Is having one weekend every now and again free of visitors that unreasonable?!

AylesburyDuck

Andypandyboy wrote: »

I haven't seen anyone calling her a liar, and Lulu herself has been very open about the faults on both sides. I am not sure what you are reading but perhaps you could point to a post which paints the OP in that light?

Andypandyboy wrote: »

We play Devil's Advocate all the time on here!

If you take at face value everything everyone says, and don't read between the lines and don't factor in information given in other threads then it would make for agreement with almost every OP.

I don't believe for a minute that Lulu is such a doormat as to always accept what her husband says and go along with it, or that he always gets his own way. That is what you are suggesting.

Whats another word for not believing? Would it be lieing?
Not twisting that, its your words.

missbiggles1

ska_lover wrote: »

I completely agree, which is why I find it interesting that you repeatedly take a combative position and cheerlead the OPs husbands POV.


To allow one person to have their own way all the time is not an adult relationship, sorry but it isn't, and never will be. Anyone who thinks it is has got a lot of growing up to do - fact.


And the people who say words along the lines of 'there are two sides to every story' yes of course there are, but clearly all we have available to discuss, is what the OP is telling us and as complete strangers we can only take this at face value rather than guessing on a complete strangers life

Sorry, I never take anything at face value - especially on MSE!

paddy's_mum

Can I divert the thread just slightly for a moment?

I never said "the scraps". I said that the females of the family had to eat whatever the men had not, an experience actually borne out by another poster's comment in which she said that the men got the biggest and the best.

My point is that the women did NOT get to share any of the biggest and the best so no equality there then, even though in a family of 17 (living) children, it could be thought that the women growing those children in their wombs should have had the finest nutrition that the family was able to provide. To my way of thinking, that's a family protecting its stake in the future.

Adequate, if not generous, nourishment of pregnant women is not new science or thinking but nevertheless, I apologise if something I said was not clear and caused misunderstanding to arise.

Thistle-down

My husband's cousin and his wife were in a similar situation when their first was born. He didn't like conflict, either. His mother made a 3 hour trip each week seemingly to tell his wife how badly she was running the house, raising the child and treating her boy. The wife finally snapped and told her to leave and not come back until she was invited.

It caused years of anger on both sides, they are now only civil to each other 15 years later. The wife says it was worth it because she and her MIL were never going to get along, at least now she only has one weekend every few months with her MIL, and she can put up with that for the sake of her husband.

Her husband did not want to upset his mother but he now agrees that it was the best thing to happen and greatly reduced the arguments he and his wife had. He admits he should have stood up for his wife and feels like a coward because he didn't.

We are quite close to the MIL and love her dearly, but she has always treated her son's wife terribly. No one would ever be good enough for her little boy. His wife is not the easiest of people but she is a great mother and a good wife. She loves her husband dearly. The MIL had it in for her before she ever met her. The MIL also complains about how her MIL interfered with her marriage and does not see the irony.

Would your boyfriend stand by you if you stood up to his mother? I feel for you, having two babies is exhausting without having to worry about entertaining every weekend and the resentment it brings. I also feel sorry that your boyfriend is not standing by you and putting your feelings ahead of his mothers. Unless things change, it sounds like you will not have a happy relationship or family life.

Kim_kim

paddy's_mum wrote: »

Can I divert the thread just slightly for a moment?

I never said "the scraps"..

paddy's_mum wrote: »

where the girl children waited upon the males of the family, where they came to the table after the men had filled their own bellies to eat whatever they could find of what was left over

That implies the scraps & makes them sound little better than savages.

It is also heresay by your own admission & sounds like a tall tale.

AylesburyDuck

paddy's_mum wrote: »

an experience actually borne out by another poster's comment in which she said that the men got the biggest and the best.

I took that to mean an experrience actually backed up by another posters comments.
Meaning theres both of them experrienced the same, not that paddy's mum was repeating second hand.
Correct me if im wrong paddy's mum.

missbiggles1

paddy's_mum wrote: »

Can I divert the thread just slightly for a moment?

I never said "the scraps". I said that the females of the family had to eat whatever the men had not, an experience actually borne out by another poster's comment in which she said that the men got the biggest and the best.

My point is that the women did NOT get to share any of the biggest and the best so no equality there then, even though in a family of 17 (living) children, it could be thought that the women growing those children in their wombs should have had the finest nutrition that the family was able to provide. To my way of thinking, that's a family protecting its stake in the future.

Adequate, if not generous, nourishment of pregnant women is not new science or thinking but nevertheless, I apologise if something I said was not clear and caused misunderstanding to arise.

I can't speak for Ireland but in many working class households, before the introduction of the Welfare State, it was important that the men had enough to eat (if anybody did:()because if they couldn't work and provide for their family, everybody in the family might starve.

missbiggles1

ska_lover wrote: »

Must be a massive mental drain to treat each person you encounter with such suspicion, assumption and askew negative judgement.

It is rather a cold world you live in being small minded and argumentative. I'm merely pointing out how you come across

I can see why you may spend a lot of time on here tbh.

It is cool I don't wish to argue, I just feel sorry that you cant relax and be more friendly, you may find a bit more happiness out there

Naivety is a charming characteristic in children, rather less appealing in grown ups.

ska_lover

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Naivety is a charming characteristic in children, rather less appealing in grown ups.

Out come the insults. now whilst we are talking about being grown up......

Argue with yourself, you will be here all night

Thistle-down

What's with all the arguments?