Letters to the Editor
Sandra M
Published Letters: 577 Editor's Choice: 139
-
That bit about 'obey' is rarely if ever in a contemporary Christian wedding.
[Read the article: Girls just want to have frills (and cats)]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was married in 1987. "Obey" was considered laughable and archaic even then. The huge huge majority of Christian weddings use the word "cherish' instead of obey- and the men say it as well as the women.
There is nothing inherently wrong or patriarchal about Christianity. The Catholic Church and other sects have indoctrinated sexism, but it was never part of the teachings of Christ, who was an egalitarian guy who hung out with thieves, beggars, lepers and prostitutes.
I'm no longer a practicing Catholic but I get tired of people holidng up the Pope in Rome as an example of everyday Catholic practice. Nothing could be further from the truth, at least in the US. The average Catholic in the US believes in abortion, divorce, premarital sex, remarriage in the church -- all big No Nos according to the big-hatted Papi. Most of the Catholics I know - and this includes my midwestern extended conservative Republican family and every priest, without exception, that has headed up the parishes where I've attended Church - are, in practice, tolerant of homosexuals, since most of us have one swimming around in our friends 'n family pool and can see for ourselves that they are normal unremarkable folks who simply have a slightly different take on what's sexually attractive.
Christianity is not all about anti-what-liberals-believe-to-be-right-and-just. It just isn't. I'm not a Christian, but I get tired of people trotting out the old tropes so they can skewer organized religion. Many people who belong to organized religion are good, honest people who wish ferverently to lead good, honest lives. They aren't all automatons marching along to weird sexist, racist, homophobic fundamentalist diatribes. Some are, of course. But most of those getting married under the auspices of Christianity are remarrying, have had premarital sex, have zero intention of obeying anyone other than the authorities and the IRS, and laugh at the very things that are so often held up as ominous, restrictive "Christian values".
-
It's a chlly kind of love...
[Read the article: Does less of a paycheck make him less of a man?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]..that's only there for you when the chips are up.
I wondered idly as I read the letter why they never married. By the end of the letter this was woefully apparent - the LW has no interesst in being supportive of the father of her children in sickness - only health. Nor in bad times - only good. And certainly not for poorer - only for richer.
Did you guys pledge your troth in some paralle dimension where circumstances never change, where no one ever gets sick, or has a disaster befall the family and have to lend financial aid, where there are no accidents are just plain old bad luck?
The LW's attitude is punishing in the extreme. The guy loses his job and she questions his manhood. Holy cow. It's kind of a miracle he can still find the sack to borrow from her.
If you absolutely have to be this cold about it, then draw up an agreement: make him a loan at a nice low percentage interest, with a payback schedule that is more forgiving of the terms a mean old bank would demand..you know, in deference to 'loving him to death' and co-parenting 3 children and all of that. For example, give him 6 months from the time of the loan to get a job, even a low-paying job. Then on month 7 he makes a minimum payment of $150, and when he finally gets a job that is at least 60% of his former pay then that payment increases to $300 or whatever.
After 16 years together it is sort of shocking to hear absolutely zero empathy coming from the LW. Despite claiming to love this guy to death, she seems to have no real feelings for his predicament - she evinces absolutely no concern for how he might be handling this internally. Losing a job can be tough. Especially if you are over 40 - in some industries that can translate to less employable, as people at that age often want the high salary they slowly built up elsewhere, but also want 'balance', i.e. are unwilling to work very long hours with the very frequent travel necessary to keep up with the young turks dying to get promoted into the high-paid position they wish to occupy.
If I were your partner, I'd be wondering if I might do better with someone less rigid about matters monetary. Who wants to live under the fear that their ass is going to be emotionaly kicked to the curb unless they deposit exactly X amount into the monthly coffer?
I'm not saying you should financially support him, no questions asked, just because he lost his job. But why isn't that a temporary option, at least? Doesn't 16 years and 3 kids together mean ANYthing in terms of wanting to help out in tough times? If you just can't help being tight-assed about m oney, can't you at least volunteer a creative lending solution that keeps you from feeling pissed off and resentful and keeps his feelings of dignity and worthiness to himself, you and the relationship intact?
Geez, lady.