T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
129.1 | | VCQUAL::THOMPSON | Noter at large | Thu Jul 09 1987 18:00 | 25 |
| I don't know if men do or not but I do know that I'm starting
to have the same feelings that Steve describes. I'll be 34
this summer and though my wife and I have one child already
I'm starting to feel the urge (need seems strong) to have a
second.
It's sort of the feeling that if we're going to have another
we should do it soon. It may be tied into the thought process,
not all of which is conscious, that I don't want to be too old
when its just my wife and I again. I love my son but I know
he'll leave one day. When it happens I want to be able (strong,
healthy) to enjoy myself.
Also I get times when I have this feeling that one is not enough.
Enough for what? Hard question to answer. I think it's the age
old situation of wanting someone to carry on the name/family etc
after I'm gone and is one child enough to do that. Now my brother
and sister also have children (she married a man name Thompson so
her son will carry the name on too it that really mattered) but
neither of them are the child of my wife and I. It's *our* family
I'd like to see continue rather then my fathers. Of course that's
probably a silly and irrational thought in to days world but...
Alfred
|
129.2 | Other factors? | VCQUAL::THOMPSON | Noter at large | Thu Jul 09 1987 18:07 | 12 |
| After re-reading my last reply, thinking about my father, and
the little I know about Steve a second though came to me. After
my father got re-married (he now has 4 children and 2 step-children
and is over 60 years old) he talked about having children with
his new wife. Now her age and other things make that unlikely
but it was interesting that with 6 grown children he started to
feel like he should have more. It was a matter of a new family
a joint production with his new wife. Your thinking/talking about
getting married again, right Steve? Wonder if that and the feelings
about more children are related more then age. Just a thought.
Alfred
|
129.3 | | QUARK::LIONEL | We all live in a yellow subroutine | Thu Jul 09 1987 18:20 | 16 |
| Well, I was thinking about having more children even before
my earlier marriage ran into trouble. Yes, I am thinking/talking
about getting married again, and the woman to whom I am engaged
does also want children, so that's nice, but it's no longer clear
that we actually will get married, or if we do, when that will
be. The later we do so, the older we'll be and the riskier it
will be. If this particular relationship ends up not working
out, I'll certainly want to consider the ability/desire to have
children in any prospective partner. It's important to me.
However, I admit to the feeling Alfred suggests that I would
want to have a child by my new wife - not as a means of "cementing"
the relationship, but because it's something wonderful a couple
can share and because I truly love children and would like another
of my own.
Steve
|
129.4 | Caution advised... | CSSE::MARGE | an ergonomical delight! | Thu Jul 09 1987 21:49 | 14 |
| I've known women who have rushed into an ill-advised marriage to
have the child "they've always wanted". And because of the courts'
bias toward the mother in custody decisions, they've essentially
deprived the father of equal parenting privileges.
I have no doubt that men feel the ticking of the clock as women
do... I would just caution single men that being a Sunday_father
is not very fulfilling.
The best laid plans...
Marge
|
129.5 | I must have been drinking too much caffeine! | HULK::DJPL | Do you believe in magic? | Fri Jul 10 1987 10:39 | 12 |
| Well, I was personally programmed to want my first child by 25. I didn't
want more than a 25 year gap between me and my first born [trying to
overcome a generation gap problem I saw in the '70s]
Well, I'm 25 and my wife is now sounding like a Ronco or K-Tel product:
Allow 6-8 weeks for delivery! :-)
With me, I am terrified of not being able to equate with my children's
ideas and opinions. This 'speeded up' my bio-clock.
This is now just so much fluff because I have major disagreements with
TODAY'S teenagers, never mind 13 years from now!
|
129.6 | Not for singles only | QUARK::LIONEL | We all live in a yellow subroutine | Fri Jul 10 1987 11:46 | 13 |
| Also, I should have included in my original topic Alfred's case
of a currently-married couple in their 30's (or whatever). There's
no reason why "baby hunger" has to be limited to single men (or
women)!
I agree completely with Marge that wanting a child is hardly a good
reason by itself to get married. And of course there is the common
belief that many women do just this - "arrange" to get pregnant
and then marry the father; I can't comment on whether this really
happens this way as often as folklore would have us believe. Has
anyone heard of a man doing this? It would seem much more difficult
for a man to arrange!
Steve
|
129.7 | age doesn't equal understanding anyway | NOVA::RANDALL | I'm no lady | Fri Jul 10 1987 11:51 | 12 |
| for DJPL:
As a mother of a thirteen-year-old I feel qualified to offer advice ...
Not to worry. Thirteen years from now teenagers will be entirely
different, so you'll have to go through it all over again anyway. :)
Just save that worry for later.
Not to mention that he or she will be just as obnoxious and wonderful
and endearing as you and I were at that age.
--bonnie
|
129.8 | not sure what conclusions to draw from this | NOVA::RANDALL | I'm no lady | Fri Jul 10 1987 11:57 | 24 |
| re: .6 (which snuck in while I was answering .5) --
Yes, I know a man who did this back when I was in college.
His girlfriend was a rather traditional woman in her private life but
determined to be a lawyer; the only way she saw to resolve these
different feelings was to remain unmarried. However, he managed to
persuade her into bed (people who know them presume alcoholic drink was
involved, but that's another story) and when the consequences became
apparent, she saw no choice but to marry this kind, loving,
compassionate man (hey, except for this one thing, he was a nice
guy...) to make sure their baby had a good home.
She worked evenings to put him through school (he used to read his
molecular physics and chem engineering assignments to their
daughter to soothe her to sleep) and then after he got a job she
finished her schooling.
They never had another child.
They eventually divorced but I don't think it had a whole lot to
do with the circumstances of their marriage.
--bonnie
|
129.9 | | CEODEV::FAULKNER | Mr Manners | Fri Jul 10 1987 12:20 | 1 |
| No.
|
129.10 | Clock? Mine must be slow, fast, or inoperable. | RSTS32::DELBALSO | | Fri Jul 10 1987 12:31 | 9 |
| I just passed my 39th birthday. My girls were born when I was 23
and 25. I love them dearly and I've enjoyed every moment (well -
*almost* every moment) of their upbringing, but I know for a fact
that under no circumstances would I want to go through any of it
again. I'd rather just move on enjoying what's yet to come. No -
I did my share of baby-holding, etc.
-Jack
|
129.11 | I'm confused... | LILAC::MKPROJ | REAGAN::ZORE | Fri Jul 10 1987 13:25 | 17 |
| I'm getting confused, I thought that the term "biological clock"
refered to the amount of time that a woman's body was capable of
producing eggs to be fertilized. I didn't think it had anything
to do with fears or wants or desires. I do understand that there
is alot of concern by women who have forgone starting a family to
get thier careers underway. That concern being that the older they
get the more difficult it is to conceive. In some cases then, I
would think that some women would express joy at not being able
to conceive rather than disappointment as they didn't want any children
anyway. Having a biological clock is a common characteristic among
all women (who are capable of conceiving at some time). Having
a fear of this clock running out is not a common characteristic
of the aforementioned group (though alot of women do want children
at some point in thier lives).
Rich
|
129.12 | | QUARK::LIONEL | We all live in a yellow subroutine | Fri Jul 10 1987 14:10 | 8 |
| Re: .11
Yes, in one sense the "biological clock" is a physiological property
of women. But its existence also fosters certain emotions in women,
and also in men, the latter being the point of my note. One hardly
ever talks about the physiological side without also discussing
the emotional side.
Steve
|
129.13 | Turn My Hourglass Over? | TOPDOC::STANTON | I got a gal in Kalamazoo | Sat Jul 11 1987 05:55 | 7 |
|
My clock went off at 26 after years of kicking around the
country being a free-wheelin' kinda guy 8^} . I met my wife
by pure accident, we married, & had our first almost a year
later, waited 6 years & had our second. Curiously, that desire
for having children is now gone.
|
129.14 | Must be something | MOSAIC::MODICA | | Mon Jul 13 1987 10:22 | 5 |
|
Must be something. All my life I hated kids; couldn't stand to be
near em. After turning 30 something happened I don't understand.
Now I not only like kids, my wife and I are having one. Geez, hope
I don't end up liking Lawrence Welk music after I turn 40 :-)
|
129.15 | it must be very erratic | HIT::WHALEN | They're only out to get you if you're paranoid | Mon Jul 13 1987 20:57 | 8 |
| Well, if there is one, then there is still plenty of time on mine.
Though I have no problem dealing with kids (people have even
complemented me as to how well I handle them), at 29, I find that
I have no desire to be a father. Part of it may be that I am still
very single, but I doubt that that is the entire reason.
Rich
|
129.16 | who does what when the alarm sounds? | ARCANA::CONNELLY | Frodo lives | Mon Jul 13 1987 23:27 | 5 |
|
As an interesting "thought experiment", if you are a man whose
biological alarmclock seems to be ringing "it's time!", think
about quitting your job and staying home with a child for the
next five years to see if it still sounds as enthralling...
|
129.17 | sounds good to me | COLORS::MODICA | | Tue Jul 14 1987 15:16 | 4 |
| Re: .16
I did.
It does.
|
129.18 | | QUARK::LIONEL | We all live in a yellow subroutine | Tue Jul 14 1987 18:05 | 5 |
| Re: .16
You are presuming that women typically stay home five years for
a child. This is hardly universal.
Steve
|
129.19 | avoiding those Awkward Ages! | ARCANA::CONNELLY | Frodo lives | Wed Jul 15 1987 01:49 | 14 |
| re: .18
> You are presuming that women typically stay home five years for
No, I'm not presuming that they DO. I'm not even sure most would
WANT TO. But at some archaic point in my childhood I would say that
that was probably the minimum commitment expected of the primary
caretaker (those were extremely sexist days, I realize).
It was only intended as a minor sanity check. Let's face it, we
all want all the bennies, and the less work we have to do, the
better the fantasy sounds. My fantasy is just that I get to cover
for 10 months - 22 months and 34 months - 46 months...that'll give
Mom most of the Terrible Twos and Finicky Fours, I can handle the
rest (I hope!).
|
129.20 | | QUARK::LIONEL | We all live in a yellow subroutine | Wed Jul 15 1987 12:53 | 8 |
| Re: .19
I suppose I can see that some people might feel this way, but as
I've generally taken care of my son half of the time since he was
eight weeks old, I didn't think it was relevant to the question.
I'm perfectly willing to put in the effort involved - that's
part of the fun!
Steve
|
129.21 | kids r great | NSG008::MILLBRANDT | Think Pantasy | Thu Jul 16 1987 13:51 | 6 |
|
I stayed home the first four years, til my younger son was two. Ego
here - I figured I had more to offer my kids than a babysitter. Now my
husband has been home three years and counting....
Lately they've been building a treehouse.
|