When sensible men marry silly women

[Anonymous]

Nobody is all serious, or silly. Just because you can’t see beyond one dimension doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

[Anonymous]

Extremely weird for someone who claims to have a degree in English literature to deride this woman as silly, in part for her love of “chick lit”, and then invoke Austen.

You get Austen was considered silly in her day and even by many since then, right? That writing novels, especially “domestic” novels focused on women, family, romance, and home life, was considered anti-intellectual and silly?

I don’t tolerate people who are rude in my life and to me that’s the real offense. But I’ve also been around (and been married) long enough yo understand that marriages are much more complex than what you see on the outside. And I especially understand how the institution of marriage continues to entrap many women in sexist stereotypes. Particularly women who marry high earning, “important” men. You get relegated to the domestic sphere and then assumed to be beneath your husband intellectually, despite the obvious fact that your unpaid labor supporting him allows him to achieve that status. It can be so hard for women married to men working 80 hours a week, travelling constantly, married to their jobs. It is lonely. But you can’t complain or look ungrateful for his hard work snd what it buys your family. No one will believe you if you say you’d be happy with a smaller home or fewer material goods if you had more of a true partner. And then even if you throw yourself into your role as wife and mother, this will be derided as unserious snd unimportant.

It’s precisely the kind of double bind Austen write about. You are right, OP, that it’s a situation ripe for fictionalization. Right down to the jealous acquaintance misusing her literary knowledge to indict a woman she’d like to replace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Extremely weird for someone who claims to have a degree in English literature to deride this woman as silly, in part for her love of “chick lit”, and then invoke Austen.

You get Austen was considered silly in her day and even by many since then, right? That writing novels, especially “domestic” novels focused on women, family, romance, and home life, was considered anti-intellectual and silly?

I don’t tolerate people who are rude in my life and to me that’s the real offense. But I’ve also been around (and been married) long enough yo understand that marriages are much more complex than what you see on the outside. And I especially understand how the institution of marriage continues to entrap many women in sexist stereotypes. Particularly women who marry high earning, “important” men. You get relegated to the domestic sphere and then assumed to be beneath your husband intellectually, despite the obvious fact that your unpaid labor supporting him allows him to achieve that status. It can be so hard for women married to men working 80 hours a week, travelling constantly, married to their jobs. It is lonely. But you can’t complain or look ungrateful for his hard work snd what it buys your family. No one will believe you if you say you’d be happy with a smaller home or fewer material goods if you had more of a true partner. And then even if you throw yourself into your role as wife and mother, this will be derided as unserious snd unimportant.

It’s precisely the kind of double bind Austen write about. You are right, OP, that it’s a situation ripe for fictionalization. Right down to the jealous acquaintance misusing her literary knowledge to indict a woman she’d like to replace.

OT but as an English teacher I love that so many people on here read Austen!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Men can be serious and mature in their career but that doesn’t mean they don’t place a very high value on having regular sex with a beautiful woman. For most men, that is the most important goal in their lives.

+1. I'm a guy. I'm not sure why many women still don't get this.

[Anonymous]

Lol because a guy who is into finance is super interesting.

[Anonymous]

Mr. Bennet was useless but mom was doing her terrible best to secure futures for her offspring.

[Anonymous]

This thread has some gems and zingers.

[Anonymous]

He isn't as nice as you think. She is rude and I bet she gossips about everyone. He is with her because whilst he puts on a charming air in public, which you fell for, behind closed doors he loves to gossip and mock everyone they talked to that night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Extremely weird for someone who claims to have a degree in English literature to deride this woman as silly, in part for her love of “chick lit”, and then invoke Austen.

You get Austen was considered silly in her day and even by many since then, right? That writing novels, especially “domestic” novels focused on women, family, romance, and home life, was considered anti-intellectual and silly?

I don’t tolerate people who are rude in my life and to me that’s the real offense. But I’ve also been around (and been married) long enough yo understand that marriages are much more complex than what you see on the outside. And I especially understand how the institution of marriage continues to entrap many women in sexist stereotypes. Particularly women who marry high earning, “important” men. You get relegated to the domestic sphere and then assumed to be beneath your husband intellectually, despite the obvious fact that your unpaid labor supporting him allows him to achieve that status. It can be so hard for women married to men working 80 hours a week, travelling constantly, married to their jobs. It is lonely. But you can’t complain or look ungrateful for his hard work snd what it buys your family. No one will believe you if you say you’d be happy with a smaller home or fewer material goods if you had more of a true partner. And then even if you throw yourself into your role as wife and mother, this will be derided as unserious snd unimportant.

It’s precisely the kind of double bind Austen write about. You are right, OP, that it’s a situation ripe for fictionalization. Right down to the jealous acquaintance misusing her literary knowledge to indict a woman she’d like to replace.

Beautifully rendered

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men can be serious and mature in their career but that doesn’t mean they don’t place a very high value on having regular sex with a beautiful woman. For most men, that is the most important goal in their lives.

+1. I'm a guy. I'm not sure why many women still don't get this.

I didn't for a long time because my husband is not like this at all. I guess he's a gem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Extremely weird for someone who claims to have a degree in English literature to deride this woman as silly, in part for her love of “chick lit”, and then invoke Austen.

You get Austen was considered silly in her day and even by many since then, right? That writing novels, especially “domestic” novels focused on women, family, romance, and home life, was considered anti-intellectual and silly?

I don’t tolerate people who are rude in my life and to me that’s the real offense. But I’ve also been around (and been married) long enough yo understand that marriages are much more complex than what you see on the outside. And I especially understand how the institution of marriage continues to entrap many women in sexist stereotypes. Particularly women who marry high earning, “important” men. You get relegated to the domestic sphere and then assumed to be beneath your husband intellectually, despite the obvious fact that your unpaid labor supporting him allows him to achieve that status. It can be so hard for women married to men working 80 hours a week, travelling constantly, married to their jobs. It is lonely. But you can’t complain or look ungrateful for his hard work snd what it buys your family. No one will believe you if you say you’d be happy with a smaller home or fewer material goods if you had more of a true partner. And then even if you throw yourself into your role as wife and mother, this will be derided as unserious snd unimportant.

It’s precisely the kind of double bind Austen write about. You are right, OP, that it’s a situation ripe for fictionalization. Right down to the jealous acquaintance misusing her literary knowledge to indict a woman she’d like to replace.

Wow. I was not expecting to feel so validated so early in the morning. Thank you for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Extremely weird for someone who claims to have a degree in English literature to deride this woman as silly, in part for her love of “chick lit”, and then invoke Austen.

You get Austen was considered silly in her day and even by many since then, right? That writing novels, especially “domestic” novels focused on women, family, romance, and home life, was considered anti-intellectual and silly?

I don’t tolerate people who are rude in my life and to me that’s the real offense. But I’ve also been around (and been married) long enough yo understand that marriages are much more complex than what you see on the outside. And I especially understand how the institution of marriage continues to entrap many women in sexist stereotypes. Particularly women who marry high earning, “important” men. You get relegated to the domestic sphere and then assumed to be beneath your husband intellectually, despite the obvious fact that your unpaid labor supporting him allows him to achieve that status. It can be so hard for women married to men working 80 hours a week, travelling constantly, married to their jobs. It is lonely. But you can’t complain or look ungrateful for his hard work snd what it buys your family. No one will believe you if you say you’d be happy with a smaller home or fewer material goods if you had more of a true partner. And then even if you throw yourself into your role as wife and mother, this will be derided as unserious snd unimportant.

It’s precisely the kind of double bind Austen write about. You are right, OP, that it’s a situation ripe for fictionalization. Right down to the jealous acquaintance misusing her literary knowledge to indict a woman she’d like to replace.

This is one of the best comments I have read on this website.

But in defense of OP, I was an English major and I didn't think that Mrs. Bennet had any redeeming qualities until I got post partum anxiety. I honestly think that Austen was a bit unfair to her.

But thank you for your comment. I feel seen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op, you sound very young and naive. Let this be a lesson to you that most men care about being with a woman who is physically attractive first and foremost, next someone fun and confident, not brainiacs. I suggest that you focus on you and not worry about other women’s hobbies or husbands.

Actually that's not true. But most men who care a lot about their own looks also place a high premium on having a conventionally attractive partner. A few of my friends graduated from MIT, and through them I know lots of smart and rich but average looking guys who married smart and interesting, but average looking women.

[Anonymous]

I truly don't understand all the hostility directed at the OP on this thread. I think there are alot of trophy wives on here. LOL. The wife the OP describes sounds like a very shallow and NOT nice person in general, why are so many people defending her? I mean, you don't have to hate on her, but she definitely sounds vapid.

OP, I get what you are saying, but I don't have any real insight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I truly don't understand all the hostility directed at the OP on this thread. I think there are alot of trophy wives on here. LOL. The wife the OP describes sounds like a very shallow and NOT nice person in general, why are so many people defending her? I mean, you don't have to hate on her, but she definitely sounds vapid.

OP, I get what you are saying, but I don't have any real insight.

I think people are being a bit hostile (or that tone just comes across as hostile because we're not talking face to face), but nobody defended the wife being mean. Many commenters specifically commented on that.

Also have you seen this:http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html