The 80/20 rule

[Marie]

DaemonSeid, I really don't know what you're talking about. You are trying to discuss the 80/20 rule as it was presented in the new Tyler Perry movie, but you are presenting it incorrectly.

The theory was this: In a marriage you are most likely only getting 80% of your needs met...then you meet someone outside the marriage who offers you that other 20%...20% looks pretty good when you aren't getting it, so you are persuaded to leave your 80% for the 20% that you JUST HAVE TO HAVE...however in the end you feel foolish and shortchanged b/c at the end of the day you are now only getting 20% of your needs met.

Its not the 'real 80/20 rule', but its the version presented in the movie with respect to relationships. They didn't at all discuss you breaking up with your 80% person and then moving on to find someone who is only 20% by default. I'm not sure from where that came.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Marie

DaemonSeid, I really don't know what you're talking about. You are trying to discuss the 80/20 rule as it was presented in the new Tyler Perry movie, but you are presenting it incorrectly.

The theory was this: In a marriage you are most likely only getting 80% of your needs met...then you meet someone outside the marriage who offers you that other 20%...20% looks pretty good when you aren't getting it, so you are persuaded to leave your 80% for the 20% that you JUST HAVE TO HAVE...however in the end you feel foolish and shortchanged b/c at the end of the day you are now only getting 20% of your needs met.

Its not the 'real 80/20 rule', but its the version presented in the movie with respect to relationships. They didn't at all discuss you breaking up with your 80% person and then moving on to find someone who is only 20% by default. I'm not sure from where that came.

Thanks for clearing that up.

I haven't seen this movie yet so I was getting confused between the original and revised "80/20 rules."

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Thanks for clearing that up.

I haven't seen this movie yet so I was getting confused between the original and revised "80/20 rules."

Same here.

[honeychile]

Wow. I mean, wow. Does anyone really think that what they're looking for in a mate at 20 is going to be the same when they're 25-30-35-40-50-60-years old? So, even if you find a person who's 99.9% of what you're looking for now, do you really think you're going to feel that way in another five years?

With the exception of having "Willing to grow in our relationship" or "Wants to grow old with me" as a main objective, I think you're really setting yourself for a fall, and should plan on a pre-nup.

MysticCat, as usual, should Mrs. MysticCat ever lose her mind & leave you, I'm very high on the list of your admirers!

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by honeychile

Wow. I mean, wow. Does anyone really think that what they're looking for in a mate at 20 is going to be the same when they're 25-30-35-40-50-60-years old? So, even if you find a person who's 99.9% of what you're looking for now, do you really think you're going to feel that way in another five years?

With the exception of having "Willing to grow in our relationship" or "Wants to grow old with me" as a main objective, I think you're really setting yourself for a fall, and should plan on a pre-nup.

Maybe you were making a general statement but, if not, I don't know what post you're referencing.

I think the majority of the posters in this thread are well above the age of 20. And, yes, finding what we want at our age is often a pretty good indication of what we will want in our 40s, 50s, and 60s. If not, adjustments can and will be made. As adults, we know more about the "growing in our relationship" and "growing old together" thingie than we did when we were younger.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by honeychile

MysticCat, as usual, should Mrs. MysticCat ever lose her mind & leave you, I'm very high on the list of your admirers!

Actually though, I tend to think she lost her mind when she married me.

[christiangirl]

Originally Posted by Marie

DaemonSeid, I really don't know what you're talking about. You are trying to discuss the 80/20 rule as it was presented in the new Tyler Perry movie, but you are presenting it incorrectly.

The theory was this: In a marriage you are most likely only getting 80% of your needs met...then you meet someone outside the marriage who offers you that other 20%...20% looks pretty good when you aren't getting it, so you are persuaded to leave your 80% for the 20% that you JUST HAVE TO HAVE...however in the end you feel foolish and shortchanged b/c at the end of the day you are now only getting 20% of your needs met.

Its not the 'real 80/20 rule', but its the version presented in the movie with respect to relationships. They didn't at all discuss you breaking up with your 80% person and then moving on to find someone who is only 20% by default. I'm not sure from where that came.

LOL, thank you!! I only sifted through the whole thing to see if someone else mentioned it already. I couldn't figure out why everyone was arguing (some playfully) about this thing when it wasn't even what the movie said! No, I've never heard of the business version of this rule, but I never took marketing or any sort of business course in HS or college.

1. Yes, I think the movie version of this rule has some truth to it. Only the best of relationships will give you about 80% as a maximum. No one person is going to give you everything you need. And yes, there are a lot of people who go for that 20%--those who have gone so long without it that it looks more than it really is and those who try to get the 80 and the 20, thinking they can have it all (and those are always found out). I don't go around dismissing guys because they're 30s, but you get what I mean.

2. No, you can't turn a 20 into a 70. It just doesn't happen. As time goes on you might find that a person is capable of satisfying more needs than you thought they were, but if the two of you are just so incompatable that things are truly at their best and you're still getting 20%, then don't kid yourself. They are someone's 80, but not yours.

3. There's one thing this movie didn't take into account--marriages have their ups and downs. There will be times when you will feel like you are getting 50% or less from your spouse. But, I believe that at those times when things are good--really, really good--that 80% can feel like 1000%. Emotions won't let the numbers be set in stone.

[AKA_Monet]

I just think folks try to aim being 100% to their partners...

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by christiangirl

LOL, thank you!! I only sifted through the whole thing to see if someone else mentioned it already. I couldn't figure out why everyone was arguing (some playfully) about this thing when it wasn't even what the movie said! No, I've never heard of the business version of this rule, but I never took marketing or any sort of business course in HS or college.

1. Yes, I think the movie version of this rule has some truth to it. Only the best of relationships will give you about 80% as a maximum. No one person is going to give you everything you need. And yes, there are a lot of people who go for that 20%--those who have gone so long without it that it looks more than it really is and those who try to get the 80 and the 20, thinking they can have it all (and those are always found out). I don't go around dismissing guys because they're 30s, but you get what I mean.

2. No, you can't turn a 20 into a 70. It just doesn't happen. As time goes on you might find that a person is capable of satisfying more needs than you thought they were, but if the two of you are just so incompatable that things are truly at their best and you're still getting 20%, then don't kid yourself. They are someone's 80, but not yours.

3. There's one thing this movie didn't take into account--marriages have their ups and downs. There will be times when you will feel like you are getting 50% or less from your spouse. But, I believe that at those times when things are good--really, really good--that 80% can feel like 1000%. Emotions won't let the numbers be set in stone.

all I can say is THANK YOU for taking the time to answer the original post as I set it up...if some people had taken time to read the examples as posted, their answers would have been more on point....