Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

[Spartan_Warrior]

NEWS FLASHES: YOUR PARENTS WERE "NOT COOL"

Also, can we keep the ad hominems limited to my own person, please? My parents were quite cool, thank you very much.

(Just kidding... sorta.)

[BecaS]

I'm neither dumb nor consumer culture, Spartan. And it's apparent to me that you are not a parent. Neither is JohnnyH. We are speaking different languages and it has nothing to do with "dumb" or "consumeristic." It has to do with life experience.

You'll get yours. I'll get the rest of mine. We'll all learn.

In the meantime, WHOOSH! out of here! Things to do. As always, great discussion, thank you for your participation, have a great day!

[Spartan_Warrior]

It has to do with life experience.

...Perfect! Back to ad hominems against me, just as I asked. Yes, I'm sure I'm just too lacking in life experience to understand why a fully dependent being 1/4 my size living in my house under my rules would somehow spend more than 100% of my own personal budget ($12,000+/yr), despite all indications (and indeed, testimony from other users on this very site) to the contrary.

Have a nice day.

[JohnnyH]

It's a new idea here that kids take up more of the monthly budget in any given household than the adults?

I'm in Never Land.

You have indeed stumbled down a rabbit hole... It is NOT a new idea that a tiny, dependent humans require more expenditures than [hopefully] two mature, independent humans. It's common knowledge... But I (like most here, I'd wager) think nearly all financial common knowledge should be questioned and almost always fully rejected.

I am still waiting for the justification of what exactly costs so much... I guess I'll keep waiting because when I ask otherwise rational people why this little naked kid costs so much money they usually reply "You're not a parent! You don't know." I can't imagine? I don't understand basic math, apparently. I guess it touches a nerve to ask figures, because they know they're wasting a lot of money, and often time as well.

So parents who are not cool and have "fallen behind" are good parents? By being in a constant state of rush and poverty they proved their devotion and love? Parents who are "cool" and have leisure time and money for hobbies are therefore selfish bad parents?

[LiquidSapphire]

@BecaS - I guess we agree to disagree. I'd really like to see a typical month of spending for a kid where it would regularly exceed $1K/mo not including child care (which is figured separately).

Here's mine:
Food: For two adults we spend $400/mo. The kid is full after half a banana. I think $100/mo would be a pretty accurate estimate, she can eat what we eat. We eat well.

Housing: Cost of an extra bedroom - $200/mo. After all - you'd still have the first bedroom, kitchen, bathroom, etc whether or not you had a kid, right? Our utilities range from $140-$240/month and that includes the extra bedroom. Turning on an extra light bulb and running the bath a few extra times might cost what, an extra $20/mo?

Health Insurance: $0-$100 depending on if it's subsidized through work. The little girl rarely gets sick. She went to urgent care one time last year for the stomach flu. Some kids get sick. A lot. And that's expensive. A lot of kids don't. Ours doesn't. So to make such a blanket statement like that is just not true. It's like saying, "I can't retire because HEALTH INSURANCE!!! WAAAA!" without really investigating what that's all about. I guess you can amortize that to like an extra $20/month for copays or whatever.

Toys/Incidentals/Entertainment/Education: You say kids wear out their clothes. In my experience, not any faster than they grow out of them. And let's say you're right about the clothes thing even. I personally shop at Goodwill. I love it there. I buy all my clothes there except highly specialized stuff which comes from eBay (I just bought a corset for $17 - 4 year olds don't need corsets.) So what's good enough for me isn't good enough for my kid? Am I failing at life if I don't go to Osh Kosh to outfit my kid every 3 months? I don't think so. I go to free city events like county fairs, etc all the time. There's always kid stuff to do for free. And what's wrong with Goodwill toys, etc? I could even buy her something new every single time we go.

