Letters to the Editor
Anonymust
Published Letters: 2032 Editor's Choice: 74
-
on men "not getting IT" ...
[Read the article: Sexual healing]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Isn't that perhaps what's really important here, but has only been "suggested" by a few posters? I.e., that men whose wives have recently given birth aren't "getting any?" And, depending on what her pregnancy was like, may not have been getting any for some time?
The comments about prolactin were especially interesting... too much makes a woman less libidinous, but, of course it's absolutely needed for breastfeeding which, by the way, does have some effect on eventually helping a woman to lose the extra weight. The extra weight that a woman gains beyond the pregnancy, just so she can breastfeed. Too bad that more women (who want to breastfeed) don't get more support for a longer period of time. Both moms and babies would likely benefit. Dads would eventually, but not as soon as some of them would like.
I suppose taking something to counter-act the prolactin is a choice-- perhaps even that same drug they used to give women to dry up their milk...
So, I began to wonder, now, when it makes absolutely no difference in my own life (already being a grandmother), if perhaps there is something (evolution, not ID!) that makes it in Nature's best interest for women to have less interest in sex for some time after giving birth. Perhaps that was the "real" birth control effect that has been attributed-- with only limited success-- to breastfeeding. Surely, a woman's lack of desire is one obstacle, though not necessarily an effective one, between a man's sperm and his wife's eggs.
If so, it's often just the beginning, for many women, of feeling torn between their husband's needs and their children's. (I can hear the uproar now!) Yes, it's true. Many women do feel that. The rest of you can argue about why. (However, my first husband did not want me to breastfeed because he was afraid it would ruin my figure and leave my breasts hanging down to my waist. Didn't happen. And I don't look like a grandmother, but it wasn't the only time he obsessed about my weight. Ironically, he was more likely to gain weight than I was, except for the pregnancy.)
Still, one or two female letter writers did hint at the dilemman: If I don't (want to) have sex with him, will he be unfaithful, or worse, will he leave me? One of the male letter writers was more explicit in saying that women must expect some "consequences" for not keeping themselves up, and for not meeting their husband's needs in a "mutually acceptable" way. (What does that really mean?)
Well, perhaps Nature, without the convenient methods of birth control available to us (for now), found other ways to keep a woman's focus on her children, at the expense of a man's attention. Would the child of a woman (in ancient times, I'm saying), who was raring to go again shortly after giving birth, have been as likely to survive if her attention was focused more on having sex than on her child? (Of course, we mustn't bring up that our own rate of infant mortality is so high.)
When I was in my 20's and even in my 30's, I took my body for granted, and I could get away with it because I had my daughter early. By 40, though, one begins to feel the changes, and gradually, one can no longer ignore them. By 50, I was just glad to have survived the challenges of my 40's. I can only imagine that having a child in one's thirties would push one set of dramatic changes up against the next set. And, frankly, those changes come more at a woman's expense than a man's, whatever his needs. Still, I am happy for the children who get to have real adults for parents. Those of us who have our children at younger ages often make more mistakes.
This discussion has given me a new perspective on the advantages for a younger woman in marrying an older man. By the time they get around to having children, he may have slowed down enough to be more patient with her, or even more likely, to be as enamored with parenthood as she is, like most of the older fathers I've seen.
-
finding pleasure in giving
[Read the article: I spend too little and save too much]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Once she resolves her own problem, the LW could possibly have her own column, helping those of us with less ability to save think of creative strategies.
Reading both the letter and Cary's eloquent response, I was reminded of a former boss, not because of a similarity, but because of a difference (although one that MAY have been born of a similarity).
At Christmas time, he would always buy himself something he wanted first, before he shopped for anyone else. Seems a little counter-intuitive, I know, but he said it put him in a good mood, and made him feel more generous. Since he was, by nature, also frugal, I think he showed a lot of self-awareness in being able to manage or cope with something that nearly everyone finds stressful-- Christmas Shopping. I can say, from personal experience, that he also gave very thoughtful presents.
Perhaps the LW, who sounds in even more need of spending money on herself, could first buy herself a small, but thoughtful, present whenever she needs to get something for someone else, not just at Christmas. (Not something most of us should do.)
Finding pleasure in her own purchases for herself, might help her imagine the pleasure that others would take in her gifts to them. And then she could find additional pleasure in their pleasure. If it's still too stressful-- worrying about what the other person might like-- there's always the option of asking first, or else going shopping with them, and buying them something they admire.
Spending our money, using our resources, is one concrete way we have of expressing our values... and not doing it, keeps us from expressing them. But more important than the money spent, is the spirit of the giving, which is why Cary's response was so perfect.