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.
My mom was talking to me and my older brother about relationships today, and she always says something that sticks out to me. She says that the biggest thing she learned from her first marriage (to my dad) is that people should always be with someone who loves you more than you love them. And its not the first time I have heard that. I heard SEVERAL people say this. She told me she was very in love with my dad but it wasn't enough to keep the marriage from crumbling. I won't go into detail but my mother left the marriage very broken hearted. She eventually learned that she doesn't want to be alone and wants companionship but wants to assure she can walk away without much heartbreak. She feels the only way she can get that is to be with someone more so for practicality on her side and more love on his side. She "loves" her current bf but she is absolutely okay with the fact that he is in love with her more than she is with him.
It seems a lot of people think this way and that they don't believe in love AND practicality coexisting on both sides. They say marrying for love is unwise and it's better to marry for compatibility/commitment and the love will just come. And a lot of people have married for this dynamic. For me personally, I couldn't imagine being in a lopsided relationship like that. Because in the past where men have obviously liked me and I didn't really feel anything towards them, them wanting to spend time with me and do things for me just kind of annoyed me. It just felt wrong. But maybe I'm misinterpreting this concept. But thinking about this has kind of made me reevaluate marriage and relationships entirely. Like I've gone through an awakening and realized a lot of what I believed about love and relationships was wrong. It's kind of fascinating to me. I know this can be interpreted in all kind of different ways and it's ultimately up to the individual to decide what's right for them.
So I pose the question to you CD fam. Do you believe being with someone who loves you more than you love them is realistic and being in a marriage where you're both madly in love with each other and are practical is just a fairy tale?
I've never been in an equal relationship. Because of my issues that weren't resolved yet, I ended up with men who didn't really love me. They were just settling. I have had very few relationships, and one marriage. I have been divorced for many years.
Yes, I have heard that thought as well, and considered it. I just don't think it's fair to the other person.
It's along the lines of "My mom always tells me it's just as easy to fall in love with a rich man as a poor man." I have found that to be untrue. I've had chances to marry rich men. I found the ones I knew to be too controlling.
My high school boyfriend loved me dearly, but we were too young and I wanted to see the world. I wasn't really in love. It wouldn't have been fair to him. He was also from a patriarchal family. That wouldn't have been good for me. He married on the rebound and is still married. I think they've grown into happiness. I didn't feel good when his best friend told me that the first man was hiding assets from his wife in case of a divorce (he had his own business). That was many years ago. I found out he went to our high school reunion at the last moment when he found out I wasn't going. Too bad, because he's such a sweet person and I would have enjoyed seeing him and his wife, but I understand it's touchy.
I believe in holding out for someone who is in the same amount of love with you as you are with them. It's hard to find in this day and age, but it IS possible and does happen.
I've heard this before but how do you quantify a feeling and say you feel more or less of it than another?
I also am not sure how you have a healthy relationship without love AND compatibility and commitment.
I think it also depends on what does love "look like" to you? Someone who isn't verbal in telling you they love you doesn't mean they don't. And someone who makes big displays of love and affection may be doing it for show. That's where the concept of the 5 Love Languages comes in, because we all have our own and sometimes they collide with other people's languages, but not out of malice, rather misunderstanding.
Dr. John Gray advises this as well, to women, to be with a man who is more interested in her than she is in him. The reason being that such a man would let the woman set the pace of the relationship, how soon sex happens, how often, and will be willing to commit to her. He is of the philosophy that women in general need commitment in order to be happy and fulfilled in relationship. And men in general are more adverse to commitment (due to the effects of testosterone, desiring novelty in sexual partners, less need for emotional closeness, etc.). So in order for a relationship to have a healthy dynamic which makes both partners happy, the man has to be more in love with the woman than vice versa.
A situation where the woman is more in love, she may be more willing to be a pushover, let him call the shots, sleep with him without commitment, let him get away with poor behavior, etc., and this leads to unhappy consequences for both parties. Whilst men are naturally adverse to commitment, they in fact do better when in committed relationships, because running around sleeping with different people outside of commitment, leads to confusion. Sex is an act that bonds people together naturally, and is best done within a commitment. <--- all this according to Dr. John Grey, and trying not to stereotype, but he bases his stereotypes on behavior which is driven by hormones, which are designated male hormone (testosterone, vasopressin, etc.), and female hormone (estrogen, prolactic, etc.)
I think he has a point. And, while I can't speak for men, I think men might prefer this dynamic too (when they are more in love with the woman than she is in love with him). When a man is just not that into a woman, it doesn't matter if she sends him dozens of roses every day, serenades him outside his window with love songs, etc. If he's not feeling that *POW* of attraction and chemistry and mad love for her, he's just going to feel annoyed by her romantic gestures imo.
Last edited by moongirl00; 06-09-2021 at 12:08 PM..
Not realistic, so just marry for the money. No such thing as true love, it's just about convenience. A lot of people are not happily married. So if you marry someone wealthy and end up miserably married atleast you will have lots of money to enjoy.
Last edited by possibleyou; 06-09-2021 at 01:25 PM..
Dr. John Gray advises this as well, to women, to be with a man who is more interested in her than she is in him. The reason being that such a man would let the woman set the pace of the relationship, how soon sex happens, how often, and will be willing to commit to her. He is of the philosophy that women in general need commitment in order to be happy and fulfilled in relationship. And men in general are more adverse to commitment (due to the effects of testosterone, desiring novelty in sexual partners, less need for emotional closeness, etc.). So in order for a relationship to have a healthy dynamic which makes both partners happy, the man has to be more in love with the woman than vice versa.
A situation where the woman is more in love, she may be more willing to be a pushover, let him call the shots, sleep with him without commitment, let him get away with poor behavior, etc., and this leads to unhappy consequences for both parties. Whilst men are naturally adverse to commitment, they in fact do better when in committed relationships, because running around sleeping with different people outside of commitment, leads to confusion. Sex is an act that bonds people together naturally, and is best done within a commitment. <--- all this according to Dr. John Grey, and trying not to stereotype, but he bases his stereotypes on behavior which is driven by hormones, which are designated male hormone (testosterone, vasopressin, etc.), and female hormone (estrogen, prolactic, etc.)
I think he has a point. When I am in a relationship with a man who is clearly into me, I feel more safe and settled in the relationship. When I sense the guy is not as into me as I am into him, I tend to feel more anxious, feel the desire to "police" him, need to control, etc. My best relationships have been those in which the man was more committed and more "into" me. And, I can't speak for men, but I think men might prefer this dynamic too. When a man is just not that into a woman, it doesn't matter if she sends him dozens of roses every day, serenades him outside his window with love songs, etc. If he's not feeling that *POW* of attraction and chemistry and mad love for her, he's just going to feel annoyed by her romantic gestures imo.
That's interesting because it's the opposite for me. I get annoyed when the dynamic is one sided. Like recently, there was this person who liked me and wanted to talk/hang out constantly, but I was not feeling it. So I can't imagine being married like that, but that's just me. I think if the person mainly wants security, then I can see them choosing the dynamic.
Do different stages of our life affect what we need? At 21yrs old, I did NOT want to be someone's everything. A person, who loved me more than I loved them, would have felt way too needy.
But oh my, when I got older, having a person, who got so much joy just by enveloping me in a gentle full-body hug and was so interested in hearing about my day; was just about the loveliest thing on earth!
That's interesting because it's the opposite for me. I get annoyed when the dynamic is one sided. Like recently, there was this person who liked me and wanted to talk/hang out constantly, but I was not feeling it. So I can't imagine being married like that, but that's just me. I think if the person mainly wants security, then I can see them choosing the dynamic.
Well, you still have to be into the person, of course. Him being more into you doesn't mean you are not into him at all. He is just *more* into you than you are into him.
Oh, do I have thoughts on this. This question about sums up my journey through sex, love, and relationships.
In my teenage explorations, I fell into feels a handful of times, when I was with someone I could have really loved...but they did not reciprocate, and my heart got broken. More often, the boy developed a puppy love for me, and I did not reciprocate and didn't even want a relationship with the dude and broke his heart. Then along came husband #1.
He loved me far, far more than I loved him. In an idealized way. It made me feel secure and powerful, sure. I had myself well convinced for a long time that it was a good deal. I had no insecurity about him looking at other women, because I was safe on my pedestal. He could not break my heart, because my heart was not truly in it. And in a sense all of that was true. Except... I felt that the "me" he loved was the IDEA he had of me and not the real me. I felt cold and sometimes full of contempt because of the uneven power situation. I did fall in love with our children and the concept of our family, and his attachment to ME and not THAT did in fact make me feel heartbroken a lot. Hearing him say that if there was a fire, he'd rescue me before the kids because we can make more kids? WTF?? No, the kids come first. Way, way first. I was unhappy because he was not committed to the boys and the family and he was unhappy because I was not emotionally committed to him. But so long as I did not stray, he could believe I was simply lacking in libido or not a romantic person. That it was my overall personality, not how I felt about him specifically. Well, I wasn't looking at anybody else and all of my sexuality and romantic feelings were seriously suppressed, so I guess he was kind of right. But that did not mean I was actually incapable of those things. I just did not love him in that way.
Maybe the thought that what he was in love with was a construct of his own making, was how I excused, rationalized, or justified staying with him even knowing that I did not love him that much. Like yeah, but the love he's got for me, it's not REALLY genuine, is it? So whatever.
We got on for nearly two decades like that. We did accomplish some impressive things as a team, and we were not always miserable. It was only occasionally awful.
But I did not believe in reciprocal love because I'd never seen it or experienced it. Not with my parents or other family or any friends or their families... I thought it was an impossible dream. A fairy tale. That I was best off with a man who loved me deeply and whom I could at least tolerate. Until I couldn't. And I can be honest enough to admit that maybe the way I felt and acted towards him was part of the push that led to his breaking point, but I don't think that anything justifies his violence there at the end. I'm just willing to admit that I was not a great spouse, either. I did my best but I don't think it ever could have been enough...just because I couldn't MAKE myself feel what he needed me to feel.
I left that marriage thinking that the pattern would always be the same. Either the partner, or I, would love more. Whoever loves the least, has the most power. Whoever loves the most, will get their heart broken. Just how it is.
Which led to a funny/cute thing happening. When I started to really feel love for my boyfriend at the time, I told him, "Well, I'm prepared to tell you, I think I've fallen in love with you. This is scary to me, because it makes me feel vulnerable. It means I'll be the one who gets hurt. But I think you're worth it, so...I'll stick it out until that day."
We had this conversation over fried ice cream at a Mexican restaurant. I'll never forget. He said, "I feel the same way."
Now we are married. And sometimes I am scared, it's hard to believe...like surely this is too good to be true. Maybe he will wake up one day and have lost his passion for me. I mean I'm better than nothing and I guess I'm good enough, but that's not REAL love, right? I doubt what I've got, because I believed so much for so long that it was not possible. Then he will look at me and tell me how much he loves me, how lucky he feels and how much he appreciates me being in his life, and it feels so real. In those moments I feel whole, like my heart and soul are full of champagne bubbles. It's incredible.
I don't know if real reciprocal love is rare. It was rare for me. Maybe other people are more easily able to find it, maybe a lot of people are less emotionally complicated, or maybe all of the long marriages of the past were cases where one or both just tolerated one another and they simply did not talk about how they truly felt, or they lied. I have no idea. All I know is that I finally did get to experience it and I don't think I'll ever stop feeling very lucky to have done so.
Oh, do I have thoughts on this. This question about sums up my journey through sex, love, and relationships.
In my teenage explorations, I fell into feels a handful of times, when I was with someone I could have really loved...but they did not reciprocate, and my heart got broken. More often, the boy developed a puppy love for me, and I did not reciprocate and didn't even want a relationship with the dude and broke his heart. Then along came husband #1.
He loved me far, far more than I loved him. In an idealized way. It made me feel secure and powerful, sure. I had myself well convinced for a long time that it was a good deal. I had no insecurity about him looking at other women, because I was safe on my pedestal. He could not break my heart, because my heart was not truly in it. And in a sense all of that was true. Except... I felt that the "me" he loved was the IDEA he had of me and not the real me. I felt cold and sometimes full of contempt because of the uneven power situation. I did fall in love with our children and the concept of our family, and his attachment to ME and not THAT did in fact make me feel heartbroken a lot. Hearing him say that if there was a fire, he'd rescue me before the kids because we can make more kids? WTF?? No, the kids come first. Way, way first. I was unhappy because he was not committed to the boys and the family and he was unhappy because I was not emotionally committed to him. But so long as I did not stray, he could believe I was simply lacking in libido or not a romantic person. That it was my overall personality, not how I felt about him specifically. Well, I wasn't looking at anybody else and all of my sexuality and romantic feelings were seriously suppressed, so I guess he was kind of right. But that did not mean I was actually incapable of those things. I just did not love him in that way.
Maybe the thought that what he was in love with was a construct of his own making, was how I excused, rationalized, or justified staying with him even knowing that I did not love him that much. Like yeah, but the love he's got for me, it's not REALLY genuine, is it? So whatever.
We got on for nearly two decades like that. We did accomplish some impressive things as a team, and we were not always miserable. It was only occasionally awful.
But I did not believe in reciprocal love because I'd never seen it or experienced it. Not with my parents or other family or any friends or their families... I thought it was an impossible dream. A fairy tale. That I was best off with a man who loved me deeply and whom I could at least tolerate. Until I couldn't. And I can be honest enough to admit that maybe the way I felt and acted towards him was part of the push that led to his breaking point, but I don't think that anything justifies his violence there at the end. I'm just willing to admit that I was not a great spouse, either. I did my best but I don't think it ever could have been enough...just because I couldn't MAKE myself feel what he needed me to feel.
I left that marriage thinking that the pattern would always be the same. Either the partner, or I, would love more. Whoever loves the least, has the most power. Whoever loves the most, will get their heart broken. Just how it is.
Which led to a funny/cute thing happening. When I started to really feel love for my boyfriend at the time, I told him, "Well, I'm prepared to tell you, I think I've fallen in love with you. This is scary to me, because it makes me feel vulnerable. It means I'll be the one who gets hurt. But I think you're worth it, so...I'll stick it out until that day."
We had this conversation over fried ice cream at a Mexican restaurant. I'll never forget. He said, "I feel the same way."
Now we are married. And sometimes I am scared, it's hard to believe...like surely this is too good to be true. Maybe he will wake up one day and have lost his passion for me. I mean I'm better than nothing and I guess I'm good enough, but that's not REAL love, right? I doubt what I've got, because I believed so much for so long that it was not possible. Then he will look at me and tell me how much he loves me, how lucky he feels and how much he appreciates me being in his life, and it feels so real. In those moments I feel whole, like my heart and soul are full of champagne bubbles. It's incredible.
I don't know if real reciprocal love is rare. It was rare for me. Maybe other people are more easily able to find it, maybe a lot of people are less emotionally complicated, or maybe all of the long marriages of the past were cases where one or both just tolerated one another and they simply did not talk about how they truly felt, or they lied. I have no idea. All I know is that I finally did get to experience it and I don't think I'll ever stop feeling very lucky to have done so.
Much respect to you Sonic. I think you have a very healthy way of processing your feelings. I think it's important to enjoy them for what they are and be willing to let them go when they have run their course. A lot of people struggle to do that and may stay hung up for years. I know this from experience. I hope it all continues to workout for you.
Last edited by Auraliea; 06-09-2021 at 02:27 PM..
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.
