'Don't Marry a Woman With a Career'

[jdobbin]

So do people here think is correct?

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2357818

[Renegade]

I guess if you want a subservient woman who will be financially trapped in a relationship because they lack the economic power to leave, then by all means follow his advice. Afterall, those damm career women can be so independent and uppity.

[Riverwind]

I guess if you want a subservient woman who will be financially trapped in a relationship because they lack the economic power to leave.

Hardly, divorce laws ensure that any man who marries a woman without a career is taking on a huge financial risk. I think the advice in the article is dumb for that reason - men need to marry a woman with a career so they won't be on the hook supporting her in the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed for the rest of her life if she leaves.

[Renegade]

I guess if you want a subservient woman who will be financially trapped in a relationship because they lack the economic power to leave.

Hardly, divorce laws ensure that any man who marries a woman without a career is taking on a huge financial risk. I think the advice in the article is dumb for that reason - men need to marry a woman with a career so they won't be on the hook supporting her in the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed for the rest of her life if she leaves.

You are quite correct that divorce laws financially disadvantage the main breadwinner, however there are a couple of considerations:

1. No matter how you split the earnings pie after divorce, the cost of maintaining two households will be more than with just one. Both households will likely suffer a decline in standard of living. In many one-earner household, both parties are likely to be economically trapped in the marriage.

2. Many (maybe most) spouses are unaware of the financial split which will take place upon divorce. That ignorance, which prevelant in both the earning and non-earning spouse, is likely to cause more anxiety to the one without an independant source of income.

[jdobbin]

I guess if you want a subservient woman who will be financially trapped in a relationship because they lack the economic power to leave, then by all means follow his advice. Afterall, those damm career women can be so independent and uppity.

Forbes magazine pulled the article but then put it back with a counterpoint article called "Don't marry a lazy man."

[RB]

So do people here think is correct?

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2357818

Because the article is written and also published by Forbes, women...career women should take notice. I am not offended that men are going to be ill advised by their counterparts. They will simply rule out most of their chances for happiness that comes financially and morally equip, plus stable support system.

I don't dispute that there are correlations of the career women, children and divorces. But reasons are more likely to point to women being able to manage financially their own monies that they contribute in a relation, using their smarts and planning for parenthood rather that having children haphazardly, and so on, they can address which stocks to play because it is also their money.

Men in their pretence to be stronger of the sexes have not been able to adjust to the female independence and now counteracts their weakness in a childish display of boycott. This is what this article is about.

Career women are likely to take action if a relation is not working in strive to be deservingly happier.

My take is that women are striving for better because they deserve the better.

Career women leaving the men have nothing to do with finances, children (a career is a minimum requirement for them to do well on their own, when the men turn out to be a disappointment), but the leaving actually falls in the irreconcilable differences. Usually it is intangibles such as love, support, wanting to be with each other, etc. .

Even I admit that no amounts of money can buy women the happiness, romance and fairytale dreams they seek with men.

[Melanie_]

I think the article wasn't meant to be taken seriously, although there are probably many of both genders who either agree or took offense. When a woman has a career, though, staying in a marriage can be based on free will, rather than financial necessity. Not to say divorce doesn't impact both partners' finances, but if a woman has been totally dependent and is unable to support herself if she leave the marriage there is great incentive for her to stay.

[jdobbin]

I think the article wasn't meant to be taken seriously, although there are probably many of both genders who either agree or took offense. When a woman has a career, though, staying in a marriage can be based on free will, rather than financial necessity. Not to say divorce doesn't impact both partners' finances, but if a woman has been totally dependent and is unable to support herself if she leave the marriage there is great incentive for her to stay.

It was a very serious article. That is why there was so much controversy.

[Melanie_]

From the link....

Today Forbes editor in chief Steve Forbes issued a statement saying the piece "clearly hit a very sensitive nerve.

"The piece was intended to be part academic and part humorous," he said. "Instead, it profoundly offended hardworking career women everywhere. We deeply regret having done so."

Of course, often people fall back on the old "I was just kidding!" when they say something they actually believe and find that it offends people, but I just can't see anyone writing an article like this and intending for it to be taken seriously.

[Rue]

I have always believed you marry a woman who has these qualities;

1-good teeth

2-nice hair

3-good skin complexion

4-long long legs

5- a good tight butt

6- a temper

7-brains

8-attitude

10-plays beach volley-ball

11-smells good

12-can dance

13-has a good sense of humour

14-has some sort of accent

15-is clean

16-is honest.

So I should also write an article. Whether a woman is rich or poor aint the point its whether she is honest or not. Everything else is just talk.

If I was younger and still had my teeth and original organs, I would probably have got it on with Kiera Knightly, Halle Berry, Angelina Jolie, Jodie Foster (yah I know she's gay), Naomi Campbell, Jessica Alba and Cameron Diaz all at the same time.

Too bad for them I am so old. I mean this Brad Pitt is such a woose. Me I would have been with Angelina and Jennifer at the same time and kept Robin Givens around too.

All this talk. Bah.

[RB]

Would it read the same way if being a woman - I am younger and still had my teeth and original organs I would probably have got it on with Brad Pitt, Rupert Hill, Jude Law, Orlando Bloom, Johnny Depp, Matt Damon, David Beckham all at the same time - hope they are all heterosexual males.

I was thinking about that article and it seems to me that the article should also point out that men are also willing for a divorce, will cheat on their wives more, if they have children - will have a stressful life and are very unhappy. Plus, I am told that the males are not contented with their lives until they have matured to say 56 years of age, then they accept some defeat or what is in store for them (even when the females come in all shapes and sizes) tsk!

My question is if it is normal for men to have a career, and it is normal for the above to occur, and no one question men and their behaviors, why is there a controversy for women to have a career and also cheat, divorce and have less children.

That article really is on men deportment but written in reverse for and about women.

[Rue]

Would it read the same way if being a woman - I am younger and still had my teeth and original organs I would probably have got it on with Brad Pitt, Rupert Hill, Jude Law, Orlando Bloom, Johnny Depp, Matt Damon, David Beckham all at the same time - hope they are all heterosexual males.

I was thinking about that article and it seems to me that the article should also point out that men are also willing for a divorce, will cheat on their wives more, if they have children - will have a stressful life and are very unhappy. Plus, I am told that the males are not contented with their lives until they have matured to say 56 years of age, then they accept some defeat or what is in store for them (even when the females come in all shapes and sizes) tsk!

My question is if it is normal for men to have a career, and it is normal for the above to occur, and no one question men and their behaviors, why is there a controversy for women to have a career and also cheat, divorce and have less children.

That article really is on men deportment but written in reverse for and about women.

There all gay but I obviously agree with you RB. The point is the the article is idiotic in its sweeping generalizations and assumptions. Quite frankly anyone stupid enough to pay money to read it and believe it can be my guest and marry Paris Hilton's sister who unlike her sister is not a career woman.

As for me I will take this old decrepid carcass and crawl back in my hole. I missed out on marrying some giggly Barbie doll. I blew it. I married someone who works.