Independent Women

[LifelongLearner]

Silly cat!

What I'm actually saying is that I'M usually so busy putting my foot in my mouth (with a lot of things I say,) I simply don't have room for a paw in addition.

However...

There ARE times when YOU have said you're cramming BOTH paws in your mouth, so...

Um. Maybe I'd just better go back to this:

You're compassionate, witty clever ...... and the rest! Definitely need to read through this some, sadly not much time at the moment either.

 

[LifelongLearner]

Pretty new to the spiritual side of this but think there's a strong cultural influence too, don't think it's seen as so much of an issue here. With my ex and me, i was the ideas person, he was the decisive one, it worked well for us pretty naturally.

Know i'm at least quite a lot older than most posting comments here, think my generation felt more secure in general and that we had a fair bit more control of our lives. Really interesting reading, Snackersmom and seoulseeker come up with so many good, thought provoking threads.

 

[JohnDB]

I think it's common sense to assume no one man or woman wants to be in a bad relationship.

But when that fear is overwhelming any desire to "take a chance on her" then they go hunt up the guys and look to play games online....beer, popcorn and Netflix night with the guys....that sort of thing.

No talking to single women....ever....about anything at anytime. (Including the weather)

The FEAR is too REAL.
Especially in economic difficult times.

 

[JohnDB]

Pretty new to the spiritual side of this but think there's a strong cultural influence too, don't think it's seen as so much of an issue here. With my ex and me, i was the ideas person, he was the decisive one, it worked well for us pretty naturally.

Know i'm at least quite a lot older than most posting comments here, think my generation felt more secure in general and that we had a fair bit more control of our lives. Really interesting reading, Snackersmom and seoulseeker come up with so many good, thought provoking threads.

 

[Sculpt]

Well Spider Man and J. Jonah Jameson were codependent...

Okay, okay, I can be serious. I swear I can.

There is a definite difference between willful ignorance of how something is done and acknowledging someone else is better at something than you are. I have seen situations where one spouse deliberately avoided learning an essential life skill because the other spouse always took care of it, and when the other died, the first person was left scrambling to survive.

But I have also seen my father leave the accounting, bill paying and checkbook balancing (remember that?) to my mother, because she was frankly better at it and he had no trouble admitting she was better at it.

So yeah, there are different levels of codependence.

If I may be so annoying as to say... there's Codependency, a term in Psychology, and a codependence definition in the common vernacular.

The Psychology definition varies but has one or more elements of external focusing, self-sacrificing, attempting to control other people and suppressing one's emotions. Hollywood picked up on the classic definition scenario of Codependency where someone (usually a woman) gets to play the caretaker and controller of a drug addict (usually a man). They're both acting in a pathological unhealthy way where they're both enabling each other's psychotic lifestyles. I think that's what Snack's referencing. It's always used in a negative way.

The other codependence is like you said, partners dividing up responsibilities.

 

[Lynx]

If I may be so annoying as to say... there's Codependency, a term in Psychology, and a codependence definition in the common vernacular.

The Psychology definition varies but has one or more elements of external focusing, self-sacrificing, attempting to control other people and suppressing one's emotions. Hollywood picked up on the classic definition scenario of Codependency where someone (usually a woman) gets to play the caretaker and controller of a drug addict (usually a man). They're both acting in a pathological unhealthy way where they're both enabling each other's psychotic lifestyles. I think that's what Snack's referencing. It's always used in a negative way.

The other codependence is like you said, partners dividing up responsibilities.

Yes... Yes, I know.

 

[Snackersmom]

If I may be so annoying as to say... there's Codependency, a term in Psychology, and a codependence definition in the common vernacular.

The Psychology definition varies but has one or more elements of external focusing, self-sacrificing, attempting to control other people and suppressing one's emotions. Hollywood picked up on the classic definition scenario of Codependency where someone (usually a woman) gets to play the caretaker and controller of a drug addict (usually a man). They're both acting in a pathological unhealthy way where they're both enabling each other's psychotic lifestyles. I think that's what Snack's referencing. It's always used in a negative way.

The other codependence is like you said, partners dividing up responsibilities.

Thanks for clearing that up.... I frequent a lot of psychology media so was only thinking of codependency in the unhealthy definition. But I'm sure there's a proper, healthy way that married people would and could rely on each other. 🤔

 

[GaryA]

I have yet to read beyond the post quoted above (post #40)...

I am thinking that what is at the crux of the matter is the idea that - if/once a woman is used to acting-and-operating 'independent' - if/when she gets married, will she totally immerse herself truly-and-fully into the marriage as being one-of-two of a codependent couple? Or, will she [want to] continue to act-and-operate 'independent' [of her husband] - reaching outside of - or beyond - the way a codependent marriage relationship should act-and-operate?

Something along those lines...

Valid concern, but couldn't the same be said for a man who is accustomed to "flying solo"? 🤔

And I realize that husband and wife would and should come to rely on each other, but is codependency ever completely healthy? 🤔

Thanks for clearing that up.... I frequent a lot of psychology media so was only thinking of codependency in the unhealthy definition. But I'm sure there's a proper, healthy way that married people would and could rely on each other. 🤔

My use of the word 'codependent' was/is intended in the proper healthy way. It means to understand and accept the responsibility that comes with being in a marriage - always having regard for the spouse - not taking opportunity to act-and-operate outside of that responsibility.

In the context of my statement in post #105, the word 'independent' takes on the "unhealthy way" in a marriage. It is perfectly okay when you are single (man or woman); however, that same kind of 'independence' in a marriage is unhealthy - because, it 'disregards' the spouse.

Sorry if I used a "loaded" word ( "Ain't English wonderful!" ) - I was merely referring to a husband-and-wife couple who naturally normally honestly depend on each other - in a healthy way - to make the marriage work. Because, that is what marriage is about - sharing [in] life together - is it not?

And, when sharing is accompanied by the proper kind of caring - 'codependence' can be a very good thing...

And, I mean 'codependence' in a good healthy way.

There is nothing wrong with the husband at times doing things with men friends or the wife at times doing things with women friends - as long as you have the right kind of friends. There is nothing wrong with having some different hobbies - it can even be a good thing for the marriage.

The kind of 'codependence' I am referring to does not restrict one spouse from doing [something] without the other spouse - nor does it confine one spouse to the [whims] of the other spouse. On the contrary, it is the exact opposite.

What I am talking about is the bringing-together-and-organizing "what both bring to the table" for the 'increase' that may be had in the marriage - to keep it functioning consistently and continually with stability and security.

I am talking about husband and wife being in complete-and-full agreement concerning the "roles" they will take on in the marriage. In so doing, they create a 'codependence' between them that actually allows for a greater "freedom" in the marriage - for the-two-as-one.

I may try to explain what I mean by this later - for now, I want to keep this post from becoming a book...

There is a certain kind of 'independence' - "being able to handle something on your own" - that both husband and wife need and should have. Otherwise, the 'codependence' (the healthy one that I am talking about) will fail miserably - and, the marriage will be dysfunctional and in chaos.

In any case, what I was trying to say in post #105 was that - from the perspective of a man with regard to an 'independent' woman - the concern is perhaps one of uncertainty about if-and-how the woman will "integrate" into the marriage.

How will she transition into the marriage? Will she transition into the marriage? How will her previous 'independence' experience affect the marriage relationship?

Lots of uncertainty. A great deal of risk for a man. And, honestly, a very possible regret for a woman if she does not want to let go of some of that 'independence' within which she has gotten very used to acting-and-operating.

Needless to say, when a man and woman get married - both of them must be willing to make changes to their lifestyle habits - otherwise, they are just two different 'independent' people living together. And, I am thinking, a 'codependence' (the healthy one that I am talking about) is essential for a stable and secure marriage relationship - or, at the very least, brings "a whole new level" to the marriage relationship.

 

[Snackersmom]

My use of the word 'codependent' was/is intended in the proper healthy way. It means to understand and accept the responsibility that comes with being in a marriage - always having regard for the spouse - not taking opportunity to act-and-operate outside of that responsibility.

In the context of my statement in post #105, the word 'independent' takes on the "unhealthy way" in a marriage. It is perfectly okay when you are single (man or woman); however, that same kind of 'independence' in a marriage is unhealthy - because, it 'disregards' the spouse.

Sorry if I used a "loaded" word ( "Ain't English wonderful!" ) - I was merely referring to a husband-and-wife couple who naturally normally honestly depend on each other - in a healthy way - to make the marriage work. Because, that is what marriage is about - sharing [in] life together - is it not?

And, when sharing is accompanied by the proper kind of caring - 'codependence' can be a very good thing...

And, I mean 'codependence' in a good healthy way.

There is nothing wrong with the husband at times doing things with men friends or the wife at times doing things with women friends - as long as you have the right kind of friends. There is nothing wrong with having some different hobbies - it can even be a good thing for the marriage.

The kind of 'codependence' I am referring to does not restrict one spouse from doing [something] without the other spouse - nor does it confine one spouse to the [whims] of the other spouse. On the contrary, it is the exact opposite.

What I am talking about is the bringing-together-and-organizing "what both bring to the table" for the 'increase' that may be had in the marriage - to keep it functioning consistently and continually with stability and security.

I am talking about husband and wife being in complete-and-full agreement concerning the "roles" they will take on in the marriage. In so doing, they create a 'codependence' between them that actually allows for a greater "freedom" in the marriage - for the-two-as-one.

I may try to explain what I mean by this later - for now, I want to keep this post from becoming a book...

There is a certain kind of 'independence' - "being able to handle something on your own" - that both husband and wife need and should have. Otherwise, the 'codependence' (the healthy one that I am talking about) will fail miserably - and, the marriage will be dysfunctional and in chaos.

In any case, what I was trying to say in post #105 was that - from the perspective of a man with regard to an 'independent' woman - the concern is perhaps one of uncertainty about if-and-how the woman will "integrate" into the marriage.

How will she transition into the marriage? Will she transition into the marriage? How will her previous 'independence' experience affect the marriage relationship?

Lots of uncertainty. A great deal of risk for a man. And, honestly, a very possible regret for a woman if she does not want to let go of some of that 'independence' within which she has gotten very used to acting-and-operating.

Needless to say, when a man and woman get married - both of them must be willing to make changes to their lifestyle habits - otherwise, they are just two different 'independent' people living together. And, I am thinking, a 'codependence' (the healthy one that I am talking about) is essential for a stable and secure marriage relationship - or, at the very least, brings "a whole new level" to the marriage relationship.

Alright, I see how you meant the term "codependent" now. It's definitely loaded haha, but no worries.

I definitely see how either spouse acting independently of the other would be detrimental to a marriage. I'm not sure if it's any different if the "independent" person is male or female, hmmm..... I've known several friends whose husbands made major financial decisions without even telling them.... and at the time, the wives were the primary breadwinners in both cases. It nearly ended their marriages. Trust was shattered, emotional walls were built..... I'm not sure some men realize what a ridiculous amount of trust a woman needs in order to pledge to submit to a man. It's not something to take lightly, for sure.

But I digress, and the above is a different topic for a different thread for a different day. Thanks for your input! 😎

 

[Snackersmom]

Pretty new to the spiritual side of this but think there's a strong cultural influence too, don't think it's seen as so much of an issue here. With my ex and me, i was the ideas person, he was the decisive one, it worked well for us pretty naturally.

Know i'm at least quite a lot older than most posting comments here, think my generation felt more secure in general and that we had a fair bit more control of our lives. Really interesting reading, Snackersmom and seoulseeker come up with so many good, thought provoking threads.

That's neat, Miss Learner! It probably is more of a cultural thing. The churches I was raised in made a somewhat big deal about gender roles, but the one I attend now is fairly chill about it. I like that.... not all of us fit a typical mold haha. There's a few things I bristle at every now and then, but overall I think the leadership does a good job and I'd rather they were too strict than too permissive, that's a pretty slippery slope. I'm glad you and your ex found such a good groove, that's something I'd definitely hope for in a marriage as well! 😎👍

 

[I_am_Canadian]

Definitely..... but there's a huge space between the 2 extremes you mentioned, and the Bible doesn't lay it all out crystal-clear. But yes, I agree, women should not seek to be masculine and vice versa..... It's more the Grey area in-between that I'm pondering right now. Like, just as Jacob didn't fit the accepted standard for manliness, one could argue that the P.31 lady didn't fit the current accepted standard for femininity. She had a head for business, provided for her family, and even appraised and purchased land (I didn't know women were even allowed to do that back then!). And Deborah was literally sent to confront God's chosen man when he didn't do as God told him.....that's not very submissive or deferential lol. 😆



Yay I fooled another one! 😜.

Seriously, I do appreciate the sentiment and I don't think most people irl would consider me to be un-feminine, I'm just sorting through some issues and mindsets to figure out what's right. I don't think much (if anything) needs to change right now, but I'm going to keep all this in mind and occasionally read back through the comments. I appreciate your input! 😎

I know I am coming in the middle of the conversation and probably missed some vital information, but commenting on the woman of Proverbs 31. I think the whole point of it is that she whole heartedly committed to caring for her family, she was good at time management and making priorities, while she could work outside the home, I don't think she did unless it was absolutely necessary. When I read it, I think of my grandmother, who had a garden in her back yard, she grew her own vegetables in a garden, she made her own pasta from scratch, made her own sauce from scratch, canned her own peaches from the tree. It's like they said in Fire Proof, the more you invest in something the more you will be committed to it.

 

[I_am_Canadian]

But when that fear is overwhelming any desire to "take a chance on her" then they go hunt up the guys and look to play games online....beer, popcorn and Netflix night with the guys....that sort of thing.

No talking to single women....ever....about anything at anytime. (Including the weather)

The FEAR is too REAL.
Especially in economic difficult times.

I see

 

[JohnDB]

I see

The fear of pain exceeds the roulette wheel of pleasure....

Meaning
The chances of engaging in a toxic and life destroying relationship is exponentially higher than getting a storybook wonderful life.

At best....you get nice feelings for a while followed by horrible feelings.

Guys value stability and see no need to engage in risky behavior.

 

[I_am_Canadian]

The fear of pain exceeds the roulette wheel of pleasure....

Meaning
The chances of engaging in a toxic and life destroying relationship is exponentially higher than getting a storybook wonderful life.

At best....you get nice feelings for a while followed by horrible feelings.

Guys value stability and see no need to engage in risky behavior.

True, but that is the price of living in a fallen world. Unethical and immoral behaviour is natural, that is what Jesus is for, no one can be born again without him. We live in a time where most people reject Jesus.