5 ms·

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

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.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    >"and not once did she mention one thing she did for her husband." If you act out of self-aware point scoring you'll never understand why. Also, the woman is being self-deprecating throughout the whole article, did you not notice that?
    - apatters 10y ago
      Asking something here with genuine interest: I interpreted your comment about "self-aware point scoring" to mean that you shouldn't think of relationships as transactional, or be too concerned with whether your contributions to them are reciprocated. My practical question here is if you live that way, how do you avoid getting screwed over by opportunists? My ethical question is wouldn't a society based on this principle create inequality through winners becoming bigger winners, because they're the ones who can most afford to give stuff away without expecting a return (whether it is money, emotional energy, or anything else)?
      - rosser 10y ago
        Heuristically, I suppose, if the "skew" is so obvious that you can see it without "score-keeping", then you avail yourself of a different approach. Which one? I'm not your marriage counselor. But talking about it is probably a good start.
      - ZenoArrow 10y ago
        >"I interpreted your comment about "self-aware point scoring" to mean that you shouldn't think of relationships as transactional, or be too concerned with whether your contributions to them are reciprocated." If you want my honest, non-expert answer, making relationships transactional means making them closer to business arrangements. Maybe that's what some people are comfortable with, but I prefer when my personal relationships are a little more spontaneous and free. So, for me, relationships shouldn't be transactional. How do you stop getting screwed over? I'd say it comes down to trust. Trust is something that builds up over time. The more you trust someone the more you can give without expecting something in return. Trust is based on support, but it's not something you have to actively track, it's something you feel (or don't feel). When trust starts to breaks down, that's the time to either work on it together or cut your losses.
  - sanderjd 10y ago
    It's pretty simple: the author thinks she's the worst and her husband is the best, but the husband (if he were a similarly engaging and witty writer) would write an article where his interpretation would be that he is the worst and his wife is the best. What you're missing is that you're only seeing one self-deprecating side of the story. You're assuming it's painting a full picture when it clearly isn't trying to.
- spiderfarmer 10y ago
  Whenever some shit happens I sometimes look at my grandparents who, now in their eighties, look back at the shit that happened in their past. They look so happy together. There's definitely romance in having endured it all together.
  - galfarragem 10y ago
    By observation, I would say, critical times are when couples get into their 50s and kids leave home. I'm yet to know a couple on that situation that looks happy together. People seem to stay in the relationship because leaving is often more 'work' than staying.
    - spiderfarmer 10y ago
      We plan to pick up our things and travel when the kids are out the house so I imagine that by then we are looking forward to it.
pluma 10y ago
Her husband is the better partner because she wrote the article. Based on her own self-deprecation I would guess that he has quite a few character traits that make him just as if not even more of a "bad partner". It's one thing to poke fun at yourself talking to your dogs and passing out while leaking from both ends, it's another to list your spouse's character flaws when they're not relevant to the story. Saying either of them is the better partner based on this article is like touching an elephant's trunk and insisting it's a snake.

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.
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  >"and not once did she mention one thing she did for her husband." If you act out of self-aware point scoring you'll never understand why. Also, the woman is being self-deprecating throughout the whole article, did you not notice that?
  - apatters 10y ago
    Asking something here with genuine interest: I interpreted your comment about "self-aware point scoring" to mean that you shouldn't think of relationships as transactional, or be too concerned with whether your contributions to them are reciprocated. My practical question here is if you live that way, how do you avoid getting screwed over by opportunists? My ethical question is wouldn't a society based on this principle create inequality through winners becoming bigger winners, because they're the ones who can most afford to give stuff away without expecting a return (whether it is money, emotional energy, or anything else)?
    - rosser 10y ago
      Heuristically, I suppose, if the "skew" is so obvious that you can see it without "score-keeping", then you avail yourself of a different approach. Which one? I'm not your marriage counselor. But talking about it is probably a good start.
    - ZenoArrow 10y ago
      >"I interpreted your comment about "self-aware point scoring" to mean that you shouldn't think of relationships as transactional, or be too concerned with whether your contributions to them are reciprocated." If you want my honest, non-expert answer, making relationships transactional means making them closer to business arrangements. Maybe that's what some people are comfortable with, but I prefer when my personal relationships are a little more spontaneous and free. So, for me, relationships shouldn't be transactional. How do you stop getting screwed over? I'd say it comes down to trust. Trust is something that builds up over time. The more you trust someone the more you can give without expecting something in return. Trust is based on support, but it's not something you have to actively track, it's something you feel (or don't feel). When trust starts to breaks down, that's the time to either work on it together or cut your losses.
- sanderjd 10y ago
  It's pretty simple: the author thinks she's the worst and her husband is the best, but the husband (if he were a similarly engaging and witty writer) would write an article where his interpretation would be that he is the worst and his wife is the best. What you're missing is that you're only seeing one self-deprecating side of the story. You're assuming it's painting a full picture when it clearly isn't trying to.
spiderfarmer 10y ago
Whenever some shit happens I sometimes look at my grandparents who, now in their eighties, look back at the shit that happened in their past. They look so happy together. There's definitely romance in having endured it all together.
- galfarragem 10y ago
  By observation, I would say, critical times are when couples get into their 50s and kids leave home. I'm yet to know a couple on that situation that looks happy together. People seem to stay in the relationship because leaving is often more 'work' than staying.
  - spiderfarmer 10y ago
    We plan to pick up our things and travel when the kids are out the house so I imagine that by then we are looking forward to it.

pluma 10y ago

Her husband is the better partner because she wrote the article. Based on her own self-deprecation I would guess that he has quite a few character traits that make him just as if not even more of a "bad partner". It's one thing to poke fun at yourself talking to your dogs and passing out while leaking from both ends, it's another to list your spouse's character flaws when they're not relevant to the story. Saying either of them is the better partner based on this article is like touching an elephant's trunk and insisting it's a snake.