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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.