# Stupid fight but I don't understand women



## knobcreek

Was I really this wrong here? A woman's perspective perhaps?

We took the kids to Saratoga race track, I let them bet a buck on each race, you can bring a cooler with beer, sodas, sandwiches and some chairs to watch the races from the general admission section. We had a great day, kids had fun, I hit an exacta and boxed trifecta so it was good day.

We had plans to get dinner in Saratoga and when we're leaving I head to the bathroom, and when I catch up to them the wife is getting the kids ice cream, we were leaving to go to dinner 5 minutes away. I basically said I don't want to spend $150 on a dinner when they all just ate ice cream (no yelling, not even annoyed just kinda pointing out that an expensive dinner is probably not worth it). She was adamant that we go, but I thought it would be a waste of money, the kids wouldn't eat and just complain the entire time.

She basically shuts down and gets emotional, totally pissed off, won't speak to me. I get our marriage sucks right now but WTF? Who eats ice cream right before eating at a restaurant? Then she comes up with all these nefarious reasons why I didn't want to go, and how I only didn't want to go to control her and she doesn't need my permission to get the kids ice cream (agreed, never said she did, just odd to get ice cream right before going to a restaurant, they're expensive with a family of 5, I would rather go when people aren't stuffed with ice cream to make it worth our while). 

Obviously this a woman really angry at me and not over ice cream, but what the F? I told her, this is what divorced people do, they nit-pick, imagine all sorts of ulterior motives of the other person, and then have some conversation setting unreasonable expectations for behavior in the future knowing neither one could ever meet it. Like if I get annoyed, sometimes I'm just annoyed, it isn't always bigger than that, people get annoyed sometimes. For anyone who watches RHWofOC I feel like our marriage is approaching cringe-worthiness of Shannon Beador and her husband.

To make it even worse as we're discussing the fight, she says "and you insisted we go to Druther's instead of Italian", when in reality I didn't care at all, stated as much, and ONLY said Druther's after multiple prods about where to eat. I only said Druther's because that's where I THOUGHT she wanted to go. So now if I don't read minds well enough I get dinged for that too!


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Why is it up to you if you go out to dinner or not? If she said she wanted to then her choice means as much as yours, you don't get to just say no. My kids could easily have a bit of icecream and then dinner 30-45 or so minutes later (food takes a while to be ordered, made and come out) I'd be annoyed that my husband wanted to just decide we weren't going out to dinner just because they had some icecream. You had plans to go, you should have gone.


----------



## Middle of Everything

Not a female perspective but yes I agree, you eat ice cream after dinner.  Sounds like your wife just had a hard time admitting she gave in to the kids to easily and screwed up. Albeit a minor screw up.


----------



## phillybeffandswiss

You probably could have handled it better, but I get the reasoning. Still, I would have suggested a big breakfast or lunch the next day. There are ways to compromise and you haven't really told us how the conversation actually progressed. Remember, you don't have to yell, cuss or curse to start an argument. Body language and passive aggressive vocalization can denote the same thing, from an eye roll to a heavy sigh, as words.

Sorry, let me add YOU played the divorce card and that is all on you and wrong. Yes, even if you believe she started the fight. This is a card that should never be played unless you mean it.


----------



## CharlieParker

Did you stay for all 10 races? If so that's totally exhausting even for an adult, well at least me. How old are the kids?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Rules can be broken on fun days, it's not up to him to decide if they go to dinner or not. 

We have a fair here that we go to once a year, we have treats before dinner and a bunch of crap that is typically off limits at home. 
Doesn't mean she "screwed up" and "gave in to the kids too easily". It was supposed to be a fun day out, sometimes you bend a little.

He talks about the cost like it's HIS money to decide what to do with. He tried to dictate if they went to dinner or not, or if they can have icecream before dinner or not. He's not in charge. He's acting like he's the boss. It's no wonder she gets all cranky. I'd be cranky.


----------



## Herschel

Rules can be broken, but then why stick to the hard fast rule of going out to dinner. Why even break the rule if you have dinner planned? Eat dessert there.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Oh and if I was the wife I'd say that's fine, you don't have to come to dinner then. We'll see you when we get home after we go.


----------



## Spicy

I think that this was not about the ice cream/dinner...she was probably already annoyed with you, the kids, the day...whatever and that issue took all the blame. It happens. I do crap like this too occasionally. She just should apologize for being grouchy instead of turning it into a federal offense.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Herschel said:


> Rules can be broken, but then why stick to the hard fast rule of going out to dinner. Why even break the rule if you have dinner planned? Eat dessert there.


Having some icecream at a fun event before you go out to dinner isn't breaking a hard fast "rule". It's just having a bit of fun, icecream goes through you quick and it's a long wait for actual dinner if they were hungry at the event. Having a snack before they go, a much cheaper one than dessert at a restaurant would be, can make a lot of sense. 

But regardless, it's not his place to say if they go or not. He should have discussed it with her and decided together if they should still go. He wanted to just decide on his own.


----------



## Herschel

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> He wanted to just decide on his own.


Really, cause, just from what he wrote, he caught up with them and she was already getting them ice cream. Seems like she didn't discuss anything with him, and that would bother me.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

knobcreek said:


> To make it even worse as we're discussing the fight, she says "and you insisted we go to Druther's instead of Italian", when in reality I didn't care at all, stated as much, and ONLY said Druther's after multiple prods about where to eat. I only said Druther's because that's where I THOUGHT she wanted to go. So now if I don't read minds well enough I get dinged for that too!


^ This tells me that she does feel like you try to have all the say and try to be in charge. Whether you did or didn't, it's how she feels. You dictating if you should or shouldn't go to dinner is just another example for her of you trying to be in charge.


----------



## Evinrude58

I think that OP is in the right. He didn't say they COULDN't go, but was likely wanting to go someplace less expensive. I would have also, since as he said, they were stuffed with ice cream.

Is a racetrack a great place to take kids all day? Seems odd to me, but I've never been to a track so I wouldn't know. Was the wife angry, acting like a jerk, and looking for trouble? Probably. Does OP need to learn how to deal with it better? Only if he doesn't want a divorce. OP, you've got to roll with the punches and not lose your cool. And remember that logic doesn't work with a woman where emotions and tempers are involved. I guess I should say-- it doesn't work on "people".


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Herschel said:


> Really, cause, just from what he wrote, he caught up with them and she was already getting them ice cream. Seems like she didn't discuss anything with him, and that would bother me.


It wasn't planned that they NOT have icecream and now she wants to change their plans. If she decided she didn't want to go to the event afterall or wanted to leave early or she didn't want to go out for dinner after, that would require discussion. Getting your kids a snack doesn't need a discussion.


----------



## Andy1001

Buddy you come across as very controlling here.Because the kids ate ice cream nobody,including your wife gets dinner?
Why couldn't you just have dinner with no dessert if it was so important to you.If I was her I would have brought the kids to dinner and you could have sulked in the car while we ate.
You could have counted your winnings while you waited.You will probably need them for the lawyers and paying child support.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Wow, 
a lot of assumptions being made here. 

If my wife says she doesn't want to go to dinner somewhere, I don't see that as her "trying to be the boss," just that she doesn't want to go do dinner there. If and where we eat out should be something we both agree on. Neither should try to make the other do something they really don't want to do. 

And I agree, if you're going to blow $150 on chow, it should have a high probability of being a good experience for all, which this did not.

That said, here's my speculation:
A day at the track, even as a family outing, is probably a lot more in tune with daddy's pleasure than mommy's. At the end of enduring this long day doing something he wanted to do, she was probably expecting to get to do something she wanted to do, which was have a nice meal prepared for them in a pleasant place. Daddy got to blow some $ on his preferred form of entertainment, why shouldn't she?

Here's what I would have offered as a solution. Get the kids a sitter and a pizza and take the Mrs. out for a fine meal, just the two of them. Probably cheaper overall and the kids are happier with their favorite food and no need to sit still and behave in a stuffy grown up restaurant, and mommy gets an elegant evening meal out with her fella. Win-win.


----------



## Rowan

OP, how on earth did you two get from "I really wish you wouldn't feed the kids ice cream right before dinner" to talk of divorce?!? That's a bridge you really don't want to cross unless or until things are really off the rails. Which leads me to think that this 'fun outing' was really two people who dislike and resent one another trying to put on a happy face and tolerate each other's presence for the kids' sake. And that's a recipe for tension, harsh words, off-putting non-verbal communication, and an eventual argument. 

If you two were happily married, in other words, this incident would have been a tiny blip on the radar. Since you're obviously not happily married, it ended up being a huge deal that led to an argument, talk of divorce, and you seeking out validation from strangers that you're the one who was "right".

Are you guys in MC? Unless you're planning to divorce soon, then you should be. Even if you're already in the divorce process, some family counseling might be in order.


----------



## Herschel

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> It wasn't planned that they NOT have icecream and now she wants to change their plans. If she decided she didn't want to go to the event afterall or wanted to leave early or she didn't want to go out for dinner after, that would require discussion. Getting your kids a snack doesn't need a discussion.


What? Getting kids ice cream while EVERYONE is out together AND you have plans for dinner does require a discussion. How would you feel if you were planning on going to dinner, had to make a pit stop to pee and your husband took your kids to get ice cream? This is silly.


----------



## Dannip

Mom was probably being a supportive trooper spending the day with you and the kids at a racetrack. Possibly much more tiring for her than you. 

She was probably looking forward to sitting down and decompressing after the day. You took it away from her and she acted like a spoiled child. 

You should have said. Ok, whom ever ate ice cream before dinner shall eat small. 

Then held her hand all the way to the car. 

Then give her a body massage later at home.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Andy1001 said:


> Buddy you come across as very controlling here.Because the kids ate ice cream nobody,including your wife gets dinner?
> Why couldn't you just have dinner with no dessert if it was so important to you.If I was her I would have brought the kids to dinner and you could have sulked in the car while we ate.
> You could have counted your winnings while you waited.You will probably need them for the lawyers and paying child support.


yes and I would have done the same. If HE doesn't want to go for dinner HE doesn't have to. But if she wants to then she can go. 

It's freaken icecream. Have you ever gone to a nice dinner with starving kids who have to wait 45 minutes before they even get their food? Some icecream before you went probably would have saved you a lot of whining at the table. Icecream is not a meal. It doesn't spoil your dinner. You still had to pack up all the kids, leave the track, drive to dinner, sit and order, and wait for food. Plenty of time for them to be hungry again.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Rowan said:


> OP, how on earth did you two get from "I really wish you wouldn't feed the kids ice cream right before dinner" to talk of divorce?!?
> 
> Either you're overreacting and reading something in here, or I'm failing to see something that is there.
> 
> I didn't see "talk of divorce." What OP said was "This is what divorced people do." To me, that seems a fair observation--people who's marriages are in difficulty will turn a minor incident into a major one. If anything, I read that as "this is behavior I don't want to be associated with." It certainly wasn't a statement that " we need to get our lawyers."
> 
> The statement is cause for concern, not because it is an overture to divorce, but because it is a recognition that that's where the marriage may be headed.


----------



## seabeeken123

I agree with you. It's hard enough to get kids to eat a decent meal and ice cream before dropping a wad of money for a dinner the kids will just pick at? 
No way. 
My kids barely finish half their dinner on an empty stomach and I'm paying a huge tab. In my opinion I think your wife gave in to them and didn't want to admit it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JustAFamilyMan

"Well now we're not going to eat at a nice dinner which was the thing you were looking forward to after spending the day letting me hang out at the track because you dared to grab a little ice cream without talking to me about it first" actually seems more petty than her response from my perspective. I realize that's not an actual quote, but that's how I read the situation.

You got to spend the day at the track. You did a little betting which is fun for you. You go off to take care of things and come back and see ice cream and pull a controlling move, because evidently spending money on a nice meal after ice cream is "wasting" it but betting on horses minutes before is just sound financial strategy. 

You've got some growing to do here. She doesn't need your permission to have a meal with the kids wherever she likes, whenever she likes. Your opinion on eating after ice cream isn't 51% or more of the choice. In fact, assuming the kids are being shown they have some input, it's not even 50%. Maybe 45%.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

I agree JustaFamilyMan and I think it's important to point out that him being right or wrong matters less than how she felt about it. This is something many "logic only" men don't understand. Feelings matter just as much. Her feelings of wanting to go to dinner are just as important as him believing he is logically right. You need to find a balance between the two. 

She feels like she doesn't get an equal say or that you often make unilateral choices. That is where the focus should be and not on the logistics of icecream before dinner.


----------



## Satya

The two of you could have gotten a nice dinner out and your kids could have shared an appetizer or something inexpensive. 

I would also be annoyed if plans changed on a dime and I had no say. Going out is a treat I'd have been looking forward to. Sure, ice cream was not the best of ideas at that time, but where in the rule book does it say you have to eat things in a particular order? Wouldn't they have had dessert after their meal anyway?


----------



## phillybeffandswiss

You should know better than to put any type of female gender biased remark in your title. You are now a controlling monster who dictates what the family does and disregards any opinion, but your own.
You are now a tyrant.


----------



## Rowan

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Either you're overreacting and reading something in here, or I'm failing to see something that is there.
> 
> I didn't see "talk of divorce." What OP said was "This is what divorced people do." To me, that seems a fair observation--people who's marriages are in difficulty will turn a minor incident into a major one. If anything, I read that as "this is behavior I don't want to be associated with." It certainly wasn't a statement that " we need to get our lawyers."
> 
> The statement is cause for concern, not because it is an overture to divorce, but because it is a recognition that that's where the marriage may be headed.



"[What you're doing now] is what divorced people do" might feel very much to his life like he's suggesting that if she doesn't want to be divorced then she needs to straighten up and fly right. Basically, I read that as an attempt to shut her down during an argument. It's a lot like "You're being crazy!". It does nothing to further communication, create greater understanding, or defuse the situation. Rather, it feels like a tactic that's being used to shut her up - an implied threat to the marriage if she doesn't. 

If that's not what the OP had in mind, then he really might want to consider that it may be how his wife is interpreting it nonetheless. And if he actually wants to stay married to his wife, then what she may interpret as threatening divorce during the heat of an argument is likely not a good thing. Which is why I suggested that they should get into MC if they aren't already. They clearly need help communicating effectively.


----------



## lucy999

You had a good day at the track and you're *****ing about money. I would have been pissed too.


----------



## knobcreek

To answer some of the questions that came up.

Saratoga is a really nice town and track, we go probably twice a year. I grew up around horses and went with my grandpa and dad to Saratoga and Belmont, they always let me bet a buck a race and it's one of my fondest memories growing up. My wife loves it, going on Sunday was her idea as we went hiking on Saturday and out to lunch and I wanted Sunday to catch up on yard work and school work. I bring a red wagon with food and beers, chairs, get a paper and we all make bets, i put them in then we go up to the rail and watch the horses final turn, my kids love it.

We stayed for 9 races, not the full 10, it was a long day already.

I never said no one can eat, I said I'll take the kids around town and she can sit at the bar and grab some apps (this pissed her off more), I also said we can take a rain check on dinner and go to one of her favorite restaurants Mountain Brauhaus later in the week.

My kids have terrible appetites, and no chance any of them would've eaten a bite at dinner, they would've fought and bugged us to leave every 2 minutes. Obesity is an epidemic in this country, so I know there's a lot of kids out there who can take down a 700 calorie serving of ice cream then sit down to a full dinner, but mine can't.

Mentioning divorce was stupid, but it was in the context of these stupid fights we have are getting into minutia and reading these bad ulterior motives are what people whose marriages are ending do, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and someone being annoyed is just that, give it 5-10 minutes and then talk about it.

So if me stating it makes no sense to get dinner when no one will eat is a "control move", is not getting them all ice cream on the walk out to the parking lot minutes before we go to dinner without having a discussion also a "control move" I fail to see the difference.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

She wanted to go to dinner with the kids. If you didn't want to go then you stay home. 

You only get to make choices for yourself. She didn't force you to eat icecream, likewise she can't force you to go to dinner but if she wanted to, she should have.


----------



## Andy1001

knobcreek said:


> To answer some of the questions that came up.
> 
> Saratoga is a really nice town and track, we go probably twice a year. I grew up around horses and went with my grandpa and dad to Saratoga and Belmont, they always let me bet a buck a race and it's one of my fondest memories growing up. My wife loves it, going on Sunday was her idea as we went hiking on Saturday and out to lunch and I wanted Sunday to catch up on yard work and school work. I bring a red wagon with food and beers, chairs, get a paper and we all make bets, i put them in then we go up to the rail and watch the horses final turn, my kids love it.
> 
> We stayed for 9 races, not the full 10, it was a long day already.
> 
> I never said no one can eat, I said I'll take the kids around town and she can sit at the bar and grab some apps (this pissed her off more), I also said we can take a rain check on dinner and go to one of her favorite restaurants Mountain Brauhaus later in the week.
> 
> My kids have terrible appetites, and no chance any of them would've eaten a bite at dinner, they would've fought and bugged us to leave every 2 minutes. Obesity is an epidemic in this country, so I know there's a lot of kids out there who can take down a 700 calorie serving of ice cream then sit down to a full dinner, but mine can't.
> 
> Mentioning divorce was stupid, but it was in the context of these stupid fights we have are getting into minutia and reading these bad ulterior motives are what people whose marriages are ending do, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and someone being annoyed is just that, give it 5-10 minutes and then talk about it.
> 
> So if me stating it makes no sense to get dinner when no one will eat is a "control move", is not getting them all ice cream on the walk out to the parking lot minutes before we go to dinner without having a discussion also a "control move" I fail to see the difference.


And another thing.
No man understands women.
Just when you think your getting there they change the rules.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Rowan said:


> "[What you're doing now] is what divorced people do" might feel very much to his life like he's suggesting that if she doesn't want to be divorced then she needs to straighten up and fly right. Basically, I read that as an attempt to shut her down during an argument. It's a lot like "You're being crazy!". It does nothing to further communication, create greater understanding, or defuse the situation. Rather, it feels like a tactic that's being used to shut her up - an implied threat to the marriage if she doesn't.
> 
> If that's not what the OP had in mind, then he really might want to consider that it may be how his wife is interpreting it nonetheless. And if he actually wants to stay married to his wife, then what she may interpret as threatening divorce during the heat of an argument is likely not a good thing. Which is why I suggested that they should get into MC if they aren't already. They clearly need help communicating effectively.


Oh, I agree the choice of wording was probably problematic. But that's the whole point--it's problematic because people make assumptions. Especially people who are already upset and/or in troubled relationships.

Greater tact and understanding are definitely in order. But nobody should be making an automatic leap of this size.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

and even if they didn't eat there, take home a doggy bag so she doesn't have to cook them dinner later. Or do you do all the cooking and cleanup after a meal? Going out to eat is a lot more than just getting food. For me it was a break from having to cook and clean for the night, a HUGE thing. 

I hope she didn't have to make everyone supper, and then clean up after it all, later on that night.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> and even if they didn't eat there, take home a doggy bag so she doesn't have to cook them dinner later. Or do you do all the cooking and cleanup after a meal? Going out to eat is a lot more than just getting food. For me it was a break from having to cook and clean for the night, a HUGE thing.
> 
> I hope she didn't have to make everyone supper, and then clean up after it all, later on that night.


Oh yeah. 

There was a bout a dozen ways to diffuse this situation, and maybe even turn it into something at least neutral, if not a full-fledged bonding event. Some have been mentioned.


----------



## thefam

FYI I'm a woman. 

No way would I ever give my kids ice cream when our next stop is dinner. BUT then again I travel around town with healthy snacks so they could have eaten something on hand. I think if I just not happened to have snacks I would have purchased a healthier option like maybe a bag of skinny pop at a convenience store. That being said if they already had the ice cream in hand I probably would have suggested dropping them off and then going out to dinner alone. If they're too young to be dropped off then they're probably too young for you to enjoy a nice dinner after a long day at the track


----------



## Ursula

Herschel said:


> Really, cause, just from what he wrote, he caught up with them and she was already getting them ice cream. Seems like she didn't discuss anything with him, and that would bother me.


And, it also sounds like he asked his wife multiple times about dinner/where to go for dinner, and she wouldn't help make a decision, so he made one on behalf of the family. Honestly, I think they're both a little at fault, and mountains were made out of molehills.


----------



## phillybeffandswiss

Ahhhhh...... You are in reconciliation after she had an affair and you NEVER dealt with it because you both dislike counseling. So, basically, you two have been dancing around issues for years and it is STILL causing major problems in your marriage.



> Hindsight 20/20 reconciling was probably a bad idea and done for the wrong reasons on both ends.





> Dug out means manageable debt, not 100% debt free, I don't plan on having both homes paid off, but credit cards paid off, savings back in the black, and enough disposable income to begin socking money away and enjoying vacations and nights out again. Student loans are what they are, just a monthly cost like an electric bill once you invest in yourself.





> When I say I pulled a 180, I pulled a 180 I didn't speak to her about anything other than our son together, started dating once separated, got a good job, went out with friends. My wife was a real mess when we reconciled, and she did everything at the time she needed to, 100% honesty, complete transparency.
> 
> I reconciled so some asswipe didn't raise my son, and my wife was a young single mother with a crap job, the only people she would meet are asswipes looking for sex, or total tools looking for an insta-family (knight in shining armor types, they always turn into possessive nuts), and of course potential child molesters', none are good options for a young boy to grow up around.
> 
> *If I didn't have a kid I would've left the minute I found out about the affair and never looked back, but kids definitely complicate things. Overall I don't regret my decision to reconcile since I have gained a lot. If this marriage doesn't work, then I'll move on. She's older, has a stable job, and I would trust her judgment more on future partners and who she would bring around my kids.* She doesn't "need" a man to take care of her, so that goes a long way to making me more comfortable than 12 years ago.



This was written 2 years ago. The one thing I noticed then and more so now is you did it out of obligation and not love. I can only imagine how this feels now, 2 years into the future.


So.....why are you two still together? 2 years ago it sounded financial and your kids. I'm starting to wonder if the debt is looking better and you BOTH are seeing the exit sign. Nope, I'm not playing the which side is right game. You both look silly, petty and childish, to me, fighting over the order of dinner and ice cream. From your story she overreacted and you did as well.

Yet, really, this is a small snapshot of your bad marriage. You both reconciled for the wrong reasons and according to your old thread, she wanted to be single. This was a small fight over a pretend issue, instead of dealing with the real problems in your marriage. Nope, it isn't a gender or control thing it is a marriage thing. FSJ, our resident MOD, told you it would get to the point you'd dislike and want to end the marriage. Sounds like you both are scared to pull the trigger.

Think about it because what ever you two are doing, whoever is right or wrong you both are screwing up the children.



> Honestly, I think they're both a little at fault, and mountains were made out of molehills.


Exactly what I felt before I read the backstory and other posts. I still agree, but I think it is done to avoid the real issues.


----------



## CharlieParker

knobcreek said:


> no chance any of them would've eaten a bite at dinner, they would've fought and bugged us to leave every 2 minutes.


I don't have kids, so I may be off, but can't imagine going out to dinner after they've been outside 6 to 8 hours plus the time to drive there, park and get to your spot. Without ice cream, wouldn't they have fought and bugged anyway?


----------



## thefam

CharlieParker said:


> I don't have kids, so I may be off, but can't imagine going out to dinner after they've been outside 6 to 8 hours plus the time to drive there, park and get to your spot. Without ice cream, wouldn't they have fought and bugged anyway?


With or without ice cream a "nice" dinner just wasn't a good idea after 8 or 9 hours outdoors in August. Everyone is going to be sweaty, stinky, dirty, and cranky.


----------



## phillybeffandswiss

Okay, I read one of your last posts. Dude GTFO and be co-parents. This cannot be healthy for the kids. Yes, you'll lose money and other things, but good lord FSJ called it right. Going through the motions doesn't help anyone at all.


----------



## knobcreek

1. The track is hours away from my house, I can't just drop the kids off, and I'm the one who always has to drive everywhere because my wife doesn't like to.

2. Let's assume this fight has nothing to do with the affair from 14 years ago, just for the sake of argument, I'm attempting to not make that terrible period in my life ruin every single facet of my life for the foreseeable future, and let it be in the past.

3. I'm willing to entertain the fact that I'm somehow in the wrong here, I just have a hard time when logically, going out to a dinner that will cost a lot when no one's eating and full of ice cream is not a good use of time or money. It's crazy!! Who eats ice cream right before going to eat out? I mean we were literally walking to the car when I made a last minute pit stop at the head.

4. We're together for the same reason a lot of couples are together, love, history, finances. 

5. My wife didn't cook supper, I picked up a pizza when we got home (2 hours later kids still wouldn't eat anything).


----------



## knobcreek

CharlieParker said:


> I don't have kids, so I may be off, but can't imagine going out to dinner after they've been outside 6 to 8 hours plus the time to drive there, park and get to your spot. Without ice cream, wouldn't they have fought and bugged anyway?


Absolutely, it's a terrible idea, but I didn't dare say anything to my wife beforehand because she would've been all bent out of shape. I was fine going to dinner even though I was tired and had a 2 hour drive home ahead of me. BUT once she filled them up with ice cream so the dinner was effectively pointless, I was like "let's take a rain check on dinner"...


----------



## knobcreek

phillybeffandswiss said:


> Okay, I read one of your last posts. Dude GTFO and be co-parents. This cannot be healthy for the kids. Yes, you'll lose money and other things, but good lord FSJ called it right. Going through the motions doesn't help anyone at all.


I simply can't due to finances, a divorce would leave me ruined without enough to live off of. I'm not going to work in a career I despise, in high stress executive management to live like I make minimum wage, it's not worth it. I have to make this work for better or worse.

Anyway this topic is about the one fight I'm trying to understand where using reason and logic went awry for me from a woman's perspective, we don't need to analyze the entire state of the marriage A LOT happens that this board isn't privy too, like most things people don't come online to talk about how great something is or going, they come online to vent/complain.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Op- think dr. Phil "do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?" I actually don't agree with a lot from him but sometimes he makes a good point. 

You think you are right, and you may be, but how it made her feel is more important in the long run. 
If she feels her wants weren't listened to or she doesn't have as much "final say" power as you do or that you're trying to control. 
She may even have felt you were questioning her parenting. 

Whatever she felt could be one straw on the camels back, see if you can look back and find other times where she could have felt the same. 

Pick your battles, this was not big enough to make a fuss over. Getting ice cream before dinner isn't the end of the world. It wasn't worth upsetting your wife by unilaterally changing your plans.


----------



## tropicalbeachiwish

I can get what you're saying. How many times did you hear as a child when you were looking for a snack right before dinner "Don't ruin your dinner!". Is it possible that she intentionally did that? Was she itching for an argument? Perhaps control is an issue, with either one of you? I can see both sides here.


----------



## CharlieParker

knobcreek said:


> Absolutely, it's a terrible idea, but I didn't dare say anything to my wife beforehand because she would've been all bent out of shape.


If you go twice a year, how did the previous trips go? What was dinner?

I've only been midweek, when it's usually only half full. I'm going Sunday, I hope I survive.


----------



## phillybeffandswiss

knobcreek said:


> 1. The track is hours away from my house, I can't just drop the kids off, and I'm the one who always has to drive everywhere because my wife doesn't like to.


 Okay.



> 2. Let's assume this fight has nothing to do with the affair from 14 years ago, just for the sake of argument, I'm attempting to not make that terrible period in my life ruin every single facet of my life for the foreseeable future, and let it be in the past.


 Ignoring things affecting your comments in other threads? Okay, silly, but it still makes you both sound petty and childish to me.



> 3. I'm willing to entertain the fact that I'm somehow in the wrong here, I just have a hard time when logically, going out to a dinner that will cost a lot when no one's eating and full of ice cream is not a good use of time or money. It's crazy!! Who eats ice cream right before going to eat out? I mean we were literally walking to the car when I made a last minute pit stop at the head.


Parents, on an outing, all over the US but not you. Sounding logical doesn't mean you are right. I'm frugal to the point of irritation, but on a trip I save more for silly expenditures like ICE CREAM before dinner. You sound like my wife who wouldn't eat leftovers, she does now, because she liked hot fully cooked meals.



> 4. We're together for the same reason a lot of couples are together, love, history, finances.


If you say so, I just posted your own words, which talk very little about love and whole lot of "if it weren't for my kids."



> 5. My wife didn't cook supper, I picked up a pizza when we got home (2 hours later kids still wouldn't eat anything).


You have NO CLUE why they didn't eat. You do realize long drives, fatigue and/or PARENTAL FIGHTS can kill an appetite right? 

So, you want people to look at just this incident and pretend it is a one off to make your wife look bad? Then you should start a Blog where you can control the responses. Still, please continue, this is why a few are saying you are controlling. I just bought a ticket on that boat, but haven't got in line, YET.


----------



## knobcreek

Just so everyone's clear, this isn't like we stopped for ice cream at 4:00 PM and had 6:30 PM dinner plans. This is stopping for ice cream at 6:27 PM with 6:30 PM dinner plans! Come on it's crazy! I can't be the only one who thinks this is nuts!!!

The track is literally 1.1 miles away from the restaurant, I just google mapped it!

But I do understand that unilaterally making the decision to not go to a restaurant after literally just scarfing down ice cream upset her and that should be my focus. But I still can't get over not seeing that I'm right, I was right, the kids weren't hungry, they wouldn't have touched their food, it was already a 9-10 hour day with a 2 hour drive home. Spending $140 - $160 on a dinner out at that point was pointless, no one was hungry and everyone was fatigued.



CharlieParker said:


> If you go twice a year, how did the previous trips go? What was dinner?
> 
> I've only been midweek, when it's usually only half full. I'm going Sunday, I hope I survive.


Last time I got a hotel room in the area and we only stayed for 4 races so no issues at all. This time we went just for the races. It's a bit of a ****-show on the weekends but Sunday is better than Saturday, free lot still has spots on Sunday.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

To say that just because something's" logical doesn't make it right is absurd on its face. Logical, by definition, means it makes sense, and nobody should rebel against making sense!

That said, OP himself sowed the seeds of failure for this outing long before the infamous ice cream incident. Take children for a long drive to an activity they have little interest in, sit them in the elements all day and expect them to behave, and then... it's no wonder they wanted a little ice cream and also no wonder mom acquiesced. Stevie Wonder could have seen this coming. The kids deserved a little treat for putting up with this day ... as did mom. 

The clue bus was first missed when this outing was planned, not when the route changed.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Going out to eat is not all about how much the kids will eat. For me it's unwinding, being catered to a little, no dishes to clean up, a nice meal brought to me. It's a huge treat and I personally would have been looking forward to that part most of all. I'd also have refused to just go home and would have walked with the kids to the restaurant if I had to. 
You can say no for you, you don't get to choose no for me.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> To say that just because something's" logical doesn't make it right is absurd on its face. Logical, by definition, means it makes sense, and nobody should rebel against making sense!


Sometimes emotions and feelings matter just as much as what's logically right or better. 

Let's say my bf needs a weekend away, he's exhausted from work and logically, we could use the money for more important things but his emotional needs matter too. 
Or I want to go out to dinner after a long day out, logically the kids won't eat much but I want to go. My feelings matter just as much. 

You still have to balance wants and feelings with logic. 

Besides, right and wrong is subjective here. They could have taken doggy bags for the kids, even for tomorrow's supper saving her from making a meal, and still gone to dinner.


----------



## JustAFamilyMan

knobcreek said:


> Just so everyone's clear, this isn't like we stopped for ice cream at 4:00 PM and had 6:30 PM dinner plans. This is stopping for ice cream at 6:27 PM with 6:30 PM dinner plans! Come on it's crazy! I can't be the only one who thinks this is nuts!!!
> 
> The track is literally 1.1 miles away from the restaurant, I just google mapped it!
> 
> But I do understand that unilaterally making the decision to not go to a restaurant after literally just scarfing down ice cream upset her and that should be my focus. But I still can't get over not seeing that I'm right, I was right, the kids weren't hungry, they wouldn't have touched their food, it was already a 9-10 hour day with a 2 hour drive home. Spending $140 - $160 on a dinner out at that point was pointless, no one was hungry and everyone was fatigued.
> 
> Last time I got a hotel room in the area and we only stayed for 4 races so no issues at all. This time we went just for the races. It's a bit of a ****-show on the weekends but Sunday is better than Saturday, free lot still has spots on Sunday.


If your plans were at 6:30 and you weren't in your car yet, you're not making it on time. You arrive, let's say generously, 5 minutes late. You are seated about 5 minutes later, again generous. Drink orders are taken. You're at least 20-30 minutes from having an entree in front of you. Assuming the kids didn't wolf down 2 pints of Ben and Jerry's, they maybe had 200 calories from their little snack. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that a 8-9 hour day being somewhat active, in the sun, at the track, is going to somewhat offset the 200 calories in the world's fight against childhood obesity and the fun of getting ice cream while out was worth that setback.

Congratulations on feeling right though, I guess? 

My kids sometimes barely touch their meals. We go out anyway knowing that at least my youngest has a 50/50 chance to ignore her food. Why? Because it's not all about the dollar to caloric intake ratio. It's about spending time together, doing something each likes to do. Breaking out of a normal routine. 

Sometimes, what upsets someone isn't the pieces you can see on the surface. It's what the thing means to them underneath that matters. You can parse out the situation and make a case you did the "right" thing because of x->y->z while missing that your reaction upset her for reasons that have nothing to do with whether or not the kids were going to fully enjoy their meal. I'm sure there are times you get upset, and the thing which triggers those emotions are interchangeable because it's not the thing itself that mattered to you. It's what the thing meant. That's not her being a mysterious "woman", that's just her being another person in your life you have to work to understand.


----------



## knobcreek

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> To say that just because something's" logical doesn't make it right is absurd on its face. Logical, by definition, means it makes sense, and nobody should rebel against making sense!
> 
> That said, OP himself sowed the seeds of failure for this outing long before the infamous ice cream incident. Take children for a long drive to an activity they have little interest in, sit them in the elements all day and expect them to behave, and then... it's no wonder they wanted a little ice cream and also no wonder mom acquiesced. Stevie Wonder could have seen this coming. The kids deserved a little treat for putting up with this day ... as did mom.
> 
> The clue bus was first missed when this outing was planned, not when the route changed.


Going to the track was 100% my wife's idea, she's a teacher and has summers off, I have a boss riding my ass Monday morning, the last thing I want to do is spend 8 hours at a track 2 hours away with my kids on a Sunday. I did it for her... On a Sunday I like to get my gardening done, go for a run, grill and chill by the pool.

The kids love it by the way, we do stuff like this all the time with them, they're outside, watching horses run, and they have a horse to pull for and when I hand them $6.00 or $8.00 for winning a $1 bet they go nuts. The track is beautiful and the village historic. I can think of 3 things from when I was a kid that stand out, baseball games, hunting, and the horse track with the men in my family that are my fondest memories. It's not a drag on the kids, they really enjoy it.

They had snacks and garbage all day long, literally all day long, it was their 2nd round of ice cream!


----------



## Vinnydee

Best thing to do is agree that the woman is right. You will have a much better relationship as a result. I am married 45 years and learned the hard way. 50 points and a few years more education are between my wife and I. She is often wrong because she never checks what she reads or hears. As she once told me when I proved her wrong, "why would Sally tell me something that is not true?" She just does not understand that believing something does not make it true. It got to the point where she was crying and told me to say she is right even when she is wrong because she was wrong so much. I do not care who is right or wrong since I am very confident in myself but when what she believes affects our marriage or even has us driving an hour in the opposite direction, I have to say something. She thinks that whichever way you point the map is north and once had me drive in circles because of it. However, like most people, instead of learning to read a map she just shrugged it off and still does not know how to read a map. Thanks goodness for GPS maps in cars. 

Even outside of marriage there are always more than one perception of the facts or truth. I also am a corporate security officer and have to interview people a lot. It always amazes me how three people viewing the same event can see it differently than the others. Then you also run up against the many who accept their beliefs as truth regardless of the facts. There are the facts and there is the truth. Most often the two do not agree with one another. Keep in mind that your view of the world is much different than anyone else's because we all view the world through our own eyes and filtered by our beliefs, experience, knowledge and intellect. Your truth may not be mine no matter how much you believe in yours. Best thing I ever learned is that a happy spouse makes for a happy house. Since learning that lesson, our marriage had been better than it used to me. 

Instead of disagreeing, just keep thinking that in 5 years there will be sex robots available an in a few years after that, they will interact and look like the real thing. You will always be right then.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Sometimes emotions and feelings matter just as much as what's logically right or better.
> 
> Let's say my bf needs a weekend away, he's exhausted from work and logically, we could use the money for more important things but his emotional needs matter too.
> Or I want to go out to dinner after a long day out, logically the kids won't eat much but I want to go. My feelings matter just as much.
> 
> You still have to balance wants and feelings with logic.


Then, logically, the weekend away is also a valid choice, because it is, as you say a need. By definition, the other things aren't necessarily more important. Ditto your desire to go out to dinner--whether or not the kids will eat much is immaterial, and as you point out, you can get a doggy bag, thus providing for another meal (a quick and easy one at that) for the kids later. That is a very logical thing to do!

Which was my whole point. Lots of alternatives here .. that make logical sense _and _could have met emotional needs. Please refer to my previous posts with multiple suggestions as to how this could have been planned better from the get-go and, failing that, how things could have been massaged without all the friction once the plan began to unravel. So many options, so little reason for this blowup.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

My daughter doesn't eat in public. She wont touch her whole meal, ever. It's still well worth it to go. 

Even just to sit and unwind a bit at the restaurant before the long drive home would make the cost well worth it to me. 

The dinner wasn't all about the kids eating. It doesn't matter if they would eat or not.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

knobcreek said:


> Going to the track was 100% my wife's idea, she's a teacher and has summers off, I have a boss riding my ass Monday morning, the last thing I want to do is spend 8 hours at a track 2 hours away with my kids on a Sunday. I did it for her... On a Sunday I like to get my gardening done, go for a run, grill and chill by the pool.
> 
> The kids love it by the way, we do stuff like this all the time with them, they're outside, watching horses run, and they have a horse to pull for and when I hand them $6.00 or $8.00 for winning a $1 bet they go nuts. The track is beautiful and the village historic. I can think of 3 things from when I was a kid that stand out, baseball games, hunting, and the horse track with the men in my family that are my fondest memories. It's not a drag on the kids, they really enjoy it.
> 
> They had snacks and garbage all day long, literally all day long, it was their 2nd round of ice cream!


Nevertheless, it takes its toll. Even with an activity they enjoy, they will likely reach kid burnout at some point, and they won't handle it as well as the adults. 

It's interesting how you keep disclosing a little more with each post that is relevant and could have helped understand things earlier. Eating junk all day is not conducive to a good dinner, much moreso than just getting ice cream once right beforehand. 

Okay, so this was wifey's idea, and she also indulged the kids all day long to boot. Now, it's starting to get clear why you may have felt the need to take control late in the day.


----------



## Evinrude58

knobcreek said:


> Just so everyone's clear, this isn't like we stopped for ice cream at 4:00 PM and had 6:30 PM dinner plans. This is stopping for ice cream at 6:27 PM with 6:30 PM dinner plans! Come on it's crazy! I can't be the only one who thinks this is nuts!!!
> 
> The track is literally 1.1 miles away from the restaurant, I just google mapped it!
> 
> But I do understand that unilaterally making the decision to not go to a restaurant after literally just scarfing down ice cream upset her and that should be my focus. But I still can't get over not seeing that I'm right, I was right, the kids weren't hungry, they wouldn't have touched their food, it was already a 9-10 hour day with a 2 hour drive home. Spending $140 - $160 on a dinner out at that point was pointless, no one was hungry and everyone was fatigued.
> 
> 
> 
> Last time I got a hotel room in the area and we only stayed for 4 races so no issues at all. This time we went just for the races. It's a bit of a ****-show on the weekends but Sunday is better than Saturday, free lot still has spots on Sunday.


You don't get it. Yes, you're totally in the right on not going to dinner after an ice cream at an expensive restaurant. Yes, you're wife was tired as hell and jumped into beast mode. YOU have to be the man that takes control, but doing in in a respectful manner that isn't phased by anyone's opinion other than your wife's. SHOW her you care about her opinion by simply stating your perspective and telling her it's her decision on whether to eat at the expensive place or not. I'll bet if you did that, by the time you arrived at the restaurant, she'd have thought about it and changed her mind.

You're not in the wrong, but it's not about that. It was about tiredness, you changing the plans, hurt feelings, etc.

You aren't controlling, you're just logical. You're wife is not controlling, she was just tired and forgot that your feelings count too.

I certainly wouldn't want to pay for an expensive meal when the kids just had a big ice cream snack. Nobody else would, either. Ignore the whiners who say you're a jerk and she should have the say and you should feel bad about a track outing because it's what YOU wanted to do. Guess what? It's your life, and YOU COUNT TOO! I'm sure you spend countless hours doing outings that the wife suggests---- sounds like this was even one of those.
You shouldn't have to feel guilty about 1 day out of a hundred doing something with your family that YOU enjoy (not that this was the case here). It does seem like dad's are the ones that should always be the one that does the activity that is someone else's first choice--- according to society these days. 

Either way, you might avoid a fight if you remember that it's not always about logic and who is right. MAYBE.
There is not a danged thing wrong with you being the leader of the family, either. Don't apologize for it or let every decision you make be up for a contest.

State your perspective and ask your wife's, try to get mutual agreement and if not, bow to her wishes respectfully and have fun sometimes doing what you didn't think was the right thing----- don't let her run over you constantly, however. 

Question: Does she constantly start a fight anytime you make a decision in the relationship? Do you fight every time she makes a decision? Ask yourself if you're a good leader, or a leader that makes your family feel like you're a tyrant? (I don't think you're a tyrant) I suspect you may be too willing to second guess your decisions and they pounce on you because you've shown weakness-- a human thing, everyone does it to an extent. You can say no without being overbearing or disrespectful. Not saying you were either. Stick with your decision. It wasn't "wrong".


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

He should only be the leader if they have both mutually discussed and agreed to that, otherwise they are equal and he has no more say in anything than she does. Him being the man doesn't mean crap. It does not mean he is the leader. No one leads a marriage unless they agree to that. 
Honestly I think him thinking he is the leader is getting him into this mess to begin with.


