There are still wonderful moments when I look at my husband searching in vain for his pants in the morning, or sitting at his laptop trolling goodreads.com, and I think to myself, “OK, he’s going to be absolutely adorable at 85.” There are times when I see him standing in line next to a little girl at our neighborhood bakery, and I imagine him giving a look, not the look, but a loving, awe-inspired gaze toward our future daughter. I honestly cannot imagine what my future would look like without him.Such are the journalings of a woman talking herself into staying with her husband. Amanda Kling ≈ a man to cling.
I suppose I have to decide whether the promise of how things could get better will outweigh what has gone wrong so far. Maybe all of the things I think have gone “wrong” are just the inevitable ups and downs of any long-term relationship. Maybe if I just stop waiting for the perfect look or the perfect moment of sexual intimacy, and start accepting that this longing for more may always be there, I can finally start to enjoy my reality again.
Much more sex at the link. I thought you might like the view into a woman's head as she's weighing the option of leaving, or, perhaps more accurately, weighing the option of permanence in an inadequate sexual relationship.
They don't have children yet, so one can only hope that weighing "the promise of how things could get better" doesn't involve experimenting with the creation of new human beings. And in the absence of any actual children, the phrase "a loving, awe-inspired gaze toward our future daughter" is disconcerting. If you have a child, it might not be a female child — a little you — and, male or female, a child does not arrive in the world for the purpose of inspiring awe or posing in cake-shop tableaux that make your husband look romantic.
As for the husband... "searching in vain for his pants" is a telling phrase.
पोस्ट्स
४४ टिप्पण्या:
I thought you might like view into a woman's head....
The horror. The horror.
It's all exactly what I expect from Salon women. And their men.
On the issue of marriage: the best advice I ever heard was if you're not absolutely certain it's permanent on your wedding day, it probably won't last.
It's amazing to me how feminists both despise the manosphere and simultaneously behave exactly as the manosphere predicts.
On second thought, those two things are probably related.
Shallow.
Vapid.
Musings of the emotionally immature.
It's like reading the diary of a 14 year old girl.
So is marriage about companionship or is about sex?
Sounds like ... me me me me me..
And LOVE has nothing to do with it. So what was that marriage vow? Sham? Didn't mean it? Kings X?
So her whole world is one of fucking?
And I say this being married over 21 years myself. And I am very happy my wife is my wife.
Sex gets old folks, but if you LIKE the other person, and in time before you get married you LOVE the other person, then you don't have the problems this lady has.
She is even ashamed he sometimes has to find his pants. As if that is come kind of character flaw.
It's a fun thought experiment to imagine a man writer, too cowardly to use his real name, writing about his wife's sexual inadequacies or frigidness in the pages of Maxim or GQ or something. Some feminist writer at salon would no doubt link to it so her sister readers could vent at what an appalling person this man is and how much his wife must be suffering. Of course these same women are the ones eagerly lapping up the article Althouse has shown us.
Amanda Kling: Your husband is not a mind-reader. If you are waiting for him to read your mind you will be disappointed.
I first misread it as "...searching in vain in his pants..." and thought "well there's your problem right there".
The lead is buried at the end of the fourth paragraph: "And it wasn’t just any orgasm — it was the first orgasm I’d ever had during intercourse."
As for the husband... "searching in vain for his pants" is a telling phrase.
Makes me think of Walter White, and of all of the times that pants, or the lack thereof, were featured in Breaking Bad.
So much of what's wrong with the world and with us can be distilled into one word - "selfishness." How can we get people like the author of this piece to unerstand that centering on self alone never leads to happiness.
Her man has been replaced with a sex toy. And she cannot figure out why he is around anymore, taking up space on HER bed. Flipping a coin maybe his best chance to keep her.
Thanks to Betamax3000 Industries the Betamax3000 Unit comes pre-equipped with Sex Toys. The Dial ranges from "Mmmm" to "Stun".
Key sentence: "I think it’s because I grew up believing that the person I married would be my perfect match."
How humiliating for the husband. Would be like a man writing about going to strip clubs or some such because his bride isn't "perfect."
No guy with balls would marry this narcissist. The fact that he would marry her tells us all we need to know.
I notice, in passing, that she ran into a very successful saleswoman.
The woman who ran the 'sex class' convinced Amanda to drop hundreds of dollars on equipment shortly after the first class.
(I presume that the class itself cost money, also.)
On the one hand, I've met many (non-sexual) situations in which the proper tool was very helpful.
