Liberating Motherhood

[Meepy]

Divorce rates say little about how marriages worked. Divorce used to be a lot harder to obtain. Just because there was less of it doesn't mean marriages were any better.

I'm proud to have the choice to stay home with my family rather than being forced to do it. Most of all because I know for sure that being stuck at home would drive me nuts. I think I'd be a better mom if I could get out of the house a few days a week. And no, that's not me being selfish, that's me being realistic. To say that I should just stay home diminishes the value of my job. I like to think that what I do at work has some value.

yea but benedicto was saying how husbands are leaving their wives in droves without anything. Hence I told her that before modern feminism the divorce rates were very very low. Men very rarely left their wives like they do now today.

The Church upholds the indissolubility of marriage. It was the feminists who wanted things like no-fault divorce and wanted to get rid of homemakers.

 

[Meepy]

Those days are gone. The only ones I know who are doing that are financially well enough off that they can.
For the rest of us, we all answer to the man now. There is just that much less of our lives in the private sphere.
You learn how to juggle, and do what needs to be done.

Something lost, something gained. Many more are not even bothering.

which is why Catholic Social teaching and Living family wage is such an important issue. But no one will listen to the Popes or the encyclicals, or the tenants of social teaching. That is the root of the problem. Severing the Church totally from civil issues.

 

[Meepy]

Yes... because everything was perfect when women were trapped in loveless, even abusive, marriages because there was no possible means for them to support themselves and their children if they left. Good times!

that is an awfully generalizing sweep to take on pre-industrial marriages. Who says they were loveless??

Did you know that the Amish were rated the happiest people on earth? something to think about.

 

[Rebekka]

I was expecting more than a nevermind when I asked you for more information, that was for sure.

And I said nevermind... where exactly? I gave you more information, as best as I could with what little information you gave me. I think you're reading things into my posts that aren't there.

 

[Meepy]

Meep, first I'm not a feminist, never have been and never will be, so don't even try to pull that junk with me.

This is not a either /or thing. Its both & and. There is nothing wrong with the traditional role of motherhood and I'm not anti the motherhood role but what I am against is a women not also, in addition to, not having something to fall back on just in case the man turns out to be an idiot.

I never said you were a feminist. But by the tone of your posts, you do seem to have some anger that might have been provoked by western feminist ideal. Just like how the middle east goes to far the one way, the US goes to far to the other way. And when you grow up in an ideal it can become a part of your attitude towards something.

What I realize is women have to have a way to take care of themselves if the man should leave.

You disagree? That the big alpha men DO leave their wives, even if they are the "good" Christian if they think the wife has not done her "job" to make him happy?

Well the wife should want to make her husband happy because of her love for him and God instead of acting like it is a job. Marriage is a sacrifice. Just as the husband sacrifices to provide for his family, the wife sacrifices by taking care and watching the household and the wellbeing of the husband. That's what the essential meaning of "helpmeet" is. To help and support your husband emotionally and in other issues. A rapport. A leveling factor within the house.

You do know that happens in the real world, right? Not some idealistic principle but the real world.

which part? the western real world? middle eastern? eastern? asian? west europe? east europe?

Be that as it may- how does that negate what I said before?

because you were complaining about men leaving their wives with nothing. Yet ever since this ideal of female careerism and job priority over motherhood the divorce rates have raised significantly.

Women who do stay married and raise a bunch of kids, who played the devoted wife and the ever fulling role of mother to a bunch of needy ppl, one day when the kids are grown, she realizes she neglected herslef in the process. She doesn't know who she is outside of her "role".

This is kinda a selfish attitude because it doesn't understand that marriage is love and is a sacrifice. Faith, Hope and Charity. As Pope Pius XI says, it is a crime against motherhood to put her own bent above the priority of her husband and family. To assume that she must disregard the role of motherhood to "realize herself" is a common feminist argument used to weaken the role of motherhood.

Is this really radical feminist crazy talk or is it normal? Its normal for a mother and wife who spent 30 years taking care of her family to neglect herself where even her heath was being neglected.

The goal is leveling out the time for herself and the time for her family. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Taking care of her family and being a mother isn't "neglecting herself" either, but simply fulfilled a new step in life that God has given her. To assume that a mother automatically neglects her life by being a homemaker kinda worries me concerning the way you view family. Family is a fulfillment and development of the self within the realm of matrimony, not a neglecting.

Listen and listen to me good becuase I think you are newly married, a man has a obligation to make sure his wife is being care for as well.

If you begin to have kids, make sure your wife also is putting herself on the list of who gets needs met or you will one day have a hot mess on your hands when she gives all of herslef and she's just spent.

I been married for around 7 years. What each spouse does for each other they reciprocate back in love for one another and God.

You admit men walk out becuase the wife is not what she is supposed to be. what ever, you can now understand why she needs to be able to support herslef if he should leave? She HAS to be able to care for herself.

no, I am saying more men are walking out because they think women are much more independent and thus they don't need to take care of them as much anymore. The death of chivalry, which causes both men and women to neglect their emotional needs. The masculization of women, which hurts mans instinct to take care of and protect their wives. More men are walking about because of the death of chivalry and the responsibilities of husbandship. But they feel more justified in doing so because they think women as independent now. In cases of extreme times the Father in law should step in and provide respite and support for his daughter too. But because marriage has become so secular the family rarely intercedes.

So I guess you are saying if your wife does not stay in this idealistic fantasy you have created for you both based on charts and graphs, and she actually does feel like she is not getting what she needs and tries to talk to you about it and you shut her down right away, claiming she is a miserable women that you pity, you feel you have the right to leave her.

What ever, I'm not judging for that, leave her if you want, however, if she played it your way and you feel justified for what ever reason, when leave her, if she never worked, she's pretty much screwed, right?

it sounds like you have bitterness issues in some areas. I don't think marriage should be viewed with that type of attitude. Marriage should be a reciprocation of the spouses in love for one another. As Pope Leo XIII states, the husband is the head and the wife is the heart. I think that is a wonderful model that we can use. Also the model of Joseph and Mary. Motherhood shouldn't be viewed as a depletion of happiness or self. It is a new step in life, the step to matrimony, a new life.

You can pass the buck if you want... but men should own their part in the feminist movement. They provoked it Meep.

I agree. Men and women both have hurt the institution of marriage with the materialistic and vain ideals of today. Wherever there are feminists pushing for something, there is always a male judge signing it into existence.

If they had not been such jerks through the ages, there would not have been this movement.

I've seen where "Catholic" men filled with chivalry, when they feel betrayed by a wife who stayed home with the kids for 25 years, if they feel she did something to them, they will want to punish her by leaving her with nothing.

Its to teach her a lesson, that she should have kept him happy and satisfied. She should have never bit the hand that fed her.

Well if a wife does something that is harmful to the marriage she should talk over about it with her husband. Betrayal is a very serious thing. If she did do something wrong, she should make amends and repent. Preferably with their family priest. I surely hope you are not justifying spousal betrayal.

I such cases sometimes separation is needed. But the Church is against leaving ones wife destitute without any support. A separation in beds in the same house can be a start until there is reparation.

I have seen it Meepy so you can not argue with me about it.
This "traditional" man really does think like this. and he will have his own kids suffer financial hardship becuase he knows it further hurts the women. Men do try to punish women who they think did him something.

I think cases like this should be solved by the solidarity of the people. Neighbors, friends, relatives and other people who can help. It is wrong for a husband to abandon his wife, just as it is wrong for a wife to betray her husband. They are both equally bad things.

Its not healthy for a man to hold all the cards.

You know this is what you are advocating, a women being in the position where if she doesn't kiss his ___ she can't survive.

That ought to make for a real happy marriage.

oh, now all of a sudden you talk about family survival when you blasted against things like the Living and Family wage in the other OP?

benedicto, I am worried about your attitude regarding marriage though. I think you view it in a very harmful and bitter way. Why do you automatically assume a wife reciprocating to her husband in good will and towards his well-being is __kissing? Do you ever consider that a wife is good to her husband because of charity and love? And that both the spouses reciprocate towards each other within that bond of self sacrifice and love? You seem to think there is bad motive behind everything.

I'm not a feminist Meepy, Just a realist.

I never said you were. Although you have a very pessimistic and materialistic view towards marriage that is similar in some aspects of western feminism. I think you ignore the charitable aspects of marriage and that spouses help each other because of love and charity, not trying kiss someones butt.

 

[Meepy]

I like the way how in Meepy and Solomon's world, all divorces are instigated by the woman. Husbands never leave the wife, its always the duplicitous ungrateful woman running off with the man's hard earned cash.

Am I out of line in suspecting that a harsh divorce settlement migh loom large in certain poster's personal backgrounds?

I never said that. Men instigate divorce too. That's not to say it is more prominent in women(70% of all divorces are filed by women).

However I think it is more related to the view of marriage. The western female view of marriage in the US is a very materialistic, demanding, and conditional one. I think this is caused by many things, such as the attitude of instant gratification within the decadence of western life. And sadly they take that materialistic expectation into their marriages.

However when you go into areas where they aren't surrounded by the instant gratification of western decadence you will find marriages become much more self-sacrificing, less superficial, less demanding, and less materialistic.

 

[Meepy]

I like the way how in Meepy and Solomon's world, all divorces are instigated by the woman. Husbands never leave the wife, its always the duplicitous ungrateful woman running off with the man's hard earned cash.

Am I out of line in suspecting that a harsh divorce settlement migh loom large in certain poster's personal backgrounds?

you realize that the US, a county that prides itself on progressiveness and modern marriage, belittles traditional marriage, has the highest divorce rate in the world at almost 50%?

do you know what the divorce rates are in more traditional countries?

I think you got your facts reversed.

All goes to insecurity.

If you have a woman who wants an equal partnership, there's nothing to stop her leaving. No, y7ou need to keep a woman subserviant, with no career or education prospects, and keep her on an allowance, so you know she'll never leave. And that way, knowing your completely safe in the relationship, you can let your guard down and let the love flow. Thats how it works, right? If only these ungrateful women would realise that these chivalrous men want to deny them any sort of self determination or independence for their own good, so they can have a genuine loving relationship...

I think I'm going to be sick.

You know the Church anathematized people who support divorce. It also condemns the ideal of women putting work over their child and conjugal duties. You act as if throwing women out in the workforce is the answer. Yet all it did was flood the market and lower wages and work demand. So now instead of one person being paid moderately, it goes to 2 people being paid minimum.

Your ideals are destructive towards the homemaker. Because by throwing women out into the workforce in droves you diminish the wages of the homemakers husband, which then forces her to go out and work when she would rather be home with her children and husband. You are hurting women in the long run and you don't realize it sadly.

And what Pope Pius XI and Leo XIII say is relevant. I think the fact that some just disregard their words kinda speaks volumes.

 

[Meepy]

..

 

[SolomonVII]

And I said nevermind... where exactly? I gave you more information, as best as I could with what little information you gave me. I think you're reading things into my posts that aren't there.

Okay from the beginning, this time with gusto.

"A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle".


​

True or false?
Open to life, or closed to life?

Your opening statement.

I see two different issues here?

Me asking for you to expan a little so I could no what you were talking about

and?....

You replying, to paraphrase "nevermind"

Oh, nothing, it's just that I thought you presented them as intertwined.

Me wondering how having babies(open to life) without men being necessary could be even possible.

As opposed to what?
Test tube babies or something?

What did you have in mind?

...
And so on and so forth, until you state , to paraphrse, 'of course many feminists are open to life and marriage to men', whereupon I agreed, and elucidated. <post 220>

 

[benedictaoo]

yea but benedicto was saying how husbands are leaving their wives in droves without anything. Hence I told her that before modern feminism the divorce rates were very very low. Men very rarely left their wives like they do now today.

So you do acknowledge they do leave them. thats good.

Now despite who gets the blame, the feminazis or who ever, the point is, in this day and age its a reality for many women, so she has to be able to take care of herself.

You can't fault a women for that.

 

[benedictaoo]

Did you know that the Amish were rated the happiest people on earth? something to think about.

thats becuase they don't know anything else.

 

[CruciFixed]

I seen some Amish in the children's hospital because their kids keep ending up in the picu anyway......
They love elevators

Sorry to derail.

 

[Gwendolyn]

So a man's ideal really is having a woman who has to rely on him for everything?

 

[benedictaoo]

Okay Meep, I'm gonna answer you but first- wow.

Okay...

I never said you were a feminist. But by the tone of your posts, you do seem to have some anger that might have been provoked by western feminist ideal.

Perhaps I do have an "attitude" provoked by the culture and society I live in and grew up with.

You can call it what ever you like, western, feminist, what ever but I grew up with women getting screwed over by men becuase when the marriage is over he wants to pick up his ball and go home, thinking she in entitled to nothing.

So I'm not jaded, I just understand that ideals are all fine and good but then there is the reality.

Do you kinda understand what I'm saying?

You are telling me about how things ought to be and I am trying to tell you how things actually are.

I agree with you, in a perfect world this ideal works if both man and women are fully on board playing their roles. But the reality is, in the west, they aren't and its men too, not doing what he is supposed to do. Even Catholic marriages are ending in divorce and so a woman needs to be able to care for herslef.

Just like how the middle east goes to far the one way, the US goes to far to the other way. And when you grow up in an ideal it can become a part of your attitude towards something.

agreed.

Well the wife should want to make her husband happy because of her love for him and God

And he should do the same and understand wifehood and motherhood can be draining on a women and just plain hard and not so freeing and fulfilling all the time.

Over all it is but day to day, its not all the time and you as a husband should be sensitive to that and not think, "well she should do this or that becuase of love for me and God". Its just not the simple or black and white.

As a women, I can tell you, no woman (unless she's crazy) wants to make her husband unhappy and dissatisfied. Its just sometimes his expectations are too much for her when he is this big Catholic who wants to live according to every pope who ever lived, documents.

We don't live in the East, Asia or Africa, or in pope Pious' time. We live in today, in the moment and so don't create such an expectation where the ideal may be impossible to live up to.

instead of acting like it is a job. Marriage is a sacrifice. Just as the husband sacrifices to provide for his family, the wife sacrifices by taking care and watching the household and the wellbeing of the husband.

And if it proves to be too much on him to provide seeing how we are not in the middle East 500 years ago but in the USA in the here and now, maybe it would not be such a feminist crazy evil sin for the wife to work as well.

and then he can reciprocate as you say and help with the children and they get a dad that they actually can spend time with and get to know.

and you say the popes say this is criminal. Wow.

That's what the essential meaning of "helpmeet" is. To help and support your husband emotionally and in other issues. A rapport. A leveling factor within the house.

So she is there to support him and help him... not he her? Wow and that is why a marriage will not last, IMO.

which part? the western real world? middle eastern? eastern? asian? west europe? east europe?

The world in which we live. I could care less what other countries and walks of life do- the one where I'm living is what to need to care about.

because you were complaining about men leaving their wives with nothing. Yet ever since this ideal of female careerism and job priority over motherhood the divorce rates have raised significantly.

So what?

This is kinda a selfish attitude because it doesn't understand that marriage is love and is a sacrifice.

It selfish? To not want to take care of yourslef and matter?

Faith, Hope and Charity

Goes both ways. The family in the house should care about mom and want what makes her happy. How selfish is it when they don't?

I'll be frank, I do not know what planet you are living on where you think a women is fulfilled and feels "free" when she is taking care of a bunch of needy ppl who in reality, can take care of themselves if this "role" was not defined that she is not a real women in love and who loves God if she doesn't.

You are questions a woman's love for God... really? thats a bit much Meep.

It just gets tiring, boring and aggravating after a while, its not so fulfilling and if you do not recognize this and as a husband who actually loves his wife and cares about her happiness, not just your own, you will be headed for some hard times if you are not willing to fix it.

As Pope Pius XI says, it is a crime against motherhood to put her own bent above the priority of her husband and family.

Who said anything about above? No one said Jack about putting herself above anything, but her needs should be equally important to her husband if he is seriously going to bare the name "Christian" Right?

So get it straight before you start quoting popes from day gone by... no one said once that a women should put her job or anything above the needs of her family but they should not be a pecking order.

To assume that she must disregard the role of motherhood to "realize herself" is a common feminist argument used to weaken the role of motherhood.

Who said disregard? I merely said she loses herself in the process and if you were ever faced with your wife feeling this way after years of devoted love and service to you- how would you handle it?

Would you really say, "you have some nerve disregarding the family for yourself... how dare you feel this way... you must not love God"?

and what is she put herslef on the back burner so much that she had heath issues? You would not say, "enough, its time you worry about you, we are okay, we can take care of us now"?

That criminal in your mind?

The goal is leveling out the time for herself and the time for her family. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Taking care of her family and being a mother isn't "neglecting herself" either, but simply fulfilled a new step in life that God has given her. To assume that a mother automatically neglects her life by being a homemaker kinda worries me concerning the way you view family. Family is a fulfillment and development of the self within the realm of matrimony, not a neglecting.

well Meepy, you can feel about it how ever you choose to feel about it, but guess what? In reality- this happens everyday in every house through out... I would say it happens in all those other cultures too.

It happens Meep, I promise you it does and its should not be dismissed.

You are making my point when you dismiss it. You really are. How about you open up and listen to women (who been there, done that) when they tell you these things and try to be understanding and not shrug it off as, she is under the feminist influence? Or Just not be a jerk about it?

I been married for around 7 years. What each spouse does for each other they reciprocate back in love for one another and God.

Uh huh... sure. If you love God and the women, you will ask her how she feels about all this at differnt stages of her life.

no, I am saying more men are walking out because they think women are much more independent and thus they don't need to take care of them as much anymore.

How? How can they think that when they are at home, had been for 25-30 years and never worked and at best has a high school education?

Care to explain it to me?

I'm talking about women who did play the good wife and mom and it was never good enough for the man... I do not want my daughter to be like that Meepy, be in that position and you know good and well, you wouldn't want your daughter or your mother to be treated like that by a man.

The death of chivalry, which causes both men and women to neglect their emotional needs. The masculization of women, which hurts mans instinct to take care of and protect their wives. More men are walking about because of the death of chivalry and the responsibilities of husbandship

Great, what ever, who care why at this point, the woman needs to be able to care for herslef, right?

Funny thing about jerks, Meepy, you don't know that they are until its too late. Its best a woman be prepared for anything these days going in.

But they feel more justified in doing so because they think women as independent now.

How when she never was?

In cases of extreme times the Father in law should step in and provide respite and support for his daughter too. But because marriage has become so secular the family rarely intercedes.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda... but lets get back to reality. The FIL doesn't- this isn't Judaism 4000 years ago. A women these days need to care for herself.

it sounds like you have bitterness issues in some areas. I don't think marriage should be viewed with that type of attitude. Marriage should be a reciprocation of the spouses in love for one another.

I agree but when they aren't? What then? And its not bitterness, its realization.

As Pope Leo XIII states, the husband is the head and the wife is the heart. I think that is a wonderful model that we can use. Also the model of Joseph and Mary. Motherhood shouldn't be viewed as a depletion of happiness or self. It is a new step in life, the step to matrimony, a new life.

But a lot of Catholic men are twisted and they misinterpret that to mean they are to oppress the wife.

I agree. Men and women both have hurt the institution of marriage with the materialistic and vain ideals of today. Wherever there are feminists pushing for something, there is always a male judge signing it into existence.

And men never hurt it by being the fallen and imperfect man he is where he reads a pope's letter from 500 years ago and tries to apply it to the here and now and thinks the wife is his personal slave?

and Judges, they side with the men in family court, so I have no idea what you are talking about there.

Your chivalry... its not dead, its alive and well living in the family courts.

Well if a wife does something that is harmful to the marriage she should talk over about it with her husband. Betrayal is a very serious thing. If she did do something wrong, she should make amends and repent. Preferably with their family priest. I surely hope you are not justifying spousal betrayal.

and as her punishment- she is not entitled to his support any longer. You are giving me an ideal and its awesome, however, I'm giving you what goes on in these homes. You are giving me how it should be, I am giving you how it is.

I such cases sometimes separation is needed. But the Church is against leaving ones wife destitute without any support. A separation in beds in the same house can be a start until there is reparation.

In this country- no they do not get into any civil court battle. The cannon law on it is what ever justice demands and that definition of what is "just" is not what you would think it is.

For real. I been through it with a family member. I cried over it, the callous attitude I got from even the high up at the archdioceses.

at the end of the day the Church can only suggest to a man to not "make" him do anything.

I think cases like this should be solved by the solidarity of the people. Neighbors, friends, relatives and other people who can help. It is wrong for a husband to abandon his wife, just as it is wrong for a wife to betray her husband. They are both equally bad things.

But it happens and let me point out to you, if he THINKS she did something to him. NOt always she actually does.

oh, now all of a sudden you talk about family survival when you blasted against things like the Living and Family wage in the other OP?

My arguments remains the same. A women has to be able to get decent job if she has kids to take care of. Its not the laws here, its the ideology of men that she is to be bare foot and pregnant all her life where she can't if should needs to.

benedicto, I am worried about your attitude regarding marriage though.

Well don't because I think it's healthier than yours.

I think you view it in a very harmful and bitter way. Why do you automatically assume a wife reciprocating to her husband in good will and towards his well-being is __kissing?

Because often times, thats what it is. Just keepin it real.

Again you are giving me how it ought to be and I'm giving what it really is.

Do you ever consider that a wife is good to her husband because of charity and love?

absolutely.

And that both the spouses reciprocate towards each other within that bond of self sacrifice and love? You seem to think there is bad motive behind everything.

it should be that way, but its often not. why do you think there is so much divorce? I know, the feminist and the judges, but why do you think the relationship breaks down? Someone is not getting what they need Meepy, be it husband or wife and when kids are involved, its usually the man who will leave, the women will stay until her kids are grown.

I never said you were. Although you have a very pessimistic and materialistic view towards marriage that is similar in some aspects of western feminism. I think you ignore the charitable aspects of marriage and that spouses help each other because of love and charity, not trying kiss someones butt.

well maybe not... I'll meet you half way on that one. but It can sure feel like that is what you are doing sometimes... but why should you really take seriously what I'm saying?

Live in your idealist world.

 

[benedictaoo]

I never said that. Men instigate divorce too. That's not to say it is more prominent in women(70% of all divorces are filed by women).

However I think it is more related to the view of marriage. The western female view of marriage in the US is a very materialistic, demanding, and conditional one. I think this is caused by many things, such as the attitude of instant gratification within the decadence of western life. And sadly they take that materialistic expectation into their marriages.

However when you go into areas where they aren't surrounded by the instant gratification of western decadence you will find marriages become much more self-sacrificing, less superficial, less demanding, and less materialistic.

I relate it to many things Meepy. Women file for divorce mainly becuase the man is not making her happy in one area or another.

I assume men file for the same reasons.

and then there is infidelity. and then there is gambling, drug and alcohol abuse and addiction, porn addicts, etc and then there is the wife getting smacked around, that might make her file... and a bum who doesn't want to work. It could be for all kind of reasons.

 

[BAFRIEND]

and deep, deep several mental illness and schizophrenia and psychosis is not the reason?

Wow!

But, lets go with you... in all these cases we find behind it all, a man who never lifted a finger to help the woman who was trying to please him and a bunch of kids.

You have no idea how hard a job that is, huh? If you are mentally ill, it can take you to a breaking point.

So if men really do love their children and don't want them dead, they should be willing to care about their wife and see if she is alright and if he can help.

The Texas man- he admitted under oath that he changed maybe one diaper out of the 5 kids they had.

No, men have no part in why a woman may snap.

and of course you only deal with the half of what i stated you think you have a defense for

the fact that a man would hang if he did the same thing

no, women have no part in why a man may snap so put a noose around his neck and if the woman snaps- there there little lady it is okay we will still put the noose around the man's neck

oh, and that apple thing, it was all adam's fault too while we are at it

 

[benedictaoo]

Mental illness BA. No women in her right mind kills her kids just becuase.

The men need to take responsibility for not seeing the women was in a really bad place or even in some way contributed to it.

 

[Rebekka]

Okay from the beginning, this time with gusto.
Your opening statement.


Me asking for you to expan a little so I could no what you were talking about


You replying, to paraphrase "nevermind"


Me wondering how having babies(open to life) without men being necessary could be even possible.


...
And so on and so forth, until you state , to paraphrse, 'of course many feminists are open to life and marriage to men', whereupon I agreed, and elucidated. <post 220>

If anything, your "and..." looks more like "nevermind" to me than my "oh, nothing". I was the first to ask you for clarification (I see two issues here", question mark???)

You seem to equate, or at least seemed, by your fish needs bicycle and open/closed remark, a woman needing a man with procreation. But that's not the only way a woman can need a man. So my statement is, you can need a man for other things than his sperm - for example, for his love, companionship and support.

You look at it from one side (if women don't need men, they can't have babies, so the fish/bike statement is ridiculous), while I look at it from the other (the fact that a woman doesn't have kids doesn't mean she doesn't need a man). I think that's why we're talking without understanding.

 

[higherFaith]

So a man's ideal really is having a woman who has to rely on him for everything?

That sounds so wrong. Why should women have to depend on a man? But then again man depends on God.

 

[Meepy]

So if men really do love their children and don't want them dead, they should be willing to care about their wife and see if she is alright and if he can help.

.

hear that everyone? I really want people to take a look at this sentence above.

It this the loving attitude you want to bring in marriage?