Now that I am older I don't see all my friends as often because most of us are married or in relationships. I do make the effort though to get together and hang out like old times because it's important. My wife even tells me I should go out more because she is sick of seeing me. Oh how marriage can change you're relationship . She says it jokingly of course but we both try to see our respective friends at least once a month.
righto.
isn't that usually what goes on. make plans when the other is busy. sure, there are times when you just make plans with friends b/c nothing else is really going on, but let's be real - when you are in a serious/commited relationship...it's not 'asking permission'...it's simply courtesy, and yes...the fact that early on, you usually DO want to be with that person as much as possible. post right above tells it pretty clearly. i don't ask for permission, nor does my husband....but we have an unspoken, saturdays are OURS.....and we just check in with each other to see if plans are set, etc, before we go off with friends, or hell, even family. it's all how you see it.
I agree with you. My original point was that my old friend would ask to see if him and his girl were doing anything and she took it as let's make plans. He would go along with everything she said instead of letting her know what he wanted to do. It got to the point where he just stared blocking people out and had tunnel vision for her. I get wanting to spend most of you're time with the person you love. I do that now. But honestly, it's a little unhealthy to be with someone 24/7 and shut everyone else out.
Fair enough. I don't see anything in the OP to indicate it's gotten this bad though. I'm just saying it's pretty common to see a helluva lot less of your friends as they start getting into serious relationships. You admit yourself you only see your friends once a month anymore... at some point surely you saw them more? So why tell the OP to lay into his friend for being a pussy whipped bitch when you, him, me, and every other guy/adult/grown up in a serious relationship has done the same thing at some point?
"People Change as Does Everything" to quote Ed. A good friend roles with the changes in their friendship relationship. Yes it kind of sucks that a friend latches on to a new partner and that becomes their focus - but instead of acting selfishly understand that it's not anything personally against you, it's just your friends focus has changed with it. learn to deal with it. you will not do the same things with friends at 42 that you do at 12, 22 or 32. A truly great friend will find happiness for their friends when good things happen to them, even as it changes your relationship. Embrace their happiness and learn to co-exist within that bubble. If that means you only hang out once or twice a year so be it - cherish those times. Stay within distance so when that friend truly is in need of a great friend they know you are still available to them. and they will need a friend at some point, everyone does. ask yourself if you'd rather be a friend to that person 4 or 5 times a year instead of never. trust me as you get older you will cherish even those 4 or 5 times a year as much, if not more, than the times when you were younger and see these friends on a daily basis or so.
Though I agree with the sentiment of this, I don't really agree with it on principle. It's always the single person who has to adapt, who has to accept the loss. If you don't, you're not being "happy for" your friend. This to me, is complete B.S. From where I stand, if you can't fit another person into your life and integrate that person incrementally without sacrificing other relationships, you really don't deserve the friendship OR the romantic relationship. I don't believe that I have ever sacrificed friendship for a boyfriend. I don't think I've ever canceled plans with a friend or flaked out or lost touch due to a boyfriend. My boyfriends have gotten me as a whole person, who has friends and relatives and colleagues. *HE* is the new addition that must be integrated into the life that's already there and likewise me with his life. If I started dating someone who flaked out on his friends because of me, I would probably end it. That's not the kind of person I want to be with. And, as the romantic partner, you should know that if they do this to their friends, they will eventually do it to you too.
I've always held friendships in very high regard. I think they are extremely important. I don't believe that one person, no matter how much you love them, can fulfill every role in one's life. It's important to diversify the relationship portfolio.
"People Change as Does Everything" to quote Ed. A good friend roles with the changes in their friendship relationship. Yes it kind of sucks that a friend latches on to a new partner and that becomes their focus - but instead of acting selfishly understand that it's not anything personally against you, it's just your friends focus has changed with it. learn to deal with it. you will not do the same things with friends at 42 that you do at 12, 22 or 32. A truly great friend will find happiness for their friends when good things happen to them, even as it changes your relationship. Embrace their happiness and learn to co-exist within that bubble. If that means you only hang out once or twice a year so be it - cherish those times. Stay within distance so when that friend truly is in need of a great friend they know you are still available to them. and they will need a friend at some point, everyone does. ask yourself if you'd rather be a friend to that person 4 or 5 times a year instead of never. trust me as you get older you will cherish even those 4 or 5 times a year as much, if not more, than the times when you were younger and see these friends on a daily basis or so.
Though I agree with the sentiment of this, I don't really agree with it on principle. It's always the single person who has to adapt, who has to accept the loss. If you don't, you're not being "happy for" your friend. This to me, is complete B.S. From where I stand, if you can't fit another person into your life and integrate that person incrementally without sacrificing other relationships, you really don't deserve the friendship OR the romantic relationship. I don't believe that I have ever sacrificed friendship for a boyfriend. I don't think I've ever canceled plans with a friend or flaked out or lost touch due to a boyfriend. My boyfriends have gotten me as a whole person, who has friends and relatives and colleagues. *HE* is the new addition that must be integrated into the life that's already there and likewise me with his life. If I started dating someone who flaked out on his friends because of me, I would probably end it. That's not the kind of person I want to be with. And, as the romantic partner, you should know that if they do this to their friends, they will eventually do it to you too.
I've always held friendships in very high regard. I think they are extremely important. I don't believe that one person, no matter how much you love them, can fulfill every role in one's life. It's important to diversify the relationship portfolio.
perhaps not every role, but if you're considering marriage at some point, that person damn well be number one on your list. that is why EVERYONE has to adjust to fit around that person. parents do it too, not just friends. they see less of you at holidays, have to accept you splitting time to see the other family, you turn to your partner for advice instead of parents. it's not friends who are singled out. if this person means a lot to you, then yes, other people are going to have to deal with it. i'm not saying friends should be ok with being blown off or never seeing them and should just take what they can get and be happy, but i don't think it's unreasonable or unexpected that they take a back seat to someone you're in a serious relationship with.
One of my 3 best friends from college fell off the face of the earth after he got married and had twins. Now I realize that having a family means you're not as available anymore. I get that. But my other 2 best friends from college have kids now and they keep in touch and more than make an effort to hang out.
I am not as bummed about it as I was a few years ago. I got married in May, but had I gotten married 10 years ago he would have been my best man. Now he was invited, but wasn't even part of the wedding party.
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
perhaps not every role, but if you're considering marriage at some point, that person damn well be number one on your list.
I completely disagree with this statement. If I ever get married (big if), my husband will never be "number one." He will be in a group of number ones. You can't prioritize the people you care about. Sure, a person can't be everywhere at once, and sometimes reasonable decisions have to be made. As long as they are reasonable and equitable and you compensate any time lost to the other people when you make them, that's fine. If you make one person "number one" that implies that you are pushing all the other people you once loved and cared for back to numbers, two, three, four, etc.
I absolutely think it is unreasonable for anyone to take a "backseat" to a romantic partner. You've got people in your life who have loved and cared about you since birth, they've been there for you, and you have to be there for them, and I can't see how one could justify changing that because a new person has stepped in, just because that person is of the gender you are sexually attracted to. It's a different type of relationship, but there is no hierarchy.
In the practical sense that you mention about holidays and whatnot, there are no set rules. Depending on the individuals involved, the other circumstances, etc., I think I would celebrate holidays with my family regardless of my couple status (I always have), and my boyfriend/husband is free to join me or do whatever he wishes. For me, holidays have always been family events, so I don't think there's a reason that needs to change. Of course if you have children, it is more difficult to see everyone, though not always impossible.
