Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

DP wants to go on new DC's BC

525 replies

Jackieharris · 18/05/2015 14:03

He has just raised this out of the blue.

He isn't on our eldest DC's bc. That's never caused a problem. Now he's saying he wants that changed too.

I know this is 'normal practice' (hence posting on fwr not aibu/chat/parenting/relationships) but it's made me really anxious.

It came so out of the blue, I didn't have much of a response prepared. I said it hadn't caused any problems so why change. I said I didn't want to give up my exclusive rights. He said why and I gave the hypothetical scenario of him running off with a younger woman then being able to restrict where I live etc after a split.

He knew about my stance on this before we had dc1. He knows I had a very bad relationship experience before him (life threatening violence, stalking and breaking into new house after break up type stuff) so I just won't ever feel 100% safe with any man ever and need to have the security that I could escape if that happened again. From my PoV if he was on bc he could potentially use this power to continue to abuse me even if I left. (So many threads like that on relationships board and I know some irl examples too)

As long as he was never violent I'd always let him have fair access to dcs so I said to him why does he want it unless he doesn't trust me?

I'm now going to be constantly worried he'll bring it up again. Maybe he won't. I'll not mention it if he doesn't.

OP posts:
RolodexOfHate · 20/05/2015 12:13

I understand that what has been written was not what the OP wanted to hear. But I do think that it was important that she heard it. If a member of your family asked for advice and support in acting in a way that could have serious and negative repercussions, then wouldn't you want them to hear the honest truth, regardless of if their feelings were temporarily hurt?

almondcakes · 20/05/2015 12:28

I wouldn't want a member of my family to be described as 'one of the most selfish and controlling people I have ever seen on this site' when they started a thread already distressed.

I wouldn't want any member of my family to start an AIBU style thread, because I have seen how they go.

I've made comments on MN in the past which I regret, and I don't think that feelings hurt on the Internet are necessarily only temporarily hurt, or that the way people speak to each other on the Internet does not itself have serious and negative reprecussions.

RolodexOfHate · 20/05/2015 12:36

I didn't call her that, I said she had come across as that. There is a big difference, in my mind at least.

I think that the OP really needed to hear what has been said, even if she didn't want to. If she can start to understand what the moral dimension to this story is, then I think she will be saving herself a lot of pain in the future. Regardless, I expect she has probably hidden the thread.

TheBlackRider · 20/05/2015 12:39

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

almondcakes · 20/05/2015 12:52

And, sorry, Rolodex, I honestly hadn't realised that quote was from a post by you. I didn't mean to make it a personal response to your posts in particular.

It is the collective pile ons that bother me on all these kind of threads, not the actions of one poster.

I think it goes back to what Jon Ronson was talking about when he came on MN to talk about the rise in shaming people on the internet, and how it happens collectively.

Dervel · 20/05/2015 16:20

Well there is always a danger with socializing on the Internet, like minds can congregate and validate one another through finding common consensus. It can become very daunting to be a lone/new voice.

I think people "pile on" so to speak as they are merely communicating self evident truths (which they are to the community in question). I don't think anyone meant to hurt anyone here.

almondcakes · 20/05/2015 16:55

It isn't the same thing as just finding a common consensus though. People share a common consensus about all sorts of things; I share a common consensus with many people about the importance of democracy.

It is a particular sort of consensus for many people to aim a negative opinion at one person about something personal about them. It isn't the same as being a lone or new voice.

Coyoacan · 20/05/2015 17:52

Thank you for speaking up almond

I think we should all ask ourselves before posting, is it helpful and is it kind?

slightlyeggstained · 20/05/2015 19:14

Piling on can be inadvertent, in that sometimes by the time you hit post, there are six other replies that weren't there when you started. But that's not what happened here. People came back, again and again and again, feeding off the unpleasantness.

PrettyInPinkPan · 20/05/2015 22:37

it's often tricky, isn't it? It looks like the OP posted here thinking she will have a 'FWR' validation for her reaction, only to find the FWR is not a sort of closed shop to comfort her.

Which is a healthy thing? The OP may think 'bugger you, I'll still do what I want to do' (which I'd suspect she will do and 'fight' for her 'exclusive rights'Hmm)
But the thread reveals (again) the exclusivity and myopia that the 'regulars' wish to engender, it seems, and so render the 'WR' bit of 'FWR' short of oxygen.

almondcakes · 20/05/2015 22:49

It is very tricky to work out how to stop public shaming of individuals.

It happens in all online social circles.

SabrinnaOfDystopia · 20/05/2015 23:06

Not wanting to see a victim of serious dv called a controlling bully, the most selfish person they've ever seen on this site, etc, is 'myopia' and 'exclusivity of FWR regulars' is it. Okayyy Pan.

PrettyInPinkPan · 20/05/2015 23:21

Sabrinna - no, and of course she isn't all of those things, obv - and the 'challengers' overall to her view aren't so violent.

But the way the thread has fallen appears to be a sort of 'FWR regulars-it's-the-patriarcy-innit' versus the 'are you sure you are protecting yourself properly and effectively as you see it, and what about the interests of these children right now and into the future?

And of course victims of major DV can and do become overly controlling, understandably. But it isn;t something to be encouraged. As MrsD indicated, that leaves the 'power' with the original abuser.

almondcakes · 20/05/2015 23:28

People always have a moral stance, and usually a vulnerable group they claim to be defending, when they carry out a public shaming.

Blistory · 20/05/2015 23:37

There wasn't an opportunity for there to be a discussion. That was the problem.

Why is it so difficult/unacceptable for regular posters to offer each other support or space to voice their thoughts without being accused of being myopic or part of a closed shop ?

I disagree with some of the views held by other FWR regulars but I respect their views because they have demonstrated time and time again that the fundamental thing we have in common - the support of women's liberation - provides a foundation of solidarity and support. That ongoing support and commitment deserves recognition and respect. The fact that other women on here have my back when I really need it is hugely important to me and we all denied that to the OP.

There have also been plenty of times where I have been gently handed my arse or given space to think without it resorting to a personal attack or attempt at point scoring. I don't take offence at being educated or challenged on feminist thinking but nor do I feel like there's a party line I have to toe beyond women matter and do not have equality.

If you can't get on board with that as a minimum, then why post on here ?

TheBlackRider · 20/05/2015 23:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PrettyInPinkPan · 20/05/2015 23:52

Did/do we all deny 'having her back' to the OP Blistory? Or did/do some posters offer some pretty good advice re taking a perspective on her history and how it's having a really bad effect on her present. Something that a handful of 'regulars' wish to deny her.

And reflective of that, your sort of 'challenge' (...then why post on here) is exactly indicative of the narrowness the 'regulars' wish to encourage, i.e. if you don't think and express yourself like us then this isn't the place for you.

Blistory · 21/05/2015 00:01

It wasn't a challenge, Pan. It was a question.

But you carry on chucking the occasional "I am the voice of reason" post on FWR threads and I'll carry on ignoring the fact that you just cannot perceive how patronising you are and not take offence.

TheBlackRider · 21/05/2015 00:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PrettyInPinkPan · 21/05/2015 00:07

TBR - hmmm..I'd disagree but, as I'd read it, and many others too, that comparator re 'regulars' and others was/is pretty clear.

But it does look like the OP has her mind set anyways, and the partner has to 'deal with it'. Dervel indicated the prob as well where she just 'hopes nothing more is said' re real communication problems in the rel overall.

SabrinnaOfDystopia · 21/05/2015 00:13

Its just about decency and empathy towards a woman who is upset and uncertain. If she can't get that on FWR, then... oh well Confused

FWR is not AIBU, despite the slurs the regulars here have attracted for fighting back against some real grim name-calling and attacks towards the OP - who wanted support. Support does not have to equal agreement - just as disagreement doesn't have to mean attacks and condemnation - which this thread is full of.

EElisavetaOfBelsornia · 21/05/2015 00:18

I am a frequent lurker, and occasional poster here. I have never been made to feel like it's a closed, clubby place where regulars talk theoretical wank and exclude me. I totally don't recognise this description of FWR.

This thread has made me sad though. I don't expect the OP will be back. Posters who ignored her needs and history and weighed in to criticise without considering any of the complexities should be ashamed.

PrettyInPinkPan · 21/05/2015 00:19

'I am the voice of reason' barb? Blistory- yes okay, but it's sometimes difficult to not patronise the ridiculous, is it not?

But it's your playground - lots of MN folk have pointed out how restrictive this place can be, but nothing changes.

Blistory · 21/05/2015 00:24

Oh dear, Pan.

I happen to think that you sometimes bring an insight to a thread on FWR but you always have to then patronise. Every single time.

Are you really not aware that you do it and so consistently ? We all have to look to our faults but you're exempt ?

Blistory · 21/05/2015 00:30

And it's not a playground. It's part of my life as a woman, as a feminist. What I say and learn here applies to my real world so it may come down to me having a vested interest and not just a desire for some theoretical masturbation.

I guess you get something different from it.