What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .

What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

Was that men who can’t have a successful, happy marriage with a career woman should avoid them.  Makes sense to me.  I’ll leave it up to others to imagine what deficiencies would lead to such a thing.

08-28-2006 08:58 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Romulus
Regular Contributor
Romulus
Guess that’s food for thought. I’ll let others debate it out, doesn’t seem like a shortage of volunteers on either side.

Its time to retire. Ladies – its been entertaining, enlightening at moments, and definitely engaging. Gentleman – hope the article gave you a chance to reevaluate marriage and the male-female dynamic in the 21st century.

Goodbye & good luck to all.

08-28-2006 09:04 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
fishnamedjames
Regular Contributor
fishnamedjames
The statistics also support that way of thinking about it.

08-28-2006 09:05 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Cassius
Regular Contributor
Cassius
Ok ill try to break it all down for you. Noer said the risk of divorce is higher with a career woman than with a non-career woman. THats what Noer said based on the statistics he provided. The articel appeard on forbes because a man confronted with divorce looses everything and men on forbes should have a lot to loose therefore who to marry is a serious consideration for them. Just the way women seek richt man to marry if it doesnt work out Oh well deevooorce deevorce.

Dig deeper in your pockets common baby i know you got it

08-28-2006 09:07 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
fishnamedjames
Regular Contributor
fishnamedjames
Best of luck to you, Romulus.

08-28-2006 09:07 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

Cassius wrote:
Ok ill try to break it all down for you. Noer said the risk of divorce is higher with a career woman than with a non-career woman.
What he said was “that working outside the home actually increases marital stability, at least when the marriage is a happy one. But even in these studies, wives’ employment does correlate positively to divorce rates, when the marriage is of “low marital quality.”

Quit ignoring what the article actually says.

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-28-2006 09:12 PM

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-28-2006 09:19 PM

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-28-2006 09:54 PM

08-28-2006 09:12 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
jewels
Contributor
jewels

Hi Marta
Remember that old Ira and George Gershwin tune sung by Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers?  “Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off” – have a listen.

http://www.themave.com/Astaire/calloff.html

A bit of humor would go a long way….. “wimmin” now youall gitchersef busy and rang the dadgum dinner bell and give them boys sum BISCITS fore they bout to expire….no you shore don’t be needin any shus, jist un apron on top of yore barthday sute n wartch em et up up

08-28-2006 09:14 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

jewels wrote:
A bit of humor would go a long way….. “wimmin” now youall gitchersef busy and rang the dadgum dinner bell and give them boys sum BISCITS fore they bout to expire….no you shore don’t be needin any shus, jist un apron on top of yore barthday sute n wartch em et up up
Oh, I do declare, I plum forgot myself.

08-28-2006 09:18 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
JWatkins
Contributor
JWatkins
Why are feminists so against the article? I thought they believed marriage to be an oppressive institution.

Surely men not marrying career girls is better than them doing so, as it leads to less women subjugated to marriage?

08-28-2006 09:26 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

JWatkins wrote:
Why are feminists so against the article? I thought they believed marriage to be an oppressive institution.

Surely men not marrying career girls is better than them doing so, as it leads to less women subjugated to marriage?
Please stay on topic:  answer for the discrepancy between what the article actually said and what it’s been misrepresented as saying.

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-28-2006 09:29 PM

08-28-2006 09:28 PM

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

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
placidlake
Contributor
placidlake
jwatkins, if the gals on this board did not want marriage, this board would have never exploded in the first place…

duh.

you have determined one of two things.

1. there are no feminists here.
2. there are feminists here, but they want marriage.

the end

08-28-2006 09:29 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

The silence on the actual findings of Mr. Noer’s article is deafening, as I expected.

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-28-2006 09:45 PM

08-28-2006 09:45 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
placidlake
Contributor
placidlake
i don’t think it’s a finding less than what his opinion on how the world should be in regards to how men should treat “marriage to career women”.

08-28-2006 09:52 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
fishnamedjames
Regular Contributor
fishnamedjames
Yep, Mr. Noer said so himself–stability does appear to increase when the woman works outside the home, at least in some marriages. I’m not sure about his phrasing of the next sentence… is he saying that women who work and who are in undesirable marriages are more likely to leave than those who don’t? Or is he saying that bad marriages tend to end in divorce, a rather uncompelling finding? Also, how much more likely is a “career” woman likely to leave a bad marriage than a woman working in the home? None of this is made clear.

Also important to consider: Women who want a traditional family are probably more likely to have had a traditional, religious upbringing that would discourage divorce. Similarly, people tend to marry people who share their religion. It stands to reason that the sort of people who might be most committed to trying to make a marriage work no matter what might also be the most likely to have traditional households. It’s the old chicken or the egg question. And no, I’m not claiming to know the answer.

08-28-2006 09:54 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

placidlake wrote:
i don’t think it’s a finding less than what his opinion on how the world should be in regards to how men should treat “marriage to career women”.
All I’m doing is quoting the article.  And the article says (in case anyone forgot), “that working outside the home actually increases marital stability, at least when the marriage is a happy one. But even in these studies, wives’ employment does correlate positively to divorce rates, when the marriage is of “low marital quality.”

08-28-2006 09:54 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
placidlake
Contributor
placidlake
could our self-awareness of our roles in these statistics change the statistics themselves? Ohhhh, the excitement of an evolving society!

