What I mean by not wanting to "enforce" anything, Jane, is to sort of lay out the rules along with penalties.. the "or else" factor. Kinda like misombra. In a way, it seems there was an ultimatum..but I don't disagree entirely with the concept, just the motive in misombra's case. I do think it's a two way street. In theory, the correct answer to his petition should have been: "Sure, anything I do, you can do too." Especially since we weren't out to do anything but have a fun night of dancing..where he would have been more than welcome to join in on. We both know it was not intentioned to be a "date" in any kind of a romantic atmosphere between you and me, but there's always the pre-established theories and preconceived notions that a guy and a girl can't be friends..and that a guy's intention is always to get in a girl's pants and will excercise his "techniques" to charm his way in...and I'll bet that's his opinion of me, that I would waste no oportunity. So his reaction was probably defensive. He said, "okay, you're 'dating', so I get to date too". Of course, you in turn decided you wouldn't like it either, in that context. But back to theory...in theory I would say, "Yes, you can date if this is what you wish to do. I am not, never been, never will be or feel to be your owner..you are free as a bird. I only want to loyalty you want to give me. Yes I want it, but only if you wish to give it here. If you find someone else that you can be happier with than me, you should go to that person and I will be happy for you." That's true love..the ultimate sacrifice. Not the "I love you and want you to be with me", but rather, "I love you and want you to be HAPPY".

But as you say, in practice relationships will probably prove to be unpredictable to me too.

In theory I can figure anything out.

Freds

__________________
All I know is I know nothing - Socrates