Woggle Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 have decided to trust my wife because she signed a 20 page prenup. That means that I am protected if she decides to walk. It is much easier to feel safe when you are insured and a prenup is a form of divorce insurance. Great! So you are covered and protected material wise etc if she walks. But is your heart? Will your heart be protected if she walks? No prenup will save your heart from any pain that might be caused if she does walk Woggle. But goodness, its good all other areas are covered and protected. If I can survive everything else life has thrown at me I can survive heartbreak.
PandorasBox Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 If I can survive everything else life has thrown at me I can survive heartbreak. but not without a prenup you can't.
mockeryjones Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 I have decided to trust my wife because she signed a 20 page prenup. i'm not sure how to ask this without sounding like a prick. so i apologize in advance for my inability to gently phrase this question, but is that really trust? i ask becuase i have a great deal of trouble trusting anyone and wonder sometimes is setting consequences on actions (such as a prenup) is really an act of trust or an act of implied mistrust. it's kinda like saying, i know your natural inclination is to screw me over so i will invent penalties that should prevent you from following your natural behavior patterns.
serial muse Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 I know it is a bit hypocritical to be anti-marriage while I am happily married myself but I feel it is good to have somewhat of a cynicism about it. No, Woggle, what's hypocritical is to be cynical about, and to rip on, other people's relationships/marriages simply because they don't happen to be yours - and you therefore consider them to be inferior. You aren't there in Jack's home and have no idea of the relationship between him and his wife. It's incredibly rude to disparage his or anyone else's personal life every time you're having a bad spell. Anyway. What constitutes "settling" is highly personal. I think this really rings true. What is "settling," exactly? It feels like, once you've had a number of relationships under your belt, you do gain a greater appreciation for variety, but also realize that no one is going to be an idealized combination of traits. No one is perfect. So true "settling," to me, isn't so much about being willing to compromise on some of those traits, because you love the person and s/he has other qualities that are highly desirable for you. I think really settling means compromising on things that, in fact, make you deeply unhappy, and should therefore be dealbreakers. That's why I agree that settling is highly personal - it's about searching within and determining what's most important, what inspires you to love and where you can be flexible.
quankanne Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 compromise. There's an interesting word, with a heck of a lot of meanings even for just one person. there's the "good" kind of compromise that both parties reach an agreement of what you want and you're both happy with the outcome. the other kind of compromise in which someone gives up all, but only the other person benefits. And strangely enough that makes me think of the pre-nup agreements mentioned earlier. Financially, it makes perfect sense, but morally, I think it shows a huge lack of trust in the future. DH told me several times (before we started dating) that if he ever married again, the prospective bride had better be willing to sign away because he wasn't going to get screwed again. And that's sad, because it wasn't really about economics but fear, and I wonder how many pre-nups are based in that kind of fear. As in, "she won't believe that I love her unless I sign this paperwork" or "our marriage can only be stable if I sign this for him" – and I think that's the wrong foundation for a marriage. but that's me, and what works for me doesn't necessarily work for someone else. Poor dears ...
IpAncA Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 So my question to to others is, would you "just settle?" If you thought you couldn't do any better than what you had, with your spouse, would you just continue to take on the attitude "well I, put all the years in anyway with him/her, might not get any better, but might not get any worse, so I'll just stick with what I have. Would you settle? I don't agree with settle for the sake of settle. I would never say, "oh he's better than nothing," or "oh well, I guess he'll do." How stupid. I'd rather be single then settle in a situation where I KNOW I'd be unhappy in. In a few years your wife will feel like she settled. Oh save it. Tell him your jealous and get it over with?
allina Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 I really don't feel like I will go through this in my marriage because we always communicate our needs. If we feel it we say it and it usually gets resolved. Most marriages have people who expect the other to read their mind and then their spouse starts to feel resentful when the needs are never met. The second part of this statement is somewhat true, and it's good that you recognize what causes major problems in a relationship or marriage but you aren't the only one in the world who does. Yes, there are many marriages out there that are miserable but not 99% of them. You aren't the only one out there who has a good woman and a good marriage. Second, not all women feel like they settle, those that do had issues with the relationship to start, it's not something that just develops over time. I know that I never have and never will feel like I settled for my SO I couldn't be happier.
