| User | Comment |
|---|
Enheduanna  | | posted 23-Jun-2008 11:32am |
It depends on the context. Sometimes it's important to put your SO first and sometimes it's important to put your friends first. Ultimately you don't want to neglect either. However, if one of them is insisting that you always put them before the other, then you have problems. I don't imagine whichever one is doing it is going to remain your friend/SO for long, because all this kind of thing does is make people resentful and drive them apart. |
LindaH    | | posted 23-Jun-2008 11:38am |
This is not an issue to be regarded. I think it's weird to have people on some scale of how high you regard them, based on nothing but their relationship to you.
How I regard other people all depends on how they regard me, not on their role in my life. |
| kirst | | posted 23-Jun-2008 11:46am |
It's dependent on the nature/stage of the relationship. Also it's situational. At times, friends may really need you so they would come before your SO. But if you're in a serious relationship, I would imagine that your SO would come first a lot (but not all) of the time. I think the individual involved here should also put themselves first...too often women "lose" themselves a bit to a relationship or motherhood. We forget that it is okay to put ourselves first sometimes as well. |
| bill | | posted 23-Jun-2008 12:45pm |
varies, I guess... I think it's worth avoiding the comparison or playing one against the other... there's enough of you to go around |
Melf   | | posted 23-Jun-2008 1:10pm |
The chicken. |
| dab | | posted 23-Jun-2008 1:26pm |
For the most part, friends should understand times when your SO needs your time and your SO should understand when your friends need your time. |
| Crayons | | posted 23-Jun-2008 2:23pm |
I think, ideally, your SO should be kind of like your best friend. |
| Pomeranian | | posted 24-Jun-2008 12:03am |
If you have to ask this question as far as I am concerned you are with the wrong person, sorry. I am just an honest person. |
| JessicaWoman99 | | posted 24-Jun-2008 12:14am |
Friends then family come next but friends the highest |
| Biggles | | posted 24-Jun-2008 6:51am |
I don't think it's a matter of "should". |
| they | | posted 24-Jun-2008 12:16pm |
Kids.
SO.
Friends. |
cloudhugger  | | posted 24-Jun-2008 3:05pm |
SO. Otherwise why bother having a significant other? They wouldn't be significant if they had to wait in line behind friends. |
| cloudhugger | | posted 24-Jun-2008 3:06pm |
I guess I didn't see all the choices. I agree with the rest of who said it depends. |
| mrmarm |
How so? |
| mrmarm | | posted 25-Jun-2008 4:08am |
I personally believe friends should. |
| mrmarm | | posted 25-Jun-2008 4:12am |
Mainly due the fact that by putting your SO first and maybe unintentionally neglecting friends it may cause a negative inpact on your friend's opinion also your expectations, meaning you'd priortise your so one day and have none the next day. Or something like that. |
| Pomeranian | | (reply to mrmarm) posted 26-Jun-2008 3:22am |
It's a vaster modality than this but let me simplify: you're SO is your partner, not your boss, not your king. You are entitled to your friends, and they are entitled to theirs. If you you're SO can't handle that, then they are the wrong SO for you, understand? |
| Matty | | posted 27-Jun-2008 12:57pm |
After marriage:
1) God
2) wife and daughter
3) parents and brother
4 friends.
Before marriage:
It would have depended how significant the SO was.
|
| LJD | | posted 27-Jun-2008 8:28pm |
Significant other. But, I feel there needs to be a balance. If each partner is respectful of one another, they'd recognize the need to be with friends. I think it's important to include other people. No girls or boys night out at the bars however....can only bring trouble. With two people with common sense, it shouldn't be a problem. |
| kcthedog | | posted 2-Jul-2008 12:14am |
 I have something else to say
I THINK THEY SHOULD BOTH CUM AT THE SAME TIME!
 |
| kcthedog | | posted 2-Jul-2008 12:16am |
Sorry the devil made me do it! |
| LindaH | | (reply to kcthedog) posted 2-Jul-2008 12:38am |
was the devil in the beer? |
| kcthedog | | (reply to LindaH) posted 2-Jul-2008 12:46am |
> was the devil in the beer?
Beer and wine (really a bad mix and I know butter, butter that is better, or just plain better butter, (did you know if your eat butter before you drink you won't get sick?) so if I feel bad in the morning I will remember YOU brought it up! |
| LindaH | | (reply to kcthedog) posted 2-Jul-2008 12:47am |
no no. if you feel bad in the morning, nausea brought it up |
| kcthedog | | posted 2-Jul-2008 12:49am |
Am I a Trool? |
| kcthedog | | (reply to LindaH) posted 2-Jul-2008 12:54am |
How makes up these words anyway? "nausea!" If you say is slow and get the deep throat voice going, you almost wanna throw up! NaaaaaaaaZeeeeeUghhhhhhhhhh! |
| LindaH | | (reply to kcthedog) posted 2-Jul-2008 12:57am |
I'm guessing you have had more alcohol than me? |
| kcthedog | | (reply to LindaH) posted 2-Jul-2008 1:09am |
> I'm guessing you have had more alcohol than
> me?
I dooonnna nOoooooo, hWo mutch Uuuu bEEEEn Drcknnnn? |
| midagehippie |
my children first...then my partner. |
