The Proper Care & Feeding of Husbands
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 07-11-2007 - 6:29pm |
I recently read "The Proper Care & Feeding of Relationships" by Dr. Laura Schlessinger and was surprised to find I agreed with much of what she said in the book...so I returned to the library to borrow "The Proper Care & Feeding of Husbands" and again...I find I agree with most of what she writes. I would have scoffed at the titles alone 12 years ago when I was married, working up the corporate ladder with my 2 year old in dc full time from 11 months on. I thought I had it all.
I ended up divorced and now the 2 year old is 14 and I realized recently how fast she is growing up and that I really missed a lot of time with her and my husband by choice(working).
I am remarried and 3 yrs ago our son was born. I returned to work when he was 10 months and found what I think is the best dayhome I could have...they were amazing and very loving. Our family is very close with them now....I was working(primary breadwinner) and couldn't shake the feeling that I was putting my career ahead of my family when my family is monumentally more important to me than the money I was bringing in. We COULD change our situation to enable me to be at home...so we did and I now wonder why any mother who is emotionally healthy and does not *have* to work for the family to get by....doesn't stay at home? I am not meaning that disrespectfully or sarcastically as I myself did not make that choice with myt first. I resigned 9 months ago. I am proud to be at home even though I wasn't with my first(which I now regret but didn't think I would!). I am proud to send my husband off to work with hot coffee and a lunch I made that always includes homebaked treats....welcome him home to a clean home and wonderful meal...spend my days teaching my son and playing with him; treasuring it sincerely...and being here for my 14 year old daughter whether she needs me to yell at; or hug and talk...or just to stop her from sitting on the computer all day or getting into mischief.
To give you the tone of the books I will give you a couple of excerpts;
"The issue of "roles" in a marriage and family is often a sensitive one. Stay-at-home moms as well as hardworking primary-breadwinner men are not given much respect from our society-at-large. Feminist educators and activists keep trying to squeeze men and women into niches that may simply not be a good match for their innate qualites...as well as their masculine and feminine drives. It is more in the female nature to nest and nurture. It is more in the male nature to conquer and protect. Frankly, the more we ignore the true, inherent masculine and feminine qualites of people, the farther apart we pull them."
"...feminism has brainwashed women to believe that all men are inconsiderate beasts you can't rely on. Therefore, the threat goes, never give up your independence. This mentality has confsed and frightened women into an avoidance of becoming dependant on their men. To protect themselves, women ferociously parry with their men, while denigrating their own desires to tend the home and raise children. Then they call me all angry and depressed... nd they think it is because of their husbands."
So...what do you think?
*edit to correct a typo
Edited 7/11/2007 7:57 pm ET by hi_kimmie


Pages
<.
Everytime she used the word "disabled" instead of "disability benefits". If she had meant "disability benefits" she would have used those words. Alas, she did not. She used the word "disabled", which was because she was "talking about being disabled and choosing to be disabled".
<>
That is of course, different than choosing to be disabled.
<>
I did.
PumpkinAngel
"Why would I ask her about Dubious Injury Guy? You're the one who introduced him into the discussion."
I don't know. why would you bring up a pool discussion.
"Let me use my psychic powers to guess what his disability is . . . .mmmmmm . . .could it be . . . soft tissue injury?"
what is that supposed to mean?
<<he is labeled as disabled, receives benefits and whatnot just as a disabled person does. >>
Still not talking about benefits and whatnot, only being disabled and as you said, you don't know if he chose to be injured, therefore he did not choose to be disabled, he only choose to seek disability benefits, which of course is not the same as being disabled.
<<Because he doesn't meet your definition of disabled does not mean the checks will stop coming in the mail and his license plates will be confiscated, lol. >>
Not taking about any of this either...
PumpkinAngel
"....the state and the employer. They were the ones being discussed...."
they knew about the incident I suppose if the company was following rules.
"You have stated that you don't know if he chose to be injured or not, now you are saying that he did? Or do you actually mean that after he was injured and disabled, he decide to pursue receiving disability benefits?"
I don't know if he chose to be injured or not. I wasn't there. right the latter.as I've stated ad naseum! by george, she's got it!
"So we have come full circle and your example is not an example of someone choosing to be disabled, it is an example of someone who has been disabled and now chooses to receive disability benefits."
right in answer to your question of how someone chooses to become disabled. he didn't have to pursue it. others with his injury are not considered disabled. how do you explain that?
"How can I quite doing something I never started?"
You claimed I am not a medical doctor when I never claimed I was.
Pages