Divorce...

[Cal]

Originally posted by Jenda@Feb 15 2005, 08:42 PM

Cal, you seem to place a lot of respect on the $ sign. If someone makes $20/hr., and their spouse makes $75/hr., then obviously the one who makes $20/hr. is not pulling their weight. Their contribution is not worth as much as the one who makes more. Your point is not well taken. Responsibility should be split evenly. That is what marriage is all about, and, most likely, what the divorce is all about, too. It happens when one person decides that their contribution is better than the other persons. Instead of respecting the other person, they feel that they are the ones who need to be "honored". It is a disgusting attitude. You can have your discussion. I am sick of it.

Wow--what a misinterpretation! Where did I say anyone was being "honored"? All I said was women shouldn't complain about doing housework when they don't contribute much financially. What is the matter with that? I guess women are so special that men should just bend over backward, let them have everything they earn, run around town shopping all day, and let the house go to seed.

[DisRuptive1]

Oh man this thread has run quite a ways, a lot faster than I can run with it but I've caught up now haven't I.

Just to those wondering about my comment I was referring to my serogate dad. Without his help I could not have grown back the **** that my single mother took away from me (I love her and all don't get me wrong). I have

******* now, and let it be known to other people that I have them. I am confident, strong, and powerful, all thanks to my serogate father who didn't come into my life until I was 15.

He is the all powerful, very rich and successful, been divorced 4 times, yet hasn't had a child, the great and abomidable...

Tom Leykis

Need I say more?

[DisRuptive1]

Oh and by the way, when men are divorced they get a new respect for the freedom they had when they were single. The whole reason they got married (for the first timers) was so that they would be able to have a consistent lay whenever they wanted. Men have a need that has been bugging them for a long time, and to a lot of them, marriage is their answer to that problem.

When they get married, the woman slowly starts to take away the freedoms that the guy had when he was single. He can't go out with his friends as much. He has to stay home with the wife. He can't move around to different jobs or move to different cities spontaneously anymore. He has to stay grounded. Stay in one place. He has to take crap from his boss that he wouldn't have otherwise, were he single, because his wife wants him to bring home money. He also has to pretty much remain in his job unless he has a good chance of increasing his standard of living by getting a new job, and of course he would have to go over this with the wife.

When a man is divorced, the world opens up to him. He can go on trips for twice as long since he doesn't have to pay for his wife. He can "be" with any woman in the world now that he doesn't have to worry about cheating on anyone. He is actually allowed to look and admire other women, something that he had to start to give up when he got engaged. He can switch jobs as he wants, as long as he has enough money to support himself (which isn't much). Wives cost way too much, even if they have a job.

[StrawberryFields]

Originally posted by DisRuptive1@Feb 15 2005, 10:51 PM

Oh man this thread has run quite a ways, a lot faster than I can run with it but I've caught up now haven't I.

Just to those wondering about my comment I was referring to my serogate dad.  Without his help I could not have grown back the **** that my single mother took away from me (I love her and all don't get me wrong).  I have ******* now, and let it be known to other people that I have them.  I am confident, strong, and powerful, all thanks to my serogate father who didn't come into my life until I was 15.

He is the all powerful, very rich and successful, been divorced 4 times, yet hasn't had a child, the great and abomidable...

Tom Leykis

Need I say more?

Well now that explains a lot...Tom Leykis

http://www.blowmeuptom.com/index2.html

[TannersDad]

Originally posted by Cal+Feb 15 2005, 09:32 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 15 2005, 09:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--TannersDad@Feb 14 2005, 09:29 AM

You people are all crazy!!!

Most women do not get a windfall on divorce.  Alimony (they call it maintenance now)  is pretty much a thing of the past.  On the rare occasion that they do get it, the only get it for a limited period of time, usually no more than two years to "rehabilitate" them. 

The divorce rate is 43% in the United States.  Most marriages are still working. 

The divorce rate for LDS marriages is really low so whatever counsel people are getting before/during seems to be working.

The aspect of sex in a marriage is way overblown here.  It only becomes an issue when some one is being selfish.  In other words the issue isn't the sex it is the selfishness of the partner.  This is the same thing about money, child care, etc...  Someone is being selfish.  When both parties in a marriage are only concern with the well being of their partner then the marriage will work. 

Cal is up in the night.  After reading his stuff was anybody shocked that he went through a divorce?

I'm glad you have all the answers. Too bad they don't address the question. I don't recall asking or commenting much on what women get when they get divorced.

Second, the divorce rate varies from state to state--in many states it is over 50%. As to you comment on why I got divorced, you know nothing about me or about the details of my marriage. Shows how mindless you are--commenting on things you know nothing about.

Third, you are simply assuming, as many of the women on this thread have, that I am somehow against spouses treating eachother with the uttmost of respect and consideration. You completely misinterpret my comments, reading in things that suit your fears and prejudices.

As to the divorce rate in the LDS church, it is about 33%, about the same as the divorce rate of couples from other faiths that attend church regularly.

First, who said that I had all the answers? I was just pointing out that the things being discussed here are not what makes a happy marriage. People that have sex every night (with their spouse) and are wealthy still get divorces.

Second, the question was about divorce not what makes a healthy marriage. I was addressing peoples opinions on healthy marriages. As far as I can tell no one gave good info on divorce.

Third, the only thing that I am assuming is that you believe the things that you posted in your original post. Based on that I am not surprised you have been divorced. Don't misinterpret my assumptions.

Fourth, what planet do you come from where people only do things for selfish reasons? Do you really go into any action thinking what is in it for me? I can only imagine how this attitude helps in marriage...

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Cal@Feb 15 2005, 08:39 PM

For example, why does a woman SAH and take care of the kids etc. Because she is being selfless--nonsense--it is because she knows 1) if she doesn't her husband will not be please and perhaps leave her and 2) feels that she is pleasing God, her parents and she will get praise from her friends, family etc which will make her feel better (wanting to feel good is the prime motivator of human behavior, and it is, yes, selfish--not bad, but selfish)

Uh....are you referring to ALL stay at home moms? My husband insisted that I work up until I was pregnant with our fourth child.. After that I simply refused because it wasn't in the best interest of our family. If I'd been looking for praise I would have continued being "superwoman", but I was dead dog tired!

I agree with your general train of thought. There is very little true altruism in the world. Completely unselfish people would never be able to survive long enough to pass on their genes! There can (and should) be a balance though. According to John Nash (as crude as he was), we should do what is best for us AND the group.

[Lindy]

Originally posted by Cal+Feb 15 2005, 08:25 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 15 2005, 08:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -lindy9556@Feb 13 2005, 12:21 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--DisRuptive1@Feb 13 2005, 12:15 PM

All exceptions.  For ugly woman with a rich guy you show me, I can show you 100 others where the woman is attractive.

Never, that's when.

That wasn't the point laddie.....you said NEVER. I couldn't stand silent and let that one by.

OK, I'll defer to Disupts statement---hardly ever.

Thanks for that clarification from you, and I think I'm done feeling or thinking anything else on this subject matter.

[Guest estump]

Cal and Disruptive you both make me laugh. While I can certainly see where you both are coming from and understand WHY you think and feel the way you do...it makes me laugh. I love how your personal experiences become a general experience for ALL married and/or divorced couples. Carry on....

Anyway, I have to wonder how many people actually TALK about life and all the ins and outs of marriage before they get hitched?!

I know I did w/ Dh. We talked about sex, finances, how many kids based on my health, what we were willing to sacrafice to make our family work and so on.

I think if more people knew this stuff before hand a lot of people who think that love will keep them alive would NEVER walk down that isle or become sealed as the case may be.

Anyone who places monetary value on any relationship is doomed to fail. Money is the number 1 stated reason for divorce. DH and I agreed from the get go, we would NEVER put money ahead of how we felt...no matter how poor or rich we were. WE're still poor, LOL...but moving along.

[Cal]

Originally posted by DisRuptive1@Feb 15 2005, 09:51 PM

Oh man this thread has run quite a ways, a lot faster than I can run with it but I've caught up now haven't I.

Just to those wondering about my comment I was referring to my serogate dad. Without his help I could not have grown back the **** that my single mother took away from me (I love her and all don't get me wrong). I have

******* now, and let it be known to other people that I have them. I am confident, strong, and powerful, all thanks to my serogate father who didn't come into my life until I was 15.

He is the all powerful, very rich and successful, been divorced 4 times, yet hasn't had a child, the great and abomidable...

Tom Leykis

Need I say more?

Every kid needs a dad like Tom---a lot of us would have made a lot fewer mistakes with women if we had.

[Cal]

Originally posted by TannersDad+Feb 16 2005, 08:24 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (TannersDad @ Feb 16 2005, 08:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Cal@Feb 15 2005, 09:32 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--TannersDad@Feb 14 2005, 09:29 AM

You people are all crazy!!!

Most women do not get a windfall on divorce.  Alimony (they call it maintenance now)  is pretty much a thing of the past.  On the rare occasion that they do get it, the only get it for a limited period of time, usually no more than two years to "rehabilitate" them. 

The divorce rate is 43% in the United States.  Most marriages are still working. 

The divorce rate for LDS marriages is really low so whatever counsel people are getting before/during seems to be working.

The aspect of sex in a marriage is way overblown here.  It only becomes an issue when some one is being selfish.  In other words the issue isn't the sex it is the selfishness of the partner.  This is the same thing about money, child care, etc...  Someone is being selfish.  When both parties in a marriage are only concern with the well being of their partner then the marriage will work. 

Cal is up in the night.  After reading his stuff was anybody shocked that he went through a divorce?

I'm glad you have all the answers. Too bad they don't address the question. I don't recall asking or commenting much on what women get when they get divorced.

Second, the divorce rate varies from state to state--in many states it is over 50%. As to you comment on why I got divorced, you know nothing about me or about the details of my marriage. Shows how mindless you are--commenting on things you know nothing about.

Third, you are simply assuming, as many of the women on this thread have, that I am somehow against spouses treating eachother with the uttmost of respect and consideration. You completely misinterpret my comments, reading in things that suit your fears and prejudices.

As to the divorce rate in the LDS church, it is about 33%, about the same as the divorce rate of couples from other faiths that attend church regularly.

First, who said that I had all the answers? I was just pointing out that the things being discussed here are not what makes a happy marriage. People that have sex every night (with their spouse) and are wealthy still get divorces.

Second, the question was about divorce not what makes a healthy marriage. I was addressing peoples opinions on healthy marriages. As far as I can tell no one gave good info on divorce.

Third, the only thing that I am assuming is that you believe the things that you posted in your original post. Based on that I am not surprised you have been divorced. Don't misinterpret my assumptions.

Fourth, what planet do you come from where people only do things for selfish reasons? Do you really go into any action thinking what is in it for me? I can only imagine how this attitude helps in marriage...

You may not realize it but no one does anything where there is nothing in it for them, even if it is just the avoidance of feeling guilty for NOT doing it. Give it some thought, it will dawn on you what I am saying. That is just how human nature is, deep down. We use the terms UNSELFISH to simply mask our one and only motivation for doing anything--to feel good. Give me any action a humans take and I can show you how it is at its root, selfish. I challenge you! Take me up on it, I dare you,

[Cal]

Originally posted by curvette+Feb 16 2005, 10:43 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Feb 16 2005, 10:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Feb 15 2005, 08:39 PM

For example, why does a woman SAH and take care of the kids etc. Because she is being selfless--nonsense--it is because she knows 1) if she doesn't her husband will not be please and perhaps leave her  and  2) feels that she is pleasing God, her parents and she will get praise from her friends, family etc which will make her feel better (wanting to feel good is the prime motivator of human behavior, and it is, yes, selfish--not bad, but selfish)

Uh....are you referring to ALL stay at home moms? My husband insisted that I work up until I was pregnant with our fourth child.. After that I simply refused because it wasn't in the best interest of our family. If I'd been looking for praise I would have continued being "superwoman", but I was dead dog tired!

I agree with your general train of thought. There is very little true altruism in the world. Completely unselfish people would never be able to survive long enough to pass on their genes! There can (and should) be a balance though. According to John Nash (as crude as he was), we should do what is best for us AND the group.

No matter what we do, it is ALWAYS motivated by something that benefits oneself. Whether it also benefits someone else is not the point. A lot of people feel good doing things that benefit others--we call that altruistic, which it is, but it is NOT unselfish--since the person doing it does it to feel good. I call that the good kind of selfishness. Selfishness that benefits others is the best kind of selfishness. The worse kind is that which damages oneself or others in the process.

[Cal]

Originally posted by estump@Feb 17 2005, 06:50 PM

Cal and Disruptive you both make me laugh. While I can certainly see where you both are coming from and understand WHY you think and feel the way you do...it makes me laugh. I love how your personal experiences become a general experience for ALL married and/or divorced couples. Carry on....

Anyway, I have to wonder how many people actually TALK about life and all the ins and outs of marriage before they get hitched?!

