Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Shame Is Deader Than Dead
nationalreview.com ^ | June 26, 2009 12:00 AM | Mona Charen

Posted on 06/28/2009 2:36:20 PM PDT by dr_who

"The author is ending her marriage. Isn’t it time you did the same?” So The Atlantic provocatively introduces its July/August feature “Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off.” It comes at a propitious moment. This seems to be the week for TMI — too much information. South Carolina governor Mark Sanford has told more, much more, than we needed to know about his mistress (how he met her, how their relationship ripened), his views on God’s laws, on the Appalachian Trail, and on forgiveness.

Why must wayward American public figures stage these auto autos-da-fé — these self-immolations on TV? Dignity, which arises from a proper sense of keeping private matters private, is a lost aspiration, apparently — along with so many other virtues, like dignity’s companion restraint. Yes, Sanford needed to apologize to the citizens of South Carolina for going AWOL. But as for the messy private details, a simple written statement that he was having marital issues would have sufficed. At least Mrs. Sanford showed some sound judgment by declining to pose next to her straying spouse as he fielded queries about his extramarital activities. But even her statement — and it goes without saying that she finds herself in this situation unwillingly — strayed into TMI. She told the world under what circumstances she would consider repairing their union: “I remain willing to forgive Mark completely for his indiscretions and to welcome him back, in time, if he continues to work toward reconciliation with a true spirit of humility and repentance.” That’s the sort of thing that should be communicated to one person only.

The Atlantic’s Sandra Tsing Loh — not content to cheat on her husband and file for divorce — compounded the betrayal by writing about it in cringe-inducing detail. Her account begins in the office of the couple’s marriage therapist, where Loh recounts the moment she decided she couldn’t “work” on her marriage despite having two young sons. “We cried, we rent our hair, we bewailed the fate of our children. And yet at the end of the day . . . I would not be able to replace the romantic memory of my fellow transgressor with the more suitable image of my husband, which is what it would take in modern-therapy terms to knit our family’s domestic construct back together.” Does the whole world need to know that? Do her children? Her children’s classmates?

But because Ms. Loh is a journalist, she cannot resist the urge to, in George Will’s term, “commit sociology.” Since her own divorce, she’s begun a “journey of reading, thinking, and listening to what’s going on in other 21st-century American families. And along the way, I’ve begun to wonder, what with all the abject and swallowed misery: Why do we still insist on marriage?” This, bear in mind, comes from the magazine that boldly declared “Dan Quayle Was Right” on its April 1993 cover.

Loh’s form of sociology is a sloppy one — a few quotes from pop psychology texts, a few examples from among her friends and acquaintances — and she is ready to declare that marriage itself is the problem. “To work, to parent, to housekeep, to be the ones who schedule ‘date night,’ only to be reprimanded in the home by male kitchen b———, and then, in the bedroom, to be ignored — it’s a bum deal.” How far we have come, sisters, from The Feminine Mystique, when Betty Freidan cried under the lash of domesticity. Today’s woman is apparently miserable because her husband is too much of a culinary perfectionist and too inadequate a lover. Maybe. But that’s one problem with playing a sociologist in magazines. It’s all impressions, not data.

Loh’s solutions range from the casually immoral (wives should take lovers without leaving the marriage) to the tribal “Let children between the ages of 1 and 5 be raised in a household of mothers and their female kin. Let the men/husbands/boyfriends come in once or twice a week to build shelves, prepare that bouillabaisse, or provide sex.”

There are no solutions to the problems Loh identifies. People will become dissatisfied with their spouses, and they will behave selfishly. But as countless real social scientists have shown — W. Bradford Wilcox, Sarah McLanahan, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, and David Blankenhorn spring to mind — marriage remains the most secure arrangement in which to raise healthy children. It also conduces to adult happiness more than any other arrangement.

Ironically, for all her fulminating, Loh hints at the end of her piece that her own selfish quest ended unhappily. “Avoid marriage — or you too may suffer the emotional pain, the humiliation, and the logistical difficulty, not to mention the expense, of breaking up a long-term union at midlife for something as demonstrably fleeting as love.”

How about another solution that is only about 3,000 years old? How about avoiding adultery?


— Mona Charen is a nationally syndicated columnist. © 2009 Creators Syndicate, Inc.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: adultery; adulterydivorce; clintonlegacy; loh; monacharen; sanford
In divorce, there are no perpetrators, just victims! Therefore marriage is a crime!

Spent a long time reading Andrew Sullivan when the Iranian uprising was going full tilt and the regime hadn't yet rounded up the protesters. Liberals may have about as much empathy as everybody else, but they are really messed up. I guess the value of The Atlantic for conservatives is helps serve as a reminder of that fact.
1 posted on 06/28/2009 2:36:20 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dr_who

“Shame is dead”

Was he 50 years old?


2 posted on 06/28/2009 2:46:19 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

“Let children between the ages of 1 and 5 be raised in a household of mothers and their female kin. Let the men/husbands/boyfriends come in once or twice a week to build shelves, prepare that bouillabaisse, or provide sex.”

Oh, OK, sure, if you say so, lady. But what if we don’t like bouillabaisse?


3 posted on 06/28/2009 2:51:40 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

More like 3,000 years old by the columnist’s reckoning.


4 posted on 06/28/2009 2:56:25 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

>>More like 3,000 years old by the columnist’s reckoning.<<

And she’s right — about everything.


5 posted on 06/28/2009 2:57:48 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

More job security for priests, if only they could seize the moment!

Men have been the adulterers for eons and women sucked it up in order to maintain financial continuity for their children.

Now that women have been ‘liberated’, they have become, why libertines of course.

Shame on cuckolding men and women, and the homewreckers who assist in the destruction of our childrens’ right to a stable, moral family structure. Just wait until the children leave the nest if you must behave like studs and sluts.

And that’s all I have to say about that.
sod


6 posted on 06/28/2009 3:01:21 PM PDT by sodpoodle (Never give up- Keep Up!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Just another self-absorbed feminist b****’s version of Utopia.


7 posted on 06/28/2009 3:01:32 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sodpoodle
More job security for priests, if only they could seize the moment!

Good point. Priests these days are required to be pushovers.
8 posted on 06/28/2009 3:03:57 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
Don't be silly - marriage is just as much in vogue as it's ever been.




If you're gay.

9 posted on 06/28/2009 3:10:47 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
How about another solution that is only about 3,000 years old? How about avoiding adultery?

That's just crazy talk.

10 posted on 06/28/2009 3:13:07 PM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all. -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

This is the “It’s all about me” generation. During “love’s” first blush, we cater to the object of our affection. Then it gets tedious as real life sets in. Emotionally we want carnivals and circuses. And there is now nothing to tell us that’s not the way to live and will never bring true happiness.


11 posted on 06/28/2009 3:20:56 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
How about another solution that is only about 3,000 years old? How about avoiding adultery?

That's just crazy talk.

Have a friend who is getting a divorce. Told me he got in trouble and " everyone does it".

I told him no not everyone, I have been married 29years and not cheated.

12 posted on 06/28/2009 3:28:19 PM PDT by sausageseller (http://coolblue.typepad.com/the_cool_blue_blog/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

I would like to hear from this author in a few years, when she has become dis-enchanted with her fling (or vice-versa) and longs for the boring stability that she (AND her children) once had. It’s sad and sickening that this “cosmo-girl” mentality is nothing more than a dead-end street for so many women.


13 posted on 06/28/2009 3:30:51 PM PDT by Larightgirl (get rich quick....count your blessings!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Let the men/husbands/boyfriends come in once or twice a week
to build shelves, prepare that bouillabaisse, or provide sex

For what purpose would a Male agree to this arrangement?
Why agree to this “contract”
It screams “I don't need you for anything”

Strangely I have some sympathy to the argument that Marriage is a “contract” or a “Covenant”
And should have nothing to do with Governance and Law except by mutual consent.
By this viewpoint, each marriage is precisely defined by those within it,
or by Covenant - a Contract with God

Divorce and infidelity, from this standpoint would be
dealt with primarily as a breach of Contract
not as a Breach of Common Law

Polygamy and Same Gender unions would be no different than
Polyandry, Plural Marriages, and Bestial Unions

Unless it is a Covenant Marriage in which the
Contract is defined by God, and so are the expectations
This, I believe, is the correct approach
But I'm not so sure it is so much a matter of Governance and Law
Let alone, regulated and supported by coercive taking - Taxation

But the issues with regard to Societal supports, insurance, etc.
would be a null concept, except by mutual consent

14 posted on 06/28/2009 3:40:50 PM PDT by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

Well, I also wonder what happens when the kids reach age 6. Ship them off to public school boot camp?


15 posted on 06/28/2009 3:46:49 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
This is Sandra (really).

I won't be participating in the "proving the sex" part.

16 posted on 06/28/2009 3:47:39 PM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Ship them off to public school boot camp?

First grade - on steroids
Brave New World in it's infancy
Everybody belongs to everybody else
Soma - Don't give a damn, take a gram

17 posted on 06/28/2009 3:50:39 PM PDT by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

I almost upchucked lunch reading about this Atlantic magazine article. As it is, I subscribe to the Atlantic, and I haven’t read this article since I’m here at a conference. I’m not the catch of the day, certainly, but I can express a certain charm when I want to, and last night this little hot thing from Russia working at a local watering hole starting coming on to me. Flattering, sure. And during this whole round of little flirations and casual questions, all I could think about was my wife and son - and how a leap into bed could be the gunshot wound to the heart of my marriage. I paid my bill and walked out. Then I read about this twit writer and her utter lack of care about her children and her husband, and her dumbass idea that somehow men don’t need, deserve, or want a cohesive, loving family.

When I get home I plan on reading this article and then giving this immoral slattern a piece of my mind. Perhaps she can use it to fill in the hole in her consciousness.


18 posted on 06/28/2009 4:03:21 PM PDT by redpoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Perhaps she grew up believing that since her face isn’t pretty enough she is well within her rights to abandon or neglect those who are closest to her. Just a wild theory.


19 posted on 06/28/2009 4:09:57 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Larightgirl

She may never become disenchanted with her fling. It sounds like it was a bad idea for her to be married to anyone in the first place.


20 posted on 06/28/2009 4:12:51 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

One should not marry unless you are truly willing to make well-being of another person more important than your own happiness. One should not have children unless you are truly willing to make the well-being of your children more important than your own happiness.


21 posted on 06/28/2009 4:13:27 PM PDT by CaptainMorgantown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

22 posted on 06/28/2009 4:18:00 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

...either that, or she has a screwed-up idea about what love is, going by her “modest proposal”.


23 posted on 06/28/2009 4:20:36 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CaptainMorgantown
One should not marry unless you are truly willing to make well-being of another person more important than your own happiness. One should not have children unless you are truly willing to make the well-being of your children more important than your own happiness

Want a few nails to go with your cross?

24 posted on 06/28/2009 4:23:41 PM PDT by ninonitti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CaptainMorgantown
One should not marry unless you are truly willing
to make well-being of another person
more important than your own happiness.

I would disagree
One should not marry until one is prepared
to treat their partner's needs, hopes, and aspirations
As just as important as one's own

I suspect that, long term,
it is impossible to Love someone else more than One's Self
Love of others requires first Self Love
Love of Self can't be sustained without Loving Others
And none of this can be sustained without Loving God
or without He's Love for us

25 posted on 06/28/2009 4:26:44 PM PDT by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CaptainMorgantown

I dunno. Perhaps it’s an ideal that is not universally true, but happily married people often can’t be happy unless they’re assured of the well-being of their spouse/children. Might be some moments where everyone involved is at cross-purposes, but that’s regarded as the inevitable rough patch that is resolved either through the passage of time or axe murders.


26 posted on 06/28/2009 4:34:06 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge
it is impossible to Love someone else more than One's Self Love of others requires first Self Love

There must be some sort of balance. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" requires self-love, you would think,....and also the ability to plant yourself into your neighbor's shoes (in the rhetorical sense, ie don't steal your neighbors shoes. that's bad).
27 posted on 06/28/2009 4:38:41 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ninonitti

Why, do you have your hammer ready? :)


28 posted on 06/28/2009 4:40:07 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Life is tedious by necessity, very true. Young adults at least wish not only for carnivals, but also coronations and fancy dress balls. Feed the ego.


29 posted on 06/28/2009 4:49:34 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
Feed the ego.

Absolutely. And they lack the maturity to find out what real happiness is.

30 posted on 06/28/2009 4:52:39 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW
And they lack the maturity to find out what real happiness is.

In my humble and limited experience...
Happiness is not something that is found or achieved,
It is a thing that finds one, while one is doing what needs to be done.
Happiness when pursued, will invariably deteriorate into thrill and obsessions
and from that, regret and emptiness.

