Skimming the Top of Interesting Waters
Take a look at this count-pointercount in Forbes magazine, where a nice guy named Michael Noer gathers a bit of sociological data, organizes it, and uses it to advance the conclusion that mean who marry "career women" are unhappier than those who marry..."non-career women," I guess. I hope he has his flame-retardant suit on, because those career women can type (or have someone type for them), and they aren't happy. In fact, they wouldn't let Mr. Noer even post his article without a poorly thought out response right next to it that doesn't even address his main point. Elisabeth Corcoran starts out by attacking men who are stupid, and blaming them for the foibles of career women. Her message seems to be "Become better men, and then career women won't be unhappy with their lot in life or blame you for not making enough money or cheat on you with some high-toned lawyer with slicked-back hair and a $1,000 suit." Can you see how this doesn't really help?
So she's dumb, but he is too...what he's trying to do is pretty awful, getting men who are dating successful women to think twice about marrying them (and getting men who are married to them to feel resentful, for that matter). The unfortunate message of his piece is that career women have something inside them that makes them worse wives. He then backs up his message with "scientific" data. That's the problem with social science -- there's no accounting for the individual woman, or the personality change.
I'd like to make the obvious point that each individual marriage is unique, and doesn't necessarily conform to the sociological data. In fact, if you are deciding whom to marry on the basis of sociological data, you deserve to get divorced. Whatever happened to falling in love and then committing yourself to that person? Is that no longer a good idea? I know we all get caught up in having the best possible life at all times, but is there no room for real Marriage anymore?
The sad fact is that she makes a lot more sense than he does, especially when she talks about how marriages work because of sharing and sacrifice and all sorts of other values we were supposedly learning in preschool. Marriage is a big step, but it's a step that has to be made in the dark, and with a willing heart. It's scary, but it's supposed to be. Find a woman you love, and then...
Wait. Is the problem that most men today are incapable of true love? Hmm.
So she's dumb, but he is too...what he's trying to do is pretty awful, getting men who are dating successful women to think twice about marrying them (and getting men who are married to them to feel resentful, for that matter). The unfortunate message of his piece is that career women have something inside them that makes them worse wives. He then backs up his message with "scientific" data. That's the problem with social science -- there's no accounting for the individual woman, or the personality change.
I'd like to make the obvious point that each individual marriage is unique, and doesn't necessarily conform to the sociological data. In fact, if you are deciding whom to marry on the basis of sociological data, you deserve to get divorced. Whatever happened to falling in love and then committing yourself to that person? Is that no longer a good idea? I know we all get caught up in having the best possible life at all times, but is there no room for real Marriage anymore?
The sad fact is that she makes a lot more sense than he does, especially when she talks about how marriages work because of sharing and sacrifice and all sorts of other values we were supposedly learning in preschool. Marriage is a big step, but it's a step that has to be made in the dark, and with a willing heart. It's scary, but it's supposed to be. Find a woman you love, and then...
Wait. Is the problem that most men today are incapable of true love? Hmm.
posted by Mike Pape @ 6:33 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home