Ideal Husband

musicmonky

true or untrue.

h

remember to marry a ugly guy wimmins which I have mentioned in previous post

LolaLuv

Ha, I agreed with everything he said! Especially the last bit about how it eliminated everyone. Oh well, I'd honestly never get married than be stuck in a miserable relationship.

And I agree with your marrying an ugly man thing. I think it's important for the man to be more head over heels for the woman than vice versa.

PillyPen

PillyPen wrote: »

Ha, I agreed with everything he said! Especially the last bit about how it eliminated everyone. Oh well, I'd honestly never get married than be stuck in a miserable relationship.

And I agree with your marrying an ugly man thing. I think it's important for the man to be more head over heels for the woman than vice versa.

The only criteria that you need to arry someone is mutual long lasting love.

The Sweeper

Deleted User wrote: »

The only criteria that you need to arry someone is mutual long lasting love.

Indeed.

Everything proceeds magnificently, and then life gets in the way.

Copy and paste the details from the link.

Love is over rated. You need a mutual desire to make a relationship work work.

LolaLuv

Deleted User wrote: »

The only criteria that you need to arry someone is mutual long lasting love.

Well, where I'm from money is the #1 cause of divorce, so I guess that's not entirely true, is it?

nomorebadtown

meh, if you live your life chasing money than certainly, it will infect your marriage and probably destroy it. i know thats easy to say and since money is the great driving force in most peoples lives its pretty unavoidable but as long as you recognise the difference between your desire for money and your need for money and weigh that up against your love for your spouse, as long as you actually do love your husband/wife with all your heart/soul/body/mind you should be ok. if the accumulation of wealth is more of a consuming passion than your relationship then yes, your marriage is screwed.

LolaLuv

Seems a little naive to think that money can be ignored as long as you realize you separate want from need. I think most people marry for love, without the intent to get rich off one another, and if those people are divorcing each other for financial reasons then there must be more to making a marriage work than love. It might not even be money in the sense that there isn't enough of it, but if one spouse spends a ton of money and the other is frugal, that can definitely cause enough friction to end a marriage, no matter how much they love each other.

Money also becomes a lot more important when one has kids, bills, retirements, etc. to take care of. It does become a need, as opposed to just a want. It has nothing to do with gold-digging, as you implied.

nomorebadtown

I think that would be a fair stance to take if you look at marriages in the past. However, these days people court and live together for years before they marry. In the situation you point out - the frugal person will know that the other spends tons of money and if that is something which does not sit well with them, they should not get married.

Of course people change. For example if a wife suddenly starts spending money left, right and centre - this may be a big source of friction for her husband, who was always very sensible with money. However, this is not 'money's fault' - it is the fact that the wife has changed which creates the difficulty.

Naturally money matters in terms of kids, bills, retirements and yes these are all definite needs and if these needs are not met, of course there will be big problems in the marriage. However, taking five foreign holidays a year, driving a flash car and going to swanky restaurants every weekend are not needs. They are wants. And if, for one half of the couple, the fulfilment of these desires become more important than the relationship - yes, the marriage is in trouble. I'm not being naive, i just think people need to get their priorities in order. I'm not judging people for wanting nice things - we all do - but what happened to making compromise and sacrifice in the name of being with the person you love? If this makes me an idiot, fine.

LolaLuv

nomorebadtown wrote: »

Naturally money matters in terms of kids, bills, retirements and yes these are all definite needs and if these needs are not met, of course there will be big problems in the marriage. However, taking five foreign holidays a year, driving a flash car and going to swanky restaurants every weekend are not needs. They are wants. And if, for one half of the couple, the fulfilment of these desires become more important than the relationship - yes, the marriage is in trouble. I'm not being naive, i just think people need to get their priorities in order. I'm not judging people for wanting nice things - we all do - but what happened to making compromise and sacrifice in the name of being with the person you love? If this makes me an idiot, fine.

Heeeyyyyyy, I never called you an idiot! That's not fair, and I don't think that. Anyway, I agree with this point, but I don't think it's the need for flashy cars and such that makes marriages ends in most cases, but rather basic differences about where money should go and how much should be saved, etc.

nomorebadtown wrote: »

I think that would be a fair stance to take if you look at marriages in the past. However, these days people court and live together for years before they marry. In the situation you point out - the frugal person will know that the other spends tons of money and if that is something which does not sit well with them, they should not get married.

This might be true to a point, but marriages that are preceded by living together have a higher rate of divorce, because it's more difficult to extricate oneself from the situation, and it seems to the couple that they have to get married, etc.

nomorebadtown wrote: »

Of course people change. For example if a wife suddenly starts spending money left, right and centre - this may be a big source of friction for her husband, who was always very sensible with money. However, this is not 'money's fault' - it is the fact that the wife has changed which creates the difficulty.

I'm not sure if it's necessarily that people change, or simply that their feelings change. I don't think most people enter marriages blindly. I think usually people know what the differences are, but think they love one another enough to overcome them. Then when the fuzzy felings wear off, they're left dealing with the problems they initially were able to overlook, and the burden can become too much.

