TWTTWN - you really do write some interesting stuff sometimes - and I admire the frankness of your views and the way you express them. Other times you either come across as a pretty immature teenager or perhaps one of Bret Easton Ellis’ characters. This thread is definitely an example of one of the latter.
Another “you’re fucked up in some way” accusation without any actual discussion of what specifically is wrong with what I’m saying. That seems to be the main reaction around here (which is understandable because of my frankness, but I’m not here to try not to have anyone disagree with me, I’m here to offer what’s generally a very contrasting but not necessarily wrong viewpoint).
I say something that often later in the thread people agree with, but isn’t sugar-coated so it offends them and they instantly disagree out of “I can’t believe you SAID that!!” knee-jerk “I hate PUAs so I’m going to get mad because you dared to say something without beating around the bush and on top of it I’m going to paint you with a bunch of stereotypical characteristics that I attribute to PUAs” emotionally charged reacting so instead of actually saying “This is wrong because of A B and C” where we can have an actual discussion, I get accusations of being immature, too young to have an opinion, having shallow relationships, having a chip on my shoulder, being emotionally stunted, not understanding how the “real” world works, blah blah blah and get projections of “I bet it’s not like you SAY it is” and “you’re deluding yourself you only THINK that your GF is happy” and “that’s impossible because I’ve never done it before so no one could possibly live like that” from people.
It’s pretty silly to me haha If people would read what I actually write and not jump on the doggy-pile bandwagon they’d see I’m not really saying anything that isn’t simple logic or based in common sense. 
- TWTTWN
I’m surprised TWTTWN touts peace/harmony/zero conflict/happiness/no friction in relationships, yet comes to all of these relationship boards to argue with every single person’s viewpoint about the realities of life and the complexities of human emotion. With that argumentative nature, why do I find it hard to believe your home life is HAPPY HAPPY SMILES! Because happy people aren’t on the Dope defending their position to be somehow understood or accepted, are they? I’m still convinced most defensive people are in pain somehow.
I’m well-versed in attraction, social dynamics, and general self-help/positivity. Those are the only things I’m really here to discuss. I have friends in real life for talking about other subjects with.
I’m not argumentative. I have a very solid set of beliefs and stand by them when they’re challenged because I have a lot of reference experience of them being correct.
Because you stereotype me with a bunch of beliefs and opinions I don’t actually have, and you think that the way I interact on this message board is how I interact anywhere else in my life. I’m extra logical and unemotional sounding on here because even when I’m very clear about what I’m saying people get worked up emotionally and take the ball in some weird direction and run with it completely reworking what I say into something horrible, so I figure if I type like I would normally interact, in this particular crowd of “cite this” and “ya that’s what HITLER said too” that’d be inviting a shitshow.
I wouldn’t post nearly as much if people didn’t bitch at me for things I don’t actually say but they assume about me because of their personal biases, or if people didn’t insult me as a person just because my view of the world is different than theirs and, while not popular, not necessarily wrong.
I don’t really care about being accepted, but if I’m going to be doggy-piled on I’d like it to be for stuff I’m actually writing and not exaggerated bullshit (like how I had to stress repeatedly in this thread that I don’t end a relationship instantly after one mistake). I don’t want people to read those posts and go “wow that TWTTWN is a dickhead for saying that!!” when it’s like no, I wasn’t saying that at all.
Cool, think what you like. I’m convinced people who attack others personalities and home lives instead of the points they’re discussing are insecure bullies who get off on trying to make others feel worse than they secretly feel themselves. But hey, what do I know, I’m just some argumentative asshole full of rage who’s home life is obviously in shambles. :rolleyes:
- TWTTWN
Ok, this thread took off more than I expected. I’ll go through as many replies as I can, and if I forget anyone, or misunderstood you, raise your hand and I’ll back to you as fast as I can. And sorry for abandoning the thread, I just got swamped.
[QUOTE=TheWhoToTheWhatNow]
Scarcity. They worry they won’t find someone else or someone better so they stay in shitty relationships and then complain about it down the road or tell themselves all relationships are terrible.
