To think women should prioritise being equally yoked when choosing a partner?

[ThisLimeMoose]

As a woman, I firmly believe that if you don’t have children, you should prioritise dating a man who doesn’t have children. If you’re financially stable, you should be looking for a man who is equally financially stable. The same applies to emotional maturity, ambition, lifestyle and general circumstances.

I think far too many women enter relationships where they’re taking on responsibilities, complications or burdens that they wouldn’t otherwise have, simply because they’ve been encouraged to believe that love should be enough. Stay equally yoked in all things and I genuinely believe you’d avoid a significant proportion of the relationship problems we regularly see discussed on here.

AIBU?

I imagine we all have that ambition, to find a life partner who shares all the same values etc as we do but people change.

Life just isn't that straight forward sadly.

I'm not sure that's how I'd express it but I largely agree. When I met DH I was in my twenties, didn't have kids yet and extremely ambitious. I wouldn't have been interested in a relationship with someone who wasn't also in their twenties, didn't have kids yet and ambitious. It's just compatibility really isn't it? I also wouldn't have gotten involved with someone who didn't want to get married and have kids, or someone who had really strong religious beliefs because, while I can respect that, I don't share those beliefs and it's not how I want to live my life or raise my children.

He's got shit taste in music but I'll let him off for that, nobody is perfect......

I don't think that's yoked, thats a harness. Yoked is more of a heavy looking wooden bar that holds the cattle together.

Yoked re: marriage has horrible negative connotations imo. Who wants to imagine themselves fastened onto another person lugging a huge weight?! I've been married 25 years do i know full well its not all hearts and rainbows but yoked is just too grim a comparison for me.

But surely the equality comes from things like attitude and values? I'd never want a relationship with someone workshy or selfish, and I'd want someone to roughly share my ideas of the life we're working towards.

But when I met my dp of 20 years, I was a penniless student and he was in a well paid job. A year later I was qualified and out earning him while he started a business on a shoestring. Our values and personalities match, but our means and resources definitely haven't.

You sound as if you’re making a speech, putting your side of a debate. Sounds like AI.

Never heard of it. Makes me think of a mule or donkey.Not sure why

No offence, but isn't that as obvious as saying you have a better chance of staying alive if you don't jump in front of a train?

Yes, exactly.

OP I actually find it really practical advice - I actually apply this to friendships too, to some extent. It flows better and is more mutual beneficial if we are moving in the same direction.

Before having a child my priorities were good in bed and funny. I think it depends on what kind of relationship you want. If you want to settle down then having similar values on most topics is important. Even more so when you have children.

And you’d be quite right - that’s where it comes from - 2 animals fastened to a plough (donkeys, mules, oxen etc)

If the animals are of equal strength and ability, the ploughing is much more efficient

After a serious relationship with a man who had children ended, I was determined not to enter into another one. The children were sweet, the complications of him being a father were not.

So while I am a romantic and believe love finds a way, I do think we can make decisions to make our lives a bit easier on that front. But life changes and now I have two children with my DH, I might reconsider my stance if I was somehow to find myself wanting to date again (highly unlikely though that is!) Other things affecting compatibility would still be in play.

Edited to add: I think it's much easier to say "I only want to be with someone childless" in your twenties than it is in your 40s. You'd be ruling out an awful lot of potentially lovely and compatible people.

I would never have married someone with kids- no matter how much I loved him- because I would make a terrible stepmother and would always be second priority. Love is really not enough, as we see from the numerous unhappy stepmums on here.

Good job we didn’t think like that.
Me: single mother, rented flat, living on benefits. Him: working, own home, company car.
Us: married over 30 years. I’m now the wealthy one having inherited a lot.
No one knows how things will pan out in the future.

I’ve never actually felt yoked. Is this a new thing? 🤷‍♀️

I recall hearing the expression often when I was a child in the '60s, from my parents' generation (born in the '20s).

OP - It’s not just women who enter in to relationships that may prove problematic in the future. Have you ever heard of that phrase “Thinking with your genitals?” I get you though - for me (as a woman) it would be head over heart every time! I’m not single but if I was I can’t imagine hooking up with someone who didn’t have the same value system, or who wasn’t a good match socially or financially. Everyone is different though - such is life’s rich tapestry….

Not according to St Paul.

Absolutely. I hate reading posts where women say they cant help who they love to justify an affair or they love someone who treats them like absolute crap. There are many psychological names for that, but its not love.

Exactly.

what a load of sanctimonious waffling

But the point of that phrase is that to have an equal partnership you need commonality of values. It’s not about being chained to someone else, it’s recognising that in marriage you do, legally and morally, tie your fates together, and doing that with someone who is in a similar position, with similar life goals and values, is more likely to result in a harmonious, successful relationship.

It’s not about being yoked to each other. It’s about both being equally yoked to the plough ie your shared goals.

A modern secular application might be “don’t marry and have a family with somebody who doesn’t actually want to raise children, because they will be a bad parent and you will come to resent them.”

It’s not bad advice.

The happy ones are not on here complaining are they?🙄🙇🏻‍♀️

In theory it makes sense but realistically life doesn't work like that. Mostly meeting the right person is a matter of luck. I think there is a right person (people) for everyone, but actually finding them is not so simple. Often you have to make compromises with whoever you do actually meet in life. And you can't help who you fall in love with. I think if there was a magic button you could press that would direct you to your perfect soulmate that would be lovely, but in the absence of that we just have to bumble through life and hope for the best and try to make good decisions - nobody makes decisions thinking at the time that they are making bad choices in the moment, it's usually hindsight that opens our eyes to that.

Never heard this phrase ever. And I hope I never hear it again. 🤢

Maybe. I would be a very unhappy one though. I don't want to rear other people's kids. That's a good thing to know, right?