I Love Twinkies Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Pre-nups only "insure" so much and can easily be contested and thrown out by a judge later.
Pyro Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Went to lunch with some co workers yesterday and over heard one of the ladies we were eating with talk about her husband. I don't even remmber how we had gotten on the subject, but anyway, the way she described things with him came across as, she loved him but was just with him to be with him. She was pretty non chalant when talking about him, saying he was a ok father, an ok husband, decent provider, helped out some, but most of the time had to be told or asked to do what was right infront of him. Anyway, I chimed in and wasn't meaning any disrespect with what I had said, but I told her it sounded like she wasn't all that happy, and that she sounded as if she had just kind of settled with him. She looked at me and didn't even flinch and responded by saying, I was right in saying that, and she did just "settle." I guess its kind of like she maybe felt she couldn't do any better, and that this was justy the way her life was supposed to be, and she would just accept things for the way the were. So my question to to others is, would you "just settle?" If you thought you couldn't do any better than what you had, with your spouse, would you just continue to take on the attitude "well I, put all the years in anyway with him/her, might not get any better, but might not get any worse, so I'll just stick with what I have. Would you settle? No way. I would never settle for anything less then what I am compatible with. I have been told that I am picky and I am to a certain extent. If I am going to invest time and energy into someone, then they will be worth it. I would rather be alone than to have to be with someone that I am not 100% satisfied with.
Pyro Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 I have decided to trust my wife because she signed a 20 page prenup. That means that I am protected if she decides to walk. It is much easier to feel safe when you are insured and a prenup is a form of divorce insurance. She also didn't want a big wedding and didn't want a big engagement ring. She was more into the marriage than the wedding which shows where her head is at. I know it is a bit hypocritical to be anti-marriage while I am happily married myself but I feel it is good to have somewhat of a cynicism about it. You only trust her because she signed a piece of paper? Is it just me or is that utterly ridiculous?
cuteblondegurl Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 I've settled in past relationships. But no more.
PandorasBox Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 You only trust her because she signed a piece of paper? See this was my thinking too. I'm wordering if Woggle even relaized what it was he said. His beginning line is what sticks out the most to me. "I have decided to trust my wife because she signed a 20 page prenup." If she had NOT signed a prenup are you saying you wouldn't have trusted her at all? Your trust is based on a piece of paper about your belongings? I don't know, it seems like this whole prenup thing is not really about love/trust its more about, whats mine is mine and you can't have it because you're going to probably walk anyway. To me, thats not love. I mean why even bother getting married then?
Pyro Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 You only trust her because she signed a piece of paper? See this was my thinking too. I'm wordering if Woggle even relaized what it was he said. His beginning line is what sticks out the most to me. "I have decided to trust my wife because she signed a 20 page prenup." If she had NOT signed a prenup are you saying you wouldn't have trusted her at all? I don't know, it seems like this whole prenup thing is not really about love/trust its more about, whats mine is mine and you can't have it because you're going to probably walk anyway. To me, thats not love. I mean why even bother getting married then? I think that a prenup is just to have just in case the worse were to happen and it would make things a little easier to deal with if it were to come to that. At least that it how it looks to me. IMO, Woggle should not have gotten married. Generally speaking, learn to trust your SO before you even consider becoming serious with them.
Woggle Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 The prenup was the final oath she had to sign in order for me o trust her enough to marry her. Woman can talk about commitment all they want but when they all of a sudden walk out to go find themselves or because they had an affair or fell out of love all that commitment talk flies out the window. A prenup protects a man in case his wife suddenly turns on him.
