Very well-stated, E. A possible problem with mom's - particularly single moms - is that they tend to focus on their children as the central purpose in their lives. That sounds very noble and motherly, of course, but the flip-side is that when we make someone else the point of our existence, that usually results in fairly negative consequences for the object of our "point of my existence" interests. At least in the long-run.
It's highly problematic for the kids to venture out as independent, healthy entities when their parents cling to them as central purposes in their lives.
Good point, E, about the distinction between "priority" and "primary value."
I think you're right that women are *almost* required to place their kids first. And I don't necessarily disagree, at a certain point in their lives (though I prefer my aunt's point of view - that her man is #1).
I'm remembering an article by Ayelet Waldman, the adoring wife of Pulitzer prize-winning Michael Chabon, where she laughingly declared that she loved her husband more than her kids, and - also laughingly - acknowledged that she would likely receive considerable flack for that. I think she's an exception to the rule...at least the rule for young mothers (she's not so young anymore, but had fairly young children at the time of her statement).
Well, in reply to your first, T, it's basically because in the end you and your mate are the central pillars in your life (given that you have a mate). Your children will have gone on and formed their own independent lives. They won't be living for (or about) you, and neither should you live for or about them.
Of course I know that at this point, my friend, you have no one who can compete with your love for your children. But, as you've pointed out, conditions can change. I'm sure you can imagine, given your capacious imagination, the day coming when your two (adorable!) kids are busy with their own lives, and at that point, for you to make them your #1 priority might constitute interference more than a loving relationship. Try a thought-experiment on that and I'll bet you'll see what I mean.
I suspect strongly that women are more likely to list their children as their highest value. But I also suspect that probably changes with time (depending on whether they are alone in the later years).
You know the cliche of the interfering older mom in the lives of their children? That's what happens when one keeps one's children as one's highest priority/value in later life. It's really not a pretty picture, is it?
I think everyone does - ultimately (perhaps not as a young mother), Amity. Your children grow up and assume their own lives eventually - which includes valuing others (their spouse and children) more highly than they value you. I'm guessing you haven't got that far yet (and probably aren't even imagining it).
In any case, if you don't love yourself first, you can't love anyone else. It's from your love of your own life that all other love stems (yada, yada - but true).
That's not to say that you - or I - wouldn't willingly sacrifice (or risk sacrificing) your life to save your children or wife or even other family members.
What I'm getting at is that the central purpose in one's life - ultimately - is not one's children. Perhaps during a certain phase of one's life, but not ultimately. Ultimately, you will have to stand more or less solely on your own (or with your mate). Your children will be following their own lives. Such is the natural order of things. To continue to make them the number one priority would be to confute that order, I think.
As Tony has pointed out (and you agreed, Amity), one's priorities might change depending on circumstances.
In my case, however, this would've been my list even as a young family man. Of other people, my wife came first. She, however, placed our children first. That's a very popular choice, but my belief is that one's romantic relationship is primary - that one's spouse should be valued above all others.
I once asked my aunt how she felt about that (she'd had a loving relationship with my uncle for many decades, until he died of cancer). She has four daughters which she utterly dotes on. She answered without hesitation that "her man" was the most important person in her life. My kind of lady (in that respect, at least ).
There's no way of knowing you could prevent something like that or not - absent actually trying. So, logically, you ought to try (if you care about the result). Simple, eh?
"Err on the side of caution..." That is what I was trying to say. Thanks, Venere. That seems like the rational option, given that whether or not the ex is being manipulative or is legitimately seeking help is speculative. You don't risk someone's life - someone you care about - on a speculative basis. Logic 101.
Then do it. The people here who say "don't worry, she's just being manipulative," have no idea what they're talking about.
Again, what do you have to lose by being compassionate? At worst, you'll learn she was manipulating you. If so, you can withdraw from her in peace.
On the other hand, if she truly is in such a dark place - and you attempt to help her - you can also find peace in that. It's truly a win-win situation to respond compassionately.
Then do something. Even if she is being manipulative. Do it for your own peace of mind. And - I have no idea, given your taciturn summation of the situation - she may not be being manipulative. Perhaps she truly is at a crossroads, and could use some support. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by being helpful and compassionate. You can always revise your strategy is you discover she is in fact being manipulative, no?
I have actually faced this question. I tried to talk her out of it, of course, while feeling horrible at my possible contribution to her state of mind.
That's a good point about being tall. At least that would give you a momentary reprieve from having the top of your head inspected by most women. But as you point out, the moment for a closer inspection will inevitably - if you're fortunate! - come, and then...well, one can only hope she is sufficiently distracted.
Yeah, I'm with you about grey in one's beard/stache...I'm not quite ready to be that dignified yet.
Ah, so many possibilities, RD. I don't think clean-shaven would work as well with my bald head...it feels like I need some facial hair to sort of balance it out.
I'm happy with my impulsive decision, because sometimes you gotta shake things up (and of course, hopefully, it will grow back!). I wouldn't say it's my favorite look, though...and I still feel rather self-conscious venturing out. My preference would be to have a full head of hair (like yours), but c'est la vie.
RE: Priorities...
Thanks, T.You do have bloody adorable kids (judging from your descriptions and their photos)! I admire you for your love of and devotion to them.
Just wait until their later teenage years when they powerfully test your love and devotion (if you're like most parents, that is)!