Dating while married with kids

My husband and I rarely get a chance to go out. We moved to a new town five years ago, now, and in that time, we've made friends, but having little kids puts a cramp in the social calendar. It is extremely rare that our schedule coincides with that of our friends, given everyone has babies of different ages, or are working on dissertations, or are travelling, etc. So, when we do get a chance to go out, it's usually solo. Which is great, as we happen to really like each other's company, however, when you take a couple dynamic that has existed in a bubble for five years, and will resume existing in that bubble for the foreseeable future directly after venturing out into society for 3-5 hours, you end up with a very lackluster evening.

Couples with children are usually not usuals at any one establishment. As such, they cannot wander into a restaurant, bar or coffee shop and run into acquaintances or even people they've ever seen before and possibly have reason to converse. Unlike people traveling in larger groups, or oppositely out on their own, engaging socially with people who already have a pattern in place looks out of place. The cadence of conversation is slightly off. If already social couples, groups and singles are like ropes swinging toward and away from each other as they go from place to place, meet new people, and say hello to old friends and acquaintances they at least know a bit about, an isolated couple is like a ring: any attempt to engage with others bounces off the boundaries of the dynamic already present within the couple alone.

And without having any set plan, conversation is limited to what is going on directly around you, which runs out quickly, no matter how many observations you make. As a solid couple, you already know about the other person, and any other conversations could just as easily be made at home, in a more natural way.

It's not that couples don't want to be social. It's more that it's incredibly difficult to do so naturally. I know a lot of people will disagree and think about how easy it is for them to go out with their partner, and easily float from situation to situation, finding ways to be invited and inviting wherever they go. But I equally know that that doesn't happen for everyone and a lot of couples look at themselves and wonder why. I'm putting forward that it's not you, the couple, but the way in which modern life has secluded families. Extended families no longer live in the same location. Neighborhood communities are getting increasingly rare. Friendships are complicated, and people just aren't free at the same times.

The next time we organize a date night out, I'll do more planning beforehand. If we went to see a show or an exhibit or play or something, then we could do dinner and drinks and talk about the experience we just shared. We still most likely won't be branching out into social revelry, but even that is more likely, as we could talk to others about a shared experience for all of us. We wouldn't be rooting around in the dark, trying to strike a conversation out of nowhere about nothing simply because we remember how we used to do it all those years ago, and how easy and fluid it was.

It's good to get out of the house. It's better to do so with a plan.

What's in a name? -- Guest post

O Romeo, Romeo! wherefore art thou Romeo?
Deny thy father, and refuse thy name;
...
'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself though, not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O! be some other name:
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call’d,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name;
And for that name, which is no part of thee,
Take all myself.


~ Juliet Capulet, Romeo and Juliet,
Act 2, Scene 2, lines 37-38; 42-53,
William Shakespeare.

She makes a good argument for it, doesn't she? You love someone, and it's a reasonable thing to ask them to surrender their name for you. Their name, that carries with it their history and sense of family honour. It's easy to say that when your two families are at war, and you'd give anything to see their bloodline extinguished anyway. Harder, when it's just the ordinary decision of whether or not to change one's name upon marrying, as I am currently debating.



Those of you who know your Shakespeare may have noticed the lines I deliberately omitted earlier:

Deny thy father, and refuse thy name;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love,
And I’ll no longer be a Capulet.
(Ibid, lines 38-40, emphasis mine)

so there's no dispute that she intends this to be a mutual surrendering, although it is interesting that she spends seven times the length of those lines asking him to change his.

So, if Shakespeare is relevant today, is it valid to ask our men to change their names for us? I am hoping it is.

In my particular case, I have a sister but no brothers, no uncles on my Dad's side, my Grandfather is long deceased, and my Dad can't even remember the last time he saw or spoke to his male cousin (whom, I believe, had only daughters anyway). So, in the ordinary course of events, my Dad's surname will be extinguished after this generation, and there will be no one who was close to either him or my Grandfather who will be able to carry it on.

That being said, why shouldn't there be? It is entirely a cultural matter that us ladies surrender our family name and heritage, when our men do not have to do likewise, but, culture can be changed. At least, I personally do not consider cultural reasons by themselves to be enough to continue a tradition, especially one I don't agree with.

And I don't agree with it. I side with Juliet on this issue.

To lay out all of our options:

1) The traditional route, I surrender my name and family history and honour, and take on that of my beloved as if I belonged TO him (rather than, WITH him). The fact that for me, this is socially a climb-down, and I would be surrendering a surname from the English aristocracy for an American one that... isn't, also makes that suggestion unpalatable to me (although I concede that maybe it shouldn't).

2) What's good for the goose is good for the gander: he completely changes his, as, in fact, Romeo himself was eager to do:

I take thee at thy word.
Call me but love, and I’ll be new baptiz’d;
Henceforth I never will be Romeo.
(Ibid, lines 54-56.)

And also:

Juliet: Art thou not Romeo, and a Montague?
Romeo: Neither, fair maid, if either thee dislike.
(Ibid, lines 66-67.)

However, how can I, with fairness, ask my beloved to do something I am not to willing to do? No, this is not an option, not for me.

3) Nothing changes, nobody surrenders anything, we both keep our family names and heritage and just make do having to different names. In many cultures, this is still the norm. I'm not completely against the idea, but to a certain extent, I say, “Well, what's the point of getting married, then? Don't we want to look like we belong to and with each other?” For some paperwork, this actually is the way we will go. For example, I don't see any reason to pay quite a lot of money for a new passport when my current one is only a couple of years old, just because I've got married. I'll just leave it in my current name and travel under that, and then when it runs out, get a new one in my married name, but I personally think it sounds a little cold-hearted that we'd never be introduced by the same name in the flesh.

4) Use the American tradition of adding the maiden name as a second middle name, even though they then go by their husband's surname. To be honest, I can't really see the point of that. If I'm not going to continue to use my surname as my surname, why bother?

5) Hyphenate. Either one or both of us. I'd prefer both. The feminist in me is crying out, begging, that we take this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to prove to the world that in this marriage, we really do intend to be equal partners. BOTH of us matter. Both of our families, and histories, matter too. We're BOTH changing our identities when we get married, and why shouldn't our name/s reflect that?

My beloved isn't in favour of that, for a few reasons:

a) hyphenated names (apparently) cause issue with automated forms, and such. (Eh. The technology around automated forms was designed by humans, it could therefore also be redesigned, if needed...)

b) which way around would we do it? Personally, I'm a fan of both of us just adding the other's name to the end of our current name, because that points to more equality; we're both doing the same thing. He thinks that's making things unnecessarily messy, which, I have to admit, I don't think is nearly as important as he does. Were we to pick one version over the other, there's also the aesthetics argument: which way looks/sounds better? I'd argue, mine first, because otherwise there's five consonants in a row, which makes it a bit difficult to say, and also, mine's the longer name, so it does sound better that way, but that's another (small) reason he isn't up for it.

c) He – correctly – points out that the process of changing our names will be a hassle. He forgets that I'd have that hassle either way (unless we chose option 3), and thinks we ought to avoid options that create more hassle “for the sake of it”. I think it's for the sake of him showing that he doesn't think he's better than me, but he can't quite connect the dots yet.

d) But what would we name the children?? Aren't we making life intentionally more difficult for them, especially if they then want to do the hyphenating thing themselves?? Well, for starters, we are no where near a firm decision on if there even will be any children, and if we do, by the time they get to marrying, they'll be able to make their own choices about this, but why can't we just cross that bridge when we come to it? Flip a coin or something, to see which one of our names will get passed down?

This decision feels really large to me. A once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to really stand up and be counted, to take a decision that will lead to multiple conversations, and maybe, in a small way, be part of changing the world! To deliberately not take it, I have to admit, does feel... cowardly. And I am not a coward. My own deep-seated family values, which half of this conversation is about, are “be kind, be brave, be fair, be loving.” Brave, and fair, is more important than cowardliness or wanting to make life easier for oneself.

I didn't create this unfair patriarchy, although given the hand I've been dealt, I do feel obliged to play my part in dismantling it.

And yet.

My beloved didn't create it either. How far is it fair to mke him fight this battle, when it's not his personal fault? I love the man, and I want him to be happy. I think that means, not continuing to pressure him about it, even when it frustrates every bone in my body.

I can only influence myself. I can take my choices on, and I will hyphenate my name. He will, in all likelihood, not change his at all, but I will hope and pray that I'm wrong about that. It feels somewhat anti-climatic, but what other choice do I have? As my beloved himself often says, “A good compromise leaves everybody mad, right?” And, of course, in the words of Juliet, our marriage will still smell sweet, regardless of what we end up calling ourselves.

...

Sarah Fountains

An accountant living in the UK, who's engaged to an accountant living in California. Currently she lodges with/housesits for/nannys for/freeloads from close friends with two extremely boisterous sons. She's been reading parenting advice in books and on the internet as a hobby since she was sixteen, and cares particularly about adoption issues; she's probably also the only voice in the feminist crowd insisting that sexism goes both ways in different circumstances. She loves dancing and sewing, fails at one but not the other, and struggles continually with things that other people refer to as "common sense." Her lifetime ambition is to be organised enough to justify baskets in the refrigerator, and has yet to meet someone who doesn't laugh at it. Most days, though, she still has laundry on the floor. Read about her international adventures at: http://marriedwiththemominlaw.blogspot.co.uk

Addiction and Parenting -- Guest Post

The moon is high. It’s time for the ritual to begin. First, I check to make sure the kids are asleep soundly in their beds, footsteps away from other adults. Adults that aren’t me, but are still responsible. They are.

I walk down the hallway, my hands already shaking, going over the routine in my head over and over and over before I actually sit down and start it.

When I do, it goes smoothly. I find my vein with no effort, and a small sigh escapes me, even before I depress the plunger.

With the bright red plume of blood in the syringe as I draw back into the clear, brownish liquid, my entire body relaxes. It’s trance-like, watching that swath of red in the water.

As soon as the needle is out and that warm feeling creeps through my body, slowly, deliciously, and my head begins to nod, I go about the rest of my routine. Meticulously cleaning, putting away, hiding. No trace of who I become and what I do when I become that person every few days must be left in sight.

Addiction is not new to me. I was an addict for years. But I had been clean for a decade. A decade without the itch, without the whisper, without the caress.

Then one day, feeling out of control, I decided once more wouldn’t hurt. It would get me through that tough time, and I’d be done again.

Wrong. Liar. I am a liar. I lied to myself, I lied to everyone else.

For months, I justified it. Never around the kids. Never with money that could be used to support the kids. I sold other, personal, prescription drugs that I rightly needed, in order to fund what I would privately and ironically refer to as “mommy’s time out.”

I tried to lay the blame solely on the environment I was in and the people I was with at the time. But that was incorrect. While those were two huge contributing factors, it boiled down to one thing: I’m selfish.

And how do you cope with that realization? How do you deal with the knowledge that you are a parent who loves your children beyond life, yet is so selfish you’d risk death every Monday and Tuesday, just for a little bit of a break. A time out.

When I met my fiance, he knew. He knew before I told him. He was no stranger to that life. He had walked away a long time ago and maintained the strength to stay away. We talked. Many times. Many nights. What it boiled down to was if I wanted him, I had to choose. But not choose him. I had to choose myself and my kids. I had to choose life. I had to understand it in those terms, and stop being selfish. To choose him would once again be placing my needs in the forefront. Something that I clearly needed to stop doing. So, he broke it down that way. Any more needles, and the fringe benefit to life right now, him, would be gone. But I would lose so, so much more. No, he would never betray me in calling me a danger to my children or anything like that, but I would be losing what I was trying to create with him for my childrens’ sake. Something much bigger than my own companionship.

Being a parent has never been easy in the history of parenting. Being a single parent, finally finding a partner, and building a family? Even harder. And I was in danger of losing it all.

So, I did the smart thing. I did what I would eventually come to realize was somewhat self-motivated after all.

I quit cold.

Do I still get that itch? Yes. Sometimes it’s so maddening I tear my hair out and cry and scream.

But I’ve remembered what’s more important. I’ve remembered that there are other ways to get by.

Fiance has helped. He distracts me when I crave. He scoops me up, away from the places of my rituals, makes me laugh, holds me while I cry, assures me I’m not the piece of shit I feel like I am. When the sun comes up, he gathers the children around us and shows me what it’s all about and why this alternative is so much better.

And now, at the end of the first bend in this part of my road, I find myself with even more motivation growing quietly inside of me. Depending on me to stay clean and stable.

I once said I didn’t believe the “once an addict, always an addict” adage. I do now. But what I still refuse to believe is that there’s no hope left. Especially for parent addicts. We get through so much and manage to stay strong. We can get through relapses and come out clean on the other side, too. If you’re reading this and these words ring true to you, know this: I am. I’m making it. So can you. And I believe in you even if you don’t believe in yourself right now.

...

The poster wishes to remain anonymous.

Slice of Life - Rings

In honor of my five-year wedding anniversary last week, I asked people to post pictures of their rings (any rings!) that they were wearing right then. And the results? Amazing. Here are the rings people from all over the world were wearing on the Friday afternoon of August 16th, 2013:

Tiffany Hunter wears rings on both hands! In her first spot, she's got her gorgeous wedding ring.

Sascha Fernandez's college ring is full of history and legend.

Sandi Yu sports a gorgeous three-stoned ring.

Melissa Elfers goes traditional and beautiful.

Liz Hawksworth goes for a spellbinding stone.

Lauren Kerr's ring looks like its in the glossy pages of a magazine. Well done, Lawrence.

Two in a row from my hometown! Jolene Bauckman shows off the prettiest set.

Jen Mayer wears dice and wedding rings!

Jepeczenka Svadakovic's ring is an art deco meteorite ring. Read that again. Seriously. Coolest.

Gina Storozuk never takes hers off.

I love Emily Santanella's set. This is what I would want.

Cassandra Gill's ring is a present from her birth mother, hand crafted by her stepfather.

Never a dull moment with Anne Theriault.

Alyssa Lord, y'all. Bam.

Alex Nguyen's displays beautiful design work.

Alicia Helyer's ring is super sleek and classy.

Amanda Lewin with a kickass thumb piece.

Angie Birney - beautiful and classic.

Blair Celli with the ring her wife gave her on her wedding day. Aww.

Cheryl Russel, who's been married 15 years, now!

Alison Gayton with a wedding ring and her grandmother's ring.

Amber Ashgardens shows up because she does what I tell her to do. LOL

Angie Pugh with an absolutely stunning and unique ring.

Carrie Masters prefers a sapphire, and with good reason--it's gorg.

This is mine.  I love it,

Donnelle Belanger-Taylor with such a beautiful set.

Emma Wade with a classic.

Erin Newton with some tasteful pizzazz!

Greg Elfers, who proposed to his wife just steps away from where his dad proposed to his mom--unknowingly, too!

Janel Copeland is sleek and smooth.

Jennifer Kappert's is just perfect.

Jennifer Upton with a wowser!

Joan Harris and her husband. Breathtaking.

Joella Striebel doesn't have an engagement ring...because she proposed to him! Take that, gender norms.

Judith Hunter. BOOM.

Kylie and Jared Rogers. For lyfe.

Leanna Minch, who has to be careful those pointy edges don't get her baby!

Lisa Cuellar. I love this one.

Maryanne Luther's fits together just perfectly.

Myra Menchaca's is forever.

Moira Parker has worn this one from her boyfriend, Rob, for ten years now.

Raina Sadi rarely wears this ring...because she also has a ring tattoo!

Sarah Stanford's glorious classic cut and set.

Sarah Tormey's beautifully patterned band.

Tanya Noreen's expresses her personality perfectly!

Told you she'd be back! Tiffany Hunter wears this gorgeous mother's ring on her right hand.

Tobi Wolf with an amazing accented set.

And last, but certainly not least, Tracey Baker Birch stands out, too.

I really love these segments, guys. They are so incredibly interesting and beautiful. Thank you for sharing your hands, your rings and your stories with me.