- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
One reader wrote:
"Give her a reason to get out of those sweats. Spring for a romantic dinner date at an expensive restaurant, the way you used to."
And what's the assumption here? That (obviously!) any problems in the marriage are a direct result of (can anyone guess?) MEN.
I only had a few points: One, that this was a truly worthwhle article because it's one of the very rare occasions where life post-child is actually discussed! Nowhere in books, music or TV does anyone every really talk about what changes both parties go through after a child.
On TV what do we see? Having a child is awesome! The most fun anyone could ever have! And everyone dresses nice, looks great and basically acts exactly as they did when they were single -- expect for a few scense where the parents are shown pouring bowels of cereal for their youngin's. Other than feeding and watering the kids and dropping them off at school everything is just the same!
So point one is that what life is REALLY like after a child is a conversation this entire country desperately needs to have -- because when you look at family friendly TV its just one big infomerical that tells us kids are generally easy and wives and husbands look and act basically the same as the did before kids.
The message is clear: nothing is going to significantly change in your partners personality, appereance or sex drive. And that what men AND women expect -- hence the article's theme? She expected life to be exactly the same post-child, but it wasn't.
So let's extend men just a little sympathy (and women too!) and acknowledge that they have come by their mistaken ideas about life post-child honestly.
My second point is that women need to develope more self-awareness that radical, permenant changes in their personality can be a huge problem in a marriage.
Again and again we've seen women writing letters that first try to dismiss all changes in appeareance, personality and sex drive as so minor they aren't worth mentioning. When it's pointed out that these changes can be (in some cases, not all) radical (radical changes in appereances, sex drive and personality) they then move in to dismiss THAT as "temporary" -- lasting a few months at the most.
And then when some readers (reluctantly) acknoweldge that some of these changes in personlaity, sex drive and apperance AREN'T temporary women again dismiss it all by flippantly saying, "Well, any man who didn't see these changes coming is an idiot! Of course he should have known she'd radically change her apperance, her personality, her sex drive and that change would last the rest of her life!"
Where is this defensiveness coming from? And more importantly, is this a fair statement? Is it fair to dismiss significant and long lasting changes in a husband or wife's sex drive, personality or apperance as meaningless and insignificant?
If either partner, husband or wife, demonstrated a radical personality shift during a marriage there generally will be conflict. If a husband suddenly lost all interest in sex, blamed it on stress, and refused to make any effort to correct the situation at his wife's urging -- everyone her can agree wholeheartedly that the man is being unresonable and that the wife has a legitimate cause for concern and complaint.
Why is it that if a woman radically changes her sex drive (for whatever reason) and refuses to see a doctor or make any efforts at her husbands urging --- why is that being defended by female readers as "natural and acceptable?" In fact, some even go so far as to blame husbands and say they are being cruel to their wives!
This country needs an honest and open conversation about what it means to have a child and what changes and responsibilites we can expect.
That conversation cannot occur if women defensively dismiss every concern that is raised.