It is better to drop the subject, and to live in Service, Honor, and Duty.
Happiness will come back to you, in time

31 posted on 06/28/2009 5:49:44 PM PDT by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

I’ve been married 39 years. There have been happy times and frustrating times. The happy times are the time spent with the one who knows me better than anyone else ever has. Well, except God. :-)


32 posted on 06/28/2009 6:23:10 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
“We cried, we rent our hair, we bewailed the fate of our children. And yet at the end of the day . . . I would not be able to replace the romantic memory of my fellow transgressor with the more suitable image of my husband, which is what it would take in modern-therapy terms to knit our family’s domestic construct back together.”

In other words, she cheated on her husband and enjoyed it, so screw the kids and toss the marriage in the trash, time to move on the the next thrilling episode in the soap opera of her life. "Modern therapy" would have it no other way. Yes, she's a liberal all right.

The Wall Street Journal should hire Mona Charen to replace Peggy Noonan.

33 posted on 06/28/2009 6:29:08 PM PDT by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TChad

I’ll second that.


34 posted on 06/28/2009 6:41:34 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge
If you want to be happy, be. ~Leo Tolstoy

There are variations on the same theme everywhere.
35 posted on 06/28/2009 6:59:29 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

later reading...


36 posted on 06/28/2009 8:08:07 PM PDT by NYC Republican (This Too Shall Pass- in 8 years.. how much destruction will they create?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
Loh’s solutions range from the casually immoral (wives should take lovers without leaving the marriage) to the tribal “Let children between the ages of 1 and 5 be raised in a household of mothers and their female kin. Let the men/husbands/boyfriends come in once or twice a week to build shelves, prepare that bouillabaisse, or provide sex.”

Yeah, lololol, that's why hippy communes are alive and thriving and worked sooooo well. Right. I can't stop laughing.

She'll try this and inside 6 months she'll be writing to us more of the tortured details of her life. Jealousy when her kids prefer one of the other moms or one of the housemen rebuffs her affections. Tired of them leaving the cooking for her. She'll be writing that her commune way of life “To work, to parent, to housekeep, to be the ones who schedule ‘date night,’ only to be reprimanded in the home by (fe)male kitchen b———, and then, in the bedroom, to be ignored — it’s a bum deal.” She'll pack up her confused children and be on to the next social experiment. Not marriage, she's off that.

37 posted on 06/28/2009 8:54:19 PM PDT by fortunecookie (Please pray for Anna, age 7, who waits for a new kidney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
Btw, shame isn't necessarily dead.

The new shame is having any shame for things that were once shameful.

Like adultery, cheating, lying. Yep, it's all the rage.

38 posted on 06/28/2009 8:58:23 PM PDT by fortunecookie (Please pray for Anna, age 7, who waits for a new kidney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
The Lyrics for Outkast's song Hey Ya!:

One, two, three uh!

My baby don't mess around
Because she loves me so
And this I know fo' sho'
But does she really wanna
But can't stand to see me
Walk out the do'

Don't try to fight the feelin'
Because the thought alone
is killing me right now
Thank God for mom and dad
For sticking two together
'Cause we don't know how

Hey ya [8X]

You think you've got it
Oh, you think you've got it
But got it just don't get it
When there's nothing at all

We get together
Oh, we get together
But seperate's always better
when there's feelings involved

If what they say is "Nothing is forever"
Then what makes, Then what makes, Then what makes
Then what makes, what makes, what makes, love the exception?
So why oh, why oh
Why oh, why oh, are we so in denial
When we know we not happy here?

Y'all don't wanna hear me you just wanna dance

Hey ya [3X]
Don't want to meet your daddy,
Hey ya
Just want you in my Caddy
Hey ya
Don't want to meet yo' mama
Hey ya
Just wan't to make you cumma
Hey ya
Oh I'm...
Hey ya
I'm just being honest, I'm just being honest

Hey, alright now
Alright now fellas
Yeah!
Now what's cooler than bein' cool?
Ice cold!
I can't hear ya'
I say what's cooler than bein' cool?
Ice cold!

Alright [15X]
Ok now ladies
Yeah!
And we gon' break this thing down in just a few seconds
Now don't have me break this thang down for nothin'
Now I wanna see y'all on your baddest behavior
Lend me some suga', I am your neighbor
Ah here we go!

Shake it, shake, shake it[3X]
Shake it, shake it, shake, shake it
Shake it like a Polaroid Picture,
Shake it, shake, shake it[2X]
Shake it, shake it, shake, shake it
Shake it like a Polaroid Picture

Now all Beyonce's and Lucy Lui-s
And baby dolls, get on the floor
You know what to do
You know I do

Hey Ya [8X+]

39 posted on 06/28/2009 9:54:09 PM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson