That column was unusually mystifying for a Modern Love column. Usually, I can recognize the type of weirdo the story's about, but I am unable to visualize a man who would act as described, where a cutely written up summary of his bad behavior would have an effect on him.
The writer of the column is a novelist, so I'm sure everyone involved is a nutter.
I confess I stopped reading about Count II, the whole thing seemed too ridiculous. But that's my usual reaction to Modern Love.
Yeah, but that's not ordinary nuts. I can imagine someone acting as badly as she says he did; I just can't imagine the same guy giving a fuck about the cute little 'Complaint'.
My guess is either her presentation of the facts is so weird as to be unrecognizable, or he in fact didn't give a damn, and the divorce is sometime next month.
Given the sums of money involved, I'm not sure why they didn't get her foot set in Israel and continue with as much of the trip as was accessible by wheelchair (which might involve some significant retooling, but would hardly exclude all the interesting sights). It's not like she lost a leg.
I'm glad it seems to have gotten something across. For some reason, when I've been in a situation with a partner who is acting unreasonably mean, and then I express myself in a manner that's calm, collected, and organized, they then flip out on me for being so inhumanly rational. When people behave in a cruelly provoking way, they seem to want their partner to flip out on them in turn so they can have it out in a dramatic way, not necessarily ending in hot sex. People only enjoy being assholes when they can imagine their partner deserves it.
That is: I would probably send a husband a letter like this--dispassionate, funny, clear--and he would probably divorce me.
her presentation of the facts is so weird as to be unrecognizable
Well... her physical description of the injury could well be overstated. Ellen hurt her foot once on a trip, though she did not break a bone, and I didn't realize for a little while after the injury (hours? a day?) that it was causing her as much trouble as it was; if I had been less (that is to say, "even less") attentive I guess I could have passed the whole trip without understanding what was going on, and been resentful about her holding us up.
If you're going on a once-in-a-lifetime, multi-thousand-dollar trip, you get freakin' travel insurance. Also, go to the doctor's in a foreign country, dammit.
I'm tempted to split the bad behavior squarely down the middle. He was an ass, but in her recount of the details she exaggerated his behavior and omitted the ways in which she was an ass, too. Even so, when he saw her account he realized that he had pushed the equilibrium of their relationship a little too far, and needed to make amends.
(BTW, if you're sitting in the aisle seat, don't cross your legs so that your foot is dangling in the aisle -- it makes an attractive target for the flight crew with their colossal beverage carts.)
I actually thought that the author of the piece was being a snot.
More misogyny from Dr. B.
10: I don't think I can split the bad behavior down the middle. I can come up with a story where it's mostly on her: she didn't want to take the trip, or she's a neurotic attention-seeker, and the foot injury was bullshit, either nothing or a minor strain that she could have walked on fine -- she phonied up the injury because she wanted to spoil the trip. This would make his dismissively angry behavior perfectly justified, although maybe not the acts of a saint.
But I can't split it down the middle. If the injury was real, he's a shithead; if it wasn't real, or wasn't significant, she is.
Can't they both be shitheads? After all they named the dog "Elvis." She needed to go to the bathroom at the airport, but she couldn't move the wheelchair herself? Piss on pity! And yes, weird how there are no doctors in Israel.
What if the injury was real, but he was more compassionate than she's letting on? I'm imagining a couple where the compassion comes in waves, and vanishes completely when they have screamy fights. If they generally fight a lot, he might underestimate that on this occasion her stress level is compounding faster than usual.
But when writing the legal thing, she might sample his barbs from the fights, and omit his bouts of compassion in between the fights. (And omit her own role entirely.)
The only reason I'm not totally willing to buy her side of the story is that she's soooo angelically innocent the whole time.
The only reason I'm not totally willing to buy her side of the story is that she's soooo angelically innocent the whole time.
Bingo. I'm perfectly willing to believe that he was a surly grump about cancelling the trip--which is a pretty human reaction, after all. But then she throws in all the stuff about how he isn't waiting on her hand and foot after they get home, which okay, you'd need a little extra help, but she's really laying it on pretty thick when she starts bitching about the fact that he made hot dogs for dinner.
Plus that whole "you have to speak to your husband in a language he understands," and the condoning of the woman who bought a $40,000 car to punish her husband for driving too fast?? Gross.
I dunno if it's artistic license on her part, but when I read the part that said when he got served the complaint and saw her name, he thought it was divorce papers -- that to me said louder than anything that the marriage was in trouble. Who leaps to that conclusion if their marriage is doing okay?
15, 16: Oh, I suppose the injury could be real, but she could have been a jerk about how she handled it. That doesn't make his behavior any less lousy, but there could be room for hers to be equally bad. I was thinking of trying to half excuse him, and not getting anywhere with that.
18: If you get served with legal papers and your spouse's name is on the top? Anyone would have a moment of "omg, is this divorce papers?"
20: Ah, I see, maybe "thought it was" more in the sense of "afraid it was". THAT makes more sense.
Hmm. Plausible that he was being a dick, partly out of disappointment and frustration; I can also see her having a history of drama-queen now-you-have-to-take-care-of-me behavior which might add to his irritation.
I don't think so. I can't be sure of how I'd react, but I'd think the entirely unfocused "WTF!?!" would last until I figured it out.
22: Where are you getting the evidence of drama-queenieness, Labs? Or are you just projecting because chicks are like that?
Words that I never thought I would write: B is totally right. (In #12.)
The egregious behavior of the Defendant caused the Plaintiff to experience flashbacks of guilt and culpability regarding the details of her accidental fall and exacerbated her baseline anxiety regarding travel abroad
makes me think she was bitching and moaning even before the trip started.
25: in the expectations she has for how he should treat her at home, and in her reaction to the expectations not being met? OMG, hot dogs!
...and I continue to be puzzled by the bathroom thing.
27: Excellent catch. This probably suggests why she insisted they go home to see a doctor. I'm pretty sure I'm now almost completely on the husband's side.
I am sure that the guy is at fault. However, the cutsy fake legal complaint and willingness to expose marital problems in the nyt make me glad I am not married to the author.
I cannot imagine reading that story and not feeling at least a wee bit of sympathy for the poor bastard who married her.
I cannot imagine reading that story and not feeling at least a wee bit of sympathy for the poor bastard who married her.
See, I think B and Tim are overstating his innocence. I think they're probably just right for each other.
The whole fake legal complaint thing really does bring passive-aggressiveness to a whole new level, doesn't it?
I got about three counts into the indictment and had to stop reading. I'd already realized that (a) these are both terrible people who (b) probably deserve each other. Also (c): who writes this kind of thing, couriers it to her husband at work, and then cc's the New York Times? Doesn't she realize potential dates will be googling her after the divorce?
33: See, this is a perfect example of how playing the martyr inevitably lends all support to the other person in the relationship, no matter how justified your complaints are.
OT, but Emerson's soulmate lives in Japan.
"I ... I screwed ... a ... fish!!" he finally blurts out. "A Prussian carp. And other species."
36: I'll buy that. Martyrs are annoying.
I wonder if Modern Love is part of some covert unit in Emerson's No Relationship army.
37: Hilarious article, but I dread to imagine your Google News search terms.
Yeah, that'll get your motor runnin'.
I'm actually carp-neutral and defend them only out of fairness. Heebie's the one with the carp obsession.
John Emerson actually buys carp-credits which go towards R&D as part of his ongoing commitment to live carp-neutral.
Right, never mind that Emerson consumes 12 to 20 times as much carp as the average American.
I didn't know if anyone else caught this encouraging video clip. It looks like media folks are starting to give Ann Coulter a bit of a hard time, and she's not taking it too well.
Argh, nevermind, Apostro-pwned in the previous Coulter thread. I didn't know this clip was that old, or that thread was so recent.
I just balance the utils by giving money to the mouse warehouse.
Bigotry is always wrong. Obama claims that the Asian carp is a menace, which is why he'll never get my vote. You have to admire a 30 pound fish that can jump 4 feet out of the water.
I just balance the utils by giving money to the mouse warehouse.
Works for me.
Now, if the guy answered the passive-aggressive faux-legal papers-serving with actual divorce papers, it would be a better story, and actually funny. To a dispassionate observer, I mean.
willingness to expose marital problems in the nyt
Yeah, this to me kind of sealed the deal on her being a really annoying person. She didn't even write it anonymously, which is completely permitted in those Modern Love pieces. She probably starts to wither up and die whenever her husband isn't giving her exactly the right sort of attention.
He doesn't sound like a prize either, but who knows how the balance worked out.
I got stitches in Israel when I was 2, and can therefore verify that there were doctors in Israel then. Further, that dealing with Israeli emergency room personnel was a fairly stressful experience for my parents.
A lawsuit! Obviously the appropriate way of dealing with your relationship! A lawsuit witnessed by a dog called Elvis!
Yes, I know this is heresy on Unfogged for various reasons connected to the fact everyone else here is a lawyer.
Also, joys of the European Union: reciprocal healthcare agreements! I can fall ill anywhere on the continent with impunity, and a form. Now that's what I call civilisation.
Not that it can't be stressful. I remember translating for my scoutmaster after he gashed open a foot in France. Everyone was terribly helpful, but there were a ton of forms to fill out.
That the woman expressed her anger through some cheesy legal form, and thought it was such a cute story that it ought to be published in the NYT, demonstrates that she is, at best, Bingo Little's wife. That her husband didn't immediately divorce her indicates that he deserves her. That the NYT agreed that this was a wonderful little story indicates that Modern Love is a very broad joke, civilization is headed for collapse, or Emerson is right about long-term relationships.
I think the fact that I didn't hate the piece is proof that Modern Love is normally so awful that this seemed like a breath of fresh air.
My reaction to the $40K car was basically, uh, if it's "their" money and *he's* already a "wealthy spendthrift," what the hell makes it such a big, clever punishment that she went out and spent some of the money on a luxury for herself. (Mind, I am freely assuming there were oodles of dollars left in the account afterwards. If she cleaned them out, then it's totally not clever for different reasons."
Limpy and the lawyer actually make me gag more, though. It seems the whole thing is all about having a cute premise for a witty story -- so she can be as cool as her car-buying pal. Tee hee, we sure showed it to those husbands! He's probably getting as much of a kick now telling his buddies how he screwed up and his wife, bless her, wrote this whole complaint as if she were a real lawyer (yulk yuk guffaw).
What ever happened to the days when people had the decency to resolve their marital issues by screaming at each other and withholding sex?
54: Or else it's a sign that Shivbunny's in deep trouble.
He hasn't run away yet! And he needs me for a green card, so he's stuck with me for at least two years!
Also re: the article... how passive are you if you break your goddamn foot and you don't say, screw you, I'm going to get this checked out? Maybe I'm just high maintenance, but if I broke my foot and shivbunny said, but i wannnna hike, I'd tell him to take a hike and call a cab to the hospital.
I dunno -- I can see, if I was in the sort of pain that was vacation-spoiling but not an immediate emergency, wanting to get home to a familiar doctor rather than navigating getting and paying for health care in a foreign country.
It's either bad enough or not bad enough to warrant a doctor's visit. If it is, put your non-broken foot down and realize that it's Israel. If it isn't, quit whining.
57 gets it exactly right. And I'm glad to see that Cala's making a bold move to promote women's equality in the mail-order spouse industry.
You no clean-a da house, you no get-a green card!
Huh. Now I'm feeling like a delicate flower. Injured and in pain, in a foreign country, feels to me like a time when you're allowed to collapse on your partner without being called lame or passive for it, and when their letting you down is impressively shitty. I can completely sympathize with someone who'd rather get home than try to figure out how an Israeli emergency room works.
62? really? Israel's a pretty tourist-friendly place, and I bet their ERs work like ours.
I bet their ERs work like ours.
Yeah, but I don't know. Is the sign for the emergency room entrance going to be in English so I can find it and figure out where I wait? What are their standards for 'emergency' -- I'm in a lot of pain, but I'm pretty sure I'm not going to die, and I'm not actually bleeding -- will they treat me, or tell me to go make an appointment with a doctor? Did I get travel medical insurance, or am I writing a check? How much is it going to cost? Will I be able to successfully communicate what the Israeli doctor says is going on to my doctor back home? How long are wait times -- will I be in the emergency room waiting for the same 12 hours that could get me back home?
I'm not saying these are good reasons, but if I were in too much pain to walk, I could completely see collapsing a bit, and wanting to get home to familiar turf.
LB, I haven't been to Israel, and I'd never name a dog Elvis, but surely your expensive hotel has a concierge who will know what to do. Or there are police, or various other helpful people who want wealthy Americans to have a good experience, spend their money, and CONTINUE AIPAC'S STRANGLEHOLD ON DEBATE.
Again, I'm throwing in the discombobulating effects of pain (which makes me stupid, I don't know about you).
I can see a conversation like:
Her: This really hurts, I need to get to a doctor.
Him: Don't be such a baby, you're spoiling the trip. I'm going hiking, you do what you like.
Her: I need to get back to New York.
Not out of spite, but out of inability to cope with an unfamiliar situation without support when in pain. This probably makes me a big wuss, and it depends what we're talking about in terms of pain, but I can see it.
if I were in too much pain to walk, I could completely see collapsing a bit, and wanting to get home to familiar turf.
This, true. But I can also sympathize with the partner who is annoyed that someone would fall apart like this three days into a long-planned trip.
Yeah, I'm treating 'unexpectedly in too much pain to cope' as a get-out-of-jail-free card allowing her to collapse rather than sucking it up and enjoying the vacation anyway. This doesn't work if she wasn't really in all that much pain, at which point she's a shithead. But if she was, and he knew it, rather than being honestly mistaken about how she was feeling, then taking his annoyance out on her is really nasty.
I would think that the prospect of a 12 hour plane ride pre-doctor would be some encouragement to seek a local solution. Look, LB, it doesn't matter what you say, I'm going to hate on this woman.
Obviously they're both cretins. The proper responses would have been for her to suck it up and for him to insist that she take it easy and see a doctor. Then they could have compromised on some subset of their plans that didn't require hiking. Easypeasy. But noooooo.
The only obvious problems with the woman's behavior is the "mock complaint" and the fact she willingly and openly let it run in the NYT. But those are HUGE problems.
I guess I took her at her word that she snapped a bone in her foot and was in excruciating pain. 67 is right; pain makes needy assholes of us all. And there are times in every relationship when some physical pain makes you look down a very long narrow telescope at your partner and think, "This is the moment at which I find out whether you are capable of being flexible and helpful or not." Some people live with that telescope strapped to their heads at every moment, which is annoying.
If she's like this about everything that happens, it's unreasonable. I projected onto her my own self-sufficiency, which can often lead a partner into being incapable of thinking of one as ever needing help or tenderness, even in a crisis.
When I have stayed with people after they've abandoned me in moments of pain or crisis (which is, like, every time, because I can't think of myself as a dependent person, even when I am), they've always proven to be generally rather uncaring in the long run, too. If you hold someone to that standard all the time, you suck, but having a partner you can count on in a rare crisis is non-negotiable.
The proper responses would have been for her to suck it up and for him to insist that she take it easy and see a doctor.
There are any number of proper responses, including throwing a fit, silently or not-so-silently hating him for weeks on end, sucking it up, or just waiting until he died under "mysterious circumstances." Which is what makes her actual response all the more troubling.
72's correct. And given that all we have is the mock complaint that she published in the NYT, the only reasonable conclusion is that she's a p-a cow.
74: That was what made me call this mysterious. Assuming we're trusting her on the pain, he's a shithead. (A) Why would you do some elaborate nonsense thing to make it clear to your husband that he was being a shithead? He was there, he knows, and presumably (she says she did) you told him at the time. (B) How would a stunt like that work, as she said it did? It all makes no sense.
Well, presumably he's not totally a shithead, but is only showing his shithead side because his long-awaited trip was taken away. Like an extended temper tantrum that he had to be prodded to snap out of.
Yeah, someone who has an extended temper tantrum at their injured spouse for being injured an in pain isn't worth prodding.
Oh how I hope she shows up in this thread.
Injured, in pain and not willing to take reasonable steps to deal with it. OK, you can throw yourself on the non-injured partner. but then you have to let the non-injured partner have some authority (eg to suggest local doctors) to go along with the responsibility.
Now I'm going to see if these people live in my neighborhood (where it's 'throw a rock, hit a lawyer').
81: Sure, if that's the case. Taking the article at face value (which may be a mistake -- it's weird enough that I don't trust the facts at all), the husband wasn't offering supportive problem-solving that could have rescued the vacation.
i think it's pretty clear he was already having an affair before the trip was even planned.
the sudden change in affection, the reaction to the service of papers--it all adds up to a guilty conscience on his part, completely antecedent to the foot.
He spent 2 hours looking for crutches.
Considering the guy's job -- look him up -- you'd guess he could get his wife set up with a fine doctor in Israel. So maybe he was lamer than the minimal threshold for human behavior.
Charley, was it totally easy to find him? I must be dumb.
I think the Gawker commenter who says that the point of the ML column is to make the rest of us feel marginally better about our own relationships nailed it.
86 -- It's not difficult. (Easier than posting a comment here, apparently).
'throw a rock, hit a lawyer'- a good start
Break me off a hint: his first name's not in the article, and there are a lot of Friedmans in DC.
***NOT AN ANTI-SEMITIC COMMENT.***
You know, I remember as a kid reading advice in my mom's parenting books (well, I had to know what strategies were going to be used on me!) that said parents, instead of resorting to nagging, should come up with cute and creative notes to let their kids know what needed to be done. So--yeah. The tactic she's advocating wives use with their husbands is the one that's probably more often used by moms with their obstreperous kids.
I suppose it's not different from the "Oh, those silly men! We have to manage them as best we can, don't we" attitude plenty of women have but--for God's sake. It' not like the whole thing wasn't creepy enough already.
