Concast Cable, part 5 | Buy Reprint Rights | License Candorville | Get Candorville In Your Paper | Buy Candorville BOOKS
September 2nd, 2011
Concast Cable, part 5
Discussion (12)¬
…or via Paypal
COLLECT CANDORVILLE BOOKS
COLLECT POLITICAL CARTOON BOOKS by DARRIN BELL
COLLECT RUDY PARK BOOKS by DARRIN BELL
Or, as I put it in an anniversary card,
"Between the two of us it's always clear
Who's to navigate and who's to steer;
And so we sail on going nowhere near
The rocks."
I love to hear tips for happiness from loving couples! Thanks.
Chaya, move away from the keyboard. You're getting a bit excited.
In MY marriage, I am quite aware that my husband controls the relationship. He doesn't control ME. There's a difference. We treat each other with great kindness, courtesy and love,and model that behavior for our sons. There's an line from an Auden poem 'if equal affection cannot be/Let the more loving one be me.' It's worked for me through fifteen years of wedded bliss.
Beautiful poem, Robert.
What should control a relationship needs to be KINDNESS, consideration for the other person more than yourself, and joint communication. How do you DEFINE love if you see it synonymous with CONTROL?
I think it was inappropriate to say in a comic strip that couples read that: "The one who is LESS IN LOVE in a relationship CONTROLS the relationship. Bad message. What if your wife was "less in love" and used that as leverage to get what she wants?
Midwest reader
That happens all the time. It's not a bad message, it's reality. Unfortunately, unless you're one of the lucky ones who's in a 50/50 love match, it's not going to be a fair relationship.
If this strip makes even one man realize why his wife is getting whatever she wants (or the reverse), I'd say it's the most appropriate thing he's read all day.
"Whatever she wants" sounds cynical and misogynistic.
So… you missed "or the reverse"?
Women who hate men have misandry. The point I was making is that there NEEDS TO BE NO control in a relationship. That is the enemy of love. With true love between a man and woman, there should only be SELF control, not control of the other or control of what should be a joint solution to a problem. "Getting whatever you want" is not what love is about, nor is GIVING whatever is wanted. NEEDS come first for both, and then wants are the icing on a cake. If there is more icing on her cake or his cake, the other needs to figure out what his or her own icing would taste like and communicate that. For WANTS, taking turns would be appropriate. It's like, "OK, let's get our needs met first, and then we'll take turns splurging on a want." If you put it into a conscious communication, then there is no hidden agenda, no bitterness, no confusion, no anger, no yelling, no hurt feelings. There may be FRUSTRATION with the timing or inability to get a want met, but that is totally different than resentment or hatred or antagonism along with resulting verbal or emotional abuse in a relationship. To repeat: neither male nor female or either partner in a gay relationship should feel that "getting" is unbalanced. If they pay attention to HOW they communicate, both sides "get what they want" eventually. Not right away, but eventually. Maybe not the ideal, but something pretty close. You think?
In addition to my other comment, here's a suggestion. The couple should each, on a regular basis, come together for a pow-wow discussion. Each takes a piece of paper and lists on one column, "needs" and on the other side "wants" and number them, then rank them in order of importance. Then, you guys switch papers and discuss the feasibility of which things can easily be done or have the highest priority, and you both, together, come to a joint decision on who will "get" what and when and how, and how much, etc. Some items can be tabled. Whatcha think of that idea? Would it work?
This is so true. BTW, did anyone get Netflix? I looked at their listing, and it was so old-classics laden. My friend said for newer movies, you're put on a LONG waiting list.