Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Magazine waits 20 years to apologize
Dayton Daily News ^ | 6/21/06 | Mary McCarty

Posted on 06/21/2006 7:34:57 AM PDT by qam1

Nothing like getting an apology 20 years after the fact.

Better late than never, I suppose. But have you ever gotten a heartfelt apology from someone when you were way, way over it? Imagine if your old boyfriend wanted you back, or a snobby classmate apologized at your 20th high school reunion.

In this case I'm talking about something far more serious. I'm talking about an event that traumatized an entire generation of single women.

I'm talking about the Newsweek article "The Marriage Crunch," published in June 1984. In a line that seemed wildly insensitive even then, the magazine predicted that a 40-year-old woman was "more likely to be killed by a terrorist" than to marry in her lifetime. The odds for thirty-somethings were declared to be only slightly better: One in five for a 30-year-old woman; one in 20 for a 35-year-old.

It was the shot heard round the world, at least among my circle of young, single women. Even then, we suspected the article — based on the slimmest of research by a pair of Yale University grad students — to be more backlash than foresight.

The magazine talked obsessively about a woman's "chances" of marrying, but we understood, theoretically at least, it was more about choices. The study relied on demographic trends from past generations that showed only a small percentage of women hadn't married by the age of 30. It failed to acknowledge that our generation felt far less social and financial pressure to marry in our 20s, or before the right person came along.

Not until the Newsweek article, at any rate. It felt like an elaborate taunt: "Maybe you have all this new independence, and unheard-of career opportunities, but you'll end up loveless and alone." The message struck some deep, insecure place in our psyches. We had not been raised by a generation of '50s-era mothers for nothing — women branded "long in the tooth" at the tender age of 25, spinsters at 30.

Were we really choosing career over love, as the article alleged?

Were we really being "too picky," as the magazine gleefully asserted? (There was no mention of domestic abuse or abandoned wives, or any of the dangers of not being "picky" enough.)

To mark the anniversary, Newsweek published a cover story this month on "Why We Were Wrong." The authors noted that the study's statistics turned out to be too pessimistic, and that 90 percent of baby-boomer men and women either have married or will marry. "And the days when half of all women would marry by 20, as they did in 1960, only look more anachronistic," they wrote.

Forgive us if we don't breathe a collective sigh of relief. My formerly single friends — many of whom married in their 30s — found ourselves too busy ferrying our children to soccer practice or gymnastics. In the midst of our harried schedules we might be forgiven for wishing, at times, that the magazine's predictions had come true.

But they didn't, of course, and I couldn't be more grateful for the unprecedented choices facing women of my generation.

And now, even Newsweek has recanted the story that caused us all so much angst.

Next thing you know, I'll be getting a call from the grade school bully, offering to fix my glasses.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News
KEYWORDS: apology; dinosaurmedia; genx; newsweek; oops; singles; spinster
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
To: MaryFromMichigan
but at least I have a husband.

Hehe. My wife and I have joked about that line for the past 20 years.

21 posted on 06/21/2006 7:57:50 AM PDT by speedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: qam1
Well 20 years from now Newsweek will apologize for:

the Koran story - Newsweek lied, people died
sliming the American Military (too many occurrences too often repeated to list right now)
sliming conservatives
sliming Bush Administration officials
sliming President Bush

Oh, wait, Newsweek won't be around 20 years from now, guess it won't happen...oh well.
22 posted on 06/21/2006 7:59:07 AM PDT by BlessedByLiberty (Respectfully submitted,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xrp

Yeah, and some 27 year old is going to say that there's no way that she'll marry a guy who's 35 because if he's lucky the second child will be born by the time he's 40 and she's still in her early 30's.

Women in the mid-twenties today are, on the whole, fairly immature and self centered. 28-30 is a pretty good age for them.


23 posted on 06/21/2006 7:59:48 AM PDT by misterrob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte

I don't remember that particular article, but I remember a lot of articles saying the same thing in the 80's. I say those articles were right on the mark, and nothing new: Of course, as someone grows older, and other people marry off, the pickings get slimmer.


24 posted on 06/21/2006 8:03:38 AM PDT by Tired of Taxes (That's taxes, not Texas. I have no beef with TX. NJ has the highest property taxes in the nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: qam1

Apology my butt. Simply creating a news article from a news article by pulling info out of thin air, twice, is not news.

"How can we fool them today".


