Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 93 posts

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#51

Post by cynicalkane »

derefr wrote: post #28
codexon wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally don't find these types of articles interesting either, but the HN guidelines say this: On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. So if this story has upvotes, I presume some "good hackers" here have found it interesting.

You presume wrongly. Communities begin with a "primary demographic"—people who are there for what it says on the tin. Over time, though, these communities start to lure in "secondary demographics" that are interested in both the community topic and other topics, but then those people in turn lure in "tertiary demographics," who aren't interested in the stated purpose of the community at all, only about the hybrid on-…

I'm interested in hacking, startups, and also the OP article. Why do you claim I don't exist?

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#52

Post by rajat »

impeachgod wrote: post #47
rajat wrote: post #41

From the vantage point of a 20-year marriage: it's always about compromising, about settling. My wife and I had, I suppose, one of those romantic, instant connections. She's from Sweden, my parents are from India and I grew up in the Bronx. We ran into each other at IBM Research, and we moved in together on our second date. Instant chemistry, very romantic. But during the 20 years of marriage, the way we met didn't m…

I suppose this is why I don't ever want to marry. I realize that I do not want to give up the independence I have; to have to compromise anything. I want to be like Richard Stallman with his iron stubbornness. I think some people are built for marriage, some are not.

Don't do a startup with other founders either then. Not all compromises mean that you lose something; often it is the only way to win. Insisting on independence can become rigidity. If you aren't ready to compromise, experience with other founders will simply be bitter and acrimonious.

I have done four startups now, and have been fortunate enough to have become independent (that was the goal, not to become rich). Each startup has been made immeasurably easier because I have a wife that has helped me, and she too has had to undoubtedly compromise. I have seen what my single co-founders or near founders have experience, and no way would I have gone through my experiences with as much fun as I have had without my wife's support. She has her own indie business now--and nicely profitable it is too--and I take some measure of pride in having helped her with it every day. Helping her has meant putting off or not doing something that I wanted to do.

And finally, the LGPL was a compromise.

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#53

Post by ewjordan »

jriddycuz wrote: post #38
rglullis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just an analysis of the author, in no point it addresses the issue that she mentions. The "psych" just calls her ideas "dangerous" in the end, and sticks to an ad-hominem. I'd like to read someone who can actually find a counter-argument to her thesis and convince me that the best thing women can do is to hold on to their ideal all the way to the end.

Ad hominem isn't always a fallacy. Now, I don't know if this analysis of the author is necessarily accurate , but it smacks of plausibility to me because I've seen it before. As people, both men and women, remain single as they get older, they grow more and more accustomed to thinking almost entirely about their own concerns. This kind of self-focus makes it harder and harder to establish and maintain relationships.…

Ad hominem isn't always a fallacy.

Indeed: it's only a fallacy if you try to use it as proof of a claim.

As a probability indicator, it's fantastically useful: if person A is right 80% of the time when they make a claim, and person B is right only 20% of the time (assuming all else is equal), then you'd be a damn fool not to incorporate that information into your estimate as to whether something is true: person A is four times as likely to be right, so in a disagreement between the two you should always side with A.

I'm getting a little tired of people shouting "ad hominem" every time the credibility of the author is challenged. The fact that someone doesn't believe in evolution absolutely should make me take their thoughts on global warming less seriously; similarly, if someone has displayed an extremely immature, counterproductive, or selfish approach to relationships, you should probably take any relationship advice they give with a serious grain of salt.

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#54

Post by rajat »

donaq wrote: post #17

This article could be mapped readily into "Get a real job: The case for settling for a steady paycheck."

Don't you think the lesson could be applied to startups? Do you try to work with the co-founders you have, or do you search incessantly for the perfect one (ie. Bill Gates, or Wozniak)? Do you wait for the perfect, home-run idea, or do you pick one you have and make it work?

I've heard so many people in real jobs moan about how they would do a startup if only they had the right idea. Or that they didn't think they and their potential partners could learn enough about business to make it. They're waiting for the perfect opportunity and circumstances, as if such things fall out of the sky magically, instead of being built and molded by hard work.

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#55

Post by owinebarger »

mklg1266 wrote: post #39

I hate being a 20-something women. Everybody on the planet, from doctors to HN, feels the need to comment on the apparently glaring biological clock ticking over my head, and make assumptions about A) my happiness and B) my nefarious ulterior dating motives. I will posit that there exist women who don't base their self-worth and happiness entirely on the approval and acceptance of a man. I will further posit that the…

I thought the obsession with the clock and nefarious ulterior dating motives didn't start until 30-something.

Now that you mention it, though, when did marriage and children become either nefarious or ulterior reasons for dating?

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#56

Post by owinebarger »

pvg wrote: post #50
owinebarger wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article isn't about sex, or even relationships per se, it's about evaluating the riskiness of a particular kind of venture, and how women evidently miscalculate the opportunity cost of finding "Mr Right".

Nonsense. It is very much about relationships. Read the title. Now, you can argue that it's metaphorically about or related to other things but the problem with that kind of mush-headed reasoning is then everything is about everything and everything is appropriate for any forum. It's the sort of dilution and loss of focus that that makes forums grow useless. When you fired up your browser and brought up HN today, wer…

You are confusing the pragmatics of the decision to take the plunge into marriage with the underlying relationship. I'm interested in entrepreneurial risk-taking, and the kinds of considerations and miscalculations discussed in the article are entirely relevant. There's nothing metaphoric about it, though you may find some of the obscuring detail extraneous or expressed in an insufficiently detached manner.

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#57

Post by tome »

pvg wrote: post #34
ardit33 wrote: post #3

It might sound awful, but this is one of the reasons I avoid dating 28+ girls (I am 29 myself). 1. Too much pressure. (even if it is not explicit, given her standing, it is implicit) 2. I don't know if she likes me for me, or just because her clock is ticking. On the flip side, girls it have really really easy on their early 20s. That might create an "suply is infinite" kind of thinking in girls, and maybe perhaps ev…

By the same logic, no woman should ever come near you since she can't know if you like her for her or because you are driven by the genetic imperative to spread your semen around.

No, the GP's point is very specifically that the biological imperative is time constrained for a woman whilst it isn't for a man.

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#58

Post by philk »

indiejade wrote: post #27
vitobcn wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think your comment sounds awful, but in my opinion you are giving too much importance to age and looks. I am 28 myself and when dating I am not trying to evaluate whether she already passed her prime time or if she still has a couple of good years cause she is Asian. Unless you are a teenager or in the early twenties, we are all going downhill. Shouldn't we try to find a partner who we like and share interest…

Perspective changes as you get older. Besides, women live longer than men, and reach their prime later. There are a lot of reasons it makes sense for a female to date a male who is slightly younger than him. So. . . I daresay that the comment does sound pretty awful. Awful is probably the wrong word. Delusional, megalomaniac, may be better words. Anybody who doesn't have a bell curve around the ages of people they're…

So. . . I daresay that the comment does sound pretty awful. Awful is probably the wrong word. Delusional, megalomaniac, may be better words. Anybody who doesn't have a bell curve around the ages of people they're willing to date (yes, with his/her own age in the middle) is probably missing a few logic gates.

I think that's a bit judgemental. It's okay for people to have preferences regarding who they date. If one of these preferences is for younger women, well, that's up to them. There are girls out there with preferences for richer men or taller men and we don't go around accusing them of "missing a few logic gates".

As an example, suppose you're an older guy (~45 yo) looking to get married and have kids. Your preferences are obviously going to tend towards younger women because you'll have a better chance of conceiving and healthier kids. This doesn't imply that you're crazy, or creepy. It simply implies that you have particular life plans and have a preference for getting together with someone who is compatible with these.

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#59

Post by pvg »

tome wrote: post #57
pvg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the same logic, no woman should ever come near you since she can't know if you like her for her or because you are driven by the genetic imperative to spread your semen around.

No, the GP's point is very specifically that the biological imperative is time constrained for a woman whilst it isn't for a man.

How is that relevant? I won't date a woman older than X because her clock is ticking and it might mean she doesn't like me for my sparkling personality. It is identically silly to 'I won't date any man because he might only be trying to get into my pants'. If you don't like dating women your age or older, more power to you. But rationalizing it away by some sort of ersatz pop-logic and sweeping generalization (is every 30-year-old woman a fading flower hell-bent on reproduction?) is disingenuous.

Re: Marry Him: The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough

#60

Post by btilly »

thegoleffect wrote: post #14
elptacek wrote: post #11

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 hilari…

Yeah, 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.

What'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.

Post reply on HN