Wait...you belly-flopped onto my punch fountain? where was I when this happened? oh wait, now i remember, i'm fat, so I guess I was probably eating cookies... because i was too distracted with my love of food to complete my jury duty. srsly.
sometimes i wonder if it is in fact rare for people to love each other for their possession of anything other than a fleeting superficial beauty. columns like this one don't help.
the fem theory in me makes me incapable of reading columns like this without filling in the details the writer barely hints at so as to bring the larger classist, agist, fatphobic, misogynist patriarchal context into full focus.
Here's what I get when I read this: "wow when we were young and addicted to heroin and didn't give a shit about the silverfish in the bathtub and doing laundry, our life was so punk rock and hot. now that there's all this adult stuff to deal with"--keeping a house and marriage in tact involves much more than just the "cleaning" and affirmations this guy seems to think it does--"i'm just not feelin' it."
I find it revealing that his definition of being a good husband involves telling his wife he loves her and doing some (light?) cleaning. He talks about her helping him achieve his goals (which includes becoming captain Buff 'n Stuff, but at the sacrifice of what???) but there is no mention of her own, or about why she might be "letting herself go."
We've talked at length about how the body type en vogue is always a reflection of what's available only to a select few with money and leisure, so I probably don't need to point out that if this dude has had increasing time to be some sort of Punk Rock Adonis, he probably has had to let other things, related to her and their relationship slide.
I also find it disturbing that he implies that he was "more unattractive" at the outset of their relationship, suggesting that she accepted him for who he was, but he was only down so long as she wasn't keeping food down.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-11-21 10:45 pm (UTC)sometimes i wonder if it is in fact rare for people to love each other for their possession of anything other than a fleeting superficial beauty. columns like this one don't help.
the fem theory in me makes me incapable of reading columns like this without filling in the details the writer barely hints at so as to bring the larger classist, agist, fatphobic, misogynist patriarchal context into full focus.
Here's what I get when I read this: "wow when we were young and addicted to heroin and didn't give a shit about the silverfish in the bathtub and doing laundry, our life was so punk rock and hot. now that there's all this adult stuff to deal with"--keeping a house and marriage in tact involves much more than just the "cleaning" and affirmations this guy seems to think it does--"i'm just not feelin' it."
I find it revealing that his definition of being a good husband involves telling his wife he loves her and doing some (light?) cleaning. He talks about her helping him achieve his goals (which includes becoming captain Buff 'n Stuff, but at the sacrifice of what???) but there is no mention of her own, or about why she might be "letting herself go."
We've talked at length about how the body type en vogue is always a reflection of what's available only to a select few with money and leisure, so I probably don't need to point out that if this dude has had increasing time to be some sort of Punk Rock Adonis, he probably has had to let other things, related to her and their relationship slide.
I also find it disturbing that he implies that he was "more unattractive" at the outset of their relationship, suggesting that she accepted him for who he was, but he was only down so long as she wasn't keeping food down.
grah!