ontrack
Familiar Member
Joined: Mar 21, 2011 9:44:36 GMT -5
Posts: 967
|
Post by ontrack on Jul 2, 2012 16:10:41 GMT -5
Isn't that right? What is it? it's firestaring, i.e. staring/gazing at a fire doing nothing.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Jul 2, 2012 16:12:42 GMT -5
Ohhhhhh!! LOL!!!!! That's even dumber!!!! At least by starting a fire, they were doing something semi-productive!
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jul 2, 2012 16:13:34 GMT -5
"I gotta say. That "firestarting time" is about the dumbest excuse for being lazy as any I've ever heard."
It's just a phrase, you can call it something else like relaxing or decompressing or relieving stress or doing an enjoyable activity.
Are you saying if you don't work all the time you're lazy? I really need to be "on" all the time and doing something productive? You never take a quiet night in to read a book or watch a movie anything?
For some people making time for yourself and doing activities you enjoy is a priority. I don't see what the harm in that is, but I guess that means I'm lazy.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Jul 2, 2012 16:15:35 GMT -5
"I gotta say. That "firestarting time" is about the dumbest excuse for being lazy as any I've ever heard." It's just a phrase, you can call it something else like relaxing or decompressing or relieving stress or doing an enjoyable activity. Are you saying if you don't work all the time you're lazy? I really need to be "on" all the time and doing something productive? You never take a quiet night in to read a book or watch a movie anything? I do it all the time. Read books. Watch movies. Just nap if I want to. I don't have kids. If I did, they and their needs would come first. But I certainly understand needing down time. I just think it's really unfair for either party to say, "You are going to have to handle things. I need to stare at the fire for awhile." It wasn't a case of me thinking people don't need down time - more the case of one party not being able to just demand it when there is stuff to be done.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Jul 2, 2012 16:22:50 GMT -5
Phoenix? I shouldn't have used the word "dumbest". It was inflammatory and insulting. I didn't mean to convey that at all. I should have picked a different word. I apologize.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jul 2, 2012 16:27:43 GMT -5
"Phoenix? I shouldn't have used the word "dumbest". It was inflammatory and insulting. I didn't mean to convey that at all. I should have picked a different word."
Apology accepted, and perhaps I should clairfy. I still think you need to make "down time" a priority, however, I think you need to be flexible as to when that down time happens. Obviously at certain times certain things need to get done (i.e. feeding the kiddo his dinner, changing the baby, mowing the lawn because it looks like the amazon out there ect). But all work and no play makes jack for a dull boy, even if it's only an hour from 9-10 after the kids go to bed, it's important to keep your sanity.
It's all in the words, but I personally don't like walking in the door and the next minute being given 100 things to do, just 10-15 minutes to switch gears from work to home is nice. Though I realize in certain circumstances this may not be possible (i.e. leaving a kid in dirty diapers for that length of time).
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jul 2, 2012 16:29:34 GMT -5
"They don't make play pens anymore??? seriously???"
That's news to me too. Are you joking or serious?
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jul 2, 2012 16:30:59 GMT -5
"Eh, a little dog food never hurt someone."
I remember when I was very young, one of my first memories is eating dog food. I'm no worse for the wear.
I also remember eating paper.
|
|
ontrack
Familiar Member
Joined: Mar 21, 2011 9:44:36 GMT -5
Posts: 967
|
Post by ontrack on Jul 2, 2012 16:31:09 GMT -5
i know they still make pack and plays, that's sort of a playpen...
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Jul 2, 2012 16:34:35 GMT -5
"Phoenix? I shouldn't have used the word "dumbest". It was inflammatory and insulting. I didn't mean to convey that at all. I should have picked a different word." Apology accepted, and perhaps I should clairfy. I still think you need to make "down time" a priority, however, I think you need to be flexible as to when that down time happens. Obviously at certain times certain things need to get done (i.e. feeding the kiddo his dinner, changing the baby, mowing the lawn because it looks like the amazon out there ect). But all work and no play makes jack for a dull boy, even if it's only an hour from 9-10 after the kids go to bed, it's important to keep your sanity. It's all in the words, but I personally don't like walking in the door and the next minute being given 100 things to do, just 10-15 minutes to switch gears from work to home is nice. Though I realize in certain circumstances this may not be possible (i.e. leaving a kid in dirty diapers for that length of time). I do understand what you are saying. I come home to a dog. But it's still nice to sit down for a second or two and kick my shoes off. What I was trying to convey - and was quite unsuccesful - was that I couldn't see being in a marriage where one party decided they weren't going to do anything for awhile after work and it was just up to me to handle stuff. It seemed arbitrary and quite unfair. What I could understand would be something like....."I'll get dinner started and the kids settled on this night and this night while you decompress. And you can do it on this night and this night." That way, everybody gets their "oh crap it was a long day" time.
|
|
shanendoah
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:44:48 GMT -5
Posts: 10,096
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0c3563
|
Post by shanendoah on Jul 2, 2012 16:53:29 GMT -5
This is correct. If you feel the need to tell someone to do something you have to be ready to hear the response of FU!! Rick- you forgot the follow up part where I don't get to tell DH to do anything, but, per WWBG, I should let DH command me to do things. Not happening. And yes, sometimes I tell DH he needs to do something. And sometimes DH tells me he needs me to do something. And sometimes we form it as a question, even when the only acceptable answer is yes. It really depends on the situation at the time. They do still make playpens. They don't call them playpens, and they are smaller than they were when I was a kid, but just ask to see the Pack N Plays, and you'll be taken to "travel" sized playpens.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Jul 2, 2012 17:23:11 GMT -5
"Man as the head of the household" is an iron-clad peacekeeping clause. It means that if husband and wife come to an impasse, the man's will is paramount. This may sound paternalistic (because it is), but it's also quite often the salvation of a marriage.*skincrawl* I give you credit for being honest - I rarely hear this put so baldly - but it makes me sick to my stomach. If the choice is "keep fighting or concede to DH's will just because he's a man and that's the way things should be," I'm happy to keep fighting, thanks. For all but the most extreme cases (such as a man committing grievous civil or moral crimes, etc.), if a wife loves her husband, if she is unable to persuade him and she has moved him to a point where he has put his foot down, the couple has reached "the" point. The husband may be acting irresponsibly or irrationally, and he may not be. The matter is now irrelevant. A decision has been made; the standoff has concluded.AAHHHHHHHRHHGHHHHHH!! *sound of FB's head exploding* So how about this one: my husband wants us to get a puppy. I don't want to get a puppy. He takes my opinion into account because he loves me. But in the end, he *really really* wants that puppy, and he's the man, so he "rules" and we get the puppy anyhow. I end up doing 90% of puppy care, but if I dare to complain about it, then I'm "nagging" and not showing respect. No. Sorry, but no way. The idea that this is being taught to young girls as the ultimate model of Christian femininity really sets my teeth on edge. It is NOT a coincidence that this "perfect model of conflict resolution" was written by a group of MEN. You yourself admitted it was patriarchal; well, the patriarchal system tends to seriously advantage men in more ways than I have the time to enumerate here. But regardless, if you truly want to destroy this country, all you have to do is give EITHER side unfettered access to power. VERY well said, tallguy. That's precisely right. And for Christians, the willingness is motivated by a reverence for God. For atheists, as I say, I have no idea why they do anything.Cuz it's not possible to have any kind of moral system or code if you're not religious. That argument REALLY annoys me, no matter how "respectfully" it's expressed. When I was married, I was dominant in the relationship. I knew it wasn't the worst problem to have but I still didn't like it. I've matured since then, but I still wouldn't want to be with a passive man that I could run over. Why did either one of you have to be passive? I wouldn't describe either myself OR DH as the "passive" partner. I don't WANT one of us to be the passive partner. The day we stop challenging each other is more than likely the day I stop respecting him entirely. So it's OK to quote Bible verses and take cracks at atheists, but not OK for atheists to respond. Duly noted. I'm doing it anyway, Mid! Solidarity sister! I think shooby's summary of how its supposed to work for Christians was great. Look, I trust my husband to treat me right and not "rule" over me if he had the option to do so. I'm still not willing to give him the "last word" on arguments should we ever lock horns on some important issue. Nor would he be willing to give that to me, even though both of us would be very nice dictators and have no problem putting the other first. It's not about that. It's about how in a partnership, there IS no leader. And we like being partners, not leader and servant. Thanks! Of course, being human beings, there is an obvious disconnect about how people are supposed to behave and how they actually do. And it constantly horrifies me that people can't seem to understand the connection between a system that clearly puts one group of people above another and the resulting behavior. We're human; humans tend to respond in predictable ways. Put ultimate power/authority/whatever into the hands of one person, and they will start to abuse it. It's just the way it works.
|
|
shanendoah
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:44:48 GMT -5
Posts: 10,096
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0c3563
|
Post by shanendoah on Jul 2, 2012 17:28:57 GMT -5
Rick- I agree. If it's important to me, and it's important to me that it be done on my timetable, I will almost always do it myself. However, there are some things I can not do (currently anything that requires me lifting my right arm above shoulder height) that still need to be done right now. DH gets that. Generally, if I'm asking/telling him to do something time sensitive, there's a 5-10 minute window, unless there's not, but then, he knows about the time sensitivity the same as I do.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Jul 2, 2012 17:30:53 GMT -5
Also, I should add that I kinda think shanendoah's perspective on this is healthier than mine: if it works for you, fantastic.
But I can't give the nod to paternalism. Not even if it "works for you." I have very bitter feelings about what this paternalistic model of marriage - and specifically, the Biblical mandate on it - has done to women across the world. I hate the way it has stifled and silenced and excluded and disadvantaged women. You can draw direct links from it to the parts of our society that I hate most. You can find support for some of the most misogynistic viewpoints in existence nestled right into its bearing walls.
So I don't really care how nobly it's intentioned, or how loving it's meant to be. It has caused far too much direct and indirect harm for me to give a shit about what it was INTENDED to do.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,548
|
Post by chiver78 on Jul 2, 2012 17:34:53 GMT -5
Also, I should add that I kinda think shanendoah's perspective on this is healthier than mine: if it works for you, fantastic. But I can't give the nod to paternalism. Not even if it "works for you." I have very bitter feelings about what this paternalistic model of marriage - and specifically, the Biblical mandate on it - has done to women across the world. I hate the way it has stifled and silenced and excluded and disadvantaged women. You can draw direct links from it to the parts of our society that I hate most. You can find support for some of the most misogynistic viewpoints in existence nestled right into its bearing walls. So I don't really care how nobly it's intentioned, or how loving it's meant to be. It has caused far too much direct and indirect harm for me to give a shit about what it was INTENDED to do.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Jul 2, 2012 17:37:27 GMT -5
Thanks, chiver. Honestly, reading some of the responses on this thread is raising my blood pressure!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 15:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2012 17:58:57 GMT -5
FB, maybe you were already riled up by the time you got to my post about being dominant in my marriage, but I never said anybody has to be passive. I have no problem speaking my mind and I'd want a partner that does the same. My ex rarely had an opinion on anything, not even when we were looking for somwhere to move to. I made ALL the decisions and basically ran everything, including him. I did not like that.
You seem to have misunderstood that particular post.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Jul 2, 2012 18:24:02 GMT -5
Pink, apologies if I misunderstood you. The way I read that post, you didn't like being the dominant one in the relationship - you wished HE would be dominant. That, along with your earlier posts, led me to conclude that you thought there should be a dominant partner and a passive partner - and that the former shouldn't be the woman.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,548
|
Post by chiver78 on Jul 2, 2012 18:48:52 GMT -5
Thanks, chiver. Honestly, reading some of the responses on this thread is raising my blood pressure! This is exactly why you have so many choices in partners. You will find someone who thinks the same as you. believe it or not, I agree with you. as my dear late Nana used to say - there's a lid for every pot. I'll give (almost) anyone one chance to make an ass of himself. I've politely extricated myself from first dates where the "gentlemen" was already making himself clear that he expected his mate to be barefoot and pregnant. there are definitely women would would be happy to oblige, but that's not really my thing.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Jul 2, 2012 19:20:44 GMT -5
This is exactly why you have so many choices in partners. You will find someone who thinks the same as you. Check I wouldn't say DH and I agree on everything, but one thing we are very clear about is this subject. No one is in charge. We're partners. We work together. That isn't to say that we don't have areas of defined responsibility, but we decide what they are TOGETHER, and the other person can have as much say as s/he wants in the way that area is run by the other. Finances are a good example - DH asked me from the outset to take care of our money, and I've been happy to oblige. It's easier than splitting finances, even though it took some long months of adjustment. However, to this day DH can have as much or as little input as he wants into what I'm doing with the money, and when we have huge windfalls we decide together what to do with them. If there's something he really wants, I find a way for us to afford it. Most of the time he's pretty hands off, but if he ever wants to learn more about our budget, I'm happy to talk his ear off about it
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 15:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2012 23:40:38 GMT -5
I'm curious. Are there any expectations of men (particularly married men and/or men with families), just because they're men? Not that women can't do whatever these things are. Men and women I know in real life feel like there are just some things men should do. It seems that posters here feel differently and I'm trying to understand it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 15:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2012 2:09:38 GMT -5
Also, I should add that I kinda think shanendoah's perspective on this is healthier than mine: if it works for you, fantastic. But I can't give the nod to paternalism. Not even if it "works for you." I have very bitter feelings about what this paternalistic model of marriage - and specifically, the Biblical mandate on it - has done to women across the world. I hate the way it has stifled and silenced and excluded and disadvantaged women. You can draw direct links from it to the parts of our society that I hate most. You can find support for some of the most misogynistic viewpoints in existence nestled right into its bearing walls. So I don't really care how nobly it's intentioned, or how loving it's meant to be. It has caused far too much direct and indirect harm for me to give a shit about what it was INTENDED to do. Can you tell I agree with everything you have said? LOL!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 15:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2012 5:35:01 GMT -5
Cuz it's not possible to have any kind of moral system or code if you're not religious. That argument REALLY annoys me, no matter how "respectfully" it's expressed. Well, you DO have a moral code. You do believe that some things are wrong and some things are right. I am sure you believe child abuse is wrong or murder or stealing candy from the store and a number of other things. That is a moral code, value system or whatever you want to call it.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jul 3, 2012 5:44:20 GMT -5
I'm curious. Are there any expectations of men (particularly married men and/or men with families), just because they're men? Not that women can't do whatever these things are. Men and women I know in real life feel like there are just some things men should do. It seems that posters here feel differently and I'm trying to understand it. I am a very strong, independent woman...I earn my own money, I control my own investments and I will not give in to my husband if he is wrong just because he is the "man". But...I don't kill bugs, fix things, take out the garbage or mow the lawn (well, he hasn't done that either in about 10 years!lol). I COULD do those things (except fix things....I am not handy) but I really believe those are a man's job. When we were young and poor and couldn't afford to hire out, I offered to cut the grass since he was workign longer hours than me...he didn't want the neighbors to see his wife cutting the grass!lol I do about 95% of the cooking and we split the rest.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 15:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2012 5:51:50 GMT -5
The Biblical point of marriage is that you become "one flesh". In other words, you learn to act in one accord. I have been married for years and i cannot think of a single instance where DH had to "take charge" or where we didn't come to a consensus. Part of marriage is being respectful of one another. There are things i could do, but don't out of respect. I am not going to go buy a new car or other big ticket item, unless we discuss it and agree that it is a reasonable thing to do. Could i exercise my right to go buy what i want ? Yes, but could and should are two different things. He acts likewise. As for other things like home, children, etc. We don't buy a home unless we both are on board or take vacations unless we both agree, etc. We do things in accord with one another. So, not sure what pressing issue there is in life that requires the husband to "take over" in the sense of being a boss.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jul 3, 2012 5:57:45 GMT -5
The Biblical point of marriage is that you become "one flesh". In other words, you learn to act in one accord. I have been married for years and i cannot think of a single instance where DH had to "take charge" or where we didn't come to a consensus. Part of marriage is being respectful of one another. There are things i could do, but don't out of respect. I am not going to go buy a new car or other big ticket item, unless we discuss it and agree that it is a reasonable thing to do. Could i exercise my right to go buy what i want ? Yes, but could and should are two different things. He acts likewise. As for other things like home, children, etc. We don't buy a home unless we both are on board or take vacations unless we both agree, etc. We do things in accord with one another. So, not sure what pressing issue there is in life that requires the husband to "take over" in the sense of being a boss. I think that depends on your marriage. My husband and I have separate finances and we have since our separation a few years ago. I do not discuss or ask permission for anything I buy because it doesn't impact him at all. I actually bought an investment property in florida and didn't even tell him for a few months. I wasn't hiding it, it is part of my investmetn strategy which I didn't think needed to be discussed (it's not like I call my husband everytime I am going to buy or sell a stock). When I bought the second investment property, I did tell him right before closing and only because he wanted to go in on an investment and I had to explain why I was out of cash for the time being. when I bought my convertible last year I did tell him, but only because it was tax season and I was really busy at work and I wanted him to do the leg work for me!lol
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 15:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2012 5:58:53 GMT -5
But, the point is, you are both in agreement with how these things work for the both of you in your marriage.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 15:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2012 6:01:31 GMT -5
I think we are confusing "leadership" with being a boss. Two totally different things. Biblical leadership means leading by example. It means getting down to the lowest levels, serving and washing the feet of others. That is what that kind of leadership is all about not. Not some thug beating his chest demanding his right and declaring himself to be king.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jul 3, 2012 6:02:58 GMT -5
But, the point is, you are both in agreement with how these things work for the both of you in your marriage. Agreed.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 15:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2012 6:40:35 GMT -5
This is exactly why you have so many choices in partners. You will find someone who thinks the same as you. Check I wouldn't say DH and I agree on everything, but one thing we are very clear about is this subject. No one is in charge. We're partners. We work together. That isn't to say that we don't have areas of defined responsibility, but we decide what they are TOGETHER, and the other person can have as much say as s/he wants in the way that area is run by the other. Finances are a good example - DH asked me from the outset to take care of our money, and I've been happy to oblige. It's easier than splitting finances, even though it took some long months of adjustment. However, to this day DH can have as much or as little input as he wants into what I'm doing with the money, and when we have huge windfalls we decide together what to do with them. If there's something he really wants, I find a way for us to afford it. Most of the time he's pretty hands off, but if he ever wants to learn more about our budget, I'm happy to talk his ear off about it but what do you do if there is a serious issue that neither of you is willing to budge on? DH and I do think of ourselves as equal partners, but when we come to an impass we usually concede to the person who is the most opposed to/in favor of something. Someone has to "win" sometimes. There are some things where we will mostly defer to the other as they are more knowledgable about said thing. Like picking out new cars - we look for price, reliability, and safety. DH happily researched and found 3 or 4 cars that we should consider for our next new car, and I chose the one I thought was best out of that group.
|
|