article: The Lure of Divorce Seven years into my marriage, I hit a breaking point — and had to decide whether life would be better without my husband

[MatureDJ]

The Lure of Divorce

Seven years into my marriage, I hit a breaking point. Since then, I’ve had to decide whether life would be better without my husband in it.

www.thecut.com

The Lure of Divorce

Seven years into my marriage, I hit a breaking point. Since then, I’ve had to decide whether life would be better without my husband in it.

1ft.io

To cope with the stress, I asked my psychiatrist to increase the dosage of the antidepressant I’d been on for years. Sometime around then, I started talking too fast and drinking a lot.

Here is an Aaron Clarey video about it:

 

[SW15]

She is nuts.

 

[Money & Muscle]

I was looking for the article but can't remember where I read it. Something about women most commonly initiating divorce at around year 7-8 (usually lines up with children age 5-7).

I thought it was a rational male article Schedules of Mating, but it's not that. If anyone knows what I'm talking about, drop a link please.

 

[The Duke]

She blames everyone but herself for her problems in life.

Although she is a severe nut job, it is great insight into how women think and how irrational they can be. This biatch obliterates reality. @Hacker read this, it's what we were talking about about.

 

[NoBiscuits]

I'm concerned that sharing content is corrupting our epistemology.

Culture is a function of media, not vice-versa. You can debate the validity of this in a vacuum, but the historical applications of media on culture are indisputable. It should be firstly assumed that digital articles, social media accounts, news outlets, celebrity endorsements, and major university publications are primarily instructive, not informative. This has been the correct way to view media since the 1930's onward, regardless of how many people get upset and call you names because you negated or didn't regurgitate their naive ideals.

Academics, public relation firms, and media conglomerates openly discuss how they use media to shape culture to their desired image on a regular basis. They themselves even make popular, easily accessible documentaries where they interview each other on how their team achieved their cultural and political goals (eg. Century of the Self and Hollywoodism).

If you'd still rather argue that media is instead a product of culture, then you can also read public UK government documents on nudge teams or the CDC's policy on propaganda protocols for covid. You can get these documents off of official government websites right now if you want. None of this is secretive. They openly tell us how they're going to manipulate our culture in advance, in direct language. Those who still insist on calling others "paranoid conspiracy theorists" can watch the latest video from Lock Picking Lawyer. You have no excuses.

Ok, so we're all on the same page now?

That being said, the content that OP regulary links to poses a problem for us. It ruins the way we think problems through by starting us off with faulty assumptions. It's incorrect to think of this blog as a kind of bottom-up source of information that relates in any way to what the average person thinks (ie. Emily Gould is not some average woman sharing her life experiences in the marketplace of ideas. She's a bonafide propogandist for medium-high level media whose very career is to change culture in a professionally predetermined way. The people interviewed in Century of the Self are same people she goes to meetings with).

The correct way to interpret it is instead "this blog is instructing women to believe/behave X, Y, and Z" You can't base any understanding off of it since whether those ideas get adopted or not is yet to be determined. It is in no way, shape, or form a representation or insight into female thought (but it will likely be in the near future, since propodana works).

I see this kind of content linked here often. Please stop consuming it or reacting to it. That food is for the pigs.

Spoiler: more sources

1. most successful propagandist of the 20th century, his book
2. an early book describing the duties of modern propaganda
3. example of modern use (book has been banned from Amazon)

 

[The Duke]

I'm concerned that sharing content is corrupting our epistemology.

Culture is a function of media, not vice-versa. You can debate the validity of this in a vacuum, but the historical applications of media on culture are indisputable. It should be firstly assumed that digital articles, social media accounts, news outlets, celebrity endorsements, and major university publications are primarily instructive, not informative. This has been the correct way to view media since the 1930's onward, regardless of how many people get upset and call you names because you negated or didn't regurgitate their naive ideals.

Academics, public relation firms, and media conglomerates openly discuss how they use media to shape culture to their desired image on a regular basis. They themselves even make popular, easily accessible documentaries where they interview each other on how their team achieved their cultural and political goals (eg. Century of the Self and Hollywoodism).

If you'd still rather argue that media is instead a product of culture, then you can also read public UK government documents on nudge teams or the CDC's policy on propaganda protocols for covid. You can get these documents off of official government websites right now if you want. None of this is secretive. They openly tell us how they're going to manipulate our culture in advance, in direct language. Those who still insist on calling others "paranoid conspiracy theorists" can watch the latest video from Lock Picking Lawyer. You have no excuses.

Ok, so we're all on the same page now?

That being said, the content that OP regulary links to poses a problem for us. It ruins the way we think problems through by starting us off with faulty assumptions. It's incorrect to think of this blog as a kind of bottom-up source of information that relates in any way to what the average person thinks (ie. Emily Gould is not some average woman sharing her life experiences in the marketplace of ideas. She's a bonafide propogandist for medium-high level media whose very career is to change culture in a professionally predetermined way. The people interviewed in Century of the Self are same people she goes to meetings with).

