Yes. LW1. If he tries to play it like his position is supremely logical, remind him that the logic of marriage is that two people have freely decided to make each other their priority in life, over and above anyone else, including parents.
If you have any desire left to save your marriage, I recommend you see a couple's therapist, as your husband needs to hear from a third party that his attitude is in violation of the meaning of marriage.
A guy who rents an apartment in my house has lots of toys and action figures, and, while I'm not looking for love, I think it's very charming.
He has them set up all nice on a shelf that he installed, and just generally maintains the place well, so it comes off as endearing and not childish, in my opinion.
Sounds creepy and lame.
(but unlike the others I don't think it's any better in a text)
I know I'm a little late to this conversation, but...
As someone who just recently got married, I have to say that this sounds like it is at least in part a matter of the more universal problem that everyone offers their two cents about how you are going to perform for your celebration, and any deviation from the norm strikes them as worrisome.
And then, if you stick to your guns and make the choices you want to make, after everything is said and done all anyone can say is "I just LOVED how special and personal it all was - it was SO YOU"!
Sisters, mothers-in-law etc., sometimes can't seem to prevent themselves from raising their eyebrows over every little (or big) thing. Don't let their lack of imagination/rigid sense of propriety deter you.
I'd say it's possible, but not always easy. Sure, part of what can make sex exciting is the surprise of being affirmed by a new person in a very intimate way, and that isn't really there in a long term relationship. You already know they like you, find you attractive. For some people, without that uncertainty sex seems to lose its meaning.
But I'd say, if people can continue to get themselves off for years and years, why can't one partner do the trick? I mean, if you can be creative in your own mind enough to get yourself excited, why not share your sexual imagination with your partner, and encourage him/her to do the same? Over time you get to know what someone likes and doesn't like, and you can hopefully build on that as time goes on.
(I'm not sure that this directly responds to the LW's case, where perhaps she feels she's lost her drive entirely, and not just in relation to her partner. But hopefully these more general reflections, from someone who has had the same partner for ten years, are somewhat helpful)
Amen. I wish everyone would read this post and laugh and pick up a hammer and help nail shut a coffin encasing the all of painfully obvious diet books, and turn our attention to better things.
But realistically we will probably just have to go about our lives amid the din of "you all think X, but really Y!" inane food revelations. Thanks for your astute mocking, Nicole.
oh man, i love that i live in a world that loves tina fey.
for now I'm just trying to be patient until till she does more writing, cause in the mean time i know I will be going to see whatever movie she happens to act in and that I will feel disappointed, and miss her commentary
LW1 - I'm on your page with the sortof/kindof quitting smoking...in fact I was just thinking of going out to buy a pack when I happened upon this Q&A. But reading your letter made me not do it, so Thank You!
sure, that makes enough sense.
all i really wanted to say is that if Zizek is sincere about a project of breaking down our comfort with lazily accepting the opposition between freedom and totalitarianism ("and so on and so on"), this is something I can get behind. this is a real problem for political thought. and as you say, this can't be either a negative nor a positive endeavour simply.
his role in the media is that of a gadfly, and frankly i don't blame him for this because people seem to be more attentive to his playful and incendiary rhetoric than to that of a pedant or a preacher. but that doesn't mean we have to reject him, just because he does a better job at demonstrating the difficulties in our accustomed ways of thinking than he does of "replacing" the old with the new (which for the record, i don't really think is the best way of describing the work of philosophers either, but i'll quit nitpicking your language ;)
i'm not sure i agree. sure, it is easy to reject or express an aversion for a position or a statement (especially one that offends our common sense of decency), but that is not the same as making a good negative argument (which requires actually understanding that which you are critiquing).