Egojoe......

[smokey bear]

I would like to ask a question

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hav you went through GIGS yourself, if so can you give me an account of your experience.

 

Have you had an ex back from GIGS, if so can you give me an account of your experience.

 

Thanks

[smokey bear]

To the ls team, can i edit the title? I was not aware your not allowed to use members names in titles.

[EgoJoe]

I have never had GIGS in the sense of walking out of an LTR due to it because I'm a very logical person. However, at 19-20-21 I really thought I knew it all and was very Egocentric. I partied, I hooked up casually (constantly) and I sold drugs. I had a lot of money for someone my age even before I was selling drugs.

 

I had several life changing experiences, hit rock bottom more than once, started to change dramatically at about 22 (three years ago) and through my growth in the past year I've come to learn that this is why my perspective changed and I was ready to be commited for life to my Ex who is going through the same things that I did in her own way. It is part of growing up. A good bible quote would be, "Pride comes before the fall."

 

Five to Six+ months a go I was one step above emotional wreck after trying to do all of the "right" things with regard to a GIGS girl. In the end none of it mattered and I was "dumped". An apology from me for my part (one thing specifically) and some breadcrumb BS from her after I had to cut ties and walk away.

 

Just because they have "gigs" doesn't mean it's ok to chase or that you don't have to move on. I could expound upon this topic and probably write a book. Suffice it to say Smokey that my perspective is probably outside of what you know to be the norm and from your posts I have gathered that you have probably never known somebody like or even similar to me.

 

I don't make excuses for myself or settle for the excuses of others. I live in an objective reality that I refuse to allow to be defined by subjective truths. I'm responding to this post because I think that you have an agenda and I hope that with my reply that you abandon it.

[CaliGuy]

I have never had GIGS in the sense of walking out of an LTR due to it because I'm a very logical person. However, at 19-20-21 I really thought I knew it all and was very Egocentric. I partied, I hooked up casually (constantly) and I sold drugs. I had a lot of money for someone my age even before I was selling drugs.

 

I had several life changing experiences, hit rock bottom more than once, started to change dramatically at about 22 (three years ago) and through my growth in the past year I've come to learn that this is why my perspective changed and I was ready to be commited for life to my Ex who is going through the same things that I did in her own way. It is part of growing up. A good bible quote would be, "Pride comes before the fall."

 

Five to Six+ months a go I was one step above emotional wreck after trying to do all of the "right" things with regard to a GIGS girl. In the end none of it mattered and I was "dumped". An apology from me for my part (one thing specifically) and some breadcrumb BS from her after I had to cut ties and walk away.

 

Just because they have "gigs" doesn't mean it's ok to chase or that you don't have to move on. I could expound upon this topic and probably write a book. Suffice it to say Smokey that my perspective is probably outside of what you know to be the norm and from your posts I have gathered that you have probably never known somebody like or even similar to me.

 

I don't make excuses for myself or settle for the excuses of others. I live in an objective reality that I refuse to allow to be defined by subjective truths. I'm responding to this post because I think that you have an agenda and I hope that with my reply that you abandon it.

 

I agree with you, EgoJoe.

 

And I vote the terminology "GIGS" to be retired. It doesn't have any significant impact on relationships because the word GIGS implies that everyone who leaves you has this “disease” which is not the case. The simple fact that cannot be denied is this: “If they are truly IN LOVE with you, they do not leave.” They can still LOVE YOU as a person (like a friend or family member) but they do not want to be IN a relationship with you anymore.

 

Dumpees need to understand and accept this fact. They have to pick up the pieces, dust themselves off and move on. Life goes on and it doesn’t wait for dumpees to catch up. If you waste your time trying to chase someone that doesn’t want to be with you the right person will come into your life and you’ll be blindfolded by the ex and not see him/her.

 

And much like you I had many relationships where I walked away from someone when I was young. Had NOTHING to do with the grass being greener somewhere else. It was simply the fact that I wasn’t ready for a LTR, I didn’t know what I wanted and I had a lot of immaturity to get out of my system. All I knew is the people I had dated I was never IN LOVE with. My life was my focus, not relationships.

 

It wasn't until I was in my mid 30s that I really knew what I wanted and unfortunately I ran into people who were physically in their late 20s or early 30s but still had the mentality of a 20 year old.

[EgoJoe]

I am all for retiring GIGS as a phrase if it bothers some. It is really just a label for a phase as applied to the end of an LTR that in all reality had little to no problems beyond immaturity, external influences, inexperience etc.

 

I've been told more than once that I'm 25 going on 50 though so my ability to look at it the way I do is a result of my experiences, education, tutelage and the advice I have received from others with experience.

 

I still lean towards Homebrew's statement about the need to "Rumspringer" and immaturity overpowering active feelings of love, but, at the root I think that is the same thing as "not being in love" (though slightly different) with the exception of the friendly or family member type affection connotation. The reality remains the same no matter what the root cause or situation is.

 

Thank you for your affirmation, Caliguy.

[BoredAgain]

I'm a bit torn on the issue. The name "Grass is Greener Syndrome" is very catchy, but it is a terrible description of what it's meant to describe. The idea of a "syndrome" gives people the wrong impression of a disease with symptoms, causes, and a cure. And I think that oftentimes people go much too far with this.

 

Of course, there are other common misunderstandings. Chief among them is the idea that all or most breakups can be described by GIGS. I think the opposite is true - most breakups described on LS are not GIGS. CaliGuy, for instance, writes "I had many relationships where I walked away from someone when I was young. Had NOTHING to do with the grass being greener somewhere else. It was simply the fact that I wasn’t ready for a LTR..." Well, okay, then your breakups clearly weren't GIGS-related. Remember, GIGS describes a long-term relationship which is doing just fine.

 

But even with these common misunderstandings, I think the GIGS label is useful simply because it describes a common breakup.

[CaliGuy]

But even with these common misunderstandings, I think the GIGS label is useful simply because it describes a common breakup.

 

GIGS is a whole label used to describe almost every breakup scenario and that is simply not true. While it might be for a small population of breakups, there are many other reasons that do not fit the "GIGS" adage:

 

1. "I am just not into you"

2. "I am not IN LOVE with you"....

3. There are personality conflicts.

4. Immaturity.

5. Only interested in self (how do you benefit ME?!)

6. Unable to love themselves therefore do not understand how to love others.

 

I can create a huge list here and those are just some of the basics.

[MarMarMar]

GIGS is a whole label used to describe almost every breakup scenario and that is simply not true. While it might be for a small population of breakups, there are many other reasons that do not fit the "GIGS" adage:

 

1. "I am just not into you"

2. "I am not IN LOVE with you"....

3. There are personality conflicts.

4. Immaturity.

5. Only interested in self (how do you benefit ME?!)

6. Unable to love themselves therefore do not understand how to love others.

 

I can create a huge list here and those are just some of the basics.

 

I agree. Mine failed because of 4, 6, and a little of 5 and 3 on his part and on my part 3 and my lack of boundaries not GIGS. The whole GIGS thing isn't necessarily a bad thing as a way to describe certain patterns followed by immature/confused dumpers the problem shows up when people start treating it like an actual SYNDROME that afflicts people like some sort of disease. Because of that everyone starts to believe their ex is like that because it gives them hope and something to focus on and instead healing/bettering themselves or figuring out what part THEY had in the relationship failing.

[CaliGuy]

I agree. Mine failed because of 4, 6, and a little of 5 and 3 on his part and on my part 3 and my lack of boundaries not GIGS. The whole GIGS thing isn't necessarily a bad thing as a way to describe certain patterns followed by immature/confused dumpers the problem shows up when people start treating it like an actual SYNDROME that afflicts people like some sort of disease. Because of that everyone starts to believe their ex is like that because it gives them hope and something to focus on and instead healing/bettering themselves or figuring out what part THEY had in the relationship failing.

 

Of course. GIGS is not a SYNDROME, it's a really odd-ball way of trying to lump some of the things I listed above and others into one big group.

 

And the problem is there isn't a specific group. The only GROUP you can put people in is: IN LOVE with me or loves but NOT IN LOVE with me. Those are the only 100% accurate way to describe what's happened.

 

People leave because they are not IN LOVE anymore. Love and IN LOVE are two different things.

[geegirl]

And I vote the terminology "GIGS" to be retired. It doesn't have any significant impact on relationships because the word GIGS implies that everyone who leaves you has this “disease” which is not the case. The simple fact that cannot be denied is this: “If they are truly IN LOVE with you, they do not leave.” They can still LOVE YOU as a person (like a friend or family member) but they do not want to be IN a relationship with you anymore.

 

Agreed. It's much easier to cope with the pain by hiding behind a label rather than accepting the painful truth that someone just may not love you anymore. Never been a believer in the term GIGS nor justify it as some sort of syndrome. I'm sure there are people that find the "grass greener" but that's just a simple indication of one's level of mental and emotional investment.

[EgoJoe]

Agreed. It's much easier to cope with the pain by hiding behind a label rather than accepting the painful truth that someone just may not love you anymore. Never been a believer in the term GIGS nor justify it as some sort of syndrome. I'm sure there are people that find the "grass greener" but that's just a simple indication of one's level of mental and emotional investment.

 

 

I agree with this too. I think the root problem lies with the all or nothing thinkers or claim to be gray area thinkers. I think another issue lies in the fact that the term itself is subjective, cheers.

[2sunny]

I get the impression someone is writing a book.

 

GIG is just a simple way of acknowledging that someone wants more than the person they seeing has offered.

 

It's just that simple. No big deal! Everyone has their own preferences. If they don't love the R they are in - what's the big deal if they go look for someone else who is a better fit for them?

 

It's called honesty. If it doesn't work - change it!

[CaliGuy]

Agreed. It's much easier to cope with the pain by hiding behind a label rather than accepting the painful truth that someone just may not love you anymore. Never been a believer in the term GIGS nor justify it as some sort of syndrome. I'm sure there are people that find the "grass greener" but that's just a simple indication of one's level of mental and emotional investment.

 

And that is why I am so adamant about labeling all breakups as "Grass is greener syndrome" which is far from the case. Everyone leaves for their own reason but it comes down to one simple thing: "They are no longer IN LOVE with you...."

 

People who are are IN LOVE with you don't leave aside from maybe abuse (them or themselves) or neglect.

 

I agree with this too. I think the root problem lies with the all or nothing thinkers or claim to be gray area thinkers. I think another issue lies in the fact that the term itself is subjective, cheers.

 

It is gray matter to explain all breakups in an easy fashion that the theorists believes his/her self. It'll take a few more breakups before they realize "They didn't leave me because they found someone they "like" better, they left because they weren't IN LOVE with me..."

 

I get the impression someone is writing a book.

 

GIG is just a simple way of acknowledging that someone wants more than the person they seeing has offered.

 

It's just that simple. No big deal! Everyone has their own preferences. If they don't love the R they are in - what's the big deal if they go look for someone else who is a better fit for them?

 

It's called honesty. If it doesn't work - change it!

 

GIGS is a blanket acronym for the multitude of reasons people break up, very few which can be distinctly categorized as "GIGS". It's made to cushion the blow of those who have been dumped and sometimes gives them false hope of a reconciliation. If someone no longer IN LOVE with you they no longer desire to get back into a relationship.

 

Sucks, but that is life.

[2sunny]

As a side note but pertinent here:

 

If someone thinks of you as an option and not their priority - I makes for an unbalanced R.

 

Some may come back - even after the breakup - but it doesn't indicate a healthy, balanced R just because they may be back on the scene.

 

From my experience - there are plenty of people that just can't stand being alone (or on their own). Must have someone/anyone!

 

Not healthy - and has nothing to do with gig.

 

Gig is an illusion for those not wanting to accept reality (it's over) - denial at best.

[smokey bear]

Everyone that has posted on here, Can you give me a BRIEF summary of what you think gigs is or means?

 

Thanks

[CaliGuy]

Everyone that has posted on here, Can you give me a BRIEF summary of what you think gigs is or means?

 

Thanks

 

"grass is greener syndrome" -- that is everyone who breaks up only does it because they feel they can do better or have someone else who is better. Not true. If people leave you its almost always because they are no longer IN LOVE with you anymore.

 

This is why 99% of the time they leave there is no second chance. And that is why you need to put second chances behind you and move on with life. The longer you pine for a second chance the longer healing takes.

[EgoJoe]

GIGS TO ME:

 

It's about the party, egocentric and crazy lifestyle more than being with someone else. It isn't about the fact that they love you or don't love you. These people have become 100% self-absorbed where before they were not. That is "GIGS" to me and everything else is semantics on the wayside.

 

The result of this is usually a nasty breakup and resentment while the Dumper runs from their problems and the Dumpee deals with them. I could continue to debate you Caliguy but it appears our opinions divert us and that you are focusing on certain tenets that seem to ignore the above part where a formerly level-headed person does the 180 and goes immature etc. on you.

 

It is not that you are 100% wrong or right but that the issue itself is a little more convoluted. Not every breakup called GIGS is GIGS and not even GIGS is really GIGS. It's just that "phase" and the dumper takes it all for granted.

Edited January 6, 2012 by EgoJoe

[Philosoraptor]

If you want my opinion.... a person thinks that the grass is greener because they are not getting everything they want out of their relationship. If they come back they are just settling for comfort and are likely to leave again unless they now change what they want out of life and out of a relationship. If you fufilled them to begin with they would have no reason to leave. It is of no fault of the dumpee, they were just not the right match as everyone has different wants and standards in a relationship.

[EgoJoe]

I think your statement somewhat characterizes the "180" and pursuit of excitement, Philo. Either way, I'm losing the desire to go round and round as we're mostly in agreement. Consensus can be difficult when people are disputing the subjective terminology of an online forum, hah.

[CaliGuy]

It is not that you are 100% wrong or right but that the issue itself is a little more convoluted. Not every breakup called GIGS is GIGS and not even GIGS is really GIGS. It's just that "phase" and the dumper takes it all for granted.

 

The problem is using GIGS at all is assuming that is why the dumpee was dumped. Too many dumpees now are "buying" into GIGS being the ONLY reason they were dumped and foolishly thinking their Ex is going to realize the grass is greener with the dumpee.

 

This silly term (GIGS) for being dumped is stopping dumpees from healing and moving on, which they should be doing instead of accepting the more likely reason they were dumped is because the dumper was no longer IN LOVE.

 

Anyone can use any terminology they want to in order to describe why they were dumped but the only factor is "IN LOVE" or NOT in love.

[CaliGuy]

If you want my opinion.... a person thinks that the grass is greener because they are not getting everything they want out of their relationship. If they come back they are just settling for comfort and are likely to leave again unless they now change what they want out of life and out of a relationship. If you fufilled them to begin with they would have no reason to leave. It is of no fault of the dumpee, they were just not the right match as everyone has different wants and standards in a relationship.

 

Ding ding! Winner!

 

Someone who REALLY gets it.

[EgoJoe]

The problem is using GIGS at all is assuming that is why the dumpee was dumped. Too many dumpees now are "buying" into GIGS being the ONLY reason they were dumped and foolishly thinking their Ex is going to realize the grass is greener with the dumpee.

 

This silly term (GIGS) for being dumped is stopping dumpees from healing and moving on, which they should be doing instead of accepting the more likely reason they were dumped is because the dumper was no longer IN LOVE.

 

Anyone can use any terminology they want to in order to describe why they were dumped but the only factor is "IN LOVE" or NOT in love.

 

I'd like to assert that this same "logic" could be asserted for thinking it is always 100% as simple as in love or not in love. It was iterated to me when I was really angry at the retarded hurtful things that despite the fact that feelings have changed and that it's over anyways, "You are looking at it from a mature adult perspective and this is not the same perspective that was used when a decision was reached otherwise you would not have experienced the back and forth the uncertainty and the breadcrumbs."

 

I'm not pining away with hope and I don't want my Ex back the effort would be too substantial and I am focusing on #1: me. Nor do I think that it was the ONLY reason but the behavioral changes, the way things unfolded and the reality of the situation alludes to the "Phase formerly known as GIGS".

 

An analogy I could use is that it is Not E=mc2 but more like relationship factors + feelings + maturity + life experience = result. A Dumpee's (appropriate) reaction to the result remains the same (heal, move on and work on themself with NC) and so does the reality of it but does that make the culmination of the conclusion the same simply because the end result is the same? No. Because correlation DOES NOT equal causation.

[2sunny]

The idea of like energy attracts...

 

IF one person accepts unacceptable behavior - and they take the person back - then you are dealing with settling for unacceptable behavior.

