Unpopular Opinion Thursday

melissa721 · June 2011

MySweetBaboo:

Socks with Rubber Soles!

I've never seen these before. I don't think the trend has made it to Jersey just yet. I'm sure as soon as one of the Housewives dresses her kids in these, they'll be all over the place!

melissa721 · June 2011

bostonbluejay:
This discussion about velcro shoes makes me laugh. My grandpa loves him some velcro tennis shoes. I don't think I've ever seen him wear shoes with laces. It's either velcro tennis shoes or cowboy boots.

I totally think of senior citizens when it comes to velcro sneakers.

Mrs.Slick · June 2011

annerz22:
I think parents who have obese children are no better then child abusers.

While I understand what you're getting at, I do NOT believe that a parent indulging their child is on the same level as a child molester or someone who beats kids.

DChunt09 · June 2011

melissa721:
DChunt09:
MySweetBaboo:
melissa721:
MySweetBaboo:
melissa721:

Just remove the velcro strip at the top and I'd throw them on any daughter of mine with a pair of leggings and cute shirt ;-)
Better yet, replace the velcro with a snap!
Your child shall be blacklisted from the fashion world! :P
They are adorable, Baboo! If I had a little girl, I'd let her wear them for sure!
My son wears skidders. No laces. No velcro. No snaps.
What are skidders? PIP please!

Skidders are kind of a "sock shoe." They are perfect for my son because even though he is super slender, his feet are so fat they don't fit in most shoes. These are perfect! There are tons of different ones for both girls and boys.

Skidders

MySweetBaboo · June 2011

melissa721:
MySweetBaboo:

Socks with Rubber Soles!

I've never seen these before. I don't think the trend has made it to Jersey just yet. I'm sure as soon as one of the Housewives dresses her kids in these, they'll be all over the place!

LMFAO!

lycih · June 2011

melissa721:

worknontheHfam:
I think a married couple should have one shared bank account, and should never have seperate ones. I think that when couples start splitting bills and saying well I paid for this and you pay for that, it can bring out ugly energy. I also think that having two bank accounts and "splitting up bills" can cause tension and greed and can have the potential to lead to lies.

I disagree with this. While we do have a shared savings account, I like having money for myself set aside from MY paycheck that I earned so I can buy things (after the bills have been paid) without having to ask if it's cool or be questioned about it. Same goes for him. I also like to be able to buy him gifts without him knowing.

This exactly. We have a joint account that pays all of our bills and sets some into savings. But we also have our own individual accounts that we can use however we want. And, what's the point of bothering to come up with a surprise birthday present if it's emblazoned across the joint statement?

MySweetBaboo · June 2011

DChunt09:
melissa721:
DChunt09:
MySweetBaboo:
melissa721:
MySweetBaboo:
melissa721:

Just remove the velcro strip at the top and I'd throw them on any daughter of mine with a pair of leggings and cute shirt ;-)

Better yet, replace the velcro with a snap!

Your child shall be blacklisted from the fashion world! :P

They are adorable, Baboo! If I had a little girl, I'd let her wear them for sure!

My son wears skidders. No laces. No velcro. No snaps.

What are skidders? PIP please!

Skidders are kind of a "sock shoe." They are perfect for my son because even though he is super slender, his feet are so fat they don't fit in most shoes. These are perfect! There are tons of different ones for both girls and boys.

DID YOU TEST AGAIN?

bellablue2 · June 2011

melissa721:
bellablue2:
melissa721:
bellablue2:
melissa721:
btaylor19:

melissa721:
I think velcro sneakers on kids of any age are just not cute. At all.

They aren't cute, but they sure do save time

I'll deal with the extra few minutes of retying! Know what's even worse? Velcro sneakers with little characters on them like Mickey Mouse or whatever. I seriously hate them.

::Runs to hide all her boys shoes behind the washing machine::

How old is your oldest? Does he wear them also?

He is five. He doesnt have any velcro ones anymore since he learned to tie his shoes. My little one still has a couple pairs. But, they both still LOVE the ones with lights and cartoon characters. Their most recent request was ones with cars 2 on them and they flicker with the lights...lol..but they tie.

He looks so much older than 5!!! I thought he was like 7 or 8.

Well, he is almost six..(in September).. Smile

I wont let my boys wear the running shoe style cartoon shoes. Those are hideous! We compromised with skater style ones that had cars on them or the vans style ones. I will never buy them the shoes with skates on the bottom! My boys are crazy enough without skates on their shoes! They would be like in the next town before I even had a chance to stop them! I need speed on my side!!! We love us some skinny jeans in our household too!! lol...

lycih · June 2011

lauranicole91:
ashcurious:
I do not think infants should have pierced ears. Parents should wait at least till they are 8 at least.

I agree! I know a family friend who had her ears pierced as a baby and the earring got caught in the netting of her play pen. Babies should never have to go through the pain of an earring ripping though their ear lobe just because Mommy thought it looked cute to have their ears pierced!

I don't think this is always the reason behind it. In some cases it's completely cultural. I haven't decided what I would do, but my mom had all of the girls (3 of us) ears pierced as infants. Her reasoning was if she did it before we even knew we had ears, we would have them all healed up before we knew the difference. Her words: "Every time you change a diaper, just clean the ears" So, she never dealt with us pulling on them or trying to rip them out, or getting caught on anything because we were literally days old when it was done. And, I didn't wear earrings at all from about... 4 until I was about 13, and they didn't close up because they'd already been healed for years before I stopped wearing them.

Again, I haven't decided what I would do, but I don't think it's always a "ooo, pretty" reason behind it.

DChunt09 · June 2011

MySweetBaboo:
DChunt09:
melissa721:
DChunt09:
MySweetBaboo:
melissa721:
MySweetBaboo:
melissa721:

Just remove the velcro strip at the top and I'd throw them on any daughter of mine with a pair of leggings and cute shirt ;-)
Better yet, replace the velcro with a snap!
Your child shall be blacklisted from the fashion world! :P
They are adorable, Baboo! If I had a little girl, I'd let her wear them for sure!
My son wears skidders. No laces. No velcro. No snaps.
What are skidders? PIP please!
Skidders are kind of a "sock shoe." They are perfect for my son because even though he is super slender, his feet are so fat they don't fit in most shoes. These are perfect! There are tons of different ones for both girls and boys.

DID YOU TEST AGAIN?

Yep. I tested last night after holding my urine for a while and it did the same thing. These two tests came from the same box so I was anxious to test with a new box this morning. I did and it was negative. I am holding out hope that maybe I am not 11 DPO but really I should just be expecting my period soon. I was super excited this cycle because my phantom symptoms were the exact same as with DS and this morning I seriously thought I was going to vomit. Oh well. I guess I'm still not out yet.

annerz22 · June 2011

Mrs.Slick:
annerz22:

I think parents who have obese children are no better then child abusers.

While I understand what you're getting at, I do NOT believe that a parent indulging their child is on the same level as a child molester or someone who beats kids.

Indulging is one thing- it's not every day. I am going to let my kids have treats/candy/snacks too, just not all the time. I'm talking about the parents who ONLY feed their kids fast food/mac and cheese/pop tarts/candy etc

gigismomma · June 2011

annerz22:

I think parents who have obese children are no better then child abusers.

Amen.

nola 1017 · June 2011

brookelynpaisley:
This is part UO, part confession, I guess. I know I will really struggle with our IF treatment decisions because a part of me is still a scientist that believes in natural selection. My heart wants a baby more than anything, but my head tells me that maybe we're not meant to and we're not supposed to mess with it. We've chosen to draw the line at IVF, but I'm open and willing to go through IUI. It feels hypocritical at times - that I'm willing to go through certain types of artificial insemination/reproduction and not others.

Please understand that I don't question anyone's decision to do IVF. It's an incredibly personal decision. It's just not for me, and thankfully my husband agrees, for the reason above and for others.

I'm sorry that you and Mr. BP are faced with these difficult decisions. I'm glad that you are both in agreement over your next steps. I don't think it's hypocritical at all to be open to IUI but to not want to do IVF. Only you and YH know what's best for your family. I hope you find success soon BP. *hugs*

cm42878 · June 2011

Michelle_G:
cm42878:
Michelle_G:

I personally feel that if you need (not want) your mom or MIL to stay with you for weeks after your have a baby, that maybe you weren't ready to have said baby. ::cringe::

I agree with this, I mean eventually they are going to have to leave and you are going to have to learn to do it yourself.

However when my BFF had her baby her mom lives several hours away, if she needed her in the middle of the night she couldn't just come over. Or if the new grandma wanted to spend time with or see baby. But her husband also took two weeks off of work, so it wasn't like she was home by herself all day or night from the begining either.

Its not something we will be doing in our household.

I mean, I'm totally understanding of having a mom over to help watch the bambino while you try to nap or something. I get that. I just don't get the "hey mom, will you stay with me for a month?". That's just me though, and I'm not tight with my mom at all.

I have a friend that now has two kids. Her mom lives in Lithuania, and has come in for 6 months for each delivery. I get that she's coming in for as long as her Visa will allow, but she literally did everything for the babies. Feedings, cooking, bathing, coddling, ev.ery.thing. My friend just chilled out and drank beer (no breast feeding, obv) THEN she b!tched about how hard it was after mom left. Weird to me, that's all.

You know that is weird to me as well, I don't get it and I know I don't have a child yet so I might not. But I don't plan on having either of our moms in the delivery room or stay with us after. I know people do it, but I want to learn, experiance, bond and figure it out on my own. I am sure it will be tough, tiring ect but well I know this going into delivery/.

I didn't word my paragraph about my friend well because I had a screaming kid here!! He has since left so I can concentrate. I thought BFF was crazy for having her mom come in and stay, then when her husband took of two weeks I really thought it was crazy. I understand she lives a few hours away but she was there when BFF was in labor, when she delivered she had a cu p on the door listening and immediatly started knocking wanting in, the whole time they were in the hospital and when they brought the baby home.

It wasn't like her DH went right back to work and she had no one to help cook or clean. Their friends brought dinner over every night for the first week (rotating each night) and DH was off for two weeks to help around the house and with baby so to me having mom there might have been an overkill.

gigismomma · June 2011

guppysown@yahoo.com:
Michelle_G:

I personally feel that if you need (not want) your mom or MIL to stay with you for weeks after your have a baby, that maybe you weren't ready to have said baby. ::cringe::

This might change after you've *HAD* a baby. I didn't want someone to stay with me before I had my first LO, but I had a different vision of what maternity leave would look like. Between nursing and trying to get in some naps, I was exhausted and overwhelmed that I didn't get anything done around the house. My dog felt neglected, I wasn't getting laundry done, my poor husband came home to fix dinner every night. We got through it, but I understand now that you might need help more than you want to admit.

I agree there is certainly an adjustment period where having 'help' is needed. I was not planning on a c-section but I got one and I had no help at night or much of the day besides family visiting. It was difficult I would speak up and ask for help for #2 if H cannot be there.

OP: I think staying for weeks is a tad bit too much. I think help is fine for the first two weeks or so, this way mom and baby get on a routine and MIL or Mother can just stop in to check on the new mom & baby.

Mrs.Slick · June 2011

annerz22:
Mrs.Slick:
annerz22:

I think parents who have obese children are no better then child abusers.

While I understand what you're getting at, I do NOT believe that a parent indulging their child is on the same level as a child molester or someone who beats kids.

Indulging is one thing- it's not every day. I am going to let my kids have treats/candy/snacks too, just not all the time. I'm talking about the parents who ONLY feed their kids fast food/mac and cheese/pop tarts/candy etc

I completely agree that what you're referencing is a form of child abuse. But I still don't put those people in the same category as baby rapists. There are levels of evil and I don't think what you're talking about is of the same caliber as all types of child abusers. That's all I'm saying.

gigismomma · June 2011

NJtoMD2011:

I think it's a bit ridic that some of my married friends keep their money fiercely separate from each other - as in writing each other checks for "their half" of the mortgage. I understand that it makes them feel like they can spend "their" money as they see fit, but I find that these are the couples that openly fight about money the most (in my experience). My husband and I take the combine and conquer approach.

I agree but having your own money to do whatever with is nice. Especially when you want to buy one another a gift. We have two joint accounts for checking purposes. We have separate credit cards and separate savings accounts but we have access to eachothers savings accounts. I think if it works for you great but if it doesn't work for you then go with what does.

NJtoMD2011 · June 2011

gigismomma:
NJtoMD2011:

I think it's a bit ridic that some of my married friends keep their money fiercely separate from each other - as in writing each other checks for "their half" of the mortgage. I understand that it makes them feel like they can spend "their" money as they see fit, but I find that these are the couples that openly fight about money the most (in my experience). My husband and I take the combine and conquer approach.

I agree but having your own money to do whatever with is nice. Especially when you want to buy one another a gift. We have two joint accounts for checking purposes. We have separate credit cards and separate savings accounts but we have access to eachothers savings accounts. I think if it works for you great but if it doesn't work for you then go with what does.

I think as long as you're not fighting over money, whether you combine it, keep it separate, or some form of the two, then that's great. I agree that you have to do what works for you. I just think a married couple nickle and diming each other openly is bad news - no matter how they manage their finances.

BlueEyeZ1981 · June 2011

I think that Stay at Home Moms have the responsibility to care for the home completely. They should have dinner cooked and on the table when their husbands get home. The house should always be clean and their children should be well prepared for kindergarten. If they don't do these things then they are lazy and ungreatfull for the ability to stay at home.

My husbands friends that are currently unemployeed need to put the video games down and get a #$(* job. They are instead having the state pay for their kids through the wellfare program. If you want to go to school to be retrained then do it quit doing nothing but laying around and playing video games. You are not entitled to months off after being laid off. You are not entitled to the state taking care of your family. You only get what you work for so get off your ass and get a job!!!

melissa721 · June 2011

BlueEyeZ1981:
I think that Stay at Home Moms have the responsibility to care for the home completely. They should have dinner cooked and on the table when their husbands get home. The house should always be clean and their children should be well prepared for kindergarten. If they don't do these things then they are lazy and ungreatfull for the ability to stay at home.
My husbands friends that are currently unemployeed need to put the video games down and get a #$(* job. They are instead having the state pay for their kids through the wellfare program. If you want to go to school to be retrained then do it quit doing nothing but laying around and playing video games. You are not entitled to months off after being laid off. You are not entitled to the state taking care of your family. You only get what you work for so get off your ass and get a job!!!

I don't agree with that. I am not a SAHM but I don't think that SAHMs should automatically get the title of "Maid." While they should take it upon themselves to handle a bit more of the housework as much as they can, I don't think it should be their sole responsibility. Taking care of kids is a lot of work and that's what they do all day... hence to the term stay at home MOM.

It's no different from having an outside job and sharing the housework with your partner. I still think some of the housework should be shared.

I don't think a SAHM taking care of kids all day AND being responsible for the housework vs. a working dad solely responsible for his 9-5 duties is equal amounts of work at all.

ETA: wording

bostonbluejay · June 2011

melissa721:
BlueEyeZ1981:

I think that Stay at Home Moms have the responsibility to care for the home completely. They should have dinner cooked and on the table when their husbands get home. The house should always be clean and their children should be well prepared for kindergarten. If they don't do these things then they are lazy and ungreatfull for the ability to stay at home.

My husbands friends that are currently unemployeed need to put the video games down and get a #$(* job. They are instead having the state pay for their kids through the wellfare program. If you want to go to school to be retrained then do it quit doing nothing but laying around and playing video games. You are not entitled to months off after being laid off. You are not entitled to the state taking care of your family. You only get what you work for so get off your ass and get a job!!!

I don't agree with that. I am not a SAHM but I don't think that SAHMs should automatically get the title of "Maid." While they should take it upon themselves to handle a bit more of the housework as much as they can, I don't think it should be their sole responsibility. Taking care of kids is a lot of work and that's what they do all day... hence to the term stay at home MOM.

It's no different from having an outside job and sharing the housework with your partner. I still think some of the housework should be shared.

I don't think a SAHM taking care of kids all day AND being responsible for the housework vs. a working dad solely responsible for his 9-5 duties is equal amounts of work at all.

ETA: wording

I agree with Mel here. I may not have children of my own yet, but I have had a toddler stay with us overnight on occasion. Do you know how much work it was trying to keep up with a two year old!? I think the house was messier at the end of the day than when I started! Toys everywhere, cheerios out on the table...keeping up with an on the go child is very time consuming. Sure, there was nap time, but that lasted only two hours. Two hours is not enough time to clean the entire house, do laundry, and get dinner ready to go. Even trying to just put him in the pack and play to try to pick up toys and some of the mess we made didn't work when he started throwing a temper tantrum. While I agree that more of the housework will fall on a SAHM, I certainly don't think that the husband/father should be completely off the hook.

melissa721 · June 2011

bostonbluejay:
melissa721:
BlueEyeZ1981:

I think that Stay at Home Moms have the responsibility to care for the home completely. They should have dinner cooked and on the table when their husbands get home. The house should always be clean and their children should be well prepared for kindergarten. If they don't do these things then they are lazy and ungreatfull for the ability to stay at home.
My husbands friends that are currently unemployeed need to put the video games down and get a #$(* job. They are instead having the state pay for their kids through the wellfare program. If you want to go to school to be retrained then do it quit doing nothing but laying around and playing video games. You are not entitled to months off after being laid off. You are not entitled to the state taking care of your family. You only get what you work for so get off your ass and get a job!!!

I don't agree with that. I am not a SAHM but I don't think that SAHMs should automatically get the title of "Maid." While they should take it upon themselves to handle a bit more of the housework as much as they can, I don't think it should be their sole responsibility. Taking care of kids is a lot of work and that's what they do all day... hence to the term stay at home MOM.
It's no different from having an outside job and sharing the housework with your partner. I still think some of the housework should be shared.
I don't think a SAHM taking care of kids all day AND being responsible for the housework vs. a working dad solely responsible for his 9-5 duties is equal amounts of work at all.
ETA: wording
I agree with Mel here. I may not have children of my own yet, but I have had a toddler stay with us overnight on occasion. Do you know how much work it was trying to keep up with a two year old!? I think the house was messier at the end of the day than when I started! Toys everywhere, cheerios out on the table...keeping up with an on the go child is very time consuming. Sure, there was nap time, but that lasted only two hours. Two hours is not enough time to clean the entire house, do laundry, and get dinner ready to go. Even trying to just put him in the pack and play to try to pick up toys and some of the mess we made didn't work when he started throwing a temper tantrum. While I agree that more of the housework will fall on a SAHM, I certainly don't think that the husband/father should be completely off the hook.

THIS THIS THIS. When my nephews stay here, there's sh!t all over the place and they're even really well behaved kids. It just gets messy when they want to play. How do you get housework done?! And then playing referee and dealing with crying and time outs and 'He took my toooyyyyy!!!" is very time consuming.

annerz22 · June 2011

melissa721:
bostonbluejay:
melissa721:
BlueEyeZ1981:

I think that Stay at Home Moms have the responsibility to care for the home completely. They should have dinner cooked and on the table when their husbands get home. The house should always be clean and their children should be well prepared for kindergarten. If they don't do these things then they are lazy and ungreatfull for the ability to stay at home.

My husbands friends that are currently unemployeed need to put the video games down and get a #$(* job. They are instead having the state pay for their kids through the wellfare program. If you want to go to school to be retrained then do it quit doing nothing but laying around and playing video games. You are not entitled to months off after being laid off. You are not entitled to the state taking care of your family. You only get what you work for so get off your ass and get a job!!!

I don't agree with that. I am not a SAHM but I don't think that SAHMs should automatically get the title of "Maid." While they should take it upon themselves to handle a bit more of the housework as much as they can, I don't think it should be their sole responsibility. Taking care of kids is a lot of work and that's what they do all day... hence to the term stay at home MOM.

It's no different from having an outside job and sharing the housework with your partner. I still think some of the housework should be shared.

I don't think a SAHM taking care of kids all day AND being responsible for the housework vs. a working dad solely responsible for his 9-5 duties is equal amounts of work at all.

ETA: wording

I agree with Mel here. I may not have children of my own yet, but I have had a toddler stay with us overnight on occasion. Do you know how much work it was trying to keep up with a two year old!? I think the house was messier at the end of the day than when I started! Toys everywhere, cheerios out on the table...keeping up with an on the go child is very time consuming. Sure, there was nap time, but that lasted only two hours. Two hours is not enough time to clean the entire house, do laundry, and get dinner ready to go. Even trying to just put him in the pack and play to try to pick up toys and some of the mess we made didn't work when he started throwing a temper tantrum. While I agree that more of the housework will fall on a SAHM, I certainly don't think that the husband/father should be completely off the hook.

THIS THIS THIS. When my nephews stay here, there's sh!t all over the place and they're even really well behaved kids. It just gets messy when they want to play. How do you get housework done?! And then playing referee and dealing with crying and time outs and 'He took my toooyyyyy!!!" is very time consuming.

AGREE to both of you!

Everyone can flame me if they want but I plan on being a SAHM AND DH already said he fully intends to keep the cleaning lady we have 2x a month as well.

Being a SAHM is a full time job, to take care of your child. Yes, there is housework involved and I will do some cleaning and I'll have dinner on the table. But if I didn't want to pay attention to my child during the day because I was too busy cleaning and keeping the house spotless then I may as well stay in my office job and get paid for it.

BlueEyeZ1981 · June 2011

melissa721:
bostonbluejay:
melissa721:
BlueEyeZ1981:

I think that Stay at Home Moms have the responsibility to care for the home completely. They should have dinner cooked and on the table when their husbands get home. The house should always be clean and their children should be well prepared for kindergarten. If they don't do these things then they are lazy and ungreatfull for the ability to stay at home.

My husbands friends that are currently unemployeed need to put the video games down and get a #$(* job. They are instead having the state pay for their kids through the wellfare program. If you want to go to school to be retrained then do it quit doing nothing but laying around and playing video games. You are not entitled to months off after being laid off. You are not entitled to the state taking care of your family. You only get what you work for so get off your ass and get a job!!!

I don't agree with that. I am not a SAHM but I don't think that SAHMs should automatically get the title of "Maid." While they should take it upon themselves to handle a bit more of the housework as much as they can, I don't think it should be their sole responsibility. Taking care of kids is a lot of work and that's what they do all day... hence to the term stay at home MOM.

It's no different from having an outside job and sharing the housework with your partner. I still think some of the housework should be shared.

I don't think a SAHM taking care of kids all day AND being responsible for the housework vs. a working dad solely responsible for his 9-5 duties is equal amounts of work at all.

ETA: wording

I agree with Mel here. I may not have children of my own yet, but I have had a toddler stay with us overnight on occasion. Do you know how much work it was trying to keep up with a two year old!? I think the house was messier at the end of the day than when I started! Toys everywhere, cheerios out on the table...keeping up with an on the go child is very time consuming. Sure, there was nap time, but that lasted only two hours. Two hours is not enough time to clean the entire house, do laundry, and get dinner ready to go. Even trying to just put him in the pack and play to try to pick up toys and some of the mess we made didn't work when he started throwing a temper tantrum. While I agree that more of the housework will fall on a SAHM, I certainly don't think that the husband/father should be completely off the hook.

THIS THIS THIS. When my nephews stay here, there's sh!t all over the place and they're even really well behaved kids. It just gets messy when they want to play. How do you get housework done?! And then playing referee and dealing with crying and time outs and 'He took my toooyyyyy!!!" is very time consuming.

My experience comes from SHAM's that sit on their butt and do nothing all day not even clean up after their kids. If the mom is taking an active roll in activities with the kids then no they don't need to take on everything. I agree with that the husband shouldn't be let completely off the hook. I could have worded things a little bit differently for better understanding. My real issue is with stay at home mom's that are lazy and don't do a dang thing.

MrsDixie · June 2011

kdodge423:
megemoney:

kdodge423:
bostonbluejay:

Ugh, this one might get me in trouble...but here goes. I, personally, think co-sleeping with babies/kids is a bad idea. ::hides under desk::

I'm curious what your issue is with the baby being in the same room? Because that is co-sleeping.

In the same bed is bed sharing. They are two completely different things.

(Thank you for the clarification Kdodge!) Bed-sharing with infants scares me. Seems very dangerous to me, although I know that there are co-sleeping/bed-sharing devices so that you can do it more safely. Still highly doubt I will do it.

It's one of those things that gets tossed around like they are the same thing. But truly, there are differences.

Bed sharing can be done safely- but there are a lot of steps and precautions that should be taken. Many people don't, and unfortunately that is why you hear the horror stories about bed sharing.

I agree with KDodge. When done correctly, co-sleeping (whether in the same room OR the same bed) actually REDUCES the risk of SIDS. I recommend this book for anyone who is interested in infant sleep studies.

https://www.amazon.com/Sleeping-Your-Baby-Parents-Cosleeping/dp/1930775342

Bubbalub · June 2011

I'm REALLY late to this thread and it's probably totally dead already, but I've been meaning to say this for a couple weeks now.

I think it's gross when posters include a picture of their pee stick in their BFP post. Dude, I believe you, you don't need to show me "proof" of your positive. I get that you're excited and all but no one besides myself and maybe H is ever going to lay eyes on something I've peed on like that. *shudder*

muppetwedding · June 2011

If that's how you want to live your life fine but obviously you don't see men and women as equals because you're saying there's some things only women can do and men have no place doing.

lukesliebe · June 2011

I think that choosing to have meds during your delivery doesn't make you a "bad" mom or that having a natural birth makes you a "good" mom. I don't think that it's wrong to have medication to help ease the pain. In fact they may actually help since you'll be able to push more effectively when some of the pain is reduced. I'm not trying to slam those mothers who choose to go natural but rather that women who use meds shouldn't feel ashamed. It's entirely up to the mom either way and whatever she feels is best for her and her new baby.

