In TFA he says it wasn't about the dish. He also strongly implies that it's not about not doing things around the house. It was that for all things that he considered unimportant, he treated as unimportant. Even if his wife said they were important to her.

To him, a single glass by the sink was no big deal if there was no company. She didn't want the glass by the sink. Him refusing to even consider a compromise here was communicating "what you think is important doesn't matter."

My wife is one of those people that thrives on a regular bedtime schedule (always go to bed at X PM, every day). I'm the sort of person who goes to bet at 9pm one day, 2am the next, but I always get up at the same time.

So far, all good.

However, she really wants me in bed next to her if we are both home. I think this is silly. It was a constant fight for a while until we had a couple of good talks about it; she sleeps just fine with a light on, so I can have a book or a laptop[1] in bed next to her and be awake as long as I want and she is perfectly happy; me being a voracious reader am also pretty darn happy with this. Also, had we not talked this out, this solution would never have occurred to me; I can't fall asleep with a light on in the room unless I am seriously sleep deprived. At first I was reading only e-books on my phone to not disturb her, but when I mentioned that to her she said "oh I don't mind a light on."

Perhaps in the author's example, if he thought he might want another more water before running the dishwasher, there might be another place he could put his water glass that his wife would be fine with. Maybe she'd even be happy to check there and put it in the dishwasher before running it! Maybe he'd have just had to come to terms with "We got 12 glasses at at our wedding and there's only 3 people in the house, so I can just get another glass." We will never know because these conversations just didn't happen.

1: The laptop I reserve for emergencies only; I really don't want to do anything even slightly work related in bed, if at all possible.

I'm pretty sure people absolutely do get divorced because they disagree about how to handle several trivial things.

Those can be insidious. To the one annoyed by the status quo, it can feel like the other person doesn't care about them. To the other, it can feel like their partner's trying to micro-manage a bunch of little things that barely even matter, and that they're "losing" because they find fewer of their partner's habits irritating enough to make a stink over.

Oh, 100%. I think the author just picks out specific examples because it’s easier to visualize that than general unequal distribution of work.

Yeah. I selected a few of the volume descriptions to abstract the principles he was trying to communicate.

Overall, it sounds like the divorce was unexpected and out of his control, so he's trying to reassert control by nitpicking his faults and using emotionally charged, self-critical language ("I was a shitty husband").

Some make sense (and all likely contributed). However, Vol. 9 and 11 were strong indications that that there were broader issues than neglect. In specific for Vol. 9, his spouse wasn't willing to respect his want for alone time, implying a compatibility issue.

-Vol. 3, don't be neglectful to your spouse at a party: "I was at a party and I had a tiny crush on the married birthday girl, and I watched her husband ignore her all night (and already knew him to be a less-than-ideal partner). The whole scene made me sad because it reminded me of how I used to treat my ex-wife."

-Vol. 6, remove some of the burden of decision-making: "You can destroy your marriage by trying to be “nice.” By letting your spouse make all the decisions. You think it’s a nice gesture, letting the other person have their way"

-Vol. 8, don't roast/mock your partner so much: "What starts at an early age on playgrounds, turns into a relationship killer in adulthood. Men using jokes, sarcasm and mockery to belittle their wives and girlfriends both privately and publicly."

-Vol. 9, wanting alone time is neglectful (I disagree and don't think it's a "guy" thing; it's very possible to be in a relationship with an introvert who gets the need for alone time): "Guys like “Me”-time. Maybe everyone does. But a lot of time when husbands and fathers do it, it looks and feels to his wife and children like he isn’t interested in them or that he’d rather spend time alone than with his family. "

-Vol. 11, fixing a marriage is about working on yourself (it's plausible, but it sounds one-sided): "I think married couples who are sad and angry about their lives and relationships make the mistake of trying to “fix the marriage.” They spend all their time trying to figure out how “we” can do things different, and how the other person can make changes to make life better. But I think people need to work on themselves to fix the marriage. To look inside themselves and figure out how they can be their best self."

General neglect was a major driver, but there were other bigger issues. The lack of respect by his spouse for his alone time is a major one, like in the full Vol. 1 article [0], where he says a major failure was choosing to see a televised once-a-year major golf tournament instead of going for a picnic in a park because she loves the outdoors.

If he actually skipped the tournament to go out, it's also likely he would have become resentful (even if he had the best intentions); bottled up, this can cause issues down the road. On the other hand, his spouse ended up as a person who was resentful, which did lead to issues down the road. He suggests the solution was to suppress his own wants, but a better solution would be to find some way to compromise, because both wants are important.

It's also concerning that he's then offering paid divorce/marriage counselling, when I don't think he's qualified (to his own admission of lack of formal credentials).

[0] https://matthewfray.com/2013/07/03/an-open-letter-to-shitty-...

I read the article and felt sad. There's a lot of emotionally charged language (repeatedly: "I was a shitty husband"), but stripping away that language, his main point is consistent with his Atlantic article. Namely, that while he tried to be a good husband for the 'big issues' (e.g. never cheating), he was neglectful for the little things, and didn't give her enough attention or care.

My interpretation is that the divorce was somewhat unexpected as there were no major issues besides the 'little things,' but he largely feels that the divorce was out of his locus of control. He's then compensating to assert that it really was in his control, and also severely criticizing himself with emotionally charged language for letting the divorce happen.

Given the information at the time, I don't think the divorce was avoidable. If anything, the ex-spouse at least has an iota responsibility to identify the feelings of neglect, rather than pointing out the neglectful habits without reflecting on why she was so bothered them.

It would be healthiest for him to let it go, and find happiness elsewhere in life (e.g. with another partner and pursuit) and move on as much as possible (though it's hard as he has a kid). It's hard to see him really make the divorce part of his identity, the point where he publishes a book about it, writes in The Atlantic, and even offers divorce counseling services at the end.

He's also selling services in "relationship coaching and divorce support coaching."

For what it's worth, I do think he's being genuine, and sounds motivated by the want to spare others from his suffering. However, I just don't think he's qualified, because his solution seems to repeatedly be to care more for your partner without compromising (in excess, this can lead to a well-documented trait by clinical psychologists of "codependency," where one can never do enough for their partner).

There has to be a balance between your interest and your partner's; it's unhealthy and not noble to completely sacrifice your own self-interest for your family's. A person ultimately miserable can't support others, and there is also inherent value in enjoying the opportunity to live for yourself.