in which people are dumb

[rivendellrose]

Still more proof that no, there really are still men out there who think like it's the 1950s. Dear Forbes: Fuck off.

Now, before I'm accused of being a hypocrite, let me lay this out very clearly: I, personally, would not particularly like being the breadwinner in a relationship. The careers and interests that I'm passionate about are not the kinds of pursuits that are likely to lead in that direction, and I would neither be likely to get, nor likely to enjoy should I happen to end up with, a lot of the jobs that are considered high-earning. Additionallly, I'm a beta-wolf personality by nature - I don't like to be the one in charge and making all the decisions. It tends to make me irritable, bitchy, and condescending when I'm stuck in that position, whereas if I'm with someone whose opinions and decisions I trust, I find it a relief to relinquish a little bit of control. It keeps me from stressing.

Now, maybe that's because I've absorbed the societal norm that women aren't supposed to want to be in charge. I don't know - I'm still working through that whole mess in my head and trying to figure out where all of that comes from and where it goes to. But I know for a damned good fact that a lot of the women I know are not like that. They'd be perfectly happy being the breadwinner in the family, thank you very much, and there is no way in hell some dumb-ass magazine should be telling men that no woman can be happy that way, or certainly that they shouldn't date "career" women.

I wish I could come up with something more coherent to say about this, but I'm not feeling that clever this morning.

Comments

[cirakaite.livejournal.com]

The other reason a career can hurt a marriage will be obvious to anyone who has seen their mate run off with a co-worker: When your spouse works outside the home, chances increase they'll meet someone they like more than you.

. . . So, ideally, you want a woman who's barefoot and pregnant, and only meets other mothers in the park a couple of times a week? No male friends, of course, no unmarried women friends, because you can't be completely positive that she's entirely straight . . .



Ugh. Men.


That's one of those articles that took some fairly common sense data - more two career families get divorces - and put totally the wrong spin on it. Why is it all the woman's fault? Why not ask the men not to marry a career woman unless they plan on being supportive? Obviously, a 2-career marriage isn't going to work along the same lines as a 1-career, 1-caretaker marriage, whether it's the man or the woman working, because things like house cleaning do take time, and allowances either need to be made, or other arrangements designed to take care of it . . .

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

Oh, god, I missed that bit! I got so frustrated that I just skimmed most of the article... that's just awful. Can you imagine the kind of reaction a woman would get if she suggested the reverse of this?

Also . . .

[cirakaite.livejournal.com]

It tends to make me irritable, bitchy, and condescending when I'm stuck in that position, whereas if I'm with someone whose opinions and decisions I trust, I find it a relief to relinquish a little bit of control. It keeps me from stressing.


Ohhh, yeah. Much with the sympathising - I do exactly the same thing. Which doesn't mean I'm incapable of taking the lead, I'm just happier with someone else to defer to. It makes more sense to the way I think.

Re: Also . . .

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

You seriously will not believe how happy it makes me to hear that you have the same problem. It makes me feel so neurotic sometimes!

[shadawyn.livejournal.com]

That's... um... interesting.

I think that has more to do with male pride than a problem with female career.

M and I share the bills, but if we want to go in terms of career/advancement potential, hours worked, commute, and income, I am by far the breadwinner of the household. Works well enough for us. It would be BETTER if I had the career I wanted, but that's a work in progress.

That's really silly. I almost wonder if it's meant to be a dumb joke/parody/sarcasm hing.

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

Exactly. Gods know, it might hurt these guys' delicate little egos if a woman makes more money than them.

As for the parody thing... I wish.

[maho-kiwi.livejournal.com]

*make incoherant snarly noises*
I what I what I can't and it I what and WHAT

I mean, I agree on the beta-wolf personality. I hate making decisions but. But.

WHAT

I..."even ones with a 'feminist' outlook" it says. >->;
"feminist", with quote marks. I.

I am not awake enough to properly deal with stupid this morning.

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

*Joins you in beta-wolf snarling*

I know. Why not just say, "hey guys, it's okay if your woman thinks she's for equality, so long as really you're the one in charge, going out of the house, and making money."

ARGH.

