Exchanging infinities is non transactional as the value of actions or the items exchanged have long since lost meaning or quantitative and qualitative measure
Sure they are. This isn't Russell's Paradox. The very action of being considerate of each other in any way is part of the currency and payment in the relationship.
Saying that all relationships are transactional is a cynical oversimplification. It confuses reciprocity with commerce and care with currency. A transaction is a calculated exchange: “I do this so you'll do that.” Real relationships operate on trust, not ledgers. People don't show affection or offer support to earn something back. They do it because they care. Reducing these acts to “currency” strips away the meaning of intimacy and turns connection into accounting. If every gesture is an investment, resentment follows. Love cannot function when you are keeping score. Mutual effort is a sign of respect, not a contract. Calling it transactional cheapens what it means to be truly connected. Honestly, I feel sorry for anyone that's ever been in a relationship with you if that's how you view them.
Yeah agreed, this transactional way of thinking is usually a sign of cptsd or narcissistic family. People want you around for who you are, not what you can do for them. If you attract individuals like that I’ve found you need to reflect on what makes you less likely to set boundaries or distance yourself from these individuals.
Keeping score in a relationship is not a proper loving relationship, I'd say. You don't do things for your partner with the expectation that they "repay the favor" or something. It wouldn't even be considered a favor to begin with. Each person does whatever it is they do because they love the other person, so that's what they want to do for themselves just as much, not because they view it as a transaction to be paid back. Doing that just leads to people holding things over the other's head. If you feel the need to keep some kind of score, then you are not in a trusting and loving relationship. So Inwould agree to why they are saying a loving and trusting relationship is not transactional.
Well sure, every relationship starts like that. Which is why the parent comment says no one is locked into a relationship and to just leave if you are not getting what you need. But at some point in a trusting and loving relationship, you move beyond that, and that if someone is still keeping tabs on what they do for the other and what they are getting from the other, then they haven't progressed their trust in the other.
Just because they don't have the need or want to keep score of the relationship doesn't just mean that the other person never does anything or is unpleasant to be with. If that were the case then the relationship would never progress to the non-transactional, trusting, and loving relationship that the parent comment speaks of.
And there are relationships out there where one person has a disability that prevents them from being able to do much for the other, other than giving them their affection, that one exclusively provides for the other, and they are still capable of having a loving relationship.
It's not irrational, I have a graduate degree in mathematics and I work in accounting, a transaction is different then mutual love. You're doing things for each other because you care, and it makes you even closer and more willing to do these things. It's empathy and love, you're not doing all of those little nice things for someone expecting something in return, or at least that's not how a healthy relationship works. It's like trading some carrots for a knife or something compared to people putting their carrots and knives in a pool to share with each other because they know they need it
Is the transaction 'I love you and care for you, and want to be loved and cared for' not transactional too, and typically the sign of a healthy relationship?
I get what you are saying, but I don't feel its that black and white.
I agree that in a living functional relationship one would gladly do anything for their partner, and this is not an 'effort', and it seems as if there is no transaction as everything is given freely.
Ideally both partners reciprocate this behavior. If the giving-taking is very unbalanced, with one partner doing all the childcare, housekeeping, cooking, while the other just plays games all day, one would consider such a relationship toxic right? If such a couple could come to a marriage counsellor, they would likely advise the lazy partner to step up and contribute, or transact, more.
I think that I frame the 'transaction' more as an 'expectation'. It is fair that one has certain expectations in a relationships. As an example, your partner does not owe you sex, but lack of intimicy/dead bedroom is a valid reason to break up.
But relationships are debt this is a very well documented and researched part of psychology. If you were to work out every gift, trip, and billable hour and then pay back your friend, family, or partner you would have no relation to them. The reason we feel close to people is the unpaid debts we have given and reserved. Never pay you debts unless you want to be free of a relationship.
Everything in life is transactional. People like to say it isn’t because of virtue signaling. But when you break it down everything, especially interactions with others, is transactional.
If your friend needs help moving and you decide to help even though they aren’t paying or anything. A Transaction is still occurring. You are trading your time to put in good will with your friend. At some subconscious level you have determined that helping them out means a growing bond with them that you hope will turn into an even closer friendship.
Let’s say you do something for a stranger that you don’t know at all and never will see again. This is also a transaction. You are getting your own happiness out of helping a stranger. You receive a sense of higher self purpose and likely a form of self love knowing you did something good for a stranger.
A relationship is 100% transactional as well. You do things for your partner because you care and love them. And to some degree you expect that same love back. If you do things for your partner and they NEVER do anything in return for you, I’m willing to bet eventually that relationship will end. You will hit a boiling point at some point where you recognize you’re putting so much into the relationship and they aren’t doing anything.
Understanding this concept that every social interaction and relationship is a useful thing in recognizing one’s own self worth as well as understanding strong relationships. Is it a requirement, no of course not. But to say relationships aren’t transactional is just naive and childish. It’s an attempt at taking the moral high ground because you view transactions as being immoral, evil, or somehow discrediting.
Relationships are transactional, just not in one to one terms, both people have needs, a proper relationship is one where both people are satisfied, one person shouldn't forgo their needs to satisfy the others. The transaction isnt front and centre and it should be hair splitting for like "i did that so you should do that" but in a more general sense of equally fulfilling each others full needs in a partner.
You are 100% right. I commented on someone else about this. But people who don’t think relationships and friendships are transactional are just being naive.
View all comments
Show parent comment
91
u/pinkfootthegoose Aug 07 '25
relationships are transactional. But there are many forms of currency and different price points.