I see the "rules" about these things as outdated and just a kind of artifact of social pressure for a patriarchal, nuclear family orientation. There is such a broad range of different types of families and relationships and people in our lives. I think it's more important to love the community as a whole than just one person above all else. And really, it's not a bright idea to do so anyway, even from a selfish standpoint. That one person isn't going to around all-day, every day, forever (unless you die first).
perhaps not every role, but if you're considering marriage at some point, that person damn well be number one on your list.
I completely disagree with this statement. If I ever get married (big if), my husband will never be "number one." He will be in a group of number ones. You can't prioritize the people you care about. Sure, a person can't be everywhere at once, and sometimes reasonable decisions have to be made. As long as they are reasonable and equitable and you compensate any time lost to the other people when you make them, that's fine. If you make one person "number one" that implies that you are pushing all the other people you once loved and cared for back to numbers, two, three, four, etc.
I absolutely think it is unreasonable for anyone to take a "backseat" to a romantic partner. You've got people in your life who have loved and cared about you since birth, they've been there for you, and you have to be there for them, and I can't see how one could justify changing that because a new person has stepped in, just because that person is of the gender you are sexually attracted to. It's a different type of relationship, but there is no hierarchy.
In the practical sense that you mention about holidays and whatnot, there are no set rules. Depending on the individuals involved, the other circumstances, etc., I think I would celebrate holidays with my family regardless of my couple status (I always have), and my boyfriend/husband is free to join me or do whatever he wishes. For me, holidays have always been family events, so I don't think there's a reason that needs to change. Of course if you have children, it is more difficult to see everyone, though not always impossible.
I see the "rules" about these things as outdated and just a kind of artifact of social pressure for a patriarchal, nuclear family orientation. There is such a broad range of different types of families and relationships and people in our lives. I think it's more important to love the community as a whole than just one person above all else. And really, it's not a bright idea to do so anyway, even from a selfish standpoint. That one person isn't going to around all-day, every day, forever (unless you die first).
good luck finding a guy willing to marry you that you're going to tell to his face is no more special to you than a good buddy or your parents. guys do NOT want to share their wives with the in-laws or other friends and loved ones any more than most women would be happy with their husband running to mommy with his problems instead of her. the purpose of a marriage is to build your own NEW family unit, not cling to the old one and sometimes drag along some dude you've ben fucking.
what exactly do you want a bf for anyway? you seem to view s.o.'s as no more than another friend of yours that you sometimes fuck... so what's the point? you've got friends, and you can fuck without the bf. but if you're not willing to give up a damn thing to be with him or grant him any importance beyond the importance you place on having coffee with an old college roommate, then i'm not remotely surprised you're struggling on the dating scene.
this has nothing to do with the evil patriarchy keeping you down :roll: ask your parents if their other friends took a backseat once they got married to each other and devoted themselves to you. they're lying if they tell you they saw their friends just as much after. marriage is building a partnership, about saying this person is the one person that will stand by you and vice versa no matter what. your friends may or may not. if you get offered a job across the country, you wouldn't expect your friends to move with you just to be by you. you may expect your spouse to.
in any event, least now i realize why you didn't want me to see your profile
It shouldn't be though. Life-long friendships deserve so much more respect than they get. I think the person who respects his friends regardless of his romantic status is the mature one.
make new friends but keep the old
one is silver and the other gold
sorry, just some flashbacks.
the more things change, the more they stay the same...especially with the internet, or at the very least....these forums.
my husband is my NUMBER ONE....and i damn well better always be his, tho i have no doubts. that is a fact, and i make no apologies....nor do i "need" to, b/c no one in my life thinks it should be any other way. i LOVE my family, my friends....and they KNOW this, and i know i would do just about anything for them. and yet, this in no way diminishes my husband being my number one. also, i have not cut myself off from others, hahaha....i just have...priorities? yes, even in relationships. and let's be real here, your partner should be your best friend, so he/she should know/understand that other family/friends do have needs to be met in your life too. utter silliness otherwise.
good luck finding a guy willing to marry you that you're going to tell to his face is no more special to you than a good buddy or your parents. guys do NOT want to share their wives with the in-laws or other friends and loved ones any more than most women would be happy with their husband running to mommy with his problems instead of her. the purpose of a marriage is to build your own NEW family unit, not cling to the old one and sometimes drag along some dude you've ben fucking.
what exactly do you want a bf for anyway? you seem to view s.o.'s as no more than another friend of yours that you sometimes fuck... so what's the point? you've got friends, and you can fuck without the bf. but if you're not willing to give up a damn thing to be with him or grant him any importance beyond the importance you place on having coffee with an old college roommate, then i'm not remotely surprised you're struggling on the dating scene.
this has nothing to do with the evil patriarchy keeping you down :roll: ask your parents if their other friends took a backseat once they got married to each other and devoted themselves to you. they're lying if they tell you they saw their friends just as much after. marriage is building a partnership, about saying this person is the one person that will stand by you and vice versa no matter what. your friends may or may not. if you get offered a job across the country, you wouldn't expect your friends to move with you just to be by you. you may expect your spouse to.
in any event, least now i realize why you didn't want me to see your profile
perhaps not every role, but if you're considering marriage at some point, that person damn well be number one on your list.
I completely disagree with this statement. If I ever get married (big if), my husband will never be "number one." He will be in a group of number ones. You can't prioritize the people you care about. Sure, a person can't be everywhere at once, and sometimes reasonable decisions have to be made. As long as they are reasonable and equitable and you compensate any time lost to the other people when you make them, that's fine. If you make one person "number one" that implies that you are pushing all the other people you once loved and cared for back to numbers, two, three, four, etc.
I absolutely think it is unreasonable for anyone to take a "backseat" to a romantic partner. You've got people in your life who have loved and cared about you since birth, they've been there for you, and you have to be there for them, and I can't see how one could justify changing that because a new person has stepped in, just because that person is of the gender you are sexually attracted to. It's a different type of relationship, but there is no hierarchy.
In the practical sense that you mention about holidays and whatnot, there are no set rules. Depending on the individuals involved, the other circumstances, etc., I think I would celebrate holidays with my family regardless of my couple status (I always have), and my boyfriend/husband is free to join me or do whatever he wishes. For me, holidays have always been family events, so I don't think there's a reason that needs to change. Of course if you have children, it is more difficult to see everyone, though not always impossible.
I see the "rules" about these things as outdated and just a kind of artifact of social pressure for a patriarchal, nuclear family orientation. There is such a broad range of different types of families and relationships and people in our lives. I think it's more important to love the community as a whole than just one person above all else. And really, it's not a bright idea to do so anyway, even from a selfish standpoint. That one person isn't going to around all-day, every day, forever (unless you die first).
I agree 100% ..
'I want to hurry home to you
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
my husband is my NUMBER ONE....and i damn well better always be his, tho i have no doubts. that is a fact, and i make no apologies....nor do i "need" to, b/c no one in my life thinks it should be any other way. i LOVE my family, my friends....and they KNOW this, and i know i would do just about anything for them. and yet, this in no way diminishes my husband being my number one. also, i have not cut myself off from others, hahaha....i just have...priorities? yes, even in relationships. and let's be real here, your partner should be your best friend, so he/she should know/understand that other family/friends do have needs to be met in your life too. utter silliness otherwise.
The thing I have realized over time is that it's not anything personal when a friend gets married and suddenly I don't get to see them quite as much. We're still friends and still have a blast when we hang out. That's not the point, and if your friendship is solid and you BOTH make an effort to see each other then you have no worries.
Having very recently gotten married, I am now experiencing the other side of things. My best friends are still my best friends. I'm still a loving uncle. I still love my family more than words. But now I have a wife. That doesn't diminish anything, but it changed who I am for sure. We've essentially made a pact that we're each other's support system and priority. She has become my best friend, but in a much different way than any of my other friends.
And I'm sure that when we have kids it will be even more intense and life will change even more. I'm cool with that. My friends and family will always be there. I'm not abandoning who I am.
On the flip side: I'll never understand those who drop off the face of the earth after marriage/kids. I just need variety and experiences in life, and I just can't imagine ever becoming a recluse. Life is too short.
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
my husband is my NUMBER ONE....and i damn well better always be his, tho i have no doubts. that is a fact, and i make no apologies....nor do i "need" to, b/c no one in my life thinks it should be any other way. i LOVE my family, my friends....and they KNOW this, and i know i would do just about anything for them. and yet, this in no way diminishes my husband being my number one. also, i have not cut myself off from others, hahaha....i just have...priorities? yes, even in relationships. and let's be real here, your partner should be your best friend, so he/she should know/understand that other family/friends do have needs to be met in your life too. utter silliness otherwise.
The thing I have realized over time is that it's not anything personal when a friend gets married and suddenly I don't get to see them quite as much. We're still friends and still have a blast when we hang out. That's not the point, and if your friendship is solid and you BOTH make an effort to see each other then you have no worries.
Having very recently gotten married, I am now experiencing the other side of things. My best friends are still my best friends. I'm still a loving uncle. I still love my family more than words. But now I have a wife. That doesn't diminish anything, but it changed who I am for sure. We've essentially made a pact that we're each other's support system and priority. She has become my best friend, but in a much different way than any of my other friends.
And I'm sure that when we have kids it will be even more intense and life will change even more. I'm cool with that. My friends and family will always be there. I'm not abandoning who I am.
On the flip side: I'll never understand those who drop off the face of the earth after marriage/kids. I just need variety and experiences in life, and I just can't imagine ever becoming a recluse. Life is too short.
agreed.
life is balance.
and within that balance, putting your partner in your #1 spot, well....it's just, reality?
it's not like you sit down and say, oh everyone else is now #2. hahahaha.
my husband is my NUMBER ONE....and i damn well better always be his, tho i have no doubts. that is a fact, and i make no apologies....nor do i "need" to, b/c no one in my life thinks it should be any other way. i LOVE my family, my friends....and they KNOW this, and i know i would do just about anything for them. and yet, this in no way diminishes my husband being my number one. also, i have not cut myself off from others, hahaha....i just have...priorities? yes, even in relationships. and let's be real here, your partner should be your best friend, so he/she should know/understand that other family/friends do have needs to be met in your life too. utter silliness otherwise.
On the flip side: I'll never understand those who drop off the face of the earth after marriage/kids. I just need variety and experiences in life, and I just can't imagine ever becoming a recluse. Life is too short.
i don't think anybody here is advocating anything like that.
next you'll tell us you fully support open marriages.
be sure to PM me, i want to read that post.
that makes me wonder... does lauri expect her bf not to fuck other women? becos she wouldn't get jealous if her friend had coffee with another friend, and if he's of no more importance to her than said friend, why get jealous about him doing things with other people the same as he did before? i mean, your life or priorities aren't supposed to change at all right? so why stop hooking up or dating just because you have a wife now? SHE should be willing to work around the life he already has, just like he has to accept that she will never visit his family at the holidays becos she sure isn't going to miss a holiday tradition just to spend time with the man she "loves" and his family...
next you'll tell us you fully support open marriages.
be sure to PM me, i want to read that post.
I'm a jealous motherfucker so that wouldn't work out too well....but run it by me again in about 15 years ..
'I want to hurry home to you
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
It shouldn't be though. Life-long friendships deserve so much more respect than they get. I think the person who respects his friends regardless of his romantic status is the mature one.
Exactly my viewpoint....I have several very close friends...the closest two of them being females actually, so anyone I'm dating better not have a problem with my boys and damn sure not with my girls. I'm open and honest about my relationships with the two wonderful ladies who have been there for me so much through the years....no romance should ever come between true friendships in my book
All I have to do is revel in the everyday....then do it again tomorrow
They say every sin is deadly but I believe they may be wrong...I'm guilty of all seven and I don't feel too bad at all
good luck finding a guy willing to marry you that you're going to tell to his face is no more special to you than a good buddy or your parents. guys do NOT want to share their wives with the in-laws or other friends and loved ones any more than most women would be happy with their husband running to mommy with his problems instead of her. the purpose of a marriage is to build your own NEW family unit, not cling to the old one and sometimes drag along some dude you've ben fucking.
I'm sorry, this is just not the way I see it. If a guy doesn't want to "share" me, I don't want to be with him. I don't want to find a man to marry me (welcome to 1954, ladies and gentlemen! ) I don't at all see the "purpose" of marriage as making a new family unit. In fact, I don't really see romantic partners as "family" in the usual sense. It's a different type of relationship. "Family" to me is combination of a blood line thing and a nurturing/rearing type situation. I don't see it as "clinging" to old relationships or anything of that nature, I see it is treating everyone equally. It's just the way I choose to see it. If your view is different, so be it, but know for a fact that I am not the only person in the world who has these ideas. They're everywhere, you just have to be open to ideas that aren't necessarily what you've always assumed. I just find it odd that you actually seem to be angry about what I wrote. I wrote that I care about the important people in my life equally, and you seem to take real, deep offense to that. Why?
what exactly do you want a bf for anyway? you seem to view s.o.'s as no more than another friend of yours that you sometimes fuck... so what's the point? you've got friends, and you can fuck without the bf. but if you're not willing to give up a damn thing to be with him or grant him any importance beyond the importance you place on having coffee with an old college roommate, then i'm not remotely surprised you're struggling on the dating scene.
I'm not struggling on the dating scene- I can't be struggling if I don't have a goal. There are many results I am open to when it comes to online dating. I don't think that my ideas and having a boyfriend are mutually exclusive. I said in the online dating thread that lately I've been thinking it would be nice to find a person I really care about who really cares about me to have a committed romantic relationship with. Nothing I've expressed here is in conflict with that. What I am saying relates to your use of the term "s.o." as a synonymn for "romantic partner." I never use that term, because it implies that no one else is significant to you. I think if people thought about when they used that term, they wouldn't really want to use it anymore. There are many significant people in my life. If my college roommate was really significant, then no, I wouldn't give up time with her for time with another significant person. Really, there is no reason why one should have to. I'm not saying that everyone you pass on the street is equally as important to you as the people you love, but I am saying that amongst those people who are significant to you, they hold different types of significance, but not more.
this has nothing to do with the evil patriarchy keeping you down :roll: ask your parents if their other friends took a backseat once they got married to each other and devoted themselves to you. they're lying if they tell you they saw their friends just as much after. marriage is building a partnership, about saying this person is the one person that will stand by you and vice versa no matter what. your friends may or may not. if you get offered a job across the country, you wouldn't expect your friends to move with you just to be by you. you may expect your spouse to.
I don't care what other people do or did. What matters is how I chose to live my life. No, I would not necessarily expect my spouse to move across the country with me- I have married friends who have lived in different states for years because of job conflicts. They don't enjoy being apart, but it's what they had to do to live their lives as complete people. This sort of thing is a choice. I don't even understand why married people think that HAVE to live together- the person who is your ideal romantic partner may not be your ideal roommate! I'm sure there are PLENTY of examples of that scenario playing out! If I did get married, I wouldn't follow the "rules" that don't pertain to the actual relationship between the two people involved unless that's the scenario that was right for us.
my husband is my NUMBER ONE....and i damn well better always be his, tho i have no doubts. that is a fact, and i make no apologies....nor do i "need" to, b/c no one in my life thinks it should be any other way. i LOVE my family, my friends....and they KNOW this, and i know i would do just about anything for them. and yet, this in no way diminishes my husband being my number one. also, i have not cut myself off from others, hahaha....i just have...priorities? yes, even in relationships. and let's be real here, your partner should be your best friend, so he/she should know/understand that other family/friends do have needs to be met in your life too. utter silliness otherwise.
On the flip side: I'll never understand those who drop off the face of the earth after marriage/kids. I just need variety and experiences in life, and I just can't imagine ever becoming a recluse. Life is too short.
i don't think anybody here is advocating anything like that.
I don't think so either, there are just some of us who live in the real world. I'm married, and have plenty of friends who I see whenever I want. There are also some weekends that we spend apart with our respective families/friends, which is fine and preferred by both of us....but during holidays, we need to coordinate with our families and be together..and yes, my wife is number 1 now, and it's exactly the way it should be..but that doesn't mean I love any of my friends/family any less....my mom and dad would have fucking heart attacks if I were to put them before my wife..in their eyes, they have worked their fucking ass off and sacrificed to raise me..even left their country, friends, and family behind so that their kids could have a better opportunity..they have done their job..your spouse and kids should always be priority..
Post edited by The Champ on
'I want to hurry home to you
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
It shouldn't be though. Life-long friendships deserve so much more respect than they get. I think the person who respects his friends regardless of his romantic status is the mature one.
Exactly my viewpoint....I have several very close friends...the closest two of them being females actually, so anyone I'm dating better not have a problem with my boys and damn sure not with my girls. I'm open and honest about my relationships with the two wonderful ladies who have been there for me so much through the years....no romance should ever come between true friendships in my book
I'm sorry, this is just not the way I see it. If a guy doesn't want to "share" me, I don't want to be with him. I don't want to find a man to marry me (welcome to 1954, ladies and gentlemen! ) I don't at all see the "purpose" of marriage as making a new family unit. In fact, I don't really see romantic partners as "family" in the usual sense. It's a different type of relationship. "Family" to me is combination of a blood line thing and a nurturing/rearing type situation. I don't see it as "clinging" to old relationships or anything of that nature, I see it is treating everyone equally. It's just the way I choose to see it. If your view is different, so be it, but know for a fact that I am not the only person in the world who has these ideas. They're everywhere, you just have to be open to ideas that aren't necessarily what you've always assumed. I just find it odd that you actually seem to be angry about what I wrote. I wrote that I care about the important people in my life equally, and you seem to take real, deep offense to that. Why?
I'm not struggling on the dating scene- I can't be struggling if I don't have a goal. There are many results I am open to when it comes to online dating. I don't think that my ideas and having a boyfriend are mutually exclusive. I said in the online dating thread that lately I've been thinking it would be nice to find a person I really care about who really cares about me to have a committed romantic relationship with. Nothing I've expressed here is in conflict with that. What I am saying relates to your use of the term "s.o." as a synonymn for "romantic partner." I never use that term, because it implies that no one else is significant to you.
Well I take from your wink that you understanding this has nothing to do from that.
I take no offense to it, I just find your views kinda laughable and about as common as flying pigs in the real world. In this very thread, the overwhelming majority of people, especially people that are married or dating seriously, agree that your spouse becomes number one and it's a sad fact that if you're going to get into a committed relationship, time with friends and family is going to suffer a bit. There are more people, competing for less time, and if you don't make the other person a priority, they're going to walk out on you for someone who will. I couldn't care less how your dream relationship would operate, so I'm not remotely angry about it, I just think you're lying through your teeth when you act like this is normal or common or anyone who disagrees with you is part of some 1954 plot to keep women down. :roll: I think you know it's not and you're trying to convince yourself you're right to rationalize loneliness or express how you wish things were. I've only known one person who behaved remotely like what you describe, and she has to be the most cold-hearted, self-centered bitch I ever had the misfortunte to meet. Everything was always done on her terms, and she lost a lot of friends becos of it, not just relationships.
As to you being perfectly satisfied with your dating life, I guess I misread your "that's not fair" comments about how many dates Ive had to indicate that maybe you're slightly less than satisfied with your dating life. And I stand by my assertion... I'd love to know what the hell you consider a committed romantic relationship if they are never allowed to cut into time with anyone else. Honestly, you make it sound like anyone you date is going to inevitably be number two becos there were other people there first. As to s.o.... don't be ridiculous. You're playing semantics and it's a meaningless term that was easier to type. You can call it whatever the hell you want. But everyone I know what laugh at your claim that the term s.o. somehow implies the other people in their lives are not significant. Don't be absurd.
Now answer me about your committed romantic partner sleeping with other girls. I mean, they were important parts of his life before he met you, so you can hardly ask that he stop fucking other people right? That'd be almost as bad as him asking you to maybe skip your family holiday one year to be with his family. It's unconscionable!
And I have no idea what "you understanding this has nothing to do from that" means...
I take no offense to it, I just find your views kinda laughable and about as common as flying pigs in the real world. In this very thread, the overwhelming majority of people, especially people that are married or dating seriously, agree that your spouse becomes number one and it's a sad fact that if you're going to get into a committed relationship, time with friends and family is going to suffer a bit.
I don't care what the "overwhelming majority of people in this thread" think. That amounts to a hill of beans to me.
I think you know it's not and you're trying to convince yourself you're right to rationalize loneliness or express how you wish things were. I've only known one person who behaved remotely like what you describe, and she has to be the most cold-hearted, self-centered bitch I ever had the misfortunte to meet. Everything was always done on her terms, and she lost a lot of friends becos of it, not just relationships.
I'm not trying to convince myself of anything. I think I felt loneliness a couple times as an angsty teen, but I don't remember what it feels like. I don't get lonely- I have friends and siblings and my parents and just a lot of people I like and who like me. I'm neither alone nor lonely. And I can assure I'm not a bitch and I haven't lost any friends or boyfriends or family members over the fact that I refuse to be mean to the people I care about because another person I care about has entered my life. Doing things on one's own terms does not imply self-centeredness. I don't even believe that any of the ideas I've written about are somehow novel or revolutionary-- I don't think you should ditch your friends or family for a romantic partner because your friends are important too. If that's some new idea, I should really write a book.
As to you being perfectly satisfied with your dating life, I guess I misread your "that's not fair" comments about how many dates Ive had to indicate that maybe you're slightly less than satisfied with your dating life.
There's nothing contradictory in anything I've written anywhere. I am single right now, enjoy it, and I chose not to wish I weren't. But, I also enjoy dating. I like having sex, I like kissing, I like going out and having a good conversation, I like meeting interesting people, I like men. I am also open to meeting someone I really care about and, if everything went right, committing to making them my main-or only- romantic relationship. I was kidding when I said "hey no fair" or whatever, but I have recently had more of an interest in dating, probably because I have been dating and have been frustrated that I haven't met anyone with a mutual attraction. But I know that this isn't a real problem, it's only a small part of my life.
In addition, I would like to point out that I'm single now, but I haven't always been, and I might always be, and might not always be. Most people are not defined as "single" or "coupled" for their entire lives. I believe that I treat the people who are in my life right regardless of what my current status is. I do not believe that I have ditched my friends in the past when I've been in relationships, and hope that I do not in the future. This is where the "sour grapes" argument fails. If I suddenly changed my morals and behavior when I started dating someone, then you could have this argument, but I haven't and don't, so that's that.
And I stand by my assertion... I'd love to know what the hell you consider a committed romantic relationship if they are never allowed to cut into time with anyone else. Honestly, you make it sound like anyone you date is going to inevitably be number two becos there were other people there first. As to s.o.... don't be ridiculous. You're playing semantics and it's a meaningless term that was easier to type. You can call it whatever the hell you want. But everyone I know what laugh at your claim that the term s.o. somehow implies the other people in their lives are not significant. Don't be absurd.