[barn-swallow.livejournal.com]

That... wha... yeah.

Did you watch the slideshow??

"7. You'll be unhappy if she makes more than you.
You aren't going to like it if she makes more than you do: 'Married men's well-being is significantly lower when married women's proportional contributions to the total family income are increased.' "

Then GROW A PAIR AND GROW A BRAIN AND CONSIDER THE IDEA THAT MAYBE WOMEN ARE PEOPLE TOO ASSHOLES.

>=(

Although I am definitely sending this to Carlos and telling him we are doomed because I HAVE A JOB. ;)

[barn-swallow.livejournal.com]

Ooh, another good one:

"A 2001 study found that having a wife who works less than 40 hours a week has no impact on your health, but having a wife who works more than 40 hours a week has 'substantial, statistically significant, negative effects on changes in her husband's health over that time span.' The author of another study summarizes that 'wives working longer hours not do not have adequate time to monitor their husband's health and healthy behavior, to manage their husband's emotional well-being or buffer his workplace stress.' "

Maybe that's because wife =/= mother?? Maybe? I could be wrong about that one...

[shadawyn.livejournal.com]

Lol I sent this to my bf (we live together and by the definition of this article, I'm the breadwinner career woman).

Forbes says we're doomed! *snrk*

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

Ugh. No, I didn't. I can only imagine.

This whole thing just boils down to "men's egos are too fragile to put up with a woman who has her own life and the ability to exist without a big strong man to make the money for her."

'Woe and alas, I am not a big strong man if my wife has a career of her own!' No, asshole, you're not a big strong man if that bothers you. If you were confident in your own status as a human being, you wouldn't feel the need to be bigger and better than your wife.

[reve-lucide.livejournal.com]

Okay, so I made it about halfway through that article before I gave up, so I can't speak to all of it, but damn, how can Forbes publish something so ... misogynistic? Because it is misogynistic to say that women can't be happy if they're making more money than their husbands. PLEASE.

I'm lucky to have a job that pays me well enough that my husband doesn't have to work while he's in nursing school. This has no bearing on our relationship whatsoever. I will never be "upset" that I earn enough money to pay the bills on my own.

And as far as the whole "house being dirtier" thing goes? Um, I do very little cooking/cleaning/etc around our house, because my husband does most of it during the day while I'm at work. Our house would be much dirtier if I were in charge of all the cleaning, because I'm far messier/lazier than my husband.

Urgh. Just urgh. *shakes head*

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

Don't feel bad, I didn't make it through the whole thing, either. And the comments from people who did read the whole thing are making me kind of relieved that I didn't. It's horrifying!

The only way I would be upset about being the breadwinner is if I felt my partner was just skating by and relying on me to give them a life of luxury (I have no respect to spare for people who just don't 'want' to work), and/or if s/he didn't make an effort to carry an equal weight in the household in general. If my theoretical S.O. is home all day (not working) and I'm out all day working, guess who should be doing at least a fair portion of the housework? Not me. Same goes if the situation is reversed. Otherwise it's just not fair. It's not a gender thing, it's a workload thing. And if both partners are working full-time, the house stuff should be divided equally according to their skills and/or likes and dislikes. It's not that damned difficult a concept!

[miss-arel.livejournal.com]

And as far as the whole "house being dirtier" thing goes? Um, I do very little cooking/cleaning/etc around our house, because my husband does most of it during the day while I'm at work. Our house would be much dirtier if I were in charge of all the cleaning, because I'm far messier/lazier than my husband.

See, your problem is that you're using logic. This kinda whacked out reasoning only works if you're going by the assumption that women are somehow obligated to do household chores but men aren't. Shame on you for breaking stereotypes AND using your brain! *waggles finger at you* That's two strikes right there, missy...

[miss-arel.livejournal.com]

See, I think this is why I couldn't enjoy 'Anchorman' (aside from it being a really stupid movie): because as over-the-top as it was, I couldn't help remembering that there are some men out there who really do think that kind of bullshit. This article is proof of that.

As the child of a 2-career household, both of whose parents are still happily married and gainfully employed after 20-odd years together, I say "Fuck you, Forbes".

Also, major word to what you said about yourself. Some would say that in a perfect world, all women would be agressive, alpha-wolf, dominant personalities, but I disagree. I just think that, in a perfect world, women like I just described, more submissive, passive women, and every kind of woman inbetween, would all be equally be respected, and none of them would be held up on a pedestal as a "real woman" against which all women must be measured.

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

I read the summary of that movie and it scared the living daylights out of me. That is not yet old enough news to be funny, in my mind.

And as the child of a household where the woman worked at home in a traditionally female field and cleaned, cooked, did all that kind of stuff, and then got a divorce, I'll add a "your way doesn't work so hot, either, bastard!" to that "Fuck you." :P

Women aren't inherently any better than men at running the world - we just haven't had a chance to prove that we'd do just as badly. I don't ascribe to the whole "ooo, women are so much more peace-loving and gentle" shit any more than I accept that we should be subservient by nature. All I ask is self-awareness.

[maho-kiwi.livejournal.com]

Nuuuuu don't you see if you are independent than you are a ball-buster and probably "frigid" or an "ice queen" and "out for blood" and none of those things sound like good qualities in a mate >:

Agreed on the last paragraph -- however, I think we've got a looooong way to go on that, if only because even MEN who are less agressive and more submissive and/or passive are still looked down on and considered "lesser" by the sort of people who read the linked article. So considering different types of women as equal is probably...light years beyond their comprehensiton V-V

[sigelphoenix.livejournal.com]

Oh oh oh! There's more - in the comments section:

Regardless of what sex who is, men, especially white men are regularly trashed in our society today. This has not happened by accident. I am a white man, and I have two sons (ages 27 & 29). I cringe when my sons could have had this opportunity or that opportunity, a scholarship here or there, or countless other benefits if they were a minority, or Women. Clearly this is true. I'm not complaining, because we were taught to succeed by busting butt and working harder than the other person. And we do.

WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE STRAIGHT WHITE MEN!?

[maho-kiwi.livejournal.com]

OH MY GOD

I...
I suddenly realize that, in my wanting to be able to walk down the street at night at be just as eligible for a job as anyone else who might apply or to not automatically have people assume I know nothing about cars/sports/machinery/computers I have been NEGLECTING THE NEEDS OF THE STRAIGHT WHITE MEN

Oh god, they're probably having to support themselves on their middle-class salaries while enduring abusive comments from their straight white male friends because their fantasy football team came in second! I...

Is there an aid center I can send money too? Because this is just INHUMANE.

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

*Growls* Bullshit. I get this from even my educated male friends sometimes, and it's shit. Men are failing in the educational system not because women are succeeding but because they don't have the attention span or the willpower to do as well as they did back when there wasn't any competition. I'm sorry, but nothing in the world makes me more angry than this argument. Because clearly, women and minorities need the white men pulling this whole "if you weren't getting preferential treatment we'd still have all the positions you have (because we're better than you)" shit.

[barn-swallow.livejournal.com]

... I think they made it go away. If you follow the link you put it doesn't work, and if you click the link they showhere it still doesn't work.

Shadyyyyyyyyyy!

Side note: I love all your LJ friends.

[rivendellrose.livejournal.com]

Considering the number of links I've seen to this thing today, I'm not at all surprised. I can't wait to see if they post some kind of retraction statement....

Me too. And I'm blessed enough to know most of these folks you've been chatting with in everyday life, too! XD

[cyranocyrano.livejournal.com]

Egad, woman! Sixty-nine comments! You're officially part of the blogosphere now!

[reve-lucide.livejournal.com]

Heh. The article was taken down some time last night, and replaced by an explanation, a polished summary of the original article, and a companion piece written by a woman.

Behold, the power of the internet.

Besides, you think they'd have some sort of editing team to actually, you know, read the articles for content before they're published. Guess not.

There's a pretty informative Fark thread with some interesting links to discussions if you poke around yesterday's headlines.

[wordsaremyfaith.livejournal.com]

That guy really pisses me off, but the counterpoint was great - she made wonderful points and I thoroughly agreed. Did you read that, or only the first half?