my boyfriend would not go with me if I moved either. There would be no "we" to it really. Well maybe help packing ... He has limited job prospects and would anywhere, and family here too, but really also very limited job prospects for various reasons as well.
Trees don't grow on money
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
There you go, now you know what one of your main problems in find a job is. You won't move for a new job.
If he has limited options there then he can have limited options anywhere. You probably have significantly better options somewhere else.
UL, when committed to a partner, not moving because they cannot find employment is NOT a problem. It's commitment. Relationships are give and take. It's never about only 1 of the partners but rather a balance of 2.
Actually, the problem seems to be that the boyfriend is more committed to the location than to ANM’s financial security. Because if ANM being able to find a decently paying job was more important, he would be willing to move.
ANM is more committed to the relationship than to finding a better job. The boyfriend is apparently more committed to the location than to the relationship.
Once again, CL tells it like it is!
If you have aging parents, location is an important consideration--unless you can convince them to move. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to want to stay near family and friends.
How about hospital/medical jobs? It seems they are always available. I think there's such a thing as medical equipment technician that sounds interesting; not sure what education is required.
I wasn’t judging anybody’s values, just stating what their actions implied their values to be.
I worked at The Univ of Texas. Lots of jobs available but cost of housing might negate the higher salary.
Yes, but that does not always mean 50/50. Sometimes it means one partner takes 100% and then, at the next opportunity, the other partner takes the 100%.
We have several friends who have alternated career opportunities, whether that was one partner working and not taking on a promotion elsewhere while the other got an advanced career-appropriate degree, or moving cross-country to accommodate a career-track promotion, or staying in a HSS (but stable) J so one partner can raise the kids at home until they start school. They are all joint decisions but they do come at a significant cost to one of the partners.
In ANM's case, based on what she has posted here over time, it does appear she would have more opportunities elsewhere while her BF would have the same challenges elsewhere. It may be that the level of commitment each has to the relationship precludes one moving a great distance for the other (no judgment here; just saying that there are things I would do in a marriage/LTR which I would not consider as readily for "just" a GF). Or that there are unstated reasons for wanting to stay where they are. Of course, only they know all the factors and their relative weight in the decisions they make.
This discussion is starting to sound like the one in the "Difficult to love" thread in which people are discussing compromise. It may be that the idea is not that both individuals are entirely happy compromising but that, collectively, they are happy with the goal being achieved.
Success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has overcome. - Booker T. Washington
Interesting perceptual differences. I see him as committed to being employed and his concerns about being unemployed in a new location is being respected by his partner.
I have given up things for my husband as he has given up things for me. You can never have it BOTH ways. That's the beauty of a committed relationships and compromise that is mutually satisfying and respectful.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote