Skip to comments.Don't Marry a Career Woman: The Debate Heats Up
Posted on 09/11/2006 10:39:33 AM PDT by FreeManDC
Wondering about that muffled howl youve been hearing the last couple weeks? Its the sound and fury of feminists reacting to Michael Noers latest exegesis, Dont Marry a Career Woman.
Noers 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, shes 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 dont 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 womans magazine, youll 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: Im surprised that the man thinks it. Im astonished that he wrote it. And Im 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, Dont Marry a Lazy Man. Describing Noers factual article as frightening, she dispensed this condescending advice about men: If he can pick up new ideas faster than your puppy, youve got a winner.
Needless to say, Ms. Corcorans screed only reinforced the worst stereotypes of the I-know-what-I-want-and-I-know-how-to-get-it career woman portrayed in Noers 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. Noers article springs from the fact that for the last 30 years, discussions about women in the workforce have been guided by the unspoken rule, Mens Opinions Dont Count.
But then womens one-sided conversations lapsed into over-wrought declamations about men who didnt 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.
Doesnt 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 lets 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 whats a career woman to do? For a moment, lets 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 deaths door, I only wish that I could have spent more time in the office? Neither have I.
Its no secret that the most rewarding parts of a persons 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?
Its 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.
I'd like to find a man that's willing to take on the responsibilty of being the sole breadwinner. Not many guys my age (early 30s) seem to be up to the challenge or willing to take it on.
I just celebrated my 17th year anniversary with my career woman wife. I made more, then she made more.
However, there is only one real solution to having a career woman as a wife. Get a housekeeper who also can take care of the kids. This way you have the best of both worlds.
It works the same way when the tables are reversed and the wife is staying home. :-)
Meh, maybe later. I still have two girls that I know personally whom I'm working on right now.
Ha! I guess that makes us pushovers, but there's lots of truth in all that.
And how's that defined (the welfare of the family) ? Why is that only *her* responsibility to put before something else ? It's a *man*'s responsibility to do the same.
Here's a question for you - if your wife made more money than you would you stay at home and be a house husband ? If your answer is *no*, ask yourself why that is, and why should you place that same burden on a woman.
And I wish you luck on this one - it won't work like you think.
That's it, we have a winner!
Yeah, I'm surprised Leykis' name didn't come up. He's been beating this drum for years.
"Get back to the kitchen and cook me dinner, woman."
Then fetch me a cold beer in a frosted mug. And be quick about it. I've had a hard day at the office.
I married a Japanese woman after being miserably married to an American woman. Very different psychology - she, and Japanese women in general, actually want to be feminine. They have not lost the concept of men and women being different, but equal. American women, seem to want to emulate men, not compliment them. She understands I bust my butt at work and do all the heavy, outside labor around the house. My ex-American wife was always of the 'so what, but what did you do for ME today?'
I think the bottom line is that men want a partner, not a competitor.
61 minus 53 is 12?
(You may be right)
I'm laying in wait for the usual lecherous Henry Beecher to whine in the thread about the objects of his desire (other men's wives) being "barefoot and pregnant."
Is this man a closet FReeper?
Ha! Reminds me of what my husband says when I'm chattering while he's trying to watch a game: "Woman, why don't you make yourself useful. Go fix me a sandwich or something."
Hey, just keep bringing those paychecks home. I can make sandwiches.
Practice in a mirror or something. Watch romance anime for tips.
I think one answer would be: In 1956, 1966 1976
How much of an income did a man have to make to support a family? (let's look at some TV families for instance)
Wife 3 kids and a dog? How much money did
Father's know Best make to support his family?
What about Ward Cleaver the Beav's dad? how much money for his family?
What about Mr Brady? he had an extended family and a maid on top of it? how much money did he bring in??
Fast forward to 2006 could most men afford to take care of a family like the ones of old? I would say proably Not...