3 ms·

She Divorced Me Because I Left Dishes by the Sink

7 points by nixass 3y ago

082349872349872 3y ago
Cache invalidation* is one of the two hard problems in marriage. * at least for those of us who take dishes directly from the sink rather than forcing them to round trip through the cabinets first.
jstarfish 3y ago
> The man capable of that behavioral change—even when he doesn’t understand her or agree with her thought-process—can have a great relationship. Sure. All relationships are great if you just submit when confronted. > She wants to divorce him because she feels like he doesn’t respect or appreciate her, which suggests he doesn’t love her, and she can’t count on him to be her lifelong partner. She can’t trust him. She can’t be safe with him. Thus, she must leave and find a new situation in which she can feel content and secure. Always left out of this dialogue: other people exist. "I live here too." Being a "lifelong partner" means being willing to put up with minor goddamn annoyances, and accepting (if not embracing) the flaws of others. Organizations persist despite some dick ignoring the sign and microwaving fish in the breakroom. It's not something rational people quit over. He even fucking addresses this: > “I never get upset with you about things you do that I don’t like!” men reason, as if their wives are INTENTIONALLY choosing to feel hurt and miserable. > Men want to fight for their right to leave that glass there. It might look like this: “Eat shit, wife,” we think. [...] > I understand that when I leave that glass there, it hurts her— literally causes her pain No man on the planet is leaving dishes by the sink INTENTIONALLY trying to upset his wife. We're used to reshaping every environment we operate in, and having them reshaped against our will. Plenty of men would believe they're being considerate in bringing dishes that far. Even he acknowledges that men will let things slide in good faith, but women are validated in assuming everyone acts in bad faith at all times and are incapable of managing their own feelings without taking it out on someone else, while expecting the victim to make things right. He's internalized that he's the one at fault. You were in an abusive relationship, bro. "You hurt my feelings" really has become the new "you have sinned against God." You start with 10 simple/reasonable rules and end up with a two-act, incomprehensibly-epic doctrine of contradictions you depend on someone else to interpret and are always running afoul of in some way. Being unwilling to consider or try to accommodate requests is disrespectful, but the rest of this nonsense about not being able to trust him or be safe with him is just histrionics. Clearly, the man might as well be beating her, because he's "literally causing her pain" that warrants her finding safety in the arms of someone else. She can't trust that he'd protect her or the kids if a home invader broke in-- he doesn't put his dishes in the sink, after all. So "if he won't listen to me on this, then surely he's going to leave me for his secretary." The irony is: he probably will! You'll insist it's because she's younger/prettier/skinnier but in reality it's because she's not going to yell at him about the fucking dishes or choice of home insulation or whatever you have a problem with today. It turns the home into an adversarial environment. > When you choose to love someone, it becomes your pleasure to do things that enhance their lives and bring you closer together, rather than a chore. [...] It’s not: Sonofabitch, I have to do this bullshit thing for my wife again. It’s: I’m grateful for another opportunity to demonstrate to my wife that she comes first and that I can be counted on to be there for her, and needn’t look elsewhere for happiness and fulfillment. Love: the milestone of surrendering any sense of your own identity and committing to never asking for or expecting anything for yourself. It's a great start to the "what is emasculation" chapter of your "beginner's guide to femdom" manual. I can't wait for the "embracing cuckoldry" part-- and its postscript. I'm not even joking. Remember what I said about contradictory doctrine? Once you're conditioned to be obedient, you get hit with: > But I remember my wife often saying how exhausting it was for her to have to tell me what to do all the time. It’s why the sexiest thing a man can say to his partner is “I got this,” and then take care of whatever needs taken care of. ...and you will die alone, because it is fundamentally impossible to satisfy arbitrary "feelings" and needs she can't be bothered to disclose. This is the chapter on "enjoying humiliation." Being set up to fail, you're just supposed to know what she's thinking, or debase yourself in trying anything that might please her, lest you be punished as a bad boy. No matter how you do it, you're always doing it wrong, because a Real Man would just know what she wants. At that point you're just someone's plaything until they get bored with you. It's pathetic. It's a total inversion of the power dynamic; it looks like she weaponized a female-led relationship how-to book against this guy and he doesn't realize it. In the author's case, his ass still ended up divorced, and his wife conditioned him to think it's all his fault. Not the first time I've seen this-- with him feeling so guilty and defeated I assume she cleaned him out during the divorce proceedings. He's very defensive about his now-ex-wife in the comments...but victims defending abusers is nothing new.

7 points by nixass 3y ago

Cache invalidation* is one of the two hard problems in marriage. * at least for those of us who take dishes directly from the sink rather than forcing them to round trip through the cabinets first.

jstarfish 3y ago

> The man capable of that behavioral change—even when he doesn’t understand her or agree with her thought-process—can have a great relationship. Sure. All relationships are great if you just submit when confronted. > She wants to divorce him because she feels like he doesn’t respect or appreciate her, which suggests he doesn’t love her, and she can’t count on him to be her lifelong partner. She can’t trust him. She can’t be safe with him. Thus, she must leave and find a new situation in which she can feel content and secure. Always left out of this dialogue: other people exist. "I live here too." Being a "lifelong partner" means being willing to put up with minor goddamn annoyances, and accepting (if not embracing) the flaws of others. Organizations persist despite some dick ignoring the sign and microwaving fish in the breakroom. It's not something rational people quit over. He even fucking addresses this: > “I never get upset with you about things you do that I don’t like!” men reason, as if their wives are INTENTIONALLY choosing to feel hurt and miserable. > Men want to fight for their right to leave that glass there. It might look like this: “Eat shit, wife,” we think. [...] > I understand that when I leave that glass there, it hurts her— literally causes her pain No man on the planet is leaving dishes by the sink INTENTIONALLY trying to upset his wife. We're used to reshaping every environment we operate in, and having them reshaped against our will. Plenty of men would believe they're being considerate in bringing dishes that far. Even he acknowledges that men will let things slide in good faith, but women are validated in assuming everyone acts in bad faith at all times and are incapable of managing their own feelings without taking it out on someone else, while expecting the victim to make things right. He's internalized that he's the one at fault. You were in an abusive relationship, bro. "You hurt my feelings" really has become the new "you have sinned against God." You start with 10 simple/reasonable rules and end up with a two-act, incomprehensibly-epic doctrine of contradictions you depend on someone else to interpret and are always running afoul of in some way. Being unwilling to consider or try to accommodate requests is disrespectful, but the rest of this nonsense about not being able to trust him or be safe with him is just histrionics. Clearly, the man might as well be beating her, because he's "literally causing her pain" that warrants her finding safety in the arms of someone else. She can't trust that he'd protect her or the kids if a home invader broke in-- he doesn't put his dishes in the sink, after all. So "if he won't listen to me on this, then surely he's going to leave me for his secretary." The irony is: he probably will! You'll insist it's because she's younger/prettier/skinnier but in reality it's because she's not going to yell at him about the fucking dishes or choice of home insulation or whatever you have a problem with today. It turns the home into an adversarial environment. > When you choose to love someone, it becomes your pleasure to do things that enhance their lives and bring you closer together, rather than a chore. [...] It’s not: Sonofabitch, I have to do this bullshit thing for my wife again. It’s: I’m grateful for another opportunity to demonstrate to my wife that she comes first and that I can be counted on to be there for her, and needn’t look elsewhere for happiness and fulfillment. Love: the milestone of surrendering any sense of your own identity and committing to never asking for or expecting anything for yourself. It's a great start to the "what is emasculation" chapter of your "beginner's guide to femdom" manual. I can't wait for the "embracing cuckoldry" part-- and its postscript. I'm not even joking. Remember what I said about contradictory doctrine? Once you're conditioned to be obedient, you get hit with: > But I remember my wife often saying how exhausting it was for her to have to tell me what to do all the time. It’s why the sexiest thing a man can say to his partner is “I got this,” and then take care of whatever needs taken care of. ...and you will die alone, because it is fundamentally impossible to satisfy arbitrary "feelings" and needs she can't be bothered to disclose. This is the chapter on "enjoying humiliation." Being set up to fail, you're just supposed to know what she's thinking, or debase yourself in trying anything that might please her, lest you be punished as a bad boy. No matter how you do it, you're always doing it wrong, because a Real Man would just know what she wants. At that point you're just someone's plaything until they get bored with you. It's pathetic. It's a total inversion of the power dynamic; it looks like she weaponized a female-led relationship how-to book against this guy and he doesn't realize it. In the author's case, his ass still ended up divorced, and his wife conditioned him to think it's all his fault. Not the first time I've seen this-- with him feeling so guilty and defeated I assume she cleaned him out during the divorce proceedings. He's very defensive about his now-ex-wife in the comments...but victims defending abusers is nothing new.