america, I was too lazy to pick a real screen name and was eating goodcents at the time)

[ronan the barbarian]

i do kinda agree with goodcents......

is he really so unsure about women he has to repeatedly ask strangers for advice?????????

the only advice he needs is;
1 there are way way too many women in this world to be hung up by 1 who doesnt even want you
2 get with other girls
3 forget about her
4 find someone who wants you the same amount

i know its harsh but dont get confused by real love(built up slowly over time) and the begining stages of it (lust)

[Mike Dura]

That's all reasonable and I'm sure the guy can figure that out too but I think it's just about feeling hurt. Call me doc phil here but you can be as rational as you want but feelings aren't rational.

i do kinda agree with goodcents......

is he really so unsure about women he has to repeatedly ask strangers for advice?????????

the only advice he needs is;
1 there are way way too many women in this world to be hung up by 1 who doesnt even want you
2 get with other girls
3 forget about her
4 find someone who wants you the same amount

i know its harsh but dont get confused by real love(built up slowly over time) and the begining stages of it (lust)

[goodcents]

In light of your posts, that's an ironic name you chose!

So are you calling me stupid or something? I mean where did that come from? But hey, whatever, I guess every one has an opinion

[Mike Dura]

No. I wasn't bro. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

So are you calling me stupid or something? I mean where did that come from? But hey, whatever, I guess every one has an opinion

[goodcents]

No. I wasn't bro. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

So are we cyber buddies again I'd hate to have an enemy on this site since I come here to escape the shlt at work

*Goodcents makes tea and offers cookies to Mike* (we've reached a new low )

[Mike Dura]

Sure bro. I'm an office manager and the people annoy me too!

So are we cyber buddies again I'd hate to have an enemy on this site since I come here to escape the shlt at work

*Goodcents makes tea and offers cookies to Mike* (we've reached a new low )

[bigger than you]

well dude maybe she doesn't like to party and if you like to party hardy dude
then get with another party animal too many women out there to even give a shit unless you wanna marry her or somthing. let's talk about some hard core stuff dudes this is lame.

[audis4]

leave a rubber full of oprotunity (sp)

hall of shame....ROFL

[prncezzml]

she knew that the 1st week we went out so i dont know what took her 4 months to tell me this.....she was always so happy with me telling me she loved me and saying she never wants to lose me ...asking me if i thought wed get married oneday.....she was overboard with the love stuff then out of nowhere she dumps me...i dont get it

She probably thought she could change you, and then she realized she couldn't and decided to break up with you. Some girls think that finding a nice girl will "tame" a guy. Plus, she's only 18, she can't go out with you, I'm sure that's no fun.

[LegendKiller85]

sounds like she found someone else,maybe you didn't bone her good enough.Anyway just F*** em and leave em.

[Doc.Sust]

So are we cyber buddies again I'd hate to have an enemy on this site since I come here to escape the shlt at work

*Goodcents makes tea and offers cookies to Mike* (we've reached a new low )

yes you two have hit a new low.lol!

[Chitown Raider]

Girls suck, I gave up trying to understand the things they do a long time ago.

I'll second that.

[Chitown Raider]

i asked her about being friends but she says she feels its better if we just move on ...i have to pick up something of mine from her house and she wont even give it to me in person because she says it would be too hard for her......im guessing that after a good amount of time passes we may be friends but im not sure if ill still wanna be when that time passes

She won't even see you when you pick up your stuff, there's something wrong with that. Kinda like the women who break up with men through a text message. How shallow.

[Bojangles69]

ive been with a girl for 4 months now. i am 21 and she is 18. we were different from the beginning as far as she likes to go to sleep early and not drink where i like to stay up late and party. sometimes we would argue about going out as she always wanted to stay home but it wasnt that bad. Generally everything was great she loved me and told me i was all that she had. we recently went to florida on vacation together and everything was great. about a week after we came back she started not calling me much and acting weird. last night she told me she feels im too old for her and that were too different....this came out of nowhere as our relationship was basically great and we both loved each other very much...does anyone understand where this would come from????

thanks for any replies because im very sad andconfused right now...

Shes *18* bro she has NO experience, NO idea wtf she wants, NO NOTHING but a vagina that made you think you were in love with her.

Before I yell at you and get suspended I'll just post a link to a blog that may benefit you..
http://blog.myspace.com/rcece56

You need to do A LOT of learning bro. 4 months and "we both loved each other very much" COMEON DUDE!! wtf

[Bojangles69]

If you approach women in groups it is best to do it with a wingman or two.

Sorry this is the quickest way to get blown out.

You ALWAYS approach a group of girls ALONE. Otherwise you come off like you need somebodies hand to hold because your all nervous and shit.

If you have a wing, he doesnt come in till after you've hooked the groups interest by yourself. At some point they'll ask if your alone and you bring your buddy into the group.

3 guys approaching 3 girls creates a scrambled communication dynamic. You'll have topics flying everywhere, and even if you do manage to engage them they wont be comfortable with such a random confrontation and will be thinking "how long are these guys are gonna stay here"

Thats why when you approach you say "i got a quick question" or w/e. And you lean back away from them and NEVER directly face them. Make it seem like your about to leave any second. Subconsciously through your b/language they'll pick up on the fact that it looks like your trying to get back to your friends (because that were the fun is) and it throws thier heads outta orbit and a lot of times they'll be like "wait what are you in such a rush for?"

Than you know you reached the hook point. Have a friend come in and deflect any potential cockblock from the group while you engage the target and isoloate her while your friend pumps the other girls buying temp and makes her forget that her friend just disappeared into a dark corner and is making out with your buddy. Works like a charm.

[Benches505]

Some of you are being harsh on this man!

She broke up with you, the reason doesn't matter. I know it's easier said than done but you have to move on and in a couple of months it won't matter to you. Take whatever lessons you have learned with you since they will be useful to you when you find the girl that is right for you.

I'm going through a break up right now too, I was with this lady just a little longer than you were with yours. Did I love her, no. People throw that word around too easily these days without knowing what it means so don't sweat what she said..instead look at what she did.

Women overuse the term/words I love you. My X was "in love" with me two days after we started banging, she was just in love with the multiple orgasms and I am convinced that she didn't even like me lol

[Chitown Raider]

My X was "in love" with me two days after we started banging, she was just in love with the multiple orgasms and I am convinced that she didn't even like me lol

Take it for what it's worth, just sex.

[scribbs12]

Yeah, like one of her girlfriends !!!!

2nd to that lol

[gixxerboy1]

Shes *18* bro she has NO experience, NO idea wtf she wants, NO NOTHING but a vagina that made you think you were in love with her.

Before I yell at you and get suspended I'll just post a link to a blog that may benefit you..
http://blog.myspace.com/rcece56

You need to do A LOT of learning bro. 4 months and "we both loved each other very much" COMEON DUDE!! wtf

That blog says a whole lot of nothing. And is incorrect in so many ways.

[Mike Dura]

I read his blog too. There's definately some misinformation. The other impression is that this guy has had some bad experiences with girls and he's adapting an attitude that will allow him to fend off future suffering from those "bad" woman. Goes to show you. Just when you thought you had it figured out, you became more alienated.

That blog says a whole lot of nothing. And is incorrect in so many ways.

[Bojangles69]

That blog says a whole lot of nothing. And is incorrect in so many ways.

And you said a lot more right here

That blog says EVERYTHING.

[Bojangles69]

I read his blog too. There's definately some misinformation. The other impression is that this guy has had some bad experiences with girls and he's adapting an attitude that will allow him to fend off future suffering from those "bad" woman. Goes to show you. Just when you thought you had it figured out, you became more alienated.

First if you have a penis and are a man you HAVE HAD a bad experience with a woman at some time in your life.
And I have NOT had any experience with a woman (good or bad) that has had even the remote ability to change the way I view gender relations.

How am I fending off "future suffering"? I'm stating biological and evolutionary facts, and present day trends that are all feeding into the notion that women are some "mysterious creature" never to be solved.

I dont know where you live but I hear the shit everyday.

This goes beyond the realm of someone spewing his personal philosophies on life, this is someone who has dedicated his life to help people living in a cloud of complete nonsense.

Your yet to raise any form of a real debate or arguement, only YOUR reality and YOUR impression of how YOU think life is.

I welcome criticism, but you and the other guy who both read my post did EXACTLY what I predicted you would. And its in one of the first lines of the post.

You tryed to analyze the author and form false notions of how his life must have been or how he must be now. I boldy said to read it the message without doing this because I KNEW it was impossible for most men to do.

Your manifestation of what type of person you think I am is 100% purely ego preserving behavoir on your part. Especially when you cant resist the temptation to believe negative events resulted in that blog.

Again its a message, if you dont share the same beliefs, BUT were 100% secure in your own beliefs, you'd feel no need whatsoever to degrade the value of the blog and would simply be INDIFFERENT to it.

Plus the amount of messages Ive gotten from ppl who agree with it out numbers you 2 like a million to 1. Its NEVER about the messenger, its about the message. Once you start accusing the messenger its obvious you never got the message in the first place.

[Mike Dura]

You say that,

"if you dont share the same beliefs, BUT were 100% secure in your own beliefs, you'd feel no need whatsoever to degrade the value of the blog and would simply be INDIFFERENT to it."

This is just an interpretation. There's other ways of looking at it (e.g., other possible motives). Also, taking what you said above and seeing your response, the same things can be leveled at you.

You also say,

Plus the amount of messages Ive gotten from ppl who agree with it out numbers you 2 like a million to 1. Its NEVER about the messenger, its about the message. Once you start accusing the messenger its obvious you never got the message in the first place.

The validity via consensus argument is weak. The majority of people once believed the world was flat too. The majority of people voted for Bush. The majority tends to be wrong. It's individuals that move culture forward not the masses.

About making interpretations about the source (vs. the message). That's just a fundamental part of critical reading. You're taught those things in basic English or research methods. It's important to ask, how might the author be motivated.

Again its a message, if you dont share the same beliefs, BUT were 100% secure in your own beliefs, you'd feel no need whatsoever to degrade the value of the blog and would simply be INDIFFERENT to it.

Plus the amount of messages Ive gotten from ppl who agree with it out numbers you 2 like a million to 1. Its NEVER about the messenger, its about the message. Once you start accusing the messenger its obvious you never got the message in the first place.

[gixxerboy1]

Where did i attack the messenger at all? I didn't make any comments at all about he person who wrote it. But in fact you did that about me. I love how you go at that i'm not secure in my beliefs so i have to attack yours. I've seen you tell people what they were doing is wrong. Whats the difference or are you admitting your a hypocrite.
I think its long drawn out and not very well written. I think certain parts are over analyzed to give the impression that the person knows more then they really do. Also some parts that were stated i don't agree with at all. Of course with relationships you can always find someone who agrees with any theory.

[Bojangles69]

You say that,

"if you dont share the same beliefs, BUT were 100% secure in your own beliefs, you'd feel no need whatsoever to degrade the value of the blog and would simply be INDIFFERENT to it."

This is just an interpretation. There's other ways of looking at it (e.g., other possible motives). Also, taking what you said above and seeing your response, the same things can be leveled at you.

Your right about the other ways of looking at it.
BUT, your way of looking at it (no offense) is nothing short of preposterous. The conclusion that I've been scolded by a woman and have "alienated myself" couldnt be any farther from the truth than the sun from pluto. I absolutely adore women, and if you read my second response on the blog you would have clearly seen that.

You also say,

Plus the amount of messages Ive gotten from ppl who agree with it out numbers you 2 like a million to 1. Its NEVER about the messenger, its about the message. Once you start accusing the messenger its obvious you never got the message in the first place.

The validity via consensus argument is weak. The majority of people once believed the world was flat too. The majority of people voted for Bush. The majority tends to be wrong. It's individuals that move culture forward not the masses.

"Majority tends to be wrong?" Typical kinda statement from a presumptous egotistical snoot who only has view of the world from on top of his high horse.
You take 1 historical flaw (with political views being as relevant here as what flavor bubble gum you chew) and use that as your main justification. Less reliable an argument than validity via consensus imo.

And I digress, the center of my topic was that men are turning into pussies, evidence of this existing in the topic of this post, everywhere I look, and even on yahoos home page this morning when I checked my email:
http://personals.yahoo.com/us/static..._reality-check

About making interpretations about the source (vs. the message). That's just a fundamental part of critical reading. You're taught those things in basic English or research methods. It's important to ask, how might the author be motivated.

You speak of an autocratic society, in which the leaders (if speaking politics again dont forget WE ELECT) "move our cultures forward". Culture is not a select few elite individuals, culture is a body of everyday people with specific beliefs and behavoirs. In OUR culture, the people lead the culture, not the president, the congressman or the governor, Tony fvckn robins or w/e you consider a "leader". Which is why theres sooo many cultures/subcultures as it exists, because this is an independent nation, and most people exercise thier freedom and independence to be unique and persue in life what makes THEM happy, NOT the leaders.

And NO in research methods you dont perform a psychoanalysis on the author as you attempted on me. You examine thier credentials, thier references, and thier status, thier experience, etc.

I possess very LITTLE of the aforementioned and I'll admit it. But Im more wellversed, well read and well experienced on this subject than people even 20 years my age, BECAUSE
I have a passion for truth, I throw myself into the real world, I watch things, I speak to people, I read books and its that passion that resulted in that blog.
Can it be wrong? Of course. I however think the concepts are highly accurate.
If you take a really good look at the people around you, and KNOW people and interact with them more than on "an opportunity presents itself basis", certain patterns ALWAYS prevail. I was simply trying to offer a system of logic for those patterns in my blog.

But since this is such a controversial topic I am begining to think I've finally found a great idea for my senior thesis.

My whole point being, dont ASSUME things about people EVER, you can know your GF/Wife for 10 years and really not know her like you think you do, 50% of all married couples find this out at some point in thier lifetime. And I just find it amusing how quickly you tried to pin a persona to me by a simple 3 page MESSAGE. It wasnt a biography, nor intended to be viewed and responded to as such.

If people disagree thats AWESOME, but they need to be specific in thier arguement and not bring up weak "when the world was flat" concepts but things more closely related to the actual topic, thats the only way my belief system grows stronger, is by overcoming even stronger oppositions. So if you have something to say about the CONTENT feel free, but much of your focus seems to be on the INTENT of the message/author and thats just a waste of time.

[Bojangles69]

Where did i attack the messenger at all?

You didnt. Reread my response. Its only like 2 sentences I think.

I didn't make any comments at all about he person who wrote it. But in fact you did that about me. I love how you go at that i'm not secure in my beliefs so i have to attack yours. I've seen you tell people what they were doing is wrong. Whats the difference or are you admitting your a hypocrite.

You seem to have forgotten your gixxerboy and not mike dura. I never addressed YOU, so at this point your putting words in your own mouth.

I think its long drawn out and not very well written. I think certain parts are over analyzed to give the impression that the person knows more then they really do. Also some parts that were stated i don't agree with at all. Of course with relationships you can always find someone who agrees with any theory.

OK see the above is great, but when you say things like "not very well written" all I ask is that you be more specific. Your taking the position of a critic and seem to not understand a critics job. Its not to make broad statements saturated with personal opinions.
A real critic conducts a dispute with facts, since a lot of what is in that blog is factual or statistically proven, show me some evidence, something you can attest to with more than opinion.
And overanalyzing things is the father of discovery, not an attempt to create false credentials with people. If Benjamin Franklin didnt overanalyze a lightbulb you might not be reading this right now. Everything we know and have as a science has been "overanalyzed" tested and retested.
Sure we seldomly stumble upon a great discovery every now and than (like when the first apes rubbed 2 sticks together and saw smoke) but to detest overanalyzation as a logical means for revealing truth shows where your at when it comes things like complex thought.

[gixxerboy1]

.

I welcome criticism, but you and the other guy who both read my post did EXACTLY what I predicted you would. And its in one of the first lines of the post.

You tryed to analyze the author and form false notions of how his life must have been or how he must be now. I boldy said to read it the message without doing this because I KNEW it was impossible for most men to do.

You did refer to me. Since Mike and i are the only to that posted about your blog. By default wouldn't i be the other guy?

[1819]

Shes *18* bro she has NO experience, NO idea wtf she wants, NO NOTHING but a vagina that made you think you were in love with her.

Before I yell at you and get suspended I'll just post a link to a blog that may benefit you..
http://blog.myspace.com/rcece56

You need to do A LOT of learning bro. 4 months and "we both loved each other very much" COMEON DUDE!! wtf

it could not have been said better!!!

[Mike Dura]

If you truly have a passion for the truth, re-read Darwinian theory. Here's a lead. Go on psych lit (or whatever database currently used at the university) and punch in David Buss and the term Review and you'll get some good research articles about, among other things, gender-specific mating strategies (that's relevant to your blog). From there, you can revise you're blog with particulars rather than sweeping generalities.

Try also to become more sensitive to tone. If you want to write a persuasive blog avoid coming accross like you're pontificating. Better to make references to specific research rather than offering firm answers. Introduce varying (sometimes opposing) viewpoints. This opens up room for thought for the reader and you come across as a more reliable perspective.

You say that,

"You take 1 historical flaw (with political views being as relevant here as what flavor bubble gum you chew) and use that as your main justification. Less reliable an argument than validity via consensus imo."

This is not a clear sentence and if there's a point in there, it has to be clarified and/or delineated further.

It's a good habit to reread what you write and try to make it as simple and clear as possible. You should ask yourself, what is the purpose of writing? Your purpose should be about persuasion. It's more persuasive to write clearly and let a good argument stand or fall on the basis of solid research or persuasive reasoning based on solid research. If you want to persuade.....writer, get out of the way! Bombastic writing distracts from your argument as the reader become more aware and suspicious of you. These are all learnable skills. It's all a part of the learning process. Good luck.

Your right about the other ways of looking at it.
BUT, your way of looking at it (no offense) is nothing short of preposterous. The conclusion that I've been scolded by a woman and have "alienated myself" couldnt be any farther from the truth than the sun from pluto. I absolutely adore women, and if you read my second response on the blog you would have clearly seen that.


"Majority tends to be wrong?" Typical kinda statement from a presumptous egotistical snoot who only has view of the world from on top of his high horse.
You take 1 historical flaw (with political views being as relevant here as what flavor bubble gum you chew) and use that as your main justification. Less reliable an argument than validity via consensus imo.

And I digress, the center of my topic was that men are turning into pussies, evidence of this existing in the topic of this post, everywhere I look, and even on yahoos home page this morning when I checked my email:
http://personals.yahoo.com/us/static..._reality-check



You speak of an autocratic society, in which the leaders (if speaking politics again dont forget WE ELECT) "move our cultures forward". Culture is not a select few elite individuals, culture is a body of everyday people with specific beliefs and behavoirs. In OUR culture, the people lead the culture, not the president, the congressman or the governor, Tony fvckn robins or w/e you consider a "leader". Which is why theres sooo many cultures/subcultures as it exists, because this is an independent nation, and most people exercise thier freedom and independence to be unique and persue in life what makes THEM happy, NOT the leaders.

And NO in research methods you dont perform a psychoanalysis on the author as you attempted on me. You examine thier credentials, thier references, and thier status, thier experience, etc.

I possess very LITTLE of the aforementioned and I'll admit it. But Im more wellversed, well read and well experienced on this subject than people even 20 years my age, BECAUSE
I have a passion for truth, I throw myself into the real world, I watch things, I speak to people, I read books and its that passion that resulted in that blog.
Can it be wrong? Of course. I however think the concepts are highly accurate.
If you take a really good look at the people around you, and KNOW people and interact with them more than on "an opportunity presents itself basis", certain patterns ALWAYS prevail. I was simply trying to offer a system of logic for those patterns in my blog.

But since this is such a controversial topic I am begining to think I've finally found a great idea for my senior thesis.

My whole point being, dont ASSUME things about people EVER, you can know your GF/Wife for 10 years and really not know her like you think you do, 50% of all married couples find this out at some point in thier lifetime. And I just find it amusing how quickly you tried to pin a persona to me by a simple 3 page MESSAGE. It wasnt a biography, nor intended to be viewed and responded to as such.

If people disagree thats AWESOME, but they need to be specific in thier arguement and not bring up weak "when the world was flat" concepts but things more closely related to the actual topic, thats the only way my belief system grows stronger, is by overcoming even stronger oppositions. So if you have something to say about the CONTENT feel free, but much of your focus seems to be on the INTENT of the message/author and thats just a waste of time.

[Mike Dura]

You say you have a hunger for knowlege. If so, here's a way of learning. Meet a prof. at his or hers office hours and simply ask, "do great innovations tend to come from the individuals or the masses? Get a second and a third oppinion. Also, see if you can find cases where great innovations come from the masses (I don't believe you'll find it). You may, however, find instances where progress comes from a collaborative effort but in general group situations are prone to "group think (look that up)" and the decision-making process is often prone to breaking down.

Your right about the other ways of looking at it.
BUT, your way of looking at it (no offense) is nothing short of preposterous. The conclusion that I've been scolded by a woman and have "alienated myself" couldnt be any farther from the truth than the sun from pluto. I absolutely adore women, and if you read my second response on the blog you would have clearly seen that.


"Majority tends to be wrong?" Typical kinda statement from a presumptous egotistical snoot who only has view of the world from on top of his high horse.
You take 1 historical flaw (with political views being as relevant here as what flavor bubble gum you chew) and use that as your main justification. Less reliable an argument than validity via consensus imo.

And I digress, the center of my topic was that men are turning into pussies, evidence of this existing in the topic of this post, everywhere I look, and even on yahoos home page this morning when I checked my email:
http://personals.yahoo.com/us/static..._reality-check



You speak of an autocratic society, in which the leaders (if speaking politics again dont forget WE ELECT) "move our cultures forward". Culture is not a select few elite individuals, culture is a body of everyday people with specific beliefs and behavoirs. In OUR culture, the people lead the culture, not the president, the congressman or the governor, Tony fvckn robins or w/e you consider a "leader". Which is why theres sooo many cultures/subcultures as it exists, because this is an independent nation, and most people exercise thier freedom and independence to be unique and persue in life what makes THEM happy, NOT the leaders.

And NO in research methods you dont perform a psychoanalysis on the author as you attempted on me. You examine thier credentials, thier references, and thier status, thier experience, etc.

I possess very LITTLE of the aforementioned and I'll admit it. But Im more wellversed, well read and well experienced on this subject than people even 20 years my age, BECAUSE
I have a passion for truth, I throw myself into the real world, I watch things, I speak to people, I read books and its that passion that resulted in that blog.
Can it be wrong? Of course. I however think the concepts are highly accurate.
If you take a really good look at the people around you, and KNOW people and interact with them more than on "an opportunity presents itself basis", certain patterns ALWAYS prevail. I was simply trying to offer a system of logic for those patterns in my blog.

But since this is such a controversial topic I am begining to think I've finally found a great idea for my senior thesis.

My whole point being, dont ASSUME things about people EVER, you can know your GF/Wife for 10 years and really not know her like you think you do, 50% of all married couples find this out at some point in thier lifetime. And I just find it amusing how quickly you tried to pin a persona to me by a simple 3 page MESSAGE. It wasnt a biography, nor intended to be viewed and responded to as such.

If people disagree thats AWESOME, but they need to be specific in thier arguement and not bring up weak "when the world was flat" concepts but things more closely related to the actual topic, thats the only way my belief system grows stronger, is by overcoming even stronger oppositions. So if you have something to say about the CONTENT feel free, but much of your focus seems to be on the INTENT of the message/author and thats just a waste of time.

[goodcents]

Goodcents leaves thread when he sees so much writing w/o smilies

[Mike Dura]

Goodcents leaves thread when he sees so much writing w/o smilies

[D-Bo Dre]

<- Mike Dura and Bojangles.. gotta love it..

[Mike Dura]

Lol. Always willing to lend a hand and yes, stand on my little soap box!

<- Mike Dura and Bojangles.. gotta love it..

[nyny2916]

ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

[Mike Dura]

You already sound like you're getting over it.

she called me 2 days ago because she needed airline info for her school from when we went to florida.........she now told me the reason we broke up is because i would never believe what she would tell me and i would think she was lying...and it just annoyed her too much.....i dont think that reason makes much sense because occasionally i would not believe her because i know she would make up stories sometimes and i would argue with her sometimes because she was selfish and immature and would never compromise...but according to her that bothered her so much that she will never get back with me....who knows if thats even the real reason with her lol