25 posted on 06/21/2006 8:04:52 AM PDT by JoeSixPack1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MaryFromMichigan

OK, there was my FR laugh for the day. I should probably get to work now.


26 posted on 06/21/2006 8:06:32 AM PDT by faq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: qam1

How's that old Dilbert joke go? "And what percentage of them marry terrorists?" "30" "Gosh..."
Must be a lot of Democrites getting married, then...


27 posted on 06/21/2006 8:21:38 AM PDT by ClaudiusI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1
With today's trend of not marrying at all any article or study cannot give true results in fact probably now over 30s are marrying as much or not more than under 30s purely and simply because they they have chosen not to get married before.

Any previous statistics are worthless and can not show any trend to today's society due to the lax morals that so many men and women have and not bothering to marry at all.
28 posted on 06/21/2006 8:54:42 AM PDT by snugs ((An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1
Come to think of it, I remember that article now. I think I was about 17 at the time. I think my response was probably, "ah... who cares, that crap doesn't apply to me, I'm going to London to snag myself some gorgeous English guy with great hair."

And I did end up going to London, snagging said gorgeous English guy with great hair, and then dumping him four months later. Many years later, I ended up getting hitched at the ripe old age of 33 to an even more gorgeous American guy with even greater hair. To boot, on our wedding day, my hubby was still in his twenties--A YOUNGER MAN! So... fooey on Newsweek, the goofy t*rds.

That article did upset my older sister, though. But... she's a 400 lb cat lady, so a lot of things tend to upset her.

29 posted on 06/21/2006 9:55:11 AM PDT by RepoGirl ("Bobby, if you weren't my son... I'd hug you...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1

Since Newsweek means as much to me as a dead mosquito, I don't expect an apology.


30 posted on 06/21/2006 10:01:15 AM PDT by GVnana (Former Alias: GVgirl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1

Mary McCarty

Typical bitter feminist, for obvious reasons.

31 posted on 06/21/2006 10:11:22 AM PDT by stinkerpot65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte; ArrogantBustard
Well, at that age I had a certain low cunning, but I was anything but smart. Just ask Bacon! ;)

You really don't want me answering that one. :)

32 posted on 06/21/2006 11:19:44 AM PDT by Bacon Man (If you choke a smurf, what color does it turn?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RexBeach
I suggest that anyone who was traumatized by some wacky magazine piece , such as the "Newsweek" article, probably has bigger problems at work.

Indeed.

33 posted on 06/21/2006 11:22:38 AM PDT by Skooz (Chastity prays for me, piety sings...Modesty hides my thighs in her wings...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: stinkerpot65

Gee, isn't she cute!


34 posted on 06/21/2006 11:42:57 AM PDT by RexBeach ("There is no substitute for victory." -Douglas MacArthur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: qam1

"It failed to acknowledge that our generation felt far less social and financial pressure to marry in our 20s, or before the right person came along."



It also probably fails to note how many MEN of said ages were still unmarried.

Or was their point that no matter what, 40yo men still get the pick of 20yo girls?


35 posted on 06/21/2006 12:59:26 PM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xrp

The reason possibly being they aren't satisfied with the males they're experiencing.


36 posted on 06/21/2006 1:06:48 PM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RexBeach
I suggest that anyone who was traumatized by some wacky magazine piece , such as the "Newsweek" article, probably has bigger problems at work.

I totally agree.

37 posted on 06/21/2006 1:09:22 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: qam1

I won't be taking out subscriptions to Newsweak waiting for them to do a mea culpa over man made global warming...


38 posted on 06/21/2006 3:28:39 PM PDT by weegee (happy holidays and seasons greetings...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xrp
Shoot, I just turned 33 and have no intention of ever marrying a woman over 30. My dating experiences have pretty much influenced me to believe that almost all women over 30 who are childless and haven't been married are that way for a reason.

OK, not to inject any icky ol' logic into the situation, but ... ;-)

Would you agree with the following statement? "Almost all men over 30 who are childless and haven't been married are that way for a reason."

If not, why not?

39 posted on 06/21/2006 4:53:36 PM PDT by annie laurie (All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: annie laurie
Would you agree with the following statement? "Almost all men over 30 who are childless and haven't been married are that way for a reason."

Yes, due to almost all women over 30 who are childless and haven't been married are that way for a reason.

40 posted on 06/21/2006 5:01:31 PM PDT by xrp (Fox News Channel: MISSING WHITE GIRL NETWORK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson