Statistics Don’t Determine Destiny


Statistics Don’t Determine Destiny

As a young woman studying engineering, I am very well aware of the statistics that are out there regarding women who choose to have careers in predominately male fields. I am also aware that I have been given free will and am, therefore, responsible for my choices and actions. I would never allow statistics govern my live, nor would I use them as a scapegoat when my life takes unexpected turns. No responsible adult should.

What I found MOST offensive about this article, which has since been removed from the website, was the title’s implications. “Why NOT to marry a career woman” was the title that appeared on my RSS feed. Rather than simply offering statistics to keep in mind when choosing a life partner, the author deemed it necessary to “spare” his male readers from the pain and misery that must shape his life by suggesting they not even consider such a union. In fact, in looking at the url, you’ll find that the slide show listing his top reasons to not marry a career woman was titled “singles…destined…misery.” I almost feel sorry for him. Almost.

Facts are facts and to state them is perfectly acceptable. In fact, I honestly would not be as offended as I am had the title been different. A change as simple as “The Challenges in Marrying a Career Woman” would have appeased my outrage. But the idea that a marriage CANNOT work because statistics say so is fatuous indeed!

08-23-2006 08:44 PM


Re: Statistics Don’t Determine Destiny

wow, finally, a semi-coherent response from a woman. Thank you.
Your post title says it all: Your personal destiny isn’t determined by trends of others.

Nowhere does anything the author wrote mention that ALL career women are doomed to unhappiness in marriage. These are scholarly studies. They look at overall trends, and don’t necessarily apply to your personal life and situations.

Other than that, I can see why you find the article’s title somewhat offensive, but big deal…are you going to drop subscription because you don’t like the title of one article? IS there anything in the article that is wrong? If anything, to me, if gives both career MEN AND WOMEN food for thought. EXTRA Sacrifices have to be made for this kind of relationship to work. Hmm. Sounds like marriage. IF you can’t take it, then don’t get into it. But don’t dismiss an article simply because it doesn’t live up to your lame Cinderella dreams.

08-23-2006 09:14 PM


Re: Statistics Don’t Determine Destiny

Few things:

1. What would have made the response fully “coherent?”

2. I definitely don’t have Cinderella dreams, if that statement was directed specifically at me.


3. No, personally I would not end my subscription because of one messed up title. When concerns me, though, is this man’s views, views that suggest, well blatantly state, that is it the career woman and her alone that needs to make sacrifices. A marriage is a partnership, one in which both parties must be able to compromise. THAT point was lost in this article

Message Edited by bnichola on 08-23-2006 09:36 PM

08-23-2006 09:33 PM


Re: Statistics Don’t Determine Destiny

I found John’s response to this post to be inappropriately insulting.

Nowhere in the original poster’s message could I find any hint at “Cinderella dreams”. In fact, I feel that her post was one of the most unbiased and unprovoking I’ve seen all day.

The retort was unwarranted.

08-23-2006 11:43 PM


Re: Statistics Don’t Determine Destiny

Josie, lol
Guys, this is an internet chat forum. Not a big deal.

The “cinderella dreams” comment was directed at a lot of American women in general, not the poster, whose comments were actually some of the more sensible of the women on this board.

Chill out. Everyone. Career women aren’t good wives. No big deal. Maybe some are, but most aren’t. That’s the article, summed up in a dozen words. What’s the issue??

Guess what else? Women who are strippers aren’t good wives either. And they aren’t even “career” women, as defined in the article. I don’t see you defending them though.

08-23-2006 11:52 PM


Re: Working women don’t make good wives. What’s the issue?

I agree 100% with John that’s the article in a nutshell. Perfectly expressed. Precisely because of that, I’m amazed that you are actually asking “what’s the issue?”

THAT is the issue

I agree also that there was no much statistical data in the article that wasn’t obvious a long time ago to anyone paying attention, but the conclusion that (because of the problems he talks about) career women don’t make good wives is nothing short of sinister!

I’m amazed that you don’t see why this concept is a big deal to us. It implies that for lots of men out there the convenience of having a wife covering the house front outweighs all the advantages that being a successful person can provide. How would you feel if every woman around you told you that your place is to be the janitor (and maybe the secretary too) and if you aspired to more you were not a desirable male to partner with? We know how: Hopeless and angry and resentful and distraught; that’s how you’d feel. And that’s how every working girl felt when she read this article.

There is something that apparently is taboo to address: 99% of household duties can be performed well by a semi-illiterate person with an IQ barely over a retarded level and no much training (I know this for a fact because I pay someone like this $15/hr to do everything at my house and she is a million times better at it that I could ever be). Now, by saying that “career women don’t make good wives” you are implying that someone who happily accepts these tasks as her main life purpose would make in your eyes a better partner. And you think that isn’t a big deal?

You have no idea how terrible it feels to know that gaining advanced knowledge, stretching the limits of your intelligence, improving and excelling at what you do and gaining recognition and rewards for it makes you less desirable as a woman. Because don’t forget: we want to be both successful and wanted, just like anybody else. And yet, the people that we want to like us the most (men) tell us: All those unique accomplishments that took talent and incredible effort and much perseverance mean nothing to me. Actually, I’d rather marry someone that isn’t ambitious or even bright, someone that wouldn’t go anywhere in a competitive environment. I much prefer her because she’d be around to take care of all the domestic duties that I don’t think is my place to do. She would make a better wife.

What part of all this you don’t understand why is a big deal?

And BTW, Mr. rational response: To us, this article is the equivalent of someone telling you “Your sister is a worthless **bleep** and your mother sucks c***s in hell”. Would you respond calmly and rationally to that? I think not.

The article may have presented a somewhat defendable justification for the idea that men would be better off if women didn’t work. However, I believe this incendiary idea is not really the true source of the intense reactions that rapidly escalated from both fronts. The actual trigger is an underlying issue that makes us all very nervous and confused:

Women do have a very special bond with their children because well, they house them and feed them with their own bodies. Sperm cells can be easily frozen for dozens of years and are in abundant supply. Now, if women don’t need men to provide for them: what the heck is the man’s role in today’s society?

The reality is that he’s left with nothing to define himself as a man. Understandably, men perceive the change as a dangerous threat to their very essence as men because, you know what? It is! Of course their reaction against these changes is strong. I think women would benefit from accepting that we still have ways to go before men re-define themselves as such or disappear into the wilderness in their own private continent.

So when a man says that working makes us bad wives, just like a striper, perhaps we are better off understanding it as the furious twitching of a dying genre, and rejoicing in the inevitability of a future where comments such as these will be regarded as quaint amusement from years past.

Message Edited by WiseObserver on 08-24-2006 03:42 AM

Message Edited by WiseObserver on 08-24-2006 03:44 AM

08-24-2006 03:40 AM


Re: Statistics Don’t Determine Destiny

These are *misquoted* and *miscited* scholarly articles. I actually bothered reading three of the seven articles he cited. The only one that’s truly supported is that women spend 1.9 hours less on the household if they also work. Of course, Noer failed to note that a majority of working women actually hire out part of the house work.

Women with college degrees divorce *less* frequently than women without college degrees. (Elaina Rose, “Education and Hypergamy in Marriage Markets,” (Seattle, WA: Department of Economics, University of Washington, 2004). Available at

The statistic about having children fails to address the fact that this is a joint decision, and that fewer *men* want children as well. Furthermore, career women marry later, and therefore many more of them marry with an expectation of not having children, rather than having children.

In other words, Noer’s citations do not support his conclusions.

08-28-2006 03:49 AM


%d bloggers like this: