Freeloaders, Renters, and Buyers

[ltjg45]

I agree with you but thats not realistic. If I decided to withhold sex until marriage Id be single forever. I cant find a guy willing to wait 3 months for sex. It doesnt exist anymore in my age group (Im 25)

 

I'm still a virgin at the age of 26.

 

That only makes me more special, regardless of what society says of me otherwise.

 

I'm not going to screw anything I find on the streets. Hell, it will take me a few months at the least before I give it up.

 

And to think I'm one of those "sex-hungry" males. I should be ashamed of myself.

[ltjg45]

You sound sweet but out of all the 4 relationships I described, my 2nd one was a guy like you and once I took his virginity and we dated for awhile and he became comfortable in the relationship, he became selfish over time. Hopefully you dont do that.

 

I won't. I value love too much to be selfish.

 

The thought of being selfish disgusts me. If I do go down that path, I will apologize to her first-hand and let her decide if she wants to end it or give me time to correct my errors.

 

I won't tolerate it from anyone else or from me.

 

This is why I blame myself whenever I do something truly stupid. If I was the guy I said I was, that wouldn't have happened and I take full responsibility and consequences for my actions.

[HoneyBadgerDontCare]

RedRobin would make a better partner.

 

Nah, Kim is more angry. RedRobin seems very unemotional in her response.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure Kim and somedude are the same age. I think RedRobin is in her 40s or 50s.

[RedRobin]

In upper middle class and affluent homes, women still don't contribute much. They make it clear they don't EVER want to work, that's why they got married.

Also, don't be fooled by long marriages. Just because people stay married doesn't mean they're happy. I'm sure most of the husbands have cheated on their wives, there's been domestic violence, and they're not necessarily madly in love with each other anymore. They just go through the motions, exist, and appear happy on the surface because you want to believe in that kind of family, and dream that it's possible for you some day.

 

Hate to rock your world, but my family is really quite 'out there' in terms of sharing the ups and downs of their marriages.

 

I'm quite aware of the infidelities, pre-marital pregnancies, substance abuse... and disastrous financial failings of one or both of the people in some of these marriages.

 

Funny, we had a laugh one time about the birthdates that got changed in one of the family bibles to reflect the 'real' date the baby was born after the wedding.

 

So no, I wasn't naïve about what marriage meant when I agreed to enter it. That doesn't mean I'll put up with just anything... but it does mean that I viewed my then husband as 'family' that I'd no sooner abandon than I'd abandon my sister, parent, or anyone else in my family.

 

What seems to set my relatives apart is that they didn't give up and they are both reaping the benefits of that effort. I don't know any of my relatives living in a miserable existence at all. We all have a blast together.

 

Another thing people don't realize... studies show that, on average, married people are happier than single, and everyone is happier than divorced people. Sucks for me, yea...

 

So, if you are going to get married, STAY married. You'll be happier in the long run... is my take on it.

[RedRobin]

Nah, Kim is more angry. RedRobin seems very unemotional in her response.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure Kim and somedude are the same age. I think RedRobin is in her 40s or 50s.

 

I'm 29...................

[Titania22]

Well I wonder where I fit into the analogy, if indeed I do.

 

At first I thought I must be a freeloader, but that still involves being interested in some sort of interaction.

 

In reality I have no interest in meeting anyone, and make zero effort to do so. I feel that I am done with all that for this lifetime. So in terms of the analogy, does that make me the hermit that goes and lives in a cave in the mountains, eschewing the whole property market?

[Woggle]

No, actually research shows it. Take a random poll across the country of men and describe a marriage where there is emotional neglect and the majority will say its not worth divorcing over.

 

Define emotional neglect. I talk to some of my friends who have been through relationship issues and they are accused of emotional neglect if they don't want to sit there and be told how horrible they are. Men tend to shut down when they feel they can't do anything right and that is what some of my friends feel like. They do everything their wives say they want and it still isn't good enough so they give up. Men tend to utterly loathe running around in circles and getting nowhere.

 

Of course most women are not like this but not all men are like what you describe either. Your one sided view is just as bad as the bitter men on here.

[RedRobin]

Define emotional neglect. I talk to some of my friends who have been through relationship issues and they are accused of emotional neglect if they don't want to sit there and be told how horrible they are. Men tend to shut down when they feel they can't do anything right and that is what some of my friends feel like. They do everything their wives say they want and it still isn't good enough so they give up. Men tend to utterly loathe running around in circles and getting nowhere.

 

Of course most women are not like this but not all men are like what you describe either. Your one sided view is just as bad as the bitter men on here.

 

I was going to say, yea.... that's true.

 

Can't say I've had the problems KD has had. In most of my relationships, the guys were attentive for quite a long time... years in fact. What happens, and what scares me the most, is that when a major life crisis comes up or a tough decision is to be made... it always has ended up on my back. So, we could go quite awhile being blissfully happy, then the rug gets pulled out from underneath me... mostly (I think) due to societal expectations of what men and women are supposed to do or sacrifice.

 

So, when I'm thinking about getting into a serious relationship with someone now, I naturally ask them questions about what happens if he or I lose a job, have a family member fall ill...those kinds of things. And invariably... it is me who is always expected to move for him... unquestioningly... doesn't matter if the guy is a plumber, a librarian, or a millionaire. The guy never answers "I don't know. We'll have to find something that works for both of us" or whatever... His kids, his job, his schedule etc always comes first. There is very little back and forth or give and take.

 

so, that is when I push the RENTER eject button. In that respect, KD and I have similar viewpoints.

[SJC2008]

I think there are very very few men that exist today that are capable of not taking a woman for granted and can consistently treat her well for a long period of time. Id say 10% of men today can not do these things.

 

There is a reason over 70% of divorces are initiated by women. Emotional neglect and verbal abuse are the most cited reasons.I

 

Oh so women want men who show "emotions" ha? Then why are men trained to NEVER be vulnerable with a woman? That she'll lose respect for you and lose attraction? She cancels a date and you can't say you were looking forward to spending time with her becuase you'll look weak; You have to act like you don't care. They say they want confident men etc then they get with emotionless rocks who never let them in and then blame it on the man mind you the signs of being emotionally unavailable reared it's ugly head WAY before marriage.

 

Take women for granted? Why are we taught to not give a woman what she wants (basically be good to her)? Only give her what she wants sparingly or she'll think you're a pushover and lose respect for you?

 

Where are these women who want "the real deal"? A lot of women act like a guy who will wait for sex 2-3 months is so rare he's on display at the smithsonian. Mind you the minute he's waited past the normal window she'll start questioning his interest or if he's a virgin. I can't be the only man who will wait for sex within that time frame. Where are the women who beleive a relationship is 50/50 give and take? That it should be a partnership and that the woman can come up with plans to and not let the man come up with all the plans becuase he's supposed to be a "leader"? I'll throw an iea out there and if you don't like it I'm fine with that but be an adult and come up with some ideas of your own. I'm not going spout out a checklist until I hit on something.

[SJC2008]

If a found a guy who over time, did not become selfish and lazy and feel entitled to me doing more of the work, sure Id marry him. Ive dated all types and they all do the same thing once they become complacent. Out of my 4 longer relationships 1 was an inexperienced shy virgin when I met him, one was a very hot tennis player, one was a pretty average nerdy guy and another was a quirky outgoing class clown type. ALL of them did this...so dont tell me I have a broken man-picker!

 

I'm going to tell you the same thing I told PJ bear and I mean it with good intentions and am drawing from personal experience although not from actual relationships but it's still relevant IMO.

 

You may think you have dated different types of men becuase you have dated men with different personalities but they all have the same core traits of being selfish! I learned this about myslef over the last year and Houston we have a problem lol. I thought I was dating different types of women but the ones I was drawn to and felt strong attraction to had one thing in common: They're controlling. One was very very funny, funniest women I've met to date but is moody and controlling. The other I just dated has a "normal" personality, not funny but can take a joke and joke a little. She's the domineering type, trys to change all the plans to hers, snide comments out loud. She did the bait and switch, started off as a sweetie pie and slowly eased into her bithy self. God was looking out for me in that she didn't want an r or I'd be with her right now but now I know what my problme is and know how to spot the signs and jump ship early. These are only 2 examples but they both have opposite personalities but have the same core characteristic of being controlling. So like I said it's something you may want to look into. I'm with you, it's hard to fing good people but trust me they're out there.

[Mumbles]

I dont think I ever want to get married. I dont see why I should tie myself down to a man when in a few years he will either become a jerk, detached or selfish and Im supposed to just "deal with it" because Im a woman. No thank you

 

Its the same on both sides. I agree with you though. Few reasons to get married. Why contract for a lifetime when you can choose to renegotiate the deal every day?

 

By that I mean, your woman becomes disinterested in sex? Fine, tell her is bothers you... no change? Thats fine too, find a new woman. She feels neglected or taken for granted - she can simply raise it with him, I "need" this from you, can you provide? No? Ok then, move on to the next Johnny.

 

Marriage shouldn't be contracted in my view ... its not like running a company or having a customer ... it should be more about intent. A statement, if you like, of your intent to another in the company of your friends and family.

 

With contracts come obligation, and no-one wants to live their emotional lives under obligation. You are _obligated_ as my wife to have sex with me ... oh please! Alternatively, if I'm just not _feeling_ it, I'm meant to conjure up some heartfelt and loving words or massage your ego? It all sounds lovely, all the self sacrifice for the "reward" of continued marriage, but it just kills both people inside.

[fortyninethousand322]

All relationships are 100/0. If you can't give 100% then you shouldn't be in a relationship.

[fortyninethousand322]

? 50/50 means both people are putting in equal effort. Thats why there are two sets of numbers. But yes, they should give 100%. I find women are expected to give that much and men get away with not though because well, theyre men.

 

Maybe. I wouldn't know.

 

How are men able to get away with not putting in equal effort? Why would a woman stay with someone like that?

[truth_seeker]

? 50/50 means both people are putting in equal effort. Thats why there are two sets of numbers. But yes, they should give 100%. I find women are expected to give that much and men get away with not though because well, theyre men.

 

I understand your frustration with loser men. Keep in mind though that us good men out there have to deal with loser women.

 

I would love to meet a great girl I could start a family with, yet all I meet are players who are dating 5-6 guys at once.

 

Society is more screwed up than ever.

[musemaj11]

I dont expect men to put in over 50% of the work, but sure expect me to put in well over 50%, usually 80 to 90%, of the work after the courting stage is over and act like Im crazy for not putting up with it!

How much work do you expect a guy to put in during the courting stages?

[nofool4u]

I find women are expected to give that much and men get away with not though because well, theyre men.

 

Funny, I have found it the other way around with women. Not all, but most I have come across.

 

That doesn't mean I'm going to bash women though, because I think, in general, they are wonderful:)

[carhill]

In my area it's a seller's market and only the most elite of the qualified buyers are permitted to bid on the properties. The rental market is brisk but also with stringent qualifications. Freeloaders are rarely seen and dispatched with prejudice.

 

Wait, I thought we were talking about real estate

[RedRobin]

In my other thread, Elswyth asked me what's up with the 'freeloader, renter, buyer' designations.

 

To answer her question... it is not a designation *I* invented.

 

It is a designation 'invented' by a prominent marriage counselor... one who has a very strong history of saving countless marriages in his decades long practice.

 

This man has brought many relationships back from the brink of divorce to restore love and care again.

 

The terms refer to people's behavior in a relationship... not necessarily their worth as people or even their worth to each other.

 

Amazon.com: Buyers, Renters & Freeloaders: Turning Revolving-Door Romance into Lasting Love (9781610457620): Willard F. Harley: Books

 

... as a person who was married to a relationship 'freeloader' or 'renter'... I seek to avoid committing to those whose predominant relationship style falls into this category. It is a personal preference.

 

Now, people can dislike the terms all they want... Fine. Call it something else. I don't care. But for MY purposes, I'm perfectly happy saying that I'm looking for a 'buyer' who has demonstrated (not just SAYS) they are looking to 'buy'... and has a history of doing so.

 

This is not to say that someone who has another history is incapable of being a 'buyer' or becoming one... I'm just saying that, for ME, they need to have a history of being one.

 

The Center for Professional Psychology: Articles-How A Relationship Goes from Great to Gone

[RedRobin]

You need to

 

Sure. Were you aware that he does classical music now? That style has a lot of 'rules'... and requires a great deal of training and discipline.

 

Bobby McFerrin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

So does his singing style. He only makes it look easy.... despite the catchy lyrics of this particular song. Apparently he's also been married to the same woman since 1975. *shrug*. He is 63, that means he was married when he was 25 years old...

 

And yes, sometimes it IS best not to worry and just let things slide.

 

Got it.

 

Helps if you pick a partner who is on the same 'ride' as you... Seems like he has.

Edited July 29, 2013 by RedRobin

[pcplod]

...building on my prior thread about why it has been tough for me to find someone...

 

Buyers, Renters and Freeloaders : Experience Life

 

I came across this article and it made perfect sense.... I'm a 'buyer' and I approach 'dating' like a buyer. Most things in my life I approach with an all-in or all-out attitude.

 

Think about it... if you were buying or selling a house... you wouldn't waste your time with people just wanting a lease (even if it were a long-term lease) and you certainly wouldn't want someone just interested in crashing on your couch overnight... no matter how much fun they were.

 

Interestingly, I'm betting a lot of the hassles people come into with relationships is when they are a mixed-type. Freeloader/Renter and Renter/Buyer.

 

The thing I like most about this article is that it depersonalized the choices and just talked about styles.

 

The guy I just broke up with got me into a relationship because he convinced me he was a 'buyer', but I found out in a few months that he really was just a 'renter' looking for a long-term lease.

 

My parents are both 'buyers'. When problems arise, they negotiate to both of their mutual benefit. There is no 'sacrifice'... they don't stop negotiating until they come to a successful conclusion for each of them. Their approach avoids the typical one up/one down "head of household" stuff I can't tolerate and that my parents taught us to avoid.

 

It is interesting how much we are influenced by events and experiences around us when it comes to expressing our own future preferences, even if it seems a rather obvious thing.

 

In respect of your recent ex, the thing that intrigues me is why would he try to convince you that he was a buyer if he knew all along that he preferred to be a renter. That seems rather hard work and pointless, maintaining that sort of façade at that level of effort. It can't be a natural thing, surely? Unless you reckon the effort is worth the short-term gain, while knowing that the situation is pre-ordained to 'failure'.

 

Personally, I prefer a stance of honesty, in fact candidacy, because that way you can relax and be in the moment, not having to be aware of the possibility that you might betray yourself, that your are having to constantly stress that you are someone that you are not.

 

I guess that the answer is that someone people find this actually easy to do, that it is a natural behavioural trait and that it doesn't actually require an exceptional effort of their part.

 

Kind of sobering when you reflect on it.

 

Or maybe he just didn't know going in what the hell he wanted or was putting himself through an exquisite exercise of self-deception.

[RedRobin]

It is interesting how much we are influenced by events and experiences around us when it comes to expressing our own future preferences, even if it seems a rather obvious thing.

 

In respect of your recent ex, the thing that intrigues me is why would he try to convince you that he was a buyer if he knew all along that he preferred to be a renter. That seems rather hard work and pointless, maintaining that sort of façade at that level of effort. It can't be a natural thing, surely? Unless you reckon the effort is worth the short-term gain, while knowing that the situation is pre-ordained to 'failure'.

 

Personally, I prefer a stance of honesty, in fact candidacy, because that way you can relax and be in the moment, not having to be aware of the possibility that you might betray yourself, that your are having to constantly stress that you are someone that you are not.

 

I guess that the answer is that someone people find this actually easy to do, that it is a natural behavioural trait and that it doesn't actually require an exceptional effort of their part.

 

Kind of sobering when you reflect on it.

 

Or maybe he just didn't know going in what the hell he wanted or was putting himself through an exquisite exercise of self-deception.

 

Lots of 'whys' I could come up with... Wouldn't help in the big scheme of things.

 

I just know it when I see it now, and end it.

[Woggle]

I am all for buying but if you want somebody to do so make it an attractive purchase and worth the investment. I am not talking about looks either.