Transportation: Well I bike everywhere. I can get a bike trailer. Also the town has a radius of about 5 miles. I figure maybe $25/mo in gas/wear/tear to just drive the kid around. (We'd spend the money if she's just coming somewhere we'd go anyway, and of course insurance $ doesn't change, registration, repairs, etc)

If you add an extra $100 for "shit happens" like school supplies, new shoes, extra medical costs, car seats and other one time expenses like upgrading furniture, I calculate TOTAL COST of around $600 and everything else is extra. So in my scenario, Mom profits $400/mo tax free that, if she doesn't get it, one call to the state and he gets his wages garnished. She doesn't have to spend a single penny on her own kid. Now trips to Europe sound pretty feasible.

And the kid can be ERE because I choose her/him to live the ERE life. Why wouldn't I want to impart my values on my kid? That's basic parenting to show him that life's more than money. I actively WANT the kid to live my ERE life. Maybe she can avoid the mistakes I made in my teens and 20s.

[Spartan_Warrior]

@LS: Great post once again. I hope you take it as a compliment when I say you're exactly the type of woman I hope to not-marry someday.

[BecaS]

Back for a minute- sorry guys, not being deliberately absent; I don't mind a spirited debate. (Per above, we all learn.)

My "kids" are 30 and 28, and our oldest has his own family now. Details of budget-eating expenses will escape me, sorry. It's been a few years. I do remember what it's like to have more month than money, however, and not because I was a dumb consumer.

To give context, I cloth diapered and breast fed 30 years ago.

We had the first babies and the first grandbabies on either side of the family. Hand me down baby stuff was not falling from the sky onto us like manna. There were some venues for buying used clothing and goods but it was mostly yard sale hit or miss. I am happy that there are many, many more and more viable venues for used baby/kids' goods now. Our son and his wife are using them quite successfully.

I wasn't, am not, a "hobby shopper." To reference the MMM article that Bigato linked above (which, incidentally, was light on numbers as well) I was not strolling down the aisles at Target looking for something cute to buy for my baby.

We were young, we were actually not too long out of college, we were both working, and we had not had a chance to accumulate a nest egg when our kids were born 22 months apart. (We are poster children for the fact that even conscientiously applied birth control can fail. In our case, that was OK. We were happy to start our family young albeit it was somewhat financially challenging.)

We did take a child care expense hit to the budget. That's huge and if you can avoid it, good for you.

Otherwise, expenses were as follows:

Clothing, even cloth diapering when laundered at home, will be an ongoing expense. I don't know what the current thinking is, but I pre-soaked my cloth diapers and washed them in hot water, so that's an expense. Clothing doesn't have to be a huge expense, but it will be ongoing. You'd like to think that you will raise children who are immune to the fashion bullies and to a great extent, you can do so. We did. It is somewhat of a challenge but it can be managed- not without some frustration, however. I encourage you to do so but be prepared for some tearing of hair and gnashing of teeth. And be prepared for that to begin much, much earlier than adolescence. I don't know how or why elementary school children are so consumer products/advertising driven but they were, even 25 years ago. You'll be surprised. Teaching children that they can survive without designer tags is a great lesson that will carry them well through life.

All bets are off when your male children grow into adult sized shoes and grow out of them faster than they can wear them out. That expense was, at times, mind blowing- and we aren't talking about trendy footwear here- we're talking about basic no name tennis shoes and a pair of not tennis shoes from any discount shoe retailer.

"Free public education" is far from it. You'll find out. Fees and fees and fees and some more fees and supplies and field trips and fees. If you home school, your tax dollars will not subsidize your child's education, and you will still have to supply the curriculum and materials. (There may be some tax breaks/rebates for home schoolers, I don't know.)

Medical costs, even with insurance, just for pedestrian illnesses, can sink a monthly budget. The average first grader gets 10 upper respiratory infections per year. That's an average. On a particularly bad year, the number can go higher. Now space two kids 22 months apart. At one point I was on the phone with my pediatrician, in tears, because as soon as one kid got over an ear infection with a fever, the other kid came down with one. I don't think we got clear of ear infections all year that year. The pediatrician pulled my kids' charts and counted up the number of URI's and ear infections we'd had to date as of that teary phone call. We'd not yet hit 20 visits to the pediatrician since the fall began, so we were still below the average number. My boss wasn't particularly receptive to that fact.

Ear infections *hurt.* An ear infection with a fever needs to be seen and treated. I hear you when you say that you won't take your kid to the dr. except in cases of serious illness. There's a big gray area between pedestrian illnesses and viruses that simply need the tincture of time and perhaps some OTC meds, and serious illnesses that obviously need intervention. In that gray area lies the common childhood illnesses that used to kill children, much to our modern horror, as well as the simple medical interventions we enjoy today. Make no mistake- routine illnesses can and do still kill children. Drainage from an ear infection can turn into bronchitis can turn into pneumonia in a baby or a child quicker than you think. You'll be at the pediatrician's office more often than you can imagine.

However- every trip to the dr. is a co-pay or a deductible. Every prescription costs something out of pocket. (Bonus round if you have high deductible/catastrophic type illness policies.) Day cares and schools typically won't take/keep children who are running a fever (and really, if the kid is sick enough that he has a fever, he feels lousy, he needs to be at home.) So there's a day of work that *somebody* is going to miss- mom or dad- unless there is one full-time stay at home parent. (Again, if you can do that, peace.)

Both of our kids had to have surgery to correct basic anatomical issues with their ears and throats. These are structural issues that seem to run on my husband's side of the family. So there's the co-pay for hospital and surgical costs, anesthesia costs, etc.

Both of our kids had inguinal hernias as children- my side of the family. Again, surgical and hospital co-pays.

And these are the "happy correctable" ailments that a lot of families would be thrilled to have as opposed to the health issues with which they must cope.

Bonus round prescription glasses- the child's head is growing, ergo the eyes are growing and changing shape- so vision changes quickly. Prescriptions change quickly. Glasses need to be replaced often. And that's without the kid stepping on them or sitting on them or losing them.

Bonus round orthodontics- our youngest son inherited my overcrowding issues, which my parents chose not to treat in me. I had to have that overcrowding addressed/fixed both surgically and with orthodontics while I was putting myself through college a decade later. (Yeah. I paid for that.) Waiting that decade to treat the problem meant that I lost teeth. I am 54 years old and while I have a beautiful smile, I am still and I will continue to deal with the residual effects of the choice to not pursue orthodontics during the window when my mouth and my skull were malleable and growing. Orthodontic treatment is not all about cosmetics. When I saw that my child had inherited the same mouth, we listened when the dentist referred us to the orthodontist. That child had two rounds of orthodontic treatment, with the first round beginning at 8 years old, the second round beginning at age 12? I think? 13?

Set aside a budget line item for retainers. You'll buy plenty. No matter how much you scream and threaten to glue that retainer to his teeth, the kid will still lose the retainer- and what are you going to do? Let the teeth you just paid thousands of dollars to move drift out of place again? No, you will buy another retainer. Telling your 9 year old to get a job to pay for another retainer doesn't work so well. Yes, you can give your kid "chores" to "help pay for the next retainer" and that may or may not keep him from throwing the next retainer in the trash can with his milk carton at lunch, but it certainly won't bring any more money into your budget.

So limiting sweets and encouraging brushing and flossing will not eliminate nor even mitigate the need for interventional dental care- and dental insurance, typically, is not as comprehensive as medical insurance. (Neither is vision insurance, while we are on that topic.)

Also factor in active kids and ER visits. We were fortunate- our pediatrician happily stitched up our boys in his office, thus saving us the added expense of the ER. Sometimes you can't avoid the ER, however. You just gotta go. Also, pediatricians typically don't treat broken bones. You'll be at the orthopedists for that.

And you'll be at the ENT dr. for ear tubes/ear surgeries.

And at the pediatric surgeon's office for inguinal hernias.

And at the optometrist/opthamologist/optician's office for glasses.

Allergies complicate the stew. Seasonal/pollen allergies are common, and complicate what should be a simple cold. Now it's a cold that won't clear up. HEY! I KNOW! ADD ASTHMA TO THE MIX! Now you are putting an elementary school kid through a series of allergy tests, trying to sort out asthma (which he will hopefully grow out of) from seasonal/pollen/dander/dust allergies. Cue allergy dr. Add a nebulizer and those meds to the mix. Plan on sleeping on the floor next to your child every spring and fall for a number of years so that you will be right there to listen to his breathing, just in case the nebulizer delivered meds aren't taking care of it tonight. If not, you're on your way to the ER for a stronger treatment and perhaps an epinephrine shot. There's another bill.

Speaking of unexpected expenses, HAVE LARGE LARGE FUN WITH YOUR FIRST EXPERIENCE WITH HEAD LICE. You'll need some OTC medication to get rid of the lice. You may need more than one round of more than one type of medication, because lice have become resistant. Your utility bills will spike that month because you will wash everything you own in hot water and bake it in the dryer. Here's hoping that you get rid of the lice in one fell swoop. Here's hoping that all of your child's classmates get rid of the lice all at once as well- OR YOU'RE TREATING FOR LICE AGAIN. Have fun with that!

Lessee, what else?

We haven't even gotten to the "enrichments" category that everyone loves to nail as "consumer driven." Sports, extracurricular activities, pets, etc.

Swim team was a great physical exercise for our son with pediatric/exertional asthma, and both kids enjoyed it. Cue swim suits, goggles, fees, championship fees, and 100 years of your life sitting beside a pool somewhere. Also gas money to drive to pools within a 25 mile radius at least a couple of times a week.

Ditto soccer, football, ballet, whatever.

Yes, parents over-schedule/over-stimulate/over-indulge their kids.

It's probably a good thing, however, in the name of basic socialization, for your kid to have access to some sort of extracurricular involvement, group activity, team sport, etc. Your cost will vary but it will exist.

Kid is having some problem academically? Cue tutoring. You can do it- you can try- we did. We didn't avail ourselves of the corporate tutoring services, and although I can't remember for absolutely sure, I don't think we hired a private tutor for either kid. (Both kids did well academically.) But for those occasional academic challenges, you may find yourself shelling out even more money for your "free public education." One of our kids struggled with either geometry. He almost failed that course that year. He took it again in summer school and got an A. (Go figure.) Summer school, as I recall, wasn't free. And then there were the logistics of summer school- nothing is free. If you are going out of the routine to accommodate a change, rest assured it's going to cost you something- transportation, etc.

Food- not a huge expense when the child is very young but you will be surprised at the amount of calories your kids will consume- looooong before adolescence. Looooong before then.

Notice that we've barely made it to middle school here? We aren't talking about high school. We aren't talking about driving. We aren't talking about the hit to your car insurance when teenagers start driving. We aren't talking about battling high school level peer pressure. We aren't talking about the cost of high school level extra-curricular activities. We sure aren't talking about college. We've barely made it out of elementary school.

Also notice that we are covering very pedestrian topics. There is no catastrophe here- this is every day life.

And that is a less than comprehensive list of the things that occur to me off of the top of my head, years after the fact.

[Spartan_Warrior]

Can I respectfully request that we move the discussion of child care costs to the original "ERE and Kids" thread (as linked to in the first post of this thread) or start a new thread?

I am interested in the topic of what it costs to raise a child, and I can see how it vaguely relates to this thread, but ultimately I think it's a separate discussion. I don't even want to start responding to your post, @BecaS, because there's so much content there that I'm sure it would continue to derail the thread if I responded properly. (I also think that conversation would benefit from participants who have long since given up on this particular thread.)

Regardless of what child care actually costs, in the context of this thread, can we agree that in the event of divorce the cost of child care payments is decided arbitrarily by an uninvolved third party and is not at all related to what the parents were actually spending or would have spent? Therefore, as a parent, the sum I pay to support my own child is no longer in my control as it would be without a divorce.

Can we agree that that is a valid risk in the event of divorce?

[BecaS]

Sure. Move my post/this part of the thread to whatever part of the forum you deem appropriate. Delete it if you wish.

JohnnyH said that he was still waiting for an explanation as to why children are so expensive, with some actual numbers.

I no longer have the numbers but I was able to pull up a handful of examples without much thought.

The scary thing is, that's the abridged version. God help us all if I'd gone for the details. Right off the top of my head I am aware of the various larger expenses that I didn't address because it would have been waaay too much.

If I sat and thought and thought I'd come up with even more examples.

Liquid Sapphire, again, I am not intentionally picking on you- but per my "Cliff's Notes" examples above, you can easily see why $100/month for incidentals/unexpected expenses could get blown out of the water on the first day.

If anything, I hope that those of you at the beginning of this process can augment your planning such that these "regular life events" (and it was all pedestrian, trust me, these are not the horror stories by a wide margin) won't blow up your financial planning too much.

Also, Spartan, you are asking and asking why the courts seem to weigh in heavily on the side of women and children. Extrapolate a little bit. If the mother has custody, or even if there is joint custody, can you see how the courts may pressure the higher wage earner/deeper assets partner (former partner) to ante up? Not because they are being gender biased or simply evil but because expenses can be far greater than you would believe. What you consider to be an unfair amount might simply be what it takes to get through the month, should anything at all go other than planned.

Also, let me gently remind you, JohnnyH asked, and you sent a barb armed with the term Dumb Consumeristic Parents in my general direction.

Our budget challenges and the fact that our children's needs often ate the majority of the monthly budget had little to do with dumb consumerism.

But move my response to any thread you deem appropriate, or delete it if you like. I am not emotionally wedded to this thread.

[Spartan_Warrior]

I don't have any authority to move anything. I'm just saying we could continue this in a different thread. But I'm also too lazy to start one.

Forgive the dumb consumerist parent comment. That was beneath me. My patience and corresponding filter expired somewhere around page 8 of the constant similar "subtle" ad hominems directed at me. Likewise why I'm in no hurry to start another thread.

Not because they are being gender biased or simply evil but because expenses can be far greater than you would believe. What you consider to be an unfair amount might simply be what it takes to get through the month, should anything at all go other than planned.

No. Sorry. I still in no way accept that you are correct about what constitutes reasonable costs for children. Some of it struck me as legit (e.g. orthodontia), but a lot of what you mentioned are the very same things that adults complain about and cite as impossible barriers to ERE lifestyles. Correspondingly, these expenses can be reduced for children by the same techniques we use as adults. I could go line by line and pick apart everything you said (Kids' shoes? Please, I just bought new sneakers for $10. Prescription glasses? Get em online, $20. Washing diapers in hot water? Maybe $5/mo increased electricity/water. Also, my sister and I were never near as sick as your kids! I might've gone to the doctor three or four times a year, and even less when I reached school age. Et cetera...) but like I said, that was a lot of content, and I don't think it relates directly to the thread--although, as you say, it was requested. If that's the direction this is going, why not. I'm just here for the ride at this point.

[BecaS]

IIRC, Spartan, we used Costco for glasses for the kids. It was the cheapest alternative we could find that participated with our vision insurance. Cost often depends on the prescription. We still use Costco for my husband's glasses.

Part of the increased consumption and higher costs associated with children over adults is that the child, and the situations one is trying to correct/treat, are always changing.

It's not as simple as sending off for a new pair of glasses because OOOPS! you sat on the last pair. The prescription changes as the child grows, as his head grows and his eyes grow. So you can't simply replace the glasses. It's off to the optometrist or, depending on the shape of the child's eye and the rate at which his eyes are changing, perhaps an opthamologist.

And it's not the cost of the individual pair of shoes. It's the cost of the shoes x 2 EVERY FIVE MINUTES.

Of course not one of these things will derail an ERE plan, nor will any one of these things consume $12k/year. But these ongoing monthly costs can easily mean that the kids consume the vast majority of a monthly budget.

I'm betting that if your mom would have a slightly different recollection of the routine childhood illnesses than you and your sister. You see it from your individual (and non-responsible) perspective. She sees it from a more global perspective.

We haven't even talked about chicken pox and pink eye and all of the other stuff.

My kids weren't particularly sick. Ear/throat construction (two rounds of ear tubes with some other surgical alterations) contributed to a lot of the upper respiratory stuff.

Asthma runs in my family and one of my kids was unlucky enough inherit a pediatric/exertional version of it, along with my seasonal allergies. That complicates upper respiratory stuff as well.

Otherwise the boys were exceptionally active and athletic.

The point is that we are quite typical- these are not exceptional situations nor exceptional costs.

[JohnnyH]

Thanks for the reply, Beca, I replied over in the ERE Kids thread.

if you are involved with a person who wants something from you that you'll never be willing to give, and that person is hanging around hoping that you'll change, and you know that you won't, if you are drinking the free milk, you are playing the cow. You are taking advantage of that person's emotional vulnerability.

This is where the disconnect comes for me... I don't know that I'll "never be willing to give" marriage. I'm unsure, unconvinced, not sold -that is why we are dating. Right?

It just seems girls are waiting to board the marriage boat within months... Then I start to feel that "milk for free" monster status pressure from her and society in general... I have not ruled out marriage and I am not purposely taking advantage of her... It's just I'm a catch damn it and I need to be wooed! She needs to demonstrate that she is worthy of my life...

Lol, I'm sure that riled many here up and before you reply I SHOULD need to prove the same to her. But most girls I date seem to be in such a rush (biological clock?) that they think simply showing up without a penis makes them worthy of marriage. And the concept that marriage is now a 2 way street, where both have to demonstrate value seems foreign... lol, I blame Jane Austen.

[Triangle]

if you are involved with a person who wants something from you that you'll never be willing to give, and that person is hanging around hoping that you'll change, and you know that you won't, if you are drinking the free milk, you are playing the cow. You are taking advantage of that person's emotional vulnerability.

Let me get this straight:

* I don't want to get married
* I don't think I'll ever change my mind
* The girl thinks I'll change my mind
* ???
* It's my fault and I'm "drinking the free milk"

Unless I actively lie to this person, or have made a promise in the past, how am I at fault for her unrealistic expectations?

And I don't see how "dating" is an implicit promise that one day we'll get married. Even if I never tell the girl I don't like the concept of marriage per se, and continue dating her, I think it isn't my fault if she expects this because society tells her that is what happens. If we talk about it I'll tell her the truth, of course.

[JohnnyH]

@Triangle: BecaS did say this "If everybody involved is getting what they want in an honest and frank exchange of "ideas," (so to speak), then no harm, no foul. There's no "play" going on there."

Which is good... But I am less decisive than you and haven't ruled out marriage. There's this unspoken rule that you either need to get married or break up; right away or the the male is perceived and treated as a some kind of lecherous monster sucking the vitality out of eligible, innocent young girls.

[BecaS]

JohnnyH, women want a promise of marriage within MONTHS of dating? MONTHS? No wonder you guys are balking!

Months are hardly long enough in most situations, in my opinion. Of course there are exceptions. Some people recognize a life partner immediately.

Taking your time in choosing a life partner is wise, IMHO. Taking your time to get to know a life partner before signing the contract is wise. Heck, taking your time to get to know *yourself* is probably the wisest thing of all.

And yes, marriage *is* a two way street, and the value that both parties bring to the contract needs to be conveyed and appreciated, regardless of gender.

Triangle, sort of. It's more of a personal ethics thing for me. No, you aren't lying to the girl (or the guy.) But by initiating/cooperating/continuing any sort of intimacies with her, you are participating in feeding a continued connection between the two of you. Each of you has a different agenda for that connection. If you know that she (he) wants something more or something different than you, something that you will never give- it is, in my opinion, taking advantage of her (his) emotional vulnerability to continue to accept intimacy from her (him.)

It doesn't matter that you in specific are not the source of any girl's unrealistic expectations. If you participate in an intimate relationship with a woman when you know that she wants marriage and you don't, you are feeding her emotional connection to you, even if that's not your intent. That's a loaded emotional connection if she wants something out of it that you do not. It is, in my opinion, keeping a false hope alive under the pretense of intimacy, an intimacy that means something different to each of you. The problem arises in that you intersect each other's lives, expectations, hopes, dreams, futures, in that very intimate space.

One could say that discordant expectations of marriage should not influence physical intimacy, nor should physical intimacy influence expectations. I don't think this is true. Intimacy is... intimacy. Otherwise we'd give it freely to strangers and it wouldn't carry the emotional weight that it often does.

Of course there are exceptions- some persons in some circumstances are physically intimate without emotional expectations and hopes (realistic or not.) I would say that usually, those parameters are as clearly and as carefully conscribed as the parameters surrounding intimacy with the objective of enshrining a permanent (monogamous) and emotional relationship such as marriage. (Of course this is speaking of marriage in the context of an emotional relationship rather than as a legal/financial contract.)

Just my opinion. I haven't dated in decades. Heck if I know how it works now. For all I know, the parameters are totally different.

[secretwealth]

I think it really depends on whether the man tells the woman that he's not interested in marriage or a serious committment. If he doesn't make this explicit (or, worse, lies), then BecaS is clearly right. But what if the man has made it clear that he wants nothing more than, to use the metaphor, free milk? Isn't it her personal responsibility as an adult to decide whether to accept that or move on?

I think BecaS would agree (let me know if I'm off track here) that, in that situation, the man isn't really at fault.

[BecaS]

Secret Wealth, I do agree. If the man tells a woman clearly that he isn't interested in marriage, isn't likely to change his mind no matter what transpires in terms of intimacy, and the woman, fully well knowing that, is intimate with the man on those clearly state terms, then she has accepted those terms.

It gets a little fuzzy for me when either person realizes that they are in an ongoing intimate relationship and that the emotions involved are lopsided, and that the individual hopes and aspirations for the future of this relationship are not congruent.

I'm dancing all around the words here, trying not to be too specific or too broad. The easiest way to say this is that if one person is in love and the other one is not, it's sort of cruel for the emotionally unaffected person to keep partaking of the intimacy offered by the person who is in love. Even if that intimacy is freely offered by the person who is in love, it's sort of cruel for the person who is not in love to keep drinking from that well.

In a perfect world, the person who is in unrequited love will find his or her center, pull himself/herself together, raise his/her own stock value between his/her ears, and move on.

I know that earlier in this thread (I think in this thread, geez, this is a monster thread with a million tentacles) I referred back to a relationship in which I was involved when I was very young, a relationship that was emotionally asymmetrical. Contrary to what I said above, I'm glad that I ended that relationship rather than my partner ending it. The process was painful but I gained strength from it, and clarity. I'm glad it happened and I'm glad it ended the way it did. This contradicts what I just typed. I know that. Having gone through that situation however, I would not recommend to the emotionally detached partner that he/she wait for the person in love to "snap out of it." Per above, I think that's kind of cruel. Also, emotions can be unpredictable things. In addition to moral/ethical hazard, there are all sorts of hazards involved in playing with hearts and minds.

Also, per above, my husband and I are the poster children for Conscientiously Used Birth Control FAIL. That could be a really awful situation for everyone involved if she was in love with you and carrying your child, but the feeling was not reciprocated. I'm sure that it happens all the time, but I can't imagine a more emotionally challenging situation for all parties involved.

Wow, the places this thread has gone!

[riparian]

I was gonna come back to this thread but I can't really even wrap my head around it now.

[henrik]

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/01/ ... e-another/

[workathome]

MORLOCK EAT ELOI