NML was interviewed by the UK paper/web site Daily Mail. Expecting positive coverage of the community and focus of help site Baggage Reclaim, instead writer LAURA TOPHAM chose to pursue a lurid and somewhat fanciful editorial piece posing her own agenda in “Don’t get mad, get e-venge“. Perhaps Ms. Topham should have been blogging this piece, the way she intermingles analysis of others with her own insights or agendas. Also credited for additional reporting is Diana Appleyard. The mail point of the piece is a modernization of a trite topic trotted out in various venues - women get angry with guys. Ho-hum.
The problem here is that NML started two blogs I am aware of. The first, Tired of Men, began as catharsis for relationship woes, and evolved through self-discovery into what is now the domestic doings of a delighted lady with an interesting family. And quite happily paired with a treasured companion (male, husband, father of their daughter). Uh, this is my understanding from what she has written in private and public. The second site is interesting on several levels. The Baggage Reclaim broadly focuses on the relationship of women to guys they shouldn’t be involved with, mostly because the guy isn’t engaging in a relationship (Emotionally Unavailable Men or EUM is the phrase NML uses). Most of the guys are cheating, emotionally or physically absent, disrespectful. And Baggage Reclaim is about recognizing the problems, recognizing the signs, and recovering from the harm done by trying to form a relationship with a post. Only Ms. Topham and Ms. Appleyard didn’t get that far. They were content to report instances of women that took revenge online.
…
The irony is, of course, that it is the internet itself that has made infidelity easier.
…
But having humiliated a lover online, at what point should a woman call it a day? For how long must a badly-behaved lover be punished?
One problem is that blogs posted in anger are hard to get rid of once they have whizzed off into cyberspace.
As yet, there have been no legal challenges to such websites in the UK, but in New York a man sued his ex-wife over podcasts at her website on the grounds that they included statements that were “obnoxious, derogatory or offensive” and violated terms of their divorce settlement.
The court found in favour of the woman’s right to free speech.
British blogger Natalie Lue insists: “I did write incredibly intimate details about my ex, but they’re my experiences, so I’m entitled to.
“Sometimes it feels strange that our relationship was read about by thousands of people, but there’s never been any comeback.”
But once Natalie had finished pouring scorn on her ex-fiancĂ Tom, she found herself reluctant to give up her blog.
“When I started having dates again, I’d write about any bad behaviour I encountered. None of my boyfriends knew I was writing about them on the internet, which I found very funny.
“I have a new partner now, but I’d never write about him because we have a daughter together. He makes a point of not reading my blog - he’d prefer to find out things directly.”
Natalie, Laura and Poppy also argue that their cyber words have brought comfort to other women.
“My outpourings seemed to connect with other women,” says Natalie.
“I realised it was helping them with their relationships, so I set up another site. Together, my blogs get 130,000 users every month.
“It’s empowering - both for me and for readers who learn through my relationships.”
But it’s hard not to wonder where this cyber bitching will end.
It could be argued, too, that these women would do better simply to get over their broken hearts and move on rather than washing their dirty linen in public.
…
Whoever said that romance is dead may well be right.
One thing is clear - any man who deceives a computer-literate woman is treading on decidedly deadly ground.
What strikes me in the article is the trite, standard, shallow homilies they offer. I cannot speak to the other subjects of this lurid and longish article / gossip column, but in the case of Baggage Reclaim, most of the people participating are very aware there is a fundamental difference between ending and average relationship or marriage, and recovering from an unhealthy relationship. The authors discount the distinction.
The stories related by visitors to Baggage Reclaim often include information and anecdotes about relationships. One could read these with much delight and vicarious enjoyment as examples of ‘other people’ and their trials and pains. One can also use the handy Sears catalog underwear section for inspiration when pleasuring themselves. What happens at Baggage Reclaim is an attempt to understand and heal. You don’t get a tire fixed without getting it to a mechanic; you don’t find help with a relationship without letting someone know what is happening.
I particularly twigged to one statement used in the article - possibly the single thought that spurred the whole journalistic exercise. From above:
The irony is, of course, that it is the internet itself that has made infidelity easier.
What a loaded statement. Completely unsupported. I suppose “everybody knows” this is true. So why bother about details? Such as, of those that cheat online, how many have cheated before they got online? How many found the Internet a handy tool to cheat, vs. how many were distracted into cheating because of the Internet? There is a change of universe to drag something from the Internet into your personal life. It doesn’t ‘just happen’. Cheaters cheat. The Internet doesn’t cause otherwise loyal partners to begin abandoning their partner for others.
Ms. Topham is also convinced that what happens on the Internet is ‘cyber-bitching’ to use her phrase. But what about Consumer Reports? Should someone finding a car that blows up tell their friends and shut up - or publish their experience to convince the company to change it’s ways and to let potential buyers be aware of the danger? Many of the stories related by women escaping bad relationships, and by men, too, are cautionary in two aspects. They remind others that problems happen that cannot be overcome, and they help to identify risky partners both by name and by profile. In the case of Baggage Reclaim, there is also the aspect of getting advice about healing and recovering, and avoiding repetition of the same mistakes with similarly poor-choice partners.
I found Ms. Topham’s article slightly slanted, the content mostly gossip rather than news both in the lack of depth and the way the material is brought together for the article. I found her conclusions trite and shallow. Her editor, however, needs her/his hand slapped for letting this incomplete, wordy, shallow article out the door.
But that is just my opinion.
