h a l f b a k e r yChewable.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
This would be a simple box partitioned down the middle into two equal halves. Each half would have a door with a lock on it. It would have a red light bulb on the top.
Each member of the relationship would have a key that could open their half of the box. Inside each side of the box is a simple
toggle switch. When one member of the relationship wants to break-up, all they have to do is secretly open their side of the box and flip their switch on.
Both switches have to be switched on for the light on the top of the box to light.
If the light is on, then the relationship is over.
This would keep people out of bad relationships because it would avoid the awkwardness of bringing up the subject. The light would decide everything.
[link]
|
| |
Can I suggest putting the light inside the box, thus yielding a Schrodinger Break-Up Box. |
|
| |
The relationship is and isn't over similtaneously until such time as the box is opened. That way, the pair of you could plod along for years, indifferent but content enough. |
|
| |
Um. You ever just try talking things over? We are people, not machines. |
|
| |
I think the box could be used for other decisions as well. However, it could be abused by switching temporarily to see what the other person is thinking. Possibly it would work better for more than 2 people: a jury? |
|
| |
"What have you got there, honey?"
"A mutual relationship ending box!"
"Wow, what's that for?"
<explains fundamentals of the concept, while partner's face crumples into a thousand sobs>
"...you...you... want to..." <etc>
So really, the 'mutual breakup' would go: want to break up with partner, buy MBUB, present partner with it, have screaming row, partner decides he/she never wants to see you again = mutual breakup.
This is a brilliant idea! + |
|
| |
But when you finally snap and flick the switch, and - oh noes! - the light comes on, you'll realise that you have no idea how long ago your partner flicked hers, no idea how ignorant and oblivious you have been. |
|
| |
This would neither work nor keep people out of bad relationships. That being said, I'm voting [+] simply because it appeals to me. |
|
| |
What if I don't want to wait- can I still break up with the guy who just beat the be-jeezus out of me? |
|
| |
One more appliance to worry about when going on holiday. - |
|
| |
This technology could be applied to a more positive use! |
|
| |
Why not use the toggles and lights to signal when you want sex? Each partner toggles the switch [heh heh] in secret as described. If the light is on at bedtime, then you're gettin' it on, Chester! |
|
| |
This would save a lot of relationships by not putting either partner in the position of always being the one asking for it and sometimes getting rejected. |
|
| |
Works better if the light is on a time delay also - better not to know right away if your partner hasn't toggled (or won't). |
|
| |
A visiting preacher told us that he and his wife had a toy duck each. Each would indicate his or her present feelings about the other by turning the respective duck towards or away from its partner. I agree that people aren't machines, but we can behave in tragically destructive ways through misunderstandings, so such devices are not to be dismissed out of hand. (Considers torturing self by re-reading Unrequited Love Drug. Settles on Hornbloweresque stiff upper lip.) |
|
| |
Back to neutral. Bun donated to [strange606]. |
|
| |
Yes, I see. Good ideas all. Some sort of time delay would be useful. And I like the idea about using it for sex too. |
|
| |
My light doesn't deem this a very human idea. Like [DrCurry] said, we aren't machines .. not yet anyway. |
|
| |
And on your 80th birthday you find out that the battery died 50 years ago... se la vie. |
|
| |
Damn! How long has this bulb been dead anyway? |
|
| |
The idea of a mutual break-up is more often than not, a complete lie (They do happen, but nowhere near as often as people like to think). To all intents and purposes, the relationship is over once one of the parties wants out. |
|
| |
And as [m_Al_com] suggests. The only people who would consider this are the ones who aren't happy in their current relationship. |
|
| |
In using it to signal for sex you could save money on less parts. The guy side wouldn't even need a switch, just hard-wire it on. |
|
| |
No, I think it would be better to hardwire the females switch on. |
|
| |
If I could do that, I doubt I would be here at the HB. |
|
| |