This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
|
|
|
by mcc99 on 07:13 PM February 20th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
...she, her husband, and their kids would be better off if BOTH she and her hubby agonized over everything all the bloody time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:52 AM February 21st, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Well, ladies, all I can say is the old addage, "Be careful what you wish for. you may just get it.".
you asked for it, you GOT it.
Start likin' it.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 04:42 PM February 21st, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"Mars," the henpecked husband in this story, has obviously adapted to his wife's (the authoress) neurotic behavior by tuning her out.
If he had real sense, he'd immediately go get a vasectomy.
The article is just one more trivial piece of evidence that feminism always requires women to define themselves as victims...
They were victims when they had fewer career choices, and now they're ultra-victims due to their surplus of choices.
Even when feminism succeeds, it apparently fails.
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by The_Beedle on 11:35 AM February 24th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
So the real message of the story is either that the author married someone who has always had money and doesn't worry about it, or...
That his worries about becoming a parent are so alien to her way of thinking (about only herself) that she can't even recognize that he is worried.
If she ever finds out I expect she'll blame him for failing to take the extreme measures necessary to communicate through her blinders.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|