Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree with you in theory but a lot of people are simply not built for that level of conflict. I've seen it in my own family.

Then don’t start a family.

Don't start a family unless you are "built for conflict"? What?

Anonymous wrote:

I agree with you in theory but a lot of people are simply not built for that level of conflict. I've seen it in my own family.

Then don’t start a family.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one can make you overcompensate for a lazy parent. it’s a choice. Divorce is better because you get free from the emotional abuse. You compartmentalize and do your best to raise your kids well on your time and let the rest go.

This is my approach and my kid is thriving. I also put my kid in therapy. She can process her dad’s laziness further when she’s an adult, but Mom will not be playing martyr. It’s unhealthy and sets a very poor example.

I think it's really a case by case basis and what worked for you won't work for everyone. A woman who chooses not to get divorced is not agreeing to be a martyr, and I think most women who decide to stay in the marriage and make it work are doing EXACTLY what you are doing: compartmentalizing, doing their best to raise their kids, and letting the rest go.

I've forced more equality into our marriage as well. I don't just shoulder it all and suffer in silence. DH won't plan anything. Not for himself, not for the family, not for our DC. So I plan it all, but that means I make all the choices. If he complains, I tell him that he's welcome to plan himself. He never does. So I hold outsized power over decision making in our house, because I'm the one who executes everything. Early on I worked harder to incorporate him into choices, but when I realized how little initiative he would take, that changed. For the last decade, I mostly do what I want and he mostly goes alone with it. Is it equal? No. Is it the marriage I imagined for myself? Also no. Does it allow me a better lifestyle overall, because of the efficiencies of a two-income household, and is it conducive to a better relationship between DC and DH? Yes. So it's worth it for me. I am not powerless. I chose this for myself and am reasonably happy and feel I'm doing right by myself and my child.

There was definitely a juncture (well, realistically, many junctures) where this deal I made for myself might have headed towards martyrdom and misery. DH absolutely used to fight me on decision making, while expecting to sit back and do nothing because "you're better at planning" or "you'll just yell at me if I make mistakes" and it did feel manipulative and I felt very resentful. Those are the times we've been closest to divorce. I think being willing to walk out the door, and I was, helped me stand up for myself so I didn't get walked all over.

The interesting thing is that it became very obvious DH was much more afraid of divorce than I was. And that makes sense -- if you are inherently lazy and constantly shirking responsibility for everything, the idea of being on your own, having to parent alone and take care of your own household, must be terrifying. That doesn't scare me at all. The only part I don't like is the money part, what it means to separate our households. But just taking care of DC on my own, running my own house? I know I could do that and that in some ways it would be easier than what I do now. Realizing that divorce scared him and didn't scare me helped me find more agency in our marriage. I know what my best alternative to staying married is, and it's really not that bad. But I've always found a way to make it work while staying married.

I’m skeptical that you are actually happy. Living with someone who doesn’t respect your energy is draining. Most of the women I know who take your position are just ones who are afraid of taking care of themselves financially.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean this is why many women make the best of marriage. Once you have a kid, you are tied together for life. If there isn't abuse, it can make more sense to just figure out some kind of equilibrium that works, even if it's not fair, and make the best of it.

This is a major reason I chose to only have one kid. Once I discovered what my DH was like as a dad and realized how much would fall to me, I chose to keep my workload as low as possible. My one kid is pretty great though, and I've also coached my DH into being a good father, so I feel I've done right by DD.

Completely insane that women have to do this. Jesus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one can make you overcompensate for a lazy parent. it’s a choice. Divorce is better because you get free from the emotional abuse. You compartmentalize and do your best to raise your kids well on your time and let the rest go.

This is my approach and my kid is thriving. I also put my kid in therapy. She can process her dad’s laziness further when she’s an adult, but Mom will not be playing martyr. It’s unhealthy and sets a very poor example.

I think it's really a case by case basis and what worked for you won't work for everyone. A woman who chooses not to get divorced is not agreeing to be a martyr, and I think most women who decide to stay in the marriage and make it work are doing EXACTLY what you are doing: compartmentalizing, doing their best to raise their kids, and letting the rest go.

I've forced more equality into our marriage as well. I don't just shoulder it all and suffer in silence. DH won't plan anything. Not for himself, not for the family, not for our DC. So I plan it all, but that means I make all the choices. If he complains, I tell him that he's welcome to plan himself. He never does. So I hold outsized power over decision making in our house, because I'm the one who executes everything. Early on I worked harder to incorporate him into choices, but when I realized how little initiative he would take, that changed. For the last decade, I mostly do what I want and he mostly goes alone with it. Is it equal? No. Is it the marriage I imagined for myself? Also no. Does it allow me a better lifestyle overall, because of the efficiencies of a two-income household, and is it conducive to a better relationship between DC and DH? Yes. So it's worth it for me. I am not powerless. I chose this for myself and am reasonably happy and feel I'm doing right by myself and my child.

There was definitely a juncture (well, realistically, many junctures) where this deal I made for myself might have headed towards martyrdom and misery. DH absolutely used to fight me on decision making, while expecting to sit back and do nothing because "you're better at planning" or "you'll just yell at me if I make mistakes" and it did feel manipulative and I felt very resentful. Those are the times we've been closest to divorce. I think being willing to walk out the door, and I was, helped me stand up for myself so I didn't get walked all over.

The interesting thing is that it became very obvious DH was much more afraid of divorce than I was. And that makes sense -- if you are inherently lazy and constantly shirking responsibility for everything, the idea of being on your own, having to parent alone and take care of your own household, must be terrifying. That doesn't scare me at all. The only part I don't like is the money part, what it means to separate our households. But just taking care of DC on my own, running my own house? I know I could do that and that in some ways it would be easier than what I do now. Realizing that divorce scared him and didn't scare me helped me find more agency in our marriage. I know what my best alternative to staying married is, and it's really not that bad. But I've always found a way to make it work while staying married.

Anonymous wrote:I mean this is why many women make the best of marriage. Once you have a kid, you are tied together for life. If there isn't abuse, it can make more sense to just figure out some kind of equilibrium that works, even if it's not fair, and make the best of it.

This is a major reason I chose to only have one kid. Once I discovered what my DH was like as a dad and realized how much would fall to me, I chose to keep my workload as low as possible. My one kid is pretty great though, and I've also coached my DH into being a good father, so I feel I've done right by DD.

I agree with you in theory but a lot of people are simply not built for that level of conflict. I've seen it in my own family.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree with OP (actually not quite sure of the argument) but I do think that if we could, as a society, figure out why so many men have this issue with arrested development and expect their wives to mother them, we could solve all kinds of problems. Family problems, relationship problems, childhood problems. Like if men just showed up in family life as independent adults who were (1) capable of caring for themselves, and (2) capable of caring for other people to a reasonable degree as appropriate, then this makes everything about marriage and parenting easier.

#notallmen of course -- there are absolutely men who do this. And there are of course women who don't, I get it. But it is far more common for the woman to be kind of duct taping family life together because her husband just doesn't have the skill set to be a real partner. and I'm not even talking about some equal, 50/50 ideal of coparenting. I see this also in marriages where the wife stays home with the kids and the man goes to work -- I still see men just not taking responsibility for themselves or their lives, and their SAHM wives absolutely managing them like another child. No matter how you allocate the workload, it works best of both adults can manage their own life and then some. When should not be managing themselves, their kids, AND their husbands. It makes no sense.

Just my own observation, but of the men I've dated, the ones who were actual MEN and not looking for a mother figure had very strong positive male role models. These role models actively taught them how to be a man, how to treat women, etc. It wasn't always fathers - often stepfathers, foster dad, uncles, pastors, etc.

The men I've known who were arrested development/needed a mom figure didn't have this and basically mimicked how they saw their fathers/other men in their lives behave. Dads were usually checked out and mom did everything, so it was easy for them to fall back into that once a woman was in the picture.

I don't know what the solution is. We can't force men to step it up and do better for their sons' sake. The closest thing I can think of is mandatory military service for men, although that would need a complete overhaul to get rid of all the toxicity.

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree with OP (actually not quite sure of the argument) but I do think that if we could, as a society, figure out why so many men have this issue with arrested development and expect their wives to mother them, we could solve all kinds of problems. Family problems, relationship problems, childhood problems. Like if men just showed up in family life as independent adults who were (1) capable of caring for themselves, and (2) capable of caring for other people to a reasonable degree as appropriate, then this makes everything about marriage and parenting easier.

#notallmen of course -- there are absolutely men who do this. And there are of course women who don't, I get it. But it is far more common for the woman to be kind of duct taping family life together because her husband just doesn't have the skill set to be a real partner. and I'm not even talking about some equal, 50/50 ideal of coparenting. I see this also in marriages where the wife stays home with the kids and the man goes to work -- I still see men just not taking responsibility for themselves or their lives, and their SAHM wives absolutely managing them like another child. No matter how you allocate the workload, it works best of both adults can manage their own life and then some. When should not be managing themselves, their kids, AND their husbands. It makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:Some men do become better fathers after divorce. Sometimes the divorce was a wakeup call. Sometimes the divorce face the father the ability to parent without the mom treating him as some sort of subordinate assistant. When you have your kids 50 percent of the time, you have a lot of opportunity to be a good parent. Or a bad one.

Anonymous wrote:Seems a common theme is wives leaving because they just can’t tolerate having a child for a husband. Weaponzied incompetence, performative parenting, etc. but then, once divorced, you are supposed to continue doing all the organizing and invisible labor, or else you aren’t a cooperative co parent and “the kids will suffer”. We divorce them when they don’t pull their weight in marriage but then tolerate it once divorced.

Anonymous wrote:The logic here is wild. You divorce a man because he refuses to carry his share of the load and somehow after the divorce you’re expected to keep project-managing his life so the kids’ schedules don’t fall apart? Absolutely not.

That’s what divorce orders are for. Spell. Everything. Out. Pickup times, drop-offs, school forms, medical appointments, activity registration, communication methods, every single task that used to live in the “invisible labor” bucket. If it matters, stipulate it.

And if he doesn’t hold up his end? You don’t sigh and quietly pick up the slack so no one notices. You document it and drag his ass back to court. Judges exist for a reason.

Coparenting does not mean continuing to be your ex-husband’s unpaid executive assistant. His parenting time is his responsibility. His logistics are his problem. His failures are not yours to cushion.

Not your circus. Not your monkeys.