I understand what you are saying and I don't entirely disagree with you. Allow me to submit, however, that just because "Mom's" needs changed doesn't mean that "Dad's" did or that his are somehow unimportant. Yeah, the kids come first. I get that. They should. I get that, too. But telling "Dad" to go take a cold shower and wait for 20 years doesn't seem entirely right to me either. I could be all the wrong in the world. The Wife to Whom I Am Married and I chose a childfree lifestyle. What do I know?

it's not so bad dj, and it's more like a few years of not-so-often rather than 20 years of not-at-all or rarely-ever...
we went from several times a week to a dozen times a month and it stayed that way until our third child started kindergarten...by then, i was well into my 30's, had secured a decent job, and was a happy person all around...i wasn't the high maintenance, not-so-sure 23-yr old the man married...this made everything we did together so much more enjoyable -- including sex...
we'd both matured and worked hard to make sure everyone got established...this came to help, not hinder our sex life because i for one could relax and enjoy my life...

it's all the better now with two on the way out and my youngest becoming a teenager...i'm very proud of the way the kids have turned out and we've more than earned our new found abundance of alone time...i wouldn't have had it any other way...
for those with small ones, good on you for keeping the kids near and dear...it's not true that they'll become spoiled by the time with you or any of that other nonsense...my kids are confident and sure of themselves, willing to take educated risks, and friendly, compassionate people...i know the foundation was built around the rituals of breastfeeding, the family bed, and plenty of holding...
trust me, it's true what someone said, "the days are long but the years are short"...take heart, and don't blink -- the child will be grown more quickly than you could ever imagine...

good article dawn...glad you shared...

Diana - how beautifully and openly put. I sort of see myself where you are now sometime down the road. I really do love my husband and want him to be happy, but I also know that my role as mother is essential and needs to be done right the first time around.

DJRadiohead, bless you and your wife for knowing what you want and sticking with it. Lots of people have kids and then forget the responsibility that goes with it and just end up resenting them. That doesn't help anyone.

I think the operative word here is "little" kids - the age of three seems to be when things get back to "normal"

"I think the operative word here is 'little' kids - the age of three seems to be when things get back to 'normal'"

you've got some angels you have...my life hasn't been the same (read: normal) since therese was born...she's moving to sunny san diego next month for college so i'll have to get back to you on that...

a sex life is a divine commodity in a home where one of the kids has never slept through the night...she may be related to phillip ;)

Why does this sound so familiar?:)

Dawn, Aaman left the bedroom when I gave birth to Aayan and that was three and a half years ago and now with Parita hogging the marital bed I dont see Aaman returning to 'my bedroom' for some time.

Infact when EO,EB,PW and Aaman created Desicritics- I told Aaman that this would be our third child and our chances of getting 'some' would be further reduced.

And I was right. Sex is now so low in our priorities that at one point I actually asked him if we were doomed to have a platonic relationship.

I dont resent my kids but sure miss the times when I had some 'me' time and took care of myself. Someone even called me self- absorbed for remembering my single carefree days but it got me thinking that if we women don't nuture our inner selves what kind of repurcussion would it have on our families?

After taking care of my babies without any support structure I realized that there had not been a moment when I had time to myself and now its all come to a head.

I'm worn out and feel ragged around the edges.

Its a lesson well learned. Kids grow up and lead their own lives and for that reason alone we should try not to put our marriages and oursleves on the back burner.

Its difficult to take the middle way but atleast we can try.

There's something to be said for the need for private spaces by men, as I have discovered. Also, sex is great when stolen,

As Ben Harper put it,

Now I love to feel that warm southern rain
Just to hear it fall is the sweetest sounding things
And to see it fall on your simple country dress
It's like heaven to me I must confess

'Cause I always have to steal my kisses from you

Always have to steal my kisses from you
Always have to steal my kisses from you
Always have to steal my kisses from you

Don't take this as a personal attack, but I'm really confused. While reading through the www.husbandonstrike.com website comments, some folks started accusing this guy of being a Registered Sex Offender. Benefit of the doubt...

With a little bit of research, you too can find out that the "Husband on Strike" looks just like a REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER in the state of Michigan (looks like him and has the exact same name, and address)! Can't hide from the facts, I guess, unless this is a hideous coincidence. Here's how... and it's free!

First, go to the Michigan Sex Offender registry, review the terms, and do a search on James Wilson (age around 30?).

