The article is right.


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – The article is right.

The article is right.
Freeyourself
Regular Contributor
Freeyourself
Everybody seems to be missing the point here. The article states your chances at successful marriage for men are diminished with career woman. How many women here have even stated that with their education and earnings they can leave their husbands, the US judicial system will almost guarantee them preference in the courtroom as well. Women initiate 70% of divorces with the common reasoning being irreconcilable differences. Not too promising for men when they lose half of their wealth going directly to the woman then a good amount of the rest to lawyers. I’ve seen this so many times through friends it is not funny, most men are broke when they have to start over. The lawyers definately wanted no fault divorce laws to their financial gain.

This article is stating in a man’s logically and mathematical point of view your odds at success with a career woman are lower. Accept it for what it is men don’t use irrational behavior or emotions they figure lifes problems through math and science. This is the difference between us and why women are so angry at this article. You really don’t understand us and underestimate our thinking. My mathematical reasoning tells me todays USA is a suicidal trap for men to marry. There are no benefits to men, just responsibility but the world is huge and changing with 3 billion women to choose from therefore men have choices in where they live and work.

In conclusion men don’t have to settle for a bad deal. If you agree with the author then don’t let others change your mind.

08-27-2006 01:04 PM

Re: The article is right.
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

A decent, confident man who understands that he is equally responsible to work on and for the relationship won’t have to worry about keeping his little lady in a box.

If you think you’re not good enough for a woman to WANT to stay with you over others she might meet at work, by all means–you should find one who’s willing to confine herself to the home.  But if you find a woman you are confident loves you, and with whom you’re willing to actually WORK on the relationship, you have nothing to worry about.

See, the common theme here is that a lot of you men who agree with Noer’s column are admitting that you don’t like it when women have the financial independence that will allow her to leave you if the relationship goes bad.  It used to be only MEN had that advantage…not so good when both can leave freely, huh?  Kind of takes away your license to be lazy in the relationship department.  Now – gasp! – you actually have to try to keep her happy, instead of sitting back and letter her do it.

Insecure men: prepare your wife-cages.

08-27-2006 01:14 PM

Re: The article is right.
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor

…when women have the financial independence that will allow her to leave you if the relationship goes bad. It used to be only MEN had that advantage…not so good when both can leave freely, huh?

Right, when MEN had the “advantage” of which you speak the divorce rate was infinitesimal. (Now they get penalized when the woman changes her mind. How is that fair or equal?) Now that women have this so-called adantage, they use it to wreck relationships, not create them. Men are absolutely correct in being very, very wary. — but only if they have something to lose.

______________________________________________
“The loudest, most strident voices calling women weak, stupid, and incapable of competing in the world at large are the feminists.” – zed the zen priest

08-27-2006 01:22 PM

Re: The article is right.
Freeyourself
Regular Contributor
Freeyourself
The odds are stacked against men to marry. don’t try to use a man must step up, since a man can be the greatest husband, father, and provider in the world and still lose everything. The divorce laws are stacked against men so marriage is a hazard plain and simple. The truth is American women demand more then they contribute to a relation today, there are better alternatives to American men.

Many times after the woman has divorced she realizes how good a man she had but can’t get him back. I have friends that their ex-wives want them back but too late. America is a throw away society where people think they always can find better. The thing is women have government on their side so logic dictates men should not marry.

Message Edited by Freeyourself on 08-27-2006 01:37 PM

08-27-2006 01:33 PM

Re: The article is right.
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

Yes, but that was also back when divorce – period – was pretty taboo.  You know, in the old days, when the roles were incredibly unfair and women were little more than housekeepers.

You seem perfectly comfortable blaming women for a rising divorce rate – why not at least be fair and blame both?  The women who are now able to leave when they’re unhappy (rather than staying trapped in a bad marriage), and the men who can’t deal with independent women?

08-27-2006 01:34 PM

Re: The article is right.
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

MartianBachelor wrote:

…when women have the financial independence that will allow her to leave you if the relationship goes bad. It used to be only MEN had that advantage…not so good when both can leave freely, huh?

Right, when MEN had the “advantage” of which you speak the divorce rate was infinitesimal. (Now they get penalized when the woman changes her mind. How is that fair or equal?) Now that women have this so-called adantage, they use it to wreck relationships, not create them. Men are absolutely correct in being very, very wary. — but only if they have something to lose.

Sorry – forgot to quote.  My post (above this one) is a response to the quote,  here.

08-27-2006 01:37 PM

Re: The article is right.
tomshh
Regular Contributor
tomshh

Yes, but that was also back when divorce – period – was pretty taboo.  You know, in the old days, when the roles were incredibly unfair and women were little more than housekeepers.
——————————————-

If you want to actually be smart, it was NOT “when the roles were incredibly unfair”.

