7 ms·

It sounds positively abominable. Why anyone would enjoy such a life continues to elude me.

spiderfarmer 10y ago
I'm in my tenth year of marriage with 3 kids and I can honestly say I'm much happier then when I was in my luxury appartment, living the happy single high life. It doesn't happen overnight you know.
- exclusiv 10y ago
  You're missing the parent's point. It's not about whether you are married with kids vs a bachelor; it's about having a healthy relationship as husband and wife (with or without kids). The author does not have a healthy husband/wife relationship to me. Based on what she wrote - it's all about her and her husband is along for the ride. > But my husband doesn’t yell WHAT THE HELL? at me like he should.... He acts like he doesn’t even notice that I should be locked away forever and ever in some bad, drafty place that serves only American cheese. She knows she's not doing a lot of things she should as a wife, but then she writes about how she appreciates how he falls in line. It sounds like he's a way better husband than she is a wife. That's not healthy and might not be sustainable. > You and your spouse are slogging through the slop of survival together. And it’s romantic. Mark my words. That's a fairy tale rationalization.
  - jacobolus 10y ago
    Wait, what? You can determine that this woman is a bad wife on the basis that she spends a few minutes talking to her dogs when she first gets home? Give me a fucking break. * * * Edit: Calling herself mentally unstable and suggesting that her partner should chastise her and that she deserves to be locked in American cheese hell for being a dog lover is obviously a joke. As for running sick to the bathroom, passing out, cracking her ribs on the bathtub on the way down, and spewing bloody diarrhea all over the floor... that doesn’t make her a bad spouse, only a sick one. I’m sure her husband was far more concerned about her health and safety than he was about cleaning up shit, and I’m sure she would do the same for him.
    - exclusiv 10y ago
      I didn't say she was a bad wife; just that he sounds like he is a better partner. > That’s when I notice my husband. He missed Mommy, too. But my husband doesn’t yell WHAT THE HELL? at me like he should. He doesn’t smirk. He doesn’t roll his eyes. I am clearly unstable, but he makes no sounds to this effect. Instead, he hugs me and smiles and says, “How was your day, baby?” He acts like he doesn’t even notice that I should be locked away forever and ever in some bad, drafty place that serves only American cheese. > My husband was not happy about this scene. But he handled it without complaint. Did you read the article?
      - rosser 10y ago
        The husband is the "better partner" because he indulges his wife's idiosyncratic way of greeting the dogs? And why shouldn't he be unhappy about finding his wife passed out, with cracked ribs? Should he be complaining at her for having been sick and fallen? Because, as far as I can tell, you seem to think she did that just to inconvenience her poor, long-suffering, hen-pecked husband. It's life, dude. Shit — sometimes literally — happens. Keeping score over that kind of thing is a pretty much guaranteed ticket to misery, IMO.
        exclusiv 10y ago
        She wrote an article about "What Romance Really Means After 10 Years of Marriage" and not once did she mention one thing she did for her husband. Unless I'm off, she didn't say "But my husband doesn’t yell WHAT THE HELL? at me like he should" because she thought that's an normal response to her dog greetings; but rather because she knows he's chop liver with regard to attention.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        mverwijs 10y ago
        I agree with omission of "what she did for her husband". But aside from that, as my ten years are coming up, with two kids, I found the article spot on. Life is a mess. Find someone that is willing to handle the mess with you. I believe that people reading this article /before/ getting married and having kids, and agreeing with each other that they see the world in likewise fashion, will end up staying together in a solid and constructive relationship. Having the " traditional" view of romance that Hollywood portrays is more likely to end up in divorce.
  - nl 10y ago
    She's explaining what romance is after ten years from her perspective. She can't say what her husband finds is romantic because she isn't her husband. She knows she's not doing a lot of things she should as a wife, but then she writes about how she appreciates how he falls in line. Exactly. Isn't it interesting that the things she could do better are minor things like greeting her husband before her dogs, and he indulges these foibles. Perhaps he has no foibles she has to indulge. Or perhaps she is wise enough not to air them in a public forum? It sounds like he's a way better husband than she is a wife. It sounds to me like she appreciates her husband a lot.
    - tonyedgecombe 10y ago
      I'd love to read his perspective on the relationship as well. Personally the dog thing would drive me bananas.
      - pluma 10y ago
        It depends on your own personality, really. There's a difference between a habit in your spouse you might find annoying sometimes and a habit that will prevent you from sharing a happy relationship.
    - exclusiv 10y ago
      It's definitely just from her perspective but that's not how it's written. The title doesn't say that. She says "mark my words" later. She notes that she's an advice columnist. Also... > But once you’ve been married for a long time (my tenth anniversary is in a few months!), a whole new kind of romance takes over. So I disagree; she's not just telling her story. She's trying to tell a narrative that this is how it is and that it's romantic. That being in the slog and not investing personal time in the husband/wife relationship is romantic. Everything she described could occur between two good friends. She writes nothing about how a wife might do her part to keep the romance going. She just describes how her husband keeps her version of romance going. There are two sides to everything. Just recently I was out with a bunch of guys that have been married 15+ years, all with kids. 5/6 of them basically complained about not being appreciated (gratitude/attention/sexually) and being unhappy. Their wives are completely consumed by kids and they're not putting enough time and attention into the husband/wife relationship. It's sad. Just because you hit 10 years doesn't mean it's going to be sustainable for both parties. You don't just fall in line with the slog, esp. with kids and call it romantic. It takes hard work and great communication for the husband and wife to have a healthy, romantic marriage. Sometimes you have to say your needs/expecations aren't being met and you want to find a way to meet them despite the slog of everyday life. I'll agree with the author that women see romance differently than men; that's precisely my point. I have a problem with the author pushing advice about keeping the romance alive in marriages that doesn't consider both parties. Both parties either have to see eye to eye on their definitions or understand the other side's perspective. I know that if I do extra chores around the house, my wife will get turned on and we'll both reap the benefits. If I see her doing chores, that doesn't turn me on. That's how we're wired. But let's not pretend like both sides see it the same way. Men - pitch in more on tasks, be a better team player and indulge the mundane with your partner to be more romantic. I agree with the author here. Men can do more here. Women - author doesn't talk about this at all. Basically it's still the more Hollywood romance stuff. Most men are not going to see romance as the slog she describes. That's an illusion.
abakker 10y ago
That's good, though. Other people enjoy it, you don't. There's nobody forcing you and yet you still try to understand it. Maybe one day you will. Personally, it's not all the way it's cut out in this article, but the article hits on some of the key points. If you play your cards right, there's still romance of the traditional kind too, but it takes planning, surprises, and commitment to pull it off.
- manmal 10y ago
  The article's author does sound resignated though. It seems she does not expect any (whatsoever) disruptive things to happen until death. I could not live with that feeling. I do have 2 kids and will marry soon (living together for >10 years now), so I can believe that one could dissolve herself completely in family life and what she calls romance. I just could not bear the thought of "this is all". For me, family is where I thrive and relax and love, but it can't be the answer to all questions, can't be the self-serving means to an end.
solipsism 10y ago
consulting and development services for WordPress ~shudders~ Good thing we can each do our own thing.
- oceanofsolaris 10y ago
  While you may or may not agree with his opinion or the way he worded it, a personal attack on him is really unwarranted (besides, I don't even get what's that bad about his job description?!). I think we can all agree that it is nicer to have an atmosphere where you can share your opinion without your work being attacked by strangers.
  - rosser 10y ago
    The top comment in this thread made as much a dismissal and attack of the lifestyle described in the fine article, as your comment's parent was on the platform the top comment's author makes a living supporting. That is, it is equally legitimate — or illegitimate — for someone to call another person's lifestyle "positively abominable" as it is for a third person to be all, "Eww, WordPress," at the first. In fact, I'm pretty sure highlighting that fact was the point of that comment.
    - RodericDay 10y ago
      It's very interesting how people apply very different standards for the in-group and the out-group. A Hackernewser making fun of a blog writer is fine, but a hackernewser making fun of another hackernewser is extremely impolite. I fully agree that that was the point of that comment.
apatters 10y ago
Interesting! It only took an hour for this criticism of a column which happened to be written by a woman to produce an accusation of misogyny as well as another ad hominem. I didn't think there was much of a gender component here, and there certainly isn't anything related to platform or framework zealotry, so IMO those comments say more about their authors than they do about me or the article. If a man had written this article it would have been no more or less awful. Had this been a same sex couple, still awful. It amounts to a defense of spousal neglect and how, apparently, the fact that your spouse puts up with your negligence is what makes marriage so great. We of course don't get to hear from the spouse about their take on this. Every couple is entitled to carry out their marriage however they like. I'm simply expressing my opinion that the "I've thrown in the towel on romance, sex, and treating my partner well" approach isn't for me.
- skrebbel 10y ago
  > It only took an hour for this criticism of a column which happened to be written by a woman to produce an accusation of misogyny as well as another ad hominem. Please reply to the comment you write about. You're climbing on a moral high horse that is invisible to the rest of us. In fact, I read through the entire subthread and can't find anyone accusing you of misogyny.

I'm in my tenth year of marriage with 3 kids and I can honestly say I'm much happier then when I was in my luxury appartment, living the happy single high life. It doesn't happen overnight you know.

exclusiv 10y ago
You're missing the parent's point. It's not about whether you are married with kids vs a bachelor; it's about having a healthy relationship as husband and wife (with or without kids). The author does not have a healthy husband/wife relationship to me. Based on what she wrote - it's all about her and her husband is along for the ride. > But my husband doesn’t yell WHAT THE HELL? at me like he should.... He acts like he doesn’t even notice that I should be locked away forever and ever in some bad, drafty place that serves only American cheese. She knows she's not doing a lot of things she should as a wife, but then she writes about how she appreciates how he falls in line. It sounds like he's a way better husband than she is a wife. That's not healthy and might not be sustainable. > You and your spouse are slogging through the slop of survival together. And it’s romantic. Mark my words. That's a fairy tale rationalization.
- jacobolus 10y ago
  Wait, what? You can determine that this woman is a bad wife on the basis that she spends a few minutes talking to her dogs when she first gets home? Give me a fucking break. * * * Edit: Calling herself mentally unstable and suggesting that her partner should chastise her and that she deserves to be locked in American cheese hell for being a dog lover is obviously a joke. As for running sick to the bathroom, passing out, cracking her ribs on the bathtub on the way down, and spewing bloody diarrhea all over the floor... that doesn’t make her a bad spouse, only a sick one. I’m sure her husband was far more concerned about her health and safety than he was about cleaning up shit, and I’m sure she would do the same for him.
  - exclusiv 10y ago
    I didn't say she was a bad wife; just that he sounds like he is a better partner. > That’s when I notice my husband. He missed Mommy, too. But my husband doesn’t yell WHAT THE HELL? at me like he should. He doesn’t smirk. He doesn’t roll his eyes. I am clearly unstable, but he makes no sounds to this effect. Instead, he hugs me and smiles and says, “How was your day, baby?” He acts like he doesn’t even notice that I should be locked away forever and ever in some bad, drafty place that serves only American cheese. > My husband was not happy about this scene. But he handled it without complaint. Did you read the article?
    - rosser 10y ago
      The husband is the "better partner" because he indulges his wife's idiosyncratic way of greeting the dogs? And why shouldn't he be unhappy about finding his wife passed out, with cracked ribs? Should he be complaining at her for having been sick and fallen? Because, as far as I can tell, you seem to think she did that just to inconvenience her poor, long-suffering, hen-pecked husband. It's life, dude. Shit — sometimes literally — happens. Keeping score over that kind of thing is a pretty much guaranteed ticket to misery, IMO.
      - exclusiv 10y ago
        She wrote an article about "What Romance Really Means After 10 Years of Marriage" and not once did she mention one thing she did for her husband. Unless I'm off, she didn't say "But my husband doesn’t yell WHAT THE HELL? at me like he should" because she thought that's an normal response to her dog greetings; but rather because she knows he's chop liver with regard to attention.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        mverwijs 10y ago
        I agree with omission of "what she did for her husband". But aside from that, as my ten years are coming up, with two kids, I found the article spot on. Life is a mess. Find someone that is willing to handle the mess with you. I believe that people reading this article /before/ getting married and having kids, and agreeing with each other that they see the world in likewise fashion, will end up staying together in a solid and constructive relationship. Having the " traditional" view of romance that Hollywood portrays is more likely to end up in divorce.
- nl 10y ago
  She's explaining what romance is after ten years from her perspective. She can't say what her husband finds is romantic because she isn't her husband. She knows she's not doing a lot of things she should as a wife, but then she writes about how she appreciates how he falls in line. Exactly. Isn't it interesting that the things she could do better are minor things like greeting her husband before her dogs, and he indulges these foibles. Perhaps he has no foibles she has to indulge. Or perhaps she is wise enough not to air them in a public forum? It sounds like he's a way better husband than she is a wife. It sounds to me like she appreciates her husband a lot.
  - tonyedgecombe 10y ago
    I'd love to read his perspective on the relationship as well. Personally the dog thing would drive me bananas.
    - pluma 10y ago
      It depends on your own personality, really. There's a difference between a habit in your spouse you might find annoying sometimes and a habit that will prevent you from sharing a happy relationship.
  - exclusiv 10y ago
    It's definitely just from her perspective but that's not how it's written. The title doesn't say that. She says "mark my words" later. She notes that she's an advice columnist. Also... > But once you’ve been married for a long time (my tenth anniversary is in a few months!), a whole new kind of romance takes over. So I disagree; she's not just telling her story. She's trying to tell a narrative that this is how it is and that it's romantic. That being in the slog and not investing personal time in the husband/wife relationship is romantic. Everything she described could occur between two good friends. She writes nothing about how a wife might do her part to keep the romance going. She just describes how her husband keeps her version of romance going. There are two sides to everything. Just recently I was out with a bunch of guys that have been married 15+ years, all with kids. 5/6 of them basically complained about not being appreciated (gratitude/attention/sexually) and being unhappy. Their wives are completely consumed by kids and they're not putting enough time and attention into the husband/wife relationship. It's sad. Just because you hit 10 years doesn't mean it's going to be sustainable for both parties. You don't just fall in line with the slog, esp. with kids and call it romantic. It takes hard work and great communication for the husband and wife to have a healthy, romantic marriage. Sometimes you have to say your needs/expecations aren't being met and you want to find a way to meet them despite the slog of everyday life. I'll agree with the author that women see romance differently than men; that's precisely my point. I have a problem with the author pushing advice about keeping the romance alive in marriages that doesn't consider both parties. Both parties either have to see eye to eye on their definitions or understand the other side's perspective. I know that if I do extra chores around the house, my wife will get turned on and we'll both reap the benefits. If I see her doing chores, that doesn't turn me on. That's how we're wired. But let's not pretend like both sides see it the same way. Men - pitch in more on tasks, be a better team player and indulge the mundane with your partner to be more romantic. I agree with the author here. Men can do more here. Women - author doesn't talk about this at all. Basically it's still the more Hollywood romance stuff. Most men are not going to see romance as the slog she describes. That's an illusion.

abakker 10y ago

That's good, though. Other people enjoy it, you don't. There's nobody forcing you and yet you still try to understand it. Maybe one day you will. Personally, it's not all the way it's cut out in this article, but the article hits on some of the key points. If you play your cards right, there's still romance of the traditional kind too, but it takes planning, surprises, and commitment to pull it off.

manmal 10y ago
The article's author does sound resignated though. It seems she does not expect any (whatsoever) disruptive things to happen until death. I could not live with that feeling. I do have 2 kids and will marry soon (living together for >10 years now), so I can believe that one could dissolve herself completely in family life and what she calls romance. I just could not bear the thought of "this is all". For me, family is where I thrive and relax and love, but it can't be the answer to all questions, can't be the self-serving means to an end.

solipsism 10y ago

consulting and development services for WordPress ~shudders~ Good thing we can each do our own thing.

oceanofsolaris 10y ago
While you may or may not agree with his opinion or the way he worded it, a personal attack on him is really unwarranted (besides, I don't even get what's that bad about his job description?!). I think we can all agree that it is nicer to have an atmosphere where you can share your opinion without your work being attacked by strangers.
- rosser 10y ago
  The top comment in this thread made as much a dismissal and attack of the lifestyle described in the fine article, as your comment's parent was on the platform the top comment's author makes a living supporting. That is, it is equally legitimate — or illegitimate — for someone to call another person's lifestyle "positively abominable" as it is for a third person to be all, "Eww, WordPress," at the first. In fact, I'm pretty sure highlighting that fact was the point of that comment.
  - RodericDay 10y ago
    It's very interesting how people apply very different standards for the in-group and the out-group. A Hackernewser making fun of a blog writer is fine, but a hackernewser making fun of another hackernewser is extremely impolite. I fully agree that that was the point of that comment.

apatters 10y ago

Interesting! It only took an hour for this criticism of a column which happened to be written by a woman to produce an accusation of misogyny as well as another ad hominem. I didn't think there was much of a gender component here, and there certainly isn't anything related to platform or framework zealotry, so IMO those comments say more about their authors than they do about me or the article. If a man had written this article it would have been no more or less awful. Had this been a same sex couple, still awful. It amounts to a defense of spousal neglect and how, apparently, the fact that your spouse puts up with your negligence is what makes marriage so great. We of course don't get to hear from the spouse about their take on this. Every couple is entitled to carry out their marriage however they like. I'm simply expressing my opinion that the "I've thrown in the towel on romance, sex, and treating my partner well" approach isn't for me.

skrebbel 10y ago
> It only took an hour for this criticism of a column which happened to be written by a woman to produce an accusation of misogyny as well as another ad hominem. Please reply to the comment you write about. You're climbing on a moral high horse that is invisible to the rest of us. In fact, I read through the entire subthread and can't find anyone accusing you of misogyny.