As a point of interest, I just asked my mom, who is absolutely not a gold-digger or big-spender by any means (makes more than her husband, as a matter of fact), if she thinks love is all a marriage needs to succeed, and her response was "and money".

ferdi

i have absolutely no statistics or figues to back this up but i would imagine that it is people of middle socio-economic circumstance who are most likely to get divorced - not the people who are really quite poor. Going by your logic, pillypen, marriages between people who have very little money will never last because their financial wants and needs are rarely will rarely be met. But i would tend to go along with the premise that people in poorer marriages are more likely to be happy with what they've got and stick together rather than always covetting what the don't have and feeling that they deserve more and are 'worth it'. Two important words here would be 'expectaion' and 'contentment'. Ambition is good when it drives you to excel but not when it makes you forget what brought you together in the first place.

LolaLuv

I don't have any facts for that either. I suppose it's possible that they want less, but I know several low-income couples who discuss money constantly, despite the fact that they don't have it. However, the fact that they have so little means they can't argue about how it's spent; it's just assumed that it goes to the necessities. I don't know, that's just a possibility. It would be nice to have some figures, but I imagine the divorce rate is pretty similar across demographics. I have an impoverished friend who's separated from her husband and considers herself divorced. But she isn't because she can't afford one. Maybe that's also a factor; divorces are expensive.

musicmonky

so the husband should not be better looking than the woman and have a good bit of money. I suppose that means it even then......

money has been discussed Ad nauseam in a previous thread

here

DublinWriter

Moonbaby wrote: »

Love is over rated. You need a mutual desire to make a relationship work work.

Not even close.

You need a mutual tolerance of finding each other's dirty smalls scattered around the bedroom floor.

DublinWriter

DublinWriter wrote: »

Not even close.

You need a mutual tolerance of finding each other's dirty smalls scattered around the bedroom floor.

Bullshiote.

Aren't you single anyway?

The Sweeper

A fight about money in a marriage is a fight about control and respect.

You have a finite resource. One of you probably accumulates more of that resource than the other one. You may both have different attitudes to how that resource should therefore be split.

Lets pretend it's bananas.

The husband grows 100 bananas in a week, where his wife only grows 10. The husband feeds their children 10 of his bananas, and barters another 40 to pay for the house and the car. He has 50 bananas left. His wife has 10.

This follows:

H: "Yum yum! I have 50 bananas!"
W: "Are you going to eat all of those yourself?"
H: "Well yes, I was actually."
W: "That's a lot of bananas for one person. I was hoping you'd give some to me."
H: "What? I work very hard for these bananas! If you want more you should try growing more yourself."
W: "I'd love to grow more bananas, but we turned three quarters of my plantation space into a playground for our kids."
H: "Oh hey listen, that playground was YOUR idea."
W: "Well, maybe we should send the kids to the island central playground and I'll turn my plantation back into a plantation and grow bananas."
H: "Hey I'm not giving the island central playground any of my bananas to look after OUR kids just so you can grow more of your own bananas! Anyway, 10 bananas is more than enough for one woman in a week."
W: "That's not the point. What if it's a special occasion, and I'd like to celebrate by treating myself to an extra banana split?"
H: "Maybe you should put some of your weekly bananas aside then."
W: "You're exasperating! For your information, I HAVE put some of my weekly bananas aside. For the last four weeks, I've given two bananas a week to Jo who runs the ferry to the neighbouring island."
H: "...what did you do that for?"
W: "We need a holiday. YOU need a holiday, after all you say yourself you're working hard on the plantation."
H: "Well, how many more bananas is this holiday going to cost?"
W: "It's about 200 bananas in total for you and me and the kids."
H: "What?? 200 bananas?? You really should have asked me first!"
W: "If I asked you you'd have just said no. Anyway, I know you have the bananas, you keep them out in your plantation shed, they're doing nothing, you can afford to give some to Jo."
H: "I'm not happy about this at all. What if I wanted those bananas for something else?"
W: "What else could you possibly do with 200 bloody bananas? You're so mean! If I had 200 bananas I'd HAPPILY give them to Jo so we could have a holiday!"
H: "Yes but you don't have 200 bananas and you don't have a plantation to even GET 200 bananas, and I work very hard for my bananas, THAT'S my point!!"
W: "Oh screw you and your bananas! Eat them all yourself then, and turn into a FAT BASTARD!"


(...that was possibly more fun to write than was merited by the relevancy of its point, but hey.)

LOL!!

LolaLuv

Lolol, that was awesome. You should write a book about banana management in marriage.

musicmonky

being a monky im glad the topic i started went from husbands to bananas.

Buy the way im out of yellow bendy tubes of fruit.

DublinWriter

Moonbaby wrote: »

Bullshiote.

Aren't you single anyway?

Nope. Sorry to burst your bubble.

DublinWriter

DublinWriter wrote: »

Nope. Sorry to burst your bubble.

In fairness dirty socks might very well be make or break for you and many others.

I'm an easygoing, adaptable, make love not war woman. I'm simply not bothered by the small stuff.

doonothing

PillyPen wrote: »

And I agree with your marrying an ugly man thing. I think it's important for the man to be more head over heels for the woman than vice versa.

That's... horrible... What a thing to think, I don't even know where to start...

LolaLuv

Lolol, yeah it's mostly in jest, but the couples I've seen where the man is hideous and the woman is gorgeous do tend to make the woman pretty happy. Hell of a price to pay though.

And I do think if a girl isn't into a man, things can possibly change it, but it's more difficult for a man to change his initial feelings. That's based on observations, who knows if it's true. Most people don't strategically plan their next relationship and I don't either.

Black Swan

musicmonky wrote: »

remember to marry a ugly guy wimmins

The One will have many qualities, but I cannot deny physical attraction as an important part.

Reku

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

A fight about money in a marriage is a fight about control and respect.

You have a finite resource. One of you probably accumulates more of that resource than the other one. You may both have different attitudes to how that resource should therefore be split.

Lets pretend it's bananas.

The husband grows 100 bananas in a week, where his wife only grows 10. The husband feeds their children 10 of his bananas, and barters another 40 to pay for the house and the car. He has 50 bananas left. His wife has 10.

This follows:

H: "Yum yum! I have 50 bananas!"
W: "Are you going to eat all of those yourself?"
H: "Well yes, I was actually."
W: "That's a lot of bananas for one person. I was hoping you'd give some to me."
H: "What? I work very hard for these bananas! If you want more you should try growing more yourself."
W: "I'd love to grow more bananas, but we turned three quarters of my plantation space into a playground for our kids."
H: "Oh hey listen, that playground was YOUR idea."
W: "Well, maybe we should send the kids to the island central playground and I'll turn my plantation back into a plantation and grow bananas."
H: "Hey I'm not giving the island central playground any of my bananas to look after OUR kids just so you can grow more of your own bananas! Anyway, 10 bananas is more than enough for one woman in a week."
W: "That's not the point. What if it's a special occasion, and I'd like to celebrate by treating myself to an extra banana split?"
H: "Maybe you should put some of your weekly bananas aside then."
W: "You're exasperating! For your information, I HAVE put some of my weekly bananas aside. For the last four weeks, I've given two bananas a week to Jo who runs the ferry to the neighbouring island."
H: "...what did you do that for?"
W: "We need a holiday. YOU need a holiday, after all you say yourself you're working hard on the plantation."
H: "Well, how many more bananas is this holiday going to cost?"
W: "It's about 200 bananas in total for you and me and the kids."
H: "What?? 200 bananas?? You really should have asked me first!"
W: "If I asked you you'd have just said no. Anyway, I know you have the bananas, you keep them out in your plantation shed, they're doing nothing, you can afford to give some to Jo."
H: "I'm not happy about this at all. What if I wanted those bananas for something else?"
W: "What else could you possibly do with 200 bloody bananas? You're so mean! If I had 200 bananas I'd HAPPILY give them to Jo so we could have a holiday!"
H: "Yes but you don't have 200 bananas and you don't have a plantation to even GET 200 bananas, and I work very hard for my bananas, THAT'S my point!!"
W: "Oh screw you and your bananas! Eat them all yourself then, and turn into a FAT BASTARD!"


(...that was possibly more fun to write than was merited by the relevancy of its point, but hey.)

Felt eerily realistic... could almost see the monkeys...:o I mean husband and wife arguing...

NextSteps

Someone's going to slip on a banana peel and they'll split...

Mr. Incognito

I think about um 100% of that guys list was just common sense.

He's an asshole- don't marry him.
You're completely different- don't marry him.
He has unhealthy realationshhips with people around him- don't marry him.

One wonders, if these people are stupid enough to get involved with these people to the point that they are considering marrying them whether such decent advice is actually capable of getting through to their thicko skulls.

Funny the only people that seem to listen to him are female teenagers.

Beruthiel

Deleted User wrote: »

The only criteria that you need to arry someone is mutual long lasting love.

Only in Hollywood.

stovelid

Moonbaby wrote: »

In fairness dirty socks might very well be make or break for you and many others.
I'm an easygoing, adaptable, make love not war woman. I'm simply not bothered by the small stuff.

The small stuff is the relationship, long-term.

Reku

stovelid wrote: »

The small stuff is the relationship, long-term.

Eric Draven, portrayed by Brandon Lee wrote:

Little things used to mean so much to Shelly- I used to think they were kind of trivial. Believe me, nothing is trivial.

Yes... this may indeed be an indication that I need to get out more...:rolleyes: lol

LouOB

Deleted User wrote: »

The only criteria that you need to arry someone is mutual long lasting love.

sorry but I think you are delusional
you need more than love to get through

IMO if you can say at the end of the day that the person beside you is worth the effort/pain (of whatever life is throwing at you) then you have it