I know I did w/ Dh. We talked about sex, finances, how many kids based on my health, what we were willing to sacrafice to make our family work and so on.

I think if more people knew this stuff before hand a lot of people who think that love will keep them alive would NEVER walk down that isle or become sealed as the case may be.

Anyone who places monetary value on any relationship is doomed to fail. Money is the number 1 stated reason for divorce. DH and I agreed from the get go, we would NEVER put money ahead of how we felt...no matter how poor or rich we were. WE're still poor, LOL...but moving along.

Talk is cheap, Babe. People say all kinds of things before they get married. It's actions AFTERWARD that count.

And, I hate to speculate, but if you are happy being poor, as a girl, then you are probably a Seattle 2. Disrupt knows what I mean.

California 10's are rarely content with bankrupt guys.

[Cal]

Originally posted by estump@Feb 17 2005, 06:50 PM

Cal and Disruptive you both make me laugh. While I can certainly see where you both are coming from and understand WHY you think and feel the way you do...it makes me laugh. I love how your personal experiences become a general experience for ALL married and/or divorced couples. Carry on....

Anyway, I have to wonder how many people actually TALK about life and all the ins and outs of marriage before they get hitched?!

I know I did w/ Dh. We talked about sex, finances, how many kids based on my health, what we were willing to sacrafice to make our family work and so on.

I think if more people knew this stuff before hand a lot of people who think that love will keep them alive would NEVER walk down that isle or become sealed as the case may be.

Anyone who places monetary value on any relationship is doomed to fail. Money is the number 1 stated reason for divorce. DH and I agreed from the get go, we would NEVER put money ahead of how we felt...no matter how poor or rich we were. WE're still poor, LOL...but moving along.

Also, you seem to miss the point. The point was that really hot girls USUALLY don't get stuck with Seattle 2's, so money doesn't become that kind of issue.

The issue for guys is, is the girl all talk (as you say) or is she the real deal--does she really want to take care of the guy, or is she just interested in procreating and mothering, or worse, just spending his money.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Cal@Feb 17 2005, 09:04 PM

And, I hate to speculate, but if you are happy being poor, as a girl, then you are probably a Seattle 2. Disrupt knows what I mean.

Oh now that's a real nice thing to say. Whatever happened to your manners? (are you having a midlife crisis?)

[DisRuptive1]

I am reminded of a passage by Adam Smith, the economist, about the Invisible Hand or what could be considered enlightened self interest:

Every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it... He intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for society that it was no part of his intention. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by DisRuptive1@Feb 17 2005, 09:53 PM

I am reminded of a passage by Adam Smith, the economist, about the Invisible Hand or what could be considered enlightened self interest:

Every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it... He intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for society that it was no part of his intention. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.

That would be the theory debunked by The Nash equilibrium. Society is better served when self interest is modified by the best interest of the group. "Adam Smith was wrong!"

[pushka]

Originally posted by curvette+Feb 17 2005, 11:24 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Feb 17 2005, 11:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--DisRuptive1@Feb 17 2005, 09:53 PM

I am reminded of a passage by Adam Smith, the economist, about the Invisible Hand or what could be considered enlightened self interest:

Every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it... He intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for society that it was no part of his intention. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.

That would be the theory debunked by The Nash equilibrium. Society is better served when self interest is modified by the best interest of the group. "Adam Smith was wrong!"

Curvette, the Nash way sounds good to me...I vaguely remember touching upon Nash and Adam Smith..Smithsonian School? in a Social Policy class...I'm not too great at economics tho, so it went a little above my head...LOL

[TannersDad]

Originally posted by Cal+Feb 17 2005, 09:57 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Feb 17 2005, 09:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -TannersDad@Feb 16 2005, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by -Cal@Feb 15 2005, 09:32 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--TannersDad@Feb 14 2005, 09:29 AM

You people are all crazy!!!

Most women do not get a windfall on divorce.  Alimony (they call it maintenance now)  is pretty much a thing of the past.  On the rare occasion that they do get it, the only get it for a limited period of time, usually no more than two years to "rehabilitate" them. 

The divorce rate is 43% in the United States.  Most marriages are still working. 

The divorce rate for LDS marriages is really low so whatever counsel people are getting before/during seems to be working.

The aspect of sex in a marriage is way overblown here.  It only becomes an issue when some one is being selfish.  In other words the issue isn't the sex it is the selfishness of the partner.  This is the same thing about money, child care, etc...  Someone is being selfish.  When both parties in a marriage are only concern with the well being of their partner then the marriage will work. 

Cal is up in the night.  After reading his stuff was anybody shocked that he went through a divorce?

I'm glad you have all the answers. Too bad they don't address the question. I don't recall asking or commenting much on what women get when they get divorced.

Second, the divorce rate varies from state to state--in many states it is over 50%. As to you comment on why I got divorced, you know nothing about me or about the details of my marriage. Shows how mindless you are--commenting on things you know nothing about.

Third, you are simply assuming, as many of the women on this thread have, that I am somehow against spouses treating eachother with the uttmost of respect and consideration. You completely misinterpret my comments, reading in things that suit your fears and prejudices.

As to the divorce rate in the LDS church, it is about 33%, about the same as the divorce rate of couples from other faiths that attend church regularly.

First, who said that I had all the answers? I was just pointing out that the things being discussed here are not what makes a happy marriage. People that have sex every night (with their spouse) and are wealthy still get divorces.

Second, the question was about divorce not what makes a healthy marriage. I was addressing peoples opinions on healthy marriages. As far as I can tell no one gave good info on divorce.

Third, the only thing that I am assuming is that you believe the things that you posted in your original post. Based on that I am not surprised you have been divorced. Don't misinterpret my assumptions.

Fourth, what planet do you come from where people only do things for selfish reasons? Do you really go into any action thinking what is in it for me? I can only imagine how this attitude helps in marriage...

You may not realize it but no one does anything where there is nothing in it for them, even if it is just the avoidance of feeling guilty for NOT doing it. Give it some thought, it will dawn on you what I am saying. That is just how human nature is, deep down. We use the terms UNSELFISH to simply mask our one and only motivation for doing anything--to feel good. Give me any action a humans take and I can show you how it is at its root, selfish. I challenge you! Take me up on it, I dare you,

I don't doubt that you could turn anything into a selfish act, just like I don't doubt peoples ability to justify any action regardless of how horrible it may be.

What you are not recognizing is that even though you can explain something a certain way that does not have to be the way it is. You assume that just because you can find a selfish reason behind every action that every action must be selfish. People often do things not to fell good in the end. You are correct that serving others will make you feel good but not always, like changing my son's diaper doesn't get me all warm and fuzzy inside and I could certainly ask my wife to do it, so what are my motives there? I don't want to smell him, well I could always put him in another room and close the door. How about cause I don't want him to get diaper rash and then have my son be miserable which would effect me? He already has diaper rash and is an unhappy camper so why would should I do when my wife would be fine doing it? My son doesn't cry when he has a dirty diaper so I wouldn't need to make him be quiet. Please can some one tell me the last time they changed a diaper that it made them feel really good? Alas, I am sure you will come up with something.

Here is my challenge to you: find a woman that has a newborn baby, about two weeks old. Then go to her house at two in the morning when the baby is up for his/her feeding and explain to her why getting up every night for the last two weeks and nursing her baby for an hour has been selfish. (Or better, have another baby and when you wife gets up in the middle of the night to nurse, call her selfish). Don't explain to me, I don't want to know.

[DisRuptive1]

The selfish act of knowing you are raising a child and doing a good job of it requires that you do a certain amount of "work" to help the baby out whether it is feeding or cleaning. You look at one small act when instead you should be looking at the greater picture which is, itself, selfish.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by DisRuptive1@Feb 18 2005, 06:40 PM

The selfish act of knowing you are raising a child and doing a good job of it requires that you do a certain amount of "work" to help the baby out whether it is feeding or cleaning. You look at one small act when instead you should be looking at the greater picture which is, itself, selfish.

I guess what you are trying to say is:

                                                      2 And they had aviewed themselves in their own bcarnal• state, even cless• than the dust of the earth.                                                               

[TannersDad]

Originally posted by DisRuptive1@Feb 18 2005, 06:40 PM

The selfish act of knowing you are raising a child and doing a good job of it requires that you do a certain amount of "work" to help the baby out whether it is feeding or cleaning. You look at one small act when instead you should be looking at the greater picture which is, itself, selfish.

Does this make sense to anyone else?

"The selfish act of knowing you are raising a child"

I don't count knowing as an act nor do I get why knowing that I am raising a child is selfish.

"and doing a good job of it requires that you do certain amount of work to help the baby out"

Knowing that I am working to raise a child also isn't selfish nor is trying to do my best to raise that child.

Of course I am looking at one small picture, that is all Cal requested. But I still don't get how looking at the great picture is selfish nor am I positive what you are refering.

Is looking at the big picture when raising a child selfish? or is doing acts with the big picture in mind selfish? or are you suggesting that single acts cannot be taken into context until we have the big picture and only then can we determine if the act itself was selfish?

I am not sure when speaking about selfishness why we were only allowed speak about it on a continuum and not single acts.

My point is this (not sure what you were trying to say so I'll sum up with my point):

Not every act is done for the personal gain. Can you point to personal gain in every act? Yes, does that mean the personal gain is the motive for that action?

Back on the topic of marriage, I know that when I bring flowers home to my wife it will make her happy. Do I get personal gain when she is happy? Absolutely and have I had to bring flowers home because I was in the dog house and needed to make amends? Sure, in that case the reason I brought home flowers was for personally gain but even then I would argue not pure personal gain. On the other hand I have brought home flowers to my sweet wife simply to make her happy. Let me say that again, the reason I did the act was to make her happy. Do I benefit from her happiness? Sure but it was not the reason I did it and that is the difference between a selfish act and a selfless act. Finally, I pretty confident that just like any act can be shown to be selfish, any act can also be shown to be selfless.

[pushka]

TannersDad, I tend to agree with you on your position regarding selfishness opposed to selflessness...I think all this talk about everything one does being a selfish act, whether it be a good or a bad act is taking things a little too far.

I think the reason DisRuptive1 brought up the argument of raising a child, was to support Cal's arguments that whatever we do we do because it makes us happy...therefore, the very act of creating and bringing up a child is a selfish act because it makes us happy!!! I just think they are being 'picky' for the sake of argument.

[DisRuptive1]

It still doesn't make it selfless. Like Cal said, I bet you can't bring up any kind of act that isn't selfish in anyway. If it is not selfish in any way, then we tend not to do it. Even passing the butter at the dinner table is selfish because we don't have to hear our whiny mothers or whoever constantly nag us to pass the butter. By passing the butter we spare our ears some punishment that would not have gone away had we not passed the butter.

[Guest estump]

Disruptive...are you only 21? If so that explains your response to this thread and view of the world soooooooooo much better.

BUT back to your notion of the subconcious pay off.....

I guess it all comes down to motive, as to whether or not it's good selfishness or bad. If of course, you insist on that terminology.

I am inclined to agree w/ Tanner's dad....because we've had the experience of raising children and being married. When you love someone you want to make them happy. There is something that happens and you become selfless. You become we, instead of me and us, instead of I. NOW should people still retain their personal identity in a marriage...yup. However, it takes great balance and practice to do so.

I know my DH loves certain snack foods. I"ve known this about him since we met when we were 20. If I am at the store, and I glance up to see a food he enjoys....I grab it for him. I know it will make him happy when he gets the munchies late at night while playing Star Wars. There really is no pay off for me, except for knowing that he is content and happy. I am not quite sure how that is selfish. Selfishness to me implies...self...thinking about yourself and no one else. There is no room for that in marriage and child-rearing. DH refuses to induldge in hallmark holidays. He isn't that kind of person. NO MATTER how much I hint that I Would like flowers...I am more likely to receive them on February 24, than February 14th. He knows they would make me happy, but refuses to buy into showing he loves me one day a year. I don't call that selfish on his part. I call it a personality quirk and he puts up with mine....so I put up with his.

I don't consider raising my kids selfish either and I Gather that you don't have children or else I'd be hard pressed to believe you would still view it in such a light. Maybe you would...I don't know...but I doubt it.

I truly am bewildered by some of this thread. It sounds like there is so much unresolved pain. DH and I came from unhappy homes...broken homes, if you will. So yeah, we are very selfish in hte idea of what an ideal home should be and will bend over backwards to make it happen. We work very hard to make our marriage work. We adore each other and our children. The pay off....stable children...happy children who know that a man and a woman can have a healthy relationship and be truly happy.

If that is selfish...then sobeit. I want to be selfish.

[Amillia]

Is it selfhish to take care of oneself, or stewardship? Is it selfish to do those things which will make one happy instead of angry, sad, or depressed? Or is it just good stewardship?

I think selfish is self consuming, while stewardship is taking good care and by so doing, benefitting more than self.