4 Answers

  1. “Immutability” — in what sense?

    As a given, the “inability” to change? But it is obvious that any individual man can change his wife, but the authorities in the country do not. In this sense, the irremovability of the wife, as a given, simply does not exist. But the authorities — very much even if the country does not have working mechanisms for its change.

    What is the description of the ongoing selection? — It's more interesting here. If the choice is possible, then there is a fork in the road.

    • In healthy, developing interpersonal relationships, it's actually done, over and over again. They notice changes: in the situation, in each other. When something doesn't suit you, they talk about it and start a conflict. In this sense, my wife and I have been married for 28 years — a choice that we make again and again. Including once we chose to divorce, and almost two years later we chose each other again.
    • Unfortunately, more often people tend to follow an inert choice that has already been made, with unclear expectations, claims and hopes. And the choice is not made again and again consciously, the contradictions that arise are not resolved as they appear. — It's just that everything is dragging on, until a possible serious crisis, an explosion.
    • The peculiarity of this second option in relations with the authorities is that the people who make up the authorities do not have any marital and loving relationships with our man. They definitely have THEIR own separate interests. And also the interest and resources to support the very second, inert option, when our man does not actually make a choice again and again, does not ask himself about his interests, does not go to conflicts to present and defend them.

    So the immutability of the wife does not exist, and the immutability of power is excellent for people in power and bad for the interests of that very husband.

  2. Depends on the user. You're a fool, and it won't do you any good anyway. An educated, literate person will be able to benefit in both situations.
    So it's good to work on yourself, improve yourself, and bad to look for how good it is.

  3. The immutability of the country and people is a good thing for those who seek stability and tranquility. A sign of mental health.

    As well as the irremovability of the wife and family.

    Constant anxiety and the desire to change people or wives – a sign of either mental anxiety, or youth, or when all the ways to improve their living conditions did not lead to the desired result.

    If you have already run away from the second or third wife (or country) and still did not find peace of mind, then it was not in the wife and not in the people.

    Most likely, it's because you didn't have a good example of a good family and good parents as a child. We always transfer the example from our private life to the general structure of the country.

    When a man says that he doesn't like his wife, he means the old pain that he was dissatisfied with his mother and his childhood.

    Like “Slavik” from “What men talk about”, who changed women every year and each time remained unsatisfied.

  4. Being able to change is more of a good thing than a bad thing.

    Immutability-depending on what it is caused by. If everything is good and comfortable, the change may well be superfluous.

    That is, for me, the obligation to change the government or my wife is the same thing. If everything is comfortable, goes on as usual, adapts to current requirements and realities, and does not degrade, then turnover is quite meaningless.

    In general, the question itself is political – that is, there is no unambiguous answer to it. Everyone decides for themselves to the best of their beliefs. For some, a change of country is normal, for others, wives are not attached to their children.

    The main thing here is to understand that breaking is not building.

Leave a Reply

Categories