If your husband could not provide enough money, would you leave him?

[lightshineon]

blah,blah, sorry if i skimmed the post OK, you are right I did do that. I was not the one that started mixing the post though. I am sorry, if I misunderstood you calling me overweight. The rotting teeth that to me is not a perfect analogy, unless you mixed it with money post, where some just do not have money to fix teeth. I have perfect teeth, always been straight, but have had much dental work, cosmetic. There are those who do not have that option. If I am ever rich, I would have a foundation that fixes peoples teeth, it hurts me to see those with bad, crooked, missing or hurting teeth, and can do nothing about it.

 I just think in my opinion sometimes people fall on hard times, and things get better. Sometimes after a baby like Chessmans wife just had, things will get better. She will lose the weight, I am sure. I believe that somehow however unintentional Chessman, made people think bad of his woman. I really personally worry not if my husband, had gained weight. he did, he lost it on his timing. I never said anything to him, never. I was never turned off by a few pounds. Weight can be caused by many things you know. I know over eating is the root cause, but deeper than that emotional eating, depression, being trapped in with children, an injury. If he is just patient with her, kind to her, and would change his mindset about her with prayer. Show her she is beautiful. I see maybe the Lord could be working on his mindset, more than he is worried if his wife is a little portly. Could it be. I am sorry for my knee jerk reaction. I have had quite a few of those today, so forgive me.

[yesult]

I think it was a great thread. So there 

Chessmans thread was a 'fatty' thread whether he wanted to admit it or not, and if I was his wife (I'd like to say I'd thump him) (but that probably wouldn't be practical) so maybe just tie him up when he was asleep and sit on him until he turned blue.

Seriously, it was derogatory and nasty. So what if he's wife gotten overweight. No it's not the best thing for any marriage but when you covenant with someone, you make a decision that your marriage is based on more then your ego or inconvenience. Who likes being overweight? If someone has gotten into that state it can be debilitating enough for their self-esteem without their husband (or wife) rejecting them over it.

And I think the money idea is an excellent comparison.

[BAH-BLAH]

I think it was a great thread. So there 

Chessmans thread was a 'fatty' thread whether he wanted to admit it or not, and if I was his wife (I'd like to say I'd thump him) (but that probably wouldn't be practical) so maybe just tie him up when he was asleep and sit on him until he turned blue.

Seriously, it was derogatory and nasty. So what if he's wife gotten overweight. No it's not the best thing for any marriage but when you covenant with someone, you make a decision that your marriage is based on more then your ego or inconvenience. Who likes being overweight? If someone has gotten into that state it can be debilitating enough for their self-esteem without their husband (or wife) rejecting them over it.

And I think the money idea is an excellent comparison.

Its not that the money wasnt the excellent comparison, it was the CONSEQUENCES that rendered the analogy invalid. You fell for it too. No one advocated divorce, rejection, leaving, not loving, treating badly, or any overt negative thing to the wife, no way does it change the marriage covenant.
Speaking for myself I only said its OK that he would want her to lose weight, and even that is met with derision.
I will say this, if you married because of money, you started all wrong anyway.

[lightshineon]

I think it was a great thread. So there 

Chessmans thread was a 'fatty' thread whether he wanted to admit it or not, and if I was his wife (I'd like to say I'd thump him) (but that probably wouldn't be practical) so maybe just tie him up when he was asleep and sit on him until he turned blue.

Seriously, it was derogatory and nasty. So what if he's wife gotten overweight. No it's not the best thing for any marriage but when you covenant with someone, you make a decision that your marriage is based on more then your ego or inconvenience. Who likes being overweight? If someone has gotten into that state it can be debilitating enough for their self-esteem without their husband (or wife) rejecting them over it.

And I think the money idea is an excellent comparison.

Its not that the money wasnt the excellent comparison, it was the CONSEQUENCES that rendered the analogy invalid. You fell for it too. No one advocated divorce, rejection, leaving, not loving, treating badly, or any overt negative thing to the wife, no way does it change the marriage covenant.
Speaking for myself I only said its OK that he would want her to lose weight, and even that is met with derision.
I will say this, if you married because of money, you started all wrong anyway.

 And if you married for a trophy wife, it started out all wrong also. I said in another post, maybe God is more worried about Chessmans heart, than forty pounds put on by his wife.

[lightshineon]

I think it was a great thread. So there 

Chessmans thread was a 'fatty' thread whether he wanted to admit it or not, and if I was his wife (I'd like to say I'd thump him) (but that probably wouldn't be practical) so maybe just tie him up when he was asleep and sit on him until he turned blue.