 

IF one person gets healthy and happy - and doesn't accept the person back with the unacceptable behavior - and EXPECTS someone they date to be decent, loving and kind - then they are only willing to attract like energy (so long as they participate that way themself).

 

If we attract what energy we put out there - then why settle for someone who sees us as the option?

[CaliGuy]

I'd like to assert that this same "logic" could be asserted for thinking it is always 100% as simple as in love or not in love. It was iterated to me when I was really angry at the retarded hurtful things that despite the fact that feelings have changed and that it's over anyways, "You are looking at it from a mature adult perspective and this is not the same perspective that was used when a decision was reached otherwise you would not have experienced the back and forth the uncertainty and the breadcrumbs."

 

And again I'm going back to the "IN LOVE" vs "LOVE". They are two distinctly different feelings and as was stated above, people who are IN LOVE with you will not leave (not even if GIGS was applied because GIGS won't allow them to leave someone they are head-over-heels for).

 

Do you understand? People rarely (even at a young age) leave people that their heart is 100% attached to. They may cheat (which is not GIGS, it's a big time mistake and a deal breaker for me) but that doesn't mean they aren't IN LOVE. With immaturity comes some of the things you have relegated to GIGS but I just don't believe that GIGS can be a blanket across all breakups.

 

It's responsoble for a very small percentage of breakups -- and used to make dumpees "feel" better.

 

I'm not pining away with hope and I don't want my Ex back the effort would be too substantial and I am focusing on #1: me. Nor do I think that it was the ONLY reason but the behavioral changes, the way things unfolded and the reality of the situation alludes to the "Phase formerly known as GIGS".

 

Again, it wasn't GIGS. You can call it immaturity if you'd like, because that is prevalent with very young adults, but it's not "GIGS".

 

An analogy I could use is that it is Not E=mc2 but more like relationship factors + feelings + maturity + life experience = result. A Dumpee's (appropriate) reaction to the result remains the same (heal, move on and work on themself with NC) and so does the reality of it but does that make the culmination of the conclusion the same simply because the end result is the same? No. Because correlation DOES NOT equal causation.

 

This I can agree with to some degree. The 100% focus of the dumpee should always be grieve, heal, better themselves and MOVE ON. What I am trying to do in this forum is to reduce the time needed to heal by separating them from the dumper completely. That means NO CONTACT.

 

Recall that most of the time dumpers contact a dumper isn't to start the relationship again but as "filler material" until they find the guy they are IN LOVE with. In that case you will not see them dump the next one unless they've created a mortal relationship sin (abuse of self or them, cheating, etc).

 

Cheers.

[smokey bear]

Thanks,

 

The reason i asked is because of the conflict on Wilsons post, i really hate when a post gets sidetracked or when its slandered. Im almost positive Wilson wont post the rest of his story just because of the hassle.

 

SO the arguements frustrated me enough to stop and think, there was no solution and i pondered why that was. I truly wanted to make an effort to understand all your points of view which i do now. Its as simple as everyone thinks gigs means something different so there never can be a coorect answer.

 

Either people hadnt experienced gigs in which case they shouldnt be advising because thats like a baker fixing your pride and joy car.

 

If you havent experienced gigs personally i dont think you have reason to voice your opinion, listen to others with experience and learn instead.

 

Secondly if you havent experienced an ex coming back from gigs you shouldnt advice either for the same reasons, you have no expertise or time served learning in the experience to advise someone what to do.

 

Thirdly it seems to be the label gigs that offends and yes a lot of people do use it for break ups that werent gigs, why? because they dont understand the correct meaning of gigs.

 

Fourthly from this post, a lot of people dont actually know what the correct meaning of gigs is, they catogorise it as what they want it to mean.

 

Gigs is the process of Maturing mentally and emotionally through experiences. Nothing more nothing less.

 

It is broke down further by someone trying to find individuality, there super ego fights there shadow, they are in conflict with theirselves.

 

All this is done by having experiences. The common outward Gigs symptoms and stages.

 

Ego joe this post was directed at you because i wanted to understand you, i do now, from what you post, i think you thoughts and feelings of gigs will change within the next 6 months, i wont give my reason why ill just wait and see if it does, also please be honest with yourself, you do want your ex back.

 

Thanks for answering my questions it was very insightful and i doubt we will conflict in the future