Should a man pay for everything?
In this case, when this behavior is taken for granted by a couple, this means that the man takes care of the woman in exchange for supremacy, and the woman gives him a decisive role in the systemic mechanism in exchange. In addition, a woman allows a man with her to raise his self-esteem, because when he pays for it, he shows himself and others (and above all to himself) his worth. Moreover, the woman, in turn, also raises her own self-esteem, because when a man pays for her, without further ado, she shows her that he appreciates her. I am now talking about stereotypical behavior, which seems to be logical, based on social construction, and is a kind of rite that non-verbally shows the positions of partners.
A man shows and asserts his strength, a woman - his weakness. But, of course, this is not a forced, but rather the desired behavior. Because in this strength, and in this weakness, there is a mutual service of self-affirmation and self-identification in a pair.
This is the ideal.What happens in reality?
Everything is different here. So let's look at a specific example:
“I have a problem in a relationship with a man, whose solution I don’t know how to approach. I - 31, he - 34. He divorced a long time, do not have children. At the moment, both work, we live, rent an apartment. Relations developed rapidly. I was out of work for four months, I had a lot of free time and a little money. I spent days and nights with him, cooked him dinners, washed and ironed shirts, cleaned - in general, was an exemplary mistress. He took me to museums and cafes, he paid for me himself, even paid for the subway, although at the beginning of our relationship I tried to divide spending, but he always said that later, you did not work ... I was embarrassed because I did not I can take financial part, but he was persistent, and I stopped struggling and tried to get my wallet. We talked a lot. In conversations, he regularly returned to his past relationships, especially often mentioned an affair with a girl who lasted only a month and ended shortly before meeting with me. He drew my attention to the case of these relations, it is very offended.The story was this: they had a third date, they met in the shopping center, in a shop where he chose his things. At the checkout in her shopping girl put the dress ... and did not pay. He silently paid, but was tormented by the question of why he should pay for her purchases, while she earns even more than him. He talked to her and was outraged by her opinion that a man should pay for a woman. I supported him, because I believe that no one owes anything to anyone, especially if there was no agreement.
A month after the beginning of our novel, in the context of a conversation about how we both see the relationship between a man and a woman and their financial side, he again mentioned that story about the dress, and I, catching the connection between the theme “Spending in a pair” and this story, asked if he also considered me willing to cash in on his account. He shared his fears that I also use it. In the end, I proposed to split the expenses in half with the condition that the trips to museums and cafes would have to be reduced in accordance with my financial resources. It would seem that we came to an agreement on this issue, that is, my chosen one no longer worries about the fact that I use it as a sponsor.But I got offended, getting out every time at the time of paying the bill. In past relationships, I always paid for myself, and it was natural, since my man was getting less. Why does it offend me now and how to deal with it?
Every time, paying half the bill in a cafe, museum, grocery store, I feel as if I have to prove that I am not a mercenary stinker who uses men as a resource
I myself explained his behavior by the fact that he was traumatized by negative experiences, but this does not relieve me of my experiences. This unresolved situation is like a wormhole - it ruins all feelings, although several months have passed since then, and instead of getting closer, I am moving away. ”
As we see, one partner perceives the actions of the other, based on their projections, and at this moment is mistaken. A girl who takes for granted the payment of her dress, may not understand or not at all mean that she thereby acquires certain obligations to a man. A man who, by paying for this dress, “accepts” such an agreement, will find out about it when “the cat goes for a walk on its own.”
A man who pays for a woman can thereby impose on her a co-dependent role, to which she may not be ready. In the future, when precedents of mutual expectations appear in relations, these imaginary agreements “go sideways”.
As for me as a person, and not as a digger in the brain, I prefer to pay for women. For me, this is the easiest way of self-affirmation, which I enjoy using. But, since I know that in fact I already get what I want, I have no expectations about my girlfriends. But then again, not always. Because everything is determined by the potential and the situation.
But back to the situation above. It has two layers - the general and the individual. A common layer is that the behavior of a man is inconsistent. That is, he first by his actions shows the woman readiness for a general system, and later he distances herself. The woman initially takes the first position, which is logical, and later, when the balance of power changes, can not accept the changed situation, although it seems morally ready for it.
Why did a man change his behavior? He could, for example, change his attitude toward a woman if, at the beginning of the relationship, he expected more independence from her, but, not having waited, thus passed the boundaries.Or, in any case, he was not satisfied with the systematic nature of relations, and he does not see a future in them. In his behavior, I find above all the unwillingness to accept the social role of people who are in a paired relationship with the potential for creating a family.
The individual layer is simple as a jagged egg. The man was disturbed by something, and, by sharing his anxiety, he created new conditions of relations, after which he came into balance as he got what he wanted. But! At that moment the woman lost something, and it began to disturb her already.
In fact, for a man, for some reason, it is not important that he provides his woman.
What to do?
Generally, abstracting from my role as a brain dryer, as a peasant, I would rather hang myself than I offered my woman to share the costs of a cafe. If I were in the place of this man, I would wonder if the expectations of both parties to the relationship are not divergent. Do they have a future? And if so, what is it? Well, that is what will happen next year? And in three?
I would advise the heroine to ask her man about it, and if she gets sluggish mooing like: “Well, uh ... I don’t look so far, I need to think,” then she herself should think hard: should we make illusory plans for a joint life with this person?
Plus I consider it absolutely important to discuss with him the personal experiences that she described at the end of the letter. This will at least bring her closer to her partner, and as a maximum - will get what she wants.
In all the answers I try to write something at last. Here I would write this: in the place of the heroine, I would enter into the position of a partner as little as possible, “injured by the experience” Do not spend your life creating comfort for other people.
Who are compatible Pisces
Ice Cream Sticks Casket
How to resist aggressive behavior in children
Nonstandard beauty: the stars that fullness helped in his career
How to make kvass
Why do cats tread