Why is an essay about an essay about ending a marriage infuriating so many people?

Benfer wanders through her own responses as does Tsing Loh. Letter writers are reacting not to either woman's perspective, but to some strange idea of what marriage and divorce (should) mean. The people involved in relationships or dissolving a relationship create their own meaning; the rest of us just glmpse a bit of someone else's life. Judging the entirety of a person or a person's work from an essay makes no sense and it's ugly.

The letters here remind me of those sent about abortion - stuffed full of rigid ideals of how things should be under the guise of what is morally correct, but without regard to individual circumstance. So many of the letter writers leave no room for human nature, for the gentler emotions of sadness, disapppointment and compassion. Marriage is a complex relationship loaded with historical, legal, religious and social significance. Benfer and Tsing Loh demonstrate how delicate yet flexible we all have to be to survive.

These women are not Gingrich or Edwards or Ensign, all of whom made a certain brand of "family values" a selling point for their qualification as political representatives and public moral compass. The absurdity of judging a relationship or personal values on a single thing like sex, weighs us all down. Benfer and Tsing Loh counter preposterous certainty with expressions of vulnerability by recounting the reality of change over time.

Whether or not anyone likes their style or form is another question entirely. Ripping someone to shreds because she can't meet standards that are impossible to know, much less meet, is unfair. It's as unfair as saying a marriage has failed rather than the more accurate and honest, ended.

There's something sad about Sanford's state, not pathetic, just sad. For a short time I wondered whether Sanford was suicidal. He's been something of an irritant to the GOP, the suspicion that he was pushed into politics by his wealthy wife and her family has been popular gossip, and the conflicts he's expressed about the role of politicians in corrupting society suggest a man uncomfortable with the mantle of hard line moralist.

A politician who willfully goes missing is trying to check out of more than his political position, he's trying to get away from a constricted measure of his life. Americans have a weird and cruel mythology about sex, one that views it as an ugly fact of life rather than part of a inherent, biological sensuality. Sanford perpetuated that mythology, so is a hypocrite. Still, there's something about his language that signals a desperation, a deep desire to feel more than was allowed him by the politics and religion he was born into.

Unlike Spitzer or Ensign, Sanford doesn't seem creepy, just lonely and more than a little lost.

Being and getting wealthy is a religion in America. By feeding our mythology that everyone can - and should be - rich, we discriminate against those who cannot gain a foothold on the slippery, sloped steps of the economic ladder. Despite the fact that 93% of the wealth in the US is held by 1% of the population, and much of that inherited, we cannot shake the belief that poverty is a character flaw instead of an accident of birth and the inevitable result of nearly unfettered capitalism.

We somehow think that Bill Gates or A-Rod have earned their money instead of seeing how they make money off other people's labor. The idea that someone should be awarded whatever the market will bear is exactly what allowed for sub-prime loans, for derivatives and "financial products" that were as empty as Paris Hilton's head. She makes money because we pay to watch her - and several housewives - go around being rich.

Our most profitable gurus are the tribe of charlatans who sell personal improvement, self-help, and finance advice through books, workshops and "seminars" designed to let you in on the big secret about how to get rich through real estate. From Suze Orman (Live Your Best Life) to Mr. & Mrs. Kyosaki (Rich Dad, Poor Dad)to Anthony Robbins (Maximize Personal Power) to Dr. Phil (Self Matters), these people sell the idea that emotional satisfaction and physical security is found in wealth. In fact, these people have made money by selling these false ideals and bad ideas, not by behaving the way they advise the public to behave.

We talk about the economy as if it is a separate entity from those who participate in it. "The market" is a concept we all buy into. Unfortunately, we also buy into the idea that "the market" has some moral quality that we must revere. Surely, this and the false idols who propagate this idea for their own benefit has contributed to our idea that home ownership signifies intelligence, safety and solidarity.