Author | Message |
Roles in your relationship? What are the roles that are prevalent in your relationship?
Does your woman understand that she is the woman and there are roles that come with being in a relationship? Does your man understand that he is the man and there are roles that come with being in a relationship? What roles exist in your confines? Do they mix and match....which I feel is a recipe for disaster. Are they traditional? Are they non-existent, or are they just natural in accordance to who feels they can do things better? Because as I see it, the days of long term relationships and marriages have gone the way of the Dinosaur. So what is the formula? Wait....what is your role and is it accepted or tweaked by your significant other? Just stay on topic and address the roles that are YOURS and the roles that are YOUR OTHER'S. Because I know commentary is looming from independent, strong, masculine, equal pay, bra burning, crotch grabbing advocates. It is not about that....this is about the roles necessary in a marriage/relationship and how you are harvesting them for success. The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. -- Mark Twain.
BOB JOHNSON IS PART OF THE PROBLEM!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DexMSR said: Because as I see it, the days of long term relationships and marriages have gone the way of the Dinosaur.
Dinosaurs still exist, mate. They govern the world. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DexMSR said: Because as I see it, the days of long term relationships and marriages have gone the way of the Dinosaur. AYE. At least for me, this is so. Honestly, I'm attracted to non-conventionals. Some "old-fashioned" things should always remain standard in my opinion, but when it comes to the less important things, anything goes. I'm attracted to gender-bending and slightly tilted gender roles, I think. independent, strong, masculine, equal pay, bra burning, crotch grabbing advocates.
Oh shit, my hat done fell off | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
why should there be any? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
the role in my relationship now is escapee. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: why should there be any?
Because....there are two completely different wired individuals involved...it is just natural. Can't fight it....and you know it. Whap! The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. -- Mark Twain.
BOB JOHNSON IS PART OF THE PROBLEM!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
independent, strong, masculine, equal pay, bra burning, crotch grabbing advocates.
[/quote] So we are cross-gendered now??? The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. -- Mark Twain.
BOB JOHNSON IS PART OF THE PROBLEM!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anx said: the role in my relationship now is escapee.
LOL....you and me both!!! The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. -- Mark Twain.
BOB JOHNSON IS PART OF THE PROBLEM!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DexMSR said: Handclapsfingasnapz said: why should there be any?
Because....there are two completely different wired individuals involved...[...] and that's just the thing. again, why should there be any? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: DexMSR said: Because....there are two completely different wired individuals involved...[...] and that's just the thing. again, why should there be any? That's it....two sexes....from two majorly different standpoints and perspective.... Ok...ARE YOU FUCKING WITH ME!!!! BAD SANTA VOICE!! The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. -- Mark Twain.
BOB JOHNSON IS PART OF THE PROBLEM!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: DexMSR said: Because....there are two completely different wired individuals involved...[...] and that's just the thing. again, why should there be any? i don't think there SHOULD be any, but i do think roles HAPPEN in relationships, just kinda organically. like, one person's the social one and the other person is the practical one, or one person is the domestic one and the other person is the culture vulture, and the two feed off each other that way. i'm not sure if i'm explaining this as well as i could...i don't think role should be EXPECTED, but i do think they're unavoidable. usually, this works out for the best and is a good part of a working relationship. so i've encountered, anyway. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anx said: Handclapsfingasnapz said: and that's just the thing. again, why should there be any? i don't think there SHOULD be any, but i do think roles HAPPEN in relationships, just kinda organically. like, one person's the social one and the other person is the practical one, or one person is the domestic one and the other person is the culture vulture, and the two feed off each other that way. i'm not sure if i'm explaining this as well as i could...i don't think role should be EXPECTED, but i do think they're unavoidable. usually, this works out for the best and is a good part of a working relationship. so i've encountered, anyway. those are more traits than roles, really... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: Anx said: i don't think there SHOULD be any, but i do think roles HAPPEN in relationships, just kinda organically. like, one person's the social one and the other person is the practical one, or one person is the domestic one and the other person is the culture vulture, and the two feed off each other that way. i'm not sure if i'm explaining this as well as i could...i don't think role should be EXPECTED, but i do think they're unavoidable. usually, this works out for the best and is a good part of a working relationship. so i've encountered, anyway. those are more traits than roles, really... not really. i think people in relationships settle into certain dynamics, and those dynamics settle into their personalities/identities, and roles develop. i do think what appear to be "roles" on the surface are a little more complex than people outside the relationship may think. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
You're making my head hurt... It's 8:00 in the morning go away! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Muse2NOPharaoh said: You're making my head hurt... It's 8:00 in the morning go away!
Whap! The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. -- Mark Twain.
BOB JOHNSON IS PART OF THE PROBLEM!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: Anx said: i don't think there SHOULD be any, but i do think roles HAPPEN in relationships, just kinda organically. like, one person's the social one and the other person is the practical one, or one person is the domestic one and the other person is the culture vulture, and the two feed off each other that way. i'm not sure if i'm explaining this as well as i could...i don't think role should be EXPECTED, but i do think they're unavoidable. usually, this works out for the best and is a good part of a working relationship. so i've encountered, anyway. those are more traits than roles, really... I'm with you. A practical idealist 'till my last breath. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anx said: Handclapsfingasnapz said: those are more traits than roles, really... not really. i think people in relationships settle into certain dynamics, and those dynamics settle into their personalities/identities, and roles develop. i do think what appear to be "roles" on the surface are a little more complex than people outside the relationship may think. meh. i'm pretty much non-traditional when it comes to the aspect of relationships, so that's why i'm popping in with what i'm saying. i still think stuff like that are more traits than actual relationship roles. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DexMSR said: Muse2NOPharaoh said: You're making my head hurt... It's 8:00 in the morning go away!
Whap! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: Anx said: not really. i think people in relationships settle into certain dynamics, and those dynamics settle into their personalities/identities, and roles develop. i do think what appear to be "roles" on the surface are a little more complex than people outside the relationship may think. meh. i'm pretty much non-traditional when it comes to the aspect of relationships, so that's why i'm popping in with what i'm saying. i still think stuff like that are more traits than actual relationship roles. well, okay. what do you mean by "traits"? and why are you resistant to the concept of roles in a relationship? to me, "traits" means one person has blue eyes, the other person has brown eyes. one person likes eggs, the other person likes cereal. those are traits to me. "roles" means, one person is cool with taking out the trash and the other person is cool with doing the dishes. it's an agreement made within the relationship. i don't know what's so controversial about this idea - i think it's a natural part of being in a relationship. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: Anx said: not really. i think people in relationships settle into certain dynamics, and those dynamics settle into their personalities/identities, and roles develop. i do think what appear to be "roles" on the surface are a little more complex than people outside the relationship may think. meh. i'm pretty much non-traditional when it comes to the aspect of relationships, so that's why i'm popping in with what i'm saying. i still think stuff like that are more traits than actual relationship roles. "traits" or "roles", they be changin' when you get with someone long-term. It's amazing how yin-yang people become together; almost like you fill in each others' gaps. This goes for smaller and larger areas. What would you consider "roles" then, as opposed to "traits"? Oh shit, my hat done fell off | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
to be in a role is to end up being stuck in a rut. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anx said: Handclapsfingasnapz said: meh. i'm pretty much non-traditional when it comes to the aspect of relationships, so that's why i'm popping in with what i'm saying. i still think stuff like that are more traits than actual relationship roles. well, okay. what do you mean by "traits"? and why are you resistant to the concept of roles in a relationship? to me, "traits" means one person has blue eyes, the other person has brown eyes. one person likes eggs, the other person likes cereal. those are traits to me. "roles" means, one person is cool with taking out the trash and the other person is cool with doing the dishes. it's an agreement made within the relationship. i don't know what's so controversial about this idea - i think it's a natural part of being in a relationship. See it never worked like that with me and my former partner. It was whoever wanted to do whatever at the time. Roles are what you do in the office, not in a relationship, ideally. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: to be in a role is to end up being stuck in a rut.
Oh shit, my hat done fell off | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mrdespues said: Anx said: well, okay. what do you mean by "traits"? and why are you resistant to the concept of roles in a relationship? to me, "traits" means one person has blue eyes, the other person has brown eyes. one person likes eggs, the other person likes cereal. those are traits to me. "roles" means, one person is cool with taking out the trash and the other person is cool with doing the dishes. it's an agreement made within the relationship. i don't know what's so controversial about this idea - i think it's a natural part of being in a relationship. See it never worked like that with me and my former partner. It was whoever wanted to do whatever at the time. Roles are what you do in the office, not in a relationship, ideally. and that's just it--one shouldn't be the only one who takes the trash out and the other shouldn't be the one who does the dishes. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: to be in a role is to end up being stuck in a rut.
sure, when the concept of roles are abused, neglected, taken for granted. when roles are acknowledged and when a relationship is allowed to breathe and evolve, roles can be quite useful. fun, even. (but i won't go into that, heh.) it's just like anything else that can work in your favor - if you don't maintain it, it'll go to crap. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
For Swayze's sake. I know Anxy didn't mean that having a "role" means wearing a huge sign on your forehead that says "GARBAGE TAKER-OUTER" and another on their ass that says "SUBMISSIVE" or "PROTECTOR" or "BALANCES THE CHECKBOOK".
These things are hardly forever and lots of them switch around. Some we're just more comfortable doing and... ugh, never mind. Oh shit, my hat done fell off | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: mrdespues said: See it never worked like that with me and my former partner. It was whoever wanted to do whatever at the time. Roles are what you do in the office, not in a relationship, ideally. and that's just it--one shouldn't be the only one who takes the trash out and the other shouldn't be the one who does the dishes. I've always wanted to say this: I'm sayin'...! If there's really some harmony goin' on, it's all about taking the load off who is the most worthy, or simply just putting the other before yourself.... .... fuck. I just remembered all the shit I did for that... girl. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: to be in a role is to end up being stuck in a rut.
Fight it all you want sista.....there is no escaping it. The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. -- Mark Twain.
BOB JOHNSON IS PART OF THE PROBLEM!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: mrdespues said: See it never worked like that with me and my former partner. It was whoever wanted to do whatever at the time. Roles are what you do in the office, not in a relationship, ideally. and that's just it--one shouldn't be the only one who takes the trash out and the other shouldn't be the one who does the dishes. and i agree with you. but ya know what? when it's a regular week and work is from hell and you come home and you're tired, it's nice to know that someone doesn't mind doing the one chore in the world that you hate, and it's nice to know you can return the favor. someday you might HAVE to take out the trash. if you depend on a role so much that you think it's your ticket out of having to do a thing, then you're abusing it. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mrdespues said: Handclapsfingasnapz said: and that's just it--one shouldn't be the only one who takes the trash out and the other shouldn't be the one who does the dishes. I've always wanted to say this: I'm sayin'...! If there's really some harmony goin' on, it's all about taking the load off who is the most worthy, or simply just putting the other before yourself.... .... fuck.
I just remembered all the shit I did for that... girl. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |