Thursday, January 15, 2004
Help in Defining a Happy Marriage
Since the current administration is probably going to ignore my recommended topics for marriage training (see January 14 post), I thought maybe I’d poke around and see what others think of as appropriate subjects in our quest to educate the poor, unhappy sods who cannot maintain successful marital relationships. I only had to go to today’s Op-Ed page of the NYT to find one opinion of what needs to be fixed.
In case you fail to link, let me cite the pertinent quote. In her snappy little editorial, Dowd states: “Before Mr. Bush ventures into the inner cities to practice his conjugal noblesse oblige, perhaps he should beeline to a more rural spot — a split-level ranch house with green shag carpeting and Grateful Dead albums in Burlington, Vt. The doctors Dean seem to be in need of some tips on togetherness and building a healthy political marriage, if that's not an oxymoron.” And what does Dowd think is so troubling about the Deans’ marital home? The fact that the missus hasn’t let go of her practice to follow the mister on his political trail.
I get the speculative idea thrown around considerably in recent weeks that this wifely absence may cost Dean female voter support. (Though Dowd seems to think that Ms Dean’s presence may not be an asset. She describes her thus: “In worn jeans and old sneakers, the shy and retiring Dr. Judith Steinberg Dean looked like a crunchy Vermont hippie, blithely uncoiffed, unadorned, unstyled and unconcerned about not being at her husband's side — the anti-Laura.”). But from this must we leap to the conclusion that the MARRIAGE IS IN TROUBLE?
Well then, to get in with the cool people, let me suggest a module that therefore should be included in the marital trainings:
5. (previous 4 – see yesterday’s blog) How to keep the missus glued to the hip of a husband who chooses a profession requiring her pasty smile and warm presence even though she has a career which she finds valuable and important and despises making public appearances and flashing pasty smiles and indeed is bad at both but appears to be excellent at being a doctor and raising a son and is willing to pull up her roots and move to a big city as opposed to continuing with her rural practice just on the off chance, the very very off chance that her hub will be elected.
Did I say this already? I’m just so PSYCHED about this idea of marriage training!
In case you fail to link, let me cite the pertinent quote. In her snappy little editorial, Dowd states: “Before Mr. Bush ventures into the inner cities to practice his conjugal noblesse oblige, perhaps he should beeline to a more rural spot — a split-level ranch house with green shag carpeting and Grateful Dead albums in Burlington, Vt. The doctors Dean seem to be in need of some tips on togetherness and building a healthy political marriage, if that's not an oxymoron.” And what does Dowd think is so troubling about the Deans’ marital home? The fact that the missus hasn’t let go of her practice to follow the mister on his political trail.
I get the speculative idea thrown around considerably in recent weeks that this wifely absence may cost Dean female voter support. (Though Dowd seems to think that Ms Dean’s presence may not be an asset. She describes her thus: “In worn jeans and old sneakers, the shy and retiring Dr. Judith Steinberg Dean looked like a crunchy Vermont hippie, blithely uncoiffed, unadorned, unstyled and unconcerned about not being at her husband's side — the anti-Laura.”). But from this must we leap to the conclusion that the MARRIAGE IS IN TROUBLE?
Well then, to get in with the cool people, let me suggest a module that therefore should be included in the marital trainings:
5. (previous 4 – see yesterday’s blog) How to keep the missus glued to the hip of a husband who chooses a profession requiring her pasty smile and warm presence even though she has a career which she finds valuable and important and despises making public appearances and flashing pasty smiles and indeed is bad at both but appears to be excellent at being a doctor and raising a son and is willing to pull up her roots and move to a big city as opposed to continuing with her rural practice just on the off chance, the very very off chance that her hub will be elected.
Did I say this already? I’m just so PSYCHED about this idea of marriage training!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.