As a young boy growing up into the somewhat young-man I am today, I have received a LOT of unwanted relationship-advice. The one reason I hate RECEIVING relationship advice is because I’m too analytical to NOT question the source that the advice derives from, and if it derives from some frowsy Old Wives Tale, I’m calling BS on it in a minute. But regardless, that doesn’t prevent people from SHARING their ignorant advice, thus subjecting me to entertaining MANY-a-musty theory, but none MORE mustier than the ideology that the key to finding happiness and TRUE love is making sure you get with someone who loves you MORE than you love them. That’s not romantic idealism, that’s just an easy-fall back for selfish p*ssies to scared to truly put their heart on their line like REAL love REQUIRES.

Every single time I hear this GARBAGE IDEOLOGY the first place my mind instantly goes to, is “if you get with someone who loves you MORE, it gives you a lot of LESS responsibility to HAVE to express your love for them and a lot MORE leeway to be a DOUCHE, but use that person’s emotional attachment to you, against them.” That is not some highly-intellectualized look at bonding the souls of two individuals in a lifelong union of mutual respect and admiration – it’s just a DOUCHEBAG way to say “find someone you can exploit and take advantage of their sorry-ass.”

Now I don’t know who INVENTED this F*CKERY phrase and then pawned it off on unsuspecting idiots, who, in turn praised it as intense emotional education, but I can guarantee you ONE thing about that person: They were emotionally unstable and incapable of actual vulnerability. Love is not a friggin’ stock, so the concept of low-risk/high-reward does NOT exist in the context of TRUE love. If you want to GAIN everything, you must be able to RISK everything, and if you aren’t willing, then DON’T be a jackass and misappropriate an innocent parties full love and trust.

See, the GREAT & DOUCHEY thing about loving someone who loves you more, is they are more emotionally-indebted in the relationship than you, therefore they have MUCH more to LOSE. By not fully loving them, you DON’T have to risk the illogical mood swings, the hormonal ups and downs, and the potential for absolute, emotional devastation if the relationship was to end, like most people in love do. Essentially, your significant other will be hampered with all that stuff, but you can just pack your bags and leave relatively unscathed if things don’t work out. Of COURSE that’s gonna sound great to a selfish neanderthal, but if you are a GOOD person who feels entitled to a good man, praising this theory makes you nothing more than the WORST kind of user.

Here’s an idea you can try out? Marry or enter into a relationship with someone who respects, loves and needs you just as much as you respect, love and need them. Instead of preying on someone who deserves to be loved MORE than YOU can offer – why don’t you try praying for someone who won’t make you feel like love is such a negative and risky ‘investment.’

This Is Your Conscience

When Lincoln Anthony Blades is not writing for his controversial and critically acclaimed blog ThisIsYourConscience.com, he can be found contributing articles for Uptown Magazine. Lincoln wrote the hilarious and insightful book "You're Not A Victim, You're A Volunteer: How To Stop Letting Love Kick Your Ass". He is also a public speaker who has sat on panels all over North America and the Caribbean.


  1. lincolnanthonyblades

    09/18/2012 at 5:14 AM

    Ladies & Gentlemen, What Are YOUR Thoughts On This Phrase? Good Advice Or Advocating Selfishness?

  2. Kevin W

    09/18/2012 at 5:31 AM

    Linc I've heard the same advice growing up, & though the person who gave me that advice has been married for almost 30 years now, I would not want to be the kind of husband that person is. I call bs on that advice as well because when that's the case, it opens up the door for that person to be detached & emotionally abusive; even if that person is just fooling themselves into thinking the other person loves & needs them more.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 5:36 AM

      Co-sign everything you just wrote!

      And also, the more prevalent this ideology becomes, the more we all put ourselves at first of loving someone who doesn't love US as much. I think my love deserves to be equal in a relationship.

  3. @DoWuSem

    09/18/2012 at 5:35 AM

    Exactly what I've been thinking all along. I've heard this kind of crass advice from adults I respect. Every advice has to be weighed properly. This kind of love cannot stand the test of time. For me, it's not a matter of being selfish. It's stupid to deny yourself from finding and marrying someone you truly love.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 5:39 AM

      Real talk!

  4. mena

    09/18/2012 at 5:49 AM

    In a relationship, there are going to be times when one person is more vulnerable and times when the other person is more vulnerable.

    The relationships that I have seen move into marriage were those where the guy was more emotionally invested at the beginning of the relationship and as time progressed, the girl became more emotionally invested as well. In other words, the guy fell in love first and said I love you first and the girl fell in step.

    To each their own. If both people are truly happy then does that make it right or wrong just bc i may or may not agree?

    I honestly don't know how I feel about this question.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 12:05 PM

      You don't know because you're confusing the inherent basis of the ideology. It's NOT about someone appreciating someone more at certain times, it's about finding someone your heart is not 100% into, but making sure THEY are 100% into you. It's the emotional equivalent of stringing someone along in the context of a relationship.

      • mena

        09/18/2012 at 12:47 PM

        I would rather have my head 100% into a relationship and my heart 80% into a relationship than the other way around. Again, it's different strokes for different folks.

        If someone isn't 100% invested emotionally in a relationship but yet mentally and physically they are invested 100% and they are truly happy, who are you to tell them that they are wrong or right for that matter. It comes down to what works for that person. Everyone's happiness in a relationship isn't tied to feelings of euphoria and skipping down the street. Some people are happy in a relationship being connected to someone mentally more than emotionally. If it works for them then who are we to judge.

        And again, if your intentions are pure (till death do you part, you are loyal, never cheat, and treat the person well) but the person just happens to love you more than you love them, what's the problem? Who would ever know for that matter? Only a douche would go around singing it at the rooftops.

        • lincolnanthonyblades

          09/18/2012 at 11:43 PM

          The concept of percentages of love is nothing more than rationalizing your distrust. It's cool though because I'm not one to tell people HOW they should live, but I definitely believe people need to stop calling caring a lot and liking a lot LOVE.

          The problem with people who only believe in "love-percentages" is they have a really good way of HIDING that from their partner who may be giving 100%.

  5. petersburgh

    09/18/2012 at 7:04 AM

    I never believed it even when I was young because I thought it was stupid then. Now I still think it is and here's why. Love is about a spiritual connection, it's NOT quantifiable so where does this more thing come from? The funny thing is that those who have successful long term relationships will tell you that at some point they loved more and at others, their partner loved more.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 12:06 PM

      Good point! How do you quantify "more" love unless you are speaking about NOT truly loving that person at all.

    • Jesssssssss

      09/18/2012 at 12:42 PM

      *standing ovation… slow clap* Yes!

  6. Smilez_920

    09/18/2012 at 7:27 AM

    I don't believe in the marry someone who loves you more than you love them, but as a woman you should be with a man who likes you a little more than you like him or atleast on the same level in the beginning.

    Most men set the direction for the relationship. Most Sucessful relationships start with the guy liking the girl a little more than she may like him at first. Trust I've seen relationships were the woman is head over hills for a man that is no where near that point. A man can grow on a woman ( not all men but one that she has some interest in) a woman doesn't usually grow on a man.

    But if your going to marry someone you both should love each other to the point where you don't have to think about who loves the other more or vice versa.

    • mena

      09/18/2012 at 8:27 AM

      Well said and completely agree.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 12:07 PM

      That's fair in some circumstances.

    • daisy1998

      09/18/2012 at 9:51 PM

      Second time seeing that women don't or rarely grow on men. The first time I had to poll my male friends and indeed they confirmed such. I never really thought about it so I never gave it much thought either way. Interesting to see somebody else make the same analogy.

  7. Celina

    09/18/2012 at 7:41 AM

    I've always hated that advice… I'm not going to subject myself to be with someone who doesn't make me equally happy just for some false sense of security when my emotional equal is out there waiting for me. No can do… that's just a recipe for someone to get hurt.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 12:08 PM

      Precisely my point.

  8. LINDA

    09/18/2012 at 9:20 AM

    I think ( because I remember my Grandmother discussing this issue with her friends) that this saying has been around for a very long time and it was created by a woman for other women. This is when women were often at the mercy of a man's largesse; women raised the children, kept the home and often did not venture out (without his permission) except to visit other women often quite a distance away. They had no cars or computers so interaction was minimal, except for their husband and perhaps adult family in the household. In today's environment it simply doesn't make sense.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 3:02 PM

      Very good point. I can see how the origins could make a lot of sense from that perspective.


    09/18/2012 at 9:21 AM

    Lol…. Very interesting Lincoln…So let me get this straight… If one partner loves deeper than the other… one should quit the relationship because it is doomed from the start..?… I say bullshit Lincoln….there  is no such thing as equal love.., bullshit… and any measure of it is subjective… Lol…someone will always love or be more attached to the other person more than that person may be attached to them. People marry for different reasons and most usually because they feel that love has do do with it.. Yet time and time again it has been proven that is not always the case. Hence the high rate of divorce and the usual I didn't know he or she would turn out this way.  Any relationship you get into, you are taking a chance..So yo can search for that equal love all you want .. There is no such thing as a 50-50 relationship…matter of fact I think it's selfish to demand it from anyone cause love can not be forced Neither demanded nor used as leverage to demand affection. There will always be someone wearing the pants in the house….and it can be either of the partners… Lol.. .. Love I can believe in… Marriage on the other hand, let me say it again…..and you can quote me on this…"Confusing love with marriage is like confusing Education with intelligence…the two are not necessarily related" I can divorce marriage to you but I can not divorce love for you.. And if I did divorce love for you… Then it wasn't love in the first place.. Lol… Hence if it was love ….you will Still have that love for that person even after years apart from that person..I always wish those who are looking for marriage or that  co called equal love all the best .. As far as am concerned love is never a choice but marriage is.. So quitting someone because they love me more or because I love them more is rather childish and smells like a selfish demand for love…good luck with that effort… Lol..Cheers

    • mena

      09/18/2012 at 10:00 AM

      "There is no such thing as a 50-50 relationship…matter of fact I think it's selfish to demand it from anyone cause love can not be forced Neither demanded nor used as leverage to demand affection." *nods head*

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 12:13 PM

      1st, your initial point makes no sense because the concept of "loving deeper" is a facade to mask a relationship in which one person is LOVING and the other is NOT. Like Petersburgh declared up top, how can you quantify "deeper love"? That entire concept is anti-intellectual.

      2nd, Love IS equal in its intrinsic nature – you are either IN it or NOT. Simply put. One person can put more effort into showing it and do a better job of acting like it, but a couple who is truly in love, their love can't be measured by bullshit arbitrary metrics like who says "love you" more or who brings their partner breakfast in bed.

      3rd, saying there's no such thing as a 50-50 relationship let's me know you only have a surface understanding of the true love I'm talking about. Who pays the bills, who rakes the leaves and who cleans the toilet has NOTHING to do with what I'm talking about, and if you think simple innocuous actions like that relate to love in ANY way, you are simply WRONG.

      • mena

        09/18/2012 at 1:12 PM

        You went HAM on this comment and you kind of agreed with him on the point that love isn't quantifiable.

        Can "deeper love" just be a synonym for "loving someone more than they love you?"

        I just do not believe that love is EVER truly equal. Love changes and what one person considers "love" another person may not. Someone, will inevitably love and appreciate the other person more but the tables will turn.

        MALIANUNGU actually brought up some valid points here.

        • lincolnanthonyblades

          09/18/2012 at 11:45 PM

          People can vote down my comment all they like, but most have no idea what I'm actually talking about. He brought up good points – but not ONE of them was good at refuting MY argument made in the blog. He is talking about chores and household responsibility and if that's HIS quantification of love, that's a sorry-ass one.

  10. Paul B.

    09/18/2012 at 9:46 AM

    I get your sentiment, Lincoln and I agree. As a man, I wouldn't marry a woman I thought loved me less or loved me more than I did her. I'm sure quite a few people think they love their spouse more, but to me there is something wrong there, and it's based around ego and pride.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 12:15 PM

      The idea of quantifying love is so ridiculous. People out here acting like LOVE is a Benz that comes in a base model and the AMG. It's all just LOVE.

  11. alexxussknight

    09/18/2012 at 10:53 AM

    The problem with Love is people. Love in itself is perfect in it's design because it came from and was designed by GOD. Who loves us more than him? In it's design it is NOT selfish, allowing yourself to be sheltered by some's feelings because of fear of your own is all the way selfish. That is not Love! Therefore this peice of advice sets the relationship up to become all the things that Love is not and that people are or can be!

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 12:16 PM

      I agree that people are the problem with love.

    • petersburgh

      09/18/2012 at 7:27 PM

      I like your comment. I tweeted a short while ago that "the only thing wrong with love in relationships is that it takes two people to have it". It's sad and if you're going to quantify and parcel out my love, you can keep yours. I'm not telling anyone they're right or wrong on this but I'm saying MY love won't be. Maybe all of us are right, maybe none of us are generally, but individually only ourselves can properly access the situation.

  12. NurseJilly

    09/18/2012 at 1:26 PM

    I feel like once you get into trying to find someone that will love you more than you love them you are messing with the whole point of falling in love. When I fall I fall and if I get my heart broken then I'm ok with that. Even after going through a decade long relationship and very tough breakup I wouldn't change a thing about how we loved each other.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/19/2012 at 6:12 AM

      Thank you!


    09/18/2012 at 3:24 PM

    the only way to ensure long lasting relationship success is to choose an emotional and INTELLECTUAL equal…..applicable to both sexes.
    ………implying that anyone in a relationship is more in love than the other is failure to manifest, nevrmind pursue, a proper connection. .

    • Neffy

      09/18/2012 at 5:56 PM

      THIS! Amazingly articulated. Glad I didnt sleep on this comment

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/18/2012 at 11:45 PM

      Simple truth.

  14. Ises

    09/18/2012 at 4:30 PM

    This phrase is a parable in character. It is extremely relevant in the context where a individual is chasing a person down to be with them while at the same time ignoring the ones who are generally interested in being with them. The opportunistic party is opportunistic and may use the phrase as justification/inspiration for being lazy and taking advantage. The reality is that an opportunist is an opportunist relatively.
    This story line is seen over and over in t.v. and movies. One person chases the ideal mate, usually with the help or at least moral support of someone who really loves them. Then they find out that the one they are chasing is not worthy and they find out the one who was there is the true love. The end.
    What i'm saying Mr. Ablades is that I have encounter males/females that will string people along and take advantage. However, these individuals are not cold blooded amphibians. Its more of survival of the fittest. When the player, jock, alpha female/male is ready to have true love. They are not immune to heart break or anxiety over finding Love.
    I will agree to disagree with your interpretation of the saying. I think that the elders are wise and this phrase is usually applied in the situation when the subject individual is being is taken for a ride and they want to subtly let them know they need to dump the creep that's taking advantage. Hence, be with the one who loves you, not the one you love ( lust, desire, etc)

    • Paul B.

      09/18/2012 at 6:35 PM

      The problem with that is what happens when the one you "love" comes back into the picture while you're with the one who loves you? Chances are somebody is going to be left out in the cold, and I highly doubt it'll be the one you love. Too much can go wrong in this situation, and it reeks of selfishness and ego.

  15. daisy1998

    09/18/2012 at 9:54 PM

    I was told this advice when I was 16 from my girlfriends West Indian married mother and I believe it. I can't explain why but I do probably part of the reason why I am single and never been in love yet.

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/19/2012 at 6:13 AM

      If you can't explain it, you probably don't really believe in it.

      • daisy1998

        09/19/2012 at 7:49 PM

        No, I believe it just no rhyme or reason just feels right to me. Somethings you believe other things not so much.

  16. Mrs. TBD

    09/18/2012 at 10:59 PM

    I absolutely love your blog and this post. Aside from hearing the male perspective on relationships from the brothas at VSB it's refreshing to read plain and simple practical insight from another source.

    I've been keeping an online journal of my dating adventures (putting it lightly) and thoughts, and I would love to hear your opinion on my post 'Men Have the Power'.

    Keep faith in Love!

    Mrs. TBD

    • lincolnanthonyblades

      09/19/2012 at 6:12 AM

      Good read, and I hope YOU are keeping YOUR faith in love!

  17. bellatrice1

    09/19/2012 at 8:10 PM

    I'm late, but HAD to speak on this. A random Asian man told me this in a nail shop one day when I was in college b/c he overheard me and my friend talking about relationships.

    I have come to agree with the advice, but only with regard to the man loving the woman more, not the other way around. I ultimately interpreted the advice to mean that I should find a man who considers me his "best". I'm the BEST he will ever do, but he is not the best I can do. Ultimately, if I am the best to him, he will commit to me knowing that no other woman he will ever meet can take my place. A part of us always wants what we can't have, and so to attain something you thought was unattainable is to win. Ultimately, if you're the best in his eyes, he will do whatever is necessary to keep you in his life.

    A guy once told me he wants to marry a woman that's better than him. This is another way of stating it.

    So, I didn't take the advice too literally to mean love, because like someone said upthread is not really quantifiable.

    • @iCh3ryl

      09/21/2012 at 6:42 AM

      Yeah, that's how I perceived it too… don't think the proverb applies to love in the literal sense either.

  18. Pingback: It Was All A Dream…Our Views on Relationships « From Ashy to Classy

  19. Pingback: If You Love Them…Let Them Go! « From Ashy to Classy

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *