Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I do agree with this post of SubstantialFrivolity.
My psychological hypothesis based on your entire post is: Her insistence on (1) independent (2) city travel is to keep her options open for finding a better partner. Reasons for this hypothesis are:
Reluctance to sacrifice independence: she strongly resists any move which can reduce her independent mobility (and does not even consider viable alternatives like depend upon you, or e-bikes, or ride-shares). The plausible reason (hidden or otherwise) is that the City offers proximity to social, professional, and romantic networks (much greater optionality).
Shifting the Goalpost: when the public transport thing was apparently solved, she produced new problems like career prospects. This to me, is the most weighted option for my hypothesis.
Optionality in this Relationship: even after a decade, she seems to be very comfortable in the current arrangement ("she misses him" but faces no urgency to create a shared future or overcome the distance). Why? Because somewhere deep inside, she doesn't want to be dependent to the current partner. Particularly, not at cost of Reason 1 above.
The tendency to "Have the Best Possible Mate": If a woman perceives that her current partner is her best realistic option, then she tends to be highly motivated to secure and "lock-in" the relationship (as fast as practically possible). She would be the one to push for togetherness, ready to face inconveniences, and make it work (at any cost). Not make excuses. Since she is stalling and does not show any kind of initiative, consciously or not, she does not consider You as her highest value prospect. (sorry).
In short, while no one (IMO, not even herself) can know her motivations, the sustained lack of initiative from her side, resistance to any inconveniences from her side (even when you are doing the most you can do), intense preference for independent mobility with city independence- all these point towards a mindset of having more options, knowingly or unknowingly.
A woman truly deeply in love and fully invested in a man almost never has such a defensive option-preserving posture over a decade (I really don't believe that). Such a woman would be showing real intent and decisive movement towards union (across any situation), never endless hesitation and new excuses.
This is not to say that I am saying she is bad. But these are her priorities, shown by her actions (actions speak louder than words). They are what they are.
OTOH, you have worked hard to keep this relationship alive, making extreme (to your limits and beyond them also) emotional and logistical sacrifices to try to find solutions to practical obstacles. The demonstration of level of commitment from both sides are lopsided (to say the least). You deserve a relationship where both partners are eager and willing to build a life together - sometimes one side does more and equally number of times the other side does more (never one side goes on doing and doing and the other side never / minimally does). And this relationship does not appear to be anywhere near that level. Accepting this does mean someone has to be blamed (not her, not yourself) - it is what it is. It means to free yourself from trying to fit a round peg in a square hole and actually try to find the kind of relationship / partnership which is mutual, honest, and fulfilling for both sides. Wishing you courage and clarity to decide what is right for you.
TRVTH status: NVKE. The Hanson article “Cities as Harems” is nearing its tenth birthday.
One day, I would sit and read Robin Hanson from start.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link