Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
The operative element that you didn't address is the "forbid" portion - remember, the bachelor party is as much for the guy's friends as it is for the bachelor himself, and if you're not in a position to trust him around "women of the night", no matter how exploitative or offensive you find it, you're potentially in a poor position for marriage.
If you two sit down and decide it's not for you, great - that kind of discussion is the bedrock of a successful relationship (no matter whether you wind up agreeing or disagreeing!). If you feel the need to "forbid" it, there are issues - for many women, these may include insecurity, although not in every situation obviously.
This is without getting into the fact that marriage certainly DOES change the way a man interacts with his friends, as it damn well better - especially as a practicing Catholic, I would hope that you would understand the way the bond of covenant fundamentally alters, for the better, what is expected of a guy. To act like it's offensive to recognize that a new step means new boundaries is pretty disingenuous, especially when you have to fly your argument out to the 30,000 foot level to make it work.
|
I used " " around forbid because I think that the word is being perhaps misused in the original poster's message. I didn't specifically say to my fiance (now husband) "I FORBID you to go to a strip joint, and if you do, I'll leave you." Because that sort of sounds patronizing. I said, "I'm not comfortable with you having strippers or going to a strip club because of x, y and z reason. It crosses a boundary for me in our relationship, and if you or your best man (who incidentally used to spend a LOT of time and money in strip clubs) feel it absolutely necessary to go to a strip club for your bachelor party, we're going to have to have a serious discussion about it."
No forbidding, but laying out there that I was not comfortable with it. I don't see how that makes it less trusting of him? I do trust that he would not cheat on me, let alone cheat with a woman who makes money off of such enterprises, otherwise we wouldn't have been in a relationship nor would we have gotten engaged. The stripper thing is a special situation that needs clarification, much like many things in married life.
I'm not sure I'm reading your last paragraph correctly? Yeah we have different interactions with our friends now that we're married, mainly because now we live together and we can't blow off the laundry to go spend the evening doing whatever else, plus we have to now budget for our household. But I don't get this
Quote:
|
I would hope that you would understand the way the bond of covenant fundamentally alters, for the better, what is expected of a guy. To act like it's offensive to recognize that a new step means new boundaries is pretty disingenuous, especially when you have to fly your argument out to the 30,000 foot level to make it work
|
I agree with your first sentence. It fundamentally altered what was expected of both of us. We're now legally and religiously bound to love, honor, respect and support each other. Before our marriage, we did those things because we loved each other and wanted to remain together. We now have to say "no" to some friend things (individually and as a couple) because we have to budget or because we have chores to do or because it's just not our bag. It's part of the deal.
The second part is confusing. It sounds like you're saying because a couple haven't yet made their vows, that it's OK for a partner to celebrate with a stripper party because that's marking the transition into marriage? To me and my relationship, the stripper boundary existed waaaaaaaay before engagement and marriage came into the picture. Surely, a transition can be marked by any one of a number of other activities?