Healthy Compromise in Developing a Partnership

[RecentChange]

On 1/11/2020 at 7:43 AM, lana-banana said:

Side note: you may want to think about relocating anyway. I live in the center of a major city, and career-driven women who don't want kids [myself included] are the norm. I think you could absolutely find someone who felt the same way about her work as you do about yours. But when you love someone, really and seriously love someone, work tends to take a backseat.

That was my thought as well. If the OP is always on the road anyway - why not relocate home base.

I too feel far from an outlier here - many women in my social circle do not want children and have careers that they enjoy cultivating. 

If the OPs values aren't in line with where he has chosen to live, it seems like the transient nature of his job would allow relocation.

[Els]

On 1/11/2020 at 4:12 PM, Pin3Hot said:

 So if I was to say "I'm only interested in dating strong, open minded women, who never want kids," that's a very small minority of the dating pool. Then factor in how many of those women are willing to tolerate having a partner who is gone 40% of the year, that margin shrinks exponentially.

I don't think that what you require is really all that impossible to find, it's just a matter of meeting women who are interested. Personally, if I were single (I'm not), I would be fine with this, as I'm childfree by choice and work remotely, so a digital nomad lifestyle is a possibility for me. H and I sometimes talk about how we could've traveled the world if he'd decided to go to pilot school instead, lol. To be fair, I don't know what your job/travel schedule actually is or how taxing it is - that would also affect your pool of options. I'm just saying that I don't think these options  are as scarce as you think.

Perhaps more importantly, I don't think it's fair to stay with someone just because you feel you can't find someone else. I don't know if that is truly what you're doing, but it does come across that way to me.

[Pin3Hot]

On 1/11/2020 at 9:43 AM, lana-banana said:

The thing about relationship compromises is that they aren't always equal and they're rarely simultaneous. Sometimes one partner has to make sacrifices for a few years, and then it's the other's turn. Do you know anyone who's married to a doctor? The years they spend making pennies in residency can be incredibly hard on the partner/spouse, but then the sacrifice hopefully pays off.

You talk about the compromises you'll have to make, but she's already sacrificing a ton. She is essentially a single parent for half the year while you're traveling and knows she can't count on you for birthdays, anniversaries, and special occasions. That is hard for anyone to swallow but it's especially tough for a single parent. It's perfectly understandable that she wants more stability as her child grows older. Everything she's said sounds rational.

My husband and I met in the government under similar circumstances - we had jobs that frequently took us out of the country at unpredictable times. Yeah, it really was a dream job for both of us, but even a dream job felt sour when it made being together so hard. After a while we realized we would rather be on a date than jumping on planes at 1 AM. So we both left. This, I think, is the key to your issue: we wanted to be together more than we wanted to do the work. If you don't think you love her more than you love your career, or if you think the resentment over losing your career will outweigh how much you want to be with her, then this ultimately isn't the relationship for you. It's fine to be afraid of change. It's less fine to think that the change may impact whether your relationship survives.

(Side note: you may want to think about relocating anyway. I live in the center of a major city, and career-driven women who don't want kids [myself included] are the norm. I think you could absolutely find someone who felt the same way about her work as you do about yours. But when you love someone, really and seriously love someone, work tends to take a backseat.)

So regarding relocation, there's only a handful of cities that function as hubs for my work. So it's doable, just hard. 

I hope I haven't painted the picture that my GF is being irrational or that she's not making sacrifices. I'm really trying to figure out are two things. And I understand milage will vary with these questions

1. At what point does compromise turn to resentment?

2. Realistic expectations in a partner? I know I'm not going to find someone that checks 100% of the boxes. The best I've ever found was probably 85%. My current GF maybe meets 78%. 

 

[Pin3Hot]

On 1/13/2020 at 10:04 AM, RecentChange said:

That was my thought as well. If the OP is always on the road anyway - why not relocate home base.

I too feel far from an outlier here - many women in my social circle do not want children and have careers that they enjoy cultivating. 

If the OPs values aren't in line with where he has chosen to live, it seems like the transient nature of his job would allow relocation.

Yes and no. There are about 5 cities in the country that are hubs for the concert and touring industry. Three of them the cost of living exceeds my current earning potential. If one is considered valuable enough to their company or an artist, then they can live where ever they want. That's maybe 10% of the workforce.

[Pin3Hot]

On 1/13/2020 at 11:47 AM, Elswyth said:

I don't think that what you require is really all that impossible to find, it's just a matter of meeting women who are interested. Personally, if I were single (I'm not), I would be fine with this, as I'm childfree by choice and work remotely, so a digital nomad lifestyle is a possibility for me. H and I sometimes talk about how we could've traveled the world if he'd decided to go to pilot school instead, lol. To be fair, I don't know what your job/travel schedule actually is or how taxing it is - that would also affect your pool of options. I'm just saying that I don't think these options  are as scarce as you think.

Perhaps more importantly, I don't think it's fair to stay with someone just because you feel you can't find someone else. I don't know if that is truly what you're doing, but it does come across that way to me.

There is some reassurance in your reply. I'm generally gone Thurs-Sun every week April through September. Then have very sporadic work in town Sept-Nov, and Finally gone the entire month of December. However, it could change at any point with less than 24-hr notice. 

I know these people exist, and have met them. A few here in town, but mostly while being on the road. I don't mean to sound as if I'm only in this relationship because of a lack of options. I do think there needs to be a certain degree of pragmatism though with long term relationships. I love my girlfriend, even though she's not the most exciting  relationship.

[Els]

18 hours ago, Pin3Hot said:

There is some reassurance in your reply. I'm generally gone Thurs-Sun every week April through September. Then have very sporadic work in town Sept-Nov, and Finally gone the entire month of December. However, it could change at any point with less than 24-hr notice. 

Is this something that you see yourself doing until retirement, or is it temporary? Admittedly your schedule does sound pretty rough, especially given that you're away specifically on the days and months that are usually "couple time". I was envisioning something more like a week here and there, or being gone Mon-Wed.

18 hours ago, Pin3Hot said:

I know these people exist, and have met them. A few here in town, but mostly while being on the road. I don't mean to sound as if I'm only in this relationship because of a lack of options. I do think there needs to be a certain degree of pragmatism though with long term relationships. I love my girlfriend, even though she's not the most exciting  relationship.

I don't know - I think it only makes sense for pragmatism to kick in after a certain point, e.g. when you've both aged a decade or have kids (for the couples that choose to have them) or such. If you're not even married and it's "not the most exciting", I can only see it going downhill honestly.

[lana-banana]

23 hours ago, Pin3Hot said:

So regarding relocation, there's only a handful of cities that function as hubs for my work. So it's doable, just hard. 

I hope I haven't painted the picture that my GF is being irrational or that she's not making sacrifices. I'm really trying to figure out are two things. And I understand milage will vary with these questions

1. At what point does compromise turn to resentment?

2. Realistic expectations in a partner? I know I'm not going to find someone that checks 100% of the boxes. The best I've ever found was probably 85%. My current GF maybe meets 78%. 

 

1. Resentment happens when your longing/loss/envy outweighs your feelings of love. If you sincerely believe that you would resent giving up your career for her, or if you aren't willing to give up your dreams to support her, then you almost certainly will. 

When we were on our honeymoon, our Airbnb host gave us some marriage advice---try to imagine it in halting, stilted English with a thick Greek accent---"two people, one road." Think of it as a paraphrase of Khalil Gibran, who said "fill each other's cup but drink not from one cup." You are still two separate people but you have to want the same thing, and support each other. If you don't want the same things for your future together then yes, resentment can seep in like a poison.

2. How, exactly, are you defining "boxes"? Are you including things about appearance, career choice? Or are we talking about core values and behaviors? My husband isn't a Greek god or a billionaire, but he has 100% of the core things I want in a partner. 78% and 85% sound so absurdly specific; I can't tell if you're being very picky or if you truly don't think your current girlfriend measures up against all the things that you want.

I personally don't recommend marrying someone who doesn't check as many "boxes" (assuming they're reasonable) as possible. If you know a better fit for you theoretically exists, why not find her? Do you really want to marry someone you think is "second" best for you? How do you think she would feel knowing that she only met 78% of your "boxes"?

[Mr. Lucky]

16 hours ago, lana-banana said:

How do you think she would feel knowing that she only met 78% of your "boxes"?

OP, you're clearly settling, a recipe for long-term relationship disaster.  Over time (and without your physical presence), 78% can easily become 38%.  If the woman you're looking for is hard to find, that only means you have specific criteria that are vital to your happiness - and hers.  Ignore them at your own peril...

Mr. Lucky

[Pin3Hot]

On 1/17/2020 at 11:28 AM, Elswyth said:

Is this something that you see yourself doing until retirement, or is it temporary? Admittedly your schedule does sound pretty rough, especially given that you're away specifically on the days and months that are usually "couple time". I was envisioning something more like a week here and there, or being gone Mon-Wed.

I don't know - I think it only makes sense for pragmatism to kick in after a certain point, e.g. when you've both aged a decade or have kids (for the couples that choose to have them) or such. If you're not even married and it's "not the most exciting", I can only see it going downhill honestly.

Realistically, I see myself doing this about 10 more years. Ultimately, my goal is to transition into education or R&D for a manufacturer. 
 

To me pragmatism is different than settling, but maybe I’m too into the semantics of it.  For example, if we were to say that my best two relationships met 85% of my needs. That doesn’t mean the percentages were summed from the same elements. 
 

This relationship isn’t the most exciting, but my GF is a very passionate and caring person. My last great relationship was the polar opposite. It was very exciting, but she was not very compassionate. 
 

does that make sense? 
 

 

[Pin3Hot]

On 1/17/2020 at 4:07 PM, lana-banana said:

1. Resentment happens when your longing/loss/envy outweighs your feelings of love. If you sincerely believe that you would resent giving up your career for her, or if you aren't willing to give up your dreams to support her, then you almost certainly will. 

When we were on our honeymoon, our Airbnb host gave us some marriage advice---try to imagine it in halting, stilted English with a thick Greek accent---"two people, one road." Think of it as a paraphrase of Khalil Gibran, who said "fill each other's cup but drink not from one cup." You are still two separate people but you have to want the same thing, and support each other. If you don't want the same things for your future together then yes, resentment can seep in like a poison.

2. How, exactly, are you defining "boxes"? Are you including things about appearance, career choice? Or are we talking about core values and behaviors? My husband isn't a Greek god or a billionaire, but he has 100% of the core things I want in a partner. 78% and 85% sound so absurdly specific; I can't tell if you're being very picky or if you truly don't think your current girlfriend measures up against all the things that you want.

I personally don't recommend marrying someone who doesn't check as many "boxes" (assuming they're reasonable) as possible. If you know a better fit for you theoretically exists, why not find her? Do you really want to marry someone you think is "second" best for you? How do you think she would feel knowing that she only met 78% of your "boxes"?

I like that idea of “two people one road.” Me changing careers isn’t an option. So the fact that I have someone who supports me in my career is huge. Her only exceptions are us living together within the next several years.

78 and 85 are somewhat arbitrary, but it (or at least was) the grading scale for a ‘B.’ The comparison is weighing  ‘B-‘ vs ‘B+’  The metrics that I have for defining my boxes do take in physical attraction, but they hold less weight than values and personality. If you think of it like as resume, physical attraction is the like the introduction. It grabs  attention, but ultimately doesn’t secure a job. 
 

I’ve never told her specifically that she’s at 78%, but she does know that I think of our relationship as being B level. In her mind it’s an A-. 
 

I’m sure within the scope of the population, there is someone who meets an A - level. It’s also possible to win the laundry, but that doesn’t mean it’s a smart investment of ones money. 

In summary, my road can’t change very much. My career is what it is for the Next 10-15yrs.  So I need to find someone who’s willing to go down that path with me. I have that.  She just wants me to walk through the puddles and grass instead of the side walk. 

[SummerDreams]

Are you really thinking that there is a possibility that you find a person who has 100% everything you want within the time limits you want them? And even if you are THAT LUCKY ONE who does find such a person, do you really think YOU will have 100% of what this person wants?

I think you live in fantasy world. Love and relationships are not measured by numbers. If you aim to find the perfect match, I'm just telling you now to just quit dating cause the perfect match doesn't exist. You will never be in a relationship that satisfies you 100% and the sooner you accept it, the less you will get disappointed over and over again.

Tbh if I were your gf and I found out you were putting scores to me and our relationship, I would be devastated, even if this score would be 100.

[Els]

8 minutes ago, SummerDreams said:

Are you really thinking that there is a possibility that you find a person who has 100% everything you want within the time limits you want them? And even if you are THAT LUCKY ONE who does find such a person, do you really think YOU will have 100% of what this person wants?

I think you live in fantasy world.

To be fair to the OP, I think that he's explicitly saying that he DOESN'T think this.

[lana-banana]

Do not marry someone who is "at a B level" in your mind. Don't. Just don't.

Marrying the first person who's willing to walk the same road with you is a recipe for disaster. I have dated men who were wonderful, kind, supportive, attractive, intelligent, and adoring, but I knew in my gut I wouldn't be happy married to them. I think you know it too. It is clear that you're setting yourself up for a lifetime of resentment if you go through with this.

Marriage is hard, even when you really love the other person, and children make it that much harder. If you aren't deeply and unquestioningly in love with the person you marry then you're going to be truly unprepared when the real world throws its first curveball at you. For both of your own sakes I would strongly recommend a split.

Edited January 20, 2020 by lana-banana

[Pin3Hot]

10 hours ago, SummerDreams said:

Are you really thinking that there is a possibility that you find a person who has 100% everything you want within the time limits you want them? And even if you are THAT LUCKY ONE who does find such a person, do you really think YOU will have 100% of what this person wants?

I think you live in fantasy world. Love and relationships are not measured by numbers. If you aim to find the perfect match, I'm just telling you now to just quit dating cause the perfect match doesn't exist. You will never be in a relationship that satisfies you 100% and the sooner you accept it, the less you will get disappointed over and over again.

Tbh if I were your gf and I found out you were putting scores to me and our relationship, I would be devastated, even if this score would be 100.

That is precisely my point. No one in their right mind would ever think they could find someone that meets 100% of their expectations.  Everything in life is a trade off. As the old cliche goes, “there ain’t no such thing as free lunch.” 
 

With respect, I think you might be missing my greater point. Or perhaps I’m just not communicating it properly. I think about things in terms of numbers. If something has value to me, I tend to quantify it. Obviously things such as love can’t be defined in precise numbers, but would you agree with me that there are varying degrees of love? 

[Pin3Hot]

6 hours ago, lana-banana said:

Do not marry someone who is "at a B level" in your mind. Don't. Just don't.

Marrying the first person who's willing to walk the same road with you is a recipe for disaster. I have dated men who were wonderful, kind, supportive, attractive, intelligent, and adoring, but I knew in my gut I wouldn't be happy married to them. I think you know it too. It is clear that you're setting yourself up for a lifetime of resentment if you go through with this.

Marriage is hard, even when you really love the other person, and children make it that much harder. If you aren't deeply and unquestioningly in love with the person you marry then you're going to be truly unprepared when the real world throws its first curveball at you. For both of your own sakes I would strongly recommend a split.

I appreciate your insights. All of that makes sense. However, I can’t recount a single decision I have ever made based off gut instinct. If you were to ask me something as simple what my favorite color is, my answer would be “there’s too many variables.” I just can’t process things in that way. I know this is an entirely different set of issues.