If you don't know Maureen Dowd, don't worry. It just means you're not old. But to give you the quick 1-2 on her she is arguably the original "East coast, liberal, feminist woman who lives in New York and pines about socio-romantic topics, as well as politics" type gal (hence referred to as ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP). Three decades ago she was "hot" and not just physically, but publishing wise as well. Sure she'd dispense advice on politics and economics, but an edge she had was on relationships with men with a feminist twist. Men aren't needed. Who needs men. Women are the new up and coming leaders, blah blah blah. She was heralded, many newspapers (remember those things) wanted to publish her and because of her moxie, she sold.
30 years later Maureen Dowd has paved the way for a new generation of "East coast, liberal, feminist women who live in New York and pine about socio-romantic topics, as well as politics" type gals. Obviously younger than her, they still dispense courtship, dating and romantic advice to younger women through a feminist and liberal lens. And though they deliver their message through a new media, the message largely remains unchanged. If anything, it is a more purified and modern version of feminism and leftism.
But I had this nagging thought. And, as I'm prone to do, I researched it.
Maureen has been dispense advice for all these years. And her disciples, some not so young, have also been dispensing advice for years.
Since they seem to be experts on dating, romance, men, and courtship, just how successful have they been in their lives in these regards, and therefore, should young women even be listening to them in the first place.
Off the bat I will admit this is not 100% scientific. This is "what I had to work with." If you can believe me I was intellectually honest in my research and data mining because I too was curious what the reality was. In short I was not looking for any one answer, but I genuinely wanted to know if these "experts" who consult, advise, and inform the younger women of today as to how to go about their love lives (not to mention professional lives) know what the hell they're talking about.
The first step was to get a list of all the "ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's." After eliciting my readership for a list, as well as compiling known women that would fall into this category, I came up with the following ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's:
Virginia Heffernan
Sandra Tsing Loh
Ellen Fein
Elizabeth Gilbert
Maureen Dowd
Emily Bazelon
Lindy West
Amanda Marcotte
Jessica Valenti
Jill Filipovic
Carolyn Hax
Hanna Rosin
Pamela Gwyn Kripke
Liz Jones
Millie Kerr
Lori Gottlieb
Now keep in mind, though the tone of my post thus far sounds hostile, I tried my best to make this list as intellectually honest and scientific as possible. For example many people would say, "Why is Lori Gottlieb on there? She came out admitting she was wrong!"
Correct, but for all those years she DID dispense advice as a ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP. Her epiphany or realization is after the fact.
Or for example I did not put Kate Bolick or Kay Homywitz on the list, despite my readership saying I should, in that they did not write articles that were of the feminist variety ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's did.
Additionally a lot of my readers just sent me feminists in general. There was a feminist lawyer, a handful of professors, but none of them were "writers" or "journalists" who opined about dating and men.
In short the list is the most comprehensive list of your stereotypical, left wing, feminist widsom dispensing journalists who for some reason all need to live on the east coast (I will entertain more to add to my database to further improve my research). They met these criteria and there is no "passion" or "emotion" about it.
The next thing I did was research their profiles to the extent I could to find out the following traits or "variables" about them:
Are they Currently Married?
Have They Ever Been Divorced?
Was their Undergraduate Degree in a Real (STEM) Field?
Do They Have Children?
Their Looks on a Scale of 1-10 (as rated by me)
Do They Have an Advanced Worthless Degree
Are They Employed in "Real Private Sector Work?"
Age
The reason I picked these variables is because I believed these metrics would not only be of interest to younger women (as to measure their success in romantic and courtship life), but they sure as hell are to men. Ergo, while there may be some debate as to whether young women would find these variables the correct ones to measure success, there is no debate whatsoever these are the variables men definitely look at.
Are they Currently Married?
As it stands right now the majority of the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's are not married. Only 37.5% were married. I did take some liberty with the younger ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's where it was clear they weren't, so there is some room for criticism there, but the fact does not change that the majority of them are not married. It should also be of note not ONE of the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's is under 30. So it's not like these are recent college graduates just getting their careers off the ground. They're been around for a while and very few are married.
However, in intellectual honesty I do have to state that if you take out the 30 somethings and just focus on the 40+ crowd 55% are married.
Therefore if you are a young woman and your goal is to be married by your 30's there is a less than 38% chance of that happening. However, if you wait till you're 40's or older, there's only a 45% chance you won't reach that goal, chances akin to "betting on red" in roulette.
Ever Divorced?
Nobody likes divorce. I think I can safely say that without leftist nit-pickers saying some people do.
Half of theECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's have been divorced.
Normally this would not be concern for alarm because "half of all marriages end in divorce." The problem is that women with college degrees statistically have significantly lower divorce rates. And all of these women have at least a bachelors. In other words, they are doing worse than their peer group. Unless you consider divorce a "success" (which no doubt some of them do), their performance have failed in this regard.
Worthless Undergad
My hatred and loathing of worthless degrees is no secret. But my passion against these worthless scraps of paper does not change the fact that those who are less intelligent, less rigorous, and just plain lazy pursue easier degrees. Only 1 woman in the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP group has a worthwhile undergrad (Sandra Tsing Loh, surprisingly), the rest all have what can be considered worthless degrees (English and Journalism accounting for nearly all of them). Admittedly there is some selection bias in most of these people are "journalists/writers" but it does not change the fact that at the age of 18 they purposely and knowingly chose cake degrees that avoided math at all costs (it is also interesting to note how many of them "married" into a magazine or a sizable blog)
Do They Have Children?
Good news young ladies. 60% of them do have children! And remember, about 5 of the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's are still in their 30's. So if you want to have kids there's a good chance that will happen. But there is a drawback. Of the women past menopause or at the age where it's too risky to have children (my cut off was 44) one third will go childless throughout their lives.
Single Moms
Only 25% of these women are single moms. Admittedly some by choice, because many of them subscribe to the philosophy fathers aren't needed (one even saying single mothers are better than married parents for the children). But it is still good news you only stand a 1 in 4 chance of being a single mom. However, remember a fair amount of these women were "young" still in their 30's and never married, thereby not allowing them the chance to become single mothers. If you go to 40+ 44% of them are single mothers. In short, in order to get divorced and be a single mom you have to live long enough to get married, have kids, and then get divorced. Though, again, many in this control group would not be against the turkey baster method.
Looks
The average score of a ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP is a surprisingly average 5.39. Also of note was just how plain and average most of them were. Nearly half fell in the 4.5-5.5 range. The high score was an 8.5 and the low score was a 2.75. Scoring was based on what I found attractive. Scoring was also not adjusted for age. If the woman WAS hot in her youth, it didn't matter. If she was old she got a lower score. It was my visceral response to what she looks like today. I also had to search high and low for "real" pictures. Not glossied up, "glamor shot" pics. Which I found out that feminists would resort to such fake, patriarchal nonsense that was beneath them.
Advanced Worthless Degrees
A statistic merely to quench my curiosity, 53% of ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's have advanced degrees. Naturally all of these advanced degrees were in worthless fields, namely English, Journalism, and Law.
Real Employment
Real employment is defined as genuine economic production that people willingly pay for and is not the consequence of nepotism, cronyism, government financing, or non-profits. Namely, are you producing something of value or are you in a field that produces something of value. Again, sample bias skews this statistic as I do not consider blogging or modern day journalism a real profession (let alone for "Slate" or "Salon" or your husband's newspaper), but I did award full and partial points if they had written a book or something that people willingly purchased and seemed to have some genuine economic productive value. 23% of them can be considered "legitimately employed."
Age
The average age of the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's was 43.6 years. 30 was the youngest (which was a charitable estimate) and 61 was the oldest.
Other Non-Statistical Observations
Nearly all of these women are employed by/write for Salon, Slate, Huffington Post, and Jezebel. It suggests to me an oligopoly or cartel wherein the network is tight, the cadre is small, but because of the reach and connections within the blog/journalism/east coast media monopoly they seem larger and more influential than they really are.
Supporting this is the sheer number of what I would consider "faux awards" these women received. Everyone seemed to have multiple awards from multiple organizations, most of which I've never heard of. After reading enough profiles you didn't "get the impression," you outright knew these were nothing but a bunch of "pat yourself on the back participation trophies." The impression of this segment of American media I was left with was that it was nothing more than a house of cards. All "yea for us we're all winners" akin to the minimalist art community. In other words any kind of media presence they have is largely fabricated, but necessary to market their writing/product.
Non-profit employment was rife. Again, suggesting the free market where people willingly part with their dollars was not the driving force or purpose behind their employment, but rather charity or politics in the form of a non-profit benefactor.
The Question I Have for Young Women
Now, let's summarize all the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's into one imaginary "cumulative, average woman."
The average ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP is:
- a 44 year old woman
- who is unlikely to be married
- likely to be divorced
- likely to have children
- with a good chance she will be a single mother
- doesn't have a real degree or a real profession
- but went to school for 6 years on average for it anyway
- and is very average looking coming in at a 5.4
I don't care what they write. I don't care what they say. And I don't care how sweet it may sound to your young, naive, gullible and VERY INEXPERIENCED ears.
Do you really want to be a divorced, middle aged woman with a hobby that you desperately try to pawn off as a career?
Look, while it may be cool, even intellectually stimulating, even "empowering" to think of men as the enemy, to think of men as "oppressors," or to use words fabricated in academia like "patriarchy" or "male normative," all you are doing in the long run is merely alienating yourself from the other half of the population to have some false sense of pride in your youth. The other half that (despite what the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's would say) can and most likely WILL play a vital role to your future happiness.
What you have to do is THINK INDEPENDENTLY and not let the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's indoctrination ruin your life by transforming you into one of them. Realize there is nothing wrong with liking men, or wanting to have children, or wanting a husband, or (GASP) wanting to be a housewife or stay-at-home mom. Additionally, there's nothing wrong with being beautiful or feminine or the epitome of female. There's nothing wrong with dresses, there's nothing wrong with heels, there's nothing wrong with long hair and (GASP!) there's nothing wrong finding joy in pleasing your husband/boyfriend/man. This isn't to say you HAVE to be a stay at home mom and CAN'T pursue a degree in accounting, but in listening to the utter hogwash and tripe that is perpetrated by the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's of the world you ignore your natural and biological programming to become the best thing you ever can be - a woman!
The Male's Perspective
Finally, if the argument for enjoying being feminine, being beautiful, and being a woman isn't enough, you better do what your ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP counterparts didn't and that is one very important thing:
Think of the men.
If there is ONE criticism I have of ALL women's writing (ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's or not) it's not an emotional one, it's a mathematical one. If two people are going to date, court, get married, etc., why is 100% of the attention and strategy on the woman? Why is the man or what the man wants never given any consideration?
The problem with ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's approach to men and courtship is that it's myopic (look it up). They are only focused on themselves. But in ignoring what mathematically adds up to 50% of an equation, you are GUARANTEED to fail miserably at solving it. If you want a successful relationship with a man then you (GASP!) HAVE TO CONSIDER WHAT THE MAN WANTS!
So ask yourself, what man wants a:
44 year old woman
whose been divorced
has somebody else's kids
doesn't have a real job
has student debt from her worthless masters
is only a 5.4
and has a lippy feminist attitude to boot?
Are you kidding? Not one man wants that! Not one! And the only reason a man might settle for that is because he IS SETTLING and can't get any better.
A man who is accomplished, interesting, independent, successful, confident and in shape will NEVER marry, court, date, let alone give the time of day to such a woman. The type of man you want would NEVER even entertain a ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP.
You may find that offensive. You may find that rude. You may find it disagreeable, but all of that is trumped by the fact it is true.
It's up to you whether you want to:
accept the truth, act accordingly and consequently stand a better chance at a successful love life
or
continuing listening to the ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP's, in which case you're likely to become one.
This post sponsored by "Enjoy the Decline!" Are you down and depressed about the election and the future prospects of the United States? Don't be! Learn to ENJOY THE DECLINE! "Enjoy the Decline" is THE book for anybody who is letting the dismal future of the United States get to them and affect them psychologically. It's not puppies and flowers, but it is forthright and candid about what can be done to enjoy life despite the world's great country going down the toilet. The left has ruined the country, the least you can do is Enjoy the Decline!
34 comments:
Bravo to you Aaron!
I was skeptical when you said you were a "super awesome economic genius" but now I totally support that claim. If only 10% of economists were like you, we wouldn't be in our current mess.
The Ultimate Economist would be a mash-up between Aaron and Eric Crampton of the econoblog "Offsetting Behaviour" fame (WARNING! Economics blog from elsewhere than the United States! [New Zealand, actually, although Eric's a good Canuck boy from Manitoba.] Opinions not quite in line with what you'd expect! *Rigorous* dependence on quant data (where and when available).
You're welcome.
Ahhhhhh. I was going to suggest you turn on moderation,but ya beat me to it.Oh. Great analysis,but you didn't find basket weaver,or foriegn, lesbian, burka wearing women minor OR majors????
You were right earlier when you told me I'd love this!
A question we should all ask of those from who we seek guidance is "Do they have what I want? Have they accomplished what I want to?"
If you are a girl who wants to be married with kids, then I suggest that you find women who are happily (in your own opinion) married and have kids. Take advice from those you wish to emulate, and not from those who have failed, except to learn from their mistakes.
While I agree 100% with what you say Captain, you do realize that the feminist morons (too redundant?) are simply going to turn this back around on you? They'll say "This is a nearly 40 year old MAN who is unmarried, why should we be listening to him and want to be like him?!"
Or to point out the obvious, you do realize that you're arguing with children, who have no semblance of intellectual honesty, no capacity for factual information, and no logical abilities whatsoever? If a Jezebel writer says "The sky is green and the only reason you think otherwise is because of the patriarchy!" - there is a sizable group that would honestly believe them. You could take them outside, show them the sky so they could see that it isn't green. You could have them see a notarized paper signed by every male in the world - and every female except her and the Jezebel writer, stating that the sky is blue and not green. You could then show her 100% unanimous indisputable scientific evidence that has caused every scientist in the world to believe that the sky is blue, and STILL she will think it is green! While I love your posts, the only people getting anything out of them are people like myself who already agree with you - those that you try and help, even if they do stumble across it, will simply never learn until it is way too late.
Bob,
Your points are not only well taken, they're correct. But
1. This post wasn't for the 40 soemthing feminists. It was for the <29 girls to prevent them from becoming a 40 something feminist. The Jezebel writer is not my intended audience.
2. Them "turning my arguments on me" would not be relevant nor applicable. There are different rules for men and women. I have aged better. I can date younger. I have more of what most women want today than I did when I was young. This is the cruel joke nature/god plays on women.
It's too bad that the women who really NEED to hear this message and take it to heart won't see it. THOSE women probably don't read this blog. :(
Good post btw.
I have a (small) point of disagreement with your "nonprofit" comment. Many/most sport organizations are nonprofit yet the participants are willing to pay a coach to teach them the game. This is obviously an economically viable situation. There is also a significant difference between a "nonprofit" and a "charity".
The red headed harridan of the nytimes did a column about 10 years ago or more. She was lamenting the thanksgiving turkey her mother was "slaving over" whilst the men watched Notre Dame play football. Without boring you too much, she was mad at the social compact her mother had made with her father, in that he went to war to save the nation, and that she would be his indentured sex slave for the rest of her natural life. This woman is a pig, and now probably dreams of having the life her mother enjoyed.
Cappy,
I have been reading your anti feminist rants along with the lamentations regarding lack of STEM degree attainments.
Any thinking person would agree that feminism has done great damage to our society. it’s has all but destroyed the family and it has been a real catalyst in moving us to the left.
Of course, governments were quick to accommodate those foolish women by creating tons of government jobs for them and encouraging the private sector to hire more women as well. Sort of an affirmative action for women who don’t care much for men.
However, you seem to be taking this dilemma very personally. It comes across as though you are unhappy with what is available to you for what you call ‘dating’. I don’t quite get the dating thing since you are in your late thirties and have not much to offer a women who is looking for an alpha male. I don’t criticize your career choice, or lack of one. I fully understand how being a productive member of this society can often be a fools game. However, there is a cost to having a quality woman and perhaps even a child or two. You seem far from that scenario based on your descriptions of yourself.
I have had three male friends in my life who had similar gripes with the women we have in our society today. They couldn’t find “the right woman” no matter how hard or how many they tried out ….. like shopping for a new car. My observation was that these guys seemed to regard women as a different species rather than simply a different gender. I suspect they might have done well with a Filipino import. Those little sweetie pies are fairly conservative, often catholic, love family and understand that pleasing a man is a good thing for both parties.
I don’t know if you are even interested in matrimony. Perhaps you intend on continuing on in the dating game until you are so old, you will begin to look rather foolish chasing women around for a period of fun a frolic then on to the next.
Your rants are valid, but you will not change many with them. It is well known how hard it is to change anyones mind about anything. However, you have complete control over your own mind. Perhaps there are some issues to resolve in your own world. Perhaps your chosen life-style has run it’s course and your are becoming jaded and bored with it all.
It took along time for our society to get where it is today. The stupid have been out-breeding the smart for the past few generations and it’s all catching up with us.
The influences today can provide positive support for any idiotic view and any stupid life-style such as having kids and being a single mom. It should also be stated that where men are concerned, there are a lot of assholes in that crowd too. Lots of mamas boys who are looking for a hottie and a mom rolled up in one mindless package.
What really do you want Cappy? Sometimes I am not sure where you are headed. I am curious, because I do agree with most of what you spew.
And finally, I have a question. Are you an actual accredited economist? What is your degree if you have one. You seem to understand economy and mathematics …. Just curious.
Cheers,
Love you blog.
Just as a matter of interest does my degree in Technical Theatre, which requires some maths and physics as well as a strong technical background in frequencies of light count as a worthless degree? Just asking. I actually enjoy your writing and mostly agree with you.
>with a hobby that you desperately try to pawn off as a career?
Usually, managing to make a living off your hobby is reckoned as a success. Whether the hobby is a net value add or not doesn't get a mention.
Here, the issue is the lack of self respect needed to engage in such an essentially parasitic choice of primary activity, neither craft (such as the Technical Theatre qualification mentioned above) nor service (even something as frivolous as party planning).
The average ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP is:
a 44 year old woman
who is unlikely to be married
likely to be divorced
likely to have children
with a good chance she will be a single mother
doesn't have a real degree or a real profession
but went to school for 6 years on average for it anyway
and is very average looking coming in at a 5.4
Do you REALLY want to become that?
Isn't that the average 44 year old woman of ANY political persuasion? Except perhaps with less school...what's the point? If you are a woman don't live to be 44?
Off topic, but a great quote to go with your general STEM = a good move:
"So when kids complain that they'll never use math in real life? Remind them that it's only true if they're planning on a life that sucks."
Read more: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-astronauts-more-badass-than-any-action-movie-hero/#ixzz2K7xv90K0
It's not just them. It's the influence of all the other "women of a certain age" who think like they do.
Fair disclosure: I am over 40, married to my ONLY husband (and pregnant), and studying a STEM field. I got a very late start on the whole marriage-and-family thing, partly because all I ever heard was, "Oh, you're still young! You have time! Blah blah blah..." Well, yeah, if you're 60+, I guess mid-30s really does seem like the very flower of youth. But it's not a comparative; it's an absolute. Biology can be an unforgiving beeyotch.
Also from these women, marriage was never modeled as a desirable outcome in its own right; it was treated as something that just sort of "magically happened" in a long term relationship, if you were lucky enough. We got messages like "Don't get so serious so quickly!" and "Men don't want marriage and children; if you tell them you want these things, you'll scare them away." Gotta wonder how many 20-somethings are still being told this.
Even worse was the message that women who do go straight into young marriage and family without "credentials" of their own are somehow "settling". It's OK to be a housewife or SAHM once you've established yourself, but otherwise it's just wasted potential... so goes the thought process.
Let's just say that when my turn came, it was half learning, and half unlearning.
