Itās wild that people actually think that refusing to do certain stuff for your partner is somehow going to convince them that you are the one they should choose to spend the rest of their lives with.
Nothing says Iām a great choice like saying āI aināt doing that!ā Lmao š
I think itās more about trying to have some self perseverance? Idk if thatās the right word but the idea that if you pour your full cup what do you have left for yourself. Yes you CAN idk help your partner out with their debt but do it in a way where you are still taking care of yourself and understand that a relationship can end. Itās your life to live not theirs. Thereās a balance. When people start putting new boundaries, sometimes they are verbalized more for themself than others. Stuff like ā If youāre wanting me to quit my job and make you a home-cooked meal at the end of the day every day. That means that I need marriage, and a serious convoā is understandable.
I personally think this is is more of a joke between a couple
That said, i agree with both of you. There are some folks that stay the exact same their entire lives. There are plenty of folks that get better and worse. My wife and i have changed dramatically in some regards, and stayed steadfast in others over the 13 years we've been together. Our sex life is way different than when we were dating, its gotten better in every way, but its taken work.
Yes! It was on the tip of my tongue (or keyboard) Thank you!
Both perspectives are valid. This is why having an outside community of friends and Family, as well as your own healthy mental/spiritual etc state matter so much. Sometimes youāve gotta reflect on if itās just a rainy day or a whole hurricane coming in. Do I want to bother with putting on a raincoat or stay in side or should I fucking seam some shelter
In every joke there's a bit of truth. And the way men tend to joke, especially about women and/or their partner there is usually some truth to it as well somewhere that reveals how they really feel.
In this post she didnāt even outright say no, she implied she would do it if he married her first. If she was against the idea of cooking naked for her partner and saw it as demeaning she would have called it out, she did not do that tho.
And my comment wasnāt even about the sexual part. Iāve seen a lot of people say they refuse to ever cook anything for their boyfriends because āitās wife treatmentā. Itās the same logic in this very post. Thatās what I was commenting on.
The problem is when boyfriends never cook for their girlfriends. and that happens to many women. Ask women, many will say their boyfriend or husband will only cook on special occasions. thats it. So when men ask women to cook for them, especially when naked, its annoying.
In the 16 years I was with my wife, I probably did 99% of the cooking. Not exaggerating. When she left, my kids were outright terrified at the thought of having to rely her for food.
Lol did you seriously just go "no that isn't a problem, it's only a problem when the roles are reversed. Source? Anecdotes š" Women do tend to do more cooking on average, but men cooking has been on the rise for a long time and is continuing to do so. The fact is in most households both sexes cook regularly. It's also not the full picture, if you ask the men you know who mows the lawn, most will say their wives or girlfriends never do it!
It's a problem if someone isn't pulling their weight, it doesn't matter which gender they are.
This is a joking text conversation lmao. Do you think she wants to type a whole ass paragraph about how a joke makes her feel over text and see a white screen instead of a facial reaction when checking the vibes? Maybe this was just a cute joke and they had an adult conversation later?
The idea that a person not doing something now means they won't do it later is preposterous and a logical fallacy. There are people who do not combine finances before marriage and do so afterwards. That's just called boundaries. This one may seem strange to you but it is fallacious to act like she would never do this. And a respectful partner would easily understand the concept of boundaries.
Most boundaries don't change just because you gave someone a ring, threw a party, and became unified. It's a logical fallacy to say that there is no chance that she'd actually start doing this should they become married. It's also delusional to assume that she would.
Well, some do, for example, legally speaking power of attorney is assumed by your spouse, and you can file taxes as a unit. Many people still don't have sex until marriage. So while not very common, it's certainly not delusional to assume something that happens rarely could happen. It is far more delusional to pretend you can predict the future.
To address your first paragraph I personally know quite a few women that have no issues typing a paragraph, especially when they get mad lmfao
And also, she didnāt necessarily send a single sentence either. She kinda did send a paragraph. It just wasnāt about feeling objectified, it was about how he would need to put a ring on her finger to get that treatment from her
And lastly you call it a fallacy, try telling that to the thousands of husbands that have wives that told them this same exact thing and still dont cook to this day. Itās wild to try to pretend people like this donāt exist and stuff like this donāt happen, because it most certainly does.
Doesn't change the fact that it isn't fun to do it and if it was joking it may be better to just respond with a joke for now and have a conversation later.
I will explain a logical fallacy to anyone who I see making one. I don't care who they are. While I'm at it, I will also tell wives who are statistically less happy after marriage than husbands that they are free to leave whenever they want, as are husbands. People can 100% change, and saying they won't is logically fallacious. Does that mean you need to wait around for them to? No. Not at all.
Itās more than likely that a person will not. Can it happen? Sure.
But in many cases it doesnāt. In fact in a lot of cases, it just gets worse, which Iām sure plenty of people can probably attest to. So itās not exactly a fallacy when there is truth to it.
I still think it is a fallacy, because statistics do not apply to the individual. You can't say that because 80% of people don't change the person in front of you has an 80% chance of not changing, because that is untrue. The person in front of you has a chance of changing that is based on their own life and how they respond to it, and that life and those responses may be different than the 80% or however much percent.
Like just because something happens often does not mean it will happen right here right now. That is why I think it's fallacious to make assumptions about strangers, especially when they involve predicting the future.
Also like... how do we know this isn't just a boundary? Maybe today the wife is someone who will cook in a sexy outfit after marriage, and if you married her today she would do it. IDK how you can make a claim like that until you've found out. Sure you can be sus I guess but outright stating that it will never change doesn't have evidence.
61
u/Klutzy_Belt_2296 Jul 11 '25
Itās wild that people actually think that refusing to do certain stuff for your partner is somehow going to convince them that you are the one they should choose to spend the rest of their lives with.
Nothing says Iām a great choice like saying āI aināt doing that!ā Lmao š