08-28-2006 10:00 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
fishnamedjames
Regular Contributor
fishnamedjames
Yes, self awareness might change these statistics, though it depends on a number of unanswerable why’s. We still don’t really know why the statistics are the way they are. It’s interesting, I didn’t notice it before, but did Noer define “poor marital quality” elsewhere in his article as work not getting done around the house, etc? That even sort of suggests that the women could have felt under pressure to do a lot of housework even when they were working, and that was a cause of some of the fallout. That means if you’re a guy who cleans up around the house a decent amount you might be perfectly balanced for a woman who does the same and works, as long as no one is forced to do the lion’s share of housekeeping on top of their job.

08-28-2006 10:06 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
placidlake
Contributor
placidlake
sigh, that is what i hate about sociology.

that’s why statistics should never be released until causal theories are first established. once you release statistics to the public, you change the inherent mechanisms of the society. not unlike heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. well, sorta like… not really. anyways…

08-28-2006 10:10 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
juliandroms
Regular Contributor
juliandroms

Marta said:
What he said was “that working outside the home actually increases marital stability, at least when the marriage is a happy one. But even in these studies, wives’ employment does correlate positively to divorce rates, when the marriage is of “low marital quality.”

Quit ignoring what the article actually says.

Actually, Noer first cited studies that stated that as the numbers of hours women work increases overall, the divorce rate increases overall. That’s the overall picture (what more is there to say)?

Then, for the sake of completeness, Noer cited a couple studies which broke down couples in to those with “happy marriage” and “unhappy marriages” (as defined by some nebulous social science equation one would suppose), then says divorce rates increase in one group but decrease in the other. But these latter studies insofar as we can tell don’t say what *net* effect women working has on divorce rates.

Something tells me, that the only reason a social scientist would go through antics of trying to separate marriages into “high marital quality” and “low marital quality” according to some nebulous set of principles and then compare the two, is because they saw that the overall divorce rates were higher when women worked, and they didn’t like the result. That would be my hunch, but hey, I’m a cynic (and most often correct about such things).

And isn’t it it a non-sequitor to argue that those who are in “happy marriages” don’t divorce as often?

And by the way, neither men nor women are soothsayers, capable of predicting 20 years later whether a marriage will be in the “high marital quality” or “low marital quality” category (much less how that is even quantified).

Since you don’t stand to suffer much in a divorce, I suppose you don’t care. But other have different priorities.

End point: Michael Noer was not intending to write an advice column for women in this particular issue of Forbes. It’s a column for men. Why are women suprised or even insulted that he is not rooting for their team? Must everything that is published on paper think of the wee wittle wimmins first?

If you have a problem with the article, at least try to argue it from the perspective about how it would be in the best interest of a wealthy male Forbes reader to marry a career woman. If you’re arguing it form the perspective of what best fits the needs of women, I’m sorry, you have totally missed the point. So long as family law continues to coddle women and screw men, one can hardly argue one perspective without sacreficing the other.

Message Edited by juliandroms on 08-29-2006 03:02 PM

08-29-2006 12:59 AM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

It’s refreshing to see the liberal feminists on this board finally coming around to Michael Noer’s article. Last week they were demanding apologies, threatening boycotts, and demanding Michael Noer’s head on a platter! Now we have them citing Noer’s article, which actually counter their original arguments that he was a misogynist!

Quite the contrary, Noer wrote a provacative article with a headline that his editor undoubtly penned. He cited various studies, but warned the reader (in his concluding paragraph) about correlation and causation.

Healthy spirted debate is a positive thing. I guess Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich were right when they said that all we can do is continue educating the American people.

08-29-2006 01:42 AM

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

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
radiator
Regular Contributor
radiator

Actually, women have a lot to lose from divorce–like a 45% drop in living standards.  Knock off the rhetoric.

08-29-2006 05:46 AM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

juliandroms wrote:
Something tells me, that the only reason a social scientist would go through antics of trying to separate marriages into “high marital quality” and “low marital quality” according to some nebulous set of principles and then compare the two, is because they saw that the overall divorce rates were higher when women worked, and they didn’t like the result. That would be my hunch, but hey, I’m a cynic (and most often correct about such things).
I like how with a flick of the wrist and a boatload of speculation, you try to vanish what the article actually said, which was that working outside the home stabilizes a marriage.  If a woman did that, she’d be accused of being biased, hysterical, disingenuous, stupid, etc.  Double standard much?

If you have a problem with the article, at least try to argue it from the perspective about how it would be in the best interest of wealthy male Forbes readers to marry career women.
I did:  working outside the home increases marital stability.  How many times do I have to say it?

08-29-2006 07:33 AM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
juliandroms
Regular Contributor
juliandroms

Actually, Noer first cited studies that stated that as the numbers of hours women work increases overall, the divorce rate increases overall. That’s the overall picture (what more is there to say)?

Then, for the sake of completeness, Noer cited a couple studies which broke down couples in to those with “happy marriage” and “unhappy marriages” (as defined by some nebulous social science equation one would suppose), then says divorce rates increase in one group but decrease in the other. But these latter studies insofar as we can tell don’t say what *net* effect women working has on divorce rates, so who can conclude anything from them?

He definitely did *not* as you suggest, say that women being a “career woman” increases the stability of marriages. Quit trying to pretend that he did.

08-29-2006 03:07 PM

Re: What Mr. Noer Actually Said . . .
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

Actually, women have a lot to lose from divorce–like a 45% drop in living standards.  Knock off the rhetoric.
Truth hurts, doesn’t it.

09-06-2006 11:01 PM

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

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: