But bravely, he learns to cope with it, and plus she promises to get implants and now they are going to live happily every after? And can you imagine women writing in, not understanding why other womem would be offended, since the man "matured" and it's a "happy ending"? Of course not.

Of course the guy was depressed when he lost his job. Men are supposed to be the providers. When they aren't, they feel like they aren't men anymore, and pretty much that's what Belger feels, too. But it's a lie, based on the idea that a man is supposed to make property, and his wife is a piece of it. It's the same old lie, and Belger isn't smart enough to realize it. Even when feminists are angered by the idea of men taking care of them, they seem to feel its okay for women to complain when this doesn't happen.

What about Belger's irrationality? She freaks out that she's being swallowed up by the low income living, but everything she mentions in terms of future plans when she dumps the poor guy (poor in both senses of the word) suggests she has ample funds available. There really doesn't seem to be any chance that she'll wind up in a slum, whatever his financial prospects. Hey, how about she supports them in a comfortable manner, and he stays at home. What, that's not acceptable?

The article is a slap in the face to men, reducing them to their bank accounts, which is even more dehumanizing than reducing them to their bodies, essentially turning them into sugar daddies who aren't so sweet when the money doesn't flow.

It's also a slap in the face to people who don't take it as a given that one, of course, spend a few years comfortably living in Europe (he hadn't; can you imagine?) and don't have a handy "freelance" career to take them to wherever they want in fairly comfortable circumstances. It should be part of a collection called My Yuppie Nightmare.

There's no "growth" on Belger's part. It isn't a happy ending. It makes one hope the husband realizes what he's been stuck with and divorces her, suing her ass for alimony and the "lifestyle to which he has become accustomed." What's sauce for the goose, no?

... i hope she makes it.

Spoilt, pampered Daddy's little girls like this story's writer - girls who have no context for what financial hardship, frugality or resourcefulness entails - should be required to reveal their coddled, out-of-touch-with-the-reality-of-99.9999%-of-the-world status to potential suitor.

It would save a lot of guys time, effort, money and heartache.

There are enough TRULY middle-class young women out there (reality check to Ms. Belger: you were born & raised a rich upper-class person, based on your own words) who have solid financial sense....

There are enough quality female partners out there who, unlike this Heidi Montag wannabe, aren't looking for Daddy Moneybags - but instead kind, decent men who share their financial values and class level.

So please, American Princesses - you of the "My Super Sweet 16" ilk, secretly pissed at Mommy & Daddy for buying you only a new Jetta instead of that cute Beetle convertible: do us all a favor and only socialize with spoilt, coddled American Princes.

Leave the hardworking, diligent working-class blokes alone, thank ya much.

-------------

Question to Ms. Walsh: why do you feel that younger female writers are so uber-fragile that you must rabidly protect them and their iddy-widdy feelings from we meanie letter writers?

Isn't it somewhat sexist to assume that Ms. Belger does not have a thick enough skin and enough self-confidence to withstand some pointed criticism?

Isn't it somewhat misogynistic to act as if Ms. Bulger would break into tears if you did not CHAUVINISTICALLY come to her rescue from we diabolically savage critics?

And if Salon actually did feature younger MALE writers - yeah, right - would you act as protectively of them?

Or can boys take care of themselves?

----------

One final question: what if the genders were reversed?

If a male writer wrote that he once considered leaving his wife over a financial concern, wouldn't every Broadsheeter / feminist on here be ripping him a new one for daring to abandon his poor wife?

But since we're talking about a woman pondering leaving a man because he can't satisfy her money needs, she is instead celebrated for her honesty?

I bet if she actually did divorce her husband for losing his job, many feminists would mentally high-five her for, I dunno, "empowering herself"...

Hey, Marisa?

Paul might find a lucrative position in the future. He may, in effect, become an older, wealthier man...

And at that point in the future - when he finally becomes semi-worthy of being with an American Princess like yourself?

Women younger and prettier than you - but who share your values of financial security/power in men - will become interested in Paul.

And, let's face it: Paul might become interested in them as well.

The money doubts that crept into your mind about your husband will be reflected later as the beauty doubts which will creep into his mind as you get older...and older...and older.

Karma works in strange ways, no?

---------------

Age: the great equalizer for men in relationships. Hallelujah!

Oh, that's rich. You don't think a traditional Chinese girl expects her husband to make a good living? You think your mail-order Russian bride married you for your good looks?

I swear, I'd insult you, but it would be too pitiful.

It's an issue to which most of us are particularly sensitive. Unemployment conjures up a whole range of emotions, from anger, to guilt, to self-loathing. Sure the story has a happy ending, and the author ultimately recognized the error of her ways. And I'm not going to say that she is never allowed to be angry. We are all human, as some have pointed out.

However, she should not have been brought up with the expectations that aroused her anger in the first place. I think those expectations, and not the author herself, is the appropriate target of criticism.

As this recession is cruelly reaffirming, unemployment is often out of a person's control. If Paul had sat on his ass all day watching football, then Marisa's anger and resentment would have been completely justifiable. But she said very plainly that he was working hard at finding work. What if he had been diagnosed with cancer (something that is also beyond one's control)? Would she have stood by him then? Surely that would have made things even less convenient for her. Yet I doubt you would find nearly as many apologists if she reacted similarly and displayed the same bad behavior.

A marriage that fails due to financial hardship is not a marriage. It's a business partnership. Couples who stand by their wedding vows ultimately make their commitment (and their love) more meaningful.