This has to be one of the most patently offensive things I have ever read: Forbes.com: Don't Marry Career Women.* "Studies show that professional women are more likely to cheat, get divorced and have unhappy husbands. Guys: A word of advice. Marry pretty women or ugly ones. Short ones or tall ones. Blondes or brunettes. Just, whatever you do, don't marry a woman with a career. (AHEM, READ: BRAIN!) For our purposes, a 'career girl' has a university-level (or higher) education, works more than 35 hours a week outside the home and makes more than $30,000 a year."
WTF.
I can't belive major publishers actually print this horseshit. Isn't there more to life than having some useless trophy bitch and a few crotchdroppings?
*NOTE: Forbes has since removed the slideshow (which was even worse than the original article) after quite a backlash from The Internets. I've already butted heads with people over this and honestly, keep it coming, I don't give a flying shit, I will never change my position on this. I will stomp up and down about the issue of traditional gender roles more than just about any issue on the block. I am not a feminist either, by any stretch of the imagination, I just refuse to live up to any ideals of what I should do careerwise or in my homelife stictly based upon my anatomy or the presupposition that I should drop snivelling brats by a certain age out of said anatomy.
Still, I'll probably spawn before I ever bake.
3 comments:
unsurprising. this is the magazine that had a study on how best to buy influence in congress.
having a career doesn't mean you have a brain. many people with brains are crazy/homeless/self-employed/etc.
you seem to be forgetting that people who choose to get married mostly because they have or want to have, crotchdroppings.
the only offensive thing about this post is that these people exist, not the fact that they are successfully self-selecting :D
of course, they are defining a "career girl" in totally worthless terms, really what they are saying is "marry a poor, ill educated woman." which... is an interesting idea... all things being what they are.
and i agree, the person that wrote this is clearly daft.
rixim - how is being self-employed not having a career?
I personally wouldn't call my working in the studio eleventy-billion hours a day where I am actively pursuing (and earning) monetary compensation for my efforts an "art hobby", I think linguistically "art career" is much more appropriate.
There was also six years of accredited professional school with a resultant terminal MFA degree to back said activity.
Just a thought.
Post a Comment