4 ms·
This article is long and makes me want to throw something at Lori Gottlieb. Not that I'm advocating violence or would commit it... it's just written in that sor
by elptacek 17y ago
This article is long and makes me want to throw something at Lori Gottlieb. Not that I'm advocating violence or would commit it... it's just written in that sort of smug, grating style that makes me browse away after the first 10 paragraphs. All she has done is rebranded the concept of "compromise" (important in all sorts of relationships) as "settling." Nothing new or fascinating, there.
The deconstruction is hilarious. Thanks for posting it. I read all of it.
The civil contract idea is intriguing and creepy at the same time. Part of me thinks, "...or just don't get married in the first place?" That the government is involved with what is, effectively, a religious sacrament, boggles me a little. But that's a whole 'nother discussion.
After 11.5 years (and yes, that .5 is important), I'm starting to feel like a veteran on marriage. Like Gottlieb, my perspective on what 'Mr Right' is has changed significantly. To wit, if I had advice to give to young women, it wouldn't be to "settle," but to find someone young, intelligent and not too hard to look at and train him.* By way of example, tptacek is currently in the kitchen making a chicken caesar salad.
* What this really means: grow together. It's difficult, but better than turning 40 and "settling."
- thegoleffect 17y agoYeah, when I read the article it sounded like this passive mindset. Why leave it to chance when you can train someone hehe! That, to me, is the right attitude.
- btilly 17y agoWhat's the saying? Men marry women expecting that they won't change and they do. Women marry men expecting that they will change and they don't. Yes, some men are trainable. But you had better verify that he's sufficiently trainable for your needs before marrying him.
- elptacek 17y agoThis sounds like a great self-help book. Think it'd get me on Oprah?
- btilly 17y agoI think your advice for young women is good. That is what my wife did 20 years ago. Of course as a result she has to put up with me. While I claim this is a good outcome, it is hardly a perfect one... However as a married atheist I have to point out that marriage is a legal and social construct and not strictly a religious one. I have no trouble pointing to past societies where it was very religious, and ones where it was not religious at all. In short marriage has meaning, and it has meaning for non-religious people as well. In fact, the divorce rate among atheists is lower than the general public. So one could make a case that marriage matters more to atheists than to the general public!
- elptacek 17y agoWhen I said religious, I didn't mean one of any organized religion that begins with a capital letter. I meant it in the sense of social construct. By my definition, atheism is a belief construct and falls into the subcategory under philosophy as a 'religion.' This is a pretty unpopular assertion, so I don't make it often, but it helps for clarification. To wit, legal constructs should be as abstracted from a single belief system as functionally possible, since beliefs vary so widely from one individual to the next. And because any legal system based on ideology is fraught with bugs. The description of a ship with no captain, in Plato's Republic, describes this in a way that is still disturbingly applicable to our modern political and social dynamic. A more simple way of putting it would be, "if you believe marriage has meaning, then it has meaning." True for anything, right? Now if we could only agree on what is meaningful, and what is not...