S/O of ground rules thread - What do you want your daughters requirements to be?

[Parrothead]

I'm pretty much open to any type person that makes her happy.

 

I can't imagine some deadbeat, abusive asshat will make her happy so no worries there.

[Rosie_0801]

That's interesting.  I have to wonder if it's just a $ and cents thing, or something more complex, like the egos involved.  We make it work on a teacher's salary in a sky-high COL state with me bringing in just another several hundred a week, but not every week.

 

I propose it comes back, in part, to assumed gender roles, and those couples who are less flexible about that will have less success in reversing them.

 

 

One scenario was definitely ego. Wife was supporting husband while he studied and gave him $200/wk pocket money. He found that emasculating, but didn't say no.

 

It also wouldn't work if the stay at home parent didn't actually care much about housekeeping, child raising or keeping within budgets.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Since we are talking about daughters here, I hope if mine ever hears the words "kept man" uttered by any guy she is seeing that she will immediately head for the hills and not turn back. 

 

Jeez, if I'm kept, I'm not asking for enough!   I'll take an Aston Martin DB9, please.  Cobalt blue.  Grey leather.

 

And a boat.

 

[Wheres Toto]

This has definitely been an interesting discussion.  Such a wide-range of preferences.

 

I don't have a problem with the preference for someone who is "fit" or "not morbidly obese" but there should be an understanding that things can change.  If that is such a major factor in who they marry, how will they feel if their partner puts on some weight, or no longer wants to be physically active? 

 

I think a wife breadwinner can work out if there is the proper attitude toward it.  I think the SAHM can go badly if there's a bad attitude about it.  IMO, if the breadwinner - male or female - has an attitude that it's "their money", that they should enjoy special privileges because they are the one who works, if they refuse to help out with any housework or childcare under any circumstances because they are the one going to work everyday, if the breadwinner wants to control all the money and only give money  to the SAH parent like they are granting a favor - I think the situation will eventually go bad regardless of whether it is the male or female staying home.

 

I do think some people are too hung up on gender roles for the untraditional to ever work but that doesn't have to be a universal truth.

[marbel]

I've known of a few families with a stay-home dad. (I never met the husbands and these were not close friends, just acquaintances or professional relationships, so I never knew too much about the families.)  It seemed to work for them, either because they wanted it to work, or because they had no choice in the matter (husband unemployed for some reason, wife had to work) and had to make the best of it.

 

But I haven't known many who wanted it that way.  I don't believe I've ever met a man who would prefer to be at home with the kids, and very few women who would prefer to be the main wage earner if given the choice.    Not that I know a huge cross-section of the world, but... it seems like in all these years I'd have come across someone.

[Santi]

I do wonder what "fit" means to people. That excludes people who are underweight too, right? I had an eating disorder when I was younger and I would've felt a lot worse if I knew people didn't want me dating their children just because I wasn't really healthy.

 

In regards to the gender roles thing, I would be fine if dd's husband wanted to stay at home with the kids as long as she was okay with it. I didn't mention it though because she's made it clear she doesn't want children.

[LucyStoner]

That's interesting. I have to wonder if it's just a $ and cents thing, or something more complex, like the egos involved. We make it work on a teacher's salary in a sky-high COL state with me bringing in just another several hundred a week, but not every week.

 

I propose it comes back, in part, to assumed gender roles, and those couples who are less flexible about that will have less success in reversing them.

I know several successful hetero couples with happy marriages where she is the main income earner and he is the secondary earner and/or primary caregiver. None are very affluent. The affluent families I know where she out earns him all seem to have fizzled or faltered over ego and gender role issues.

 

My husband and I have flipped around a bit. First we both worked and earned about the same, then he went pt to be the main kid caregiver. Later, I was the sole income while he was in school for a year. Then he went back pt and I worked full time. For a while we both worked pt, opposite shifts. Then in a big turn of events, I quit to stay home and he is the sole income earner. If I were married to someone who thought that this is the way it should be, or where this was determined by gender and not by other factors, I'd go bananas. I became the sahp because it was clear we needed one for our son with autism and I was the natural choice because:

 

-homeschooling a child with autism and keeping house at the same time is not his strong suit. He can do school. Or he can clean. Or he can cook. Or he can play with the kids all day. He is a kickass dad, not a kickass multitasker and he has ADD to boot making juggling all the schedules and competing daily tasks much harder for him than it is for me.

-he works where there are family health benefits I would never secure in my line of work. While I made more per week, by a fair bit, all that extra and then some would be eaten up by healthcare costs.

-his work starts when it starts and ends when it ends. When he is home, he can be home. My work was often far more than FT hours and often came home with me. So ditching my job meant more time for family overall between the two of us.

 

I laugh at how people reacted to this. Some are like "oh, finally he can support you" and some are like "don't you miss work?" To the first thing I am like, "he's been supporting me since the day he stayed over and never really went home again, even when he didn't work for money". And vice versa. And to the latter thing I am like "uh, sure don't. Not as much as I thought I would. No, no I will not apply for this position you think would be perfect for me."

 

Like you we are in a fairly HCOL place.

[Guest]

I don't have great relationships with my daughters at the moment, but I certainly hope that dd1's husband will respect her work as a nanny and see it as valuable experience that contributes to her ability to mother his offspring rather than "a menial dead-end job".

 

dd2's life is so vastly different than my own that I can only hope that she can break the negative patterns that my mother and I struggle with and find a partner that doesn't abuse or disrespect her and makes her happy.

 

 

[wingedradical]

1 A man who is emotionally solid.

2. A man who has neither personal attitudes or theology which would question his wife's equality in the area of decision making or calling from God. This is important to me because we are Christians, but we do not believe in patriarchal so-called complementarianism.

 

I'd want the same for sons - for me, there isn't really a difference in what I want for sons-in-laws and daughters-in-laws except that #2 with my daughters-in-laws looked like, "A woman who isn't overly dependent but is a strong person, able to truly share her life."

 

[Wheres Toto]

I've known of a few families with a stay-home dad. (I never met the husbands and these were not close friends, just acquaintances or professional relationships, so I never knew too much about the families.)  It seemed to work for them, either because they wanted it to work, or because they had no choice in the matter (husband unemployed for some reason, wife had to work) and had to make the best of it.

 

But I haven't known many who wanted it that way.  I don't believe I've ever met a man who would prefer to be at home with the kids, and very few women who would prefer to be the main wage earner if given the choice.    Not that I know a huge cross-section of the world, but... it seems like in all these years I'd have come across someone.

 

My dh would LOVE to be a stay at home dad.  He already cooks dinner every night, does the majority of the grocery shopping, and since I went back to work - does the dishes, straightens up, picks up the kids...   Honestly, he's no better and no worse than I am with cleaning (which isn't saying much, I'm pretty bad).

 

But, he can make a LOT more than I can, more than double.  Right now I'm the main income earner mainly because my job comes with steady paychecks.  He currently has his own company and unfortunately right now the only income is a single consulting job.  In the next few months we'll find out if he's going to be unemployed completely (he'll be a SAHM), accepting a job with the company he's consulting with, or if a prospective project will come through so he'll continued being self-employed.   Either way I will continue working since I have medical benefits, a STEADY paycheck, and I actually like my job.  Right now my mother watches the kids so we can continue homeschooling.  If dh doesn't stay home with them, we will hire at least a part-time nanny to help my mother out.

 

I think a very important trait in a partner is flexibility - the understand that sometimes life changes and the plans you made may not be the best course of action for the family as a unit.

[Crimson Wife]

FWIW, the one couple I know who the wife as primary breadwinner and the husband as SAHD who divorced had other issues.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

But I haven't known many who wanted it that way.  I don't believe I've ever met a man who would prefer to be at home with the kids, and very few women who would prefer to be the main wage earner if given the choice.    Not that I know a huge cross-section of the world, but... it seems like in all these years I'd have come across someone.

 

I did find that to be a trend when I was in a SAHD group -- besides the fact that the acronym says "sad."

 

There seems to be a preponderance of dads who do it short term, then go back to work when the cherubs hit school, thus the group is perpetual pre-pre-school.  I did meet another real by-choice HS dad once, because his kids had gone on to the public high school in DW's district.  Of course, he was out of the business at that point.  I know a former physics teacher who just swapped roles with his wife, but as you said, I'm not entirely sure that was by choice.

 

There are supposed to be 2 million fulltime fathers, of which I have yet to find a count of the HSing sub-group.  I wouldn't be surprised if it varies by region and COL, not to mention varying ideas of gender roles.  

 

Our choice was kinda simple -- DW has a tenured job with a pension and superb health insurance.  When DD was born, I was working at a dotcom startup in the city, which true to form, went belly up about 5 months after I left.  On the plus side, that office was two blocks from Ground Zero, and this all happened in 2001.  Train fare was over $300 a month and I got home at 8pm.  I can't say I miss it.

[Danestress]

I'm a little horrified by the physical appearance desires. I could honestly not care less what my ds' so's look like. I don't have daughters but I don't think what we want for our kids would be much different for daughters or sons.

 

 

It's interesting isn't it? Somehow I think people would be appalled by a list for sons - like I want his wife to be:

 

Young enough to have babies and actually want them

 

Self supporting and not expecting my son to be Mr Money Bags

 

Own her own car

 

Keep a tidy house

 

Not be moody and tempermental and to speak respectfully to my son at all times

 

Be tall enough to produce nice tall athletic children

 

Etc etc. Creepy, right?

[Danestress]

Double

[Crimson Wife]

It's interesting isn't it? Somehow I think people would be appalled by a list for sons - like I want his wife to be:

 

Young enough to have babies and actually want them

 

Etc etc. Creepy, right?

Why is that creepy? I would want my future DIL to love kids and to be able to give DS biological children. If they struggled with infertility and wound up adopting, of course I'd love the adopted grandkids. But I wouldn't want it to be because she put off having kids until it was too late for selfish reasons (career, wanting to party, general immaturity, etc.)

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

My dh would LOVE to be a stay at home dad.  He already cooks dinner every night, does the majority of the grocery shopping, and since I went back to work - does the dishes, straightens up, picks up the kids...   Honestly, he's no better and no worse than I am with cleaning (which isn't saying much, I'm pretty bad).

 

But, he can make a LOT more than I can, more than double.  Right now I'm the main income earner mainly because my job comes with steady paychecks.  

 

The ultimate, and elusive, meaning of true gender equality would be that spouses would be interchangeable if it just came down to income potential -- if either parent could step back into an industry after years of parenting and not face a penalty for not having put in enough "face time" compared to the 60-hour-a-week crowd.   We'd probably have more women as CEOs and senators and more dads at home, and everyone would benefit from a greater pool of talent.  More sons of fulltime dads would then have their own models (good or bad), and might be more open in their adult interpretations of gender roles.

 

I'm not confident about it happening on a large scale anytime soon.

[LucyStoner]

Why is that creepy? I would want my future DIL to love kids and to be able to give DS biological children. If they struggled with infertility and wound up adopting, of course I'd love the adopted grandkids. But I wouldn't want it to be because she put off having kids until it was too late for selfish reasons (career, wanting to party, general immaturity, etc.)

Yet if your son ends up happy with a career woman who wants only 1 child, I bet you would also be happy for that grandchild and happy for your son's happiness, no?

 

What I find creepy is the idea that there is some sort of ideal family besides the particular family my children and their might be spouses would want. I have a friend who had a hysterectomy in her 20s. I don't think the reasons why she did that are her fiance's parents' business.

 

For example, maybe one of my sons will marry an awesome young lady and they decide for her to stay home with their 10 children while he works FT. Maybe they will join a protestant and conservative church and she is an active Republican or heck, let's go all out there as far from my views as possible and say she's a hard core social conservative and an economic libertarian. That is not how my husband and I have lived but I would be happy for him even if his decisions and life were vastly different than our own, provided they each treated the other well and weathered life's ups and downs as a team. I am totally different than my MIL and that is ok. We love each othe very much and I am so fortunate to have her in my life.

[LucyStoner]

The ultimate, and elusive, meaning of true gender equality would be that spouses would be interchangeable if it just came down to income potential -- if either parent could step back into an industry after years of parenting and not face a penalty for not having put in enough "face time" compared to the 60-hour-a-week crowd. We'd probably have more women as CEOs and senators and more dads at home, and everyone would benefit from a greater pool of talent. More sons of fulltime dads would then have their own models (good or bad), and might be more open in their adult interpretations of gender roles.

 

I'm not confident about it happening on a large scale anytime soon.

Given that promotions and raises come with experience, I don't see how that is feasible. If you step off the career ladder those that stay on will continue to climb while you are gone. And that's ok.

 

What I would like there to be is a total lack of stigma on men who keep home and women who work and more respect generally for the work that is associated with children and the home. So that people can make their choices without worrying that working for pay compromises them as a woman or being home is somehow unacceptable for them as men. Flexibility and logic rather than rigid gender roles that force some people to make illogical or unhappy choices. I am thinking specifically of a couple, not unique, where she was a well paid engineer and he was a gig musician. She was happy working. He was happy being at home and doing his music on the side. But she felt like something was broken with her that this was what she wanted/enjoyed and so he found some crappy FT job and she started staying home. Neither was happy that way at all and it cost them a lot of money. Finally they went back to their natural but gender reversed avocations and they were much the better for it. And not just because they were more financially secure.

[marbel]

It's interesting isn't it? Somehow I think people would be appalled by a list for sons - like I want his wife to be:

 

Young enough to have babies and actually want them

 

Self supporting and not expecting my son to be Mr Money Bags

 

Own her own car

 

Keep a tidy house

 

Not be moody and tempermental and to speak respectfully to my son at all times

 

Be tall enough to produce nice tall athletic children

 

Etc etc. Creepy, right?

 

I don't think most of these are really creepy.

 

Young enough to have children and want them - if a man wants a family, he should probably focus on marrying a woman who feels the same way and is not too old to have kids.    I'm 8 years older than my husband, and was 37 when we met.  I knew he wanted a family and though I wasn't opposed to the idea, I had pretty well figured by that time of my life that child/family wasn't going to happen to me.  I actually didn't want to date him.  But we ended up staying together because though he wanted a family, he was prepared it might not happen - as indeed it might not have happened even if I had been 26 when we got married!   There are no guarantees in any case, but at least we were compatible in what we hoped for. 

 

Self supporting and not expecting my son to be Mr Money Bags - I think the ability to self-support is important. I really regret that after 16 years out of the workforce my skills are outdated, I'm pretty old, and I don't have a career I could go back to if I need to be employed again.    I would encourage my daughter not to allow herself to get into that position.  And I wouldn't want my son to marry a woman who expected a lavish lifestyle (Mr Moneybags).

 

Own her own car - Eh.

 

Keep a tidy house - Eh.   Priorities for some people.  I married a sloppy guy; I knew going into it that he was a sloppy guy and that having a neat house was far less important to him than it was to me.   YMMV on that one.

 

Not be moody and tempermental and to speak respectfully to my son at all times - ??   don't we want our daughters to marry someone who will speak respectfully to them at all times?  I sure don't want my son to marry a woman who is moody and plays the "oh nothing <sigh>" game when he can see something is wrong, and asks what it is.

 

Be tall enough to produce nice tall athletic children -  Hmmm...

 

I'm surprised too by the "horror" expressed because someone mentioned good looks.  I don't know what the poster meant by that.  I wouldn't interpret that as drop-dead gorgeous.  I would think clean, well-groomed, dressed neatly and not a slob.   Of course "good looking" changes, doesn't it?   I didn't think my husband was super handsome when I met him, but by the time we got married I would look at him and wonder how I ended up with such a gorgeous guy.  I am not a looker myself, and am aging badly but he seems to think I am OK.

 

And then the opposite - I remember a very handsome man I had a major crush on in my early working days.  All the women I worked with did.  Till we got to know him.  What a jerk!   Suddenly I realized he was not so good-looking after all. 

 

I'm thinking of my desires for my kids, not my demands.  I can't demand anything of them.  I hope not to be a disapproving MIL. I have one, so...

[Karen in CO]

I don't have any requirements for future spouses for my kids, but I have been trying to "brainwash" them into having requirements of themselves before they get married.

 

What I tell all three of my kids that I want from them before they get married is to

 

1) have graduated college

2) have a job that supports themselves

3) have traveled outside the US to at least one place of their choosing (more concrete than the previous requirement of "travel the world")

[Wheres Toto]

The ultimate, and elusive, meaning of true gender equality would be that spouses would be interchangeable if it just came down to income potential -- if either parent could step back into an industry after years of parenting and not face a penalty for not having put in enough "face time" compared to the 60-hour-a-week crowd.   We'd probably have more women as CEOs and senators and more dads at home, and everyone would benefit from a greater pool of talent.  More sons of fulltime dads would then have their own models (good or bad), and might be more open in their adult interpretations of gender roles.

 

I'm not confident about it happening on a large scale anytime soon.

 

I do think we're a long way from this being the majority, although it would be nice to see. 

 

Interestingly, I just stepped into a job after 8 years out of the workforce - a job at the exact same level and slightly more pay than the last position I held. 

 

My boss, one of the Managing Partners and President of the company I work for, is a women.

[Wheres Toto]

I don't have any requirements for future spouses for my kids, but I have been trying to "brainwash" them into having requirements of themselves before they get married.

 

What I tell all three of my kids that I want from them before they get married is to

 

1) have graduated college

2) have a job that supports themselves

3) have traveled outside the US to at least one place of their choosing (more concrete than the previous requirement of "travel the world")

 

Your first two were important to me and my oldest knows why.   I want her to be able to support herself without having to resort to a minimum wage job (at least in a normal job market).  You never know where you're life is going to go - you may plan to stay home with kids but stuff happens.  In my case it was divorce, but death and disability could send any plans to he**.

[Santi]

It's interesting isn't it? Somehow I think people would be appalled by a list for sons - like I want his wife to be:

 

Young enough to have babies and actually want them

 

Self supporting and not expecting my son to be Mr Money Bags

 

Own her own car

 

Keep a tidy house

 

Not be moody and tempermental and to speak respectfully to my son at all times

 

Be tall enough to produce nice tall athletic children

 

Etc etc. Creepy, right?

Tall parents doesn't necessarily equal tall children, and short doesn't mean non athletic. My parents were both tall and I'm only 5'2. I still did cross country for school along with gymnastics and dance.

[Anne in CA]

Mental flexibility is huge to me. I would be very sad in ANY of my children married someone who was not able to grow and learn as they got older. I invested a lot of time and money in my children to (hopefully) help make them the sort of people that can adjust to life as it comes and to a very changing world. The US is just not going to look like it does now in the future. My kids will probably not live in the same world I live in just as my parents could not have imagined the smart phone and the life that I live now. I would be sad for my children to be stuck with people who cant grow.

[Laura Corin]

Given that promotions and raises come with experience, I don't see how that is feasible. If you step off the career ladder those that stay on will continue to climb while you are gone. And that's ok.

 

 

I think it is possible, so long as job shares/part time are not looked down upon, so that people don't have to step off for long.  My best friend from school joined the civil service on the graduate fast track when she was 23.  She was given positions of great responsibility early on (working directly with Mary Warnock on Human Fertilisation and Embryologyl, for example).  When she had children, she took six months off with each child, then she stepped back to part time work, but it was a job share at the appropriate level, not a lesser position.  When her children went to school, she slowly moved into full time work and is now working at a high level in the civil service.

 

A woman CEO was saying on the radio this week about how much nonsense is talked in many companies about how difficult it is to retain good women.  She said that she had put policies in place in every company that she has managed to make exactly the above kind of part-time progression work.

 

L

[LucyStoner]

As I am sure your know Laura, in the USA, we lag far behind other first world countries (heck, and most other countries period) on actual pro-family, pro-child policies like maternity/paternity leave. A caregiver earns no social security credits for their time off except to a portion of their spouse's (if any). We really do not value unpaid family work here in real, concrete ways. Which is a tragedy.

 

Part-time work here tends to be lower level. I don't think it should be that way but it is. When I was considering part time work my main option was to work for myself as a consultant or contractor or to drop down the ladder quite a bit. Any part time jobs at my pay grade/professional level were really full time work for part time pay type gigs (where the organization is trying to squeeze what should be a full time position down to save money). Thanks but no thanks. I personally know no one who job shares a manager or director level position. Most job shares I am familiar with are for administrative type jobs.

 

So I amend my answer. It may be feasible but not in the current climate/working culture in the US.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

As I am sure your know Laura, in the USA, we lag far behind other first world countries (heck, and most other countries period) on actual pro-family, pro-child policies like maternity/paternity leave. 

 

As a matter of fact, there is a series of graphs on HuffPo that just appeared today detailing the same thing --  it's only us, Lesotho, Swaziland and Papua New Guinea that don't have mandated parental leave.  Now, I don't want to get all political, but c'mon.    :banghead: 

[Tap]

This has definitely been an interesting discussion.  Such a wide-range of preferences.

 

I don't have a problem with the preference for someone who is "fit" or "not morbidly obese" but there should be an understanding that things can change.  If that is such a major factor in who they marry, how will they feel if their partner puts on some weight, or no longer wants to be physically active? 

(post cut by Tap, to highlight this paragraph)

 

 

I do wonder what "fit" means to people. That excludes people who are underweight too, right? I had an eating disorder when I was younger and I would've felt a lot worse if I knew people didn't want me dating their children just because I wasn't really healthy.

 (post cut by Tap, to highlight this paragraph)

 

I'll respond to this part since I know it is important for dd to have someone who is 'physically fit.' I know she doesn't care if her partner has a certain BMI or if they are a little thin or thick, but she wants them to be able to do things that she enjoys.  Her summers are spent hiking, sailing, kayaking, swimming...winters are skiing, snowshoeing, playing indoor sports and being generally active. She plays a sport most school seasons.  If she isn't outside doing something almost daily, she doesn't feel good. She really needs to keep moving and she wants to do it with the person she loves.  If she fell in love with someone who is either not willing or able to keep up with her, she is confident enough to keep going on her own.  But it is one of her wishes to have someone in her life who can keep up or maybe even push her to try new things. 

[DawnM]

I have only sons.  I hope and pray that whomever they choose I can be open enough to not be disappointed or upset about their spouse.  As long as their future wife respects and loves them, I really don't want to get too hung up on what they look like, whether or not they choose to stay at home, homeschool, or any of those things.  

 

My sons may not meet all of the expectations of those of you on this board.  That is ok.  We don't live by everyone else's expectations.  I hope though, that they marry into a family who will love them for who they are.

 

Dawn

[Danestress]

Why is that creepy? I would want my future DIL to love kids and to be able to give DS biological children. If they struggled with infertility and wound up adopting, of course I'd love the adopted grandkids. But I wouldn't want it to be because she put off having kids until it was too late for selfish reasons (career, wanting to party, general immaturity, etc.)

 

 

I guess creepy maybe isn't the right word.  Nervy?  I'm not sure.  It doesn't sit right with me.  I think it is sort of off putting for parents to have a set of expectations for their children in law, especially expectations that have to do with bearing children, how to run a household, etc.  I don't think it is at all unusual for people seeking mates to have hopes and expectations - it's the parents/in-laws that I sort of find it disconcerting to hear that from.

 

And I don't think it is "selfish" to delay having children in order to pursue a career with which to support said children .... at all, whether someone else thinks that career is necessary or not.  But of course, people's decisions as to why to delay having children is usually no one's business but their spouse's.  If I had a son who had the ability to be a great novelist and wanted to give it a few years to try, and I had a DIL who agreed to delay having children and to work to support him because she really believed in his potential as a writer, I would consider that very unselfish and beautiful of her, and I would love her for that.

 

I have only one DIL so far, and honestly I can not imagine asking her when she intends to get started having children or to judge, even in my own heart, whether her reasons for not having done so yet are "good enough" reasons for me.  I am called to love her as an actual individual person and to want the best for her, so I have to support her in HER choices, and my son's.    And I can't really feel disappointed in whether she is the right height, weight, economic status, education level etc, because I never formed concrete ideas about what my wish list would be in these areas. 

 

My list in the other post, by the way, wasn't my own list - it was sort of a parody of the types of things someone might want in a DIL that I find sort of strange to want as "ground rules."  I think some people were confused about that, lol. 

[Rosie_0801]

I guess creepy maybe isn't the right word.  Nervy?  I'm not sure.  It doesn't sit right with me.  I think it is sort of off putting for parents to have a set of expectations for their children in law, especially expectations that have to do with bearing children, how to run a household, etc.  I don't think it is at all unusual for people seeking mates to have hopes and expectations - it's the parents/in-laws that I sort of find it disconcerting to hear that from.

 

 

I don't know. All the advice I got from my mother was not to marry a scrooge and to leave if he hit me. My father, bless his heart, joked about setting me up with someone who bummed money off my grandmother because we were both single. In my case, I think they ought to have had a few more expectations.

 

 

And I don't think it is "selfish" to delay having children in order to pursue a career with which to support said children .... at all, whether someone else thinks that career is necessary or not.  But of course, people's decisions as to why to delay having children is usually no one's business but their spouse's.  If I had a son who had the ability to be a great novelist and wanted to give it a few years to try, and I had a DIL who agreed to delay having children and to work to support him because she really believed in his potential as a writer, I would consider that very unselfish and beautiful of her, and I would love her for that.

 

It's never selfish not to take into account the needs of people who don't exist.

 

[gardenmom5]

I guess creepy maybe isn't the right word.  Nervy?  I'm not sure.  

creepy is my son's friend (whom I've known since he was born)  who likes to post pictures of wedding dresses online and comment how he hopes his future wife will pick this one or that one.  He's a good kid - utterly clueless, completely gaga and stupid around girls.  girls who've known him since childhood, want to thunk him on the head in hopes of knocking some sense into him as he comes across so desperate.   girls who don't know him - think he's creepy. he's nearing the end of his undergrad and is hoping to get into dental school - so hopefully he'll improve.  (he'll be too busy to think about girls all the time?)

 

his father (a man I know fairly well, and for whom I have respect) was supposedly pretty girl-crazy (and stupid) at that age too. (by his own admission) low 30+ years later, he still has a completely twitter pated expression when he looks at his wife.  (whom I also hold in respect. and they are perfect for each other.)

 

my kids are adults.  I don't comment upon whom they date, and rarely initiate a conversation upon the traits/circumstances to look for.  if they bring it up, the subject is fair game.     usually I may ask questions to get them thinking - though I did point out to one,  "if you're not going to marry this person, don't think they'll ever be someone you want to marry, end it.  stringing them along isn't fair to them."  (and I had a uncomfortable vibe from them - pertaining to how my child would be respected by this person (or not), so the sooner gone, the better.)

 

I think it is the height of gaucheness to inquire into the contents of another's womb (prior to an announcement.). dr to patient or husband to wife excepted.  (I've known many a woman who seems to delight in the pastime - even with acquaintencess.)

[8circles]

 I hope though, that they marry into a family who will love them for who they are.

 

Yes.

 

I guess creepy maybe isn't the right word.  Nervy?  I'm not sure.  It doesn't sit right with me.  I think it is sort of off putting for parents to have a set of expectations for their children in law, especially expectations that have to do with bearing children, how to run a household, etc.  I don't think it is at all unusual for people seeking mates to have hopes and expectations - it's the parents/in-laws that I sort of find it disconcerting to hear that from.

 

 

Yes.

[8circles]

I don't know. All the advice I got from my mother was not to marry a scrooge and to leave if he hit me. My father, bless his heart, joked about setting me up with someone who bummed money off my grandmother because we were both single. In my case, I think they ought to have had a few more expectations.

 

I agree although I'd say maybe they should have had higher expectations for you - not your spouse.  Plus, the expectations that I assume you are wishing had been there were maybe that you would have a more mutually respectful relationship, not that your partner would be physically attractive or want you to only stay home with the kids.

[gardenmom5]

I don't know. All the advice I got from my mother was not to marry a scrooge and to leave if he hit me. My father, bless his heart, joked about setting me up with someone who bummed money off my grandmother because we were both single. In my case, I think they ought to have had a few more expectations.

that's more than I got.  I will admit, my mother was very damaged goods from her mother.  her mother repeatedly told me to "take lots of typing classes so I can get a job as a secretary (yeah, what are those?) and support my husband while he's in school". . . . . . would you believe she was a liberal?  she also came from a very rural area and struggled through the depression.

 

My girls received MUCH BETTER advice from me.   - get a good education (*for yourself*).  and something you can make a living at.  (if it doesn't pay the bills, it's just a hobby.)

[Crimson Wife]

Yet if your son ends up happy with a career woman who wants only 1 child, I bet you would also be happy for that grandchild and happy for your son's happiness, no?

I find it sad that my maternal grandparents had 4 kids but only 5 grandkids (3 of them from my mom) and so far only 4 great-grandkids (3 of them mine). I'd like to have each generation of my family grow rather than shrink. I view babies as blessings rather than burdens and think our modern society places too much emphasis on materialism and not enough on family. I would hope that both my future DIL and my future SIL's share this worldview. Not talking "Quiverful" by any means, but being open to God blessing them with a medium-to-larger family (medium being 3-4 kids).

[marbel]

I find it sad that my maternal grandparents had 4 kids but only 5 grandkids (3 of them from my mom) and so far only 4 great-grandkids (3 of them mine). I'd like to have each generation of my family grow rather than shrink. I view babies as blessings rather than burdens and think our modern society places too much emphasis on materialism and not enough on family. I would hope that both my future DIL and my future SIL's share this worldview. Not talking "Quiverful" by any means, but being open to God blessing them with a medium-to-larger family (medium being 3-4 kids).

 

This reminds me of an old friend of mine.  He's in a family of 4 kids; 3 out of the 4 are happily married, but there are only 2 grandchildren.  By all accounts, they were/are a happy family with no major dysfunctions, no hereditary illnesses, etc.

 

It's so none of my business, but I do find that sad.

[Laura Corin]

This reminds me of an old friend of mine.  He's in a family of 4 kids; 3 out of the 4 are happily married, but there are only 2 grandchildren.  By all accounts, they were/are a happy family with no major dysfunctions, no hereditary illnesses, etc.

 

It's so none of my business, but I do find that sad.

 

I'm not being critical, but trying to work out whence comes the sadness.  

 

If there are parents who want children and can't  have them, then I can understand sadness.  And if the grandparents wanted grandchildren and there were none, then I could also understand it.  But I don't see the sadness in small families by choice.

 

L

[marbel]

I'm not being critical, but trying to work out whence comes the sadness.  

 

If there are parents who want children and can't  have them, then I can understand sadness.  And if the grandparents wanted grandchildren and there were none, then I could also understand it.  But I don't see the sadness in small families by choice.

 

L

 

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear that I was the one who found it sad, not anyone else (that I know of).  It's just my own emotional response to seeing a shrinking family tree, triggered by another post about... sadness over a shrinking family tree. 

[Laura Corin]

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear that I was the one who found it sad, not anyone else (that I know of).  It's just my own emotional response to seeing a shrinking family tree, triggered by another post about... sadness over a shrinking family tree. 

 

No that's fine - I'm trying to work out why a shrinking family tree is sad for some people....

 

L

[marbel]

No that's fine - I'm trying to work out why a shrinking family tree is sad for some people....

 

L

 

I doubt that it's something a person can explain logically.   In any case, I can't.   Maybe someone else can - would love to read it.

[8circles]

No that's fine - I'm trying to work out why a shrinking family tree is sad for some people....

 

L

 

Well, I think I get it to a degree, because I feel like my gut reaction to shrinking family trees is sadness.  I don't know, I don't think I can explain it except that it's that deep love of your family or even the natural instinct to keep your line going that triggers it.

 

I don't think it's a really rational thought, for me, & I don't expect people to have kids just to grow the family tree, but I understand the feeling.

[Terabith]

What I hope for.......  

 

to share religious beliefs 

to have strong moral values

to have a loving, close relationship with any sisters (I really think this is a great reflection of future treatment)

to be incredibly loyal and faithful

to communicate well and say clearly what he wants rather than expecting her to intuit what he thinks

to be intelligent and interesting to talk to

to have practical skills that contribute to the running of a household (good cook, change oil, etc - not all skills, but some ability to contribute)

to love her and be compatible, for them to be best friends so that when passion fades, the marriage is still strong

to have nice parents (It's nice to have nice inlaws)

to be healthy 

to have financial independence and the ability that they could live comfortably on one salary (not required - but it's nice if both partners have that ability.)

If she has a career that is more lucrative or has better benefits, for him to not be threatened by that and to be willing/ able to stay at home if needed

to love children and be good with them

 

This is a dream list.......it's not that I wouldn't be happy or delighted with someone else they brought home.  And my children are young.  But if I'm hoping, of course I'm hoping for the best, and these are things that *I* think are best.  They may not be what my daughters value, and that's okay.  

 

[Danestress]

I doubt that it's something a person can explain logically.   In any case, I can't.   Maybe someone else can - would love to read it.

 

 

Maybe because many people have very happy memories of growing up with lots of love from siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc.  There is something nice about being part of a "tribe."  Most of us have gotten the better part of the joy in our lives from relationships with other people - our marriages, children, siblings, etc.  So 'more' people seems better than fewer in a family.  

 

Of course, others of us have very small families that are quite happy, and when we hear about all the discord people have with their larger families we think, "Gosh, I am so glad I don't have cousins in-law demanding that we spend our 2 weeks vacation traveling half way across the country to attend their weddings."   So I guess part of this is experience based.  If we loved our large, loving families, we want the same for our grandchildren.  

[swellmomma]

I read my list of desires to my dd14 and she agreed completely with them.  There was nothing creepy or nervy about it, she agreed that is what she would want in a future partner.  My list for my sons is similar to what it is for my daughters.  I wouldn't have a list of own their vehicle, or of certain looks etc. And if my future sil/dil had different values than me that would be fine IF they had values that were the same as my child.  I would not want my child to marry someone who was opposite of them in basic values because that would lead to too much strain on  the marriage and possible divorce and I do not want my kids to go through that heart ache.  That said, if my dd14 married someone like her father I would be extremely dissappointed in her and likely would not have much contact with them.  Not because I would love her any less but because it would be heart breaking to see her settle for less than she deserves.  My own parents offered me $5K on my wedding day just as the music began to not walk down the aisle and marry my ex.  If they had offered it sooner than the wedding day I may have taken them up on it, but I was in the moment kwim. And 8 months later I had to leave with my kids to protect us all.  I hope and pray my dds never make that same mistake.  So yes I will be "that" mother-in-law that will speak up if I think my future sil/dil is not right for my child. If they drink/party/use drugs even occasionally for recreation I will speak up.  If they give off that vibe of lieing through their teeth and being a smooth talker I will speak up.  If they are lazy bums who expect my child to do everything from bringing home the bacon to all the housework, child care etc and they just want to sit around and watch tv, or go out with friends, or spend all their money I will speak up etc.  I don't care if they ever have children as long as the ones they have are raised right (though I really hope they discuss the big things ahead of time and are on the same page regarding issues like bfing, circing, discipline, daycare etc) and would be very dissappointed if they changed their values on those things to suit someone else and circ'd my grandsons, or refused to even try bfing my grandbabies etc.  I don't care if they are a 2 income family as long as my grandbabies if there is any are well cared for and not in substandard care just to save a buck, or spend all day at daycare and then head to a sitter in the evening so the parents can go out etc (seen that far too often).  I worry less about the looks of their potential partner than about the risk of genetic issues, mental issues etc.  Mental stability is a must, if my ds15 actually gets married one day he needs a wife that can be the rock so if he needs tweaking to meds or more therapy or whatever the household and children do not suffer kwim.  Though I would prefer that until he was 100% stable he simply remain a bachelor. 

I don't see the big deal having ideals of imaginary people for our children.  We already have dreams in our heads of the ideal college, and career, and location to live (close enough to regularily see the grandkids without being so close to be in the way of them doing their thing) etc.  It is just wishes, big deal.  It is not like we are writing personal ads for our kids to screen the perfect mate and then go through with an arranged marriage.  Will it matter to me if my ideals are not the same as my kids, no not really.  THey will love who they love, but I certainly hope that when the time comes that they are considering a life partner that they have their own ideals and don't just settle for the first one that comes along.  I want them to have their happily ever after, not years of heartache and a divorce due to a lack of ideals in choosing someone. 

[marbel]

I read my list of desires to my dd14 and she agreed completely with them.  There was nothing creepy or nervy about it, she agreed that is what she would want in a future partner. 

<snip>

 

Not for anything, but my parents never discussed future spouses with my siblings and me.  All 3 of us ended up in bad marriages that could have been avoided if we'd had some guidance.  I remember thinking as we drove away from my wedding what a stupid mistake I'd made.  And at that time I also remembered trying to talk to my mom about my marriage plans and her saying "well, I guess you know what you are doing."   Obviously I did not: I was married at 22 and divorced by 25. 

 

My sister married someone she knew the entire family disliked and with good reason.  She was nervous telling our parents she was going to marry him.  Talk about a bad start.  My brother... oh well that is a long sad story. 

 

I'm now in a happy, well-thought-out, intentional marriage.  My sibs never remarried nor did they ever have any happy normal relationships.  I don't tend to think of the family of my youth as too dysfunctional but obviously something went wrong there.   So I won't be keeping my mouth completely shut with my kids when it comes to choosing a spouse.

 

[swellmomma]

No that's fine - I'm trying to work out why a shrinking family tree is sad for some people....

 

L

 

For me it comes down to love blooms and grows and if my children choose not to have kids then I worry that perhaps I failed in their childhoods kwim.  LIke if they had happy memories of life with siblings and cousins and parents who loved and nurtured them then they would want to have several kids (I am not talking dozens but certainly more than 1), because they would want their kids to have the same experiences.  If they opted to have an only or no kids I wonder what I did wrong in their childhoods to make them feel like having siblings or a larger family is so bad. I am sure it makes no sense but that is how it feels for me now when I hear dd14 telling me she will never have kids. 

 

In my family growing up there was 3 of us, my parents have 5 grandkids, 4 of them are from me.  My sister has an only, brother and his wife have not even started trying for a family yet, they keep saying "in a few more years" then a few years later they say "in a few more years".  Both are in their 30s now and are talking about still waiting a few more years.  I worry they are going to "few more years" themselves out of having a family kwim.  So my kids only have 1 cousin and they rarely see him (though we do refer to my little cousins as theirs since they are closer in age to my kids than to me).  To me that is a bit sad, I have memories of family gatherings, birthday parties, picnics etc with the cousins growing up.  My kids don't get that, they only have the 1.  It does not mean it is a bad thing, just that they will not get to make the happy memories I have kwim and that is kind of sad because it feels like they will be lacking by not having those things.  Of course that is crazy, they can't lack what they never knew in that regard, but for me I see it as them missing out on something wonderful.

 

 

[Wheres Toto]

My mother was one of 9 children.  I have 40 something cousins on that side but with an age range of over 40 years between the oldest and youngest so we weren't all close by a long shot.

 

I only have one brother and he had no children.  My three kids, my stepbrother's one (18 years old now), and my stepsister's two (3 years old now) are it for grandchildren for my mom.  My oldest had no first cousins but spent a lot of time with some of my cousins that were close to her age.

 

People make decisions about how many children to have based on many things - health issues, career plans, money, perceptions of time/energy/space.  I would never presume my kids were making decisions of how many kids to have based on a failure on my part.  Although, I have seen many many many girls who were frequently responsible for helping out with younger siblings decide to have no children because they had enough of kids.  Some changed their mind when they go older, some didn't.

[Crimson Wife]

No that's fine - I'm trying to work out why a shrinking family tree is sad for some people....

 

L

 

Maybe it's a cultural thing because I grew up amidst my dad's relatively large Irish Catholic extended family where there were always tons of aunts & uncles, cousins, and various relatives around. My paternal grandparents had 4 kids as well but 10 grandkids and so far 9 great-grandkids. So a growing rather than a shrinking family tree. The more, the merrier!

[LucyStoner]

My paternal grandparents had 9 children. Their sons and daughters had families with 0-4 kids each. My generation is the far 0-3 kids per family with most of us done though there are 3-4 cousins who will most likely start families (my youngest cousins are still college aged and unmarried) and at least a couple of us who are married who may still have more kids. I love my family. I feel zero sadness that we are growing smaller. Very few people can offer 9 children the resources that most of my cousins want to offer their children educationally. Also only 3 in my generation are in families with SAHPs- me and my cousin who each have sons with autism and my cousin's husband who is a SAHD while she is a physician. Honestly, we romanticize the good old days too much. I am happy at home with my boys. My grandmother really wasn't and if given the opportunity to go to college or study music, she would have loved that opportunity.