----------



## JustAFamilyMan

Evinrude58 said:


> *YOU have to be the man that takes control*, but doing in in a respectful manner that isn't phased by anyone's opinion other than your wife's. .....*You aren't controlling, you're just logical*.


I'm not sure which of the bolded you believe. He doesn't have to be the man that takes control. There are 6 other people who have some input. One of those is his equal. His wife's opinion isn't something he can decide to be "phased" by. Her decisions hold equal weight, as do her emotions and reasons for being here. If someone wants to really "man up", they can do so by showing they're not threatened by choosing a partner to make decisions with.

Don't get me wrong, there are times where people want someone else to take the initiative/leadership and show some control over one another, but we're not talking about turning someone on here or helping a spouse who needs some support. We're talking about deciding whether or not it's ok to keep dinner plans because the kids had some ice cream.


----------



## knobcreek

My wife defers to me with everything, I've asked her to get more involved in managing the money, bill paying, planning our life, she has no interest and says she likes me making those decisions, so naturally that plays out to everything else. I think she is really conflicted at times, like she wants to cede control because that makes her feel safe and happy. But then societal pressure kicks in and she feels it's not right and she can't do that. But if I make everything 50/50 decisions, she becomes unhappy, plain and simple. I think every now and again she gets an "I am woman hear me roar" moment and decides she really wants 50/50 input and we have a blowup. But it always come from left field.

I don't need to lead anyone, let alone another grown adult. I do it at work, doing it at home is exhausting. I would appreciate a lot more input into major life decisions and finances but she's completely uninterested so I make the decisions. But apparently taking a rain check on dinner plans is over-stepping my bounds?

Either way, I appreciate everyone's input my takeaways are:

1. She's upset because I just made a decision which she felt undermined her as a partner and simply made her someone under me, which I never want to make her feel like, so I'll apologize for making her feel like that.
2. This may be a giant ****-test because she does defer basically all decision making and leadership to me in the marriage. She could've simply walked to one of about 50 restaurants right next to the track and said "**** you, don't eat then". But she didn't, she just walked to the car, got in, and off we went, then we argued and had sex.
3. Pick your battles, even if you're 100% right and doing the opposite makes no logical sense and going along like it does will pain you, and drive you exceedingly insane!!!


----------



## Andy1001

knobcreek said:


> My wife defers to me with everything, I've asked her to get more involved in managing the money, bill paying, planning our life, she has no interest and says she likes me making those decisions, so naturally that plays out to everything else. I think she is really conflicted at times, like she wants to cede control because that makes her feel safe and happy. But then societal pressure kicks in and she feels it's not right and she can't do that. But if I make everything 50/50 decisions, she becomes unhappy, plain and simple. I think every now and again she gets an "I am woman hear me roar" moment and decides she really wants 50/50 input and we have a blowup. But it always come from left field.
> 
> I don't need to lead anyone, let alone another grown adult. I do it at work, doing it at home is exhausting. I would appreciate a lot more input into major life decisions and finances but she's completely uninterested so I make the decisions. But apparently taking a rain check on dinner plans is over-stepping my bounds?
> 
> Either way, I appreciate everyone's input my takeaways are:
> 
> 1. She's upset because I just made a decision which she felt undermined her as a partner and simply made her someone under me, which I never want to make her feel like, so I'll apologize for making her feel like that.
> 2. This may be a giant ****-test because she does defer basically all decision making and leadership to me in the marriage. She could've simply walked to one of about 50 restaurants right next to the track and said "**** you, don't eat then". But she didn't, she just walked to the car, got in, and off we went, then we argued and had sex.
> 3. Pick your battles, even if you're 100% right and doing the opposite makes no logical sense and going along like it does will pain you, and drive you exceedingly insane!!!


There is something about your posts that I have trouble understanding.You mentioned a few times that the meal,for five people would have cost between $140 and $160 dollars and that was a lot of money to spend if the kids didn't eat all their food.You mentioned you won twice at the track,also that you have a well paying job,your wife is a teacher and you have a house with a pool.I can't see how spending this amount of cash is such a big deal to someone in your position.
Also did you even think about whether your wife might have been hungry,tired and peed off after a long day with the kids and was looking forward to a meal in a nice restaurant only for you to unilaterally cancel.And suggesting a meal later in the week was only rubbing salt into the wounds.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

^I agree and the suggestion that she sit at the bar alone and have an appetizer while he drives the kids around town would have been quite offensive to me too.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Andy1001 said:


> There is something about your posts that I have trouble understanding.You mentioned a few times that the meal,for five people would have cost between $140 and $160 dollars and that was a lot of money to spend if the kids didn't eat all their food.You mentioned you won twice at the track,also that you have a well paying job,your wife is a teacher and you have a house with a pool.I can't see how spending this amount of cash is such a big deal to someone in your position.


I can understand this perfectly. I'm also in a financial position where this would be no real problem for me, but the question is still whether it's the best use of the $$$. As I tell people who try to sell me things, "I didn't get to where I can afford nice things by buying nice things!" One can feed a family of five quite easily for less than $150. 



Andy1001 said:


> Also did you even think about whether your wife might have been hungry,tired and peed off after a long day with the kids and was looking forward to a meal in a nice restaurant only for you to unilaterally cancel.And suggesting a meal later in the week was only rubbing salt into the wounds.


I had the exact same response, and called OP on the carpet for just that. He responded that the outing was his wife's idea. That takes some of the wind out of the sails of the "she needed a break" argument.


----------



## knobcreek

Andy1001 said:


> There is something about your posts that I have trouble understanding.You mentioned a few times that the meal,for five people would have cost between $140 and $160 dollars and that was a lot of money to spend if the kids didn't eat all their food.You mentioned you won twice at the track,also that you have a well paying job,your wife is a teacher and you have a house with a pool.I can't see how spending this amount of cash is such a big deal to someone in your position.
> Also did you even think about whether your wife might have been hungry,tired and peed off after a long day with the kids and was looking forward to a meal in a nice restaurant only for you to unilaterally cancel.And suggesting a meal later in the week was only rubbing salt into the wounds.


If I make $2,000,000 a year but pay $2,000,010.00 a year in bills I'm as broke as someone making $35,000 a year and paying $35,010.00 a year in bills. We make good money, but we stretched for our current house, and the housing crash killed the value on my other house so I lose a ton in rental income each month and I'm too proud to walk away and file Chapter 13. It's nothing I won't dig out of, but right now we're tight on cash flow so the belt tightens a smidge. Plus I grew up lower middle class, I can make $10,000,000 a year and $160 will still be a lot of money to me. We went to lunch at a nice place after hiking the Catskills the day before, and I said I would take her to her favorite restaurant later in the week. She's not deprived of eating out at places, we do it all the time.

I get what you're saying, but even if I had $10,000 handy I would still think the dinner plans would be better for another day, not a day the kids just ate ice cream 5 minutes before dinner. They have a hard enough time eating so we always try to get them to dinner with an appetite or they're a pain in the ass.

But point taken, she was looking forward to dinner out, and even if she couldn't understand my point of view I unilaterally changed direction and we went home pissing her off and making her not feel valued as a 50/50 partner.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

knobcreek said:


> But point taken, she was looking forward to dinner out, and even if she couldn't understand my point of view I unilaterally changed direction and we went home pissing her off *and making her not feel valued as a 50/50 partne*r.


And there you have it folks, a successful resolution of a contentious thread, in which clue bird lands on the OPs shoulder. 

Wish they were all that easy.


----------



## MrsHolland

Skimmed most of the thread, you guys talk to much. But anyway I get the feeling that this was more about a long history of you undermining her. If the trigger for the upset is quite a small one then it may mean that it has a huge history behind it. Do you undermine her (not in your opinion, in hers)? Do the two of you fully heal between fights or is it just one thing piling up on another.
So what, she got the kids an ice cream while you we all out having a fun day? Why the need to ruin the fun? 

Oh and much of this will have been in he way you spoke to her, like a little child to be scolded or as an equal parent. Be honest with yourself on this, how do you speak to her?


----------



## happy as a clam

Poor planning all the way around. A two hour drive, followed by eight hours at the track, followed by one and a half to two hour meal, followed by a two hour drive home. Seriously?? You're looking at 14 hours minimum for a day trip with young kids. Way too much IMHO.

Forget the arguments about dinner and ice cream -- just sounds like an overall exhausting day that was bound to lead to an argument.


----------



## *Deidre*

You could have all just still gone to dinner, and take what wasn't eaten home in to-go boxes. If you argue over this nonsense, how do you handle big problems? lol This seems so childish to argue over. 

For your wife to go off on you too was also childish. You say that your marriage sucks, why is that?


----------



## knobcreek

*Deidre* said:


> You could have all just still gone to dinner, and take what wasn't eaten home in to-go boxes. If you argue over this nonsense, how do you handle big problems? lol This seems so childish to argue over.
> 
> For your wife to go off on you too was also childish. You say that your marriage sucks, why is that?


Well that's a long story, but I will say this is the most hopeful I've been in years. This is a dumb fight but I learned a lot from it. In the past, my wife would've just said nothing and then held it in, resented me for it while I had no clue it was anything more than a stupid tiff done in 10 minutes. This fight, at least we spoke about it and I got her point of view from it and I get it. In 16 years I've never had that, it was always up to me to understand moods and read minds which I'm terrible at, so she's actually telling me how she feels. I just don't want it to get to the point of absurd micro-aggressions and always looking for ways to take offense and see what I do in the worst possible light, I can't deal with that.


----------



## Satya

knobcreek said:


> Well that's a long story, but I will say this is the most hopeful I've been in years. This is a dumb fight but I learned a lot from it. In the past, my wife would've just said nothing and then held it in, resented me for it while I had no clue it was anything more than a stupid tiff done in 10 minutes. This fight, at least we spoke about it and I got her point of view from it and I get it. In 16 years I've never had that, it was always up to me to understand moods and read minds which I'm terrible at, so she's actually telling me how she feels. I just don't want it to get to the point of absurd micro-aggressions and always looking for ways to take offense and see what I do in the worst possible light, I can't deal with that.


That's fair.

There are all kinds of ways to react though to her giving the kids ice cream. A lot is transmitted in your delivery. If you asked her a pointed, leading, heated question, like "why the hell did you give the kids ice cream when we're going out to dinner?" then expect a snake bite from most women after a long day. That is obviously a way to belittle and question her common sense in front of your kids. It's a put down. 

Have you ever been to Disneyland or another amusement style park? See the kettle corn, candy floss, and general junk all around? It's part of the experience IMO, but I do understand if you're being conscious of calories and sugar. 

Next time, set the expectation so you're not shocked and disappointed. Reach an agreement with your wife about how much junk is consumed. Don't break a promise like going out for a meal unless the kids are having a tantrum or something. 

Kids aren't the only ones who crave stability and compromise. Your wife needs it, too, or she will continue to make decisions independently of you and she will see you as a killjoy only interested in what YOU want during a day out. If you bring everyone, then that day is for everyone.


----------



## Magnesium

OP, I absolutely agree with you. I think it is beyond absurd to go out for dinner and drop that kind of money after your wife just jammed them full of ice cream. I question your wife's motives in doing it, actually.

But, it really doesn't matter that you are right and she is wrong. If you're trying to get along and this is what your wife is like, you need to find better ways of coping....like lowering your expectations, biting holes through your tongue, learning to say "yes, dear" even when you want to choke her to death.


----------



## kag123

I've read this thread, and I'm genuinely scratching my head at how this turned into such a large argument between the two of you. 

Some of what you've written makes it seem like you have a lot of resentment and contempt for your wife. Why is that?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Evinrude58

JustAFamilyMan said:


> I'm not sure which of the bolded you believe. He doesn't have to be the man that takes control. There are 6 other people who have some input. One of those is his equal. His wife's opinion isn't something he can decide to be "phased" by. Her decisions hold equal weight, as do her emotions and reasons for being here. If someone wants to really "man up", they can do so by showing they're not threatened by choosing a partner to make decisions with.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, there are times where people want someone else to take the initiative/leadership and show some control over one another, but we're not talking about turning someone on here or helping a spouse who needs some support. We're talking about deciding whether or not it's ok to keep dinner plans because the kids had some ice cream.


I see your point in my wording there. 

I disagree with the fact that there shouldn't be a leader of the family. SOMEONE has to make the final decision on big things when there is a team. In every team I can think of---- there's a leader. The leader takes into account what the team wants, and at times he or she may not make the decision the leader thinks is best, but goes with what the rest of the team desires and tries to make the best of it either way. Is that controlling? I don't think so. I also don't consider OP's situation a big deal that requires a "final say"......

Would you say in a situation where one spouse makes 20% of the family's money, that they should get 50% of the say in how it's spent? In my case, I may be the one making 20%. I sure as heck don't think I should have 50% say in how 100% of our money is spent.
There's nothing wrong with him being the leader of his family. Based on his post, it appears the OP's wife wants him in that role. 

I also think that the OP has figured out why his wife was so upset and they will get this cleared up.
Yes, OP likely has some resentment about his wife's past behavior. I doubt it had a lot of affect on this situation....


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

There is no need for a leader in an equal relationship. You can figure things out between the two. Giving either of them final say power (and worse, just assuming the man has it cause he happens to have a penis) is making one more important than the other. 

Some things may be more in ones wheelhouse so they take over that aspect. 
My bf knows cars. I don't. I'd expect him to have final say power there. 
If I know or care more about something else, it'd be me making the final say. 

But overall they are equal and just because I'd want him to take over the things he is better at does not mean he can take over everything. 

And yes, they should have 50% say in money. It's not his/her money. It is both of their money no matter who makes it. You're a team. You each bring and share different things to the table.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> And yes, they should have 50% say in money. It's not his/her money. It is both of their money no matter who makes it. You're a team. You each bring and share different things to the table.


For the last 23 years, I have been the sole breadwinner... and I make a lot.

My wife is an equal partner in financial decision making. She actual does all the day-to-day financial management, and we make all investment decisions together. Neither of us makes any significant purchases (3 digits or more) without consulting the other. 

If I didn't think she was worthy of being an equal partner in this, I wouldn't be married to her. Fortunately, we are pretty much in lock step with how we, as a family unit, should handle money.


----------



## lifeistooshort

I'm trying to imagine how it would work if my hb decided that he needed to be the leader and make the final decisions when I make 80% more then him. 

Not well.

But it also wouldn't work well if i decided that how we spend was my final decision. If you need to have a final decision maker you don't have a partnership, and that seldom works well in a relationship.


----------



## Evinrude58

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> For the last 23 years, I have been the sole breadwinner... and I make a lot.
> 
> My wife is an equal partner in financial decision making. She actual does all the day-to-day financial management, and we make all investment decisions together. Neither of us makes any significant purchases (3 digits or more) without consulting the other.
> 
> If I didn't think she was worthy of being an equal partner in this, I wouldn't be married to her. Fortunately, we are pretty much in lock step with how we, as a family unit, should handle money.


Sadly, sir, most of the time people aren't even close to where your "dreamy" wife is. If only it were that easy.

So what would you suggest if one spouse is the sole breadwinner and the other thinks the paycheck is half their's and is a spendthrift, but is still loved and wanted? Should the responsible person sigh, shake their head, and look the other way while the spendthrift goes through the breadwinner's paycheck----- since it's half hers?

Everyone has their weaknesses. I do believe that a team can share leadership roles in order to balance out strengths and weaknesses. And the one that is better at a certain aspect should have the final say. I'm not suggesting one spouse be a dictator. I said LEADER.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

My ex was the spender and also often was the one making way more. 

I made a game board with a box for everything we spent money on and I got fake money (from a game we had) and I gave us the amount we made a month and we had to split it into the squares. Did the fixed spending first and then extras. Some of his extras were stuff I thought were stupid but we both got some extra boxes that we wanted. 

Once we had it all figured out, I took the amount for bills and agreed expenses out of his account as soon as he got it. The rest was his to with what he wanted. 

It was the best negotiation we could come to. He still got to spend and didn't need to check his balance and hold money for bills, I made sure bills were paid. 

Him making more money didn't mean he got more say and you don't have to look the other way to figure out an agreement you both are comfortable with.


----------



## Mr The Other

knobcreek said:


> Was I really this wrong here? A woman's perspective perhaps?
> 
> We took the kids to Saratoga race track, I let them bet a buck on each race, you can bring a cooler with beer, sodas, sandwiches and some chairs to watch the races from the general admission section. We had a great day, kids had fun, I hit an exacta and boxed trifecta so it was good day.
> 
> We had plans to get dinner in Saratoga and when we're leaving I head to the bathroom, and when I catch up to them the wife is getting the kids ice cream, we were leaving to go to dinner 5 minutes away. I basically said I don't want to spend $150 on a dinner when they all just ate ice cream (no yelling, not even annoyed just kinda pointing out that an expensive dinner is probably not worth it). She was adamant that we go, but I thought it would be a waste of money, the kids wouldn't eat and just complain the entire time.
> 
> She basically shuts down and gets emotional, totally pissed off, won't speak to me. I get our marriage sucks right now but WTF? Who eats ice cream right before eating at a restaurant? Then she comes up with all these nefarious reasons why I didn't want to go, and how I only didn't want to go to control her and she doesn't need my permission to get the kids ice cream (agreed, never said she did, just odd to get ice cream right before going to a restaurant, they're expensive with a family of 5, I would rather go when people aren't stuffed with ice cream to make it worth our while).
> 
> Obviously this a woman really angry at me and not over ice cream, but what the F? I told her, this is what divorced people do, they nit-pick, imagine all sorts of ulterior motives of the other person, and then have some conversation setting unreasonable expectations for behavior in the future knowing neither one could ever meet it. Like if I get annoyed, sometimes I'm just annoyed, it isn't always bigger than that, people get annoyed sometimes. For anyone who watches RHWofOC I feel like our marriage is approaching cringe-worthiness of Shannon Beador and her husband.
> 
> To make it even worse as we're discussing the fight, she says "and you insisted we go to Druther's instead of Italian", when in reality I didn't care at all, stated as much, and ONLY said Druther's after multiple prods about where to eat. I only said Druther's because that's where I THOUGHT she wanted to go. So now if I don't read minds well enough I get dinged for that too!


Utterly sexist talk ahead:

Imagine in our crude male minds that women have an imaginary friend who is constantly telling them that they are bad, not good enough and deserve nothing. If we do that, much of how women reacts makes sense.

She bought them ice-cream. She knows she should not really have done that. Her imaginary friend is telling her that she is a terrible person and deserves to be miserable. You come along and side with that imaginary friend.

Of course, you were not really siding with an imaginary friend.

But she was arguing with an imaginary friend who was saying she did not deserve nice things and was a bad person. You say, (her impression), "You did a bad thing. You are a bad person. You do not deserve a nice meal."

She was upset at you.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Evinrude58 said:


> Sadly, sir, most of the time people aren't even close to where your "dreamy" wife is. If only it were that easy.
> 
> So what would you suggest if one spouse is the sole breadwinner and the other thinks the paycheck is half their's and is a spendthrift, but is still loved and wanted? Should the responsible person sigh, shake their head, and look the other way while the spendthrift goes through the breadwinner's paycheck----- since it's half hers?
> 
> Everyone has their weaknesses. I do believe that a team can share leadership roles in order to balance out strengths and weaknesses. And the one that is better at a certain aspect should have the final say. I'm not suggesting one spouse be a dictator. I said LEADER.


That's why I specified that it was fortunate that my wife and I share a common philosophy about how to handle money. Someone else pointed out that couples can also compliment each areas where one is significantly more solid than the other (as have you,which I have not disagreed with). Both work for different couples, or at different times for the same couple.

Personally, tough, I love that my wife has the financial acumen that I can see and treat her as a complete equal in this very important area.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

lifeistooshort said:


> If you need to have a final decision maker you don't have a partnership, and that seldom works well in a relationship.


Bottom line right there, folks. Simple, succinct, crystal clear, and spot on.


----------



## UnicornCupcake

One question: Was your wife wearing make-up? Basically, did she put some effort into the Family Day? If she did, my guess is she just didn't want the day to end and wanted to continue it with a nice (and expensive) dinner. There's every other day to eat **** food in a **** place, but I know myself and if I'm in a good mood, feeling pretty and enjoying a romantic or fun family vibe I just want to keep it going. Maybe it crushed her that you didn't share in that emotion with her? Or, straight up, she could have been hangry.

I work every other weekend. I don't mind grabbing a bite to eat whether I'm working or not, but you can get your ass I don't not want to drop $150 on a meal if I finished work at 8 PM and I just want to eat and go home. That ruins the entire experience. Now, if we're having a good day and we just want to have a long, expensive meal, yes. Soemthing like this happened the other day: I finished work and my husband asked if I wanted sushi. Sushi here is about $150 with drinks. We LOVE sushi. We go all the time. When I said no, he was genuinely confused. I'm in my work uniforma nd I don't feel like beig in public for 90 minutes eating my face off, lol. Save that for a better day.


----------



## thefam

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> As I tell people who try to sell me things, "I didn't get to where I can afford nice things by buying nice things!" One can feed a family of five quite easily for less than $150.


Honey?? I didn't know you were posting on TAM!


----------



## She'sStillGotIt

knobcreek said:


> So if me stating it makes no sense to get dinner when no one will eat is a "control move", is not getting them all ice cream on the walk out to the parking lot minutes before we go to dinner without having a discussion also a "control move" I fail to see the difference.


Personally, I'm a female and I think she acted like an imbecile. Who the hell buys ice cream cones for their kids when they're leaving and going to a restaurant 5 minutes away? Just sounds like a ***** move to me.


----------



## MrsHolland

UnicornCupcake said:


> One question: Was your wife wearing make-up? Basically, did she put some effort into the Family Day? If she did, my guess is she just didn't want the day to end and wanted to continue it with a nice (and expensive) dinner. There's every other day to eat **** food in a **** place, but I know myself and if I'm in a good mood, feeling pretty and enjoying a romantic or fun family vibe I just want to keep it going. Maybe it crushed her that you didn't share in that emotion with her? Or, straight up, she could have been hangry.
> 
> I work every other weekend. I don't mind grabbing a bite to eat whether I'm working or not, but you can get your ass I don't not want to drop $150 on a meal if I finished work at 8 PM and I just want to eat and go home. That ruins the entire experience. Now, if we're having a good day and we just want to have a long, expensive meal, yes. Soemthing like this happened the other day: I finished work and my husband asked if I wanted sushi. *Sushi here is about $150 with drinks. We LOVE sushi. We go all the time.* When I said no, he was genuinely confused. I'm in my work uniforma nd I don't feel like beig in public for 90 minutes eating my face off, lol. Save that for a better day.


:surprise: far out $150 for sushi, please explain. Ok how much for the sushi and how much for the drinks? Here we have sushi a couple of times a week as it is super cheap, maybe $10 per person tops.


----------



## aine

knobcreek said:


> Was I really this wrong here? A woman's perspective perhaps?
> 
> We took the kids to Saratoga race track, I let them bet a buck on each race, you can bring a cooler with beer, sodas, sandwiches and some chairs to watch the races from the general admission section. We had a great day, kids had fun, I hit an exacta and boxed trifecta so it was good day.
> 
> We had plans to get dinner in Saratoga and when we're leaving I head to the bathroom, and when I catch up to them the wife is getting the kids ice cream, we were leaving to go to dinner 5 minutes away. I basically said I don't want to spend $150 on a dinner when they all just ate ice cream (no yelling, not even annoyed just kinda pointing out that an expensive dinner is probably not worth it). She was adamant that we go, but I thought it would be a waste of money, the kids wouldn't eat and just complain the entire time.
> 
> She basically shuts down and gets emotional, totally pissed off, won't speak to me. I get our marriage sucks right now but WTF? Who eats ice cream right before eating at a restaurant? Then she comes up with all these nefarious reasons why I didn't want to go, and how I only didn't want to go to control her and she doesn't need my permission to get the kids ice cream (agreed, never said she did, just odd to get ice cream right before going to a restaurant, they're expensive with a family of 5, I would rather go when people aren't stuffed with ice cream to make it worth our while).
> 
> Obviously this a woman really angry at me and not over ice cream, but what the F? I told her, this is what divorced people do, they nit-pick, imagine all sorts of ulterior motives of the other person, and then have some conversation setting unreasonable expectations for behavior in the future knowing neither one could ever meet it. Like if I get annoyed, sometimes I'm just annoyed, it isn't always bigger than that, people get annoyed sometimes. For anyone who watches RHWofOC I feel like our marriage is approaching cringe-worthiness of Shannon Beador and her husband.
> 
> To make it even worse as we're discussing the fight, she says "and you insisted we go to Druther's instead of Italian", when in reality I didn't care at all, stated as much, and ONLY said Druther's after multiple prods about where to eat. I only said Druther's because that's where I THOUGHT she wanted to go. So now if I don't read minds well enough I get dinged for that too!



I do not know why it was a big deal. The kids could order something smaller if not so hungry, you and the Mrs could still enjoy. Perhaps the kids were nagging her for icecream, you know how kids are, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill and are partly to blame in this.


----------



## knobcreek

MrsHolland said:


> :surprise: far out $150 for sushi, please explain. Ok how much for the sushi and how much for the drinks? Here we have sushi a couple of times a week as it is super cheap, maybe $10 per person tops.


Yeah sushi is always a cheap date for me and my wife, a few bucks a roll at lunch time. Must've had a good 7 drinks each with that bill.



She'sStillGotIt said:


> Personally, I'm a female and I think she acted like an imbecile. Who the hell buys ice cream cones for their kids when they're leaving and going to a restaurant 5 minutes away? Just sounds like a ***** move to me.


Thank You! I think posting this in the ladies lounge was probably the wrong place for this. Some women (not all) here seem to be projecting quite a bit in this thread, and putting all sorts of actions, attitudes that plum didn't happen into the equation. One person was stating that I was yelling at her like a child? That never happened at all!


----------



## She'sStillGotIt

aine said:


> I do not know why it was a big deal. The kids could order something smaller if not so hungry, you and the Mrs could still enjoy. Perhaps the kids were nagging her for icecream, you know how kids are, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill and are partly to blame in this.


I have to be honest.

If my husband and I had taken our son out for the day and he'd been *ignorant* enough to buy our son an ice cream cone literally minutes before dinner at an expensive restaurant, I would have throat punched him. Quite honestly, I see that as a horrific show of disrespect towards the OP who was looking forward to having a nice dinner out. It's like she purposely threw a monkey wrench in the plans. It actually sounds passive/aggressive - trying to play it off as being an innocent mommy who gave into her kids but she knew full well it would ruin their appetites. It ain't rocket science.

And yes, we all know how kids can get but that *doesn't* mean you have to over-indulge their every little whim just because they whine about wanting something.


----------



## Livvie

She'sStillGotIt said:


> knobcreek said:
> 
> 
> 
> So if me stating it makes no sense to get dinner when no one will eat is a "control move", is not getting them all ice cream on the walk out to the parking lot minutes before we go to dinner without having a discussion also a "control move" I fail to see the difference.
> 
> 
> 
> Personally, I'm a female and I think she acted like an imbecile. Who the hell buys ice cream cones for their kids when they're leaving and going to a restaurant 5 minutes away? Just sounds like a ***** move to me.
Click to expand...

Ditto here. She knew the restaurant was minutes away, and she gets the kids ice cream (specific kids who are known to be picky eaters who get their appetite ruined easily, who already had ice cream earlier in the day). I think that's really strange!! If my spouse did that on the way out to dinner a couple minutes away while I ran to the bathroom I'd be dumfounded. OP did you ask her: WHY???


----------



## knobcreek

Livvie said:


> Ditto here. She knew the restaurant was minutes away, and she gets the kids ice cream (specific kids who are known to be picky eaters who get their appetite ruined easily, who already had ice cream earlier in the day). I think that's really strange!! If my spouse did that on the way out to dinner a couple minutes away while I ran to the bathroom I'd be dumfounded.* OP did you ask her: WHY???*


She got heated after I didn't want to go to dinner so I don't bother trying to talk to her in that state, nothing good will come out of it. We didn't speak on the drive home really, but we discussed it (loudly) before bed because we promised not to let fights linger and to address them and not go to bed angry, or if we are angry no one leaves the bed and we still cuddle to sleep (I have a hard time sleeping without holding her).

By the time it was resolved it wasn't really worth revisiting. It could've been passive aggressive. I still think it may have been one big **** test from her. But it could just be she didn't really think about it. She thought we could just get dinner and the kids wouldn't eat or pick at an app while we ate. But our kids would not just sit there while we ate and had some beers, especially after the 10 hour day we were already working on. I would spend the entire dinner stopping my son and daughter from fighting and listening to how bored they are and that they want to go home, then pay $150 bill, then drive us all home 2 hours exhausted.

Anyway, I took the family out to our favorite restaurant last night, everyone was starving, ate their dinner, and a great time was had by all ($214.00 later).


----------



## Evinrude58

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Bottom line right there, folks. Simple, succinct, crystal clear, and spot on.


So when 2 partners disagree, who makes the decision? Do we play spin the bottle, or in the land of rainbows and unicorns where everything is perfectly equal, does the voice of Aslan or whatever suddenly come booming down to help choose which thing gets done?


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Evinrude58 said:


> So when 2 partners disagree, who makes the decision? Do we play spin the bottle, or in the land of rainbows and unicorns where everything is perfectly equal, does the voice of Aslan or whatever suddenly come booming down to help choose which thing gets done?


If no agreement is possible, then that's problematic, which was the point of the original post. Things don't have to be "rainbows and unicorns" for two people to come to an agreement. Even people with very different outlooks will come to an agreement if they really want to.

When my wife and I positively can't come to an agreement, one or the other generally relents. While we may see each other as "equal" in an overall sense, we know each has our strengths and weaknesses and we respect that and it affects our joint decision making accordingly. If there is absolutely no hope of agreement on a course of action, then the answer is no action. If we can't both sign on, we quite simply don't do it.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Often when a couple can't come together to make a choice it's because they haven't been in the habit of negotiating and taking their spouse's feelings into consideration. The more they do it, the easier it is. 

There should be very little that can't be discussed and agreed on. If 2 people disagree, find a middle ground. Compromise, talk it out. 

The Policy of Joint Agreement


----------



## EleGirl

knobcreek said:


> I basically said I don't want to spend $150 on a dinner when they all just ate ice cream (no yelling, not even annoyed just kinda pointing out that an expensive dinner is probably not worth it).


How much did you bet at the track?


----------



## EleGirl

knobcreek said:


> To answer some of the questions that came up.
> 
> Saratoga is a really nice town and track, we go probably twice a year. I grew up around horses and went with my grandpa and dad to Saratoga and Belmont, they always let me bet a buck a race and it's one of my fondest memories growing up. My wife loves it, going on Sunday was her idea as we went hiking on Saturday and out to lunch and I wanted Sunday to catch up on yard work and school work. I bring a red wagon with food and beers, chairs, get a paper and we all make bets, i put them in then we go up to the rail and watch the horses final turn, my kids love it.
> 
> We stayed for 9 races, not the full 10, it was a long day already.
> 
> *I never said no one can eat, I said I'll take the kids around town and she can sit at the bar and grab some apps (this pissed her off more), I also said we can take a rain check on dinner and go to one of her favorite restaurants Mountain Brauhaus later in the week.*
> 
> My kids have terrible appetites, and no chance any of them would've eaten a bite at dinner, they would've fought and bugged us to leave every 2 minutes. Obesity is an epidemic in this country, so I know there's a lot of kids out there who can take down a 700 calorie serving of ice cream then sit down to a full dinner, but mine can't.
> 
> Mentioning divorce was stupid, but it was in the context of these stupid fights we have are getting into minutia and reading these bad ulterior motives are what people whose marriages are ending do, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and someone being annoyed is just that, give it 5-10 minutes and then talk about it.
> 
> So if me stating it makes no sense to get dinner when no one will eat is a "control move", is not getting them all ice cream on the walk out to the parking lot minutes before we go to dinner without having a discussion also a "control move" I fail to see the difference.


Brining up the obesity epidemic in this country is not helping your argument because it has nothing to do with your children.

So children who could sit through 9 races, a very long day for children, cannot even sit at a restaurant and behave? Interesting.

It was about spending time together as a family, not your rules. You could have gone to the restaurant and let your kids share an appetizer. You could take the left overs home in a box for them to snack on later. 

You told your wife that she could go alone to some restaurant and get appetizers? Really? I agree with many others on here... from your point of view you set the rules and everyone else has to comply. I don't blame your wife for getting upset.


----------



## EleGirl

thefam said:


> With or without ice cream a "nice" dinner just wasn't a good idea after 8 or 9 hours outdoors in August. Everyone is going to be sweaty, stinky, dirty, and cranky.


It seems to me that going home and mom cooking dinner would be great for everyone except mom. Perhaps that's part of why she was not happy with the his reaction.


----------



## Evinrude58

He's said he understands now that he didn't make her feel it was a 50/50 relationship and was going to try to correct that in the future.

Everyone makes mistakes. They need to work on how they handle responding to one another. If she'd have explained that he hurt her feelings and why, and provided an option........... I'll bet he would have had a different response.

Could he have foreseen that saying no to an expected dinner would be a bad thing? Yes.
Could she have foreseen that feeding kids ice cream immediately before a big meal at a nice restaurant wasn't logical. ???? 

The guy is here to try to figure out how he screwed up. I think he's correct in his analysis.


----------



## EleGirl

Evinrude58 said:


> So when 2 partners disagree, who makes the decision? Do we play spin the bottle, or in the land of rainbows and unicorns where everything is perfectly equal, does the voice of Aslan or whatever suddenly come booming down to help choose which thing gets done?


They work at it until they arrive at a compromise. If they BOTH cannot compromise some to arrive at an agreement there is a problem with the relationship.

Some couples seem to let (my mutual agreement) allow for one of them to have last say in a particular area, and the other in another area. For example if one person is an technology expert by training, their spouse might defer to their desired decision about a home alarm/security/camera system. Or if one of them is better at interior decorating, defer to that person's decision. 

But it's still a joint decision to defer.

The Policy of Joint Agreement


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

EleGirl said:


> They work at it until they arrive at a compromise. If they BOTH cannot compromise some to arrive at an agreement there is a problem with the relationship.
> 
> Some couples seem to let (my mutual agreement) allow for one of them to have last say in a particular area, and the other in another area. For example if one person is an technology expert by training, their spouse might defer to their desired decision about a home alarm/security/camera system. Or if one of them is better at interior decorating, defer to that person's decision.
> 
> But it's still a joint decision to defer.
> 
> The Policy of Joint Agreement


Exactly. I can't think of a disagreement that can't be figured out between each other without one person having to put their foot down.


----------



## Blondilocks

Where you went wrong: planning for a nice dinner after a long day with 3 kids

Where you were right: ice cream right before dinner was stupid

Where you went wrong: saying anything about ice cream. You observed and could have said that you were bushed and wanted to just head home & put your feet up. Nothing you could do about the ice cream so may as well accept that the plan had been altered and create a new plan. For all you know, she didn't want to have to tolerate those kids any longer than she had to so sabotaged the dinner. 

You know kids are just as happy to have McD's as going to a nice sit-down restaurant and your wallet will thank you. Save the bucks for when they will appreciate it. Or, use the money for a sitter and take your wife to a nice restaurant where you can actually enjoy the experience. Leave the kids home once in awhile and date your wife.


----------



## Cynthia

knobcreek said:


> But I do understand that unilaterally making the decision to not go to a restaurant after literally just scarfing down ice cream upset her and that should be my focus. But I still can't get over not seeing that I'm right, I was right, the kids weren't hungry, they wouldn't have touched their food, it was already a 9-10 hour day with a 2 hour drive home. Spending $140 - $160 on a dinner out at that point was pointless, no one was hungry and everyone was fatigued.


I understand what you are saying. When my kids were little there is no way they could eat dinner after having ice cream. If you are planning to go to dinner and your wife feeds the kids ice cream while you go to the bathroom, she was probably trying to pick a fight.

However, I think you are confused about what the issue is here. It's not about who is right and who is wrong. It doesn't matter, especially if your wife was purposefully picking a fight. I think the better choice when she pulls this kind of thing is to ask her what she is thinking and let her talk. Clearly she has some sort of issue going on that she would do this, when it is obviously something that she knows as well as you do. Not letting it turn into an argument would be the best thing in the future. You have some say in whether or not you engage in an argument.

This whole situation is ridiculous and you are worried about who is right. You are both wrong, because the issue isn't about whether or not you should go to dinner when the kids are not going to eat it. The issue is about living in love and harmony with each other. That is the missing piece here. You have the ability to have a loving attitude and have your wife's back. That means being concerned about why she would pull a stunt like that and blame it on you. You are all defensive about this and that isn't what marriage or family is about. It's about loving each other and having each other's backs. No one seems to care about that. Instead you are engaging in an adversarial relationship, which is bad for the whole family.


----------



## Emerging Buddhist

CynthiaDe said:


> I understand what you are saying. When my kids were little there is no way they could eat dinner after having ice cream. If you are planning to go to dinner and your wife feeds the kids ice cream while you go to the bathroom, she was probably trying to pick a fight.
> 
> However, I think you are confused about what the issue is here. It's not about who is right and who is wrong. It doesn't matter, especially if your wife was purposefully picking a fight. I think the better choice when she pulls this kind of thing is to ask her what she is thinking and let her talk. Clearly she has some sort of issue going on that she would do this, when it is obviously something that she knows as well as you do. Not letting it turn into an argument would be the best thing in the future. *You have some say in whether or not you engage in an argument.*


You actually have all the say whether you engage or not... the one control in an argument you do have.



CynthiaDe said:


> This whole situation is ridiculous and you are worried about who is right. You are both wrong, because the issue isn't about whether or not you should go to dinner when the kids are not going to eat it. The issue is about living in love and harmony with each other. That is the missing piece here. You have the ability to have a loving attitude and have your wife's back. That means being concerned about why she would pull a stunt like that and blame it on you. You are all defensive about this and that isn't what marriage or family is about. It's about loving each other and having each other's backs. No one seems to care about that. *Instead you are engaging in an adversarial relationship, which is bad for the whole family.*


Most of the time our arguments are with our own ego's than with another... humility will turn skirmish lines into healthy boundaries that invoke trust... you'll be right every time even when you are wrong.

Your passion between you later does not always make up for the compassion lost between you earlier... you are still talking resentments today (you wouldn't be worried about who was right or wrong if this wasn't so) and in those you'll both ride that resentment like a roller coaster if you don't communicate far better and far earlier in the leading up to you both getting defensive and making it about the individual win... and as CynthiaDe said, not having another's backs, especially when needed after a long and tiring day.


----------



## LaReine

You could have handled it better but I agree that getting ice cream was silly.

I would have said "oh ice cream yum. Are we having dinner later or is this just a nice treat? Will we be hungry after this?"




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## UnicornCupcake

MrsHolland said:


> :surprise: far out $150 for sushi, please explain. Ok how much for the sushi and how much for the drinks? Here we have sushi a couple of times a week as it is super cheap, maybe $10 per person tops.


Omg. I'd be heaven, lol. We're int he GTA. All you can eat sushi is a craze here. It's about 28.99 pp and regular drink prices unless you choose one of their specialites which costs like $9/beer, lol. Between two people and a few drinks and tip it adds up quickly. There are cheaper order places, but the all-you-can eat is kind of expensive.


----------



## kag123

Where do you all eat sushi so cheaply? A sushi dinner will cost us around $100 here. That's about 4-5 rolls which we split between two of us plus one drink each. 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

kag123 said:


> Where do you all eat sushi so cheaply? A sushi dinner will cost us around $100 here. That's about 4-5 rolls which we split between two of us plus one drink each.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk


I know some cheap all you can eat Chinese buffets that include sushi. It's a sort of a Chinese Golden Corral! :grin2:


----------



## CharlieParker

UnicornCupcake said:


> We're int he GTA.


Katsura, the Japanese restaurant in the Westin Prince hotel is absolutely fabulous. I've literally flown in just to eat there. But it's not cheap.

I'd love to talk sushi, but to keep on topic. I'm going to the Saratoga with my wife (but no kids) this weekend, her first time. This thread is good reminder to pay attention to "end of long day" crankiness.


----------



## Livvie

CharlieParker said:


> UnicornCupcake said:
> 
> 
> 
> We're int he GTA.
> 
> 
> 
> Katsura, the Japanese restaurant in the Westin Prince hotel is absolutely fabulous. I've literally flown in just to eat there. But it's not cheap.
> 
> I'd love to talk sushi, but to keep on topic. I'm going to the Saratoga with my wife (but no kids) this weekend, her first time. This thread is good reminder to pay attention to "end of long day" crankiness.
Click to expand...

And to not get ice cream 5 minutes before dinner in an expensive restaurant!


----------



## knobcreek

kag123 said:


> Where do you all eat sushi so cheaply? A sushi dinner will cost us around $100 here. That's about 4-5 rolls which we split between two of us plus one drink each.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk


We have a lot of Japanese Hibachi/Sushi restaurants by me, they always offer lunch specials 2 rolls $9.00 3 rolls $11.00 with a miso soup. Good sushi too, maybe it's geographic but sushi isn't expensive where I'm from. You can find expensive sushi restaurants, but it's not necessarily better.


----------



## LaReine

knobcreek said:


> We have a lot of Japanese Hibachi/Sushi restaurants by me, they always offer lunch specials 2 rolls $9.00 3 rolls $11.00 with a miso soup. Good sushi too, maybe it's geographic but sushi isn't expensive where I'm from. You can find expensive sushi restaurants, but it's not necessarily better.




To me that's expensive. But my toddler would eat 2 and I have a 10 and 12 year old also!

It's 2 rolls for $6 here but we usually get bento boxes and share.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CharlieParker

Rainy, but a good day (only down $34, well under budget). I paid attention, lots of kids. Sorry, no ice cream selfie, but no stupid fights, so a win.


----------



## Evinrude58

I'd start a big argument and eat ice cream if I was gonna be forced to eat freaking sushi. Ugggh


----------

