Why do THEY always have to win?

[Cataholic]

FORBID? Yikes, that is a word with too much negative feeling about it. I am not married. Maybe there is a reason? Certainly, I wouldn't even know how I would react if someone 'forbid' me to do anything. I don't even remember my parents using that word with me. I would assume everyone is of legal age when they marry, and can do whatever they want. So, I think using the forbid word is really just an excuse to cover up alot of other issues.

Someone that forbids someone else to do something is looking to exercise some control over that person. That can't be a good thing.

Someone that lets another forbid them from doing something is also allowing themselves to be controlled. That lets them give up the responsibility for their actions. That can't be a good thing.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Interesting discussion. Some of you may remember that it was my husband who wanted a cat and my mother who bullied me into agreeing to get her! I thought of myself as a dog person and am allergic to cats.

He often talks about getting another cat -- which I veto on the grounds he doesn't do enough of the cat care (especially the brushing which is so important for my allergies!) I feed, water, and scoop. Yet...when I feel in love with Edwin -- the Edwina look alike in Indiana -- he was hesitant to take him home (not sure if he belonged to someone, how would Edwina react?)

So it is a mutual thing. I am an adult and cannot be forbidden. It becomes how much hassle/fight/agrument/pouting am I prepared to endure on any issue.

[lynnestankard]

I voted 'No' because Don would not forbid me to do anything. We would discuss the issue and after both stating our views hopefully come to a mutual decision!! He knows I would take in any furbaby in need and tries to patiently explain why we don't need another cat! I DO understand but my heart tends to rule my head and where cats are concerned I can see no further than the sweet furbaby in need.
(Of course at the moment we have Elizabeth's dog, Tricky with us. I find her hard work but then she's great company for me! I cannot take her out every day for a long walk and she's getting to realise this! So we have a lovely game - me throwing her stuffed toy up the stairs and her bounding after it and returning it for another go!! She certainly gets puffed out!!)
But you see she was a furbaby without a home - and I couldn't say 'No' - where could she have gone? Even Don understood this - even though he's not a dog lover.
Lynne

[All Creatures Great And Small]

Originally posted by Cataholic
I would assume everyone is of legal age when they marry, and can do whatever they want.

Well, legally, yes. But I would hope that in a marriage (or living arrangement), the people involved don't just do whatever they want with no regard for how it will affect the other half of the partnership. If my husband could "do whatever he wants", there would be a lot of decisions made that I would not be happy living with, just like he would be unhappy if I had free rein and didn't give a thought to how something I did would affect both of us. I agree that FORBID has negative connotations, and that there are probably some issues there with one of the partners always acquiescing to the other just to "keep the peace", or someone is allowing themselves to be "forbidden" or controlled. In the case of not wanting another pet to be added to the household, the person who doesn't want it is probably envisioning the extra work, expense, etc., even though that may never be the case. Unfortunately, you can't do pets on a trial basis, so you couldn't say "well, let's just take the (pet) and see how it goes; maybe you're wrong about how much trouble/expense it would be". A person just has to go by their instincts because of the permanence of taking on a pet. It's a lot like deciding how many (if any) children to have; not a decision to be taken lightly (unless your religion does not condone birth control; then the decision is made for you by a higher power).

In our house, I'm the one who doesn't want a yellow lab added to the household menagerie. My daughter wants one so badly she's delirious, and my husband would enjoy having a lab companion for hunting. However, they can't agree on who would "own" the dog, and with my daughter reaching the age soon where she'll be leaving home, a "shared" dog wouldn't work, because she'd want to take it with her. My husband would want the dog specially trained for bird hunting, which involves a very close relationship between him and the dog. I also would not want to be left with a dog to take care of if my daughter leaves home and can't take it with, because I am looking forward to being "free" in my autumn years. My husband, too, has given some thought to whether he wants to take on the responsibility of a dog, because he travels a lot, and he would like to be more spontaneous as we age. There are probably those of you out there who would say we're wrong, that a dog would be a wonderful addition to the family, they're not as much work as you think, etc., but ultimately we have to know ourselves and our family situation. I guess you have to balance your deep love for animals with your deep love for your spouse/partner and your family, and do what is best for all of them, animals included.

Meanwhile, I am considered the Wicked Witch of the West by my daughter because I have FORBIDDEN them to have a dog. Hey, if the pointy hat fits..............

[Cataholic]

Originally posted by All Creatures Great And Small
.... the people involved don't just do whatever they want with no regard for how it will affect the other half of the partnership. If my husband could "do whatever he wants", there would be a lot of decisions made that I would not be happy living with, just like he would be unhappy if I had free rein and didn't give a thought to how something I did would affect both of us.

How did my statment that everyone can do whatever they want somehow acquire the EXTRA WORDS " with no regard for how it will affect the other half..." or "...didn't give a thought..." ???

I was presuming that human kindness, trust, love, respect ,etc., went into any decision affecting two or more people, and I didn't think it was necessary to add the words.

HOWEVER, having post humorously added the forgoing to my original quote....I will add that ANYONE claiming to be involved in a mutual decision that results in one party giving up/in so to appease the other (be it in having kids/no kids, pets/no pets) isn't involved in ANY mutual decision making process, and I would wager there is an underlying issue in the relationship.

As I said before, maybe there is a reason I am single...

[anna_66]

All of the decisions are made by both of us. Whatever it takes, we will compromise.
When we got Roxey, I really, really wanted her, so I was the one who got up everytime she wanted out, cleaned up any messes (even if Mark was the one who found it, I would clean it up. No matter the time, day or night), fed her, basically I did everything for her. I felt it was my responsiblity. He does do his part, but I feel I wanted her the most I should be the one to do most of the work.

[RICHARD]

for me it was no problem at all..........

my signifigant other could have anything she wanted.....

i always thought she could get a new pet AND a new boyfriend.... .....where would that leave me?

[NoahsMommy]

It took me a day to respond to this post. I voted yesterday....but needed to calm myself. I am a certified feminist.... Why? Well, let me explain....

I grew up with a dead beat dad. I watched my mom support my brother and I on her own. I also watched my grandmother support herself in a huge house after my grandfather passed away. My dad's father left his family, so I've also seen that grandmother support herself and her family. Can you guess how I felt about this post? ALLOW??? FORBID??? Those would NOT my in my vocabulary when describing what a man can do.

My marriage is based on respect. My hubby would no sooner control anything I did...and usually its me who controlls things, but I would never FORBID him from doing anything.

As far as adding an animal...that's a responsibility question...if you can handle one, go for it. If you disagree on it, maybe it should have been discussed BEFORE marriage. I may be wierd, but I was really into our pre-marital counseling, I didn't want anything to come up years later and be stuck unhappy.

Cataholic...right on!! I agree with everything you've said! And being single a bad thing??? Nope! I can't tell you how many times I've said "Why did I get married?" Its hard to be independant and be married.

[sandragonfly]

Well, I'm not married but had this discussion with couple of boys before, they all had no 0.1% problem with my love for the animals, (two of them were farmers). 9 years ago, I begggged my father to D|E|A|T|H to have a black kitten..he just simply spoke with his power..nasty authorize..."NO, Gina...No IS No, PERIOD!". He is an anti-cat person (straching stuffs, nippings). Obviously, he never have met a dear 'can-be-a-nice' cat. My grandfather, and my uncle is allergic so they said no to their wives. like wolf_Q said.."my mom would have let me" but I don't think mom need a bruise from dad.

Yes, I agree with you, Noah's Mommy, Marriage is also based on part of happiness! Having passion and love for the animals is part of happiness...(having the pets too!). I'm just saying I don't see how I can live with a person who doesn't at least can compromise something that wouldn't hurt them...except the allergics! Sooo, I forbid a person to forbid me!

[jenluckenbach]

I did not wish to make anyone's blood pressure raise. The word forbit was a bad choice.. It was difficult for me to get the idea across with only a few words (I didn't think I should make the question on the poll too long....like I do on my posts).

[wolflady]

I agree that it should be a mutual decision, and also how many animals you can provide for financially. Space in the home is another issue. Right now, most of you know, there is a neighborhood stray cat that I care for. I would just love to bring her in and make her a house pet, but our little house is just too small for a third cat and litterbox. If we only had a separate room, laundry room, basement...or something...it would have been no problem.
However, I have encountered this sort of thing with other people. I'm not sure if any of you remember the siamese cat that I took in while I was in college, because one of my friend's aunt's boyfriends forbid (yes, forbid) her to keep the cat. He said that it was either him or the cat, and he would take the cat and dump it. Of course, she chose the loser boyfriend over her pet. I was so mortified when I heard this! I took the cat immediately and ended up finding her a new home a few months later. So, yes, I have encountered people like that, but no...Aaron and I are not like that. Like others have said, he probably keeps me in check, otherwise the house would probably be overrun with animals. Needless to say, I have to wait for the dog...and it could be a very long time!

[Cataholic]

Originally posted by NoahsMommy
Cataholic...right on!! I agree with everything you've said! And being single a bad thing??? Nope! I can't tell you how many times I've said "Why did I get married?" Its hard to be independant and be married.

I am saving myself for Basil...

[Edwina's Secretary]

Cataholic....

As someone who was single until ~40 years of age and who lived alone and made ALL the decisions for 20 years I can tell you it isn't as simple as it looks....

I will add that ANYONE claiming to be involved in a mutual decision that results in one party giving up/in so to appease the other

This is reality. If I want a dog and he doesn't one of us is going to get what we want and one isn't.

Appeasement...maybe...negotiations...yeah. Sometimes doing things to make your partner happy (aka appease) is the right thing to do.

Remember the line from Man of La Mancha "...whether the pitcher hits the stone or the stone hits the pitcher...it's going to be bad for the pitcher..."

[Cataholic]

Originally posted by Edwina's Secretary
Cataholic....

As someone who was single until ~40 years of age and who lived alone and made ALL the decisions for 20 years I can tell you it isn't as simple as it looks....



This is reality. If I want a dog and he doesn't one of us is going to get what we want and one isn't.

Appeasement...maybe...negotiations...yeah. Sometimes doing things to make your partner happy (aka appease) is the right thing to do.

Remember the line from Man of La Mancha "...whether the pitcher hits the stone or the stone hits the pitcher...it's going to be bad for the pitcher..."

Well, I guess there is still hope for me, as I am 'only' 37..he he he..And, while I don't know the Man of La Mancha, I certainly get your point. BUT, (always a but, eh?) I think we are getting into a area of semantics. I totally know, appreciate, understand that relationships of any kind, duration, etc., take negotions or appeasement. I think what I am trying to express is the "I can't because my husband/wife won't (forbids) me". That isn't the same as saying, "well, this is one area where I might have to give/appease/let go". I truly (and perhaps, naively) believe when it comes to the point of "I win-you lose"...there is a serious issue. I think that it becomes something more like "I love you, and therefore, want what is best for you and us, and my decision is to go with your wants". I will stick by my earlier statment that being in the position of allowing someone to 'forbid' you is a slippery slope.

[Kfamr]

If i was married, or with someone, lived with them.. whatever... They couldn't stop me from getting what I want. If I want another animal, then I will get one. If they don't agree then they need to understand animals are what make ME happy and if i'm happy with it, so should they.