Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)
Reply to "At a loss- spouse openly disregarded my wishes on something"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]And this is why DH and I each get a separate sum of money to do whatever we want with each paycheck. I would go crazy if I had to run everything by DH and he feels the same way.[/quote] This is just masking the issue at hand. [/quote] +1 This is what OP said: "Spouse wanted to buy something on impulse that I felt would be a huge time suck and would result in adding more to my overflowing plate because of the time commitment"[/quote] How would it be a huge time suck for her, if her spouse bought this thing? It might be a huge time suck for him. How is it a huge time suck for her?[/quote] It sounds like she needs to do work on the weekends (As she mentions big law hours) which likely means husband needs to be on kid duty. If he is out on his boat type structure then she is doing both kid duty and work duty or needs to do work later when she might otherwise have relaxed[/quote] I don't understand why OP framed this as her husband getting to impulse-purchase something over her veto, and then ranted on about all the times her wishes to purchase something had been vetoed by him in the past; but now it's about her not having enough time, or him not having enough time, or something? No. This is about OP being butthurt that she deprived herself of purchasing things she had wanted, based on her husband's veto; but then her husband ignored her retaliatory veto of the recent purchase. Op is trying to turn it into a rationalization of why her veto was legitimate, that it will be a time suck. But the way she described the fight, and their history, actually makes it sound like the real reason she vetoed the purchase was retaliation for prior vetoes by her husband. She is making a big law salary, that's hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. I think she could probably hire a baby sitter or housekeeper if that's the issue.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics