Equitable relationships...
Poll: Equitable relationships...
Total Members Polled: 48
Discussion
Someone was telling me that for a relationship to be successful in the long-term the relationship must be equitable. A simple example is the man is very wealthy and the woman has a great body. A less simple example could be the man makes the woman feel good through humour, a good conversation and the woman has a similar sense of humour and also is a great conversationalist plus has a nice rack. 
And importantly, when the relationship becomes unbalanced (rich man loses his job or hot wife eats lots of pies), the relationship dies.
Discuss.
And importantly, when the relationship becomes unbalanced (rich man loses his job or hot wife eats lots of pies), the relationship dies.Discuss.
Edited by ShadownINja on Tuesday 12th January 18:48
t!"musclecarmad said:
truly 100% don't believe relationships work out long term - people may stick with them out of habit.
Funny you say that. I have come around to the thinking that the only way you can say a marriage has been successful is when one of the partners has died! It's like in share trading... some are of the view that even successful traders are lucky and that long-term you cannot be profitable. So death is the only way to prove that you were profitable. Maybe. 
ewenm said:
I think you can easily over-analyse this sort of thing.
Well, I have a habit of doing that.Thing is, if a relationship is unbalanced, then perhaps one person is insecure and needs the other person so the other person can take advantage of the insecure one and thus doesn't need physical attributes to be good... I do know of a waster who's dating a hotty... everyone thinks she can get better than him but she's very insecure so he's on to a winner. That said, it's a sample of one so hardly scientific.
Mattt said:
Ta!ETA: Amusing. Dunno how true a lot of that is. Only a woman could say but would she ever admit it.
Edited by ShadownINja on Tuesday 12th January 21:11
MitchT said:
I agree that a relationship has to be equitable... in so much as each partner has to be the other's natural "other half". To what extent that balance is achieved via financial, physical, intellectual, sexual, conversational, etc. means is, I guess, unique to each partnership.
that sums it up for me. When it stops being equitable then it's time to make changesMitchT said:
I agree that a relationship has to be equitable... in so much as each partner has to be the other's natural "other half". To what extent that balance is achieved via financial, physical, intellectual, sexual, conversational, etc. means is, I guess, unique to each partnership.
Good answer 
I do, however, hold some belief in the '7 year itch' theory.
Says the man getting married this year!
I disagree.
The equitable relationship idea is a modern fad driven by PC ideology as opposed to sense.
A relationship is akin to a box of a given volume. There is only so much that you can fit into the box.
Each person in the relationship adds to the box.
A person with a big personality, or big ego, or big ambition fills a lot of the box up, maybe more than half.
If the other person in the relationship is equally big, the box overflows and the relationship fails.
Two giant personalities / ego's rarely stay together.
Two small personalities mean the box is not full and the relationship remains unfulfilling for one or both.
A successful relationship (and by that i only mean one that stays together) is one where a big personality is matched by a smaller one so the box is only just full OR where two people have equal sized personalities.
Typically the big loud person with the smaller quiet person.
The equitable relationship idea is a modern fad driven by PC ideology as opposed to sense.
A relationship is akin to a box of a given volume. There is only so much that you can fit into the box.
Each person in the relationship adds to the box.
A person with a big personality, or big ego, or big ambition fills a lot of the box up, maybe more than half.
If the other person in the relationship is equally big, the box overflows and the relationship fails.
Two giant personalities / ego's rarely stay together.
Two small personalities mean the box is not full and the relationship remains unfulfilling for one or both.
A successful relationship (and by that i only mean one that stays together) is one where a big personality is matched by a smaller one so the box is only just full OR where two people have equal sized personalities.
Typically the big loud person with the smaller quiet person.
Edited by Swilly on Wednesday 13th January 08:27
Swilly said:
A relationship will be successful if one party is willing to give without recieving and the other to take without giving.
A very cynical view.I (we) find that our relationship works (I can't comment on anyone else's) because we both want to give to the other, which ultimately results in us sharing everything.
I'd go along with Jasandjules :
Jasandjules said:
Each side has to give and take. Each party has to change a little. That's it.
Concise, simple and accurate!SurreyMustang said:
Swilly said:
A relationship will be successful if one party is willing to give without recieving and the other to take without giving.
A very cynical view.I (we) find that our relationship works (I can't comment on anyone else's) because we both want to give to the other, which ultimately results in us sharing everything.
I'd go along with Jasandjules :
Jasandjules said:
Each side has to give and take. Each party has to change a little. That's it.
Concise, simple and accurate!A person who is happy to give and is fulfilled by their partner enjoying their effort and doesn't need anything else in return is afterall happy.
The modern equitable relationship that you refer to is very fragile and susceptible to the instability that comes when one parties requirement differs radically from the others. i.e. a midlife crisis, a change of ambition, wanting children or not etc etc
An equitable relationship also has a tendency to constrain both parties which can lead to tension.
I personally believe in tolerant relationships whereby you do not impose an equitable yoke on each other but on the contrary allow total freedom of expression and direction and practice tolerance of each other. I will give give give if it is in my nature, makes sense at the time and in the situation etc etc not because of any other overriding requirement.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff