Wives... were you glad pubs weren't open today

iebamm2580 wrote: »

One question do you think that the husband should not go out one night a week just because the wife doesn't? I already said 2 nights is too much but one night to meet with friends come on like. BTW i never said she was a whinger.

He doesn't go out one night though, he goes out two and he's hungover and unengaged with the family because of it. She asks if she can go out.

Fair enough, you didn't say whinging, but you did say she was looking for pity. Then you said you don't buy her not having money. That sounds like you think she was whining and lying. She's not the one in the wrong here.

If you don't see something very unfair going on here, you're blind.

iebamm2580

Candie wrote: »

He doesn't go out one night though, he goes out two and he's hungover and unengaged with the family because of it. She asks if she can go out.

Fair enough, you didn't say whinging, but you did say she was looking for pity. Then you said you don't buy her not having money. That sounds like you think she was whining and lying. She's not the one in the wrong here.

If you don't see something very unfair going on here, you're blind.

For the third time i said 2 nights is too much but people on here would lead you to believe that even one night out by himself is too much even if she has no interest in going to the pub with him. Yes i do think the no money thing is a cop out for not actually wanting to go out with her husband. Do you believe that he would not take her with him if she wanted to go to the pub, the impression i get is that shes just not interested in going out and has nothing to do with money. Again its only my opinion.

iebamm2580

Omackeral wrote: »

Don't think anyone would disagree with one night a week. However we're told it's two nights a week (fri and Sat) so that's what we're working off. The fact he is entitled to take friday and saturday to himself to get sh!tfaced while she needs to ask to go for a meal is the real worry in my opinion. Totally unfair.

Yes i know 2 nights is too much but people on here would tell you even one night is too much which is what im arguing over as thats just ridiculous in my opinion.

PARlance

kylith wrote: »

Bollocks to the idea that men in certain jobs rarely see their families. My father, and yours, worked all hours but still spent time with their families in a time when single-income families were the norm. If a man isn't spending time with his children these days it's rarely because he can't and more often because he can't be bothered.

But who isn't spending time with their children here?

Quite a lot of posters seem to have misread the OP. The father is spending time with his wife and kids. The OP says that they all head off to football etc on a Saturday morning. She said that she wouldn't be able to function with a hangover but the husband does and is there with them.

Most of us agree that 2 nights each weekend is far from ideal and selfish but he's not a non functioning husband at the weekends. We know a small bit of one side of the story. From the OP I'm getting that he's a good husband when he's around, he should just be around more than he is at present.

iebamm2580

PARlance wrote: »

But who isn't spending time with their children here?

Quite a lot of posters seem to have misread the OP. The father is spending time with his wife and kids. The OP says that they all head off to football etc on a Saturday morning, she said she wouldn't be able to function with a hangover but the husband does and is there with them.

Most of us agree that 2 nights each weekend is far from ideal and selfish but he's not a non functioning husband at the weekends. We know a small bit of one side of the story. From the OP I'm getting that he's a good husband when he's around, he should just be around more than he is at present.

Exactly what im saying i couldnt agree more.

pickarooney

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Yeah cycling and alcoholism. I can see the link now. :rolleyes:

You need to break the cycle
You need to fix the cycle

nice_guy80

But sure he'd miss the craic in the pub of a Friday or Saturday night...

You'd wonder if there are a lot of husbands who display the same sort of behaviour

In other news, family is more important than the craic

nice_guy80 wrote: »

But sure he'd miss the craic in the pub of a Friday or Saturday night...

You'd wonder if there are a lot of husbands who display the same sort of behaviour

In other news, family is more important than the craic

Going by the response on this thread there are quite a few - poor man works hard all week, needs a break at the pub, what is wrong with that? But OP said she has no money, doesn't go out, works all week and looks after the kids.. while he rides on her coat tails Saturday morning hungover, but is back on form to return to the pub Saturday night.

She has no money and rarely goes out.. lonely sitting at home on her own Friday and Saturday night. Great life for her, eh? Where do I sign up? :rolleyes:

Fighting Tao

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Going by the response on this thread there are quite a few - poor man works hard all week, needs a break at the pub, what is wrong with that? But OP said she has no money, doesn't go out, works all week and looks after the kids.. while he rides on her coat tails Saturday morning hungover, but is back on form to return to the pub Saturday night.

She has no money and rarely goes out.. lonely sitting at home on her own Friday and Saturday night. Great life for her, eh? Where do I sign up? :rolleyes:

Someone else mentioned the OPs previous thread on having money issues. Hard to believe if you have a glance over the list of other threads the OP started.

Yeah I know circumstance change.

The only issue seems to be that the guy is in the pub on a Friday after work and the wife is lonely. He's there for foootball etc on Saturday. As I said previously it could just be habit. He joined the after works on Friday drinks crew and never left it.

There is little point in discussing it on the internet when she should be discussing it with him. If she is unhappy she should be telling him and not to strangers. If she continues to be unhappy she should get out of there.

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Someone else mentioned the OPs previous thread on having money issues. Hard to believe if you have a glance over the list of other threads the OP started.

Yeah I know circumstance change.

The only issue seems to be that the guy is in the pub on a Friday after work and the wife is lonely. He's there for foootball etc on Saturday. As I said previously it could just be habit. He joined the after works on Friday drinks crew and never left it.

There is little point in discussing it on the internet when she should be discussing it with him. If she is unhappy she should be telling him and. To strangers. If she continues to be unhappy she should get out of there.

So, why are you posting and discussing it then? Going to great lengths to give alternative reasons about his pub life? I notice too you have discredited her too by stating she is not telling the truth about having little money - whether she states that here or in another thread doesn't amount to anything.

She infers in her OP that all other wives of the pub-going males accept it and so she should too.. she states it's Good Friday so no pubs open because this where he usually is on Fridays.. and to be clear she isn't discussing anything: she asked if other wives were happy no pubs open on Good Friday meant the men were at home. She now knows, thanks to the common sense replies on this thread, her set-up isn't the norm, and knows too she shouldn't be measuring herself as a wife by other females so-called acceptance of husbands in the pub 1950s style.

I'd say this thread has been very useful in helping her realize her situation is not normal.. +1 for the internet!

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

I'd say this thread has been very useful in helping her realize her situation is not normal.. +1 for the internet!

Aye, give yourself a slow clap there for speculating about the circumstances of a complete strangers relationship and judging it to be abnormal. +1 for people who appoint themselves the moral arbiters of society and social norms (I guess they've never seen the Simpsons, it's popular because people can relate to it - everyone who thinks in childhood that their own family are dysfunctional or abnormal, soon realises as they grow into adulthood that their own family are pretty much normal by comparison with plenty of other examples of families).

"+1 for the internet" my ass, all I can see from this thread is the OP realising they shouldn't have bothered starting it because it took a completely different direction, thanks to some people who just can't seem to help themselves :rolleyes:

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Aye, give yourself a slow clap there for speculating about the circumstances of a complete strangers relationship and judging it to be abnormal. +1 for people who appoint themselves the moral arbiters of society and social norms (I guess they've never seen the Simpsons, it's popular because people can relate to it - everyone who thinks in childhood that their own family are dysfunctional or abnormal, soon realises as they grow into adulthood that their own family are pretty much normal by comparison with plenty of other examples of families).

"+1 for the internet" my ass, all I can see from this thread is the OP realising they shouldn't have bothered starting it because it took a completely different direction, thanks to some people who just can't seem to help themselves :rolleyes:

Help themselves comment on what the OP said in her original post. You can see from this thread.. and from her post.. and.. and..

Yeah right, what you're doing now, lol! High horse, anyone?

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Help themselves comment on what the OP said in her original post. You can see from this thread.. and from her post.. and.. and..

Yeah, of course, that's exactly what I mean, because all you did either was make an innocuous comment that didn't at all suggest to the OP that when they try to start a light hearted thread in AH, they should be aware that AH is choc-a-bloc full of wishful thinkers that would imagine every family should aspire to be the Waltons... actually, to be perfectly honest, I don't think they know themselves what they want, other than everyone to be how they imagine everyone should be. That in itself is normal, but actually thinking anyone would actually adjust their lifestyle on the basis of people passing judgement upon them on the internet? Children and teenagers might, adults? Not so much.

Yeah right, what you're doing now, lol! High horse, anyone?

And yet again you appear to miss the point - I wouldn't pass judgement upon complete strangers without trying to understand them first, and trying to turn that around as if your own behaviour is then justified, says more about you IMO than anything it says about me.

(You'll undoubtedly turn that around to try and point score now, rather than make any attempt to understand the point, because of course you have no responsibility for your own behaviour, but expect everyone else should be responsible for their behaviour)

One eyed Jack wrote: »

And yet again you appear to miss the point - I wouldn't pass judgement upon complete strangers without trying to understand them first, and trying to turn that around as if your own behaviour is then justified, says more about you IMO than anything it says about me.

(You'll undoubtedly turn that around to try and point score now, rather than make any attempt to understand the point, because of course you have no responsibility for your own behaviour, but expect everyone else should be responsible for their behaviour)

You're already point scoring against yourself, don't need my help.. just too funny, writing on AH about wishful thinkers; making judgements on people making judgments and inferring that they are children/teenagers.. oh gosh, this could run and run.

Keep unravelling it all here mate, and you'll end up no where.. at least you'll have your own pure judgements about non judgements to feel good about, eh?

Maybe I should run along and play, being a child with no responsibility 'n' all. Lol! :P

.........

Why can't grown adults buy drink in this country every December 25th ?

Pac1Man

How easy is it to spot the apologists?

Obviously defending the same selfish behaviour they partake in themselves.

Pinch Flat

......... wrote: »

Why can't gown adults buy drink in this country every December 25th ?

Because grown adults in gowns should be nowhere near a bar :pac:

.........

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Because grown adults in gowns should be nowhere near a bar :pac:

Don't wear your gown then

Estrellita

One eyed Jack wrote: »

all I can see from this thread is the OP realising they shouldn't have bothered starting it because it took a completely different direction,

While she was probably surprised by the reaction she got, I think it's also been a bit of an eye opener for her.

There appears to be a strong argument by some that its perfectly acceptable for a man with a family to spend his weekend nights in the pub because he 'works his b0llocks off', and hungover for the weekend days.

Thankfully this seems to be dying off with the attitude that men shouldn't change nappies or push prams. The reality of it is we now live in a world where father's get involved in their children's lives, both in their care and hobbies and interests. Days out with their families and really playing an active part as a father.

According to the OP, she's the one at the side-line for her children's activities, and when their father does show up he's likely to be half steamed from the night before. With other parents there and the kids coach I wouldn't be wild about him chatting to them banging of booze.

Then there is the issue of the wife. Just because she doesnt want to see her weekend go by in a boozey haze she shouldn't be punished for it. What about date nights in or out? Quality time together as a couple? Weekdays can be so hectic with work and school routines, the weekend can sometimes be the only time that is feasible to do it.

There's no high horse here. Im not saying the man isn't entitled to a drink. But it starts to become an issue when every weekend ends up in this routine. Quit the excuses. As an old relative of mine used to say "If you join the army, you better soldier on".

Nonsensical and illogical to bring up a supposedly clean, high brow argument against posters' response to the what the OP has written in black and white. There is no guess work involved in responding to facts as they are presented by the OP: hubby is in pub Fridays and Saturdays. She didn't say the odd weekend, she implied and confirmed (not contradicted) her own isolation with an acknowledged post later in the thread that this happens weekly.

Now, for someone to come along and say this is not the case, we shouldn't judge is laughable. He is married, has kids, should be at home helping his wife and be with the family. If they love their social life, time out in the pub, they should take turns/share or get a babysitter and go out together.

Posters responding to what has been written in clear black and white only to get berated on this thread is again laughable and smacks of defensive apologists.

She didn't write a different post which allows guess work, she wrote what she wrote. Posters are responding to that - no more, no less. I think when apologists don't win by knocking down posters, they then blame the internet.. then comes the scoring points argument: even-if-you-do-win-points-me-not-wrong-cos-I-called-it-first, is hilarious! Very self-defeating and child-like method of arguing, I must say.

So back to the facts: OP, it is not normal to be married with kids, work flat out all week while your partner scarpers off to the the pub every weekend. It is 2017, you're on equal ground, both of you get to have a break or non at all. He is not more equal than you or you, him.

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

You're already point scoring against yourself, don't need my help.. just too funny, writing on AH about wishful thinkers; making judgements on people making judgments and inferring that they are children/teenagers.. oh gosh, this could run and run.

Keep unravelling it all here mate, and you'll end up no where.. at least you'll have your own pure judgements about non judgements to feel good about, eh?

Maybe I should run along and play, being a child with no responsibility 'n' all. Lol! :P

You're not a teenager then?

Well shìt, you'll have to forgive me, I was working on the understanding that given your post, you could only be a teenager, so I figured the Simpsons was an example of a family you would relate to, and the Waltons you were likely too young to remember them so I crossed them out.

Pac1Man wrote: »

How easy is it to spot the apologists?

Obviously defending the same selfish behaviour they partake in themselves.

I haven't seen anyone apologising to the OP for jumping to conclusions about her and her husbands relationship. Some posters took great satisfaction in telling the OP like they thought it is (because the OP only lives with and loves her husband, but she wouldn't have a bulls notion what he's like as a person, naturally!), Mr. Wemmick above just about shying away from wetting themselves with gleeful delight that strangers on the internet who knew better than her had put her back on the righteous path...

Praise be d'Internet, d'Internet has provided, PBUd'Internet...

Yes Mr. Wemmick, to give you your due, you predicted that one coming, you're practically the new prophet of d'Internet.

Yeah, I'm not taking this thread seriously any more either.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You're not a teenager then?

Well shÃ¬t, you'll have to forgive me, I was working on the understanding that given your post, you could only be a teenager, so I figured the Simpsons was an example of a family you would relate to, and the Waltons you were likely too young to remember them so I crossed them out.

I haven't seen anyone apologising to the OP for jumping to conclusions about her and her husbands relationship. Some posters took great satisfaction in telling the OP like they thought it is (because the OP only lives with and loves her husband, but she wouldn't have a bulls notion what he's like as a person, naturally!), Mr. Wemmick above just about shying away from wetting themselves with gleeful delight that strangers on the internet who knew better than her had put her back on the righteous path...

Praise be d'Internet, d'Internet has provided, PBUd'Internet...

Yes Mr. Wemmick, to give you your due, you predicted that one coming, you're practically the new prophet of d'Internet.

Yeah, I'm not taking this thread seriously any more either.

The unravelling method of arguing is going well, I see.

The insults will start shortly.. oh hang on..

Bless.

Pac1Man

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I haven't seen anyone apologising to the OP for jumping to conclusions about her and her husbands relationship. Some posters took great satisfaction in telling the OP like they thought it is (because the OP only lives with and loves her husband, but she wouldn't have a bulls notion what he's like as a person, naturally!), Mr. Wemmick above just about shying away from wetting themselves with gleeful delight that strangers on the internet who knew better than her had put her back on the righteous path..

That's not what an apologist is.

Getting defensive is a way of projecting on to other their own guilt or uneasy about their own behaviour, they know they are being judged.

If the woman is happy married and is not tackling his behaviour that is her choice even if others think it strange, it does affect children though.

If someone has made the choice to have children then the weekend is for family life not drinking its as simple as that.

andekwarhola

Checking back into the thread after a while.

Let me guess, OP and other moderate voices have fled and interminable multiquote war now being waged between parents, non-parents, boozehounds and ex-boozehounds.

mariaalice wrote: »

If someone has made the choice to have children then the weekend is for family life not drinking its as simple as that.

It's not as simple as that, by all means disappear off the radar like many do when they have kids (or are whipped and forced to) but many more don't. They still have their regular nights out with friends at weekends etc, maybe not two every weekend but one night each out per week for each parent is far from unreasonable imo and plenty of parents who want to keep their social life manage it just fine. Mentally even it's not good for a person to stop having a social life and start losing contact with friends etc.

Alma Weak Stabilizer wrote: »

It's not as simple as that, by all means disappear off the radar like many do when they have kids (or are whipped and forced to) but many more don't. They still have their regular nights out with friends at weekends etc, maybe not two every weekend but one night each out per week for each parent is far from unreasonable imo and plenty of parents who want to keep their social life manage it just fine. Mentally even it's not good for a person to stop having a social life and start losing contact with friends etc.

Of course people have to have some sort of social life they would go creaked otherwise, but there is a difference between having a few drinks and getting up on Saturday morning for rugby/football/GAA practice being active and engaged with their children and so on verses been too hungover to do anything.

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

The unravelling method of arguing is going well, I see.

The insults will start shortly.. oh hang on..

Bless.

It genuinely wasn't meant as an insult. Your post read like you were almost delighting in the fact that the OP who had intended a light hearted thread, had her marriage picked apart on the internet by people who made all sorts of assumptions about their relationship. That's the kind of immature mentality I'd expect of a teenager, not a mature adult. Again, that's not intended as an insult, it's intended by way of providing an explanation (something I'd rarely feel the need to bother doing for strangers on the internet as it's usually a futile exercise offline, let alone online, as people tend to believe what they want regardless).

Pac1Man wrote: »

That's not what an apologist is.

I know what an apologist is, which is exactly why I said I saw nobody who had made excuses for their picking the OP's marriage apart, make any apology to the OP for their behaviour. I wouldn't consider their behaviour was acceptable, but they have an excuse of course, and the OP has had their eyes opened, apparently, so their behaviour by their own standards is completely justified. Can't agree with that tbh.

Perfectly possible to have an odd drink and have a functional family life, of course it is.
But the OP's husband is going drinking to the extent that she won't even sleep beside him at weekends and she is delighted when the one Friday per year the pubs are closed arrives. The OP sounds like a v mild mannered lady with a husband who doesn't seem to have a lot of self awareness around his drinking, regardless of what kind of guy he is in other ways. Surprising that sleeping apart regularly due to drink hasn't brought things to a head before, hope this thread helps the couple reassess things a bit.
I think when you drink a good bit or are around someone who drinks a lot your view on what is okay can become a bit too broad and sometimes hearing other people's views is both uncomfortable and necessary. Hope the whole thread isn't too upsetting for Mockingjay.