Cimarron29414

People choose to live solely for their children. This is a relatively new concept, and it creates rotten children. My wife and I do not live for our child. Our marriage is first. Date night still exists and the child gets good grandparent time.

I can't think of a single "valuable" freedom that I have given up. I think you just realize how trivial the things you valued were.

There will be absolutely no deterioration of the relationship with your wife. She will never be prettier, sexier, or more desirable than as the mother of your child. She'll smile more, laugh more, and be less grumpy. So will you.

To be honest, you will be more tired which usually means less wild sex. However, that's what lunch at home is for - nooners while the kid is at daycare/grandma's.



For the record: It is okay not to have children. It's not a club. It is as big a commitment as you think it is. While I don't agree with Plan9 in attitude, I do agree that there are people who simply believe that having children is step 4 which has to follow step 3. Generally, those are the people who create rotten kids.

Think of the billions of knuckleheads before you that raised perfectly delightful human beings. You aren't any different than them. In most ways you are better because you are entering this phase with forethought rather than "Oops, the condom broke."

---------- Post added at 05:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:59 PM ----------

...with that cool Tom Selleck mustache waving in the wind as your 328 whips around the blind corners...you keep clingin' to that dream, man.

It's a shame, Plan9, because you'd probably be the coolest fucking dad EVER! Who else would have their kids tac'd out at 6 years old? Who else could have kids that could rightfully call Nugent's kids pussies?!?!

__________________
Gives a man a halo, does mead.

"Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."