Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No man who has been in a relationship and treated it the way you say to will back you up on this.
Status differences favoring the woman are very often poisonous (not always, mind, but, commonly enough). "I moved out here where there are no jobs for my skill set so you could do better in your career" won't cut it when she starts resenting him for not being able to find decent employment. Being a little less well off is very often healthier for a relationship than opening that kind of gap up even wider.
A few years ago I would have backed your post up 100% but it just doesn't work in practice. Been there, done that, learned my lesson.
I'm not following you You quoted my post, but I think you were responding to the poster I was responding to (WFW&P)?
Otherwise, please explain to me what "doesn't work in practice", because working as a team is the only way to make these situations successful.
I'm not following you You quoted my post, but I think you were responding to the poster I was responding to (WFW&P)?
Otherwise, please explain to me what "doesn't work in practice", because working as a team is the only way to make these situations successful.
The problem with the team approach is that many women have a gut negative emotional reaction to the resulting status gap. Especially if it puts him below average for the area. Yes, logically it would make more sense to maximize total income between the two, but, it just doesn't work more broadly. If he moves to an area where he can't find decent employment she will, more likely than not, eventually start to resent him for it, logic/selflessness of the move be ****ed.
There is more to life than just maximizing income; if you make 10-20k more between the two of you but end up divorced, you're not better off.
The problem with the team approach is that many women have a gut negative emotional reaction to the resulting status gap. Especially if it puts him below average for the area. Yes, logically it would make more sense to maximize total income between the two, but, it just doesn't work more broadly. If he moves to an area where he can't find decent employment she will, more likely than not, eventually start to resent him for it, logic/selflessness of the move be ****ed.
There is more to life than just maximizing income; if you make 10-20k more between the two of you but end up divorced, you're not better off.
Mature, stable couples are able to work together when these kinds of situations arise, even "status gaps".
The fact that she wants what she wants and he wants what he wants does not bode well for this couple.
If their insurance benefits come from her job then they move with her new job.
If their insurance benefits come from his job then they stay and she looks for a new one.
Either way, SOMEBODY is going to have to get a new job. Digging your heels in and getting angry at each other is counterproductive and never "works in practice".
Mature, stable couples are able to work together when these kinds of situations arise, even "status gaps".
The fact that she wants what she wants and he wants what he wants does not bode well for this couple.
If their insurance benefits come from her job then they move with her new job.
If their insurance benefits come from his job then they stay and she looks for a new one.
Either way, SOMEBODY is going to have to get a new job. Digging your heels in and getting angry at each other is counterproductive and never "works in practice".
Quote:
Mature, stable couples are able to work together when these kinds of situations arise, even "status gaps".
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It's an unnecessary risk.
Quote:
The fact that she wants what she wants and he wants what he wants does not bode well for this couple.
Couples argue. How they go about doing so and resolving it is the potential red flag.
Quote:
If their insurance benefits come from her job then they move with her new job.
If their insurance benefits come from his job then they stay and she looks for a new one.
If someone is sick, sure, but, for a younger couple who have no preexisting conditions and take care of themselves (exercise, don't smoke, don't overeat, brush their teeth) the cash value equivalent of benefits isn't that significant.
Quote:
Either way, SOMEBODY is going to have to get a new job. Digging your heels in and getting angry at each other is counterproductive and never "works in practice".
Here I agree with you, somewhat. Digging heals in and getting angry would be counterproductive. Having a calm, collected discussion about how he would never be able to find decent work in that area and would not be comfortable with that even if it would allow them to have a somewhat higher standard of living on the other hand makes a truckload of sense.
Last edited by ALackOfCreativity; 09-01-2011 at 10:22 PM..
Reason: proper punctuation
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You quoted my post, but I think you were responding to the poster I was responding to (WFW&P)?
