Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:06 PM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 28,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepperlandgirl View Post
Besides, nobody should have to stay in a relationship they don't want to be in.
Don't marriage vows mean anything?

I'm not saying that no one is ever justified in leaving a marriage—or even necessarily that Movie Cunt and/or Book Cunt wasn't justified; I wouldn't know—but I think it requires more than just a whim or feeling that "I don't want to be married to you any more."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolga View Post
Look, I really do not get this attitude. There were no children, and while yes, her husband was hurt, probably dreadfully so, it seems that people are saying "you married him, so suck it up, bitch, and stay in the marriage even though you don't love him anymore. Have children you don't want, because that was the expectation."

I guess people really do believe that no one should ever change their minds about anything ever, and no one should ever change their feelings about anyone, ever.
And I don't think anyone in this thread is being that absolutist about it.
  #52  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:14 PM
bup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: glenview,il,usa
Posts: 11,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink View Post
Don't marriage vows mean anything?
I've been thinking this but hadn't said it. Nobody forced her to promise all the things she did when she got married.
  #53  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:20 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
And I feel like I have to keep pointing out that, in the movie, she left only because a voice in her head told her to do it, not because there was anything actually wrong with the marriage. Moreover, it was her tone about the whole thing that was cuntish - not just that she left, but that she did it on an arbitrary whim, with no feeling at all for how it affected her husband, and she immediately started banging some other dude.
  #54  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:24 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulf the Unwashed View Post
Well.... She writes, "I moved right in with David after I left my husband." And, "I clung to David for escape from marriage as if he were the last helicopter pulling out of Saigon." You make it sound like taking a lover was completely unrelated to her divorce, but she certainly didn't take any time to lick her wounds, now did she? Certainly divorce proceedings would've been complicated by his presence in her life--and her presence in his bed.

(As others have said, think of the reaction to men who walk out on their wives and immediately start fucking somebody else, showing no interest whatever in trying to patch the marriage back together. Lots of sympathy for the wife, lots of anger at the husband, and a general sense that the wife is entitled to whatever she can get from him. Also, I would guess a deep suspicion about the husband's claim that he didn't start seeing anyone until AFTER he left his wife. "Scout's honor! It was at least a WEEK after I moved out!")

I don't know what Gilbert is like in real life, and I haven't seen the movie, but I do have a problem with the way she casts herself in the book. "I won't open any of that," she says high-mindedly with regard to why she left her husband, and then just a few pages later opens it up after all, and in a way designed to make him seem mean and petty and toddler-like:

"...communications reminding me of what a criminal jerk I was."

"He let me know that I was a liar and a traitor and he hated me and would never speak to me again."

Especially when she doesn't reveal the things she may have said to him (is it really possible that she remained pure of motive and friendly of speech throughout?). Look, either discuss it fairly or don't discuss it at all, but it's really not okay to say you won't discuss it and then proceed to do exactly that, putting someone else in a very bad light.

That said, I very much liked the scene on the bathroom floor (in the book). Too bad she came across in most of the rest of the book as so very whiny, self-centered, and mean-spirited, because she surely can write.
It sounds like her account in the book is even more self-serving and obnoxious than what's shown in the movie. I don't buy that she wasn't already banging that other dude either.
  #55  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:27 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiz View Post
I didn't read Julie & Julia, but I did read Cleaved. I actually found the butchering far more interesting than the affair. My first thought? Here's a book than can be made into another movie!
Julie and Julia would have been a much better movie if it had just been about Julia Child and the Amy Adams character was dumped altogether. All of the Julia Child scenes were great (my favorite sequence was the vist from Jane Lynch as Julia's sister), all of the Amy Adams scenes were bog-standard, chick flick crap.

Last edited by Diogenes the Cynic; 12-01-2010 at 05:28 PM.
  #56  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:55 PM
Lemur866's Avatar
Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 22,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Julie and Julia would have been a much better movie if it had just been about Julia Child and the Amy Adams character was dumped altogether. All of the Julia Child scenes were great (my favorite sequence was the vist from Jane Lynch as Julia's sister), all of the Amy Adams scenes were bog-standard, chick flick crap.
Yeah, the problem is the character of "Julie" in the movie is a boring, bland rom-com cipher. Whereas the real Julie Powell is apparently a cranky opinionated bitch. A movie about her might have been interesting.
  #57  
Old 12-01-2010, 07:07 PM
Sam A. Robrin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,111
The reaction is part of the fallout of so-called "feminism," which has collapsed under the weight of its own absurdities, unbeknownst to Hollywood, whose denizens continue to try to enlighten us with lessons that we should be teaching them.
In its early years, as popularized by Betty Friedan, who perpetually emphasized that it would be mutually beneficial to women and men, "feminism"* started with good ideas. Then came a legion of people who'd Read An Article and saw their opportunity, and what was fair and sane became an excuse for indulging in any sort of behavior at a whim, regardless of who got hurt.


___________________________
A big part of its problem is its name: If you believe in equal rights for people of all races including white people, you don't call yourself a "Whitist"--you'd understandably be regarded as a supremacist.
  #58  
Old 12-01-2010, 07:12 PM
Ferret Herder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Suburbs of Chicagoland
Posts: 22,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink View Post
Don't marriage vows mean anything?

I'm not saying that no one is ever justified in leaving a marriage—or even necessarily that Movie Cunt and/or Book Cunt wasn't justified; I wouldn't know—but I think it requires more than just a whim or feeling that "I don't want to be married to you any more."
Yeah, so her husband gets stuck with someone who doesn't love him anymore and doesn't want to bear him any children? That's no prize for him, either. Even if counseling could get her to behave in a loving fashion towards him, I doubt it could easily "fix" her lack of desire to be a mother.
  #59  
Old 12-01-2010, 07:58 PM
Snarky_Kong is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
And I feel like I have to keep pointing out that, in the movie, she left only because a voice in her head told her to do it, not because there was anything actually wrong with the marriage.
Probably because most people realize it was just her conscience being vocalized, not a hallucination.
  #60  
Old 12-01-2010, 08:42 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,261
Well, heck, my wife did more or less the same thing, and we DO have a child. And she gave me not a red cent, since she has none. So ponder that, Dopers. Imagine if Elizabeth Gilbert had a kid AND had an affair AND her decisions left everyone involved living paycheck to paycheck.

I think the real problem with the movie is the idea that the character escapes her marriage and then advises a girl to enter into a marriage she doesn't want to be in... and THEN gives her no gift other than her idiotic "wisdom." That contradiction alone, no matter what else the movie contained, makes the movie-Gilbert a horrible human being.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #61  
Old 12-01-2010, 08:46 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snarky_Kong View Post
Probably because most people realize it was just her conscience being vocalized, not a hallucination.
What conscience?
  #62  
Old 12-02-2010, 03:40 AM
kiz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
What conscience?
Have you read the book? Her conscience speaks to her for much of it; hence, why it's more "interior" and therefore an important piece of the story which doesn't translate easily to film. Take away all the interior monologue and the movie Gilbert, from all accounts in this thread, is a whiny, vapid, pretentious woman.

Watch her TED talk. She doesn't come across like that whatsoever IRL.
  #63  
Old 12-02-2010, 06:52 AM
DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 11,286
This movie caused the one and only time my ex apologized to me during our entire relationship. You could switch the male/female roles in this movie and it would be a lifetime movie of the week, her behavior was incredibly selfish, self absorbed and narcissistic. Put it all together and cunt just about covers it. So far nobody defending has addressed the whole "if a man had done this nobody would be defending him" issue.

Last edited by DigitalC; 12-02-2010 at 06:52 AM.
  #64  
Old 12-02-2010, 07:10 AM
Ferret Herder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Suburbs of Chicagoland
Posts: 22,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalC View Post
So far nobody defending has addressed the whole "if a man had done this nobody would be defending him" issue.
Fine, I'll dig up the link I've posted in previous discussions on this - here's a review discussing what the male-written version would be like. And here's the parody version, titled "Drink, Play, Fuck." Frankly, I've never been interested in almost any of the books/movies mentioned in this thread, including "Bridges of Madison County" or the title work.

It seems that one problem with the movie, as pointed out previously, is that trying to show internalized thought processes on screen almost never works out well - not to mention the ever-present problem of trying to compress a book into a couple-hour story.

And it seems like the author might have gotten a bit wrapped up in talking about her travelogue and was a tad too light on setting up how she got to that point.

Last edited by Ferret Herder; 12-02-2010 at 07:12 AM.
  #65  
Old 12-02-2010, 08:22 AM
heatmiserfl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
This thread is bizarre. I didn't read the book or see the movie but it looks like quite a few people who are calling Gilbert a cunt also didn't read the book or see the movie. WTF?

