Skip to main content

Willingness of the Wife

When picking a potential spouse, it is the disposition of the daughter in law (what I will refer to as the "Willingness of the Wife" or WoW) that determines her success or failure at building a relationship with her in-laws?

I have recently discovered two instances in which the Willingness of the Wife (or lack thereof) to spend time with her inlaws was the cause of separation. In one case, the wife refused to bond with her mother-in-law, refused to visit even though she lived down the street. In another case, the girlfriend chose to ignore her boyfriend's family at a Thanksgiving dinner celebration, instead planting herself before AIM and chatting away her evening.

These two cases raised questions of WoW as the primary cause of antagonist behavior from the wife.

I think daughter in laws (naturally), and women generally, prefer to do what they want to do. If individuals make decisions based on their preferences, then why is there a double standard when it comes to the choices of the wife/girlfriend? Why must she always be culpable for the decisions that effect the family (in law)? She is expected to always do what is best for the family, regardless of her emotional or mental state.

It is really just a matter of cause and effect? To say for instance that the girl was UNWILLING to make the time to spend with hus parents? I think this is the typical fashion in which men blame women for just about everything.

I have an alternate interpretation of her perceived un-WoW. What if it is the failure of the partner to communicate and show HOW SIGNIFICANT his family is to him, and connect that to them as a couple. He must show how committed he is to serving the needs of his parents before he can have that expectation of his wife. She needs evidence. Things that I think signify thoughtfulness to parents: he purchases a home for them, or he bring them their medicine from the pharmacy, he pays their bills, he hires a maid for them, he brings their groceries. Most of all, he spends time with them. He shows up for dinner EVERY NIGHT because it is expected of him. If he showed commitment, he would NEVER miss family dinner, the one time of the day that everyone is together. Because his absence burdens others..

What the irresponsible husband would do is make the wife guilty for not spending time with his parents, and making her feel poorly about her decisions as an adult. He makes her feel guilty for wanting to spend time with her friends or even her parents because it is at the expense of not spending sufficient time with his parents. He is upset that his wife does not spend time with his Mom not because she does not want to, but because she does not make decisions that are conducive to arriving on time. He blames her working too long a commute, even though it makes her supremely happy.

Ultimately, it is not the unwillingness of the girl to spend time with her inlaws. Unless your inlaws are better than your parents, it is very difficult to be able to always place their preference over your own preference. As a society, we are not rewarded for that sort of sacrifice. Instead of the WoW factor, there is really a bigger question of WHAT IS HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH HIS PARENTS? If it is simply "okay" you cannot reasonably expect the wife to have an "excellent" relationship with your parents, when she sees you making little effort.

Thus, to answer the original question posed, it depends arbitrarily on something else entirely: i.e. the son's relationship with his parents. If he has a good relationship, and he encourages his wife to do the same, then it will not matter whether she is willing to or not--she will have to adjust to the circumstance. Despite wanting only to "hide" in my room, I cannot because it would disappoint/anger/hurt/effect my husband in very tangible ways. Moreover, he will almost always let me know that what I am doing is wrong. If I see him there, chatting with his parents, I am more likely to take his lead and follow suit. If he is there (and I am not) then it is very problematic. And it is problematic because he makes it so. IHowever, if I am there and he is not, it is understood by his parents that their son is at work making income. If you entertain for a second that there is a choice, that you can choose to sit on gmail while your in laws cook you dinner--then you are flawed. There are some men, however, who do not feel obligated to their parents in this way, in sharing their company. Instinctively, the female will want to remain apart from his family and do whatever she wants to do--but it takes a special kind of son to led her to his parents.

It is his responsibility to make sure that she is able to adjust. i hate that people always blame the girl when the relationship ends, and i am not trying to defend anyone in particular but i am just saying, if anyone is culpable it is the son who does not facilitate the relationship with his parents and his wife.

I apologize that this was not well structured. I had a great conversation today about work going forward. And a house to clean so I can't be bothered with editing.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Not Friendship (Revised)- Repost

It is difficult to be merely a friend to a boy who seems more suitable as a husband than a friend. To reduce a potential life partner to a friend is immature and selfish. Friendship is the not the greatest type of relationship, but it is the safest. Friendship allows you to be intimate without the messiness of other things, like physical attraction, etc. Between friends, there is a warm permanence, a fuzziness that can be called appreciation and gratitude. There is also comfort and trust. Friendship is great if only for the possibility that one can know the beauty of another human being. The possibility of that is worth the difficulty of all else. But sometimes friendship is not enough. Sometimes, to reduce someone to friend when he should be much more is an affront to the opportunity God has presented before you. It is like saying to him, I know that we are amazing together, but we should be friends because I am a dumbass. To reduce him to friend also precludes the possibility of love...
Malcolm Gladwell. "Getting In: The Social Logic of Ivy Leage Admissions" http://www.gladwell.com/2005/2005_10_10_a_admissions.html Major themes: 1. Passion is a significant contributor to success. 2. High intelligence means little without discipline and passion. "Bowen and Shulman write about the characteristics that make athletes more coveted by Ivy League schools: One of these characteristics can be thought of as drive--a strong desire to succeed and unswerving determination to reach a goal, whether it be winning the next game or closing a sale. Similarly, athletes tend to be more energetic than the average person, which translates into an ability to work hard over long periods of time--to meet, for example, the workload demands placed on young people by an investment bank in the throes of analyzing a transaction. In addition, athletes are more likely than others to be highly competitive, gregarious and confident of their ability to work well in groups (on teams). I ...

Re: Your Inquiries

"You confuse yourselves with your actions, even with your thoughts. You barely understand that in order to be, it should not be necessary to act, and that the world changes you far more than you change it." (Malraux, The Temptation of the West, 1961 ) The world consists of wonderful people who enter and exit your life. When you let them enter, your breaths seem more thoughtful, your behaviors more scrutinized, your ideas challenged, and sometimes your brain orgasms from happiness. But when these individuals leave, you experience equally significant things like confusion and hurt. It seems okay to let someone in, someone trustworthy, good, honest, and not concern yourself with the end. As things exist in your mind, there is no harm. Intellectual promiscuity, then, is not so bad. To have intimate, intelligent conversations into the morning is not troubling, either. Sometimes when good people enter, it is not necessary to act, or specifically to resist. When people enter, their ...