I don't get dual relationships (duality)

[Faith]

@Adam Strange

I'm sure you will agree that all close relationships are between equals, or between people who trade things of equal value. I'll bet that you've never dated a homeless guy, or a criminal just out of jail, even though there are probably a few available male IEE's living on the edge of society who would like to meet you and your savings account.

I rarely see ppl as an "equal" (not that they are less, just like there's no way to even measure, standardize or estimate that), so there's not much compatibility in all areas with most of ppl (and like how is it going to happen with a dual when you are almost opposites according theory?), and for the second part of the sentence is very different, I like ppl who value things the same way as I do so we can have some mutual understanding, not that we trade things of equal value, that's very different. I don't see exchange as the base of relationships, that's just mere convenience, and there is more than convenience, there is sympathy, a je ne sais quoi or mere love. But I'm p sx and you are j, for sure.

Maybe Gulenko is right when he says that Gamma is a the quadra of capitalism while Delta is the true "moral" quadra. For the rest Adam, yeah, f*** homeless ppl and criminals, they don't deserve love, better for them if they just die, who would ever want to love them <---sarcasm


I'm not going to even give you details about my personal life or my checkbook balance, you are just circling around the same stuff and I think all of that is secondary, but you are totally wrong in your assumptions about me or about how the rest of the ppl (probably the most) works in such area. Plus, stuff as "criminality" or the reasons of poverty are relative and individual. That's why I think that evaluating ppl by those traits is more often than not prejudice, and you are basically saying that ppl has no potential to change. Each case is independent. For example, there are countries where belonging to certain religion makes you a criminal.

Anyway, I was trying to say to you that everything means sacrifice of some sort, or investment or risk, if you get it better…not if the "numbers match" or not or if the checklist is half full or half empty, because you are talking about people, not things, and you simply can't manage ppl as if they are numbers or things or a list of plus and minuses. I just wanted to say that if you see relationships as an exchange is not very different from an arranged marriage, and I don't think it's beneficial to see ppl as objects even if at first it looks like its going to make things easier. I think it would actually make difficult to understand ppl and seek for improvement in yourself and your relationship. But I'm not judging you and I think everybody is free to do things as they wish, I'm just saying that seeing ppl as assests and doing the maths could give the illusion of convenience and equity, but in fact it could be that you are just missing the best part of it all, which is love. In the opposite case, (if you just look for convenience) I think an arranged marriage or a sex doll would be a better option for a partner, because ppl requires an effort and any relationship is probably going to take not just a part but all from you. That's the way love is.

Btw, in all honesty, do you want me to give opinions or moralize you about your marriage? I think it would be rather disrespectful if I give you my opinion about it, plus, its not like I know how it was or not, I don't even have a way to opine objectively about it. I dont even know you, I wasn't there and I bet your ex has her version too. You don't have a way to do it about my personal life either. So lets put that aside.
So you don't need to be defensive, I'm just giving my opinion about how you see relationships and why I think its not very adequate, realistic or practical. The throw ppl away is not an accusation, is deduction from the same idea you are proposing (treat marriage/ppl/relationships as transactions based on material equality or social status, in such way, when equivalence is lost by extended period of time, the relation breaks, not saying that you did this, remember that I was talking about your present view not your past experiences). Lets put the idea on different example, if a woman marriages with a man because of his money, what will happen if he lose all of his money and he can't get it back? Probably the women is going to leave him.