I married a housewife.
I was reading a web site just awhile ago called MidlifeBachelor.com. It's one of those serendipitously tripped-over web sites that one encounters, usually while searching or browsing on a related topic, that just sort of sucks one into it, like informational quicksand. The guy who does at least some of the writing there is funny and not without a certain amount of wisdom, which is what makes the site interesting to me, that and its topic concerns a subject near and dear to my own circumstance - male, middle-aged, and single. What's even better, he's talking about dating but not writing from the perspective of the so-called pick-up artist - a particularly vapid and somewhat vaguely unsavory philosophy which seems popular among single men lately. Encounters with writings in this latter vein tend to abrade my sensibilities.
Anyway, there is an article or essay on the site called Some Fundamental Truths About Women and Midlife Dating Today, which I am finding amusing and thought-provoking by turns. As I said, the guy is funny and not without a certain wisdom, or at least it seems so to me. I'm about halfway through the essay and about halfway through a subsection of the essay entitled Fundamental Truth #7: Types of Women.
I tend to be careful about "typing" people. I try to take systems which attempt to classify people with a grain of salt, like blog memes, until and unless they start to offer me some actual verifiable utility in understanding elements of the human psyche. Myers-Briggs Personality Type is one such system which has a certain amount of utility, I have found, in my personal experience. At any rate, as an individualist, I tend to be wary of lumping people into collectives, especially where people are not free to do their own self-identification and associating. Nobody is a perfect stereotype. Everyone is unique. To judge people strictly according to ones perception of how well they fit into a neat little pigeonhole of presumptions about their personality blinds one to the individual's true uniqueness. Nevertheless, the more I read and think about this guy's personal taxonomy for women the more I begin to suspect that he makes a certain amount of sense. I recognize a few signs and characteristics of some women I have known in the types about which he is writing.
So, I'm about halfway through this section of the essay wherein the author is expounding upon his observation that there are basically fourteen types of women, when I start reading about type number six, The Housewife, and it immediately hits me, right there in the first paragraph, that I am reading about my dear ex-wife. Crystal does seem to fit the type that the author defines as "The Housewife." Now this is not necessarily such a bad thing. In fact, the author himself expresses the opinion that he is quite fond of the type and that this type of woman certainly has many qualities which his target demographic would find attractive and suitable and I am inclined to agree with him. Hell, for all I know, I could end up with someone else who fit this category eventually. Who knows? Certainly, there are worse types mentioned in the essay, some of which for whom I have absolutely no patience at all.
Anyway, there is an article or essay on the site called Some Fundamental Truths About Women and Midlife Dating Today, which I am finding amusing and thought-provoking by turns. As I said, the guy is funny and not without a certain wisdom, or at least it seems so to me. I'm about halfway through the essay and about halfway through a subsection of the essay entitled Fundamental Truth #7: Types of Women.
I tend to be careful about "typing" people. I try to take systems which attempt to classify people with a grain of salt, like blog memes, until and unless they start to offer me some actual verifiable utility in understanding elements of the human psyche. Myers-Briggs Personality Type is one such system which has a certain amount of utility, I have found, in my personal experience. At any rate, as an individualist, I tend to be wary of lumping people into collectives, especially where people are not free to do their own self-identification and associating. Nobody is a perfect stereotype. Everyone is unique. To judge people strictly according to ones perception of how well they fit into a neat little pigeonhole of presumptions about their personality blinds one to the individual's true uniqueness. Nevertheless, the more I read and think about this guy's personal taxonomy for women the more I begin to suspect that he makes a certain amount of sense. I recognize a few signs and characteristics of some women I have known in the types about which he is writing.
So, I'm about halfway through this section of the essay wherein the author is expounding upon his observation that there are basically fourteen types of women, when I start reading about type number six, The Housewife, and it immediately hits me, right there in the first paragraph, that I am reading about my dear ex-wife. Crystal does seem to fit the type that the author defines as "The Housewife." Now this is not necessarily such a bad thing. In fact, the author himself expresses the opinion that he is quite fond of the type and that this type of woman certainly has many qualities which his target demographic would find attractive and suitable and I am inclined to agree with him. Hell, for all I know, I could end up with someone else who fit this category eventually. Who knows? Certainly, there are worse types mentioned in the essay, some of which for whom I have absolutely no patience at all.