-
Reader Comments

Marital responsibilities

Written by Brandon McGinley, Columnist
Published: Thursday, October 22nd, 2009
Princeton University prepares its students well for many aspects of life after college. It churns out investment bankers and analysts like an assembly line. It has an entire school dedicated to preparing young people for government service. Furthermore, there is ...(back to the article)

Viewing 25 comments...

  • 12:35 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    P12

    Great article, Brandon!

  • 12:51 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    Tiger10

    You raise some good points!

  • 12:57 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    AC

    I have noticed that people denigrating Anscombe et al. often try to degrade the social status of abstinent students, conflating them with males who wish to be sexually active but, because of their low social status, are unable to obtain sex. This is a cheap tactic, but does have some visceral appeal.

    In order to counteract this, all visible Anscombe leaders should be sure to mention their relationships, and, if possible, recruit their girlfriends (or boyfriends) as active spokesmen for the cause. Because the dirty truth is, regardless of ideology, nobody wants to affiliate themselves with "sexless losers," lest others judge them as low-status for doing so.

    No, it's not fair. Feminists are not asked to demonstrate their ability to procure loving husbands, and gay marriage activists are not questioned about the stability of those marriages. However, that is the imperfect world we live in.

  • 1:29 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    butler proud

    i'm not quite sure how the prince is ok letting brandon use it as a platform for all of his anscombe issues...

    granted, this was a better, somewhat less biased column than usual, but still. really prince?

    @AC
    your last paragraph...what?

  • 2:28 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    '11

    There are indeed schools that should teach people the rudiments of socialization. They're called elementary schools. When you take away the usual crypto-Catholic Anscumbag (zing!) verbiage, your column is basically a plea for one of the world's great research universities to treat its students like small children. That's really, really dumb.

    Besides, the predictors of a successful marriage - a) get married fairly late, b) not because of an unplanned pregnancy, c) know that you're sexually compatible beforehand, d) (unfortunately) be middle-to-upper-middle-class, e) have a fair, open and egalitarian relationship - are all pretty much ingrained in the majority ethos of the University, even though your organization is doing its impotent best to destroy a) b) c) and e).

  • 2:57 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    Oscar

    I haven't read TFA yet, but @11': did you just zing yourself? I believe that that goes against the Law of Zing.

    (Fake edit: I like the CAPTCHA for this post.)

  • 3:04 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    '11

    @Oscar: I was using it in urbandictionary.com sense 3 ("noun: a statement designed to verbally serve someone"), rather than sense 4 ((Interjection) A word used when a joke is only funny to the person that tells said joke and has no real relevance to the conversation currently at hand. ).

    CAPTCHA:shirt

  • 8:31 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    Pointless

    This article is basically completely lacking in content except to suggest that if the university taught its students some (unnamed) set of behaviors, they would all lead happy lives. That being married, or even not getting divorced, is what makes people happy is very unclear to me. Moreover many people never plan to have children (and probably many more people than do shouldn't have kids.) And even if you do believe that married parents are ON AVERAGE better for children, that doesn't mean that the children of couples that actually get divorced would be better off if their parents stayed married. What's next, Princeton as match.com?

  • 10:17 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    '11

    We don't all have the same definition of marriage, nor do we all want it. Stop trying to institute a universal set of rules of sexual conduct for everyone.

  • 10:32 a.m. on Oct. 22nd, 2009
    Posted by
    Eleven

    Great article, Brandon. Especially at Princeton, where flexibility and personal wishes often take precedence over commitments that have become less desirable. Don't get me wrong, it's great that we have the freedom to try things out and then drop them when we don't like them. It's just that comitted relationships and marriage require a very different attitude; we have to accept that sometimes we'll have to put our personal satisfaction second, or even third, fourth, etc.

Page 1 of 3 | next > | last >>

Post your comments on this article

Comments:

:

Captcha

For security reasons, please enter the word in the image above.

The Daily Princetonian reserves the right to monitor and delete inappropriate comments.

 


< Back to the article


The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.