Who comes first: Spouse or children

[ECOCKS]

Hmmm....

I don't expect anyone to accompany family members to visa interviews. I asked the wife if she thought it was necessary for her to go when her son eventually does his and she asked, "Why?"

I was in the building but felt it would be better for my wife to do her tourist visa application on her own. She was anxious but experienced no problems.

[KenC]

No, of you know what it is to get visa in Russia.
I would do same.

Doll,
Then you plan on having a very immature 20 yo "child" and plan to be an overprotective mother.     And yes, I do know a little about getting Russian visas.  The "man child" in this case would be going for a very routine visa.  On the other hand, my ex took a train to Moscow, and applied for a student visa (not a routine visa by any means) at almost the same age, all on her own.  After getting the visa, she returned home for a week, packed her stuff and was on her first plane flight Moscow to Chicago where I met her.
KenC

[Vaughn]

The guy's getting out of the Army, and like most young men, won't feel the need for
Mama to coddle him any longer. This would be true even taking the USA out of the
scenario.

Protectionism - I don't see it any differently between FSU mothers vs. Western women. What
strikes me is the noticeable (by me, anyway) strengthening of the notion by single mothers,
especially those who consider a second try at marriage. Anybody walking a bride up the
aisle better consider that yes, that child's welfare will be forefront in her priorities - and if one
has trouble accepting that, might better be served by finding another woman - without kids,
or whose kids are fully grown, self-supporting and independent.

This Me or Child concern reveals much to me about some men here. Not a healthy outlook to
regard the whole dynamic in black and white. If you're not thrilled about taking on somebody
else's offspring, do the lady (and yourself) a huge favor and call it a day.

[Turboguy]

We all know it is very stupid for two people to fly to Belarus to accompany a 20 year old MAN on a flight to the USA for fear he can't do it on his own.   For someone who has never been on a plane and never seen how easy it is and how little that can go wrong I am sure it does not seem stupid at all.   My guess is that once she has flown here it might not be as big an issue with her.  Everyone is protective of their kids but that is worrying about nothing.

Back to the other question, to me the spouse comes first.  Kids are kids, their little people who don't have much life experience and don't always think logically.  Darn, some of the things I did as a kid make me wonder how I even survived it.  We took a lot of vacations and I never consulted the kids.   Of course our vacations were family vacations and they were to places like Disney World or the shore where we did family things.  I would never have considered going on an adult vacation and sticking the kids somewhere. 

[Mars]

I have a hard time imagining a situation where something must be done genuinely FOR the child and still "there can be no compromise, no sharing, no trading of times, no nothing" - unless the husband is a complete dork.  

Are you ruling out that it may be the woman and offspring who are the complete dork(s)?

And again, I have repeatedly ruled out the situations where it it something absolutely needed FOR the child.

But your statement actually reveals a lot, perhaps unwittingly, about your true feeling concerning this issue.

Where the woman chooses the offspring over her mate, if the mate does not fall in line with this decision . . . then he is a complete dork.

[Mars]

I don't think the OP talked about it at all.

My OP was not an actual situation applying to me.  I was trying to show an example that would cover the general situation and get a conversation started where others would have other examples, etc.

[Mars]

This Me or Child concern reveals much to me about some men here. Not a healthy outlook to
regard the whole dynamic in black and white. If you're not thrilled about taking on somebody
else's offspring, do the lady (and yourself) a huge favor and call it a day.

Vaughn, I have tried several times to point out that I am NOT IN ANY way talking about the real needs of infants and children.  I and all others agree that both parents put these needs ahead of all else.

I am talking about the choices desired by children and the particularly nearly adult children or actual adult children.  i.e. Such cases as Viking and Phil have posted about.

But I see many people do not want to think about the real situation where the wife or significant other is consistently choosing the offspring over mate in situations that are completely non threatening to the offspring.  Desire to avoid the pain of thinking about that.  Much easier to wave the flag and hint at things that are needed for the welfare of the child.

[viking]

When a child is born, it knows only one thing and one thing only. Love. It is pure and unadulterated.Everything else in life is either taught to it or learned in some fashion. What is good, bad, nice, evil, safe, dangerous and the list goes on. As parents we bear the primary responsibility to teach our children these things and during their early life their needs come first as they are dependant upon us. That does not mean we cannot take some time out for ourselves ( a night out, a weekend away, a small vacation away from the hassles of child rearing) and that does not mean we are putting ourselves ahead of the child. But as that child matures, and our roles as parents begin to diminish and evolve into something more along the lines of advisors in their lives rather than caretakers, that child should begin to take on more responsibility in their own lives. And the parents should understand that this is a natural order of the child establishing their own identitity in the world. Some do it early on (more mature) and some take their time ( less mature).

IMHO a parent should encourage this drive for independance and not impede it by constantly intruding on their childs decision making processes. We do learn from our own mistakes. And the separation process between parent and child ( first day at school, the first time they drive alone, the time they move into a college dorm and do not come home for weeks at a time) can often be difficult. But it is necessary for the child to learn how to exist on their own in the world. We can only hope that our roles as parents was sufficient to allow them to lead decent and fruitful lives based upon the experiences they learned form us.

[Blues Fairy]

Are you ruling out that it may be the woman and offspring who are the complete dork(s)?
And again, I have repeatedly ruled out the situations where it it something absolutely needed FOR the child.
But your statement actually reveals a lot, perhaps unwittingly, about your true feeling concerning this issue.
Where the woman chooses the offspring over her mate, if the mate does not fall in line with this decision . . . then he is a complete dork.

I am not ruling out anything, please don't twist my words and make ridiculous assumptions about my "true feelings".  I said, when something must be genuinely done FOR the child, I have a hard time imagining that a compromise cannot be reached between two parties.  Assuming that the woman acts in the interests of the child, which was a given in your situation, a compromise can generally be reached unless the other party, i.e. the man, acts like a dork.  

Now if you rule out that the woman acts genuinely in the interests of the child, then of course SHE must be at fault and I don't see the point for opening this thread.  If we understand that the woman acts like a dork, why even put her in the position of making a responsible choice between two options?  Your premise is completely screwed up.  

[Mars]

, please don't twist my words

I wouldn't even dream of competing with you in 'twisting words' as the rest of your post illustrates.

And rest assured the men here will rush to your support and defense, even while stating you don't need it.

[Blues Fairy]

I wouldn't even dream of competing with you in 'twisting words' as the rest of your post illustrates.
And rest assured the men here will rush to your support and defense, even while stating you don't need it.

 :noidea:

Ok, let's start over.  Please make your point and I'll honestly tell you what I think about it. 

[Turboguy]

When I was in the meeting stage it always made me a little uneasy when a woman had teen aged children.  Something like Viking is experiencing when the son is 20 would not have made me aprehensive as much because the odds are before long he would be leading his own life.   I met some women who had teen aged sons that would have been wonderful to have as part of the family and some whose child would have scared me to death.

The question who comes first seems a little vague to me.  In what context.   When you are a family you should function as a family.  Vacations were mentioned and I would have made my family vacations someplace with a beach or an amusement park and not someplace like Club Med.  I don't see much to debate about there.

If the question deals with education or clothes then it isn't who comes first it is a matter of doing whatever you can and if you simply can't afford something then you can't afford it.  If the 16 year old child wants a new convertable and you can't pay bills now it isn't a matter of who comes first, it is what you can do and what you can't.

I think where it comes into play the most is behavior.   Lets say you have a situation similar to what one of our members experienced.   Let's say hypothetically you have a step son who is 16 and wants to bring 15 year old girls home, to his bedroom and have sex while you and your wife are there and without the knowledge of her parents.   Let's also say hypothetically the wife is fine with it but you are not.   Things like that and this particular situation was discussed in depth so we don't need to rehash that, however things like that are where I see a problem and in cases like the RW approving any behavoir that you don't it also is not a case of who comes first, it is a difference in parental values.  

I think your spouse is your partner in life and needs to come first.  There was a comment that husbands come and go but children are forever.   I see lots of familys that are lucky if they spend one holday a year with thier children and for the most part they are gone and others where there are just totally gone.  I don't buy that at all.  You chose to make your mate  your partner in your life and that is the important consderation.  

[Mars]

:noidea:

Ok, let's start over.  Please make your point and I'll honestly tell you what I think about it. 

OK, let's go back to my OP with some modifications that I added as the discussion progressed:

In several other threads, there is always some mention of FSUW putting their children first in all situations, particularly with respect to a WM husband.

I am wondering about if this is the 'correct or right' order.

Now before people get all uptight, I am not talking about abandoning a child in favor of a man (or woman) or not doing everything possible to raise and care for a child properly.  I am talking about the simple ordering of relationships when conflicts arise.

And I emphasize, I am NOT talking about any decisions that impact the health, welfare, education, or future of the child.  And I am not talking about very infant children.

And I am not talking about simple solutions where the decisions of woman alternate back and forth in favor of mate vs offspring.

I am referring to the case where, over time, it becomes apparent that the woman is going to choose the offspring over the mate virtually every time in every non-threatening situation where she must make a decision.

My question to the men and women here who have first hand experience:  Is it true that FSUW tend to do this (more so than WW)?

[Blues Fairy]

I am referring to the case where, over time, it becomes apparent that the woman is going to choose the offspring over the mate virtually every time in every non-threatening situation where she must make a decision.

My question to the men and women here who have first hand experience:  Is it true that FSUW tend to do this (more so than WW)?

A no-brainer here; of course such behavior is unwarranted and of course FSUW are no more at fault than any other women.  There is no cultural imperative for the FSUW to cling to their kids, unless they've been conditioned by their past unsuccessful relationships to do so - just like women in any other culture.

But I think you misrepresent the dilemma - once again, it's not husband vs kid, its more like "interests of other people vs selfish interest", be it a selfish desire to control the child's life, or a selfish desire to achieve personal comfort at the expense of the child's (or husband's) interests.  When people start putting themselves in other people's shoes, a compromise is almost always attainable. 

[Mars]

The question who comes first seems a little vague to me.  In what context.  

Come on Turbo, you can do better than this.

OK, something all people can understand.  The man and woman are getting ready for sex.  In fact they are very ready!  The phone rings.  It is the woman's adult daughter.  She wants to talk in person with her mother about an argument she had with her boyfriend.

There isn't even a discussion about 'can this wait a few hours, or even a few minutes.'  The woman merely jumps out of bed and rushes to the daughter.

This and other such situations arise over time, and each time, the woman chooses to go with the wishes of the daughter rather than the wishes of her mate.

Is this typical behavior for FSUW?

[Mars]

A no-brainer here; of course such behavior is unwarranted and of course FSUW are no more at fault than any other women.  There is no cultural imperative for the FSUW to cling to their kids, unless they've been conditioned by their past unsuccessful relationships to do so - just like women in any other culture.

But I think you misrepresent the dilemma - once again, it's not husband vs kid, its more like "interests of other people vs selfish interest", be it a selfish desire to control the child's life, or a selfish desire to achieve personal comfort at the expense of the child's (or husband's) interests.  When people start putting themselves in other people's shoes, a compromise is almost always attainable.  

OK, good write-up.  Now, let's hear from the men with experience, if there is substantial difference between FSUW vs WW.  

From what I understood from many other threads, FSUW have this tendency (whether we want to call it mate vs offspring, selfish desire, or anything else) much more than other women.

[ECOCKS]

Come on Turbo, you can do better than this.

OK, something all people can understand.  The man and woman are getting ready for sex.  In fact they are very ready!  The phone rings.  It is the woman's adult daughter.  She wants to talk in person with her mother about an argument she had with her boyfriend.

There isn't even a discussion about 'can this wait a few hours, or even a few minutes.'  The woman merely jumps out of bed and rushes to the daughter.

This and other such situations arise over time, and each time, the woman chooses to go with the wishes of the daughter rather than the wishes of her mate.

Is this typical behavior for FSUW?

No.

[ECOCKS]

OK, good writeup.  Now, let's hear from the men with experience, if there is substantial difference between FSUW vs WW.  

From what I understood from many other threads, FSUW have this tendency (whether we want to call it mate vs offspring, selfish desire, or anything else) much more than other women.

No again.

If you are selective with the type of woman you want and not blinded by some ego-driven factor related age, sex, body parts, insecurity or white knight syndrome then this shouldn't be a problem. If it is, look in the mirror rather than at culture as to what is to blame.

This is why people used to date/court for years before getting married. I think many make this into a problem as a result of impatience and financial burdens of international relationships. If you ignore the warning signs of the woman's personality traits towards her children, shopping, materialism, activities, residence geography, grasp on reality, etc. you have no one to blame except yourself.

[Misha]

If you ignore the warning signs of the woman's personality traits towards her children, shopping, materialism, activities, residence geography, grasp on reality, etc. you have no one to blame except yourself.

 

I agree. RW are not mass produced in a factory somewhere in Siberia. They are all different and you have to get to know the woman as an individual and understand who she is as a woman.

[greg2654]

My question to the men and women here who have first hand experience:  Is it true that FSUW tend to do this (more so than WW)?

No, not at all. A good example of this is when we try to decide what movie to go and see. My wife usually doesn't like either of our choices and if my son and I don't moderate our choices we'll be going by ourselves.

Actually, the only time she does pick a side is when the problem really does matter (health, safety, finance etc,)

[ECOCKS]

Just to clarify, the quoted question is from someone else, Mars I believe.

[Mars]

If it is, look in the mirror rather than at culture as to what is to blame.

. . . . you have no one to blame except yourself.

This is a very common charge to throw out on these forums to cover a multitude of situations.  Blame the man.

[Misha]

This is a very common charge to throw out on these forums to cover a multitude of situations.  Blame the man.

Given that it is the men seeking and given that it is the men who decide to sponsor or not to sponsor a woman and bring her to his country, in most cases he has himself to blame whether partially or wholly IMHO.

[Blues Fairy]

This is a very common charge to throw out on these forums to cover a multitude of situations.  Blame the man.

Yet you readily imply that FSUW in general are more prone to putting the whims of their kids over common sense.  Who's biased? 

[Faux Pas]

This is a very common charge to throw out on these forums to cover a multitude of situations.  Blame the man.

Mars that statement is so absurd my IQ dropped 20 points just from reading it. How would it not be the mans fault when he chooses a woman based on the criteria ECOCKS mentions. Who else's fault could it possibly be?  :noidea: