|
Choice?
Aug 30, 2005 15:12:44 GMT 1
Post by Sad on Aug 30, 2005 15:12:44 GMT 1
I'm quite happy living alone actually, have done it before and liked it. I live with someone now because I love him not because I need the company, which is different I think.
|
|
bertie
Olympic Poster
Much Loved...
Posts: 999
|
Choice?
Aug 30, 2005 15:28:27 GMT 1
Post by bertie on Aug 30, 2005 15:28:27 GMT 1
Personally, I'd go for option 2.
If he loves you and misses you, he'll follow. If he doesn't.... then you have your answer.
Good luck in whichever of the two options that you decide to follow.
|
|
|
Choice?
Aug 30, 2005 15:35:21 GMT 1
Post by bhpride on Aug 30, 2005 15:35:21 GMT 1
option 2
|
|
|
Choice?
Aug 30, 2005 15:38:22 GMT 1
Post by Stella on Aug 30, 2005 15:38:22 GMT 1
I'm very happy living on my own too, & love living on the yard with the horses, but I would go for option one acctually !! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
Jane
Olympic Poster
Colo ("koala")
Posts: 938
|
Choice?
Aug 30, 2005 22:11:52 GMT 1
Post by Jane on Aug 30, 2005 22:11:52 GMT 1
Oh, so he's been married before? And now you two live together as if married but aren't, so you haven't got any of the physical security that comes with the bit of paper? It sounds like he had this home before you met and doesn't view it as part of your relationship in any way.
I'm not pro-marriage, don't get me wrong, if anything I'm anti. I'm sorry if this sounds brutal. But there's not a total commitment to the other person here. If there were, you'd be finding a solution that worked for you both, even if it meant some compromise on both sides.
Good luck. I hope your heart gives you the answer you're looking for soon.
|
|
|
Post by Sad on Aug 31, 2005 7:47:14 GMT 1
I don't think your reply is brutal Jane but I don't really understand it. Are you saying I should work harder to make this work or that we both should? Of course he doesn't view his house as being part of our relationship however I have lived there for 6 years, contributing both financially andin a big way improving his life. Of course even if we were married then he could have the same will, so it wouldn't really make any difference and I think it's wrong to marry just to secure your future anyway. You should look after each other regardless. I think I've more than shown my position, as everything I have goes to him in my will, including a share in a property that I joint own and is rented out. I think that compromise on both sides is something all relationships should be able to find but in this case it seems I'm doing all the compromising at the moment. Which is why I'm starting to think maybe it's time to look after myself. Thanks for all your views everyone I have some thinking to do.
|
|
|
Post by gwenoakes on Aug 31, 2005 8:06:31 GMT 1
If its security for his child he is worried about why doesnt he take out an insurance policy (cant remember what its called) to cover his child when he dies? This would allow you to follow your dream with him and provide adequate cover for his child. I know this can be done as we are moving and two of our three children are moving in with us but the third doesnt want to and this was suggested to us. We want to provide security for all our children, but also want the two that move with us not to be forced to sell the property and give a third to the youngest daughter when something happens to us. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by anon 123 on Aug 31, 2005 8:33:29 GMT 1
:DIt really amazes me as to some lenghts people, or risks people will go to for a horse!! Yes i do have a horse or two, but i can honestly say they would not be the "excuse" i need to stay in a one sided relationship. I feel really sorry for the poster of this, but what you must remember is, your feelings, thoughts and actions have as much right to be heard, said, or acted upon as his. I think that he has this hold over you, over the house and daughter issue, is it not called blackmail...... listen girl, get your ass out of there this life is for living, cos you are a long time dead......... go ,live the dream i am sure you have friends.
|
|
charlie
Olympic Poster
before he went insane!!!
Posts: 798
|
Post by charlie on Aug 31, 2005 8:52:43 GMT 1
Number 2 without a doubt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am married to a wonderfull person, but made it very clear to him from beggining that the horses and my "dream" comes first, otherwise I am liable to becoming a miserable, morose and bitter human being. This extends to the fact that if move then he has a choice, coem with and make it what he wants, or stay in London, its as easy as that!
Never compromise your own security and "dream", we're all a long time dead and an example is my mother who I have watched compromise endlessly for the men in her life and the result is a 50yr old woman who is unfurfilled, bitter and regretfull. In the end she gave up her own dreams to allow the men to furfill theirs and eventually bugger off and leave her with NO SECURITY AT ALL!!! don't get into this situation.
As others have mentioned if he indeed loves you that much, he will visit and eventually come round to your way of thinking, if not then you are compromising and allowing him his cake and eating it!!! 20miles is hardly the end of the world and you could easily see each other at weekends etc, like my won relationship, I see my husband 4 evenings a week and spend teh weekends in Kent with the horses and this is great as we don't smother each other and we can both get on with our own interrests in peace.
Again I'd say #2 whats teh point in loving someone if you will in the long term become resentfull, worried about your future, old and bitter for not doing what you dreamed. Go for it!!!! Cx
|
|
|
Post by Sad on Aug 31, 2005 9:03:52 GMT 1
"some lenghts people, or risks people will go to for a horse!!" Sorry if I've not been clear, but I'm not staying with him for the sake of the horses I can have the horses regardless of him. I stay with him because we get along great, are kind to each other, give each other the space to enjoy our individual interests and because, yes, we love each other. Just this one problem about where he wants to live, he doesn't like change, and the fact that his daughter was there a long time before me and he can't quite alter his thinking to include me as someone who might need looking after if he wasn't here. Everything else is great, and that's a lot more than can be said for many people's relationships. Life is for living? Oh yes, but if I told you all the living I've done you'd know who I am, and I'd rather have the facade of being anon for this. Maybe this is the first time in my life I've considered making a big compromise for the sake of a man, before I think I've just chucked them. I'm sort of verging towards option 2 and I don't think we'd split over it, it would just change things. Which artist was it who had a castle of his own and so did his wife? Maybe we'd be like that!!!
|
|
bayhorse
Intermediate Poster
IH Member
Posts: 217
|
Post by bayhorse on Aug 31, 2005 9:05:02 GMT 1
It's a really tricky question, and not one I could answer easily - but if you stayed with him where you are, would you end up resenting the fact you cannot live your dream - or would your love overcome this?
If you did decide to go and he didn't, could you not both still see each other (although it wouldn't quite be the same!). If he loves you enough, then maybe over time he would soften to the idea.
Best of luck anyway.
|
|
sa
Elementary Poster
Posts: 81
|
Choice?
Aug 31, 2005 10:01:34 GMT 1
Post by sa on Aug 31, 2005 10:01:34 GMT 1
Loads of couples have one person living in the countryside and one in town during the week. In this case because it is only 20 miles it isn't even that much of an issue. I think this is about more than the dissatisfaction with the area and goes to the heart of the relationship. You have no security, and you are right to flag it up because it isn't fair. The balance in the relationship is wrong. Renting out his property and buying another more desireable one which you will have a stake in makes financial sense. Being left a liferent in his will is not ideal as his children could then pressurise you to get out once he is gone. It sounds like he wants the advantages of having a partner around but not all the committment. I would impress on him the financial advantages of your plan, which makes the more sense than the current arrangement. Sometimes men can get very set in their ways and need to be shocked out of it.
|
|
|
Choice?
Aug 31, 2005 13:02:27 GMT 1
Post by gem on Aug 31, 2005 13:02:27 GMT 1
I would choose option 2, but i know that my OH would come with me without question. Like Charlie I have made it clear to my OH there are a few things i wont comprimise on, 1) are my horses and 2) are my values and dreams, he understands this fully and because of this we get along great, he has his wants and so do i.
As someone said you're a long time dead! why live with someone who you will resent ultimately when you could live where you want and as who you want to be.
|
|