to beg women with lazy sexist arsehole DHs not to have more DCs with them

[BeeInYourBonnet]

Apologies as I'm sure this must have been done before, but some of the threads recently have been SO depressing. I've been on MN 8 years, and it never ceases to amaze me what total fucking arseholes some women are married to. These manchilds are pathetic.

I want to cry when I read that some poor woman is pg with no 3, 4 or 5, and admits that her DH has never helped with a single night wake-up, has hardly changed a nappy, provides no support emotionally or practically, is financially abusive, the list goes on....

I know its more complicated than this, but I just want to scream 'stop having DCs with these complete bastards' 'stop showing them that's its OK to check out of family life'

although some posters in this thread obviously think that in that scenario, DD should wait around for the twat to change his ways, because it would be more feminist and not victim blaming

sparkly my ignorant, crap post came from someone who was the product of such a relationship.

Why my mother kept having children I will never know, id have been quite happy not being born. As I said, it's the children which end up suffering.

Dahlen, the thread title is not about stopping women with arsehole partners from having children with them in the first place, it's about them going on to have more children with same arsehole.

Which is where nomnom's post about multiple partners, having the child you want and then kicking partner out, is also not relevant.

It's not about failing to foresee that he might turn useless when the first baby is born.

The OP was about women who are on baby no 3 or 4 with the same arsehole.

Now I would imagine if the partner is violent and abusive the woman might not have much choice about this: besides, there is plenty of evidence that living with a violent partner messes with your head and makes it harder to see clearly.

But if he's just a lazy arsehole in general, it's harder to see. Unless he is a rapist and you are too scared to give him away, having several babies is actually optional.

The trouble is, if you believe the statistic that 80% of domestic chores and childcare is still done by women, then you either have to believe that 80% of men are sexist twats (I don't) or that society still culturally reinforces the notion that these are primarily female tasks.

We are all culturally conditioned to some extent, and to some extent we can't avoid contributing to it either (e.g. maternity leave and paternity leave being in no way comparable).

There are an awful lot of very nice, non-sexist, thoroughly decent men out there who would walk over hot coals for their DP/Dw but who still expect her to do more than her fair share of housework simply because that's how they were brought up and they've never been taught to question it. And why would they? Cleaning adverts are aimed primarily at women. Baby magazines are aimed at women. Throw in a woman raised in a similar way and the cultural norms remain unchallenged and this couple can actually be happy.

The trouble is that while that particular couple may be happy, it creates the environment in which entitled arseholes are able to flourish.

cory - I'll repeat a bit of my post and expand on it to make it clearer.

How many of you mystified by this situation would have left your DP/DH when on maternity leave with say a 3-month-old child in tow?

By the time the child is a little older and she's in a position to start redressing the balance, she has become numbed to the unfairness because she's had to become so in order to stand living with that vulnerability.

This is the key - in coping, you become inured. You fail to see the situation as it really is, creating an alternative reality in which he does love you really, or he will be different with this child...

DreamingBohemian, yes logically the answer is "choose a nice man" but until after the feminist revolution, when all men are nice, women can only choose from the pool of available ones.
Not that they knowingly choose shit men - they just turn out to be shit, and then, well there you are.
I think there is a lot of sense on this thread but there are a few aspects of it that I find disquieting: the emphasis on women's behaviour (when there would be no abused women, mothers or otherwise, if abusers didn't abuse); and the "don't have children till everything is perfect" idea, which is deeply problematic and ties in with a notion of delayed gratification which for some people is just "somewhere over the rainbow"

"although some posters in this thread obviously think that in that scenario, DD should wait around for the twat to change his ways, because it would be more feminist and not victim blaming" Erm no. Because he is unlikely to change his ways. What we aren't doing is blaming women for staying or for having more children. This shouldn't be about women's choices but about men's choices.

What we want to do is stop future generations of men to think that are entitled to treat women with a lack of respect. And what we want are safe, supportive and more accessible ways for women to leave relationships (or even better abusive men to be removed from relationships) without the stigma of victim-blaming. Because even when a woman leaves she gets blamed.

I don't think you need to wait to have kids until everything is perfect, but wouldn't you say having a decent partner is kind of fundamental? It's not the same as having a nice house or lots of money or whatever.

I disagree that all these men seem nice and then turn out to be shit. Yes, in some cases this is definitely true. A lot of abuse starts in pregnancy. But most of my friends in stupid relationships, there were big red flags all over the place, certainly by the time kids were a consideration.

I'm not saying I'm perfect, I've had stupid relationships myself btw. I wish I could go back in time and kick my own ass.

I had children 25 years ago, I like to think that if I was young today and able to read threads like this I'd have woken up and made different choices in life.

I was just naive and gave no thought to the longer-term implications

Why do so many women end up with lazy, selfish arseholes??? The obvious answer is that there are so many of them, it's all about the numbers. If 30% (I'm being far too generous there, but for the sake of argument) of men are lazy, selfish arseholes then around 30% of women have to either be single or be with a lazy, selfish arsehole. Most women are brainwashed/manipulated/lied to to think that a lazy selfish arsehole is better than being single and childless forever.

Women stay with lazy, selfish arseholes for child 2, 3 and 4 because they don't want the stigma, hardship and everything else that goes with being a single parent and fear being on their own.

The only solution is stop men becoming lazy, selfish arseholes. There should be classes in school for boys to help with this. Men should be thrown in jail if they fail to support their children. Domestic violence should be dealt with very harshly, maybe 10 - 20 year sentences. Men should be given the same maternity leave as women, maybe. Men should be paid the same as women etc etc etc. Lots of things need to change.

of course scallops and I totally agree but I feel that there is an implication that it can't go hand in hand with the immediate need to educate women and girls so they can recognise the signals of abuse. And I don't think that is blaming women or expecting them to sort out a situation which is not of their making: it is about being informed in the short term, while in the long term, hopefully, abusive behaviour becomes increasingly socially unacceptable

Men are lazy and selfish because they can get away with it, we live in a patriarchal culture men have more power and status.

If the boot was on the other foot I expect women would be the ones taking the piss, I don't think men are inherently bad it's just a case of circumstances and opportunities to behave in a certain way.

Behavior is learned not instinctive.

Karma - it's always better to treat the cause and not the symptom. I don't think your plan will work short or long term.

Honestly apocalypse? Do you honestly wish you'd never been born? I am sorry if you do feel that way .

dreaming - I agree. Quite often the flags are there before children, but often they are subtle and completely normalised by wider society.

It's not enough to be well brought up to see them either. I was raised in a very happy, perfectly functional family in which my parents deeply loved each other. I still didn't spot the red flags. Actually, that's not true. I did and I questioned them. But because I was raised to be a nice person, I accepted what I was told in return (difficult childhood bla bla bla) and found myself manipulated into the situation of trying to help overcome the problem - after all, a relationship is a team isn't it?

I am now an expert in red flags and can spot them a mile off. Since I educated myself, I've never been wrong (although sometimes it's taken years to become apparent). Some people are naturally good at spotting flags without learning the hard way. I wasn't one of them.

I think what's needed is formal education about red flags. Unfortunately, you have to tackle the wider social structure that allows this to flourish and if we were to do that, an awful lot of men and an awful lot of families (many of which are establishment) would come in for a lot of unfavourable criticism, so I don't see it being tackled formally in anything other than the most superficial way.

happybubblebrain I really like your post because it concentrates so firmly on changing male behaviour.

Sadly, I think we have a mountain to move. With a teaspoon. But still, inch by inch, and with many hands (or tea-spoons) ...

I want to go back to what Cheesy wrote, because it seems to me that's exactly what we're suggesting women should do -- if you do find yourself with a less than ideal partner, wait for evidence of change before having another child with him.

I'm just wondering, Cheesy, whether part of your willingness to wait is because you would be ok with only having one kid, if it comes to that?

Because I'm starting to think that a big part of all this is that so many women are really driven to have more than one child, and if that's the case then a lot of this is inevitable.

Dahlen I agree, I would LOVE to see classes on red flags. I don't think it will ever happen though because it would be too contested.

For example, my friend started dating a guy last year who seemed really lovely. But after just a couple weeks, he was giving her grief because she walked to the tube station after work with one of her male colleagues. Now that's an obvious red flag. But I'm sure if you tried to put that in a class people would be all, but why does she even want to walk with another guy if she has a boyfriend? Or, he's just showing her how much he cares about her. etc.

Some women in relationships like this will have been pressured into the pregnancy though. They will feel like they don't have other options. They may be so used to giving way to what their partner wants that they are easily manipulated.

I agree with others saying that it's not as simple as women waiting for evidence of change before having another baby. It can't be assumed that the woman is always the one in the driving seat as far as the number of children are concerned.

YANBU because if more women simply didn't put up with this type of man, in terms of refusing to have a relationship with him in the first place, or walking out when they showed signs of this behaviour, then those men would realise they wouldn't get away with it and would have to buck up their act.

Dahlen We are all culturally conditioned to some extent, and to some extent we can't avoid contributing to it either (e.g. maternity leave and paternity leave being in no way comparable)

True, its cultural; I find it quite sexist and old fashioned in Scotland compared to The Netherlands and am often astonished with the sexism the men get away with, whereas as a woman if you dare speak out about it they try to quieten you down.

And its not only men who have the monopoly on being sexist and lazy...some women I am convinced put up with a man as a trade off for getting a certain lifestyle.

My sister's husband is a lazy, idle, stupid, sexist, selfish, money-grabbing arsehole of the highest order.
She cried a lot during their relationship when they had only one Dc, and complained to me how unhappy she was with her life with him because of how he treated her, and how very little he helped with their Ds.
I warned her to never have any more children with him because he'll never change.
She ignored me and had two more. He's still a twat and her life is even harder.
I'll never understand what possessed her to have two more Dcs with that idiot.

happybubblebrain but if the cause is going to take a long time to treat, is it not common sense to alleviate some of the symptoms in the short term?

This isn't going to be fixed by the time my DD is a teen- it's probably going to take quite a few generations, because as thecatfromjapan says, it's a mountain.

But I don't want my DD having to deal with the same shit I did, so that is why I want her to be able to recognise red flags as much as possible, so she can avoid these types of men. Yes, that is putting the onus on her, when it is totally the fault of the man in question,but at this stage, the alternative is years and years of misery in a relationship with an abusive man who isn't going to change, because society isn't changing fast enough.

I absolutely believe it is the behaviour of men that needs to change first and foremost, but that does not mean I am going to leave my daughter uninformed, and vulnerable in the short term. If that means I am being narrow minded and victim blaming, then so be it- I am a victim, and I know what I have to live with.

right, you can say to your own daughter "don't have children with an arsehole" but if the question is "why do women have children with arseholes?" the answer, as happybubblebrain says, is "because so many men are arseholes" - which gives the clear solution that men have to stop being arseholes

It might not take so many generations to change, we may just need to reach a 'tipping point'

I hope so suzanne