Its never "until" its just when they decide to let that crazy side show itself. For some it comes out early, for others (like ex-miss cashmoney) it takes awhile but it was always there.

Thanks! :cool:

Too big of a hassle, rude and it would only give her mother just a another reason to say how bad I am to her in her ear. I can totally just see her mother waiting to see if I ask for it back just so she can say " I told you so."

We're all so cynical today.

Not every woman is a gold digger, not everyone woman is "crazy" (I mean come on...we're all a little crazy, men and women).
Also, no one should be wearing the proverbial pants in the marriage. No one should have an upper hand. A marriage is supposed to be an equal partnership and if anyone goes into a marriage with the thought that they should always be the boss, then of course there are going to be problems and of course it's doomed to fail.

I agree, I came from an egalitarian family. My folks are still together after 24 years. Both have really strong personalities and I doubt they would've stayed together if one "wore the pants".

When I say wearing the pants...i dont mean one person's word is end all be all.....Its just, in my family...my dad makes the money and mom spends it as do the children. So, when there is a decision to be made, dad has the final word. However, thats not to say mom can't convince him at times to change his mind....which she definitely does. Ex-miss-cahmoney on the other hand, wanted her way to be the end all be all to everything and I wasnt raised like that. And frankly, I dont think she was either. Its just her mother has went off the deep end. I told my brother I ought to have her commited to an assylum or go tell the FBI she's been promoting extreme islamic fundalmentalist propoganda publicly in downtown Ft. Lauderdale. :o

Well obviously my view is different on things.

I grew up in a double income house. So any major financial decisions are made by both parents as they are both making the money.

Thats Canada for you.



btw, ever been to the club called Guvernment? I'm going there August 23rd.

Eh? I don't get it. Double income hosueholds aren't just a Canadian thing, nor do I think that it's a Canadian thing to have an equal partnership in marriages.

No, I've never been to the Guvernment, but I have heard of it (there aren't many people in the T Dot who haven't), but it's not my scene.

In the south, in most cases I know of, the one who makes the most money or all the money is usually the one who has a larger say in financial decisions. In the double income households, usually the man has the larger say when it comes to finances. Yet, thats not say the marriage isnt an equal partnership. I know some people in marriages like to think that its an equal thing...but more often than not that isnt the case when it comes to finances. The way I was raised, as were most of my peers, things would go like this: Dad says how much money we can spend while mom decides what we're eating for dinner. Catch what I'm trying to get at? Its equal partnership....just somethings are to left up to a man while others can be left up to a woman.

So you're saying if one "wears" the pants then things wont work?

Thats why ex-miss-cashmoney and I broke up.....she wanted to wear the overalls 24/7.

I totally get what you're saying, and I'm not saying it's "bad or "wrong". But the way you made it sound initially, was "the man is the head of the house, he makes all the decisions, yadda, yadda. yadda", and then of course my feminist red flag goes up and I'm like "dude, no way! It should be equal"

Basically, what I'm saying, is if one person (be it the husband or wife) tries to have complete control (like your ex wanted) then yes, there will definitly be problems.

well i'm traditional. so dont shoot me but i was taught that the man is top of the household, the wife is next, and then the child. its like a ladder. now i'm not saying that the man should control everything. he should definately consult his wife. they need to both have a say-so in things and agree before something is carved in stone. traditionally speaking though, the man should protect and support the household. he doesnt have to totally support the household. the wife should feel more than welcome to get a job if she wants it.

i was always taught that the man should work to support his wife and child(ren) but i personally cannot live without my job so i dont totally agree with this. i'd still have dinner waiting on him when he got home considering i was not already busy cutting someone out of a car.