PandorasBox Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 I think that a prenup is just to have just in case the worse were to happen and it would make things a little easier to deal with if it were to come to that. At least that it how it looks to me. It makes sense. And to each their own sure. I guess its done more so by people who feel they could have alot to lose, such as people who own alot of things, such as businesses or land, or riches period. I guess I don't hear tell of to many people who have absolutly nothing, wanting to sign a prenup, becasue if they have nothing to lose then what would be the point. I don't know I guess it can be looked at boths ways, some people may see it as looking at things long term and covering themselves, "just in case" something happens. And some may not even consider that or think of that when inlove.
PandorasBox Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 A prenup protects a man in case his wife suddenly turns on him. Or vice versa Woggle.
Pyro Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 The prenup was the final oath she had to sign in order for me o trust her enough to marry her. Woman can talk about commitment all they want but when they all of a sudden walk out to go find themselves or because they had an affair or fell out of love all that commitment talk flies out the window. A prenup protects a man in case his wife suddenly turns on him. Is your wife aware that you look at her and your marriage through a half-empty glass? It makes sense. And to each their own sure. I guess its done more so by people who feel they could have alot to lose, such as people who own alot of things, such as businesses or land, or riches period. I guess I don't hear tell of to many people who have absolutly nothing, wanting to sign a prenup, becasue if they have nothing to lose then what would be the point. I don't know I guess it can be looked at boths ways, some people may see it as looking at things long term and covering themselves, "just in case" something happens. And some may not even consider that or think of that when inlove. This is all very true. Never thought of it like that either.
Storyrider Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 The question isn't will you settle, but how will you settle and when? Unless you think there is someone out there who is perfect. Are you willing to settle for a so-so sex life to get a great provider and father? Are you willing to settle for a husband who is always out of town in order to be financially secure? Are you willing to settle for a guy who can't cook so long as he is fun in the bedroom? Are you willing to settle for a guy with a big nose if he has a cute ass? It might be minor, but we all have to settle for something.
Pyro Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 The question isn't will you settle, but how will you settle and when? Unless you think there is someone out there who is perfect. Are you willing to settle for a so-so sex life to get a great provider and father? Are you willing to settle for a husband who is always out of town in order to be financially secure? Are you willing to settle for a guy who can't cook so long as he is fun in the bedroom? Are you willing to settle for a guy with a big nose if he has a cute ass? It might be minor, but we all have to settle for something. Speaking for myself, I know that there is no such thing as perfection, so I am not looking for Ms. Perfect, but for Ms. Good enough for my standards.
PandorasBox Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 The question isn't will you settle, but how will you settle and when? Unless you think there is someone out there who is perfect. Are you willing to settle for a so-so sex life to get a great provider and father? Are you willing to settle for a husband who is always out of town in order to be financially secure? Are you willing to settle for a guy who can't cook so long as he is fun in the bedroom? Are you willing to settle for a guy with a big nose if he has a cute ass? It might be minor, but we all have to settle for something. This is true. One trade off for another, so I suppose we all do settle to a point even if its a little. I could settle for a man who cooked and helped clean even though he might not be gorgeous. I would NOT settle though for someone, who was abusive though, I don't care how good looking, how good they were in bed, how well the kept house or good of a provider they were etc. I do think too, if I can put forth effort in a relationship to try and do my part, be kind, trusting honest, respectful, etc, then I do expect that in return and wouldn't settle for less. If I can take the time and and energy to have that in a relationship, then I would like the other person to do the same.
Storyrider Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Speaking for myself, I know that there is no such thing as perfection, so I am not looking for Ms. Perfect, but for Ms. Good enough for my standards. Good point, Rid. So we must define and fine-tune our standards and values before we can pick the right mate, before we can know which aspects are negotiable and which are not.
Pyro Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Good point, Rid. So we must define and fine-tune our standards and values before we can pick the right mate, before we can know which aspects are negotiable and which are not. That is correct. Still enjoying your fifteen minutes of fame?
Storyrider Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 That is correct. Still enjoying your fifteen minutes of fame? You bet!
alphamale Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 everyone has to settle for what they can get. thats the way life is and it must be accepted. you have to be realistic and objective about these matters.
Recommended Posts