Is there anything wrong in wanting to make profit from my relationship with my husband?

Nothing wrong maami...every partaker of relationships have expectations fa. So, what do you consider a profit? Some would say the kids, the house, the dog, the company, the fulfilment, the affiliation, money...whatever rocks your boat maami

yeye thoughts

There's everything wrong with such a wish and mindset. A marital/romantic/interpersonal relationship (a healthy one) is/should always be symbiotic. So, you should neither see your relationship with your husband as a commensalistic nor venture for profit earning one. Only think of profit when you think of trade.

sisisioge:


Nothing wrong maami...every partaker of relationships have expectations fa. So, what do you consider a profit? Some would say the kids, the house, the dog, the company, the fulfilment, the affiliation, money...whatever rocks your boat maami

Thanks

LordKO:
There's everything wrong with such a wish and mindset. A marital/romantic/interpersonal relationship (a healthy one) is/should always be symbiotic. So, you should neither see your relationship with your husband as a commensalistic nor venture for profit earning one. Only think of profit when you think of trade.

Thanks

LordKO:
There's everything wrong with such a wish and mindset. A marital/romantic/interpersonal relationship (a healthy one) is/should always be symbiotic. So, you should neither see your relationship with your husband as a commensalistic nor venture for profit earning one. Only think of profit when you think of trade.

Daddy, I know I'm looking for trouble by quoting you o but I just felt I should point out that you're looking at it from financials alone. Just a few weeks/days back, we had a "what's in it for me" thread where most kept looking at monetary alone forgetting that things such as company, appearance, reproduction, sexx, love...could be reasons for venturing into that affairs in the first place. Once set goals are met, then one could say the venture is profitable and continuity prevails. Same reason divorce ends an unprofitable marriage.

Surely, healthy relationships are symbiotic...something must be in it for the other person too. Otherwise, why bother.

LordKO:
There's everything wrong with such a wish and mindset. A marital/romantic/interpersonal relationship (a healthy one) is/should always be symbiotic. So, you should neither see your relationship with your husband as a commensalistic nor venture for profit earning one. Only think of profit when you think of trade.

You’re beginning to make sense these days

sisisioge:


Daddy, I know I'm looking for trouble by quoting you o but I just felt I should point out that you're looking at it from financials alone. Just a few weeks/days back, we had a "what's in it for me" thread where most kept looking at monetary alone forgetting that things such as company, appearance, reproduction, sexx, love...could be reasons for venturing into that affairs in the first place. Once set goals are met, then one could say the venture is profitable and continuity prevails. Same reason divorce ends an unprofitable marriage.

Surely, healthy relationships are symbiotic...something must be in it for the other person too. Otherwise, why bother.

Consociate me! You know this isn't true "I know I'm looking for trouble by quoting you" - I ain't a domineering person to the best of my knowledge.

Meanwhile, I ain't viewing the subject under discussion from a financial standpoint alone, no, rather I am viewing it from what I know and understand a healthy marriage should be. My submission is based on my personal philosophy, so it can only make meaning to you if you believe in living life at the periphery of conventionalism and in doing so.... Marital/romantic relationship is contractual not transactional - so beneficialness shouldn't be mistaken for profitableness.

LordKO:


Consociate me! You know this isn't true "I know I'm looking for trouble by quoting you" - I ain't a domineering person to the best of my knowledge.

Meanwhile, I ain't viewing the subject under discussion from a financial standpoint alone, no, rather I am viewing it from what I know and understand a healthy marriage should be. My submission is based on my personal philosophy, so it can only make meaning to you if you believe in living life at the periphery of conventionalism and in doing so.... Marital/romantic relationship is contractual not transactional - so beneficialness shouldn't be mistaken for profitableness.

I said it...now I need dictionary to break some words therein. When I said trouble, I meant big words are coming for me shortly

Meanwhile, without getting further deep into this, let's just focus on the elements of a contract: offer, consideration and acceptance. Again, at bolded shows that there is still that element of "what's in it for me" in the so called "contractual" marriage. Every man/ woman won't get into anything in life without hoping to get something out of it. Wonder why you are with that babe? Yeah, she offers more of your needs...it's that simple. Of course, the other party too won't come in with void expectations.

Elder0001:



You’re beginning to make sense these days

If I give you e-slap! lol. Actually, the correct statement should be that "you've began retracing your step from being an expedient person to a quasi-principled one." - while I've remained constant with my philosophy because it isn't a religion but a way of life for me.

Anyway, I can still bet that you'll soon return to your usual self - a leopard can't change its spots. Psychological liberalism you're trying so hard to adopt isn't healthy for you, worse still when you're trying so hard to mix it up (unknowingly) with conservatism. Take to libertarianism for your own good.

sisisioge:


I said...now I need dictionary to break some words therein. When I said trouble, I meant big words are coming for me shortly

Meanwhile, without getting further deep into this, let's just focus on the elements of a contract: offer, consideration and acceptance. Again, at bolded shows that there is still that element of "what's in it for me" in the so called "contractual" marriage. Every man/ woman won't get into anything in life without hoping to get something out of it. Wonder why you are with that babe? Yeah, she offers more of your needs...it's that simple. Of course, the other party too won't come in with void expectations.

I understand you well. Truth is that, altruism doesn't mean absence of conscientiousness - so once the interest is immaterial (attribute based), it's automatically healthy. A healthy marriage (or romantic relationship) will always be symbiotic - but reciprocation can never be in equal and proportional measure.

LordKO:



I understand you well. Truth is that, altruism doesn't mean absence of conscientiousness - so once the interest is immaterial (attribute based), it's automatically healthy. A healthy marriage (or romantic relationship) will always be symbiotic - but reciprocation can never be in equal and proportional measure.

