Reply: Marriage is for Blogger of Viral Post “Marriage Isn’t for You”

24 Nov

You all might’ve heard about the blog post read ‘round the world, but here’s the auntsavant’s last word on the blogger’s misleading message espoused in “Marriage Isn’t for You.”

Although, the married Mr. Smith’s intentions were good when he wrote the now viral blog post: “Marriage Isn’t For You,” Seth Adam Smith’s altruistic view on marriage wasn’t received positively by all readers.

Yahoo Shine summed up the general consensus of the massive responses the controversial essay invoked on Twitter, chiming in with an article titled, “Why Man’s Marriage Isn’t For You’ Essay Misses the Mark.”

And it does, almost entirely. Smith said his hope was of “helping someone going through a similar experience to turn around their relationship,” which he voiced on It apparently not only didn’t convey what he had hoped, but was also met with strong skepticism.

Citing a recent research study, Washington, D.C.-based licensed clinical psychologist, Andrea Bonior, PhD., told Yahoo “science substantiates that marriage is not just about one person’s needs.”

Though well meaning, this paternal advice could be better shelved under “old-school romance,” as Cosmopolitan noted in a similar reply to Smith’s spiel on marital edification.

READ: Why Winfrey Says She and Longtime Mate Stedman Graham Have Not Married

Oprah Winfrey acknowledged publicly that the main reason she and longtime mate Stedman Graham haven’t wed is because of “the very idea of what it means to be a wife and the responsibility and the sacrifice that it carries.”

Not willing to enter into a traditional marriage in order to try to please someone else or conform to societal cultural mores — she scrapped her wedding plans in 1992. An argument can be made for attributing the high percentage rates of infidelity and divorce in the U.S., to this type of matrimonial philosophy that advocates one spouse unselfishly put [his] spouses’ happiness above [his] own.

Why can’t both individuals strive to be happy without one person having to sacrifice their happiness for the other?

If two people are equally committed to their union, there wouldn’t be any need to settle for a 60-40 or 70-30,  or God forbid an 80-20 proposition. It would preferably be 50-50, and a win-win for both parties.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Sherry Howard

One Story at a Time


A great site

Thought After Thought

I have an insatiable curiosity to discover joy in everything.

Notes From The City

Information & insight for site

A MishMash Life!

Live. Laugh. Blog.

Dare To Be Happier

Caroline Johnstone's Blog

The Blog

The latest news on and the WordPress community.

%d bloggers like this: