Page 20 | Child guru says nurseries harm small children

Greensleeves · 13/02/2006 18:07

It's so much more FUN though HC.....

harpsichordcarrier · 13/02/2006 18:09

tbh it rather reminds me of shooting fish in a barrel

HRHQueenOfQuotes · 13/02/2006 18:10

it's funny as I said earlier I work with old people, most of who have/had been for 40yrs+ (except for on man who recently passed away who was a bigomist ) and all of them say that one of them was 'in charge' when it came to unnegotiable decisions.

Most people I know who are married, regardless of religious beliefs have one of them who makes 'final' decisions when compromise can't be reached.

uwila · 13/02/2006 18:10

Well it all took a turn when Bear stated that her role in the home was to serve her husband and therefore everyone would be better off if she was a full time SAHM. And her basis for these beliefs are a couple of scripture quotes.

tamum · 13/02/2006 18:11

The idea of one person being in charge in a marriage must be because they're old though, surely? I don't know any modern marriages/partnerships like that.

HRHQueenOfQuotes · 13/02/2006 18:13

as I've said 'being in charge' doesn't mean that they 'rule' or 'dictate' the relationship - it still works very much as a partnership with both people's opinions and ideas being listened to and acted on. Just because you don't openly say that someone is the 'head' of the house, doesn't mean that there isn't on partner taking the 'lead' where nessecary.

Greensleeves · 13/02/2006 18:14

Yes QoQ, patriarchal marriages were much more commonplace 40 years ago, as was domestic violence, stigma attached to divorce, and unmarried women having their babies forcibly snatched from them. Not all progress is bad.

It achieves very little to simply argue "Well all of MY friends agree with ME". Of course they do

So.... are you seriously claiming that you actually believed you were a lesbian who had had children by IVF and was looking forward to her wedding? Or are you saying the alcohol made you want to tell lies?

tamum · 13/02/2006 18:15

No, I got that, but no-one takes the lead either in marriages I know. It's completely random who "wins" any given argument/discussion.

harpsichordcarrier · 13/02/2006 18:16

yes uwila I liked your joke btw

HRHQueenOfQuotes · 13/02/2006 18:20

it's not about 'winning' any arguments, and it's not about the woman always 'compromising' (I believe any relationship where all discussions ends in 'compromises' are doomed as always being in a position where 'compromise' is forced on your can't do any relationship any good).

Greensleeves · 13/02/2006 18:24

DH and I have been together for 11 years and have never been happier QoQ. Many relationships do succeed and bring great happiness without being patriarchal or unequal. You are simply wrong on that point.

So about this alleged drunken post of yours.....

tamum · 13/02/2006 18:25

Quite, Greensleeves.

harpsichordcarrier · 13/02/2006 18:26

I am yet to be convinced about the benefits of patriarchy
exhibit a - western civilisation
exhibit b - organised religion

need I go on?

Greensleeves · 13/02/2006 18:27

Ooooh, yes, HC, do go on!!

HRHQueenOfQuotes · 13/02/2006 18:31

our relationship is very 'equal' I have as much say in the decision making as he does - I chose to go back to work, I even chose to do nights

what is an 'equal' relationship anyway,

One where the decisions are split 50/50
one where both partners work equal hours
where they both do 50/50 childcare

No-one 'wins' in our disagreements, if someone 'wins' an argument it means the other has 'lost' which creates bitterness and friction.

harpsichordcarrier · 13/02/2006 18:34

an equal relationship is one where one partner is not "in charge" but both have equal rights and responsibilities, the nature of which are subject to negotation

Greensleeves · 13/02/2006 18:37

QoQ, had your husband said "I don't want you to go back to work, I am really against it" and yet you had desperately wanted to - what would have been the outcome? If you discussed it and couldn't agree?

HRHQueenOfQuotes · 13/02/2006 18:38

but my DH ISN'T in charge ARGHHHHHH how many times do I have to say this. The ONLY time he makes a 'final' decision is when something is totally unnegotiable or where compromise can't be reached (or could be reached but would only leave both of us feeling like we'd 'lost').

In those (very rare) circumstances I always just tell him to make a decision. Then it's a) out of my hands so I do't have to worry about it b) sorted quickly and without upset to anyone.

Obviously if he's not around to make an important decision which needs to be made quickly - then I do it.

Greensleeves · 13/02/2006 18:40

...so you "submit" to your husband's higher authority because:

a) it saves face, because neither of you has to suffer defeat, and

b) you are too lazy/lacking in self-confidence to make your own decision.

Very healthy. I'll stick to endless compromise, thanks

HRHQueenOfQuotes · 13/02/2006 18:41

greensleeves - I "wanted" to go back to work a few years ago when DS1 was tiny. He didn't really want me to, and when we sat down and talked about it civilly I realised I didn't want to either. I had PND (though only realise it later) and needed a 'break' - which I got through other means which I was perfectly happy with - looking back I would have HATED going to work then.

This time round I was the one who would rather have not gone back to work, but finances dictated otherwise. Thankfully I do actually enjoy going to work, don't know if I'll want to continue or not once finances are sorted - but that's going to be a a few years yet so I don't need to worry about it now.

If we're ever in that position where I genuinely want to go back to work and DH doesn't want me to I'll let you know .

HRHQueenOfQuotes · 13/02/2006 18:42

'defeat' only leads to resentment in the long run - what's the point of building up resentment or 'point scoring'???

I have plenty of self confidence - I couldn't do either of my jobs if I didn't believe in myself

Greensleeves · 13/02/2006 18:46

But "defeat" can never be a feature of a healthy mutual adult discussion which results in a decision being reached through compromise. Even the concept of "defeat" suggests a very strange relationship - DH and I trust and respect each other, moreover, we actually like each other, so negotiating, bringing in our different ideas and perspectives and seeing who has the stronger argument - never results in "defeat", it only leads to one person seeing that the other's view makes more sense. To feel that it's safer and less confrontational to bail out and let your husband do all the thinking - or even just that when it comes to the crunch he has more control over your marriage than you do - it's just a bit sad, really.

HRHQueenOfQuotes · 13/02/2006 18:51

To feel that it's safer and less confrontational to bail out and let your husband do all the thinking - or even just that when it comes to the crunch he has more control over your marriage than you do - it's just a bit sad, really.

He DOESN'T do all the thinking - how many times do I have to say it - we've acted on LOADS of my ideas and thoughts. We wouldn't be living in this house, with our two gorgeous children for starters if he didn't! He'd be working as a dodgy kitchen sales person instead of the job he's got now which he really enjoys. He'd been driving a car that we couldn't really afford to run, need I go on?

I can only think of 2 occasions in the 7yrs we've been together where I've (as you put it) 'bailed out' and let him makes the decision on his own, and both of those I'd rather not go into on a public forum.

Greensleeves · 13/02/2006 18:53

Then why are you here banging on about wives submitting to their husbands? You really are very strange.

Are you going to answer the question I asked you about that bizarre post? Alcohol really doesn't cover it, you know

Enid · 13/02/2006 18:54

isn't it just a sex thing, this whole idea of the dominant dh?

Fascinating though I didn't think it still went on in this day and age