Every now and then, we're asked what the worst piece of advice we've ever heard is, and honestly, there's a lot to sort through. For second place. For first? It's no contest.
"Marry a man who loves you a little more than you love him."
Who came up with this old adage? A social-climbing psycho?
What's wrong with it? Lots.
- "More than you love him?" It's true there are many kinds of love; brotherly, sisterly, fatherly, motherly, bromatically, creepy, and so on. But they're not measurable. There's not a love-meter that actually works. Either you love somebody, or you don't. So what this is really saying is "Marry somebody you don't love, but can tolerate." Uhhhh, yay?
- We're talking about marriage here. Marriage. 'Til death do us part? Maybe this made sense back when being married was more about collecting your wife's dowry and possibly scoring some sweet-ass horses, and then popping out an heir or two in between shagging prostitutes and dying of horrible diseases we eradicated centuries ago. In the twenty-first century, not so much.
- And finally, it's really crappy to the guy in question. He's got to buy the ring, pop the question, agonize over the big event, and all for a woman who secretly is choosing to settle? Yeah, that's not going to blow up in your face in about twenty years, when he can do nothing right and you're both wondering what happened. This is why we've got a double digit divorce rate.
Marry somebody you love and who loves you. It's the only way to make a marriage work.
-
I agree that the adage is unfair, and to me the third point is probably the worst part of it, but I'm not sure I agree on your first point. My experience has been that, in most relationships (romantic or otherwise) there is someone who's more invested in the relationship. For me at least, it's been rare to be in a relationship of any kind where I felt like the balance was always even.
What this weird 'rule' fails to recognize is that that dynamic shifts over time. In the two years I've been with my current boyfriend, we've sort of taken turns being that person. It doesn't stay the same. So basing a marriage on who loves who more at the time, besides being cruel, is also shortsighted and ineffective.
Just sayin'.
Dan,
You're right...this is soooo misunderstood!!
I've read many relationship articles about this. Funny how when things are couched a specific way, it seems like an absolute answer.
The info I read made it seem more like this:
"The one who loves less in the relationship, controls the relationship."
I believe it was from a movie at one point, but the real life explanations seem to indicate that it is meant as advice for women to avoid becoming "needy" as the male instinct is to maintain an edge of dominance and be the one to "chase", keeping the relationship interesting to him, rather than getting stale, and having the woman be taken for granted.
I agree with you, in that it's an equal love partnership, but I have always given 110% of my heart to relationships and when the other person gives less, the instinct is for me to lean forward and pick up that extra effort, thus looking needy and dependent in comparison....you know the chasER versus the chasEE.....that kind of thing.
I wish I could find some guy who just wants to love honestly, without the insecurity or fear of vulnerability. Oh, and he should be attractive, smart, wealthy and straight, too. ;)
Where did that piece of lovely advice come from? '101 relationship tips for psychopaths'?
It would really bother me if I thought I wasn't as committed to a relationship as the person I was with, especially if I was married to them. I'd worry endlessly that one day I'd grow bored and loose interest and end up massively hurting them and that there was someone out there who'd be better for them.
I don't know I think there is some truth in that. Someone always loves someone more. It's never 100 % balenced. And the person who loves the most will probably be the one that gets hurts. My bf is crazy head over heels with me and I still think I love him more. And I really wish it was the other way around.
Obviously, I have to disagree.
Here's the thing about love, it doesn't really come out until it's tested. So if you think you love somebody less than they love you, and then something bad happens, well...it can be rough.
Part of the reason my boyfrien and I work is that we both know we're each other's second loves. Our first love is our art. It always comes first, and we support each other in that. Other boyfriends have resented the time that I devoted to work, and sometimes when they needed more from me, I wasn't totally sure if it was that I couldn't sacrifice a bit more of my work time or if I just wouldn't, because I didn't want to. And even when I felt sure that I'd never loved someone as much as I did that person, ink Ew I'd drop it all in a heartbeat for my art, and it always got in the way. At least until I Kent my current boyfriend, who is quite possibly more passionate about his work than I am about mine. Knowing how devoted he is to his art, and that he understands my devotion to mine is one of the things I find most attractive about him. Sometimes the best way we can show our lobe is to leave each other alone when we're in the middle of big projects. Or send an encouraging text that you know wont get a response for another fifteen hours when they send a quick thankyou before they crash for two days straight in blissful exhaustion after the most recent project. Maybe it's less of loving art more, but understanding our priorities, and respecting that in each other. Point is, I know what it's like to feel like you're not giving someone the kind of love they give you, and I think happiness comes from finding someone who's willing to give on same terms as you.
Hmm. I received this advice and 20 years later, now that I'm 40 and having a bit of a crisis, I think I may have followed it. You're right on, it sucks for everyone.
This old adage is the truth IF she loves him too. The thinking is a man that loves her a little more will gladly do more than is expected of him. Assuming women put in all the effort - if he matches her, that's half the battle. A man that loves you equally may meet you halfway "sometimes"... It depends on your interpretation but I never understood this to mean she settles and he is taken advantage of...
I think goodkarmagirl is right in that the concept behind the adage concerns the traditonal male role of the pursuer. If he feels like he no longer needs to pursue your affections, he's more likely to fall into a complacent mindset. And then the woman wonders why he doesn't do or say the things he used to, and dissatisfaction takes root.
I think goodkarmagirl is right in that the concept behind the adage concerns the traditonal male role of the pursuer. If he feels like he no longer needs to pursue your affections, he's more likely to fall into a complacent mindset. And then the woman wonders why he doesn't do or say the things he used to, and dissatisfaction takes root.