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.
THat would be the day.
Was just trying to get a rise outta xs.
She hasn't responded yet, so she must be dead or something.
And how about the women with IQs of 140 who have master's degrees and want to do something more intellectually stimulating than housekeeping? Some men actually like being married to women who can carry on an intelligent conversation, commiserate with their office battles and work stress, and earn money so they can drive that hot car and play golf every weekend.
Then he ought've followed his own advice, lol.
That's what I keep hearing. I figure I'll end up married sooner or later.
I'm 61 and my wife is 53.
;)
There's truth here. Women have a remarkable support network that validates their opinions and even their whims. Women have friends, tv programs, daytime talk shows, womens magazines, etc that validate their mandate. Men don't have nearly as strong a support network.
Head to the bedroom and get ready for me, and I won't put up with any of this "I'm Tired!" crap either ;)
In my opinion I think the true devastation is what happens to the children, spouses and extended families of career women. It is true, wives/Mothers that have poorer large families do many times have to work right alongside their husbands, but these woman would give anything to stay at home and be with their children and tend to the house etc.
Where I think things get really crazy is for women and families who are already living in the 1% or even upper middle class economic bracket. The children are shuttled off to the nanny and day care and even thrown back at the husband (who is also working at a high level job) to care for them.
I think these women are the most selfish women I know and they are always libs, usually rabid.
I used to say and sometimes still do that the husband chose that person so they made their bed--live in it. Yet, the children did not choose that Mother, sadly and also the women many times misrepresent themselves when they are dating and when it comes time to be a wife and Mother they revert to their selfish feminist brain and run full speed ahead into the work environment. It is harder dealing with the unpredictability and complexity at home.
Thus I see these women as not just poor choices for mates and Mothers, but also think they are scaredy cat babies themselves to use a childhood phrase :-). JMO
LOL!
I'm blessed with a pornographic memory myself.
I didn't post the story! As for keeping a clean house, I don't, and I freely admit it. But then, I'm a career woman by necessity -- I'm single and don't want to be a ward of the state.
If SHE is unhappy, I will be unhappy.
Not quite sure how that works, but it has something to do with my a55 being chewed unmercifully when she is not happy.
...effective.
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.