For the record, I don't care about money beyond paying the bills and buying a few games, its the freedom I value, so the above does not apply to me. You bringing it up feels like you're attributing it to me, or others, but you then go on to say you're not, so fair enough. I don't really get the point of posting it at all, if you aren't trying to use it in that way, but again, fair enough.
For the record, 99% of everything you said was fine, here are some examples I didn't feel were fine:-
Do you think that the husband only has a 50% financial burden on the bills and mortgage and everything else is the responsibilty of the wife? and that is somehow dependent on the ages of the children?
You infering that I claimed (or believed) such a thing by posing it as a question to what I said, and I find it completely insulting and felt it was done on purpose.
Well, that explains your attitude to an equal marriage I suppose.
Loaded statement. Feel free to backtrack and state that wasn't meant to be a dig, but it looks to me like it was.
Fair enough, although I never married to bolster an income or vice versa (what a strange accusation to garner from anything I have said)
I didn't actually say any such thing, which makes it look like you're twisting what I've said on purpose to make me look bad.
I have no need to feel or be superior to my partner, financially or otherwise.
Loaded statement, implying that I do.
I work as part of our family unit, as does the wife
Loaded statement, implying that I do not.
our friends however (or at least one of them) is not happy and therein lies the problem with the system they chose
Implying this is somehow relevant to the system I've chosen when I don't have kids and already pointed out I'd change my ways once I had kids.
call it assumed permanence within the relationship rather than committment if you will.
You've basically repeated that several times. Loaded statement. You infer others are not as commited as yourself.
but I would not be comfortable in a marriage that was not one of equals
Loaded statement. We're not equals because we don't share all our money?
Its entirely possible you don't actually intend to attribute these things in the way they come across, but it doesn't make much sense for you to be posting them in responce to me otherwise, and you'd probably feel the same way if the tables were turned. These types of statements are the only reason I've bothered to respond, as I don't really like the way they come across.
I disagree with this. Different, yes. Better for me, yes. Superior, no.
Fair enough. I'll accept that you didn't intend what you said to come across the way you said it, but being resonable you should be able to see why this and the above quotes can come across in the way I have stated and probably choose your words slightly better in some circumstances.
Well I can't entirely agree with you on that point. If she had one kid with him, fair enough, fool me once and all that. Continue on to have another 3 children with someone who seems like a completely worthless partner, and you need to accept that you were at fault making that decision.
That doesn't absolve the guy from being a complete and utter ******, I just don't understand the womans decisions on the matter, but then I've met a few woman in my time, and understanding them was often not a trivial matter.
If you're using that example to poke holes into my system that I've already accepted, then its not on point. The reason I've responded to it was it seemed to be a counter example which included a scenario we agreed was not relevant and furthermore the story is just weird and unrealistic. I'm not saying its made up mind you, just that as above, she must be an idiot and he must be a complete ****. Sadly, thats actually an entirely plausible scenario, but its still weird when you see it.
Last edited:
