Dear Cary...my husband is too creative to work

[katty]

more: http://www.salon.com/mwt/col/tenn/2009/04/28/creative_husband/

My husband is too creative to work
We're going bankrupt and losing our house because he refuses to take a job.

By Cary Tennis

April 28, 2009 | Dear Cary,

My husband and I have been married for over 20 years. He's an interesting, creative, intelligent, funny person who everyone loves and we've had a good marriage -- rocky at times but always loving and fun, even exciting -- and we've raised a smart, talented kid whom we're very close to and proud of. We both feel an incredibly strong bond and attraction to each other and have since the first day we met. The problem is he doesn't work much, and over the years I've slowly become the principal breadwinner by default. His job is in a creative field, as is mine, only I can go on staff and earn a salary and he's an independent contractor.

As talented and creative as he is, he has never made enough money to support himself, let alone our family. I've hung in there hoping he would finally "break in" or "make it," but he's still working toward this amorphous and seemingly unattainable career that just never happens. Don't get me wrong -- he works like a dog doing freebies and below-the-line work to meet people, network and make connections -- but he refuses to take a job just for the money in fear that a "real" job will come up and he won't be available. Since he only works about three weeks a year, a job wouldn't get in the way. But when I try to talk to him about it he gets angry and defensive. I lost my job last year, and even this hasn't seemed to light a fire under him to try to get work. So we've been living on my unemployment -- not easy with three people.

We're losing our house, our savings is gone and we've filed for bankruptcy. My unemployment is ending in two months and I keep reminding him, hoping he'll start looking outside the box, but it's like he's paralyzed.

[cliffordu]

1. As a deadbeat, let me be the first to say:

:popcorn:

Pass the butter.

[TahitiNut]

2. I had an uncle something like that. Useless as teats on a hog.

:shrug: :puke:

[LibertyLover]

3. Sounds like my husband - except he's too lazy to work

Oh, he complains on occasion about being at home all day with the dogs and the kid when she comes home after school, but oh darn, he just can't get a job because what would we do about the kid? So, I declared bankruptcy in December, have no savings and we will be loosing the house soon to foreclosure. He's extremely pissed about that of course, but not pissed enough to go out and try to find a job. He gave up working about 2 years after we married, to see if when we got the kid he could stand to be a stay at home dad. He found out that it wasn't bad - wife gets up at 0:dark:30 in the morning to go to work, he gets to stay home and watch tv, play with his toys and after we had the kid, take care of her. For a while that was time-consuming I will admit, but now that she is in first grade, not so much. Well, now he's getting to pack up the house because we will, barring a miracle, need to leave soon. Of course that is making him mad too because he doesn't have as much time to build trains or do his reenactment stuff.

[prolesunited]

5. Can I ask why are you still with him?

You don't sound happy or that you're getting anything out of it. You're perfectly capable of taking care of yourself and your child. Heck, you would be better off without having to support him as well.

As for staying together for the sake of a child, my parents did and they didn't do us any favors. I'm not going to bore you with the dysfunctional details. You are a much better parent and role model if you are happy and take charge of your life.

[LibertyLover]

13. Frankly I'm considering leaving him

my parents stayed together for my sake and it sucked. The only reason I hold back is that, for all the problem he is, he is a good father and my 6 year old adores her daddy.

[prolesunited]

31. Her daddy can still be in her life and be a good father

You deserve a good husband or even just being single.

At 6, she adores him, but it's not going to take her long to see what's going on, even if you say nothing. Also, if this was your daughter's situation, what advice would you give her. Is this the life you would want for her as an adult. Odds are, she will emulate you.

[LibertyLover]

36. Too true

She is a smart little thing. I will have to see how things play out over the next few months. If things don't get better, leaving is almost certainly what I'll choose.

[dysfunctional press]

115. have you clearly told him of your intentions in that regard?

to be fair- it would probably be the fair thing to do.

it isn't kosher to be a 20-year enabler, and then decide to place the blame without at least talking it out first.

[LibertyLover]

129. Well, we've only been married 10 years and he hasn't worked for 8

so 20 is a bit off the mark. However, I have given him until the end of this year to come up with something. At least it seems to be making a dent - last night he talked about going and getting training to be a phlebotomist.

[dysfunctional press]

130. sorry- i guess i carried the 20 from the op...

although, even at 10 years, the point is still the same.
but it sounds like you've got that covered.

[JerseygirlCT]

38. I don't get this

I know someone who hasn't worked in years. Excuse being the kids. The kids are now perfectly capable of taking care of themselves after school. Yet this person constantly complains about money.

If you're so concerned about money, go get a stinking job already! I work p/t so I don't have to worry about the childcare situation. It's entirely possible to do at least that. But this person would prefer to complain, I think.

Sorry you find yourself in that situation. It's just wrong. Both partners ought to be contributing, as needed by the family. Sometimes that means one works, and one works at home caring for children, etc. But everyone ought to be pulling some weight.

[liberalhistorian]

45. I'm sorry, this is really none of my business and not

my place to say, but I'd dump his ass faster than he could get it wiped. In fact, I'd have dumped it years ago. As it is now, you'll probably have to pay HIM alimony and some of your retirement and all that happy horseshit.

[Hamlette]

142. I worry about your daughter

The mother of my grandson, (I'll call her Sally) was been raised by a man exactly like your husband. In her family, after it had gone on for several years, they started saying their father was too ill to work but no doctor has been able to diagnose what is wrong with him.

Anyway, Sally wants to be like her father. She wants someone to take care of her. And there is NEVER enough that my son or any of us can do to make her happy. I even went to a shink to figure out what I'm dealing with. She said Sally's father is a dependent personality and so is Sally and we could move her into the Taj Mahal and she would not think we had done enough. (My son lived with her for a year. They are separated now.)

It is impossible to predict which parent the child will emulate but all 5 of the kids have serious issues with work. Sally's brothers work, but only off and on. Her two sisters do not work. The 6th child committed suicide when he was 23.

IMHO you need to get out so your daughter doesn't model after him.

As for raising kids in "broken" homes? It sucks but it is what it is and again, IMHO, it is better for your daughter to go between one functional home and one dysfunctional home than to be raised in one dysfunctional home.

[CTyankee]

4. I divorced one of those.

He married again as did I. He pulled the same shit with the new wife, even worse actually because the IRS was after him and threatened to put him in prison.

Oh, but you see he was a Harvard man who was far too brilliant and talented to be bothered with making an honest living...

[noamnety]

6. I wonder if reactions would be different

if the genders were flipped.

