"Don't Marry Career Women"

[sff_corgi_lj]

American misogyny rears its ugly head in the cultural petri dish created for it: Forbes magazine recently published the above-titled article by some... person... named 'Michael Noer, an executive editor and writer for Forbes.com', along with an earlier thoughtful piece by him:

..."The Economics of Prostitution," in which he compared "wives" to "whores" and wrote that "the implication remains that wives and whores are -- if not exactly like Coke and Pepsi -- something akin to champagne and beer. The same sort of thing."

Forbes pulled "Don't Marry Career Women" for a couple of days, according to the Salon article from which I quote ("Unhappily ever after"), and replaced it with "Careers and Marriage", which had a counterpoint written to the first piece.

Here's some more tidbits from the Salon article, quoting Noer's:

An accompanying slide show listed the "Nine Reasons to Steer Clear of Career Women," starting with the news that a professionally successful woman won't want to marry you -- "you" being Noer's male reader; he didn't bother to pretend that he might have any female eyes skimming his work -- because high-achieving women "search less intensively for a match," and "have higher standards for an acceptable match than women who work less and earn less."

...According to Noer, working women stray when a wife ventures outside the home, because a job increases the chances that "[she'll] meet someone [she] likes more than you." That surely doesn't sound like a stretch in this case.

..."Your house will be dirtier," since studies show that a woman who makes more than $15 an hour "will do 1.9 hours less house work a week."

And wait until you read why the husband of a 'career girl' is more likely to fall ill. You'll think you're in a time warp.

There's a reference on the first page to a Caitlin Flanagan -- I had to look her up, as thankfully I'd never heard of her. Formerly of The Atlantic, MS. Flanagan is apparently the kind of person who says writing isn't a real job so she can pretend she's not a working mother and remain piously self-righteous and self-justifying. Ms. discusses her apparently non-professional writings, for which she's getting paid lots of money to be not-working, at more length in the linked article.

What the bleep is going ON?

Comments

[blueeyedtigress.livejournal.com]

Y'know .... I don't think I'd want a man dumb enough to believe that tripe.

[parke-matru.livejournal.com]

Agreed with blueeyedtigress. This only serves to scare off the jerkfaces that nice career women would hate to be married to, anyway.

[acusa-dora.livejournal.com]

I don't even think I know too many men who would fall for that. (not even my 80 year-old father-in-law!) There are so many things wrong with his logic that I don't know where to begin.

[minoukatze.livejournal.com]

I think Forbes must have a serious dip in readers, considering that they'd resort to publishing this sort of polemic crap to get attention.

It's funny, I probably fall into the demographic that Noer and the extremely hypocritical Flanagan (check out her background- not only does her supposed non-job take her away from her kids on book tours, she has a good deal of hired help to aid her in her maternal duties) think a good housey-wife should be. I never would have allowed myself to depend on any guy who subscribed to this line of thought, though- it's much better to be alone.

I imagine Mr. Noer is a very sad man.

[kit-the-brave.livejournal.com]

Oh, my. I love the way he blythely declares what all these statistics mean with absolutely no shame - he quotes a number and then tells you it proves your house is going to be dirty!

And, um? "Girl" quit being used as a term for a female over the age of 16 in the last century...

[xianghua.livejournal.com]

I made talked Dad into canceling his Forbes subscription. :D Since it's obviously devolved into Time, which is not terribly worthwhile as a newsmagazine and it costs more and we get that anyway. So Hah!

[spin1978.livejournal.com]

I realized I could conceivably be in the target audience for the original article. To which I say, "Pfft."

I don't need a waste of electrons telling me how to choose a wife, I need suggestions on how to organize and maintain a royal harem!

:)

[sff-corgi.livejournal.com]

Ah, but the important part is to write the letter explaining WHY you're cancelling! Twist the knife, twist the knife!

[sff-corgi.livejournal.com]

You, my lord, are the exception to every rule.

[zahdi.livejournal.com]

I had a couple of other firends post links to the Forbes article, and, wow, I'd been trying really hard not to read them.

*laughs*

Srsly though (the pluto stuff has me saying "srsly" all day for some reason. Bear with me till i recover..) that is really disgusting.

And? I think I spot some Freudian-type issues there. Srsly.


-- Zahdi

[cerrberus.livejournal.com]

I think I spot some Freudian-type issues there. Srsly.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but an a$$hole is always an a$$hole?
I got *my* career woman, and still feel damned glad [& lucky] to do so- 32 years on.
And now I know I needn't waste time reading Forbes. Srsly.
8>)

[wormtorturer.livejournal.com]

According to Salon, Gloria Steinem e-mailed Forbes to thank them for weeding out the guys too dumb/helpless for modern women to marry.

[wormtorturer.livejournal.com]

I just want to be like Harriet Vane and marry a smart, witty gentleman who loves me for being smart and creative, wants me to enjoy using my talents--and has hired someone amazingly competent at the day-to-day stuff neither of us wants to worry about.

Ha, maybe I should make silly comments to the Foglios about Agatha + (Gil & Wooster) :: Harriet + (Peter & Bunter).

And completely OT... I wonder what Wooster's been up to since we saw him fly in? And where's the Baron? Could Gil and the Clays be catching up?

[sff-corgi.livejournal.com]

Apparently the tension's driving you mad, too. ^_^

[zahdi.livejournal.com]

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

Sometimes.

"a$$holes" (I prefer the version with s', but ok ;) are made, not born. Whether that justifies them or not, it is always the case.

Reading these lines: he didn't bother to pretend that he might have any female eyes skimming his work -- because high-achieving women "search less intensively for a match," and "have higher standards for an acceptable match than women who work less and earn less."

..."Your house will be dirtier," since studies show that a woman...

reeked of emotional issues. This, especially:

...According to Noer, working women stray when a wife ventures outside the home, because a job increases the chances that "[she'll] meet someone [she] likes more than you."

sent off some instant alarm bells of "Mommy Issues."

Don't mistake me; I don't look for things where they don't live. I enjoy pegging a guy (or gal) as "simply an a$$" just as much as the next person, it's fun. But, sometimes people say and do things that are practically like screaming, "I have problems!" or "I was hurt at some point!" or "I don't believe in faeries!" *lol* or what have you, and it's hardly an easy thing to ignore screaming like that ^_^.

Sorry to go into the exposition like that *lol.*

Good for you, 32 years is nice!

On the Other Hand...

[(Anonymous)]

Hey...I'm looking for someone who doesn't need me to work! How much money does he have? But do I have to clean? How dirty is this guy?

Re: On the Other Hand...

[sff-corgi.livejournal.com]

You're not supposed to care about that - you're just supposed to stay home, clean the house and have as many kids as HE wants to neglect emotionally.

[selenesue.livejournal.com]

SHFU. My house is spotless. I can afford maid service.