Getting what you wish for …
An astonishingly bitchy piece today in the Telegraph – up even to Daily Mail standards of misogyny – about how men are said to be giving up on “trophy wives” because they keep “going bad”… becoming, (add horror movie music here) toxic wives.
“It is like a perversion of the evolution theory: they have evolved into creatures whose function is simply to get the most for doing the least,” whispered an exhausted husband to me recently. “I wouldn’t mind providing her with so much if she just did something for me occasionally. She’s never even once cooked me a meal.”
Well if you want a woman who is 40 but looks like she’s 21, with the breasts, thighs, and face to match, she’s going to have to spend pretty well every minute of the day attending to that – and she mightn’t have time to keep up with French philosophy or gourmet cooking.
If you seek a capable woman and turn her into your dependent, she’ll probably turn out at being good at getting things out of you, just as she was once good at her job.
It is called getting what you wish for…
And although it is not entirely clear from the website, I suspect that this is in the “news” section: MSM journalism really is going down the tubes…
Stumble it!
Digg
reddit 
Del.icio.us
“the night of the toxic wives” what a great horror movie that would make… spot on post.
Comment by jimjay — January 17, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
OK, I’m hooked on the first page, but that’s all I’m getting. The links seem to be broken for the remainder of the article. Do you have the full text?
Comment by BlondebutBright — January 17, 2007 @ 3:24 pm
It seems to me the phenomena of “trophy wives” would diminish as the gap between male and female income closes (if indeed it is).
Comment by Jarod — January 17, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
I suspect there is only one page, BbB – I think the extra links a just a site glitch.
Comment by Natalie Bennett — January 17, 2007 @ 3:48 pm
Really? No analysis? Just some quotes from a few disgruntled hubbies? AND it’s written by a woman? I’m speechless.
Comment by BlondebutBright — January 17, 2007 @ 3:59 pm
ok, um. that article was crap.
even women who started off with an “Oxford education” may descend into bitchiness when– by their own hand–they have progressively limited their opportunities for self awareness and fulfillment that are not dependent on their partners.
anyway, everybody has always known that some women are bitchy, including some wives of rich husbands.
how is this article news? it’s definately not a very educational or insightful analysis. so what is it?
Comment by julep — January 17, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
Oh, come on, Natalie, there’s nothing astonishing about this appearing in the Telegraph and such garbage really isn’t worth quoting.
And most of the MSM isn’t going down the tubes: the Telegraph was flushed down years ago.
Comment by Tony — January 17, 2007 @ 6:57 pm
Blimey, Tara Winter Wotsit had better watch out.
I don’t want to be around when Mrs Weggis discovers she’s been labled “a lazy, indulgent, over-pampered slug.”
Comment by weggis — January 18, 2007 @ 11:15 pm
Ack.I’ve always hated the trophy wife aesthetic, but this is disgusting. Yeah, part of the “Trophy Wife” thing is spending money. If he wants a wife that’ll be happy with what she has, he should go looking for a Trophy Wife.
Not to mention they skewed a line from Pride and Prejudice. Grr.
Comment by Lydia — January 21, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
I read the whole article earlier and have to say it was truly, truly bizarre. I’d forwarded it to some friends who both commented that it must have been made up from scratch by a very peculiar person. Not a single quoted source sounded authentic.
It seemed to have been written by someone who had a few rich friends whom they hated, and who had desperately extrapolated this into a strange parody that wouldn’t work in the tackiest Hollywood screenplay. Made Jackie Collins look like socio-realism.
Comment by bowleserised — January 21, 2007 @ 6:45 pm
Assuming this is not a figment of a journalists imagination, I think the critical lines are:
“Can’t you just divorce?” I asked.
“Are you kidding?” he replied. “I’d lose everything I’ve worked for, including my children, and I’d be paying her an indecent amount of money for life.”
So you should never marry someone who is poorer than you or agree to their giving up work.
Comment by speculation — January 21, 2007 @ 8:21 pm
As far as I can see, these long-suffering hubbies seem less perturbed by their wives spending money than by them not acting as the old-fashioned society hostesses. It’s not the Botox and the shopping that’s the grievance, it’s the not throwing dinner parties.
Who has dinner parties these days, anyway? Get a sitter and go to a restaurant with your friends. Or have your friends and their kids over and order takeaway. Mind you, I’m probably barking up the wrong tree here. I don’t think society hostessing is really about socialising with friends, it’s about business networking.
Maybe some of these women are complete bitches. But maybe some of them thought they could have it all, then had children and realised two parents both working 60 hours a week was not a recipe for foolproof childraising. A lot of these highly paid City jobs are way, way more than fulltime, and it doesn’t seem to be the kind of environment where flexible hours and job-sharing are encouraged (except among the clerical staff, I daresay).
Besides, look at what they have to put up with in the way of husbands. Who the fuck grouses to a reporter about how his trophy wife isn’t being quite trophy-ish enough? Aren’t these guys embarrassed? And is anybody else getting the impression that some of these grievances have to do with the trophy wife not providing the exact amount of sex these guys want, when they want it?
Comment by Raincitygirl — January 22, 2007 @ 12:54 am