5. They could talk about anything, from Milton to the best lacrosse players in the Ivy League. Growing up with so many boys, Mr. Levy said, “I didn’t know you could develop the kind of connection with a girl where she really understands you.”
4. “My parents,” she added, “didn’t raise us to have a sense of entitlement.”
3. The reception followed at the bride’s large and gracious childhood home in Garrison.
2. Ms. Pataki felt much the same way: “I was between two brothers, so Dave’s masculinity didn’t bother me. I was comfortable with silence.”
1. Charlotte d’Orchimont, who has known Ms. Pataki since they were both in the second grade in Garrison, N.Y., said, “Alli is someone others have always been drawn to.” She added that Ms. Pataki “was definitely the most popular girl in our class.”
Who are they?
Why does that article exist? Why do we care about these nauseating people and their magical heterosexual wedding? Just why after why…
‘What do you think of Milton?’
‘Milton Forbes-Whitely? Oh he’s the best lacrosse goalie in the Ivy League.’
From the article:
In 2010, Ms. Pataki began working for her father’s consulting firm, the Pataki-Cahill Group, where she is now a director.
Why not? After all, they’re entitled.
This sounds more like a cry for help than anything.
As long as she used protection, I have no problems with this.
I don’t know whether to feel that this is a hatchet job by a hateful and clever NYT writer, or a pair of aliens from outer space.
I’m thinking the former, but it could be the latter.
I think the quote above lends support for option #1.
Every so often I see certain articles, and I think to myself “To the guillotine with you!” or “First up against the wall when the revolution comes.”
This is one of them.
This thread made my day.
The phrase “between two brothers” gave me a completely different, much more awesome mental image than what I think was intended.
I was wondering who these people were and I read the article. Oog. Wish I hadn’t.
I read this in the Times on Sunday and picked out the exact lines you highlight here as making me in fact vomit a little bit in my mouth.
#OccupyVowsSection
!!!!!!!!!!!!! AMAZING.
Incidentally, someone is upset that Allison Pataki is stealing her gig:
Fail, biscuit. Mods, feel free to get rid of post 14.
Not long after the midterm exam, Ms. Pataki realized that Mr.
. . . I’m not sure what’s worse: That after weeks of partnering in class, he only feels it’s appropriate to “IM her” after she kisses him, or that he apparently thinks all relationships that occurred before Facebook was around were “nebulous.”
Really? Being nasty about someone’s wedding is the feminist issue of the day? Why do you even care?
Wait I’m sorry, was this post titled “Feminist Issue of the Day”?
And I care because I’m making a concerted effort to get the sanctimonious, humorless nitpickers off of this blog.
Really? Being nasty about someone’s wedding is the feminist issue of the day? Why do you even care?
Yes, this is obviously a criticism of someone’s decision to wed. Nothing at all about how spectacularly asinine and vapid the Vows column is.
I’ve been wondering why Feministe has been so damned awesome lately.
It’s useful to keep track of how wealthy Americans think if you care about social justice.
… so don’t read it?
I’m torn between thinking that maybe this pair is just spectacularly ghastly and wondering whether, faced with such an imperturbable columnist, even the Kristens could come through such an exercise unscathed and without looking thoroughly cringeworthy.
But there is absolutely no hope for the friend who thought that having to keep a schedule of who got to sit next to her at lunch was such a glowing recommendation. In a compassionate society, anyone like that friend, male or female, would be put down as humanely as possible.
Thank you for providing the most amusement I’m likely to have all day.
What is so wrong with making fun of the ruling class? You’re offended on behalf of Allison Pataki or something? Making fun of the Vows column is fun. That’s why I read it every week. I actually cannot imagine any other reason for reading it.
And I care because I’m making a concerted effort to get the sanctimonious, humorless nitpickers off of this blog.
Here’s an adult idea: Ask me to leave if you’d like me to leave.
I have an awesome sense of humor, thanks. I just don’t think ridiculing other women on a *feminist* blog is very funny.
I’m not ridiculing other women (although I think ridiculing women who act like assholes is totally fair game, for the record). I’m ridiculing the Times Vows section, and the weird class dog-whistles they always throw into their articles, and their repeated construction of “love stories” as having really fucked up gender dynamics.
And I’m annoyed by the fact that any time I put up a post that’s not about a 100% Feminist Issue (TM), someone is inevitably like, “WHAT IS THIS DOING ON A FEMINIST BLOG?!?!?!”
What is so wrong with making fun of the ruling class? You’re offended on behalf of Allison Pataki or something?
I didn’t know that making fun of wealthy brides would further the causes of social justice. But I guess you’re right: All those nasty brides, with their vapid comments in stupid bridal columns – they’re the problem! Call off the Wall Street protestors!
Ridiculing other women because of their patriarchy-approved behavior is not feminist.
I didn’t say it would. I said it was fun. You do know what “fun” means, right?
That said, I do think that ridiculing the manners and mores of the ruling class is a good thing, as it reinforces the important fact that they suck and have no god-given right to be in charge of the rest of us, and we don’t have to respect them.
I didn’t realize that women got a get-out-of-being-mocked-for-being-a-superficial-wealthy-jerk-free card because of Patriarchy. Here I was, under the impression that women representatives of the ruling class were just as creepy and oppressive as the men with whom they hang out. Somebody better tell black feminists to not to mock white women for taking advantage of their place in the power hierarchy.
Because there is no such thing a portrayal of a wealthy, privileged woman that is sympathetic to the restriction and expectations her status forces upon her. Oh wait, I saw Titanic, or was it Pride and Prejudice? Wait, they were playing Lady Chatterley’s Lover on HBO… Princess Diaries 2?
So nice to read something like this and think – *phew* I’m NOT crazy…other people find it wholly ridiculous. TOO! – The laughter and a little bit of snark is such a great release :)
“And I’m annoyed by the fact that any time I put up a post that’s not about a 100% Feminist Issue (TM), someone is inevitably like, ‘WHAT IS THIS DOING ON A FEMINIST BLOG?!?!?!’”
I’m glad that isn’t at all the point I made, then.