I argue with him as much as necessary to make him know I'm boss. And when he shows signs of forgetting this fact, I bicker a little more.
I argue with him as much as necessary to make him know I'm boss. And when he shows signs of forgetting this fact, I bicker a little more.
Wrong... wrote:
Ima Grownup wrote:
^ This
You often here the cliché that all good relationships require work. Personally, I think that is a ridiculous rationalization dreamed up by people who are too insecure to let go of bad relationships. Bottom line, if you have to "work" at a relationship (which typically includes the task of arguing), then you are with the wrong person.
Completely and utterly wrong
So what are you going to do when the relationship goes through its rough edges? When it starts to get challenging? When you gave to solve problems? That constitutes as "work" as well, and its pivotal to having a healthy relationship
And it WILL happen, because that's how life works, and the presupposition that whoever you meet is going to be the perfect soulmate for you where no problems occur whatsoever and you both agree on nearly everything and that everything is "sunshine and rainbows" is not only foolish, but downright stupid, and life will eventually come knocking and you wont be prepared
I think its a ridiculous rationalization to think that good relationships just "Come to you naturally and you dont have to work to get there". That thought coincides with movies and cartoons. Real life doesnt work that way. Relationships require work, because its apart of life and life in itself is a strife and people will always have different opinions on things and do things that make you feel uncomfortable or annoyed. But if you can find meaning and rich value in the relationship such that the work is worth it, and you're both striving towards it, then that my friend is a pretty health relationship. Because what that means is that you acknowledge each others positives and negatives and still accept each other for who you/they are and you are both moving towards a better world together. It doesnt meant that you fight and bicker with your mate, that isnt what Im saying - healthy communication is very important in a relationship - but to say that not striving to "work" towards a good relationship is not a "right relationship" is just so asinine It makes me want to vomit
It's certainly your right to talk yourself into believing the crap you're preaching, but my guess is that your are trying to make yourself feel better because you're in a less-than-perfect relationship. I'm not bending. If you're in a relationship that has "rough edges," "challenges" or any other sort of conflict, then you are - quite simply - in the wrong relationship.
I believe you are also operating under the ridiculous notion that we're supposed to be tied to one person for life. That is just stupid. People change, and there is nothing wrong with letting someone go when you are no longer compatible with that person. I would rather go through life enjoying a series of good, short-term relationships than to be stuck in misery for a lifetime because I'm adhering to an outdated societal concept that we have to work through struggles with a mate.
Bottom line, I have to work through problems and make uncomfortable compromises every day of my life when dealing with co-workers and the general population. There is no reason why I need to endure that nonsense in my personal relationships too.
"People change, and there is nothing wrong with letting someone go when you are no longer compatible with that person. I would rather go through life enjoying a series of good, short-term relationships than to be stuck in misery for a lifetime because I'm adhering to an outdated societal concept that we have to work through struggles with a mate."
Please be fair and transparent upfront by telling that to any new woman you want to date and see how fast she runs. You are exactly what is wrong with the dating world. A quitter and a coward. Only promiscuous women are ok with short-term relationships.
Not A_Grown_Up wrote:
"People change, and there is nothing wrong with letting someone go when you are no longer compatible with that person. I would rather go through life enjoying a series of good, short-term relationships than to be stuck in misery for a lifetime because I'm adhering to an outdated societal concept that we have to work through struggles with a mate."
Please be fair and transparent upfront by telling that to any new woman you want to date and see how fast she runs. You are exactly what is wrong with the dating world. A quitter and a coward. Only promiscuous women are ok with short-term relationships.
First of all, I am neither a quitter nor a coward. The fact that I choose when I deem it worthy or not to immerse myself into miserable situations does not merit either description. I have no problem being up front about my relationship goals. Sometimes it results in two dates, sometimes in two months, occasionally two years. Why would I not be honest from the start? Those types of games are for those of you who seek drama and pain in your relationships.
Arguing is normal and if done in an occasional and respectful way, it can be a healthy part of a relationship. The real death knell to any relationship is when you don't even bother to argue about things that upset you. Arguing per se is not an omen.
But that's what quitters do, they deem something not worthy of their time and they quit. Marathons can be grueling, but you can stick through it until the end, or perhaps quit maybe halfway to 3/4 of the way through, or maybe even earlier. You're definitely not a winner.
Usually daily over stupid stuff. But it’s like we are at the point where it’s agree to disagree and just stfu. If my partner starts the arguments or nagging I just ignore at this point. Like yea yea bye... onto my life
LennyZ wrote:
I have been married for 22 years. I think a lot of this comes down to personality and role modelling. I know that I grew up with parents (who are still married today) that would raise their voices and have disputes every day. My wife's parents were the same way. Most of this was day-to-day stupid stuff. There would be a flare up and then things would calm down almost immediately and everyone moves on. None of these squabbles ever escalated to "I hate you" or "you are stupid", and were in the category of "I thought you were going to clean the kitchen before I got home from work? You let me down.". I remember having friends come over to my house in high school and say... "man, your parents argue a lot." I never really thought about it. It was a healthy way to vent off some stress in my home. Grudges were never kept and nobody ever brought these things up again after they were over. Often times the source was lack of sleep, hunger, or work anxiety and it was just a way to vent general frustration with life. Other people have different styles and traditions that work for them. Some never argue and somehow that seems to work (with my personality, I don't know how some people don't argue, but they don't).
If arguments turn into fights, and the couple goes to bed angry/not talking, then IMO that is not healthy. Arguing and fighting can be healthy as long as the couple can quickly move past it and understand that the source of the argument was not really the other person, just a general stress level in life that needed to be released in some way.
I have always found the right response to be, "she is really stressed about something, not me. She can't lash out at whatever the source of this problem is at work or not enough sleep, etc. I should try to help her to relax, take some load off her, and not take this personally." That is hard to do when someone is accusing you of something, but if you can see it clearly for what it is, you will succeed.
P.S. As I get older, I also treat people with road rage the same way. I used to get angry and "fight back" when I got cut off in traffic. Now I think, "this person must be totally stressed to the gills for some reason. I need to get out of their way and help them move on." Again, easier said than done with my competitive, somewhat aggressive mindset.
Lenny Z --- You have it right. My sister has been married for 40+ years. They might argue and it might even get loud for a few seconds. But it's over quick. I am getting better with traffic///lol
Pope Pie Us the Strawberry Rhubarb wrote:
Fred A Stair wrote:
I must ask, did you both have premarital sex? Do you think that had anything to do with your eventual breakup?
Why do you feel as you do? (Since divorce and breakups are far more common today than they were in the ~ say 1920s ~
it seems to me this is a valid argument against this act.)
Do you have any statistics to support this claim?
Maybe marriages lasted longer because the average life expectancy in 1920 was around 54 years versus 73-79 years today.
Premarital sex is not a new concept.
https://academic.oup.com/maghis/article-abstract/18/4/9/940067"During the US colonial period, premarital sex was publicly frowned upon but privately condoned to an extent. Unmarried teenagers were often allowed to spend the night in bed together, though some measures such as bundling were sometimes attempted to prevent sexual intercourse. Even though premarital sex was somewhat condoned, having a child outside wedlock was not. If a pregnancy resulted from premarital sex, the young couple were expected to marry. Marriage and birth records from the late 1700s reveal that between 30 and 40 percent of New England brides were pregnant before marriage"
"
It was not unusual for courting couples in late eighteenth-century New England to spend the night with each other—often in their parents' homes and with their parents' permission. Andrew Burnaby, a young Englishman who was traveling through the North American colonies in 1759–1760, reported as follows: “At their usual time the old couple retire to bed, leaving the young ones to settle matters as they can, who after having sat up as long as they think proper, get into bed also, but without pulling off their undergarments, in order to prevent scandal” (1). Other visitors from abroad noted with astonishment that parents generally knew about and condoned these overnight visits. The young couples in question were not necessarily even betrothed—they had sometimes known each other for only a brief time. "
It's possible to find almost anything on the internet about anything. Note that you did have to use the word
"astonishment," in your quote. That would indicate that it was not normal. Today it's normal for girlfriends and
boyfriends to have sex before marriage. We do not even bat an eye. Obviously you disagree with me. Most
people do. That does not mean it's the right thing or even common sense!!! By the way if Fred A Stair was alive
today he would indeed "A Stare."
asdgasdfasdfdsf wrote:
Fred A Stair wrote:[/
I must ask, did you both have premarital sex? Do you think that had anything to do with your eventual breakup?
Why do you feel as you do? (Since divorce and breakups are far more common today than they were in the ~ say 1920s ~
it seems to me this is a valid argument against this act.)
Are you asking me or the op or both? I wasn’t married, and we broke up because of other issues. If we had been married we might have stayed together but been unhappy.
Obviously most people who meet in their teens, 20s, or 30s do not have much life experience.
They do not have experience in relationships. Another thing that happens is we do not have time to
sit back and say, "what have I been doing wrong in my relationships?"
Most of us (both men and women) are incredibly dumb when they are young. This is for everything.
That is why I am a proponent of getting to know the person outside of sex before getting serious.
Few do that today. You had to do it in yesteryears because it was not acceptable to do otherwise.
Obviously there are other factors such as having Feminism as we have today.
There is something about the Bible that can make a difference in relationships. It is meant to be a
guidebook for our lives. How many of us use it?