"Better to marry a man who loves you more than you love him"

[FoxMulder]

As I said earlier, love is measurable only by the amount of energy one invests into a relationship. So yes, I think it is important than the man invest slightly more energy.

 

The best example I can think of is a couple that I know and have been friends with for years. I think he is more into her, in that he has seen her more as The One all along. The more time they spend together, the more she sees him that way, and at this point, she wouldn't want to live without him, I'm pretty sure.

 

She is a very smart, capable, appealing woman who has had her choice of partners. Like many men, for most of his 20s and early 30s, he had the tendency to shuffle his feet on commitment, not wanting to "grow up" and do all the things that entails. In fact, for most of her 20s, he was following her around the globe as she earned her degree, worked abroad, and so on. He was very aware that she had plenty of options, so this kept his fire lit to prove himself as the best mate.

 

Because he was a little more into her than she into him, he felt this urgency to secure a commitment and do his part in that. And he continues to view her as a prize, so that feeling of urgency and need to do his part persists, which motivates him to keep being a good partner. And the better he is as a partner, the more secure she is and the more energy she has to give.

 

In general, women are all about working on the relationship, contributing time and energy to making it strong, and so on. This is because our biology drives us toward that end. Men, on the other hand, have a different set of biological imperatives to deal with. If they want a stable relationship, family, and all that entails, they often have to make themselves "grow up" and make that commitment to one woman.

 

Being highly invested in the female is a great motivator to help this process along. If he's not very into her, and, in fact, not a little more into her than she is him, the undertaking will be all the more difficult.

 

Offcourse all women would like it if the man loves her a bit more than she loves him. Because thats an advantage to you, that means you will always have the upper hand in the relationship no matter what... But for the guy it can't be that fun knowing that the woman is not fully invested in him and doesn't love him as much. THAT's why I keep saying thinking like this is selfish because you don't think at all about the man's feelings, you only think about what is best for you.

 

If I had a girlfriend/wife I would be very hurt if she told me that she doesn't love me as much as I love her. No man would LIKE to know that he loves more than her.

[SteveC80]

Who doesn't want to be treated special? Only a fool, or a masochist.

 

And anyone who's done any living whatsoever has probably been burned. A smart individual will learn from those mistakes and make wiser choices about how to invest their energy in the future.

 

 

This is just laughable. I love body and soul, and I delight in making my man as happy as possible. No man who has been with me would argue with that.

 

The thread is degenerating because of the fears of some insecure men who repeatedly distort what others are saying -- a common devolutionary process on LS.

 

How ironic that you call others insecure when you are afraid to love allot again becasue of what has happend to you in the past

[Ruby Slippers]

I can see the truth in this.

 

OP, if you don't mind me asking, what has been your longest LTR?

My first serious relationship was 5 years long, but we had some on and off, so I don't really count that. The longest continuous one was 3 1/2 years.

 

Offcourse all women would like it if the man loves her a bit more than she loves him. Because thats an advantage to you, that means you will always have the upper hand in the relationship no matter what... But for the guy it can't be that fun knowing that the woman is not fully invested in him and doesn't love him as much. THAT's why I keep saying thinking like this is selfish because you don't think at all about the man's feelings, you only think about what is best for you.

 

If I had a girlfriend/wife I would be very hurt if she told me that she doesn't love me as much as I love her. No man would LIKE to know that he loves more than her.

I believe that relationships are more stable when the woman has this slight upper hand. I think that most secure, confident men understand this fact. If she doesn't have any kind of upper hand, he is unlikely to make a full commitment to her.

 

How ironic that you call others insecure when you are afraid to love allot again becasue of what has happend to you in the past

I'm not afraid to love a lot. I couldn't stop myself from doing that if I tried.

 

I don't deny that I have my insecurities, but my thoughts on this topic are grounded in feelings and in sound logic. I'm smart enough now to know that it's a waste of energy to invest my energy (love) toward a man who doesn't invest as much energy (love), and a little bit more, toward me.

 

I have been on both sides of the equation, and I know which one feels right and good and healthy, on every level.

[CLC2008]

My first serious relationship was 5 years long, but we had some on and off, so I don't really count that. The longest continuous one was 3 1/2 years.

 

I meant the OP.

 

I'm just trying to gain a better understanding of where the **belief** is stemming from, as opposed to blanket statements of "the majority of women feel this way because of....".

[Woggle]

None of this takes into account how women tend to fall out of love and lose attraction when a man loves her more. I actually understand where Ruby is coming from because I am a bitter and jaded person myself but I know this is not a healthy way to approach relationships. All this does is create a situation where a woman has a lap dog wrapped around her finger that she couldn't care less about and has no attraction for.

[Ruby Slippers]

I meant the OP.

Ah, yes. That's my cue to take a break from the navel gazing and get outside and enjoy this beautiful day.

[FoxMulder]

I believe that relationships are more stable when the woman has this slight upper hand. I think that most secure, confident men understand this fact. If she doesn't have any kind of upper hand, he is unlikely to make a full commitment to her.

 

Thats not always true. Why can't a man make a full commitment to a woman unless she has the upper hand? Thinking that just because you are a woman you deserve to have the upper hand and be loved more is selfish thinking imo. NO ONE in a relationship should have an upper hand.

[Sazerac]

I don't necessarily agree that either gender **should** love the other more.

 

My aunt and I were talking the other day, and somehow the topic of dying came up. She has been a nurse for 40+ years and has had her share of being alongside 100's of dying patients.

 

She said out of all those patients, there were maybe a handful, where it was the man by the woman's side dying.

So, just something to consider, at least from a biological standpoint.

 

This may not be truly tenable, given the difference in longevity between the genders. Depending upon the ages of the women who were dying, their husbands may have predeceased them by a few years.

 

Among my mother's friends, of those who become widowed, it tends to be the widowers who have the harder time coping with the loss of their wife. The widows tend to pick up fairly quickly and move on with their lives after the loss of a husband; at least, they seem far more philosophical about it than the widowers are.

[FoxMulder]

None of this takes into account how women tend to fall out of love and lose attraction when a man loves her more. I actually understand where Ruby is coming from because I am a bitter and jaded person myself but I know this is not a healthy way to approach relationships. All this does is create a situation where a woman has a lap dog wrapped around her finger that she couldn't care less about and has no attraction for.

 

I completley agree with this. As a man I can say that I would never want to be with a woman who thinks like "Ruby Slippers" because that's precisley what would happen.

[Woggle]

This may not be truly tenable, given the difference in longevity between the genders. Depending upon the ages of the women who were dying, their husbands may have predeceased them by a few years.

 

Among my mother's friends, of those who become widowed, it tends to be the widowers who have the harder time coping with the loss of their wife. The widows tend to pick up fairly quickly and move on with their lives after the loss of a husband; at least, they seem far more philosophical about it than the widowers are.

 

I agree with this. Chances are the man already passed away in most cases.

[CLC2008]

This may not be truly tenable, given the difference in longevity between the genders. Depending upon the ages of the women who were dying, their husbands may have predeceased them by a few years.

 

Among my mother's friends, of those who become widowed, it tends to be the widowers who have the harder time coping with the loss of their wife. The widows tend to pick up fairly quickly and move on with their lives after the loss of a husband; at least, they seem far more philosophical about it than the widowers are.

 

I'm not suggesting it's true accross the board per se. My aunt's time in her field and the situations she's been in, her view is as such, is that most men do not have the same emotional capacity from a bioligical standpoint to nurture, love, commit and endure. Though love is measured differently by different people, male or female.

 

My uncle lost his wife from breast cancer, and he could not cope, at all. But, she also took care of everything for him, basically, and when she died, he didn't know what to do with himself. He want into a severe depression.

 

My friend's wife who lost her husband to a heart attack, she never moved on emotionally. After he died, she would visit his grave every day and spend the majority of the day there, lying on his grave with a blanket and a radio playing their song.

 

[donnamaybe]

My friend's wife who lost her husband to a heart attack, she never moved on emotionally. After he died, she would visit his grave every day and spend the majority of the day there, lying on his grave with a blanket and a radio playing their song.

 

 

This made me cry.

[CLC2008]

This made me cry.

 

Yeah, me too donna...

[carhill]

I agree with this. Chances are the man already passed away in most cases.

By loving more, sacrificing his longevity at the altar of the woman and family, the man killed himself off

 

Anecdotally, in my immediate family (mom had 7 sisters and three brothers), the females outlived their spouses in all instances and the brothers spouses outlived them. My mom currently has outlived hers by 25 years. In another thread I outlined the case of a 40+ years married man who cared daily for his spouse as she died of cancer. He's now enjoying his mid 70's with a new love interest.

 

When I get a whiff of 'cares less', bye-bye. BTDT, ain't gonna do it again. Unhealthy for me. I'm sure some other guy will be happy to fill that space. Go get 'em

[FoxMulder]

I'm not suggesting it's true accross the board per se. My aunt's time in her field and the situations she's been in, her view is as such, is that most men do not have the same emotional capacity from a bioligical standpoint to nurture, love, commit and endure. Though love is measured differently by different people, male or female.

 

My uncle lost his wife from breast cancer, and he could not cope, at all. But, she also took care of everything for him, basically, and when she died, he didn't know what to do with himself. He want into a severe depression.

 

My friend's wife who lost her husband to a heart attack, she never moved on emotionally. After he died, she would visit his grave every day and spend the majority of the day there, lying on his grave with a blanket and a radio playing their song.

 

 

I didn't know that a woman even could get that attached to a man... One thing that is certain is that women who thinks that the man should always love more than the woman and that the woman should always have the upper hand in a relationship would NEVER be able to become that attached to a man.

[CLC2008]

I didn't know that a woman even could get that attached to a man... One thing that is certain is that women who thinks that the man should always love more than the woman and that the woman should always have the upper hand in a relationship would NEVER be able to become that attached to a man.

 

Well, maybe because you haven't been in a LTR? Or, maybe you have....

 

Those are assumptions on my part, since you never bothered to answer my original question.

[Dolos]

I believe that relationships are more stable when the woman has this slight upper hand. I think that most secure, confident men understand this fact. If she doesn't have any kind of upper hand, he is unlikely to make a full commitment to her.

 

I agree with you, but i think you're wrong in saying it can only happen if the man has the upper hand. I know i have seen several situations where a woman refuses to commit because she knows she can keep the guy without becoming exclusive. If someone (of either gender) has the upper hand and knows it, they are generally going to use it to their advantage.

 

The story about your friends is really adorable because it had a happy ending, and it changes how you look back on it knowing that it worked out. But just think about it from a different perspective. Imagine you had a friend, gender doesn't really matter, who was really into someone who refused to commit and wanted to travel around with no thought to what your friend wanted. Would you seriously recommend that your friend follow them around "keeping their fire lit"? Or would you tell them to drop that person and find someone else who actually wanted to be with them? I'm pretty certain i know what advice you, and most other people, would give here, considering most situations like that end in total disaster for the person doing all the chasing.

 

I have been on both sides of the equation, and I know which one feels right and good and healthy, on every level.

 

This is only true in your case because you're a better person than most. It worked out for you even when the guy loved you more because you didn't abuse it. It didnt work out for you when you loved the guy more because he, as most people would, used it.

 

Also, it seems a little underhanded to call anyone who disagrees with you insecure, while proclaiming any guy who agrees with you to be reasonable and confident. To me staying with someone who loves you less than you love them is a really insecure thing to do, it just seems like settling.

[FoxMulder]

Well, maybe because you haven't been in a LTR? Or, maybe you have....

 

Those are assumptions on my part, since you never bothered to answer my original question.

 

No I have never been in a relationship.

[CLC2008]

I was just trying to understand your pov better. It helps to know where people are coming from.

[SteveC80]

lol at this being sound logic and "facts" because of a few experiences you had an maybe poor choice in partner or at least not being able to read the signs early on

 

Women say all the time to Men on here that you shouldnt let a few women make you think all women are like this maybe some of you should take your own advice

 

Just because in a relationship or two you had where you loved the Man more doesnt mean its an absolute fact for everyone or even the majority..

Edited May 26, 2010 by SteveC80

[Ross PK]

I always thought women would find it a turn off, OP. Nice guy syndrome and everything.

[You Go Girl]

By loving more, sacrificing his longevity at the altar of the woman and family, the man killed himself off

lol carhill

 

 

Just because in a relationship or two you had where you loved the Man more doesnt mean its an absolute fact for everyone or even the majority..

 

How would you know, assuming the man/woman did love you --who loved more? I've never played this game, so I don't know the rules.

[Ruby Slippers]

One thing that is certain is that women who thinks that the man should always love more than the woman and that the woman should always have the upper hand in a relationship would NEVER be able to become that attached to a man.

Not true. The guy I talked about in this thread -- oh, man, I was so crazy in love with him. Every day when he got home from work, he would scoop me up in this big awesome hug and kiss, and I was so overcome with sheer happiness. And sometimes while he had his arms all wrapped around me, holding me tight, and I felt just giddy, I would then feel this big sadness at the thought of ever losing him and being without him. Sometimes it brought tears to my eyes. He was dealing with a health issue he had inherited from his dad at that point, and his dad had died at a relatively young age because of it. I was very fastidious in making sure he took care of it, and it was so painful to think he might go at a youngish age, too, and I would lose the man I loved more than I knew I could love someone.

 

He was never deprived of abundant love from me, but he always made it his goal to love me even better.

[Woggle]

Sex in the city quote.never ever date a woman who watches sex in the city.

 

It's okay if she watches it but there are women who literally think it is their bible and you should stay away from them.

[callingyouuu]

As I said earlier, love is measurable only by the amount of energy one invests into a relationship. So yes, I think it is important than the man invest slightly more energy.

 

The best example I can think of is a couple that I know and have been friends with for years. I think he is more into her, in that he has seen her more as The One all along. The more time they spend together, the more she sees him that way, and at this point, she wouldn't want to live without him, I'm pretty sure.

 

She is a very smart, capable, appealing woman who has had her choice of partners. Like many men, for most of his 20s and early 30s, he had the tendency to shuffle his feet on commitment, not wanting to "grow up" and do all the things that entails. In fact, for most of her 20s, he was following her around the globe as she earned her degree, worked abroad, and so on. He was very aware that she had plenty of options, so this kept his fire lit to prove himself as the best mate.

 

Because he was a little more into her than she into him, he felt this urgency to secure a commitment and do his part in that. And he continues to view her as a prize, so that feeling of urgency and need to do his part persists, which motivates him to keep being a good partner. And the better he is as a partner, the more secure she is and the more energy she has to give.

 

In general, women are all about working on the relationship, contributing time and energy to making it strong, and so on. This is because our biology drives us toward that end. Men, on the other hand, have a different set of biological imperatives to deal with. If they want a stable relationship, family, and all that entails, they often have to make themselves "grow up" and make that commitment to one woman.

 

Being highly invested in the female is a great motivator to help this process along. If he's not very into her, and, in fact, not a little more into her than she is him, the undertaking will be all the more difficult.

 

Thanks for your responses! They're really well thought-out. And I thought that was a cute example.

 

From what I understand from your post, I think the belief is that men are generally more fickle with relationships than women. If they don't feel like they hold some kind of prize in their arms, they won't commit enough to a relationship to allow women to feel secure enough in a healthy relationship. Hence, according to this theory, the best relationships exist when the men are slightly more dedicated to their women so they can get the ball rolling on the commitment cycle (men first, and then the woman).

 

However, I think this more applies to maturity than biology. Ruby, you're almost refreshingly mature, and it seems like the woman in your example was the same way. Hence, it makes sense in my eyes for the man who hasn't "grown up" yet to be more invested in the relationship. If this isn't the case, the more fickle man will probably cause problems simply because he can't handle relationships as well unless he's head-over-heels for her.

 

If you flip the genders, I think this is still true. A female who isn't as mature but somehow has managed control over the relationship might make more impetuous decisions, or even leave on a whim. I think this is semi-verified by the anecdotal evidence on LS where women in their college years seem less likely to commit very well, even though they might personally believe in their own maturity.

 

In general, I just think it's more an issue of maturity than biological reasons, though the latter probably does contribute to why women still seem to mature sooner than men do.