Sign in to follow this  
PV2004

I deserve better - Rant

Recommended Posts

OK this has been bugging me all day and so maybe I just need to get this out. So a friend stopped by last night and we started to talk. She started talking about her single life situation and a guy who was interested in her. She said the guy wasn't active in the church and so on. Then she made the comment that she would never date the guy because "I deserves better than that." Refering to the fact she deserves someone who is active in the church and so on.

That comment just really bugs me. It just bugs me that people say "I deserve better than that," when refering to someone who is interested in them. Now don't get me wrong. If the guy isn't active in the church and isn't a worthy priesthood holder then she shouldn't go out with him if she doesn't want to. I am in no way implying that she should date him or comprimise her standards to date him. I guess my issue is that by saying "I deserve better than that." I feel the person is being condescending to the other person and is saying they are better than the other person. Does anyone else feel like that when they hear that comment?

I mean it is one thing to say, "We are not a good fit." or "He just isn't my type.", but to say "I deserve better than that." I think is on a different level.

Am I alone here or do other people feel the same way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I feel the same way.

I was not LDS when my husband married me. I would knock him upside the head if he ever thought "he deserved better than that" simply because I wasn't a Mormon. I betcha I was a much better person than a lot of Mormons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel you brother! I got told by someone that a girl i like wasn't in my league because of the "milestones" she has had in her life. and she deserves someone that has a house and can provide security, i know my situation isn't great but i am actively trying to improve it. i will grow into the provider i want to be, my first thought was, is owning a house important to the kingdom of God? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in no way implying that she should date him or comprimise her standards to date him.

By talking about compromising her standards you are implying he is below her standards or otherwise not good enough for her/substandard. You're basically painting the house a different shade but the same color.

I feel the same way.

I was not LDS when my husband married me. I would knock him upside the head if he ever thought "he deserved better than that" simply because I wasn't a Mormon. I betcha I was a much better person than a lot of Mormons.

You feel the same way, that people shouldn't be implying some are better than others, and then proceed to postulate that you are in fact better than a significant number/a lot of people? Curious.

Edited by Dravin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dravin I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying. by standards I am saying / meaning the qualities she is looking for in a husband. She is definitely looking for someone who is active in the church. Just becuase someone isn't active in the church doesn't make him substandard, it just means he does not possess the qualities she is looking for. I personally believe that it doesn't make him less of a man or anything like that. I believe by her saying "I deserve better than that" she is making him sound substandard. that is why I don't like that comment. I am also saying if she is looking for someone who is active in the church she shouldn't give that up. She shouldn't settle. Again I am not implying that someone who is not active in the church is less of a person. I am just saying that such a person just doesn't meet my friends criterial for a future husband and therefore she shouldn't date him. that is why I say it would have been different if my friend had said "we are just not a good fit." She wouldn't have been putting him down, but also would be acknowledging that there are difference between them (active and not active) that she isn't looking for in a future husband.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's much ado about nothing. Seems to be a situation of simple semantics. Perhaps your friend's phrasing isn't putting the most positive spin possible on the situation. So what? Does she really need to be that perfect in her manner of phrasing to not offend you?

It seems a little odd to get emotionally stirred up by the particular phrasing used by another person when the phrasing was inwardly focused and not at all impacting you. How about looking at it from a different perspective, perhaps trying to consider how she is feeling - perhaps she really likes the guy, is very attracted to him, wants a relationship with him, but it working hard to resist such and stick to her convictions of what is right. But, because there is an internal struggle, she uses phrasing designed to convince herself of what is right.

How about being glad that she didn't focus outwardly by saying "he's beneath me"? I see "I deserve better" as a much more positive, and self-focused way of convincing oneself of the appropriate path to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel you brother! I got told by someone that a girl i like wasn't in my league because of the "milestones" she has had in her life. and she deserves someone that has a house and can provide security, i know my situation isn't great but i am actively trying to improve it. i will grow into the provider i want to be, my first thought was, is owning a house important to the kingdom of God? :lol:

Is being a supermodel?

You'll be happy to know, Saldrin, that there are a plethora of women who don't care about someone owning a house.

Now, how many people the world would class as 'Homely' have you dated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

by standards I am saying / meaning the qualities she is looking for in a husband. She is definitely looking for someone who is active in the church. Just becuase someone isn't active in the church doesn't make him substandard, it just means he does not possess the qualities she is looking for.

Yes it does, if one's standard is that they be active in the church. If one's standard is that they not have red hair I am substandard.

I believe by her saying "I deserve better than that" she is making him sound substandard.

That would be because he is substandard (by her standards). Doesn't mean he's a horrible human being but that he lacks qualities that she feels she deserves.

She shouldn't settle.

Oh, so marrying him would be settling? How is that an uplifting or neutral implication? Do you know anyone who would take being talked about being settled for in a positive light? That it isn't implying they are the lessor of some other potential choice?

Like I said, same color but a different shade.

that is why I say it would have been different if my friend had said "we are just not a good fit."

Now why isn't it a good fit? Because he doesn't meet her standards (you've already stated she shouldn't adjust her standards).

Edited by Dravin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of us judge the people we date and marry. We try and figure out if they are "right" for us, or even good enough for us. Many LDS feel they can "do better" by marrying a worthy person inside the temple, than not.

For those who marry non-LDS, the chances of that person converting are very small - especially for non-LDS husbands. The statistics are consistent over the last 40 years, with about 1-2 in 10 non-LDS husbands eventually converting. Not very good statistics at all. Worse, after a year or two of marriage, many non-LDS husbands will tire of the perceived competition they have with all the Church activities and expectations, and will become negative towards it, some even demanding their wives to stop attending altogether.

All LDS women deserve better than that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

You feel the same way, that people shouldn't be implying some are better than others, and then proceed to postulate that you are in fact better than a significant number/a lot of people? Curious.

Did you miss the words "simply because I wasn't a Mormon" in my post?

Here, let me post it again:

I feel the same way.

I was not LDS when my husband married me. I would knock him upside the head if he ever thought "he deserved better than that" simply because I wasn't a Mormon. I betcha I was a much better person than a lot of Mormons.

I even bolded it for you.

You understand it now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

All of us judge the people we date and marry. We try and figure out if they are "right" for us, or even good enough for us. Many LDS feel they can "do better" by marrying a worthy person inside the temple, than not.

For those who marry non-LDS, the chances of that person converting are very small - especially for non-LDS husbands. The statistics are consistent over the last 40 years, with about 1-2 in 10 non-LDS husbands eventually converting. Not very good statistics at all. Worse, after a year or two of marriage, many non-LDS husbands will tire of the perceived competition they have with all the Church activities and expectations, and will become negative towards it, some even demanding their wives to stop attending altogether.

All LDS women deserve better than that!

There are people out there who are just as "Mormon", if not more so, than a lot of active Mormons.

Women marry Mormons thinking they are qualified to be their eternal partners just because they hold a touted temple-recommend, without bothering to find out if that guy is TRULY a good person... so that 5 years down the line, when that guy sinks into sinfulness, loses his temple recommend, and flies off with some bimbo leaving her barefoot and pregnant, she blames the church for it.

Juxtapose that with the woman who gets to know a non-LDS guy inside and out aligning her morality and relationship with God, diligently seeking 'Thy Will Be Done' (non-LDS Christians believe that too,)... that guy has a better chance of making it there.

Therefore, I conclude, that just because you are an active LDS doesn't make you a better candidate for marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is being a supermodel?

You'll be happy to know, Saldrin, that there are a plethora of women who don't care about someone owning a house.

Now, how many people the world would class as 'Homely' have you dated?

three or four I don't get out much.. yet.. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, the problem isn't in her standards. The problem is in the choice of words.

I have a real problem with "deserve".

Who says you "deserve" anything? By what standard? Who pays when you "deserve"?

To me, the word "deserve" is too self-serving and selfish. It's also too closely related to the word "entitle".

I like to watch Extreme Makeover: Home Edition on occasion. I keep hearing them say that the particular family "deserves" this fabulous house that's being custom built. I wish they'd say that they're happy to provide a house that will be better suited to their family. To show that it is a gift, and not some social debt that they're "entitled" to.

No one deserves anything... except what's coming to them! :) And sometimes, they're entitled to just that! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

skippy740 said it best. Her standards have nothing to do with it. Her choice words is the issue.

Dravin - You make me laugh. You are trying to nit pick and start an arguement that isn't even there. You are just like my brother who tries to do the same thing. You pick out words and phrases and then twist them around. My brother did the same thing when he tried to argue. I have even used that tactic before as well. So I am not going to get drawn in. You fail to see the big picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

skippy740 said it best. Her standards have nothing to do with it. Her choice words is the issue.

Dravin - You make me laugh. You are trying to nit pick and start an arguement that isn't even there. You are just like my brother who tries to do the same thing. You pick out words and phrases and then twist them around. My brother did the same thing when he tried to argue. I have even used that tactic before as well. So I am not going to get drawn in. You fail to see the big picture.

And you're doing the same thing with your friend's choice of words. Which is my entire point. It's much to do about not much of anything, it's just a different way of expressing that someone doesn't meet you standards. It's common stock (and slightly idiomatic) phrase, just like talking about not settling, or not compromising one's standards. All of which, once one breaks them down, have negative connotations if you want them to.

You're free to have a peeve, don't get me wrong, I'm just explaining how I'm seeing tomato to your tomahto.

Edited by Dravin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

skippy740 said it best. Her standards have nothing to do with it. Her choice words is the issue.

Dravin - You make me laugh. You are trying to nit pick and start an arguement that isn't even there. You are just like my brother who tries to do the same thing. You pick out words and phrases and then twist them around. My brother did the same thing when he tried to argue. I have even used that tactic before as well. So I am not going to get drawn in. You fail to see the big picture.

I'm right there with Dravin on this one. Being offended to the poing of posting on a forum over someone else's word choice, to me, is a great example of "nit pick[ing] and start[ing] an argument that isn't even there"! You have picked out one word, focused on that, and from an outsiders point of view, discarded the entire intent of your friends message to herself.

It honestly makes me stop and wonder if there isn't a oversensitivity because something similar (being dissed and the girl saying she "deserved" better) has been done (or is being done) to you. We all have those sore spots, whether they came from past girfriends/boyfriends/spouses, onery siblings, or inherent insecurities. It is important though to recognize that the issue is within ourselves any time we have an issue with someone else.

Matthew 7:3

Edited by ryanh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I think her friend meant something less insulting then what has been assumed here. I think she meant that she has worked hard to be a worthy member and she feels she deserves a worthy priesthood holder who can take here where she wants to be...(sealed in the temple).

I think this is taken out of context and much ado about nothing. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Wow, I think her friend meant something less insulting then what has been assumed here. I think she meant that she has worked hard to be a worthy member and she feels she deserves a worthy priesthood holder who can take here where she wants to be...(sealed in the temple).

I think this is taken out of context and much ado about nothing. :)

I don't think so.

The OP sees what a lot of people see in the LDS church membership. You can try to deny it, but it is there. I've always seen it way before I started investigating the church. This pervasive attitude that "I'm better than you because I'm LDS and you're not". I have heard it from the pulpit plenty of times - especially among the youth. It is this attitude that contributed to my husband's inactivity in his late teens. I do not see this in the Roman Catholic church that I came from. I also see this in some of the protestant churches that claim "I accept Jesus as my personal Lord and Savior" with this prideful lift of the chin.

It is just plainly exemplified by the event the OP suggested.

Edited by anatess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And many of us will have to disagree with your assessment, Anatess. There's a big difference between LDS temple marriages and those of other religions. First, it is eternal. Second, it is a requirement for exaltation.

As glad as I am that you are now a member, your member husband took the chance of losing his exaltation by marrying outside the temple. It isn't that Mormons are better (though I agree many are proud and stuck up), but that we have a different standard than the rest of society.

It really doesn't matter if a Catholic and a Jew/Protestant/Atheist marry, as long as they agree on how to raise the kids. It DOES matter how a Mormon marries, because it impacts eternal families.

And because of that standard, this girl's comment makes sense. It isn't that she is better than another, but that her standards are different, and perhaps even higher (in an eternal sense) than another's might be.

Yes, I agree that many LDS men (and women) are slugs, even if they are eligible to marry within the temple. That said, it is just as true for those of other denominations as well. All I know is we take a chance when we marry. When I was sealed in the temple to my first wife, I made a covenant with both God and her. That my first wife did not keep the covenant did not affect the covenant I made with God. I was still worthy of exaltation and all its blessings. Had I married outside the covenant, I would not have had that promise. Ever.

Even though I'm sure I could have found many wonderful non-LDS women to marry outside the temple, I married an LDS woman the second time, as well. Why? Because I have a covenant with God for exaltation that is more important to me than anything else. I have a great marriage, but there have been many trying times that could have destroyed this marriage, had we let them. Instead, we held onto the covenant through the tough times, and keep emerging victorious.

I think my exaltation is too important to squander on a relationship that may not get me there. I'm glad for all those mixed religion marriages that have ended up in a temple marriage. However, from the callings I've had in the Church, I can tell you they are rare and few between. More often, we see the member go inactive or attend the other person's church. Exaltation becomes a lost hope.

So, I'm glad for the young man or woman who decides that temple marriage is the only route for them. They do deserve more than "till death do you part." They deserve exaltation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

And many of us will have to disagree with your assessment, Anatess. There's a big difference between LDS temple marriages and those of other religions. First, it is eternal. Second, it is a requirement for exaltation.

As glad as I am that you are now a member, your member husband took the chance of losing his exaltation by marrying outside the temple. It isn't that Mormons are better (though I agree many are proud and stuck up), but that we have a different standard than the rest of society.

It really doesn't matter if a Catholic and a Jew/Protestant/Atheist marry, as long as they agree on how to raise the kids. It DOES matter how a Mormon marries, because it impacts eternal families.

And because of that standard, this girl's comment makes sense. It isn't that she is better than another, but that her standards are different, and perhaps even higher (in an eternal sense) than another's might be.

Yes, I agree that many LDS men (and women) are slugs, even if they are eligible to marry within the temple. That said, it is just as true for those of other denominations as well. All I know is we take a chance when we marry. When I was sealed in the temple to my first wife, I made a covenant with both God and her. That my first wife did not keep the covenant did not affect the covenant I made with God. I was still worthy of exaltation and all its blessings. Had I married outside the covenant, I would not have had that promise. Ever.

Even though I'm sure I could have found many wonderful non-LDS women to marry outside the temple, I married an LDS woman the second time, as well. Why? Because I have a covenant with God for exaltation that is more important to me than anything else. I have a great marriage, but there have been many trying times that could have destroyed this marriage, had we let them. Instead, we held onto the covenant through the tough times, and keep emerging victorious.

I think my exaltation is too important to squander on a relationship that may not get me there. I'm glad for all those mixed religion marriages that have ended up in a temple marriage. However, from the callings I've had in the Church, I can tell you they are rare and few between. More often, we see the member go inactive or attend the other person's church. Exaltation becomes a lost hope.

So, I'm glad for the young man or woman who decides that temple marriage is the only route for them. They do deserve more than "till death do you part." They deserve exaltation.

Unfortunately, this is something I do not agree with. I understand this is taught in church so I won't expound on my disagreement, especially in an LDS.net site.

Now, if half of my ward were not temple-married/divorced with all their many kids being passed between wards/stakes/states, then yeah, that exaltation bit might make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, the problem isn't in her standards. The problem is in the choice of words.

I have a real problem with "deserve".

Who says you "deserve" anything? By what standard? Who pays when you "deserve"?

To me, the word "deserve" is too self-serving and selfish. It's also too closely related to the word "entitle".

I like to watch Extreme Makeover: Home Edition on occasion. I keep hearing them say that the particular family "deserves" this fabulous house that's being custom built. I wish they'd say that they're happy to provide a house that will be better suited to their family. To show that it is a gift, and not some social debt that they're "entitled" to.

No one deserves anything... except what's coming to them! :) And sometimes, they're entitled to just that! :)

I kind of disagree. If a young woman or young man work hard, stay chaste, attending their meetings and do everything to be a righteous son or daughter...I think they deserve to be able to have and to expect the same.

Just because you deserve something doesn't mean that you are expecting it for not doing anything or because it should be handed to you. I think this is another example of semantics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this