Letters to the Editor
aarinsane
Published Letters: 12 Editor's Choice: 2
-
next steps
[Read the article: My husband constantly upstages me]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think you should take a step back, think about this pattern you describe (along with ultra-specific incidents that illustrate the pattern) and sketch it out on a timeline. It sounds like a dire situation and I think it's entirely necessary for you to build a "pathology report" of sorts in order for you to do the right thing. Your relationship isn't just in an unhealthy state, it's diseased and that disease needs an analysis where you're not just looking at how things are now, but how they came to be this way. Engaging in this process will also help you examine your underlying feelings for this guy. It will probably break your heart to analyze your marriage so coldly and it should. How it breaks your heart is the important question that needs answering. Additionally, I would recommend compiling your knowledge of your husband's parents' marriage, as that will yield clues to where he might be going. He might have had an Archie Bunker dad that dominated his mother irregardless of her capabilities. Their might be a legacy of failure in his family that he isn't prepared to deal with, etc.
From the way you describe things, it sounds like things have been potentially going south from square one. If they have, that's a far cry from a situation where his life fell apart after a bad business deal or a death in the family or some other pivotal turning point. I think the guy probably has problems deeper than a marriage counselor or other professional can readily fix without his honest recognition that he has a problem. You can't fix the arrangement by yourself. Ultimately if it falls on you to fix it, you should probably consider moving on unless you think you'll be happy letting him take credit for all of your ideas for the rest of your life.
Good luck. Stay forgiving, but remember your priority: YOU!
-
Lynx: difference between abortion and miscarriage
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Lynx,
I initially wanted to say fuck you in response to your comment. I then backed off since I usually don't do that sort of thing and it doesn't promote any sort of dialog.
I then went back and parsed your post:
"In your mind, what's the difference?"
Do you realize how condescending this is? Do you even care? The difference is in all of the connotations we speakers of english carry with us. Language derives its currency from usage. This holds true for the "rabble" as much as it does for scientific circles. To deliberately ignore the living pulse of a language, along with the according meanings people inject into the words they use, and instead embrace your cold adherence to "scientific" language smacks of the bad kind of elitism to me.
Additionally, the American Heritage dictionary i checked mentions that "miscarriage" refers to a situation involving a non-viable fetus. I know it's just a lowly plebe dictionary, but that's a pretty big distinction in the eyes of the lowly commoner from situations where viable fetuses are not brought to term.
By the way, I'm pro-choice. My mom lost twins in a miscarriage situation before I was born.
-
blightstar
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Now I understand why they refer to you as BS65.
This woman is an argument against safe and legal abortions like VA Tech is an argument for the repeal of the Second Amendment.
We as a country are actually on average pro-choice and pro-gun, get used to it.
Oh and why in the hell do you need to be protected from this crappy "performance artist"? She might be a freak, but it's really not affecting you aside from your paranoid "gyno-spiracy" worldview.
Oh and the method she "used" for the abortions can't even be regulated without a super-invasive police state. You're really just looking to exploit this douche-bag in pursuit of your hysterical (yeah, I said it) "abortion is the root of all evil" social agenda.
-
lynx
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]thanks for the fair and smart response. i would say that if the post you're referring to was too short, your first one keeps it good company. you didn't leave me much to go on, plus you used that "in your mind" phrase. it sounds like I overread/misread the question in retrospect. but that language implied to me that you already had the opinion that there was no difference.
Looking at Jeannette's distinction, I think that she was trying to separate unwanted terminations of pregnancies from intentional terminations and not digging into anti-choice propaganda. My defensiveness certainly stems from my connection to someone that's gone through this and I wonder if she might be coming from a similar place.
anyway, thanks for the measured response. it was probably more than i deserved.
-
that's pretty funny, King
[Read the article: Now batting, number $, Derek Jeter]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I had to look twice before i deduced that it was a joke. It is a joke right? You really do capture the slippery slope idiocy of her position. I would make the hypothesis that if it weren't for the initial segregation baseball went through, no player should have (and,) hypothetically, would have had the universal retirement of their jersey.