Also bizarre is the notion that people can't fall out of love; they must have never been in love in the first place. Therefore, they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place. Really? Like love is some sort of rational cost/benefit analysis or that people are the same 6 years later or people never, ever misrepresent themselves before they get married, etc. etc. The worst is the idea that even if that person changed and/or the other one fell out of love, they have to stay together in a marriage and "work it out". What is there to work out if you don't love someone anymore? Completely falling out of love is quite different from having issues that make it difficult for a couple to get along. Those you can find solutions and work thing out. Otherwise, how exactly do you remodel your brain to fall back in love? Oh, and please don't tell me about how true love should last forever. So I suppose this Gilbert was supposed to doom herself AND her husband for the rest of their lives?

Dio is one of the few (and maybe others, he just stands out) who actually watched the movie and is ascribing her cuntishness to her flippant attitude to the whole thing. That is reasonable. Apparently, however, the book describes her as feeling very guilty.

Now anyone who thinks she's a cunt because she's a spoiled, rich woman who wouldn't know suffering if....well, I can get on board with that.
  #66  
Old 12-02-2010, 09:16 AM
Nava is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 43,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferret Herder View Post
It seems that one problem with the movie, as pointed out previously, is that trying to show internalized thought processes on screen almost never works out well - not to mention the ever-present problem of trying to compress a book into a couple-hour story.
I suspect that details such as turning her romp with a man much older than the real Gilbert into one with a current heart-throb younger than Roberts didn't help - and that is not something the producers/director/etc did not "realize", it's something done on purpose.

Btw, link to a previous thread on this movie.
  #67  
Old 12-02-2010, 09:21 AM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiz View Post
Have you read the book?
I've tried to make it pretty clear that I'm only talking about the movie. I have to say that the movie did not make me want to read the book, especially if the movie is an accurate representation of how the author views Eastern spirituality.
  #68  
Old 12-02-2010, 10:00 AM
Baal Houtham is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Leaky Heart of America
Posts: 2,576
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalC View Post
So far nobody defending has addressed the whole "if a man had done this nobody would be defending him" issue.
Yep.

And this is the start of the review Ferret Herder linked to:
As I enter my 30s, I find myself emotionally unsatisfied. I have achieved professional success as a writer, I own a new house, and my wife is ready to have kids, but somehow it all just feels wrong in a way I can’t quite identify. Thus befuddled—and given to random jags of weeping and self-pity—I elect to assuage my unhappiness by shacking up with a cuter, younger writer-actress woman from New York.

Soon, I come to love the cute, young writer-actress in a way I could never love my wife
Yeah, people can do what they want. People can get a new spouse anytime they get bored with the old one.

What I want to do is think those people are usually shallow and misguided. What's wrong with feeling that way?
  #69  
Old 12-02-2010, 10:53 AM
PeskiPiksi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 989
I think the issue here is that people are judging Elizabeth Gilbert the person as opposed to Elizabeth Gilbert the character in a movie. Sure, sounds like the way she was portrayed in the movie wasn't great. But that's not who she actually is, if you believe the way she portrays herself in the book.

Re: what if a man did it? I think you guys are right--there is a double standard. That doesn't make it right. If a man found himself in the same situation she did, unhappy in his marriage, depressed, and basically lost, I would think he should do the same thing Gilbert did. Leave the spouse before you waste more of their time, before you cause even more damage to both of you and heaven forbid any unwanted children.
  #70  
Old 12-02-2010, 10:54 AM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
I think he should sack the fuck up and be a man.
  #71  
Old 12-02-2010, 10:58 AM
PeskiPiksi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 989
So honestly, if your wife fell out of love with you, and was really unhappy despite counseling, etc., you'd want her to stay? You'd want to be married to someone who didn't love you?

I sure wouldn't.
  #72  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:02 AM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
If you don't love somebody, don't marry them.

Besides, she didn'tr fall out of love with the guy. A magic voice told her to leave him.
  #73  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:03 AM
PeskiPiksi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 989
Nice way to dodge the question.
  #74  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:09 AM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
The "falling out of love" angle is irrelevant since that's not what happened in the movie. The marriage was fine until she heard the magic voice.

Also, like I've said repeatedly, it wasn't just that she left, but how she left. She was abrubt, cold and capricious about it. It was like buying a new coat to her. She just dumped a nice guy who loved her out of the clear blue sky and with no explanation to go jump in the sack with a guy half her age. And she had the nerve to try to sell it as part of some "spiritual" journey. If a guy dumped his wife out of the blue to go bang some piece of fluff and tried to pass it off as some kind of spiritual obligation, he would not have many defenders.

Last edited by Diogenes the Cynic; 12-02-2010 at 11:09 AM.
  #75  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:16 AM
DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 11,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeskiPiksi View Post
Nice way to dodge the question.


It's not really a dodge, marrying someone then going "woops, changed my mind!" puts you in the asshole/cunt category by default.
  #76  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:16 AM
DrFidelius's Avatar
DrFidelius is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 12,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeskiPiksi View Post
Nice way to dodge the question.
He can only work with what was presented in the movie,otherwise it is just fan-wanking.
  #77  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:35 AM
unwashed brain is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by bup View Post
I've been thinking this but hadn't said it. Nobody forced her to promise all the things she did when she got married.
Exactly. Lots of cavalier attitudes about marriage vows expressed in this thread. There are good reasons you recite them in front of friends and family and declare your intentions to the State and your deity of choice. It's no-joke serious bizness, not 8th grade "going steady."

Last edited by unwashed brain; 12-02-2010 at 11:36 AM.
  #78  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:38 AM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
Amen to that. If you aren't ready to promise forever and really mean it, then don't get married. If you do make the promise, then keep it.
  #79  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:38 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,533
Dudes have said "well, she shouldn't be forced to stay in a loveless marriage" and they have a point. But to find a guy and have an affair so soon after stinks, especially as it far more likely she started her affair while still married and that's why she got out of the marriage. Anyone in the dating scene knows that her timeline is rather suspicous.
  #80  
Old 12-02-2010, 11:44 AM
WhyNot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
Posts: 33,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalC View Post
So far nobody defending has addressed the whole "if a man had done this nobody would be defending him" issue.
If a male author had written the book with the same insight and self abuse that Gilbert did, going through the same thought process and growth, I'd have related to him and enjoyed the book as well.

In fact, I suspect this is the key: men don't tend to let us in on their internal thought process and emotions as much as Liz does. Knowing someone's motivations and guilt goes a long way to building sympathy for their situation. Certainly male Dopers in loveless marriages have been encouraged to get out, once we understand where they're coming from.

If a male actor played the role of "Les" identical to Liz except for gender in a film identical to this one, I'd think he's a cunt, too. Because the movie does a terrible job of capturing the inner process that explains the character's actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
...especially if the movie is an accurate representation of how the author views Eastern spirituality.
It's not.
  #81  
Old 12-02-2010, 12:12 PM
Saltire's Avatar
Saltire is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 3,756
If I can be allowed to present a second-hand opinion based on the book and without exposure to the movie, my mother told me recently she'd read the book and had no interest in the movie.

Her reasoning is that Gilbert went on this epic voyage of self-discovery which resulted in her finding another man to fulfill her inner needs. If she'd found the strength to deal with herself by herself (at least for a while), it would have been a far more profound story.
  #82  
Old 12-02-2010, 12:13 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Besides, she didn'tr fall out of love with the guy. A magic voice told her to leave him.
So do you think the director was portraying her as schizophrenic or was it supposed to be God/Angels speaking to her?

Last edited by CarnalK; 12-02-2010 at 12:13 PM.
  #83  
Old 12-02-2010, 12:30 PM
bup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: glenview,il,usa
Posts: 11,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferret Herder View Post
Yeah, so her husband gets stuck with someone who doesn't love him anymore and doesn't want to bear him any children? That's no prize for him, either. Even if counseling could get her to behave in a loving fashion towards him, I doubt it could easily "fix" her lack of desire to be a mother.
That's true. However, if one committed to this thing, and meant it, they should at least involve the person they've fallen out of love with in the decision, rather than unilaterally saying "Wha!? I'm not in love anymore! Wha'd ya expect, a lifetime commitment!?"
  #84  
Old 12-02-2010, 12:33 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
So do you think the director was portraying her as schizophrenic or was it supposed to be God/Angels speaking to her?
It seemed to me as if the movie expected the audience to actually take the supernatural at face value. It espouses woo in other ways too (like the guru fortune teller).
  #85  
Old 12-02-2010, 12:37 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 11,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Amen to that. If you aren't ready to promise forever and really mean it, then don't get married. If you do make the promise, then keep it.
The movie shows her husband taking those vows seriously. And in 2 scenes he all but gets on his knees and begs her to come back.

I'd like to reiterate that her husband wasn't a bad guy. He needed to grow up a lot, but that's it. Had he been cheating on her, beating the shit out of her, coming home drunk every night or gambling the mortgage away, then taking off would be more than justified on her part.

His big sin? He wanted to start a family. The sonovabitch!
  #86  
Old 12-02-2010, 12:45 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
I know. I'm on the husband's side completely. It wasn't like he even surprised her about wanting kids. She knew that when she married him. She promised him something she wasn't really willing to give.
  #87  
Old 12-02-2010, 01:07 PM
Jennyrosity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1,675
I'm hesitant to comment on this, having read neither the book nor seen the film (and not being interested in doing either), but the comments on marriage have intruigued me. Like some other posters, I think marital vows should be taken rather more seriously than some of the comments would suggest they are.

It shouldn't be a case of "I don't love you anymore/I'm not happy anymore, so I'm outta here". Over the course of a long-term relationship, your feelings may well change. One person is unlikely to make you completely happy for every moment of your life, or to keep filling you with those gorgeous "in love" feelings forever. I don't think that means you get to just walk away - you committed yourself to that person for life. You owe that committment at least an attempt to work things out. And no, you can't force yourself to love someone. But if you stay and put the work in, you might remember why you loved them in the first place, and some of those feelings may reignite.

I've only beem married 2.5 years (together for 6.5), but one thing I'm learning is that it takes work. A few months ago a colleague who was about to get married asked me if I had any tips. I thought about it for a minute, and responded: "It's harder than you think". In hindsite possibly not the most tactful thing to say to a bride-to-be, but I think it's true, and more people should be aware of that before getting married.

Of course it's different in an emotionally or physically abusive relationship. And the children thing would be a dealbreaker for me, too. I checked that my now-husband wanted kids as soon as the relationship got serious, because I knew there was no point in pursuing it if he didn't. I certainly wouldn't have married him and hope he might change his mind afterwards. That'd hardly be fair to either of us.
  #88  
Old 12-02-2010, 01:46 PM
heatmiserfl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by bup View Post
That's true. However, if one committed to this thing, and meant it, they should at least involve the person they've fallen out of love with in the decision, rather than unilaterally saying "Wha!? I'm not in love anymore! Wha'd ya expect, a lifetime commitment!?"
I'm still not getting this. Why would either partner want to continue a marriage in which one of the partners is no longer in love?

Also, he wanted children. Should he have children with someone who doesn't love him?

Let's say an uncuntish woman falls out of love with her husband but continues the marriage and has children. That's preferable?

Either people are claiming that love is an easily explainable phenomenon and something that someone can control or both partners should be forced to remain in a relationship in which one of the partners does not love the other. Or maybe the third possibility is that uncuntish women never fall out of love????

Again, I'm confused.
  #89  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:00 PM
Ferret Herder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Suburbs of Chicagoland
Posts: 22,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
I know. I'm on the husband's side completely. It wasn't like he even surprised her about wanting kids. She knew that when she married him. She promised him something she wasn't really willing to give.
I'll just add here that for decades, nearly every time I said that I didn't want kids, nearly inevitably I would hear, "You'll change your mind," often accompanied with a look like I couldn't possibly know better, or with anecdotes of women who did just that. I even heard 'are you sure?'-type questions from my gynecologist, at age 40.

I know it does happen that some people change their minds. (My husband changed his, to no.) I think it's quite possible that she believed that she, too, would change hers.
  #90  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:00 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
She shouldn't have made those vows in the first place is what we're aying, and if she did make the vows, she should have made a bare minimum effort to honor them. She certainly should not have lied and told him she was willing to have kids when she wasn't.

Moreover, in the movie, she did not fall out of love with him. A supernatural voice told her to leave him.

And once again, the most egregious thing was her tone about it all. No tact, no feeling, no concern at all about jerking the rug out from under her husband with no warning. Just me me me. She's like that through the whole movie. She never cares about other people and thinks that spirituality is all about loving and gratifying and "forgiving" herself.
  #91  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:06 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferret Herder View Post
I'll just add here that for decades, nearly every time I said that I didn't want kids, nearly inevitably I would hear, "You'll change your mind," often accompanied with a look like I couldn't possibly know better, or with anecdotes of women who did just that. I even heard 'are you sure?'-type questions from my gynecologist, at age 40.

I know it does happen that some people change their minds. (My husband changed his, to no.) I think it's quite possible that she believed that she, too, would change hers.
I don't see how you can anticipate changing your mind or just take it for granted that you will. That makes no sense to me. You can certainly always acknowledge that it's a possibility, but a certainty? What? She was certain that she would change her mind? That comes off as dissembling and self-serving to me. If she was really willing to stake a lifetime commitment on a certainty that she would change her mind about something years down the road, then she was an idiot to begin with.
  #92  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:06 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by heatmiserfl View Post
I'm still not getting this. Why would either partner want to continue a marriage in which one of the partners is no longer in love?

.

OK, fine. But dumping him and running off almost immediately? The timing stinks and strongly implies a affair during marriage.
  #93  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:09 PM
Skammer's Avatar
Skammer is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Music City USA
Posts: 14,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by heatmiserfl View Post
Either people are claiming that love is an easily explainable phenomenon and something that someone can control or both partners should be forced to remain in a relationship in which one of the partners does not love the other. Or maybe the third possibility is that uncuntish women never fall out of love????
I think people are saying that love is more than just a feeling of infatuation; it is also a product of will. If you marry someone, you sometimes have to work at loving them and not give it up when you don't have butterflies in your stomach anymore. If you can't make that commitment, you shouldn't be getting married.
  #94  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:13 PM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 28,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by heatmiserfl View Post
Or maybe the third possibility is that uncuntish women never fall out of love????

Again, I'm confused.
Several people have been using the phrase "fall out of love." What kind of "love" are we talking about, that a person can be walking along and—"Whoops! I fell! I don't love you any more"?

I'd rather let someone else with more personal experience address this. But I have heard from many people who have been married long and successfully that the kind of love that a successful marriage is based on is more than just a feeling that can come and go: it's something you work at, something you practice, something you nurture.
  #95  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:13 PM
StGermain is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Toon Town
Posts: 10,950
I've hesitated to respond because I, too, haven't seen the movie or read the book. But as to the marriage thing - she may not love him right now. If she hadn't bailed because "oh, noes...I'm soooo unfulfilled", she may've found that she loved him again in 6 months. I'm not married. But being in any kind of family should teach you that there's more to a relationship than what's going on right at any given moment. The feeling of not being blissfully in love may be no more real than the giddy feeling of first love. Hopefully, in the end, most people realize that, in the words of Carly Simon
Quote:
What if the Prince on the horse in your fairytale
Is right here in disguise?
And what if the stars you've been reaching so high for
Are shining in his eyes?
Anyway, my opinion is less valid than others because I haven't seen the movie or read the book.

And I didn't know until just now that Sue Sylvester played Julia Child's sister in Julie and Julia.

StG
  #96  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:19 PM
Lemur866's Avatar
Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 22,401
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
  #97  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:37 PM
Trepa Mayfield is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur866 View Post
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Wow. You're a really good poet.

SPOILER:
Learn to attribute your quotes, thief.
  #98  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:47 PM
heatmiserfl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink View Post
Several people have been using the phrase "fall out of love." What kind of "love" are we talking about, that a person can be walking along and—"Whoops! I fell! I don't love you any more"?

I'd rather let someone else with more personal experience address this. But I have heard from many people who have been married long and successfully that the kind of love that a successful marriage is based on is more than just a feeling that can come and go: it's something you work at, something you practice, something you nurture.
My husband and I don't "work" on our marriage. I guess we're lucky in that we're both pretty easy-going outside of work. I simply like being around him. I dunno. Maybe I'm lucky.

OTOH, I almost married a guy but broke off the engagement. We were together for 3.5 years. I'm pretty sure I was in love with him at first but my perspective on life and goals changed during the course of the relationship. He was kind of a dick but not necessarily abusive. I was lucky enough that I woke up before we got married. However, the decision to break up came as an epiphany. He said something minorly assholish and I suddenly couldn't stand the sight of him. Phew! Dodged a bullet.
  #99  
Old 12-02-2010, 03:02 PM
Lemur866's Avatar
Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 22,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedescribe View Post
SPOILER:
Learn to attribute your quotes, thief.


Son, everyone on the planet knows that sonnet. Even illiterate millet farmers in Namibia.

You honestly thought I was plagiarizing William Fucking Shakespeare's Sonnet 116?

Seriously?
  #100  
Old 12-02-2010, 03:03 PM
Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 14,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedescribe View Post
Wow. You're a really good poet.

SPOILER:
Learn to attribute your quotes, thief.
I really, really doubt that Lemur866 of all people was attempting to pass that off as his own.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017