Unemployed girlfriend of 3 years pressing to have a baby

Errata

Sixer wrote: »

Oh come on, ONW!

I agree that someone has a perfect right to the opinion that children should be born within marriages.

But to suggest that bar steward doesn't have an overwhelmingly pejorative meaning today (and by extension that MC didn't know that perfectly well) is complete cobblers.

It's not of the same order as, say, partner and boy/girlfriend. At all.

I can't think of a single context in which that word would be used.

claire16c

If your girlfriend was that serious about having a baby, shed hardly be smoking would she! Shes already at an age where going to have a baby is going to be tough, shes just making it even harder for herself. Not to mention shes selling stuff to pay for the fags because shes too lazy to get a job? Surely even if she really had problems getting a job, shed be using that money shes making off ebay to either put into the household or some kind of baby savings fund.

She doesnt seem too bothered about it to me.

Id tell her to stick it until she proves otherwise. What is there even left to sell after so long of doing this too?

Oldernotwiser

Errata wrote: »

I can't think of a single context in which that word would be used.

The fact that it's unfashionable to use it doesn't alter the fact that it refers to an illegitimate child, one whose parents weren't married to each other.

My father was illegitimate; a lovely man but a b@stard.

clemmatis

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

The word exists and that's its definition - get over it.

I think we all know the word exists. The complaint here -- which I am happy to endorse -- stems from

margaretclare wrote: »

And why not? There is a name for a child born out of wedlock, although it may be non-PC even to hint at such a thing. Accidents are one thing, cold-blooded planning is something else.

in reply to

melly1980 wrote: »

how ironic that you feel the op has offended then go on to offend in your very own way by suggesting that a couple must be married to have a baby.

margaretclare is not, as you seem to be trying to suggest, simply saying there's a word, !!!!!!!, whose meaning is "illegitimate child"; she invokes, deliberately or not, a word that does indeed mean that and also is, in general use, an insult.

margaretclare, you could simply have said that you indeed did believe only married couples should have children. Why did you feel the need to hint at derogatory words and talk, vapidly, about "PC"?

eta I see the forum software has proved my point... .

Oldernotwiser

clemmatis wrote: »

I think we all know the word exists. The complaint here -- which I am happy to endorse -- stems from



in reply to



margaretclare is not, as you seem to be trying to suggest, simply saying there's a word, !!!!!!!, whose meaning is "illegitimate child"; she invokes, deliberately or not, a word that does indeed mean that and also is, in general use, an insult.

margaretclare, you could simply have said that you indeed did believe only married couples should have children. Why did you feel the need to hint at derogatory words and talk, vapidly, about "PC"?

eta I see the forum software has proved my point... .

The forum software has some strange quirks, like not being able to write f eckless and pu$$y.

Tsmee

runningwoman wrote: »

Oh dear. My heart bleeds that you don't respect me, that's been my number one goal in life, has been since I was a small child.

(I'm also delighted that a superior little creature like yourself has confirmed that it's a free country, because I didn't know that before. Well done :T Would you like a cookie and a pat on the head?)

Ok, I just had to respond to this. If you spout reams and reams of your personal experience in defence of why it's OK to do nothing while your boyfriend supports you, it's perfectly reasonable for someone to respond to how that makes you come accross as a person (i.e not someone for whom they'd have respect). It's seems a bit churlish to reply with what comes across as teenage sarcasm.

I also think that your implication that posters are somehow mercenary and must constantly have the scales out, checking that what they are getting out of a relationship exactly matches what they put in, is a bit unfair. Most people in relationships expect each other to contribute, in whatever fashion that might be. It's very easy to call someone a Daily Mail reader whenever they mention that practicalities and money matter in addition to romantic feelings, but it's a cheap shot.

The fact that some of the individuals you happen to have gone out with were happy to shoulder the whole financial burden doesn't mean that it's wrong for another individual to be unhappy with that arrangement, as clearly the OP is, or he wouldn't have posted about his "unemployed" girlfriend.

I do agree that with you that the fact that his GF is foreign seems to be a little...overemphasised by some. The OP brought it up and it is entirely legitimate to wonder how it would affect his GF's employement prospects, and" future location should they split up after having a child, but some comments are a bit kneejerk, I think.

To the OP - a few years ago your GF might have walked into a good job really quickly, happily worked at it for the last couple of years, and now be thinking about a baby. Unfortunately that didn't happen and I think it's human nature that the longer you don't work the more daunting it becomes to get out of the safe environment you're in. You've both let it slide this long, so she's not going to see the sudden need to change. I do think having a goal would help. Something achievable and not too long. How about after say, 6 months of any kind of job, the two of you will start trying for a baby? That would make it a bit more likely that she'd start working again in the future.

Or reconcile yourself to the fact that she'll morph from "unemployed" to "stay at home mum" from now on. Only you know if that's something you could be happy with.

likelyfran

melly1980 wrote: »

wake up son, she wants you as a sperm donor. Just ask yourself this, what is she bringing to the party?

Dont ask the questions if your not gonna like the answers.

Perhaps she loves the OP, wants to have his children and would be an excellent mother?

What the hell is wrong with the world these days?

likelyfran

Errata wrote: »

She can't afford a baby, you can't afford a baby ............ which bit of this doesn't she understand?
PS I can't afford to fund your baby either.

This place is still full of 'disgruntled taxpayers' then!

Is motherhood not considered a worthy full-time job any more? Obviously not! Oh, and if you can't afford to consume, consume and buy your kid all the latest computer games and other carp, you shouldn't bother having children!

A return to old-fashioned values is very much needed!

VfM4meplse

krlyr wrote: »

My "other half" is also called my boyfriend, depends on the audience really.

My b/f is also called my lovair, he makes a bloody good job of it too :j.

I just thought I'd share that ray of sunshine with everyone .

neverdespairgirl

likelyfran wrote: »

This place is still full of 'disgruntled taxpayers' then!

Is motherhood not considered a worthy full-time job any more? Obviously not! Oh, and if you can't afford to consume, consume and buy your kid all the latest computer games and other carp, you shouldn't bother having children!

A return to old-fashioned values is very much needed!

The OP's girlfriend isn't a mother, isn't even pregnant. She's spent nearly 3 years sitting on her backside smoking. Doesn't seem terrible "old-fashioned values" to me.