Pin, I’m not misinterpreting what LH has said. He most definitely said that T should work it out with her, and has implied T and I are both shallow because we would break up with someone after saying ILU if we encountered a dealbreaker - yet everyone admits they have a dealbreaker somewhere where they would do the same.
LH kept saying they should work it out, G implied it was terrible if him to break up with her.
Originally Posted by kml
[quote] Not one person said they shouldn’t break up
Forgive me for speaking for you, LH and G (and absolutely correct me if I’m wrong), but what I believe LH was getting at was they should work out the financial crap rather than CW being angry and ending it just because she made bad choices that he went along with. And G’s implication was more about it would be bad to break up solely abruptly just because she mishandled her money and he had to bail her out. Again, LH and G, please forgive me for speaking and misinterpreting if I did but after the week I’ve had at work that has been full of stuff like this, I had to add my 2 cents.
Me 52, H53 Bomb drop 9/29/2014 Divorce from XH final 12/17/2014 Marriage #2 12/31/2019 5 adult (step)daughters (3 from XH's first marriage, 2 from current H's previous relationships) 6 grandkids
Pin, I’m not misinterpreting what LH has said. He most definitely said that T should work it out with her, and has implied T and I are both shallow because we would break up with someone after saying ILU if we encountered a dealbreaker - yet everyone admits they have a dealbreaker somewhere where they would do the same.
Apparently I’m the defender of LH today and I don’t know why since he is perfectly capable of handling himself but NO….he is not saying y’all are shallow for breaking up after saying ILY and encountering a deal breaker. He’s pointing out that saying ILY has a deeper meaning to some while others toss it out like they’d say “you want fries with that?” He didn’t say you were shallow nor say anything about anything related to a deal breaker.
Me 52, H53 Bomb drop 9/29/2014 Divorce from XH final 12/17/2014 Marriage #2 12/31/2019 5 adult (step)daughters (3 from XH's first marriage, 2 from current H's previous relationships) 6 grandkids
And I’m not against romance - but almost every true crime story starts with some woman or man being “swept off their feet”. So it pays to keep our wits about us and not ignore the red flags.
And if some dude is telling me he loves me a few weeks or a month in, I’m assuming he is trying to sweep me off my feet so yeah, I agree it is important to keep my wits about me and not ignore red flags.
Me 52, H53 Bomb drop 9/29/2014 Divorce from XH final 12/17/2014 Marriage #2 12/31/2019 5 adult (step)daughters (3 from XH's first marriage, 2 from current H's previous relationships) 6 grandkids
Thanks Dawn for having my back and I’ll take it from here. K I didn’t say you were shallow I said the two of you are inauthentic and have no honor because your words don’t mean anything. They are just words you say in the moment either to make you feel good or avoid an awkward situation. Like when a man says at the end of a date “I’ll call you”. And then doesn’t.
If he loved her he should try to work it out. Obviously he doesn’t so or at least what 99% of us equates to love so I say “dump her broke a§§”!
And G’s implication was more about it would be bad to break up solely abruptly just because she mishandled her money and he had to bail her out
He shouldn’t try to work it out if irresponsibility is a dealbreaker for him. It is and it would have been for me too. And it doesn’t mean we are inauthentic , just that we recognize red flags when we see them. If it’s not a red flag for you, fine. It is for me - a big one - and apparently for T too.
LH you can’t seem to disagree with people without insulting them. Why is that?
What is so out there about this being a dealbreaker? It’s not that she’s broke or can’t budget. It’s that she’s spending irresponsibly - new car, new sofa, expensive weekend trip -when she doesn’t have the money or even an available credit card and while expecting daddy to bail her out. To me that says something deeply important about a person’s personality traits - entitlement, impulsiveness, maybe overly concerned with appearances. And that’s a personality type I don’t care to be in a relationship with. Others are not bothered by this, in fact some guys are attracted to “damsels in distress”. Have at it.
A lot of us women were raised on “our prince will come” fantasies. I’ve known a lot of women who didn’t think they had to be responsible with their money or plan for a career because someday some guy was going to bail them out. It’s not a trait that I respect in my female friends. I certainly would consider it a dealbreaker if I was dating a guy who turned out to be that way - or who turned out to be overly concerned with status, or keeping up with the Joneses. Definitely not my type.
I wouldn’t be likely to say ILU to someone as early as T did, and I can’t currently recall ever having said it first - definitely never uncomfortably so. But I don’t believe just having said it obligated me to work through dealbreakers if they crop up, and most of you don’t either. We just have different dealbreakers.
Well K you are bringing out the worst in me so I’ll explain it one more time. Dealbreakers are great, awesome and a must. Now if CW would of took his time to know K he would have found out the dealbreaker before the ILU. I will say it one more time and then no more. CW has displayed his disappointment many times that no one lives him for his warts and all. Too many on here that sounds very hypocritical.
I’m done with this subject and will no longer comment on it.
