Conference turris::womannotes-v2

USMRM2::PMONFALCONE                                   8 lines  12-SEP-1988 11:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lorna,
      I absolutely agree with you.  Imagine the burden this
    child will bear for perhaps the remainder of his life!
    This statement will be in the back of his mind always.  Even
    if she happens to retract it at some point in time.  What's
    the matter with some of us adults?
    
    Paula

NOVA::M_DAVIS "Old-fashioned Grin Mill"               7 lines  12-SEP-1988 12:48
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Totally agree with you, Lorna.  It's amazing to me that folks going
    thru divorce manage to be so blinded by their pain that they have
    so little regard for their kids.
    
    Marge
    
    

AKOV12::MILLIOS "twentysomething"                    13 lines  12-SEP-1988 12:55
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    re: .140
    
    Adulthood is combining the clarity of childrens thoughts with the
    maturity, foresight, and tactfulness of experience, combined with
    the ability to carry through on those thoughts.
    
    Seems both the mother, and the fellow who told Lorna, lack some
    or all of the above.
    
    A pat on the back, Lorna.
    
    :^)
    Bill

JJM::ASBURY                                          19 lines  12-SEP-1988 13:02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    re: .140
    
    I sincerely hope, since this woman seems to so desperately
    "need" a man to take care of her, that she find an ADULT man to
    do so. Children should not be expected to act as support for single 
    parents, *especially* a child so young. No matter the age, however,
    I do not think it is healthy for a child to have to act as a partner
    for a single parent. I know that it happens all the time. I was
    one of those kids.
    
    There is a psychological-ese term for this situation which I can't
    seem to remember at the moment. All I know is kids should be allowed
    to be kids. They are not "equal" with parents in the structure of
    the family, nor should they be. 
    
    I hope you can understand what I am trying to say, here. I have
    the feeling I am not doing a great job of explaining.
    
     -Amy.

    Boy, can I relate to that.  My mother did the same thing
    to me.  My father left when I was 12.  My mother would confide
    everything in me, take me everywhere with her.  I didn't feel the
    burden at the time, but as the years wore on it created friction
    in our relationship.  She wasn't really allowing me my own life,
    and I had this overwhelming, unnatural concern for her welfare.
    
    Glad it's all worked out now though.  But when I come to think
    of it, I only started less of this concern for her when she got
    remarried.  Kinda like 'somebody else can take over now'.
    
    Dorothy

	What a burden to put on a three year old kid! I can imagine
	him saying to himself, "Who me? You want me to go look for
	work?" If it weren't so serious it would be funny.

	But if she had just said, 'Now, you have to be the man of the family."
	I don't see that as being so bad. All things being equal, a family
	with a woman and a man is better off than a family without a man. An
	the eldest son becomes, by default, "the man of the family", whatever
	that means. Acknowledging the reality of the situation ought to
	be a positive thing. But the kid shouldn't be swamped with
	feelings of responsibility that he is in no position to shoulder
	(the responsibilities or the feelings)

						Tom_K

       RE: .6 - I don't believe using the phrase "be the man of the
       family" is appropriate at all. Even the oldest son is not the
       "man" until he's past the age of 21. There is something implied
       in this phrase that brings back all the thoughts of the past
       years that women are somehow not able to make it without a man of
       some sort. Let boys be children before we insist they become men.
       liesl

When my kids father and I separated and for many years after that my son
would try to "take care" of me - I am not sure who told him he should do
that but it was very frustrating for both of us.  Now he 20 and when he
comes home on weekends (or extended visits such as this past summer) he
gives me a bear hug and says "I'll take care of you mummy.  As long as
you let me have the car tonight."  My son was never allowed to be the
"MAN" of the family in my house - I did not want him to be and I really
did not need one.  My son was and still is "my baby" even though my
daughter is also "my baby" (neither of them encourage this behavior on
my part).

Anyone who even suggests such an idea to a child is doing incredible
damage to that child.

BTW - why would the woman need a "man of the family" anyway?

_peggy

		(-)
		 |
			A woman is a girl
				and
			A boy is a man????

			and a fish without a bicycle...

    Re: .8
    
>			and a fish without a bicycle...

    Is like a man without religion - at least according to the original
    version of this saying....
    
    Re: all
    
    I agree that saying something like this puts a terrible burden on
    the child, but I also think Lorna was perhaps less tactful than
    was possible in expressing her opinion (which I share) on the subject.
    No matter....
    
    I too was one of those kids without a childhood.  I didn't have
    to take care of my mother - she was amply able to take care of herself
    - but I did have to take care of my younger brothers while we were
    growing up.  It was good in some ways, and bad in so many others.
    I would avoid at all costs putting my son through it (though it
    doesn't seem too likely, at present....)
    
    				Steve

    I have known several situations where mothers clung like leeches
    to their children after a divorce, and it really makes me so damn
    angry!
    
    Additionnally, the two cases I was priviledged enough to watch both
    implicated mothers who had never bothered about their children before
    the separation, sobbed on their childrens'shoulders during their
    difficult times, and dropped them again as soon as a new boy-friend/
    husband appeared on the horizon. Now, how's that for perturbing
    a child completely?
    
    One of them had her child sleeping in bed with her (Oedipe, au
    secours!) every night... until she had a new boy-friend, obviously.
    
    Now, "Kids as crutches" is a pretty bad scenario, but "Kids as weapons"
    and "How to manipulate your ex- through his/her children" is, I
    guess, even worse, and even more current.
    
    Joana                                     

    
    	Whenever either marriage partner leaves the family that they've
    made, issues of abandonment are created. In this case, the father
    left and it's been suggested that one of the children take on the
    role of the nonexistant father. What this effectively does is abandon
    the child twice. It's bad enough that in the child's mind, he "wasnt
    worth" it for daddy to "stick it out". Now, the child's needs have
    no chance in being met in their proper time, cause the child is
    forced to deal with the needs of his mother now. There's no time
    for his needs. He's been virtually abandoned again.
    
    	As he grows up, he'll likely become further and further "enmeshed"
    with his mother. He wont know where he ends and where mother begins,
    in terms of personal boundaries - cause there likely wont be any.
    He'll get the "hole in the soul" that so many of us share. He'll
    feel this and know deep down that something's very wrong here, but
    he wont be able to put his finger on it for some time. As he grows
    through his teens, he'll feel the need to get away from this family
    (as all male teens do) but he'll feel so, so empty when he's away.
    He'll seek the illusion of connectedness to fill this void within.
    He'll try all things and find that every one of them fails to meet
    what was denied him so long ago and is the cause of his personal
    emptyness.
    	
    	Perhaps he'll meet a woman of like origins, and form a co-dependant
    relationship for a time, maybe even marry! The marriage could go
    on for a while, but even that will not satisfy across time. There's
    still something missing, and, as a result, he'll always really be
    searching. During the time that close intimacy with his wife did
    satisfy, another child is concieved. The unity felt between the
    couple - because of the baby - gives them reason and drive to make
    things work. It's very logical and makes sense. But because the
    real problem was never adressed and solved, the seething emptyness
    still resounds in his soul.
    
    	Still searching over the years, he finds another woman who seems
    interested, but he realizes he's married! He has a kid! As time
    goes on, the logic is broken down by the sheer power of emotion.
    He makes a move - his new friend responds in kind. He has found
    again what temporarily seems to fill the void within himself. He
    becomes convinced that *this* is it, now, the bond that will lead
    to his happiness and fulfillment! (Nothing could be further from
    the truth) He announces to his wife that "things are over - I'm
    leaving" abandoning his child as he was abandoned himself. Our
    common crisis has gone full cycle, into the next generation.   
                                       
    	The story can have a happy ending! Perhaps the couple with the
    young child were introduced to the theory of family dysfunction.
    Maybe they both resolved to "stamp it out" at their generation,
    by doing the recovery work necessary to 'erase' the void within.
    Reliving the parts of your childhood that were never given in their
    proper time is a bit difficult as an adult. But it can be done.
    It takes an incredible awareness of the way things are and were and
    a large amount of determination to stop this cycle so that the effects
    will not be carried forth. Again. Ad infinitum.
    
    	Trouble is, it's so just much easier to be an addict, a
    co-dependant, a compulsive/abusive, an alcoholic, a ....
    
    	Joe Jas

>           RE: .6 - I don't believe using the phrase "be the man of the
>       family" is appropriate at all. Even the oldest son is not the
>       "man" until he's past the age of 21. There is something implied

    Did you really mean 21? The reason I ask is that all versions I
    can remember of when a girl becomes a woman has that taking place
    sometime between the start of menstruation (13?) and 16. I would
    assume that the change for boy to man would take place at about
    the same time.
    
    			Alfred

    re: .11
    
    Joe - I agree, mostly. One thing, though - 
    
    >In this case, the father
    >left and it's been suggested that one of the children take on the
    >role of the nonexistant father.
    
    Why did you assume that it was the male child? 
    
    In any event, regardless of your reasons, let me point out that
    this same situation (Dad leaves, one child takes over the role of
    the "other parent") can occur (and does, unfortunately) with female
    children. My parents were divorced when I was 8. The my mom went
    to work so we could have food, clothing, shelter. (all those
    'luxuries'... ;-) ) And I was responsible for making sure my sister
    (3 1/2 years younger) behaved. (No easy task, let me tell you...
    you see, I had the responsibility, but not the authority.) I was
    also responsible for at least getting dinner started (eventually,
    I cooked the whole thing) ON TIME, and there was often hell to pay
    if things were done late or imperfectly. The house also had to be
    cleaned up, the table set, etc. BEFORE my mom got home. Period.
    
    Of course, we also had chores to do on the weekends. Dusting and
    vacuuming, that kind of stuff. That all makes perfect sense to me.
    I think all members of the household ought to share in the
    responsibilities around the house. But there was also an emotional
    responsibility to support the working parent. I think this is too
    much (not healthy) for an 8 year old child. Or any child.
    
    Again, I hope I am making sense, here. Because there are so many
    emotions wrapped around what I am trying to say, I'm not sure if
    what you are reading is indeed what I am saying.
    
     -Amy.                                          
    
    

    Re .12, I don't think of my 14 yr. old daughter as a woman.  I guess
    if I had to pinpoint it I start thinking of both males and females
    as adults somewhere between the ages of 18 and 21, depending on
    the individual.  But, I still don't think a child should be made
    to feel he or she has to take care of his or her mother just because
    her husband has moved out.  And, as Peggy said, why does there have
    to *be* a *man* of the household?!  Women should live with men for
    companionship, love, romance, sex, but not because they *need* a
    man to "take care of them."  That's the sort of thinking that has
    made so many divorced women poor because they no longer have the
    husband's higher paycheck to help take care of them in life.  (Believe
    me I know what I'm talking about!)  I hate to see that type of attitude
    perpetuated, and it's not fair to men either!  The woman has three
    children.  Why should the youngest, just because he happened to
    be born male, be told that he has to take care of his mother and
    two sisters?  Why should males always have the burden of taking
    care of females?  Why shouldn't we all take care of ourselves as
    best we can?
    
    Lorna
    

    
    	Re .13,
    
    Actually I hadnt assumed that at all - at first. But then I thought
    I remembered that the gender of the child was identified in .0 and
    I changed the context of my story from s/he to just "he" - which
    simplified writing it a lot!
    
    I do realize that this can happen to a girl-child as well as a boy-
    child, due to the same circumstances. I meant no disrespect or
    indifference to women by the context I ended up completing the story in.
          
    	Joe Jas

< Note 172.12 by CVG::THOMPSON "Basically a Happy Camper" >
                            -< wait a minute here >-

>           RE: .6 - I don't believe using the phrase "be the man of the
>       family" is appropriate at all. Even the oldest son is not the
>       "man" until he's past the age of 21. There is something implied

<    Did you really mean 21? The reason I ask is that all versions I
<    can remember of when a girl becomes a woman has that taking place
<    sometime between the start of menstruation (13?) and 16. I would
<    assume that the change for boy to man would take place at about
<<    the same time.
    

       I was using the age more as a symbol than anything since I don't
       know how to tell if someone's really an adult until I see whether
       they act like an adult. I suppose defining how an adult acts
       could be a topic all by itself. My main point was that children
       should be allowed to be children. Isn't it true that the higher
       up an animal is on the intellegence scale the longer they nurture
       and care for their offspring? Should we force them to "grow up"
       too soon? liesl

    re .12, in the spirit of .14...                    
    
    I don't believe that the definition of the age a boy becomes a man is
    the issue in question.  I agree with leisl's main point, that the
    statement does strongly suggest that this grown woman needs to identify
    a figure that somehow equals "man of the family," implying male human
    taking the place of the father that is now gone. I don't think she
    (Liesl) was trying to define the age when it would be "okay" to
    identify the son as the "man... etc." It may be difficult to raise
    children as an only parent, but placing part of the role of an adult on
    a child of three simply because he is male ridiculous. 
    
    IF this woman meant (and that is not completely clear) that "man of the
    family" equals "head of household," equals male, it is ridiculous that
    a grown woman (my opinion) needs to identify such a figure especially
    when the one she chooses is so obviously less suited to the task than
    she - I agree with points made that I hope most women of today don't.
    She's it now, she's in charge, not the oldest male.
    
    My interpretation of the statement "you are now man of the family" in
    the context given, implies that "you" are replacing the function of
    father.  You must fill the void daddy left behind because the family
    needs an adult male.  Yes, saying that to a three year old is
    potentially damaging, and very unfair.  Instead, saying, "I need
    your cooporation now while I adjust to being the only parent," would
    have been much more appropriate.
    
    The need of this woman to have a partner adult (usually male) to act as
    co-parent to provide assistance now in raising children and managing a
    household, however, is not so ridiculous.  Not many of us would choose
    or willingly accept raising children as a single parent, and those that
    can and do are exceptional.
       
    However, like I said, this woman seemed to by implying that she would
    turn to the oldest male member of the family to fill that role, even
    though he was only three. 
    
    It is remotely possible that this woman could have meant to identify
    him as the only male member of the family now, but given the context, I
    think that unlikely.
    
    other Amy              
    
                        

	It's been asked 'why is it necessary for there be a man in the family?'
	It isn't, just as it isn't necessary for there to be a woman. But,
	in general, it makes for a better family.


							Tom_K

    Re: .18
    
    I think the objections are to the connotations of "the man of the
    family."  He's the one who takes care of everything, the family
    manager, so to speak.  A woman who is a capable manager doesn't
    need to have a "man of the family" in that sense.

    re .15
    
    Joe - I realized that later, when I went back and read .0. 
    Sorry.
    
    -Amy.

    It seems pretty clear that the child in question here is male. 
    While many female children are used by their single parents as
    substitute spouses, female children are seldom told that they are
    the "man of the house" now that Daddy is gone.
    
    Elizabeth

    On Oprah (I think) a while ago there was a guy who, after his wife
    died, turned his 15-year-old daughter into his wife.  She slept
    with him, cooked his meals, did the laundry, the whole nine yards.
    I thought it was pretty sick.

    when my mother died when I was 7, I was told I was the woman of
    the house. It didn't include what the previous reply did(sex) but
    I was responsible for the housework, taking care of my older brother
    etc until my dad remarried 6 months later. 
    maybe thats why I am so visiously independent now.
    
    vivian

    Me too, to a lot of what's been said.  The last time I ever saw
    my father, I was 7 years old.  After he had gone, my mother looked
    to me as "the man in the family" and I tried like hell to live up
    to the responsibility she had "entrusted" to me.  I wanted to protect
    her, so I took on responsibilites that were way beyond my years.
    I did any heavy lifting so she wouldn't "hurt" herself.  I hauled
    groceries home from the store because they were "too heavy" for
    my Mom.  I helped with the laundry on weekends since she worked
    all week and I "only" went to school and tutored my sister with
    her homework.  When Mom decided to go to night school, I was the
    one who stood with her in the -32 degree weather waiting for the
    bus at 10:30 at night so I could "protect" my mother from "bad people"
    who might try to hurt her.  Anything a daughter could do to "be
    there" for her mother, I tried to do.  It was tough, but I don't
    regret it 'cause I know that even though I was only a child, I learned
    a lot about what responsibility is that has stood me in good stead
    on more than one occasion.
                                                                        
    I guess the amazing thing is I never was her "favorite" daughter,
    but I did it anyway!
    
    Barb

 I hate when parents pick a favorite.. I was the favorite, and you
can not (or perhaps you can) imagine the stress and bad feelings that
having a favorite child/grandchild or whatever brings on the whole 
family.

 My Sister married when I was about age 10 she is 11 years older, and
they had one child, and my sister was ready to divorce her husband,
however she became pregnant again, and decided to stay married.
 In total she had five daughters, and she told me that everytime 
they had sex that it hurt her.  (major problem here, either a brute
of a husband or size was a problem) Anyway she blamed the pain and
suffering that she endured on the second child and this child was
never loved.  Sharon, my niece will call me up at night and cry,
telling me that I am the only one who understands and loves her.
Breaks my heart every time, and the big looser in my eyes is my
sister.

 I have a total of Seven children and I could never choose one of
them over the others.  They are all Precious Gems cut by the hand
of God just for me, and at times I would gladly give them all away
but I love them all, and there is no favorite.  Granted when one
comes home with HONORROLL then for a moment I swell with pride,
and I remember all the good things that all the others do and
I can not forget the others.

Got carried away, but I hate Favoritism and the problems that It
causes.

Dave

    This has been an interesting topic for me to read since I have a
    5 year old son who is by default the "man of the family".  While
    I don't don't expect a 5 year old to "take care of me", I often
    wonder if I place an emotional burden on him.  Having a child keeps
    me sane in the rough times after divorce.  I have to hold myself
    together for the sake of my son.  Does he feel this?  Does he feel
    that he has the responsibility for Mom's happiness?  Am I making
    him the emotional man of the family?  Can we put pressure on our
    children without saying the words?
    
    - wendy -
    
    
    
    

    I don't think this aspect of the problem has come up
    in this topic yet and thought I'd try for some feedback.
    
    My ex and I were separated when my daughter, Emily, was
    10 months old.  She's now 4 years.  Since I was treated as
    an adult at a very early age and resented it, I have been
    very careful to avoid this with Emily.  _I_ became the
    "man-of-the-family".  One day a few weeks ago we were talking
    about marriage and families and Emily announced that when
    she got older she would marry _me_.  I know this is normal
    with fathers and daughters but I was sort of taken aback
    to say the least.  Hopefully the lack of a male role model
    hasn't confused her permenantly.  I'm not overly concerned
    about this just mildly so.  If anyone has any thoughts, 
    or experiences about this I'd like to hear them.
    
    Nanci
    

re: .28

Nothing confusing there, as far as I can see.  She is saying that she thinks
so highly of you that she wants to be around you forever.  

Now if she still wants to marry *you* when she is an adult, then you have
a confused young lady.

            Carol

    re: .28
    
    I agree with Carol -- this is normal for a girl your daughter's
    age.  "I want to marry you" in a 4-year-old is usually a statement
    of love and a happy family life. 
    
    --bonnie

Back to the original topic again. I agree that putting pressure on a 3 year
old to be "man of the family" is bound to cause him problems in later years.

I also think that there are a lot of family dynamics that go on through divorce
at any age. My parents got divorced after 38 years of marriage when I was
an "adult". I was 23, living on my own, 1000 miles away, and fully supporting 
myself. My mother (who at the time was 63) was devastated and she really needed
support. My brother (who was then 35) very much played the "man", and dealt
with some of the legal, protection etc. issues. I was her emotional support.
She spent some time feeling very guilty about leaning on us. 

The divorce was hard on us all, the feelings of abandonment by my father, 
were still very much there even though we were adult children on our own.
At the same time a lot of emotional support was required from us, which
also complicated at least my feelings.

I also understand my mothers need for support. She was lucky in a way that
her kids were older and could provide that support. A woman, getting divorced,
needs support and it is understandable that she turn to her kids, even if
they are too young to handle it. I don't think it is right, or fair, but it
is understandable.

It is now 10 years later, and my mom is doing great. She has not remarried, has
become very independent and is a lot of fun. I think we are closer than ever,
because we now have a close friendship that exists of mutual support. I don't
think we could have had this friendship if she hadn't needed me in a way she
hadn't before.

Muggsie