SAH/WOH--extramarital affairs
Find a Conversation
SAH/WOH--extramarital affairs
| Tue, 02-15-2005 - 12:54pm |
I was just at the gym this morning and overheard a conversation between two women on treadmills who were discussing/debating as to whether married sahms were any more or less likely to have affairs than married wohms.
I thought it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this.

Pages
<>
Here: http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-pssahwoh&msg=15105.35, when you wrote this:
<>
You change your tune an awful lot on this board, I have noticed. But it will be interesting to see you try to reconcile these two points of view. What if someone is writing a novel just because she likes it? Is that not OK? And, if not, then how do you justify reading novels or consuming other works of art yourself? If people didn't pursue strange and varied professions just for the love of them, how on earth would our society function?
I thought of asking these questions before, but it seemed pretty fruitless. If you truly, truly doubt the value of any pursuits other than those that would bring financial reward or elevated social status, if you're not just being obtuse for the sake of argument or to justify your own life choices, then a real exchange of ideas is darned near impossible.
The pursuit of love and happiness are not valid motivations for ANY course of action, as far as I can tell from your posts. A grim determination to carry out the life plan that one developed at age 18, now that's valuable (although why I don't understand, since you often point out how immature you were at 18 -- another interesting contradiction). I just honestly find it difficult to communicate effectively with someone of your values.
The ability to do something and actually doing it are two different things. So what if you "could" go to work tomorrow? Today, you are dependent on your dh earning money. Which was the point.
I'm curious though why your dh would continue to pay you if you returned to WOH. What would he be paying you for, since apparently you can't do those things he's paying you for unless you SAH?
<>
So, like I said, you were just ignoring the context. Because whether or not something counts as a "service" wasn't even an issue. The issue was whether or not a SAHP is financially dependent on the WOHP. How many "services" the SAHP does or does not provide is completely irrelevant.
Edited 3/1/2005 11:10 pm ET ET by taylormomma
Pages