Dear Wendy
Dear Wendy

Friday Links

Here are a few things from around the web that may interest you:

I disagree with this one, although I know a lot of people must love it because it’s been filling my Facebook newsfeed all week. The message it sends is, in my opinion, impractical and irresponsible … and frankly, kind of stupid. Marriage isn’t about being a martyr; it’s about being a team. And it isn’t about having children. Not for everyone, anyway. And even if it were, I would hope more thought goes into choosing a spouse than whether he or she will be a great parent (though, of course, that IS important if you want to have kids!). Anyway, here it is: “Marriage Isn’t For You” [via Seth Adam Smith]

“I Learned Everything I Needed to Know About Marriage From Pride and Prejudice” [via The Atlantic]

Rape-preventing panties are a thing now, which I guess means women will soon be blamed for their rapes because they weren’t wearing the kind of underwear (oh, wait, I think that already happens…) [via Time.com]

“19 Habits Of Really Healthy Women” [via HuffPo]

Chip Wilson, founder of Lululemon, “explains” the company’s PR disaster earlier this year by saying, “Quite frankly, some women’s bodies just actually don’t work [in Lululemon’s pants].” Hmm. Something tells me this isn’t the end of their PR nightmare. [via NPR]

“Laurie Anderson’s Farewell to Lou Reed” [via Rolling Stone]

Thank you to those who submitted links for me to include. If you see something around the web you think DW readers would appreciate, please send me a link to wendy@dearwendy.com and if it’s a fit, I’ll include it in Friday’s round-up. Thanks!

You can follow me on Facebook here and sign up for my weekly newsletter here.

30 comments… add one
  • LadyinPurpleNotRed

    LadyinPurpleNotRed November 8, 2013, 12:39 pm

    Reply Link
    • katie

      katie November 8, 2013, 12:44 pm

      oh i am posting that!! that stupid marriage isnt for you think has popped up soooo much lately!

      Reply Link
      • LadyinPurpleNotRed

        LadyinPurpleNotRed November 8, 2013, 12:46 pm

        It’s a great response! I just thought it was funny. I opened facebook. Then Dear Wendy and Friday Links and boom!

        Link
      • avatar

        jlyfsh November 8, 2013, 12:47 pm

        yeah i think it sounds ‘romantic’ in the, love should be dramatic like a movie!, way. but, practically i mean come on!

        Link
    • avatar

      Banana November 8, 2013, 2:05 pm

      Ah! This paragraph from that article is what I was TRYING to say in my post below!

      “Marriage is for the other person’s happiness: If you love someone, you want them to be happy. And it’s very nice to think that you can make another person happy, but it’s also very arrogant. What really makes a person happy? Lots of things: family, friends, hobbies, work, and more. It will be your job to add to their lives and help them be even happier. The way to do that is to be happy yourself, with hobbies, friends, and work of your own. And when those things aren’t going so well in your lives, you can each help the other through the bad times. Together, two happy people can create an even happier couple, but if you make someone else’s happiness your mission in life, you give them the power to make your life a failure.”

      Reply Link
    • avatar

      iseeshiny November 8, 2013, 4:08 pm

      This is going on my facebook RIGHT NOW. Thanks for sharing!

      Reply Link
    • Portia

      Portia November 9, 2013, 5:26 pm

      Thanks for putting that up!

      Reply Link
  • katie

    katie November 8, 2013, 12:45 pm

    i am so glad you didnt like that weird marriage article! i felt odd after reading it. like, i couldnt pinpoint it, but something wasnt right about that….

    Reply Link
    • GatorGirl

      GatorGirl November 8, 2013, 12:46 pm

      Gah, I HATED that marriage article. Some of the points are good-ish, but over all blech.

      Reply Link
    • avatar

      starpattern November 8, 2013, 1:07 pm

      Hah, I never took it seriously because (among my FB friends anyway) it was being posted primarily by young, single, evangelical women who desperately want a husband… is that mean of me? It’s probably mean.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        Fancy Pants November 8, 2013, 3:02 pm

        Honey, I noticed the exact same trend. I saw it posted 9 times and only once was by a married person and never was it posted by a man. 5 of the women who posted it were evangelical.

