Anonymous commenter number two makes a valid point:
“Here’s a suggestion: why don’t you actually read the book before you judge it? You’re basing your entire argument off of a 2 year old, 5 page article and a controversial book title. Perhaps when you read it, you’ll feel the same way, but maybe you’ll actually see that there’s wisdom in Gottlieb’s book. How about it?”
Yesterday’s post is a here’s-what-I-assume-Gottlieb’s-book-will-be, but anyone who went to middle school knows what an assumption does (ass, you + me). I’ll buy it today, Saturday January 30th, (update: not available until next Tues…) and report back my new or same opinion once I’m done.
And if that comment’s from you Lori Gottlieb – touche on the direct marketing strategy…
Until I’m through, here’s another pre-read assessment – this one from the male perspective. My friend Kevin explains some thoughts on settling from the side we’re supposed to settle on:
How about just one guy, one self-respecting guy, being given enough credit because he realizes and wouldn’t want to be the one settled for? I have a problem with this “settle” theory because it is so self-involved that it really doesn’t take into account the dynamics of a relationship– there are two people making choices. For Gottlieb, is it like choosing a dog? You go to the pound having wanted something so spectacular, but you settle for the mutt? It’s all the same because you end up falling in love with the mutt just as you would have if you’d found that purebred bichon frise.
Gottlieb’s article talks as if women are the only ones making decisions in relationships. If that’s the case, do you really want to be with a man who’s only a puppy dog throughout the course of your relationship? Maybe that is what some women are looking for, but a mutually beneficial relationship, where two people are equals and challenge and grow together, that seems the better option; that’s what friendships are. Shouldn’t she be saying, instead, “If I had wanted the things I want now back when I was in my 20s, I would have made different choices when it came to relationships”? Well, holy shit, no kidding. You grew up, maybe matured a little, and when you were ready to settle down you decided it was too difficult and came up with a half-cocked idea that you should have settled earlier.
Along the same lines, Gottlieb had wanted a child and didn’t want to wait for a father to come around. She was artificially inseminated. Don’t take this as judgement, because it’s not, but she was then a single mother. It actually made her lonelier to be a single mom than it did to be a woman searching for love, sans baby. In fact, I assume it became more difficult to meet, and put herself in a situation to meet, eligible bachelors because now she had a KID. If her be-all and end-all goal is to be in a marriage, whether liking the guy or not, why does she continue to stack the cards against herself? I really don’t even believe she believes this is the right theory for her, but it seems like a good story. And it seems like something an older woman would say because she felt she had missed out on some chances. The problem is that there will be some people who believe this – who believe that settling is just “settling,” it’s us being hard on ourselves and our significant others. There’s more to it than that. Relationships are more complicated than one person saying, “You like me, great. You’re a suitable breeding partner and will make my child a decent enough father. Let’s do this marriage thing. No more lonely for me.” Hate to tell you, but there are many people who are just as lonely, if not lonelier, being in a loveless relationship where they are not getting the support they need from their partners. Then you’re stuck. There’s divorce, but that can be really hard and financially taxing. Separation? Ok, but there’s still some emotional toll. And now what about that father you picked for your child?
Even in the best-case scenario, it seems the risks aren’t really worth the mediocre reward. Well, that’s unfair, because best-case scenario would be you settle, but you find out that you are compatible and willing to work and grow your relationship together. But that’s not really settling; it’s having been blind to something that was there all along. Maybe Gottlieb should be challenging women to be more aware of their future needs and desires before posturing this idea to “take what you can get.” It’s the wrong attitude. And I don’t believe it’s simply a challenge she’s putting out there, deliberately using inflammatory words and statements to inspire women to a certain position. No, it’s an actual argument: Take it now or forever be lonely because of your mistakes. Lucky is the man who gets chosen for that kind of relationship.
Yes, I’ll try to get Kevin to read the book too.
1 comments
Comments are closed.
bichon frise sounds like a fancy french meal, I’d settle for that