Seriously, it was derogatory and nasty. So what if he's wife gotten overweight. No it's not the best thing for any marriage but when you covenant with someone, you make a decision that your marriage is based on more then your ego or inconvenience. Who likes being overweight? If someone has gotten into that state it can be debilitating enough for their self-esteem without their husband (or wife) rejecting them over it.

And I think the money idea is an excellent comparison.

 Hey thanks made my day.

[yesult]

Its not that the money wasnt the excellent comparison, it was the CONSEQUENCES that rendered the analogy invalid. You fell for it too. No one advocated divorce, rejection, leaving, not loving, treating badly, or any overt negative thing to the wife, no way does it change the marriage covenant.
Speaking for myself I only said its OK that he would want her to lose weight, and even that is met with derision.
I will say this, if you married because of money, you started all wrong anyway.

Chess man was talking down about his wife because of her weight gain. When critised he backtracked very fast about how much he actually loved her. How would he like it if his wife came on here and asked advice for how she could 'encourage' him to make more money for her to spend. That he didn't seem to love her anymore because he wouldn't work as hard in the office. He seemed to have lost some of the drive and determination to be successful that he used to have and it was 'affecting their marriage'.

It's selfish. Plain and simple.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

I dunno.  What did you agree on in your marriage covenant?

I mean, if the terms there state that he is to support you, then if he doesn't, he's in violation there.

Although, as long as he is supporting you (though perhaps not as well you'd like), then you're obligated to stay.

But if you're not happy about it, I wouldn't blame you.  That seems like a pretty normal reaction.

[yesult]

 Hey thanks made my day.

You're welcome 

[janine]

I still like to go back to the OP Title.  If he could not provide enough money, would you leave him?

I don't think so.

It would be -- it is -- my job as a partner in my marriage to make the most of him, to encourage him all his life in his efforts to grow and learn and support his family.

If he needs to make more money, maybe I need to help him find some educational options to complete his degree so he can demand more money.  (He'd have to change his work, he already makes top regional dollar for exactly what he does... but, he's looking into advancement/education/certification etc.)

I also can do things to bring in more money, to make the most of what money we have, etc.

But... what if he would not bring in enough money?  What if he were perfectly capable of improving the family earnings but did not want to?

I'm not talking about career changes that would put a Daddy with small kids overseas for months at a time; I'm not talking about diving into some more lucrative career only because of the money, even though it doesn't suit your talents (or even though you doubts its ethics).

I'm simply talking about some lazy-butt bum who wants to skim barely along and live off of relatives or the government when he is perfectly able to stand up on his own.

THAT guy, I might leave.

[lightshineon]

I still like to go back to the OP Title.  If he could not provide enough money, would you leave him?

I don't think so.

It would be -- it is -- my job as a partner in my marriage to make the most of him, to encourage him all his life in his efforts to grow and learn and support his family.

If he needs to make more money, maybe I need to help him find some educational options to complete his degree so he can demand more money.  (He'd have to change his work, he already makes top regional dollar for exactly what he does... but, he's looking into advancement/education/certification etc.)

I also can do things to bring in more money, to make the most of what money we have, etc.

But... what if he would not bring in enough money?  What if he were perfectly capable of improving the family earnings but did not want to?

I'm not talking about career changes that would put a Daddy with small kids overseas for months at a time; I'm not talking about diving into some more lucrative career only because of the money, even though it doesn't suit your talents (or even though you doubts its ethics).

I'm simply talking about some lazy-butt bum who wants to skim barely along and live off of relatives or the government when he is perfectly able to stand up on his own.

THAT guy, I might leave.

 That was a great post, "lazy butt bum" made me laugh out loud. Really laugh, sometimes strange things are just funny. All of you have had great post actually, even those debated me. I would not leave my husband either, and would get a better paying job myself if something happened. Nothing usually stops us from improving our station in life. Paul said to be content with food and shelter.

[BAH-BLAH]

I still like to go back to the OP Title.  If he could not provide enough money, would you leave him?

I don't think so.

It would be -- it is -- my job as a partner in my marriage to make the most of him, to encourage him all his life in his efforts to grow and learn and support his family.

If he needs to make more money, maybe I need to help him find some educational options to complete his degree so he can demand more money.  (He'd have to change his work, he already makes top regional dollar for exactly what he does... but, he's looking into advancement/education/certification etc.)

I also can do things to bring in more money, to make the most of what money we have, etc.

But... what if he would not bring in enough money?  What if he were perfectly capable of improving the family earnings but did not want to?

I'm not talking about career changes that would put a Daddy with small kids overseas for months at a time; I'm not talking about diving into some more lucrative career only because of the money, even though it doesn't suit your talents (or even though you doubts its ethics).

I'm simply talking about some lazy-butt bum who wants to skim barely along and live off of relatives or the government when he is perfectly able to stand up on his own.

THAT guy, I might leave.

Funny, there has been only one response to this post, and it seemingly missed the parallel to the weight issue that the OP set forth. I dont advocate anyone leaving over weight or money.....but this post makes it clear, that IF the person WONT (not CANT....WONT) address the issue that is different than in they cant.
Great post and great points.

[lightshineon]

I still like to go back to the OP Title.  If he could not provide enough money, would you leave him?

I don't think so.

It would be -- it is -- my job as a partner in my marriage to make the most of him, to encourage him all his life in his efforts to grow and learn and support his family.

If he needs to make more money, maybe I need to help him find some educational options to complete his degree so he can demand more money.  (He'd have to change his work, he already makes top regional dollar for exactly what he does... but, he's looking into advancement/education/certification etc.)

I also can do things to bring in more money, to make the most of what money we have, etc.

But... what if he would not bring in enough money?  What if he were perfectly capable of improving the family earnings but did not want to?

I'm not talking about career changes that would put a Daddy with small kids overseas for months at a time; I'm not talking about diving into some more lucrative career only because of the money, even though it doesn't suit your talents (or even though you doubts its ethics).

I'm simply talking about some lazy-butt bum who wants to skim barely along and live off of relatives or the government when he is perfectly able to stand up on his own.

THAT guy, I might leave.

Funny, there has been only one response to this post, and it seemingly missed the parallel to the weight issue that the OP set forth. I dont advocate anyone leaving over weight or money.....but this post makes it clear, that IF the person WONT (not CANT....WONT) address the issue that is different than in they cant.
Great post and great points.

 blahblah, will you quit judging me and I will throw you some manna. I happen to mention it was a great post. I also thought yours were good. Seems like you want to throw rotten tomatoes at me. Oh what the heck, I will give you manna anyway.

[Cally]

Its not that the money wasnt the excellent comparison, it was the CONSEQUENCES that rendered the analogy invalid. You fell for it too. No one advocated divorce, rejection, leaving, not loving, treating badly, or any overt negative thing to the wife, no way does it change the marriage covenant.
Speaking for myself I only said its OK that he would want her to lose weight, and even that is met with derision.
I will say this, if you married because of money, you started all wrong anyway.

Chess man was talking down about his wife because of her weight gain. When critised he backtracked very fast about how much he actually loved her. How would he like it if his wife came on here and asked advice for how she could 'encourage' him to make more money for her to spend. That he didn't seem to love her anymore because he wouldn't work as hard in the office. He seemed to have lost some of the drive and determination to be successful that he used to have and it was 'affecting their marriage'.

It's selfish. Plain and simple.
It's

I'm working really, really hard to believe that the same people would respond to that sort of counter-scenario the same sort of way they did to the "fatty woman thread" (which I hardly looked at . . .). I'm thinking it may be more true than I'm personally used to: that someone would come to the man's defense in an equal scenario.

Actually, I would rather that both were shown a little sympathy also (I didn't read the other thread). Like Lightshineon said, I believe it would be kind of a bummer if the "turn-ons" weren't there anymore.

[janine]

Your spouse could stay the same wonderful looker they always were, and you could change, so that those great things were no longer what you wanted.  What then?   "Woman, you'd better add another 50 pounds, I wants me something I can hold onto these days?"

Desires change.  Since I started taking metformin to help with my blood sugar, I no longer enjoy sweets as much, and I can't recall the last time I actually ate and finished and enjoyed a chocolate candy bar.

If our desire for our spouse comes only from appearance, we are shallow and never developed a well-rounded love for them.  Notice, I didn't say no proper or righteous desire comes from loving the spouse's appearance... it's just that we need to build on so much more than that alone.

[janine]

I am seriously thinking about merging the two threads, the one about the wife's weight gain versus the husband's... erm... limp desire -- and this one, comparing the husband's earning power (or lack thereof).  I think the back-and-forth of the points made both ways would make for a powerful thread...

But maybe not.  It might end up confusing.