R216, true, maybe.
However, being human, while also being savvy, intelligent, experienced, and even thoughtful, does not negate the desire for companionship, nor does it disqualify one, nor does it demand a choice between attempting to have a successful union with another, nor does it place the burden of success of a marriage, solely on one’s shoulders, while denying the other partner self-awareness, participation, contribution to the success of the marriage, and the commitment to developing and practicing behaviors that sustain the relationship.
What you propose is full responsibility on Madonna, when falling in love is usually always an endeavor wrought with risk, and requiring both parties to set aside that risk, in favor of trust, communication, and honesty.
If we were to consistently consider marriage or commitments to a romantic partner as a corporate merger or compose risk analysis, then where exactly does the trust in someone else come in, and without hope that a partner will be trustworthy, is the risk behind the entire thing, and that cannot happen without two people agreeing to say, “Fuck it. Let’s see if we can do this for the long haul!”
👆🏽This👆🏽 is called falling in love, & it happens so that people draw parameters called boundaries, around their relationship, and within that relationship. Those boundaries are expectations, not realized benchmarks, to be measured on a quarterly and annual basis. A marriage doesn’t become self-actualized, nor does it reach a perfect moment or a perfect time. It changes and adjusts, and with healthy, non exploitative, non abusive people, it might be tested, but not necessarily corrupted.
Guy nor Madonna were expected to have perfect outcomes, and I highly doubt that either went into it expecting perfect partners. But if the partner fail to work within boundaries such as honest communication, vulnerability, and mutual respect, while avoiding emotional, mental, or physical abuses, then those boundaries were adhered to, then one can safely assume that the marriage can survive almost anything.
Someone started walking outside of those boundaries. Someone put their own individual “stuff”, before the partnership formed for a presumed and hopefully, solid, relationship.
I’m not claiming to know who went first, or to even know how, but it happened, or else they would still be married.
Madonna is a human being, who also happens to be highly successful at her career, and earned lots of money as a result. Those accomplishments do not prevent her from wanting what almost everyone eventually seeks: love. No one is required to choose either or. However, to both of our points, that in itself can be overwhelmingly threatening to someone who isn’t viewing her as an equal, and failing to do so because she’s good at what she does for income, or because she doesn’t need the things he was taught is the role of a good husband as an economic provider, rather than just being a good husband who doesn’t eventually come to a point where he starts thinking or objectifying her as a piece of meat, specifically known as gristle.
I’m assuming that to get to a point where you can feel OK with calling your wife gristle, you probably called her many other things, that were propagated toward diminishing her self esteem, and specifically, to influence how others also view her, in order to advance the objective of dressing her down, or putting her in her proper place.
He may not have been a complete asshole to her all of the time, he he definitely was some of the time, or he would have never said something so crass in the first place, and publicly so.
Men should consider that if they have reached a conclusion that their wife is the equivalent of a piece of gristle, it may be that she became a piece of gristle, because his behaviors served as the flames necessary for a piece of gristle to develop and eventually harden.