I don't see much common sense in this paragraph. My argument is that I do not believe that romantic relationships are more important than the other personal and important relationships in our lives, but that for some reason, it is the common default mode to consider them as such, even when it doesn't really make much sense. It's not a matter of who was there first. Friendships are important- they play a different role in your life than your romantic relationships, but that doesn't mean either is more or less a priority. I value this, I'm sorry if you don't. I also just happen to think that it doesn't benefit the person ditching their friends to do so in the long run. My one grandmother got divorced when she was 60 and she is now 95; my other grandmother lost her husband 15 years ago. The point is, if you make your romantic partner your "sex and everything else partner" you can't guarantee that that person will always be there to fill all those different roles. Even if your partner outlives you and you're together until the day you die, I think it would be sad to not have friends in addition to your partner. Sometimes you need a different perspective, sometimes you just need someone different to hang out with and laugh with and do new things with and learn from. If you ditch all your friends in favor of your partner, they're not going to come running back when you need them. That's what I originally said to Drop the Leash: it sucks for him for sure, but in the end, his friend will lose out too. This is obviously not an optimal outcome. We all agree that this happens; I disagree with you that it should happen.
I consider a committed romantic relationship one where that's the only person you're having a romantic relationship with, not that you're committed to eliminating all other persons and relationships from your life. Let's not be ridiculous, you know what I consider to be a "committed" relationship.
How does referring to one person as your "significant other" not imply that all the other others are not significant? It's not semantics, it's what the words mean and what everyone understands them to mean. Ok I guess it could be construed as being the only potential romantic other that is significant to you. If that's what you take it to mean, then ok, I will give you that. I disagree that semantics are always a waste of discussion, but that is a different topic.
Now answer me about your committed romantic partner sleeping with other girls. I mean, they were important parts of his life before he met you, so you can hardly ask that he stop fucking other people right?
This is starting to get silly. You know that's not what I'm arguing, and you know that it's not an appropriate analogy.As I said, it's not an issue of someone being there first. I am not saying that an ex is necessarily just as important to a person as a current partner- in fact if you've chosen to end it with them in the past, there is obviously a reason that they are no longer a "significant" person. I've also never said that everyone holds the same importance to a person (if I did, I mis-wrote, it was not my intention). All I am saying is: I don't believe there is a reason to believe that romantic relationships are more important than friendships or other important relationships. I don't believe it is ok to ditch your friends because you think it's more important to have a girlfriend or something like the original poster wrote about. I don't think it's nice and I don't think it's wise, and I think the importance that people who do this place on romantic relationships over all others(which all of society does, really) really undermines all those other relationships that when it comes down to it could be longer lasting and more stable and more important to your overall well-being. This is all I am saying. I think you are trying to pick an argument by reading all this other stuff into it.
That'd be almost as bad as him asking you to maybe skip your family holiday one year to be with his family. It's unconscionable!
This is not an unconscionable scenario (and I know that you realize I never insinuated that it was). People can ask their partners and friends and relatives to do whatever they want. I'm just saying there are no rules- or perhaps there are "rules" but there is no reason for them. There's nothing that says a person has to be with their husband on thanksgiving rather than their uncle. There's nothing that says a person has to go everywhere with their romantic partner. In my example, all I meant was, when I think of say, Thanksgiving, I think of my mother. It would be important for me to see my mother on Thanksgiving. I would have no problem going to see my mother on Thanksgiving, and inviting my romantic partner to come along. But if he wanted to see his mother, I would have no problem if we did our separate things, because that's the way I see it. I'm just that there are certain relationships that to me, are just as important as any romantic relationship, and I would rather realize that and work them into my life than just try to stick to the "rules" no matter what. Am I saying everyone should do this in this little Thanksgiving scenario? No. I am saying that if someone finds themselves in a situation where she really want to see her mother and their partner really wants to see his mother, perhaps they should consider not following the rules and allow themselves to realize, "yes, it is important to me to see my mother on Thanksgiving, and it is important to my partner to see his mother on Thanksgiving. It is just as important for us to see our mothers as it is to see each other. Perhaps we should consider taking separate Thanksgiving trips." Under the current "rules," you're not allowed to consider this, because the rules say that your romantic relationship always takes precedence, and if your married or whatever, you have to always go with your partner. All I'm saying is, maybe we all need to rethink these "rules" and do what is important to ourselves and our relationships (all of them) rather than just sticking to them.
I really think I've made myself clear several times replying to you, soulsinging. I've said everything I have to say, and I don't want to argue about it anymore. You can construe what I've said anyway you want, but the bottom line is: I don't think it's right to ditch your good friend for your girlfriend or your wife. I'm saying friendships are undervalued in our culture. That's it.
I don't think it's right to ditch your good friend for your girlfriend or your wife. I'm saying friendships are undervalued in our culture.
and i don't think there is even one person in this thread who even remotely suggested this was ok. most have advocated that, simply, friendships oftentimes take a back seat to many things at different times in your life, but you bet, it is always important to cherish and nurture your friendships, all relationships. i also happen to disagree with your assessment. i don't think friendships are undervalued at all. some may be, but that's on an individual basis, not at a cultural level. friends are VERY important, studies show how important they are to us all. the fact that as a culture we put our romantic and marital relations, our families in general, ahead of friends...is honestly, quite natural. sure, just dating is one thing...but a truly committed relationship, living together, making a life/future together...well, that's a serious commitment. one need not discard friendships, but one needs to prioritize. just like if one chooses to have children. caring for your child will usually take precedence. this is common sense.
now if you choose not to want to live your life like that...great! if you choose a partner who shares these same values as you, great! we all have to find our own way to live. many, many people would not be comfortable with how my husband and i choose to live our lives/marriage...and i have been told that more than a few times. and again, that's a-ok..b/c WE are happy in our marriage, and that's all that matters in our marriage. so truly, if you want a partner like yourself, i hope you find him...however, NO one is even remotely advocating anything you have said, just focusing on the 'reality' of a committed relationship. it's not just about it being a romantic relationship...it's also about friendship, commitment, living together, working on a future together, perhaps having a family, etc, etc. it's not just about who you fuck. and a truly committed relationship is simply 'more than' a friendship...b/c that is simply what makes a committed relationship, well, committed. most of us have 'less time' for friends, committed relationships or not, simply b/c life gets busier as we age.....however, none of this means we ditch our friends, at all. life is balance. i spend most of my free time with my husband, you bet...but i have many wonderful friendships that i nurture and will continue to do so, all of my life...so no, most of us aren't losing out at all.
Lauri - the problem I see with your attitude is that you do not have the right to choose what your friends prioritize in their life. When a friend chooses to focus more on a romantic relationship how do you react to that? Do you accept the change and adapt to it or do you take it as some kind of slight to yourself personally and react negatively to it? A true friend adapts and accepts the changes their friend has chosen. A friendship shouldn't have a scorecard. It shouldn't be you called them 10 times and they only called you once. If you choose to make no changes in your friendships when you are in a relationship that is all well and good but how do you truly react when your friends choose a different path than your own?
Lauri - the problem I see with your attitude is that you do not have the right to choose what your friends prioritize in their life. When a friend chooses to focus more on a romantic relationship how do you react to that? Do you accept the change and adapt to it or do you take it as some kind of slight to yourself personally and react negatively to it? A true friend adapts and accepts the changes their friend has chosen. A friendship shouldn't have a scorecard. It shouldn't be you called them 10 times and they only called you once.
i think i love you!
you summed it up perfectly. no one is 'out to get the single person'...or it's not about 'the single person has to adapt'...it's just, life. REAL FRIENDSHIP is exactly as you say. well said. also why my TRUE friends, well, are still in my life and always will be....single or coupled...we ALL have life events that take precedence at times, and that's how it goes. knowing the love is always there = priceless friendship.
:thumbup:
I refuse to be mean to the people I care about because another person I care about has entered my life.
I do not believe that I have ditched my friends in the past when I've been in relationships, and hope that I do not in the future.
I also just happen to think that it doesn't benefit the person ditching their friends to do so in the long run. I think it would be sad to not have friends in addition to your partner. Sometimes you need a different perspective,
Ok I guess it could be construed as being the only potential romantic other that is significant to you. If that's what you take it to mean, then ok, I will give you that.
Only you would act like it would be so unusual for it to be construed this way. Who has ever used the phrase in any other way in our lifetimes?
Lauri - the problem I see with your attitude is that you do not have the right to choose what your friends prioritize in their life. When a friend chooses to focus more on a romantic relationship how do you react to that? Do you accept the change and adapt to it or do you take it as some kind of slight to yourself personally and react negatively to it? A true friend adapts and accepts the changes their friend has chosen. A friendship shouldn't have a scorecard. It shouldn't be you called them 10 times and they only called you once.
i think i love you!
you summed it up perfectly. no one is 'out to get the single person'...or it's not about 'the single person has to adapt'...it's just, life. REAL FRIENDSHIP is exactly as you say. well said. also why my TRUE friends, well, are still in my life and always will be....single or coupled...we ALL have life events that take precedence at times, and that's how it goes. knowing the love is always there = priceless friendship.
:thumbup:
well it is nice to be loved - as Ed sings "I'm a lucky man to count on both hands the ones I love, some folks they got one, others they got none" - the funny thing is I am single and pretty much all of my friends are married and most with kids - but i have friends i have had for up to 30 years. I fully understand and respect the fact that they might have married friends, or parent friends - doesn't mean they love me any less than they did before. In a weird way I think it is awesome to have friends that you don't need to be involved in their every day life - yet whenever you see them or talk, once a year, five times a year, 30 times a year, etc. you are the same friends and there for them when they need a friend. i've never understood how easily some people throw away friends - as I get older the only thing that matters to me are people in my life - work, money, etc. is all BS.
Comments
Now that I am older I don't see all my friends as often because most of us are married or in relationships. I do make the effort though to get together and hang out like old times because it's important. My wife even tells me I should go out more because she is sick of seeing me. Oh how marriage can change you're relationship
9/29/04 Boston, 6/28/08 Mansfield, 8/23/09 Chicago, 5/15/10 Hartford
5/17/10 Boston, 10/15/13 Worcester, 10/16/13 Worcester, 10/25/13 Hartford
8/5/16 Fenway, 8/7/16 Fenway
EV Solo: 6/16/11 Boston, 6/18/11 Hartford,
Fair enough. I don't see anything in the OP to indicate it's gotten this bad though. I'm just saying it's pretty common to see a helluva lot less of your friends as they start getting into serious relationships. You admit yourself you only see your friends once a month anymore... at some point surely you saw them more? So why tell the OP to lay into his friend for being a pussy whipped bitch when you, him, me, and every other guy/adult/grown up in a serious relationship has done the same thing at some point?
Though I agree with the sentiment of this, I don't really agree with it on principle. It's always the single person who has to adapt, who has to accept the loss. If you don't, you're not being "happy for" your friend. This to me, is complete B.S. From where I stand, if you can't fit another person into your life and integrate that person incrementally without sacrificing other relationships, you really don't deserve the friendship OR the romantic relationship. I don't believe that I have ever sacrificed friendship for a boyfriend. I don't think I've ever canceled plans with a friend or flaked out or lost touch due to a boyfriend. My boyfriends have gotten me as a whole person, who has friends and relatives and colleagues. *HE* is the new addition that must be integrated into the life that's already there and likewise me with his life. If I started dating someone who flaked out on his friends because of me, I would probably end it. That's not the kind of person I want to be with. And, as the romantic partner, you should know that if they do this to their friends, they will eventually do it to you too.
I've always held friendships in very high regard. I think they are extremely important. I don't believe that one person, no matter how much you love them, can fulfill every role in one's life. It's important to diversify the relationship portfolio.
perhaps not every role, but if you're considering marriage at some point, that person damn well be number one on your list. that is why EVERYONE has to adjust to fit around that person. parents do it too, not just friends. they see less of you at holidays, have to accept you splitting time to see the other family, you turn to your partner for advice instead of parents. it's not friends who are singled out. if this person means a lot to you, then yes, other people are going to have to deal with it. i'm not saying friends should be ok with being blown off or never seeing them and should just take what they can get and be happy, but i don't think it's unreasonable or unexpected that they take a back seat to someone you're in a serious relationship with.
I am not as bummed about it as I was a few years ago. I got married in May, but had I gotten married 10 years ago he would have been my best man. Now he was invited, but wasn't even part of the wedding party.
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
I completely disagree with this statement. If I ever get married (big if), my husband will never be "number one." He will be in a group of number ones. You can't prioritize the people you care about. Sure, a person can't be everywhere at once, and sometimes reasonable decisions have to be made. As long as they are reasonable and equitable and you compensate any time lost to the other people when you make them, that's fine. If you make one person "number one" that implies that you are pushing all the other people you once loved and cared for back to numbers, two, three, four, etc.
I absolutely think it is unreasonable for anyone to take a "backseat" to a romantic partner. You've got people in your life who have loved and cared about you since birth, they've been there for you, and you have to be there for them, and I can't see how one could justify changing that because a new person has stepped in, just because that person is of the gender you are sexually attracted to. It's a different type of relationship, but there is no hierarchy.
In the practical sense that you mention about holidays and whatnot, there are no set rules. Depending on the individuals involved, the other circumstances, etc., I think I would celebrate holidays with my family regardless of my couple status (I always have), and my boyfriend/husband is free to join me or do whatever he wishes. For me, holidays have always been family events, so I don't think there's a reason that needs to change. Of course if you have children, it is more difficult to see everyone, though not always impossible.
I see the "rules" about these things as outdated and just a kind of artifact of social pressure for a patriarchal, nuclear family orientation. There is such a broad range of different types of families and relationships and people in our lives. I think it's more important to love the community as a whole than just one person above all else. And really, it's not a bright idea to do so anyway, even from a selfish standpoint. That one person isn't going to around all-day, every day, forever (unless you die first).
good luck finding a guy willing to marry you that you're going to tell to his face is no more special to you than a good buddy or your parents. guys do NOT want to share their wives with the in-laws or other friends and loved ones any more than most women would be happy with their husband running to mommy with his problems instead of her. the purpose of a marriage is to build your own NEW family unit, not cling to the old one and sometimes drag along some dude you've ben fucking.
what exactly do you want a bf for anyway? you seem to view s.o.'s as no more than another friend of yours that you sometimes fuck... so what's the point? you've got friends, and you can fuck without the bf. but if you're not willing to give up a damn thing to be with him or grant him any importance beyond the importance you place on having coffee with an old college roommate, then i'm not remotely surprised you're struggling on the dating scene.
this has nothing to do with the evil patriarchy keeping you down :roll: ask your parents if their other friends took a backseat once they got married to each other and devoted themselves to you. they're lying if they tell you they saw their friends just as much after. marriage is building a partnership, about saying this person is the one person that will stand by you and vice versa no matter what. your friends may or may not. if you get offered a job across the country, you wouldn't expect your friends to move with you just to be by you. you may expect your spouse to.
in any event, least now i realize why you didn't want me to see your profile
Good luck with that.
one is silver and the other gold
sorry, just some flashbacks.
the more things change, the more they stay the same...especially with the internet, or at the very least....these forums.
my husband is my NUMBER ONE....and i damn well better always be his, tho i have no doubts. that is a fact, and i make no apologies....nor do i "need" to, b/c no one in my life thinks it should be any other way. i LOVE my family, my friends....and they KNOW this, and i know i would do just about anything for them. and yet, this in no way diminishes my husband being my number one. also, i have not cut myself off from others, hahaha....i just have...priorities? yes, even in relationships. and let's be real here, your partner should be your best friend, so he/she should know/understand that other family/friends do have needs to be met in your life too. utter silliness otherwise.
