 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Family Forum / Parenting / Parenting / April 2008about "bitching"
'at odds about discipline' was a pretty good thread, and Vickie seems to be on a better track, but there is this issue about BITCHING that I find interesting. Lots of different opinions. A dad made the point that when a woman appeals to her husband for help with discipline, then she should accept his solution. If she doesn't like his way of handling things, she shouldn't bitch about it. I don't know if I agree with that dad. Here is an example: Lately, our third son Isaac (age 10) has been swearing. This is the son I clash with.... He has ADD, is 3 years older than the youngest, and 3/4 years younger than the 'Irish twin' older two. My husband has more patience with him, and doesn't get his buttons pressed like I do when dealing with him. The other morning before school, one of the older boys was being sort of a jerk to Isaac, and Isaac shouted 'Cut the f-ing S#@t!' I made the oldest boy leave the room, turned to Isaac, and said that the language had to stop, that it was not gonna fly for him to get into the habit of cursing. Then I sent him to brush his teeth. My husband was in the kitchen, and I said, "I don't want to lose it with him, but something has to be done about his mouth... there has to be a consequence." Tim (my husband) said, "Just wash his mouth with soap every time he swears." I said, "I don't think I can do that." Tim,"So what do you want to do?" Me: "I don't know... but that's too harsh and physical and humiliating to me, and it would probably cause more anger isues with him." Tim:(peeved) "So what do you WANT to do?" Me: I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it! Tim: I already told you how I'd deal with it! It sort of disintegrated from there. He was pissed that I rejected his idea, and I was mad that he wouldn't brainstorm to come up with more ideas. Each kid has a myriad of little issues that need parental input, guidance and action, and I take care of the majority of those issues. I use a LOT of thought in my solutions, and it just made me mad that he had this one off-the-cuff idea, and when I rejected it - he was DONE. This is not a big deal... it was a garden variety argument and it's being worked out. But I used it as an example of what Rsdf (sorry, probably wrong letters!) was talking about. > 'at odds about discipline' was a pretty good thread, and Vickie seems >to be on a better track, but there is this issue about BITCHING that I [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Me: I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it! > Tim: I already told you how I'd deal with it! Then have him implement his idea. Banty "then have him implement his idea" Banty, this isn't about the swearing thing - I'm not looking for help with that problem. It was just an example of the topic. But hey, if I could go away for a week and not have to take part in the soap thing, my husband could have at it! Now and then, I can dole out a smack, but it isn't in me to put nasty things in my kids' mouths. I didn't mind filming them when they competed to see who could last longer after biting a clove of garlic, but I would feel really wrong doing something so methodical as the old 'soap in the mouth' punishment. If my husband was the one always home, and he wanted to do the soap thing, it would be ok. Soap won't kill anyone. But it would be too much on ME to do that. >"then have him implement his idea" > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >always home, and he wanted to do the soap thing, it would be ok. Soap >won't kill anyone. But it would be too much on ME to do that. See - that's exactly so often the problem. *His* idea, *you* live with it. Yeah, I think I know what you mean. I work in a (still) male-dominated engineering field, and there's always been few like that. Ask any advice, even "bounce something off" them to get ideas, and they're :shocked: :shocked: and :peeved: if you don't implement said advice as the Best Advice Ever You Must Do or Shaddup About It. Well, at work I chock these up on my (mercifully) *short* Do Not Ask list, and confer with someone *else* on problems. (Short list because most guys aren't like that, even amongst us engineer types, and I've met few women like that.) But once in a while I need to work with someone like that, and I've learned a thing or two. If you've married with someone like that - do the best you can do keep responsibilities and consequences closely attached. If it's his idea, he does it and deals with any aftermath. Even if you have to keep a score and tell him about the transgressions the next time he comes home. (Heck, as a kid I had to wait until my Dad got home from temporary duty in Guam or Reykjavik!) So he gets his precious idea (and no, the kids won't break, as you acknowledge), you get it off your hands. It's often best even without that sort of pride-of-advice problem to divide whole responsibilities, rather than tasks. Carve out a piece of the enterprise and give it to them. So people can own them, both in working on it the way they like, *and* dealing with what doesn't work. You both win in a way, and the problem gets dealt with in some way. It also sorts pretty quickly between those irritating halfass-off-the-top-of-the-head ideas and ideas the adviser really believes inn ;-) (Kid crying in car, DH says "lock him in trunk", you say "ok, wait until I find a spot to pull over..." ;-) It's that, or maybe talk through about how people talk about ideas to sort through for the best ones and inspire each other to come up with new ones, and that there are many ways to skin a cat, but it sounds like you may have that other type on your hands. Cheers, Banty (but of course you don't have to follow my advice.. :-) "or maybe talk through about how people talk about ideas to sort through for the best ones and inspire each other to come up with new ones" Oh, how nice it is when this actually happens! But it often doesn't, and this is exactly what I think gets labelled as 'bitching'! The times when a mom is just out of ideas or energy, and needs some backup, and a husband has some idea that he thought up in 2 seconds. Successful authors are sometimes peeved at how 'just about everyone' feels that they could write a book, and walk around with the assumption that a successful novel is only a few sessions at a typewriter away. It's sort of the same thing for mothers who do most of the legwork. Hearing 'Just do this!' is really annoying. Ahhh... luckily, life is fun and humor can be found in most situations. >"or maybe talk through about how people talk about ideas to sort >through for the best ones and inspire each other to come up with new >ones" > Oh, how nice it is when this actually happens! But it often >doesn't, and this is exactly what I think gets labelled as >'bitching'! Yes, I do think this is the kind of thing that gets labelled "bitching". Among many other things ;-) >The times when a mom is just out of ideas or energy, and >needs some backup, and a husband has some idea that he thought up in 2 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >typewriter away. It's sort of the same thing for mothers who do most >of the legwork. Hearing 'Just do this!' is really annoying. This is where tying the actual *implementation* of the 'just do this' to the efforts of the just-do-this-'er person works. It's the only effective education some of these ever receive. Banty > "or maybe talk through about how people talk about ideas to sort > through for the best ones and inspire each other to come up with new > ones" > Oh, how nice it is when this actually happens! But it often > doesn't, and this is exactly what I think gets labelled as > 'bitching'! Well, I can’t speak for your husband. But what I’d personally label as ‘bitching’ in the above account is the way that you seemed to be blaming him for not immediately coming up with a solution that suited you, despite the fact that you weren't having any more luck coming up with a suitable solution and had in fact deliberately asked for his advice. “I don’t KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!” is *not* talking about ideas and inspiring each other. It’s opting out and expecting him to hand you the solution on a plate. And then getting annoyed because he doesn’t. And things disintegrated from there? No sh.t, Sherlock. > Successful authors are sometimes peeved at how 'just about > everyone' feels that they could write a book, and walk around with the > assumption that a successful novel is only a few sessions at a > typewriter away. It's sort of the same thing for mothers who do most > of the legwork. Hearing 'Just do this!' is really annoying. Your husband did not walk up to you and start jumping in with unsolicited advice. You asked him what he thought and he told you. If you don’t want a solution, don’t ask for one. If you ask for one, don’t complain because the one he comes up with isn’t good enough. Of course, you don’t have to accept it if you don’t like it. But the way that conversation sounded to me - whether you meant it that way at the time or not - is that you came up to him, dumped the problem in his lap, washed your hands of it, and then acted as though he was somehow at fault for not being happy to take on the job of drawing up as long a list of solutions as it takes to come up with whichever one meets your approval. All the best, Sarah -- http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com >> "or maybe talk through about how people talk about ideas to sort >> through for the best ones and inspire each other to come up with new [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >hand you the solution on a plate. And then getting annoyed because he >doesnt. And things disintegrated from there? No sh.t, Sherlock. IMHO he should have been paying attention to what was going on so that it did not get to the point where she was on her last nerve. Just as no one can be expected to come up with a reasoned solution on the fly, so also it is not possible to come up with anything when things have deteriorated to such a point. She should not HAVE to ask him to help her, and if he was paying attention, he would not have had to come up with something so quickly. This is not to say that some women (and also some men) are not bitchy. But I don't think that this qualifies. The talking about it comes BEFORE there is a problem, or at the very least, sometime afterwards. Also it occurs to me that he may have deliberately given a solution that he knew his wife would not be able to implement in order to seem to be supportive, but to really opt out again. >> Successful authors are sometimes peeved at how 'just about >> everyone' feels that they could write a book, and walk around with the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Your husband did not walk up to you and start jumping in with >unsolicited advice. You asked him what he thought and he told you. Actually she didn't really ask him for a solution. She was really asking for help and support. He gave her a solution that HE could do, but she couldn't. Just because the first solution is rejected does not mean that the dialogue has to end there. >If you dont want a solution, dont ask for one. If you ask for one, >dont complain because the one he comes up with isnt good enough. Of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >a list of solutions as it takes to come up with whichever one meets >your approval. That wasn't the way it sounded to me. It sounded to me as if she tried to deal with something and he deliberately ignored all of it. (He was interested in his toast.) And then we he was asked, he gave it no thought whatsoever. >>> "or maybe talk through about how people talk about ideas to sort >>> through for the best ones and inspire each other to come up with new [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] >(He was interested in his toast.) And then we he was asked, he gave >it no thought whatsoever. The things that strike me about this whole conversation are - - 1. WHERE does all this nitty stuff about whose idea and not validating it immediately means it was shot down and therefore of course the whole matter gets dropped COME FROM?? Do real people actually interested in working through a problem go through this? Is this written down somewhere?? Maybe someone should try it, because it would be pretty apparent how silly and unreasonable it is. There's give and take, one person may interrupt another, an idea may be quashed then resurrected. To get all wrapped up in this pride about it is when things get dysfunctional, and it's a reason for a lot of the dysfunctional things that happen between people. 2. I've worked in both engineering and volunteer work mostly with men and guys DO NOT work like this - not when they see a need to get things done. I see this kind of problem way more in men than in women, but that doesn't mean this is how guys work. Take two guys carrying a heavy piece of furniture though a door. If one guy said "lets do it end up" and the other guy says "naw I got one of these through a house like this by turning it sideways" and starts moving to get it sideways, the first guy does NOT put his end down and walk away. They might *at most* argue about it a bit and roll their eyes about the other guy, but usually the first guy goes along with the second guy's move to get the piece in sideways. If the second guy was wrong, he knows they'll be doing it end up. But if he's not wrong, the furniture will get in and he mostly just wants to get the damn thing moved through the door! Hes not out to prove it's better to do it end up. This isn't a guy thing, it's a pride thing. If you're walking away from a family problem because wifey didn't say "dear" at the right spot in the conversation and validate all your input, it'd be like the first guy walking away from that piece of furniture. Except no one's there to fire your a.s. Now that said, folks should be aware of when they're stepping on each other a lot and get each other frustrated by details of their interaction. But to write it off as "she didn't follow these rules a. b. c., so he's justified in throwing up his hands about it" is in itself pretty silly. Banty Answering both Rosalie's post and Banty's post together, since they're both contained in this one: >> IMHO he should have been paying attention to what was going on so that >> it did not get to the point where she was on her last nerve. Possibly. But the way the OP was presenting this was not "Ack, I was stressed out and said something I shouldn't and regret it now" It was more like "How unreasonable of him to be annoyed at me! Jeez, you see what I have to put up with!" [...] >>> Your husband did not walk up to you and start jumping in with >>> unsolicited advice. You asked him what he thought and he told you. >> Actually she didn't really ask him for a solution. She was really >> asking for help and support. That's not the way it came across at all. First of all she says something needs to be done. Maybe she didn't mean that as asking for a solution, but it's sure as hell the way it sounds to me, and I wouldn't blame him for taking it that way. Then she tells him that she wants HIM to deal with it. That's not asking for help and support - it's asking for him to come up with a solution. And then she complains that he won't brainstorm. Brainstorming isn't help and support, it's... guess what? Looking for solutions. > He gave her a solution that HE could do, >> but she couldn't. Just because the first solution is rejected does >> not mean that the dialogue has to end there. Of course it doesn't - that's the point! When he asked her what she wanted to do, she told him that she wanted him to deal with it. That isn't dialogue; it's cutting off dialogue. If someone said that to me I'd hear it as "Sort it out for me - I don't want to talk about it further." I'm guessing that that's probably how it sounded to him, too. >>> If you don’t want a solution, don’t ask for one. If you ask for one, >>> don’t complain because the one he comes up with isn’t good enough. Of [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> (He was interested in his toast.) And then we he was asked, he gave >> it no thought whatsoever. OK. This is what I'm really not getting here: He can't come up with a solution that suits her (although he does have one unsuitable solution). She can't come up with a solution that suits her (or any other suggestions, even ones that don't work out). Somehow, this gets interpreted as *him* giving it no thought whatsoever and *her* being hard-done-by. Huh?? > The things that strike me about this whole conversation are - - > > 1. WHERE does all this nitty stuff about whose idea and not validating it > immediately means it was shot down and therefore of course the whole matter gets > dropped COME FROM?? Not me, so I have no idea why you raised this point (apparently) in response to the post I made. [...] > 2. I've worked in both engineering and volunteer work mostly with men and guys > DO NOT work like this - not when they see a need to get things done. I see this [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > through a house like this by turning it sideways" and starts moving to get it > sideways, the first guy does NOT put his end down and walk away. Which is already not an analogy to the conversation as given. That would be more like: First guy: "Let's do it end up." Second guy: "I don't think I can do that." First guy: "OK, so how do you think we should hold it?" Second guy: "I don't know... I just think holding it end up would be too awkward, and we'd probably drop it." First guy (a bit miffed): "OK, so how do you think we SHOULD hold it?" Second guy: "I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!" So... how do guys generally respond to someone who's acting like the second guy? I don't know, but I'm guessing that it's *not* invariably a warm sympathetic "Well, if you feel that way, let me think of another solution." > They might *at > most* argue about it a bit and roll their eyes about the other guy, but usually > the first guy goes along with the second guy's move to get the piece in > sideways. Er, yes. Because, in the scenario you gave, the second guy gave a suggestion instead of just expecting the first guy to come up with all the ideas and deal with something that it's supposed to be *both* their job to deal with. > If the second guy was wrong, he knows they'll be doing it end up. > But if he's not wrong, the furniture will get in and he mostly just wants to get > the damn thing moved through the door! Too right. And if the second guy won't go with his suggestion OR come up with one of his own but just acts like it's somehow entirely the first guy's job to sort things out to the second guy's satisfaction, then that isn't getting the furniture moved. > This isn't a guy thing, it's a pride thing. I don't see where it's either. > If you're walking away from a > family problem See, again - this is what I don't get! He comes up with one solution. She comes up with no solutions, and tells him straight out she wants HIM to deal with it. How is *he* the one who's walking away from the problem?? > because wifey didn't say "dear" at the right spot in the > conversation and validate all your input, I don't think that's the problem at all. I think the problem is that, when the two of them were faced with a joint problem that neither of them could think of a solution for, she didn't treat it as a shared problem. She treated it as though it was HIS problem and he was somehow at fault for not coming up with a solution she deemed suitable. > Now that said, folks should be aware of when they're stepping on each other a > lot and get each other frustrated by details of their interaction. But to write > it off as "she didn't follow these rules a. b. c., so he's justified in throwing > up his hands about it" is in itself pretty silly. Which would be why I didn't say anything of the sort. All the best, Sarah  Signaturehttp://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com "That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell >> The things that strike me about this whole conversation are - - >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Not me, so I have no idea why you raised this point (apparently) in >response to the post I made. I SAID "the whole conversation". I didn't SAY "you, Sarah, what you said", I SAID "the whole conversation". But I do agree with Rosalie that a lot of the problem is the inaction; that the problem was right there and he wasn't doing anything about it. Even if he wasn't doing anything about it at this particular moment, if he *did* step in, let say, about 1/2 the time, I don't think this conversation would have happened. >[...] >>2. I've worked in both engineering and volunteer work mostly with men and guys [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > >Second guy: "I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!" Now wait. Let's really make this analogous. :::furniture sitting there in front of the door:: ::furniture sitting there in front of the door:: ::first guy gets the dolly and places it up, and props open the door:: ::second guy is eating a sandwich:: ::wait:: ::wait:: First guy: "Really need to move this furniture, and I need your help." Second guy: "Just prop it on the dolly and push it through." First guy: "I don't think I can do that." Second guy: "So HOW do you want to do it". First guy: "Look I don't really care, but it's not getting over the threshold of the door if I try to just push it through and it's a two man job to lift it". Second guy (peeved): "So, HOW do you WANT to get it through the door!?" First guy: "I don't KNOW! I just need YOUR HELP to deal with it!" Second guy: "I already TOLD you how I'd deal with it!" Is that how men work if there's something to be done and they're really set to do it? Nope. Parenting is a two man job. (So to speak...) >So... how do guys generally respond to someone who's acting like the >second guy? I don't know, but I'm guessing that it's *not* invariably a >warm sympathetic "Well, if you feel that way, let me think of another >solution." I dont' think they talk that way much to begin with ;-D Sure the OP got whiney. But do you think the first guy above had no reason to be a bit miffed at the second guy's off-the-cuff unworkable idea (after his not doing anything for awhile with the work to be done under his nose), and should have it all together to come up with a plan each and every time? Phooey. If the conversation *even gets to that*, there's been a problem. Which is one of Rosalie's points. >> They might *at >>most* argue about it a bit and roll their eyes about the other guy, but usually [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >the ideas and deal with something that it's supposed to be *both* their >job to deal with. Speaking *in general* (I actually was *not* trying to offer an exact analog in that post), when men need to get something done, all this stuff about whose idea was offered (even in response to being asked for help) goes by the wayside pretty quick as they work it out to get it done. That was my point. Mostly in response to agsf's ideas about how supposedly this is how one has to work with men - not step on their solutions if you don't have a better one right at hand because they're, whateve. >> If the second guy was wrong, he knows they'll be doing it end up. >>But if he's not wrong, the furniture will get in and he mostly just wants to get [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >first guy's job to sort things out to the second guy's satisfaction, >then that isn't getting the furniture moved. NO. My POINT is - in getting things done, they DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT sh.t. Not if they're interested in getting the job done. If one guy has all the ideas, fine. >> This isn't a guy thing, it's a pride thing. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >She comes up with no solutions, and tells him straight out she wants HIM >to deal with it. How is *he* the one who's walking away from the problem?? Oh good grief. She has no ideas, he has an unworkable one. What should happen? Lessee - - He should be all peeved that she didn't take his unworkable solution 'cause she didnt' have a better one. or maybe..... consider.... They talk it over and come up with a solution that IS workable! >> because wifey didn't say "dear" at the right spot in the >> conversation and validate all your input, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >problem. She treated it as though it was HIS problem and he was somehow >at fault for not coming up with a solution she deemed suitable. I think she was miffed that he was doing *nothing* with the problem right in earshot. >>Which is already not an analogy to the conversation as given. That >>would be more like: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> >>Second guy: "I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!" I decided - let's *take* that the way you have it! >>First guy: "Let's do it end up." OK ... >>Second guy: "I don't think I can do that." OK ... >>First guy: "OK, so how do you think we should hold it?" Well, OK, but it's not like the second guy now *has to* solve it. (Which is what I get from some of this - he rejected the first idea, now it's 'in his court' somehow.. why is that.) >>Second guy: "I don't know... I just think holding it end up would be too >>awkward, and we'd probably drop it." OK ... so.. >>First guy (a bit miffed): "OK, so how do you think we SHOULD hold it?" Again, what's with this "you didn't like my idea - your turn" stuff? First guy can come up with a second idea (really, it's not like they're playing a board game or something!), or he can describe his first idea more to explain how it isnt' so awkward, or...or... >>Second guy: "I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it!" Which is the whiney response to his testy one. Then is goes downhill from there... Banty > In article <fuj6vb$ku2$1$8300d...@news.demon.co.uk>, Sarah Vaughan says... Snipping to this one point, because this is the main point I was trying to make and I think it's getting completely missed: > Oh good grief. She has no ideas, he has an unworkable one. What should happen? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > They talk it over and come up with a solution that IS workable! Yes, I agree! What I've been objecting to is the fact that SHE refused to do this! Or at least, she made it sound as though that was what she was doing, whether or not she meant it to sound that way. Just telling someone "I want YOU to deal with it" is giving them a loud clear message that you're *not* interested in working together with that person to deal with it. She says it's after that that things deteriorated and that her husband got more pissed. Which doesn't surprise me, because I know I'd be pretty PO'd if my husband just told me that he wanted ME to deal with X, as though I was somehow falling down on my rightful job for not being willing to take the whole problem off his hands. Everyone seems to be assuming that the reason he's annoyed with her is some sort of male pride thing (jeez, these men and their egos, so unreasonable...) but I do wonder whether at least some of it may actually have been, whether or not he could articulate it at the time, that this attitude was what was bugging him. I'm not trying to say that he acted brilliantly. But when the OP started talking about how important it is for people to talk things over and share ideas, I just figured... well, hey, woman, own your part in the fact that that wasn't happening! Gotta say – I *still* find it bizarre that everyone is going on about the importance of both partners being willing to talk things over, but nobody seems in the least fazed by one partner just telling the other “I want YOU to deal with it” when *they* are supposed to be dealing with it *together*. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can't shake the feeling that that last sentence should end “...as long as it's the woman who says it”, and that, if a woman came on here complaining that her husband had said that to her, then everyone would be up in arms about how unreasonable that was. All the best, Sarah -- http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com > Gotta say – I *still* find it bizarre that everyone is going on about > the importance of both partners being willing to talk things over, but [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > husband had said that to her, then everyone would be up in arms about > how unreasonable that was. Can't speak to the particulars of this situation, as a few sentences on a newsgroup don't really round things out well enough to tell. That said, while I think parents need to work out strategies together (not in front of the kids), sometimes the execution needs to be primarily one parent or another, depending on the child and the strategy. Sometimes it's best for one parent to stay out of something and have the other be the enforcer for any number of reasons. I also think that it is occasionally understandable for someone to get frustrated when they've been unsupported in attempting to deal with a thorny issue and have run out of ideas on their own. Just because someone has run out of ideas doesn't mean they're incapable of recognizing an unworkable idea or have somehow lost the right to shoot down an unworkable or unacceptable idea. Would it be better if everyone could always maintain perfect equanimity and never get frustrated by situations or other people? Of course. But if perfection is what is required to deserve any compassion, support, or kindness, then we're all in a world of hurt. Best wishes, Ericka >> In article <fuj6vb$ku2$1$8300d...@news.demon.co.uk>, Sarah Vaughan says...= > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >whether or not he could articulate it at the time, that this attitude >was what was bugging him. ?!?! Another funny rule. First it was them's who asked for a suggestion, had better take that suggestion unless they got a better one right then and there. NOW apparently there's a rule somewhere now that for Parent A to suggest this is something Parent B should handle is another conversation stopper?? That *is* a possible answer! He may well be the better one to handle it. (Or, she may have simply meant she wants him to step in from time to time.) Is it the best or more workable answer? That's not known yet - he should be asking "why", she can answer. Or she can answer that it's just that she's too wrung out at the moment (to which the response would be, postpone the discussion but not cancel it). Banty > Answering both Rosalie's post and Banty's post together, since they're > both contained in this one: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > That's not the way it came across at all. Especially to us men. > First of all she says > something needs to be done. Maybe she didn't mean that as asking for a > solution, but it's sure as hell the way it sounds to me, and I wouldn't > blame him for taking it that way. When my wife pulls one of these on me, I usually have to step back, recalculate the argument and determine if this is one of those issues. > Then she tells him that she wants HIM > to deal with it. That's not asking for help and support - it's asking > for him to come up with a solution. And then she complains that he > won't brainstorm. Brainstorming isn't help and support, it's... guess > what? Looking for solutions. At this point she's a bitch. > > He gave her a solution that HE could do, > >> but she couldn't. Just because the first solution is rejected does > >> not mean that the dialogue has to end there. > > Of course it doesn't - that's the point! Exactly! > When he asked her what she > wanted to do, she told him that she wanted him to deal with it. That > isn't dialogue; it's cutting off dialogue. If someone said that to me > I'd hear it as "Sort it out for me - I don't want to talk about it > further." I'm guessing that that's probably how it sounded to him, too. If it was so simple. It's more like "Sort it out for me now, and no, I don't like your first solution. And guess what, since you don't have another answer, you failed as a problem solver (and as a man)." At this point we get pissed off. > >>> If you don’t want a solution, don’t ask for one. If you ask for one, > >>> don’t complain because the one he comes up with isn’t good enough. Of [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > [...] Neither have I. > > 2. I've worked in both engineering and volunteer work mostly with men and guys > > DO NOT work like this - not when they see a need to get things done. Yes we do. > > I see this > > kind of problem way more in men than in women, but that doesn't mean this is how [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > warm sympathetic "Well, if you feel that way, let me think of another > solution." It's more like "You figuire it out, I'm going to take a piss." Then when the first guy gets back from the bathroom, the first words will be "Well, did you think of something yet?". First guy says no, then they try it end up. If first guy says yes, then second guy tries his method and if it fails, goes back to the end up method. If the end up method fails, then they would research it or reapproach the situation. Maybe use the back patio door instead of the front door. > > They might *at > > most* argue about it a bit and roll their eyes about the other guy, but usually [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > first guy's job to sort things out to the second guy's satisfaction, > then that isn't getting the furniture moved. Exactly! > > This isn't a guy thing, it's a pride thing. > > I don't see where it's either. It's not pride. This will probably come to no suprise to you ladies, but 99% of my ideas get shot down with my wife in these situations. My pride is not affected at all. I just chalk it up to you women being illogical. ;) > > If you're walking away from a > > family problem > > See, again - this is what I don't get! He comes up with one solution. > She comes up with no solutions, and tells him straight out she wants HIM > to deal with it. How is *he* the one who's walking away from the problem?? And if we pull that level of expectation from our wives, we will have hell to pay. > > because wifey didn't say "dear" at the right spot in the > > conversation and validate all your input, > > I don't think that's the problem at all. It's not. > I think the problem is that, > when the two of them were faced with a joint problem Especially one that she initiated... > that neither of > them could think of a solution for, she didn't treat it as a shared > problem. She treated it as though it was HIS problem and he was somehow > at fault for not coming up with a solution she deemed suitable. 100% correct. Your house husband must be so proud of you! > > Now that said, folks should be aware of when they're stepping on each other a > > lot and get each other frustrated by details of their interaction. But to write [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Sarah Both of your responses are correct and that is what I was trying to explain. Even as I was reading the couch analogy I already formulated the same response you gave. Normally, I don't jump into a thread in which I agree with, but damn, it was perfect and in the way I wanted to get the message across. Now if they understand your response and not mine, I will be jealous. Not bad for an oppressed woman. ;) Regards... Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for advice!). Conclusions: 1.) I should have been more honest, and flat out said, 'I just don't have it in me to deal with this right now, so will you?' 2.) But if I had just said that, and my husband went ahead and forced the soap-thing right then, I would have stopped him. 3.) The actual problem that I need to address with my husband is this: It's exhausting to be in charge of all the 'behavior modification' with four boys; I need help. 4.) The bigger problem (harder to solve) is that although I need help, I am not willing to watch my husband (who IS an amateur at behavior modification, and tends to stick to ideas even when they don't work)... I'm not willing to watch him run roughshod over the boys in a fit of anger. I'm not trash-talking him, I'm stating a fact: when something doesn't work, he just gets mad and tries to force it, and if he can't force it he accepts defeat. 5.) Because of # 4, it is ridiculous to expect #1. So # 3 is how it will stay. Final conclusion: Yes, I was a bitch, but I forgive myself. Sighhhhh Responding to: > I think the problem is that, > when the two of them were faced with a joint problem.... "Especially one that she initiated..." "She" didn't initiate the problem. The problem was a 10- year-old swearing. And no, not a stepchild or foster child, which are the only reasons (although sorta lame ones) that I can think of to exempt the dad from having to care. > Responding to: > > I think the problem is that, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >the only reasons (although sorta lame ones) that I can think of to >exempt the dad from having to care. Yeah see that's the problem outlook - childrearing is *your* project, so bringing up an issue to you DH is "initiating a problem". Banty > Responding to: > > I think the problem is that,> when the two of them were faced with a joint problem.... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the only reasons (although sorta lame ones) that I can think of to > exempt the dad from having to care. Dear, apparently it wasn't important to him or he felt that you already handled it. You raised the issue, therefore initiated the situation. Regards... " Dear, apparently it wasn't important to him " Sweety, that's the problem. > " Dear, apparently it wasn't important to him " > > Sweety, that's the problem. I know from your perspective that is the problem. My suggestion is to let it go! He is not going to change and forcing your ideals onto him will only hinder the situation. Deal with it on your own terms. I doubt he's stopping you. You want his input and help, then asking him to brainstorm with you when he has thought about it is the best route, but please be prepared to give some ideas as well. In fact, I'm sure he's open to what you suggest as long as you stop approaching him with this issue! Regards... >> " Dear, apparently it wasn't important to him " >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >he's open to what you suggest as long as you stop approaching him with >this issue! Momo4boys - maybe you should try that attitude with little things like - how he likes his dinner cooked. That last sentence was interesting, btw - "In fact, I'm sure he's open to what you suggest as long as you stop approaching him with this issue!" Um, hmmmm. Cheers, Banty >" Dear, apparently it wasn't important to him " > > Sweety, that's the problem. Exactomundo. Banty > Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these > responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Final conclusion: Yes, I was a bitch, but I forgive > myself. Sighhhhh Well, of course that's the issue. I'm always a little surprised at these discussions. It's not like we don't know a thing or two about parenting. While it's true that kids vary and parents vary and there's room for some differing styles out there, it simply isn't true that parenting is an "anything goes" proposition. We do know that some things are just flat out ineffective and inappropriate. If someone at work waltzed up to me and proclaimed that we were going to do things in an ineffective and inappropriate way, he'd be roundly ignored at best by any sensible business people. And yet, somehow just because a parent wants to stick his or her nose in and spew nonsense about child rearing, he or she has to be treated like a delicate flower? I don't think so. *Especially* when it comes to child rearing, there's an obligation to make a credible stab at proposing an effective and appropriate solution. I wouldn't say that someone who proposes something asinine in ignorance should be ridiculed, but certainly the proposition doesn't merit serious consideration of adoption! I think where you went astray was in implying to your DH that the only problem with his solution was that you were too squeamish to adopt it. You implied the problem was with *you*, not with the proposed solution. Now, had you put it on the table that the proposed solution was an inappropriate child rearing practice, you may well have been attacked and put on the defensive, so I can understand why you wouldn't be keen to take that approach, but had that happened, it would just show that your expertise in child rearing was being devalued. If your experience and expertise had been respected, your opinion on the validity of the proposed solution would have had some weight. That's the problem with this whole setup--yeah, the child rearing is supposed to be mom's work, but Lord High Diletante can come in any time and make decrees with little or no expertise and his positions are to be respected and adopted. Huh? Talk about faulty logic. If I'm stuck on how to solve a thorny engineering problem, that doesn't mean that Joe Blow off the street's off-the-cuff solution has equal merit with my attempts or that I can't recognize an inappropriate solution when I see one. This whole dilemma only comes about because parenting is seen as something where there is no body of knowledge and no skill, so anyone can proffer solutions with equal validity. While some parenting is common sense, there *is*, in fact, a body of theoretical knowledge as well as a body of practical experience gained through the day to day experiences with a particular child. Best wishes, Ericka >> Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these >> responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] >of practical experience gained through the day to day experiences >with a particular child. The essential problem is WHY is one parent the neophyte? If both parents take ownership of the job of childrearing, one won't be the neophyte. (So, the one who hasn't been involved has only him/herself to blame for the ideas getting less weight). The thing that's hard to apply, whether both are truly involved or not, is to distinguish what really is a bad idea as in truly ineffective or even damaging, and when it really is a matter of differences in style and personality and how people pretty universally prefer whatever idea they thought of. Banty > The essential problem is WHY is one parent the neophyte? If both parents take > ownership of the job of childrearing, one won't be the neophyte. (So, the one > who hasn't been involved has only him/herself to blame for the ideas getting > less weight). That is certainly an issue. I think that depending on how a family is organized, there will often be one parent who is with the children more than the other, in which case that parent is going to climb the experience curve more quickly, but there is no reason that any parent can't do his or her best to gain both theoretical and experiential knowledge in order to be a useful partner in parenting. > The thing that's hard to apply, whether both are truly involved or not, is to > distinguish what really is a bad idea as in truly ineffective or even damaging, > and when it really is a matter of differences in style and personality and how > people pretty universally prefer whatever idea they thought of. Sure. But respectful people who are both interested in the welfare of the children have conversations about these things (not in front of the children), rather than playing games about who's in a snit because his off the cuff idea isn't immediately adopted as gospel. Someone who really respected his wife's effort and expertise wouldn't just toss out an off the cuff idea in a take-it-or-leave-it fashion. He'd consider that if his wife was having difficulty, perhaps the problem was a bit thornier than it might appear at first and engage in a conversation to learn more about it before throwing out suggestions. Of course, if you ask me, the fact that the child was using inappropriate language and only the mother stepped up to do anything about it even though the father was present speaks volumes about the likely root cause anyway. Apparently, Dad doesn't think it's a problem, and the son is going to follow Dad's lead. So, in fact, Mom doesn't have much prayer of solving the issue if Dad isn't going to show any leadership. And that's really why she's having trouble coming up with a solution. There's little she can do that will overcome Dad's obvious tacit approval of the cussing. Best wishes, Ericka >>The essential problem is WHY is one parent the neophyte? If both parents take >>ownership of the job of childrearing, one won't be the neophyte. (So, the one [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >any parent can't do his or her best to gain both theoretical and >experiential knowledge in order to be a useful partner in parenting. Right. It doesn't have to be 50-50 or anything like that. But it cant be "I'll take them to soccer and go to school plays and play with them but you do the rest" either. >> The thing that's hard to apply, whether both are truly involved or not, is to >>distinguish what really is a bad idea as in truly ineffective or even damaging, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >who's in a snit because his off the cuff idea isn't immediately >adopted as gospel. Yep. And there's nobody up in the sky keeping a ledger of whose idea was first and if an idea was proffered for every idea rejected or any of that hoo haa. >Someone who really respected his wife's effort >and expertise wouldn't just toss out an off the cuff idea in a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >doesn't think it's a problem, and the son is going to follow >Dad's lead. *Does* Dad think it's a problem or not? >So, in fact, Mom doesn't have much prayer of >solving the issue if Dad isn't going to show any leadership. >And that's really why she's having trouble coming up with a >solution. There's little she can do that will overcome Dad's >obvious tacit approval of the cussing. Yep. And she said "I want *you* to deal with it.'", I dont think she mean "I want you and only you forever here on out to be the one to deal with it." Banty > If someone at work waltzed up to me and proclaimed that > we were going to do things in an ineffective and inappropriate > way, he'd be roundly ignored at best by any sensible business > people. A word for you, Ericka. Dilbert. SignatureChookie -- Sydney, Australia (Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply) http://chookiesbackyard.blogspot.com/ >> If someone at work waltzed up to me and proclaimed that >> we were going to do things in an ineffective and inappropriate >> way, he'd be roundly ignored at best by any sensible business >> people. > > A word for you, Ericka. Dilbert. Well, sure, there are plenty of idiots to go around in the business world, which is why I added the modifier "sensible" :-) And I do get people suggesting ridiculous courses of action not all that infrequently. The good news is that most of the time they get shut down. Best wishes, Ericka >Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these >responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for >advice!). WHY did you bring it UP if you didn't want advice?? What am I supposed to do about it. (That's all they do, bitch, bitch, bitch..) Banty ;-) > roughshod over the boys in a fit of anger. Rule number 1 of training animals and children is this: do nothing in a fit of anger. I don't know what your children's behaviors are that need modification, but I can tell you that no matter what they are, you may find some useful ideas about timing and technique in books on training animals. Especially on training dogs and horses. Because animals are trained by our actions, not our words, the training issues tend to be more easily reduced to their essentials. Timing is very important. Pologirl "Does* Dad think it's a problem or not?" (the swearing) If he is engaged with the kids at the moment it happens, he'll say 'Hey, watch your mouth'. Otherwise, he seems to tune it out or only be vaguely aware of it. He has some strong points as a dad... he is affectionate with all of them, wrestling and hugging a lot. He loves to fool with them and usually says yes to most requests for his time ('Will you color with me? Wanna play chess? Hey, wanna go check out this new fishing spot?'). And concrete problems, like a messed up fishing rod or brake-job for a bicycle.. he is good with that stuff. It's just problems which involve behavior or emotions, he usually is ineffective, and gets irritated and stops trying. It seems like he becomes defeated before he even puts his mind to the problem. And that bothers me, because it leaves just ME to deal with all of that stuff. " I can tell you that no matter what they are, you may find some useful ideas about timing and technique in books on training animals. " Pologirl, I agree. A good study of how wolves behave together in a pack gives TONS of valuable info for managing 4 kids (especially boys...and I'm not kidding!) Also, the similarities to dog-training are numerous. To anyone who has never owned a dog, that probably sounds demeaning toward children, but it isn't meant to be. Alas, when kids approach adolescence, the similarities taper off. Although, come to think of it, maybe not: adolescent animals of all kinds are notorious misbehavers! > Pologirl, I agree. A good study of how wolves behave >together in a pack gives TONS of valuable info for managing 4 kids [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Although, come to think of it, maybe not: adolescent animals of all >kinds are notorious misbehavers! Actually, I think any social group has a lot of similarities to wolf packs. Banty > "Does* Dad think it's a problem or not?" (the swearing) > > If he is engaged with the kids at the moment it happens, he'll > say 'Hey, watch your mouth'. Otherwise, he seems to tune it out or > only be vaguely aware of it. Sounds like me. From my perspective, it's not something I like to see happen, but if and when it happens, I am not going to start WWIII or go overboard about it or even make it an issue. I either ignore it or raise my voice to tell him to stop. And if I tell him to stop, it's usually cause my wife is giving me the evil stare of "Look at your son, what are you going to do about it!". Maybe cussing is like burping and farting? > It's just problems which involve behavior or emotions, he usually is > ineffective, and gets irritated and stops trying. It seems like he > becomes defeated before he even puts his mind to the problem. And > that bothers me, because it leaves just ME to deal with all of that > stuff. Maybe it's because he thinks you are leading a crusade or getting too involved in matters he thinks are trivial in nature. Maybe when you start implementing something new, he thinks "oh boy, here we go again! I wonder what moron or book suggested this!" Ask him if this is indeed the case. Just don't smack him when he says yes! Regards... Maybe it's because he thinks you are leading a crusade or getting too involved in matters he thinks are trivial in nature. Maybe when you start implementing something new, he thinks "oh boy, here we go again! I wonder what moron or book suggested this!" agsf, stop and consider what you just said, and how it comes across. "I wonder what moron or book sugested this!" , for instance. Why the (superlative) (curse) do you take part in this message board, if your assumption is that women are idiotic in their approach to life? A woman concerned about a 10-yr-old swearing.... some book must have given her some silly ideas and now she is being histrionic? My oldest kid nearly got suspended for stealing last year. It sounded really bad when the principal called me. But I asked a lot of questions and got to the bottom of it. He was in 'last lunch'. The muffins and rolls that don't get bought are thrown out at the end of the day. Lunch was ending, and the tray of muffins was destined for the trash. My son snagged a muffin on his way out of the caf, and was seen. The assistant principal was overzealous... shaming him in the office, calling me to talk about the 'seriousness' of his offense. I thought she was a moron, and pathetic. But I dealt with her politically, and used the experience as a talking-point with my kids. (by the way, I didn't use a book) "if and when it happens, I am not going to start WWIII or go overboard about it or even make it an issue. " Goody for you, whoopie if a kid starts cursing left and right. And I'm with you on the first two things.... not gonna start WWIII or go overboard, but, um, it IS an issue. I haven't made any blanket statements about males or fathers. My respect for you drops when you indulge in that kind of pigeonholing. "I'm glad you acknowledged how women are sometimes seen as Children." I'm not sure that I did, although being compared to a child isn't really so bad. Honest with emotional responses, yes. > Maybe it's because he thinks you are leading a crusade or getting too > involved in matters he thinks are trivial in nature. Maybe when you [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > if your assumption is that women are idiotic in their approach to > life? He is an idiot. > A woman concerned about a 10-yr-old swearing.... some book > must have given her some silly ideas and now she is being histrionic? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > My respect for you drops when you indulge in that kind of > pigeonholing. > Maybe it's because he thinks you are leading a crusade or getting too > involved in matters he thinks are trivial in nature. Maybe when you [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > agsf, stop and consider what you just said, and how it comes > across. "I wonder what moron or book sugested this!" , I used the word "maybe" because I don't the particulars of your household. However, I'm sure most men like me have that "what now" reaction when we are confronted with new crap that we are not used to seeing or hearing from our wives. It's like you watched Oprah or read Cosmo and are using us as human guinea pigs. > for instance. > Why the (superlative) (curse) do you take part in this message board, > if your assumption is that women are idiotic in their approach to > life? I comment where an idea or approach hasn't been brought up, regardless of the sex of the poster. > A woman concerned about a 10-yr-old swearing.... some book > must have given her some silly ideas and now she is being histrionic? It could be interpreted as such. Especially when some off the wall idea is being introduced. > My oldest kid nearly got suspended for stealing last year. > It sounded really bad when the principal called me. But I asked a lot [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > her politically, and used the experience as a talking-point with my > kids. You know, I see this a lot lately. Kid does something bad in school and instead of disciplining the kid, the parent thinks the teacher or school is at fault. Your son stole a muffin. It doesn't matter if it was going to be thrown out or not. He had the audacity to take something that wasn't his. And you somehow think it was OK?? But I digress...What was the point of the story?? > (by the way, I didn't use a book) > > "if and when it happens, I am not going to start WWIII or > go overboard about it or even make it an issue. " > > Goody for you, whoopie if a kid starts cursing left and right. No, it's just not that big of a deal. > And I'm with you on the first two things.... not gonna start WWIII or > go overboard, but, um, it IS an issue. Actually didn't you blow up at your husband regarding this issue?? > I haven't made any blanket statements about males or fathers. > My respect for you drops when you indulge in that kind of > pigeonholing. Generally speaking, what I state is the truth. Sugar coating the issue won't help. You're more than welcome to make blanket statements regarding any subject or gender. If I disagree, I will chime in. No respect or disrespect given. And plus you asked a question and I answered. You don't like the answer, then don't respond. If you disagree and want to debate it, then go for it. Or maybe you rather have had this: {{{{{{{ HUGS }}}}}}}}} Your husband is an uncaring idiot! Drop that zero and get a Hero! You go girl! Regards... " most men like me have that "what now" > reaction when we are confronted with new crap that we are not used to > seeing or hearing from our wives. It's like you watched Oprah or read > Cosmo and are using us as human guinea pigs." Arghh! 'confronted with new crap...from our wives'! The crap isn't from the wives, it is from the kids. What you seem to be saying is that it is rude for a wife to disturb her husbands process of encapsulating himself in a bubble of 'Zen' amidst the chaos, by requesting his assistance in dealing with the chaos. I could wait by the door, and the second my husband came home, say "See ya!", and go shut myself in my room to read a book. If he knocked on the door and asked for my help, would he be using me as a human guinea pig? I don't watch Oprah. I don't read Cosmo. I read 3 newspapers a day, and watch one hour of TV a week. "> You know, I see this a lot lately. Kid does something bad in school > and instead of disciplining the kid, the parent thinks the teacher or > school is at fault. Your son stole a muffin. It doesn't matter if it > was going to be thrown out or not. He had the audacity to take > something that wasn't his. And you somehow think it was OK?? But I > digress...What was the point of the story??" The point..: I was illustrating my usual nature of NOT getting wound up over things. And yes, in the grand scheme of life, I do think it is ok for a 14-yr-old to see a pan of muffins that is destined for the trash, and snag one. After all of your talk about women who fuss over stupid crap, I can't believe you are taking this stance! What, an adolescent boy grabbing a mouthful of food from a tray of discards should be punished.... and a 10 yr old who starts peppering his speech with the F-word is an annoying non-issue? " > Or maybe you rather have had this: > {{{{{{{ HUGS }}}}}}}}} Your husband is an uncaring idiot! Drop that > zero and get a Hero! You go girl!" " After I read several responses from people who were 'on my side', so to speak, I wrote about my husband's strengths as a dad. You know, this whole thread wasn't a request for advice. It was meant to start a conversation about the dynamics of arguing.. I only used the swearing thing as an example. And for the record, Nanny is right. I WAS pretty unfair in that particular argument. I was sick of dealing with every problem, and I threw it at him in frustration. >" most men like me have that "what now" >> reaction when we are confronted with new crap that we are not used to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >encapsulating himself in a bubble of 'Zen' amidst the chaos, by >requesting his assistance in dealing with the chaos. Yeah, that's what strikes me. The kids he fathers, the household he shared, but somehow it's "where did this crap come from"?? It's *his* crap too. > I could wait by the door, and the second my husband came home, >say "See ya!", and go shut myself in my room to read a book. If he [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >tray of discards should be punished.... and a 10 yr old who starts >peppering his speech with the F-word is an annoying non-issue? Actually, I think not stealing also means not doing that. > " > Or maybe you rather have had this: > > {{{{{{{ HUGS }}}}}}}}} Your husband is an uncaring idiot! Drop [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >that particular argument. I was sick of dealing with every problem, >and I threw it at him in frustration. Especially after your dealing with every problem, he dealing with this one *is* a rational option. Banty >" most men like me have that "what now" >> reaction when we are confronted with new crap that we are not used to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > encapsulating himself in a bubble of 'Zen' amidst the chaos, by > requesting his assistance in dealing with the chaos. THAT was pretty funny. >> Maybe it's because he thinks you are leading a crusade or getting too >> involved in matters he thinks are trivial in nature. Maybe when you [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >seeing or hearing from our wives. It's like you watched Oprah or read >Cosmo and are using us as human guinea pigs. Do you have any idea how presumptuous that is? How about if women declared all the cockamamie ideas their husbands come from must have come from their hunting buddies, because apparently it couldn't have come from their own minds?? Banty (who hasn't read Cosmo in years - not sense the weekend she took off after her PhD quals and was too wrung out to do much else, and a roommate had it...) > In article > <c9279394-8b50-4bd8-ba11-3cdf70c10558@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > her PhD quals and was too wrung out to do much else, and a roommate had > it...) What is Cosmo? >> In article >> <c9279394-8b50-4bd8-ba11-3cdf70c10558@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > >What is Cosmo? The dog on The Jetsons. Banty "The dog on The Jetsons." Hah!!! > "The dog on The Jetsons." > >Hah!!! Ah - I just looked it up - the dog's name was Astro. Oh well :) Banty >> "The dog on The Jetsons." >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Oh well :) But there was a Cosmo--Cosmo Spacely, George's boss. Best wishes, Ericka >>> "The dog on The Jetsons." >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > But there was a Cosmo--Cosmo Spacely, George's boss. Was he pointy-haired? Banty >>>> "The dog on The Jetsons." >>>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Was he pointy-haired? In spirit ;-) Best wishes, Ericka > Wow, I have definitely gained both insight and validation from these > responses (even though my 'example' was not meant as a plea for > advice!). I just broke down the example you gave to show you how we think and where you went wrong! ;) > Conclusions: > 1.) I should have been more honest, and flat out said, 'I just > don't have it in me to deal with this right now, so will you?' No good. Since it already happened and you already talked to him, I would be confused as to what you would expect from me and I would have responded "What do you want me to do?" and you would respond, "I don't know" and it would roller coaster into an argument. > 2.) But if I had just said that, and my husband went ahead and > forced the soap-thing right then, I would have stopped > him. Then you would have been in the wrong. You should wait until he is done and talk to him afterwards when the two of you are alone. > 3.) The actual problem that I need to address with my husband is > this: It's exhausting to be in charge of all the 'behavior > modification' with four boys; I need help. Sit down and make a list of things you think are issues and you need help with. Then brainstorm together as to how to solve them. > 4.) The bigger problem (harder to solve) is that although I need > help, I am not willing to watch my husband (who IS an [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I'm stating a fact: when something doesn't work, he just gets mad and > tries to force it, and if he can't force it he accepts defeat. I don't know about all this talk about behavior modification. It's like we are a society that tries to cookie cut our children into what we think they should be and if they don't respond accordingly, we label them as having ADD (or whatever) and feed them pills. From what you describe, it seems like you have a house full of healthy boys and a husband who loves you dearly. The trials that they have with their dad are the trials of life. It creates a great bond. > 5.) Because of # 4, it is ridiculous to expect #1. So # 3 is > how it will stay. Maybe you need behavior modification?? ;) > Final conclusion: Yes, I was a bitch, but I forgive > myself. Sighhhhh But you should ask for forgiveness from your husband, because no man looks forward to coming home to a bitch! (or eating toast with one). Regards... >> Final conclusion: Yes, I was a bitch, but I forgive >> myself. Sighhhhh > > But you should ask for forgiveness from your husband, because no man > looks forward to coming home to a bitch! (or eating toast with one). Any man who does not want to be bothered with issues concerning his kids is an a-hole. No wife looks forward to a-hole coming home from work. He deserves as much b*tching as she can dish out. > 'at odds about discipline' was a pretty good thread, and Vickie seems > to be on a better track, but there is this issue about BITCHING that I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > doesn't like his way of handling things, she shouldn't bitch about > it. I don't know if I agree with that dad. It's in the approach after advice was given. I'll explain below... > Here is an example: > Lately, our third son Isaac (age 10) has been swearing. This is [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Tim (my husband) said, "Just wash his mouth with soap every > time he swears." Husband makes suggestion. > I said, "I don't think I can do that." It gets shot down with no logical reasoning. > Tim,"So what do you want to do?" Husband then asks if wife has any ideas since his was rejected. > Me: "I don't know... but that's too harsh and physical and > humiliating to me, and it would probably cause more anger isues with > him." Wife states that she has no idea and now the reasoning comes to play. Which is good. > Tim:(peeved) "So what do you WANT to do?" Basically he says what do you expect from me since what I propose doesn't fly with you and you have no ideas. > Me: I don't KNOW! I want YOU to deal with it! This is where you went wrong. You still have no solution and you want him to come up with something after he already proposed a solution. Also, it can be interrupted that you want him to own this burden while restricting his approach. You should have responded, in a cool calm and nice manner, with something along the lines of "Honestly dear, I have no idea how to resolve this issue, but I don't think washing his mouth with soap is a good idea. Can you and I think of something else? Maybe when you have a minute to think this through?" See how the two approaches affect the situation? You responded in a bitch like illogical manner instead of a cool calm person looking for ideas for a solution. > Tim: I already told you how I'd deal with it! Exactly. You wanted a one-way brainstorm and when given the answer, you rejected it. You probably pissed him off at this point. What Vicky did was to keep introducing the problem in the above example without proposing a valid solution and criticizing her husband's methods, which worked. Furthermore she reintroduced the issue after arguing or dealing with her daughter, which made her an emotional fireball. That's what made her a bitch to her husband. > It sort of disintegrated from there. He was pissed > that I rejected his idea, Rejecting his idea didn't really upset him. It's what transpired afterwards. >and I was mad that he wouldn't brainstorm to > come up with more ideas. You didn't contribute. So you approached it in an illogical manner. > Each kid has a myriad of little issues that > need parental input, guidance and action, and I take care of the > majority of those issues. I use a LOT of thought in my solutions, and > it just made me mad that he had this one off-the-cuff idea, and when I > rejected it - he was DONE. Again, he was done because you didn't contribute while expecting him to produce more ideas. He probably thought your reasoning against the soap thing was illogical as well since it worked well for a lot of generations. > This is not a big deal... it was a garden variety > argument and it's being worked out. But I used it as an example of > what Rsdf (sorry, probably wrong letters!) was talking about. No problem. I hope you can see where and why you might have been seen as a bitch. One last thing and just out of curiosity, was your husband in the kitchen when your son used profanity and how did he respond? If he wasn't in the kitchen, how would have he responded if he overheard the argument and profanity? Regards... > This is where you went wrong. You still have no solution and you want > him to come up with something after he already proposed a solution. > Also, it can be interrupted My bad, it should read "Interpreted". Damn spell checker! > that you want him to own this burden while > restricting his approach. You should have responded, in a cool calm > and nice manner, with something along the lines of "Honestly dear, I > have no idea how to resolve this issue, but I don't think washing his > mouth with soap is a good idea. Can you and I think of something else? > Maybe when you have a minute to think this through?" > Regards... "One last thing and just out of curiosity, was your husband in the kitchen when your son used profanity and how did he respond?" He was, and he was deeply involved with toast. "You should have responded, in a cool calm and nice manner, with something along the lines of "Honestly dear, I have no idea how to resolve this issue, but I don't think washing his mouth with soap is a good idea. Can you and I think of something else? Maybe when you have a minute to think this through?" See how the two approaches affect the situation? You responded in a bitch like illogical manner instead of a cool calm person looking for ideas for a solution. " Ok, agsf, this is where things go wrong, and get weird. You just showed me a REALLY NICE WAY to say what I meant. But as an irritating situation, I abbreviated it and expected to be understood. How you worded what I meant..... GEEZ! It looks like a special little tea-party invitation with pretty curli-cues on the vowels. Don't women get accused of giving too many details when giving driving directions? SHORT AND SWEET... isn't that the way guys LIKE to receive info? But you are advising a carefully worded request in cases like this? I am frowning, and thinking that it is ridiculous that women are the ones accused of being too complicated. > "One last thing and just out of curiosity, was your husband in the > kitchen when your son used profanity and how did he respond?" > > He was, and he was deeply involved with toast. The reason I asked was maybe he didn't think of it as an issue. Maybe he was proud that his 10 yr old son stood up for himself? > "You should have responded, in a cool calm > and nice manner, with something along the lines of "Honestly dear, I [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > driving directions? SHORT AND SWEET... isn't that the way guys LIKE > to receive info? Yes, we like direct and short replies. And when he asked "So what do you want to do?", he was expecting one. Such as "Ground him","take away TV privileges" , etc. However, that was not the case. You responded with a non-answer, which is illogical. You, at this point, just complicated the situation. > But you are advising a carefully worded request in cases like > this? Yes, because you introduced an issue, shot down an idea, and keep pushing for a solution without providing one yourself. It's enough to drive any man insane. > I am frowning, and thinking that it is ridiculous that women are > the ones accused of being too complicated. I am sorry that I failed you. Regards... "I am sorry that I failed you" Thanks, agsf, for helping to flesh out this problem. (the problem being discussed in this post is NOT the kid swearing.... it's the miscommunication between spouses when an overwhelmed mom appeals to a dad for backup, and then doesn't agree with his first solution). "Yes, because you introduced an issue, shot down an idea, and keep pushing for a solution without providing one yourself. It's enough to drive any man insane. " Ummmm, this is a scenario that children present to mothers on a near-daily basis, and mothers don't exactly go insane. (Cough, cough..)... ok, yes mothers DO go insane on occasion due to an overload of this type of thing. > "I am sorry that I failed you" > > Thanks, agsf, for helping to flesh out this problem. (the problem > being discussed in this post is NOT the kid swearing.... it's the > miscommunication between spouses when an overwhelmed mom appeals to a > dad for backup, and then doesn't agree with his first solution). Of course... > "Yes, because you introduced an issue, shot down an idea, > and keep [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > cough..)... ok, yes mothers DO go insane on occasion due to an > overload of this type of thing. You mean..."I wan |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message