Captain,
You wrote, "Normally this would not be concern for alarm because 'half of all marriages end in divorce'". I have wondered about this statistic. Just because half of all marriages end in divorce does not necessarily mean that half of all people who get married get divorced. Some people get married multiple times and those people are much more likely to get divorced than those who do not. I knew a woman who got married seven times! Does this not skew this statistic? So the fact that half of these women have been divorced is likely above the average. Signed Happily Divorced in ChiTown
You forgot one category.
How many cats do each of these women live with?
One might even add, how many of these women smell like cat piss.
Then add in this factor, to the question for the under thirty women. Later in life, do you want to be ugly, divorced, and smelling like cat piss.
Another thing to consider for the aspiring ECLFWWLINYAPASRTAWAP wannabe is the associated demand. Can the market support a 17th? how about a thousand more? or ten thousand more?
Seems there's an almost limitless supply being pumped out of our universities, and the trend isn't showing any sign of slowing down. Sure we all dream of grandeur when young and naive, but at some point the economics of reality really should set in.
You missed this witch.
Heather Mallick, ten times as bad as Maureen Dowd.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/21/jonathan-kay-on-heather-mallicks-bizarre-obsession-with-feminist-self-pity-and-bad-sex/
To call her a hate filled cow would be an insult to all hoofed animals.
Stan
Good data mining there Captain.
People always say "Don't live your life by statistics".
It's funny that most of those who live the longest, watch what they eat and are careful with what they do and who they hang out with.
Must be a coincidence!
Care to share which of those women you consider to be an 8.5 out of 10 in the looks dept?
Most curious!
Robert W: "Care to share which of those women you consider to be an 8.5 out of 10 in the looks dept?"
Magic 8 ball says it was someone younger than the average. Shocka! Very scientific, deductive analysis of feminist decline. Non-feminist women are hot into their 80s.
I'm wondering about your inclusion of Liz Jones. She became famous for admitting that her social life is a train wreck--and that she herself is a train wreck--and has offered herself up as a cautionary tale.
I find men to be very useful in life. And knowing what they want is also very, very useful.
That said, I am not familiar with those list of authors, although I've probably read some of their work since I visit those sites you mentioned. From what I understand about feminism, it was supposed to be about women having the right to make their own choices about their lives and bodies. Including dumb and destructive ones. Of course there will be those who will use that idea for profit, for a career, for ego, or to overcompensate for some perceived flaw.
I'm also not completely clear as to what your stance is (other than hating feminist writers) since this is the only post I've read that wasn't about me. I do think two parent homes are better than one. But the feminist movement was to help those women who had to work and take care of their family alone, because the man was too incompetent or abusive. Most girls I know want to get married AND have a career, or just be married. My only issue is that some of these girls want it because they think it's going to solve certain issues they have, which it won't, and they will just drive their husband and everyone else around them crazy. (And probably end up right where those feminsts are at that age). I'm glad that you're encouraging women to think independently though.
The main reason why those women above aren't considering men's wants in their work is because there isn't a market for it. People/women want to hear whatever it is that they're writing, for whatever reason. I wonder if any of their writings on other subjects got them as much attention or praise or work? I bet if it did, they would be writing about that.
Now, your questions:
There's a 100% chance that I'm going to age, get wrinkles, and most likely put on a few pounds (can't be as active as I am now), especially if I have children. That is inevitable whether or not I listen to those ladies.
There is a possibility of me being single or divorced with children. But then there's that 50% divorce rate I have to watch out for, feminist or not. Even if I stay married, the odds that my husband will die before me are pretty high and I will still end up a single mother but now in my 60's or older. And now have to depend on the government, my kids, or hope that I married well ($$$). Feminist or not. Also, married women get old, gain weight, and get wrinkles too. Feminist or not.
Your argument tries to appeal to a woman's vanity and fear of dying alone, but you failed in directly linking feminism/feminists as a direct cause of the things you listed. Many women can end up that way feminist or not. Maybe you should focus more on the benefits of getting and staying married. I'm sure there are a lot of stats to support that argument as well.
I'm curious to know what these women's life satisfaction, happiness, or depression (are they on anti-depressants?) rates are. And if they have a history of psychological issues or abuse. I think that would be a better angle for your argument. You're welcome.
Also, in the comments you said as a man in your 40's you have better dating options than a single woman in her 40's. But then another commenter mentioned that you complain about your lack of options.
Awkward.
Moksie,
If you are single after your children are grown and gone, I'm pretty sure you don't fall into the "single mother" category. That one is reserved for "young kids still at home".
That "50%" stat came from a single study where they counted the number of marriages and the number of divorces in a single year. It may even have been in a single area, rather than nationwide. Not the most scientific of studies but it's been gospel ever since.
@heresolong
thanks for clarifying some points.
I have found that you can find stats to support whichever point you want to make anyway so I am not surpised by the details of the 50% divorce rate stat.
@ Moksie Maloney,
Yes, one can find stats to support anything...but only if one does not care about methodology.
That's the trick: make sure you understand 'who' did the study. Then check out the details. Few people do this obviously.
- Apollyon
A feminist giving advice on romance makes about as much sense as Al Gore talking about climate science, or Barrack Sotero talking about economics.
October 30, 2005, Maureen Dowd was in the news doing what she does. Other columnists commented, among them one of my favorites, Kathleen Parker. I dropped her a note.
Re-reading it, I believe I am both right and wrong. Men will overlook and ignore distracting traits in the women they pursue. We are ever optimistic. Still, when confronted with the characteristics of the catch, I believe more than a few good men's opinions will mirror mine regarding ...
Forgiving Feminists -
Dear Kathleen Parker,
There is a quality of good men that I think you have overlooked: the romantic idea of justice.
We men, who have lived with Dowd's ilk and seen them from the beginning, will not forgive them.
Those paranoid brats have raised predator sons and slut daughters. Juvenile-in-Chief Bill Clinton is their progeny's hero, parsing the language to rebel against stodgy rules. No economic strata is safer than any other. Into this new world, I must send my most precious, so armored that I don't know how they will find love.
The sometimes wild, sometimes cold determination that we have focused on becoming available or single fathers is coming to bear upon our adversaries, now that the children are in college, or at least out of the house.
To have compassion for feminists is to betray our mothers, our daughters, and our children's children. Other Dowd's will wail that they didn't know. Have mercy on the victims of feminism's fraud!
No.
I've been saying for some time that feminism is as much a war of older women against the interests of younger women (with men caught in the crossfire) as it is "the battle of the sexes", nuclear post-apocalypse style. Think intrasexual competition.
The number one biological rule is that human females get more out their males (that's us) than any other animal on the planet. All women are in some sense competing for their share of the vast pool of male resources, how best to carve up and bleed men dry. The older women lack something the younger ones have. (Sex appeal.) So feminism is how the older ones do a Tanya Harding on the Nancy Kerrigans, in an attempt to level the playing field to their advantage.
There is nothing noble about their advice at all. The more they can kneecap the younger, more attractive gals and mess with their heads about men, love, sex, relationships, the "more better" it is for them, and the more younger women lose. And in this zero-sum feminist world that's a win for older women.
Fifteen years ago, in a piece in Salon, Barbara Ehrenreich correctly observed "The whole media world is dominated by upper-middle-class women", by whom she meant older, more affluent women -- who have a stake in keeping other, younger and better looking, women from making off with their "steak".
In clan-based and tribal societies, younger women depended on the guidance of their older female relatives, with whom they had common interests. But in an anonymous world of unrelateds, it's an entirely different ballgame.
Pre-wall women (~35 or less) should be very wary of anything they're told by any post-wall women. Especially the part about blaming men for all their difficulties, which have in fact been engineered by older women for their own benefit.
If a married woman with children wishes to avoid divorce, the main thing she needs to do is to not file for it. That is because in marriages involving minor children in the U.S., the wife files >70% of the time. Being sexually faithful and reliably sexually available to her husband, being good with the kids, responsible with money, kind, pleasant, not gaining a ton of weight, not screwing up things with his family/ friends/ career, letting him have his hobbies, etc., etc., all help a lot as well. What decent women wouldn't want to be that way anyway? But, so many aren't now; the feminist mental disease of "women get every choice and reward from marriage, men deservedly get zip" has infected too many women's minds, not being curable til after menopause and 10 cats.
Post a Comment