        Link
      • avatar

        starpattern November 8, 2013, 4:00 pm

        I’m glad it’s not just me!

        Link
      • avatar

        missliss November 8, 2013, 3:42 pm

        I noticed that on my feed it was posted by mostly Mormon women. Also random people who are not very traditional posted it, which confused me.

        Link
      • othy

        othy November 8, 2013, 10:40 pm

        It made all the rounds amongst my Mormon facebook friends. Not a a single non-Mormon friend of mine posted it.

        Link
      • Portia

        Portia November 9, 2013, 5:32 pm

        It also did not sit well with me and I’m so glad I’m not the only one! But the people who were posting it were all over the map: almost-married man, a single girl from my birthright trip, a just-married female friend, and of course the obligatory single evangelical. There were a couple of others too, but I was like, what am I not getting here?

        Link
    • CatsMeow

      CatsMeow November 9, 2013, 3:25 pm

      Did you read the comments? Even worse.

      Reply Link
  • avatar

    Lucy November 8, 2013, 1:13 pm

    I don’t understand why Lululemon don’t stop digging themselves a hole over their mythical sizing issues. I say this as a size 12 yoga teacher who wears their clothes literally, no exceptions, every day of my life. Just. Stop. Talking.

    Reply Link
  • avatar

    Banana November 8, 2013, 1:19 pm

    Yeah, I’m really glad you posted that marriage article. I’ve been seeing it all over the place and it just irritates me. At the end of the day, it’s way too simplistic. “Marriage isn’t for you…it’s for you to give something to another person” is only one fraction of the whole marriage equation. The truth is, marriage is for you, it’s for the other person, it’s for the partnership you establish, and it’s all three of these things in shifting proportion, and a lot else besides.

    In general, I think a lot of arguments in favor of giving more of yourself to the rest of the world to do good can get a little tiresome. It’s sort of implying that anything you do JUST for yourself somehow subtracts from your ability to do good for others. But you can’t help someone else if you don’t know how to help and care for yourself, first. That’s what gets me. If you want to contribute to a marriage, if you really want to make at least part of it “about” the other person — you giving yourself to the other person — you have to take care of yourself, too, you know? You have to at least be self-caring enough to identify your own needs, your own vulnerabilities, and your own desires so you can communicate them to your partner and let them take care of you, too. And so you don’t simply drain yourself. And so you can look after yourself simultaneously. I’m between meetings so i’m not very articulate but that’s my rushed response.

    Reply Link
  • avatar

    bethany November 8, 2013, 1:24 pm

    That marriage article seemed weird to me, too.

    I’ve only been married for 2 years, so I’m no expert, but I think marriage is something different to everyone. In fact, my marriage probably means something different to me, than it does to my husband, and that’s ok.

    Is it me, or does anyone else think that a lot of people are writing articles/blog posts specifically with the intent/hope that they go viral? It seemed to me like that article wasn’t so much as that guy speaking his personal truth, but more like an attempt to write something that would get attention.

    Reply Link
    • avatar

      Fancy Pants November 8, 2013, 3:00 pm

      I felt like it was just an effort to go viral as well. I totally got that from the stupid “Made you click!” tagline. Granted I also hate silver bullet one size fits all live like me or die alone and sad articles.

      Reply Link
  • avatar

    SasLinna November 8, 2013, 1:31 pm

    The marriage isn’t for you article is really kind of illogical. How can you give anything to a partner if you’re heart isn’t in it, if you don’t want to do it FOR YOU? And wouldn’t the whole thing work reciprocally – if you’re marrying someone, someone’s marrying you, and by the logic of the article they would be marrying you FOR YOU.

    Reply Link
    • avatar

      Banana November 8, 2013, 1:40 pm

      Yeah. I thought the whole thing was very circular.

      Reply Link
    • Lindsay

      Lindsay November 8, 2013, 7:27 pm

      I don’t think it’s saying that you should never consider yourself in a marriage. At least, I didn’t read it as being as super strict as it seems a lot of other people see it.

      And it’s a lot different to do something for yourself than for another person to do something for you. Like buying yourself a gift is a whole different concept than someone buying you a gift.

      Reply Link
  • iwannatalktosampson

    iwannatalktosampson November 8, 2013, 1:40 pm

    I love that 19 habits of healthy women. I just love articles like that.

    Reply Link
  • avatar

    missliss November 8, 2013, 3:55 pm

    Exactly WWS on the anti-rape underwear. We’ve designed a a new reason to blame women if they get attacked. “Well if she was only wearing the protective underwear…”
    Anyway, it says it cannot be cut through. That doesn’t give me any peace of mind. If an attacker brought a knife and tried cutting through them and couldn’t, couldn’t he just threaten the person with the knife until they removed them anyway? This is just like that trial where the perpetrator was acquitted because the woman was wearing jeans, and of course she MUST HAVE removed them voluntarily. UGH.

    Reply Link
    • mylaray

      mylaray November 8, 2013, 4:56 pm

      The whole idea is just icky all over. Plus it also makes the assumption that someone can’t be raped orally.

      Reply Link
    • Miel

      Miel November 8, 2013, 7:31 pm

      I agree that the underwear seems to be a bad idea, but I was kind of upset that they mentioned the south african barbed condom as if it were the same thing. South Africa has one problem : women that are being raped on the street by strangers jumping on them, spreading AIDS and making the streets particularly unsafe. The US (and other countries) have an entirely different problem : victims being raped by an aggressor that they often know and trust, because the aggressor think “no means yes”. I mean… do you really think a woman will wear those undies in bed because she doesn’t want to have sex with her abusive husband that night ? You think that’s really how you’re going to make this woman’s life easier ?

      I don’t know, I just feel like not all “anti-rape” device are evil. It’s varies so much based on the country and situation.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        Kaluu November 9, 2013, 2:26 am

        I don’t know how it is in South Africa. Maybe there the device would for some reason be effective. But here I imagine the rapist being very angry and hurting the woman. I’ve never known a rapist but that’s my perception of what an American rapist would do in reaction, based on media.. Also I think (from the media) that some may get off on the chase/ predAtory behaviour/ obsessively planning their attack, so an obstacle would just make them try to “win the game” more, not give up. Maybe it would be better in a college rape situation. Like, that type of rapist may be very down with roofie-ing a female peer so he can rape her, but he might not be down with something more likely to get him in trouble. Like if that kind of rape is often not getting the perpetrators in much trouble, those types of rapists may be less willing to do anything that could actually have consequences for them.

        Link
      • Miel

        Miel November 9, 2013, 11:19 am

        I’m not sure you understood how those condoms work. They are filled with spikes. If the penis gets in, it becomes stuck. The instinctive reaction for the men is to pull out, but that will just remove the condom from the women and cause the men an incredible amount of pain because of the spike injuring his penis. He also can’t remove the device.

        I really don’t know a man that would be able to “win the game” while spikes are piercing holes in his erect penis and the woman is already running away.

        However, this is a South African solution, not an american solution.

        Link
  • Lindsay

    Lindsay November 8, 2013, 7:25 pm

    I don’t have a problem with the marriage article. I think the important thing is to realize that not all commentaries like that are supposed to blanket statements to everyone and for every situation, and that it doesn’t have to be taken completely literally.

    I don’t think that reminding people that marriage isn’t only about you is trying to turn people into martyrs. Many people already grasp the idea that marriage is bigger than just who you want to see every day for the rest of your life and what they can do for you. If so, that’s great, but some people don’t, and I think this is for them. I also don’t think that it means that a person should never think about their own interests. It’s just highlighting one point about a very large concept.

    Reply Link

Leave a Comment