161–170 of 812 posts
There is a whole other potential article out there that could be written from the ex-wife's side - "My marriage died because I couldn't make this one simple sacrifice". And I suspect both would just as incorrect, at least by omission. The glass thing is a useful article hook, but it's unlikely that it encompasses the sole reason their marriage fell apart. There is a deeper issue here, about neither side being willing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Force the other person to plan weeks of meals, keep the pantry stocked, etc. shines a bigger light on the unseen work and value each partner is providing." If my wife were doing this, our grocery bill would double and it would all be frozen dinners and takeout. I'm not sure I trust her to do safety critical mechanic work either. So maybe switching isn't great for some tasks. Edit: It seems people disagree. Why? All…
You should learn to cook new dishes together. To each their own, especially in their own home, but cooking have inherent value itself for multiple reasons, and teach a lot of soft skills. And cooking together is great, if your wife agree to let you be slow and let you mess up. If you have kids especially: some of my best memories are my parents learning to cook weird asian dishes and fail or succeed together.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems as though people are focusing on the hook and not the core argument. The author clearly states his marriage failed from "death by a thousand papercuts" and this glass-by-the-sink is an example of not understanding their spouse.
I’m shocked by how many people in this thread have been completely derailed thinking the literal glass is the issue rather than being symbolic of the issue. I always hated how much teachers would drill symbolism and literary device analysis into you in school but then I come across threads like this I wonder whether we aren’t focusing on it enough.
> I always hated how much teachers would drill symbolism and literary device analysis into you in school but then I come across threads like this I wonder whether we aren’t focusing on it enough.
I feel, the inability to treat the glass solely as a symbol, is more related to the form of writing.
This sort of confessional writing, it does not tolerate symbolism well because the author is also the protagonist. The symbolism of the glass, in this article, it's more of a protective screen. The author explicitly writes the glass wasn't really the issue, but then we never actually learn about all these other things that were the real issue. Like, dedicate some paragraphs to it dude, don't leave us hanging! In the writing, he's a kindly, oblivious man. We get hints that he wasn't. Disrespect, what's that exactly, that can be downright cruel, where on the spectrum are we here? Beyond the glass, honestly, there's nothing. Like, was he rolling his eyes when she was talking to her. "communication issues", what's that, did they share meals in silence, or where they fighting like cats and dogs, but then making tender love to make up, what's going on?!?! Tell me. The glass really is the thing here. (Maybe his book has more, I don't know). For all intents and purposes, yeah, it was the glass. The reader can only understand their divorce in vague generalities, and since we get nothing more than the glass, it feels more like a distraction. Also, like come on, we need to hear from his ex-wife!
Symbolism in fiction, functions more like an anchor, around which the mind can wander, which invites us to contemplate. And we can, because, honestly, right or wrong, it doesn't matter. There's less of this need to get it right, make sense of it. The motives of the author are just less important, a reader has less of this curiosity or nosyness, in the sense, that we're tickled to take a peek behind the curtain.
I think, if the article were written as fiction, say a short-story, that glass would be great symbolism, and there would be less this need to come up with solutions, or try to pinpoint who was right and wrong, ... But in that article, I don't know, it feels more like a dodge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't recommend this book enough on the topic. TLDR Women are more picky then Men in the courtship marketplace, and finding a partner with matching values is most important to growing and staying together. People expect a fairy tale, when they're signing up for a job (relationships require work and effort). A quote from the author 10 years post publishing: “I think the book is really, ironically, about having highe…
"People expect a fairy tale, when they're signing up for a job." This is worth reiterating.
Why are you people so cold and calculating when talking about feelings? Love and care do wonders and you are able to work everything out almost effortlessly. I have seen it in couples several times in the past and I am experiencing it for over 8 years now as well. With the right person it works automatically and there's zero sense of "sacrifice" there. In 8 years I haven't felt that I've made a compromise that hurt me or her. None of us ever felt like they had to cut a part of themselves to continue being in the relationship. We develop and grow together.
I'll never agree to this work-ethic-like expression of relationships. To me you look miserable for even using that framework of a language.
Some other things being harder before ironically maybe us better at accepting that sometimes situations end with nobody getting what they want, and learning how to reach "good enough".
"My wife left me because she's either ridiculous and unwilling to compromise on trivial shit, or incomprehensibly dense" is a much shorter and more succinct than an entire book, but I guess they don't pay people for that. His articles all read as pathetic blame-porn aimed at satisfying the egos of women, while pretending to be advice aimed at men, and even though his only skills are apparently being someone who got d…
that doesn't mean it's all his fault, but we don't know what her attempts to resolve the issue were.
There is a whole other potential article out there that could be written from the ex-wife's side - "My marriage died because I couldn't make this one simple sacrifice". And I suspect both would just as incorrect, at least by omission. The glass thing is a useful article hook, but it's unlikely that it encompasses the sole reason their marriage fell apart. There is a deeper issue here, about neither side being willing…
> It was about consideration. About the pervasive sense that she was married to someone who did not respect nor appreciate her.
I get the point of the article and I agree with the overall conclusion, but I don't agree that it applies in the example he provided. If you are going to go to war over something, make sure it is worthy of doing so. In his example: what is the harm in the drinking glass being there? Is it occupying space of others? Is it preventing others from doing something? Is it a burden on anyone? Or is it an aesthetic choice? I…