Women have avoided certain classes of men for years, but now are upset when the tables are turned.


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Women have avoided certain classes of men for years, but now are upset when the tables are turned.

Women have avoided certain classes of men for years, but now are upset when the tables are turned.
MikeDanger
Visitor
MikeDanger

So far, I’ve been amazed and amused by the quality of responses to Mr. Noers article. Instead of articulating the reasons why Mr. Noers conclusions are wrong, most of the respondents simply fell back on the age old tactic of labeling him with some sort of shame inducing description; primarily that of misogynist. According to my dictionary, a misogynist is someone who hates women and since Mr. Noer is only advocating the avoidance of a certain type of women, he doesn’t fit this description.

Also, while Mr. Noer’s article utilized data from several different scientific studies to back up his conclusions, the response from his chief critic lacked the same sort of scientific evidence. Mrs. Corcoran’s primary evidence for her conclusions was her own marriage and career. However, simply because Mrs. Corcoran’s experiences are in direct contradiction to Mr. Noer’s conclusions, they don’t make Mr. Noer’s conclusions incorrect. Mrs. Corcoran could simply be the exception and not the rule.

Avoiding certain types of individuals when choosing mates is not exactly a new concept. Mothers tell their daughters not to date short men. Fathers tell their sons not to date high maintenance women. Career women tell one another to avoid lesser educated males. Most men prefer not to date women with children. So this is nothing new. What is new is the inclusion of “career women” as a category of people to avoid.

Truth be told, most men already knew not to get involved with women who are focused on their career, or education, or whatever else. I’m a reasonably intelligent, home owning, twenty-five year old male and I already knew enough to walk away from any woman who suggest that she is highly educated or focused on her career. I’ve found that these are the women who are the quickest to point out personal faults, the most argumentative, and the least likely to be willing to compromise.

Finally, as an adult male who is searching for a suitable woman to marry and raise a family with, I agree with Mr. Noers conclusions. Contrary to the sentiment of many of the respondents, this doesn’t imply that I am simply searching for a beautiful but unintelligent woman. A beautiful but unintelligent woman is no more likely to be a good mother (in my opinion) than a workaholic woman with a MBA. I simply want a woman who is going to put her family first just as I would, and I don’t believe that a woman who has spent countless years and effort to educate herself and achieve a certain professional standing is going to want to do this.

Of course, I am only twenty-five, so what do I know?

08-24-2006 06:25 PM

Re:Bolded reply
MrDonadei
Contributor
MrDonadei

So far, I’ve been amazed and amused by the quality of responses to Mr. Noers article. Instead of articulating the reasons why Mr. Noers conclusions are wrong, most of the respondents simply fell back on the age old tactic of labeling him with some sort of shame inducing description; primarily that of misogynist. According to my dictionary, a misogynist is someone who hates women and since Mr. Noer is only advocating the avoidance of a certain type of women, he doesn’t fit this description.

Read the new topic I made please.

Also, while Mr. Noer’s article utilized data from several different scientific studies to back up his conclusions, the response from his chief critic lacked the same sort of scientific evidence. Mrs. Corcoran’s primary evidence for her conclusions was her own marriage and career. However, simply because Mrs. Corcoran’s experiences are in direct contradiction to Mr. Noer’s conclusions, they don’t make Mr. Noer’s conclusions incorrect. Mrs. Corcoran could simply be the exception and not the rule.

I agree, but who tells you that what Mr Noer is saying is the “rule”? Without a careful analysis, the referred studies don’t have much added value respect to Mrs Corcoran’s experience.

Avoiding certain types of individuals when choosing mates is not exactly a new concept. Mothers tell their daughters not to date short men. Fathers tell their sons not to date high maintenance women. Career women tell one another to avoid lesser educated males. Most men prefer not to date women with children. So this is nothing new. What is new is the inclusion of “career women” as a category of people to avoid.

I agree on the existence of this kind of “discriminations”. But how do you fell if someone tells people to avoid you? Why should you accept this?

Truth be told, most men already knew not to get involved with women who are focused on their career, or education, or whatever else. I’m a reasonably intelligent, home owning, twenty-five year old male and I already knew enough to walk away from any woman who suggest that she is highly educated or focused on her career. I’ve found that these are the women who are the quickest to point out personal faults, the most argumentative, and the least likely to be willing to compromise.

I agree, but this point is valid also for men. In the article the target is only half population.

Finally, as an adult male who is searching for a suitable woman to marry and raise a family with, I agree with Mr. Noers conclusions. Contrary to the sentiment of many of the respondents, this doesn’t imply that I am simply searching for a beautiful but unintelligent woman. A beautiful but unintelligent woman is no more likely to be a good mother (in my opinion) than a workaholic woman with a MBA. I simply want a woman who is going to put her family first just as I would, and I don’t believe that a woman who has spent countless years and effort to educate herself and achieve a certain professional standing is going to want to do this.

I agree, but again this is not only a female issue.