Click on the photo to reveal his smiling face. Is it him?

Let's check out the WHOIS database for James now. Go to godaddy.com and click at the bottom to get to the Whois lookup. Type in husbandonstrike, verify, and bang! The address on the Sex Offender Registry perfectly matches the name on the Whois database. Hmm. Pardon me if this is a total coincidence... but if not, WHY ARE NUMEROUS MEDIA AND NEWS STATIONS GIVING AIR TIME TO AN IDIOT STRIKING ON HIS ROOF BECAUSE HE IS LACKING INTIMACY TIME (SEX), WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, HE IS A REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER?

Don't forget to google Offense: 750.520C
Description: CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT 2ND DEGREE (MULTIPLE VARIABLES)

Could somone please expose this fool, and stop the coverage and lighthearted banter about this idiot?

I feel sorry that the wife is married to such an idiot, with such blatant delusions of adequacy.

You may be right, unfortunately, the Whois information is now locked down, updated on March 30 at 15:39 EST

Interesting, deserves further research

hmm, I dont' feel so sorry for myself now

I can't imagine that the newsmedia didn't pick up on that this guy is a sex offender, and what on earth would compell him to draw that much attention to himself?

I would like to assume that this is a case of mistaken identity.

As for Aaman and Swingingpuss, I can totally relate. You guys need a vacation, sans kids!

Dawn, I think you put it quite well in saying that you know this needs to be done right the first time around. 'Cause we all know we only get one shot at good parenting. If we fail early, we fail completely. And we fail, not just our children, but society as a whole.

Diana, your daughter will always have a safe place to run to in San Diego if she needs it.

Good read Dawn!

I remember those days...Amber in between us all night long...reminds me of an old Galaghar skit...when he threw out the anchor with a diaper on it...we have a baby!


If he really is a child molestor wouldn't her wanna keep the kid in bed with him???

maybe i'm just foolish... maybe i'm just a horndog... but if i didn't get laid for 3 years, there would be some bodies piling up... whether they were corpses or hookers, i don't know. you leave a man alone for three years, you might not find a man there three years later.

i just don't know if a woman that could go without for 3 years (3 weeks, 3 days!) could ever keep me happy...

but if i didn't get laid for 3 years, there would be some bodies piling up

Seems like a great reason to file for divorce. Or you know... buy a crib. Whichever.

wouldn't it be easier just to spread the legs? cribs and divorces are expensive... sex is just fun... it doesn't take all that much time, especially if the ladies don't give it up all that often... what's half an hour? put the baby down, turn on the monitor and get to fuckin. my god. isn't everyone happier after a good fuck? i know i can be one angry asshole when i don't get laid.

half an hour? Does that include getting undressed?

oh, quiet now. snide. snide. i walk around naked with a condem on.

and oh yeah, i don't play in cathedrals. work that one out.

Not getting joint bed time != not having sex

do it in the kitchen! do it in the bathroom! go into the garage and hop in the backseat! just do it!

do it anywhere the kids are not. drop them off with a baby sitter once every couple of weeks! just get to rammin'!

my god... if a woman don't put out, or if a man don't put out... it doesn't make any sense...

who said anything about no sex for three years? The point was a reduced emphasis, that's all

And its the quality that matters not the quantity. In fact the quality was so good that one mistake and we conceived Parita (our second kid) ;)

I have no issue with the quality - it seems SP and I have something in common - receptive fertility :)

'receptive fertility' - it's our hard-working boys that did all the heavy lifting:)

Daddy'sdon't come first till after the kids a grown.You will be supprised how fast this time goes and you'll have plenty of time with Mommy unless you push to far now!

ha!
ha!

we'll have plenty of time with mommy's friends...

that sounds horrible.

it's all about balance.

Great piece! Here's to the parents (and to those who opt not to be).

i don't generally say things like this, but this was not a good piece. it was a strange piece... but, i am totally unconvinced by it. i think your sexlife is lacking and you want to put the blame on the baby and relax into your motherhood role, while your husband is steaming and fuming and frustrated and worried about you and him and if he'll ever get to stick it in again. he will say he is fine with things, because he is a good man, but, inside, all he wants right now is to reverse time, tie his tubes, and fuck like there are no children in the world.

if this is the reality of having kids, count me out... i don't want to say that... a healthy, full sex life is very important, and no kids are gonna ruin it for me and the woman.

I told my wife that i am going to have sex 3 times a week. She has first dibs. If your wife isn't giving it to you, you have every right to go somewhere else. By the way, you breast fed until the kid was 3 year old? what kind of bond were you trying to form?

zingzing you are...hmmm...how do I put this...an embarrassment to men.

No wait, make that an embarrassment to the human race.

What a complete and profound pile of ignorance that was your statement.

Stone Cold - um, the lasting kind. Clearly unlike what you have with your mommy.

Where did all these trolls come from?

that's not the answer either. ick. if you go outside of the marriage, you probably won't have any sex with your wife, who, let's face it, you married so that you could have sex with her all the time. and, if anything is good in the world, she married you so that she could fuck you as often as possible as well.

if you leave a man alone for too long, the sex you have isn't going to be that great... i.e... short...

frequent sex leads to longer, better sex and life.

Dawn:
When your children grow up to be insecure, blame yourself. Get your children out of the bed, if not for your husbands sake, then for the child's. Aside from the physical danger you are putting your child in by having him in a bed with two adults (ask your pediatrician what they think about that) you are putting a mental crutch on the child. Stop being so selfish.

oh jesus, dawn... i'm being a little silly with these comments, but i don't think you are being completely honest with your motivations. i think that sex is very, very important in a relationship.

i've had a relationship that floundered because the sex was... infrequent (and not all that great). it led to horrible fighting, that, even though we loved each other, we couldn't get through. there was fighting before the sex lessened, but we were always able to get through it, because our physical relationship was so strong.

a strong sexual relationship is very important to the overall relationship. i think you are treading dangerous waters if you belive otherwise. how many old couples do you see every day who have nothing left for each other, that stick around just because it is safe? how bored are they?

since we don't know each other, do you mind if i ask some questions? they are going to be personal, and i wonder if this is the place for them... you know what? i'm not an embarrasment to men or the human race. i just question your motivations... as in, is it just an excuse?

My kids rock, and my sex life rocks.

Nothing more needs to be said, ask Eric if you have any further questions. Let's not be so quick to assume things about other people, their sex lives and their children, and I won't be so quick to hand out the insults.

Your kids "rock", until somebody "rolls" over on them. Get it. Rock and Roll. I'm a comedic genius.

who is eric?

i guess that i need to clarify myself: i'm just saying that if i saw a significant drop-off in the quality of my sex life, i would be upset. in sex, deny it if you want, quantity is important. quality is important as well... but quantity matters for something.

i wouldn't want to say, yeah, i haven't had sex in ages... ages... but the last time i did, it was spectacular.

i would love to say that i could accept your reasoning, but, as an honest person, i know i could not. i would be upset to say the least. i think it would have a detrimental affect upon the relationship.

i am not attacking your choices. i am wondering how you justify them, beyond this "children come first" mantra.

Isn't that enough? Kids. Come. First.

And if your relationship is based on a near nonstop supply of high-quantity/high-quality sex, I would suggest trying some new interests with your partner. If it's purely a sexual thing, OK, but Dawn's talking about something more than a pair of lovers. She's talking about a marriage (whatever the genders of its participants this is about reality, not law), which is a whole different ball of steel, especially when children are involved.

The last phenomenal sex I had was about nine years ago; it was my swan song. I miss it. But given the choice between a meaningful relationship that includes regular rolls in the hay and doing what's best for my kids (doing without), I would have to choose the kids. It's called being responsible. Kids. Come. First.

how is it best for the kids? that's my question, i suppose. what does one have to do with the other? kids take up a lot of your time, i understand. but, they don't take all of it! do you go to work? do you have time to sit here and write these posts and comments?

what you are saying is not "kids come first," you are saying "kids are everything."

i just don't get it. help me to understand why you not having sex is the best thing for your children.

My situation is quite different from Dawn's. In general (in relationships where both partners are sexually attracted to each other) and it's the general situation that is germane, it isn't a question of either-or, it's about prioritizing. Kids. Come. First. Which means sometimes sex has to be backburnered. Which can be tough but is absolutely essential. And I bet if you ask the parents - the kid-focused and their sex-starved spouses - both, if looking at the large vista, likely will say that making the choice to put the kids first is for the best.

yes, but why?

you explain it like a mother would: because i say so. that doesn't tell me anything.

sure, your kids can come BEFORE your sex life. but it shouldn't be at the EXPENSE of your sex life. a less than sexually satisfied spouse is not good for the marriage or the kids (who kind of like the marriage to be strong... so it doesn't fall apart around them).

First and foremost, no one is saying that not having sex is the answer for any marriage. Clearly there is a problem if that is the case. The issue at hand here is the balance between raising small children and fucking like rabbits. Most good parents would rather error on the side of good parenting to the deficit of a overabundant sex life. Why? Well that's a big enormous DUH - because small children are very draining of one's time, energy and resources - that's assuming that you love them and I kind of feel like if you are going to bring them in the world, the least you can do is love them.

No one on this thread suggested you should give up sex forever because you now have children, they merely suggested that the natural progression of parenthood is that the formative years mean making lots of changes and sacrifices - and one of those is sex.

Like Swinging Puss said, quality over quantity tends to be emphasized in these early years.

Is that a good enough answer for you?

As to SC assertions that a child will get rolled over on, to that I say: you sir have never been around a new mother who takes her role (no pun intended) seriously.

I don't give five fat figs what the American Pediatric Assoc. says about co-sleeping. I have a king size bed and my son (or daughter) always knew that I was right there for them when they were too small to express their needs or too young to communicate.

I have extremely well-adjusted children who are exceptionally intelligent and full of charisma.

Obviously we are doing something right.

see? that's okay. no, you don't have to "fuck like rabbits" to have a good sex life. as long as both you and your spouse think that there is enough quantity and quality to your sexlife, i can find no fault. but if hubby is getting distressed, no matter whether or not you find it to be sufficient, you have a problem.

i think all of us can agree that both sex and children are important, and a balance (which both of you can agree on) is what you should strive for. obviously, your children's needs are you children's needs, and your needs will have to be sacrificed accordingly. but when the sacrificing of your needs creates problems, you need to find out a way to balance your children and your selves, or else you lose your marriage to the product of that marriage.

"First and foremost, no one is saying that not having sex is the answer for any marriage. Clearly there is a problem if that is the case."

Not necessarily. Sex isn't a priority for everyone and every marriage is different. Mine is more tolerable without than with, which means we are all better off in the long run.

"As to SC assertions that a child will get rolled over on, to that I say: you sir have never been around a new mother who takes her role (no pun intended) seriously."

Absolutely true! Yes, there have been stories of kids squashed in beds by negligent parents, but we're talking about responsible parents here. We had both babies in bed (they're seven years apart in age) with us when they were very small and they were perfectly safe and protected by whichever parent was with them.

zingzing, anyone who has been around BC long enough knows how strong the bond between Eric and Dawn is.

Sex is important and does get its due but my husband and I tend to do so many things together that sex is just another activity done together with a lot of enthusiasm and creativity as time is always of the essence.

Most of the times we land up giggling like kids and if a little one happens to wake up we feel like teens who have been put to a hold and it is rather nice to feel all pent up and rib each other over it.

BTW, my three year old did co-sleeping and so is my eighth month doing right now. My eldest has been sleeping in his own bed and in his own room for over a year now. He likes to sleep in pitch dark, doesnt like to be disturbed and wakes me up only when he is sick.

Co-sleeping makes a child secure. It makes a child feel that his parents are within arms reach and helps them develop good sleeping patterns.

And my sex life doesnt suffer as once the kids are in bed by nine, we have all the time to oursleves but it depends upon us how we spend our time together.

It is a win win situation for all - some women may say no to sex because they are either plain tired, the husband may not be helping around the house or there may be a drop in their hormone levels.

Good sex doesnt begin or end in bed...when we love our spouses through our daily actions sex merely reflects how good the marriage is.

very very well put SP, ND, and Dawn - thanks.

And there is no such thing as perfect: everyone wants attention, and they want it when they want it. Any division of attention within a group will always cause some friction. Little kids are only little kids once and for a relatively short period of time - it they aren't your priority, then you aren't a good parent.

I'm perfect...I'm a perfect...(insert insult here)

Dawn: "I don't give five fat figs what the American Pediatric Assoc. says about co-sleeping."

Those silly pediatricians and their "studies". What do they know about babies anyway? So what if they went to "college".

sp: "We had both babies in bed (they're seven years apart in age) with us when they were very small and they were perfectly safe and protected by whichever parent was with them."

My grandmother smoked for years and she didn't get cancer. Does that mean that smoking is safe?

BTW I have a two month old son who sleeps in his crib. We have a night vision camera, audio, and a motion sensor mat that detects each breath he takes and if no motion is detected for twenty seconds an alarm sounds. HIS safety comes first. Not my wife's selfish wants of having the baby with her.

Stop pretending that you are sleeping with your children for THEIR benefit. It is for your own. Make all the rationalizations you want.

Call me dense but I've not figured out if Eric is Dawn's husband or father. Since we're talking so
openly about her sex life - or lack thereof - I sincerely hope it's the former.

Hopefully the only time Dawn calls EO "daddy" is on those 'quality' moments she spoke of. :o)

Stop pretending that you are sleeping with your children for THEIR benefit. It is for your own.

Maybe people should just stop making sweeping judgments about how other people raise their children (assuming that there's no abuse involved). If sleeping with her very young children makes a woman feel more closely bonded with those children, they both no doubt benefit from that stronger bond and a happy mom.

If people don't want to co-sleep, because they want to maintain the quality of their sex lives then that's good too. Strong marriages are good for kids. Happy parents are good for kids. This choice probably also reduces the chances that he child will be smothered and that's good too.

And of course people are sometimes making decisions that benefit themselves and not their children. It might be because *gasp* parents are still people who still have needs and wants. Sometimes those needs are going to come first. If the benefits of a given decision to the parents far outweight the costs to the child, there's nothing wrong with that either. The world seems to be full of people who think they're the only ones who matter. Maybe if their parents had taught them as children that they were part of a family in which everyone had needs instead teaching them that they were the center of the universe they would have come out better.

Really, some people co-sleep, some people don't. Some people bottle feed, some people don't. Some people send their kids to daycare or high priced pre-schools, etc. Can't we all just admit that these are decisions that have to be made on an individual family basis instead of assuming that those who don't agree with us are selfish or stupid?

As for the case here or similar ones: a man who knew that his wife was the kind of woman who thinks you can put marriage on the back burner when the kids are young could have just refused to breed with her or marry her in the first place. Finding himself in the situation he's in now, he can make his needs known and leave her if he finds he still feels ignored and unloved. The wife, on the other hand, can decide whether preserving her relationship with her husband is worth putting the baby in a crib.

Really, the issue isn't complex at all. No man has a right to sex and no woman has a right to a husband. They'll either compromise, if the family relationship is worth it to them, or they won't.

Stone cold, to compare co-sleeping with cancer is plain stupid.

And you sure have gone overboard with all the electroic gizmos. Do you also take turns watching your kid sleep at night incase the electronics fail to work? Talk about paranoia.

Parents who drink, do recreational drugs or are on medication are the ones who should not do co-sleeping. Its a known fact. Even my daughter's Pediatrician did co-sleeping.

Its been over four years since I had more than a beer. Why? because I co-sleep with my daughter.

As far as the American Pediatrician Association is concerned they came under a lot heat for saying that infants should be put in cribs with pacifers.

Every doctor/breastfeeding parent knows that pacifiers cause nipple confusion ...so much for their know it all attitude.

Why not put the kid in a bassonette (sp?) next to the bed? Then the he would be close to the mom and still not get smothered or dry humped.

Babies beyond the age of four- to five months should not sleep in bassinets as they can sit up and fall out of the bassinets and the second statement is so obscene that I wont respond to it.

i will! that's gross! funny, but gross! anyone like "dead baby" jokes? i got a doozy...

A guy walks into a convenience store and walks up to the counter.
He tells the clerk,"I need some condoms for my twelve year old daughter."
The clerk asks "Your twelve year old daughter is sexually active?"
The man replies, "I wouldn't say she was active, she kind of lies there like her mother."

Tah Dah. The Aristocrats... get it?

i swear... SWEAR... that was not me.

Eric's a "bit" older than I am, but certainly not old enough to be my father. That would be like gross and stuff.

Only grotesquely irresponsible parents would be so drunk as to roll over on to their children and smother them.

And honestly, if you were that drunk, you probably shouldn't be a parent to begin with.

Pediatricians make broad sweeping generalizations about parenting to include the really, really, really, REALLY stupid asses who have no common sense. Which it would seem there are a suprising number of when reading some of the comments around here at times.

if you're drunk, you should be fuckin'. if you're not drunk, you should be a parent. sleeping with your children in the bed is optional.

Scott, I am not married to either of my daughters, so that should explain that

Glad to hear that, Eric.