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.
Being self-sustainable is not "trivial". Having a job, nowadays, is quite important. High up on the list, in my opinion.
Leech? Perhaps, if you were an investment banker and she was a 22 y.o. call girl. But I don't see how an employed, self-efficient woman would be a leech for leaving a man who could no longer support himself and relied on her income solely. Me think thats you would actually become the leech.
Why would a reasonable woman want to be with a guy like that????
Damn right, no woman is going to stay with a guy who can't afford his own toilet paper. Provide her lifestyle? Nah. I don't expect you to "take care" of me, so don't expect me to "take care" of you.
The entitlement on here: "I'm unemployed so you have to financially support me until I find work or you're not a good person!" HAHAHA. If a woman decides to help her boyfriend out, so be it. But you are not entitled to no such favour. To think so, would make you pompous.
I understand if you're in a marriage, sharing assets and pooling income, to "weather the storm". Or if you were a SAHM who needed to step-up and start looking for a job. That is reasonable.
But if we're casually dating and you shoot me a text to pay your cellphone bill that's coming up -- Hasta la vista! If you aren't paying my bills, I sure as hell am not paying yours :D
Damn are we talking about casually dating here? For some reason I thought this was about committed relationships/marriage.
If a man is laid off, or had to leave his job because of health reasons, I would do everything I could to pick up the slack until he found another job if he were physically able to return to work. If he stopped looking, lazed around the house all day and didn't contribute in any way, I'd have a real problem with it. No way do I want to come home from work to find dishes in the sink, the house a mess, and my husband laying on the couch watching tv.
That's the kind of attitude that makes it hard to feel as though we were a team since he wouldn't be supporting me in ANY way, not just financially. I'd assume he didn't care if the roof over our head was in jeopardy, his wife was overworked and stressed, and our relationship was going down the tubes. So leaving him would be a definite option if it went on too long. If he were genuinely trying to find work, and making himself useful I'd stay in the relationship.
I wouldn't stay with a man who didn't work and support him financially.
LOL...it's not for you and that's okay.
OP - I think the thing is that it's not necessarily an all or nothing answer. Each person has their "deal-breakers" when it comes to relationships. It depends on their life experiences and expectations, their needs and wants in a relationship.
I didn't leave my husband (and he wasn't my husband then) when he lost his job soon after we started dating. Things worked out. It's not that he doesn't look for work or that he sits around the house all day eating cheetos and Mt. Dew (although he does love his Dew! LOL). To me, some of this argument is similar to the working mom vs. the stay at home mom thing. Just because one partner in a marriage/relationship stays home doesn't mean they don't work. There are many things that need to be done in the home that my husband does. And he has helped me tremendously in other ways (with some volunteer work). It works for us. It doesn't have to work for everyone.
These kinds of threads are funny to me. Our situation is so unique as to actually repulse some people.
In the end, we're happy and that's all that really matters.
Damn are we talking about casually dating here? For some reason I thought this was about committed relationships/marriage.
no where in the OP do I see him exclusively mentioning committed relationships/marriage???
I interpreted it as relationships as a whole. Casual or committed. But I feel the exact same way about a LTR, as well. The only thing that might make me question the decision to leave, would be if I were in a marriage, because things are a little more complicated then. However, even a boyfriend of two years, who went 6 months without work,
I think it would be fair for me to separate myself if I was the only one financially sustaining us. Would it be a huge deal if we weren't living together and didn't share expenses? Maybe not. The unemployment thing might not be a deal breaker. But if I'm carrying all the financial weight, I don't think it makes a woman a bad person to walk away if the burden is too much.
I don't see why it would make her a "leech." The ability to financially support yourself isn't "trivial." If anything, I see it as more of a woman not wanting to be with a man who can't hold his own and who she would have to financially support. But you know, different perspectives and all.
You're the one who's adding in the caveat that you'd be supporting him. I never mentioned that at all, nor is that what I'm talking about.
I'm only talking about a guy who lost his job temporarily (laid off, downsizing, etc.) and is looking for a new one. Most likely he is on unemployment insurance or living off of savings while he looks, not living off of his SO completely (unless they're married and live together).
