Replies

Interesting.

Back when I was in an unaffectionate marriage, I read a lot of relationship books. There were two extremes.

One extreme said women were responders and men were 100% responsible for how they responded. While there is some truth that women are responders, this extreme denied that women bore any responsibility for their attitudes or choices.

The other extreme said that women were 100% responsible for happiness in the home. That if women would just feed men’s two hungers, food and sex, that a man would build them the Taj Mahal. And again there’s some truth that if women would meet those two needs of men, that would go a long way. But I know that there are men that don’t appreciate what they have. And they will treat women poorly regardless of how good the woman is to them. Plus a lot of men do not have a clue how or the resources to build the Taj Mahal, so be careful of setting too high of expectations.

My folks told me that marriage is not 50/50. That it needs to be 100/100, because there will be times when your spouse can not give 50.

Good luck.

Since marriage is a partnership as opposed to a business contract, it is grossly unjust to expect one person to shoulder the full responsibility for the success of the relationship.

Theoretically, yes, marriage could be 50/50, but each person should be willing to give that 100% when necessary.

There is plenty of blame to go around on both sides, but it does no one any good to broad brush an entire group of people based on a bad personal experience.

Exactly: 100/100.

Each should be ready, willing, and able to pick up the entire load on a moment’s notice. I don’t need to enumerate scenarios.

Each should trust that the other is doing their level best, given differing opinions, abilities, etc.

If something needs doing, few things cause more resentment than expecting the other do it - and then criticize how it’s done. Feel free to do better.