Suppose they were perfectly respectful to you in everyday life, but it just so happened that the baseline of your relationship is this 70⁄30 split? This is not unusual in my observation. It’s a mistake to confuse “equal status” with “respectful”: this is especially clear when you attempt to apply that heuristic beyond romantic relationships.
That would be different. I read the original comment to say that the person in question was offering me such terms with the understanding that because I’m lower status than them, I have to accept lop-sided terms. When it comes to relationships, being considered lower status by my mate is an automatic deal-breaker to me.
But it’s of course possible to settle on a 70⁄30 split while both partners consider themselves equal in status. That might very well work. (And of course, there are plenty of happy relationships where the partners do consider themselves to have an unequal status—which is great for them, but I don’t see it working for myself.)
Suppose they were perfectly respectful to you in everyday life, but it just so happened that the baseline of your relationship is this 70⁄30 split? This is not unusual in my observation. It’s a mistake to confuse “equal status” with “respectful”: this is especially clear when you attempt to apply that heuristic beyond romantic relationships.
That would be different. I read the original comment to say that the person in question was offering me such terms with the understanding that because I’m lower status than them, I have to accept lop-sided terms. When it comes to relationships, being considered lower status by my mate is an automatic deal-breaker to me.
But it’s of course possible to settle on a 70⁄30 split while both partners consider themselves equal in status. That might very well work. (And of course, there are plenty of happy relationships where the partners do consider themselves to have an unequal status—which is great for them, but I don’t see it working for myself.)