If, on entering a relationship with someone, you think of being with them forever as "you'll never...be with anyone else" as though that is something to regret, then he is probably not the person you should set out to spend the rest of your life with.
I know a girl who sort of did A and it was fine til she met someone she found sexually attractive (she never really found DH attractive but he 'rescued' her when she was in a desperate situation). She cheated on him and felt awful about it and it made her resentful of her DH when she compared the two. She can't 'motivate' herself to give her DH any physical closeness and is making him unhappy and feeling awful about it. Also resentful of what she could be missing out on. So they are both unhappy
If you already have, or want to have children, it's not a bad idea to look for a partner who is nice, kind and financially competetent. He doesn't have to be rich but what you don't want is a man who spunks his money on plasma screen TVs when you're behind with the rent (or one who controls the money to keep you under control). ROmantic love is all very well but all too often the 'romantic' partner is not much use for day to day living and the 'exciting' one is an arse.
If I felt happy day to day with man in a and we had a nice time together when we were alone then a. I think a and b sound similar anyway. - sometimes you fall out of love and then start loving again. Although the comment about being his full time carer is a important one.. So now i am thinking i don't know. I hate struggling for money and worrying etc so my inclination is a.
SW you have a point of course, but I think it's one of the great achievements of Western culture, that we have that glimmer. It's something to be cherished.
the rest of the world hopes and prays for that, it is only us in the Liberated West that even has the glimmer of an alternative that believes the grass would be greener
look,we are all going to be infirm and old and incontinent at some stage and a steadfast partner and stability may counter-act that. IYSWIM.
A is not a proper option a life is never mapped out - sure there may not be money worries but what about health issues and unexpected accidents ect. You make A sound boring actually - but if you love him then its a good starting point.
B sounds less materialistic but not so poor as to miss out too much.
Having gone through a couple of really bad years i would not give my independance toatally again ever. But that is not to say you cannot be in a partnership with A.
b I think it is an insult to teh other person to 'settle' and would hate to think someone had settled for me no matter how attractive and easy that option seemed.The other person deserves to find someone who really loves them and doesn't see and use them like a security blanket
If A included each of you having passionate feelings for each other - I don't mean just sex, but caring and interest, then yes I would go for A. But if the relationship was fairly cool or totally placid then A would not be enough for me and I would choose B.
I'd go for A. Love grows and security is a good base to work from. Nothing wrong with taking all of these things into consideration. If he is a good person, kind and treats you well then I think that A. is definitely the right choice.
If I loved the simple man then the former. If I didn't then definitely the latter. I suppose it is just difficult sometimes to know if you actually do love someone or not and you may only find out after they are no longer in your life.
Your feelings for that man are the only thing that matters- anything else is irrelevant. Guess if you have to ask this question, your heart is not as involved as it could be- otherwise you'd know the answer. if he is MR RIGHT why would you even WANT to be with anyone else- ever?
Do NOT stay with someone just because they offer security and money - it's a recipe for unhappiness if you do not really love them.
Having my future mapped out to some extent sounds appealing - you can always tweak the details after all. I think a lot of stress stems from money worries and so that is appealing too. Doesn't really matter though - if you love this man deeply and your children accept him(I assume that's the situation?) then go for it, but if you don't then wait. Is it about relishing your independence? I do that despite being a sahm with no income of my own - it's a state of mind!
If you had the following two options, what choice would you make
A) Having your future mapped out for you, a life with a simple man, set in his ways but who you know inside out, would love your kid(s) as their own. A big house, no mortgage, comfortable lifestyle, would never see you go without or struggle. Complete stability. Yet knowing that you'll never move or be with anyone else etc
or
B) Being on your own, financially stable with your own modest home, raising your child(ren) and not knowing what was round the corner or where life may take you next
which would you chose and how much would your feelings for the man play a part in that?
