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
Kinda like you're denigrating your DH having had anything to do with "your" "accomplishment" in having kids?
Even if so, why does it affect you? I wonder, do I get to be, what was the phrase, deeply resentful? highly offended? every time you denigrate your spouse's contributions to your family? Hmm. Maybe this could be fun.
Mondo
We have separate funds too..you and I have
No, I was debating one specific subthread of the thread. Happens all the time, we start debating one subject and it leads to a discussion on another subject. This post started out as SAH/WOH Extramarial Affairs but many other things are being discussed. Which means that that starting subject has lead to many other discussions (including whether a SAHP is financially dependent on a WOHP). Whether or not a SAHP is dependent fincially on a WOHP was not an issue until someone brought it into the discussion.
"But aside from childcare, none of those are things which one must hire anyone to do."
Also is has absolutely nothing to do with whether someone is dependent on someones income or not. Why is it ok for you to veer off from a subject but when I do I am ignoring the content?
I was debating that specific post just like you were debating the specific post that you replied to.
Edited 3/2/2005 6:28 am ET ET by texigan
Edited 3/2/2005 6:30 am ET ET by texigan
I looked that up. My usage is now deemed obsolete! Thanks.
I'm not really versed in disability compensation, but I'm up on my SS reading and there are many things including the death benefit, the survivor's benefit, a possible increase in payments upon the death of a spouse, which certainly indicate an incentive encouraging family.
I can't imagine why the legislature would allow disability payments to the family after one passes away unless there were also an intention to encourage family.
What are your thoughts on QM's perspectives?
PNJ already discussed that very distinction before you posted in #740, I think.
Admit it, you just wanted to use the word parthenogenesis. lol (What - Parthenon, babies popping out of male gods' bodies? I don't have my dictionary at hand.)
That would bother me too. I'd still be her friend and wouldn't "resent" it. But annoying nonetheless.
I think it's the people who get up everyday to get to work on-time that have it not necessarily harder, but a more structured and more demanding time of it than sahps. They are entitled to say they alone earned the money.
I also consider DH's hard-earned money his money. He earned it and I'm glad he's generous with it and doesn't put any conditions on my spending it. Whenever possible, I'll try to get his input (like for bigger purchases for the house or family) because deep inside, I believe it's his money. I know I couldn't have earned his larger income as a lawyer. My friends keep telling me NOT to think that way. But so far it's not an issue.
Pages