Decisions, Decisions
While teasing a few Patriots fans on Facebook yesterday (Even though it may be blasphemous for me to admit this as a Steeler fan, I dislike the Pats more than I dislike the Ravens. To repeat something I said on Twitter a couple weeks ago, if the Ravens are beets — a food I thoroughly dislike, but respect — the Pats are beets…covered in sh*t), I saw something in my news feed that caught my eye.
I happen to be friends with Anslem of Naked With Socks On fame, and if you’re familiar with him at all you probably know that he’s recently married and just launched a joint blog with his wife — who’s also a writer. Anyway, the thing that caught my eye was a new post on their blog titled “My Mama or My Wife: Who’s the No. 1 Woman in a Man’s Life?” — a piece where Anslem wonders exactly how his marriage has affected the decades-old dynamic he has with his mother.
It’s funny how there are certain questions in life that you never think about until you have to. I found myself faced with one of those questions the other day:Â Who do I love more my mama or my wife?
At any other point in my life if I were posed with a question that pitted my mother against any other person, place or thing in the world and the woman who gave me life would win hands down every time. No questions asked. None needed. But recently my ability to answer such a question with absolute and immediate conviction began to waver a bit. Don’t get me wrong, I love my mother unconditionally and with all my heart but I can say similar things about my wife. Unlike the latter, though, the Mrs. is someone I chose to love. Somehow that makes this different.
Hmmm.
Now, because the loves are so drastically different, attempting to categorize the love one has for a husband or wife and the love one has for parents doesn’t seem to be possible. It’s like asking someone “Which do you need more? Water or your heart?” — both extremely vital, but both serving completely different functions.
But, the more you think about, the more you realize your answer has to be your spouse. They’re the ones you’re choosing to start a life with, the ones you vow to be with until death, the “top spot on any beneficiary form.” Basically, if your spouse doesn’t supersede all, you shouldn’t be getting married. Everything and everyone else should become secondary…including your children.
I imagine that most of you all were with me until those last three words. “Yeah, Champ. You’re right. As much as I love Mom Dukes, my wife has to be number one. Really, what’s the point of marrying someone if they don’t automatically get that number one spot, and…what? Wait? What? Kids? My wife should take priority over the people we bring into this Earth??? Can’t roll with you on this one, man”
Lemme explain.
I think that the best families operate through a hierarchical matrix that goes something like this:
Parents, as a collective unit and as individual people, should value their kids lives over their own. Their primary duty as parents is to protect and provide for the people they’ve created, and if they were forced to make a choice between their lives — individually or as a collective parental unit — or their children’s lives, it should be a no-brainer.
But, the parents as individuals should love and value each other more than they do their children.
You know I can’t make a point without including some contrived analogy that actually ends up confusing more than it clarifies, so…
Let’s imagine a four person family (two parents, two kids) was on the Titanic. The ship is sinking, and there’s only room on the lifeboat for two people. In this situation, the parents should definitely put the kids in the lifeboat — sacrificing their collective lives for the lives of their children.
Now, let’s say you’re on that same sinking ship, and you were knocked off the boat, but the sea current miraculously led you to the shore. Once you get out the water, you glance off the shore and see that your spouse and your young child are in the water behind you, struggling to stay afloat. You can only save one, though. In this situation, as heart-wrenching and devastating as this decision may be, you reach down and save your spouse…even if your spouse doesn’t want to be the one to be saved.
The (somewhat morbid) rationale behind this? If you believe your spouse was put on Earth to be your spouse, they’re irreplaceable. (And, if you don’t believe this, you probably shouldn’t be getting married…but that’s another topic for another day.) Your kids, as precious as they are, aren’t as irreplaceable. (I hate the way that sentence sounds, but there’s really no other way to put it.)
Heh. I just had a vision that, years (YEARS, I TELL YOU. YEARS!!!¹) from now, some precocious little big-headed boy that (hopefully) looks more like his mother than me will be googling his daddy’s name, searching for any information he can find on me. He’ll come across this article, read the entire thing (because he’s a smart motherf*cker just like his dad), frown, find me sitting on the couch, and ask “Is it true that you’d let me die.”
Me: “Ummm…well…ummm”
Champ Jr (CJ): “That’s ok Dad. I understand. That’s what you’re supposed to do. When I get a wife someday, I’ll let you die too.”
Me: “I taught you well and sh*t, son. I taught you well and sh*t.”Â
¹Knocking on wood
—Damon Young (aka “The Champ”)
ehhhhhhh I’d never save anyone before saving my kids. But I agree with everything else.
I mean realistically, if I had to choose between my husband and my 2 kids, I’d die trying to save them all. But I agree, the spouse comes first, but if you both love your children the way you should, there will never be a time where you’d have to choose between your spouse and your kids.
Like
But I agree, the spouse comes first, but if you both love your children the way you should, there will never be a time where you’d have to choose between your spouse and your kids.
we all hope not and sh*t
Yeah, didn’t work too well for my father, but I guess that’s what happens when you marry a b*tch. He’s had to tell her multiple times that if she makes him choose between her and us , we win every time. And in all fairness, we were here first and we’ll be here long after they divorce. She’s wife #3. Hope she didn’t think she won a special prize or nothing.
A real man won’t wait for you to save him. He should be trying to save the kids or saving you, depending on his choice. lol
I like this!
“A real man won’t wait for you to save him. He should be trying to save the kids or saving you, depending on his choice. ” Powerful statement, I completely and wholeheartedly agree. This is the difference between an Alpha male (not to be confused with the fraternity) and a regular dude.
“This is the difference between an Alpha male (not to be confused with the fraternity) and a regular dude.”
actually, if we’re going to use the strictest definition of “alpha,” an alpha male might be more likely to make sure he’s alright first than any other type of guy.
” actually, if we’re going to use the strictest definition of “alpha,†an alpha male might be more likely to make sure he’s alright first than any other type of guy.”
And I don’t disgree. He has to get himself straightened out before he goes to save his woman or his children!
An alpha male usually will have multiple offspring by multiple women. Alpha males make sure their DNA proliferates. They wont die, not when there are more women to impregnate and make more babies with. Its women who have a finite number of offspring they can bear and cant afford to lose one.
” An alpha male usually will have multiple offspring by multiple women. Alpha males make sure their DNA proliferates. They wont die, not when there are more women to impregnate and make more babies with. Its women who have a finite number of offspring they can bear and cant afford to lose one.”
So true. Yet another reason I consider the wife replaceable…I mean, if it comes down to it and sh*t
Alpha men value being immediate rescuers of their family in emergencies and protecting the primary family unit. No comment on his alleged extracurricular activities.
His priority would be the continuation of the family name, the family DNA…that would be saving the male of the species. He would likely deem the females replaceable…IJS
this reminds me … it’s weird to me and a little disconcerting when i see married people talk more about their kids, and reference their spouse as an afterthought. (i’m not saying you’re doing this; the thought just came when i read this comment & some of the others). the spouse is your life partner! they should come first. they’re the foundation upon which you build your family, kids and all.
I think that talking about your kids more than your spouse isn’t evidence that your spouse isn’t #1 in your life. I think some people are just fascinated that those human beings that came out of their body are doing what babies/kids do. Sometimes though, this behavior is a coping mechanism. Who knows what has shifted in the relationship that one spouse just focuses on the children. Not to say that’s how it should be ideally, but realistically, people go through phases and experiences during a marriage. Also, sometimes, people avoid talking about their spouse because they feel the conversation will be dull or they feel they’d be hijacking the conversation. Not everyone wants to hear about your spouse, they want to hear about you. Or they get in the habit of asking about the kids and not the spouse.
” Basically, if your spouse doesn’t supersede all, you shouldn’t be getting married. Everything and everyone else should become secondary…including your children.”
This didn’t need explanation. I agree. Ok, going back to read your explanation anyway. lol
“This didn’t need explanation.”
lol, apparently it did
Anyone who desires to have a successful and happy marriage should put their spouse above their kids. When the husband/wife team are a happy united front then the kids automatically benefit. Making your spouse a priority over the kids doesn’t mean the children are deprived or neglected.
+1
I don’t think it’s about the kids being deprived although plenty of parents choose their lover over the kids and the kids definitely suffer for that choice.
Kids are a blank slate and never asked to be in this world. If you make them, they own your life. It’s that simple, you owe it to the kids you create to give your life to them until they are able to move ahead on their own..otherwise what was the point of having a kid?
” Kids are a blank slate and never asked to be in this world. If you make them, they own your life. It’s that simple, you owe it to the kids you create to give your life to them until they are able to move ahead on their own..otherwise what was the point of having a kid?”
Exactly. Wit so many “very smart people” saying otherwise it’s a wonder so many ppl have so many issues. Clearly a lot of ppl feel that way…smh, thank God for me havin parents that had their priorities straight
I agree. I imagine happy, satisfied, fulfilled parents should be great parents.
When the husband/wife team are a happy united front then the kids automatically benefit. Making your spouse a priority over the kids doesn’t mean the children are deprived or neglected.
***nodding head.***
Agreed. Kinda like parents are always hesitant to put their own health first when they’re overly stressed. Kids are some observant mofos. Folks may THINK they’re helping by putting everyone before themselves, but how can you help someone else if you ain’t up to par yourself?
I always use the safety instructions they give you before your flight takes off. They say put your mask on first before you try to help anybody else with theirs.
YES! Great analogy.
I guess this is why I’m never marrying because I won’t put that jerk above my kids. Too many men abandon women for me to seriously consider putting a man above children (that even includes children I might adopt).
AMEN!
The reason 50% of marriages end in divorce is because most people transform from “husband and wife” to “Dad and Mom”, after the kids are born. THIS IS WRONG!
You shouldn’t lose your identity just for the kids! I see most parents start spoiling their kids and neglecting their spouses, which is a shame…and a recipie for bratty kids and cheating husbands!
I’m late but I agree. That’s why I think newly married couples should wait at least a year before having kids.
This wuda been a good topic bout family dynamics until champ took it all the way left talkn bout desert islands, who wud u save, & all dat. Things aint that black & white. Im sorry, he jus threw me a lil bit wit dat 1. Now my thought process is all jumbled. Lol
Agreed!
Um…..Ice? Dearest. Your purposely misspelled words offend my eyes. Please, please, please, for the love of God or whatever you love, save that kind of writing for your text messages. It’s like nails on a chalkboard to read. It’s like smelling a fart in an elevator. It’s like watching a fat woman in spandex run to catch a bus.
I beg of you.
I just think of it as shorthand. *shrugs* But since you asked so nicely, i’ll do my best just for you, cougar
However, if im drunk when i post, no promises! (I usually post at midnight). Deal?
Now my thought process is all jumbled. Lol
jumble deez
Ok ok i think i hav it now. It goes God, kids, spouse, parents. In dar order.
why?
I like that God is first. With God first everything else falls into place, imo.
God First, then spouse, then kids. If you are seeking a Christ centered marriage, this is clearly established in the bible. Other than your relationship with Christ, nothing should be more important than your marriage (i.e. spouse). That includes offspring, jobs, parents, friends, frat, money, etc. etc. etc. So often this order gets screwed up which is where most of the problems. Keep in mind that having priorities doesnt mean you just completely neglect the other things that are important.
“You can only save one, though. In this situation, as heart-wrenching and devastating as this decision may be, you reach down and save your spouse…even if your spouse doesn’t want to be the one to be saved.”
Okay “I-Robot” aka Champ (LMAO), NO, wrong rationale. I don’t feel like explaining right now. I agree spouse over children but not in this kind of example. I’ll give examples in the morning. lol you’re funny.
I kno rite! Dramatic much? Lmfao
Okay “I-Robot†aka Champ (LMAO), NO, wrong rationale
lol, that was a good one. very appropriate and sh*t
Actually, it goes God, Spouse, Kids, then Parents.
All the lonely a$$ women be the ones putting kids before their spouse. Sooner or later your kids will leave the nest and you will have to find happiness, not to say that you have to find this happiness in a man but you can find it in a loving relationship with your spouse. And you don’t have to neglect your children to find love, but you have to draw lines.
However, Champ I believe your spouse would resent you if you saved her and not the child. As a man, as a husband how would you be able to explain that to a woman? Even worse than losing your wife is having a wife that resents you for the rest of your life, because you saved her life and not the child.
On the contrary it is understandable, but the psychological repercussions of such an act would be irrevocable. Leaving myself to beg the question: Would it be better if the man just risk his life to save wife and child, and die in the process?
Nonetheless, good sh!t. And NWSO is always dropping those introspective, fuzzy sock, Drake Canada Dry blogs. I need to check out the one you referenced.
Im out.
” However, Champ I believe your spouse would resent you if you saved her and not the child. As a man, as a husband how would you be able to explain that to a woman? Even worse than losing your wife is having a wife that resents you for the rest of your life, because you saved her life and not the child.”
Resent? How about divorce? Marriages that experience the death of a child have a high rate of divorce.
A mother is not going to go home with her husband after seeing he didn’t try to save their child and all she does is resent him? That ain’t happening.
Yeah IDK how I would feel if my husband saved me and not our children. Might as well kill them yourself if you don’t try to save them.
See: Janet and Malik Yoba in WDIGM
To this day, I don’t get why she didn’t try to hurt him at least, when he burned up the only photos they had of their baby.
‘All the lonely a$$ women be the ones putting kids before their spouse. Sooner or later your kids will leave the nest and you will have to find happiness”
Totally backwards arse dude logic. Every woman knows that the kids will leave the house. That’s why we raise them! Some mothers, if they do their job well, are happy that they have raised self sufficient offspring. You make it sound like the only happiness in a woman’s life is to raise kids. Raising kids is work, not some damn game. And, believe me, if you’ve raised them well you will be happy they are flourishing on their own. There is life after raising children— and it ain’t raising grandkids!
@Nillalatte
When people chop and screw my paragraph/comments, then try to make an argument based on part of what I said. Pipe Down Mama.
” ‘All the lonely a$$ women be the ones putting kids before their spouse. Sooner or later your kids will leave the nest and you will have to find happinessâ€
Totally backwards arse dude logic. ”
Oh nah, don’t put that ish on dude logic. Put that on selfish arsehole that doesn’t actually want kids’ logic. Dude’s ain’t gon ride wit him on this one lol
“Dude’s ain’t gon ride wit him on this one lol”
I beg to differ.
” I beg to differ”
I should re-phrase. Only other selfish arsehole dudes will ride with him on this one
But you’re at least considerate enough to be childless, a lot of people with your mentality aren’t…I wonder how Panama feels about this topic…
Well damn bruh!
“Actually, it goes God, Spouse, Kids, then Parents.”
+1. That is how I always looked at it. God is the only person in my life that comes before anything in my life. If you look at examples of people with marital problems, a lot of those problems stem from the spouse not being prioritize correctly. e.g. husband putting work/career before wife, wife putting kids before husband, wife and husband putting parents before their marriage, wife putting her friends before husband.
I’m not saying those things are not important but you have to choose to treat the person you love as the most important person in the world to you. You have to be willing to put them first.
Kids grow up and the couple that put the kids first b/f their spouse are the ones wondering (at their 25th wedding anniversary) how they grew so far apart. They are also the ones that sleep in separate rooms. lol.
Uhm, happiness comes from within. You don’t need anything or anyone outside of you to experience joy. Putting that kind of unspoken burden on a child or spouse, as if they are a court jester (not what you said at all Hallway, it’s just my choice of words), is just wrong IMHO — and sets you up for possible disappointment. And what happens if your spouse becomes terminally ill or your child is born with a condition that requires more care from you than your “happiness quota” will allow? Not to hop on a soapbox but as someone married with children I’m just not following your logic.
“However, Champ I believe your spouse would resent you if you saved her and not the child”
yeah, i know. it kind of reminds me of that scene in Crash with wet wipes and thandie newton. it’s like, wtf are you supposed to do?
Beat the cops ass. She will visit you in jail and stay loyal because she’s just as down as you!
lol, there would have been no beating cop’s asses that night. the next time she saw him would have been in the morgue.
” lol, there would have been no beating cop’s asses that night. the next time she saw him would have been in the morgue.”
I actually gotta ride with Champ on this one. Not the same situation. This is actually a much tougher decision for me, but I guess I’d….sheesh. I don’t know what the hell I would do. But in the situation from the post, it’s a no-brainer I’d take the kid. Adults are replaceable.
She would become a widow.
Not me… I’d say “Good looking out baby.” Go home fix that man a sammich and a cold beer and then sign us up for some couples counseling.
But there may be a reason why I don’t have children. LOL
I like your style! Lol. Can you make it Steel Reserve??
“Sooner or later your kids will leave the nest”
And so will your spouse. Look at the high divorce rates and the increasing number of women who are abandoned by their spouses. At least children come back most of the time.
” And so will your spouse. Look at the high divorce rates and the increasing number of women who are abandoned by their spouses. ”
That’s what I’m sayin. The spell fades after the first 5-10 years. By year 15 most people can barely tolerate each other, and often find other ppl they like better (thus all affairs that tend to put the last nail in the coffin). I can’t even see how a chick could respect a man that took her and let his daughter or son drown. I know I wouldn’t respect him…
Um, hell no. A spouse can be replaced. People do that all day erday. Maybe because you don’t have kids or because you aren’t married or whatever, but your kids come before anyone else. Always. Period. No one else or anything else matters.
Now, that said, back in the day, that’s why people used to have large families. Both my grandmothers came from a family with 12 siblings. Most died in childhood. Few lived to be over 50. They had big families back in the day because mortality was horrid. They knew they’d lose children and if an adult made it to 40 they were considered very old and damn lucky.
I can’t imagine one, not one incident where I would have chosen my husband (when I was married) over the survival of my children. You on your own bro. Better get those Rambo skills in order ’cause I’m gonna leave yo’ butt hanging in the wind. Can’t cut it? You ARE the weakest link. Next.
And thats why you are no longer married. Fail!
Wrong. Because HE was the failure. Since you don’t know it’s best you go on about your business.
“Um, hell no. A spouse can be replaced. People do that all day erday. Maybe because you don’t have kids or because you aren’t married or whatever, but your kids come before anyone else. Always. Period. No one else or anything else matters.”
+1 They’re really makin my face scrunch up with some of these justifications for choosin the spouse…smh. It’s actually a no-brainer to me…
Im guessing yall dont have a family. Or arent happily married.
I do have a family and was married. Why I am no longer married is easy to explain. He is an arsehole who did arsehole shyt and got his arse kicked to the curb.
In the circle of life, the offspring are the ones the parents are supposed to protect and fight for, not their spouse.
You almost make me want to marry you.
lol @ Nillalette- I know right. I definitely gained newfound respect for you after reading your initial response. These folks tryna make me feel like I’m the crazy one. My parents been married for almost 40 years and I GUARANTEE you that they’d both choose the kids first. I would make a joke about why white kids turn out better just based off these answers but I’ll resist the urge lol….smh tho
It irks me that so many people put their partners before their children and it can be unbelievably detrimental to the children’s well being (or should I say lack of). It’s also incredibly selfish to think that your spouse comes before your kids- why? because you’re afraid of being alone? BS!!!
CHILDREN DON’T ASK TO BE BORN! They have no say in the matter, nor do they have a say in who their parent is. Sadly so many people have kids and put them last- it’s not fair. Children are innocent, pure and need to be protected. Women putting their husbands first is one of the key reasons why so many children witness their mothers being abused and are abused themselves. It’s the reason why so many children grow up resenting their parents and end up having no relationship with them. Your child should never come last in your life, if they do, you’ll suffer the implications and frankly you deserve to.
Reading this post made my want to scream! #SELFISHNESS
“Um, hell no. A spouse can be replaced. People do that all day erday.”
and most of those people shouldnt have been married in the first place.
in an ideal situation — not the b.s. many of us find ourselves in — the spouse should be number one.
+1
spouse before kids. cuz ya know, you should have a spouse before kids. oops, stepped on a few toes…
SHOTS FIRED!!!
” and most of those people shouldnt have been married in the first place.
in an ideal situation — not the b.s. many of us find ourselves in — the spouse should be number one.”
1) The ppl that would choose the spouse shouldn’t have had kids in the first place….
2) How many ninjas you know live in an ideal world? Cause I need to find them and take notes.
“A spouse can be replaced.”
Checkmate.
In the swimming to safety scenario, such a decision would cost you your whole family! Why? Because your wife/mother of your child will not let you save her! She will be fighting you to try to get to her baby to save her baby’s life!
I was with you up until you mucked up your decision making capabilities while swimming from a sinking ship to safety!
“I was with you up until you mucked up your decision making capabilities while swimming from a sinking ship to safety!”
LOL, i didn’t swim. i was knocked off the boat, and the current carried me to shore
lmao
And note: Her fighting you to try to get to her baby means the whole family gonna die, especially if you let her child die, she will kill you for not saving the baby. Come on now Champ.
why the whole family gotta die?
Whole fam, B.
the kid, the dog, everybody dying!!
But I’m mos def saving the wife. The kids gon leave you as soon as they get the chance. The little hustlers probably already plotting to put you in the cheapest nursing home, furthest away from their state!!
Other side note: Your child could be 11 years old and the size of a grown man. He will always be her baby. And she will have your azz if you try to save her while the baby is struggling in the water.
other side note: this is why negros need to learn how to swim!
LOL… but true though.
The real tragedy in this scenario is the man-sized 11 year old lol. Growth hormones are the damn devil! Making all our children impossible to pull to shore because they’re all 6’2 with a goattee and a prison tat.
*lmao* Sidenote: I don’t know why in the hell she let her child get a tattoo as the only means to remember his sister who passed. What’s she gonna do if her baby gets Hep C?
Yeah, I read that story too. I was flabbergasted. The worst was all the women coming to the mother’s defense. ‘Oh, it’s sweet he wants to remember his brother!’ Lol, yes, sweet. Sweet and permanent and damned trashy.
I agree with you…though that really is a terrible analogy!
For me, it’s not so much that I think your spouse is irreplaceable – though I get your point – but rather, I believe that children do better when raised in families where mommy and daddy really loved and respected each other, versus families where “I know mom and dad loved me, but I’m not so sure how they felt about each other.”
A parents job is to protect and care for their children, a spouses job is to love and honour the other.
A parents job is to protect and care for their children, a spouses job is to love and honour the other.
good way to put it
“I believe that children do better when raised in families where mommy and daddy really loved and respected each other, versus families where “I know mom and dad loved me, but I’m not so sure how they felt about each other.—
*nodding head*
If by default, one suggests that your spouse is more important than your kids, what is a man supposed to do in a Michael Corleone situation, where his wife has decided to go rogue, and is aborting sons because she doesn’t agree with the legacy that is being built: do you either nod in agreement, break up the family business and stay with her, or do you slap her in the face, kick her out the house and say f**k off and then try to make up 30 yrs later? Hmmm, I know what you’re thinking, that’s probably why none of you have Coopola as a last name, nor the millions in the bank either.
A marriage isn’t about sacrifice, it’s about legacy. It’s about passing down ideas that are carried on from one generation to the next; unlike human beings, who are mortal, ideas are ever lasting. Legacy is more important than the individuals in a family, and people who have successful marriages understand that and live it, this is why in ancient African cultures, dishonor was the worse thing you could bring to a family because it meant you had tarnished the legacy of the family.
If you want to have a successful marriage, put the legacy of the marriage ahead of your spouse and kids and embrace that. Isn’t it ironic when legacy was attached to the word marriage, people stayed together much longer and marriage was viewed with optimism and as an act of spiritual enlightenment, however, ever since sacrifice became associated with marriage, marriage has continued to walk down the path towards perdition?
+1000
as a person who regularly employs awful analogies, I have to say kudos.
in the corleones situation, they were clearly a mismatch. not soulmates, not even really partners, just two people in a effed up, loveless marriage. in a situation like that, your kids definitely come first.
like i mentioned upthread, though, the situation i’m referring to is the ideal. and, in an ideal marriage, the marriage supersedes all
Soulmates or not, that has nothing to do with legacy. The legacy of the Corleone family, whether it was positive or negative, was about power in the arenas of politics, business and law. Kay didn’t want to be a part of it – that life disgusted her and it eventually led to her presenting Michael with a choice of either destroying the whole legacy of his family or taking her and his kids and driving into the sunset. If he had taken her side, his family would’ve grown weak, he would’ve been prey to all past enemies, he would’ve most likely been murdered and at the very least Kay would’ve raised the children all by herself.
Now I’m not saying that the legacy of the Corleone family was admirable, neither am I saying it was a good example of what a marriage should be, the point is that the goal of a marriage, the goal of a union is far more important than the actual individuals in it. If the goal is to have kids who go to college and change the economic circumstances of the family, that goal is more important than the lives of the spouses. People don’t get married because of simply love, contrary to popular belief, most people have been in love with other people before they got married, they just like to rationalize those past loves as moments of lust or passion, because they don’t want to accept that love wasn’t enough to make those past relationships a success. People get married to accomplish a goal, and the fact that most people no longer embrace that concept is why marriage as an institution is in shambles today.
Again, +1000
No, no, no. Kids are totally irreplaceable. Our DNA will never combine that way again to make this unique individual.
Any good spouse will not let you save them over their kids. I’d be mad as shit when I found out you let my son/daughter die instead me.
Any good spouse will not let you save them over their kids. I’d be mad as shit when I found out you let my son/daughter die instead me.
you’ll get over it
See, Champ, you placing little value on the kids lives and that is disturbing to me. In most marriages, when children die the marriage breaks apart. I don’t know why this phenomenon occurs, but my guess is it would be exactly the reasons stated here: one parent values the lives of the children over the life of the spouse, and can’t understand why the other didn’t save that child.
A parents love is a pure and deep love, if you are any type of parent at all. A true parent will always sacrifice themselves for their children.
“See, Champ, you placing little value on the kids lives and that is disturbing to me.”
i dont know how saying that i value my wife above all others means that i place little value on the lives of my children
“A parents love is a pure and deep love, if you are any type of parent at all. A true parent will always sacrifice themselves for their children”
i think though, that there is a difference between the people that you love (your kids, your parents), and the one you are IN love with (your spouse)…perhaps that bond with the one you love, superseeds that bond with those that you love.
Man, it’s sad seeing how many of yall have fell for this chick flick logic. You’re gonna take the life of someone YOU created and who YOU are responsible for just cause you don’t wanna be lonely, or just because you saw enough love movies to think your wife actually comes before your own damn children?! How often do we hear about people falling out of love. That type of “in love” feeling is a drug. It actually releases the same chemicals in people’s brains that many illegal drugs release. So essentially you’re choosing drugs over your kids…d*mn black people smh lol
Drugs over kids? Lmao @ the conclusion u made. Lmao
Yes! Agreed.
Many marriages break up with the death of a child because men are least likely to get grief counseling and it spills over to the marriage. Men feel powerless when they see that kind of pain in their wife’s face and they feel powerless to have prevented the tragedy from happening. I highly doubt that *most* men value children’s lives less than their wife does.
*instead of me
When it comes to decision making/an argument/daddy said no/should we just let them drink in the house (kidding) the parents should always be a united front. You take your spouse’s side, you have their back before ANYONE else. Yes, your spouse should come first UNLESS you have to save a life. I can’t let my babies die like that.
***note to self: Marry someone who knows how to swim***
***note to self: Marry someone who knows how to swim***
^ LOL basically.
I was just thinking that! Make sure everyone in the whole dang family can swim…exceedingly well. Then we can all save ourselves or at least the parents can save 1 child each.
What a warped analogy, Champ. No bueno. There is no either or more. Each situation requires different types of loving & prioritizing. Hopefully your spouse, your children & loved ones can dance gracefully w/you through those.
And MOST importantly, don’t cruise on the dang Titanic w/your precious family. Seriously, research ahead & come up w/plans w/the whole family around safety. Then you know you did all you could do before & during.
Again, don’t put your family on a sinking ship, Champ! It ain’t right! Haha!
“Marry someone who knows how to swim”
or, if you’re like me and you cant swim, stay the hell off cruise ships
@Champ and LEARN how to swim ASAP!
De-lurking to say that I think that it’s generally a good idea for spouses to value each other a smidgen more than they do their kids in everyday life (you never hear ppl complaining that their parents loved each other too much and they felt left out), BUT in a life and death situation, children always come first! You brought them into the world and you owe it to them to do everything you can to keep them alive.
“(you never hear ppl complaining that their parents loved each other too much and they felt left out)”
yeah, i don’t think i’ve ever heard that either
I’m sorry but this is the order in my book..
person who brought YOU into this world<person you brought into YOUR world< person YOU brought into THE world.
no question…
"If you believe your spouse was put on Earth to be your spouse, they’re irreplaceable."..choosing your children over your soulmate is just another one of those selfless acts you have to make once you become a parent.
person who brought YOU into this world
i like the way you put that. still disagree, though
I want to agree with you, but for me it’s God, children, spouse, parents. The love I have for my kids supersedes everyone else.
I think it’s different for a husband and wife. A wife probably 9 of 10 times will save the kids. A husband will be more likely to save the wife and the wife will make his ass go back out there. And he will.
“I think it’s different for a husband and wife. A wife probably 9 of 10 times will save the kids. A husband will be more likely to save the wife and the wife will make his ass go back out there. And he will.”
interesting point. basically, women dont give a damn about our asses?
We care quite a boatload (no pun intended) about your a$$es. But, not as much as your momma does. Hence, that’s why the our children will be saved first. As soon as the babies are safe, we want you to be safe. In a perfect world, if the children’s safety is number 1, your safety is 1.2. I’ll die a dozen deaths for my sons. I’ll take a bullet for the man that I love and am married to.
” interesting point. basically, women dont give a damn about our asses?”
If my wife saved me over my child, I’d never be able to respect her afterwards…we’d get divorced….seriously, the kids are first priority in financial situations and life or death situations. When it comes to everyday attention and ish like that the wife comes first (no pun intended). Seriously though, women are right to feel that way. No matter how lovestruck you are, the two of you can and will get over it if you were forced to lose your spouse. I’d never get over sacrificing my d*mn kid for some (optional) obligation to a marriage
No true. And I don’t care how it makes me sound… I’d save my husband.
Man im 30 yrs old & dats why my mother & i rarely speak to this day, cuz she put her new hubby before us (me & my bros) when i wuz 17. Hurt me so bad, lost sooo much respect 4 her. Now im a mother & i wud neva put ANY ninja b4 my child. NEVA HAPPEN!!!
Thats because its just some random ninja, not your soul mate and babys father
You’re 30? I was guessing like 22 from the writing. #noshade
play nice
how you gonna say #noshade, when you’re clearly throwing shade. lol
No, really! That’s the style these young people use today. Im not saying its bad, I just hate it like death. But that’s cause im old, see? Just thought only people under 25 use that ….shorthand.
I take offense to “these young people”. Lol
#BEPC!
Came out of lurking to give you a high-five…this ‘shorthand’ is unacceptable..
lol. the idea that you put your spouse above your kids assumes your souse IS your kids’ father.
it’s not talking about a random dude.
I went through something similar with my mother. Unless your mother allowed this man to abuse you and your brothers, you should really try to let go of the resentment. Seriously. When I look back at the time where my mother and I didn’t speak, I realized that I know my mother loves me and I should love her enough to allow her to enjoy her life.
If mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody gonna be happy in the household. When men realize this, they will be able to make the best decision in emergency situations and real life situations.
I know some women who were hotter than fish grease when their husband picked the kids to their neglect.
” I know some women who were hotter than fish grease when their husband picked the kids to their neglect.”
What the h*ll did they expect?! Man, I swear people have an exaggerated idea of the value of romantic love. Of course the husband would choose the kid(s). Yall some selfish arse mofos. I wonder how people from different parts of the world would answer this question…I’m so close to giving up on Americans in terms of marriage that I can’t even say that as a joke anymore. It’s becoming how I really feel…Too many chick flicks done ruined all our men and women…smh
Jstme, I’m talking about the wife upset because he and the kids are tight but exclude her. She is on the sidelines pouting, eating dinners alone, left out the videogames , left out the fun. Lol
Champ – you’re looking at it wrong. You don’t save your wife because she is irreplaceable, you save her so she can help you save your kids. The same as on an airplane; you put the mask on yourself(capable adults) first. Just a thought.
hmmm. perhaps. that’s not the point i was trying to make, but i guess i see where you’re going with that
Exactly. And sometimes you cant save all the kids. But if you can save only 3 kids and the spouse or 4 kids and no spouse, always pick spouse. Someone has to raise the kids.
Wow. Well this pretty much flies in the face of all the folks who are proud of themselves for loving their kids more than the other parent.
~~~”Champ Jr (CJ): “That’s ok Dad. I understand. That’s what you’re supposed to do. When I get a wife someday, I’ll let you die too.â€
LOL
And if the universe ever provided someone that infinitely special to me, and allowed me to marry him, AND he felt the same about me, that would just seal it. Life would be perfect.
young cj is wise beyond his years and sh*t
*those who love their kids more than they love the other patent of their kids.
Thanks for the love, Champ….
I’m with you on the interpretation and without a doubt the wife gets the No. 1 spot. In a morbid sense you’re guaranteed more time with her (if you’re lucky) than you are with a parent.
As for the choosing spouse over kids, though, think you’re off base because no parent wants to outlive their child. Parents role is to protect their child so that would include saving their life before your spouse. It’s like when you fly in an airplane, you secure your mask before you assist any other helpless passengers which would likely be a child over an adult.
“As for the choosing spouse over kids, though, think you’re off base because no parent wants to outlive their child”
i agree that outliving your child is probably a parent’s worse nightmare. but, i just think spousal duties supersede parental ones.
I think you just used a bad example. Don’t let your kids die but don’t put them before your spouse. If you do it right you’re actually just teaching them how to love.
If both parties are taken care of by each other they have the energy to take care of the kids.
Better examples that don’t include death:
1) Daddy always gets the big piece of chicken no matter how grown your son thinks he is
2) Mommy always gets the last piece of cake and Daddy’s attention after a long day no matter who else needs him. They will have to wait until Mommy’s taken care of.
* But if peeps are drownin’ and shit….well, ya know. Save the babies!
Yes, I like those examples, MJoy.
Champ you could have even used these examples:
A. Your wife is an alcoholic and the household is in ruins. Do you stay while she is in rehab and have the kids go through this, or do you take the kids and leave until she cleans up her act?
B. Your mama is horrible with money. Just horrible. She is about to lose her home to foreclosure and be put on the street. Nobody in the family can take her in. You want her to move in your house. Your wife says hell no because every time they are together, your mother challenges and criticizes how your wife runs the household. Your wife gets stressed and her hair starts falling out. If you get mama an apartment, there will be no anniversary vacation in the Bahamas with your wife. What do you choose to do?
My mom and my woman are not allowed to beef to that point. If my mother constantly has something to say, she needs to be checked. IMMEDIATELY. If my wife has a habit of being confrontational with my mom, she needs to be checked. IMMEDIATELY. That’s just basic MAN 101. Keep YOUR household in order.
Excellent, Mr. Corey.
When I hear anyone say parents before spouse, I wonder how those scenerios are handed.
” Better examples that don’t include death:
1) Daddy always gets the big piece of chicken no matter how grown your son thinks he is
2) Mommy always gets the last piece of cake and Daddy’s attention after a long day no matter who else needs him. They will have to wait until Mommy’s taken care of.
* But if peeps are drownin’ and shit….well, ya know. Save the babies!”
Now see THIS ^ I can get down with. There are times when your spouse comes first, but not when it comes to life or death situations and financial needs (not wants). But in those two situations I would put the spouse first…
no spouse no kids, so I’m a non-factor to this situation
However bc I like the water (yes sistahs w/natural and relaxed and weaved hair can swim). I want both parents to know how to swim and try their best to tread water/doggy pattle hold on to some ish like Rose on Titantic, still salty she let Jack go..like scoot over, anywhoo..Be on some Survivor Instincts ish and..try your Best to save the innocent infant =first priority because he/she can’t swim/isn’t strong enough..
“no spouse no kids, so I’m a non-factor to this situation’
join the club. you still have an opinion, though
I know couples who have divorced or have problems because they put their child(ren) or parent(s) before anyone else (ex Kourtney Kardashian and everything revolves around Mason, Pageant Moms/Mommas boys). their children or one of their children =their God and they forget about the fact that they are married or in a relationship to someone with “adult needs”, forget to have date night make time for one another and have boundaries. It kinda makes people jealous of their own kids =sad
Agreed. I think this analogy takes it to the extreme. It should be more about regular life.
If you let your kids sleep in your bed with you while you let your spouse struggle to get good rest on the couch when they need to get up early for work, this is you.
If you’d rather read bedtime stories EVERY night instead of sex with your spouse, this is you.
If more than 75% of what you and your spouse discuss involves your kids, this is you.
There you have it, a loveless marriage… Or at least one that is more based on raising children than the actual love for each other you had when you took the vow to begin with.
That’s not a loveless marriage. That’s a woman avoiding dealing with a problem she’s having with her husband. Maybe he’s impotent, had affairs, sucks in bed, or gambled away their retirement money and she is pissed. Maybe he got fat and she’s turned off by how he makes love to her with a heavier frame. That’s a time to go to counseling to talk about what the real problem is. Its not reading bedtime stories to the kids everyday. You can read them a bedtime story every night and then go spend time with your husband. lol
Lol yeah I meant to say “instead of.” But my point is how some seem to use their kids as an avoidance method for talking about marital issues, or just how some don’t realize in doing this, they’re actually neglecting their spouse.
@ SweetT- See now those situations are different. I would choose the kids anyday over the spouse in Champ’s scenario, but in those situations that’s a bad spouse. I would say that person shouldn’t even be married…context is important, because in some situations I’d choose the kids first, in some situations I’d choose the spouse first…
“in some situations I’d choose the kids first, in some situations I’d choose the spouse first…”
I totally understand. I just wanted to point out other real-life everyday situations that might put things in a different perspective.
But if in your last scenario you did save your spouse and let your child drown, chances are that both of you would be so grief stricken that the marriage wouldn’t last much longer after that.
Imagine your spouse is abusing your child; does the spouse still come first? Of course not.
Children have to come first.
But parents are a very different story. They immediately lose their top spot once a person marries. Otherwise all hell will break lose the first time one partner chooses a parent over their spouse.
“Imagine your spouse is abusing your child; does the spouse still come first? Of course not.”
no. you’re referring to a less than ideal situation. in an ideal situation — which is what i’m thinking of — spousal duties come first.
Maybe 10 years ago I would have considered this post to be totally insane. However, since I’ve experienced the insanity of deep irrational love that was actually reciprocated (the reciprocity pulled me in even deeper)…comparing the importance of anyone else to that person that has your heart on lock is kind of tough.
Agreed. Saving the kids would be the “right” thing to do. But what is it like returning to life after something like that. I wouldn’t even want to live without my spouse. So there goes the quality of life for our kids, dealing with mom’s never-ending depression.
It really is. I haven’t felt what it’s like to love a child. Parents say it’s just as deep and life-changing. I pray I just never have to make that decision.
this is very presumptuous of me to say this, but i think that many (not all, but many) of the people who are quick to down play the importance of a spouse either aren’t really all that concerned with being in love or just have never experienced it. they just can’t imagine feeling that strongly about a wife/husband.
Perhaps you’re equating love with wanting to save the more helpless family members.
I would be a grieving woman if my spouse died even if my child survived. I have a working heart. I would be honored that he saved our child. And I would be devastated by the loss of my spouse and the father of my child in the sinking ship scenario.
that’s the key, champ! I’m married to the love of my life and we lost two kids. as painful as that was, I couldn’t imagine the pain of losing him instead. he comforted me and consoled me after our loss. kids can’t do that. and we have the chance to make more kids, not as replacements, but more. but where is the other him? I guarantee from reading what pop culture tells me, I’m doomed to be a lesbian if he dies. lol
DING DING DING!
You know.
TOTALLY AGREE. Married my first boyfriend, he is the love of my life. He is irreplaceable.
Let me clarify my thoughts. In a perfect world the order of things are God, husband, me, kids, and then other people. It’s a fact of life that circumstances may call for the order to vary occasionally and temporarily.
But, I won’t lie, as a mom, the safety of my sons are paramount. I will die saving them. I will love my husband for trying to save me over the kids, but I will grieve like no other. I will have wanted him to save them over me. Again, I will die a dozen deaths at the hands of a barbarian for my kids. I will take a bullet for husband, and if I happened to die from that bullet, so be it.
I can always count on you to say out loud what many of us would avoid saying (because we don’t want to get nailed by a flying shoe).
” Your kids, as precious as they are, aren’t as irreplaceable”
True. There’s millions more where that came from right? I brought you into this world and I can let you fade right on out too lol
But nah, all jokes aside the wife gotta go. The kid’s got his/her whole life ahead of him….she’s at best more replaceable and at worst as replaceable. But in an ideal scenario if one of the three of us had to go I’d hope it would be me obviously
“But nah, all jokes aside the wife gotta go.”
LOL, damn. Tell us how you really feel.
that kilt me dead too. no pun intended.
” I’m with you on the interpretation and without a doubt the wife gets the No. 1 spot. In a morbid sense you’re guaranteed more time with her (if you’re lucky) than you are with a parent.
As for the choosing spouse over kids, though, think you’re off base because no parent wants to outlive their child. Parents role is to protect their child so that would include saving their life before your spouse.”
Co-sign to the tenth power. Yall ninjas must be expectin to be head over heels in love throughout your marriage? I mean ppl stay in love, but the love changes from that type of irrational love that would let a kid die to keep the bond strong. To hell with that. “Till death do us part” right? Well, death is here, so unfortunately she’s gonna have to part….like someone else said, the marriage would be HORRIBLE after that. What yall gon do start from scratch and make some new better lookin kids? Smh, I wonder how many actual parents out their feel this way fa real…judgin from the divorce rates I doubt too many of them disagree with me…then again a lot of ppl don’t like their kids so….who knows. Good post though, even though I vehemently disagree lol
Did it ever occur to you that people are getting divorced BECAUSE the spouse isn’t made the priority?? Oh. Keep choosing people over your spouse and you will find yourself out of love and divorced…
” Did it ever occur to you that people are getting divorced BECAUSE the spouse isn’t made the priority?? ”
YEah it did, but I think more of the problem is people not having the same ideas/expectations about what a marriage should be like and what the goal(s) and priorities of said marriage should be. People should discuss things like this before they tie the knot, but they don’t because they’re too busy making impulsive decisions like teenagers…still smh
“Till death do us part†right? Well, death is here, so unfortunately she’s gonna have to part….like someone else said, the marriage would be HORRIBLE after that. ”
Thank. You.
and your kids life will be HORRIBLE without their parent.
So then we will all die. JK. At least one of the parents will still be around.
Not necessarily. Kids survive and thrive without their birth parents all the time. The same cannot be said for parents or marriages that try to survive without kids.
” Not necessarily. Kids survive and thrive without their birth parents all the time. The same cannot be said for parents or marriages that try to survive without kids.”
Exactly. See I knew my logical homie TAC would feel me. I sincerely feel like if I were married and my spouse let me die to save the kids I’d die with a smile on my face. I would meet her in heaven and make jokes about it, but my love for her would be the same or even greater than it was before…
Yall ninjas must be expectin to be head over heels in love throughout your marriage?
i’m a marriage idealist. so, yes. i do expect to stay in love with my wife for the duration of my marriage.
I’m gonna have to ask you to stop doing that crack mon, it has eaten your brain alive. LOL Or at least share so I can live in your disneyland fairy tale too. LOL
” I’m gonna have to ask you to stop doing that crack mon, it has eaten your brain alive. LOL Or at least share so I can live in your disneyland fairy tale too. LOL”
OMG! Thank you! lol, I used to consider Champ a realist before today. He definitely disappointed me on this one. U know how many times I’ve been smitten for chicks and then snapped out of it to realize that I was literally high on dopamine and excessive endorphins. Disney got yall ALL trippin out here lol
Smitten is deep, but there is something deeper. When you hit that irrational level of love, you can choose not to do anything stupid that would compromise your well-being, but at the same time you openly admit to not being able to ‘snap out of it.’
+1,000,000
marriage idealists unite! That shit’s gonna be epic.
My name is A Woman’s Eyes, and I am a marriage idealist. Divorce didn’t change my view of marriage. If anything I know it is possible to be madly in love with someone for years and years, even with the ebb and flow of love and the ebb and flow of life.
*raising both hands (and feet)*
i love this term marriage idealist.
*raises hand* i too, am a part of the club.
The permanency of a connection doesn’t always manifest as a fairy tale marriage, nor is it limited by the time span of a marriage. The beloved could be unavailable, a bitterly departed ex, married, dead, on crack, or whatever…and you feel so strongly that you can easily admit your love for this person without feeling embarrassed about looking like a total @$$hat (thanks 2520′s for this brilliant term). This is one of those adult lessons (aka super f***ed up unfair experiences) that slapped me in the face recently.
You’re post had me rolling!!! I agree with you 100%. I think folks are taking putting your kid as a priority in marriage as negative when that has been historically the point of marriage. To birth a legacy. Now obviously kids shouldn’t be your only concern and the parents neglect each others needs, but kids do trump. Weider better be prepared to die in that scenario and as I’m swimming to save my kids she should be thinking “my @$$ is too darn grown to not know how to swim/float.” Deuces.
Please excuse the Swype errors. I promise I can read and write.
” I think folks are taking putting your kid as a priority in marriage as negative when that has been historically the point of marriage. To birth a legacy. Now obviously kids shouldn’t be your only concern and the parents neglect each others needs, but kids do trump.”
Thank you! There’s still hope for our community lol. This whole save the wife instead of the kid mess really came from this relatively new (only a few centuries old and European in nature) concept of marriage being about romantic love. I consider the people that have bought into that to be under a marriage illusion, as opposed to them being marriage idealists…either that or they’re just selfish as h*ll…
“when that has been historically the point of marriage. To birth a legacy…”
I agree with this. Marriage is a technical arrangement that serves this purpose. Love exists on some hyper dimensional plane way beyond the institution of marriage. If you happen to be able to marry the person you are in love with, then that’s nothing short f a miracle.
Maybe I’ve just even in a defeatist funk lately, but I’ve toyed with the idea of a technical marriage. Just finding some guy who can make himself useful in my life, who I don’t necessarily have deep feelings for, but who I can appreciate as a decent husband/ father.
this is going to sound horrible but i was thinking save the spouse because we can have more kids, we cant as quickly find and replace our spouses. i also agree with someone else who sad save the spouse b/c then you can both try to save the kids the analogy they gave was the airplane oxygen mask and two adults have to do mask 1st
“this is going to sound horrible but i was thinking save the spouse because we can have more kids”
doesn’t sound horrible to me
Family ranking, in my opinion
1) Keep God first
2) Spouse is 2nd. You take a vow until death to us part, so support and take care of him/her better than any other person on earth
3) Kids are 3rd. You raise them to leave you. Even if you’re a full-time mom, you’ve got to have other interests in your life. Don’t be one of those moms who tries to have another kid at 45/have a nervous breakdown when your youngest kid turns 13 andno longer needs you all the time
4) Parents are 4th. To piggy back on #3 – your parents should have raised you to leave. But be there to care for them in their old age if necessary. Not necessarily in your home, if mom and dad come between you and your spouse, time to pack up to assisted living
My 2cs
AMEN
…and there it is.
Well, I guess I’m confused.
Some of you say kids are priority because they are the ones who are irreplaceable, have so much more life to live, you have parental responsibility, etc. BUT, if something happens to the child (not to say that EXACT child is replaceable, but…) you and your spouse can have more children between the two of you. That’s not to say it’s not a hard thing to move on from.
I guess I just don’t understand because everyone makes it seem like such a no-brainer. I feel like if your spouse isn’t #1 in your life, you’re either a) married to the wrong person or b) married for the wrong reasons. But that’s just me.
I feel like if your spouse isn’t #1 in your life, you’re either a) married to the wrong person or b) married for the wrong reasons. But that’s just me.
lol, it’s not just you
” I feel like if your spouse isn’t #1 in your life, you’re either a) married to the wrong person or b) married for the wrong reasons. But that’s just me.”
Me choosing to save the kids over her doesn’t exactly imply that she isn’t #1 though…I would love her too much to put her through that. She’d never recover from me making such a bad decision that caused her so much grief, guilt, depression, and trauma. (yall say she’d get over it, but she would. Also I’m sure many people who are now divorced once felt the same way, and they’d be ready to commit suicide after they realized that they killed a child to save a marriage that ended up failing anyway…) That’s a horrible thing to do to someone you claim to love so much…when you factor that into the rest of the reasons I already gave it falls closer along the lines of the “no-brainer” category than the “tough decision” one…
+1
def not just you!
yes, not just to you…
*not just you
sorry, quite early in the day. :p
Funny how people throw God in that #1 spot as if 1.) He’d be drowning or in dire straights and somehow countin’ on you to play lifeguard or savior or 2.) anyone might have the temerity to place deity somewhere other than first (“Nah, man…God has been good and and cool and all, but yo, I got to put Him that number two spot when it comes to *wifey.”)
Now back to the tangible beings–I’ve had ‘em all, and this really shouldn’t be much of question. I LOVE my momma. I do. But she’s been choosing her husband over me for(ever) years–or at least since I got off of the tit. So there’s that…
And when you’re married, things come into an entirely different perspective. But when you have children, it flips all over again–triple lindy. And for the egg/chicken folks like me (meaning your child preceded matrimony), sh!t can get real complicated even without the desert islands and life preservers. Add a divorce to that and you’ve got a fcukin’ tsunami of the mind. But not really…
Sure you’d put your wife above your maternal unit. Hell, if you’re smart you put even a remotely potential wife about your maternal unit. Lest you never realize said potential. And in matters of life, you side with the wife–kids or no kids. But in matters of life and death, your instinct is always gon’ to lean towards the youngin’s (See: ‘The Box’. No, not that box–the actual film).
What’s the logic? Well let’s Scissors, Paper, Rock it out. Champ started it off right, you’re born into your family so other than continuing to breathe, there’s no real doin’ on your part. And you “choose” (though I have to use that term loosely for some) your spouse, so spouse beats momma. But you create your children (no slight to God up there in that at #1). So kid beats ball and chain. Besides, kids can’t divorce or even “quit” you really. They’re not under contract, but you are under obligation. And you are legally responsible for their fcukery.
Your spouse can do what she damn well pleases (and often will). ‘Tis the luxury of adulthood. You may be held socially responsible if the Mrs. goes batsh!t crazy, but not legally. *Wifey is still atop the totem pole. But in the end you know she is accountable to and for herself and can hold her own as an adult if it comes down to it–your kids can’t.
Now once their lil’ @sses are grown…
*Any use of the term “wifey” is purely satirical
This I agree with.
2.) anyone might have the temerity to place deity somewhere other than first (“Nah, man…God has been good and and cool and all, but yo, I got to put Him that number two spot when it comes to *wifey.â€)
LOL, yeah. it reminds of the professional athlete who always has to put God first at the beginning of anything he says
“first, i gotta thank the man upstairs, because without him, I wouldn’t have had the strength to knock that n*gga out the f*ck out in the 3rd round”
If you have a mother that put her husband before you I can easily see how this is problematic.
BUT if your mother and father are married and they BOTH give you the love and attention you need and deserve you wouldn’t mind if they put each other first (as long as they still fulfilled their responsibilities as parents). You would probably admire it and see them as a great example of what you want some day.
Yup. Thats how I feel about my parents.
” But you create your children (no slight to God up there in that at #1). So kid beats ball and chain. Besides, kids can’t divorce or even “quit†you really. They’re not under contract, but you are under obligation. And you are legally responsible for their fcukery.
Your spouse can do what she damn well pleases (and often will). ‘Tis the luxury of adulthood. You may be held socially responsible if the Mrs. goes batsh!t crazy, but not legally. *Wifey is still atop the totem pole. But in the end you know she is accountable to and for herself and can hold her own as an adult if it comes down to it–your kids can’t.”
So poignant dude. Citizen Kane has the best post hands down imo….ALL OF THAT needed to be said. So eloquent man. Great points.
“Funny how people throw God in that #1 spot as if 1.) He’d be drowning or in dire straights and somehow countin’ on you to play lifeguard or savior or 2.) anyone might have the temerity to place deity somewhere other than first (“Nah, man…God has been good and and cool and all, but yo, I got to put Him that number two spot when it comes to *wifey.â€)”
OMFG*. Thank you!
*no pun or sacrilege intended.
Are any of you who say kids first “happily married?” If you were, you’d know to put spouse first. In terms of happiness and just hope it never comes to a life or death ultimatum. What he means is in terms of who to make happy first. If either parent is unhappy or unsatisfied, the kids grow up single parent or no parent anyway. This how I grew up. Dad lived there,but he wasnt there because they couldnt stand each other oh and he had anotherr family. But I know if wifey aint happy, nobody is and I think thats the point.
If either parent is unhappy or unsatisfied, the kids grow up single parent or no parent anyway.
good point
“What he means is in terms of who to make happy first. ”
Exactly.
“What he means is in terms of who to make happy first. ”
But he didn’t say that though. That’s an entirely different discussion/judgment call. He asked who would you rather allow to live…
Things aren’t so black and white when it comes to marriage. At least that’s why I didn’t take it so literally. *shrugs*
I think the terms “replaceable” and “irreplaceable” are wrong to use because all of these people are irreplaceable. You definitely can’t trade in a parent and mines will definitely be number three on my list, number four if you include god. I believe your spouse should come before your children but more in an authoritative way. Your children or parents should never dictate what decisions are made in your home. That is between you and your spouse and if anything comes between that you are setting yourself up for disaster. In a situation where our lives are in danger I would save my child because in a caring and loving marriage it is probably an underlying understanding that we want to protect our children, a decision that we both made even if we never spoke about it. The order of these people are a result of the power they have in the relationship not the amount of love.
“In a situation where our lives are in danger I would save my child because in a caring and loving marriage it is probably an underlying understanding that we want to protect our children, a decision that we both made even if we never spoke about it.”
Well stated
“In a situation where our lives are in danger I would save my child because in a caring and loving marriage it is probably an underlying understanding that we want to protect our children, a decision that we both made even if we never spoke about it.â€
+2 This is what I was trying to say. It’s not like you let your spouse down or showed her that she doesn’t come first. It’s more like you made the decision that she would’ve expected/wanted you to make. Why are ppl finding that so hard to grasp?
“I think the terms “replaceable†and “irreplaceable†are wrong to use because all of these people are irreplaceable.”
yeah, i actually agree with this. couldnt think of another way to express what i was trying to say, though
In a perfect world, I’d like to believe that I love everyone equally, but in reality, if I HAD to choose, it would be: 1.Kids 2.Parents 3.Spouse.
Children and parents are irreplaceable, spouses aren’t.
For me, unconditional love comes first. You love your children unconditionally and your parents love you unconditionally. And vice versa. (Unless you had a terrible parent/parents…) The conditional love you have for your spouse may fade. You and your spouse may simply grow apart. Your spouse may cheat on you, abuse you, or divorce you. Your parents and kids will always retain their respective titles and relationships with you, while a spouse’s role in your life is contingent on many factors. I just can’t see myself putting someone I’ve only known a couple of years (my spouse) above my parents. My parents have loved me all my life and supported me emotionally and financially. I just can’t disregard their sacrifices. By ranking my parents 2nd, I’m not implying that I will let them run my marriage, monopolize my time, or that I would ignore my spouse. Your family had your back before your spouse arrived and they will if they disappear. I don’t believe spouses are disposable beings with love expiration dates, but I realize that spouses involve a different type of love.
Ranking your loved ones emotionally doesn’t necessarily equate to neglecting the lower members, but some people behave like it does. We’ve all heard or seen what happens when a parent puts his/her spouse/partner first and neglects the children.
If the ranking is based on needs, parents and spouse are debatable, but children are still first. Children are “helpless†in a sense, dependent, and require so much. Spouses and parents are grown individuals, adults. As adults, they should be more independent.
If you love someone, you’ll do anything for them, no matter what their ranking is. Trying to rank them is like trying to decide which letters you like best and which letters you want to break off your keyboard. It’s irrelevant, as you need them all for a completely functional keyboard. You love all these people and they complete your life.
In a perfect world, I’d like to believe that I love everyone equally, but in reality, if I HAD to choose, it would be: 1.Kids 2.Parents 3.Spouse.
damn. parents above spouse?
This scares me. Seriously. SMH
@CNotes- why does it scare you? Your parents gave birth to you! Your mother risked her life to bore you and yet you’d put a man before her? That scares me! lol
So I’ve read all the comments & am finally ready to lay out my final verdict: The above scenario, Champ, did indeed muddy the proverbial waters. You were right to say it would confuse things. It did & then some.
Life & love IMHO is not dictated by a hierarchy. When we marry, don’t we become one? Love your spouse as you love yourself & all that? So if we’re one, we work on being one when it comes to choices about family & everything else while allowing for space. You are a team. Observe how those work & learn from the best in all arenas.
There is no comparison replaceability actually. You assume that fertility is not an issue & a new child or 2 can be eà sily made & dispatched to replace the other 2. No one is replaceable & this placement of comparison & choice is troubling & troublesome.
Have a spouse who can save themselves & your children. Have children who can save themselves or lend when they’re old & strong enough to. When they’re helpless, it is the team’s job to ensure their survival.
The team IMHO needs to prepare ahead of time so it doesn’t have to choose between its survival & that of its progeny. There is no either or there’s ALL. We all live or we die trying.
“We all live or we die trying” +1…that is the go to plan
Have a spouse who can save themselves & your children. Have children who can save themselves or lend when they’re old & strong enough to. When they’re helpless, it is the team’s job to ensure their survival.
way to make things all complicated
” way to make things all complicated”
I know right. I agree with EVERYTHING she said. She made excellent points, but I still shook my head at her for riding the fence and not takin a stand lol
@Justmetheguy My stance is pretty clear “I am not choosing”. We either ALL die or we die trying. I refuse to live without spouse OR children. As I said to Champ previously, I like to win. Winning usually takes preparation. The most I can do to ensure odds are in my favor is to choose a spouse with the same perspective when it comes to me and family. I would also ensure that we have the skills to make sure we can help our family survive. Since I can’t predict the future, that’ll just get us to wherever it gets us. I can only pray that it’s enough. We’re gonna do what it takes to make sure no one is left behind and we don’t live life wracked with guilt. I said the example was problematic. I just wouldn’t choose. Can’t compare apples and oranges. Can’t live without the kids or the spouse. Wouldn’t want to so I won’t.
Not complicated. I’m a contingency planner. I hate losing. To win, I prepare. It’s worked so far. I look for the holes and fill them. I refuse to compromise when it comes to things like my family living. I’ll do whatever it takes.
If you said anything other than spouse, I was going to criticize. You and the spouse are the foundation for the family. Now, if I make it to shore and my child and husband are out there, we can all die together. I just don’t see me going “eeny meeny miney mo…” in that situation. I would put my child on a boat and me and my spouse can die. I think the logic behind that is my child has a lot more living to do than I so let them live. It sounds like people who disagree don’t believe in marriage and the foundation of a family…makes sense. My stepdad still gets served food before me and any other benefits my mom bestows upon him. I get it…he is an important person in her life and I’ll be fine if I have to get my food myself lol. Anyway, with your morbid scenarios lol, I hope I never ever ever have to make that choice. God, spouse, kids, parents. Period.
If you said anything other than spouse, I was going to criticize.
lol, thanks for letting me know that
On this topic- I don’t know. Ill get back to you when I’ve made my “three from the two” and ill let you know who is no. 1. However this does bring to mind the new nbc show called Awake. A man is in an accident with wife and kid and wakes up in 2 alt realities-one with wife and one with kid. Now, who comes first? Which reality would you want to become permanent?
Oh and def check out promo, it looks good.
you don’t work for NBC, do you?
LOL, I saw that commercial and it reminded me of Inception. I’m not sure how it can be a TV show though.
*SMH* I think some of y’all are being irrational with Champ’s analogy.
God, spouse, kids and parents: that’s the order. That’s what my parents had and both sets of my grandparents as well. Maybe that’s why all three couples completed their vows (til’ death did they part). When you see it in action, you realize it’s not even about giving the kids “less than.” It’s about teaching your children that this is the way a marriage is supposed to be.
When it comes to dating and relationships, my parents secured their oxygen masks before they assisted my sisters and I with ours. I’m glad they did.
“my parents secured their oxygen masks before they assisted my sisters and I with ours.”
Good analogy.
*SMH* I think some of y’all are being irrational with Champ’s analogy.
in hindsight, i probably could have used a better scenario. ah well
Logically it makes sense spouse>kids but there is something in everyone that would make this a tough decision…i think spouse over kids is a societal/religious construct….in nature animals usually ferociously protect their offspring, passing on the dna is what comes above all else…with that said…im not sure what i would do…..cuz we wont make it til “death do us part” if i gotta listen to her complaining the next 40 years about me not saving the baby
” in nature animals usually ferociously protect their offspring, passing on the dna is what comes above all else ”
But in nature, if the offspring are not able to swim, can’t do anything, the mother kills her offspring. I’m just saying. \o/
and, don’t forget about the fact that some parents will, if the situation demands, eat their offspring
Yep. Protein so they have energy to have more litters of babies. Humans don’t have the fertility of hamsters and polar bears.
And I know polar bears do not have litters. They continuously have babies as long as they eat, they can procreate again.
Oh mother animals will eat babies or abandon them in a minute if things are too tense. Some animals can even REABSORB FETUSES if the time isnt right to give birth.
A mother animal will never sacrifice all her young for the sake of one.If that one lil rascal cant keep up he dies. She lives to mate next season.
” i think spouse over kids is a societal/religious construct….in nature animals usually ferociously protect their offspring, passing on the dna is what comes above all else…with that said…im not sure what i would do…..cuz we wont make it til “death do us part†if i gotta listen to her complaining the next 40 years about me not saving the baby”
Exactly! I’m not drinkin the kool-aid. I’ll take unconditional love over conditional love ANYDAY, and the last thing I need from my wife is ANOTHER (and this time legitimate) reason to moan and whine and nag the h*ll out of me for the rest of our lives…
Dammit Champ. You just don’t phuckin learn do you?
LOL, I guess he just said phuck it.
Yep. I am not understanding this post at all. I guess I will tell my future husband “if a ship is sinking, i am saving our children first. If you try to stop me from saving my kids, I will kill you in the process so you better help me or go to shore.” I get that in a marriage, you need to put your husband first…at times. But I have been in the situation where my mom put a man before me and trust, it damages the relationship. Kids don’t choose to be here. We choose to get married. I can’t even imagine thinking that my child is replaceable. I carried that life for 9 mths. This sounds like some selfishness masked in “I will love my wife till death do us part.” I say, find someone that will make you the center of her world and don’t have children.
This post, to me, came off completely selfish and I don’t think that I could be with someone that had this mentality. I get what he is saying and yes, too many marriages fail b/c the couples don’t take the time to be an actual couple but this is on a whole different level. This post is saying, it is me and all about me in a marriage. You are the one I married to always focus attention on me and don’t forget that.
Balance is needed. His scenario is mess up.
“This post is saying, it is me and all about me in a marriage. You are the one I married to always focus attention on me and don’t forget that.”
ummm, no, lol.
i’m actually not really worried about who’s focused on me. what i’m saying is that the relationship with/love for my wife takes priority over the relationship with/love for our children. collectively, as parents, protecting and providing for the children is the number one thing. but, individually as a man/husband, my wife is number one.
” This sounds like some selfishness masked in “I will love my wife till death do us part.†I say, find someone that will make you the center of her world and don’t have children.”
That’s exactly what I said. People who feel this way should do the world a favor and NOT have kids. I mean that in all sincerity too
@Corey… lamo… that is all.
Kids first, then the wife. Point being, logically you put the wife first for many decisions, but once you have kids, you’ve made a top priority for the next 20 years. No matter how much you love someone, YOU CREATE CHILDREN. You don’t meet them like your lover nor are you inclined to love them because of family like your parents, YOU CREATE YOUR OWN CHILDREN. A blank slate that never asked to exist, and only exist due to selfishness of two people. So any talk of putting anybody else first seems ridiculous to me because the love is always there. But if the house is burning, I save the kids first, unless if I can save the wife and she’s not injured, then I have a better chance of saving the kids with 4 hands instead of 2.
And as far as God goes, that’s a given for many people but me and him have a different kind of understanding. I acknowledge him, he might acknowledge me, but he aint getting first priority when i know I never got his.
“When i know i never got his” Please dont say that
” And as far as God goes, that’s a given for many people but me and him have a different kind of understanding. I acknowledge him, he might acknowledge me, but he aint getting first priority when i know I never got his.”
I didn’t wanna be the one to say it but that’s a good point. I mean, I take it even further and say “God doesn’t need me or my love. God will be omnipotent and almighty regardless of my priorities…so why am I putting God before my responsibilities (my kids) again?”
Devil’s Advocate:
So in situations where pre-existing kids are present in the relationship do they maintain the same spot or is there jumbling of the order on the part of the non-biological party? AND
If there is a different hierarchy, how does the biological parent reconcile the fact that the children hold a different place of priority for the other party?
Good questions, Corey. I assumed that in a crisis like a ship sinking, you grab whatever kids are close to you and get further out to the rest of the children.
Sidenote: I am going to make sure my son can do more than just float and kick. He’s gonna get lessons on swimming like Michael Phelps.
It comes down to marrying the person that has the same mentality as you in that situation. If you place your new spouse above your children then find someone who wants to be placed above your children. If you tell your new spouse that the kids, for the majority of the time, will be the top priority, then find someone who understands that as well.
I don’t have kids but to me, once you have them, your entire world of “it’s all about me” has gone out of the window. Women and men who know that their man or woman is the center of their universe, to the detriment of everyone around them and possibly their children, shouldn’t have children.
Know the type of person you are and follow through accordingly.
“It comes down to marrying the person that has the same mentality as you in that situation.”
Co-sign. Without a doubt.
” I don’t have kids but to me, once you have them, your entire world of “it’s all about me†has gone out of the window. Women and men who know that their man or woman is the center of their universe, to the detriment of everyone around them and possibly their children, shouldn’t have children.”
See. She gets it!
“So in situations where pre-existing kids are present in the relationship do they maintain the same spot or is there jumbling of the order on the part of the non-biological party? ”
i don’t know.
I know of a few relationships where the non-biological party was placed above the pre-existing children and the children had a difficult time coping with that realization. Even as late as their early 20′s. I do not understand how a biological parent reconciles how the new spouse takes a higher priority.
For me and a few other single parents I know, it’s blood is thicker than water. One dude I know always tells me his son comes over any woman. He gets the same shyt back from me. My kids come before any dude. Always. No competition whatsoever. That is just the way it is. He can either accept that or keep it moving. But, let me also say that if he feels the same way about kids, we’re gonna get along great.
No shots here but that kinda sounds like you and buddy are held together by the bond of being parents more so than an actual bond between the two of you. What happens when everyone is grown?
When the kids are grown the relationship between the two people who are mature also matures. Relationships change overtime even within marriages. I think this may be an age thing too. Because, remember, I’m much older than some here. Doesn’t mean I have it all figured out, but I have to go with what I feel is right in my heart.
Naw I get it. I only ask because I have SEVERAL peers that I grew up with and their parents divorced as soon as the youngest graduated from high school. That seems like a situation where the marriage was over long before then and the parents were either in denial about it or so focused on the kids they didn’t take the time to actually mature as a unit. Coincidentally, I also detest the thought of me being married and having a kid within the first year. I feel like you’re setting yourself up for a glorious fall with that particular game plan.
“Coincidentally, I also detest the thought of me being married and having a kid within the first year. I feel like you’re setting yourself up for a glorious fall with that particular game plan.”
I know it’s late, but I agree. I am all for long engagements and then several years being married with your spouse before having kids. It’s all an adjustment. The more time between these life altering changes the more time you have to adapt.
My mother remarried and my step father definitely was a priority. We had no problems in our home and everyone knew their place. They have a wonderful marriage, with all the issues you typically find in relationships, but they were happy and my sister and I were happy. I’m happy my mother and him chose to be together because I saw first hand how a marriage is supposed to work and what it means to be a spouse and a parent. It’s a tough job.
What makes me even more happy is that my mother has someone to grow old with. Some of my mother’s friends who ended up being single parents don’t and I think it was because they put their children before any and everything in their life. My mother never did that and as an I adult I now see why. My sister and I are grown, out of the house, and living our own lives and because my mother maintained her relationships and outside interests she has a very full life today. I love calling home and asking what’s going on and listening to her talk about her film productions classes and the trips her and my dad are taking. She didn’t wait until me and my sister were off to college to do these things.
That is why I end up thinking that the ball got dropped somewhere if children are angry that mama or daddy re-married and put their spouse as priority. It means the children got hurt or the children were raised that they are their mama’s whole and only life.
I agree with all this, although I believe in the last scenario the spouse probably would not want to be saved and if you value the spouse more you would value his/her wish to save the children.
I’m sure someone has already mentioned the Bible perspective that says, effectively, children should be raised up to leave their parents’ house. A man’s first commitment is to the family he creates.
I agree that a husband and wife should put each other first above children and parents. I can also respect the perspective that children are to be a woman’s lot in life and a wife is to be the man’s lot. I also think that parent’s putting each other should result in a healthier marriage which would create a better example for kids and probably a happier household all around.
With all that being said, I’m not married and don’t have kids so I have yet to test my theories.
parent’s putting each other *first*…
parents…dammit just excuse all the grammatical errors
“I agree that a husband and wife should put each other first above children and parents. I can also respect the perspective that children are to be a woman’s lot in life and a wife is to be the man’s lot. I also think that parent’s putting each other should result in a healthier marriage which would create a better example for kids and probably a happier household all around.”
All of this speaks to the fact that there is no one right answer.
Totally disagree champ, you would save yo kid not spouse and spouse would understand.
how would i know if she understood if she’s dead?
You’d know by what she’s hollering to you as she sees her child drowning.
There is no hard and fast rule about this. On any given day at anytime, you may have to make a decision that will change the hierarchy and I reserve the right to make that decision when neccessary.
way to romney your way out of an answer
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!
Wedding vows= “Forsaking ALL (not except children, or except when drowning on islands) others.” And GOD (that most of you agreed ALWAYS undoubtebly comes first) said that. That is all.
That’s the major one ain’t it? “Forsaking all others…” If one believes in those vows, the spouse has to come first.
hello
Forsake
: to renounce or turn away from entirely
Source Merriam-Webster.
If we are literally to read it, the way it seems you’re suggesting, we renounce and turn away from everyone entirely, family, friends, kids… everything. And for good measure we could say, “that’s what God says”…
…does that ring true to you?
lol, you know the literally interpretation doesn’t apply. all it means is that they come before all others
Yeah I don’t think it was meant to be read literally either. So when I hear “forsaking all others” I understand that to mean forsaking all other in terms of intimate personal relationships; which to my mind’s eye, is neither applicable (nor inteneded to be applicable) to the relationship of a child to a parent.
” And GOD (that most of you agreed ALWAYS undoubtebly comes first) said that. ”
How do you know God said that? Serious question….what does his voice sound like?
I’ll be back later, but It’s interesting how the comments have either been…
“duh, your kids need to be first. it’s a no-brainer”
or
“duh, your spouse needs to be first. it’s a no-brainer”
What’s interesting about this issue isn’t so much that people feel differently but that there seems to be no ambiguity with how we feel. There aren’t many here today like “hmmm. tough decision”
Mornin champ. You didnt leave room for ambiguity when the scenario u gave us has them DROWNING IN THE FLIPPIN OCEAN!!! Smh lmao
There is soooooo much ambiguity in this situation, but your scenario sort of makes it absolute in that there is finality in death. In my day to day life, there are days when my husband comes first and there are days when my boy comes first. Just like on some days within my marriage union it’s 70/30 me and some days it’s 90/10 him. This isn’t black and white. There is no such thing as 50/50 in a marriage just like there’s no way to determine who comes first in your family. When my son is sick, my husband gets out of our bed and sleeps on the couch so that my son can be monitored through the night. However, my son has NO PLACE in our bed at any other time because that is ours and he has his own. I don’t care what he wants.
The bottom line is this. Individuals in healthy, loving families don’t worry about rankings. We concern ourselves with balance so that no one feels like they have to jockey for position.
+1
“The bottom line is this. Individuals in healthy, loving families don’t worry about rankings. We concern ourselves with balance so that no one feels like they have to jockey for position.” Nicely put.
“The bottom line is this. Individuals in healthy, loving families don’t worry about rankings. We concern ourselves with balance so that no one feels like they have to jockey for position.”
Perfectly put.
i’ve been thinking about how form follows function. we are what we are, regardless of what we want to believe ourselves to be. some of us are mothers, some of us are fathers, some are husbands, some are wives. and some of us are none of the above.
if we are a mother or father, the child comes first.
if we are a husband or a wife, the spouse comes first.
if we are none of the above, we have one less problem in the world.
there is no universal answer because not everyone holds the same form. when you know your form, there is only one solution for you. but your choice is always and only your own.
that said, some people live as both mother and wife, husband and child. that is why this post is so provocative. it calls out to us to determine who we truly are.
I like your train of thought.
I see truth in this.
“that is why this post is so provocative. it calls out to us to determine who we truly are”
good point
As I sit in the front of dual monitors one with a desktop photo of my precious daughter and one with Champs article, my heart swelled to my throat when he said save your spouse and let my baby drown because she can be replaced!!!! I am sorry that will never happen. I either will die trying to save the both of them OR my baby will be using me and his die body as a floatie to get to shore…but she will be saved.
The order is God, husband, wife, then kids.
I’m glad it wasn’t just me. I have my boy’s face all around me at my desk and I started to well up just thinking about that. I’m not gonna watch my baby die. That’s not even an option.
In this dream world,once the baby gets to shore alone who is feeding it and caring for it and building fires and protecting it? Y’all all gonna die.Cept the baby/child will die a longer miserable more drawn out death as it starves alone and scared.
People never think things though.Go on to the REST of the story.
” People never think things though.Go on to the REST of the story.”
R u serious?! There are orphanages all over. I have a HUGE family. The child can go get married or start working until he/she gets on their feet, their are homeless shelters, group homes etc; We don’t live in a third world country, I doubt the child starves. I will have raised my child to be resilient by that point so I think his/her chances of survival are greater than 50%. I like those odds thank you very much
I tend to speak GENERALLY and in principles. HERE and now in the US yes there are orphanages. But the question did not presuppose that we were in the US.In GENERAL, as a rule on the planet, parents have to survive for offspring to survive. In general, the stability and strength of the FAMILY which provides shelter, support,sustenance and education for the young takes priority over any individual offspring. You do not allow one of the pillars of the house to fall in order to save an inhabitant of the house because….well…the house falls and inhabitant has no house and is still SOL
If we can bring the BIBLE, a book written kinda by primitive backwards desert dwelling Palestinians over 3000 years ago, into the discussion SURELY considering that all places are not the US or developed world isnt that much of a stretch.
That’s what the bible says.
100.
The kid comes first. Second comes the spouse. Then comes the parents. God, by my logic, is in all of those people, all around, all the time.
Once you have a kid, I think, a lot of the energy have goes towards making that kid cool person. Not cool in the sense of walking around to the Pink Panther theme all the time, but cool as in well-rounded, intelligent and independent.
Why can’t you work on your relationship with your spouse before, during and after having a child? It’s never that cut and dry where you’re like “Sorry honey, but Timmy needs *insert incredibly demanding and not necessary thing here* …maybe in a few weeks, kay?” No. Timmy can read while you talk to your dude about his day. Timmy can do his homework while you give your man a back rub. Timmy needs to learn that it’s okay to be alone and not have all the attention on him. Timmy also needs to learn and see in action a productive, loving relationship.
The parents are the hard ones; once they get a certain age you start to realize that they won’t be around forever. But they’re your parents, not your children, so you can’t necessarily tell them how to live their lives, or even to live out the rest of it with you. All you can do is keep them involved in the family dynamic: make going to Grandma’s a regular thing – not regular to the point both Grandma and kid are like “again?!” but regular enough to form bonds and memories, because in the end that’s really all we’ve got.
*gets off soapbox*
“Not cool in the sense of walking around to the Pink Panther theme all the time, but cool as in well-rounded, intelligent and independent.”
This ish right here SLAYED me!!!
I think the only reason you put your spouse first is to create a loving stable home for the children. So your relationship is in service to them until they are no longer in the home. If you did it right, you have a good marriage after they leave. But technically, this puts the kids before the spouse.
+ 1
+2
+3
+4 WC summed it up nicely there
Wild Cougar is correct.
“The most basic instinct possessed by humans, primates and other creatures, is protection of our children. No one with a basic sense of mental health needs to learn this. We are biologically and evolutionarily wired to protect our offspring, even at the risk of sacrificing our own lives. Hence, we see, in the regular course of parenting, parents give more to their children than to anyone.”
who are you quoting?
I disagree with saving a spouse before your children. If placed in this situation I know I’d go after the kids. Don’t get me wrong, I’d love my wife BUT kids before spouse. And if my spouse and I are anything alike we’d both be busy trying to save the kids.
“And if my spouse and I are anything alike we’d both be busy trying to save the kids.” Exactly. Marry someone who has the same vision as you when it comes to marriage and raising a family.
“And if my spouse and I are anything alike we’d both be busy trying to save the kids.”
This. Right. Here.
x1000. We will all be some splashing mo’ fo’s out in that water. I know it’s easy to say because I’m not physically in that situation, but I would rather die trying than to willingly watch any part of my family perish while I do nothing.
Can you seriously imagine your children crying out to you to help, “Daddy Daddy” and you go for your wife? I couldn’t do it. The woman I marry wouldn’t tolerate me doing it either. The kids come first.
Right.
I agree. American culture makes us focus on our children so much despite our kids. Our Spouse should be number 1 before kids. that way, you model the right behavior to your children.
Had this argument on FB once. Pretty strong opinions on that.
One more thing.. I hate that save only one wife or child scenario but I am saving my wife everytime. I love my kids dearly but I knew that even if we had no kids, i would be happy.
Wife first..
” I knew that even if we had no kids, i would be happy.”
You just don’t know if she’ll be happy.
First time poster here-
I agree with putting the spouse first IF you’re both “parents” of the children. Dont get me wrong, I value and respect “step-relationships”. Some of those bonds are stronger than biological bonds. But IMO, when the natural parents are present, you are fairly certain that they are both equally invested in the well being of the children, and that “choice” would never have to be made.
I would feel some type of way to know my mother chose to save her husband (soul mate she remarried 2 years ago) over me. Too often we realize, after the fact, that the person we thought was our soulmate wasn’t. High divorce rates prove this. Now, Im not gonna go into the WHYs of our inflated divorce rates, thats multifactorial. Just suffice it to say, lots of people realize that the person they chose to marry is not the same person they’re waking up beside 20 yrs later.
With regard to our children, far less parents regret having their kids than those regretting their spouses.
So in a perfect world, I would say spouse>kids>parents but in our realistic, imperfect world it has to be kids>spouse>parents
Just my $0.02
welcome and sh*t
The bible expressly states:
Matthew 19:4-6
“ 4And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5And said, for this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.â€
The command that “…let not man put asunder†means exactly what it say. No is to come between the husband and wife not even your children.
As most already know, the reason that 5th verse make no mention of children is because children are supposed to be a product of marriage and not before. Just because some of us have had a child before getting married does not change what God says and what he will hold us to. And the real purpose of God giving us these commands to follow is he knows how we as mere flawed mortals think and feel. If he didn’t know this he would not have to instruct us. It’s not even about how we feel but more so of what pleases God. And God despite popular belief has our best interest at heart when he gives us such “unbearableâ€, some may say, instructions.
Kids are a wonderful gift however they are not meant to be our all in all. We are to love them and teach them then send them on to create their own lives. They are our future (i.e. generations of future off springs) but they are never meant to be One with us. Only our spouse gets that privilege and blessing from God.
“…but they are never meant to be One with us. ”
Interesting perspective. People have mentioned wild animals protecting their young, but those young often take off and never associate with the parent again once they are big enough to take care of themselves.
True… but that oneness? That’s only here on earth. No marriage in heaven right?
I agree our kids aren’t supposed to be our “all in all”, it’s not their job to give us happiness (though hopefully at times they will) it’s OUR job to take care of them. Marriage ends at “death do you part”. No?
This.
Yes it ends at death but that changes nothing about what’s given to us to do here on earth. The same God that joins man and woman as one until death do us part and that expects us to live up to it, is the same God that we will face when death takes us from here.
Which in my eyes is more reason to do what he says while I am down here on earth.
I am suggesting that the two, being a parent willing to lay down their life for their child, and being faithful to your spouse (in a way that would please God), are not mutually exclusive.
Also if you believe God is our heavenly father… (Luke 11)
and Jesus and God are one… (John 10:30-33, Matthew 1:23)
Then it seems to me that the Heavenly Father was willing to die to save His children…
…all depends on how you choose to look at it I guess. (Not trying to start a religious debate, just saying)
so what if you ain’t that religious? all of this is well and good…assuming that you believe in God.
Mm hm…
You don’t have to be religious or believe in God to be humanly capable of saying “that’s my baby calling for me in that water, I’m going to go and save her from drowning”
Panama, just because some choose to not be “that” religious or even religious at all does not make the fact that God set into motion and gave the rules for this thing called marriage.
And it’s not about religiion it’s just how it is.
Marriage is not so much a religious thing. it’s a human right and privilege established by God. Just because a person chooses not to believe in God does not make him not exist or his laws and statutes of no value.
@To Know is to Grow: Actually, if you are agnostic or an atheist, then it DOES mean that the laws and rules of God (or the Bible) don’t mean much to you. You can’t logically expect a person who isn’t religious or is an atheist to abide by the rules of marriage set forth in a text considered by some to be mere methaphor and allegory.
I’m not here to throw stones or start a religious debate. I’m just speaking on behalf of all of us “non-believers”.
I understand clearly what you are saying. All I am saying is just because a person or group of people don’t believe someone or something exist does not make it not exist. It’s just your personal preference not to acknowledge it’s there.
I can flip that around to you…just b/c you believe it does doesn’t mean that it does either. its also your own personal preference to decide that something exists. and given that religion is based on faith.
and for the record, i’m not an anti-religious individual. but the argument had a whole in it.
” so what if you ain’t that religious? all of this is well and good…assuming that you believe in God.”
Exactly! As soon as I saw that that post was about what the Bible said, I scrolled down without reading it. You’ve lost me in a discussion when you need the Bible to validate your point…
We actually had the “save me from the sinking ship” conversation on our honeymoon. We were on an overcrowded ferry in Costa Rica; it was a CNN moment waiting to happen. There were only a few life vests on the ferry. If the boat went down there would be a whole bunch a people fighting over them. It wouldn’t be pretty.
Despite having failed junior life saving – twice, I’m a strong swimmer and I knew that I could swim to safety. I turned and looked at my husband who never learned to swim and said, “I can swim to shore, but I can’t tow you too. If you really love me, you’d let me go.” Okay, then I laughed, but he knew I was dead serious. As I did learn in lifesaving: Save yourself first. No sense in both of us drowning.
That said, I’d always save my child first. I put my husband first in a lot of things, but never above my child’s health and safety. Our daughter, fortunately, can swim like a fish. I guess that we’d both have to try to save his no-swimming behind.
That said, I’d always save my child first. I put my husband first in a lot of things, but never above my child’s health and safety. behind.
THIS! i totally agree
I’m gonna need all these folks who can’t swim to do better.
Go the local YMCA and jump in the dang water. Even little babies know how to paddle, LOL
Stop talking bad about me WIP. It ain’t my fault. I’m from a landlocked state!!
We’re black WIP. We don’t do so hot on precipitation. That’s why you don’t see us winning medals in swimming or skiing or skating (yeah I know I know… what about Shani)… I’m saying for the most part. We just don’t do precipitation. Now put us on dry land… oh yeah we are all up in that a$$… put us on precipitation? Yeah, we’re 2nd tier atheletes.
*Today’s ignorance was brought to you by: “Lack Of Sleep, Inc.”*
It is my husband’s duty to save my son because I will certainly be fighting like hell to save myself so that they are not left alone to mourn me. The last thing I want is for my guys to have to go through the trauma of losing me, nor do I want my best friend and I to lose our most precious gift. God seems to give us mothers INCREDIBLE strength (I call it mama strength) in times of adversity, particularly when our their babies are in danger, so I trust will find a way to get out of harm’s way. I’m fairly certain of it. So yeah… Save my baby, son. I got me.
“Save my baby, son. I got me.”
That’s a good point. I have more of a chance on my own than our child would have on his/her own. The child would need the help more.
This whole blog has got me thinking…in my pondering I realized that in the second example, “the husband” said family be d*mned and swam to safety before he thought to look for his family…makes you wonder that maybe in all this dialogue some people are selfishly considering themselves first when deciding who ranks where in their lives…benefit self first, right…just sayin
Oh, and as a side note…different people take precedence in different situations and if the feeling/action that you truly convey between each member is love then there is room for understanding when one has to fall back on the list when another’s situation is more pressing…where is flexibility in the family unit…just sayin
“makes you wonder that maybe in all this dialogue some people are selfishly considering themselves first when deciding who ranks where in their lives” This is exactly how this post read to me. Whether or not that was the intention, that was the underlying tone.
“…in my pondering I realized that in the second example, “the husband†said family be d*mned and swam to safety before he thought to look for his family”
he didn’t say “deuces” and swim away. he got washed away to shore and sh*t
this has been an issue with me off and on in my marriage. I love my husband i do but coming from a family of strong single mothers, and a situation where i feel that my mom choosing my dad over the kids has had a very negative impact on my life makes it very hard for me.
i honestly feel like the husband should feel that way about the wife, but I feel it is almost impossible for a woman to feel that way about her husband.. and i think that is one of the things thats unequal but fair.
you choose to love your spouse but you also choose to have a child and that bond that is between a mother and child…while they are a child is like no other.
I get fighting mad when someone comes at my husband, but id flat out kill a mofo about my child.
however in the context of relationships in order for the marriage to stay strong i have to but the wants of my child behind the needs of my man. i think thats where this really comes into play.
when I first had my child i use to feel guilty having someone keep them so we could go out, or getting the sneaky freaky on in the other room..
and for while we were just two people with a baby, i had to learn for myself to draw the line..
“I get fighting mad when someone comes at my husband, but id flat out kill a mofo about my child”
This ^ I agree with simply because children while young are helpless. It’s our duty to provide and protect.
And that needs before wants is spot on. These little crumb snatchers can be some selfish ingrates. We as parents have to weigh their “im going to die if i don’t get this” wants to other’s genuine needs.
“i honestly feel like the husband should feel that way about the wife, but I feel it is almost impossible for a woman to feel that way about her husband.. and i think that is one of the things thats unequal but fair”
hmm. i see your point here, and i think this actually may be true
“i honestly feel like the husband should feel that way about the wife, but I feel it is almost impossible for a woman to feel that way about her husband.. and i think that is one of the things thats unequal but fair.”
I couldn’t have said it better myself. And I don’t think it’s unequal either. It definitely is fair, like you said.
This is another reason I should never get married. I can’t see myself ever putting anyone else’s life before my kids. Not even my own.
Yet as a single parent, we must put our life first so we are healthy and alive to take care of our children. I must put myself first for the survival of my child.
I will fight for all of us until I can’t. But, if I have to die so that my kids can live I have other people that I trust to love and raise them to adulthood. As long as they have a chance life I will be okay giving up mine.
This post makes me want disclaimers for Blogs. Just so the reader can be aware of the educational background of the writer. Have they had any mental health training? Any instruction or foundation to provide at minimum, a research-based psychological assessment.
you can borrow my DSM-IV whenever you like.
well since i can’t swim i don’t know if going back out in to the water would do anyone any good. but lets say i could swim and if i had to choose between saving my wife and my children i would save my wife. plain and simple.
just if i had to choose between being a father and being a husband i would choose being a husband. i’m sure i’ll love my children with with all my heart but i believe my wife will be made specifically for me and i for her. kind of hard to talk about this without quoting scripture so i will. genesis 2:24 “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” eventually children will leave their parents as they are supposed to, with that said i will place a higher priority on my wife than my children.
of course i’m saying this now as an unmarried man who has no children.
“of course i’m saying this now as an unmarried man who has no children.”
this doesn’t mean that your opinion isn’t valid, though
true.
I respect every opinion on this post no matter know skewed some may seem. Some people have taken bible verses and other information to back their statements. For me it comes down to principle. I’ve heard it a million times but I don’t buy into that age old adage that, “If I brought you into this world I can take you out”.
It would be really selfish to put my life above that of my wife or kids. If this situation ever occurs and I have to choose, deuces… Close the casket and play Brandy’s “Missing You” while you bury me and say Roll Tide. Seriously though I couldn’t live with myself if I were placed in that situation and I chose my life above that of my wife or kids. There’s only one choice, save them…
Why is it selfish to want to live?
It isn’t selfish to want to live. That’s basic human instincts, but it is selfish to choose your own life over that of your child in this situation. What’s your view on this?
Wouldn’t be just as selfish to want to be saved?
The scenario above is too broad to really have an opinion. If I there was a high probability that I and my child would die in trying to save them, I think it makes more sense to save myself. I just keep hearing the word selfish thrown around. In a real life or death situation, realistically, it would be a feat if I had the state of mind to save anyone, child or stranger.
“Seriously though I couldn’t live with myself if I were placed in that situation and I chose my life above that of my wife or kids.”
So if you don’t save yourself FIRST how are you going to save your child. You get to safety then see how you will go about trying to save the others.
To save yourself is not selfish, it’s logical.
The situation The Champ presented is not like someone is holding a gun to you and you put your spouse or child between you and the gun. If someone shots at my child I will with all might attempt to pull my child to safety. And even take the bullet for my child.
But to stay out at sea and drown under the reasoning of I would be selfish if I got to land before trying to save the others doesn’t help anyone. Who knows there may be something on shore that I can use to help save the others.
As a single parent, I dont know that any of this applies to me because I dont have the privilege of marriage to my son’s dad (RIP). So in this situation, choosing between a life I cannot recreate or a companion I can replace – hands down the companion is going to have to fend for himself.
What I think is so interesting about this post is how certain people are about their choices. Hopefully none of us will have to make these kinds of choices, but if we ever do, I hope that we can all live with the choice made.
As a single parent, this is how I feel.
PLEASE read my reply to this below. As the child of a single parent, making me your world puts an unhealthy burden on me as a child.
If I had a husband and kids..it would be GOD first, then husband, then children, then parents and then the rest of my loved ones.
As others have explained a loving unit as husband and wife, both putting GOD first are better equipped as spouses and parents and children of their parents etc…
agreed
Your children are ALWAYS first. If you save your wife over your child, you deserve to thrown back into the water. When you decide to have a child, you decide to protect them with your life. Your wife (baby momma) makes the same choice. It goes children, spouse, parents, siblings. That’s the same rule for everyone. So you are #1 to your parents, etc… Even tho, I must admit, it would be hard for me to ever love a woman more than my mother. I mean, she (mom) loved me before I loved myself. She’s loved me from the day she knew she was pregnant to second I typed this comment. I would love my wife but if we get divorced…do I still place her above my mother? I just don’t think “replaceable love” can top permanent love. I know it should but how can I not have the woman who has loved me above all others at the top of my list? I…just…can’t…do….it. It’s my mamma man!
i didn’t realize people thought this. i thought all of us were taught by our parents that SPOUSE comes first. lol. kids coming before spouse is like cherishing the top of the pyramid instead of the foundation.
but! this is another question to ask my future spouse AHEAD OF TIME so i thank you for your thoughts!
“i thought all of us were taught by our parents that SPOUSE comes first’
yeah, that’s what i basically learned from my parents
Let’s be real, this post makes every bit of flucking sense! The spouse comes first….ALWAYS, ALL THE TIME! The problem is folks don’t go into relationships with this mentatlity, as a result, when they are forced to choose, they pick the wrong one. Let’s completely eliminate children out of the equation, spouses ARE choosing mothers over their wives and husbands. LET’S BE REAL! When the sh*t boils down, you aren’t going to be banging your mother and her couch with the holey cushin just isn’t going to compare to the California king with the 1500 thread count Egyptian cotton sheets and duvet. WISE UP DOUCHEBAG!
By relationships, I DEFINITELY, mean marriage!!!!
LOL, tell us how you really feel, alana
My stomach just turned over at the analogy.
I was literally JUST talking with someone about this Friday. As the child of a single parent I’m gonna need ALL SINGLE MOTHERS TO READ WHAT I AM ABOUT TO WRITE.
There is no child on EARTH that would choose to bear the responsibility of being the sole provider of their parent’s happiness, or purpose in life.
I will repeat myself.
There is no child on EARTH that would choose to bear the responsibility of being the sole provider of their parent’s happiness, or purpose in life.
If I could fill up this entire thread with that one sentence, I would. I swear I would. My mother sacrificed everything for me & my sisters. Her personal relationships, career choices, etc etc. She dedicated her life to make us happy. She also gave us a years-long guilt trip when it came time to LEAVE said house. Because, with no one left, if she wasn’t a mother, than what was she? Children are ungrateful by nature, and will never fully appreciate what you have done, because they will always tell you “I didn’t ASK to be born”. I carry the guilt of leaving my mother’s house with me everyday, even though my sisters don’t, & it breaks my mother’s heart. I gladly would have done with less time, less food, less ANYTHING if it meant that my mother would be a happy adult with healthy, thriving relationships. But alas, I am my mother’s best friend, and it has killed my own relationships as well. Putting your spouse first does not mean turning a blind eye to abuse, or neglecting your children to spend inordinate amounts of time with your spouse. It is the realization that children learn from SEEING, not saying, and I need to see a healthy, balanced adult. I NEED to see a healthy, loving relationship. I NEED the security of something I can count on (ie- my parents PLURAL).
I CANNOT BE YOUR WORLD.
I DO NOT WANT TO.
I CANNOT BE YOUR LIFE, BECAUSE YOU WILL NEVER LET ME HAVE MY OWN.
If I reach one.
Thank you for that. I think that was kind of what my questions before were getting at. I don’t know. Maybe its because I see it on a much grander scale these days but I just get the feeling that there are quite a few mothers who are going to be all the way bent out of shape when their children move on with their lives and they are alone and feel like they just lost their identity.
You have no idea. I’d be married now, but my ex knew it would be a losing game if he asked me to move back to the UK with him. I absolutely hate NY, but I can’t leave. I stopped introducing her to my boyfriends ten years ago. maybe my situation’s extreme, but I honestly don’t think so. Europeans do not cling to their children the way we do in the US, and their kids turn out fine. There’s a HuffPost article that describes this perfectly;
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/debra-ollivier/bringing-up-bebe_b_1224589.html
I agree Corey. Maris, it is not too late to have the relationships you want outside of your mother. Guilt is not something you want to carry for years, as the burden is bad for health and happiness, but I suspect you already know this.
well said!
And this is an extreme. My best friend is going through this with her own mom. It is ridiculous and i can’t even wrap my head around this. I also think that Champ’s scenerio is an extreme. Based on what he said, I can’t honestly see how someone could chose their own life or their spouse’s life over their children. I would be devastated if I lost my husband, but to lose a child, i don’t even want to imagine that.
Everything is about balance and I think that for those who arent married and with kids (like myself) we tend to see things in black and white b/c we haven’t gone through it. I like to read the comments of those that ARE married and/or DO have kids. They have gone through this. Marriage is not always going to be ideal. Having kids won’t always be wonderful. There will be times that i may one day feel guilty for placing my husband’s needs above those of my kids and vice versa but I will do it so that the house is balanced. And that to me is fine. Not everyone can win all of the time. I also hope to recognize or to at least listen if i am placing too much emphasis on one or the other. I will also need to place myself above those of my husband and children. So look at all of the grey area i just mentioned and I am not even in the situation.
I hope to one day marry someone that has the same mindset that I do about marriage and family. And i hope when I tell them that in a life or death situation, they should help our kids before they help me b/c i plan on doing the same that he doesn’t get offended.
Mostly everyone is ungrateful. At least children come around eventually and learn to appreciate their parents, especially when they become parents. When a man or a woman chooses to leave his/her spouse rarely does that person ever come back or show gratitude for the times you were good to him/her.
Exactly.
Also, Champ, you’re really bad at scenarios and should really stop using them. Maybe you can start citing scholarly articles are something, but of course that’s not fun.
Dead.
“Also, Champ, you’re really bad at scenarios and should really stop using them. ”
lol “bad” depends on how you define “bad.” while they may not be perfect (or sane, or reasonable, or sensible), they have a way of driving points home and getting people talking
This reminds me of my horror when I mentioned to my husband after we discussed some news story that I could never forgive him if he ever abused one of our kids (sexually or badly physically) because I think that’s unforgivable and I could never trust him with them again. Ever. And he totally floored me when he admitted he would probably be able to forgive me or if not forgive me, he would still love me. I was like WTF???!!!! And I had the same reaction when reading The Champ’s analogy and he was once again on the male side of “Well, of course I’d save you first!” WHY?
Until they are old enough to defend themselves, your kids have to come first. There are too many cases where a woman stayed with a bad boyfriend/father because she didn’t want to lose him – your first obligation is to your kids. Now, once they are 18 and safely out – you can stay with any abusive POS you feel like staying with, commit yourself 100% to your husband first and foremost, whatever. But until then? I feel like for a woman trying to fight that instinct to place her kids first is fighting a losing battle. And generally the women who do win that battle raise fucked up kids that shoot em as soon as they have access to a gun anyway.
Maybe this is one of those fundamental gender differences or something.
“Until they are old enough to defend themselves, your kids have to come first.”
Excellent point.
See, but everyone always assumes the extreme (& yes I realize the irony of using “always” in a sentence about generalizations) & thinks putting the husband first meant staying with an SOB after he has abused you and your kids. That is just being an idiot. Allowing someone to hurt you indicates a really effed up set of priorities and is not what anyone means in that instance. It means that you put your husband, & the relationship, before the WANTS of your children, NOT before the non-negotiables.
“See, but everyone always assumes the extreme (& yes I realize the irony of using “always†in a sentence about generalizations) & thinks putting the husband first meant staying with an SOB after he has abused you and your kids.”
Considering the Champ’s grand analogy was about who you would save first if they were drowning, I figured a dramatic (though statistically far less extreme) example was appropriate
I agree that common sense should play a role in these kinds of decisions and it shouldn’t always be 100% spouse first/kids first, but I do think it’s far more important for the health and safety of families if most women always put minor children first before spouses. Let’s face it, most people don’t understand nuance as well as they should and are better off hearing and subscribing to a blanket “protect your kids first” over a blanket “spouse comes first.” One has far more dangerous potential consequences.
And he totally floored me when he admitted he would probably be able to forgive me or if not forgive me, he would still love me. I was like WTF???!!!!
i think it’s easier for a woman to fall out of love with a man than vice versa, so that doesn’t surprise me. once we (men) are head over heels, we’re completely gone, lol
See, I woulda guessed the opposite but maybe you make a good point. Maybe.
“The (somewhat morbid) rationale behind this? If you believe your spouse was put on Earth to be your spouse, they’re irreplaceable. (And, if you don’t believe this, you probably shouldn’t be getting married…but that’s another topic for another day.) Your kids, as precious as they are, aren’t as irreplaceable. (I hate the way that sentence sounds, but there’s really no other way to put it.)”
I’m sure someone already mentioned this, but the better argument is that you can create another child with your spouse, but you cannot create a spouse with your child. #justsaying
I’m not married and I don’t have kids. If you wish to stop reading here and disregard my comments because of it, be my guest.
Ordinarily I would think this was just a semantics argument or a contextual one, but given the example that Champ gave, I can’t say that it is. He apparently is saying your spouse should come first at all times. I couldn’t find a scenario where I disagreed more (and I considered a scenario where white Republicans actually voted for Herman Cain in 2012).
I feel, you have the luxury to make your spouse your #1 priority at all times in all things UP UNTIL you have a child. Marriage may not necessarily be about sacrifice but parenthood is. If you agree that:
“…if your spouse doesn’t supersede all, you shouldn’t be getting married.”
I would submit to you
“If you child doesn’t supersede everything, you shouldn’t have any”.
Just like you chose to get married, you chose to have a child. The child didn’t ask to come. If you can’t put your child (who is dependent on you) first, don’t have one, then you’re free to make each other the priority. After you are married your spouse comes first, but after you have kids, your family comes first; for me (emphasis “for me”) only the very worst display of selfishness would suggest otherwise. Life is about MORE than just you; especially when you help usher new life into the world.
*Walks off stage like Rakim the 18th Letter*
TALK TO ‘EM!!!
Thank you.
I think a lot of people misconstrue what it is to put a “relationship first” and what “needs vs wants” are. A child NEEDS to eat. We are not saying feed the husband first & let the child starve (even though I am Latina & y’all KNOW about the big piece of chicken). A child NEEDS to be clothed. No one is asking you to clothe your husband & let the child go naked. A child NEEDS routine. We are not asking you to change dinnertime because the husband came home late from work. And, despite Champ’s analogy, we are NOT asking you to save the spouse first when y’all are drowning. Here’s what I need you to understand.
A healthy, well balanced adult in a healthy, well-balanced relationship more often than not produces healthy, well-balanced CHILDREN.
What I am saying is your children’s WANTS should not trump your husband’s NEEDS.
Here’s an example; Your children NEED nuturing time. That nurturing time should be left out of the marriage bed. If he WANTS to sleep with y’all, your husband’s NEED to be nurtured by his wife in a womanly fashion trumps Tommy’s WANT to be in your bed. Sometimes, the kids have to go to grandma’s and you need some alone time to nurture your RELATIONSHIP. You cannot give your children every ounce of your energy and then resent your husband (because men really almost NEVER do that) because he wants some of your energy, too. I’ve seen families watch TV on the couch & the mother leaves the husband in the corner of the couch and sits with the kids on the floor. I’ve seen people change their entire houses to appease the kids (beyond babyproofing, like re-painting & making the whole house about Barney). I’ve seen women who CANNOT turn back into women after they become mothers; the rest of their identity is GONE. That is what I’m talking about.
+1
I’m riding with Maris today. +1
” You cannot give your children every ounce of your energy and then resent your husband (because men really almost NEVER do that) because he wants some of your energy, too.”
PREACH!
“I think a lot of people misconstrue what it is to put a “relationship first†and what “needs vs wants†are. ”
I don’t think people are miscontruing it all, there was very little ambiguity to the supporting analogy that Champ offered, and thus, I think folks are seeing it at as the misnomer that it is. If you are attending to your child’s needs before your spouses wants you, by every conceivable definition, you are NOT putting the “relationship first”. I’m happy to scoot around Champ’s analogy because if we applied it here, both your spouse and your child would have a “need” for rescue, and he is arguing that your spouse’s need would supercede that of your children, and uses that as part of the argument for putting the “relationship first”. If you are not talking about that, then I need for you to understand:
1. You don’t agree with Champ either when he says “the relationship is first”
2. Arguing that the children come first is not mutually exclusive of a happy healthy relationship…
“2. Arguing that the children come first is not mutually exclusive of a happy healthy relationship…” It seems like a lot of men that agree with Champ are getting hurt by the attention that the woman gives her child. When a kid comes into the mix, her attention becomes divided and his should as well. It sounds like some of the people don’t realize that a balance is needed. Extreme cases do exist but not all of the time. Again, Champ’s analogy is all types of wrong. It isn’t either you put your spouse first or you don’t. It should be when to put your spouse first and when to put your child first. There has to be some middle ground–it can’t be all or nothing. If that is the case, I would end up a miserable wife. But if it is life and death, my kids come first. That is a part of me in that water drowning.
The majority of the people here are not arguing Champ’s analogy, because, well, most people wouldn’t have made it to land without finding their family first. To be honest, there is a “need to defend the family” er ‘gene’ I guess (?) built into children. That is the tool most child molesters or kidnappers use to convince the child to not tell the authorities or run away (they threaten their family with harm). The likelihood is much greater, should this be a real life occurrance, that the child would perish trying to save YOU. My argument is the point of spouse or children ‘first’.
The argument begins because most people who agree with ‘spouse first’ are arguing a completely different point than the ones who are arguing ‘children first’. The ‘children first’ people so far have brought in all kinds of “well, what am I supposed to do, stay with an abuser?” & “what, so I have to kick my child out of the house?” & “there’s no way I am choosing my spouse OVER my kids”. I never, at any point, and neither have most of the people arguing for ‘spouse first’, have advocaed Choosing either or, or following your spouse to the detriment of the child. I’m not saying, “I put my husband first so I smoked crack with him & to hell with Bobbi Christina”. I understand that if two people joined for life are both working to raise a child that the needs of that child come first & intheory at least. should strengthen the relationship. I am saying that some people, unfortunately a disproportionate amount of women, will turn their life into that child-to their OWN detriment, and it is not healthy. I am not speaking as a parent, I am speaking as a child. You make your child your life, what happens to your life when the child is no longer there? I know a husband right now about to pack his stuff because his wife moved her adult children back into their one-bedroom house-because they cant hold down jobs. I can’t leave the state for fear of what would would happen if I wasn’t there for my mother-because she did not retain any adult relationships (friend or otherwise) while raising her children. To make a relationship work you have to pay attention to it-and sometimes we get so caught up in what we think our children need that we forget we need stuff, too.
+1,000,000.
LET ‘EM KNOW!
I would most definitely save my kids first. As an adult, my husband should be able to take care of himself. Children, on the other hand, need help/support. Also, adults have (hopefully) lived full, rich lives whereas the children’s lives are just beginning.
i get your rationale. i disagree, but i still get it
This topic seems to always cause controversy. And I quickly remembered a TRUE STORY that happened a couple of years back.
I am definately with Champ on this one. I love my child, I also know that my husband loves our child. So why would I put more of a sad burden on him if I knew that it hurt him twice as much to save me over our child.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/fathers-choice-save-his-son-or-his-wife-20091130-jz40.html
This isn’t the same. His wife was screaming so she was the first person he could get to. His son was unconscious and submerged.
Theoretically this seems like the way things should be. However… As a mom the feelings might differ. Even though I do not have any kids, I cannot imagine carrying my kids for 9 months and choose anyone over them (even my spouse). Yes, your spouse isn’t replaceable, but no one is repalceable. I would probably attempt to save them all in the water situation, but bullet to head decision would… I would choose my kids. Men and women might differ on this since that maternal connection is a lot more emotional.
“Men and women might differ on this since that maternal connection is a lot more emotional.”
perhaps, but it seems like the answers today have been split between genders. some men and women agree with me, some men and women don’t
Funny. On Super Bowl Sunday, something went down where my cousin wanted something from her father (my uncle) and my aunt (his sister) was like, “no your mama, i.e., his wife gets first dibs.” And my cousin was all, “nuh uh.” And my aunt says, “yes. It’s wife first. Then kids.” And my 16 year old cousin was like, “NOOOO KIDS FIRST!” And then there was a really long, awkward pause in the room because no one wanted to say, “heffa get over yourself. You trippin.” Because it seemed like the most logical, natural response. Now, I don’t know what happens when you throw in sinking ships without life boats…but in the everyday of life it should be that hierarchy.
lol, your little cousin has a lot of nerve
Yes a lot of nerve. I thought she was 6, not 16.
She’s not gonna die, whatever it was she wanted, if she got it after her mama did.
If you view marriage as anything more than a contract between two people then you will probably choose your spouse over your child. How one can place a person that can walk away from you at any time over any and everything else in their life kinda floors me. Your child and your parents have a life long connection to you no matter what.
Yes, at a certain point your kids should walk away from you but that is expected and ultimately required. Even if one of mine turned to me at sixteen and said they hated me and wanted to get emancipated I wouldn’t regret anything that I gave them up to that point and probably still wouldn’t deny them anything from that point forward. I wouldn’t feel the same about a man. I just wouldn’t. Right or wrong.
“If you view marriage as anything more than a contract between two people then you will probably choose your spouse over your child.”
and i do, hence my feelings and sh*t
Children disown parents all the time. For logical reasons and for illogical reasons. A child who feels smothered by a parent may leave home early and keep that distance.
I think the thing about kids and why they can seem to come first it that they are your kids. My son is AWESOME! And yeah, I can be that parent. But so is my husband. My son has two teeth, can feed himself Cheerios, and is just learning to walk. To watch someone literally grow up right before your eyes is amazing. My husband is my best friend and he is always first, but he is also a grown man and can do for himself. This isn’t the case with your kids. They need you and depend on you and pretty much always will. SO while I believe that my husband comes first, my son needs me more.
“while I believe that my husband comes first, my son needs me more”
i think i might agree with this
Seeing as I’m not married but do have a child its hard for me to say spouse first. Perhaps when (and if) I do find somebody to love and marry for eternity then I’ll feel that way. But right now, my daughter is everything to me and as my job is to be her protector and provider then by letting that ninja sink would mean I wasn’t protecting her. And seeing as her mother’s job is also to do the same, if we let her go, then we didn’t do our job.
And yes Champ, your scenario was terrible. LOL. Kudos.
I do believe in love, but sometimes I think I’m just bad at it. So perhaps that would color my response as there’s no way I can afford to be bad at loving my child. So I won’t be.
“So perhaps that would color my response as there’s no way I can afford to be bad at loving my child. So I won’t be.”
i’m thinking that the majority of the single parents reading this disagree with me (some vehemently and sh*t). i understand why. but, like you allude to, i wonder how much of that feeling is based off of things they’ve experienced. like, if their life had gone another direction, would they feel differently?
See, here’s where I take issue with what you said.
Say you got married and had another child. At what point would you no longer give your woman a pass to tell you “you can fend for yourself” when you wanted sex, or how long would you give her to, as men often say, “pull herself back together”? How long would it be before you started seeking some attention from another woman, because you relinquished the attention back home? And, when it happened, exactly how eager would you be to blame anyone but your spouse for “forgetting” you?
Putting your spouse first-or even your needs first-does not mean at the EXPENSE of your child. The two are not mutually exclusive. There are countless books that put “work/life balance” at the TOP of the list of things one needs to be a productive worker. I do not understand how people cannot put the same scenario into the house.
” I do not understand how people cannot put the same scenario into the house.”
I don’t get it either because I’ve been married. I’ve been wife and mama. You can do all the wife stuff and do all the mommy stuff *too*.
I think some people don’t like their hypothetical husband.
not to be funny, but i dont understand this comment in response to what i said. or at all really.
i get the last few lines, but i dont understand what you mean or how anything you said in the beginning relates to what i said.
PJack, I was commenting on what Maris said.
Specifically I was commenting on this:
” Putting your spouse first-or even your needs first-does not mean at the EXPENSE of your child. ” in regards to comments that choosing a spouse means a child won’t get what he/she needs (in regular life, not in the sinking ship analogy that Champ used).
What I am alluding to is, while it is very clear to you the reasons for putting your child first right now as a parent, would you be able to understand and empathize with your future wife putting you last, if that happens? Like, right now you can’t conceive of putting anyone before your child, but what happens when your spouse puts everyone in the house before you?
I ask because I was in a very similar situation. I would jump in front of a bus for my ex’s son, and when he lived with us, he was my priority. There was a point in our relationship, however, when my ex was not really that comfortable with the er…attention shift. Putting the child first was all well and good for him untill he started coming last in the house, then it was all, “where’d my big piece of chicken go??” Just another perspective.
“I do believe in love, but sometimes I think I’m just bad at it.”
+1
I’ma jump on board here too. If/when you marry would you expect the wife to feel as strongly about your daughter as you do? If she doesn’t, is it an issue?
” If/when you marry would you expect the wife to feel as strongly about your daughter as you do? If she doesn’t, is it an issue?”
I think if she doesn’t it is an issue because spouses end up resenting and losing respect for their spouse who doesn’t share the same feeling as they do about their child.
Por example: Men and women have felt some kind of way about their spouse who is not affectionate with their child, knowing they are capable of affection as they use it with them a lot.
I dont know. I mean I agree in theory but in my life we’d be talking about a step-mother. and while im sure she’d be a great mother to my daughter…i dont know that i’d think she’d be as good a mother as the woman who bore her.
like she couldn’t shun her. that would be a problem and she’d need to grow to care about her and hopefully love her. and its easier with little kids probably. but what i would demand from both parties is equal respect.
i cant expect another woman to feel as strongly about my child as i do. its not her blood. that would be unfair and unrealistic. i come from a step-family home and while i definitely didnt notice any difference (or care enough to pay attention, i was the only boy) my sisters have vastly different stories about the treatment from both my mother and father.
In my world, the step-parents love, treat, raise the children as their own. Everyone’s child is cherished. #noWillJadaandSheree though.
“I do believe in love, but sometimes I think I’m just bad at it.”
I was just thinking this today. I’m glad we’re like cyber twins and ish.
the wife has to be tops in my opinion. but, it’s easier said than done because mistakes and issues raised by children can be excused first by their youth and then later by the sense that their failures are the result of your own. with a spouse it’s much easier to be pissed because you believe they are grown and should be doing better. however, the husband/wife relationship is the bedrock of the nuclear family. everything else is secondary
Save your kids first. Job one as a parent is to protect your children from harm. Besides, if you save your wife and allow your children to drown she will, (rightly), NEVER forgive you. I don’t think you can get past that. The sorrow, guilt and resentment will be a cancer that grows until it consumes the two of you. Then you will have lost your kids and wife as well.
Any person who marries with the premise that this person is replaceable SHOULD NOT BE GETTING MARRIED.
In theory, of course we would like to save our children over an adult spouse, but it’s very simple: God, Spouse, Children. It just won’t work otherwise.
These life rules aren’t always fair and understandable but they are fitting.
LOVED this one Champ.
To add complication to this already complicated scenario: What if your child is closer to you in the water than your spouse? You can STILL only save one. Do you swim PAST your child to rescue your spouse? Or do you grab the closest one to you and head for shore?
I’m not sure I can say which at this point. I’m just curious as to what The Champ and others would do.
Yeah. I can’t swim. So somebody is going to have to save my black arse on this one. In the event that I COULD actually swim, whoever is closest is getting grabbed. It’s not a question of emotion for me so much as it is simple mathematics. I can get EVERYBODY faster if I start with the one nearest me. Some considerations will be made if there are strong swimmers in the group but for the most part its going to be a proximity thing.
This is exactly how I feel, and I’m a decent swimmer. Whoever’s closest is getting grabbed first.
*On the real, folk….learn how to swim. Stop perpetuating the myth…lol.
Thats actually pretty standard. The parents are the foundation of the family. ANd as horrible as it is, in other places and times, if someone had to die during childbirth or if there wasn’t enough food for the baby and the spouse (and there were more kids) then the children, sadly enough, were expendable.
One parent with kids alone was not able to do the work needed to survive. It took at least 2 parents. You sacrifice a parent for the sake of one child and what happens is the children go under because they NEED that parent’s resources.
You dont let mom die in childbirth to save the baby because then who is going to take care of the baby and other kids? Then they all die. But you can make more kids.
With welfare and social support systems we dont have to make those choices much here.
But as far as prioritizing. parents should be united to raise the kids and not let them play one against the other but recognize them as a legal unit, one entity dedicated to the rearing of the kids.
Good post, folk…interesting questions, too.
I agree with you re: the order of things (i.e., God, spouse, kids, parents). The sinking ship scenario is probably messing with some folks, tho’…Perhaps a less extreme, more likely scenario would help clarify some things: a pregnant wife with serious labor complications. In this situation, a woman is having a difficult labor and both mother and child’s lives are at risk. Modern medicine aside, if the husband has to decide who should receive more attention (ie., who will be saved) I think many (if not most) men would choose the wife, whereas the wife would likely choose to save the child if she could. This situation illustrates an interesting, if not overlooked, difference between the sexes: women potentially sacrifice themselves just to bring life into this world. Every woman who has ever delivered a child risked her life in the process. I’m inclined to think it’s second-nature for many women (i.e., mothers) to want to save the child first, ‘cuz they’ve already done it before. On the other hand, men don’t get to experience the near-death cost of motherhood. Our bond with our children has to be established after birth…but our relationship with our wives is (hopefully) set. As stated above, in an ideal marriage, a man chooses to pledge himself to his wife….her happiness/joy, her sorrows/pain, her ups & her downs. You’ve really got to love the sh#t out of someone to commit yourself to that, y’know?? I know that if I’ve committed myself to this woman before God, our families, and a whole bunch of other people I don’t know, it would be a no-brainer for me: save the wife first.
It’s a murky situation all-around, tho.
This is a good one and totally understandable. I would expect for my husband to save me. Why? B/c neither of us know this child yet and we can have another child even though this one will be lost. You need to help Champ with his analogies next time.
Lol…Champ’s analogy is more extreme…but it got the comments a’flowing.
Awesome analogy. I think you might even make the ‘children-first’ population stop and think for a sec with this one.
Will I place my husband, my life companion and father of my children above my children? Absolutely. But just because he comes first and they come second doesn’t mean that I don’t have the ability to be a good parent. In fact, growing up with parents that have so much love and such a bond could actually be good for the kids to see. I’m still going to kiss them before bed and school, but I’m not going to forget about loving my husband and considering his needs just because I popped out a little ‘us’.
If I had the option of saving my husband and my 4 month old, I’m saving my husband because I know him more. I don’t want to lose him, save the kid and by chance that kid grows up to be a f*ck up and our relationship sucks. Nope, I’ll miss the baby but we can make another.
Always save the child first. Your spouse isn’t worth a damn if s/he disagrees. You will never love anybody the way you love your children. Nobody. That includes your spouse.
Blood first-MY KIDS! No ifs, buts or explanation needed. I birthed them, that’s enough.
I was outta the loop yesterday. That being said, posts like this one are why I continue to read this blog. It’s unpopular to admit, but on this point your are right sir. Even in the Bible, it is explicitly stated that except for God, NOBODY comes before a spouse, including the kids. Assuming there are no kids involved before marriage is entered into, a man and woman are the foundation of their family. If one parent loves a child above their spouse, there will be a crack in said foundation.
Cracked to foundations lead to crooked structures, feel me?
What if you have a child before you have a spouse? What then?
I wish there was a way to measure this: I bet single parents who have never been married are more likely to chose the child over the spouse than a single childless person or a married person.
Spouse comes first. Here are the reasons why:
1) God created Adam and Eve. Eve was made from Adam’s rib. That was the first union. The children, Cain and Abel, came later.
2) A foundation for a strong family unit is a strong marriage. Children can only benefit from an example of what a healthy relationship looks like, and therefore grow up and create that with their spouse. Putting children first will only cause problems: The husband/wife will leave which can result in divorce, and that does not benefit children at all. When you think about it, there are more advantages to putting spouse first.
3) Children are not one flesh with their parents; they are a part of their parents. A big difference. Spouses are one whole whereas children are a part. A whole is greater than a part.
4) Spouses made a vow before God. When there is a divorce, you are breaking that vow you made with God. You do not make a vow before God with your children.
5) Children will eventually grow up and become concerned about their own lives and you the parents will be secondary as you should.
The reason why the divorce rate is so high is because people leave God out of their lives. If more people were less selfish, and consulted God, not just for a mate, but to guide them in all things, the divorce rate would be much lower. God ordained marriage, so how can you expect your marriage to work if you leave him out of it. When you allow God to choose your mate, he will put a kind of love in you for your mate that is indescribable. True love comes from God. And many people confuse lust, fond feelings, and caring for a person as love when it’s not love but one ot the other things mentioned above. And yes that kind of love is different from the love that you have for your children, because the love you have for your children is primal, that’s why you must make sure you put your relationship with your spouse first so that relationship can last and not be another statistic. Too many people are selfish and take a pessimistic view of marriage and therefore they’re fears end up manifesting because that’s all they focus on.
Spouses come first and that’s the cold hard truth.
You are to be a good steward over your children and are there keeper . Your their protector and provider and they look to you for direction And guidance
In my family dynamic my children come first. They are my responsibility my husband is not. My husband is replaceable and my children are not. Marriages are paper unions my children are my very own flesh .
. In fact on the car ride home from the hospital our first unanimous parental decision was that.,given the chance , in an accident who ever sat opposite the baby would take the brunt of an impact in an accident
My husband is well aware that I expect him to prioritize our kids the same way.
My wife continues to take the side of her son, I am the STEP DAD, so many can relate to that….It has become to a point where she cannot control her 16 year old son and he continues to defy authority, and I and others deem that since he cannot take care of himself, then how can he take care of others. Especially, my two year old daughter.
My wife continues to take the side of her son, who has become quite disrespectful and disobedient, he is 16 years old and I am the step dad. Myself and others do not feel safe for her son to be alone with my two year old daughter because of his lack of responsibilities for himself and others, and the fact he has a mood disorder. This of course has been creating a ripple between myself and my wife, where she says that, “I will take care of my own and butt out.” Thus giving her son a shield to hide behind when he becomes defiant. My main focus here is that my marriage is on a tight-wire and the balance of it is off. Right now, I wonder what I can do to protect my daughter, if I lose out right in a custody battle for her. My wife knows how disrespectful her son is, but she allows him to get away with everything without a consequence. More or less, she puts him before me, but I love my wife and daughter too much to give up on them…. Her son proved his point the other day calling me out, with his mom in the middle, and I see no resolve since he thinks he has his own reigns as long as his mommy is there to back him up. I am at fault in some ways, but I feel like I am always in left field looking in at the game in progress.
It’s sad how one choses their own flesh over the love of their ‘life’, how selfish.
One day, your ‘own flesh’ will leave and seek for their other half, and be happy with them.
It’s not about you in a marriage, I believe it works as a team, that Team that becomes ONE.
That ONE team will work their best, and will deliver the best of their best, and so on.
That is indeed, the way it goes. It makes my heart ache when I hear parents putting their child at first.
You perfect yourself, and you show how it’s done, by becoming ONE perfect team.
- It’s sad to see many married/divorced people here who don’t know what to be in real love is, and don’t know how to take advantage of it and live a complete happy life, like it’s supposed to be.
By the way, I’d die before watching my other half die. (Risk myself for her). I don’t care who lives, as long as one of us does, it’s all that matters. You’ll go knowing you tried.
Obviously, the ONE team is the one to give LOVE to the child from above, where they’re first.