60
61

RELATIONSHIPSEntitlement (self.RedPillWomen)

submitted by loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor

Once upon a time, society had rules. Among those rules were rules surrounding marriage. Looking back into history from our perspective, these marriages of old seem more like business deals than like the love and romance we like to dream about. Problem is, we haven't fully moved to a world where marriage is defined by love and romance (and we never will). Thus, we now have a really messed up idea of marriage where we are appalled at the idea of obligation while still feeling entitled.

Marriage of old

Men and women get married for different reasons. We each have needs and desires which we seek to fulfill by getting married. Some of the actual desires are the same but their rank within the hierarchy of desires is not the same.

(Obviously, your personal millage may vary because both men and women have masculine and feminine character traits, it's just that men are generally more masculine and women are generally more feminine. There are masculine women and feminine men out there. This post will speak in general terms. By "men" I mean most men or the more masculine version of humanity and likewise with regards to "women".)

In the days of old, it was not socially acceptable to have sex outside of wedlock. Did it happen? Of course it happened, but it was unacceptable and therefore happened much less and more hidden. Because of this, if you wanted to have a regular sex life, you had to get married. This was true for most people. Since sex is higher up on the list of needs for men, this practically meant that men had to accept marriage in order to have regular sex. There were parts of marriage which he may not have been particularly interested in or perhaps he was indifferent to these parts or even opposed to them, but this was the trade off, he committed to these elements in exchange for regular sex.

Same was true in the reverse. Maybe sex wasn't as important to the woman as it was for her husband. Maybe she would have been okay with half the amount of sex as what he wanted. Maybe she didn't need it altogether. But his happiness, his ongoing commitment and support were extremely important to her and so, in exchange for that, she had more sex than what she would have had if it all went according to her desires.

It's true that there were miserable men and women back then, there always are. However, to a very large degree, this worked. Men had to prioritize what was important to their wives and women had to prioritize what was important to their husbands. It was a trade-off and everyone knew it and was open about it being a trade-off. But once the terms and conditions were agreed upon, it was expected of both parties to keep their end of the deal. Not upholding your end was grounds for divorce while getting the lower hand in the process.

New age marriage

According to modern thought, nobody owes anything to anyone (except when they do). This is especially true with regards to the obligations of a wife towards her husband. "It's my body and I don't owe him sex" is heard quite often. Similar sentiments are sounded with regards to many other issues. (I'm not here to debate the issues themselves so if you're here to troll, you can leave now).

OTOH, certain entitlements remain, especially when the marriage doesn't work out and the couple divorces. This is destructive to marriage. As much as we'd like to believe in love and romance, reality is that people want to give and receive within a marriage. When one party feels like they're only giving and not receiving anything in return, they feel taken advantage of and the marriage breaks down from there.

Masculinity and femininity are meant to balance each other to create a harmonized marriage, family, community and world. When we each play to our strengths and work in tandem, our marriages, families, communities and the world at large will be a much more wonderful place to live in. When we work against each other, we experience a breakdown in marriages, families, communities and the world. This us vs them mentality helps no one. It's destructive to everyone.

Taking responsibility

We can't change the world, but we can change ourselves. We can treat our own spouses in a manner where we work together, our positives balance out the negatives of our spouses. We encourage and support one another and live a great life. The key to this in a world gone haywire on marriage is to do the exact opposite as what caused the problem to begin with.

The problem began when the feminist movement sought to liberate women from male oppression. Let's examine this statement without getting sidetracked by whether women were or weren't oppressed in the 50's because that's besides the point. This statement assumes that traditional marriage is oppressive to women and that men are the oppressors. It seeks to pit men and women against one another, thus breaking down the family unity. It also assumes that the old version of marriage was all obligations for women while being all benefits to men. This is not true. As explained above, marriage of old was a trade-off which was actually negotiated in great detail in many cultures.

If the problem is that people wish to shirk responsibility while reaping the full benefits, the solution is to do the opposite, to provide the full benefits by fulfilling our full responsibility without expecting immediate returns. Many of the seasoned women here can attest to their successes which occurred only after they were consistent in sticking to their end of the deal while giving their men the space to catch up when they were ready.

Conclusion

Ask not what my husband/wife can do for me, ask what you can do for them. Live your married life in full devotion to your spouse without expectation of anything in return.

If a period of time passes and they are only taking and taking and are taking you for granted, perhaps it's time to consider divorce. When the basics of the marriage are in place but your guys just got a little sidetracked in the bickering, one spouse can break the vicious cycle by doing their part consistently. The other spouse will usually catch up after a few months. However, if they don't catch up and just take you for granted, it may be a sign that the foundations are shattered beyond repair.

Take a step forward and improve your marriage today! If you aren't married yet, take a step forward and improve your RMV today!

Cheers!


[–]neveragoodtime 16 points17 points  (2 children)

The concept of marriage has changed drastically over time. It used to be that people built a fence around their relationship where they planted seeds of love and nurtured it carefully in their own garden, through rain and shine. Now it seems, people wander around and when they find a flower of love already in bloom, they build their fence around it and call it marriage. But they have no idea how to take care of that flower, the efforts and its needs. And so the success of their marriage is based only on the life of that flower and no better than 50/50 odds. Because from time to time that flower will die, and if you can't plant a new one and you can't live in a loveless marriage, then your garden ends in divorce.

[–]sweet_serial_killer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm stealing this! Idk what I'm going to put it on, maybe just my own wall, but it's a great analogy!!

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good points. Thank you for your input.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (8 children)

It seeks to pit men and women against one another, thus breaking down the family unity.

Totally agree

Live your married life in full devotion to your spouse without expectation of anything in return.

This is the definition of love!

Many of the seasoned women here can attest to their successes which occurred only after they were consistent in sticking to their end of the deal

Raises hand excitedly

[–]Nyquil-Junkie 10 points11 points  (4 children)

Live your married life in full devotion to your spouse without expectation of anything in return.

This is the definition of love!

I dunno. We all have expectations from our SO. If you expect absolutely nothing in return you're better off with a nice fish tank and a cat.

You expect your SO to be faithful... to return your affections, to be kind and patient. You expect a lot of things. When you don't get those met, thats called "a deal breaker" depending on how much shit you are willing to swallow.

There is no "unconditional". Unconditional is a fairy tale dreamed up by poets and story tellers.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Mm I think more to the point, you do things because you love the person, not because you expect them to have sex with you or do the dishes.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I addressed your concerns within the post itself. Did you read it through or did you just skim?

I also wrote a post in the past - The myth of unconditional love

[–]Nyquil-Junkie 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I didn't reply to your post I replied to Sadie's. She said that snippet was "true love". It wasn't a concern it was an offhand comment.

I read what followed. I agree.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ah. I see. I apologize.

[–]testmypatience 5 points6 points  (2 children)

For some reason I get this image of you sitting in a chair with a cup of coffee in hand and your entire body is jittering about in the chair while you have a grin on your face as if you were pumped full of happy pills. It's very entertaining. Thanks.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

😂😂

[–]testmypatience 2 points3 points  (0 children)

By jittering I mean that thing old time wind up bells alarm clocks did when they go off. Just vibrating and shaking and moving about the table surface. I was tired still earlier.

[–][deleted]  (25 children)

[deleted]

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 3 points4 points  (14 children)

It's difficult to give an accurate assessment of your relationship from here, but I will mention a few points that jump out at me. These points may or may not be what's really happening. I don't know.

1) Does he know what your needs are? If yes, are you sure? How did you convey your needs?

2) You seem to be minimizing his contribution while inflating your contribution to the relationship. It's obvious that certain things are of greater value to you and other things are of greater value to him. Is it possible that you're each doing for each other what you like and not what the other needs? (See point 1)

If there's no exaggeration at all, why are you still with him?

3) In addition to the first two points, it seems like you may be acting as a doormat at least to an extent.

4) There's a saying - you get what you tolerate, not what you envisioned. While I don't fully agree with the premise behind this statement, there is some truth to it which may apply to you.

5) The point of dating is to determine whether you'd like to spend the rest of your life with this person or move on to someone else.

6) Keep reading around here and you'll find plenty of useful stuff. Read the sidebar if you haven't yet. You can also pm me anytime if I can be of help.

[–][deleted]  (13 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Willow-girl 9 points10 points  (3 children)

    I'm currently seeing a new man (2yrs casual...) who ticks lots of the good things in the RPW book, when we hang out i offer to clean for him, prepare his drinks, listen to his interests, watch his recommended movies/shows, satisfy him in bed (i know, bad before dating but this has been going on since before i started with RPW) these things i do the best i can even though i dont live with him, i try not to be overly invasive. We're very close to dating but he has trust issues due to a bad ex.

    Hon, when a man is really into a woman, she doesn't have to beg him for commitment. He will want to lock her down, to keep other men from making off with her. If a man you're intimate with isn't trying to lock you down, it's because he's really not that into you. He's stringing you along while keeping his options open in case he finds a girl he really wants to be with.

    I'm sorry if that sounds harsh. Hell, I've been on the receiving end of that treatment; probably we all have at some point. But ... live and learn. Quit wasting your time on this one. Go out and meet/date other men, but get it right this time. Don't invest in a relationship unless the man is making an equal or greater effort than you are.

    [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    it's because he's really not that into you. He's stringing you along while keeping his options open in case he finds a girl he really wants to be with.

    This assumes that he wants to settle with someone. This assumption is true is many cases but untrue in many other cases. There are many men who'd be perfectly content with sexual relationships and don't want anything beyond the sex.

    [–]Willow-girl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Well, yes, that can certainly be the case as well!

    [–][deleted]  (6 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]Nyquil-Junkie 2 points3 points  (3 children)

      Because cows make fine pets.

      [–]TetraKent -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

      I think you shouldn't comment on what you dont understand matey

      [–]Nyquil-Junkie 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      lol

      [–]TetraKent -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      :)

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

        [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        As others have pointed out, you may never get commitment from him. Your situation doesn't sound like it's built upon good foundations.

        blogs

        Stay right here, there's plenty of good stuff for you to read. Take a look at the sidebar, read and observe for a while. It will be very useful.

        [–]testmypatience 5 points6 points  (5 children)

        Bill Gates is rich and I buy his software. I don't want him to buy me stuff

        [–]801735 1 point2 points  (3 children)

        Fun fact (didn't check, tho, just googled "How much does Bill Gates make per second?"):

        With a worth of $72 billion, a 6% rate of return would earn Gates roughly $114.16 per second he is alive, making it a poor investment for Bill Gates to bother picking up a $100 bill if he dropped it (Source).

        [–]testmypatience 2 points3 points  (2 children)

        ... holy shit

        [–]801735 4 points5 points  (1 child)

        I know, that's why I follow him around... just in case. ]=)

        [–]kokoroutasan 2 points3 points  (1 child)

        I terms of spending money, my SO also makes 5x what I make, but the only reason he has zero issues paying for stuff for me so often is because he knows I don't expect him to. I will always offer, I will never ask to go somewhere I am not willing to pay, as such he does not feel like I'm manipulating or using him and so he is willing/ insists on paying.

        [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Very good point!

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–]TetraKent 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Thank you!! absolutely going to check that out :)

          [–]aster0idB612 4 points5 points  (1 child)

          I feel like this post embodies the core values of this forum. This is what I love about RPW - focusing on what you can give and what you have to offer instead of what other people owe you. Thank you for the reminder. =)

          [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          You're welcome.

          [–]RedDetergent 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          Long time lurker, I just wanted to say that I love all your posts! It always makes me happy when I see that you have posted a new topic. RPW poster of the decade :D

          [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Thank you!

          [–]WholesomeAwesome 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          was grounds for divorce while getting the lower hand in the process.

          who do you have in mind got the lower hand?

          [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Whoever didn't meet their obligation within the marriage had the lower hand in the divorce in many societies. That's the idea of "fault" divorce. If you're at fault for the breakdown of the marriage, you get the lower hand. "No fault" divorce means that you could deliberately wreck your marriage and still get the upper hand.

          [–]TheFrenchFondler 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          Great post. I agree with all of this .Theories like this are pleasing to read but they mean jack squat if you don't have evidence - it's just armchair theorizing. What are some of these traditional cultures that you are referring too?

          [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Just about every traditional culture from around the world in one form or another. Do a Google search on various cultures and I'm sure you'll find plenty of material. I'm on my phone now and can't do a thorough search at the moment. I didn't make this up, I based it on my knowledge of several cultures.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [deleted]

          [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          1) My posts are often inspired by certain misunderstandings or misconceptions or things which can use some clarification that I see in the comments. This post is one of those.

          2) Sometimes it's beneficial to state and clarify the obvious.

          3) There are newcomers who can benefit.

          4) If everything of common sense wouldn't need discussion, we wouldn't need this forum altogether. But as they say, common sense isn't so common after all.

          5) Perhaps some of the women who liked my post can add reasons which explain why they found it beneficial.