# Trade-offs in relationships, or, how honest are you?



## The Backward OX (Apr 12, 2011)

What do you put up with/accept/rationalise about, in your personal relationship or relationships, in return for peace and quiet/money/sex/whatever?

In other words, if you were solo, would you still (be able to) do, or not do, the same things?

My house-mate puts up with my pedantry and perfectionistic tendencies in return for having a man around the house. I put up with her creating a mess everywhere she goes, in return for her financial contribution to life.

Your turn…


----------



## Jinxi (Apr 12, 2011)

I moved in with my man 2 years ago. I had only been seeing him for 3 months when this happened - my father kicked me out of the house because I didn't fit in with his new fiancée and her daughter. This could have been disastrous. Fortunately it has worked out perfectly. 

I can't cook. It's not that I haven't tried, it is just one of those things that remains a mystery to me. He has 2 children - a 4 year old boy and a 5 year old girl who stay with us twice a week. He puts up with my non-cooking because I have been the only woman in his recent days that has accepted his children. We are very similar in many ways, but differ in many others. I am also a perfectionist - desperately trying to keep the house clean and tidy. This is a difficult task because his children have a habit of unpacking their toy box all over the house, we have a farm yard living in our small townhouse (3 cats, 1 dog, 1 bunny, 1 tarantula and a bearded dragon) and my man is messy too. I think every relationship has those little differences that each partner has to accept in order to work together.


----------



## Dudester (Apr 12, 2011)

A couple of months will be half a century as a bachelor. I spotted something in a movie that sums up my situation. 

The Sound of Music, just after Georg and Maria return from their honeymoon, Max is trying to persuade Maria into talking Georg into accepting the Germans. She replies "I can't ask him to be less than what he is."

She nailed it. And that's the whole entire enchilada right there. Most American women will not only ask their man to be less than what he is, they require it (and for the sticklers-I used the word most, not all). I am a man of my principles and that kind of thing is despised by many. It's why I'm single. I have a couple of wonderful movie scripts, but I won't let others make "creative changes" just so I can schmoze with people who really don't care for me. Had I a wife at the time, she would've told me to swallow my pride, but if I have to die alone, that's okay.


----------



## KarlR (Apr 12, 2011)

Found this in my inbox yesterday.  Thought it might be a good fit here....

[FONT=&quot]*  The Princess and The Fighter Pilot  

Once upon a time, a Fighter Pilot asked a beautiful Princess,  
"Will you marry me?”*[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]*The Princess said “NO!!” 

....and the Fighter Pilot lived happily ever after and rode motorcycles, made many deployments, got good promotions and duty stations and made love to skinny big-breasted broads and hunted and fished and raced cars and went to men's clubs and dated women half his age and drank Whiskey, Beer, Tequila, Rum, did shooters and Flaming Hookers and never heard bitching and never paid child support or alimony, hosed cheerleaders, almost movie stars, barmaids and kept his house and guns and never got cheated on while he was at work or on a deployment and all his friends and family thought he was friggin' cool as hell and he had tons of money in the bank and left the toilet seat up .  

The end *[/FONT]


----------



## Ditch (Apr 12, 2011)

I am just happier when I'm with someone in the long run. at times my wife needs some space and will tell me to go hunting or fishing for a few days, what a girl. I make the money and do the man stuff.

She takes care of the house, is a great cook and makes the house a home. This video pretty much says it all...YouTube - Conway Twitty - I'd Love To Lay You Down

When a whole lot of Decembers
Are showin in your face
You auburn hair has faded and silver takes it's place.
You'll still be just as lovely
And I'll still be around
And Darlin if I'm able I'd still love to lay you down.


----------



## The Backward OX (Apr 12, 2011)

KarlR said:


> Found this in my inbox yesterday. Thought it might be a good fit here....
> 
> *The Princess and The Fighter Pilot *
> 
> ...


 
You perhaps need to be of Joe’s granpappy’s age to follow some of this, but even so:

“By the ring around his eyeball
You can tell a bombardier;
You can tell a bomber pilot
By the spread around his rear,
You can tell a navigator
By his sextants, maps and such
And you can tell a fighter pilot
BUT YOU CANNOT TELL HIM MUCH!”


----------



## Candra H (Apr 12, 2011)

Why does it always have to be the male who lives happily ever after away from females...?


----------



## alanmt (Apr 12, 2011)

No offence, dudester, but sometimes those who love us ask us to be more than what we are, not less. Have you considered that you might well single because you are unsufferable? Some of your principles might be wrong-headed; your absolute intractibility may be reflexive of narrowmindedness and egotism, and your screenplays might be better artisitically and commercially if revised. It is easy to rationalize vice into virtue, particularly when you adopt a personal epistemic closure whereby stubbornness becomes principle and another's request for your betterment becomes a demand that you abandon who you are.


----------



## Gumby (Apr 12, 2011)

I agree with you Candra, but I guess that's just the male side of the story. Certainly no more valid than the female equivalent of same story.

Hubby and I have been together for twenty six years. They've been good years and yes, there have been a few serious disagreements, always over the kids. Would I be happier without him? No, but I could do it, and so could he. I put up with his tendencies to always 'take charge' and he puts up with my tendencies to 'put off' dealing with things I find unpleasant. He wants to micromanage every situation, and I tend to go with the flow. But we stay together for more than just financial reasons, there's this little thing called love.


----------



## Mike (Apr 12, 2011)

I would say that I earnestly fuel the chemical delusion of hormones that idealizes the initial relationship as a romantic comedy in exchange for a lot of sex until, of course, I run out of things to burn.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 12, 2011)

Dudester said:


> Most American women will not only ask their man to be less than what he is, they require it (and for the sticklers-I used the word most, not all). I am a man of my principles and that kind of thing is despised by many. It's why I'm single. I have a couple of wonderful movie scripts, but I won't let others make "creative changes" just so I can schmoze with people who really don't care for me. Had I a wife at the time, she would've told me to swallow my pride, but if I have to die alone, that's okay.



I don't see how making a commitment and taking on the responsibility of a relationship and family requires that you be less of a man. I'd think the opposite.

What do women demand of you -- or ask you to do or not do that would make you less of a man? 

Marriage isn't for everyone. But this stuff sounds more like sour grapes to me -- like you've failed to find someone or form a lasting relationship, and it's more convenient for you to blame "most" women instead of looking in the mirror.


----------



## Mike (Apr 12, 2011)

Joseph, I don't necessarily agree that commitment, or marriage or the responsibility of a family makes you more a man. Nor do I agree that it makes you less of one. You're a man, regardless. I know that you put in the qualifier that marriage isn't for everyone, and I agree with you. Just wanting to state that idealized happiness in the form of the stereotyped white picket fence, and from a viewpoint that can only be bias, shouldn't take precedence over individual happiness.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 12, 2011)

Yeah -- I wouldn't have put it in terms of being more or less of a man either. I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean -- and Dudester really didn't make it clear either. It sounds to me like he thinks marriage turns you into some kind of henpecked milquetoast -- that you have to give up individuality and all your manly pursuits or whatever. Maybe not. Who knows. Regardless, if someone thinks marriage isn't for him, fine -- but don't blame half the population of the planet if doesn't work out for you -- half-ass qualifiers aside.

And I'm married. Coming up on ten years. I wouldn't change a thing and life is good, but I'm more than aware it doesn't have anything to do with some idealised happiness or picket fences. And it really doesn't make me particularly biased one way or the other.


----------



## The Backward OX (Apr 12, 2011)

alanmt said:


> another's request for your betterment becomes a demand that you abandon who you are.


 
No offence, montanaman, but that other's request for betterment is only betterment by the other's standards.


----------



## Deleted member 33527 (Apr 12, 2011)

Dudester's words were, "ask their man to be less than what he is," ----> women do not allow you to reach your full potential because they ask you to break your principles, which makes you less than what you are.  

Not sure what that has to do with being married though. Not all women are like that. Some will ask you to bend your principles, some will respect them.


----------



## Zedten (Apr 12, 2011)

The Backward OX said:


> What do you put up with/accept/rationalise about, in your personal relationship or relationships, in return for peace and quiet/money/sex/whatever?
> 
> In other words, if you were solo, would you still (be able to) do, or not do, the same things?



This is a difficult one! I'm up at 3.40 am 'cos I cant sleep.....stuff on my mind...:lol: 

It's being brave enough to go it alone, so you put up with **** like 'you can't ******* cook', 'I'm going to beat you up till dead', and when my daughter was one day old telling me he wanted to leave. What man who really loves his wife does this?
We're still together, and don't get me wrong he can be nice too, tho' I love him less since we've had these and more bad arguments.
I'm not sure how much longer we will last, but it's the children I worry about, its not an easy decision.

Someone write something more cheerful now!


----------



## Dudester (Apr 13, 2011)

Alanmt asked: No offence, dudester, but sometimes those who love us ask us to be more than what we are, not less. Have you considered that you might well single because you are unsufferable?

If I was unsufferable, would I then also be unpopular ? Right now, my church family, with whom I’ve been affiliated with for nearly twenty years, considers me quite likeable. I’ve held elected office in the church for ten years now. And in case you’re wondering, I spend an average of ten hours a week at church, so it’s more than just a few fleeting minutes that I spend with them. 
I’m also liked at work. I spend about fifty hours a week with those folks.

JosephB asked: What do women demand of you -- or ask you to do or not do that would make you less of a man?

Case 1- I walk into my college dorm one day and get a weird feeling. I go the room of an aquaintance. I find my girlfriend there. She’s acting a bit funny and I soon find out that he’s slipped her a mickey and he’s waiting for the tranquilizer part to fully kick in. I get her to the safety of her room and make it quite clear to the aquaintance that he is not to go within 100 yards of her at any time. Still, she invites this sexual predator to a couple of functions-which he attends. She asks me to keep my temper in check around him. He needs to be put in a giant blender and have the puree button pushed. Why do I need to put up with this giant piece of human waste ? 

Case 2-The last two years of my military career, I’m in charge of a company of Military Police. In ten short years, I’ve risen from Private to First Lieutenant-quite an accomplishment. The General’s daughter is getting married in a social affair that brings many of the local big wigs. One of the big wigs parks his Jaguar right in the fire zone of the church. I tell this jerk to move his car. He throws his keys at me like I’m some sort of minimum wage valet. At the same time, my GF pokes me in the ribs like I did something wrong.   

Case 3-I’m in the choir room. I see one couple walk in, and another couple about twenty seconds later. The two women start talking. One man goes to a corner and pretends to be busy. The other man goes to an opposite corner and does the same thing. Both men  have been iced out and made to feel uncomfortable. Those men remain in their corners until other people arrive. 

Women are by nature social creatures-nothing wrong with that, it’s natural. In many married couples, the man has to give up his friends and social activities because she is to be his life now. Meanwhile, she is free to pursue social contacts of her own. This is a bit one sided. Some couples end up working out a compromise, but again I return to The Sound of Music.

Georg is a military legend. He’s become neglectful of his children because he hasn’t dealt with the grief of his wife’s passing. Still, from the attendance at his party, we see that he has many social contacts. Maria rightfully demands that he spend more time with his children, yet she respects his principles when he says that he will not, in any form, cooperate with the Nazi’s. 

In contemporary America, an oppressive regime takes over-be it a home owner’s association, an oppressive city administration, or a social clique that rules the subdivision, would the wife respect the husband’s decision to oppose the oppressive group, or would she tell him to get along with the group for the sake of the family ?


----------



## Mike (Apr 13, 2011)

Any positive interactions with women, Dudester? Three moments in time (and I'm sure you have more up your sleeve), can hardly determine a mean for the relationship bell curve. In Case 1, you were in the right to go to the rescue of your girl. You ceased to be in the right after she invited this predator to those social functions, especially if she knew what he tried to do and courted the consequences anyway. In Case 2, a little more tact could have been used in the interaction between you and this 'big wig.' It was at a wedding, and your girl most likely didn't want you to make a scene. In Case 3, you did not consult the men individually, so you cannot be certain of whether or not they preferred to be alone. In any relationship, the partner needs his or her Me Time, and both of the husbands might have conceded that their wives' Me Time was talking to each other at church. It's pure conjecture at this point, anyway. 

Regardless of any past occurrences, it doesn't mean that someone who would suit your principles is beyond reach. Surely you can't base these past experiences on any ones you might face in the present. These experiences give you certain insight into a good majority of women who _don't_ fit your profile, but the singularity is still there.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 13, 2011)

Dudester said:


> Women are by nature social creatures-nothing wrong with that, it’s natural. In many married couples, the man has to give up his friends and social activities because she is to be his life now. Meanwhile, she is free to pursue social contacts of her own. This is a bit one sided. Some couples end up working out a compromise, but again I return to The Sound of Music.



I would agree that women are generally more social. And because of that, they tend to manage the social calendar. Very often men simply abdicate this to women -- they aren't forced to do it. 

Friendships require that you make time for them, something women are usually more willing to do. Most couples, especially if they have children, are very busy and women are just more likely to make the effort to maintain friendships and make new friends. If they're at home with the kids, usually they have a little more flexibility that allows them to get together with friends, often other moms. Women make plans to see friends and they work that time in. Very often, men just don't make the effort. That's not the women's fault. 

Otherwise, I know plenty of married men who do things with friends -- play golf, hunt, fish, play poker, watch games etc. They tend to do things that are more time-consuming that are centered around activities -- and therefore they do them less often. Women are more likely to get together on a whim, for lunch, to shop, have coffee -- or they'll just get together with the kids at the park or whatever. 

This is just how it goes. Men usually allow women to drive things socially -- women don't demand it. I'm wondering, since you're single, if there isn't some resentment going on here -- you're not able to get together with your friends as often as you'd like -- and it's easier for you and likely for them to blame the women. The other things is, couples make new friends together and the old ones fall away -- the single friend is sometimes the odd man out. That kind of sucks, but again -- that's not the women's fault.

I could pick up the phone any time I want and make plans with friends -- I just don't do it very often. But when I do, my wife is always just fine with it. In fact, she's suggested that I do it. And I really can't think of a married guy I know who's wife doesn't allow him to hang with friends. For one reason or another -- most of them just don't choose to make the effort on a regular basis. Women do -- so from your perspective, it just looks like they're the ones in control. But that's usually not the case -- even if your male friends complain about it, pretend to be henpecked and blame the little woman. 



Dudester said:


> Some couples end up working out a compromise, but again I return to The Sound of Music.



I would say most couples work out a compromise -- again, if the man makes the effort and doesn't just go along. I'm not even going to address those isolated "cases" or give them any credence. That's just some stuff that happened to you. Not sure how or why you would apply any of that across the board. You also might want to ask yourself what it is about you and your behavior that attracts a certain kind of women that you don't find suitable. Otherwise, you might have a more of a clue about all this if you didn't take your cues from movie musicals.



Dudester said:


> ...would the wife respect the husband’s decision to oppose the oppressive group, or would she tell him to get along with the group for the sake of the family?



Gee, I don't know. Some might, some might not. I haven't seen a real-life scenario where anything like this has happened -- where the wife has demanded that the husband just go along and not rock the boat. And I'm married and have a large circle of friends and acquaintances who are married. More often than not, I see men and women on the same page where there are issues with some outside force -- a school, neighborhood association or even a church. But I'm sure it happens. So what?


----------



## Ditch (Apr 13, 2011)

In defense of Dudester, some people, men and women, are just a lot more selective in the compromises that they make and are completely happy not being in a relationship. I don't see anything wrong with that. He is happy with his church family and that is important. He is happy at work and that's a lot more than some of us can say. I'm sure that if the right person came into his life, he would be receptive. I know that there are a lot of people in relationships that are not happy with their lives but are codependent on the other. To each his own.


----------



## Foxee (Apr 13, 2011)

There are insufferable people in church and, yes, even in leadership roles. The only difference is that in church everyone else is supposed to be more forgiving about it.

Women are individuals same as men are individuals. Some of the generalizations regarding women in this thread are amazingly obtuse.

Sure, I'd have a different life if I hadn't made some promises and married my husband but I did. I suppose anything that might have happened in that alternate reality is what I've 'given up' but spending time worrying about how else one's life might have gone - especially if you think it would have been rosy - is a recipe for unhappiness and that goes for anyone, single or not.

Edit: I don't know, Ditch, if a guy thinks that any woman would ask him to be less than he is, I think there's a wall there. There are probably unwise women that do that but it doesn't sound like what a wife should be to me.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 13, 2011)

Ditch said:


> In defense of Dudester, some people, men and women, are just a lot more selective in the compromises that they make and are completely happy not being in a relationship. I don't see anything wrong with that. He is happy with his church family and that is important. He is happy at work and that's a lot more than some of us can say. I'm sure that if the right person came into his life, he would be receptive. I know that there are a lot of people in relationships that are not happy with their lives but are codependent on the other. To each his own.



That's all great. Lot's of people are happy on their own and more power to them. But Dudester's idea that men are somehow forced give up everything, friends and social life etc. when they get married is based mostly half-truths and his imagination. There are plenty of women out there who wouldn't dream of forcing a husband to give up his friends and social life.


----------



## Ditch (Apr 13, 2011)

Marriage is a compromise, that's for sure. A lot of give and take goes on but to me it's worth it. the key is finding the right person.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 13, 2011)

I look at it in terms of what I've gained -- not what I've had to "give up." And I'm not even sure that I have given up anything. If I was single, it would just be different. I'd have different priorities. It's all just speculation. All I know is, I pretty much like things the way they are.


----------



## wyf (Apr 13, 2011)

Ditch said:


> Marriage is a compromise, that's for sure. A lot of give and take goes on but to me it's worth it. the key is finding the right person.


 
a lot of it is about expectations. women will often fall out of men because they don't change and men fall out of love with women because they do.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 13, 2011)

KarlR said:


> Found this in my inbox yesterday.  Thought it might be a good fit here....
> 
> [FONT=&quot]*  The Princess and The Fighter Pilot
> 
> ...




Karl, I'm sitting here weeping and wiping tears away, that story was so beautiful.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 13, 2011)

JosephB said:


> What do women demand of you -- or ask you to do or not do that would make you less of a man?



:neutral: Pat your "member" with toilet paper after you've urinated. 

And for the record I refuse to do that. Call me head strong but I shake my "thang" off old school style just like Jimmy Hoffa did and every other man and teamster before him. It'll be a cold day in hell before I take up female "delicacies" in a bathroom.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 13, 2011)

Mike said:


> Joseph, I don't necessarily agree that commitment, or marriage or the responsibility of a family makes you more a man. Nor do I agree that it makes you less of one. You're a man, regardless. I know that you put in the qualifier that marriage isn't for everyone, and I agree with you. Just wanting to state that idealized happiness in the form of the stereotyped white picket fence, and from a viewpoint that can only be bias, *shouldn't take precedence over individual happiness.*



Two different views to consider (for me if not for you)

*Catholic.

*1. Your statement placed in bold is selfish if it negates commitment in some form (e.g., religious vows, militant service etc.)


*Science of biology.

*2. A "man" in quotes is a cultural construct that as you realize has nothing to do with the biological reality of being a man - or better put - a male (chromosomal). But with that said one is more or less "fit" as a conditional to having more or less children. The man with 2 children is more fit than the man with 1 child. The man with no child (such as myself) is less fit of all. Osama Bin Laden was something like the 50th child of his father - who had several wives - so, Osama's papa was just not totally pimp, but more fitter than the lot of you jokers on here.


----------



## Ditch (Apr 13, 2011)

Let me edit this...Marriage is a compromise, that's for sure. A lot of give and take goes  on but to me it's worth it. the key is finding the right person, _*and being the right person.

*_I've been working on watching what i say. A lot of conflicts can be avoided if we follow this simple rule..    Reckless words pierce like a sword, but the tongue of the wise brings healing. – Proverbs 12:18 (NIV)

Our  culture esteems quick wit, but many times that wit devolves into words  that hurt others for a laugh. The Proverbs challenges us to see our  tongue as a healing balm. How do you do that? It starts with what we are  looking for. Instead of looking for the inconsistencies in other  people’s lives, start to notice the strengths. When what we notice is  turned into words, we can encourage others in ways that few people do.  An occasional jab is fun, but may we be known more for the way we build  others up instead of tearing them down.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 13, 2011)

Ox, I just want another crackhead with teeth. Someone I can share crack pipes with into old age. When we marry ceremonially, we won't kiss, we'll lock arms and fire up our crack pipes.



Dreamworx95 said:


> Dudester's words were, "ask their man to be less than what he is," ----> women do not allow you to reach your full potential because they ask you to break your principles, which makes you less than what you are.
> 
> Not sure what that has to do with being married though. Not all women are like that. Some will ask you to bend your principles, some will respect them.



I like Alan's response. And the Dudester has an ego the size of the twin towers. Oops... poor analogy. 8-[

But culture and era can and does impact an environment for good or ill. I've had two separate professors (before Obama was elected or ran for office) of two different "races" state to my two separate classes that the contemporary political culture of the United States is not only more polarized than the 1960's but the most polarized since the U.S. Civil War.

I can accept that outlook. Seems reasonable to me.

American women in general are *militantly* on one side. However true that may be I can assure you that in general, Black-American women (as an ethnicity) specifically, are *far more *militantly on one side than White-American women or any other ethnicity of women in the United States. And Black-American women in general (not every single one, but in general) are extremely self-righteous, and intolerant of any other world view other than theirs. 

Prior to the 1970's most Black-Americans were Republicans. But that like a number of other things about Black-American history is largely "forgotten" or lost to most Black-Americans today, similar to the declined Mayan civilization before the Europeans arrived. So, when a people forget their own history it might evidence certain conditions their culture is in. And relative to my privileges paragraph, most Black-Americans are Democrats. And the two party system in the U.S. today should probably viewed as two major religions today given they each have their sacred, infallible creeds. I'm a heretic within Black-America by the way. That I'm ethnically Black-American and was reared Catholic (aside from Creoles, the vast majority of Black-Americans are Protestant) is bad enough, but that is tolerable, but what's intolerable is that I contradict the sacred stories of certain fallacious "history" and their eucharistic bread of political thought. 

Amy Chua - the famed Asian "Tiger Mom" - and Jewish parental guidance that develops infants into financial specialists and medical specialists rarely if ever exists within Black-America. To your average Black-American woman medical doctors pop out of the sky, no black kid has any responsibility in school and the problem is merely the school itself and a lack of financing said schools, and religion should never enter the political discussion. Excuse me... Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, not to mention Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Reverend Wright? :x

As you can see... I'm unpopular over the internet. :coffee: I'm suppose to embrace what's repeated rather than reflect upon actual obvious events. If you don't like my *personal* views on marriage because you associate their Catholic origins with the political right and you mock "family values" then be consistent. Why run to the support of Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton? And because Democrats embrace Islam you don't like my views critical of multiple marriages in Islam? These things are more important to you when seeking out a male mate? But it's my fault over 70% of Black-American women giving birth to children are single? Being "a man" means being promiscuous, uneasy to wed, and the desire of most women within your ethnicity due to your personality and void of any real "character." 

But aside from Black-American women I think it is true American women in general complain more than any other woman on earth. You'd think they were living in Afghanistan. Look... the Supreme Court gave you the legal right to hire a doctor to wack your unborn child possibly by decapitation. I'm not a monster for not holding your hand to the abortion clinic. Plus, unlike you, I might get arrested for holding a crack pipe in my pocket. Your body might be yours but apparently mine is owned by the Government of the United States of America. 

And for the record... I admire Alan a lot and it's men like him that makes it much easier for me to reconcile with homosexual marriage and support it being legalized. I might not totally agree with it but _hey_ after witnessing all these heterosexual clowns getting married and the Las Vegas chapels that make mockery's of marriage, maybe people like Alan and his husband might actually raise the bar on marriage. But even if that weren't the case, just if it will reduce suicides by young homosexuals, by assimilating them more into society, so be it. I'm not like some of these cold heart lay Catholics that actually would prefer to see people jumping off roofs because they don't like them due to not agreeing with them.


----------



## ARNorris (Apr 13, 2011)

Interesting responses/reaction to marriage. I will admit I had some reservations about marriage as a concept. Then I met my husband and I realized, with the right person marriage is an added strength and positive thing in your life.

I'm nowhere near the stereotype of the female/wife and my husband is nowhere near the stereotype of the male/husband. He's the social butterfly and I'm the natural hermit. He's a great at-home parent and you couldn't threaten me with a gun to my head to become a stay at-home parent. I thrive in the business world and he thrives in the PTA.

I let him be who he is and stand on the sidelines cheering for him just as he does for me. 
That's what being married is, supporting someone you love and them doing the same for you. I'd hate to try and force my husband to be someone he's not. That would make him unhappy and me unhappy. I fell in love with him for who he is. Just like he fell in love with me being who I am. We've also not restricted each other's growth/evolution as people. If he decided one day he wanted to head into the work sector...well, I'd be ready to help him any way I could. (I would say if I one day decided to be an at-home mom...but that thought scares me and sends me into fright sweats.)

I'm not sure where all these stereotypes of women/men wife/husband came from but it's entertaining to read...but also a little sad. It seems some have put their whole basket of eggs in that thought and closed themselves off from a potentially wonderful experience.

No mater what life route people choose, I hope it's because that's where they're happiness and drive are taking them...not because they fear or have had a few bad experiences in another route.


----------



## Candra H (Apr 13, 2011)

Foxee said:


> Women are individuals same as men are individuals. Some of the generalizations regarding women in this thread are amazingly obtuse.


 
Seconded.

I'm too tired tonight to go into my own view of things from a single female's point of view but there's no way I'm letting all the bachelors do the talking on their own.

I'll be back...


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 13, 2011)

Stereotypes are probably over-simplifications that would show little to no verifiable proof to be justified. Probably. 

But generalizations and of themselves are not bad and probably not one and the same as stereotypes. Recall the social sciences like sociology, anthropology, Africology, and economics that study *collectivities* and in doing so make generalizations their bread and butter.

I can't talk about 300+ million Americans (United Statesians) by giving a biography of each one. That would be impossible for one man. Plus, for an economy of words it suffices to generalize. Also recall that we have something called ethnicity as well as culture. Both are suggestive of the limitations of individuality. 

I'm reminded of Black-Americans who never like criticism about themselves as a collectivity and are quick to respond by talking of "stereotypes." Then they turn right around in a different conversation or a different thread and speak blatantly about "white people" where they ascribe behavior and motives to them. I become unpopular - online - when I remind Black-Americans guilty of this online, in a thread. :drinkcoffee:

Women in the Western World (not just the USA) have done well for themselves reminding the social and political settings about all the numerous things they dislike that can be ascribed to men - being born male. The whole feminist movement was helped propelled by making generalizations about men. And I'm subject to reading liberal Black-American women type away online, frequently, about the blame resting squarely with "black men" for all the black single mothers walking around in the United States. :-k A broad can abort her child - her *choice *- but she has no choice or responsibility in the kinds of men she chooses to date or have sex with? For this I'm held responsible for all the millions of single, impregnated black women, I've never met, strolling around in the United States. It would be comical if it was not so absurd and vindictive. 

I'm not Republican by they way. I voted for Obama. Aside from voting for him for his race, I would have voted for him just because I like his swagger, that and his dark, black wife with her nice round butt, makes for an excellent aesthetic change in First Ladies in the White House. Let to me though it would have been a Latina (female or pre-op transsexual) with a basketball butt like Jennifer Lopez. But hey, the rest of the world has not developed my level of art appreciation yet.

Although the sexiest English speaking woman I have ever heard was a very accented Russian woman in a Milwaukee County bus speaking on cellphone about the "dog" (her daughter) she wanted to beat, there is a reason I'm enamored by the sun drenched bodies, awakened minds, of the apple bottomed Brazilian women. The exception being Candra of course. It's all quite _Einstein_. 


[video=youtube;-vHT6b7u1_Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vHT6b7u1_Y&feature=related[/video]


----------



## ewan (Apr 13, 2011)

> I have a couple of wonderful movie scripts, but I won't let others make "creative changes" just so I can schmoze with people who really don't care for me.



Someone quoted this early on in the thread. It intrigued me. I have seen people live their lives as in a  movie script, it happens. The police will tell you of copy cat crimes. And children's programs warn the children not to try the stunts seen in the program. I would say it is a dangerous practice, I mean who hates Indians and Japs for past crimes these days? Same with modern movies, most are violent and full of weird sexual antics. Doesn't make for reality and is dangerous.

I would say live out your life to accommodate your circumstances and if you actually find some happiness hang onto it with all you've got. 



I actually admire these large ugly Europeans (or Westerners) who marry lithe youg beauties from the east, they have bucked the trend and appear to have found some happiness.


----------



## The Backward OX (Apr 13, 2011)

Two female posters in this thread have referred to the part played by "love" in these situations. I'm reminded of a time many years ago when I picked up a young woman in my cab one night. She'd been crying and was a mess physically. I asked her what was wrong. 

"My boyfriend just bashed me."

"Sounds to me like you need to leave him."

"I can't do that. I love him."

???


----------



## Gumby (Apr 13, 2011)

As one of those female posters, I have to say, _that_ situation _isn't_ what I mean by love. But I imagine you knew that already. If you asked the boyfriend, he would probably say that he loved her, too. That's a situation where two sick people have found each other to fill their unhealthy idea of love.


----------



## Candra H (Apr 15, 2011)

Well, a lot of this thread has disappeared since I last looked so some of what I was going to say now seems irrelevant. Anyway...

The reason I avoid generalisations about anything is because they're easy. They allow people to fall back on socially/culturally constructed ideas about others based on gender, status, belief system, or whatever else, rather than actually observing the people they're interacting with on their own merit and responding appropriately.

I don't think I've ever accused any male of being a stereotype but if I have, apologies. To me, people are people regardless of gender, race, or social status and I don't expect anyone to conform to any idea I may have of them, because said idea would probably only be created by a life lived within a certain culture and not really applicable to everyone across the planet. So yeah, generalisations might be handy for certain methods of study but not so handy when dealing with individual humans.

Ech, ramble... 

As for the relationship thing? Well, I think a lot of people might be getting their blinkers in a twist because they're placing expectations on the opposite sex based on what they think relationships should be and how the partners within them should behave. I also think a lot of the pressure people are under in that regard is because "relationship" is posed as the default setting for everyone within our society. So, for those of us who feel more comfortable outside the setting of "relationship" there appears a sense of judgement/ostracisation/pity from those who feel comfortable within relationships. So what we could all be doing is to stop putting expectations on ourselves and others based on what we think they should be doing, i.e., going out there and looking for the ideal partner.

Second ramble...

That all sounded much more reasonable and coherent in my head.



> Although the sexiest English speaking woman I have ever heard was a very accented Russian woman in a Milwaukee County bus speaking on cellphone about the "dog" (her daughter) she wanted to beat, there is a reason I'm enamored by the sun drenched bodies, awakened minds, of the apple bottomed Brazilian women. *The exception being Candra of course*. It's all quite _Einstein_.


 
Uh, thanks, I think... Though, for all you know I could have a _moon_-sized backside.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 15, 2011)

Candra H said:


> Uh, thanks, I think... Though, for all you know I could have a _moon_-sized backside.



I can handle it, Candra. After all, I have a _moon_-sized Afro.

Plus, I've been studying my Russian. No pain, no pain. Hahaha.

I opulence (moon-sized anything).

[video=youtube;jBOq-skoi1c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBOq-skoi1c&feature=related[/video]


----------



## Candra H (Apr 15, 2011)

My computer doesn't agree with video links.


----------



## Baron (Apr 15, 2011)

Candra H said:


> My computer doesn't agree with video links.



You don't know how lucky you are.


----------



## Candra H (Apr 15, 2011)

Heh. Probably more than I deserve.


----------



## Jinxi (Apr 19, 2011)

I have read through everyone's comments here and it seems that many people have quite a cynical view on both relationships and love.

I have been witness to women who believe in the "fairytale love" - the kind of love that one sees in the movies. Media portrays true love as something that brings OTT happiness 24/7. Yes, the couple will experience a drama of sorts that pulls them apart, but all is made right in the end and they live happily ever after. I am, of course, generalising many romantic films. This kind of portrayal leaves many women wondering what is missing from their lives and their relationships. I have seen good relationships fall to pieces because she is looking for more from her man. It is sad to think that people can be so mislead by media that they begin to believe that this is how their lives should be. In my opinion, having someone who loves you whole-heartedly and makes you happy should be enough. Why go looking for something more?

I am a typical hopeless romantic - I love roses and songs and poetry and cuddles and all that  Even though I am this way - I am realistic about relationships. It cannot always be sunshine and kittens. Both my man and I are opinionated, him more so than me. His past relationships have been damaging and he has many difficulties that he has to deal with as a result. I too am damaged goods, from disastrous family relationships. I will NEVER ask my man to be anything other than who he is. I love him that way and I am proud to be with someone like him. Regardless of his insecurities, he is a wonderful, loving, generous man.

He has many hobbies that he thoroughly enjoys. He participates in online gaming, music, reading and especially loves spending time with his children. I could be like the women that have been described in above threads and limit his time to do the things he loves. But why would I want to do that? I have encouraged my man to join a band and gain as much experience he can from performing live. In fact, he is playing his first solo gig in 2 weeks (he is a singer and a guitarist). Yes, his hobbies are time consuming, but they are part of what makes him who he is. It is an honour for me to stand next to the stage and see how much he has improved and just how happy it makes him. I could be selfish and demand he spend time with me and my friends, as was previously mentioned in this thread, rather than enjoy his online games. Instead, I joined in. I learned how to play the same games and now we enjoy that time together. I cannot understand women who take away from their men the little delights that they may have.

When you look at our relationship there is so much drama that surrounds us – my family in particular have created a difficult environment, but we have both moved beyond that and are the better for it. We are discussing an engagement and I am over the moon. He makes me unbelievably happy and I know he feels the same. It would be an honour to be his wife.

A relationship is not a tennis match where one person wins and the other loses. It should rather be viewed as a game of doubles – where together you can either succeed or not.


----------



## Mistique (Apr 19, 2011)

Gumby said:


> I agree with you Candra, but I guess that's just the male side of the story. Certainly no more valid than the female equivalent of same story.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Mistique (Apr 19, 2011)

JosephB said:


> That's all great. Lot's of people are happy on their own and more power to them. But Dudester's idea that men are somehow forced give up everything, friends and social life etc. when they get married is based mostly half-truths and his imagination. There are plenty of women out there who wouldn't dream of forcing a husband to give up his friends and social life.


 
I am one of those  I have never asked my husband to give up his friends or social life. Some of the time he visits his friends alone and some of the time I go with him. He would prefer if I always went with him, but I am not always in the mood for it. He accepts that I stay home when I don't feel like going.

At one point my husband even had a friend (a female one) who had had a crush on him for years (long before he had met me), but it had never grown into more than just friends. She invited him over and specifically asked him to leave me at home. My husband wasn't sure what to do as he did like this friend, but didn't want to offend me. It would have been easy for me to tell him not to go, but why would I? I had no reason to be jealous, because if anything were to happen between the two of them it would have happened in the years before he met me (and when he was still single). So I told him that he would have to decide on his own if he wanted to go or not, but I was fine with it either way.


----------



## Candra H (Apr 19, 2011)

Mistique said:


> Gumby said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with you Candra, but I guess that's just the male side of the story. Certainly no more valid than the female equivalent of same story.
> ...


----------



## Mike (Apr 19, 2011)

Thanks, Jinxi, that was a good dose of reality, if I ever saw it.


----------



## Luckystars1987 (Apr 19, 2011)

My partner puts up with my not being able to cook, like jinxi said, it's not that I haven't tried, it just doesn't come naturally for me at all in return for me doing the washing up and the extra treats to say thank you 
In return I put up with his rather worrying obsession on Fishing.... I tell you if i was a carp i'd never be left alone!
We both still have social lives and I don't stop him from doing things with his friends as I wouldn't have it if he tried to stop me.


----------



## Mystery (Apr 19, 2011)

Jinxi said:


> I have read through everyone's comments here and it seems that many people have quite a cynical view on both relationships and love.


I decided to start with this quote because while it is true, there is a part missing in it.

Many people also have an over idealized view of relationships and love, and they will fight tirelessly to defend it because they have built their life on it.

Dudester and Jinxi, you immediately earn a lot of respect from me. Dudester you are a man of principle and honor, you will not bow your head and you will not compromise who you are, nor will you accept second best for yourself in your life, I find that is a quality sorely lacking today. Jinxi, you are down to earth and show that not only do you understand what a relationship is, but you understand what it needs, something a lot of women don't.

And with those two compliments, I've also pretty much summed up my opinion.

I am willing to compromise, to an extent. There are things however, that cannot be compromised. Cooking? Going out with friends? These aren't important, I can compromise all day. My principles and values? Relationship necessities? No, I will not compromise.

Most women either are not prepared for the relationship, do not understand it, or do not understand what compromise is(something I find wrong with the whole world mind you). I often find myself making compromises that are not asked for, because I know it's something that needs to be done for the relationship. The female counterpart is oblivious to it until I bring it up, or I start breaking that compromise, and I am always guilty, and she is always the victim.

The other problem is that women today have a very strange idea about relationship dynamic. 

I am an 'alpha male' in the sense that I am quite old fashioned in how I think a man should be, and how I think a relationship should be, while picking and taking what I think humanity has learned over the last millennium. 

I am a man. I will protect you, provide for you, support you. 

What most women don't understand is that when I say I will protect you, it means even if you don't understand it. That good friends of yours that always puts his arm around you and flirts with you a lot, but you're just friends? He is dead meat. I am not only protecting you from others, I am protecting you as MY woman.

I will provide for you. Food, drink, a roof. I will not waste my money on every asinine thing you want. I am willing to give you a place to live and a comfortable environment. I'm not willing to be your sugar daddy. I will get you gifts, I will get you treats. At the end of the day however, its my choice, and I expect the same from you.

I will support you. I will be a shoulder to cry on, I will be an ear that listens, I will be the one to tell you "you did the right thing". When the time comes, however, I expect the favor returned. In full. I support you, because this is a relationship, and as a good song once said, I need to lean on you too sometimes.

I chose these three because I think they are the three most sore thumbs. Women are not willing to return the favors, or return the compromises. They are not willing to accept both halves of the coin and compromise in a way that is necessary for a relationship.

Oh and no, I do not believe all women are like this, I've met a few that aren't. I do however think most are like this. The few that I have met, that you will bring up and try to justify, they are called statistical anomaly. They are not part of the normality.

So as a nice summary, and a little irrelevant. Most people, never mind what sex, don't understand that a relationship is not just about love, it is not just to reproduce and have a family. A relationship, and further yet a marriage, is a bond. You take the other person as someone you love, someone you enjoy being around and will be able to enjoy being around for many years more, someone who can support you and fill in the gaps for you, and someone who you can do it all for too. It is a choice and a pact, to spend your days with someone who can help you and who you can help weather through life with.  

When you enter a relationship, you are choosing the person you will enjoy and suffer life with.

Sorry for the rant.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 20, 2011)

The view point from one old timer (circa 1920's).

OnMilwaukee.com Milwaukee Buzz: Ex-prisoner trades solitary freedom for a home behind bars



> The 71-year-old machinist got a hero's welcome at Cutler-Hammer when  he resumed his old job in early September "with the enthusiasm of a  child."
> 
> But now he had a hankering for a different kind of ball-and-chain.
> 
> ...









I guess that old guy was like that Russian that likes, "Saving the money."


----------



## JosephB (Apr 20, 2011)

Mystery said:


> What most women don't understand is that when I say I will protect you, it means even if you don't understand it. That good friends of yours that always puts his arm around you and flirts with you a lot, but you're just friends? He is dead meat. I am not only protecting you from others, I am protecting you as MY woman.



I'd trust my wife to handle this -- and I doubt that there's anything about this she or the vast majority of women wouldn't understand. I'm betting if it made her feel uncomfortable, if the guy crossed the line, she'd let him know. And if that wasn't sufficient to make him stop, I'd intervene in some way, if necessary. But it would most likely never come to that. This is about trust -- and since I have no reason not to trust my wife, there'd be no reason for me to get all upset about this, make a big scene or feel the need to make the guy "dead meat" -- which I assume means beat him up or something. The last thing we'd need is for me to go to jail on an assault charge because I felt the need to go on some macho, jealous rampage over nothing. My wife would definitely not appreciate that.

Trust is one of the key foundations in any relationship -- and if you trust your partner, an overly affectionate or flirty friend of the opposite sex is little more than an annoyance.


----------



## Jinxi (Apr 20, 2011)

JosephB said:


> Trust is one of the key foundations in any relationship -- and if you trust your partner, an overly affectionate or flirty friend of the opposite sex is little more than an annoyance.


 
I agree with this entirely. Trust is the building blocks of a stable relationship. You may be happy together, but if jealousy creeps in over insignificant situations this could destroy the happiness in an instant.

I think a situation such as the one described by Mystery should be left in the hands of the woman. She will know how to deal with it and, as Joseph said, will ask for your help if it does not come to a stop. I have had problems in the workplace where my boss was sexually harassing me on a daily basis. I made my partner aware of every comment or chirp that was made, so that he knew exactly what the situation was. He offered his assistance by suggesting he speak to my boss, but I refused and chose to deal with it myself. I put a stop to it and my boss and I continued to have a professional relationship. This situation is a good example because my partner had met my boss and knew his overly sexual behaviour, but he trusted me enough to allow me to handle it. My partner was annoyed at the fact that my boss's initial behaviour made my working environment unpleasant, but he was confident that I would handle myself correctly and not fall prey to my boss's sexual antics like so many of his previous female employees.

Trust is crucial in any relationship, be it a couple, friendship or even family. When one does not trust their friends or family, they begin to distance themselves. It is obvious that this would happen in a loving 'couple' relationship too.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 20, 2011)

If the flirtatious behavior of a friend is a big problem, it likely means that one partner is jealous and overprotective, or it means that there has been some transgression in the past that might make someone feel suspicious. Or perhaps it's some combination of the two. However you slice it, it's a problem that really doesn't have a whole lot to do with gender or how "most" women think or behave.

I can't really say how "most" women are, except based on my own experience. And in my experience, women are no more or less capable of understanding compromise and every other aspect of what it takes to make a good relationship. It really depends on the individual -- not the gender. 

I say this as someone who's been married almost 10 years and who moves in circles with couples of all ages, in marriages of varying duration. Couples who have faced all kinds of difficulties and come though them -- or sometimes not. My opinion is based on what I've been though, what I see, and what we discuss with other couples. It's not based on guesswork or some imagined ideal of what a marriage or partnership should be.

Otherwise, if you consistently have a problem or issues with the opposite sex, then I think you might want to try and step back and ask yourself what it is about you and your behavior that attracts this kind of person or that attracts you to them. Or you might want to reconsider the overall company that you keep. Or perhaps you should look at your childhood and adult role models  and the environment in which you were raised. You might get to the root of things and stop blaming half the planet's population -- or "most" of them -- for your difficulty in finding this seemingly rare and suitable partner.


----------



## Mystery (Apr 21, 2011)

JosephB said:


> I'd trust my wife to handle this -- and I doubt that there's anything about this she or the vast majority of women wouldn't understand. I'm betting if it made her feel uncomfortable, if the guy crossed the line, she'd let him know. And if that wasn't sufficient to make him stop, I'd intervene in some way, if necessary. But it would most likely never come to that. This is about trust -- and since I have no reason not to trust my wife, there'd be no reason for me to get all upset about this, make a big scene or feel the need to make the guy "dead meat" -- which I assume means beat him up or something. The last thing we'd need is for me to go to jail on an assault charge because I felt the need to go on some macho, jealous rampage over nothing. My wife would definitely not appreciate that.
> 
> Trust is one of the key foundations in any relationship -- and if you trust your partner, an overly affectionate or flirty friend of the opposite sex is little more than an annoyance.


Oh Joseph, I forgot how awesome you where.

Like I said before, I am very old fashioned in the way I think, I will not only protect my partner, I will protect her as MY woman. I am territorial.
Also, its not about how much I trust her, It's about another man trying to make a pass at MY woman.
(to make this clear, since you didn't realize it the first time, its about pride, honor, respect, the unspoken law among men)

I did say most women, which I now correct to people, cannot understand this principle, as you have demonstrated.



> Otherwise, if you consistently have a problem or issues with the opposite sex, then I think you might want to try and step back and ask yourself what it is about you and your behavior that attracts this kind of person or that attracts you to them. Or you might want to reconsider the overall company that you keep. Or perhaps you should look at your childhood and adult role models and the environment in which you were raised. You might get to the root of things and stop blaming half the planet's population -- or "most" of them -- for your difficulty in finding this seemingly rare and suitable partner.


Ah, you managed to insult my mental sanity, ability, social ability, emotional state, upbringing, parents, family, friends, school, culture, country etc all I one go. I have to admire that as a fellow connoisseur of all encompassing insults. Now I could return the insult, but then I would someone be to blame, funny world isn't it. How you can demonstrate the points I say, and deny them in one go. Instead I will just point out that by questioning my environment, and my upbringing, you have made a broad spectrum generalization like the one you are accusing me of.

Sorry Joseph, but its a weak excuse. I have long lasting friendships with people that have lasted years and will last more, I have very good social contacts and I get invited to regular social events because I socialize well. I have many good female friends who I'm regularly in contact with. I am not socially crippled. I am not crippled in my relationships with people. I just don't see any that I would like to commit in a relationship with.

I am just not willing to accept anything but first place for myself. I can't go "well, silver is good too", I can't go "well, she fits 9/10 of the things I have to have in a relationship", I can't go "well, she is almost perfect". 

It takes a different measure of fortitude to say "If I cannot find a person that I want to enjoy this journey with, then I will enjoy it alone". I don't NEED a relationship, I don't NEED social interaction. I like them, I want them because I enjoy them, but I don't NEED them. I can spend days alone musing and thinking and enjoying myself without realizing that I've been alone. If I can enjoy my life with the friends and people I know, without committing to one woman, why should I do it unless I think they are perfect for me?

And then people wonder why divorce is so widespread.

And one last thing, I'm not blaming anyone. Like I said I have a peculiar way of thinking and seeing things. My way of thinking, my standards, what I see and how I want, are my own. It's not anyone's job to live up to them and I will deny expecting them even thought deep down I think it would be for the better(hi, opinions 101). Maybe I'm wrong, the difference is, I don't have to change my way of view because it's not popular, or it doesn't fall in line with the world. 

In fact, you could say, that my very viewpoint over relationships, and my understanding of how serious and life changing this commitment is, is the reason why I'm not willing to rush into it or take anything but perfect for it.

So stop finding a reason to insult me please. Understand that it is MY way of life, you don't need to like it, but you need to give me the respect to say "alright, but I don't see it that way".



> I agree with this entirely. Trust is the building blocks of a stable relationship. You may be happy together, but if jealousy creeps in over insignificant situations this could destroy the happiness in an instant.
> 
> I think a situation such as the one described by Mystery should be left in the hands of the woman. She will know how to deal with it and, as Joseph said, will ask for your help if it does not come to a stop. I have had problems in the workplace where my boss was sexually harassing me on a daily basis. I made my partner aware of every comment or chirp that was made, so that he knew exactly what the situation was. He offered his assistance by suggesting he speak to my boss, but I refused and chose to deal with it myself. I put a stop to it and my boss and I continued to have a professional relationship. This situation is a good example because my partner had met my boss and knew his overly sexual behaviour, but he trusted me enough to allow me to handle it. My partner was annoyed at the fact that my boss's initial behaviour made my working environment unpleasant, but he was confident that I would handle myself correctly and not fall prey to my boss's sexual antics like so many of his previous female employees.
> 
> Trust is crucial in any relationship, be it a couple, friendship or even family. When one does not trust their friends or family, they begin to distance themselves. It is obvious that this would happen in a loving 'couple' relationship too.



This is why I see the world the way it is Jinxi. If I can't trust a woman, do I strike you as the kind of person who would say "okay you know, I can't trust her, I will still try a relationship with her"? Let me answer it for you, No, I am not. I mean no insult so pardon me if I'm coming off a bit aggressive here. I'm just a very straight forward person that borderlines on brutal honesty.

It's not about trust, it's about the way I see things. I am a man, if someone else tries to approach my woman, I will go on a full prominent display of power to ensure it stops. I do warn both people first, I've never thrown the first blow so to speak. Also consider this, if a girl can't let go of an overly flirtatious friend, or stop men from being flirtatious with her, does she deserve my trust, let alone my respect?

Also, you should stop seeing the forest for the trees, one example isn't my life story, nor the reason why I choose to see the world the way I do.

Furthermore, both of you need to realize I'm not talking about marriage. Yes it is in there somewhere, but not at the stage I am at. I'm talking about relationships. I have no experience in marriage, that why I'm not even touching the subject. And that I'm from a very different part of the world, a very different culture and a very different country.


----------



## Jinxi (Apr 21, 2011)

Mystery said:


> This is why I see the world the way it is Jinxi. If I can't trust a woman, do I strike you as the kind of person who would say "okay you know, I can't trust her, I will still try a relationship with her"? Let me answer it for you, No, I am not. I mean no insult so pardon me if I'm coming off a bit aggressive here. I'm just a very straight forward person that borderlines on brutal honesty.
> 
> It's not about trust, it's about the way I see things. I am a man, if someone else tries to approach my woman, I will go on a full prominent display of power to ensure it stops. I do warn both people first, I've never thrown the first blow so to speak. Also consider this, if a girl can't let go of an overly flirtatious friend, or stop men from being flirtatious with her, does she deserve my trust, let alone my respect?
> 
> ...


 
I completely understand where you are coming from Mystery and I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinions on any matter.

My question to you (and it is meant with the utmost respect) is how far can someone push you before you react? By this I mean, is subtle flirtation from a naturally flirtatious friend enough to annoy you or must it be blatant disrespectful flirting? If it is the latter, then by all means exert your dominance and protection over your lady. However, if it is the first, do you not think that perhaps a little leeway should be given?

I am not trying to insult you, so please do not take it that way. I am just trying to gauge you and your feelings towards this subject.


----------



## Mystery (Apr 21, 2011)

Jinxi said:


> I completely understand where you are coming from Mystery and I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinions on any matter.
> 
> My question to you (and it is meant with the utmost respect) is how far can someone push you before you react? By this I mean, is subtle flirtation from a naturally flirtatious friend enough to annoy you or must it be blatant disrespectful flirting? If it is the latter, then by all means exert your dominance and protection over your lady. However, if it is the first, do you not think that perhaps a little leeway should be given?
> 
> I am not trying to insult you, so please do not take it that way. I am just trying to gauge you and your feelings towards this subject.


Generally I draw the line when they start putting there hands where they shouldnt be/acting like they own her.

It's not insulting, don't worry, I don't bite as much as I say I do.


----------



## The Backward OX (Apr 21, 2011)

All this talk of people putting hands where they shouldn't, and a third party being disturbed by it, presupposes that the third party is drawing lines about where hands should and shouldn't go. 

What about open relationships?


----------



## JosephB (Apr 21, 2011)

Mystery said:


> Like I said before, I am very old fashioned in the way I think, I will not only protect my partner, I will protect her as MY woman. I am territorial.
> Also, its not about how much I trust her, It's about another man trying to make a pass at MY woman.
> (to make this clear, since you didn't realize it the first time, its about pride, honor, respect, the unspoken law among men)
> 
> I did say most women, which I now correct to people, cannot understand this principle, as you have demonstrated.



 I can only respond to what you’ve written. I’m seeing one of my wife’s male friends putting his arm around her and being flirtatious. Because that’s what you said.  If the arm lingered to the point where it made my wife uncomfortable, she would move away – and I’m betting that would be the end of it. Your comments about making someone “dead meat” suggest that if you saw this happening, you’d stomp over and start a fight. Is that not a reasonable assumption?

  Because if that’s the deal, I’m secure enough in my relationship and manhood that I wouldn’t feel the need to make a big macho show of protecting my “honor.” I demonstrate honor by acting honorably -- and beating up someone over minor a flirtation doesn’t seem honorable to me. Maybe it does to you -- and maybe you’ll find a woman who thinks that’s an appropriate way to behave and who’ll see you as the big hero. If so, I hope you’re happy together. Just make sure the little woman carries adequate bail money.

  And if you want to elevate that sort of physical display to the level of “principle” –- great. Or better yet, think about preempting the whole situation by finding a woman who doesn’t have rude, disrespectful male “friends” who can’t keep their hands off her. This would not be a problem for me in the first place.

  If you are talking about anything that approaches inappropriate sexual touching, of course, it’s very likely that I would have to physically insert myself into the situation. That’s a no-brainer. I can’t think of why any woman would object to that. However, if for any reason my wife asked me not to intervene, I hope that I would trust and respect her judgment and do my best to keep my cool. Her wishes supersede my need to show everyone that I'm a big man.

Otherwise, I trust my wife, and to me, that's what it's all about.



Mystery said:


> Ah, you managed to insult my mental sanity, ability, social ability, emotional state, upbringing, parents, family, friends, school, culture, country etc all I one go. I have to admire that as a fellow connoisseur of all encompassing insults. Now I could return the insult, but then I would someone be to blame, funny world isn't it. How you can demonstrate the points I say, and deny them in one go. Instead I will just point out that by questioning my environment, and my upbringing, you have made a broad spectrum generalization like the one you are accusing me of.



 You might see my comments as insulting, but I can only go by what you’ve posted. You made several highly negative generalizations about women – not “people” -- some that you didn’t even try to qualify. For example:

_“Women are not willing to return the favors, or return the compromises. They are not willing to accept both halves of the coin and compromise in a way that is necessary for a relationship.”_

  It’s a reasonable assumption that you’ve had negative experiences that would lead to that kind of thinking. So the questions posed are valid. That’s not generalizing so much as common sense. If you haven't based the above assertions on repeated experience, then you must be making them up or it's something you've seen on TV or in the movies. So really, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. But if these really are things you've repeatedly experienced in your relationships, then I think it's also reasonable to ask, is it something about you -- or is about "most" women?

I agree with that other stuff about not settling for anyone just to be in a relationship or to be married. But everything in your initial post shows that you believe only women have a problem with these relationship issues -- or “most women” – and that’s ridiculous. 

  Women do not have the market cornered on demanding and not reciprocating support, or settling for just anyone, or asking a partner to compromise principles, or buying asinine things or any of the other things that you pinned on “most” women, Now, if you want to backtrack and change it to “people” --- then I have to agree with some of what you've said. But I have a feeling your couching things now -- and that you meant just what you said the first time. And everything you said indicates that you have a great big problem with women.

Personally, I haven't made any big compromises. My wife and I learned we were on the same page on all the big issues before we got married -- children, finances, faith, our friendships with the opposite sex, the amount of time we each need alone or to pursue interests, etc. In fact, that was all fairly evident early in the relationship. And yes, it's too bad that many people rush to get married even though they haven't reached a meeting of the minds on those things. Oh well. At least I see that it's not always the woman's fault if that doesn't happen.


----------



## Sam (Apr 21, 2011)

Mystery said:


> Oh Joseph, I forgot how awesome you where.
> 
> Like I said before, I am very old fashioned in the way I think, I will not only protect my partner, I will protect her as MY woman. I am territorial.
> Also, its not about how much I trust her, It's about another man trying to make a pass at MY woman.
> (to make this clear, since you didn't realize it the first time, its about pride, honor, respect, the unspoken law among men)


 
First off, you're talking about about a woman as though she's your property. She isn't. No more than you are her property. If it comes to it, I will defend my girlfriend to the hilt. Have done in the past. But she is by no means 'mine'. I did it because I love her and someone tried to get physical with her. Not because someone tried to chat her up. I'm confident enough that my girlfriend can talk to any guy she wants and will come back to me at the end of the night. I trust her. Because, after all, there are times she's going to be without me and have guys come up and talk to her. I either turn into a stalker and follow her everywhere, or I trust that she cares about our relationship and doesn't respond to his advances. 

Plus, there's nothing that says "I have zero confidence" like feeling threatened by every guy who talks to your girlfriend.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 21, 2011)

The Backward OX said:


> All this talk of people putting hands where they shouldn't, and a third party being disturbed by it, presupposes that the third party is drawing lines about where hands should and shouldn't go.
> 
> *What about open relationships?*



Yep, there are couples that are swingers or they agree to "open relationships." Human sexuality in some respects might be akin to religion. The world is full of different religions or different religious expressions. I really think a person's ethnic and national culture influences their opinions of "right" and "wrong" in social interactions. And having said that "swingers" are still a bit taboo in Western culture - at least in the United States, I don't know about England or Australia.

A friend on mine in prison right now - for one homicide and one attempted homicide - was reared in a home where his father pimped his mother. I've had one woman tell me in the past, I would make a good pimp. Another told me (admonished me) I shouldn't want a wife but a house mate. And another (rather good looking too) that was divorced and with kids, instructed me that if a woman is not putting money in my pocket I don't need to be dealing with her. She offered to "pay me" ($$) to be with me. Although, she presumed I would be some some house guy, she'd work and come back home and kindly ask me to fetch X,Y, and Z for her.






Mystery's comments as well as him and Joseph going back and forth at one another reminds me of the issue of *sexual selection* we just finished covering biology class. In general males compete with one another for females. Less often is the case females compete with one another for males. My female biology professor (her special area of research being in ecology) put up cartoon drawing on power point during lecture of two female birds sitting at a table, to demonstrate this. One female bird told the other, "Don't encourage him," of the the male bird trying to court her friend. 

According to the science of biology mating occurs through male to male competition and female choice. Therefore, if human females take a preference for males who wear red wear shoes, drum, drive one of three cars women like, or knows how to dribble a basketball then a male will have to adapt to and perform with those things females like. But it's possible that in a different population (e.g., country, ethnicity) the females show preference for males wearing blue shoes and one that can climb a rope or wash dishes and walk with "good" gait rather than drive a car.

According to the science of biology females are much more selective than males, and largely due to eggs being expensive and sperm being cheap. Because of this and reproductive time lines, males have a greater advantage than females when they get into their older years. Basically, women are fertile for only so long, so, a man in his 30's can afford to be more selective than a woman in his 30's.

Among humans, females also show more equality among number of offspring produce by them. Of course this deals with both mean (average) and range. Among males the inequality is rather staggering. Far more likely is it for males to have zero children (rejected by females) and a tiny portion to have 20 children and yet still a smaller portion to have 50 or more children. From the graph I looked at not a single woman within the range, produced 50 children. :shock: And we know Osama Bin Laden was the 50th or so child of his father. Osama baby had several wives and many children himself I believe. 

Having said all that, from my experience I would say a Priest (now a black Bishop in Chicago) I once spoke with summed things up pretty good. He remains the most disciplined (also very refined) man I've ever met. More than any Marine. Anyways... he said it is true to attract a woman you need to show off and represent superficial things. _However, _he said, there are those rare woman that see deeply inside a man, and they can tell if you are weak or insecure, they look into the depth of you. 

I've been fortunate to come across women of the latter a few blue moons in my life. One tutored my in algebra at my community college. She original was a waitress for years, went back to school and picked what she believed was the hardest subject she could challenge herself with as a major: math. A few times when she looked at me, I could feel her eyes looking into mine and piercing through to my soul. She knew I had insecurities. Just not any man can pull that type of woman.

Now, 99% of the women I cross on the terrain we call earth, are about as brilliant or stupid, and as superficial and into venerating the "sacred" popular trends within their respective cultures as 99% of men are. What I'm suggesting is the view point of 99% of women is nothing I construe as "objective truth."


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 21, 2011)

Sam W said:


> First off, you're talking about about a woman as though she's your property.



Let me guess... it was this part :lol:: 



Mystery said:


> I will provide for you. Food, drink, a roof... *I will get you treats*.



I'm not attacking, Mystery, not even for that post where he made the above remarks. Just the tone and diction _literally_ had me laughing out loud to myself when I read it. Classic. Sig worthy. 

It sound like he was speaking about his woman as though she is [female dog] on knees before him as he sits on couch, with her head tilted back and tongue hanging out and panting. Oh my God I found that soooooo funny. Excellent work Mystery. 



> Plus, there's nothing that says "I have zero confidence" like feeling threatened by every guy who talks to your girlfriend.


Eh... I tend to agree with you. However, I'll acknowledged some men might have equal or more confidence than me but simply have different values or cultural notions than myself when it comes to things like this.

For example, I once had this super-bad mulatta, about my same age, in remedial math (non-college level math) with me at community college. I read her up and down. She thought I was some goody-two-shoes. I knew she was a former stripper and crack user before she ever told me so. I have pretty good instinct for these things. 

She would come in to every class with tight jeans, painted on jeans, and spiked high heels that would destroy the feet on the average woman. And boy could she walk in those things. She had men wrapped around her finger. She'd speak about guys on the street stopping their cars to holler at her, giving her gifts and paying for her hair to get done.

She was at me. So much so she eventually asked for my number and that same night asked me to come over to her apartment. 

She had a personality compatible with mine, and she was a tough girl too, she'd fight in a minute. And I loved the way she dressed. I would have _loved_ walking with her down the street and cat's whistling or try to talk to her. Because if she's mine - truly mine - I know she'd be coming back to me. Never leave me actually. And those guys can eat their hearts out.

But that's me. I would mind watching her dance with other men either. But to each their own.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 21, 2011)

Two youtube videos my female biology professor hyperlinked in power point presentation.

This one demonstrates male vs male competition for a female.

[video=youtube;ct_Bq3KpVmQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct_Bq3KpVmQ&feature=player_embedded[/video]


This one demonstrates "female choice" as well as some female preference for male beauty or unattractive looking males.

[video=youtube;7dx2CUMtZ-0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dx2CUMtZ-0&feature=related[/video]


----------



## Patrick (Apr 21, 2011)

Writ-with-Hand said:


> [video=youtube;ct_Bq3KpVmQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct_Bq3KpVmQ&feature=player_embedded[/video]



I am pretty sure I saw these two outside my local bar one evening.


----------



## Mistique (Apr 22, 2011)

Candra H said:


> By the way, good to see you Mistique. Long time no speak. How are you?


 
Ah, but you live in Scotland, Candra. Isn't that enough to be happy already?  I am just kidding of course, but I do love Scotland.

Thanks  nice to be noticed. I have been around all along though, just more in the background. Very nice to see you too and to hear that you are happy. I have been unhappy for quite a few months, but lately that has inproved greatly and although my life isn't perfect I would certainly consider myself happy.


----------



## Candra H (Apr 22, 2011)

Sorry, Ox. Off-topic.



Mistique said:


> Ah, but you live in Scotland, Candra. Isn't that enough to be happy already?  I am just kidding of course, but I do love Scotland.


 
Haha, thanks. I guess it's a place to be happy in, I don't know. I just live here, but I forget how others view Scotland so no worries. It is a beautiful country though, even if I do say so myself.



> Thanks  nice to be noticed. I have been around all along though, just more in the background. Very nice to see you too and to hear that you are happy. I have been unhappy for quite a few months, but lately that has inproved greatly and although my life isn't perfect I would certainly consider myself happy.


 
Yep, I know you've been around. It's me who hasnt. Off skulking on other forums and avoiding this one. Sorry to hear you've been unhappy for a bit. I hope you're doing better now, and well, happiness is relative so, as long as you can say you're doing alright to yourself, thats all that matters.


----------



## The Backward OX (Apr 22, 2011)

Women!


----------



## JosephB (Apr 22, 2011)

My sentiments exactly -- only if said allowed, with an intonation that suggests a general appreciation and enthusiasm.


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Apr 22, 2011)

Interesting. Uden seems to have some connection to Wisconsin. I never even heard of Little Chute, Wisconsin.

Uden looks pretty attractive too. 

However, I think I may have found the source of your depression. Your municipal flag. Why in the name of all that is holy, do you guys have a flag made up of no more than two color. Two boxes. That's enough to drive me to a migraine and jump to my death off of a bridge.

Uden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


[video=youtube;dyG658eU2i0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyG658eU2i0[/video]


----------



## Mystery (Apr 26, 2011)

I was gonna reply, but it will just end up being a 1up war.

So here is my closing statement,

For people who are all about confidence and trust, you display an enormous lack of it there of by feeling so insulted by MY OPINION. It's my opinion, I never said it was right, or better etc. I never said your opinion was worse or whatever. I never claimed to be macho or a big man. I didn't say men aren't as bad as woman, I just gave my opinion on women because I date women and its a relationship thread. You are all working tirelessly to defend womens honor(something you all claim they are able to do on their own), as well as your own opinion, or your masculinity or god knows what, and all I can see is that for some reason, you feel threatened by my opinion. A view different than yours.

I mean, does not one of you, besides jinxi, have the presence of mind to ask instead of making assumptions, or weakly disguised insults?

You seem to lack the confidence your preach.

And you should have noticed by the fact that I am praising one woman as superior to the men arguing against me, that I don't think nearly as badly about women as you think I do, especially when you don't know my opinion of women, just what I think of them, out of experience, in general terms of relationships.

Does what I think REALLY bother you that much?

End.


----------