:thumbup:
i *heart* this place.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I agree 100%
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
next you'll tell us you fully support open marriages.
be sure to PM me, i want to read that post.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
The thing I have realized over time is that it's not anything personal when a friend gets married and suddenly I don't get to see them quite as much. We're still friends and still have a blast when we hang out. That's not the point, and if your friendship is solid and you BOTH make an effort to see each other then you have no worries.
Having very recently gotten married, I am now experiencing the other side of things. My best friends are still my best friends. I'm still a loving uncle. I still love my family more than words. But now I have a wife. That doesn't diminish anything, but it changed who I am for sure. We've essentially made a pact that we're each other's support system and priority. She has become my best friend, but in a much different way than any of my other friends.
And I'm sure that when we have kids it will be even more intense and life will change even more. I'm cool with that. My friends and family will always be there. I'm not abandoning who I am.
On the flip side: I'll never understand those who drop off the face of the earth after marriage/kids. I just need variety and experiences in life, and I just can't imagine ever becoming a recluse. Life is too short.
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
The ONLY thing better than a glass of beer is tea with Miss McGill
A protuberance of flesh above the waistband of a tight pair of trousers
agreed.
life is balance.
and within that balance, putting your partner in your #1 spot, well....it's just, reality?
it's not like you sit down and say, oh everyone else is now #2. hahahaha.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
i don't think anybody here is advocating anything like that.
that makes me wonder... does lauri expect her bf not to fuck other women? becos she wouldn't get jealous if her friend had coffee with another friend, and if he's of no more importance to her than said friend, why get jealous about him doing things with other people the same as he did before? i mean, your life or priorities aren't supposed to change at all right? so why stop hooking up or dating just because you have a wife now? SHE should be willing to work around the life he already has, just like he has to accept that she will never visit his family at the holidays becos she sure isn't going to miss a holiday tradition just to spend time with the man she "loves" and his family...
I'm a jealous motherfucker so that wouldn't work out too well....but run it by me again in about 15 years
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
They say every sin is deadly but I believe they may be wrong...I'm guilty of all seven and I don't feel too bad at all
I'm sorry, this is just not the way I see it. If a guy doesn't want to "share" me, I don't want to be with him. I don't want to find a man to marry me (welcome to 1954, ladies and gentlemen!
I'm not struggling on the dating scene- I can't be struggling if I don't have a goal. There are many results I am open to when it comes to online dating. I don't think that my ideas and having a boyfriend are mutually exclusive. I said in the online dating thread that lately I've been thinking it would be nice to find a person I really care about who really cares about me to have a committed romantic relationship with. Nothing I've expressed here is in conflict with that. What I am saying relates to your use of the term "s.o." as a synonymn for "romantic partner." I never use that term, because it implies that no one else is significant to you. I think if people thought about when they used that term, they wouldn't really want to use it anymore. There are many significant people in my life. If my college roommate was really significant, then no, I wouldn't give up time with her for time with another significant person. Really, there is no reason why one should have to. I'm not saying that everyone you pass on the street is equally as important to you as the people you love, but I am saying that amongst those people who are significant to you, they hold different types of significance, but not more.
I don't care what other people do or did. What matters is how I chose to live my life. No, I would not necessarily expect my spouse to move across the country with me- I have married friends who have lived in different states for years because of job conflicts. They don't enjoy being apart, but it's what they had to do to live their lives as complete people. This sort of thing is a choice. I don't even understand why married people think that HAVE to live together- the person who is your ideal romantic partner may not be your ideal roommate! I'm sure there are PLENTY of examples of that scenario playing out! If I did get married, I wouldn't follow the "rules" that don't pertain to the actual relationship between the two people involved unless that's the scenario that was right for us.
Well I take from your wink that you understanding this has nothing to do from that.
I don't think so either, there are just some of us who live in the real world. I'm married, and have plenty of friends who I see whenever I want. There are also some weekends that we spend apart with our respective families/friends, which is fine and preferred by both of us....but during holidays, we need to coordinate with our families and be together..and yes, my wife is number 1 now, and it's exactly the way it should be..but that doesn't mean I love any of my friends/family any less....my mom and dad would have fucking heart attacks if I were to put them before my wife..in their eyes, they have worked their fucking ass off and sacrificed to raise me..even left their country, friends, and family behind so that their kids could have a better opportunity..they have done their job..your spouse and kids should always be priority..
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
that's why you're single.
Wish you were here...
♥~RIP Dad
I take no offense to it, I just find your views kinda laughable and about as common as flying pigs in the real world. In this very thread, the overwhelming majority of people, especially people that are married or dating seriously, agree that your spouse becomes number one and it's a sad fact that if you're going to get into a committed relationship, time with friends and family is going to suffer a bit. There are more people, competing for less time, and if you don't make the other person a priority, they're going to walk out on you for someone who will. I couldn't care less how your dream relationship would operate, so I'm not remotely angry about it, I just think you're lying through your teeth when you act like this is normal or common or anyone who disagrees with you is part of some 1954 plot to keep women down. :roll: I think you know it's not and you're trying to convince yourself you're right to rationalize loneliness or express how you wish things were. I've only known one person who behaved remotely like what you describe, and she has to be the most cold-hearted, self-centered bitch I ever had the misfortunte to meet. Everything was always done on her terms, and she lost a lot of friends becos of it, not just relationships.
As to you being perfectly satisfied with your dating life, I guess I misread your "that's not fair" comments about how many dates Ive had to indicate that maybe you're slightly less than satisfied with your dating life. And I stand by my assertion... I'd love to know what the hell you consider a committed romantic relationship if they are never allowed to cut into time with anyone else. Honestly, you make it sound like anyone you date is going to inevitably be number two becos there were other people there first. As to s.o.... don't be ridiculous. You're playing semantics and it's a meaningless term that was easier to type. You can call it whatever the hell you want. But everyone I know what laugh at your claim that the term s.o. somehow implies the other people in their lives are not significant. Don't be absurd.
Now answer me about your committed romantic partner sleeping with other girls. I mean, they were important parts of his life before he met you, so you can hardly ask that he stop fucking other people right? That'd be almost as bad as him asking you to maybe skip your family holiday one year to be with his family. It's unconscionable!
And I have no idea what "you understanding this has nothing to do from that" means...
...and I never said anyone here was.
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
I don't care what the "overwhelming majority of people in this thread" think. That amounts to a hill of beans to me.
I'm not trying to convince myself of anything. I think I felt loneliness a couple times as an angsty teen, but I don't remember what it feels like. I don't get lonely- I have friends and siblings and my parents and just a lot of people I like and who like me. I'm neither alone nor lonely. And I can assure I'm not a bitch and I haven't lost any friends or boyfriends or family members over the fact that I refuse to be mean to the people I care about because another person I care about has entered my life. Doing things on one's own terms does not imply self-centeredness. I don't even believe that any of the ideas I've written about are somehow novel or revolutionary-- I don't think you should ditch your friends or family for a romantic partner because your friends are important too. If that's some new idea, I should really write a book.
There's nothing contradictory in anything I've written anywhere. I am single right now, enjoy it, and I chose not to wish I weren't. But, I also enjoy dating. I like having sex, I like kissing, I like going out and having a good conversation, I like meeting interesting people, I like men. I am also open to meeting someone I really care about and, if everything went right, committing to making them my main-or only- romantic relationship. I was kidding when I said "hey no fair" or whatever, but I have recently had more of an interest in dating, probably because I have been dating and have been frustrated that I haven't met anyone with a mutual attraction. But I know that this isn't a real problem, it's only a small part of my life.
In addition, I would like to point out that I'm single now, but I haven't always been, and I might always be, and might not always be. Most people are not defined as "single" or "coupled" for their entire lives. I believe that I treat the people who are in my life right regardless of what my current status is. I do not believe that I have ditched my friends in the past when I've been in relationships, and hope that I do not in the future. This is where the "sour grapes" argument fails. If I suddenly changed my morals and behavior when I started dating someone, then you could have this argument, but I haven't and don't, so that's that.
I don't see much common sense in this paragraph. My argument is that I do not believe that romantic relationships are more important than the other personal and important relationships in our lives, but that for some reason, it is the common default mode to consider them as such, even when it doesn't really make much sense. It's not a matter of who was there first. Friendships are important- they play a different role in your life than your romantic relationships, but that doesn't mean either is more or less a priority. I value this, I'm sorry if you don't. I also just happen to think that it doesn't benefit the person ditching their friends to do so in the long run. My one grandmother got divorced when she was 60 and she is now 95; my other grandmother lost her husband 15 years ago. The point is, if you make your romantic partner your "sex and everything else partner" you can't guarantee that that person will always be there to fill all those different roles. Even if your partner outlives you and you're together until the day you die, I think it would be sad to not have friends in addition to your partner. Sometimes you need a different perspective, sometimes you just need someone different to hang out with and laugh with and do new things with and learn from. If you ditch all your friends in favor of your partner, they're not going to come running back when you need them. That's what I originally said to Drop the Leash: it sucks for him for sure, but in the end, his friend will lose out too. This is obviously not an optimal outcome. We all agree that this happens; I disagree with you that it should happen.
I consider a committed romantic relationship one where that's the only person you're having a romantic relationship with, not that you're committed to eliminating all other persons and relationships from your life. Let's not be ridiculous, you know what I consider to be a "committed" relationship.
How does referring to one person as your "significant other" not imply that all the other others are not significant? It's not semantics, it's what the words mean and what everyone understands them to mean. Ok I guess it could be construed as being the only potential romantic other that is significant to you. If that's what you take it to mean, then ok, I will give you that. I disagree that semantics are always a waste of discussion, but that is a different topic.
This is starting to get silly. You know that's not what I'm arguing, and you know that it's not an appropriate analogy.As I said, it's not an issue of someone being there first. I am not saying that an ex is necessarily just as important to a person as a current partner- in fact if you've chosen to end it with them in the past, there is obviously a reason that they are no longer a "significant" person. I've also never said that everyone holds the same importance to a person (if I did, I mis-wrote, it was not my intention). All I am saying is: I don't believe there is a reason to believe that romantic relationships are more important than friendships or other important relationships. I don't believe it is ok to ditch your friends because you think it's more important to have a girlfriend or something like the original poster wrote about. I don't think it's nice and I don't think it's wise, and I think the importance that people who do this place on romantic relationships over all others(which all of society does, really) really undermines all those other relationships that when it comes down to it could be longer lasting and more stable and more important to your overall well-being. This is all I am saying. I think you are trying to pick an argument by reading all this other stuff into it.
This is not an unconscionable scenario (and I know that you realize I never insinuated that it was). People can ask their partners and friends and relatives to do whatever they want. I'm just saying there are no rules- or perhaps there are "rules" but there is no reason for them. There's nothing that says a person has to be with their husband on thanksgiving rather than their uncle. There's nothing that says a person has to go everywhere with their romantic partner. In my example, all I meant was, when I think of say, Thanksgiving, I think of my mother. It would be important for me to see my mother on Thanksgiving. I would have no problem going to see my mother on Thanksgiving, and inviting my romantic partner to come along. But if he wanted to see his mother, I would have no problem if we did our separate things, because that's the way I see it. I'm just that there are certain relationships that to me, are just as important as any romantic relationship, and I would rather realize that and work them into my life than just try to stick to the "rules" no matter what. Am I saying everyone should do this in this little Thanksgiving scenario? No. I am saying that if someone finds themselves in a situation where she really want to see her mother and their partner really wants to see his mother, perhaps they should consider not following the rules and allow themselves to realize, "yes, it is important to me to see my mother on Thanksgiving, and it is important to my partner to see his mother on Thanksgiving. It is just as important for us to see our mothers as it is to see each other. Perhaps we should consider taking separate Thanksgiving trips." Under the current "rules," you're not allowed to consider this, because the rules say that your romantic relationship always takes precedence, and if your married or whatever, you have to always go with your partner. All I'm saying is, maybe we all need to rethink these "rules" and do what is important to ourselves and our relationships (all of them) rather than just sticking to them.
I really think I've made myself clear several times replying to you, soulsinging. I've said everything I have to say, and I don't want to argue about it anymore. You can construe what I've said anyway you want, but the bottom line is: I don't think it's right to ditch your good friend for your girlfriend or your wife. I'm saying friendships are undervalued in our culture. That's it.
and i don't think there is even one person in this thread who even remotely suggested this was ok. most have advocated that, simply, friendships oftentimes take a back seat to many things at different times in your life, but you bet, it is always important to cherish and nurture your friendships, all relationships. i also happen to disagree with your assessment. i don't think friendships are undervalued at all. some may be, but that's on an individual basis, not at a cultural level. friends are VERY important, studies show how important they are to us all. the fact that as a culture we put our romantic and marital relations, our families in general, ahead of friends...is honestly, quite natural. sure, just dating is one thing...but a truly committed relationship, living together, making a life/future together...well, that's a serious commitment. one need not discard friendships, but one needs to prioritize. just like if one chooses to have children. caring for your child will usually take precedence. this is common sense.
now if you choose not to want to live your life like that...great! if you choose a partner who shares these same values as you, great! we all have to find our own way to live. many, many people would not be comfortable with how my husband and i choose to live our lives/marriage...and i have been told that more than a few times. and again, that's a-ok..b/c WE are happy in our marriage, and that's all that matters in our marriage. so truly, if you want a partner like yourself, i hope you find him...however, NO one is even remotely advocating anything you have said, just focusing on the 'reality' of a committed relationship. it's not just about it being a romantic relationship...it's also about friendship, commitment, living together, working on a future together, perhaps having a family, etc, etc. it's not just about who you fuck. and a truly committed relationship is simply 'more than' a friendship...b/c that is simply what makes a committed relationship, well, committed. most of us have 'less time' for friends, committed relationships or not, simply b/c life gets busier as we age.....however, none of this means we ditch our friends, at all. life is balance. i spend most of my free time with my husband, you bet...but i have many wonderful friendships that i nurture and will continue to do so, all of my life...so no, most of us aren't losing out at all.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
i think i love you!
you summed it up perfectly. no one is 'out to get the single person'...or it's not about 'the single person has to adapt'...it's just, life. REAL FRIENDSHIP is exactly as you say. well said. also why my TRUE friends, well, are still in my life and always will be....single or coupled...we ALL have life events that take precedence at times, and that's how it goes. knowing the love is always there = priceless friendship.
:thumbup:
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
The only problem here is that I never said any of these things should happen.
Only you would act like it would be so unusual for it to be construed this way. Who has ever used the phrase in any other way in our lifetimes?
well it is nice to be loved