Watched Normal People. Realised "healthy relationships" as described by the stringent standards of Mumsnet are unrealistic and rare as hens teeth.

[ChippyPickledEggs]

It's a clunky title. But my point is that Mumsnet would have told Marianne that Connell had absolutely no respect for her and that she'd to pick her self respect up from the floor and LTB immediately, multiple times.

And it just made me think that the standards for relationships insisted upon here are unrealistic and bear little resemblance to how things tend to go in real life. I'm not talking about red lines like domestic abuse. But about humans being messy and scared and sometimes selfish.

Of all the long term relationships I know, there isn't a single one would be described as equal and healthy on mumsnet. Not one. There's always something: men not doing their share is a common one, or one partner who can drink too much and be a bit flirtatious perhaps. A mismatch in investment I see being very common, even in decades long relationships: a kisser and a kissee as my friend would put it. And at the beginning of relationships as well - things are often not that smooth sailing.

Thoughts?

Didn't see the TV series but the novel was a load of rubbish, so I wouldn't be using it as any kind of benchmark for real life.

You’re comparing the Mn relationships board with the amours of two spectacularly self-absorbed fictional teenagers?

Well, in fiction romances are even less likely to be smooth sailing than in real life. Because that would be a very boring story.

I would not base what is normal or healthy in relationships on melodramatic "romantic" storylines.
Have you read Wuthering Heights?

Well, I disagree that a fictional TV relationship is realistically healthy or normal. But I do agree with you OP that the relationship standards on MN are absolutely ridiculous. LTB is said far to often for far too little reason.

I'm not basing what is normal and healthy on a fictional storyline. Just saying that the series had got me thinking more generally.

Mumsnet would have told Marianne that Connell had absolutely no respect for her and that she'd to pick her self respect up from the floor and LTB immediately, multiple times

And Mumsnet would have been right. Bad relationships don't become good because there are lots of them.

well, my relationship would pass all the mn tests.

Not boasting. I am far from perfect and so is he, but in terms of how we relate, we are normal and healthy.
I would also describe my brothers marriages as the same, and my SIL and BIL (dh's siblings) as the same.

My parents and grandparents probably slightly less so, more of their time, especially in terms of the men puling their weight, but in terms of how they treated their partners, in terms of mutual respect, certainly healthy.

All the marriages I am talking about are 20 + years.

But as a pp said, Sally Rooney’s novels are all about dysfunctional, obsessive relationships, usually involving a very young woman who loathes herself, self-harms or starves herself or likes being tied up and insulted by unpleasant men, and a man who is unavailable, married, an eejit etc, with whom she is sexually infatuated. That’s her subject matter. Marianne in Normal People pretty much maps onto Frances in Conversations With Friends, only with endometriosis and a married boyfriends daughter a deeply annoying female ex — you could move chunks of text between the two novels without noticing.

It’s not any kind of recipe for functional behaviour.

The fact that Connell considered Marianne a secret and wouldn't publicly acknowledge her would have been a warning flag in a real life relationship. Mumsnet would have asked her to think about why she considered herself so unworthy of basic human respect and suggested therapy. And they would have been right. She learned fucked up relationships from her family and it damaged her.

Yabu. The relationship in normal people is awful. I really enjoyed that series but I dread the thought of my dds ever tolerating anything marianne does with any of her boyfriends.

Mn was right about my marriage and some other dysfunctional relationships. I thought it was all normal until current dp who whilst an amazing partner is simply a normal, non abusive emotionally mature adult.

Right Councilworker. But in the end they both feel that the relationship has made them into better people, and that they are the love of eachothers lives (obviously they are still very young.) Ultimately the relationship was an enriching experience for them both.

I mean, the point of my thread wasn't about Normal People as such, it's more that the series was a springboard for some more general thinking.

AsCoolAsKimDeal mumsnet would not have been right - that's the point. I'm not saying aspects of his behaviour weren't poor at times, but he did love and respect her ultimately.

Do you honestly think that wanting a partner who does his fair share around the house, doesn't get drunk all the time and flirt with other woman, and isn't obviously less invested in the relationship, is an example of ridiculous and unattainable standards? That's really bloody sad. Most of the women I know are in unhappy and unequal relationships where the above conditions are not met. That definitely seems to be the most common dynamic between heterosexual couples. But that doesn't make it OK, it doesn't mean women shouldn't expect something better, and it doesn't mean that those standards are too high or unrealistic. I mean, if you want a man who is 6ft tall, earns over £100k, got a first at Oxford, and spends his free time volunteering at the soup kitchen then yes you might need to compromise somewhere, but seriously, just looking for a man who does 50% of the housework, doesn't get drunk every night, and seems to love you back is not exactly a big ask! I want to live in a world where that's the minimum most women can expect from a relationship, and the only way that's going to happen is if we all collectively refuse to accept less.

Op I do agree with you on this , I think mums net can be very judgmental I’ve seen women giving advice to leave husbands because they’ve watched porn or get there ‘ducks in a row’ over a liked picture when it’s been a 12 year marriage etc

ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings I didn't mean it to sound as though I think it is wrong or unreasonable to want or aspire to these things (someone who does 50% around the house etc etc.) I think it's fine to decide that unless a relationship meets these standards then you'd rather be single.

I just reckon you probably would be single if you applied all the standards for equal, healthy relationships that Mumsnet imposes. Like you, I know almost no women who are in relationships like this.

Is this another one of those Mumsnet is evil because posters encourage other posters to have boundaries?

Which one is this #5,326?

@ChippyPickledEggs

Right Councilworker. But in the end they both feel that the relationship has made them into better people, and that they are the love of eachothers lives (obviously they are still very young.) Ultimately the relationship was an enriching experience for them both.

I mean, the point of my thread wasn't about Normal People as such, it's more that the series was a springboard for some more general thinking.

They’re formative for one another, sure, but more friends who dip in and out of a sexual relationship, than anything more melodramatic — and by the end they’ve possibly grown out of one another and choose to live on different continents in the full knowledge that they may now be on very different life paths.

And I’d argue that after the school scenes, Marianne has most of the power, social and economic, anyway — she’s emerged as popular, admired and confident after a few weeks at university, and her wealth means she’s not worried about jobs or where to live, whereas Connell is a lonely, inarticulate culchie in a grim roomshare until she and her set pick him up.

And of course Connell wouldn’t even be at Trinity doing English if she hadn’t made him think of it as possible, he’d have been with his friends in Galway, being the same person he always was — she transforms him far more than he transforms her.

And yet my relationship is pretty damn awesome because I married a man and not a man-child

I’ve seen women giving advice to leave husbands because they’ve watched porn

I'd leave my husband if he used porn. i couldn't be with a man who had so little respect for other women

@summerstorms

I’ve seen women giving advice to leave husbands because they’ve watched porn

I'd leave my husband if he used porn. i couldn't be with a man who had so little respect for other women

I would too. I wouldn’t spend twenty minutes, far less twenty years, in the company of someone who thought that commodifying women in increasingly brutal and degrading ways was fine.

OP I absolutely agree with you and sometimes wonder lf the more vocal members are actually in relationships themselves or holding out for something that is impractical and impossible to achieve.
And I'm bloody glad my relationship doesn't pass the MN challenge. He texts women he works with, he buys them gifts, I have no inclination to go through his phone ( although have every password) and trust him profusely.
I'm happy as a pig in shit

@ChippyPickledEggs

ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings I didn't mean it to sound as though I think it is wrong or unreasonable to want or aspire to these things (someone who does 50% around the house etc etc.) I think it's fine to decide that unless a relationship meets these standards then you'd rather be single.

I just reckon you probably would be single if you applied all the standards for equal, healthy relationships that Mumsnet imposes. Like you, I know almost no women who are in relationships like this.

Then I feel sorry for you.

There are often threads on mn like - tell me about your lovely dh, etc. They are full of people, like me, in long happy marriages, where we are equal.

I am well aware that many crap marriages exist. I am also aware that many women put up with a lot in marriages. But to say that most people would be single if they applied these basic aspirations is nonsense

I think my main observation of the advice on the relationship board is this...

I see a lot of very good advice from posters. And they are right, of course they are, to denounce poor behaviour

But, i have seen very good advice from some posters, some whose advice I've received over the years and whose advice I've seen on other posts. It's easy to think those posters have it all sorted etc. But then I've been surprised on occasion to see those same posters asking similar questions of their own relationships on here and you realise that they are speaking from a position of idealism and not experience or perosnal reality.

That doesn't mean their advice isn't valid - what they are saying is still true, but it does mean that there are even fewer people in 'good' relationships than it would first seem.

I do agree though that, if we collectively shunned these men rather than twisting ourselves to accept, tolerate and accept their shitty behaviour then men would have to step up their game.

That or the human race will die out!

I personally think its about time we started to change the narrative about low standards in relationships to be frank OP. Imagine if women just collectively decided they weren't going to put up with that shit anymore? Imagine if instead of women saying to each other "you can keep your standards high but you'll stay single a long time" we lived in a world where men said to each other "you can keep treating women like shit, but you'll stay single a long time". I think that world is possible. I think that males live down to the low standards society sets for them, and that if we expected more most of them would do better. Especially if the prize for not doing better was to be single and celibate. Why should anyone put up with these sad excuses for relationships when most women would be happier single? As long as we keep telling ourselves and each other that especting basic acts of kindness, respect, and love in relationships is some kind of impossible dream, thats what we're going to keep getting. It doesn't need to be that way.

Alain de Botton would say it's because people are attracted to what's familiar based on their childhood experiences, which is often not what's good for them.

Unfortunately if you've had a tricky childhood you may crave a more intense relationship. I also think a passionate sexual relationship can come with more arguments/differences, and a more stable and secure relationship comes with a more lack lustre sex life. There will always be compromises and deficiencies in some area. So on mumsnet most people who posted about their relationship would probably either be told life is too short for bad sex or that their other half doesn't treat them well enough.