to have called my DS a cocklodger?

[Bogeyface]

DH says I was being harsh.

I say that unless he is told that he should pack in taking the piss just because she has a job and he hasnt (not for want of trying, there is no issue there) he will carry on doing it and the girl is adores will dump him.

He was very defensive about the fact that once again, she paid for their food shopping and he paid nothing, but still had money for some D&D bollocks. I got really angry with him and pointed out that there is nothing guaranteed to put her off him more than him taking her and her money for granted. I pointed out that if (as he claims) she is happy to pay then he should "pay her back" by making sure he does as much of the cooking and chores as he can without help (he has mild cerebal palsy but is capable of doing many things. Imagine he was born with only one arm but that that one arm worked perfectly).

Dh, as I say, was saying that I should keep out of it and I was being harsh. But I dont want him to fuck this up for the sake of thoughtlessness, which I do believe it is, not dont deliberately. And he made a point of saying today that he had given her some money but she insisted she didnt want it and he insisted she have it, "So I am not a cocklodger......OKAAAY?" :o

I think like clue is in the name. Someone who behaves like a lodger (having his meals cooked and getting hie bed changed and skidmarks cleaned by someone else) but the only rent he pays is with his cock.

Cocklodger is a foul and hypocritical term used by certain women on MN. I have yet to see a GF or wife who relies on her BF/husbands generosity be termed a cuntlodger, although that kind of relationship is still far commoner.

Every relationship is unique and, as long as both parties are happy within it, it is hard to term it exploitation. It would be nice to think that your son's GF enjoys his company, intellectual stimulation, sex etc enough to think that the financial support is a fair exchange, at least until he gets a job, which, by the sound of it, he is trying to get.

Leave them alone and they will learn their own lessons.

:o Cuntlodger.

multiple possibilities

larrygrylls, whilst you may not have seen the female equivalent of "cocklodger" you clearly can't have been on the SAHM threads where a woman who stays at home looking after the house and family is accused of not contributing.

Anyhow, I think it bears pointing out to the OPs DS that he needs to ensure he is contributing in some way to the relationship. It doesn't have to be financial.

I don't think it's too bad, it depends on the relationship you have with ds! Insults are fair game in my family, they are meant and taken in jest. And if you said 'stop acting like a cocklodger' then it's not like you said he was one.

All a bit dramatic on here today!

Anyway it's not a real word, first time I heard it today.

Soup,

Why? Surely that is up to an indivdual couple? There are some people who like being dependent and some who like to be depended on. If they get together and it works for them, what is the harm? Not all people are identical.

Hmm, as for those SAHM threads, it is normally the stupid husband who accuses the SAHM of not contributing and MN who explains that running a household and childcare is a BIG contribution. Your typical "cuntlodger" would be a SAHM whose children are now at school, who has plenty of help in the home and spends her days beautifying, playing tennis, having coffees etc. You see I have no problem with that (or the other way around) as long as both partners are happy within whatever structure they have negotiated. It is only where one partner is trying to impose a structure that the other partner is unhappy with and is actually being exploited that it becomes an issue. And, in this thread, I don't see that being the case.

No, don't just substitute it for arsehole! You really need to find a better way of communicating with your family, or a perfectly valid point will get lost in a barrage of insults. You have an apology to make.

"it is normally the stupid husband who accuses the SAHM of not contributing"

No, I was referring to other mumsnetters.

I have been giving this too much some thought.

There is an old-fashioned term "kept woman" (also "kept man") which meant a woman (or man!) who did not have children to look after but who was in a relationship with a partner, which by mutual agreement was one which was financially one-sided. The relationship being understood by most onlookers as, yes, perhaps equated with prostitution in a way but because there was actual affection/love involved not a purely financial transaction, thus prostitution didn't quite fit it.

Prostitution is, as we all know, a transaction based on money for sex, no affection involved or expected.

A cocklodger situation is to my mind, one in which a women begins a romantic relationship with a man, and a decision is made by the couple to become live-in partners, to pool finances together and to live together. To her dismay however she discovers that it does not work like that, he rarely contributes and she is left with more expense and one more mouth to feed. He, if he was sprayed with a truth potion and made to be completely honest, might own up to being "a bit of a kept man hur hur hur" but he isn't because his partner did not consent to "keep" him, he has conned her into it. Which means he is a cocklodger.

I would say that the female equivalent would probably be "gold digger," actually, even though that term originated with someone after a rich man, it still applies to someone in any relationship where they are also making a financial gain, and would probably not be in that relationship if they had to contribute more.

Hang on - you've been given diff information here. It means a bloke who relies on his girlfriend to pay the bills, and doesn't pull his weight. Which sounds about right. And good for you saying so. If you don't show your disapproval - he'll be the unhappier when she leaves him...

Not getting into the meaning of the terminology, but leave his relationship to him unless he asks for your advice, if he listens too closely to you his GF will start calling him a mummy's boy, and he won't be able to escape being called names.

Leave them to it. If he turns up at yours complaining, by all means call him what you will, but otherwise, leave him to it, let him learn (or not) on his own.

I assume he's an adult?

Maybe the way you phrased it was off but the sentiment was right. I split up with my bf of 10 years over this exact behaviour and it knocked him for six as he really didn't realise he'd been doing anything wrong (just that I was obsessed with money like all women . I'm well shot and don't regret splitting up for one minute but if his parents had told him what he was doing I think he could have dealt with it much better.

I think you should back off and let him live his own life , even if it means making a few mistakes along the way.

If my son did this I don't think I'd call him a cocklodger but would tell him i didn't think he was pulling his weight, I'd feel the same if my daughter behaved like this.
I think it's a useful word as it makes you realise how parasitic blokes who do this regularly are. There isn't really an equivalent word for women. Whore isn't an equivalent as money doesn't change hands. "Kept woman" possibly.
I would never describe someone who did childcare and all the domestic drudgery with these terms though, they are contributing to the household. It is just for lazy folk who neither work nor do childcare or housework.

urban dictionary cocklodger

where did the "whore" definition come from???

So Op got a roasting she didn't fully deserve a cocklodger is as she thought it was!

"I think it's a useful word as it makes you realise how parasitic blokes who do this regularly are. There isn't really an equivalent word for women. Whore isn't an equivalent as money doesn't change hands. "Kept woman" possibly."

Kept woman/Kept man
Cocklodger/Cuntlodger

Personally, I prefer the first pair but if cocklodger is a "useful word", why shy from its etymological equivalent?

When we get lots of men posting on dadsnet about how their partners won't pay towards rent or bills, despite having a job or the time/capacity to earn money, and how they expect to have their cooking/washing/maintenance done for them by their male partners, and how they won't lift a finger to look after their own children and expect their male partners to bear this entire burden - then we can think about coming up with a female equivalent.

Uh, yeah, of course I do.

That was not implied by what I said at all.

Men do it more often than women because traditionally women were expected to do all of the housework/childcare. Some of today's men were brought up with the attitude that the woman should do it all, adding financing the arrangement to the list of things women should do is no biggie because they have been raised to have little respect for women.

Not all men, not even most men, but more men than women.

point being, that if a woman lived in a man's house, where he earned the money, she would be expected to clean/cook to earn her keep.

If a man lives in a woman's house where she earns the money, the man should be expected to clean/cook to earn his keep.

If they don't then they're cocklodgers/cuntlodgers/spongers

"That was not implied by what I said at all."

Nope, it was not implied, it was said pretty explicitly. Go to any David Lloyd or equivalent inside some of the nicer suburbs and you will find a large population of ladies of leisure. Clearly they have plenty of paid help around the home, their children are at school and they have many free hours to wile away playing tennis, having coffees, using the gym etc.

As I have said, I have no problem with this and I am sure their husbands are happy that they can enjoy themselves. However, what is objectionable is to coin an offensive term for the small minority of useless men.