[MyBrainIsBroken]

A slightly dissenting opinion here. My wife and I were young when we first married and it felt like she put her mother first and I was in second place. Then the children came along and I went to third place. Then the children grew up but my granddaughter came along and we raised her so my position didn't change. Then my MIL unfortunately passed away and I went to second place. And after my granddaughter went to live with her mother it was just my wife and I.

Note that this is just my perception, doesn't mean it was reality. Her's the dissenting opinion. I was ok with this. I know my MIL, children, and granddaughter were important to my wife, they were important to me as well. And I never felt neglected. And it was nice when it was finally just the two of us. We went to Disney World, just the two of us. We drove cross country from NY to the Northwestern coast, down to California, and back. We went out to dinner a lot and took a lot of short trips. We enjoyed life. And then MLC came along. And now you know who comes first, don't you? That's right, my wife. It's all about her now. Maybe it's her turn, who knows.

BTW, all of those years, she always came first for me, she was the center of my universe.

It would be interesting to hear others experiences.

[Songanddance]

Now look, I know how a mother is with her children, and I am not about to say she should choose her husband over them; I am not an ogre; but this is a large part of the issue and the main reason men feel neglected in the marriage! Once the kids come along, he is no longer relevant except to provide; in essence, he is the means that drives her primary goal; to have and raise HER children. And yes, that is the way she looks at it; they are HERS!

As soon as child #1 comes along, he is now #2. As soon as child #2 comes along, he is #3. and so on, and so on. He will never be #1 with her again; ever!

It's not so much that a woman should put priority over her kids; I would never say that. However, it also doesn't mean you completely dismiss your husband or treat him any less than what he was to begin with. Unfortunately, this is what happens, along with other undesirable events.

And then you have what always happens; he feels rejected and used as he as seen as simply an asset. Her attention and intimacy for him die off; he attempts to resolve the issue by whatever means but eventually just withdraws off to his Man Cave and the next thing you know there are two parallel paths and the marriage ends up just being a partnership of sorts.

This is what my MLCer said to me about our R although ironically I did put him first. In his denial phase he bought the cars, the boats - tried to sail across the Atlantic three times. I was behind and funded these purchases. I have never been a stay at home mum - always worked and whilst my H built up his business was the sole breadwinner for 5 years. 
It was when I read the articles about the validation that an OP gives to the MLCer that I realised A) this was true and B) this was his problem. I then read love languages and realised that we were poles apart in our levels of intimate communications.

Would this have made any difference if I had read love languages and kept him solely as #1?
Probably not as he is in MLC and believes that his whole life had been a lie. He claimed that he put me first at all times but so often I felt neglected in favour of the children/trips abroad/business. But to me that was what being a parent/wife was. We Galed together such a lot too!
I didn't realise that most people put their Rs on pause when children arrive and think that they can pick up where they left off once the children are grown.
What should be #1?  Not the spouse or the children or the wider family but the self. Then appropriate sharing of self to the spouse and children is the way forward. 

[Braveheart]

I think it just boils down to unrealistic expectations and maturity. I was fully aware that the kids would come first for both of us when they were younger and never resented that fact. One can't carry on like newlyweds when there's babies to be fed and diapers to change, even if the husband pitches in big time.

I think the problem starts with some women being of the "Now" and men being of the "Future". As a man I simply looked at it as "This too will pass", all the work having kids entailed was temporary and as they grew older more time would free up for us. I could see a future, all my X could see was how she felt right now.

[Slow Fade]

I think it just boils down to unrealistic expectations and maturity. I was fully aware that the kids would come first for both of us when they were younger and never resented that fact. One can't carry on like newlyweds when there's babies to be fed and diapers to change, even if the husband pitches in big time.

I think the problem starts with some women being of the "Now" and men being of the "Future". As a man I simply looked at it as "This too will pass", all the work having kids entailed was temporary and as they grew older more time would free up for us. I could see a future, all my X could see was how she felt right now.

My H never understood this. He was the odd man who only thought of "Now" and never saw or planned for or could wait for "Future". He didn't want to wait.

[Thunder]

I don't think it really matters when this crisis hits.  I always put my H first but when he hit the fog he must have mixed me up with some other woman who never loved him. 

I guess I feel you have to be first to each other, which doesn't mean ignoring your kids.  Obviously they take time and energy but you can't neglect your spouse.

I knew all this, learned it from my wonderful parents (we knew who came first with them) but it didn't make a lick of difference.

[Braveheart]

I think when a lot people get married, they don't seem to get the memo, there is no longer a "Me" or "You", it's now "Us"... The whole damn service is full of "Yoked, Joined and Cleave"

[Mitzpah]

Mad Hatter said

As soon as child #1 comes along, he is now #2. As soon as child #2 comes along, he is #3. and so on, and so on. He will never be #1 with her again; ever!

In our marriage it was quite to the contrary! I put off having kids until we had been married for eight years, we were both 30 by then, because I was terrified of becoming number two, three or four...
I remember long talks we had back then in which I expressed this fear and he assured me that it would not be so.

Like MBIB, I was so looking forward to this period in our lives when we would be free of parenting responsibilities and little easier financially to be able to travel and spend time together as a couple without the kids hanging on.

Interestingly, my h. clings to the kids and is in constant contact with them, admittedly much more as a 'mate' and 'rich' uncle than a father, but then that could be just my perception because the kids don't complain. On the other hand he has not been in direct contact with me for over two months now. He even sends the OW to bring the kids home!

He has told me that I stopped him from having a close relationship with his children (he also told them the same thing) and that he has a much better relationship with them now than before.

However, he doesn't have them live with him and he limits his spending with them to pocket money/mobile phone  and pays our electricity and water bills. I have to pay/do all the rest - full health insurance for myself and kids, food, house taxes,cabletv and internet, house maintenance (the house is falling to bits), pool chemicals and upkeep, maid (because I have to work FT), laundry, half of d20's rent at student apt, birthdays (separate presents and festivities). I am the parent that is here and faces the everyday wear and tear.

So, he has it all, right? - a new family (OW has two younger kids), his adoring kids whenever he wants and less expenses...

I guess my case is a little different than most.

[elray]

Guy question

Given all of the following hold true for you (and I believe some with religious views would be excluded)

(1). Our sex life died on around BD
(2). we are emotionally healing and not necessarily ready to take
On a new relationship
(3) Standing means emotionally holding out for our spouse putting a new r at high risk of getting hurt
(4) Our partners broke the vows of marriage
(5). We are men not monks

Why not purchase an escort?

 It's widely available, and not prohibitively expensive.

 Has anyone put a good deal of thought into this?  It seems morally defensible, may help extend a man's stand, and much better emotional solution than getting  entangled with dating.  Yet it seems we frequently support and understand LBSers dating but strongly frown on this option.  Is that really consistent?

[MeNow]

I suppose the advantage would be no one gets hurt while fulfilling a base need. But still not fulfilling.

What does it for me is knowing I'm it for her. The intimacy of a kiss, looking into her eyes and seeing that sparkly love glow, the gentleness of a loving caress, of pressing closer and closer to one another until we're practically one. Seeing her turned on turns me on. I want the real thing.

[Dji76]

Gotta agree w MeNow on the escort issue. No gamesmanship in handing over cash for the goods. I will agree it's probabaly a better bang for the buck though!! Haha sorry, couldn't resist. In all seriousness I enjoy gettin to know a woman and what turns her on. Can't force (or pay for) real desire.