It seems you are referring to a guy who doesn't seem to have his crap together and then wants to rely completely on the woman to support him. Yeah, sure. Nobody wants to be with a deadbeat. I get that. But that wasn't really what I was referring to in the OP.
Clearly you are generalizing here....from just one, maybe 2 posts. What standards are you referring to? Most people here said no they would NOT walk out. Why are you wanting to think that most would do otherwise?
You're trying to infer something that isn't there. I never said that most would do otherwise. I was just asking if these same women who said they'd leave would hold themselves to the same standard. That is all.
The entitlement on here: "I'm unemployed so you have to financially support me until I find work or you're not a good person!" HAHAHA. If a woman decides to help her boyfriend out, so be it. But you are not entitled to no such favour. To think so, would make you pompous.
Get over your misinterpreted version of what's being said here. There was no entitlement implied. I never said that a man should expect his woman to take care of him long term while he was unemployed, and I don't think anyone else did. This topic was sparked by another discussion on another forum. I was curious if the women on this forum would leave a guy who became unemployed not particularly due to any fault of his own (downsizing, laid off, etc.).
That said, I was also curious if these same women who said they would leave the man would hold themselves to the same standard. In other words, would they be as understanding if the man decided to leave them because they couldn't support themselves?
That's the only thing that was mentioned here. All this other hyperbole and nonsense you guys are injecting into the discussion is off topic and unrelated. That's pretty much why a good discussion can rarely happen on this forum. People misconstrue what's being said and take it to a completely different direction than it was intended.
no where in the OP do I see him exclusively mentioning committed relationships/marriage???
I interpreted it as relationships as a whole. Casual or committed. But I feel the exact same way about a LTR, as well. The only thing that might make me question the decision to leave, would be if I were in a marriage, because things are a little more complicated then. However, even a boyfriend of two years, who went 6 months without work,
I think it would be fair for me to separate myself if I was the only one financially sustaining us. Would it be a huge deal if we weren't living together and didn't share expenses? Maybe not. The unemployment thing might not be a deal breaker. But if I'm carrying all the financial weight, I don't think it makes a woman a bad person to walk away if the burden is too much.
I'm not saying that a woman, or any person, is a bad person for not wanting to carry long term financial burden of two people.
However, I do ask if you'd be as understanding if you were to lose your job and the guy decided he didn't want to support you. Because it seems that what some people advocate in life is that it's acceptable for a man to support a woman financially, but it's never acceptable for a woman to support a man financially. Nor is it acceptable for a woman to stick it out with a man who can't support her, while it's completely acceptable for a man to stick it out with a woman who can't support him or herself temporarily. So turn the tables for the sake of discussion. If you lost your job and were having a difficult time landing a new one (say it was taking longer than three months), would you be understanding if your hypothetical man decided he was done with you because you couldn't support yourself? Or would you be distraught, you know, because "it's a man's job to take care of his woman"?
I'm curious if there's a double standard held by some of you.
You're the one who's adding in the caveat that you'd be supporting him. I never mentioned that at all, nor is that what I'm talking about.
I'm only talking about a guy who lost his job temporarily (laid off, downsizing, etc.) and is looking for a new one. Most likely he is on unemployment insurance or living off of savings while he looks, not living off of his SO completely (unless they're married and live together).
It seems you are referring to a guy who doesn't seem to have his crap together and then wants to rely completely on the woman to support him. Yeah, sure. Nobody wants to be with a deadbeat. I get that. But that wasn't really what I was referring to in the OP.
If he has a long stretch of unemployment, someone is going to have to financially support him during that time so that he doesn't end up homeless, without food, a car, insurance, etc. If he is able to get by without that financial support coming from me, great. All I'm saying is that I don't want to financially support a man or attempt to build a life with someone with no income. I'm not saying that every man who finds himself unemployed deserves to be dumped.
My first love has anxiety problems and could not work. I stayed with him for a few years. While he lived with his parents, I gave him gas money, money for food, paid his cell phone bill, bought his clothes, and even his school books. I also paid for any outings we had. I bought him video games for crying out loud. His parents flatly refused.
I don't know if I would do it again. He never DID anything about his mental health problems. He just diddled around in school and mooched off me.
I am a hard worker. If I lost my job, I'd pound pavement or at least make myself useful in the home. My parents instilled a good work ethic in me.
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.
