"It never occurs to fools that merit and good fortune are closely united." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
"It's incredible that someone so unforgettable thinks that I am unforgettable too." Nat King Cole
The perceived deservingness (equity, fairness) of our situation or that of others is of great importance in determining the nature and intensity of emotions. No one wants to be unfairly treated, or to receive what is contrary to one's wish. Accordingly, the feeling of undeservingness is hard to bear-sometimes even more so than actual hardship caused.
The characterization of deservingness is complex due to its similarity to, yet difference from, moral entitlement. Claims of desert, such as "I deserve to win the lottery," are based on our sense of the value of our attributes and actions; claims based on moral right, such as "she is entitled to receive a raise in her salary," often refer to obligations constitutive of the relationships with other agents. Claims of desert are not necessarily grounded in anyone's obligations, but rather in the value persons perceive themselves to deserve. (see The Subtlety of Emotions)
The problematic nature of personal desert is expressed, for instance, in the case of a husband who has continual love affairs and who recognizes his wife's moral right to have affairs as well, but nevertheless does not feel that she deserves it and is still jealous of her when she has such an affair. President John F. Kennedy, who had many love affairs, was nevertheless quite jealous of his wife Jacqueline when he suspected her of having an affair with the wealthy Greek businessman Aristotle Onassis (whom she later married).
Perceived undeserved situations can be due to impersonal, arbitrary circumstances, rather than to immoral deeds. Thus, it is not immoral for a rich person to win a huge lottery prize or to marry another rich person; nevertheless, many poor people may consider these to be undeserved. In a sense, an artificial decree forcing rich people to marry poor ones would be problematic from a psychological perspective, as the rich person might consider him(her)self to be under compensated and hence to deserve extramarital affairs and other such privileges.
The issue of deservingness plays an important role in love. When we think that our partner does not deserve us, our love will be reduced, and we are likely to look for other partners. The equity theory postulates that those involved in an inequitable romantic relationship consider themselves to be undeserving. This is the case both for the "over-compensated," who feel guilty for receiving more from the relationship than they feel their partner does, as well as for the "under-compensated," who feel indignant at being unappreciated or inadequately treated by their partner.
Involvement in extramarital relationships can sometimes serve as a way of compensating for such inequity. The under compensated may perceive extramarital relationships as something they deserve because their spouse gets more from the marriage than they do. The over-compensated tend to be involved in extramarital relationships (a) to escape the unpleasant state of inequity and (b) to prove to themselves and to their partner that they actually are deserving and attractive to the opposite sex (see Prins, Buunk & VanYperen, "Equity, normative disapproval and extramarital relationships").
In a similar vein, it was found that the person who stands to lose the most is apt to be the least likely to risk ending the relationship by having another sexual partner. Accordingly, if the woman has a higher level of education than her partner, she is more likely to risk the relationship by having a secondary sexual partner than if both members of the couple have equal levels of education (see Forste & Tanfer, "Sexual exclusivity among dating, cohabiting, and married women").
Feeling that we deserve each other is important for a flourishing romantic relationship (see In the Name of Love). In the short term, the inequities might give rise to great admiration and hence may increase love and, even more so, sexual desire. Thus, people who can provide us with social status, such as the rich, the famous, and the powerful, will generate more intense sexual desire and sexual satisfaction.
A survey of hundreds of Italian women indicates that two-thirds found greater sexual satisfaction from "powerful men in socially respected positions"--bosses are perceived to be better in bed (cited in Love Online). In the long term, however, significant inequities become problematic for both sides, whereupon superficial short-term goals (such as being associated with a famous person) become of less importance, and can even reduce the intensity of romantic love. For example, the "higher status" person might begin to show a lack of reciprocity, which will eventually damage the "lower status" person's love and could even generate negative emotions such as envy, jealousy, and anger.
The issue of deservingness is of less impact in cyberspace. The fact that there are fewer practical implications and more positive alternatives weakens the impact of a negative event perceived as undeserved. Nevertheless, when online love is intense, participants may feel that the practical constraints preventing this love from being fulfilled are highly undeserved.
The issue of deservingness is clearly expressed in the following confession: "I was no longer in love with my husband and he deserved much more than I could ever offer him, so I left to give him a chance to love again. My lover is refusing to leave his wife for me, because of the kids, and I continue to love him with all of my heart, mind, body and soul, and yet he cannot make the choice. I too have a daughter, and she was hurt and angry. My life is ruined because of my deep love for this other man. I know what his wife is feeling and I don't hate her, but if she knew how much her husband loved me and how much I love him, wouldn't she rather give him up than keep him?" (Cited in Love Online) As situations like this will become more common in cyberspace, the issue of deservingness will gain greater prominence as well.
Anthony Giddens argues that democracy does not imply a "leveling down," but an elaboration of individuality. Democracy does not necessitate sameness, nor is it the enemy of pluralism. However, "Democracy is an enemy of privilege, where privilege is defined as the holding of rights or possessions to which access is not fair and equal for all members of the community." In the case of romantic relationships, too, no member of the relationship should be privileged above the other; nevertheless, each person constituting the relationship should feel unique. When one partner feels privileged or deserving of more than he/she receives, the relationship is at risk.
There are many circumstances in which one feels to deserve either to replace the partner or to have an additional one. This does not mean, however, that democracy should be applied to love and that love is like linen-often changed, the sweeter. On the contrary, people who are rapidly replacing their partners are often inadequate in their ability to form loving relationships. Many of them are addicted to destructive love relationships, and despite huge efforts on their behalf, they cannot achieve the stability and warmth of healthy, loving relationships.
