Deal-Breaker

[rue721]

I was reading the "Next President" thread, and was interested in what Metella was saying about having a zero-tolerance rule re: cheating in a relationship.

I was wondering if other people felt this way- how important is monogamy/the sexual aspect of a relationship to you?

I personally woudn't find cheating in the way that it seemed to happen with Clinton (sex based, not emotionally intimate) a very big deal... I honestly don't feel a lot of sexual jealousy, and I have a terrible time keeping my willpower in the face of any kind of physical temptation, so I would be prone to forgive. But if my "significant other" were to care deeply about someone else, share their intimate thoughts with someone else.... just generally get closer to someone else than they are to me- well, that would be a HUGE problem, and I would be very hurt. Of course, I have (happily) a fairly limited experience in the area, so a lot of this is still unproven.

What WOULD be a deal-breaker for other people? In relationships? In friendships?

I personally have found that there a couple friends that are "undumpable".... I've given up trying to keep a check on everything and just have had to go to a place of unconditional love for them. But the only reason I know that is that they have transgressed my "deal-breakers" and have not been able to really, truly cut them out of my life (as I have with others). I don't know any longer what my "deal-breakers" are... and I don't know if that's a good thing, or a bad thing.

How strict are your standards?

[Sirenna]

manipulative people. I drop them fast.

[janetcatbird]

Intolerance and close-mindedness. I'm not saying you have to agree or that you don't hold your principles, far from it. Just don't condemn other people. Even when I don't have a personal stake in something, I don't like it when people get picked on.

--Catbird

[Sirenna]

yep, I totally agree with that.

[doctorj]

it's funny you bring this up. i've been talking to people about this and wondering what my deal breakers are.

so here's a story. i got sick a few months ago -- food poisoning. it was awful. i could hardly move. around 7pm i called a friend of my who lives down the street and asked if she might drop some gatorade by so i could balance my electrolytes. she was out -- and she didn't call me back. by 11pm, i realized i was in immediate danger of becoming a prune. i decided i had to try and get it myself. i had to sit down twice on the way to the convenience mart, and at one point i stopped to barf behind a dumpster. somebody actually stopped and offered me a dollar, thinking i was a drunkard bum or something. but i made it back home eventually. she wrote me an email the next day... no call that night to see if i needed anything, no call the next day to see if i was okay.

the thing i realized after this experience is that this person could only ever be an acquaintance to me -- never a friend. what's the point of having friends if you can't count on them when you're in trouble? i value those people i can count on, and i do my absolute best to be there for them. i take it seriously. it's a loyalty thing.

so: being giving is a deal breaker for me. i don't want to invest myself too deeply in any relationship where there isn't a true give and take.

[rue721]

Ooops. Well, maybe there IS a good reason to stay away from both

Actually, that's a really thought-provoking point, jenethyland. I guess I actually DO (though unconsciously) equate relationships with gambling- mostly because in each, you are pretty damn powerless over the outcomes.

I was talking about a couple people who I realized that I'll just care about no matter what they/I do, in my earlier post... well, that was a really scary realization for me, because it kind of put me at their mercy. No matter what, I realized, I couldn't just walk away unscathed.

I fell in love (and out of love) with one of those people, and it just kind of swept me up and took me for a two-year ride. I really did lose myself in that... and that was frightening.

I'm WAY too scared of losing control over my finances/independence to gamble... and I'm way too scared of losing control over my emotions/independence to enter into a conventional, adult relationship... at least not yet. I'm going to wait to feel more secure in my own self(hood) till I (consciously) try out the whole "lose yourself in something greater" bit. Those kind of drives- for love, for thrill, for unity, whatever- are just too powerful for me to handle right now.

[Techguy]

Interesting subject. I discussed this with Mrs. T, and she told me she would be more upset--her deal-breaker--wouldn't be if I cheated on her but if I lied about it and tried to cover it up when confronted about it. She says she would be willing to forgive a repentant and remorseful husband, but not one who won't face up to what he's done, denies everything, and then continues the affair.

I can see her point. A one-time transgression can be forgiven IF there is admission of guilt and a promise made--and kept--not to repeat the offense. It can be argued that a one-time transgression wasn't planned, so long as the transgressor walks the straight and narrow from that point onward. Lying and cover-ups are much more serious offenses in Mrs. T's view because it suggests planning, premeditation, and the intent to deceive and continue to do so. This latter scenario is kick-to-the-curb territory, and don't look back.

*Techguy, who is of like mind but doesn't want to ever test this theory*

[Metella]

janethyland: I am perhaps more a romantic than you are You mention Medieval times; but there were marriages and love long before that - so I'll go back to Roman times where (like Today) there were marriages made for positioning, and there were marriages made for love. Both are referred to, both are found in ancient plays .... so like today, it may depend on a person's fears, strength of character etc as to what kind of marriage they have. So to sum it down to currency, I'll only concede that point with some; but not the whole "institution" of marriage.

Then I also don't equate it as close as others with gambling. With a marriage, you mostly know what you are getting - even one's where parents arrange the marriage - so that shot of adrenaline and feeling you may come out a millionaire - just aren't there. I think that this all just tries to mire the discussion in too much analogy and (eps!) reanalyze-ing. I think it goes into too much of a tanget to the start - of a deeply personal line.

I think what people have shared here is interesting - it also made me think back on my own history .... I have changed my lines slightly overtime & changed them to the tighter.
I also had a friend who I knew was not reliable, and when she wasn't going to keep an appointment, she would call up an lie about her car tires, or a cold or something. Since I KNEW this, I factored this into my dealings with her & was happy with our friendship. I gave her a place to stay when she was having trouble with her father - was there for her through all sorts of things .... being a stronger person, I never needed her for years. Then when I did, I ask for some help - I was ignored while she played with a new boyfriend & treated like a marginal part of her life. So much for a 20 year friendship. Now, (not just because of this) I see the small lies, the unrealiable-ness as a sign of deeper things & I do NOT do more than a causual and friendly interaction.

This is why cheating is a deal breaker for me, not that the physical act cannot be overcome, but even if contrite, truly sorry AT THE TIME, the same traits will be there & I don't have time to invest in more hollow relationships.

Let me tell you, I would bring my friend hot soup and gatoraid at 2:00am !! and if I needed it, I would expect the same.

[Sirenna]

rue721 said:

...a couple people who I realized that I'll just care about no matter what they/I do, in my earlier post... well, that was a really scary realization for me, because it kind of put me at their mercy. No matter what, I realized, I couldn't just walk away...

The only people I feel like that about are my family.

For friends or lovers, as Metella, Drj have pointed out, at some point taking all on the shit is not enough to qualify as any sort of relationship/friendship. It has to be a two-way street. If I am the only person moving to a place of unconditional love, as you eloquently put it, and their actions constantly force me to bend around them then it doesn't seem like a friendship.

As for love being an out-of-control gamble, I've been there too and my feeling is it is short-term and bound to burn itself out so that's also nothing lasting or strong. I think unconditional love comes from a place of strength. It takes a lot of self-assuredness to recognize how the other person limits us and still make the decision to allow them into our lives but in a way that doesn't limit us or force us to bend our sense of fairness or, worse, our moral code.

[doctorj]

word, metella and sirenna.

my life seems to get more complicated and busy by the minute, and i'm no longer interested in wasting my time with someone who will inevitably (i've learned) turn out to be unreliable. this goes for friends and lovers.

the discussion of expectations in marriage is fascinating. i agree that people's motives for marriage have varied over the centuries and still vary today. though it's interesting... among my family and friends, those who expected marriage to be about longs-standing friendship and respect and partnership to get things done (like raising children, etc) -- they've done well in terms of staying together. but those who expected romantic love and fire for all eternity in marriage have not done so well.

so... if ever-burning romance is not the key to healthy marriage, does that mean we're back to seeing marriage as a social contract? in which marriage becomes a deal worked out between two human beings to run a household and (most often) bring up children?

[Sirenna]

Interesting question!

I don't think marriage is solely convenient. Couples could divvy up household stuff without going through the wedding part. I think it is conciously deepening the committment. We all need to belong to someone.

[doctorj]

"we all need to belong to someone" -- what a beautiful way to think about it!

and completely true, if you ask me. i was talking to this elderly lady at the JFS where i volunteer and she was telling me that people don't understand the word "love" these days. she said, when you get to be 70 and you're out a restaurant and your spouse helps you clean up after you crap yourself, that's love.

there's really only one person who signs up for that level of intimacy. and it's the person we belong to.

[peachybc]

calliope said:

word, metella and sirenna.

my life seems to get more complicated and busy by the minute, and i'm no longer interested in wasting my time with someone who will inevitably (i've learned) turn out to be unreliable. this goes for friends and lovers.

the discussion of expectations in marriage is fascinating. i agree that people's motives for marriage have varied over the centuries and still vary today. though it's interesting... among my family and friends, those who expected marriage to be about longs-standing friendship and respect and partnership to get things done (like raising children, etc) -- they've done well in terms of staying together. but those who expected romantic love and fire for all eternity in marriage have not done so well.

so... if ever-burning romance is not the key to healthy marriage, does that mean we're back to seeing marriage as a social contract? in which marriage becomes a deal worked out between two human beings to run a household and (most often) bring up children?

Doctorj,

I can't speak for why everyone gets married only to why I got married. I married because I fell in love (mentally, physically, emotionally), and I wanted to share and spend my life with my husband.

Ever-burning love is part of a healthy marriage, but people have to understand that the firework, frenzied, honeymoon type physical passion isn't sustainable. Heck, you'd kill each other and never get anything done! LOL ;D But if you really love each other, the physical passion doesn't die. It ebbs and flows over time, impacted by the intrusion of daily life. The romance doesn't die either. If you find all that's getting lost in the daily grind, you stop and make an effort to reconnect romantically. Ya schedule date nights if necessary! And to me friendship and compatibility are equally important in a marriage. You've got to like and respect the person as much as you "romantically" love them.

After 34 years of marriage, I'm happy and feel fortunate to say our love has deepened, and our like and respect for each other has also deepened as we've gone through life together. We have grown and changed over the years and still delight in each others company. We still marvel over having found each other and never go a day without saying and meaning, "I love you."

Sappy, huh?
PeachyBC

[Shadow]

Peachybc

That was beautiful....Your post said a lot about real love.
Thank you

Shadow

[Metella]

Not sappy (and I have the largest sappy detector on the board!) it is wonderful.

I agree - this is my take on marriage; it is finding someone to belong to, to be loyal to, to lean on, to share & laugh and cry with and still know they are going to be around to do it all over again. It has some passion and a lot of respect thrown in the mix.

I LOVE to hear actual happy endings. One thing that throws me in a frenzy is hearing about any 10+ year marriage breaking up and the guy connecting to a younger woman. That is one of my biggest pet peeve buttons. So I really dig hearing 34+ relationships still going strong.