Relationship: am i being unreasonable?

Sounds like you want to put yourself before your partner and you don't want to fulfil your partners needs.

In this scenario it really sounds like your "space" is number 1 priority.

Great way to make a really unhappy partner.

If she sticks around she's probably going to be miserable and it will be a slow death of the relationship. That's my guess at least. But "feelings" tend to mess everything up. So what will happen is anyones' guess!

Sometimes people are just on different pages. Fine if you're just friends, if your mate doesn't want to hang out every weekend, hang out every other weekend. But she's your partner. Got to be on the same page...whatever that page looks like. Otherwise you've got to be awesome at repairing things when they all get F'd up because you are constantly pushing against each other.

You can't have competing priorities and expect things to play out nicely. She's backed off for now. But if #1 priority is being away from her and #2 priority is being with her, you're in for a rapidly weakening relationship now that things are getting long term and serious and her expectations are adjusting above and beyond those at the start of a relationship.

It's kind of like if your #1 priority was blowing money and your #2 priority was investing and growing money. What do you think your bank account will look like a year later?

 

Both of you have perfectly valid points of view.

On one hand maintaining independence is very valuable for some people. When you're together it's wonderful, but it's also nice to have your time apart for all sorts of reasons.

On the other hand, neither of you are getting younger and as people get older, finding a partner often gets more difficult. Time wasters may not be welcome in this scenario.

Add a combined total of 5 kids into the mix and things only get more complicated with arguments for and against moving in. This raises a good question, what's right for your kids?

It's a cliché, but a good one; communication and compromise are key to good relationships, whichever way you decide to go.

I love being married to my wife, we work well together and we've settled into a good routine of both independence and closeness that works well for us. We just seem to 'work'. We're both lucky to have each other. Honestly though, if I were single again, I don't know that I would remarry. It would be very difficult to find the right mix with someone else, no matter how great they were.

 

What 'needs'? Food, clothing, shelter? Those are needs. Those needs are being taken care of. She is asking that they live together. That is a want, not a need.

This is the way it should always be, for everyone, all the time. You can't properly look out for other people if you aren't looking after yourself first.

Firstly, he is not responsible for her happiness; she is. What about *his* happiness? Or does that not matter, because she's not getting what she wants? Is he supposed to sacrifice his happiness for hers?

His #1 priority is not 'being away from her', it is about having his own space. You guys (speaking generally, not you specifically Tim) just don't seem to be able to accept that *some* people need (yes, actually NEED) their own space, to have a bit of distance from the rest of the world. By discounting this, you're discounting another individuals' (potential) needs for the sake of pushing your agenda.

Look, I get that some people in this thread are all 'You're being selfish by not giving her what she wants'. In our society, we are raised to believe that men are supposed to sacrifice everything for a woman's happiness and that empathy flows downhill; from men, to women, to children.

TMNT, if this doesn't work out for whatever reason, then what that means is that the both of you have the opportunity to go out into the world and find prospective partners that are a better fit for each of you. Neither of you are at fault here for anything, it's merely that it may not be right for you both at this moment in your lives.

 

Not too sure why you are getting agro with me. But here it goes

I dont think 1 or 2 days per week space is too unreasonable. And i know youre not a woman but i dont like this "all or nothing" type of thinking. I can understand if i said i wanted to do fifo type of lifestyle for 5 years.

But yes. I do agree with your point about putting a bandaid over problem. The problem will eventually reappear and potentially larger

And yes we arent spring chickens. Oh btw she is older then me by 12............weeks

 

Yes if it doesnt work out it doesnt work out. No bitter feelings whatsoever. She is a great lady and i only wish the best for her

 

Woooooooo! Toy boy!

 

Nah no agro at all. I'm completely neutral to this, trust me.

Just stating fact. Relationships are simply a means of "relating" to another person. If you are on different pages you're no longer relatable.

Heck if she wasn't on the same page as you with something else, say for example she puts her friends before you, and is constantly cancelling dates with you so she can hang out with her own friends, then she has her priorities out of wack. Unless you are on the same page and you too believe friends should be put before your partner.

It's just the way people and relationships work. Looks like Mombius Hibachi wants to kick up a stink about that. But meh. I don't need to convince anyone here. I counsel people with relationship issues for 8 hrs a day 234 days a year at my job.

And before anyone tries to shoot holes in what I've shared, remember there is very little info and context to go off of here, and what I've shared is very general and may well look very different to the points I would make if given the full context.

Relationship counselling would be a good idea if you really like her and you want to reach an agreeable solution or find ways of working with the disagreement. Having an impartial mediator tends to be able to reflect on and share things that both parties find easier to swallow.

But anyway after working with people's relationships for many years, every single time someone puts something before their partner, they are in for trouble.

As for the needs you've got to provide for your partner. I don't actually mind the pop psych stuff that talks about needing: security, love and connection, & significance.

*From what you've shared (only basing this on that) you are making your partner feel insignificant when as her partner you should be the person in the world that makes her feel the most significant and important.

You are making her feel insecure when you are the person that should be making her feel most secure.

And you are making her feel unloved because you are putting something else in front of her.

Like it or not. That's what is happening. At least based on what you've shared.

Could be you've not shared the full picture and heaps of other stuff is going on. Who knows. But that's generally how peoples' brains work, male or female.

 

Also the question you asked at the start "am I being unreasonable?" just doesn't matter if you're actually interested in a happy relationship.

Whether you're "reasonable"(right) or she is being "reasonable"(right), doesn't matter. It's all about what's right for the relationship.

The cool thing about relationships is if you've found a decent person to have one with, if you invest in them they pay out ridiculously well. Like buying a property for $100 000 that doubles in value every 2 years.

But stop investing, or mismanage your investment, or pick the wrong initial investment, things are going to go poorly.

 

nice, wewll said, like a true psychatrist/psychologist

 

I think he means, 'Am I being immature, fearful, selfish and avoidant?' (We all relate.)

 

Problem is if you don't change your mind set you doomed for failure when it comes to relationships, it will just be a different person/different issue.



MTR

 

TMNT, here are a few posts from the great Rollo Tomassi, that you may wish to read and consider. To pre-empt the inevitable backlash, this guy has been married for 19 years to the same woman. So much for 'mindset'. The idea that you are destined to be alone, lest you surrender to her frame ('her' being any woman you get into a relationship with) is nonsense. In actual fact, you're almost certain to be alone *if* you surrender to her frame. As you'll see further down in this post and when you read the 'Just Get It' link.

-----------

http://therationalmale.com/tag/9-iron-rules-of-tomassi/

Women neither expect nor want a ‘Good Guy’ because he’s not believable, and his genuineness is always doubtable. That may sound jaded, but throw away any idea of being a ‘Good Guy’ balance of Alpha and Beta, because the Beta side of ‘good’ is so reinforced and common in men that it’s become the default template for women’s perception of you.

There is no Alpha with a side of Beta, there is only the man who’s genuine concern is first for himself, the man who prepares and provisions for himself, the man who maintains Frame to the point of arrogance because that’s who he is and what he genuinely merits. There is only the Man who improves his circumstance for his own benefit, and then, by association and merit, the benefit of those whom he loves and befriends.

That’s the Man who Just Gets It.

-----------

http://therationalmale.com/2012/08/22/just-get-it/

I’ve stated this before, but, having experienced the ups and downs of single-man-sex-life as well as married-man-sex-life, I can honestly say that I’ve never found Game more necessary than when it’s within the context of marriage. I’ve also written volumes about the all-risk proposition of marriage for men, and women’s utter inability to appreciate the all-risk sacrifices men assume in committing to marriage. So it should be obvious that under such conditions if a man chooses to entertain a lifestyle of marriage the only acceptable condition is that it be within his frame and his terms. And this, gentlemen, requires not only a commitment to Game itself, but an understanding of, and an internalization of a much tighter Game than would be necessary in single-man-sex-life.

-----------

The guy with the capacity to call a woman’s bluff with a confidence that implies she is to be worthy of him rather than the other way around is the Man to be competed for. Essentially the ‘chick speak’, ‘chick advice’ phenomenon is a **** test writ large on a social scale. And even your own mother and sisters are in on it, expecting you to ‘get it’; to get the message and see the challenge for what it really is, without overtly telling you.

She wants you to ‘get it’ on your own, without having to be told how. That initiative and the experience needed to have had developed it makes you a Man worth competing for. Women despise a man who needs to be told to be dominant. Overtly relating this to a guy entirely defeats his credibility as a genuinely dominant male. The guy she wants to f__k is dominant because that’s ‘the way he is’ instead of who she had to tell him to be.

Observing the process will change it. This is the root function of every s__t test ever devised by a woman. If masculinity has to be explained to a man, he’s not the man for her.

-----------

http://therationalmale.com/2011/11/14/appreciation/

I think what most men uniquely deceive themselves of is that they will ultimately be appreciated by women for their sacrifices. Learn this now; you wont. You can’t be because women fundamentally lack the ability to fully realize, much less appreciate the sacrifices a man makes to facilitate her reality. Even the most enlightened, appreciative woman you know still operates in a feminine-centric reality. Men making the personal sacrifices necessary to honor, respect and love her are commonplace. You’re supposed to do those things. You sacrificed your ambitions and potential to provide her with a better life? You were supposed to. You resisted temptation and didn’t cheat on your wife with the hot secretary who was DTF and ready to go? You were supposed to. Your responsibilities to maintaining a marriage, a home, your family, etc. are common – they’re expected. They are only appreciated in their absence.

-----------

Empathy flows downhill, buddy.

-----------

Also, here's something that is going to make a few heads explode. Virtually all women want a dominant, masculine man that they can follow (that's why empathy flows downhill; it's almost impossible to empathise with a leader and still have confidence in them as a leader). Most women will howl in protest at the assertion, but as the saying goes "Never listen to what a woman says, watch what she does". I know more than a few people will be thinking that I put that in there to stir the pot, but I didn't. It's absolutely 100% true. I know this from personal experience and having read thousands of accounts from men who do the same and from watching naturally dominant guys who maintain their frame attract women with relative ease. It's not politically correct to say it, but the truth is the truth.

 

You are entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that you are wrong. Besides saying that what you wrote isnt even worth addressing.

 

Sound familiar? Once again telling us all 'what women want.' Same post, different mask.

 

I thought this place was too mature for the alpha beta nonsense.

It belongs on bodybuilding forums filled with 20 year old narcissists.

 

It's a mix up isn't it.

-Now please note what I'm about to say are generalisations, and there are relationships with completely different dynamics.

In my opinion men need to be strong. But not for the reasons mombious put forward.

-Men don't need to be strong in order to boss the woman around so that the man can do whatever he wants.

-Men need to be strong so that they can offer the woman security and a sense of control. A woman doesn't want a guy to be a push over in life, because how secure would you feel tied to a partner like that?

I believe women are required to have the same strength, but there are generally slight differences between masculine and feminine strengths.

I know with my wife if we are facing hardships and she is upset, I remain strong and supportive. I may even push us in a certain direction if she is feeling overwhelmed. But I always do it with her wellbeing in mind. And I always take on board her feedback. When it comes to her wellbeing I am bloody minded.

For example my wife went to the doctors once because she had a bit of dermatitis around her nose. The steroid creams the doctors prescribed weren't working. I had access to medical journals at the time because I was a student and I did lots of research. I found that what my wife had was perioral dermatitis and that steroid creams on the face are a bad idea to treat this, as they just make it worse.

I printed out studies that showed eryacne antibiotic cream was the best treatment and showed incredible results. My wife went into the doctors office with all this information.

However my wife got really upset and the doctor didn't listen to her and just prescribed her the steroid cream again.

My wife came out of the office, she was upset, she told me what happened, she told me she just wanted to go home. Did I listen to my wife? Did I do what she wanted?

No. Of course not because that wasn't the best thing for her. I marched into the doctors office, told him what we needed and why, he wrote the prescription, we got the right cream, and the dermatitis was gone within a couple of days.

Sometimes guys have to be "masculine" and directive/bloody minded. But that's not a bad thing, not when it's done for the right reasons.

As for the strengths women have...I don't want to generalise too much. But I'll say what strengths my wife has: empathic, understanding, supportive, loving, caring, detail oriented, incredibly intelligent, self controlled, logical, faithful, trustworthy, and mindful of those she cares about.

This line cracked me up: "You sacrificed your ambitions and potential to provide her with a better life?"

My wife brings out my ambitions and potential. My wife supports it. My wife facilitates it. My wife motivates it. lol "sacrificed" I don't think so.

 

this is so cynical and negative. Why do you even want a relationship?