Feeling resentful because my fiance comes from money and is vacationing without me.

[luvmy2ns]

No, I don't. They can share the mutual earnings starting as at the point that they're married but beyond that, he has no obligation to share the rest. If he does, it's extra.

 

No, no one is obligated to spend money on her, but he should at least care about her enough to maybe opt for a less lavish vacation with her. Something the two of them could afford that they could both go on together. Oh, but no. He has to have it all and leave her with nothing. His entire attitude is one of not giving a rat's ass about her, even to the point of making her stay up way too late on work days so he can be personally chauffered to the airport and back. Big jerk. And the dangling of the proverbial carrot and the use of the word "might" implies that it could be that fun things and events that cost money she can't afford on her own may be withheld during the marriage if she doesn't "behave herself." I'd be very wary of this guy, and I would most definitely have my own attorney look over the obviously upcoming prenuptual agreement.

[Trialbyfire]

Overall, I see this as the prevalent female expectation that the man should share his earnings, even before marriage. I truly sympathize with men over this.

[doiask42much]

No, I don't. They can share the mutual earnings starting as at the point that they're married but beyond that, he has no obligation to share the rest. If he does, it's extra.

 

Sure, he has no obligation to do anything really. I used the word "should" loosely. Like I should floss, but no one's going to make me. Nothing he's doing is against the law. I just think that if he cared how she felt and wanted to be a good husband, he would do more than he's been doing. It doesn't bode well for their future. Love should (there's that word again) not be about obligation.

[VinaAmez]

I would most definitely have my own attorney look over the obviously upcoming prenuptual agreement.

 

Well yeah. That's being smart. Anyone should no matter who they are.

[Trialbyfire]

No, no one is obligated to spend money on her, but he should at least care about her enough to maybe opt for a less lavish vacation with her. Something the two of them could afford that they could both go on together. Oh, but no. He has to have it all and leave her with nothing. His entire attitude is one of not giving a rat's ass about her, even to the point of making her stay up way too late on work days so he can be personally chauffered to the airport and back. Big jerk. And the dangling of the proverbial carrot and the use of the word "might" implies that it could be that fun things and events that cost money she can't afford on her own may be withheld during the marriage if she doesn't "behave herself." I'd be very wary of this guy, and I would most definitely have my own attorney look over the obviously upcoming prenuptual agreement.

I don't see it. If something like this happened to me, I would say have a nice time but don't expect me to drive you. I don't resent anyone else's good fortune or are ever jealous about it. What I have of my own, I will use accordingly.

[doiask42much]

And again, I said his lack of sympathy is the issue here, not the money. Yeah, of course she wants to go on the trip and is going to pout because she's not going, but he's rubbing salt in her wounds by being off-the-wall happy about going, offering no words of comfort, and simply telling her to suck it up and be happy for him.

 

Yes, money would make this situation a nonissue, sure, but in lieu of that, some indication of caring on his part would help diffuse the resentment.

[luvmy2ns]

So, TBF, what you're saying is his caring about her should matter much less than having his own selfish wants catered to? He could still have a vacation, but she could have one too if they chose one they could both afford with their combined money, and they would be together. He should WANT to be with her and WANT her to be happy as well. They are getting married. If his want for her happiness means this little already, imagine 10 years down the road.

[Trialbyfire]

And again, I said his lack of sympathy is the issue here, not the money. Yeah, of course she wants to go on the trip and is going to pout because she's not going, but he's rubbing salt in her wounds by being off-the-wall happy about going, offering no words of comfort, and simply telling her to suck it up and be happy for him.

 

Yes, money would make this situation a nonissue, sure, but in lieu of that, some indication of caring on his part would help diffuse the resentment.

If this is a reoccuring theme in their relationship, no wonder he has no sympathy.

[Trialbyfire]

So, TBF, what you're saying is his caring about her should matter much less than having his own selfish wants catered to? He could still have a vacation, but she could have one too if they chose one they could both afford with their combined money, and they would be together. He should WANT to be with her and WANT her to be happy as well. They are getting married. If his want for her happiness means this little already, imagine 10 years down the road.

Nope. She can't control him. She can only control herself.

[luvmy2ns]

Nope. She can't control him. She can only control herself.

 

PRECISELY why many of us are advising that she take a good, hard look at how he treats her now if she expects to be treated decently in the future. He is treating her like a second class citizen within the realm of his life and his loved ones. I would take a lesson if I were this gal and run, not walk, as far away as I could.

[Tomcat33]

Overall, I see this as the prevalent female expectation that the man should share his earnings, even before marriage. I truly sympathize with men over this.

 

And why not? Why shouldn't women expect this? If he weren't spending this money on her he would be spending it on another woman, because that's what men do, they spend money on the women they love it's all part of the conquering ritual.

 

Now if she settles for this kind of treatment this early on she is setting a path for herself to always be treated as second rate. She is his wife to be, if he cannot expect his parents to also pay for her, he should be going on a trip with her instead and he should be considering her feelings in this. And then he can plan a less extravagant thing with his parents where by he could also include his fiance, why is that so wrong?

 

And in the least he should NOT be rubbing this in her face expecting a pat on the back for HIS great "fortune"and her "misfortune" He is taking advantage of her good will and this will only get worse with time. He's learning very early on to manipulate her (early signs of abuse) into having to be "happy and supportive" for him in ALL of his decisions even if they EXCLUDE her or her well being.

 

In a relationship like that she will never have a say in their future it will always be what daddy tells him and what he wants from daddy and SHE, his own W will have to sit quietely and agree with the decisions that will only benefit HIM. THAT'S what this is about.

[luvmy2ns]

Okay, let's put this in another perspective, shall we?

 

Let's say a gal has a child from a prior relationship/marriage. Some time down the road she gets involved with a man w/o children and they are living together. Every day after work he stops for a drink with the boys. She can't join him because daycare closes at 6:00, and "he's your child, not mine." Each weekend he takes off on fun little jaunts that children cannot attend. Well, the child is hers, after all, so it's her problem that she can't go, right?

 

It's not about the money, TBF. It's about his attitude, which sucks BIG TIME.

[Trialbyfire]

Okay, let's put this in another perspective, shall we?

 

Let's say a gal has a child from a prior relationship/marriage. Some time down the road she gets involved with a man w/o children and they are living together. Every day after work he stops for a drink with the boys. She can't join him because daycare closes at 6:00, and "he's your child, not mine." Each weekend he takes off on fun little jaunts that children cannot attend. Well, the child is hers, after all, so it's her problem that she can't go, right?

 

It's not about the money, TBF. It's about his attitude, which sucks BIG TIME.

If a man invests in a relationship with a woman with the understanding that they will be a family, then he has the obligation to help with the child. If he specifically states that he doesn't want any responsibility and she still agrees to marry him, who do you suppose is right?

 

In this relationship, he's already defining as such. If she agrees to it and still marries him, knowing full well this is his attitude, who's the dummy now?

[luvmy2ns]

I made more money than the guys in my last LTR's. Guess what? I didn't get more because I made more. I shared what I had with my men. It's called *GASP* loving your partner.

 

Maybe there's something wrong with me. Maybe I should be more selfish.

[Tomcat33]

Okay, let's put this in another perspective, shall we?

 

Let's say a gal has a child from a prior relationship/marriage. Some time down the road she gets involved with a man w/o children and they are living together. Every day after work he stops for a drink with the boys. She can't join him because daycare closes at 6:00, and "he's your child, not mine." Each weekend he takes off on fun little jaunts that children cannot attend. Well, the child is hers, after all, so it's her problem that she can't go, right?

 

It's not about the money, TBF. It's about his attitude, which sucks BIG TIME.

 

TOTALLY agree!

[VinaAmez]

Well regardless of this trip, I still see problems. Even if she's not bringing them up or see's them.

 

I'm curious who's idea this way for the long engagement.

[luvmy2ns]

If a man invests in a relationship with a woman with the understanding that they will be a family, then he has the obligation to help with the child. If he specifically states that he doesn't want any responsibility and she still agrees to marry him, who do you suppose is right?

 

In this relationship, he's already defining as such. If she agrees to it and still marries him, knowing full well this is his attitude, who's the dummy now?

 

No s--t Sherlock. That's what we're saying. If she agrees now to his selfish behavior, she'll only get more of the same when they're married. NOW who's the dummy?

[Trialbyfire]

The prevalent attitude is that it's a requirement and proof of love. I say otherwise. It's a personal choice to share or not, not an obligation. Resentment, jealousy and envy come from the perception of obligation.

[Trialbyfire]

No s--t Sherlock. That's what we're saying. If she agrees now to his selfish behavior, she'll only get more of the same when they're married. NOW who's the dummy?

With all this in mind, she is not entitled to feel resentment for his good fortune. She can feel dislike for his values. Two completely different things.

[Tomcat33]

I made more money than the guys in my last LTR's. Guess what? I didn't get more because I made more. I shared what I had with my men. It's called *GASP* loving your partner.

 

Maybe there's something wrong with me. Maybe I should be more selfish.

 

 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with your attitude that's what people do in love and when they care about their partners they don't make distinctions for money and for recreationals past times given their bank accounts. I have done the exact same for partners and it has been reciprocated, you don't calcuate it you just do it because you would never want your loved one to feel rejected and because you want to share these moments with a loved one.

 

In this situation unfortunately it sounds like the fiance is being awfully calculative and this seems like the begging of a long road of rejection and segregation. I feel for Surfgirl she is not in for an easy road if this already makes her feel uncomfortable it can only get worse.

[Tomcat33]

With all this in mind, she is not entitled to feel resentment for his good fortune. She can feel dislike for his values. Two completely different things.

 

 

YES SHE IS, she is entitled to feel whatever she wants. They are her feeling, and no one has any say as to what a person should or should not feel.

[luvmy2ns]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with your attitude that's what people do in love and when they care about their partners they don't make distinctions for money and for recreationals past times given their bank accounts. I have done the exact same for partners and it has been reciprocated, you don't calcuate it you just do it because you would never want your loved one to feel rejected and because you want to share these moments with a loved one.

 

Now THIS is an expectation ANY person who is engaged should be able to have of their partner! All this BS about expectations bringing on problems is a load of crap. I would never expect my sweety to not have expectations in a relationship with me. He knows how much I care about him and my unselfish attitude, therefore, his expectation would be that I would NEVER go on a vacation alone that we couldn't afford together, regardless of our separate incomes. But that's just me. I also expect courtesy, consideration, and respect in my relationship, and he gives all those to me and much, much more. Oh, and GREAT sex!!!

[Trialbyfire]

YES SHE IS, she is entitled to feel whatever she wants. They are her feeling, and no one has any say as to what a person should or should not feel.

Entitlement is as such. If you run around resenting, being jealous and envious of other people, you will live a miserable life.

[Tomcat33]

Now THIS is an expectation ANY person who is engaged should be able to have of their partner! All this BS about expectations bringing on problems is a load of crap. I would never expect my sweety to not have expectations in a relationship with me. He knows how much I care about him and my unselfish attitude, therefore, his expectation would be that I would NEVER go on a vacation alone that we couldn't afford together, regardless of our separate incomes. But that's just me. I also expect courtesy, consideration, and respect in my relationship, and he gives all those to me and much, much more. Oh, and GREAT sex!!!

 

 

Exactly! If you should not expect anything from your partner then you should also not expect respect, love, admiration, consideration, and even monogomy once you are married! Pffft LOL

What a load of crap to NOT HAVE EXPECTATIONS in a committed relationship.

 

How can you even form a serious union with another human being when you have 0 expectations!

 

I'm totally with you on that one Luvmy

[Tomcat33]

Entitlement is as such. If you run around resenting, being jealous and envious of other people, you will live a miserable life.

 

 

The woman who started this thread topic is not running around resenting people and feeling jealous for people in general, she is feeling resentment for her fiance who is doing everything in his power to create an unhealthy situation between she and him. Her feelings are HARDLY unjustified, to me they are entirely valid.

 

She didn't post that she is jealous of Paris Hilton's llife style she posted about resentful feelings her FIANCE'S actions porvoked in her by creating this segregation so selfishly this early on and just as she is about to embark on a life long journey with this guy. I think she is 100% right to question her feelings and to question her situation and to feel downright crappy about it.