As I mentioned on the thread when I read her post, Good on her. And the loss of their friendship is no big loss. She needs to go out and meet a better class of people anyway.

But since she played with the kids, while the other moms were being catty, the kids will likely notice that "the nice lady" who played with them doesn't come around any more when they have get-togethers.

It's a shame. The kids got close adult supervision, so someone could be right there if they were doing something dangerous or one of them got hurt. But the other mothers can't stand the thought of someone "keeping themselves up" and getting compliments from their husbands, that they're willing to ostracize a decent human being at their children's expense.

Glad you posted this comment, Amy. What a drag it must be for her to have "friends" who think it's a terrible offense to want her husband to lust after her. They're probably of the attitude that, hey, we're married, so he has to deal with what he gets. I'm betting Jan has the best marriage of all those people, since she seems to be quite self-aware.

These layabouts have it coming to them, courtesy of the law of case and effect: being out of shape means greater injuries in a car crash, higher risk of cancers and more vulnerability to thugs.

Not to mention the loss of simple abilities earlier in life.
Nice going, lardbodies!

I spent the rest of the party running around with the kids while the moms sat, talked and ate.

That says it all, doesn't it?

God forbid you might want more identity beyond just a mom. Don't raise that bar, because others aren't going to appreciate the contrast of them being too fat and lazy to jump over it. We don't have to morph into Donii figures.

Here's hoping the letter-writer finds herself a new bunch of friends more on her wavelength. She's well rid of those petty, jealous little hausfraus she's been hanging out with. I'd be this woman's pal anytime!

Here's the other side of the letters I've been getting:

WTF?? In the first letter you refer to an overweight woman as "fatty", say she has fatty-itis, that she stuffs her face with ho-hos and that the pot at the end of her rainbow is the kind that flushes, because according to you, "political correctness is outweighed" because "fatty-itis" is voluntary. You recommend that her friends be honest with her, brutally honest......then the second letter....

you totally defend a person who is raising small children is a filth-infested house and you recommend being "kind" and not bringing the problem up at all!!! So having a filthy house is NOT voluntary?? I'd rather be fat and CLEAN than be thin and live in filth!!!

I used to love your column but now I just think you're a bitch, and a stupid one at that.

For your information, fat people CAN see their own reflection in mirrors and we KNOW we are fat. It is not the place of anyone besides our doctors to bring the issue up at all. If a man was not physically attracted to me because I have "folds", as you so delicately put it, I'd tell him good-bye and move on to the next one. There are plenty of men out there attracted to women like me, believe it or not. And no, not just other "fatties" or losers. Quality men....one of whom has been my devoted boyfriend for 3 1/2 years. Oh yea, and we have an AWESOME sex life, you bigot bitch!!

(P.S. you must be thin, but horribly ugly, and that's why you bash fat people, because you know quite a few who are way more gorgeous than your fugly ass).

(The couple with the baby in the dirty home didn't write to me; their friend, a commenter here, did. You don't give people unsolicited advice -- it's rude, and not taken well. The couple will likely get defensive if confronted head on with this. Much like this woman.)

Couple in dirty home column here: http://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2010/03/grime-and-punis.html

I have a friend who irritates me that way, too. I tend to put on ten pounds over the winter, but take it off and get back into racing shape when spring comes and I get back on the bike. She sniffs and proudly declares that she and her husband get to eat and drink at THEIR house. (She could stand to lose 30-40 pounds.) Projecting onto me that I must starve myself and live some miserable life devoid of fun, just to pursue the ideal of being thin. Hey, hon, lower your OWN standards. I'm not buying all new biking clothes, just because my ass gets too big to fit into the ones I have. So blow me.

You would dare tell a super mom they aren't super?

Don't you now that any female that biologically produces a child has an automatic and impenetrable halo the minute their child is born?

You are, however, correct.

It's amazing that people feel if they fall into a politically correct, protected class of citizens, that they can't be criticized.

Glad she is finding a new crowd. Before I hurt my back I was running and loved it. I was very proud of the shape I was in and took care of myself. There were some women like me and some who weren't. Some of the in shape women were nice and some were catty bitches and it was the same with the overweight women. Its not always black and white. Not every overweight woman thinks the in shape mom is trying to steal her husband and not every in shape mom does it for her husband. I live in an area where most women take very good care of themselves. Everything is designer including plastic surgery. If a man isn't interested in you after you gained weight, you have two choices...get back in shape or accept that he's no longer interested.

Amy, that comedian would have been right up my alley! (I'm not even an A cup).

Back when I worked in a mostly female office, the idea of "doing" anything for your husband was considered right up there with holocaust denial. You know what? My husband does lots for me. Why shouldn't I do lots for him? Sometimes it's fixing his favorite meal, sometimes it's getting him a drink when he's comfortable and doesn't want to get up, sometimes it's sex when I'm not particularly in the mood, sometimes it's making myself (or keeping myself) attractive for him.

If couples in a relationship can't do things for each other, why bother being together at all?

I'm not sure there is a new crowd for her to join. I'll second what Jan says, at the risk of sounding vain, but there aren't many other mommy groups who welcome attractive women into their "folds" (ha!). Being thin and pretty (and, at the time, young on top of it), I was actually rejected from LaLeche League. They kept changing the meeting times and places, until I finally caught on that these overweight moms wanted to nurse and graze without me there as a reminder that they could, in fact, lose the baby weight.

I haven't felt too welcome by most other moms since...and that's been 20 years now. I do have other moms who are friends, but most are also thin and attractive, or at least not threatened by my looks, but in the world of motherhood, these women are few and far between.

There's actually a lot of peer pressure to fit in to these mom groups at school and on the playground, and I suspect many women do make a different choice from Jan - sacrificing their relationships with their husbands to "fit in" by bulking up.

This brings us to Dr. Rosemond's mantra for parents (which I mentioned before): "Put your marriage first." (Not exactly what Dr. Laura would approve of!)

He's also pointed out that it's telling that we've moved from the term "housewife" to "stay-at-home-mom." This clearly suggests that the latter group are primarily mothers, not wives.

