Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: WFTR
If her previous boyfriend was "Mr Not Ready," why did it take her three years to figure out that he wasn't ready?

It isn't unusual for a woman to see a man as a "project", and her duty to bring him to his full potential.

What was so attractive about him that she stayed with him for those three years?

She saw his "potential."

In the early stages of that relationship and in others, did she continue looking for guys who might be more ready? Was she willing to dump the ones who clearly weren't ready for those who were when she was younger and work towards marrying one of those guys someday?

For the most part women don't think that way (it is, unfortunately, more typical of men to look over the fence to check out the grass on the other side). She saw this as an ever-accruing investment. In fact, note her reaction to the fact that he almost immediately got engaged to his subsequent girlfriend:

Then, to her annoyance and dismay, she found out that her Mr. Not Ready had turned into Mr. Ready. With someone else! He was ready to make commitments to his new girlfriend. Ready to follow her to another state where she had a job. Ready to give her an engagement ring. She had spent three years of her life in a relationship that she thought would lead to marriage or at least to a long-term relationship. She had trained the guy. And now her investment was paying off for someone else.
Note that I'm not really knocking this concept, that a relationship equals "an investment." But you wouldn't for one second expect this bright, savvy young woman to be taken in by a fast-buck investment scam artist. You can bet your bottom dollar she knows the financial investment market, and navigates it with great knowledge and confidence.

Whe she can't figure out "sure thing" vs. "junk stocks" when it comes to picking her men is beyond me.

As I read her story, I wonder a little whether she's had her fun with the party boys and now she wants a relationship that doesn't require as much work on her part.

I don't know that she (or her myriad sisters) are trucking with "party boys" so much as with "peers" who look, act and think (or so they imagine) the way they do: It's not important to "get serious" early on; you can save that for your thirties.

For those of us who have been careful to avoid using women, the thought of being offered leftovers from someone who has allowed herself to be used isn't very attractive.

You're showing your (and my) age here.

The "modern" young person doesn't think in terms of "used merchandise," because everyone is a "user" as well as a "usee".

As I said: The shallowness and callowness of the mindset is astounding, and it comes ultimately from the fact that they are all spiritually dead. They're exquisite corpses, perhaps, but they are corpses all the same.

3 posted on 01/27/2003 6:47:01 PM PST by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Illbay
Thanks for some interesting posts. I haven't responded so far because I am still pondering them. As I get older, the thought of getting married just to avoid being alone doesn't sound so bad. I'm not ready to be a father right now, and I may never be ready. However, I'm reaching the age where I need to start now or not start at all. I think men and women were made to be partners, and I think that a good, stable, lifelong marriage that does nothing more than keep each of them from being single is worthwhile. Obviously, society needs people to marry and produce children, but things didn't work that way for many of us.

WFTR
Bill

17 posted on 01/27/2003 9:26:10 PM PST by WFTR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson