dobler33 Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 After being married to a nag who treats you like garbage it is tempting to want to marry June Cleaver. yes, and after being married to a self-absorbed abusive bully it's tempting to want to marry a freakin carrot, but you don't see me proposing in the produce aisle.
Island Girl Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 When men try to make a marriage work with one of these modern and independent women it usually ends up with his balls in her purse and her losing all respect and attraction for him. I have absolutely no sympathy for these "men". They are the ones wanting the woman to handle everything (yes, everything!) for them so they have no responsibility or accountability. They are the ones handing them over on a silver platter, "honey can you put these in your purse please -- they are important to me but I don't want to carry them around or be responsible for them". Most men actually would like a true equal partner but the average modern woman's version of an equal partner means that he does whatever she says and he sits and takes it when she berates him. These men don't want an equal partner -- because they themselves aren't willing to step up to that "equal" plate. He picked her - he chooses to stay- and chooses to deal with the relationship by rolling over and saying "yes dear" over and over again. No one has a gun to his head -- well, in most cases anyway. These women get a raw deal too Woggle. Chances are she thought she was marrying a MAN who would be strong and equally responsible for getting the bills paid and the household taken care of. Then he decides he doesn't want any part of the day to day chores, decisions, child rearing, bill paying, or even having a say in how things go. It is so much easier to just let her handle that, and that, and this, and -- oh, yeah -- EVERYTHING. How much easier is it to just sit back and complain instead of actually doing something about it??!!
Woggle Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Of course it is always the man's fault. No matter what a woman will spin to be the man's fault. That is not how it was in my first marriage but I bet you will find a way to blame me. I did everything and was still made out to be the bad guy. I was even blamed for things that she did to herself that I had nothing to do with. I'm still being blamed for the fact that she's a junkie and I haven't seen her in person since 2006. It's all our fault isn't it?
Island Girl Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Of course it is always the man's fault. No. That is not what I said but it doesn't surprise that is the way you interpret it. There are TWO people in the relationship. Each bears the same amount of responsibility. One for dishing it out and the other for swallowing it and asking for more. No matter what a woman will spin to be the man's fault. Pot meet Kettle Woggle. This is what YOU do. Thankfully I do not operate in such black and whites. There are always shades of gray. In every marriage where there are problems there are two people with plenty of accountability on both sides.
marlena Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Bentnotbroken, I won't copy and paste your post. I'll pin it all by myself instead. It was very well thought out and grounded in truth. Well done! And I would suspect most of the women who were abused by these same H's because they didn't uphold these archaic notions about what a woman is or should be find this article offensive to be trotted out and upheld as a standard of which should be followed. This is one aspect that is often swept under the carpet. These women who were terribly used and abused were not only too frightened to speak up against their abusers but also terrified to go against societal dictates. Some were even brainwahed into truly believing that this was their lot in life. To the OP, Make your husband find a second job to pay for a housekeeper. Put your foot down and tell him that you will not stand for any more verbal or psychological abuse from him. If he can't get his act together, show him the door and tell him in no uncertain terms not to let it slam him in the butt when he makes his final exit. The last thing you need is a man to make your life a living hell.
Taramere Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Girl you betta PREACH This is so true. The scenerio described in that article is a totally white, upper class, Leave It To Beaver, fantasy. The reality is that any woman who tried to live that way would need huge doses of valium to stay sane. Whatever "Leave it to Beaver" is, I'm sure you're right. The only thing I don't agree with is that Ariadne's article paints an upper class scenario. It sounds more like a stereotypical, old fashioned "We might be poor, but we're respectable....and you could eat your dinner off my floor, I'm a proper woman I am...." kind of thing. But yes - again, the kind of scenario that isn't a reality beyond superficial appearances, cosy, nostalgic tv shows and so on. It is insulting really. It assumes that women are so simple that all they need to give their life any sense of purpose is a man who is catered to and a beautiful shell to live in and beautiful children as props. Have you ever read "The Doll's House" by Ibsen? He gives a really good commentary of what happens when the shell starts to crack.
Ariadne Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 When the men come home, the wives are stressed out from having their kids crying all day long because they too busy scrubbing the toilet to play with/take care of the kids. When he gets home, HE needs to relieve her of her parenting duty so she can finally get a moment's break to herself. He gets the ride to and from work, ALONE. She is with the kid from sunrise to sunset. You obviously don't have children. (The poor men, no wonder).
Ariadne Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 You do mean upper middle class & wealthy white women right? Because historically, lower SES's in the white community, 85% of African American communities, Native American communities, Asian communities and Latina communities, the women have always been out of the home working to support their families When I was married, I was a SAHM, and my husband at the time made so little money I don't even know how we made it to the end of the month. When I met him he was making 2.85 dollars an hour!!! (He started gaining more soon after but not much more) But we lived in a one bedroom apartment, paid 500 dollars in rent, and I got to be with my son all day. I was a SAHM till he was 11 years old, somehow I managed to keep it that way, because it was the best for him. I guess if you don't have children there is not much need for a wife to be at home, but if the husband doesn't need (or expects) you to work, then you should treat your husband with kindness once he gets home (and at all times). I pointed out that article because I believe in it myself, and when I read it first I thought that someone had it figured it out. You can't have your husband happy with you with demands, but love and care instead.
marlena Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 (The poor men, no wonder). Poor men. Poor women. It's a tough world for both genders. So, both should work with eachother and not against eachother. No one should have to be a victim. It all boils down to being fair and both partners equally sharing repsonsibilities.
Ariadne Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Poor men. Poor women. It's a tough world for both genders. So, both should work with eachother and not against eachother. No one should have to be a victim. It all boils down to being fair and both partners equally sharing repsonsibilities. Yes, with respect and mutual support. And I agree with sharing responsibilities. In the case of that article, the man has all the responsibility of being the provider. That's more than plenty. Again, that applies more to people with families than just a single couple.
marlena Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 In the case of that article, the man has all the responsibility of being the provider. That's more than plenty. Ariadne, the article does not take about equal sharing of responsibilities. It does not focus on that. Instead it's all about how to bend over backwards to please/serve a man without any mention of what a man should do to please a woman. Can't you see how very one-sided it is?
Ariadne Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Ariadne, the article does not take about equal sharing of responsibilities. It does not focus on that. Instead it's all about how to bend over backwards to please/serve a man without any mention of what a man should do to please a woman. Can't you see how very one-sided it is? No, it's not about bending backwards. Where did you get that idea? It's about being kind to someone coming home tired from working all day. Btw, when I was a SAHM, for me it was a party. No trouble at all.
marlena Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Even if a woman were to do all the things mentioned in the article, this still would not guarantee a happy home/marriage. Many, many men are unappreciative and selfish. As are many women. Not the cleanest home in the world, the brightest smile on your face orthe sexiest lingerie in the Victoria's Secret collection will make a man love and respect you if he just doesn't love and respect you.
grogster Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Even if a woman were to do all the things mentioned in the article, this still would not guarantee a happy home/marriage. Many, many men are unappreciative and selfish. As are many women. Not the cleanest home in the world, the brightest smile on your face orthe sexiest lingerie in the Victoria's Secret collection will make a man love and respect you if he just doesn't love and respect you. Well said, marlena, and uncomfortably true. Many things in life are simply beyond one's control.
marlena Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Many things in life are simply beyond one's control. Yes, of course, there are. What we choose to do about them though is to a great extent within our control, wouldn't you agree? You see, at 24, I was a lot like that woman described in the article. I had to learn the hard way that even my best was not enough. I've missed you, by the way.
Ariadne Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Not the cleanest home in the world, the brightest smile on your face orthe sexiest lingerie in the Victoria's Secret collection will make a man love and respect you if he just doesn't love and respect you. Well, if you are married, hopefully is because you love each other. I'm not sure why a man would marry you if he didn't love you.
grogster Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Yes, of course, there are. What we choose to do about them though is to a great extent within our control, wouldn't you agree? You see, at 24, I was a lot like that woman described in the article. I had to learn the hard way that even my best was not enough. I've missed you, by the way. That's why youth is so wonderful. At 24, we're overflowing with vigor, vitality and enormous illusions of personal power and control. It's a great time until the Great Disillusion begins. I prefer youth's illusions to age's tired wisdom. Good to see you again, too.
Ariadne Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Ohh that might work, because than I wouldn't worry about him soo much and he would be loved, right? Than I can get myself together, because he would be happy and I wouldn't worry about him Hi, Nah, this doesn't apply in your case. This time it is you who should be receiving the treatment from that article because you are a little sick. And maybe hiring some help wouldn't be a bad idea, instead of paying for an extra place for you, but that's for you to decide. I think that after all this time of being pushed by your husband, you probably are having concerns of your own with that situation. Hopefully you'll work it out with him, maybe he is scared that his world is tumbling down with the last events, and he is stressing too. Maybe he wants things the way they were and doesn't want to see the situation as it is because he had it good for a number of years. People are afraid of changes. Especially when the health of a partner is involved.
Ariadne Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 the women have always been out of the home working to support their families, because society... Btw, I don't think women should not work at all, even if they have children. (Unless then can afford it and the husband is ok with it) Just not "so much." That's where the stress comes from. Women can part-time while the children are in school, or help their husbands with his business, or something like that to contribute.
dobler33 Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Btw, I don't think women should not work at all, even if they have children. (Unless then can afford it and the husband is ok with it) Just not "so much." That's where the stress comes from. Women can part-time while the children are in school, or help their husbands with his business, or something like that to contribute. where are these women you're talking about? i don't know any. i'm with bent on this one - you're talking about an upperclass white experience of priveledge, one that i am totally unfamiliar with even as a white woman. my mother had 3 jobs, and we still ate government cheese. this whole "balancing career and mothering" thing is seriously irrelevant for most of the families i work with. many of the mothers i work with are women of color who end up having to take care of the children of wealthy white women and have no choice but to put their own children in government- funded wraparound childcare services. and it's not just them - my husband and i have no children but if we were to try to start a familiy in the city where we live (one of the most expensive in the world) there would be NO WAY either one of us could not work. you are lost in some kind of fantasy world - one that is not only hatefully misogynistic but pretty comprehensively racist and classist as well.
dobler33 Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 That's horse dodo. Don't paint us all with the same brush or men for that matter. It isn't all ways the man's fault. I was 50% responsible for the problems in my marriage. Mr. Messy did his dirt, I did mine. I was financially irresponsible and verbally abusive(out of anger and lack of coping skills)but it doesn't excuse the abuse or the affect the abuse had on him or our kids. I own, he has to own his. WE abused, broke and failed to nurture our marriage. It wasn't all him or all me. He cheated which was the last straw for me. But if I cheated, it may have been the last straw for him. We took turns driving that marriage into the ditch. and right on with this, too, bent. it's not about gender, it's about taking responsibility for your sh*t. most relationships - both homosexual and heterosexual, i'll point out - are riddled with the kind of inculcated, indoctrinated sexism i keep talking about, but in the end it comes down to managing your own damn self.
OpenBook Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 you are lost in some kind of fantasy world - one that is not only hatefully misogynistic but pretty comprehensively racist and classist as well. Sheesh dobler, aren't you being a little harsh here??? I think Ariadne's position is a very valid, thought-out one. And if we could have afforded it at the time, I would have done that exact thing - be a SAHM at least until my D went to kindergarten. Unfortunately it wasn't possible then. But that was the ideal.
Ariadne Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Who gives a flying fish egg if he is okay with it. Well, the great majority of men nowadays are not happy with women not working. It'd take a special man to let the wife be a SAHM and be ok with it. Or else, if he makes so much money that it's not needed.
dobler33 Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 Sheesh dobler, aren't you being a little harsh here??? I think Ariadne's position is a very valid, thought-out one. And if we could have afforded it at the time, I would have done that exact thing - be a SAHM at least until my D went to kindergarten. Unfortunately it wasn't possible then. But that was the ideal. it's not the choice i object to - feminism is all about access to choices. it's ariadne's assertion that this is the "right" way for women to be. that sucks all choice out of the equation. i worked with an older woman many years ago who had been really hurt by friends in the 60's who condemned her for her choice to stay at home and raise a family while her husband worked. i agreed with her - what women for centuries have been fighting for is choice, not imperative. that means that a woman can chose to have her husband's slippers waiting at the door, or she can chose to let him get his own damn slippers. the slippers are not the problem, the idea that what a woman is for is to retrieve them is the problem. does that make sense?
Woggle Posted June 13, 2009 Posted June 13, 2009 I was speaking sarcastically. Of course I don't believe it is always the man's fault but that is how society acts. No matter what wrong a woman does in a marriage she can twist it around to make herself the victim and many people will rally around her. Men these days are damned if they do and damned if they don't. This is why I don't even worry about trying to make women happy.
Recommended Posts