I’ve seen a disturbing amount of discussion about men “needing” a woman or other partner to be successful, fullfilled, etc.
I have to agree with someone else from earlier on, if this was phrased the other way, it would be a rampant thread discussing how shallow and narrow minded the OP was for assuming a woman needed a man for anything. (It has sort of swerved over there a few times).
Can we just say that, in most cases, people in a good, healthy relationship will reap benefits from being in that relationship. Regardless of the sex of the people in question.
But I think people (maybe mostly women) tend to get resentful when men act as if they would have been Mr. rock star millionare astronaut investment banker male model esq. if it wasn’t for getting some chick knocked up. Because 90% of the time, men’s “plan” is mostly to drink at the pub with their boys every night, hit on girls and play videogames.
It’s easy for people, especially those who come from more modest backgrounds, to become trapped in the sort of “groupthink” of the people they grow up with. They get hammered with ideas of “do what everyone else does because that’s what everyone does”.
Then again, a lot of people don’t really have a dream of doing anything other than lead a typical middle-class American lifestyle.
What I can’t abide by is “I coulda’s” or “I woulda’s”. Don’t blame other people because you coulda, woulda, shoulda but didn’t.
But don’t you find it interesting that men who are most successful (as deemed by conventional standards as well as “rockstar” standards) are married? It should certainly cause you to reevaluate what you posited earlier about women holding back men. If thaat were really the case, many successful men would be single.
Help me see the point you’re trying to make here. I’ve read this paragraph multiple times and it doesn’t seem to relate to anything that I’ve written.
Many successful men are single. You’re just cherrypicking a few examples. Seth McFarlane, for instance, creator of Family Guy, is single. Maynard James Keenan (singer of Tool) has described himself as “happily unmarried”. Those are just two guys off the top of my head I can think of. I’m sure I could find many more with a little research. Also, although many successful rock stars and tycoons might be married now, after they have achieved immense success, undoubtedly many of them were single during their rise to the top (if for no other reason than that they just didn’t have the time for a serious relationship.)
Also a lot of men simply aren’t interested in getting married for love. At best, after they are successful, they marry a trophy wife to provide them with offspring. Often they aren’t particularly good husbands or fathers.
Although I would submit that raises the question of whether someone’s “best” can be defined as their professional and financial acomplishments or how good of a husband, father and person they are. Or perhaps how well they ballance these things.
Agreed. I’ve never said women need a man, just that a relationship benefits them more due to having biology that can mess with their emotions/bodies more frequently or for a long period of time. This is just logical. A male who gets sick a lot would benefit more from having a relationship than a male who’s in excellent physical health. This isn’t an insult to anyone.
Ya, I agree with this. Like I say, I had issues with the OP being gender-specific and absolute from the start, that’s all. I’m pointing out that having a woman in your life doesn’t necessarily mean the relationship will be “good, healthy and benefitial”, that’s just stating the obvious that goals and values of both parties need to be taken into consideration. But it’s like I’m a monster for pointing out that not all relationships are awesome and not all women are special amazing snowflakes.
Agreed, and I also never said that. If a guy’s goal in life is to be an astronaut, and he gets his GF pregnant, then maybe his goal now becomes “to be the best father ever”. The point is that he has to re-evaluate himself at points in his life and decide what his goals are, and then take action to achieve those goals…which comes back to the start of this thread where I said that a man has to know what he wants and strive to be his best self, and if he chooses to find a partner, in knowing what his goals are if he chooses a partner who compliments those, he can be enhanced, but if he chooses a partner who doesn’t, he can be held back.
I’m honestly not saying anything that isn’t completely logical if people would get past the PUA thing.
I agree with this too, but in terms of the OP’s question, I just wonder why we don’t all want to be our best selves for the sake of being our best selves. Are we just apathetic as a society?
Were they married before they were successful (ie - was Steven King writing books before he met his wife, was Bon Jovi a popular musician before he met his wife? Was Bill Gates successful before he met his wife?) And are they over 30 (ie - getting into “time to get married 'cause I’m getting old and that’s what you do when you’re old” territory)?
I’d be more interested to see how many men under 30 (who have no societal pressure to get married or have kids yet) who are “rockstar” successful are married. Past 30, you get into territory where it’s assumed you “need” a wife (the way a lot of women panic as they approach 35-40 with no husband/kids in sight), but under 30 marriage is completely voluntary. So that statistic might be more interesting/relevant.
Sorry, that was more toward Invisible Chimp’s post, where he/she wrote:
But I fucked up the quoting and didn’t re-read my post (it’s hard on an iPhone haha but definately my bad sorry!) This post suggests that success happens early on and if you don’t make it before 30 you’re never going to make it…yet there are tons of entrepreneurs over 30 or people who change career paths in general, or politicians who don’t become presidents or prime ministers till they’re well over 30.
Why don’t we all want to be our very bestest selves for the sake of being our best selves?
Sir, or Ma’m - life. Life beats you down. THEN comes apathy. If we’re going to bound out of bed early on a summer’s morn, sharp as a tack and ready to take on a wonderful day, we are generally under the age of 8. The future looks bright to the young, who are more likely to follow the advice in magazines (Playboy, Cosmo, Redbook, Family Circle, Glamour) - how to attact chicks! Lose 10 lbs. in 10 days! Make this Thanksgiving feast for $25 for your big loving Norman-Rockwell family! How to put on a Tiki party for your hordes of fun-loving friends! Dress this way, cut your hair that way, be your darn best!
Depression. Child abuse. Sex abuse. Bullying. Bad schools. Bad jobs. NO jobs. Rejection. Illness, physical or mental. Lack of money. Did I say depression? Really, sometimes even when you’re well enough off, it’s hard to just slog through the day. Much less blow yourself up like Arnold Schwartzenager, score chicks like Hugh Hefner, or lose that 25 lbs. of baby weight and make yourself over into a Megan Fox look-alike.
If you want to be the best you can be, it’s not “all about you”. A person, generally speaking, NEEDS someone in their life besides awestruck admirers, this is where a husband, a wife, a partner, a significant other starts to matter. Because then you’re in it together, you’re a team, you encourage and support each other through life’s ups and downs. Otherwise, you live for yourself trying to be the best you can be, and that’s OK - but to what end? You get to be a ‘rockstar’, and so? And what if all your effort comes to nothing, because you just lack the raw materials to be a ‘rockstar’? I suppose if you make enough money to keep yourself in creature comforts until the day you can afford a private nurse when you’re 90, it doesn’t matter if you have a significant other. The rest of the common herd just lead mundane lives, day after day, some good, some bad, but significant others can, sometimes, make the journey easier. No guarantees, there’s a 50/50 chance it will work out, but still.
Dunno about the others, but Stephen King was married and had 2 kids before publishing his first book. He was certainly writing before meeting Tabitha–you don’t just up and write something fit to publish without a lot of practice, after all–but at that point he was just another undergrad with big dreams. Also, he would never have published his first novel, the one that was almost immediately optioned for a movie, the one that arguably made his career, without her. He got stuck, gave up, and threw the manuscript away. She’s the one who fished it out of the trash and made him finish it.
I don’t know. Why do some people work out every day while others let themselves go to complete shit while some are in between content to carry around a few extra pounds.
Nah I’m not because I’m not asking anyone to enumerate every single highly successful man who is unmarried or married.
My point is that marriage rates don’t seem to dwindle off as you rise of the male totem pole of success, so there is appears to be zero basis for saying women hold men back from achieving their dreams. So the question is how has TheWhoToTheWhatNow reached his conclusions? If they are based in reality–which he insists–then he should make an evidence-based case.
Marriage rates are probably lower in young overachievers (both men and women) than young underachievers. But this probably is due to a whole of factors, including being focused more on studying and/or working than dating. Also, overachievers are probably less likely to rush into marriage because they are more conscientious at preventing accidental pregnancies, since they have more to lose. So they have girlfriends and drawn out engagements for a longer period of time.
The members of the rock band Rush all married their high school sweethearts.
For all your “experience”, your opinions aren’t much different from nearly every 28 year old single guy I’ve ever met.
But to your point, it’s tough to be a “rockstar” and get married in your 20s. If you typically graduate college at 22, 2 years of work, another 2-3 years of MBA or law school, that’s basically 27 years old and just starting out in your new hot job working 100 hours a week and traveling all over at a top law firm, tech startup or investment bank.
Yeah, I think it’s easy to forget how much work it takes to be a celebrity-level phenomenon. How much free time did Bill Gates, the founders of Google, and other pioneers like that have in their 20’s? Was it spent in bars and other social outlets, perfecting the art of being popular? Probably not. It was spent working, working, and working some more. So it would not be surprising if these guys were single. They’re trying to make money, not friends and lovers.
Even still, I would not assume that Bill Gates et al. were unattached even in their 20’s. A man can not live by bread alone.
