DW work is impacting our marriage - looking for advice from the smart people of DCUM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, I think the way we tie our identities and sense of self-worth to our employment is the source of a lot of problems in society.

When the robots do everything, the people who own robots are going to be rich, the rest of us are going to be poor, and nobody is going to know where to find their identity.

This is a gem in a mess of a thread. In a utopia, robots do the work, everyone gets a stipend, but yes, what will be our identity when we don't work?

Totally disagree. Everyone wants to feel like they are making a difference, like they are doing something that has value, that they are using their talents. Some people get that feeling through pride in their home and families, some through their hobbies (like running marathons), some through their work.

This thread is a perfect example, so many posters here trying to justify their own workaholic ways in a very transparent manner. Newsflash folks, not seeing your kids more than half the evenings every single week because you chose to stay at work instead, whether you are a man or a woman, is just plain selfish. If you aren’t willing to consider your kids more a priority than your career, you probably shouldn’t have had kids. And I say this as a working woman who has never made less than six figures with a dh with one of the most time intensive careers out there. Both of us put our kids first, and we have family dinners at least six nights a week,
.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, I think the way we tie our identities and sense of self-worth to our employment is the source of a lot of problems in society.

When the robots do everything, the people who own robots are going to be rich, the rest of us are going to be poor, and nobody is going to know where to find their identity.

This is a gem in a mess of a thread. In a utopia, robots do the work, everyone gets a stipend, but yes, what will be our identity when we don't work?

Totally disagree. Everyone wants to feel like they are making a difference, like they are doing something that has value, that they are using their talents. Some people get that feeling through pride in their home and families, some through their hobbies (like running marathons), some through their work.

This thread is a perfect example, so many posters here trying to justify their own workaholic ways in a very transparent manner. Newsflash folks, not seeing your kids more than half the evenings every single week because you chose to stay at work instead, whether you are a man or a woman, is just plain selfish. If you aren’t willing to consider your kids more a priority than your career, you probably shouldn’t have had kids. And I say this as a working woman who has never made less than six figures with a dh with one of the most time intensive careers out there. Both of us put our kids first, and we have family dinners at least six nights a week,
.

She didn't have a career at all for seven years but now to get her career restarted she's missed half the dinners (while her husband is home--no nanny) for three. And according to you this means she's unfit to be a mother and shouldn't have had kids? (And according to her husband she's not being a good wife, either?)

This is why the US reproductive rate is plummeting -- millenials women look at this and say "no thanks"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, I think the way we tie our identities and sense of self-worth to our employment is the source of a lot of problems in society.

When the robots do everything, the people who own robots are going to be rich, the rest of us are going to be poor, and nobody is going to know where to find their identity.

This is a gem in a mess of a thread. In a utopia, robots do the work, everyone gets a stipend, but yes, what will be our identity when we don't work?

Totally disagree. Everyone wants to feel like they are making a difference, like they are doing something that has value, that they are using their talents. Some people get that feeling through pride in their home and families, some through their hobbies (like running marathons), some through their work.

This thread is a perfect example, so many posters here trying to justify their own workaholic ways in a very transparent manner. Newsflash folks, not seeing your kids more than half the evenings every single week because you chose to stay at work instead, whether you are a man or a woman, is just plain selfish. If you aren’t willing to consider your kids more a priority than your career, you probably shouldn’t have had kids. And I say this as a working woman who has never made less than six figures with a dh with one of the most time intensive careers out there. Both of us put our kids first, and we have family dinners at least six nights a week,
.

She didn't have a career at all for seven years but now to get her career restarted she's missed half the dinners (while her husband is home--no nanny) for three. And according to you this means she's unfit to be a mother and shouldn't have had kids? (And according to her husband she's not being a good wife, either?)

This is why the US reproductive rate is plummeting -- millenials women look at this and say "no thanks"

Yes, if you can’t get your butt home for dinner with your kids four out of five weeknights, week after week, you are a bad parent, whether you are the mom or dad. One of the basics of being a parent is, you know, actually spending time with you kids on (gasp,) a daily basis.

Feel really really sad for your kids that you find this such a burden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, I think the way we tie our identities and sense of self-worth to our employment is the source of a lot of problems in society.

When the robots do everything, the people who own robots are going to be rich, the rest of us are going to be poor, and nobody is going to know where to find their identity.

This is a gem in a mess of a thread. In a utopia, robots do the work, everyone gets a stipend, but yes, what will be our identity when we don't work?

Totally disagree. Everyone wants to feel like they are making a difference, like they are doing something that has value, that they are using their talents. Some people get that feeling through pride in their home and families, some through their hobbies (like running marathons), some through their work.

This thread is a perfect example, so many posters here trying to justify their own workaholic ways in a very transparent manner. Newsflash folks, not seeing your kids more than half the evenings every single week because you chose to stay at work instead, whether you are a man or a woman, is just plain selfish. If you aren’t willing to consider your kids more a priority than your career, you probably shouldn’t have had kids. And I say this as a working woman who has never made less than six figures with a dh with one of the most time intensive careers out there. Both of us put our kids first, and we have family dinners at least six nights a week,
.

She didn't have a career at all for seven years but now to get her career restarted she's missed half the dinners (while her husband is home--no nanny) for three. And according to you this means she's unfit to be a mother and shouldn't have had kids? (And according to her husband she's not being a good wife, either?)

This is why the US reproductive rate is plummeting -- millenials women look at this and say "no thanks"

Yes, if you can’t get your butt home for dinner with your kids four out of five weeknights, week after week, you are a bad parent, whether you are the mom or dad. One of the basics of being a parent is, you know, actually spending time with you kids on (gasp,) a daily basis.

Feel really really sad for your kids that you find this such a burden.

DP: you're pretty insufferable. This 4/5 weeknights thing is such a strange and arbitrary line in the sand, and you've decided it makes OP's wife a bad parent?

As a reminder: OP never once said that he thinks his wife is a bad mom. Only you keep saying that. OP said he wants sex one more time a week and some compliments on his household management skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, I think the way we tie our identities and sense of self-worth to our employment is the source of a lot of problems in society.

When the robots do everything, the people who own robots are going to be rich, the rest of us are going to be poor, and nobody is going to know where to find their identity.

This is a gem in a mess of a thread. In a utopia, robots do the work, everyone gets a stipend, but yes, what will be our identity when we don't work?

Totally disagree. Everyone wants to feel like they are making a difference, like they are doing something that has value, that they are using their talents. Some people get that feeling through pride in their home and families, some through their hobbies (like running marathons), some through their work.

This thread is a perfect example, so many posters here trying to justify their own workaholic ways in a very transparent manner. Newsflash folks, not seeing your kids more than half the evenings every single week because you chose to stay at work instead, whether you are a man or a woman, is just plain selfish. If you aren’t willing to consider your kids more a priority than your career, you probably shouldn’t have had kids. And I say this as a working woman who has never made less than six figures with a dh with one of the most time intensive careers out there. Both of us put our kids first, and we have family dinners at least six nights a week,
.

She didn't have a career at all for seven years but now to get her career restarted she's missed half the dinners (while her husband is home--no nanny) for three. And according to you this means she's unfit to be a mother and shouldn't have had kids? (And according to her husband she's not being a good wife, either?)

This is why the US reproductive rate is plummeting -- millenials women look at this and say "no thanks"

Yes, if you can’t get your butt home for dinner with your kids four out of five weeknights, week after week, you are a bad parent, whether you are the mom or dad. One of the basics of being a parent is, you know, actually spending time with you kids on (gasp,) a daily basis.

Feel really really sad for your kids that you find this such a burden.

DP: you're pretty insufferable. This 4/5 weeknights thing is such a strange and arbitrary line in the sand, and you've decided it makes OP's wife a bad parent?

As a reminder: OP never once said that he thinks his wife is a bad mom. Only you keep saying that. OP said he wants sex one more time a week and some compliments on his household management skills.

Not being home to see your kids four out five nights every week for over three years is good parenting to you? Really?

Op’s wife may be over her relationship with him, too bad she has taken to avoiding her kids as well to punish him. That’s pretty petty and immature.

[Anonymous]

It's actually 3/7 not 4/5.

[Anonymous]

Three years is "just getting started?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, I think the way we tie our identities and sense of self-worth to our employment is the source of a lot of problems in society.

When the robots do everything, the people who own robots are going to be rich, the rest of us are going to be poor, and nobody is going to know where to find their identity.

This is a gem in a mess of a thread. In a utopia, robots do the work, everyone gets a stipend, but yes, what will be our identity when we don't work?

Totally disagree. Everyone wants to feel like they are making a difference, like they are doing something that has value, that they are using their talents. Some people get that feeling through pride in their home and families, some through their hobbies (like running marathons), some through their work.

This thread is a perfect example, so many posters here trying to justify their own workaholic ways in a very transparent manner. Newsflash folks, not seeing your kids more than half the evenings every single week because you chose to stay at work instead, whether you are a man or a woman, is just plain selfish. If you aren’t willing to consider your kids more a priority than your career, you probably shouldn’t have had kids. And I say this as a working woman who has never made less than six figures with a dh with one of the most time intensive careers out there. Both of us put our kids first, and we have family dinners at least six nights a week,
.

She didn't have a career at all for seven years but now to get her career restarted she's missed half the dinners (while her husband is home--no nanny) for three. And according to you this means she's unfit to be a mother and shouldn't have had kids? (And according to her husband she's not being a good wife, either?)

This is why the US reproductive rate is plummeting -- millenials women look at this and say "no thanks"

Yes, if you can’t get your butt home for dinner with your kids four out of five weeknights, week after week, you are a bad parent, whether you are the mom or dad. One of the basics of being a parent is, you know, actually spending time with you kids on (gasp,) a daily basis.

Feel really really sad for your kids that you find this such a burden.

DP: you're pretty insufferable. This 4/5 weeknights thing is such a strange and arbitrary line in the sand, and you've decided it makes OP's wife a bad parent?

As a reminder: OP never once said that he thinks his wife is a bad mom. Only you keep saying that. OP said he wants sex one more time a week and some compliments on his household management skills.

Not being home to see your kids four out five nights every week for over three years is good parenting to you? Really?

Op’s wife may be over her relationship with him, too bad she has taken to avoiding her kids as well to punish him. That’s pretty petty and immature.

Speaking of petty and immature.

You're . . . bringing your own stuff to the table here, to put it mildly.

[Anonymous]

Family dinners are ridiculous on weeknights in DC proper. Most jobs do not end until 7pm and school lets out at 3:15. There is a disconnect between the two schedules.

OP needs his wife to stop being so self-absorbed. That’s it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's actually 3/7 not 4/5.

Only 156 nights a year! These attempts at rationalizing going days without spending time with your children week after week, year after year, are really something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, I think the way we tie our identities and sense of self-worth to our employment is the source of a lot of problems in society.

When the robots do everything, the people who own robots are going to be rich, the rest of us are going to be poor, and nobody is going to know where to find their identity.

This is a gem in a mess of a thread. In a utopia, robots do the work, everyone gets a stipend, but yes, what will be our identity when we don't work?

Totally disagree. Everyone wants to feel like they are making a difference, like they are doing something that has value, that they are using their talents. Some people get that feeling through pride in their home and families, some through their hobbies (like running marathons), some through their work.

This thread is a perfect example, so many posters here trying to justify their own workaholic ways in a very transparent manner. Newsflash folks, not seeing your kids more than half the evenings every single week because you chose to stay at work instead, whether you are a man or a woman, is just plain selfish. If you aren’t willing to consider your kids more a priority than your career, you probably shouldn’t have had kids. And I say this as a working woman who has never made less than six figures with a dh with one of the most time intensive careers out there. Both of us put our kids first, and we have family dinners at least six nights a week,
.

She didn't have a career at all for seven years but now to get her career restarted she's missed half the dinners (while her husband is home--no nanny) for three. And according to you this means she's unfit to be a mother and shouldn't have had kids? (And according to her husband she's not being a good wife, either?)

This is why the US reproductive rate is plummeting -- millenials women look at this and say "no thanks"

Yes, if you can’t get your butt home for dinner with your kids four out of five weeknights, week after week, you are a bad parent, whether you are the mom or dad. One of the basics of being a parent is, you know, actually spending time with you kids on (gasp,) a daily basis.

Feel really really sad for your kids that you find this such a burden.

DP: you're pretty insufferable. This 4/5 weeknights thing is such a strange and arbitrary line in the sand, and you've decided it makes OP's wife a bad parent?

As a reminder: OP never once said that he thinks his wife is a bad mom. Only you keep saying that. OP said he wants sex one more time a week and some compliments on his household management skills.

Not being home to see your kids four out five nights every week for over three years is good parenting to you? Really?

Op’s wife may be over her relationship with him, too bad she has taken to avoiding her kids as well to punish him. That’s pretty petty and immature.

Speaking of petty and immature.

You're . . . bringing your own stuff to the table here, to put it mildly.

Oh sweetie, it is clearly the reverse. People who also do not make their children (or spouse) a priority are trying to justify the wife’s behavior to justify their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's actually 3/7 not 4/5.

Only 156 nights a year! These attempts at rationalizing going days without spending time with your children week after week, year after year, are really something else.

Kids that need their parents hovering more that 60% weekly is insane.

I agree parents should be around 60% of the time, more than that enters the arena of deminishing returns and verging on unhealthy.

[Anonymous]

Oh FFS, there is no magic formula to spending time with kids. Dinner is not sacred, especially if another parent is there. You do not have to have 2 parents at everything. 60% is not a magic line.

I am shocked at the level of sexism in this thread that this was A-OK for DH to do for 7 years while he traveled and worked and got himself into a high earning path, but how that Mom works it is a disaster.

I know many cabinet level or sub-cabinet or exec. level women who don't dine daily with their kids. But, they do chat on the phone at the office, help with homework by text, have dinner with the kids near the office, send them pictures or whatever. Their kids survive quite well, despite what Anne-Marie whats-her-face says.

My own kids didn't see their Dad for 6-8 weeks at a time while he was working in crazy places overseas. No one ever told me he was a bad parent for not being there for dinner every night. He sent pics. He emailed. He called Etc. Kids know that he loves them. We had fun dinners without him, and I would share daily achievements/problems so he was still in the loop when he got home. Kids benefited a lot by his experiences.

OP needs to grow up. OP's wife deserves to develop personally and professionally and he took her time and effort to do that for himself, so now he owes it to her to hold down the fort, with or without her. The kids will not die or being emotionally stunted if she doesn't show up for dinner most nights.

Sex is a different matter. OP would do better to ask himself why his wife isn't more interested and try to adjust accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regardless of whether you're a man or a woman, I think the way we tie our identities and sense of self-worth to our employment is the source of a lot of problems in society.

When the robots do everything, the people who own robots are going to be rich, the rest of us are going to be poor, and nobody is going to know where to find their identity.

This is a gem in a mess of a thread. In a utopia, robots do the work, everyone gets a stipend, but yes, what will be our identity when we don't work?

Totally disagree. Everyone wants to feel like they are making a difference, like they are doing something that has value, that they are using their talents. Some people get that feeling through pride in their home and families, some through their hobbies (like running marathons), some through their work.

This thread is a perfect example, so many posters here trying to justify their own workaholic ways in a very transparent manner. Newsflash folks, not seeing your kids more than half the evenings every single week because you chose to stay at work instead, whether you are a man or a woman, is just plain selfish. If you aren’t willing to consider your kids more a priority than your career, you probably shouldn’t have had kids. And I say this as a working woman who has never made less than six figures with a dh with one of the most time intensive careers out there. Both of us put our kids first, and we have family dinners at least six nights a week,
.

Sorry but my spouse is a doctor and can"t just work less once the kids came along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh FFS, there is no magic formula to spending time with kids. Dinner is not sacred, especially if another parent is there. You do not have to have 2 parents at everything. 60% is not a magic line.

I am shocked at the level of sexism in this thread that this was A-OK for DH to do for 7 years while he traveled and worked and got himself into a high earning path, but how that Mom works it is a disaster.

I know many cabinet level or sub-cabinet or exec. level women who don't dine daily with their kids. But, they do chat on the phone at the office, help with homework by text, have dinner with the kids near the office, send them pictures or whatever. Their kids survive quite well, despite what Anne-Marie whats-her-face says.

My own kids didn't see their Dad for 6-8 weeks at a time while he was working in crazy places overseas. No one ever told me he was a bad parent for not being there for dinner every night. He sent pics. He emailed. He called Etc. Kids know that he loves them. We had fun dinners without him, and I would share daily achievements/problems so he was still in the loop when he got home. Kids benefited a lot by his experiences.

OP needs to grow up. OP's wife deserves to develop personally and professionally and he took her time and effort to do that for himself, so now he owes it to her to hold down the fort, with or without her. The kids will not die or being emotionally stunted if she doesn't show up for dinner most nights.

Sex is a different matter. OP would do better to ask himself why his wife isn't more interested and try to adjust accordingly.

[phone]