[/QUOTE]
But if all relationships are terrible, why have one? All broken bones are terrible too, and people don’t line up for those (unless they’re into that sort of thing, I guess).
[QUOTE=RickJay]
You’re beginning with an extremely questionable assumption that, I think, needs to be defended before a reasonable response could be crafted. Why is a non-perfect relationship not worth the sacrifices? Why should I assume you’re correct?
[/QUOTE]
I’m not asking you to assume anything, I’m stating my own puzzlement, and asking for input. Hence starting my post with “It seems to me…”. I’m describing observable human behavior which baffles me, and asking for help in arriving at some sort of explanation. As to why I think a non-perfect relationship is not worth the sacrifices? Well, why would it be worth giving up your independence, and including a person in your life whose needs and wants you have to take into account, and in whose company you will be spending most of your time, if you all you get back is petty jealousy, stress, financial upsets or any of the other nonsense people don’t walk away from?
[QUOTE=cosmodan]
What?? It seems pretty unrealistic to for any relationship to make you happy all the time. Hopefully people happy more often than not, although happiness itself is not just a product of the relationship itself but has a lot to do with the people as individuals.
Relationships can go through phases and periods of strife and the efforts of solving problems and personal issues , working things out can make things even better. How many unhappy days do you think warrant bailing on the relationship?
[/QUOTE]
Sure, there will be ups and downs, but the default state in an acceptable relationship should be “happy”. The people in it should be happy on an average day, and on a typical day. Happy should be the general state of things when nothing in particular is going on. You should be able to look back in the past and say “Yeah, we’ve been happy”, be more or less happy today unless something special is happening, and have a reasonable assumption of being happy in the future. If the default state is “tense”, “arguing about getting married”, “stressing about X behavior” or just “feeling low”, then I don’t understand why people stay.
[QUOTE=Malthus]
The notion that someone ought to abandon a person one has years of memories with because they intrude on one’s happiness with a “negative attitude” one day is just odd - people ought not to be disposable, and I can’t see how treating them that way would make anyone happier in the long run - if you do, certainly you will be treated the same when you come to a low point (and you will - everyone does).
[/QUOTE]
I’m not talking about staying in relationships with decades of good history because of a bad patch - I’m talking of staying in relationships that are more like bad patch quilts.
[QUOTE=Jsgoddess]
My relationship doesn’t make me happy. I am happy and bring that to my relationship and become even happier.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but the relationship still result in a net gain of happiness. Would you stay if all it did was dilute the original happiness you brought to the table?
Okay, Still have a ton of posts to get to, but I have to work. Have patience, and thanks for helping me get my head around all this
I think the answer will always boil down to independence not being worth the hassle. I may not be happy, but I’m better off than I was. I may be arguing all the time, but I’d rather do that than be lonely. I may not be happy at this moment, but I’d go through a long period of perfect misery if I’m gone. Or, according to some people’s beliefs: I’ll go to hell if I leave. Or, the worst one: he’ll beat me and my children severely if I cross him.
Fear is a good motivator to keep people unhappy.
I think the use of “non-perfect” confused the issue here. From your OP (highlighting mine):
TWTTWN likes to paint himself as someone who is in total control and has it all figured out, probably thanks to his study of the art of “pick up”. What he does not seem to realize that his “my way or the highway” attitude makes him come accross as immature, shallow and narcissistic.
TWTTWN - What is “wrong” with your theory is that if you only allow someone to be in a relationship with you so long as everything is always positive, you will only end up in relationships with several types of people - people who have such a low self esteeme that they don’t mind being subservient to your needs, shallow and vapid people only interested in partying and good times, prostitutes. It is difficult to impossible to have anything beyond a superficial relationship with any of those sort of people.
That is why someone made a referrence to Bret Easton Ellis. The characters in his books/films (American Psycho, Less Than Zero, Rules of Attraction) typically lead lives that when viewed externally, seem pretty glamorous. They are attractive, wealthy, sexually permiscuous and popular. They are also incredibly lonely and disturbed because all their relationships are vapid and shallow.
IRL, relationships require putting up with a certain about of the other person’s crap. Because believe me, someone has to put up with yours.
Ok, second installment. I haven’t read whats been posted since my last post, so bear with me here.
[QUOTE=HazelNutCoffee]
People are afraid of change. If you’re living with someone you’ve been with for 4 years, for example, breaking up with them means you’d have to figure out a new living situation AND seriously hurt someone you have a long history with and probably still have a lot of affection for. The living situation part might sound trivial, but if you’re living in a big city and living from paycheck to paycheck, it’s anything but. And it’s hard to work up the courage to deal such a blow to someone you still care for.
Sure, you could argue that things would be better in the long run so they should just suck it up and deal. But the first step is the hardest.
[/QUOTE]
I still don’t understand how it got to that point. Why move in with someone non-perfect? Why entangle finances with someone non-perfect?
[QUOTE=Whynot]
In my case, it was because “content” was all I thought was possible. Not “all I deserved” or “all I was capable of,” but literally the only thing a long term relationship between two people could be. And so why would I leave my husband for another relationship which would also be work, would also have its ups-and-downs, would, at the best, be “content”.
Then I met a man who makes me “happy”, not just content, and it’s, to steal a phrase from Disney, “a whole new world.” But I had not meant him and discovered what a real loving, supportive, happy relationship is like, I’d probably still be married and “content”.
[/QUOTE]
You’ve told this story before, and this I can understand. I’m worry you had to deal with that. This is precisely the reason why I think people have a duty to not say together for the children - it gives children a bad idea of what a relationship should be (not WhyNot specifically - I have no idea what your family was like growing up).
[QUOTE=Lady of the Lake]
the phrasing here really rubs me the wrong way.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, sorry about that. I should have phrased it more carefully.
[QUOTE=Palo Verde]
It’s worth it.
[/QUOTE]
And good for you. Utilitarian marriages I can grok.
[QUOTE=kopek]
Health insurance.
[/QUOTE]
This just makes me really happy I live in a civilized place.
[QUOTE=BigT]
I came into this thread assuming the OP was a parody of the advice often given here. Sometimes it seems like, if you have any problem in a relationship, at least one person here will say you need to break up.
But, no, this guy is serious. I guess it’s great he found another person who doesn’t give a crap about anyone but themselves, and they’ve made a go of it, but that isn’t how life works for the other 99.99999997% of the world.
[/QUOTE]
I’m the OP. I think you’ve confused me with TheWhoToTheWhatNow, whose attitude does not match mine. I’ve mentioned nothing about my own relationships in this thread. Read for comprehension and snark somewhere else.
[QUOTE=RedBloom]
I was getting worried that too many people lived their lives like the OP in some delirious belief that you quit and leave everything and anything that doesn’t make you happy, almost like a small child. Frightening. Grown up realities require a bit more perseverence than simply quitting because your happy button isn’t pressed down 24/7.
[/QUOTE]
I think you’ve done the same thing. Hi, I’m Septima. My name in no way resembles TheWhoToTheWhatNow
I’m not sure why I deserve insults, but please quote the passages from my posts you don’t like, and I’ll clarify for you.
SecondJudith, I realized too late that my phrasing was off. I meant “perfect” as in “perfect for each other”, and “all the time” as in “the normal state of things”.
[bolding mine]
I think this is key: for some people, “independence” as an abstract quality isn’t actually all that high on the list of priorities, and having someone to spend most of your time with is actually in and of itself a good thing. For someone with these needs/priorities, which are the opposite of yours apparently, being in a passable or not-horrible relationship can seem like it’s worth it.
ETA: I’m not necessarily describing myself here, but it’s pretty common from what I’ve seen.
Thanks. My parents divorced when I was 6, and my mother dated one man for about a year after, and hasn’t dated since. So yeah, I got no model of a happy loving relationship from her. My dad married again and I presume is fairly happy, but he’s so incredibly stoic that he could break a leg or win the lottery and the expression on his face would be the same. I know he loves his spouses, but it wasn’t a great example, either, as he looks about as “content” as I always felt my marriage to be. Had he and my mom stayed together, they would have looked pseudo-content as well, so there was really just no winning. It was a lesson I had to learn first hand, as my assorted parental units were unable to teach by example.
But I’m so, so glad that my own kids get to see it in me, and now in my ex’s relationship with his new partner. I hope our daughter can see real love and support and happiness, and recognize when her boyfriends aren’t measuring up. We make a *great *4 parent, 2 household family, far superior to the 2 parent 1 household family she was born into. Although it’s a little crowded at parent-teacher conferences. 
wow so you’ve really never met a confident member of the opposite sex who has their life together, has an inherently optimistic outlook even in bad times, doesn’t care for drama and only gets upset over important issues, and makes an effort to get along with the people around them simply because they enjoy spreading good vibes to the people they interact with?
I honestly feel bad for you and think you should meet more people. I wonder if that’s why a lot of people can’t relate to what I’m saying? They haven’t actually met someone of the opposite sex who’s an all around high quality person? I just kind of assume everyone has met a few of these in their lives but I guess if you’ve only ever been surrounded by low self-esteem drama-queen types you’d paint everyone with those attributes. I’ve met a lot of shitty people like you’ve described there, don’t get me wrong, but I’ve also met some amazing people and the amazing ones are the ones worth being in a relationship with.
I guess this saying is applicable here: “I could be happy being poor if I had never been rich.”
- TWTTWN
I think the problem is that you’re giving advice on “committed relationships” when you don’t have the foggiest notion of what that really means. There’s no room for a “work is more important than you, and if you complain I’ll warn you, then I’m gone” in a committed relationship. How many times can you blow off this “high quality girl” you’re seeing and still have her be okay with it? Once a month? Once a week? Twice a week? How about when you’re living together? When she’s sick or pregnant with your kid? When she doesn’t even want you around for herself, but because if “work is my priority,” it also ends up being your priority over your own child?
Your “rules” are fine for a casual dating relationship, but that’s all they’re good for. Eventually, if you move beyond casual dating, you have to work things out together; none if it is black and white, because there’s no “me” anymore when making big decisions, there’s only “us,” because any big decision affects us both. If my husband thinks I’m not spending enough time with him, that’s something we have to work out together, and, because he’s important to me, it’s important to me that his need for us to spend time together is met. So, we work out a compromise. There’s no, “he complains about my rule, so he gets a warning.” That attitude has no place in a non-superficial relationship. None.
You know why? Because most people WANT someone who will say something to have their needs met. Most people care about meeting their partner’s needs. Someone who doesn’t care to say anything about being blown off either doesn’t care about seeing you that much or is unwilling to confront you about what they want. Neither of those qualities are good for a long-term relationship, the first for obvious reasons and the second because most people want a partner who will assert themselves. If you’re with woman who won’t confront you about being blown off, what will she confront you about? You making a mistake about what job to take? Doing something that’s hurting you? Doing something that’s hurting your future kids?
One’s partner is often their first line of defense against fucking up- the one person who cares about you enough to tell you the truth when you’re doing something messed up. If they won’t confront you about what they need and you don’t want them to, you’ll never move beyond the most superficial kind of relationship.
…or, you know, they’re confident people who know that you’re going to see them as soon as you’re free and that the relationship isn’t in danger because they know it’s solid, and they have their own lives going on so if you’re not available they have other things they can do, like see friends or partake in hobbies because they aren’t so clingy needy and co-dependent that they need you to be on call 24/7 and ignore everything else in your life to make them top priority and would, in fact, not respect someone who’s entire life revolved around them and had nothing else going on.
Consider me completely mindblown that you don’t consider that an option.
- TWTTWN
The problem isn’t that sometimes work is more important, it’s that work is always more important, and if she complains about it, she’s violating a rule.
Deciding that you require carte blanche to blow off your partner as much as you like without them being able to validly complain is simply not workable for a long-term relationship, because at some point they are gong to need you more than you need to be at work. It’s not working late on a particular Wednesday, it’s that you work late anytime you want, indefinitely, and if she ever complains, that’s her warning.
In fact, I don’t even think YOU subscribe to that black-and-white a view of it, because you acknowledge that it wasn’t a special occasion or anything. So, which is it? Is work always more important, or is work sometimes more important and there are times when she could validly complain about you blowing her off?
Didn’t say it was always more important. In fact as you acknowledge in your post, in my original example I stressed that we didn’t have anything important planned just a normal DVD night, and that originally I was planning to see her but I had work to do (something important came up at the last minute).
Agreed. I also never said that’s how my relationship is. Other people have assumed that, and dishonestly/ignorantly attributed that to me, because they’re exaggerating things to make me sound like some overly controlling insensitive asshole because painting me with that brush lets them get on a high-horse and lecture me on how I don’t understand how the “real world” works, but that’s not my view at all and is, in fact, no one in this thread’s view.
Probably. A casual Wednesday DVD night is not that occasion. If she said “But I need to see you tonight, my dad died” I would skip out on my work…again this is why I stressed that we didn’t have epic plans, and again why I think it’s silly how overly exaggerated people like to paint my views is.
Bolding mine:
No it’s EXACTLY that. That’s exactly what I wrote in my original post mentioning the scenario, fuck. That’s like you saying “I wouldn’t get into a fight.” and then me going “oh so I guess if someone was stabbing your children in the face with a knife you would just let him do it because you hate your children and want them to die.” Like, fuck, back the baseless extrapolation truck up.
Thankyou for acknowledging that. It’s almost like someone read what I wrote…minus the first half of your post where you’re arguing the views of NOBODY IN THIS THREAD, that is.
There are a shitload of nuances. If it had been our anniversary dinner or her birthday, I wouldn’t have bailed or if I had to bail because the work issue was a matter of extreme importance (like not handling it would cost thousands of dollars or result in me being fired etc.), I would’ve expected her to give me some shit for it and would have made sure to make it up to her hardcore with flowers and romanticy shit the next time I saw her.
If someone had asked me this reasonable thoughtful question at the start instead of hopping on the doggy pile of “you’re a monster and I’m going to exaggerate everything you say in the worst possible light instead of asking for clarification”, I would have been happy to explain that.
- TWTTWN
What if the person was a doctor who was regularly on-call and their job involved SAVING LIVES. Would that “work is never regularly more important than your spouse” rule apply to that person? Would that doctor be an asshole for ending a relationship with someone who demanded they be higher priority than their job?
(this isn’t my situation at all, and as my last post says I don’t subscribe to the black and white view you’re describing that I’m quoting here, I’m just trying to point out how the black and white view of “YOUR SIGNIFICANT OTHER ALWAYS COMES FIRST OTHERWISE NO RELATIONSHIP YOU ARE IN IS MORE THAN A SHALLOW HORRIBLE LIE FULL OF SADNESS AND TEARS” is silly…I’m sure there are a lot of people with very important jobs and very understanding partners who love them and understand their job is important, who would be sad to hear their marriages are shallow facades and that they don’t have the foggiest notion what a committed relationship is)
- TWTTWN
Back in the mid 80s I met a guy who was, in many ways, one of my favorite types, physically. I got hard just thinking about him. I was also pretty much what he was looking for as well. Though we had many things in common, I knew from the beginning that it would not lead to anything permanent. There were things about him (he was into a lot of New Age shit) that I knew were incompatible with my values. And in spite of the attraction, we were not entirely compatible sexually.
Surprisingly, we managed to stay together for over 3 years. I remember some rocky times when I felt like ending the relationship, and weighed all the pros and cons of remaining vs. leaving. I still got a lot out of the relationship, and couldn’t deny the incredible attraction. I kept asking myself whether I’d be better off single again, and for the longest time the answer was “no.” But finally the negative things began to take a real toll on both of us, and we parted as friends.
A few months ago I was at the supermarket, and encountered a man who looked ***exactly ***like my ex . . . at least the part of him that I could see. He caught me staring at him, and I had to explain why. I then realized that he looked like my ex all those years ago, not what he’d look like today. But it was still somewhat of a shock to see this guy out of my past. I was literally shaking. And oh god, I wanted to have sex with him right there in the produce section.
Question for those of you who endorse “marriages of convience”: Wouldn’t it serve everyone involved better if you “freed” them to be with someone they’d, you know, actually be compatible with?