Career Women Are Not Looking For Love


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Career Women Are Not Looking For Love

Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
kb
Newbie
kb

This can be said for more than career women. I am 0 for 2 in marriage to career women and am so damaged that I will never try again.  Women have an agenda, which has precious little to do with ‘Love’.  They will use sex, special attention and, any other means to be ‘married’.  Yes, that is their agenda.  And married into wealth is just that much better. That may well be family will or social will but it is not their will.  These women don’t have a clue what they want. These women are the cowards of their sex, which is the vast majority.  They are not looking for Love, they are looking for acceptance, be it social, family or, community.  OK, OK, I am only talking about 95% of the profession working women who are not hookers.  The precious 5% who are the stuff dreams are made of I have never met.  Perhaps they just don’t exist.

08-29-2006 06:35 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
radiator
Regular Contributor
radiator

Sorry, but you can’t generalize to all career women from your poor record with 2.  Sounds like you made bad choices.  Especially since you have such a high regard for hookers.  I’d be interested to hear from your exes about the divorce.

08-29-2006 07:05 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

Sorry, but you can’t generalize to all career women from your record with 2.

The counter arguments do the same, so yes he can.

His argument was supportd by Noer’s Bibliography.

Yours is supported by…more opinion.

His is supported by man after man recounting similar stories.

Yours is supported by a handful of woman shaming the men.

08-29-2006 07:26 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
radiator
Regular Contributor
radiator

First, the women here provide a lot more detail about what happened in their situations.

Second, Noer’s stats didn’t reveal the whole story.  Correlation/cause, remember? Have you read my recent post about divorce stats?  Check it out.  I’m not trying to “shame” men.  I’m merely pointing out that the blame should not be laid at the foot of career women when our society is a lot more complex than that.

kb just has bad taste in women, apparently.

08-29-2006 07:37 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

Second, Noer’s stats didn’t reveal the whole story.  Correlation/cause, remember? Have you read my recent post about divorce stats?  Check it out.

Your stats are a total wash, supporting no position.  Poorly selected, poorly done.  Lacking in focus, and sometimes not relevant to this topic.

I’m not trying to “shame” men.  I’m merely pointing out that the blame should not be laid at the foot of career women when our society is a lot more complex than that.

Noer’s stats just support his assertion that men shouldn’t marry a career woman.
They do not lay the blame at the foot of career women for societal ills.

He posits that men shouldn’t marry career women.  He never claimed that they couldn’t make contributions to society, or that they weren’t successful, or that they shouldn’t get a career.
He claimed that women who do, demonstrate their priorities and that men who want a successful, children filled marriage would be wise to not marry a career woman.

Why do you women continue to attempt to convince us that Noer is wrong?

By continuing to argue, you support the idea that women want men to marry them, and that you are attempting to change our minds.  What do you have against men chosing whom they wish to marry?

08-29-2006 07:55 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

kb wrote:
This can be said for more than career women. I am 0 for 2 in marriage to career women and am so damaged that I will never try again.  Women have an agenda, which has precious little to do with ‘Love’.  They will use sex, special attention and, any other means to be ‘married’.  Yes, that is their agenda.  And married into wealth is just that much better. That may well be family will or social will but it is not their will.  These women don’t have a clue what they want. These women are the cowards of their sex, which is the vast majority.  They are not looking for Love, they are looking for acceptance, be it social, family or, community.  OK, OK, I am only talking about 95% of the profession working women who are not hookers.  The precious 5% who are the stuff dreams are made of I have never met.  Perhaps they just don’t exist.

I’m always fascinated when men have bad experiences with their poor choices in women, and who then use their experiences as justification for saying ALL women are the same.  (For the record, I find it equally ridiculous when women do the same about men.  “My ex cheated on me!  All men are dogs!”  Sigh…)

Get over it, fix yourself, and try to find QUALITY women.  Not all women are the same, just like not all men are the same (career – women or not).

I’m sad for you, though, that you’ve only been attracted to twits.

There are plenty of women who work and who are as interested in love as working men are…they just (like men) have other interests, which means love is not the ONLY thing they want.  Like men, they are able to love, and work, and might have to put in the effort (like men should) to find ways to make room for both.

Message Edited by ftesyektsi on 08-29-2006 08:58 AM

08-29-2006 08:56 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
radiator
Regular Contributor
radiator

Your stats are a total wash, supporting no position.  Poorly selected, poorly done.  Lacking in focus, and sometimes not relevant to this topic.

Not so.  My stats point out the superficiality of Noer’s analysis.  They are relevant to the topic because Noer wants to make it look like there is a fairly simple correlation between career women and rocky marriages, implying that the problem lies with the women being in careers.  And my posts are all about how it’s not as simple as that.  Moreover, Noer’s article is a lot about DIVORCE, not about “career women”.  Hence my recent posting.  So, you’re just flat wrong to attack me.

He posits that men shouldn’t marry career women.  He never claimed that they couldn’t make contributions to society, or that they weren’t successful, or that they shouldn’t get a career.
He claimed that women who do, demonstrate their priorities and that men who want a successful, children filled marriage would be wise to not marry a career woman.

Why do you women continue to attempt to convince us that Noer is wrong?

Because a “successful, children filled marriage” as Noer has presented it is all about what the man wants, and nothing about the women’s sense of self or fulfillment or value or financial independence, all of which are what the women’s movement was about (if you know anything about social history, and if you don’t, go read some).

By continuing to argue, you support the idea that women want men to marry them, and that you are attempting to change our minds.  What do you have against men chosing whom they wish to marry?

Of course I don’t have a problem with men choosing whom to marry.  And YES, I do support the idea that women want to marry men (I object to your phrasing “women want men to marry them” because it makes women sound manipulative and passive).  Why do you think I have a problem with that?

Most of my posts are in fact directed at the vituperative comments of many other posters who are just hailing faecal matter onto women in general–many posters have made degrading comments about how women should wear burkahs (are they Muslim terrorist sympathizers, I wonder?  Maybe I should call Homeland Security on them.) and get back into the kitchen.  These posters are not   Now, if these blogs were a reasoned discussion, and if people would just reply to one thread and have a real dialogue, we might get somewhere.  I would do that–and I do go back to other posts and reply to comments, as you may have noticed–except that it’s a losing battle to do it that way.  So, I’m offering more general posts to rebut these other arguments.

As for Noer’s article, a few quick comments because I have better things to do with my time:

Overall, his article is an irresponsible piece of journalism because it doesn’t delve deeply enough into the issues.  It’s clearly slanted to stir up the kind of trouble we see on this blog.

I am very keen to know if Noer is married and if so, to what kind of working or nonworking woman.  I would like to know if he has ever been married or divorced, and why.  Just curious.

1) A recent study in Social Forces, a research journal, found that women–even those with a “feminist” outlook–are happier when their husband is the primary breadwinner.

Comments like this are too general–they don’t take into account WHY they are happier.  It could very well be that women are tired of hitting their heads against the glass ceiling , the wage gap, and sexual discrimination at work.  See my previous post “How About Some Data”.  In which case the real problem is the American workplace, not that women are in it.

2) And, of course, many working women are indeed happily and fruitfully married–it’s just that they are less likely to be so than nonworking women.

See #1.  Of course, “less likely to be so” is very vague.  And doesn’t guarantee that nonworking women are happy in vast numbers.  Would have to look at the data in more detail.

3) You will be unhappy if they make more money than you do ( Journal of Marriage and Family, 2001).

That part is the man’s problem.  And perhaps this contributes to stress in the marriage, which could lead to divorce.  So perhaps it is the male ego causing divorce in these cases.

4)  You will be more likely to fall ill ( American Journal of Sociology).

An interesting one.  Perhaps because she will be too busy to hound you to go to the doctor as traditionally women have done.  Including me with my boyfriend.

5) Even your house will be dirtier ( Institute for Social Research).
Nobel laureate Gary S. Becker argued that when the labor specialization in a marriage decreases–if, for example, both spouses have careers–the overall value of the marriage is lower for both partners because less of the total needed work is getting done, making life harder for both partners and divorce more likely. And, indeed, empirical studies have concluded just that.

Well, time to clean it–get moving.  Or if you have a dual income, hire a cleaner if you can afford it.  This just implies that women are responsible for all the housecleaning even when they have a full-time job.  Of course I object to that.  Becker may be right, housecleaning when you have a full-time job does cause conflict!  The answer seems to be to act like caring, rational adults and divvie up the work accordingly.  If you really love the person, you can find a way to make it work.  Maybe you even love them more than an immaculate house–who knows.  Housemates who are not married and not even in romantic relationships (regardless of gender) often have huge falling-outs over cleaning.  I’m living now in an area where people from all over the world have to live in shared accomodation–and believe me, one of the biggest issues is standards of cleanliness which just as often divide along cultural lines as gender.  Often this isn’t about marriage per se–it’s about willingness to negotiate, ability to communicate, and put in the time and effort required.

6) A few other studies, which have focused on employment (as opposed to working hours), have concluded 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.”

This has been raised already elsewhere by Marta2003, and you have already seen this.  It sounds like people who shouldn’t be together in the first place are more likely to get divorced.  Duh.

7) When your spouse works outside the home, chances increase that he or she will meet someone more likable than you. “The work environment provides a host of potential partners,” researcher Adrian J. Blow reported in The Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, “and individuals frequently find themselves spending a great deal of time with these individuals.”

There’s more: According to a wide-ranging review of the published literature, highly educated people are more likely to have had extramarital sex (those with graduate degrees are 1.75 times more likely to have cheated than those with high school diplomas). Additionally, individuals who earn more than $30,000 a year are more likely to cheat.
This has also been argued elsewhere on this post:  Note the gender-neutral phrasing in the first paragraph.  Surely that includes men…..  Yes, it does!  Wow!  I’m not going to repeat ad nauseum the mantra that “career men” are more likely to cheat–this has been posted.

Now, according to the US Census, (see my previous post “How About Some Data”), men average $55K+ per year, and women a mere $33K.  That would mean WOMEN are less likely to cheat, if you correlate income to cheating!  And that also means that MEN are more likely to cheat!  But for some reason Noer just glosses over this.  Which is why I consider his article irresponsible journalism.

8) And if the cheating leads to divorce, you’re really in trouble. Divorce has been positively correlated with higher rates of alcoholism, clinical depression and suicide. Other studies have associated divorce with increased rates of cancer, stroke, and sexually transmitted disease. Plus, divorce is financially devastating. According to one recent study on “Marriage and Divorce’s Impact on Wealth,” published in The Journal of Sociology, divorced people see their overall net worth drop an average of 77%.

What Noer doesn’t say is that if the MEN’S cheating leads to divorce they are also in trouble.

Men have higher rates of alcoholism and suicide than women.  Depression is up for debate, as it’s not clear if women are just more willing to report depression than men (I have posted about this already here elsewhere, in my first post).  What he also doesn’t say is that marriage is BETTER for men in terms of health (sorry, too busy to go look it up, do it yourself–I’ve done enough research today).

As for divorced “people”, again, the gender neutral noun indicates to me that Noer is counting on people glossing over this and leaping to the conclusion that BOTH genders suffer equally.  But…. I’VE JUST SUBMITTED DATA THAT MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WOMEN SUFFER MORE FINANCIALLY.  So my data is VERY RELEVANT.

8) higher earnings for adult men
In other words, a good marriage is associated with a higher income, a longer, healthier life and better-adjusted kids.
Definitely better-adjusted kids (though not always, if the father is an alcoholic or commits suicide, as has happened to two people I know).  In those cases they are pretty unhappy.

The higher income only applies to men.  Why shouldn’t marriage also give women the benefit of a higher income?  Another longer discussion.  But basically, men do better in the workplace if they have a surrogate mother at home taking care of their needs.

The longer healthier life I am pretty sure, though I’d have to check the sources again, correlates to men only.  Women already live longer than men.  Perhaps in part because we aren’t suicidal alcoholics as often and we go to the doctor without being nagged and get treated for depression so we don’t become suicidal alcoholics.

9) A word of caution, though: As with any social scientific study, it’s important not to confuse correlation with causation. In other words, just because married folks are healthier than single people, it doesn’t mean that marriage is causing the health gains. It could just be that healthier people are more likely to be married.

Aww, a cute little caveat at the end of a long attack on the career woman.  Ain’t that sweet.  Now, why didn’t he provide caveats for all the other statements he made in the article?

Happiness, though–now, isn’t that what marriage is supposed to be about?  Yes.  I can go there.  BOTH women and men are happier when married.  That is probably because they have a greater sense of emotional and financial security.  Because when you are LOVED you are happier.  And when you LOVE you are happier.  See my other posts.  Just a guess.

08-29-2006 09:02 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

radiator wrote:
Your stats are a total wash, supporting no position.  Poorly selected, poorly done.  Lacking in focus, and sometimes not relevant to this topic.

Not so.  My stats point out the superficiality of Noer’s analysis.  They are relevant to the topic because Noer wants to make it look like there is a fairly simple correlation between career women and rocky marriages, implying that the problem lies with the women being in careers.  And my posts are all about how it’s not as simple as that.  Moreover, Noer’s article is a lot about DIVORCE, not about “career women”.  Hence my recent posting.  So, you’re just flat wrong to attack me.

He posits that men shouldn’t marry career women.  He never claimed that they couldn’t make contributions to society, or that they weren’t successful, or that they shouldn’t get a career.
He claimed that women who do, demonstrate their priorities and that men who want a successful, children filled marriage would be wise to not marry a career woman.

Why do you women continue to attempt to convince us that Noer is wrong?

Because a “successful, children filled marriage” as Noer has presented it is all about what the man wants, and nothing about the women’s sense of self or fulfillment or value or financial independence, all of which are what the women’s movement was about (if you know anything about social history, and if you don’t, go read some)….

Wow.  Did you read that fake interview?  Almost all the same points!  You might like it.

08-29-2006 09:08 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
moneyneversleep
Regular Contributor
moneyneversleep

Likewise, women’s poor choice of men, but most men are blamed for your stupidity as well.  Funny isn’t it that most women don’t believe in personal accountability, responsibility or liability.

08-29-2006 09:35 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
radiator
Regular Contributor
radiator

Where did you get this idea that most women don’t believe in personal accountability, responsibility, or liability?  You definitely aren’t talking about me.  Source?

08-29-2006 09:46 AM

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

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Career Women Are Not Looking For Love

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
moneyneversleep
Regular Contributor
moneyneversleep

It is quite simple, give up claims to the assets and alimony ergo you admit you are responsible for your actions and will take care of yourself, since you are my equal, shouldn’t be a problem.  These are the double standards and reasons why I make too much money to get married.

08-29-2006 10:08 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

moneyneversleep wrote:
It is quite simple, give up claims to the assets and alimony ergo you admit you are responsible for your actions and will take care of yourself, since you are my equal, shouldn’t be a problem.  These are the double standards and reasons why I make too much money to get married.

Who are you talking to, though?  All women, whom you assume want to take all your precious money, or some abstract evil woman you’ve made up in your head, or what?  (Btw, your response is hardly an an answer to the question asked of you.)

Many women DO agree to part with nothing but what they went into the relationship with…again, I have to ask, where are you finding all these crap women?   And why are you so attracted to them?

“I make too much money to get married.”  I doubt it.  But you’re obviously very much in love with your finances…perhaps you can sip yummy wine with them over a steak one night.

08-29-2006 10:23 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
moneyneversleep
Regular Contributor
moneyneversleep

There you go again, presuming a man needs to get married to enjoy a woman’s company.   That is a false premise.   I enjoy being unmarried and will continue to do so.  Next.

08-29-2006 11:18 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
wilburnts
Visitor
wilburnts

Not all women are after your money.  Get a prenup, I’d gladly sign one!

08-29-2006 11:59 AM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
moneyneversleep
Regular Contributor
moneyneversleep

What do you look like?   Lets face it appearance is important.

08-29-2006 12:01 PM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
wilburnts
Visitor
wilburnts

Oh, I absolutely agree.  I’ve never had any complaints.

08-29-2006 12:04 PM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
moneyneversleep
Regular Contributor
moneyneversleep

That is a loaded statement and depends entirely upon the company you keep.  Are you are LA “10” or a Dayton, Ohio “10”?  There is a distinct difference as I prefer the LA or Newport Beach, CA “10’s” from an appearance perspective only.  These are the young women who gravitate to areas such as Montecito/Santa Barbara, South Beach Miami, Manhattan, Scottsdale, Newport Beach, Santa Monica/Marina del Rey who are very hot and men who have lots of money (such as I do) select them first.  I truly love evolution and how it has worked.

08-29-2006 12:16 PM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
wilburnts
Visitor
wilburnts

You know what they say, the best looking women are in Texas.  So, if these are the types of women (hot) that you go for, then yes, they’re after your money.  You date a good Christian woman, smart, sophisticated, and also a career woman, who may not be a blonde barbie, such as myself, you might have better luck. I would say and other would say I’m pretty good looking.

08-29-2006 12:27 PM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
moneyneversleep
Regular Contributor
moneyneversleep

Not a religious fellow myself as I have never seen a church that didn’t wish to stick it’s hand in your pocket for money, while the priest molests little boys or the pastor/parson is looking for his next female victim to cheat with.  I put not account or value in “a good christian woman”.  I value actions.  I went to the funeral of a very old and great man in Texas within the previous yeat.  While graveside the women were discussing their men (they were “good christian women” who were generally dismissive and discussing how much their husbands do for them and how much they control the house, etc.).  I ventured up to them and told them “ladies, I advise that you **bleep** your husbands more often and be kinder to them.  Else you will find he will seek a more receptive individual, perhaps at his office, who will.”  There was silence.  I am certain they saw me as a demon, and I don’t care.  Marriage is a 2-way street and 1 person typically contributes more and loves more than the other.  What I value in a woman includes (but is not limited to) the following:  sensuality and enjoys sex with no hangups, kindness, good attitude, physically attractive, reasonably intelligent, some worldly experience, has a good relationship with their parents (this will tell you volumes), is not opressive or insecure, lives their own life, does not interfere with my work, is not narcissistic to the point of annoyance (all women exhibit some narcissism), is not a borderline personality, is not manic-depressive, is not an alcoholic or a drug addict, doesn’t mind traveling to Europe 4-6 times a year, the caribbean 4-5 times a year, Canada 3-4 times a year, isn’t a religious nutjob or a propaganda parrot of whatever is currently in political vogue (actually, it is mandatory that they feel our current President and his ilk are immoral imbeciles and incompetent, but that his father is a good man), etc.

There you have some of my criteria.  Most of which is arrived at within 2-3 dates.  I don’t care if a woman is a career woman, as I will not marry.  If I were to marry, it is not likely to be a career woman.  If I were to marry the woman would waive all spousal support and financial incentive in favor of a 1 time lump sum settlement.

08-29-2006 12:43 PM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

moneyneversleep wrote:
There you go again, presuming a man needs to get married to enjoy a woman’s company.   That is a false premise.   I enjoy being unmarried and will continue to do so.  Next.

I presume nothing.

You just sound far more attached to material things than you could ever be to another person.

Which I think is kind of sad.

Has nothing to do with marriage – I could give two bleeps who gets married and who doesn’t.  But you’re very, very money-oriented.  Different priorities for different folks, I guess.  If money’s what matters to you, that’s what matters.  Kinda shallow, though.

08-29-2006 01:04 PM

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

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Career Women Are Not Looking For Love

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
moneyneversleep
Regular Contributor
moneyneversleep

The word is practical, which you are not.

08-29-2006 01:19 PM

Re: Career Women Are Not Looking For Love
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

moneyneversleep wrote:
The word is practical, which you are not.

Mmm…brilliant.  Why didn’t you just say, “Am not!  You are!”  Same same.

And you don’t know me, nor are you privy to my personal history.

But!  If practicality means a preference for cars and little green pieces of paper and a big house over the companionship of someone I am absolutely thrilled to have the opportunity to love as much as I do, I’ll gladly be called impractical.  You can have it.

08-29-2006 02:09 PM

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

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: