OnlineBookClub.org

I think both Rachel and the protagonist are to blame for their relationship. On the one hand, Rachel did not offer him moral support and chose only for the good of the family but without taking into account his wishes. On the other hand, he had to communicate more and share his fears and dreams with his partner. As long as there was no good communication between them, the actions of both of them led to the man's infidelity and their relationship's end.

I can definitely see why Rachel’s perspective but it was obvious that she was unhappy from some underlying issues.

Cotwani wrote: ↑03 Jan 2020, 08:17 I know poor communication is a verified relationship killer. All the same, I think Rachel's attitude played a big role in the final fall-out. I mean, I found her unsupportive (heck, she was opposed to man mission from day 1), selfish (wouldn't go to work), bitter and a loner (she didn't reach out to the "wives committee).

On the other hand, maybe its just that the main protagonist's character (whose name I don't remember seeing) was better fleshed out. We didn't get to hear her side of the story.

What do you opine?

Team main protagonist! Rachel was really mean to him and sometimes it was just heartbreaking. To an extent I wondered why he felt bad for cheating on her when she was always threatening him with divorce.

They both had flaws but I seem to understand Rachel more. The protagonist won't just abandon his wife to go on vacations every year. She deserves some adventure. She has responsibilities as a mother and wife abit of fun won't be bad. The men should have organized some sort of WOMAN MISSION for their wives.

I would find it hard to be on the side of Rachel since the entire book was written from the point of view of the protagonist. If the book was written from her perspective, I'm sure it would be a completely different book. I'm also a bit biased in that I love to travel, so I didn't like when she kept trying to get in the way of his trips.

I'm on neither of their teams. The main protagonist and Rachel are both deeply flawed people. I feel for both of them but they each had a hand in the collapse of this marriage.

They both had flews but i understood Rachel the most.

Both of them were fine.

B Creech wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 12:20 Rachel did come across as a nagging wife at times. However, the main protagonist was totally selfish in many ways. I like the concept of the Man Missions, I think that was an awesome way to spend time with friends. However, I think the women should have had the same opportunity to go away for an annual outlet and let the guys stay home with the kids!

I don't think he would have minded her going away. The man missions was an annual thing before they met, she should have realized the more she was going to kick against it the more he would want to do it.

karendi jururi wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 05:44 I think Racheal may come across as rather unrealistic and somewhat of an enemy to the protagonist's missions. However, her decisions do not seem as unrealistic on a closer look. Who would want their husband away all the time? Who would help her look after the kids?
I am team Racheal all the way. Calling her selfish is judging her too harshly. After all, the protagonist abandons her with little kids to go to various missions. That is more selfish to me than any of Racheal's actions or words which to be fair, I found rather nagging.

All the time is really an exaggeration. The man missions were usually a week or less at a time. That is 7 days out of 365 days in a year. Besides, if Rachel wanted to spend time with her husband as well they could have agreed to do something similar to man missions but for both of them. They could go on a holiday together once a year as well. She could also go on a holiday without him once a year with her friends if she wanted.
While I agree that the protagonist was wrong, I think they both had a part in the relationship failing.

It is true that Rachel has her flaws, but I would not judge her because the story is not hers. It won't be fair to judge her without knowing her side of the story. But I found the men's travels somewhat unbearable.

As a married man, you should not leave your wife and young kids for a week and come back home injured, adding unnecessary burden to your wife. I felt as some point that they should at least invite their wives, even if it's just once. That would have solved a big part of their marital problems.

The reason the protagonist especially is so consistent about the traveling is because he can't face Rachel and have a productive talk with her. The travels are like avoiding his marital issues.

Connie Otwani wrote: ↑03 Jan 2020, 08:17 I know poor communication is a verified relationship killer. All the same, I think Rachel's attitude played a big role in the final fall-out. I mean, I found her unsupportive (heck, she was opposed to man mission from day 1), selfish (wouldn't go to work), bitter and a loner (she didn't reach out to the "wives committee).

On the other hand, maybe its just that the main protagonist's character (whose name I don't remember seeing) was better fleshed out. We didn't get to hear her side of the story.

What do you opine?

I agree with you on that, Rachel was always against every annual expedition of the man mission. I found her to be selfish and self-certain. She was all good at first but after marriage. A lot changed about her.

I was off put by her persistently nagging the main character. She was unsupportive of man missions from the start. I don't sympathize with her character.

I was off put by her persistently nagging the main character. She was unsupportive of man missions from the start. I don't sympathize with her character.

I would have liked to know the women's opinion about Man Mission. I did feel like both of them could have tried a bit harder to resolve their issues. I believe lack of communication was a major reason why the couple drifted apart.