KdgTeacher · June 2011

lukesliebe:

I think that choosing to have meds during your delivery doesn't make you a "bad" mom or that having a natural birth makes you a "good" mom. I don't think that it's wrong to have medication to help ease the pain. In fact they may actually help since you'll be able to push more effectively when some of the pain is reduced. I'm not trying to slam those mothers who choose to go natural but rather that women who use meds shouldn't feel ashamed. It's entirely up to the mom either way and whatever she feels is best for her and her new baby.

Those same pain meds ( at least the epi) can actually slow/stall labor. From what I've read on the NB board, pushing itself does help with pain as it channels pain/energy into something positive/productive. But then again, I've never been in labor, so what do I really know?

DChunt09 · June 2011

KdgTeacher:
lukesliebe:

I think that choosing to have meds during your delivery doesn't make you a "bad" mom or that having a natural birth makes you a "good" mom. I don't think that it's wrong to have medication to help ease the pain. In fact they may actually help since you'll be able to push more effectively when some of the pain is reduced. I'm not trying to slam those mothers who choose to go natural but rather that women who use meds shouldn't feel ashamed. It's entirely up to the mom either way and whatever she feels is best for her and her new baby.
Those same pain meds ( at least the epi) can actually slow/stall labor. From what I've read on the NB board, pushing itself does help with pain as it channels pain/energy into something positive/productive. But then again, I've never been in labor, so what do I really know?

I've been in labor and what Kdg said is correct for some women. Ultimately, everyone will handle it differently.

mchupie · June 2011

BlueEyeZ1981:

I think that Stay at Home Moms have the responsibility to care for the home completely. They should have dinner cooked and on the table when their husbands get home. The house should always be clean and their children should be well prepared for kindergarten. If they don't do these things then they are lazy and ungreatfull for the ability to stay at home.

I really hate to pull out the "just wait until you're a Mom" card here, but I think it's necessary.

When Carina was 2 months old, there were some days I would have to wait 3 hours to be able to pee. I wouldn't be able to eat for 6 hours. I was lucky if I had time to throw something in the crockpot or do a load of laundry in between fits of screaming and poop explosions.

I'm currently working full time until we move in the Fall, then I'm going to be a SAHM indefinitely. I can't imagine how hard it will be to SAH with multiple kids...but I can't wait to experience it

bellablue2 · June 2011

KdgTeacher:
lukesliebe:

I think that choosing to have meds during your delivery doesn't make you a "bad" mom or that having a natural birth makes you a "good" mom. I don't think that it's wrong to have medication to help ease the pain. In fact they may actually help since you'll be able to push more effectively when some of the pain is reduced. I'm not trying to slam those mothers who choose to go natural but rather that women who use meds shouldn't feel ashamed. It's entirely up to the mom either way and whatever she feels is best for her and her new baby.

Those same pain meds ( at least the epi) can actually slow/stall labor. From what I've read on the NB board, pushing itself does help with pain as it channels pain/energy into something positive/productive. But then again, I've never been in labor, so what do I really know?

I have heard that it can go both ways. If a woman is in extreme pain they cant relax and progress. Once they get the meds it will help them progress since they relaxed. But, I have also heard some women say the complete opposite happened for them. Once they got the meds it hindered their progression. I had meds with both and for me personally it helped me progress. I think it just depends on the person and their body. I will say there are a select few (my sil's) who went natural and tried to make me feel bad about having meds. They can kiss my lily white a#$! Big Smile

lauranicole91 · June 2011

NJtoMD2011:
I think it's a bit ridic that some of my married friends keep their money fiercely separate from each other - as in writing each other checks for "their half" of the mortgage. I understand that it makes them feel like they can spend "their" money as they see fit, but I find that these are the couples that openly fight about money the most (in my experience). My husband and I take the combine and conquer approach.

My thoughts exactly. I just don't understand the point. We combine and conquer as well.

lauranicole91 · June 2011

Myrtis06:
BN+JL2010:
I believe that women do belong in the home and should be submissive to their husbands. There, I said it. ::running for cover now::
If I could stay home I totally would. I would love to be a housewife!! Sure, I might get a little bored but it's where I would prefer to be. Hopefully someday!

^^^this

lauranicole91 · June 2011

lycih:
lauranicole91:
ashcurious:
I do not think infants should have pierced ears. Parents should wait at least till they are 8 at least.

I agree! I know a family friend who had her ears pierced as a baby and the earring got caught in the netting of her play pen. Babies should never have to go through the pain of an earring ripping though their ear lobe just because Mommy thought it looked cute to have their ears pierced!
I don't think this is always the reason behind it. In some cases it's completely cultural. I haven't decided what I would do, but my mom had all of the girls (3 of us) ears pierced as infants. Her reasoning was if she did it before we even knew we had ears, we would have them all healed up before we knew the difference. Her words: "Every time you change a diaper, just clean the ears" So, she never dealt with us pulling on them or trying to rip them out, or getting caught on anything because we were literally days old when it was done. And, I didn't wear earrings at all from about... 4 until I was about 13, and they didn't close up because they'd already been healed for years before I stopped wearing them.
Again, I haven't decided what I would do, but I don't think it's always a "ooo, pretty" reason behind it.

True. Good point. It was a bit rude for my to assume that's the only reason mothers do it. I guess because I have heard one horror story it just scares me.

macchiatto · June 2011

annerz22:
melissa721:
bostonbluejay:
melissa721:
BlueEyeZ1981:

I think that Stay at Home Moms have the responsibility to care for the home completely. They should have dinner cooked and on the table when their husbands get home. The house should always be clean and their children should be well prepared for kindergarten. If they don't do these things then they are lazy and ungreatfull for the ability to stay at home.

My husbands friends that are currently unemployeed need to put the video games down and get a #$(* job. They are instead having the state pay for their kids through the wellfare program. If you want to go to school to be retrained then do it quit doing nothing but laying around and playing video games. You are not entitled to months off after being laid off. You are not entitled to the state taking care of your family. You only get what you work for so get off your ass and get a job!!!

I don't agree with that. I am not a SAHM but I don't think that SAHMs should automatically get the title of "Maid." While they should take it upon themselves to handle a bit more of the housework as much as they can, I don't think it should be their sole responsibility. Taking care of kids is a lot of work and that's what they do all day... hence to the term stay at home MOM.

It's no different from having an outside job and sharing the housework with your partner. I still think some of the housework should be shared.

I don't think a SAHM taking care of kids all day AND being responsible for the housework vs. a working dad solely responsible for his 9-5 duties is equal amounts of work at all.

ETA: wording

I agree with Mel here. I may not have children of my own yet, but I have had a toddler stay with us overnight on occasion. Do you know how much work it was trying to keep up with a two year old!? I think the house was messier at the end of the day than when I started! Toys everywhere, cheerios out on the table...keeping up with an on the go child is very time consuming. Sure, there was nap time, but that lasted only two hours. Two hours is not enough time to clean the entire house, do laundry, and get dinner ready to go. Even trying to just put him in the pack and play to try to pick up toys and some of the mess we made didn't work when he started throwing a temper tantrum. While I agree that more of the housework will fall on a SAHM, I certainly don't think that the husband/father should be completely off the hook.

THIS THIS THIS. When my nephews stay here, there's sh!t all over the place and they're even really well behaved kids. It just gets messy when they want to play. How do you get housework done?! And then playing referee and dealing with crying and time outs and 'He took my toooyyyyy!!!" is very time consuming.

AGREE to both of you!

Everyone can flame me if they want but I plan on being a SAHM AND DH already said he fully intends to keep the cleaning lady we have 2x a month as well.

Being a SAHM is a full time job, to take care of your child. Yes, there is housework involved and I will do some cleaning and I'll have dinner on the table. But if I didn't want to pay attention to my child during the day because I was too busy cleaning and keeping the house spotless then I may as well stay in my office job and get paid for it.

As a SAHM to 2-year-old twins, I totally agree with you all.

Want a personalized experience?

Unpopular Opinion Thursday

Re: Unpopular Opinion Thursday

Choose Another Board

Search Boards

Want a personalized experience?

***Unpopular Opinion Thursday***

Re: ***Unpopular Opinion Thursday***

Choose Another Board

Search Boards

Unpopular Opinion Thursday

Re: Unpopular Opinion Thursday