to think that men should not expect their wives/partners to remain the 'sex kittens' they once were after having children

[Toppy]

I read this article Where did my sex kitten go? today in the Sunday Times on the tube whilst having a rare toddler free 'me day' courtesy of my DH. (Weirdly it is listed under Women online but was in the Men's Special Style section today)

My jaw just dropped open and hung there for the duration of the article then I sat in shock as I took his opinions in.
AIBU in my utter disgust at this man or have I become so like the woman he wrote about that I am unable to appreciate his point of view?
My gut instinct a year on from having my first child (and putting my career on serious pause) is to think he is an utter t**t but a tiny part of me wondered if all DHs secretly wonder where their 'sex kitten' has gone (not that I ever was one) even if they were up for having kids in the first place.

Since having my DS I have let myself get fat, don't have the libido I once had and am indeed pretty wrapped up in my 1 year old but I would like to pray that this would not force DH to go out and have an affair !
Is Simon Jones' article food for thought or is the author a prize ** ?

(sorry for the asterisks - I am so wound up by this article though)

Spero: Yes, there are some important truths in there - it doesn't make you a horrible person to sometimes wish for your childfree days back at least briefly even when you adore your children. But the answer is not to slag off your partner, it's to make the effort to have a weekend away without kids now and again.
It is, tbh also true that some women love children more than men and really lose interest in couplehood once they have their DC, which can be pretty miserable for the man in question.
But any article which takes one person's whinges about their own relationship and suggests that there's any universal gender-truth in it is bound to be a load of old cock.

Its awful and shallow to leave your partner because s/he has increased wobbly bits or whatever... but equally isn't it just saying a silent 'fuck you' to your other half if you are content to slob around and never make an effort?

sgb, I think this article is rather more than just one knob's lament. It's not just a question of wanker man, poor victim woman. He has not expressed himself in a way to win fans (but I agree that is cynically deliberate to get us all chuntering)... but at the core of what he said, I think he is right.

Mrs P - he might have loved his first wife, in his own pathetic way, and not wanted to lose her? She sounds just as emotionally unintelligent as he; why demand to have children with a man who has made it clear he is not that keen?

Spero: except that most of the men who feel like this are the ones who do nothing in the house and therefore turn sex into a service their wives should be performing for them (and wonder whinily why the wives are not keen).

Message withdrawn

sgb - But if you have a marriage where the husband is out all day earning money, and the wife is at home - why should the husband have to come home and start doing housework?

SGB - I think that's pretty true - the knob my DH works with didn't even take paternity leave when his DC was born, and he hasn't changed his pre-DC rituals at all - still plays squash 2x a week and goes to the pub with mates on Friday afternoon (they finish work at 1 on Fridays) and Saturday. From what he says, he does nothing domestic - his DW has to do it all. No wonder she doesn't want to service him as well, as someone else said earlier!

Pruners - it appears to be becoming an accepted truth that having small children means that their mother's appearance will often 'pale into insignificance'.

I just really don't get this. It takes five minutes to have a shower, you can leave the baby in the cot or wherever - yes, even if he is crying! five minutes to put some clothes in the wash and another five minutes to put them on.

aren't we running the risk of just infantalising women by saying that its perfectly fine and normal for a baby to turn you into a dressing gown clad zombie who resents sex with her partner?

And its not just the damage you do to your relationship if you just can't be bothered. What about the damage to your own self respect and self esteem??

If I might add a personal and male perspective to this. I have read the article.

I tend to agree with solidgoldbrass:

"It is, tbh also true that some women love children more than men and really lose interest in couplehood once they have their DC, which can be pretty miserable for the man in question."

Not all women do this and of course having very small children around is utterly exhausting (and yes I did the night feeds). Libido is bound to fall off and time to pamper yourself is non existent. All that is expected in both the man and the woman in the relationship. However, it does not and should not be like that forever.

here I do slightly agree with the article is where the person a man marries a woman who is dynamic, ambitious and at the top of her profession with a lot of common interests and also cares about herappearance he is perhaps entitled to feel unhappy when that person completely disappears nver to return from the moment thay have kids.

My wife still dresses nicely she has of course got stretch marks and is slightly heavier than she was but I encourage her to still be feminine and not feel she has to dress in trousers and baggy jumpers just because she has kids.

I think a woman that just stops trying, stops having sex and has no interest outside the kids is being unfair to her man if she expects him to just turn into some sexless drone who brings in the money each month and gets nothing back.

I emphasise not all women do this but some undoubtedly do. I also dare to say that I think there are a fair few MN posts where this has clearly happened.

What about the man in the relationship's duty (wrong word)to make his partner feel like a desirable woman, perhaps no longer a 'sex kitten' whatever that is, but rather a magnificent, well rounded woman in her prime. Is he still a 'boy' who cannot cope with a real woman? And what about the many men I have read about on Mumsnet who cannot contemplate red hot sex with their partner because she is now a 'Mummy' and should not be indulging in 'dirty' things.

Spero- why SHOULDN'T he? Is his job more demanding than hers? There are no rules saying that, while he gets to finish work at a set time, hers should continue through the evening.

His first wife may well have 'let herself go'. But in a marriage there is supposed to be time for both partners to change. Her phase of 'letting herself go' might have run its course, eventually, given a more forgiving, loving or understanding husband. And then HIS reward for his forbearance would have been that, when he goes bald/ gets a paunch/ loses his teeth/ gets ill/ loses his job etc etc- she would have stayed with him, loyally, bearing in mind his patience with her, helping him through his own tough time, instead of whining that he'd 'let himself go' and running off with a hunky toyboy.

Message withdrawn

what a prize knobhead!!
i see nothing wrong in revelling in motherhood while you have the time!!
he sobbed on and on about how HIS needs werent being met and HE was being pushed to cheat FGS its not like she forbid him from ever having sex with her again!! she was actually trying to discuss having another child with him so correct me if i am wrong here but isnt sex a main component in TTC?? i thought he was a doctor...would that have not been in day one biology class?? sounds like a complete toss pot to me and deserved to be 'tricked' as he believes he can claim he was
xx ei xx

Message withdrawn

PRSB - he shouldn't have to for the same reason he doesn't ask his wife to come in and sort out his spreadsheets or chair a meeting with the accountants! come on, unless you live in a mansion (in which case I assume you will have staff) you will have the housework done in a few hours (unless you really are a hopeless lazy slattern in which case he will divorce you quite quickly. Generic you, not personal you obviously)

I simply dont think it is fair for a woman who stays at home to expect her bloke to be out all day, presuambly working quite hard, and then come home to clean out the hamster etc of an evening. I don't see that as a fair and loving partnership. Weekends might be different, but again it would depend on what he does.

Pruners, I think it DOES matter if the change of priorites means you change from being the interesting vibrant person you were at the beginning of the marriage. Of course in a loving partnership, your partner should support you thru what is hopefully a temporary rough patch, but if the woman is content to let it drag on and on, I think that says very concerning things about her self respect and her love for her partner.

Spero: a person who is single and in employment must either do some domestic work or pay for it to be done, and a person who is married and in employment (or self-employed) has no right to expect that their partner be 'on duty' 24/7 in return for nothing more than subsistence. For a couple-relationship to thrive, both partners need a certain amount of free time to enjoy doing stuff that isn't about servicing anyone else. Being the income-earner in a household doesn't make you the boss or owner of other people in the household.

ABetaDad- you say NEVER to return?

The pillock waited six months after the birth of his child with his first wife. Nine months after the birth of his child with his second wife.

Hardly a long time, let alone never.

sgb - equally a person who doesn't work is expecting to be supported by the one who does. I simply don't accept being at home and doing housework means you are a domestic slave 24 hours a day.

That is total bollox. To keep my house ticking over I do two hours a day (I work full time btw). I'm a single parent and I still manage to get some me time!

I don't see how a working man is expecting to be the 'boss' if he simply wants to come home of an evening and not be faced with ironing, hoovering, cooking tea.

I think a more interesting topic is being uncovered here - whether or not a baby is something that can completely derail your life or not.

You can get an amazing amount of tidying up done in just twenty mins. Maybe i was just very lucky with mine, she didn't kick off much. But when she did, I didn't have any problem leaving her crying for ten minutes while I tidied up. It always made me feel much better to be able to sit down and have a cup of coffee in a relatively tidy environment.

And since when is brushing your hair something you do for your husband?? It is something you do for yourself surely? What are you saying if you don't value yourself enough to keep clean and wear clean clothes? i just don't accept that a baby could or should get in the way of that. You don't have to hold them 24 hours a day, collicky or not. They won't die if you put them down for ten mins.

sgb "any article which takes one person's whinges about their own relationship and suggests that there's any universal gender-truth in it is bound to be a load of old cock." I think that pretty much sums up most of the weekend Women/Relationships/Family etc. section articles in most newspapers!

"Frances" doesn't come out all that brilliantly from it either, to be fair. "She completely lost the plot, screaming that I owed her a child." Erm, highly-strung and high-maintenance, much?