On the other hand, it's very easy to blames the tool (or lack thereof) for poor performance. Even if the cause of the poor performance was lack of skill, instead of wrong equipment.
I'll echo Mike Lang above: is marriage about companionship or about sexual intercourse?
And with the others, I'll ask if she's used the tool of communication to enable better intercourse.
Whether the intercourse is sexual or otherwise...
This reminds me of a commercial I just saw. The man comes up this wife and says "do you feel like you've settled?" And she gets all discombobulated at the question, as obviously she has settled in the marriage.
And then he says " for cable service" or some such. Then the pitchman comes in and describes the new and improved cable service that they will now be using (verizon maybe?)
Then after the pitch the husband says something to the effect of "there will no more settling at this house. Right honey?"
And again she gets all discombobulated and stammers when she agrees. Because obviously, she does feel like she settled in the marriage.
Its a sad statement on the state of affairs. And I can only imagine if the situation were reversed and the guy was the one saying he settled on his plain jane wife. Could you even have that commercial?
She married a Brit she met floating in the Dead Sea.
SJ wrote:
I'll echo Mike Lang above: is marriage about companionship or about sexual intercourse?
even if it is about intercourse talk about lack of imagination on her part. She doesn't think that maybe her husband could use the toy when they're making love to spice up,the love making?
The Dial ranges from “Mmmm” to “Stun”.
What about all the allusions in romantic literature to orgasm = death. Shouldn't there be a higher setting?
"we rushed into marriage to secure his green card." (Didn't Sandra Bullock star in that movie?)
A sound basis for marriage if I ever heard one. Expecting a dazzling sexual experience seems a bit of a stretch.
No orgasm during courtship when he was giving her the "eye"? Hint, hint!
I believe this piece merits the Bull Shit tag.
All women should be required to post such things, so that men would know which ones to stay away from.
Note that he married her for the Green Card. It's an immigration problem at the root, so her marriage has always had a sell by date. She made a good investment in the toy...until a better model comes along or she wears this one out, whichever comes first...comes best?
Having wasted the time in reading the article this woman is deluding herself on many levels-it appears rather obvious that he married her for a green card.
Wait until the red pill boys weigh in.
I wonder how old this woman is. She should enjoy what she has while her husband is still in the prime of life.
The day may come when her husband develops one of a number of health conditions, or has to take certain medications, which will make it difficult or impossible for him to have intercourse at all.
What will she do then, walk out on him?
I thought women were supposed to be better at communication than men. If that's so, why is this clod talking to us about this issue instead of her poor husband? Even me - supposed-poor-communicating-man that I am - knows that you can't solve a problem by communicating with the wrong agent.
"No guy with balls would marry this narcissist. The fact that he would marry her tells us all we need to know."
Unless it was for a green card.
So the other day I read a memoir about a woman who, at the age of 22, had complete memory loss due to a freak accident. (http://janetheactuary.blogspot.com/2014/05/from-library-i-forgot-to-remember-by-su.html ) And, unlike the Hollywood version, everything didn't just return to normal (or a better version of normal) upon being released from the hospital.
Huge challenge to the commitment of marriage for her husband.
One suspects that this Salon author would have bailed. This certainly isn't "for better or for worse."
Why is she married?
It's no wonder people think gays getting "married" is no biggee. People have no clue what marriage is for anymore.
He's either gay or asexual. Or... we don't have a picture of this anonymous woman. Could be no man with normal taste in women could ge it up for her.
But, the real tell is, as mentioned by numerous others- he married her for the green card. If he were a drunk driving law breaking Hispanic, he would just live here without fear of deportation. White Englishman? First plane out after a swat team raid on his apartment.
Amanda Kling seems to have grown up in world of too many trigger warnings; not enough triggers.
A) It's Salon. First strike
B) She didn't know she was marrying a cold fish? That can be fixed. Its called divorce.
C) I noticed there wasn't too much self examination (other than digitally) of her "abilities" or "performance.
D) C is do to the fact it's *never* the woman's fault. Just the man's. But we're not allowed to judge.
Is she from the Lego Movie??? "Honeeyyyyy, where are my paaaaaanttttsss?"
Now, there would be some surrealism worthy of the New Yorker ...
Do I have this right, Althouse?:
Ladies, aligning your personal life and ambitions with a larger feminist narrative might get you pretty far, the top job at the Times, or even the Presidency for example.
That wasn't possible before.
So be and sure play your cards right in the minefield of incentives out there.
Many men will call you a bitch; some of them actually are mouth breathers upset because they've lost out.
Sometimes men and women will be correct though, because you may have to be a bitch in order to get ahead. But at least be of substance if you're a bitch and ready for the job. This requires moral and intellectual guidance as well as character.
However, you'd better not expect to get that all fhat character from feminism, because feminist ideology is perhaps not able to even defend your liberty at the end of the day. It's a means to an end not really a program for the moral life necessary for you to wield power should you ever have it.
In the media universe, you will be standing on the shoulders of giants such as Nina Totenberg, Eleanor Clift, Tina Brown, and/or Jill Abramson. They are your natural allies and there for the exploiting. They are ready to repeat talking points and worship at the altar of the pantsuit.
So fill that pantsuit if you must, or at least pay tribute if you're in public life.
Whatever you do, dont exploit your sons boyfriends and husbands (as writers are wont to do) just for sake of feminist ideology (the purer the ideologue, the raunchier the material).
Talking about orgasms for the sake of click bait at Salon kind of makes you not just a bitch, but quite possibly much worse.
Offered in pursuit of this blog's joy-in-word-play:
She describes him "trolling" goodreads.com, but this may not be the fishing metaphor she is looking for. To "troll", in fishing lingo, is to dangle a line behind a boat and hope that something bites. To "trawl" is to cast a net, haul in whatever it catches, pick out the good fish and toss the rest back. The later is a better term for internet foraging.
In internet lingo "trolling" is deliberately picking fights, shocking, etc., for attention. I'm more amused by (and therefore choose to believe in) the image of her husband gleefully attacking members of a reading site. This would make her decision easier.
I have very little on this. But I'll try. Assuming the story is even real. Or maybe so one-sided as to be a virtual fabrication. Here goes:
I think she's too messed up to ever get right. I feel sorry for her, her husband and any future husbands, lovers, etc. Having to fake orgasm all that time. Sexual drudgery. Like a prostitute. Reluctantly trudging to bed with men, some who will intuitively realize there's no there there, some who won't care because they're also screwed up. The psychological exhaustion alone … The new-found ability to achieve an orgasm while in the presence of a man isn't going to be much of a problem solver.
She wants to have a child? I hope she doesn't.
The husband may be just as hopeless. It's been my experience that pathology will tend to seek out a dovetailing pathology. Or it could just be the green card angle, as others have pointed out. Or both.
If they divorce she might try sex with a woman. Maybe that's her problem. Maybe she's denying her true sexuality. She mentioned threesomes …
Well, I guess I had more than I first thought. The article is disturbing.
"Wait until the red pill boys weigh in."
We're just sitting here smirking at the clueless folks who don't see the obvious, especially the feminists who understand less about women's psychology than anyone.
This lady is following the script coded into her DNA to the letter.
As if she had a choice.
My god. Overthink much?
"But then I got a job in New York, and we rushed into marriage to secure his green card. There was no proposal, no ring, no joyous phone calls to friends and family about this wonderful life event. Instead, it was the first time I realized my husband had doubts about me. He wanted to keep the wedding simple at city hall, inviting no one, telling no one, and treating the marriage like a meaningless piece of paper. He claimed it was so that our “real wedding” down the road would feel more special, but if he knew I was the one, why not propose now?"
There you go.
The comments are too hard on this woman. She fell in love with a man who does not love her. That's why she dwells on how her husband doesn't "look" at her. She knows what is wrong, but hasn't decided what to do about it.
This isn't about sex at all. Sex is the modern vocabulary for talking about love, which is something totally different.
Spending all the time and money on sex classes is avoidance- the real problem is her husband's lack of commitment. That's why the writer muses about children, because she knows that her husband isn't going to be there to raise a child. He isn't committed to her, or their marriage, or to their future. Marriage is an expedience to be discarded when it is no longer useful. She's realizing that time is limited if she wants to have a family.
So, it's all very sad.
Please leave him.
You can improve two lives at once.
I can't find this in the article -- how long have they been married? Because a green card isn't automatic: you start with a conditional green card, and then,after two years, have to prove the genuineness of your marriage (which largely means having shared finances). When we went through the process, there was a point at which my husband had to leave the room, and the immigration officer asked me whether I had any reservations, whether he might have married me for the green card and intended to divorce me after it was made permanent.
In that room, what'll she say, and how truthful will she be?
Oh, sure, maybe he didn't marry her solely for the ability to come to the U.S. But he sure didn't make a genuine marriage-commitment to her.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा