Posted on 09/11/2006 10:39:33 AM PDT by FreeManDC
Wondering about that muffled howl you’ve been hearing the last couple weeks? It’s the sound and fury of feminists reacting to Michael Noer’s latest exegesis, Don’t Marry a Career Woman.
Noer’s column, which ran at Forbes.com, surveyed marriages in which the wives doggedly pursue a high-powered career, all the while neglecting family and home. The research shows these women are more likely to be unhappy if she earns more than the guy, or if she quits her job and stays home. Either way, she’s going to be a grump.
Her husband is more prone to be discontented if she is the primary breadwinner. The house is going to be dirtier. In the end, she is more apt to cheat on him and the marriage will fall apart. [www.forbes.com/2006/08/23/Marriage-Careers-Divorce_cx_mn_land.html]
Of course, these findings don’t apply to every ambitious woman who has risen to the top of her field – but the connection is true in many cases.
In practically every woman’s magazine, you’ll find advice columns to help the reader find Mr. Right and then entice her football-addled boyfriend to commit for the long-haul.
But when a male columnist dispenses relationship advice for men, that appears to be strictly verboten — at least according to the Shrieking Sisters of Silliness who cut loose on Mr. Noer.
On Good Morning America, one Rutgers U. prof claimed to be absolutely shocked: “I’m surprised that the man thinks it. I’m astonished that he wrote it. And I’m astonished that anyone published it, particularly Forbes.” (No word whether MIT professor Nancy Hopkins swooned at the news.)
Forbes hastily arranged for reporter Elizabeth Corcoran to pen a response sporting the acid title, “Don’t Marry a Lazy Man.” Describing Noer’s factual article as “frightening,” she dispensed this condescending advice about men: “If he can pick up new ideas faster than your puppy, you’ve got a winner.”
Needless to say, Ms. Corcoran’s screed only reinforced the worst stereotypes of the “I-know-what-I-want-and-I-know-how-to-get-it” career woman portrayed in Noer’s column.
Thereupon the readers jumped into the fray, all recounting their grudges about members of the opposite sex. A pretty picture it was not, but the debate is long-overdue: http://forums.forbes.com/forbes/board?board.id=respond_marry_career_woman and http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1688730/posts .
Part of the ladies’ discomfiture with Mr. Noer’s article springs from the fact that for the last 30 years, discussions about women in the workforce have been guided by the unspoken rule, “Men’s Opinions Don’t Count.”
But then women’s one-sided conversations lapsed into over-wrought declamations about men who didn’t pitch in around the house, forgetting that that men often put in longer hours on the job, commute longer distances, and do physical labor that leaves them exhausted.
Doesn’t mowing the grass, killing creepy-crawlers that traipse through the kitchen, clearing leaves out of the gutter, and coaching Little League count for anything?
And let’s not forget the old axiom that rights and responsibilities go hand-in-hand. If women are demanding more rights, then what additional duties – like compulsory registration for the draft — are they going to shoulder?
Ironically, the same day that Michael Noer published his op-ed, columnist Nancy Levant came out with a fem-ripper called The Cultural Devastation of Women. [www.newswithviews.com/Levant/nancy55.htm]
Levant deplored the fact that thanks to the libbers, American women “now hire maid services, landscapers, pool cleaners, painters, interior decorators. . . .while losing every intuitive aspect of our female natures.” In the process, women “use men like ATMs” and “bankrupt multiple men with mandatory child support payments.”
One can only imagine the hullabaloo if Mrs. Levant had uttered such heresy at Forbes.
So what’s a career woman to do? For a moment, let’s can the feminist ideology and take stock of that rare commodity, common sense.
Have you ever seen a woman (or man, for that matter) exclaim at death’s door, “I only wish that I could have spent more time in the office”? Neither have I.
It’s no secret that the most rewarding parts of a person’s life revolve around relationships with spouses, children, and other family. So why are career women driven to dismember those connections that give the most meaning to their lives?
It’s true that women find satisfaction and fulfillment from paid work. And some have no choice but to get a full-time job.
But the reality is, wives’ happiness is not tied to living out of a suitcase or having an equal paycheck with their husbands. Indeed, the opposite is true. When husbands are the primary wage earners, wives have more freedom to pursue their own interests.
So Mr. Noer, lick off those wounds, straighten up that tie, and sharpen your pencil. Get ready for Round Two.
Ping to read later.
Get back to the kitchen and cook me dinner, woman.
Discussed on FR earlier, and I think the concensus was "Don't marry a b*tch!", and it just so happens that there tends to be a higher proportion of b*tches among career women than normal women, but that may not even be the case, or the difference may be small.
Beer me, Marge!
Sounds like someone struck a truth nerve.
My solution is "not getting married." I figure that by the time I'm forty and rich, there will still be plenty of divorcees and manipulative twentysomethings for me to date.
I reckon it' ddepend upon the woman. if she's a rabid feminist, then she'd probably have a career. That would probably be a bad match for any poor fellow dumb enough to get mixed up with.
On the other hand, there are some nice ones. The problem is that they're subjected to a barrage of male bashing and criticisms on an ongoing basis by management in the guise of "sensitivity training exercises". If you can find one that hasn't been warped by that, you'll probably be OK.
Mine is a formed Dean of Students. a more wonderful woman cannot be found - career or not.
I keep a very clean house!
Hehehehehehehe...
Okay- But after I cook your dinner can I have 500.00 to buy
a new winter coat and boots to match?
I'd rather marry a professional woman than one of those amateur women.
The amazing thing is that, as a guy, I don't think I'd mind doing all the guy things (mow yard, kill spiders, etc) if all I could get was a minimal amount of respect. That's all. While I'm not yet married, there is something undeniably fun about doing The Man things when the ladies need them done and I get to do it. If they have a bare minimum of appreciation for them.
No.
Marrying a career woman is just plain stupid, unless you are one of those rare male golddiggers. But it's still stupid because you'll still be miserable, but while driving a nicer car...
It is not a cultural thing. It is simply the way we are wired (designed). Men and women were designed with different purposes in mind.
Marrying a "career woman" is fine as long as you're the kind of guy who doesn't mind sharing your wife with someone else. In truth, she'll have two spouses--you, and her job.
What kind of career? Some women make a career out of having kids....or cooking and cleaning.
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.