Unrealistic Expectations - Women - Entitlement Mentality

[Misha]

Thou does protest too much. Seems to me you are missing his point.

Why so defensive over a statement that, if you are correct, wasn't meant for you? Do you not see the value in that message?

Who is protesting? Merely presenting a divergent perspective. Or do you believe that this should not be permitted?

[OlgaH]

Why so defensive over a statement that, if you are correct, wasn't meant for you? Do you not see the value in that message?

Personally I don't see Misha's post as defensive, but he made a  good point too.

Talking about shopping ... a man will not know if he can or can not afford buying a woman until he knows about her goals and expectations, what style of life she dreams of and so on.

[mendeleyev]

Sorry Mendy, I did not shop for a wife, but sought a woman to love with shared life goals. The problem with your equation is that what can be afforded is contingent on wants, not needs. Few men could afford any and all wants that a woman could potentially have, other than a few billionaires. Yet, there are plenty of happily married couples in spite of this.

Exactly my point, and I know that you didn't. What limited but pleasant things I know of you and your wife demonstrates a healthy relationship. I didn't shop for one either.

Misha, I will listen to you and accept your advice anytime. But I truly tire of men whose words and actions strike me as if they're coming over to shop, picking out the best lady in the window, boxing her up and carting her home at which point she somehow emerges from the box ready to perform--often getting a job and immediately contributing financially, etc, when very often it is the man's expectations that are out of line. When reality sets however suddenly the lady is the one accused of having unrealistic expectations. Hmm, how about the man?

[OlgaH]

But I truly tire of men whose words and actions strike me as if they're coming over to shop, picking out the best lady in the window, boxing her up and carting her home at which point she somehow emerges from the box ready to perform--often getting a job and immediately contributing financially, etc, when very often it is the man's expectations that are out of line. When reality sets however suddenly the lady is the one accused of having unrealistic expectations. Hmm, how about the man?

and who are these men in this thread?  but on the other hand there are women who will try to get their EAD and find a job as soon as possible.

[mendeleyev]

but on the other hand there are women who will try to get their EAD and find a job as soon as possible.

Can't blame them, most do. But usually at first not at the level some might expect due to possible English and job experience adjustments.

[Daveman]

... But I truly tire of men whose words and actions strike me as if they're coming over to shop, picking out the best lady in the window, boxing her up and carting her home at which point she somehow emerges from the box ready to perform--often getting a job and immediately contributing financially, etc, when very often it is the man's expectations that are out of line. When reality sets however suddenly the lady is the one accused of having unrealistic expectations. Hmm, how about the man?

Hey now, RWD cannot be accused of gender discrimination! We have an thread devoted to the goofball expectations of men

[OlgaH]

Can't blame them, most do. But usually at first not at the level some might expect due to possible English and job experience adjustments.

again depends on a woman 

[Boethius]

I am not a big fan of equal rights = equal responsibility in marriage.

I absolutely reject the idea of a 50-50 marriage, and I'm not talking only about money. Marriage is a partnership of 100-100 which often means that at certain times one of the parties may be called on to carry the 100. There are times when one spouse is sick, etc, and the other spouse cannot sit on his/her arse and only do 50%. When both are contributing 100-100 then love works, marriage works, kids grow up well adjusted and happy. And often 100-100 means that the man brings in all or a great majority of the income. If you can only define her share of a relationship as either bringing in income or in washing dishes & cooking, then we live in two different worlds and I like mine a lot better.

I agree 100%.  I think you have to commit all to your marriage.

Gentlemen, the job market for most RW in the first few years is nil to minimum wage at best. In fact, the best investment you can make in the first few years is to provide English improvement classes and the chance to acclimate before she is thrown unprepared into the workplace.

Generally, that is true.  A woman without a job history will have limited options.

A woman from your home country has advantages: She has some assets (even if just her personal clothing and "stuff"), she is fluent in the language and likely has a job history. A RW has none of this to speak of in your country.

Again, I agree.  Further, she will have family and friends around if she is feeling lonely/alienated/frustrated, etc.  While WM/WW marriages should also be 100% committed, this is another reason to take the commitments seriously.

If you can't afford to bring over a RW and provide 100% of the income, then you can't afford a RW. If you can't afford to bring over a RW and provide 100% of whatever those future needs are (college, dental, second family car, etc) then you can't afford to bring home that particular woman. Don't shop for what you can't afford.

I also agree with this.  Money is one of the primary causes of stress in a relationship, and a primary cause of divorce.  Money to survive on one income is a must.  That is different from expectations.

The key word in that sentence is "we'll" be fine. I flat out reject any sense of mine versus hers. It is 100% ours or we have nothing. She is not expected to do "her share" because frankly gentlemen if we're honest when looking in the mirror, a woman usually brings more to the table in a relationship than most of men ever realize or could muster themselves. From loving us, loving our children, to improving the quality of our lives is something only a wife could manage and any attempt to define/reduce her "contribution" in financial terms is just plain silly.

I agree again, though I can see see how a man or woman may wish to protect certain assets for the benefit of progeny from prior relationships.

[Faux Pas]

Who is protesting? Merely presenting a divergent perspective. Or do you believe that this should not be permitted?

ML was. That statement wasn't directed at you. Thus, I took the time to separate and quote you both separately. Was it that difficult to follow?

Why so defensive over a statement that, if you are correct, wasn't meant for you? Do you not see the value in that message?

I read your post as defensive. If you didn't shop for your wife, why would Mendy's remarks draw such a reaction from you? The guy made a very profound post albeit general in nature but profound just the same. One might only guess you did shop for your wife if that offends you.

Divergent perspectives are the norm on forums aren't they Misha? Why would it not be permitted? You are as free as I to present your POV but, please tell me, what about Mendy's post was off base?

[OlgaH]

Generally, that is true.  A woman without a job history will have limited options.

She may or may not have.

I personally met women from different countries of FSU who are nurses, doctors, dentists here in the US and they made their career in the US on their own. They came here with their degrees and work experience. The worked and at the same time were getting additional  education and training.

There are also forums of Russian immigrants in America where they share their experience and advice.

Yes, some people able to do everything on their own and some people need a lot of help and still can not succeed.
 
As one immigrant on a Russian-American forum said "The most important is a strong desire, patience, persistence, and to start prepare yourself before immigration process"


***
I think the best approach in finding your RW is not to look at RW as at some kind of an exotic helpless animal or a flower that needs a lot of caring, tending and so on.

[Misha]

ML was. That statement wasn't directed at you. Thus, I took the time to separate and quote you both separately. Was it that difficult to follow?

Let's see, you combine the two retorts in one post and use protest for one and defensive for the other. Given the parallel nature of the verbs to protest and to be defensive, it is entirely logical for me to reply that I am neither protesting nor being defensive. There, are you happy?

I read your post as defensive. If you didn't shop for your wife, why would Mendy's remarks draw such a reaction from you? The guy made a very profound post albeit general in nature but profound just the same. One might only guess you did shop for your wife if that offends you.

Mendy is a big boy and capable of defending his ideas on his own. However, profound as you think they may be, there is a logical flaw, it is pretty much impossible for a man to be able to pay for any potential expense and for any desired lifestyle. As Olga highlights, this requires both sides to be clear as to their expectations and if either side believes that the expectations of the other cannot be delivered, then they have the responsibility to end the relationship if a compromise is not possible. This does not mean that either should get married, rather they should continue looking elsewhere. However, if one's person't expectations are too unrealistic and they follow this path, then they may never find anybody suitable. Such is life.

[mendeleyev]

I think the best approach in finding your RW is not to look at RW as at some kind of an exotic helpless animal or a flower who needs a lot of caring, tending and so on.

Glad I didn't say that in my post!

The fact that she often out earns me in many months is a big clue that she's not a helpless animal.

However, the flower is another topic. She is indeed the most beautiful flower in my world. 


 

[mendeleyev]

 

there is a logical flaw, it is pretty much impossible for a man to be able to pay for any potential expense and for any desired lifestyle.

No flaw at all and in fact I agree and would hope that most men be sensible to understand such. One would naturally assume that "any" is a pretty broad term and would need to be discussed prior, which is why I didn't mention it.
If is often men like you and I, Misha, who are labeled as cheap because our wives may enjoy yard sales, etc. 

As Olga highlights, this requires both sides to be clear as to their expectations and if either side believes that the expectations of the other cannot be delivered, then they have the responsibility to end the relationship if a compromise is not possible. This does not mean that either should get married, rather they should continue looking elsewhere.

Which is what I said in my post. In the terms I used, one should not try to bring home what he cannot "afford."

[OlgaH]

Glad I didn't say that in my post!

The fact that she often out earns me in many months is a big clue that she's not a helpless animal.

However, the flower is another topic. She is indeed the most beautiful flower in my world. 

very understandable especially about the most beautiful flowers, cutest bunnies and kitties 

My point was that exaggeration about RWs is  too much some times, especially how should a man to take care of a RW, what does he need to prepare for a RW, what should his income be to satisfy her life and so on 

[mendeleyev]

My point was that exaggeration about RWs is  too much some times, especially how should a man to take care of a RW, what does he need to prepare for a RW, what should his income be to satisfy her life and so on

And you are correct, Olga. 

[Doll]

Exactly my point, and I know that you didn't. What limited but pleasant things I know of you and your wife demonstrates a healthy relationship. I didn't shop for one either.

Misha, I will listen to you and accept your advice anytime. But I truly tire of men whose words and actions strike me as if they're coming over to shop, picking out the best lady in the window, boxing her up and carting her home at which point she somehow emerges from the box ready to perform--often getting a job and immediately contributing financially, etc, when very often it is the man's expectations that are out of line. When reality sets however suddenly the lady is the one accused of having unrealistic expectations. Hmm, how about the man?

Agree 100%

[mendeleyev]

She paints some pretty flowers, too.   

[Boethius]

She may or may not have.

I personally met women from different countries of FSU who are nurses, doctors, dentists here in the US and they made their career in the US on their own. They came here with their degrees and work experience. The worked and at the same time were getting additional  education and training.

But they generally have to retrain, to greater or lesser degrees.  That's all I was saying.

[Misha]

Which is what I said in my post. In the terms I used, one should not try to bring home what he cannot "afford."

This is what you wrote:

If you can't afford to bring over a RW and provide 100% of the income, then you can't afford a RW. If you can't afford to bring over a RW and provide 100% of whatever those future needs are (college, dental, second family car, etc) then you can't afford to bring home that particular woman. Don't shop for what you can't afford.

I have highlighted the passage that I believe is relevant. How can we know with certainty what these future needs will be? Also, these future needs are dependant on the future wants of the woman you marry and your ability as a couple to come up with a common budget.  The future needs you describe are also contingent upon future circumstances: if she is not working and you take the bus to work, a second car may not even be necessary. For all you know, the kids may not even want to go to college and the dental work depends on whether you have a dental plan.... In other words, if you obsess too much about potential future needs, then nobody should be getting married 

[Misha]

My point was that exaggeration about RWs is  too much some times, especially how should a man to take care of a RW, what does he need to prepare for a RW, what should his income be to satisfy her life and so on 

Amen Olga   

[mendeleyev]

Misha, again we agree.

The original idea was that one particular woman wanted to bring over her children and they'd have needs such as college, dental, etc. Her needs/wants were different than another lady.

I responded just as you would:

then you can't afford to bring home that particular woman. Don't shop for what you can't afford.

You're assuming that I was writing a blank check. Not so.

I believe that you and I agree that the only way a couple can determine financial compatibility is by discussion before marriage. And in some case that may mean walking away from that courtship.

[OlgaH]

But they generally have to retrain, to greater or lesser degrees.  That's all I was saying.

or as one Russian woman who did not had any problem to find a job as a dressmaker, now she has her own studio.  It is also depends on different skills.

[OlgaH]

The original idea was that one particular woman wanted to bring over her children and they'd have needs such as college, dental, etc. Her needs/wants were different than another lady.

or the original idea was that the woman looking for a man so she would not need to work and he would pay for her children education.

[Misha]

Misha, again we agree.

The original idea was that one particular woman wanted to bring over her children and they'd have needs such as college, dental, etc. Her needs/wants were different than another lady.

I would be wary of any woman whose primary needs don't include love and respect. If the priority is merely not working and somebody else for one's children's education, that would not be appealing to me...

[Faux Pas]

Let's see, you combine the two retorts in one post and use protest for one and defensive for the other. Given the parallel nature of the verbs to protest and to be defensive, it is entirely logical for me to reply that I am neither protesting nor being defensive. There, are you happy?

Well, I quoted you line and verse Misha. It even has your name where one part of my post was directed at you. On the other was quoted ML and directed at his post. I'll try to simplify it for you next time if that was too difficult for you to understand 

Mendy is a big boy and capable of defending his ideas on his own. However, profound as you think they may be, there is a logical flaw, it is pretty much impossible for a man to be able to pay for any potential expense and for any desired lifestyle. As Olga highlights, this requires both sides to be clear as to their expectations and if either side believes that the expectations of the other cannot be delivered, then they have the responsibility to end the relationship if a compromise is not possible. This does not mean that either should get married, rather they should continue looking elsewhere. However, if one's person't expectations are too unrealistic and they follow this path, then they may never find anybody suitable. Such is life.

Mendy doesn't need me defending him and I wasn't. I am lending support to his statement and opinion. There is a difference, yes?

Nobody has a crystal ball or even capable of reading one to "know" any or all expense they may incur and that's not even what he said. Nice red herring. I find it a bit ironic that you disagreed with his post. We're you not prepared to cover the expenses of your wife when she immigrated? Suppose after she arrived and could not find gainful employment, would you have sent her back?