Hmmm...so we are agreed on symbiotic gains. Awesome!

That brings us to the gains meeting approval so long as they remain immaterial... Now that's funny. My deduction of immaterial things mean those things we can't touch but feel right. Dang! You've never seen yourself liking a chick cos she's beautiful, amongst other viable attributes, and would help produce beautiful children? Since we can see kids, shall we call them materials ? Let me leave you be on this beautiful Sunday. No matter how much we pad our objectives by allowing cultural noise form out thoughts, we won't stop looking until we find what we want, thus fulfilling the "what's in it for me" quest. Cheers sir.

sisisioge:


Hmmm...so we are agreed on symbiotic gains. Awesome!

That brings us to the gains meeting approval so long as they remain immaterial... Now that's funny. My deduction of immaterial things mean those things we can't touch but feel right. Dang! You've never seen yourself liking a chick cos she's beautiful, amongst other viable attributes, and would help produce beautiful children? Since we can see kids, shall we call them materials ? Let me leave you be on this beautiful Sunday. No matter how much we pad our objects by allowing cultural noise form out thoughts, we won't stopping looking until we find what we want, thus fulling the "what's in it for me" quest. Cheers sir.

Attribute can never stand alone, and don't forget, perfection is only of the most high - this explains my previous assertion "altruism doesn't mean absence of conscientiousness." So in recognition of this celestial posit (perfection is only of the most high), we always ascribe anything seventy (% in this regard) and above as excellent. Also, don't forget that attribute is akin to a process, not an end - just as money is a means (to an end), but not an end. With attribute/immaterial thing (good or bad) comes material yield and its ilk - this is about the beautiful chic and children, the children can only be best fit when they're a product of good attribute.

LordKO:



Attribute can never stand alone, and don't forget, perfection is only of the most high - this explains my previous assertion "altruism doesn't mean absence of conscientiousness." So in recognition of this celestial posit (perfection is only of the most high), we always ascribe anything seventy (% in this regard) and above as excellent. Also, don't forget that attribute is akin to a process, not an end - just as money is a means (to an end), but not an end. With attribute/immaterial thing (good or bad) comes material yield and its ilk - this is about the beautiful chic and children, the children can only be best fit when they're a product of good attribute.

Wowzerful...now I'm lost! Are we still on the same page? We aren't talking about perfection or attribute per sa...we are actually still on the "why" I'm with you. What's in it for me regardless of your perfection or otherwise. Why would Regina marry Ned? Or Why would two classmates that have been together forever marry each other? Why am I dating my simple bf? Why are you with that babe? Why why why? Anyways, I'm sure we will all be alright last last.

LordKO:


If I give you e-slap! lol. Actually, the correct statement should be that "you've began retracing your step from being an expedient person to a quasi-principled one." - while I've remained constant with my philosophy because it isn't a religion but a way of life for me.

Anyway, I can still bet that you'll soon return to your usual self - a leopard can't change its spots. Psychological liberalism you're trying so hard to adopt isn't healthy for you, worse still when you're trying so hard to mix it up (unknowingly) with conservatism. Take to libertarianism for your own good.

I was never a conservative.

sisisioge:


Wowzerful...now I'm lost! Are we still on the same page? We aren't talking about perfection or attribute per sa...we are actually still on the "why" I'm with you. What's in it for me regardless of your perfection or otherwise. Why would Regina marry Ned? Or Why would two classmates that have been together forever marry each other? Why am I dating my simple bf? Why are you with that babe? Why why why? Anyways, I'm sure we will all be alright last last.

Lol. We're still on the same subject, the extrapolation was done wittingly and in good faith. Meanwhile, Regina and Ned shouldn't be standard, you should know this - I didn't say they're either right or wrong anyway, because to each his own.

Actually, it'll be difficult, if not impossible, for you and I to be in one accord on this particular subject since obviously we don't share same ethical leanings. Maybe you'll return when you start living life at the periphery of conventionalism and doing so... We disagree to agree.

LordKO:


Lol. We're still on the same subject, the extrapolation was done wittingly and in good faith. Meanwhile, Regina and Ned shouldn't be standard, you should know this - I didn't say they're either right or wrong anyway, because to each his own.

Actually, it'll be difficult, if not impossible, for you and I to be in one accord on this particular subject since obviously we don't share same ethical leanings. Maybe you'll return when start living life at the periphery of conventionalism and doing so... We disagree to agree.

Lol at "ethical learning". I guess I'm just not articulate enough to pass the message across. My point apparently came across as harsh, as it did when the topic first emerged in the past. As it is, I really do not have the energy to keep going back and forth on this. However, me, you and the rest of the world will continue to seek that which suits us regardless of our vantage points...it's on our biology. Let me let you enjoy the rest of your day. Cheers.

sisisioge:


Lol at "ethical learning". I guess I'm just not articulate enough to pass the message across. My point apparently came across as harsh, as it did when the topic first emerged in the past. As it is, I really do not have the energy to keep going back and forth on this. However, me, you and the rest of the world will continue to seek that which suits us regardless of our vantage points...it's on our biology. Let me let you enjoy the rest of your day. Cheers.

No, I didn't say "ethical leaRning" but "ethical leanings."

Cheers too.

LordKO:


No, I didn't say "ethical leaRning" but "ethical leanings."

Cheers too.

Your English no be for here....oh, ethical believes kwa

pandv:
Is there anything wrong in wanting to make profit from my relationship with my husband?

na dem

Theglobalman:


na dem

What is it?

pandv:


What is it?

I say we know your type. I dey my house come and fight me