The common reaction to Wilbanks' supporters who claimed that her actions should be excused because she was under severe stress can be summed up by this forum post from last year: "Stressful is not having the money to feed your children, not deciding what to feed your 600 wedding guests...give me a break."
This seemed to be the overall consensus of most of the detractors who found it difficult to empathise with the 'runaway bride'. My question is 'why did they care?', why did they become so angry? Was it jealousy of Ms. Wilbanks socio-economic status? Because Ms. Wilbanks, to their wanting and unfed eyes, squadered her resources while others found it difficult to feed their children?
This lack of empathy seems quite distasteful to me, and should be replaced with, in the very least, disinterest or apathy rather than outrage. Once again the disenfranchised seem to operate from a need to point out that their stress is better than anyone else's. People that have made profitable decisions in their pasts seem to have the need to look down on Ms. Wilbanks for making an unprofitable decision. People like myself, however, look at Ms. Wilbanks and think how simliar our lives would probably look to those on the outside, if I were to find myself in the unlucky position of slipping up at a most inoppurtune moment.