Good
Excellent story btw
Ok, good cause I really do want to praise her and call her blessed. It’s always something I’m a bit uncertain about doing though. Concerned I’m going to come across as gloating over having a treasure that others don’t. One of those things a guy just has to get used to navigating i guess.
NEVER hesitate. If where an individual goes is toward bitter envy, that's a personal problem, and there's no reason why anyone should hide his or her joy just because someone else will "feel bad."
Thanks! Good word. I'll remember that.
Do you think by submitting to him first that would possibly encourage him to step up and act better as a man? Or is it a risk you're not willing to take?
I've often made this point. I saw it made somewhere more eloquently but the idea is that to an extent, people get what they put in. Especially in a culture that treats female submission as alien, and with relations between the sexes (all two of them in case anyone needs clarification...) strained.
I think Megan was saying if a man isn’t worthy of that level of submission he needs to worry about his own behavior and excellence.
Possibly, but betting the rest of your life on that risk is not a wise idea.
Absolutely agree here! To clarify I was speaking to a situation where a woman already finds herself bound to a man and realizes her choice was poor and her man is unworthy of her esteem. Her best course of action is to count him as worthy of her esteem, and focus on herself and her behavior and attitude.
And I want to make sure I say this as well. A similar instance applies to men. If you realize your woman is (surprise!) human and fallible, imperfect and unlovely.
I am not being any kinda way but it seems like you are saying it's good to be submissive unless your husband isn't doing what he is supposed to? He has to basically earn his general status before women will submit? Is that a correct interpretation?
Great question.
I see this as behavioural expectations.
Megan, you are a tremendous and amazing high-value woman hampered only by autism and a bit of previously-lived trauma. You are thus in the far-above-rubies category, but the answer to your question is that (a) the majority of unmarried women aren't even average, and (b) there are significantly more unmarried women seeking marriage than there are unmarried men seeking marriage, and thus (c) the average unmarried woman doesn't come close to having the luxury to marry an average man and have him all to herself. Especially given the continued stigma about plural marriage, yes, in a partial sense, you're correct that, if she's willing to share a husband, the average unmarried woman has the leverage to expect a better class of man than she would otherwise acquire -- but even with that stigma firmly in place the average unmarried woman is light years away from being able to demand a significantly-better-than-average man if she's willing to share him, and this will only become exacerbated as the stigma abates -- which it will. No one can force women to accept the level of men they deserve, but none of that will stop the women who hold out for higher than they deserve from dying alone in poverty with their cats and dogs . . . and rats and squirrels.
Would also like to add that as a single female seeking to join a family, there are many more options for us vs a man/family looking to add an additional wife. Women have the upper-hand in choosing not only a family but the right family.
As is anyone who jumps into marriage without not only weighing options but being realistic about them.
Some do, but no matter what realm of human behavior one focuses on, some do just about any stupid thing. What I'm observing on the main is large numbers of men desiring polygyny but being unwilling to just take any random woman who holds up her hand. Most -- and I mean the vast majority -- remain married to one one wife.
For sure, you should be discriminating, because, what is that thing they say? -- only fools rush in where angels fear to tread -- but my concern with the men seeking polygyny isn't that they're under-cautious but that many also have far too many deal-breaker conditions just like women do, so I'm regularly encouraging men to broaden their level of generosity to include a greater range of women. So both sides of the equation are risking making the perfect the enemy of the good. Why this is more disadvantageous for single women, though, is that, when single women are too picky or overinflate their SMV, they end up out in the cold -- whereas the married wanna-be-polygynists and their wives still end up in each other's arms.
True. And there is nothing wrong with being happily monogamous either!
That's interesting because from the men/families I've spoken to, a lot have tried and failed at Polygamy. Some quite often. I'm not blaming the men for settling primarily. I think men moving too fast and settling combined with the fact that women have many options even if they chose to leave the relationship both play roles in the relationship's demise at times. I'm sure other factors come into play though. Just as it does in monogamous relationships as well.
I've personally not had this experience too often. I've found the majority of the people i've spoken with to be open to compromise. Even the ones who want a strictly biblical marriage. Then again saying and doing are two different things.
If I understand what you're saying correctly, it's essentially "don't be too picky and miss your opportunity while doing so?"