(To my knowledge, however, he'd rather not bring up the subject of a husband's need for a trim wife.)

From a 2008 column of his (you can Google it):

"As for your husband, the 'univolved father' who wants what is best for his wife, perhaps you are so involved with your children that he has difficulty feeling like he can get involved without incurring your micromanagement. Any woman who says she is giving more than 33% of herself to her kids is, by definition, what I call a 3M mom: a magnificent maternal micromanager. Obviously, you more than qualify. Besides, as I’ve said in recent columns, I don't think parents should be involved with their children. They should be interested and ready to get involved, but involvement should be the exception, not the rule. A HUSBAND AND WIFE SHOULD BE INVOLVED WITH ONE ANOTHER. And yes, I'm yelling, because all-too-many of today's parents need to be strapped to chairs and made to listen to a tape loop of the previous sentence blaring over a loudspeaker until they get it."

And, from last week:

Q: Help me. My wife and I have been married for nearly 10 years. We have one child, a 3-year-old boy. Ever since our son was born, our marriage has been slowly slipping away as she has become more and more absorbed into motherhood. She dotes on him constantly, talks to him constantly, praises him for every little thing he does, and does things for him he’s perfectly capable of doing for himself. If I bring up the fact that our marriage is becoming an illusion, she gets very angry at me, accusing me of having no appreciation for the demands of motherhood and so on. I don’t see many demands except those she is putting on herself. What can I do?

A: A couple of months ago, after a talk I gave in Georgia, a woman told me she had been offended by my many references to mothers who are enmeshed in their children’s lives. These women, when I talk to them about this issue, and if they are able to bring some degree of objectivity to the conversation, admit they have virtually abandoned their marriages.

The offended woman felt that I was “putting it all on women.” In a sense, I am. Over the past 40 years, since the advent of what I call “psychological parenting,” the role of the adult female in the family has morphed considerably: once primarily a wife, now primarily a mother. In the process, “mother” has become infused with pressure, stress, anxiety and guilt. The typical female parent — if I can get her to relax her defenses concerning the subject — tells me she feels lots of pressure from her peers to “perform” in certain public ways to validate her motherhood. The interesting thing is that they nearly all say this. Obviously, therefore, the peers who are applying and simultaneously submitting to this performance pressure are all of them, rare exceptions noted.

The performance in question involves putting one’s child at the center of one’s attention and scurrying about in a constant quest to raise the bar of expectation on all the other mothers, who are all doing the same.

So, at speaking engagements, I say to my audiences, who average 60/40 to the female side of life, “Raising children is the most stressful thing a woman will do in her adult life, more stressful than running a major corporation.” And then I ask, “Anyone disagree?” When no one disagrees, and no one ever has, I up the ante: “Raising children has become bad for the mental health of women. Anyone disagree?” No one has ever disagreed. I go on to ask, “Why are women submitting to this? Certainly this is more oppressive than a glass ceiling or having other professional doors irrevocably shut. No?” No one disagrees.

In the 1960s, women decided they would no longer stand for being limited in any arbitrary way. In the new millennium, women submit to arbitrary limits as soon as they have children. In the 1960s, women complained about men treating them as if they were mere objects. Forty years later, women allow their children to treat them as mere objects. In the 1960s, women began demanding a new kind of respect. Today, women teach their children that women exist to solve their problems and fetch. And yes, there are laudable exceptions, but this seems to be the clear norm.

Consequently, you are by no means the first man to bemoan the problem and ask how his marriage can be salvaged. Perhaps you might dare to begin by putting this column on the counter next to a dozen roses. As for the complaint of that woman in Georgia, indeed, if this is going to be changed, women are going to have to decide, as they did some 40 years ago, that they’ve had enough. In this case, however, men are looking forward to it.

Let me do the old gender-reversal trick, as an illustration. Suppose I go home this evening and tell my wife, "Honey, I quit my job. I'm tired of the daily grind. I've decided I want to paint like Jackson Pollack. Obviously I won't be working much or making much money anymore. But I hope you will still love me for who I am."

I think she'd have every right to be highly pissed at me. Not necessarily because of the money per se, but because a slacker artist-wannabe isn't the man she married. There's a huge difference between being blind-sided by an unexpected layoff, and deciding to just drop out. I've been laid off before, and I know how to handle it: When you are without a job, finding a job is your job. I went around town handing out resumes and cover letters; I talked to people; I pulled strings; I answered ads and went to interviews. After a month I found some consulting work. It started as a 60-day job, but it turned into five months, and at the end of that time, I had two full-time job offers to choose from.

My wife has been through some weight issues the past two years, the result of an externally imposed trauma on our marriage (nasty issues with a contractor). I have to admit she wasn't as attractive when she was overweight, but I did my best to let her know that I still cared about her, because I could see she wasn't giving up, and as long as she wasn't giving up, I wasn't giving up. She tried a bunch of things and eventually went to a weight clinic, where they put her on a diet that is very much like what Amy describes. Now she's nearly gotten all the weight off. And she feels a lot better about herself. I didn't have to nag her about it because she was on her own case much worse than I ever could have done. In her own eyes, it was a failure to live up to her own standards.

Lenona, Dr. Rosemond sounds really interesting. But I disagree with you that Dr. Laura would disagree. She would completely agree. Her new (well, maybe not that new- I only catch her every now and then) thing is demanding that wives, even long-married maternal ones, be their "husband's girlfriends." In other words, treat him as you would have when you were dating, pretty up for him, be sexy, etc.

On a related note, when my husband and I went through pre-martial counseling, the priest mentioned something that I still very much believe: The best thing that a father can do for his children is to love their mother." (and vice versa)

Personally, I'm completely unattracted to fat men and would never look twice at a guy who was even a little overweight. So it would be pretty unfair of me not to hold myself to an equally high standard.

I think this needs to be filed under "The Truth Hurts". No one wants to be told that they look like a fat tub of goo, but Amy, you're the friend we all need. You're the one I'd want around saying "Gosh, do you really need that cookie?" or when I'm shopping: "Really? Because capri pants make your calves look like sausages." People who really do care about us tell us the TRUTH, even when it may be a bitch slap across the face and sting like heck.
I'm a mom of two young boys, and I've worked hard to stay thin. And it sucks. Big time. Getting up at 5 am to work out because you have no time during the day. Eating two slices of cheese and one banana with a glass of water for lunch when you'd rather be stuffing your face with Fritos, sucks. Vanity is a part of it, but there's another issue too, and that is health. I want to see those boys grow up and get married and be able to run around with my grandkids. Some of my girlfriends have gained 30 pounds since having kids, and while they are chubby, I'm more concerned about the fact that their heart is having to work harder and their joints are taking a beating.
Looking nice is great, and important. But when their kids are standing over a coffin at the age of 17 because Mommy ate herself into a coronary, I'll bet those women will be wishing they'd tried a little harder to take off that weight.

It would be bad if people were using this as an excuse to make fun of fat women (or fat anyone: I'm 5'7" / 170).

But the thing is, after a few years, many marriages become more challenging anyway. Causes and effects get hard to distinguish. (Anybody ever read [or just skim] Knots by RD Laing?)

A lot of marriages aren't what they ought to be. But I bet if everything else were going well, weight wouldn't be such a big deal.

Somewhat on topic: Dalrymple. God, I love this man.

The problem with low self-esteem is not self-dislike, as is often claimed, but self-absorption.

______________________________

And for the record, I'm not so sure Shannon's standards are "high" more than they're just firm. You wanna hang out with skinny people, then hang out with skinny people, and Best Wishes to all of you.... But don't imagine this taste is a simple matter of elevation.

>>A lot of marriages aren't what they ought to be. But I bet if everything else were going well, weight wouldn't be such a big deal.

Ace one, Crid. Totally agree.

Look, I work hard at my marriage (which I cherish) and I'm in the best shape I can be for a middle-aged broad and I adore looking adorable. (Amy is right on the money with her general advice).

But that letter was bizarre.

I can't figure out why all the lard ass ladies so VERY suddenly changed their tune. Jan writes: "At a birthday/pool party for a classmate of my youngest child I was complimented on my improved shape by the other moms in attendance. When asked what motivated me, I responded "I want to be the only one my husband leers at!" .

So the ladies first coo admiringly at Jan's newly trim shape.

Next, they're even sufficiently appreciative & fascinated by stunning Jan's weight loss to beg her for her secret.

And only THEN do they all pull a 'Lord of the Flies' on the poor letter writer?

Really?

If they're all the fat, complacent harpies she describes - wouldn't they have pelted suddenly slender Jan with doughnuts the minute she sashayed in the door?

Maybe Jan just came off as a real snotty-ass!

I've seen the sort of segregation that lovelysoul describes occur within my social circle, as friends married and began to have children. First it was the single women who were excluded, then the moms who didn't fit in. Fitting in among this group of moms apparently entails making yourself look like a chubby 45 year old transvestite.

And they don't just do it to other women, they'll often alienate their husband's friends as well. Especially single men.

The phenomenon is kind of ugly. Because it's really not something that the kids make them do. It's a choice. Truthfully I think that it arises from self absorption more so than the awesome pressures of caring for children. These women seem to almost regress psychologically, they become very selfish.

Dr. Rosemond sounds really interesting. But I disagree with you that Dr. Laura would disagree. She would completely agree. Her new (well, maybe not that new- I only catch her every now and then) thing is demanding that wives, even long-married maternal ones, be their "husband's girlfriends." In other words, treat him as you would have when you were dating, pretty up for him, be sexy, etc.
___________________________

So has she stopped chanting "I am my kid's mom"? That would prove it. Hardly anything else would. Especially since she got so angry at Rosemond in 2000 when he said that housewives should not revolve around their kids - and that it's OK for a 4-year-old to be put in an after-school program so Mommy can work outside the home, even if it's not the neighborhood norm.

One thing I wonder about Rosemond, though, is: If, as he says, parents are supposed to spend most of their time with adults in adult activities and vice versa, why would kids over 10 be expected to put up with even one family event per month, when so many already resent that?

From a letter writer, quoted by the Goddess: you totally defend a person who is raising small children is a filth-infested house and you recommend being "kind" and not bringing the problem up at all!!! So having a filthy house is NOT voluntary?? I'd rather be fat and CLEAN than be thin and live in filth!!!

I don't believe you defended these people who live in a filthy (and dangerous) environment for raising their baby. You were asked the most tactful and diplomatic way to make the point that their home was simply not appropriate (and could potentially get them in trouble) for raising a child. And you gave the best advice. Better than I would have come up with. I would have done the "sit down with them and be polite and tactful as you can" approach.

As for the woman, she pointedly asked if it was normal for a man to withdraw all affection because his girlfriend gained forty pounds, the implied question being "Why is he doing this?" You gave her the truth about how male sexuality operates.

I don't see any inconsistency operating here. Apparently, you're supposed to brutally honest across the board, whether the person with the problem is the one writing you, or the person being written about.

Amy, while I'm thinking about this, how would you have advised me in this? A guy I know is in a committed monogamous relationship (so he thinks), but I know for a fact his partner is cheating, and not necessarily being safe about it. (I walked in on his lover at a gay bar restroom, performing oral sex on a guy that was not his lover. I would have said something about getting a room, but the cheating lover bolted when he saw me.)

None of my business might be the right response, but given the fact that sex was unprotected, does that queer the equation? (Pun intended.)

When asked what motivated me, I responded "I want to be the only one my husband leers at!"

This could have been interpreted as, "I'm so much sexier than you fatasses, and your husbands are all busy checking out other women. Maybe even me."

And that might be true, but it's not necessarily the way to Make Friends and Influence People.

> This could have been interpreted as, "I'm so
> much sexier than you fatasses

That's really, really a stretch. The women would really have to be looking for trouble anyway to imagine to translate "my husband" into "you fatasses". When people are being that narcissistic, struggling for the perfect wording is a waste of time: Their hearts are going to break anyway, because they want them to.

Jody's on to something too. This one's two-sided.

When people are being that narcissistic, struggling for the perfect wording is a waste of time: Their hearts are going to break anyway, because they want them to.

Which may be exactly what happened here. Choosing a different lifestyle (losing weight and looking great) can be seen as a criticism if the people involved are already insecure about their lives.

Agreed— But even then, Jody may have had a point about this woman:

> This set off a firestorm of caustic comments

A "firestorm of caustics" is brutal imagery. It seems like sensitivities were inflamed on each side.

Somehow this is just typical of a certain segment of the population. Back when I was in the military, the "common knowledge" was that you should keep a woman as a girlfriend as long as possible. Because as soon as she dragged you to the alter, she would turn dumpy and fat. The sad thing is: this was common knowledge because we saw it happen over and over and over again.

Take a sexy woman who dressed nicely, wore tasteful makup, and generally took care of herself. A couple of months later, when she started coming to work in junky clothes, wearing no make-up, and was visibily heavier - well, it was a safe bet that she'd caught her fish and was all done setting bait. The stereotypical picture of a middle-aged military type was a fit guy and a fat wife.

This could have been interpreted as, "I'm so much sexier than you fatasses, and your husbands are all busy checking out other women. Maybe even me."

Yeah, there's something a little bothersome about her talking of her husband "leering" at other women. Sounds like that took the discussion into the territory of why should she *have* to be so sexy in order to keep her husband from leering at other women..which isn't such a bad question.

And I'm saying this as a woman whose flirtatious ex-husband pretty much conditioned me to believe it was my job to be sexy, and to make him look like the luckiest guy in the room.

TYet, talking about your hot sex life, much less being demonstrative about it, is decidely NOT the way to win female friends in most cases.

So, it may be partly in the way she came across. Still, it is generally harder for thin, more attractive women to fit in with groups of other women.

In a way, it's just human nature not to want to bring temptation home. Many marriages are more fragile than they appear, especially if the wife has let herself go or is struggling with weight, and the man is feeling neglected in favor of the kids. I'm not saying it's good, but I always kind of understood why those women didn't want me around their husbands.

I wouldn't have wanted me around either. I have attractive friends, but I was careful to avoid the types that I knew attracted my husband. His tastes are more like the comedian Amy dated, so most of my girlfriends have big boobs. Their husbands like big boobs, so I'm not their men's tastes either...so it works out.

The hausfraus at the pool party *know* that their husbands aren't leering at them. They probably suspect that they leer at other women, but the unleered-at can always either look away, or pretend the leer-ee isn't there.

When LR happily proclaimed that she not only knew her husband leered (at her) but that she actively *sought* such leering, she tore the scab off of the wound that the fraus were pretending wasn't there.

So now they have the choice of admitting that they are no longer the subject of their husband's lust, or marginalize the person who put them in this position.

I don't think the LR realized the position in which she had placed the fraus when she made her lusty husband comment. But the friendly relationship she had with the other mom's ended at that moment.

I am very, very glad to not be married into that group any more... my ex and her friends are all like that... I think they figure once the ring is on their finger, it's a bill of sale, and they no longer have to try.

Interestingly, or tellingly, my ex- never liked being called a wife, she insists on being called a mother. "and what will you be when your children have moved on?"

> Sounds like that took the discussion into the
> territory of why should she *have* to be so
> sexy in order to keep her husband from
> leering at other women..which isn't
> such a bad question.

Let's formulate a speculative answer!

[1.] Men like tail.

[2.] By default, they're not clever about it; proximity and accessibility are as important as any other concerns, like a body-part obsession or the desire to climb socially.

I once read an article about a woman who understood this. She was named (cumulatively) Pamela Beryl Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman. She moved through the lives of a lot of powerful and successful men, even though it was universally acknowledged that she lacked great beauty, natural warmth, brains, wealth, station or other attractions. She had one powerful tool at her disposal when she'd chosen her next conquest, something that the pretty, kind, bright, rich, well-bred women didn't have: She was in the room with the man at that moment, and they weren't. It was no contest.

Women who really want affection from their husbands shouldn't pretend they have nothing to work with. Guys are too needy for that to be true.

“A husband is like a fire, he goes out when unattended" - Evan Esar

Wow - Jan should move up here to Montreal if she needs non-fatty mom friends. All of my "mom friends" jog and go to the gym at 8 months pregnant. Others play ball hockey right up until their 5th month. As soon as that kid pops out they are right back in the gym. The only friend that hasn't followed that model gave birth to a 12 pound baby boy (C Section)!!!!!!!!!!!!! She had a hard enough time walking let alone working out. It's been tough on her to get out there again too...

I think it's a pervasive problem among married women. I know when I was in social groups when I was married, anything that challenged the accepted "take" on women being put-upon by men's expectations was met with hostility. And it wasn't necessarily about weight--it could be about anything, from cooking meals to keeping the house clean to being sexually available to him.

As annoying as it was to sit in a group like that and have them be angry with me for implying that we had some responsibilities to our husbands, it was instructive. It taught me to keep an eye out for times when I might fall into that trap myself. I think I am a better partner to this day because of the "reverse psychology" of being around bitter women.

"Take a sexy woman who dressed nicely, wore tasteful makup, and generally took care of herself. A couple of months later, when she started coming to work in junky clothes, wearing no make-up, and was visibily heavier - well, it was a safe bet that she'd caught her fish and was all done setting bait."

I think when guys talk about women "letting themselves go," they don't necessarily realize all the time, energy, and disposable income your average "hot" woman spends on making herself look hot. It doesn't happen by magic (no, not even for Angelina Jolie!) and it goes well beyond just putting down the donuts.

A typical regime for a single woman in her twenties might include gym sessions, personal trainers, yoga and pilates classes; haircuts, highlights, blowouts, pricey hair products, deep conditioning; eyebrow wax, underarm wax, bikini wax; moisturizing, toning, exfoliating, facials, chemical peels; fake tanning, self-tanning, manicures, pedicures; shaving, tweezing; high-end makeup; and shopping for the latest clothing, shoes, bags, and accessories.

Obviously this all takes a lot of time and money, which is fine when you're living on your own schedule with plenty of disposable income. But when you get married and have children, your expenses, responsibilities, and priorities change-and rightfully so. I'm not saying that women should let themselves gain 30 pounds, but if you're spending your kid's college fund on facial peels and letting your baby sit in dirty diapers while you're spending 45 minutes applying makeup, then that makes you a bad parent and pretty reprehensible human being.

So yes, I think that men should accept that women may need to "let themselves go" to SOME degree after marriage and either relax their expectations slightly, or be prepared to support the time and money that their wife invests in her appearance.

Of course, men look. Women look too. However, it's disrespectful to be too obvious about it. There's a big difference between looking discreetly and openly.

With the ex, there were several critical "cheater" signs that I missed, and one is that if a man respects you, he shouldn't openly leer at or flirt with other women. Particularly if a guy frequently makes comments about the way other women look, it's a bad sign, even when it's framed as a compliment (ie: "Your legs are a lot nicer than hers"). This shows he's not only seriously looking but comparing.

My fiance looks, but he's never obvious about it. And he does one thing that I would highly recommend to other men (or women), if you cherish your relationship. Whenever there is another attractive woman around - if she's speaking to him or whatever - he'll make sure to lovingly put his arm on my shoulder or my back. It's kind of a claiming move to show the other woman that he's with me, while also reassuring me that he's not after her. It's a very subtle thing that makes a huge difference. Even before an introduction, he's sending the clear signal that he's not available.

Yet, in my marriage, I was usually the one who had to walk up and introduce myself as "his wife". It's never a good sign if a guy sends the message he's available, even if only for a few minutes while he conveniently forgets to mention he's married or sends a lustful look across a room. Getting caught looking is usually an indicator of this because, if the wife is catching it, then you can be sure the other women are too...and much more often.

> Jan should move up here to Montreal if she
> needs non-fatty mom friends

We can't let this get out of hand, OK? Some women weigh 20 or 40 extra pounds, and their husbands love them anyway, and it's not the end of the world. Extra weight isn't always about psychodrama or hyper-defensive personalities.

> it could be about anything, from cooking
> meals to keeping the house clean to being
> sexually available to him.

Some these chore are, um, not emotionally coterminous. Completion of one doesn't necessarily leave one in the mood for the next, even in homes of bitter bachelors. It's good that I never became a man's wife.

> anything that challenged the accepted "take"
> on women being put-upon by men's expectations
> was met with hostility.

This is the vibe I've been getting from my liberal friends this past week. Successful passage of HCR has left them more arrogant about things, not less. They're falling deeper into the fantasy that gosh darn it, everyone should just be perfectly supportive of everyone else, and that we should blindly support Nancy & Barry to give our lives meaning.... There's some echo in what we're hearing from these women: The man is supposed to love me even though I'm giving him no reason to.

>>"The man is supposed to love me even though I'm giving him no reason to."

That's the thing: In my experience, the women who have the strongest negative reaction to being told they have a part to play in keeping their marriage healthy live under a delusion that when a man makes a commitment via marriage it means "He's promised to forever and for always be in love with me with no effort on my part."

But if you turn it around on them and ask them to love HIM with no effort on his part...well, that shit doesn't fly. It's all just variations on "Do as I say, not as I do."

I have to say that I am grateful for the lesson. I make efforts not only to be attractive for my partner, but to appreciate what he does for me, and he does the same.

That comes up a lot here, most pathetically in our discussions of divorce. Goofy people think that the contract is the end of the transaction, rather than a description of the ongoing exchange. 'He SAID he loved me....'

Shannon - I agree with you if a guy knows going in to the marriage that his wife is gonna have 5 kids. But if they only have 1 child, he has a reasonable expectation that she not "let go". Of course he has an obligation to keep his 6-pack abs. This is a 2-way street.

What's bizarre is the LW who jumps to, "You must be hideously ugly because you don't think I'm sexy." This is not an unusual tactic, yet I always find it bizarre. As someone with a boyfriend 20 years younger than me, I've ended up defending age-disparate relationships occasionally, and often the haters go down the road of, "Well, I wouldn't want a younger partner anyway. Stupid kids, with their not thinking I'm hot anymore. Well, f*ck them. They're not so hot themselves, with their stupid haircuts and funny clothes." Somehow "you don't think I'm attractive" has to be followed by "You're not so hot yourself, buddy." Can't really see how this is goal-oriented behavior, but apparently it makes them feel better, without having to actually change anything about themselves.

"A typical regime for a single woman in her twenties might include gym sessions, personal trainers, yoga and pilates classes; haircuts, highlights, blowouts, pricey hair products, deep conditioning; eyebrow wax, underarm wax, bikini wax; moisturizing, toning, exfoliating, facials, chemical peels; fake tanning, self-tanning, manicures, pedicures; shaving, tweezing; high-end makeup; and shopping for the latest clothing, shoes, bags, and accessories."

WHOA! That's typical? The gym stuff, sure, but the fake tans? Where do you live that people fake tan?

I don't think anyone I knew in my 20s went through all that. I mean, if they weren't busy being bohemian artists they were in grad school. I don't think many people I knew had the time or money for all that!!!

Some people might do it, but I wouldn't say it is typical.

"A typical regime for a single woman in her twenties" - Shannon.

OK, sure, maybe girls DO that, but how much does their target care?

He judges you on the fly by your curves and how clear your skin is. Is your hair CLEAN? A LOT of this stuff is what women WANT to do, or based on another womanly peer pressure, what their friends think.

One thing guys really hate, is waking up with someone different then they went to sleep with, and a lot of the stuff you mention feeds into that.

What we are talking about here is women that physically let themselves go so that their curves go away, so that they only wear sweats, and IMPORTANTLY that they treat a caress on their tush as an affront to their motherhood.

Guy REALLY aren't that hard to figure out, IF you want to figure them out. A lot of women get to a point that they don't care, and make it his problem...

"Of course he has an obligation to keep his 6-pack abs."

Funny. I like to work out, so I would do it anyway. But there is also another reason to keep oneself together: it is easier to keep a particular woman's interest when you can keep womens' interest generally.

Is that really so hard--or so offensive--a concept for people? It always seemed to me that you gotta earn a partner, a job, a responsibility, whatever every day. Every day. Not just once, but the whole time it is yours. Because it isn't really yours, and such things go away fast when you stop tending them.

NicoleK, the bit you quoted is an expression of what I've seen Moxie refer to as a "fashionista value system". It's clearly not being done for her men, because men either won't notice half of it, or else they will think it looks vaguely weird (like a lot of Hollywood starlets these days). It's today's equivalent of the 1950s enormous hairdos that took all day in the salon to put together.

There's a huge difference between ordinary self-care -- showering, taking a few minutes to primp, and wearing clothes that fit reasonably well -- and the sort of thing that you quoted. There's also a huge difference between ordinary self-care and not taking a shower, chopping your hair off because it's too much effort to brush it, going everywhere in your pajamas, and stuffing your face with Doritos all day.

Agreed, Dave.

I gotta say, though, fake tanning? Was this in Miami circa 1980?

The overdone look seems a bit trashy to me. I think women in the lower stratas tend to have way more elaborate beauty regimens... anyone seen Chris Rock's hair documentary? Rather shocking.

Fake tanning is very popular up here...where it's winter for about 8 months of the year!!

karen: Fake tanning is very popular up here...where it's winter for about 8 months of the year!!

It must be popular in Ohio, too. Which would explain John Boehner's unnatural orange hue.

I swear, every time he gets on television, all of a America must get up to adjust the color setting. He should come with a service announcement. "Do not adjust the color setting. The man you see really is orange."

LS writes: "Of course, men look. Women look too. However, it's disrespectful to be too obvious about it. There's a big difference between looking discreetly and openly. [...] My fiance looks, but he's never obvious about it. And he does one thing that I would highly recommend to other men (or women), if you cherish your relationship. Whenever there is another attractive woman around - if she's speaking to him or whatever - he'll make sure to lovingly put his arm on my shoulder or my back. "

Hey LS: here's something where I totally agree with you! Yes, it's disrespectful to leer or stare; that goes even if you're unattached. If you're attached, it's doubly disrespectful, because it not only embarrasses the person you're leering at, it also shows up the person you're with. Yeah, everybody looks, but ladies and gentlemen have learned how to be discreet about it. And yes, it's uncouth to look at another girl and then turn to your wife/girlfriend and say something like, "Wow! Did you see the funbags on her?"

And: there's never a wrong time to let your SO know that you love them. There may be right and wrong times for particular methods of expressing it, but in general, reassuring your SO that you're there for them is always in order. When my now-wife and I had been dating for a few months, she said something interesting: that one of the things that she liked about me was that, say when we are doing household chores, whenever we pass, if I have a hand free I'll give her a little rub in the upper back or some such. Just a little expression of affection, in passing. This was a big deal to her, and I didn't realize it. She told me that, whenever her ex touched her, there was an expectation or desire for sex associated with it. She said it took a while for her to get used to the idea that I would touch her, with no expectation attached to it, just because we happened to be near at the moment. To me, that's just something that people who are in love do, and it kind of shocked me that anyone would deliberately withhold that except for when they want something. Am I naive or what?

"and IMPORTANTLY that they treat a caress on their tush as an affront to their motherhood."

Is it hard to feel sensual again after you have kids? Self-confidence issues aside (b/c no matter how much you work out, I feel like some of that skin just doesn't go back...). I am luckily not a mom right now (wow those kids would be hurtin'!) but I can imagine that if I went through the process of having a kid it might affect my relationship with my body after it served that all-consuming function. Like, as the kid rips from your body, it rips out your mojo, too. I know a lot goes into it. But that's just a thought.

Skin care is probably the most important 5 minutes you can spend on yourself every day. And yes, you have five minutes - if you can't find it, force it into your schedule. Let the kid cry a few minutes. Also, it doesn't need to take a lot of money. A lot of products that you can find, on sale, at CVS work just fine. Keep your skin exfoliated (I just use a Clean&Clear one that costs 5 bucks!), moisturized (I like Eucerin with Q10 for sensitive skin at night - ten bucks!), protected (I use Cetaphil moisturizer in the AM with SPF 50 and dust with SPF minerals to set it), and then treat. Put your money on the treatment part, be it some retinol from the derm (insurance covers most of it for me) or some benzoyl peroxide.

It's like 5 minutes before bed. 3 minutes in the morning. Most guys I know notice leg stubble far less than we do. But if your face is busted up and leathery because you didn't care for it, you will not be lusted after.

I fully "get" that my complete obsession with make up, skin care and perfume is my own personal dilemma and that Dave doesn't notice the difference if I put on Nars Orgasm blush vs. something 1/3 the price at CVS. I just look not-pallid to him. But beauty junkies are their own species.

"It always seemed to me that you gotta earn a partner, a job, a responsibility, whatever every day. Every day. Not just once, but the whole time it is yours. Because it isn't really yours, and such things go away fast when you stop tending them."

Absolutely. With divorce rates as high as they are, I simply can't imagine anyone believing that they don't need to keep themselves up because their partner is contractually obligated forever. That's plain irrational.

Yet, there seems to be pressure on mothers today not to do anything for themselves, and by extension, their relationships. Taking time away from the kids to go on date night with dad, or to the gym, somehow makes them "bad mothers". I actually heard an interviewer ask Kelly Ripa the other day how she "dealt with the guilt" when she spent an hour at the gym a day and not with her kids.

Like Rosemond, I don't understand this. Staying fit is the best way for a mom to be there for her kids - to have the energy to be active with them -and keeping the romance alive is the best way to assure the family remains intact (although it doesn't always work).

Other than fake tanning, I do most of the stuff on the list. It's really not that expensive. I do pilates and use an exercise bike at home to keep my body in shape, color my own hair (except for occasional highlights, which I often do myself too). I wear nice clothes, and lingerie, which makes me feel sexier. Sometimes, I wear sweats, but I get the sexier Victoria Secret kind, not ugly ones from Walmart. I splurge on facials and skin peels about twice a year, which does wonders for my skin.

This really doesn't cost that much, especially considering the benefits, but I'd do it for myself anyway. It's just a part of keeping yourself up. You only have one body.

The bigger issue is not why these women don't keep themselves up for their husbands but why don't they feel the need to do it for themselves? Do they think caring about their health and appearance makes them bad moms?

"She said it took a while for her to get used to the idea that I would touch her, with no expectation attached to it, just because we happened to be near at the moment. To me, that's just something that people who are in love do, and it kind of shocked me that anyone would deliberately withhold that except for when they want something. Am I naive or what?"

No, you're brilliant, Dave. And your wife is very lucky. Being affectionate like that, without any expectation or agenda, is so critcial to a good relationship.

My guy is always touching me, offering a hug or a kiss, just when we're making dinner together or taking a walk. There's no expectation, but, let me tell you, it works wonders towards that end of the relationship anyway. Smart guys understand that foreplay is an all-day event.

NicoleK, I'm not sure that it's limited to any particular class -- the subset of women who are into fashionista values cuts across economic classes. Within that subset, there are sub-subcultures that differ in specifics. The trailer-trash fashionistas are probably the most noticeable, because that sub-subculture is so brash about it, plus they're spending money they don't have.

"when my husband and I went through pre-martial counseling"

So what did you finally decide on? Karate, Krav Maga, Jeet Kune Do? And what are the rules -- say, no spinning backfist to the head if the argument is over clothes left piled beside the hamper?

Yet, there seems to be pressure on mothers today not to do anything for themselves, and by extension, their relationships.

Have you ever read The Mommy Myth? It's a solid exploration of how guilt-driven the current (1960s and beyond) approach to motherhood is, and how unhinged it has made many mothers. A good read.

No, I haven't read it, Monica, but it sounds very true.

Rosemond's view is that when parents become too absorbed with their kids, the family begins to revolve around them instead of the parents. This puts a lot of pressure on the kids, causing them to feel that they are the glue that holds the family together, and judging by the state of some of these marriages, they're right. It's a heavy burden for them to carry. How can you leave home if you worry your parents have nothing else to live for and nothing in common but you?

I think kids would much rather feel that mom and dad have a fulfilling life that exists apart from them, and particularly with each other.

When my son was in high school, there was a mom who came every day and prayed on her son's locker, even though he was 16! She would lay her hands on his locker or books and pray that he'd have a "blessed day of learning".

I remind my son not to ever say I embarrass him - just think of her. lol I'm sure that boy would've much rather his mom spent that time at the gym or out to lunch with some friends.

If you're a chapper, Eucerin is the shit.

Gretchen, the Orgasm blush is totally worth it, speaking as a beauty junkie myself. I actually now use the Multiple in Orgasm on my lips, cheeks, and eyes. Really easy and pretty for spring and summer.

Did someone swap topics while I wasn't looking?

What is the Orgasm Blush? Please share.

Do you think there's motor oil called Multiple Orgasm?"

Sure there is.

Well, for the gearhead. Not for the mechanical Muggles.

lovelysoul: The brand NARS has a shade of blush called Orgasm. Prettiest shade ever, in my opinion, sort of a flushed peachy-pink, meant to simulate the flush of, well...you get the idea. Even works on my skin. I'm not quite Amy's fresh Wite-Out, but close. Sorry for the thread hijack, everyone.

My husband and I have the hottest and most exploratory, uninhibited sex life of any monogamous couple we know, and we are in our 40s!

The secret? We communicate, we love each other for what's on the inside... oh wait, and we stay in good shape!!! It's amazing what that does for one's libido, male or female. Personally, I love it when I enter a room and my husband visibly checks me out. I don't see how anyone could give that up.

Sure, it has become harder work to stay in shape the older I get, but big deal! The rewards far outweigh any inconvenience.

Plus, we both dress like we've self esteem. That helps with the whole checking-each-other-out thing.

Thanks, N6, I'll have to try it. And good for you, Melissa G.

You know, it's nice to hear about couples who truly love each other and still have great sex. Perhaps it's partly because these examples are so rare that others conclude that it's more "normal" to grow bored and let yourselves go.

I have a friend who posts very positive comments about her husband and marriage on Facebook, like "Randy brought me home flowers today. I love my husband so much!" or "He made me the most incredible dinner tonight. I'm so lucky!". I know they do have a great marriage, and I pesonally enjoy hearing such joy over a relationship, as opposed to people bitching about their partners, but I often wonder how others take it.

It's sad, but I sometimes feel like I have to moderate my own happiness in my relationship - obviously not here, where I'm anonymous, but with people I actually know. I'd be hesitant to post things like that for fear it would piss my female friends off.

You should post them frequently. Then we'd hear fewer of these bullshit "studies": http://article.nationalreview.com/429884/getting-serious-about-pornography/anonymous

I'd be willing to bet real money that the wife in question "let herself go", but can't imagine why her husband went astray.

You don't want your husband to run away? Simple: stay attractive and put out.

Men are alarmingly simple creatures. Modern women are overcomplicating things to their detriment.

Yes, Brian, the average guy will be content with a woman who stays in shape and puts out, but it's not always so simple.

That article is about "sex addiction", which I'm still not convinced is a real addiction, but it reads pretty much like my marriage. And I didn't let myself go, and I always put out - in increasingly more intense ways - yet my ex was never satisfied. He was also heaviliy addicted to porn, starting at an early age. That thing about having to get a bigger and bigger "high" is true.

Look at Elin and Sandra Bullock. These are not women who've let themselves go. So, whereas I agree that, for most marriages, it's enough for both people to stay attractive and sexually involved, for some, that's still not going to "affair-proof" their marriage.

Porn can be a very destructive element in a relationship. If it's used to enhance the relationship, that's one thing, but when a partner (and this happens to women too) frequently withdraws to the basement, or wherever, to pleasure themselves, this is a major sign of trouble. Affairs are usually next if they haven't already begun.

Amy, do you believe in "sex addiction"? I waiver on it because I do see it meets the criteria of an addiction in many ways, but I don't know if I buy it as an excuse. I mean, people love food, and some say they're "addicted" to food too, but does that really mean they can't stop? Can't put down the fork?

I think it's simply about not having any boundaries, which will lead someone to do whatever feels good at the moment...eating, screwing, etc...but it's more of a selfishness than an "addiction".

I read where an expert the other day said if Bullock really looked at it closely, she'd see other areas where he didn't put her interests first, and that was certainly true for me. It wasn't just about the sex.

Sex "addiction" is bullshit. Men want sex. The bulk of them can curb their urges and be satisfied with one good woman. Some can't, and actively seek out other women.

Jesse and Tiger (and numerous other celebrities) have women throwing themselves at them all the time. They either lacked the discipline or the sense to say "no".

If neither Jesse nor Tiger had been married, this would never have been an issue. Nobody called Mark Messier a "sex addict" because he never committed.

"sex addiction" is a bullshit way of saying that a man who can't commit is a bad person and needs to be "fixed" by therapy or drugs or what have you to correct some perceived shortcoming.

They would have been better off simply staying unmarried. If you want a family, then tough shit, society says you have to give up your membership in the pussy-of-the-month club.

I would worry that Tiger's claims of "addiction" were trying to medicalize trivial misconduct, maiming the language and mocking our collective sexual integrity, except that it's so much fun that this poor sap's wife just caught with him with his dick out.

Celebrity is a weird machine... All these women who come out with stories... What's in it for them? How is an afternoon of fame as Mistress #7 something that can be monetized or made into a career?... Maybe some talk-show hostess will fly you to Chicago for an afternoon or something, but otherwise, why bother?

And, not really taking sides on this one or anything, but... When a woman makes her errant husband go through a months-long, globally-observed crawl of contrition through press conferences and inpatient therapy and bogus statements of regret, is that woman really demonstrating mastery of the interpersonal realm?

She be pissed. Who can blame her? Jus' sayin'.

As far as porn goes, this seems typical of what we get from people inclined to worry about it.

It would be great if everyone could be the tightly-controlled locus of prim, provident bunny-love for their devoted, married partners, but that's just not the world we're on. You don't have to be a prude to think that pornography has some bad effects, but it's difficult to imagine a planet that gets rid of porn without putting women in burqas, too.

And of course, the Middle East has both pornography and burkas. And you'll never guess were that porn comes from.

"As far as porn goes, this seems typical of what we get from people inclined to worry about it."

Crid, you're trivializing something that is very serious. People should worry about porn if their partner is making it a priority.

I think porn is a lot like "guns". Some people say guns are bad, but it's not the gun, it's how it's used. A gun can save your life, just as easily as it can kill you. Likewise, porn can be used to spice up a couple's sex life. It can be wonderful. Yet, if it becomes an obsession, especially one used alone, in the basement or the locked room late at night, then that's a problem that any spouse should worry about.

All these serial cheaters have one thing in common: porn. Jesse James was apparently still trolling porn websites looking for dates ("tatooed biker chicks with big tits"). Tiger had porn readily on his I-phone. It's important for women (and men) to understand that if your partner is immersed in porn, they are likely cheating.

> People should worry about porn if their
> partner is making it a priority

They should worry about their partners. Listen, alcoholism is a real problem, but I think alcohol is just about as available as it ought to be. As friends and family select partners, they're encouraged to make sure the new person doesn't drink too much. It's like that.

I'm not sure what you're saying, Crid. Alcoholism is a problem, but I've actually seen many relationships survive alcoholism. The partner may be falling down drunk, but not screwing someone else. That's easier to forgive.

And I don't see how friends or family members are supposed to "make sure" someone isn't into porn. It's a very quiet addiction. Hardly anyone knows about it, often not even the spouse. This is a new age, with laptops and I-phones. You can generally tell when someone is imbibing to excess with alcohol, but not with porn. Friends and family are not likely to be able to prevent their loved one from being with someone addicted to porn. This knowledge usually comes after a commitment has been made, when there's enough intimacy for the other partner to stumble upon the porn, and even then, there's a taboo against snooping, which keeps many partners in the dark.

"As friends and family select partners, they're encouraged to make sure the new person doesn't drink too much. It's like that."

LS, Crid - when he isn't fired up about FSM knows what - makes perfect sense. He is saying that you should listen to your friends when you find someone new, because they'll be better at filtering out the pr0n addict than you - just as they would be better at identifying a lush.

I've been there. My friends told me to get away from a girl I ended up marrying, and they were right. I was very lucky to escape as cheaply as I did, later. That haunts me still.

Jeez— That wasn't the case I was making, though I've made it in other comments here. I do think there'd be a lot less divorce if people had better friendships and made better use of them when picking mates. And buying cars. And buying houses. Anybody wants to disagree, go ahead. But it seems like the culture of Disney Narcissism™ that we've been pursuing for the last few generations ("Trust your feelings, Luke!") hasn't worked out so well.

But that wasn't what was said a couple comments ago. Mostly I'm saying –to friends, and to all the Carbon Earthlings who'll fall so servilely into submission on Planet Cridmo when I finally make my move [Soon! Soon!]: Don't come cryin'.

People really oughta know what enthusiasms populate the hearts of new spouses, whether it's drinking or other nighttime behaviors. Especially people who get all pissy when the rest of the culture tries to make suggestions about how things can go better. You got it all under control? Fine. Leave the rest of us out of it. Don't say you couldn't tell.

Believe me, your friends do not know about your partner's porn or sexual proclivities. Their own friends usually don't know. All my friends were completely charmed by my ex. None advised me not to marry him, and they certainy never would've suspected what "enthusiasms populated his heart."

The people who do know are the ex's. I'd highly recommend meeting your future spouses ex's if they have any. Of course, your boyfriend or girlfriend will charge that they're crazy and full of lies, which may also be true (though it's usually not), but if there's any bedroom dirt or cheating allegations to know about, they're the best source.

By all means, go sick with this, OK? Be as suspicious as you want... It's a sure a path to marital discord as any.