[LMB] GOOD GRIEF, was Ektarin and 'homebodies'

Paula Lieberman paal at gis.net
Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:15:45 -0500

Sheesh.  I already wrote that I misread the comment that caused me to write
what got quoted below!

And I NEVER said ALL married men act like that grad student's wife!   NEVER!
And I did start that thread off with "snitrant" after all!!!

There ARE women like that, and trying to hold a conversation  about politics
with them is a bad joke, like the time when I was working packing plastic
plant pots in the Pink Flamingo factory (Union Products, Lancaster Street,
Leominster, Massachusetts) when I asked the other women working there, some
of whom were married, some not, but all local from Leominster [I was from
there, too...], a question about state politics.  Boston's 40 miles east,
but as far as they were concerned, it was in a galaxy far far away that was
utterly irrelevant.  "That's in -Boston-!" they said, as if it were totally
irrelevant -- despite the fact that the laws the legislature enacts affects
everyone in the state.  Grrrrrrrrr.....

Again, someone was quoting ELLI mentally asking herself what Miles would
think. I misread that for "Ekaterin" -- the names start with the same
letter, and l and k are close in order in the alphabet....

And I really do NOT believe the datum that Debbie quotes at the bottom

Why am I not married?

1.  I'm not a doormat/yesdear type who's going to rearrange her life for
someone else's convenience.
2.  I didn't want a relationship with the OTHER person playing doormat
for -me-.  I had opportunities for that, and preferred not to take the
opportunity to be a domestic tyrant.
3.  I wasn't interested in be #3 in a marriage, either in serial mongamy, or
in polyamory.... I actually have a relative whose years as "the other woman"
turned into being the fellow's second wife, after his children were on their
own.  But the price paid was that the cousin has no children, that was part
of the arrangement, he didn't any more children.

Etc. etc. etc.  The opportunity for full partnership never showed -- unequal
ones, yes, but complementary team, no, and I wasn't willing to deal with
Relationship from Hell, or relationship promising to turn into Hell.  There
are lots of Tiens out there, for example.  There are Baron Ryovals.  There
are Prince Sergs.   There are Vorrutyers.  There are nebbishes.  There are
people who are too much -effort- to deal with, and there are couch potatos
who yell for their pizza and beer and expect it to be brought to them.
What's the line from Twelve Fair Kingdoms, "there are two types of men, a
very few and magnificent, and most are pathetic."  And the book shows some
of both, and the lives of the wives--the ones who spend part of their time
shoving their nitwit husbands out of the way, the wives who themselves are
nitwits some of them married to nitwits (one of Responsible's aunts by
marriage and her idiot husband... the nitwit aunt being the sister of the
bright intelligent aunt deliberately brought into the family, whose husbands
wasn't a swift type, but the family wanted the wife and the price was her
nitwit sister), there are bright women married to bright men (Responsible's
grandfather Jonathan [can't remember middle name] Brightwater and her
grandmother Ruth of Motley....

-- Paula Lieberman
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Debbie" <lioness at bellsouth.net>

> At 07:05 PM 11/26/2003 -0600, you wrote:
> >Paula wrote:
> >
> >>That's a major contributor to me finding Ekaterin someone I don't go out
> >>of my way to read about.  <snip> "What do you think of the Nixon
> >>impeachment hearings?" Sandy asked the woman.  The woman turned to her
> >>husband and asked, "Honey, what I do think about the Nixon impeachment
> >>hearings?" AAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!  I really, really, really don't want
> >>to deal with that sort of thing!   Give me someone who's at least able
> >>carry on an intelligent conversation or have an opinion of their own, or
> >>play Ivan and come up with all sorts of crazy ways to get out of
> >>expressing one!
> >
> >That is an AWFULLY narrow view of married women.  I know no few women who
> >made a choice to run the household and raise the kids (as well as other
> >activities, such as handling all the moneys and investing and thereby
> >surpass the nominal pay income substatially...or maybe even write SF
> >novels) who held strong, independent views their entire relationship with
> >a given partner.  It is extremely faulty logic to make the baseline
> >assumption of "married, home, with kids" (aka  "homebody") = what Paula
> >describes above, and then having made that extremely broad assumption,
> >apply it to Ekaterin.  Ekaterin hasn't demonstrated any instance I can
> >recall that would validate Paula's scenario above as being applicable.
> >
> >I also know some single women (and men) who are single because...well, at
> >least, theorized by those who know these critters...they have very little
> >to actually contribute to a relationship.  Some are even rather
> >educated..but they are unable to share, communicate (as in transmit AND
> >recieve...the transmitter works, reciever very faulty), they are
> >relatively unemcumbered by responsibilities and can construct a safe
> >for them to pen themselves up in....well, I'm sure everyone can thing of
> >people who are single "for a reason", and not neccessarily because the
> >person says "I don't want anyone."  Just making the point while Paula
> >seems to have this very myopic view of married women, being married or
> >being single is not an indicator of ...well, of about anything except
> >maybe their tax return structure.
> >--
> IIRC higher IQ women are statistically MORE likely to be married than
> IQ women, and FAR MORE likely to have arranged their family's finances so
> that they can actually afford to stay home with their children during
> formative years.  Paula might want to look at some hard data and not just
> old non-wives' tales.

Please cite the references.  I don;t believe them.