The correct way to interpret it is instead "this blog is instructing women to believe/behave X, Y, and Z" You can't base any understanding off of it since whether those ideas get adopted or not is yet to be determined. It is in no way, shape, or form a representation or insight into female thought (but it will likely be in the near future, since propodana works).

I see this kind of content linked here often. Please stop consuming it or reacting to it. That food is for the pigs.

Spoiler: more sources

1. most successful propagandist of the 20th century, his book
2. an early book describing the duties of modern propaganda
3. example of modern use (book has been banned from Amazon)

You make a valid point there is still validity. There were several examples of how men and women think differently and one is more rational than the other. Parts of this are reality for many folks.

1. I ordered takeout and demanded he go pick it up for me. Calling from the restaurant, he was incensed. Did I know how much my takeout order had cost? I hadn’t paid attention as I checked boxes in the app, nor had I realized that our bank account was perilously low — I never looked at receipts or opened statements. Not knowing this, I felt like he was actually denying me food, basic sustenance.
Any long term couple could experience this scenario. He saw it in a very rational, looking out for the family concern. She saw it as something personal and couldn't make sense of the facts her husband understood very well.

2. In the meetings with the shrinks, I steadfastly maintained that I was sane and that my main problem was the ending of my marriage. I put Keith, and my mother, on a list of people who weren’t allowed to visit me. Undaunted, Keith brought me gluten-free egg sandwiches in the morning, which I grudgingly ate
- Here is the husband showing honor, loyalty, empathy, etc even though he had sanctions placed on him and might not be appreciated.

3. We couldn’t afford to live separately, even temporarily, but the one thing that our somewhat decrepit, inconveniently located new apartment had in its favor was two small attic bedrooms and one larger bedroom downstairs. I claimed this downstairs room for myself and began to live there alone,
- Here she thinks of herself once again. The man who is paying all the bills, holding all of this together lets the crazy biatch take the premium bedroom, while he gets a small one in the attic. How many times have you heard a version of that story play out? Man and woman get in a fight, HE sleeps on the couch. Man and woman are having issues, he goes to stay at a hotel/friends house/etc. And later the woman goes on to resent that large bed room she took. It reminds her of her darker days.

4. This woman went from loving this guy and having children with him to flipping a switch and FEELING he is a threat to her professional writing career and jealous of him. Totally irrational. But now she focuses on how they are not compatible. Its the LIGHT SWITCH theory discussed about on another thread played out in this marriage.

I've had these exact things play out in my relationships with women that weren't even close to being CLUSTER B personalities. These same story lines have been shared right here on this forum from others.

I don't see where this article was advising women to believe/behave as you took it. It was telling a story.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

I was looking for the article but can't remember where I read it. Something about women most commonly initiating divorce at around year 7-8 (usually lines up with children age 5-7).

I thought it was a rational male article Schedules of Mating, but it's not that. If anyone knows what I'm talking about, drop a link please.

Oftentimes aligns with hitting a "mid-life crisis" where you wonder if this is what you want for the rest of your life and if you can do better.

 

[Dash Riprock]

I simply cannot believe, for the life of me, why any successful man would choose marriage in 2024.

 

[pipeman84]

She blames everyone but herself for her problems in life.

Although she is a severe nut job, it is great insight into how women think and how irrational they can be. This biatch obliterates reality. @Hacker read this, it's what we were talking about about.

I don't think this case can be used to portray men as superior beings compared to women ... see also your second post in this thread. If that guy was any good himself, if he was the rational one, as men are supposed to be, he wouldn't have 1. married her 2. have children with a woman with mental illness 3. remain married to a clinically insane woman who also cheats on him.

 

[The Duke]

I don't think this case can be used to portray men as superior beings compared to women ... see also your second post in this thread. If that guy was any good himself, if he was the rational one, as men are supposed to be, he wouldn't have 1. married her 2. have children with a woman with mental illness 3. remain married to a clinically insane woman who also cheats on him.

Yes I suspect he is deficient in detecting red flags! Certainly the guy ignored things he should not have in the beginning.

 

[Divorced w 3]

I mean what divorce actually goes well especially in the beginning, what a ridiculous clickbait article. Of course she sounds nuts. All women are and then sprinkle divorce with kids on top?

 

[MatureDJ]

I simply cannot believe, for the life of me, why any successful man would choose marriage in 2024.

Steady poontang?

 

[Ricky]

I was looking for the article but can't remember where I read it. Something about women most commonly initiating divorce at around year 7-8 (usually lines up with children age 5-7).

I thought it was a rational male article Schedules of Mating, but it's not that. If anyone knows what I'm talking about, drop a link please.

i too have read this in a lot of places. I am sure Rollo talks anout it but some research must back this up as well