[cliffordu]

9. Yep. Not a fucking peep, then.,

[dustbunnie]

18. Lol, I disagree. Her ass would have been working the register at Wal-Mart -

years ago. She'd have to fit in her poetry writing after the day job and taking care of the house was done.

[EOTE]

10. No doubt. NT.

[Demobrat]

12. That's an interesting point.

I think the reactions would be the same if the family were in dire financial straits, about to lose their home, like this one is, and the wife refused to do anything to help.

[katty]

19. agree-however, i know some couples with small children

and the husband has 'issues' with either going all out to try to get any job for survival and won't take care of little kids IF he is the one that is at home for the duration. They can't afford day care even if there is only one parent working and the other one not working and at home, but does not want to take care of the kids-they just are not 'tempermentally' suited to take care of kids all day-that may be true, but when you have to survive you do what you must.

[Demobrat]

20. I've seen that situation too.

It's like the man wants to be taken care of like another child. I have no idea why any woman would put up with it.

[katty]

21. it is really strange, i know a few couples that are in very

difficult financial situations-and the male parent just won't take on the kids for even awhile during the day. the women that may be working in this scenario work part time or make other arrangements during the day. in some cases both couples are not working and the wife is taking care of the kids herself all day-and they are both at home. i just don't get it.

[Maru Kitteh]

92. No way in hell I would stay with a man who couldn't be bothered with his children.

Sooner or later *you* will be too inconvenient for him as well. Like when you can't fuck him because you have cancer. That's the wrong time to wake up and realize your husband is just a worthless hunk of carrion that drinks beer.

[lumberjack_jeff]

97. No. The story would be a tear-filled story of loss due to the husband's long unemployment..

In fact, it would have emphasized the husband's fruitless job search and the duration of his unemployment, and the impact that has on the wife and child.

When a man is the homemaker, he is exploiting his wife and is to blame for a collapse of the household economy.

When a woman is the homemaker, she's a blameless and helpless victim of the collapse of the household economy, usually due to his financial mismanagement.

Personally, I'd agree with your statement. A wife who won't get off her ass to support her family in their hour of need should be kicked to the curb.

... but society at large doesn't think that way, and neither does the conventional DU wisdom.

[Lorien]

15. No difference when foreclosure and bankruptcy are involved

that's "all hands on deck" time-even if you have young kids at home (and it doesn't sound like their child is that young). I had the same argument with an old fiend; he was on the verge of bankruptcy and his wife refused to work. Hell, she has even refused to learn how to DRIVE and she's 53 years old! They had no kids and home (one in college) and she still refused to do anything for money because she didn't feel like working. I see that as being every bit as bad.

[Hello_Kitty]

33. Oh definitely. eom

[BoneDaddy]

25. Most likely

DU is has a long standing record of double standard when it comes to gender. Women, can often do no wrong and men are pretty much held to a much higher standard.

[noamnety]

26. Yes and No

We do have double standards.

I raised the gender issue here because I think women who stay home to raise children are perceived one way, and men who stay home to raise children are perceived another way. One is seen as a housewife, the other as unemployed and lazy.

Whether it's a high standard or not, I'm not sure ... if working outside the home is seen as a "higher standard" than being a traditional housewife, then yes, they are held to that. The flip side is that traditional women's work is seen as having lower value.

At the point where they are both unemployed and at risk of being foreclosed on, then most of us would agree they have equal responsibility to try to find a job and make ends meet. But it sounds like the woman also resents that the man stayed home to raise kids when they weren't in financial trouble, even though he "raised a smart, talented kid" so I question why it's bad for the man to do "woman's work."

As a community, do we think less of women who made that choice? This is typical of a lot of women: "she has never made enough money to support herself, let alone our family."

[dustbunnie]

27. But the double standard in the OP once again works against the woman.

They're "both" creative people, yet his genius has been coddled while she's put her dreams aside all these years, to take a day job.

[lumberjack_jeff]

96. Homemakers are "being coddled"?

Care to rethink that?

Would you agree that male breadwinners "put their dreams aside" to take a day job?

There is no double standard here except the one you are demonstrating.

No place that I frequent, in real life or online, embraces more bigoted gender stereotypes than DU.

The phenomenon of the OP is a result of the collapse in the job prospects for men, which in the abstract is no big deal. However, more women are becoming the primary breadwinner, and as this thread demonstrates, the burden is less fun than it appears when the shoe is on the other foot.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/business/06women.html

[dustbunnie]

100. No, you have completely misunderstood. The thread is not about homemakers.

If you look at the OP again, it's about two creative people. One who sacrificed her talent to take a day job, albeit in a creative field, in order to allow the other one to stay home and foment in his genius... in the hopes he would eventually get a break and be a working artist.

That is not the same as a couple agreeing that one person would stay home and be a homemaker. Be it the man or woman.

I've seen this story unfold in every combo you can imagine... gay, straight, as in, male supports female artist, female supports male artist. There are many reasons why someone may not get a break, including no talent, great ideas but no work discipline, lack of market interest in the person's work, blah blah.

Usually the person who takes on the breadwinner role will do so for a number of years, but eventually the couple have to accept the failure and move on. Sometimes it means letting go of the dream, other times the artist takes on a part-time gig. But there's usually a threshold. Sometimes it's even a relief for the artist to let go and move onto something that will see positive results rather than endless rejection.

[noamnety]

103. Jeff, I want it on the record

That we agreed about something, just this once, in a thread about gender roles. :D

While I still find some of your phrasing objectionable, the reality is that many men did put their dreams aside to take a job. Women, too, mind you - staying home and having dinner ready at 5 was the dream of some women, I suppose, but for a great many it wasn't - it's just what their lives ended up as. And for men - working as a cube rat or on an assembly line was not their highest goal in life.

That doesn't excuse that women historically have been excluded from even have the opportunity to earn a living in fields they wanted to be part of. We should both be able to admit that, just as we should be able to admit that HAVING to earn a living is not the same as BEING ALLOWED to earn a living.

I'd be happy if neither of us embraced gendered stereotypes, but could freely admit that the ones that have been put on us hurt both men and women.

[lumberjack_jeff]

117. Will wonders never cease.

:hi:

I absolutely agree that gender stereotypes are tremendously damaging to both men and women.

As a society, we've gone to great lengths to reject negative stereotypes of women, but not so much for men. The culture still expects men to be solely responsible for the economic failure of a family (deadbeat, lazy, gambler), while ascribing selfish motivations to men who make the sacrifices which enable the family to succeed economically. (distant, workaholic, unavailable).

The flipside of this coin is that women are either helpless victims of the failures or full partners in the success by virtue of their "holding the family together".

If you read stories about foreclosure, the story is always the same, only the names change. Husband gambled on buying a house at the prevailing value and not only was the house a poor investment, but he lost his job. Poor blameless family suffers for his poor decisionmaking. Mom is now the breadwinner! :cry: "Why doesn't she set an example for her kids dump the loser (who raised them)"?

In contrast, when houses were appreciating like crazy, the wives weren't portrayed nearly so impotent and helpless - they were full partners in the prudent house-buying decision. The family got rich because both partners were willing to take risks.

People do need to contribute everything they can to the wellbeing of their family, but DU isn't breaking the stereotypes to the degree we think we are, nor do we demonstrate very good critical thinking when we take a dear abby letter as unbiased truth.

Objectionable phrasing? Maybe a little. :blush:

[BoneDaddy]

121. or a father's work

depending upon your perspective. when a man stays at home he is doing father's work. Sure, traditionally it is called mother's work based upon gender roles and stereotype's but he is fathering, not mothering. But lazy is lazy. Truth be told, both need to get off their ass and do something.

[Skittles]

128. aw, poor BoneDaddy

:cry:

[BoneDaddy]

149. LOL

That is the fun of it all. Although I can see the double standard, I don't care. I am just pointing it out. If you think I am asking for your sympathy, I wouldn't want yours. It is not needed. I think you and the "male hating" women on here are a complete joke. Totally blind that you have become the very thing you feel victimized from... get some therapy. Your comment above represents the "negative masculine". Insensitive, bullyish etc.. Like so many pitiful creatures that come before you, you have become that which you hate. I find that hysterical.

[JerseygirlCT]

39. Well, I know of a situation similar

with the genders reversed, and it still bugs me. (Wouldn't be my business, except for the whines from the non-worker about money. Duh, get a job!)

[Hello_Kitty]

74. No double standards here. A moocher is a moocher. eom

[lumberjack_jeff]

88. Ya think?

But if you try to make the point that marriage is transactional, people will call you a sexist.

Husbands are great, so long as they continue to bring home a paycheck. If we accept that, is it really such a stretch to say that wives are just fine so long as they remain attractive?

The unspoken assumption in this thread is that husbands alone are responsible for the family's economic wellbeing.

[Demobrat]

136. What BS.

The wife has been solely responsible for the family's economic wellbeing for 20 years. Now she needs help and he refuses to even try. And somehow you take from that that husbands are great as long as they bring home a paycheck? Unbelievable.

[lumberjack_jeff]

144. This isn't about the dear abby letter that constitutes the OP.

It is about the bigoted (yup, men are like that) stereotypes that posters have brought to bear in defense of it.

The person downthread who observed that depending on gender, non-working spouses are either deadbeats or homemakers, was right on the money.

[Marr]

98. Same thought occurred to me.

If the genders were flipped, this wouldn't even be worth discussing. And if it *were* brought up, I've no doubt much of DU would be condemning the husband for demanding his wife get a regular job in addition to raising the child.

[Cats Against Frist]

152. Not so.

I was a deadbeat my whole life until three years ago. Got nothing but crap for it from everyone around me. I was just lucky to have boyfriends that made reasonable livings. I raised a baby to school age and wrote a poetry manuscript and went to grad school. Still, everyone around me was envious and made me feel bad.

Speaking as a former deadbeat that now has two jobs: jobs are for suckers.

[hunter]

7. There are jobs?

That's the first problem. Even if this guy is highly motivated to get a job now he's competing with highly experienced people like his wife who just got laid off.

"Let's see..." says the manager of a business who is somehow hiring people, "...should we hire the guy with the spotty job history, or the highly experienced guy with the skills we want who just got laid off and is willing to work twice as hard for half his previous salary?"

This is just one of the ways a bad economy breaks up families.

One of the peculiarities of U.S. society is that workers blame themselves for being unemployed, partly employed, or suffering shitty wages and unacceptable working conditions. We never hit the streets with pitchforks and torches to take control away from the oligarchs. Instead we start sniping at one another.

[Lorien]

17. Did you read the article? He has been offered jobs

but turns them down because they cut into an activity that he does three weeks out of the year.

[hunter]

43. That's not quite how I read it; it sounds to me like quite a bit more is going on.

In the old days the situation would be reversed and we would simply have said "the breadwinner" lost his job. There would be zero expectation that the housewife could go out and immediately find a job that paid enough to pay the mortgage and stay out of bankruptcy.

The U.S. cult of productivity is deadly to relationships and deadly to the environment. When people get tossed out of the game, as is happening now when our economy is falling apart, there are terrible consequences.

For twenty years when the economy was up and the wife had a good job things were good enough. Now they are not. Both of them need to be "looking outside the box." The box they are suffering in is fabricated entirely of economic and social expectations that turned out to be unrealistic for one reason or another, and neither party may be at fault.

I suspect the couple wouldn't be crashing if they lived someplace more civilized like Western Europe or even Canada. Unfortunately this couple is getting ground to bits by the 800 pound Gorilla of "developing nations." The United States is not a civilized nation if people have to worry about homelessness, hunger, and healthcare when they can't find work, for whatever reason. The guy may be lazy, crazy, or just tired of getting beat up by a system that treats him as a disposable commodity, but in any of these cases no family should have to worry that they'll be tossed out onto the mean streets without any sort of safety net if they can't find work.

[Dogtown]

8. He might have Borderline Personality Disorder

or something related. I'm not making excuses for him, but it's important to realize he's ill and can't help his behavior, even with your help.

I'm NOT a professional, but it really sounds as if he might need to see one. That strong a refusal in the face of desperate need is a sure indicator that something is not in balance.

Counseling might help you see the issues more clearly, also. After all, you've had to live with this for 20 years, you've got to be affected by he stress.


Good luck to you!

:hug:

[dustbunnie]

11. It's not necessarily that dire. Anyone who's worked in the creative milieu has met dozens of these -

or at least a few. They just can't let go of "living the dream" even if they have no real talent. I think Woody Allen stereotyped this type of person in one of his movies, can't remember which one, where one of the sisters was "creative," but just couldn't ever find or apply herself.

[Dogtown]

16. A valid point

I day-dreamed similarly for years, but didn't let it interfere with reality. Not sure at what point it becomes clinical, but the OP's situ seems severe enough to explore the possibility.


It is humbling to accept being ordinary, i'll admit...

:cry: :blush: :cry:

[dustbunnie]

22. Nobody is ordinary.

:) There's an old saying creative NYC'ers call up... "even if you're one in a million, there are eight more just like you." Not everyone gets to be a mega-star, and even successful novelists, poets, et... teach, or do something on the side, to make a living.

It's okay to live the dream when you're alone and can subsist in dank basement apts, get the occasional grant, glom off friends. But when you commit to a family, it's different.

Hey, if you have a dream, hope you make it real. You never know! :hi:

[hunter]

95. If you are "one in a million" there are 6,707 more of you...

... and the big international corporations are sure to find the thousands who will work for a dollar an hour or less.

[wolfgangmo]

62. It was explained to me this way by one of my music mentors

When I was a younger lad and still working as a musician one of my mentors explained it this way. "There are ARTists and then there are artISTS . ARTists do the job while artISTS only talk about it. There are more artISTS than ARTists, but they don't work so they aren't any competition."

So yah, I've met tons of artISTS in coffee shops and it has been my pleasure to work with many truly great ARTists.

ARTists, FYI, take day gigs to pay the bills when they have to.

[dustbunnie]

86. Your mentor was/is wise!

And yes, I'm aware that ARTists take day gigs. :) A few of the great ones come to mind instantly. But there are plenty more who currently fill ad agencies, university halls, work as security guards (night work is good as you can write, etc... when no one's around), tarbenders, you name it.

[B3Nut]

131. I'm a musician...

...and I happily do a day gig. My IT career provides the stability (and health coverage for me and Mrs. Nut!) so I can do the music gigs and not be stressed about where the damned mortgage is coming from. I enjoy IT on top of that, so it worked out well. Sure, it would be good to be able to do music full-time...but that isn't even remotely realistic for most musicians. They should at least have the sense and self-discipline to slug it out in a day job while working toward that goal. Turning down a good day-job in the hope that you're close to that "big break" is being a lazy-ass, IMHO. Nothing wrong with being part of the workaday workforce, after all...gotta eat somehow.

Todd in Cheesecurdistan

[Raksha]

102. Probably not Borderline Personality Disorder, but he sounds like a classic case of ADD/ADHD.

Attention Deficit Disorder. The "H" stands for "Hyperactive," and hyperactivity may or may not be a part of it. It's more common for males to be hyperactive, but the other aspects of the syndrome are pretty much the same for men and women.

That was the first thing I thought of when I read the description of this man in the OP. It sounds as though he should get diagnosed and treated ASAP if he wants to save his marriage.

[Lorien]

14. I know a lot of guys like this

I know one Freeper who has been married for 20 years and hasn't worked much at all for the past five. He brings in about $600 a year from a few art jobs that he does while his wife works a 52 hour week. He still expects her to care for the kids, cook and clean as well. He handles their money because "the Bible says that the man is the head of the house". Most days he just hangs out at a cafe and picks up girls. It's sickening.

Another guy I know became unemployed three months ago. He loves living on unemployment and hasn't seriously looked for work at all yet. He taught High School English for a few years then worked in broadcasting for 28 years. He's decided that there are no jobs in teaching or broadcasting (without even looking) so he wants to go to community college for a few years to learn about the hospitality industry. Thing is; we're in Orlando and tourism has tanked here. Loads of people in the hospitality industry are without jobs already. I think that he just doesn't want to work, so he's going for a job that he knows won't be there. The shame is that he IS a very intelligent, well educated guy. He's just very, very lazy. What a waste!

[Alcibiades]

30. "picks up girls?"

Where in the Bible is that?

[onethatcares]

41. it's in the book

"Likcliticous"



Wow, I typed that?:evilgrin:

[Lorien]

49. You know Freepers; the rules apply to everyone else

not them.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

23. I'm creative as hell, but I manage to hold down a real job.

It'd be great if my creativity eventually pays off, but I know it's not going to pay the bills any time soon.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

48. Yeah, I'm creative and I'm in one of the least creative fields possible

[Starbucks Anarchist]

64. What do you do again?

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

110. Check your PM

[BoneDaddy]

24. Alot of self labeled "creative" people think they are special

and that their given strengths mean that others will recognize it and reward them, with little effort on their part.

[Demobrat]

28. They are not only special

but much, much better than the sellouts who actually lower themselves to work for the man. This breed thrives in my neighborhood, the North Beach section of San Francisco. You can see and hear them any morning at Cafe Trieste, expounding on yuppie scum and the appalling lack of art appreciation in society today. And mooching coffee money.

[Marr]

101. Ha! You've touched on a subject that's near to my heart.

I switched from fine art to commercial illustration and design while in college precisely because of the split I saw emerging between these two camps of creative people. On one side you had the fine artists, who seemed mostly into themselves, their peer group, their little "thing". On the other side you had illustrators and graphic designers, who were more into communication and getting their work seen by as many people as possible.

The fine artists equated commercial success with selling out. They reveled in the obscurity of their chosen path; how exclusive it was. I never got that. In my mind, if your work isn't being seen, it's worthless. If it isn't speaking to anyone beyond your own tiny clique, it's meaningless.

We used to get into heated arguments on this subject. To me, art itself is worthless unless it speaks to someone. It's value is in what it says about a place or a time, and if it doesn't resonate with *some* sizable group, it says nothing about either. There were some fine artists who shared an opinion similar to my own-- it's not like it was an absolute divide. But it's an interesting topic.

[BoneDaddy]

119. That is true as well

but many "artists" are as predatory as those they profess to be above.

[Quantess]

29. I'm picturing Tobias Funke, but without the wealthy in-laws.

[Mz Pip]

32. This woman must be getting something

out of this relationship to put up with this loser. Maybe she has self esteem issues an doesn't think she deserves a guy who will be willing to make a few sacrifices for her and the family.

The guy is manipulative as hell, using anger and defensiveness to divert attention from the real issue - his laziness.

[Freddie Stubbs]

34. Most divorces are caused by money problems

[Matariki]

35. I've lost far too many creative friends to appreciate the bashing in this thread.

Our culture doesn't particularly value creativity, unless it can be put to commercial use. Personally, I see it as a shortcoming of our culture rather than a shortcoming of highly creative people who aren't able to adapt.

on edit - by lost I mean suicided.

[EFerrari]

44. There are two people like that in my extended family.

They work at home in some way and not always for money. Their contribution is different and it's hard for their immediate families sometimes but they get by.

[Matariki]

77. I'm grateful that there are people in our society like that

Somebody has to stretch the boundaries of the imagination for the rest of us.

[lumberjack_jeff]

89. If you think the primary target is "creative types" then you seriously misread DU. n/t

[Matariki]

106. Indeed?

I'm having a difficult time understanding any point you're trying to make, so perhaps you're correct.

[lumberjack_jeff]

111. Creative women are respected. Creative men are freeloaders. n/t

[dustbunnie]

114. THAT'S the biggest load of hooey Jeff!

Women love artistic men. The worst physical specimens though they may be, women flock to them as though they were elixir in human form poured from the heavens by the gods. I would hazard a guess that poets, painters and sculptors do the best in the women attracting department.

Take a look throughout history... all the talented women who subjugated their own careers and their art to support their man, no matter how selfish he might've been, or how poor his prospects were. Then find all the men who supported women artists.

[lumberjack_jeff]

120. Your observation is true, to a point.

That point being when it becomes apparent that he can't make a living being an artiste'.

You should read the biographies of Georgia O'Keefe and Alfred Stieglitz.

[dustbunnie]

122. I have read about Georgia O'Keefe and Stieglitz.

They were two successful people, so don't think they apply here?

Have you read anything of Pollock and Krasner. She completely devoted herself to him, and it was only upon his death that she pursued her own career. Rodin and Claudel? There's a nice story. :D

I understand what you're saying, and the points you make about gender roles are astute. But they just don't apply in this thread I don't think. Here's an analogy for you. Man and woman marry with some nebulous plan to both pursue a career. She's always fancied running a flower shop because she's creative and can do miracles with an arrangement. Ten years go by and every business she starts flops, for whatever reason. He keeps indulging her because she's creative and exciting. But suddenly his business goes into the crapper and they're at the brink of homelessness. You don't think he's going to tell her to "fracking forget the goddam flower shop bullshit for now and get a job to help us out"? That's closer to the thread content, and unless I travel in the wrong circles, that's how any man I know would react.

[lumberjack_jeff]

123. The dyanmic is different.

If his business goes in the crapper, it's his fault and her associates will advise her to dump the loser. Clearly, if she'd been indulged for so long, she must bring something valuable but intangible to a relationship - that she would bring to any relationship with a less loser-ish guy. The fundamental worth of a woman isn't devalued by economic failure in the same way men are.

Put another way; if the relationship between sucessful businessman and failed floral-arranger was equitable, then what kind of leverage does he have now that he is a failed businessman? Who is he to dictate conditions? He is less valuable to her.

I've become a cynic about relationships, I think for the most part they are transactional. "I deserve better" or "Is that all I'm worth to you?" Our relationship language is just a subdued and drawn-out form of car-dealer-ese.

I've increasingly begun to see my own relationship as unusual, and I am grateful for it.

Krasner was an accomplished artist before she met Pollock. They were both prolific during their years together, and she continued to paint after his death. Her first solo show was arranged by Pollock. Pollock did not discourage her from painting, they were a unique creative partnership. They developed a strategy which worked for them. Her support for him increased the value of both.

[dustbunnie]

124. I wasn't thinking of the typical lunch lady career whim bankrolled by the mogul hubbie.

I was thinking of my analogy guy as a creative type as well, maybe a copywriter or graphic designer with his own little gig going. But he could be an ad agency copywriter, making a decent but not amazing salary. That would fit the OP analogy better. In this economy, people like that are being axed left and right, so don't see why he would be faulted as being a failed anything. You seem to be thinking of an upper-middle class, or even leisure class scenario in your assessment of how people are valued. That isn't the way it works in the artsy fartsy environment. No one can "dictate" conditions unless they are willing to lose everything, but if he sacrificed to indulge her dream, that is bringing "value," and if she loves and cares for her mate, in return she'd commit to doing her share to ensure their family stays intact. That is equality.

And of course she is valued for something intangible... but that works for both genders. As the OP stated, creative people are often exciting, and also inspiring, funny, witty, enthusiastic, insightful, etc... It's just that their creativity and spirit don't always translate well onto the page or the canvas. This is why creative people often fail to make a living at their art. The ideas are there, but not the practical expression.

Is it a function of age/generation, or class perception? Because I've been around this so-called creative milieu since I can remember, and relationships seem to be more fluid than what you describe. There is perhaps less expectation for the genders to behave according to the "norm." A person's value is based on more than the transactional. At least the obvious transactional.

Krasner did work during her time with Pollock, but if you read up on her, she wasn't as prolific as she could have been. They fueled each other's imaginations until his demons took over again and she basically became a mother figure. He cheated on her and treated her terribly toward the end as thanks for her loyalty and support. Most male artists wouldn't have provided the same support, or tolerated the behavior, if the roles had been reversed.

[lumberjack_jeff]

133. "Most male artists wouldn't have provided the same support, or tolerated the behavior,"

revisit Steiglitz and O'Keefe.

Steiglitz' friends wondered why he bankrolled, supported and put up with her shit.

I can't speak to what most artists will do. I am not an artist.

[dustbunnie]

138. I know we're just cherry-picking here.

We could go back and forth all week. But my list would stretch from here to eternity since historically, women artists, like their homemaker counterparts, were expected to subjugate their own talents for their men.

I remember some thread that I think you responded to, where the sub-thread went into young men having no industry role models for what they should look and act like, and the arty poser types came up. I think people are responding to that caricature here, as it seems that the OP is talking about just such a person.

I always appreciate your comments about gender roles as you make people think about the stereotypes and how the pendulum sweeps from one end to the other. Hopefully, eventually people will find balance. Some of the more socialist-minded countries are way ahead of us in that respect.

Sorry for my long-windedness last night. I was avoiding some bile-producing, not very creative, creative work. Perhaps people who make their living that way have less sympathy for the poser types. :)

[lumberjack_jeff]

147. Thank you for your nice comments

It's always beneficial to discuss this with you. I do realize that being a stay at home dad (of three sons) has caused me to become somewhat defensive about the issue.

I want for them what every parent does regardless of gender; fulfillment, respect and economic opportunity. For young men, I see the opportunity to obtain any of those aspirations to be highly conditional - at best, because of a perceived social need to punish them for the sins of their forebears.

:hi:

[EFerrari]

126. I mostly agree with you, but honestly, could you say as easily

"his support for her increased the value of both"?

[lumberjack_jeff]

132. In the social environment in which they lived and worked, not really.

Absent Pollock's success, she would have had a much harder time being taken seriously as a tier 1 artist. If their mutual long-term success depended upon her immediate success, both would have suffered.

I don't mean to suggest she was riding his coattails. She was a brilliant artist, but she painted in a different culture from ours... one in which she needed the credibility she got from Jackson.

[EFerrari]

143. A culture not too different than ours or, not different enough.

There's a ton of resentment on this thread and as much as I dislike it, I have to cop to some of it as a woman who has been writing and painting in a largely hostile society since the 70s. I used to kid my mom about the difference in the way the family treated my musician brother and me, "Michelangelo, come down from the ceiling! Your brother needs a tuna sandwich and the dog needs to go out!"

lol

I have two boys that will never know that particular obstacle and three nieces who, hopefully, will know it much less intimately than women in my generation. That would a good thing.

[lumberjack_jeff]

145. I'm neither female nor an artist.

And I wasn't alive during the 40's. I'm limited in my ability to understand the differences between the hurdles that women artists faced 50 years ago compared to today.

I can only note that colleges turn out many more art majors today, of whom the vast majority are women. I find it hard to envision systemic discrimination against women by an industry dominated by women.

[EFerrari]

146. Depends what you're meaning by domination.

For example, black women dominated the novel in the 90s but that didn't translate into generalized institutional support or some lever in the marketplace or even, a better expectation of support for young black women novelists at the time.

Women are always being herded into support positions in the same way men are always being herded into positions that produce immediate paychecks. We have a way to go yet as a culture.

[NashVegas]

108. Ouch

I actually have a job in a creative field and have for 25 years. Don't make enough money to support a family above the poverty level, but I was aware of that going in, and chose to focus on something other than family, anyway.

What most people will never understand is that in order to make it BIG in the arts, you have to be able and willing to work in a way that will allow others to make HUGE enough profits off of your work that promoting it will be worth their while. No, I'm serious. That's the sole secret to great commercial success. If you are willing, you've got to dedicate yourself to finding the RIGHT people who have the goods and the muscle, who won't sell you down the river.

Sorry about your friends.

[Hello_Kitty]

37. Frankly, the 'too creative to work' types should stay out of the workforce

It's not like they change their stripes once they are drawing a regular paycheck.

[EFerrari]

50. Some people really can't deal with working around other people.

It's not even a choice. When we were really down and out, Doug tried to go make sandwiches. Before the first week was out, everyone at work hated him and he felt bad all the time.

The exact inverse of being on stage all alone, having complete control of the audience and having everyone like you because they don't know you up close. It's sort of wild.

[Hello_Kitty]

52. And some others get along with other people just fine but don't want to work.

[EFerrari]

54. Sure. n/t

[shadowknows69]

140. Well put. I use to literally talk to thousands of people on the radio

But put me in a room with ten of them and I'll have a panic attack.

[Demobrat]

63. No kidding. I'm a "creative" in advertising.

Every once in a while a true "artiste" decides to lower him or herself to take a job in the commercial art field. Not work, mind you, just take a job.

[TexasObserver]

40. Fathers who don't work are leeches. Mothers who don't work are homemakers.

Some consider it divorce worthy if the husband doesn't work. I don't see anyone suggesting the reverse would ever be true.

If dad doesn't bring home a paycheck he's a bum. If he does bring home a paycheck, well that's his duty. If mom brings home a paycheck, she's a hero. If mom doesn't bring home a paycheck, that's no discredit to her.

Each marriage partner should be judged by the same standard, as the duty to support children is co equal under the law.

[prolesunited]

46. I think most here were commenting on the specific situation

I think whatever works for the couple and what is mutually acceptable. However, this woman certainly is NOT happy with the situation and responses reflect that. I think you're bringing a whole lot of your own baggage into this.

In this specific situation, whether it was the man or the woman at home, I think whoever it was has a responsibility to contribute to the family.

If a dad stays home to care for the house and kids and that's what the parents decided was best, more power to them. But when kids are grown or financial issues hit, like possible foreclosure, it's time to re-evaluate, and if someone needs to make some money, they need to get in gear.

[katty]

60. yes, whatever is worked out by the couple-as fair as possible

and mutually agreed upon. Sometimes one partner takes on more, at others times another-and great if you have some balance of responsibility and 'division' of labor with respect to a family. I have taken on more from time to time (as well my partner) in a relationship and this was a mutual agreement with some kind of an 'end date' or shift-it is about caring and assisting each other as a couple and your children.

[TexasObserver]

67. Nonsense.

You seem unable to evaluate the situation without projecting, as your personal attack indicates.

[prolesunited]

85. Personal attack?

Have the mods delete it, but it wasn't.

OK, here's your chance. I have an open mind.

Present the case in the OP and back up your assertion. Spell it out for me how you went from the OP to your post.

[Lorien]

53. See post #15. nt

[dustbunnie]

56. But this couple had never agreed he would be the homemaker.

The OP states that she was subsidizing them until he could catch a break. Seems as though after 20 years, either the breaks aren't coming or he has no real talent. I don't see how if the genders were reversed, the resentment or issues would be any different.

[dysfunctional press]

112. yes, they did. 20 years is a decision.

[Hello_Kitty]

57. When you're about to lose the house everyone should be working

You are using the OP to grind your own axe but that's not what it's about.

[Demobrat]

69. Some fathers who don't work are homemakers.

One of my neighbors takes care of two kids fulltime while his lawyer wife works. I don't think anybody would say he was slacking. I think he yells at his kids too much - but that's just my opinion. The fact is that he's the fulltime caregiver to two kids under three.

[lumberjack_jeff]

90. Ding, ding. ding.

Winner!

[davidthegnome]

150. Excellent post

You said what I was feeling, less offensively than I would have - and in far fewer words than I would have used.

[TexasObserver]

154. Each couple has to be judged based upon its own history and dynamic.

I've seen husbands act like jerks when they worked and their wife didn't. I've seen wives act like jerks when they worked and their husband didn't. I've also seen couples where the one works and one doesn't arrangement works great, and both appreciate the role of the other.

I've also learned never to believe entirely the first story you hear from anyone who wants your advice on divorce. They're usually looking for permission, and often mangling the facts to fit their desired result. Until you hear from the other person, you have no idea how much is true of what you've been told by the other person. It's best to assume they will leave out the parts that make them look bad and overstate the things that make their spouse look bad.

[varelse]

42. Cary provided excellent advice

and some insight into the possible root of this particular situation (narcissistic personality).

[ContinentalOp]

58. Well done!

The man bashing wasn't enough. This thread really needed some amateur pop psychoanalysis thrown into the mix!

[varelse]

61. I don't think the intention of the OP was man bashing

the advice columnist did give good advice - including a suggestion to get professional help. There are a few personal anecdotes in the replies to this thread, but I think they're just that - personal stories - not "man bashing".

[Juche]

47. I'm so glad I couldn't get a girlfriend

Makes my life so much easier. I can just do what I want and am not responsible to anyone but myself. People never see the glass as half full.

[Lorien]

51. So her glass is "half full" why?

She's supposed to be thrilled just to have him there when they're losing their home, life savings and filing for bankruptcy? That's stressful by itself; when you have a partner who isn't even interested in helping out it's doubly so.

[Juche]

55. I'm talking about my life, not hers

I don't have to worry about all of these stresses that come up and all these fights and power struggles.

[Hepburn]

59. Lady, let me make it clear: You married a L-O-S-E-R!

It's your choice where you go now...but, frankly, I would have dumped him long, long ago.

[Demobrat]

66. That depends on your POV.

There's a (sociopathic) mindset that believes that getting somebody else to support you while you stay home to play with your toy trains makes you a bigtime winner. The loser is the one who hauls her butt out of bed every morning.

[NeedleCast]

65. Boggles the Mind

I know tons of nice, decently to well salaried IT folks who are not hideously deformed or socially awkward who can't get a date...and this douche appears to be thriving on the back of hise wife.

[earth mom]

68. I don't think everyone is cut out for a 9 to 5 job nor do I think that all jobs should only be

office jobs that require a degree.

I'm sick of the cookie cutter mentality that says only an education and a job in Corporate America is worth having. :puke:


To most people and especially men, a job defines who a person is.

I don't blame this guy for trying to follow his dream even though it's looking more and more like a dead end right now.

But that doesn't mean it's over, or that he won't ever realize his dream.


So for the moment, this guy and his wife need to find another way to live in order to keep a roof overhead and food on the table.

Who knows, they just may discover an incredible life they never could have envisioned otherwise.

[Demobrat]

70. Following his dream would be fine

if he wasn't taking his family down with him. I think the truth is that he's LIVING his dream. He has exactly the life he wants. It's the woman who got stuck with the bill who's living the nightmare.

[earth mom]

73. How is he taking the family down with him? She was the main breadwinner and lost HER job.

At this point, it's not time to start pointing fingers but figure out what they can do together to start over.

When my husband-who has been the main breadwinner for our family-lost his job about 13 years ago, he didn't finger point at me and tell me to get to work.

Instead, we worked together to figure out ways to bring in money while he looked for a job.

It wasn't easy and we lived on the edge for close to 9 years while he worked for living poor wages before he got a decent paying job 4 years ago and things turned around for us.

It took almost 10 years for us to get back on our feet, but we made it, and we're fine now.

I think the difference is we hung in there and didn't give up.

It's been a journey that brought many good things that we never expected.

That's why I posted what I did.

[Demobrat]

76. Oh he's working with her to figure out ways to bring in money?

I got the impression he was kicking back waiting for her to take care of things - as usual.

[earth mom]

80. You should read post #71 and educate yourself about what being creative means. nt.

[Demobrat]

81. I've made my living as a writer for 25 years.

I know exactly what creativity means, and it DOESN'T mean that working is beneath me.

[Matariki]

107. Sure you have. Just like William Blake.

Or do you mean advertising copy? Or tech manuals?

[Hello_Kitty]

155. What creative can also mean....

Expecting that food just magically shows up in the fridge and utilities get paid.

Expecting that gas is available at the pumps and the roads are repaired and all the services that make life livable in a civilized society are done for you by those '9 to 5 drones' you so disdain, so you can be comfortable while you are 'creative'.

It means never having responsibility for anyone, not even yourself.

[Hello_Kitty]

72. But using another person to support you while you 'follow your dream' is shitty

It's selfish, manipulative, and indicative of an astonishing entitlement mentality to refuse to seek paying work when your family is about to lose the home.

[earth mom]

75. How do you know all that from a short letter?

Who said he isn't trying at all to help? :wtf:

BTW- Isn't "personal responsibility" a rethuglican meme?!

p.s. Read my reply #73

[27inCali]

71. in response to some of the bashing here of creative types

who are not financially successful. As a stay at home dad who nutures a creative passion for music on the side, I find some of the replies to the OP here deeply offensive and lacking in imagination........... no one has a right to make their family suffer poverty because they don't want to work, but many people rightfully see the modern concept of 'productivity' as a total fucking sham used to manipulate people into working way too hard for way too little pay. I thought we were progressives here and wise to that corporate bullshit..........you can go slave your ass off your whole life at the factory to build doodads to make someone else rich, but how many doodads does it take to have something worth the Ode to Joy?

J.S. Bach lived his entire life in absolute obscurity and was not 'discovered' as the gargantuan musical genius he was until long after his death.

after Fredrick Chopin's death,they were finding pieces of his music being used to wrap meat at the local butcher shop. He lived in poverty and exchanged music for food. That poor stupid butcher was ruining priceless works of art.

Beethoven was a complete social outcast and lived in relative poverty during the time that he was writing his 9th Symphony (what my creative writing teacher in highschool called the single most important piece of sonic expression in the history of Western Culture).

Tchaikovsky spent the first half of his career in absolute obscurity. His first ballet, "Swan Lake" -probably some of the most beautiful music ever written- played for one night only was panned so harshly by critics and audiences alike that he fled Russia out of embarassment.

Jimi Hendrix only ever had one radio hit (and that was a cover) and spend the first half of his career as a backup musician.

the Ramones basically invented modern rock music as we know it today, but never tasted success in the 20 something years they were together.

Don't even get me started on Van Gogh and Nietszche.

All of these people are so iconic and revered in our culture now, it is hard to grasp the idea that there was a time when what they were doing was dismissed as crap and that they were looked down upon by their contemporaries as losers, but the truth is that much of what is most ground-breaking in the field of art, music, creativity in general is just totally beyond the comprehension of the casual moron on the street and we should all thank the heavens that the above mentioned artists did not listen to that casual moron on the street, but persevered on. Their work has done so much to give our lives beauty and meaning and who you see today as a lazy slacker artist guy(girl) may just be tomorrow's intrepid genius.

[earth mom]

78. Great post! You nailed exactly how I feel about this!

:thumbsup:

[Demobrat]

79. Did any of those men expect to be supported by women

while they followed their bliss?

[ContinentalOp]

116. Um, actually yes. Many artists are supported by their spouse, lover, etc.

What do you call a guitar player without a girlfriend? Homeless.

[Matariki]

82. Thank you. Those are good examples.

Our society doesn't appreciate artistic expression unless it can turn a quick buck for some commercial enterprise. It's truly to the detriment of our culture. Choosing to persist in following any sort of pure artistic vision in America is a very difficult thing to do - almost on the order of a religious vow of poverty, but with much less support.

[dustbunnie]

83. I'm trying to figure out which one of these people on your list -

enjoyed a stable, happy marriage. Every one of them worked like dogs at, and were completely obsessed with, their art.

That's quite different from the creative person who dibble-dabbles at this and that.

And from the way the OP was written, it seems the wife sacrificed her own potential for greatness in order to cultivate his.

[EFerrari]

84. Some people aren't comfortable unless they're slamming someone for something

even if all they have to go on is a third hand account of someone they don't even know on the internets.

[TexasObserver]

87. Agreed. And it is silly to believe one person's version of a relationship.

Someone writes a letter to someone else, seeking advice. The worst thing any reader could do is assume the person who tells their tale of woe is telling it accurately. That would be the exception, not the norm.

When two people have a family, if one person works and brings in the money, and the other doesn't, there is often resentment by the bread winner against the non bread winner. That's true whether the bread winner is male or female. This letter sounds like one of those rants.

Maybe the husband is a grand loafer, but even his wife gives him credit for being creative and trying to get his work out there. We don't really know what he does at home. He may be the only nurturing parent. The wife may be non nurturing. We don't know his contribution, and his angry wife is a bad source of information. For all we know, she's trying to rationalize getting out, when her real reason is something else entirely.

A wise course would be to assume she's telling the story in the light that makes him look worse than he is, and herself better than she is. That's how most contemplating divorce tell their story.

[lumberjack_jeff]

99. That's absolutely true.

What is more interesting about this story... in fact most stories, are the reactions.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

91. Nobody is preventing him from being an artist.

It's entirely possible to hold down a "real" job while utilizing your creative talents in the downtime. Millions of people, myself included, do the same.

If it were up to me, I wouldn't have to work and could just write screenplays all day long. Then again, I need a roof over my head and food in my body. That requires a "real" job which will provide for me financially until (or if) my creative projects can serve the same purpose down the line.

The fact that the husband has an unemployed wife and small child, yet still refuses to find a job when he is perfectly able to hold one, is just selfish on his part.

[Demobrat]

93. Quite the contrary. His wife has enabled him to be an artist for 20 years.

I wonder what he'll do if she decides to dump him. Probably sue for lifetime alimony.

[NashVegas]

109. +35

Thanks for that. Here's a repeat of what I wrote higher up in the thread:

What most people will never understand is that in order to make it BIG in the arts, you have to be able and willing to work in a way that will allow others to make HUGE enough profits off of your work that promoting it will be worth their while. No, I'm serious. That's the sole secret to great commercial success. If you are willing, you've got to dedicate yourself to finding the RIGHT people who have the goods and the muscle, who won't sell you down the river.

[Hello_Kitty]

118. "you can go slave your ass off your whole life at the factory to build doodads to make someone else"

Is that what the person who is supporting you does? Must be nice to be so disdainful of the hand that feeds you.

[Greyhound]

125. "I thought we were progressives here and wise to that corporate bullshit"

What on earth ever gave you that idea? This is a Democratic Party board and the progressives are a small minority.

For the most part, DUers are vehemently in favor of the soul-crushing, anti-artistic, anti-intellectual, American Capitalistic System and only find fault with it when it comes down on them personally. You will notice how few of the replies find the idea of a family losing their home and future to be abhorrent.

Can't find, or are not suited to a JOB? It must be the person's fault for failing to comply with or conform to The Great Machine.

[Demobrat]

135. Actually we all find the idea of a family losing their

home and future to be abhorrent. It's the oh-so-special artiste who doesn't seem to have a problem with it. At least not a big enough problem to lower himself to work to keep them. It might crush his soul doncha know.

[BlooInBloo]

94. Never had much respect for alleged "too dreamy to live in reality" types. Shit or get off the pot.

[Demobrat]

104. Me neither. I have absolutly no problem with supporting people

who are unable to work due to illness, disability or age. But leeching off of other people while preening one's self as more creative? Screw that.

[shadowknows69]

141. Don't worry those of us afflicted with that don't have much respect for ourselves either

But sometimes being "too dreamy to live in reality" is harder and truer than you might think. Could you concentrate on a job when your very senses spin out of your control sometimes? When your mind can't focus because it is constantly bombarded by images, sounds, memories, even voices that you can't seem to filter out or shut off? Being a freak sucks. Thanks for reminding us.

[Roon]

105. Every,last, single person I have ever been with

has been the somewhat same. And if they did work, they didn't help with bills and counted my check to help pay for everything. One nice thing about being single. :-)

[dysfunctional press]

113. it's time for peter pan to grow some balls...

and for her to kick him in them.

[KillCapitalism]

127. Where does this couple live?

I wonder if it is an area with very high unemployment.

I live in an area where there is 25% unemployment. A few people I know have been looking for work for years & when that happens they just get so down and defeated that they give up and just quit looking.

[MindPilot]

134. I had a room-mate like that; dumb as a posthole,

but thought he had all kinds of talent. He just couldn't understand why being able to sketch a picture of a car wasn't enough to have the major car companies competing to hire him as a stylist.

A couple that my ex was friends with, the husband was the too cool for school type. The guy has few skills that extend beyond model railroading, no degree and of course the workplace is "too oppressive". Additionally being that he is soooooo much smarter than anyone else and incapable of making a mistake, it was tough for him to tolerate any kind of structured environment. His wife supported him and all his failed "business" ventures.

I sent the room-mate packing after two missed rent payments, and I no longer have any contact with Mr. Knowitall.

[European Socialist]

137. AS they say in sports--You are never so good when winning...

and never so bad when losing. That guy might end up with a good job and support his wife for the rest of her life.

[Thegonagle]

139. I've never seen so many strawmen (and strawwomen) in one thread, on any website, ever.

It's bound to happen in almost any discussion about poverty, but this one bears resemblance to a horror movie. The strawmen! They can't be stopped! Ahhhhhhhhhhh!

[Bucky]

148. This letter really makes me sympathize with poor Mrs Beck

[ecstatic]

151. She enabled his spoiled ways for 20 years

now expects him to change? :shrug: She was never his wife, she was actually his second mom! Wow! That could NEVER be me! I can do bad all by myself!

[JVS]

153. Tough shit