Do you think women whose men have become a "househusband" lose sexual attraction for them?

[MatureDJ]

I was reading this, and it got me interested:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...g-wives-ditch-men-em-em-wanted-stay-home.html

It's the bitterest of ironies: thousands of men who've given up work to care for their children are being ditched by their high-flying wives - who wanted them to stay at home in the first place.

"I sensed that Louise was becoming more detached and less interested in me sexually within a year of becoming a househusband," says Richard, 50.

"It was as if she was losing all respect for me, just because I was the one at home, doing the domesworktic duties. Then, one day two years ago, she announced she was leaving me - and taking the children with her.

For five years Richard, from Watford, Herts, had worked hard to become a perfect "mother" to their sons, Jack, who is now nine, and Edward, seven. But from the moment he gave up his job, Richard says Louise, 47, failed to see him as a "man".

Divorce lawyer Vanessa Lloyd-Platt says that in her experience, the decision to allow the wife to be the main wage earner will have a detrimental effect on as many as half of these relationships, and that divorce statistics in these cases have risen by at least five per cent in the past two years.

And man, has this poor guy gotten REAMED!

For two years he fought through the family courts, desperately trying to gain full access to Jack and Edward. And at the same time, he was forced to find to meet maintenance payments. Having effectively quit his career five years earlier, he had to start at the bottom all over again.

"I was left out in the cold," he says. "It left me in an impossible situation, because I'd been out of the workplace for five years, caring for my children, and yet now I was expected to get straight back to work and start paying her some maintenance."

The moment Richard's wife said she was leaving him and taking the children, she changed her working hours from full to part-time so she could spend more time with the boys, while her mother helped with the rest of the childcare.

"It was very cleverly done," he says. "I've had to take a series of menial part-time jobs just to keep me going financially, and on top of all that I've had two years of solicitor's bills in taking my wife to court to get better access to the children, which has cost me at least £12,000.

It's a conundrum which is all too familiar to 46-year-old James Thomson, who works as a mechanical engineer, but prior to this was a stay-at-home father to his three daughters, Alice, 14, Chloe, 11, and Amy, eight. He lives in Manchester, and like Richard, he found that his marriage to Angela - a 43-year-old who runs her own communications company - began to crumble once he had given up his job.

James says: "We made the decision that I should stay at home when Alice was 18 months old. Angela was earning twice as much as I was. Up to that point we'd had a child-minder, but it felt as if neither of us was spending much time with our child.

"Alice would scream when we dropped her off with the child-minder, so it was obvious that all was not well. We then had a two-week family holiday in Greece and talked about the future. It became obvious that by the time we'd paid a child-minder and both of our petrol costs, there wasn't a lot left from my wage. It actually made financial sense for me to be at home.

"One day she came home suddenly and told me that she didn't love me any more, and she was fed up with being the main breadwinner.

"It came out of the blue to me - we'd jointly agreed that this was the best plan, and it was as if the rug was being pulled from under my feet to be told that she was not happy and deeply resented having to earn all the money.

"Further arguments followed and over the course of several months they got more and more heated until in the end I told her to pack her bags and get out if she was so miserable. At first the children stayed with me and she visited them, but then she took me to court."

As both Richard and James were to discover, the British courts still favour the mother when it comes to deciding where the children should live in divorce cases, even if the father has previously been the primary carer.

 

[Fruitbat]

This is why I do not like "career women"

Of course this sh1t will happen. If a woman wasn't tearing to be the one bringing up the kids and aiming for me to be the breadwinner, there is something wrong with her as far as I am concerned.

You might as well just get a poor sloot because as we see above, even ifyou are poorer and the main caregiver, the sexist bastard courts still side with vagina. You'll be paying maintainence either way.

 

[CMNILS87]

This is why I do not like "career women"

Of course this sh1t will happen. If a woman wasn't tearing to be the one bringing up the kids and aiming for me to be the breadwinner, there is something wrong with her as far as I am concerned.

You might as well just get a poor sloot because as we see above, even ifyou are poorer and the main caregiver, the sexist bastard courts still side with vagina. You'll be paying maintainence either way.

I think if this happened in the U.S., they would side more 50/50 ish. Plus without s job or career the man wouldn't be able to pay child support. Likely get alimony from her and joint custody of the kids.

Morale of story: don't be a house husband

 

[Fruitbat]

I think if this happened in the U.S., they would side more 50/50 ish. Plus without s job or career the man wouldn't be able to pay child support. Likely get alimony from her and joint custody of the kids.

Morale of story: don't be a house husband

Here, marriage means nothing.

Kids, woman gets it all, no questions asked.

 

[glass half full]

This is why we should use 'em and dump 'em. They are only good for loving, and sex.

 

[Desdinova]

If these men weren't just doing housework and instead were going out, killing food, fixing people's cars, collecting scrap metal, and finding other manly ways to provide for the family while taking care of the kids, they probably wouldn't have run into this problem. Instead, they chose to wear an apron.

 

[Fruitbat]

If these men weren't just doing housework and instead were going out, killing food, fixing people's cars, collecting scrap metal, and finding other manly ways to provide for the family while taking care of the kids, they probably wouldn't have run into this problem. Instead, they chose to wear an apron.

Do they have to be working class? There's more intelligent ways to earn money!

 

[speed dawg]

If these men weren't just doing housework and instead were going out, killing food, fixing people's cars, collecting scrap metal, and finding other manly ways to provide for the family while taking care of the kids, they probably wouldn't have run into this problem. Instead, they chose to wear an apron.

Yep, this is the issue.

I can name more than a few women with 'careers' that come home to a construction worker, biker guy or whatever every night. Being the breadwinner doesn't seem to bother them too much.

Problem these guys run into is that they are acting all metrosexual, wearing baby bjorns, cooking/cleaning, wearing skinny jeans and thick frame glasses and carrying the bags for the women's social life as well.

 

[Fruitbat]

Yep, this is the issue.

I can name more than a few women with 'careers' that come home to a construction worker, biker guy or whatever every night. Being the breadwinner doesn't seem to bother them too much.

Problem these guys run into is that they are acting all metrosexual, wearing baby bjorns, cooking/cleaning, wearing skinny jeans and thick frame glasses and carrying the bags for the women's social life as well.

These guys are effectively male bimbos, doing stereotypical male roles for a woman that keeps them as a sexual plaything. I know them.

Fvck that. You have to be more successful and they must depend on you in ways other than achieving an orgasm because you smell of oil. As soon as you hit 45, these are the guys that get divorced, as you're purely a d1ck to them.

I have time for any man who is clever and articulate in what they do, constrution or othrwise,but I question dynamics in these types of relationships. Men are supposed to be leaders, and leaders don't change oil for a living.

 

[Thorninmyside]

When I was married, I quit a retail management position to run my own business from my home office. B*tch supported me at first but the resentment of me not having to fight the traffic, office politics and shopping mall food courts on a daily basis finally got to her and she started trying to leave me lists of chores and never did any herself. We divorced a year later.

 

[BeExcellent]

My ex was a house spouse for 10 years. I was happy to support him because A.) I could without difficulty, and B.) His nightclub business blew up rather unexpectedly and I didn't see any issue with him doing parent duty. He didn't want to work for someone else. That was an embarrassment to him. Parenting is hard and we didn't want some stranger raising our kids. So we were agreed.

But he got lazy. As in super ridiculously lazy. He got so complacent that he never would open the mail, do or fold the laundry, make the doctor's appointments or clean up. So I would come home from a business trip excited to see my family and my husband and find a filthy house, piles of unopened mail, an empty pantry, no gas in the cars and sometimes the utilities shut off (because of not opening the mail or paying the bills). I never questioned how much money he said he needed either so it was NOT a money issue. If he said he needed money, I cut him a check, - I had quit having a joint account with him after he repeatedly bounced checks -.) I'm sorry but there is NO excuse for any of that. Zero. He napped constantly, he gained 50 pounds and he got whiny if I mentioned being upset about working all week, supporting him and the family in a very nice lifestyle where he wanted for nothing...and then I would have to clean house, do laundry, open mail, and get whatever crisis arose out of his laziness and procrastination solved. Do that all weekend plus do expense reports and business reports and leave again the next week. That got old after a while.

So yes, after YEARS of this and years of "I'm sorry" and years of "I'm going to change" I told him either this changes...or I'm out. And then I gave him 4 more years before I actually divorced him. All the while I was busting my rear for the family, loyal, faithful, listened to all the excuses, was encouraging...but after a while I got mad. Things got toxic at that point.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. So I did something different finally.

I was true to my word and divorced him. I didn't want my son to see me accepting a weak lazy man and I didn't want my daughters to grow up with me modeling taking care of a weak lazy man either. So I had to set the example that lazy is NOT ok.

But I never lost sexual attraction for him, I never quit caring about him & loving him, and even today if he ever gets his life together I will be happy for him, because he can become a man at that point instead of a man-child. All he needed to do was handle the household and the kids. Granted child rearing isn't easy, but I figured I was pulling my weight and then some, I thought the least he could do was pull his. Had he handled the things he was supposed (and had agreed) to handle, we'd still be married. Lazy and complacent. Never again.

And in the US the courts are heavy handed toward the breadwinner. The courts could care less which gender the breadwinner happens to be. My dad was a family law attorney and I knew this well. So I was the one at risk of losing the assets and income stream I had worked so hard for to support me, him, the children. The idea of divorce court was daunting because I had a lot to lose. I got a great settlement (and no my father did NOT represent me - I was in another state). Why? My ex husband was too lazy to bother hiring a lawyer at all as jaw dropping as that is. We got divorced cheap and I made out very favorably. I pay no child support, and got all the assets. I see it as a gift really because I'm the one who knows how to manage those assets and I will take care of him with the income those assets produce for the rest of his life because it's the right thing to do...but nothing obligates me legally.

Maybe he's the smart one after all. He will be taken care of for the rest of his life because I think that is the proper thing to do given the settlement we made, and he doesn't show any interest in becoming ambitious in his 50s. He is happy with a paid for house, a paid for car, help with spending money, and a job making a living wage that has educational perks for my son. Will he ever change/mature/become responsible? Maybe. But if he does or doesn't? Not my problem.

But had he done his part, house spouse or no, we'd still be together. It does suck for men who actually DO the house spouse role and get burned anyway. I don't consider my marriage in that category as my husband was too lazy to do much of anything. I mean really. Who lets the lights or the heat or the water get shut off because you can't be bothered to open the mail or pay the bills (all the while lying and telling me - Oh no babe, everything's cool, bills are all paid, things are handled.)

He failed to open a credit card bill for a card in my name, for like 4 months. He realized it and was "embarrassed" and wouldn't tell me until I started getting collections calls. Only then did I find out I was 120 days in arrears and my credit was seriously screwed up, even though there was PLENTY of money to pay that bill in full (I've only recently had my credit score recover from that bone headed irresponsibility)...He lied to me about all sorts of stuff like that. It's expensive to reconnect water, and power. He got traffic tickets I would end up paying. It was ridiculous & unreal. So I left. You bet.

I don't think any man here on this forum would put up with that sort of thing from a spouse, and after many years, neither did I. He wasn't like that when we married, so believe me do I get it about marriage being a crapshoot. I get it about not getting married, I get it about pre-nump agreements. You have no control over how someone else chooses to do after the marriage ceremony. I put up with it much too long, but we have children, so there were serious considerations indeed.

 

[Fruitbat]

My ex was a house spouse for 10 years. I was happy to support him because A.) I could without difficulty, and B.) His nightclub business blew up rather unexpectedly and I didn't see any issue with him doing parent duty. He didn't want to work for someone else. That was an embarrassment to him. Parenting is hard and we didn't want some stranger raising our kids. So we were agreed.

But he got lazy. As in super ridiculously lazy. He got so complacent that he never would open the mail, do or fold the laundry, make the doctor's appointments or clean up. So I would come home from a business trip excited to see my family and my husband and find a filthy house, piles of unopened mail, an empty pantry, no gas in the cars and sometimes the utilities shut off (because of not opening the mail or paying the bills). I never questioned how much money he said he needed either so it was NOT a money issue. If he said he needed money, I cut him a check, - I had quit having a joint account with him after he repeatedly bounced checks -.) I'm sorry but there is NO excuse for any of that. Zero. He napped constantly, he gained 50 pounds and he got whiny if I mentioned being upset about working all week, supporting him and the family in a very nice lifestyle where he wanted for nothing...and then I would have to clean house, do laundry, open mail, and get whatever crisis arose out of his laziness and procrastination solved. Do that all weekend plus do expense reports and business reports and leave again the next week. That got old after a while.

So yes, after YEARS of this and years of "I'm sorry" and years of "I'm going to change" I told him either this changes...or I'm out. And then I gave him 4 more years before I actually divorced him. All the while I was busting my rear for the family, loyal, faithful, listened to all the excuses, was encouraging...but after a while I got mad. Things got toxic at that point.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. So I did something different finally.

I was true to my word and divorced him. I didn't want my son to see me accepting a weak lazy man and I didn't want my daughters to grow up with me modeling taking care of a weak lazy man either. So I had to set the example that lazy is NOT ok.

But I never lost sexual attraction for him, I never quit caring about him & loving him, and even today if he ever gets his life together I will be happy for him, because he can become a man at that point instead of a man-child. All he needed to do was handle the household and the kids. Granted child rearing isn't easy, but I figured I was pulling my weight and then some, I thought the least he could do was pull his. Had he handled the things he was supposed (and had agreed) to handle, we'd still be married. Lazy and complacent. Never again.

And in the US the courts are heavy handed toward the breadwinner. The courts could care less which gender the breadwinner happens to be. My dad was a family law attorney and I knew this well. So I was the one at risk of losing the assets and income stream I had worked so hard for to support me, him, the children. The idea of divorce court was daunting because I had a lot to lose. I got a great settlement (and no my father did NOT represent me - I was in another state). Why? My ex husband was too lazy to bother hiring a lawyer at all as jaw dropping as that is. We got divorced cheap and I made out very favorably. I pay no child support, and got all the assets. I see it as a gift really because I'm the one who knows how to manage those assets and I will take care of him with the income those assets produce for the rest of his life because it's the right thing to do...but nothing obligates me legally.

Maybe he's the smart one after all. He will be taken care of for the rest of his life because I think that is the proper thing to do given the settlement we made, and he doesn't show any interest in becoming ambitious in his 50s. He is happy with a paid for house, a paid for car, help with spending money, and a job making a living wage that has educational perks for my son. Will he ever change/mature/become responsible? Maybe. But if he does or doesn't? Not my problem.

But had he done his part, house spouse or no, we'd still be together. It does suck for men who actually DO the house spouse role and get burned anyway. I don't consider my marriage in that category as my husband was too lazy to do much of anything. I mean really. Who lets the lights or the heat or the water get shut off because you can't be bothered to open the mail or pay the bills (all the while lying and telling me - Oh no babe, everything's cool, bills are all paid, things are handled.)

He failed to open a credit card bill for a card in my name, for like 4 months. He realized it and was "embarrassed" and wouldn't tell me until I started getting collections calls. Only then did I find out I was 120 days in arrears and my credit was seriously screwed up, even though there was PLENTY of money to pay that bill in full (I've only recently had my credit score recover from that bone headed irresponsibility)...He lied to me about all sorts of stuff like that. It's expensive to reconnect water, and power. He got traffic tickets I would end up paying. It was ridiculous & unreal. So I left. You bet.

I don't think any man here on this forum would put up with that sort of thing from a spouse, and after many years, neither did I. He wasn't like that when we married, so believe me do I get it about marriage being a crapshoot. I get it about not getting married, I get it about pre-nump agreements. You have no control over how someone else chooses to do after the marriage ceremony. I put up with it much too long, but we have children, so there were serious considerations indeed.

If he wasn't doing laundry or bills,were there other "blue jobs" he was doing? Was he taking out the rubbish, mending things. doing the shopping, heavy lifting work? I'm sure a lot of guys can relate on here that many women seem to think because they can't do these, they don't count and the work BOTH of you can do has to be shared.

I was married a long time and my ex pushed and pushed until every job was my job pretty much, other than washing clothes, because I was at home working mainly. She didn't understand that I was WORKING at home and I always had to stress that the house was clean before she came back. Also, she was super jealous I was making 5 x her income without doing 9-5. In reality I was doing 8-7. Also, HER standards for everything were 10 times higher. I don't care if the kettle needs a descale but that was my negligence, apparently.

This continued for years, I'd try and negotiate but it was "How can I explain what I want - I can't explain my needs"

I'd say "You need to be more reasonable with those needs" Her "NEVER" Me "I will have to leave you then"

One day, I did.

Seems a bit harsh you got all the assets and pay no CM, a little triumphant about that. Guys saying that.....well, they don't because it doesn't happen, at all.....you're a guy - duh!

However, this man sounds like a retard so probably fair enough.

 

[SteR]

My ex was a house spouse for 10 years...

I don't think this problem is exclusive to a particular gender. I think ultimately if a partner isn't pulling their weight then it's going to piss the other one off. It's the same thing you hear with guys complaining about their lazy wives sitting around in front of the TV, doing nothing.

The only different is, with you, you can pretty much walk away with everything. If the roles were reversed, the guy's trapped. He can't divorce her because he knows he'll lose most, if not all of what he has. I realise some people will say "oh, that's changing.." and even though that may be true, the courts still favour women in the majority of cases.

 

[speed dawg]

These guys are effectively male bimbos, doing stereotypical male roles for a woman that keeps them as a sexual plaything. I know them.

Fvck that. You have to be more successful and they must depend on you in ways other than achieving an orgasm because you smell of oil. As soon as you hit 45, these are the guys that get divorced, as you're purely a d1ck to them.

I have time for any man who is clever and articulate in what they do, constrution or othrwise,but I question dynamics in these types of relationships. Men are supposed to be leaders, and leaders don't change oil for a living.

If a woman isn't attracted to a man, nothing else matters. Every single bit of it comes back to that.

 

[BeExcellent]

Seems a bit harsh you got all the assets and pay no CM, a little triumphant about that. Guys saying that.....well, they don't because it doesn't happen, at all.....you're a guy - duh!

However, this man sounds like a retard so probably fair enough.

He was not "working from home" at all. He did take out the trash and cut the grass. He did get the children to and from school and get them fed. I office at home when I'm not traveling so I get it about working from home. That is entirely different from being a stay at home parent. Being a stay at home parent is a big job however if done properly.

I wanted to stay OUT of court because my attorney (a female lawyer who was herself a judge for 20 years) told me there was no way the court would not award him half of everything. So I negotiated with my ex to stay out of court. I and MY lawyer both suggested he hire his own lawyer. He didn't. Had he hired his own lawyer things would have gone very differently. He didn't so it worked out as it did.

Splitting the assets (that he was in no way prepared to manage) would have destroyed the portfolio's ability to create income. That income is about to put all my kids through college (which I am 100% solely financially responsible for) and pays both his house payment and mine (so he has no housing cost) and would have meant I would never have enough income to be home BEFORE my minor kids graduated high school (in other words it would mean I never get to be a mom at home with my children.) He got 10 years home being a dad whereas I was having the babies, handing them off and going immediately back to work. You have no family leave when you are self employed as I am and if you are not working you are not having income.

He knew he had been lazy in the marriage. He felt bad about taking away my opportunity to be a mother while my kids were still living at home (which I had worked for 12 years to build precisely for that purpose) That is why he did as he did. I see that as an enormous gift and as quite selfless on his part. He chose NOT to dismantle the engine I built to create income. Therefore I will see to it he is financially looked after for the rest of his life. I think that is the proper thing to do. He did not dismantle the income engine, and therefore it is the right thing in my mind for him to have the benefit of that engine. But I don't need a judge to tell me to do the right thing, and I don't need anybody to tell me I was DAM lucky either.

My point is the court would have wrecked me given the opportunity.

I don't think this problem is exclusive to a particular gender. I think ultimately if a partner isn't pulling their weight then it's going to piss the other one off. It's the same thing you hear with guys complaining about their lazy wives sitting around in front of the TV, doing nothing.

. I agree 100%. Sitting around spending their husband's money and getting fat. Not cool.

The only different is, with you, you can pretty much walk away with everything.

I could, that's true. But I won't. He trusted that I won't. That's character.

The really funny thing is that now he helps me more than he ever did. In part because he is changing who he is to a degree (he is now working, and understands that his financial welfare is tied to mine even though we are divorced), and in part precisely because he knows that if he helps me it in return helps him and helps the children, which relieves financial pressure on him. He is supposed to pay for 50% of childcare, doctor visits, food, and expenses. I told him that I am happy to pay for 100% of those things and I do not keep a score. So what we did works for us in the end, and it meets everyone's needs financially.

I know him better than anyone else. He almost needs some level of hardship to find motivation if that makes any sense. The marriage was too easy for him in essence. In the marriage he never had to face his own failures and shortcomings (which were factors in the business issues he had). He was too comfortable to grow. I actually respect him more now than I have in years. Both because of what he did for me vis a vis the divorce, and also because of his efforts to improve himself since the divorce. I may back him one day in a business financially. He can't afford to be lazy anymore.

We are still close and we get on very well. The toxic stuff from the marriage is gone, and we like each other as we always have. We are transparent with our children. At dinner recently with my ex and my kids we got to chatting to the restaurant owners, who are friends of ours. The wife said "Y'all get along so well...when are you getting re-married?"...to which my 13 year old daughter said "Oh NO. They are NOT getting remarried. They are very happily divorced."

Everyone fell out laughing. But her statement is true.

 

[Fruitbat]

He was not "working from home" at all. He did take out the trash and cut the grass. He did get the children to and from school and get them fed. I office at home when I'm not traveling so I get it about working from home. That is entirely different from being a stay at home parent. Being a stay at home parent is a big job however if done properly.

I wanted to stay OUT of court because my attorney (a female lawyer who was herself a judge for 20 years) told me there was no way the court would not award him half of everything. So I negotiated with my ex to stay out of court. I and MY lawyer both suggested he hire his own lawyer. He didn't. Had he hired his own lawyer things would have gone very differently. He didn't so it worked out as it did.

Splitting the assets (that he was in no way prepared to manage) would have destroyed the portfolio's ability to create income. That income is about to put all my kids through college (which I am 100% solely financially responsible for) and pays both his house payment and mine (so he has no housing cost) and would have meant I would never have enough income to be home BEFORE my minor kids graduated high school (in other words it would mean I never get to be a mom at home with my children.) He got 10 years home being a dad whereas I was having the babies, handing them off and going immediately back to work. You have no family leave when you are self employed as I am and if you are not working you are not having income.

He knew he had been lazy in the marriage. He felt bad about taking away my opportunity to be a mother while my kids were still living at home (which I had worked for 12 years to build precisely for that purpose) That is why he did as he did. I see that as an enormous gift and as quite selfless on his part. He chose NOT to dismantle the engine I built to create income. Therefore I will see to it he is financially looked after for the rest of his life. I think that is the proper thing to do. He did not dismantle the income engine, and therefore it is the right thing in my mind for him to have the benefit of that engine. But I don't need a judge to tell me to do the right thing, and I don't need anybody to tell me I was DAM lucky either.

My point is the court would have wrecked me given the opportunity.



. I agree 100%. Sitting around spending their husband's money and getting fat. Not cool.



I could, that's true. But I won't. He trusted that I won't. That's character.

The really funny thing is that now he helps me more than he ever did. In part because he is changing who he is to a degree (he is now working, and understands that his financial welfare is tied to mine even though we are divorced), and in part precisely because he knows that if he helps me it in return helps him and helps the children, which relieves financial pressure on him. He is supposed to pay for 50% of childcare, doctor visits, food, and expenses. I told him that I am happy to pay for 100% of those things and I do not keep a score. So what we did works for us in the end, and it meets everyone's needs financially.

I know him better than anyone else. He almost needs some level of hardship to find motivation if that makes any sense. The marriage was too easy for him in essence. In the marriage he never had to face his own failures and shortcomings (which were factors in the business issues he had). He was too comfortable to grow. I actually respect him more now than I have in years. Both because of what he did for me vis a vis the divorce, and also because of his efforts to improve himself since the divorce. I may back him one day in a business financially. He can't afford to be lazy anymore.

We are still close and we get on very well. The toxic stuff from the marriage is gone, and we like each other as we always have. We are transparent with our children. At dinner recently with my ex and my kids we got to chatting to the restaurant owners, who are friends of ours. The wife said "Y'all get along so well...when are you getting re-married?"...to which my 13 year old daughter said "Oh NO. They are NOT getting remarried. They are very happily divorced."

Everyone fell out laughing. But her statement is true.

So you picked a total loser and decided to have kids with him?

What was the attraction?

 

[Fruitbat]

If a woman isn't attracted to a man, nothing else matters. Every single bit of it comes back to that.

But is that

If a woman isn't attracted to a man, nothing else matters. Every single bit of it comes back to that.

I know tons of women who wouldn't dream of dating a meathead.

 

[playa99]

This post sums up my long term fear in an LTR.. I fear marrying, the dynamic changing and I end up losing half my stuff that I've worked for.

@BeExcellent has been very fortunate that her ex didn't take half of what she's worked for along with alimony!

I think 'house husbands' will become more and more common. Women can support a family nowadays & gender roles aren't as stereotypical as they once were. It isn't a given that the man is the provider and the woman is the carer in a household.

Certainly in the UK, you need a six figure income to comfortably support a family of 2 adults & 2 kids.

 

[speed dawg]

I know tons of women who wouldn't dream of dating a meathead.

Being a meathead doesn't equal attraction. It certainly may help in many instances.

And I don't care what individual women's preferences are. All women must be attracted to their men, to stay with them (and have a successful relationship).

The only exception to this are those really sheltered, stupid, weird girls that are 25 years old and never kissed anybody. Those girls usually marry a gay guy who's trying to be straight. These are the only types of people they feel comfortable enough around to let them see themselves naked. This never ends well either.

 

[BeExcellent]

So you picked a total loser and decided to have kids with him?

What was the attraction?

When we were dating and got married he owned the hottest high end nightclub in a well known nightlife city. So that was who he was (or who he put himself out there to be) until AFTER we were married and AFTER his partner (a childhood friend since they were in gradeschool) screwed him over. He was also naturally charming and we got along very well. So I thought "Gee this is great, I'm marrying a fellow business man & we both really enjoy the nightlife industry...this is wonderful." But when the chips were down he wouldn't get up. I didn't find that out until after getting married.

That's the whole problem. You don't really know much about who someone really is until life dishes out some hardship. He was utterly unprepared to handle hardship. I didn't have a way to know that going in and looking back I think he honestly had no idea what he didn't know. So he was completely congruent in his behavior and thus utterly believable.

When I began to understand who he really was, I was about to give birth to our son. So at that point I thought..."OK, we are in serious sh1t, but we are about to have children. That changes everything. We need to make this work" so I actually redoubled my efforts and fortunately I was already earning six figures as a self employed professional so I simply figured I would carry the family financially until he got his stuff sorted and figured out his next move. Only he didn't.

So yeah. I always felt that he presented himself as someone he was not, but he did so more out of ignorance rather than malice, and I picked him, so I also figured I had made that choice and therefore I needed to make that choice work.

My story is in various places around the forum. Even as I look back on it, I'm not sure there would have been any indications differently beforehand. So it is what it is.