I like to call it a "midlife adjustment" and there is not a person alive who gets to that age who does not have to deal with it at some level - it really is the transitioning from the phase of life where everything points up to that in-between phase where things slow down, age starts to show itself more, and our mortality looms nearer. We all react to it differently but react we do, unless we are beyond feeling.

This piece nicely sets forth how a wife stuck through a pretty tough time with a husband who was adjusting pretty badly. It is a great story of how patience, perseverance, and wisdom can see us through trials. The lesson is that grace should control and guide us where our emotions would lead us to do things we might otherwise regret.

I'm not even going to write about how this applies to hackers and why it could be a good lesson.

I really just want to say: "that was nice to read".

May 2010 follow-up interview to this 2009 essay by Laura Munson from the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/may/08/laura-mun...

Laura Munson's new book:

http://www.amazon.com/This-Not-Story-You-Think/dp/0399156658...

Who knows how to make love stay?

“When we're incomplete, we're always searching for somebody to complete us. When, after a few years or a few months of a relationship, we find that we're still unfulfilled, we blame our partners and take up with somebody more promising. This can go on and on--series polygamy--until we admit that while a partner can add sweet dimensions to our lives, we, each of us, are responsible for our own fulfillment. Nobody else can provide it for us, and to believe otherwise is to delude ourselves dangerously and to program for eventual failure every relationship we enter.” -- Tom Robbins, "Still Life With Woodpecker"

Sometimes it seems the quality of HN is deteriorating, and then a submission like this, which you'd think one has to be at least 35 to even understand, gets 149 points. Pretty amazing.

I'm not going to comment on the lady - but there's one thing I wish; to hear the other side of the story.

I thought that story was awesome, though I completely respect those who hated it. Here is whyb (somewhat stream of conciousness... sorry...):

Long term relationships take work and commitment, including possibly long stretches of unhappiness. This article celebrates working toward something besides "fun".

A rewarding life is NOT the same as being happy all the time. If you ask me, focusing on happiness above all else is tantamount to addiction, and really bad. ("Self overcoming" is what makes a rewarding life, and self overcoming almost requires suffering; I study math -- suffering is fun once you get the taste...)

She wouldn't take the blame for his crappiness, and decided to be OK with herself; she practiced this OK-ness even when it didn't come naturally.

I hate to be all curmudgeonly, but between the 1960s and Freud we have adopted a VERY self indulgent ideology which makes me want to puke. (And which has probably fueled a big part of the conservative movement, unfortunately...)

I may have other less easily expressed reactions that are coloring my overall gestalt, but I think those sum it up.

I'm surprised no one has brought up mental illness. There are very few of us who will make it through life without some kind of depressive episode. Some of use internalize it, some of us lash out and destroy the things around us.

I think the author knows very well the character of her husband. She realized that these feelings and changes in him were out of character, and that other things in his life might be causing him serious distress. She was patient, and gave him the chance to leave if he really thought he needed to, and the time to get his head straightened out. What she didn't do was respond to his lashing out, making the situation worse.

As I see it, she stuck by her husband as he was having a hell of a time in his life. She knew the kind of man he is, and that he'd be back.

So I took this advice a bit too literally when this article came out, and was in denial about all the tantrums my wife was throwing. This weekend, she told me she's hired a lawyer and moved out with my daughter. Should I "buy it" yet?

I'd like to make a thoughtful comment, but I'm struggling to get past the phrase 'age-appropriate'. As someone who has never been 'appropriate' to their chronological age in any respect, it always comes across as reductive, patronising and ultimately dehumanising. It seems to me to be the product of a worldview which sees children not as distinctive individuals with unique preferences and aptitudes, but as mere larvae passing through 'developmental stages'. I consider it an affront to the dignity of all children and my teeth are set on edge every time I hear it.

OK, <thoughtful comment>.

If I expressed my deepest feelings to someone who was close to me, the most painful response I could imagine is "I don't buy it". If they spat at me or hit me, then at least they heard me, took me seriously and emotionally engaged with what I am saying. To hear "I don't buy it" is to be told "I don't recognise your feelings as valid", it is to be told "you don't matter, I'm the one in this relationship that decides what we feel about things". To hear "What can we do to give you the distance you need" is to be told what you need, not asked. When he said "I don't like what you've become", she didn't want to hear what he didn't like, she didn't want to engage, she didn't even acknowledge what he was saying, she just invalidated him and shut the discussion down with "I don't buy it".

There's a good chance I'm being grossly unfair, but I can't see anything but an emotionally manipulative woman, breaking the spirit of her husband by refusing to engage with him emotionally. I see a man who has had his every thought and feeling dismissed for years, who has become scarcely able to recognise his own emotional autonomy. When he says “You’re going to make me go into therapy. You’re not going to let me move out. You’re going to use the kids against me.”, I don't see paranoia, I see a man who had a damned good idea of what he was in for; Her only statements of any real meaning were to tell him “What can we do to give you the distance you need, without hurting the family?”, “[do] anything but hurting the children and me” and “It’s not age-appropriate to expect children to be concerned with their parents’ happiness. Not unless you want to create co-dependents who’ll spend their lives in bad relationships and therapy.”. They all sound an awful lot to me like some things you might say in order to manipulate someone into not leaving by using their kids against them.

Of course we know nothing about their relationship prior to this incident and very little about it since, but I find what we do know to be deeply troubling. It seems to me that every aspect of this situation screams "PATHOLOGICAL NARCISSIST". She seems completely unable to recognise the thoughts and feelings of others, and seems to simply refuse to acknowledge the possibility that there is an objective reality beyond her own imagination that she is unable to control. As I said, I could be being grossly unfair, but everything about this story sits badly with me and I find it deeply worrying to see this woman unquestioningly lauded as wise and enlightened.

</thoughtful comment>

That's a very Zen way of dealing with conflicts. The level of self-control to pull this off is admirable and something to learn from.

personally, I think that the husband was lucky to last as long as he did without succumbing to torpid disillusionment with himself, his potentialities, and his powers. I'm so jaded and disgusted with myself most of the time that I tend to not trust anybody who doesn't seem to want to blow their own brains out.

I read this a little differently. I think she made a smart bet.

It seems to me he was having an affair. Knowing that most relationships don't work out, she positioned herself perfectly to pick up the pieces when it failed.

Would that we all had someone in our lives who knows and loves us so well.

It's not always easy to pinpoint what exactly is it that makes us unhappy. And according to Daniel Gilbert (seriously, check out his book and TED talks), we sort of suck at predicting what does make us happy.

And usually, we know what's better for ourselves than anyone else. That's because we have more information about ourselves than anyone else, of course. But it's easy to get lost in the echo chamber of our minds, and that's when a second opinion becomes priceless.

Steps to writing an annoying article: 1. Deny you're calling your husband childish while comparing him to a child. 2. Proclaim that you're impervious to abuse by touting your toughness as if those in abusive relationships are not physically tough enough. 3. Highlight your suffering martyrdom as much as possible while claiming that you refuse to suffer.

I liked the article. But whether or not I agree with the author is irrelevant. What strikes me here most is to see things like this discussed in depth and intelligently in Hacker News. That's magnificent and somehow heart-warming. I have to say: I love this site :-)

I forwarded this to my (soon to be ex-) wife. I wish I had such an understanding partner...

>The dreams you set out to achieve in your 20s — gazing into each other’s eyes in candlelit city bistros when you were single and skinny — have for the most part come true.

It sounds like her dreams were achieved. His dreams we never hear about.

I find it an interesting comparison with the "I want to quit my job" feeling.

Except I'm stonewalling myself because I know the unhappiness is in my head and that with a change of opinion it wouldn't exist anymore.

fantastic article. wise woman.

I remember when this came up on Reddit a year ago.

Summary: hold on to your man by emasculating him, then wait for enough depression to kick in that it suppresses his urge to improve his life.

Also, I'm going to guess that most of her fond remembrances of romantically planning their future together primarily reflect what she hoped for, not what he did.

In other news: people who write long-winded, self-obsessive essays and books tend to be self-absorbed.

“Go trekking in Nepal. Build a yurt in the back meadow. Turn the garage studio into a man-cave. Get that drum set you’ve always wanted. ..."

Is there anyone else who finds this a very condescending and nasty thing to say? This ought to sound to her husband like fighting words.

Heh, that article is crazy. Have fun with your 20 acre plot 3 kids and pony... Who wants to get married in today's society? Your kids will just send you to an "adult home" anyway. I'd rather be driving a high end bimmer/mercades and be dating a woman 20 years younger than me when those years come around. The "American dream" is a fabrication, have fun with your 20+ years of kids leaching off you, 9-5 job, and all. How about legalizing prostitution, drugs, getting rid of speed limits, compulsory education (12 years of brainwashing) -- then there might be some fun.

Ugh. This is like reading about someone training a dog not to crap on the floor.

She's a megalomaniac and he's a baby. I'll bet they both had extremely dominant mothers.