Lets be honest….

In those days women could NOT leave the house.  There were not police on every corner to protect you from those evil men.  The work days were 12 hours long, most jobs were manual labor, 99.99% of women could not have kept a job for a week in those days.  Their bodies and minds would not endure what it took to make a living.  There were not baby care centers on every block to raise the kids, while you went out to play play.  There were not cushy, sit on your ass, take 3 hour lunches, HR jobs in those days.

The only reason you women could EVER leave the house in the first place, is because MEN advanced society enough.  And our society will fall back to a point where women have no choice but to stay in the house again.

My advice is you thank men for what we have done, then stop whinning, and do soemthing with your life.

08-27-2006 01:40 PM

Re: The article is right.
Freeyourself
Regular Contributor
Freeyourself
“You seem perfectly comfortable blaming women for a rising divorce rate – why not at least be fair and blame both? The women who are now able to leave when they’re unhappy (rather than staying trapped in a bad marriage), and the men who can’t deal with independent women?”

You are right it is mens fault as well. The politicians and lawyers who were men wanted no fault divorce since it transfers money to their pockets. You see you stated yourself you can leave when you’re not happy and there is not one single marriage that at one point or another someone becomes unhappy. But when there is no economic reason to leave the marriage, then over time most of the couples that stayed together find that their bad times were nothing compared to staying and working through the rough problems. What happened to for better or worse for sicker or poorer, seems women don’t take to wedding vows anymore. This leads back to the logic of men should not marry under such laws.

Marriage will become favorable to both men and women when no fualt divorce is abolished, until it is I believe it is in mens best interest to marriage strike like millions are doing today.

Message Edited by Freeyourself on 08-27-2006 01:50 PM

08-27-2006 01:46 PM

Re: The article is right.
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor

ftesyektsi wrote: …You seem perfectly comfortable blaming women for a rising divorce rate – why not at least be fair and blame both?

Because the law doesn’t blame both. It blames and punishes the man.

When a woman files for divorce she can be sure of filing a claim for a substantial portion of what the man has or will have down the line. When the man files for divorce she can be sure of filing a claim for a substantial portion of what the man has or will have down the line.

There is thus quite an incentive for women to divorce, an incentive which men don’t have. You could call what men have an anti-incentive. You could say women have men by their testicles, especially if you go with Robin William’s saying that a divorce is a woman removing a mans testicles through his wallet.

I know how it works with most women because I’ve seen it on The View and Oprah: if the man files for divorce it just shows what a cad he is; if the woman files for divorce it just shows what a jerk he is.

There is a fundamental difference in the way man and women view money: men want to do well because they know women don’t generally want a poor, homeless loser — i.e., you could say men make money and generally strive for achievement to make themselves more attractive to women. (In the extreme this results in “male makeup” — a fancy sports car, abode, clothes, bling and other signs of wealth, all bought on credit which the guy can’t really afford.) However, as we’ve heard numerous times on the board here, a woman makes money so she can do without a man who doesn’t suit her just about absolutely exactly — and if she grows tired or dissatisfied with him (grows “liberated” at any point in the future she can dump him, and maybe even profit in the deal. She doesn’t generally use her money to create relationships, say by asking men out, paying for them, buying them expensive gifts, taking them on luxury vacations, buying them homes and cars, supporting them and their kids, etc. — even if she has the money to do so.

Message Edited by MartianBachelor on 08-27-2006 12:03 PM

______________________________________________
“The loudest, most strident voices calling women weak, stupid, and incapable of competing in the world at large are the feminists.” – zed the zen priest

08-27-2006 01:50 PM

Re: The article is right.
Romulus
Regular Contributor
Romulus
I agree. I read the article and took from it the simple fact that marrying a career woman increases the chances of unhappiness in the marriage, which in turn increases the chances of divorce. It increases unhappiness b/c a career woman brings competing priorities to the table which are just as important as the man’s. This environment causes conflict – that’s what competition is. Its no surprise that this results in unhappiness and tension in the marriage – one side wins, one side loses, or both compromise and are left at odds with each other. This correlates with an increase in divorce b/c in the studies I’ve read the majority of people get divorced b/c they are unhappy. I don’t understand why women are so upset by this article. He’s not saying career women are insignificant, don’t make meaningful contributions to society, etc. He’s saying that marrying a career woman will increase the chances of divorce and he’s right. Maybe what the feminists are truly angry about is that he has given yet another reason why men shouldn’t get married.

08-27-2006 02:07 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.
Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – The article is right.

Re: The article is right.
Freeyourself
Regular Contributor
Freeyourself
Romulus your right and the women don’t know how bad it is going to get. All these guys deciding not to go to college. A lot of them have already decided they don’t want marriage and family so why spend all that money and time in college. Men used to try to get the best education and job possible to their abilities to support a family. Now they decide they don’t need all this materialism so a less paying and stressful job is good enough(men going their own way). Many college women are already complaining that they don’t see as many men on campuses. They already see that they will have to compete for fewer educated men. Articles on the web are pointing to many of these educated women looking for a man to marry and support them them but a silent strike is on that they can’t see.

08-27-2006 02:21 PM

Re: The article is right.
billyk
Newbie
billyk

This is funny.  Maybe if the guys worried about WHY the 70% of divorces are innitiated by women instead of how to pay for them, we would all be better off.  Once a woman gets into the work force and witnesses first hand the behavior of these guys, any one with a brain would get as far away from them as possible.  Between the strip joints, hookers and stopping by other single women on their route home (and by the way, I am refering to the financial industry…not a pack of Hell’s Angels)…its amazing that these men have been able to keep their wives at all.  If any one of these women had an ounce of wits they would get the Heck out and take everything they could with them ASAP.

The good news is.  Men no longer have a choice.  With 60% of management jobs being held by women, greater numbers of women law school graduates, MBAs, etc. than men…well they are stuck with it!

So take a look in the mirror guys.  See a therapist, clean up your act, and behave like decent human beings.  Maybe then a bright woman might want to actually stay married to you.

08-27-2006 02:44 PM

Re: The article is right.
Termi0n
Regular Contributor
Termi0n

Maybe if their wives were better they wouldnt go to strip joints or try to see other women.

Wait are you a guy? Or a woman named Billy? I cant tell.

Women want fried ice. -Arab Proverb

08-27-2006 03:00 PM

Re: The article is right.
Romulus
Regular Contributor
Romulus
“Once a woman gets into the work force and witnesses first hand the behavior of these guys, any one with a brain would get as far away from them as possible. Between the strip joints, hookers and stopping by other single women on their route home (and by the way, I am refering to the financial industry…not a pack of Hell’s Angels)…its amazing that these men have been able to keep their wives at all. If any one of these women had an ounce of wits they would get the Heck out and take everything they could with them ASAP.”

Interesting you should bring this up. When I was in college I worked part time as a bouncer for a nightclub/bar. I rotated shifts and this bar had various themed nights like oldies night, singles night, ladies night out, etc. Almost every week there was a bachelorette party involving women, some single, some married slipping dollar bills in a male stripper’s underwear, giving him pseudo-fellatio and hand jobs, etc. Then there was ladies nights out – women dancing on bars, removing their tops, etc. I can’t count the number of times I was hit on by drunken women both college girls AND 30ish year old career women. We live in a highly sexualized culture. Arguing that only men engage in such behavior is asinine.

“The good news is. Men no longer have a choice. With 60% of management jobs being held by women, greater numbers of women law school graduates, MBAs, etc. than men…well they are stuck with it!”

And this is a bad thing for men? I couldn’t be any happier. I think its great that women are making meaningful contributions to the workforce and society. It brings new perspecitives and ideas to the table which increases productivity. I couldn’t be any happier having colleagues as women – in a number of cases I’ve learned a lot from them. I just won’t marry them b/c it would mean conflicting priorities in my personal life and one or both of us would suffer, grow unhappy, and be more likely to divorce. I think too may women on this forum are equating a man’s refusal to marrying a career woman as dismissing their place and contributions to the workforce. Which is not the case at all, we just don’t want you career women as wives.

Message Edited by Romulus on 08-27-2006 03:24 PM

08-27-2006 03:01 PM

Re: The article is right.
blaineso
Contributor
blaineso
…men who can’t deal with independent women.

This line is so tired, and it’s not going to work anymore.

08-27-2006 03:07 PM

Re: The article is right.
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

This is funny.  Maybe if the guys worried about WHY the 70% of divorces are initiated by women instead of how to pay for them, we would all be better off.

Men have been listening to the complaints of women for 40 years, adjusting our behavior to be ‘better men, more sensitive men..’  It has not been enough, and the women continue to demand more, more, more.  This is a moving target of increasing female expectations without bound or reason.  Men have reached a point where we are no longer willing to compromise for women who unilaterally demand yet more changes. I have been reading of such and hearing of these demands since I was 9, and I have had enough.  Men have changed and grown tremendously in the past 40 years, but it is still not enough.

Maybe it is time for women to examine their behavior, and find what they can do to improve in themselves.

Once a woman gets into the work force and witnesses first hand the behavior of these guys, any one with a brain would get as far away from them as possible.

Women are free to raise their expectations as high as they want.  What will be the natural result of such behavior?  If women in the workforce conclude in large numbers that men in the workforce are unworthy partners, who exactly are the women going to marry and have kids with?  Unemployed men?  Men not in the financial field?  Men who earn $25k/year?

If they deem themselves too good for the men, for whatever reason, and they don’t rear a family with them, they are choosing genetic extinction.  Their behavior, mores, attitudes, education, feminist outlook – all of it will be selected out of the gene pool and will die with them when they hit menopause.

With 60% of management jobs being held by women, greater numbers of women law school graduates, MBAs, etc. than men…well they are stuck with it!

So you are a Female Supremacist, then.  How is 60% of managements jobs being held by women a sign of equality?  Equality would be 50-50.

This is what happens when policy prefers women over men.  School and Uni have been changed to favor women, who are 57% of enrollees and graduates, yet women can still get minority grants and scholarships.

How is this equality?  How can a group that is 57% of enrollees be considered a minority?

Message Edited by leeraconteur on 08-27-2006 03:29 PM

08-27-2006 03:26 PM

Re: The article is right.
Freeyourself
Regular Contributor
Freeyourself
“This is funny. Maybe if the guys worried about WHY the 70% of divorces are innitiated by women instead of how to pay for them, we would all be better off. ”

We don’t need to worry why you do it since it is obvious. Women have nothing to lose in divorce. Men usually have to move out and send a portion of his wages to the woman. Now if she is good she can move into another man’s home while still collecting her first husband’s partial wages. Can’t you understand it is financial suicide for men to marry today or live with a woman.

“The good news is. Men no longer have a choice. With 60% of management jobs being held by women, greater numbers of women law school graduates, MBAs, etc. than men…well they are stuck with it!”

What are we stuck with? Many of the skilled jobs pay very well without having to put up with the office crap. Who is more important an Accountant or Tool and Die worker? Most will say Accountant because of the longer college years while the Tool and Die worker learns on the job with some technical school. I say the Tool and Die maker is worth more than his weight in gold compared to an accountant. This is becoming a scary scenario for America as companies offshore more manufacturing and trades like Tool and Die dissapear, what will happen in a global war? We will call China up and say we want to buy some weapons from you before we fight? Tool and Die is a profession that provides the skills needed to turn a coffee can making plant into a ammunitions plant but at the pace we are going we will lose this skill and are ability to self sufficiently defend ourselves. Like I argued in another thread China is printing 500,000 engineers a year to our 50,000 as a woman you should be worried when China has more future products than we do since you can’t manage a business if a business has no product to sell. Maybe you should start to think about seeing more boys pass high school and go on to Universities that allow them to study what they want not the Feminists cultures and curriculum on campus today.

08-27-2006 03:28 PM

Re: The article is right.
legacy42
Contributor
legacy42

If you think you’re not good enough for a woman to WANT to stay with you over others she might meet at work, by all means–you should find one who’s willing to confine herself to the home.  But if you find a woman you are confident loves you, and with whom you’re willing to actually WORK on the relationship, you have nothing to worry about.

This is crap.  I married my wife knowing she had an MBA from a top 5 MBA school and career ambitions.  What I did not realize then and have come to realize since is that she would pursue her career at the expense of my career and at the expense of time with her kids.  She now regrets that and resents setbacks in my career that have come in accommodation of her career (see my post under Marrying a “Career” Woman).  The fact is when children are in the equation someone’s career or the children will suffer.  “Career” Women pursue careers at the expense of their spouses or their children.  Women have an inherently nuturing nature that is better for raising children and if a man wants a woman to nurture their children they should avoid marrying career women, which is the point of Michael Noer’s article and right on the money.

08-27-2006 03:40 PM

Re: The article is right.
earthlaughs
Contributor
earthlaughs

MartianBachelor wrote: when MEN had the “advantage” of which you speak the divorce rate was infinitesimal.

Divorce laws were more sticky as well. A bad marriage wasn’t nearly as easy to get out of. Social influences made divorce less desirable, imposing a stigma on divorced women (but not men). There was less likelihood for a woman who hadn’t worked outside the home to have sufficient money to care for her children, and there was little “dead-beat dad” recourse, so most divorced women relied on low-paying jobs or welfare. How fair was that for the children?

08-27-2006 07:47 PM

Re: The article is right.
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

legacy42 wrote:
Women have an inherently nuturing nature that is better for raising children
If that were true, this article wouldn’t have been written.  Clearly there’s no such thing as “an inherently nuturing nature,” either in men or women.  Even women will not nuture if they do not feel safe to do so.  In order to feel safe to nuture, women have to know that they will not be abandoned for the latest skirt that walks down the street, that they will not be demeaned by their spouse for doing unpaid work, and that they will not live with a tyrant, who demands things from them (rather than requesting) as a result of their unemployed status.

The absence of this is what feminism responded to.

08-27-2006 08:26 PM

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

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: