4 ms·
Apparently this essay, published in 2005, "led to extensive and vitriolic debate" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayelet_Waldman#Motherlove https://en.wikipedia.
by bshimmin 10y ago
Apparently this essay, published in 2005, "led to extensive and vitriolic debate" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayelet_Waldman#Motherlove https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayelet_Waldman#Motherlove). You can kind of see why, though I think probably mostly from the perspective that an awful lot of women perhaps don't feel the same way as she does - but I wonder how many divorces the fact of this simple statement has resulted in: "the wife's passion has been refocused".
- cookiecaper 10y agoYeah, there was a time that this was not a controversial assertion at all. The marriage must always be number one. That's not such a distinct thing from the welfare of the children, though; the lives of all family members are inextricable. Neither the husband nor the wife are going to be pleased and say the marriage is going fine when the prosperity of one or more of the children is in jeopardy. "The children" and "the marriage" are not really separable. They are two fully blended parts of the same thing, "the family". Spouses and children are not competitors; they're collaborators. Any action on one part is going to spread out over the others.