have you tried talking to him about it?

Not exactly. I think you would have to give more information on the background of you current situation before anyone can answer fully.

However, here is my thoughts. You got to remember that us guys are nothing more then cave men that haven't evolved much....yep...I said it.

Way back in the days when we would have to hunt for our food, men traditionally, would form hunting parties to better their chances for prey.

My thought here is that the harley celebration is nothing more that the old time hunting party....your husband my be acting on something that has been installed in him over a million years ago.

I wouldn't be upset that you haven't been invited...again, Cave women weren't typically invited into the hunting groups ether...

I guess what I'm saying here is that you may be able to domesticate the family dog...but he's still a dog...right?

UM...except for the fact that there are PLENTY of other Harley ladies at these shindigs......if you are so short on money how is he so selfishly spending the money?? And why then, take a trip that is gonna cost so much?? I'd be upset to.

Ya...I agree..and that's going to be the hard part...what about the other women? But, I think that's a conversation that might be a whole different thread about trust.

I think the "we're short on money" was a wussy excuse given to ease HIS (not hers) situation.

In this case...he's got two choices....either tell his wife that she is simply not invited...and possibly make her angry (that's a bad thing in guy land) or come up with an excuses as to why she can't come along..possibly something that is out of his control.

Sounds like he went with the second (and I dare to say, less manly) option. I hate to go against my own gender here...but we are excellent lairs. In this case...it backfired.

Again, he can possibly escape getting her angry when he gives an excuses that is out of his realm of his control. "I'm sorry honey...but there is nothing I can do...it's out of my hands...."

What a lot of women don't understand is that men (most of us) can be fearless at times....however, nothing scares us more that having our wife angry at us....that is the worst thing in the world.

I don't think this is exactly a money issue here...I think it is a matter of her husband that is too chicken to tell his wife of what his needs are....

deadlast, you bring up some very good points...however..I for one that am of the believe that - - if there is enough money and time for him to go by himself, he needs to include his wife. I would feel alienated.

IF I had an SO and he were to simply "not" invite me to something more than once and I HAD told him how much it bothered me the other times..I would expect, out of respect, to be included.

There are variables to this...as we all know...he's going for a 'guys night out' sorta thing...GO have fun...it goes both ways...

Yup, i would be mad. I think you sit down with him and tell him exactly how you feel about it. Good luck!

If he couldn't take me, he DAMN sure wouldn't be going. You need to put on your shit kickers and stomp a mudhole in his ass! Don't put up with that crap honey!

So that brings up a confusing question for me, and that's why I'm with this group.

Where do you draw the line?

In order to have a healthy relationship, must couples do everything together? Must my SO like everything that I'm in to?

The thing that gets me most about us humans is, we are so quick to take freedoms away from others and then cry that we don't have enough freedom ourselves.

Can you imagine if your SO came to you and said "you can no longer go shopping unless I am with you?" Would you put up with that?

What picture do you get when you put yourself in that situation? Can you imagine dragging your SO with because he demanded it and then watch him "Huff and Puff" because you are taking too long?

Um, no thank you.

What I'm getting at here, is sometimes it might be OK not to invite your love one into something you are doing. There are sometimes it is better to do things alone.

Now, notice the word sometimes here. I think that if the sometimes becomes all the time, then it would be OK to be upset.

the thing is... he went to one of these things before and did something bad, thats all i can think about, we made the agreement that he would never go to one of those "events" again without me, he says he thought i was "over" it, i said you never aploigized for hurting me! He said i said i was sorry, i said you said you wer sorry for doing it, not hurting me! ok, im embarrassed for him, he took pics of a womens privates at a bar, i found the the pictures, much later, i was devasted. Also, i think its that i feel like he enjoys doing things without me.

It's only my opinion but I don't think it's proper. I know I wouldn't enjoy the trip anyway if I left my wife behind and especially if there was a shortage of money. I feel bad for you, and I'm sure ths isn't helping your situation.

So it is a trust issue.

OK, this is coming from a guy that prides himself as a jerk. So, it might be a little diffrent point of view.

Would I be mad that my S O is going to an "event" without me? No.

Would I be upset if a saw photos that my S O took that involved nudity? Well, it depends on the photos. If it was a "one on one", yes. However, if it was just a random, just passing by and took the photo, No.

However, where I would get pisses at, is the fact that your husband is acting like a weniee. Ya, I said it.

Look, what happens while I am away, should stay away. I would never be as stupid as to bring something home, like photos, for anyone to find. On top of that, I wouldn't have weniee excuses as to why I have them or for what I do. More importantly, I would not blame my actions on anyone other than myself.

Does he think you are stupid?

I real man in this situation would stand up and tell you excatly what is going on, if you like it or not.

He would stand up and say, "I'm a man, this is what I do." Of course, it will cause friction, however, that's how it works. I state what I need and you state what you need and we meet somewhere in the middle.

However, once you start with the weeine excuses (we don't have enough money for you to go, I thougt YOU were OK with it, It's not my fault, I couldn't help it) then you just deleted yourself out of the manhood classification.

Just my twisted view on things, take it or leave it.

dead last, he didnt say it wasnt his fault, he admitted he did wrong.
Iam a nice christian lady and am very offended by ANY pornography, espec, when my hubby is taking the pic.
We ARe short on money, he shouldnt be going, and I beleive that when you agree to something(which he did, said he wouldnt go again, without me) that you should stand by your word.

This "something bad" that he did--did it involve physical contact with another woman? Or just posing by a woman who happened to be topless? Either way, yeah, if it hurt you, he shouldn't be doing it again.

I don't know the whole situation, I don't know how much pressure he's under at home (with you), I don't know any of this. Maybe if you're a "good Christian girl", maybe he feels he needs some fun to get himself out of the mold of being a loving husband and father, maybe he feels you're too prudish to enjoy yourself at these events, which would kill his fun, I really don't know. But, yeah, if he gave his word and then broke it, I'd be mad.

koolman
it wasnt the top half he took a picture of and iam not prudish, i go on the harley all the time w him.He doesnt drink or party.

I think it is unreasonable to think that just because you are married, you will do EVERYTHING together. Sometimes people need space.

That being said, if he's always taking space away from you, he is always the one who gets to go golfing or on trips and you never get to either go with him or go somewhere on your own that is unfair. If you two are "short on money," then he should be belping you save it and stay at home! I would me mad too.

And as far as the caveman analogy, I went to school origionally as a history major- back in hunter-gather days, both men and women hunted and gathered. Especially in the beginning before tools and weapons were more advanced, they relied heavily on the gathering and less on the hunting- as one of the most effective ways of getting meat was by trapping- something very difficult to do. In remains that have been studied from those times, there is very little meat found in their stomach contents. There has been absolutely no historical evidance to suggest that men participated in the hunting part moreso than women, except for maybe while the women were pregnant. To assume otherwise is just not factual.