Sexless Marriage

[Le Jacquelope]

As for male bashing...please. Boo-hoo, poor men. They still rule the world, they still dominate sexually in most countries.

And you women still reward male dominance by breeding with alpha dominant males and steadfastly refusing to have anything to do with men who don't want to play that game.

Women are just as much a part of the problem as men, but you're passive; you don't conquer lands and kill people, you don't run major corporations and pollute the environment - you just call upon legions of chest-beating male suitors to do it for you, all in the name of competing for your sexual attention.

When you bash men, you bash yourself. Everything that makes men bad and evil, your foremothers made it that way because they almost universally reject men who are not like that.

 

[SweetErika]

I work full time, bring the majority of the income, do all the shopping and cooking, educated myself on the pleasuring of women. It was all great in the first few years. Then the downward spiral begins. I keep myself in great shape, eat well and am a gentelman. I am learning fast that nice guys finish last.

You sound a lot like my husband, a really quality guy. Yet, after eight years, there's no downward spiral; in fact, it just keeps getting better. Sure, there have been draughts and problems, but the reality is the lack of sex and emotional abuse aren't there because we're a good match. It has nothing to do with being a nice guy, and saying it does is a cop out.

What it may have to do with (speaking generally here, as I don't know you) is not asserting your needs and being an advocate for your own happiness. I think sometimes "nice guys" are associated with passivity, and that's the real issue -- instead of saying, "these are my fundamental needs, and I'd like to work together to meet them because I want this relationship to work out" they sit back and wallow in their misery, maybe trying to change it here and there, but generally letting resentment fester until there's nothing left. Through the inaction of not making it better, whether that means doing everything possible to get the relationship back on track or getting out of the situation, they make themselves finish last. A lot of women certainly do the same, just look at how many stay in really destructive relationships.

 

[past_perfect]

You sound a lot like my husband, a really quality guy. Yet, after eight years, there's no downward spiral; in fact, it just keeps getting better. Sure, there have been draughts and problems, but the reality is the lack of sex and emotional abuse aren't there because we're a good match. It has nothing to do with being a nice guy, and saying it does is a cop out.

What it may have to do with (speaking generally here, as I don't know you) is not asserting your needs and being an advocate for your own happiness. I think sometimes "nice guys" are associated with passivity, and that's the real issue -- instead of saying, "these are my fundamental needs, and I'd like to work together to meet them because I want this relationship to work out" they sit back and wallow in their misery, maybe trying to change it here and there, but generally letting resentment fester until there's nothing left. Through the inaction of not making it better, whether that means doing everything possible to get the relationship back on track or getting out of the situation, they make themselves finish last. A lot of women certainly do the same, just look at how many stay in really destructive relationships.

Very true - it isn't that easy though. The biggest problem is that those men like the self-image they project, as they get positive feedback all the time. Even suppressing one's own needs fits into the "giver" image, some sort of self-congratulatory attitude to one's own ability to harmonize in spite of the misery it is causing. In reality it is just over-emphasizing one part of one's own personality and repressing or ignoring the other. Acknowledging and then asserting one's own needs and that other side of one's personality is even more difficult if the partner isn't involved in the process of self-discovery and change, but confronted with resulting demands which don't seem to fit into their own perception of the partner's personality - especially if they are communicated in an incomprehensible fashion. The resulting confusion tends to cause a retreat and reversion to the status quo ante - until the cycle starts anew or the partner is involved properly in the process.

 

[viosh]

apologies for not posting since I started this thread

I would love to comment on so many posts but I dont know how to do 'multiple quotes' how do you do that - you folk are so clever

anyhoo - here goes.....

prior to marriage we had regular sex, every night, twice, three times etc.

after marriage - same same

I 'think' she wanted to get pregnant and soon did .... so it tapered off during the pregnancy but sex was still regular and good.

Lack of sleep and new kid kind of killed the mood for a while then we decided to go for kid #2, more sex and more often. the inevitable happened and kid # 2 came along.

more sleep deprivation and the like later and sex frequency dropped off

we agreed to try for child # 3 and so it was like honeymoon time all over again .... guess wot - yup kid #3 came along.

i have raised the lack of intamacy time and time again and she has agreed that she could do better and it was for a while however as someone else posted - it didnt last for long

this happens time and time again

I want to stay with her, I still love her.

She can be a real wild cat in bed, sometimes more than I can handle but I do my best *grin*

but nothing starts unless I start it or unless I fill her with booze

we have tried marriage couselling, talking, ignoring, etc

I do more than my fair share of house work, kid minding, send flowers, whisper sweet nothings, bugger me I can't do much else

I appreciate a lot of the great posts I have read here however I think the next step for me will be out of the door. I cant bring myself to do this cos of what it will do to the kids.

Am I being selfish?

so confused

 

[M's girl]

I have no kids of my own. It always surprises me how people SEEM to think children will NOT effect their (sex-)life. They do. Big time! Like any other thing/event/person you have going on or need to spend a fair amount of time on/with.....

The thing with children is: they are there 24/7 for the rest of your life. They don't go away. Never. They take up your time and energy. They are great too, and funny, and cute. But mainly also VERY demanding. More people need to recognize this fact before they even start thinking about numero uno!

 

[NevrGettinOld]

Wow!!!!!!!!!

Thanks for the INCREDIBLE amount of sage and well thought out advice. Even the spirited side arguments help. I'm sure I speak for foot and viosh when I say thanks for the interest and advice. I think all of us in this position can read these posts and take away some valuable insight. I, for one, have a clearer picture of my contribution to the demise of the relationship and feel confident that I can prevent a repeat of that behavior.

With apologies to viosh for steering his thread a little, let me ask this. Let us assume that our current relationships are too far gone. It seems as though our choice is to stay and continue suppressing ourselves for the benefit (?) of the kids or to make the break and deal with it. To those who support staying, how do we completely supress ourselves and what does happen when the nest empties? To those who have made the break, how did you do it? Any tips on how to help heal the kids?

Most of all, thanks to all who chimed in, whoever it was that said this was worth way more than the $100 an hour guy was sure right!

 

[M's girl]

Oké..... again.... I have no children of my own, but I am currently living with a man who does. Two young boys. Cute as can be too. I love them dearly and, thank God, they love me too. They spend every other weekend with us, plus some holidays (they were here for two weeks during the summer holiday for example). We had lots of fun together. We were exhausted too. Partly because we are not used to them being around all the time, so your daily rhythm changes.

But M is devorced. My sister got a devorce in the end and some of my friends did. These are my only experiences I can speak of when I say that I don't believe staying in a marriage for the kids is the only way. It depends. It depends on how well you still get along together as a couple. Children pick up on the bad stuff big time! If you can't make it so they really don't notice, they will, and it will have a huge effect on them. Devorce, however sad, is quite a normal thing these days. Children in school nowadays have at least as many devorced parents in the classroom as parents who are still together. After a devorce it all depends on how the devorced parents deal with the devorce and what they tell (and show!) their children. Don't try to fool them. Don't talk bad about the other parent, however much you hate him/her. It's not the child's fault you two can't get along together.

Best way is to seperate when things really do not work any longer. It's healthier for ALL parties involved. Parents who stay together for the sake of the children only, will have to put up one giant fake act. It does not work. They will be unhappy - both.. and the child(ren) too as a result of that.

I'm all for working things out and talking and trying first. But there comes a point when you just have to call it quits! Best you can do after that is trying to maintain some sort of friendship for the sake of the children.

 

[Eilan]

Parents who stay together for the sake of the children only, will have to put up one giant fake act. It does not work. They will be unhappy - both.. and the child(ren) too as a result of that.

And that's the fucking truth.

Children, even young children, aren't stupid. They know when things aren't right in their parents' relationship. I knew when I was three or four years old that my parents had issues. My mother tried to leave my (abusive) father once and my brother and I cried that we didn't want to leave our dad. I wish she hadn't listened to us, because it wasn't our decision to make.

Hell, I wouldn't even exist if it weren't for my parents thinking that having a child would fix a relationship that was already FUBAR.

My parents' relationship taught me jack shit about the dynamics of healthy relationships. I learned by fucking up my first marriage (WITH help from my ex). But I'm glad that my ex and I can put aside our differences in order to do what's best for our kids.

 

[3113]

And you women still reward male dominance by breeding with alpha dominant males and steadfastly refusing to have anything to do with men who don't want to play that game.

What game are we to play if we don't? For the record, I don't bash males, I bash mysogenistic assholes and, I'm afraid, they're usually male. And for the record, I'm married to an alpha male who doesn't bash, degrade or undermine women. Who doesn't want to play that game (you were, by the way, arguing from a false premis: all alpha males are misogynistic. Not true).

But I've got options. If I wanted to go into politics, I'd have fewer options--not in breeding, but in dealing with mysogenistic assholes. If I wanted to go into science, I'd have fewer options. There's an article about a transexual scientist (female to male) who found that once she was a he, articles that didn't get published did get published. That other scientists who never talked to "Her" would talk to "Him." She wanted to be a scientist. How was she suppose to avoid dealing with mysogenistic teachers (mostly male), mysogenistic collegues important to her work (mostly male), mysogenistic publishers (mostly male)?

You're creating a strange Catch-22 for women. We can only bash misogynistic males if, somehow, every female on earth refuses to deal with such men, no matter what the woman's situation. No matter if they're poor and their lives depend on having a job from a mysogenistic boss, etc.

Let's also clarify this: I'm not defending women who bash men just to bash them. They've got issues. What I am saying is that bad movies that protray men as villians (and in most of those movies there's also a GOOD guy, hello?), aren't necessarily beyond the pale. The world is still misogynistic.

And the really sad part about this whole argument? The most popular shows on television are often misogynistic--men are still the heroes and leaders, and women still the sex objects. Meanwhile, those stupid Lifetime movies, made for women who had a bad divorce and are living in a one-bedroom apartment, getting screwed by their husband, and in need of some vicarious revenge because there is NOTHING they can do in the real world to get justice...those movies barely keep the channel afloat.

Hence, my point. When the Lifetime movies are as popular and making impressions on young women as all those mysoginistic movies and television shows on every other channel, come back to me. I'll get out my sign and protest shoulder to shoulder with you against male bashing. Right now, all I hear is that television shows should be radical and misogynistic to fight rampant "PC-ism!" And so they do. One after another, the same old shit. Two wrongs don't make a right, but the only male bashing I EVER see on television or in movies...is on fucking Lifetime.

 

[footlongish]

She can be a real wild cat in bed, sometimes more than I can handle but I do my best *grin*

but nothing starts unless I start it or unless I fill her with booze

I don't mean to make light of your situation, but you have it much better than I do. I'm just saying.

 

[footlongish]

That would be me. I am a Big Time Giver.

The sad part is that she has now driven the sex drive out of me. Men are dogs, but when told no and no and no again (smacked with the newspaper) after awhile you just give up. I would rather go to the gym in the morning rather than wait for the intimacy that will never come.

That is exactly the way I feel too. I used to lay in bed on Saturday and Sunday mornings and wait for her to wake up and get in some sort of a mood. Actually, I used to initiate but I soon learned not to do that ! Now, when I wake up, before I get aroused and get tempted, I get out of bed and do something. Sometimes I masturbate while she sleeps. Othertimes I work out. Sunday morning has become my workout time. I've kind of forgotten that couples are probably amorous with each other on Sunday morning. That is sad. Its gone that far.

 

[Bandit58]

There are so many reasons--and that's the problem, after all. If there was one, people could make a pill or go into a program to cure it. But given how many there are, it's hard to know exactly which one is affecting the woman and how to cure it, especially if she's not being open.

Among the possibilities:
1) The man may not try to pleasure her. It might be old faithful, he ruts and gets off and leaves her unfulfilled. Alternately, and frankly, the husband may not be a good lover, but the wife doesn't want to tell him that. So sex is boring and unsatisfying and she'd rather be reading.

I'll add that there are some women who still enter into marriage quite naive about sex--who have never had an orgasm or real sexual pleasure. If their husbands make little to no effort to find out what arouses them, then these women can go through years of marriage thinking sex isn't pleasant, just a chore. They're ignorant of the possiblities, and the husband, satified with the status quo or just unexperimental, may not have tried the one thing that will work on this particular woman. Like maybe she needs anal sex. Or maybe she needs to tie him up and take charge.

It's amazing how unaware people are not only of different fetishes, but of differences in the human body. They think people are all the same and what works on one will work on all. So a husband may assume that oral sex and then a missonary position works on all women, and he may give it his very best effort every time. But perhaps this woman needs her nipples pinched and to be taken from behind. We're all different.

We can blame the woman for not saying anything, but then, she may not know anything. She may be very unaware of her own needs and wants.

2) There may be chemical changes involved, hormones or depression. She just can't get aroused or horny. In this case, outside help is really needed. She's not trying to frustrate him, but she's miserable, trapped in her head and in her emotions and she can't escape it.

3) As mentioned, differences in sex drive. His may be naturally high, hers naturally low. And, as mentioned, she might start off by accomidating him in the early part of the relationship, maybe thinking he'll slow down or she'll speed up, and then when that doesn't happen she finally stops accomodating him.

Which, just to add, I think is one of the worst ways to go as it's dishonest on her part (or vice versa is the wife has the high sex drive and the husband's is low). A person needs to admit where their sex drive is to the partner and not to expect it (or their partner's) to change. To do so is to delude not only the partner, but one's self.

I'll add also that it must be far harder on a guy to have a woman he can't keep up with then for a woman to have a more sexual man. Men are, afterall, expected to be more sexual and women to passively accept that. It must really hit the manly ego to have a woman that makes him feel inadequate.

4) There may be a shit load of other problems in the marriage and the wife is displacing. She feels neglected or unloved, he doesn't listen to her or pay attention to her, he's being an asshole and refuses to see that. And however she's telling him (or not telling him) about the problems, he's not hearing it. So, in true passive-aggressive fashion, she punishes him and gets her point across by refusing sex.

This is a mutual problem. The husband has stopped listening to the wife, leaving her frustrated and confused, and so the wife communicates by withholding sex, but that way doesn't get the message across either, it just leaves the husband frustrated and confused. End result: two frustrated and confused people.

Again, professional help is needed--a mediator not necessarily a therapist to get both sides to listen. Possibly to get both sides to talk to each other as many women aren't aware the men aren't mind readers.

Those are just some of the most common possiblities and why it's a frequent problem on both sides. Finally and in the end, it's possible that these two people where never as compatable as they thought, and I don't mean sexually as that can be worked around. I mean emotionally, mentally, etc. Sometimes, we just marry the wrong person. Alternately, sometimes we marry the right person, but they change radically over time and become the wrong person.

1) When I got married 28 years ago I was very ignorant about sex and he was my first partner. I naively thought things would get better once we married but they did not. He was very selfish and of course I had no idea what gave me pleasure.....I didn't even have an orgasm until I'd been married 3 years and that was through masturbation.

2) After second child came along I had post natal depression for most of her first year. I actually don't remember the first six months of her life. I switched everything off including my sex drive. I went to the doctor and told him I wasn't coping, didn't get much help there (it was in the late 80s). It took years to come back out of that and by then I was feeling very trapped and miserable.

3 & 4) He would guilt me into having sex. He never touched me unless it was for sex. He told me there was something wrong with me, I was "broken". He took me for granted, put me down and my self esteem was at rock bottom. I lost my rose coloured glasses a long time ago. I was existing in a marriage with someone I didn't love, who never showed affection and the kids and me came second to his damn farm. We never had a holiday for 10 years before I left. The kicker came when my son went to university and I realised that it would be only 4 more years and we'd be a pair of strangers living in the same house. It took another year and a stomach ulcer for me to make the move (and one put down too many).

I'm definitely not broken. I do regret the wasted years though. I definitely married the wrong person. Now I'm with the right one

 

[viosh]

...........................................

 

[Le Jacquelope]

What game are we to play if we don't? For the record, I don't bash males, I bash mysogenistic assholes and, I'm afraid, they're usually male. And for the record, I'm married to an alpha male who doesn't bash, degrade or undermine women. Who doesn't want to play that game (you were, by the way, arguing from a false premis: all alpha males are misogynistic. Not true).

LOL, you haven't met
a) conservative groups (namely, all those women who opposed the Equal Rights Amendment)
b) Ann Coulter

have you?

But I've got options. If I wanted to go into politics, I'd have fewer options--not in breeding, but in dealing with mysogenistic assholes. If I wanted to go into science, I'd have fewer options. There's an article about a transexual scientist (female to male) who found that once she was a he, articles that didn't get published did get published. That other scientists who never talked to "Her" would talk to "Him." She wanted to be a scientist. How was she suppose to avoid dealing with mysogenistic teachers (mostly male), mysogenistic collegues important to her work (mostly male), mysogenistic publishers (mostly male)?

So she ran head on into the good old boys' club and instead of taking your wrath out on them, you say it's okay for women to take their wrath out on the general male population which also couldn't break through those ceilings because those same good old boys are making us all redundant by offshoring?

Bill Clinton cheated on his wife and sexually harassed several women. Yet Hillary didn't do squat. If you, as a woman, denounce the Clinton couple for that crap... you'd be the first that I've seen.

That's the problem - when you run up face to face with a real misogynist who's taking your rights away, it seems for some reason they still get to linger around afterwards because some woman (see: HILLARY!!!) who could have kicked him in his butt, didn't, but wait, let's make up for that by taking it out on the average male on the street.

By the way, the corporate glass ceiling is tough to deal with, but women business owners are very successful, more so than new businesses started by men. Oh and speaking of being discriminated against... how many women up in your family tree were dragged out of their homes and shipped off to Japan, Korea, Germany or Vietnam against their will, and then abandoned and forgotten in foreign POW camps? Did you, by any chance, sign up for selective service? No? Then allow me to get to the next point: At least the Government doesn't sacrifice your life in wartime. Of course this might partially explain also why the poor oppressed women of America outlive their dominating all powerful all oppressing male counterparts.

Long after we've died from the absolute stress of surviving on our own and from breaking our backs to support our wives, you'll be still alive to complain about how oppressed you are. Yeah yeah, I know. The stress that men go through isn't important. We're just men. One dies, there's another to replace him. Just as long as there's some guy to buy you expensive diamond rings made at the hands of a whole lot of dead Africans, it's all good!

Ever wonder why more men than women are homeless? Oh yeah, we're just men. Nevermind.

You're creating a strange Catch-22 for women. We can only bash misogynistic males if, somehow, every female on earth refuses to deal with such men, no matter what the woman's situation. No matter if they're poor and their lives depend on having a job from a mysogenistic boss, etc.

Yeah. Kinda. I'm asking you ladies to take a teensy weensy initiative in rejecting these men for dates and marriage and instead try out one of those quiet, tee totalling, smoke/drug free, safe driving, go out of his way to avoid conflict males who listens all day long to laides complain about how their men are so mean and evil to them and tells him "you're a nice guy, BUT".

You're never going to get anywhere if you keep rewarding misogynistic, knuckle dragging brutes with sex, children and relationships. If you wish to call that catch-22 then fine, be the perpetual victim. I'm proposing that women take action and turn these men away when it comes to romance, but if all that can be done is screech that men are all pigs, then okay. But remember... one path leads to alleviating the problem, the other leads to perpetuating it, rewarding it, and breeding it.

Let's also clarify this: I'm not defending women who bash men just to bash them. They've got issues. What I am saying is that bad movies that protray men as villians (and in most of those movies there's also a GOOD guy, hello?), aren't necessarily beyond the pale. The world is still misogynistic.

Movies that portray all men as villains, buffoons and losers, while portraying women as the put upon heroes, are all too numerous and all too boring. There are tons of movies like Chicago which glorify women killing their husbands and getting away with it, or movies like Waiting to Exhale where some woman lights a guy's car on fire for cheating (ok, that's just movies... how about Lionel Richie's wife throwing hot grits in his face in real life for cheating on her.. imagine if a man did that in America and got away with it?).

How many movies can you list for me that show men burning up a woman's car and then being portrayed as a hero? Oh, and I'll help you on this one. "From Dusk To Dawn" featured George Clooney, his friend raped and killed a woman, and he let the guy live instead of putting him down on the spot. He was portrayed as a hero despite supporting his rapist murderer friend (who later died, but that's beside the point). I never want anything Clooney or Tarantino-related in my household.

But then again, my motto is, so many races, two genders, one law to bind 'em all. You won't see me making excuses for men who behave like that. You won't see me making excuses for oppression of women, either. (Yet for some reason, because I oppose special treatment for anyone, that is somehow 'misogynistic'.)

And the really sad part about this whole argument? The most popular shows on television are often misogynistic--men are still the heroes and leaders, and women still the sex objects.

That's not so much true as it used to be. There are a lot of heroines out there now. Exactly who was rescuing Halle Barry in "Catwoman" or "X-Men III"? The most popular shows on television are just as often misandrist.

But one thing I will say, on one hand you have the male bashing on TV, commercials and in movies, and on the other hand? The "coddle the middle aged male" craze. Some of these shows make me feel like I'm not a real man unless I start losing hair and chase 18 year olds. Well, no it doesn't but it sure as hell tries to. My favorite station KWOD 106 just dumped its balanced music schedule for the midlife crisis crowd. I did a whole paper about the trend recently in college.

Meanwhile, those stupid Lifetime movies, made for women who had a bad divorce and are living in a one-bedroom apartment, getting screwed by their husband, and in need of some vicarious revenge because there is NOTHING they can do in the real world to get justice...those movies barely keep the channel afloat.

Are you talking about Desperate Housewives? Dear GOD, those women are taking their men to the cleaners!

Have you not seen all the myriads of movies, sitcoms and commercials that portray men as bumbling idiots? Name one that doesn't and I'll name you two that do. And you know what? I'd give my right arm, when I was single, to be portrayed as a sex object. Bring it the hell on. A seething mass of women groping and pawing for a man? Just call me bombs away, because I'd be taking a dive. Yeah yeah yeah, I know, men and women are different, and there's no way I'd want to see any woman subjected to that.

In real life? If I were a teenaged male now, I'd just as soon have forms signed in triplicate by any woman I'm going to have sex with, just to make sure everyone knows she's not being exploited, if you get my drift.

Hence, my point. When the Lifetime movies are as popular and making impressions on young women as all those mysoginistic movies and television shows on every other channel, come back to me. I'll get out my sign and protest shoulder to shoulder with you against male bashing. Right now, all I hear is that television shows should be radical and misogynistic to fight rampant "PC-ism!" And so they do. One after another, the same old shit. Two wrongs don't make a right, but the only male bashing I EVER see on television or in movies...is on fucking Lifetime.

You know, you can't preach equal rights on one hand, and then look down your nose at discrimination against men on the other. It's like Jesse Jackson saying "Welcome to Hymietown" and someone making the excuse "He can't be racist, he's black".

If your point is that you don't care about anti-male behavior because there's anti-female behavior running rampant, you don't give any legitimacy at all to the concept of equal treatment because no one is practicing it. You might as well hunker down and say "this is the battle of the sexes and I'm for my side, to heck with equality, my wide right or wrong". Which is, by the way, a jingoism perpetuated by dominant good old boy males.

If you want to oppose what "men do", don't then do what men do. Show by example.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

What game are we to play if we don't? For the record, I don't bash males, I bash mysogenistic assholes and, I'm afraid, they're usually male. And for the record, I'm married to an alpha male who doesn't bash, degrade or undermine women. Who doesn't want to play that game (you were, by the way, arguing from a false premis: all alpha males are misogynistic. Not true).

But I've got options. If I wanted to go into politics, I'd have fewer options--not in breeding, but in dealing with mysogenistic assholes. If I wanted to go into science, I'd have fewer options. There's an article about a transexual scientist (female to male) who found that once she was a he, articles that didn't get published did get published. That other scientists who never talked to "Her" would talk to "Him." She wanted to be a scientist. How was she suppose to avoid dealing with mysogenistic teachers (mostly male), mysogenistic collegues important to her work (mostly male), mysogenistic publishers (mostly male)?

You're creating a strange Catch-22 for women. We can only bash misogynistic males if, somehow, every female on earth refuses to deal with such men, no matter what the woman's situation. No matter if they're poor and their lives depend on having a job from a mysogenistic boss, etc.

Let's also clarify this: I'm not defending women who bash men just to bash them. They've got issues. What I am saying is that bad movies that protray men as villians (and in most of those movies there's also a GOOD guy, hello?), aren't necessarily beyond the pale. The world is still misogynistic.

And the really sad part about this whole argument? The most popular shows on television are often misogynistic--men are still the heroes and leaders, and women still the sex objects. Meanwhile, those stupid Lifetime movies, made for women who had a bad divorce and are living in a one-bedroom apartment, getting screwed by their husband, and in need of some vicarious revenge because there is NOTHING they can do in the real world to get justice...those movies barely keep the channel afloat.

Hence, my point. When the Lifetime movies are as popular and making impressions on young women as all those mysoginistic movies and television shows on every other channel, come back to me. I'll get out my sign and protest shoulder to shoulder with you against male bashing. Right now, all I hear is that television shows should be radical and misogynistic to fight rampant "PC-ism!" And so they do. One after another, the same old shit. Two wrongs don't make a right, but the only male bashing I EVER see on television or in movies...is on fucking Lifetime.

Odd. All of the TV shows that I see bash men. Which is why I don't bother watching sitcoms anymore. I got tired of it. It's why Everybody Loves Raymond lost my interest very quickly, as did "Yes, Dear", "According To Jim", etc. I don't bother watching most sitcoms anymore. They make me want to vomit, not laugh. Maybe we're not watching the same TV shows. I watch mostly CNN, Sleuth (a relatively new channel for old detective shows), History Channel, Discovery, C-Span, and other channels of that sort. I also watch Premium networks like HBO and Showtime. Network TV lost me for good, aside from "Will and Grace", "My Namie Is Earl" and some documentary shows.

 

[NevrGettinOld]

moving forward

as if i haven't gotten enough help so far, i want to ask for just a little bit more. can anyone offer some suggestions on how to make the split go as smoothly as possible? i'd also like any tips anyone has on helping my kids with the whole thing. and thanks again for all the advice.

 

[footlongish]

"and getting no reward it leads to such depressive moods. Just saying if you keep going to the well sometime its gotta dry up."

We must live parallel lives. I went to counselling because I couldn't concentrate at work anymore. I didn't realize that my relationship stuff was affecting me like it was. And now that I realize it and I'm not burying it, I have to deal with it.

The best way to leave ? I dunno. I'm there myself, same place you are.

 

[footlongish]

"Odd. All of the TV shows that I see bash men."

I don't want to get into the argument that you guys have going, but I noticed that too about a year ago. Every sitcom is based on a stupid man. Can't fix the sink, screws up relationships with women, clumsy, out of shape, etc. Somehow its OK to bash men, even though some of us are pretty darn good people.

 

[SweetErika]

as if i haven't gotten enough help so far, i want to ask for just a little bit more. can anyone offer some suggestions on how to make the split go as smoothly as possible? i'd also like any tips anyone has on helping my kids with the whole thing. and thanks again for all the advice.

I think individual and family counseling can really benefit kids during and after a breakup because it often gives them a safe place to share and a neutral party to listen and support them. I remember (at 10) feeling caught in the middle, like I had to be careful to not upset either parent by saying the wrong thing or bringing up an emotional topic, and counseling helped with that. I wish we'd had more, both as a family and individually, and my parents definitely should have made and stuck to a plan to be civil to each other to make it easier on me.

My mom encouraged me to go back in the years following the divorce when issues came up, and as I started dating we went together to talk about the things that led to the divorce and how I could avoid falling into the same pattern and dating the wrong men in an effort to make up for what I'd missed for so many years (which I had started to do already and continued for another year or so, but that counseling played a big role in staying with and marrying the right guy).

I would have liked:
- My parents to have ended it sooner, before there was so much animosity

- My parents to get along when they dealt with each other (most of the animosity was over money; when my dad didn't have to pay anymore, all was fine )

- My dad to at least pretend he wanted custody for my sake, and really work to be/stay involved in my life

- My dad to not complain or argue over child support and helping me with college, especially given that he was far better off financially

- My dad to have talked with me about dating and his relationship as it progressed, instead of just introducing me to the woman he was serious with, and me discovering she'd moved in on my own

Yeah, there's definitely a pattern here...my dad did the overwhelming majority of things wrong, and made it a lot more difficult than it had to be. He was petty and incredibly selfish, and our relationship was irreparably harmed because of it, sadly. He's not a particularly great guy anyway, but he could/should have conducted himself better during and after for my sake.

Hopefully my loss can be others' gain, though.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

"Odd. All of the TV shows that I see bash men."

I don't want to get into the argument that you guys have going, but I noticed that too about a year ago. Every sitcom is based on a stupid man. Can't fix the sink, screws up relationships with women, clumsy, out of shape, etc. Somehow its OK to bash men, even though some of us are pretty darn good people.

Uh, no, your grandfather probably slapped a girlfriend once. You're evil down to the 7th generation. Evil, I say!

 

[NevrGettinOld]

thanks...

erika

..thats exactly the kind of thing i am looking for. i appreciate it.

 

[CutieMouse]

as if i haven't gotten enough help so far, i want to ask for just a little bit more. can anyone offer some suggestions on how to make the split go as smoothly as possible? i'd also like any tips anyone has on helping my kids with the whole thing. and thanks again for all the advice.

My ex and I spent 9 months in weekly counseling before I decided it was over. We continued to have "divorce therapy" for the next few months to focus on how to co-parent the children and continue to work together for their best interest (we have 5, the youngest was only a few months old when I decided it was over). I don't care how much people dislike therapy- nothing will replace time spent with a *good* mediator, learning to keep the children's needs first.

Whatever sadness, bitterness, etc you have with regards to your partner, you both have a responsibility to continue to put the children's well being ahead of your animosity- for the rest of their lives.

I am very thankful we did therapy before, and after I decided to leave. It hasn't been easy, but I do feel it has greatly minimized the impact on the children. My oldest says we are 'divorced-light'; they live with my ex and his girlfriend (they make 5 times what I do, and there is a 2 adult household- it seemed a logical decision), I see them as often as possible (we're in different states), and everyone is happy and thriving- children and parents, alike.

 

[NevrGettinOld]

thanks

thank you cutie, this is the kind of thing i need to prepare

any other suggestions?

 

[akatrex]

as if i haven't gotten enough help so far, i want to ask for just a little bit more. can anyone offer some suggestions on how to make the split go as smoothly as possible? i'd also like any tips anyone has on helping my kids with the whole thing. and thanks again for all the advice.

The best thing that happen for my boys and I was the judge ordered "Shared Parenting Classes". I have a Bi Polar ex wife. The class teaches the both of you how to be parents rather than adversaries.

The most dangerous part of any divorce is the money. Many (generally) repeat "GENERALLY" - women equate the amount of visitation with the amount of money they get. The less visitation the father has the larger amount of money the women receives. A major problem with the family law system today.

The absolute best thing you can do is stay involved in the children's lives.
Every opportuity you get, spend it with your kids.

 

[M's girl]

Best thing you can do is make sure you both think and know the relationship is over. Then also both decide and understand that from then on (the devorce) you are both on your own again, and the only thing that you need to worry about together is the children.

Of course, it's great when two people can go somewhat beyond that and maintain a friendship. But it rarely works that way. My sister managed while her ex-husband has had a few relationships after their devorce. I'm not saying they are best friends, but they spend birthdays and such (also their own, not only the children's) together and even the occasional new year's eve and other holidays... with new partner(s) present! I think that's great, but it takes 4 adults to make that work.

Most of the time and with most people it does NOT work. My M is devorced and tried to maintain some kind of friendship/relationship with his ex for the sake of the children. That's what she said she wanted too, but instead it only gave her opportunities to bash him and frustrate him. I would have gone along with it (hey, I'm not eager to spend time with ex-wives but I'm old and wise enough to know that when you date a man with young children it can be part on the deal!) but it just was not doable. Things got so bad, after we tried and tried and swallowed our pride and words MANY times so the children would not notice her animosity, that we finally sort of gave up and decided it was best for ALL concerned to keep the contact with his ex to an as minimum degree as necessary/possible. It's not how we wanted it, but there seems to be no other way.

Basically his ex wife did not move on yet after two years. It's not even like she wants him back. She just cannot accept that he has moved on and the children like me very much too.

Maybe it does not matter but I want to add that she got everything after the devorce (he was literally left with his own stereo, TV-set and a bed, she took the rest), including all his money and the car she bought with his money too. She has the children and he only gets to see them every other weekend and she does not turn to him (us) when she needs someone to take care of them when she needs a babysitter in between those weekends (we live less than 10 km apart from her and the children).... He does not get to say anything about how the children are raised nowadays, but she complains ALL the time about things we do (and don't do) with the children. She gets a more than decent amount of child support (I heard someone mention that that would be related to how much a man gets to see his children, well, not in M's case..) and still nothing he ever does (we do) is ever good enough. It's killing, especially for M. Very frustrating. I also want to add that M did not leave her for me (because if that would have been the case, I could understand her anger and bitterness somewhat) but they decided to get a devorce after many years of fighting and hurting. It was a mutual decision, made when neither one of them had a new partner or was looking.... It is true, however, that M found me around the time their devorce was finally official (almost a year after they had decided to split up and they no longer shared the same bed)....

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I hope people can be wise and sometimes put their own issues aside for the sake of the children. They are NOT asking for all this. They are the ones getting hurt, no matter what, because they ALLWAYS want their parents to be together at such a young age. I'm not saying all parents should stay together because of that, because when things are bad, the children are better off when each one is living his/her own life and being happy. But if you decide that that's how it's going to be, then move on!

Uhm.... rant over