Law Students

Happy Marriages

By Andrea

Oh no! Ken Jennings has visited the lowly pages of PBB, ganking my picture and calling me out for describing him as a dork! I say it with great respect, good sir. For a person who met her spouse in the midst of a competitive shouting match about government intervention over oil prices, I am incapable of using "dork" as an insult.

Ken makes reference to both him and me having happy trivia marriages. This is true.  I recommend one. I do not, however, recommend this amazingly offensive, ridiculous article in this month's Atlantic, positing that women over 30 should settle for any dudes who will marry them, even if they're gay or repulsive. I like the Atlantic, so I'm not sure what the deal is. I could go on a rant, but you can just imagine 30 minutes of eye-rolling as you read these gems:

Overlook his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics. Because if you want to have the infrastructure in place to have a family, settling is the way to go.

That's going to be AWESOME for your kids.

Choosing to spend your life with a guy who doesn?t delight in the small things in life might be considered settling at 30, but not at 35. By 40, if you get a cold shiver down your spine at the thought of embracing a certain guy, but you enjoy his company more than anyone else?s, is that settling or making an adult compromise?

That's creepy and sad. You're going to marry a guy who's too gross to cuddle?

Those of us who choose not to settle in hopes of finding a soul mate later are almost like teenagers who believe they?re invulnerable to dying in a drunk-driving accident.

I like the "almost" qualifier, as if it saves this sentiment from being off-the-wall insane.

I really wish this article were a satire, or that it were published by some tiny little magazine so it wouldn't matter all that much. It's not. Gah.

Full post as published by Peanut Butter Burrito on February 11, 2008 (boomark / email).