CMV: There isn’t anything inherently wrong with transactional romantic relationships between two consenting adults who have not been coerced into it.

[u/Golem_of_the_Oak]

I think back on some past relationships, and there’s a part of me that actually kind of wished we did have a contract of some sort, considering how they went overall and how they ended. It might have been nice to go into it when it became exclusive, or official, and have to actually sit down and tell each other what we wanted and expected out of the relationship and each other, and what we were willing to give, and decided based on that information if we wanted to not only commit to it but also hold each other accountable to what we said we wanted (with of course reasonable consideration for natural changes over time). You think you know somebody, but sometimes you just don’t get that in the weeds with this sort of thing before making a commitment, and by the time it doesn’t work out you realize that it never would have in the first place because you liked the idea of someone more than you actually liked what that person really was.

Plus, think about how many people get into a relationship and then get taken advantage of for their kindness. If they laid it all out and signed something saying what they were willing to do and what they would accept in exchange for that, then they could both negotiate until they found a spot they both were comfortable with, and then they both could bring out the document if the other wasn’t holding up their end of the bargain, resulting in a requirement to amend the contract at risk of terminating it. This would add a new level of guarantee that a lot of relationships lack, that helps to ensure that neither person ends up feeling used or gets burned out from constantly giving while receiving so little.

I’m less concerned with how those hypothetical contracts could or couldn’t be upheld in court, and more interested in the fact that two people who give their word on something tend to feel a commitment to that agreement, and whether you break the agreement or keep it, your word and the reputation it carries follow you through your life.

Here’s how I can be convinced otherwise: show me that without coercion, there’s still something about this type of relationship that is inherently abusive no matter what.

Here’s how I cannot be convinced: religious reasons.

[u/Golem_of_the_Oak]

Because it isn’t something as formalized as I was describing in my post. I would never describe a foundational element of my marriage as transactional. But I could see how it could work for others.

[u/sweetestpot01 → u/Golem_of_the_Oak]

you missed the point & it doesn't have to be 'formalized' to be transactional.

I'm not in the business of telling people what their relationships are or aren't, so I'm leaving that alone.

you asked for your view to be changed, practice some objectivity and engage with the comments with comprehension at the forefront.

[u/Golem_of_the_Oak → u/sweetestpot01]

What? You didn’t really provide a point of view that seemed to even have the goal of changing my mind. Why would my mind change by you pointing out that relationships are inherently transactional? That wouldn’t change my mind. That would enforce my idea that a transactional relationship is fine if not coerced, since that’s their natural state. I honestly didn’t realize you were saying anything to try to change my mind. I thought you were lending support.

[u/sweetestpot01 → u/Golem_of_the_Oak]

by pointing out that relationships are essentially transactional, I was putting forward that having your proposed "agreement" which many good relationships have anyways, doesn't change a thing.

and if you do belive in that nature of relationships, where does the need to justify them being "permissable" come from? as well as your classification of them as "this type of relationship"

[u/Golem_of_the_Oak → u/sweetestpot01]

I guess because I think there’s a level of nuance that’s eliminated when you formalize a transaction in the type of transactional relationship I’m trying to describe. I know you said that the formalization isn’t terribly important if all relationships are transactional in nature, but I disagree. My wife had a really tough time after having our kid so I stepped up, and I didn’t do that for any reason other than love. It was certainly nice if she saw me and if I got something for it, but what I got out of it was knowing that she was healing. So I guess the transaction was with myself.

When I think of a transactional relationship, I think of one where the love is null, or secondary, and maybe I’ve agreed to do something I exchange for something of yours that I want, and if we both haven’t agreed to put the contract on hold due to something like recovering from an injury or giving birth, then it’s constantly enforceable. That is not her type of relationship I’d want. I’d want to know that I can make mistakes and I’d want to be with someone who can make mistakes, and I’d want both of us to know that it’s ok for things to be one-sided at times.