Of course, I am only twenty-five, so what do I know?

08-24-2006 06:43 PM

Re: Re:Bolded reply
MikeDanger
Visitor
MikeDanger

MrDonadei,

On your first point:

I’ve taken the time to read your new topic and I am unsure of what your intent was. You’ve taken one sentence out of an entire book which Mr. Noer wrote. Further more, this one statement doesn’t even suggest whether or not that was Mr. Noers own statement. Mr. Noer could have been simply citing a statement made in the study which he was utilizing. If your reason for posting that statement without any supporting documentation was to slander Mr. Noer’s character, then it was unfair and irresponsible. Additionally, I could probably take any book and find at least one sentence which I could deem inappropriate, especially if it’s taken out of context.

On your second point:

While Mr. Noer’s conclusions may not apply to all career women, he does draw those conclusions from the results of several different sources. Mrs. Corcoran on the other hand simply uses her own life experiences in her attempt at a rebuttal. So I’m willing to believe that Mr. Noer’s scientific studies are more representative of career woman than Mrs. Corcoran’s personal life.

On your third point:

First and foremost, it’s not discrimination. It’s not discrimination to state a personal preference. Preferring red over blue, or blondes or brunettes, or Mexican food over Chinese food, is not discrimination. Anyway, I’m actually quite comfortable with these kinds of “personal preferences.” These kinds of personal preferences allow us to differentiate between individuals who will be successful partners and those that won’t. These kinds of preferences are also innate and have developed over thousands of years, and no amount of misogyny or misandry is going to change them.

On your fourth and fifth point:

You’re right. Mr. Noer’s article only targeted women, and there was a good reason for that. It was an article for men by a man. Mrs. Corcoran’s article was written specifically to lambaste men, but that doesn’t imply that only men can be lazy. Both, the arguments that Mr. Noer used and Mrs. Corcoran used can apply to both sexes.

08-24-2006 07:39 PM

lorem ipsum
WillOWisp
Contributor

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est

Message Edited by WillOWisp on 08-30-2006 06:29 PM

08-24-2006 07:51 PM

Re: answer to your problems
warbaby
Regular Contributor
warbaby

Hey, look at that! More shaming language from someone who couldn’t come up with an actual argument. And look, it’s WillOWisp again!

08-24-2006 08:50 PM

Re: Re:Bolded reply
MrDonadei
Contributor
MrDonadei

MrDonadei,

On your first point:

I’ve taken the time to read your new topic and I am unsure of what your intent was. You’ve taken one sentence out of an entire book which Mr. Noer wrote. Further more, this one statement doesn’t even suggest whether or not that was Mr. Noers own statement. Mr. Noer could have been simply citing a statement made in the study which he was utilizing. If your reason for posting that statement without any supporting documentation was to slander Mr. Noer’s character, then it was unfair and irresponsible. Additionally, I could probably take any book and find at least one sentence which I could deem inappropriate, especially if it’s taken out of context.

Right, it could be in the right context. Very irresponsible from me!

On your second point:

While Mr. Noer’s conclusions may not apply to all career women, he does draw those conclusions from the results of several different sources. Mrs. Corcoran on the other hand simply uses her own life experiences in her attempt at a rebuttal. So I’m willing to believe that Mr. Noer’s scientific studies are more representative of career woman than Mrs. Corcoran’s personal life.

I made a scientific study: I tossed a coin two times and I had two H. The same happened to a friend. Now I am going to publish this outstanding discovery. (Do you know the in every university of the globe there exist researchers that are obliged to publish papers?)

On your third point:

First and foremost, it’s not discrimination. It’s not discrimination to state a personal preference. Preferring red over blue, or blondes or brunettes, or Mexican food over Chinese food, is not discrimination. Anyway, I’m actually quite comfortable with these kinds of “personal preferences.” These kinds of personal preferences allow us to differentiate between individuals who will be successful partners and those that won’t. These kinds of preferences are also innate and have developed over thousands of years, and no amount of misogyny or misandry is going to change them.

Yes, also the Neanderthal career woman was very discriminated by Fred Flinstones.

On your fourth and fifth point:

You’re right. Mr. Noer’s article only targeted women, and there was a good reason for that. It was an article for men by a man. Mrs. Corcoran’s article was written specifically to lambaste men, but that doesn’t imply that only men can be lazy. Both, the arguments that Mr. Noer used and Mrs. Corcoran used can apply to both sexes.

Right, so I won’t be surprised if women decide to delete subscriptions? If articles are written for men…

08-24-2006 09:03 PM

Re: Re:Bolded reply
tomshh
Regular Contributor
tomshh

WillOWisp, why do you want to get laid so badly?

My guess is you are a virgin, and getting laid is all that matters to you. To us men who have grown up, gone to college, had our women, etc. it is not a big priority.

I would rather be 25 and own a house and be single, than be 25 kowtowing to average at best women, just to say “wow, I am cool, I got laid”.

How pathetic.

08-24-2006 09:07 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: