What was he thinking? I agree with the boycott, and glad you're spreading the word about it.

Feminist Moms

holy crap! I know Forbes is known for some seriously reactionary economic stuff (they put the "C" in capitalist for sure)...

I can't get over this gem:

the more successful she is the more likely she is to grow dissatisfied with you.

I wonder how many women he's talked with who were abandoned by their husbands once the guy got his medical career or ph.d.? The more successful, and upwardly mobile, he is, the more likely he might also pick up and move on...

Yet this neanderthalish essay plays to a very creepy, and utterly false, notion that women who stay home are always happy. How many women stay home (and stay married) not because they're happy or satisfied with who they married, but because they don't have any options to leave? How many women, who have stayed home for years, know the difficulties of getting back into the workforce, and know they will never be able to make enough money by themselves to support themselves (and possibly children)?

What this creep seems to be advocating is econoically crippling women by telling them if they make money (over 30 grand a year--not a great some) and have careers that they're not marriageable. Why is it always that, to get women to stay put, the best "solution" is to for them to be economically (or educationally) crippled?

Tish Grier
Editor, Corante Media Hub
Blogging at: The Constant Observer and
Love&Hope&Sex&Dreams

GREAT things to say about that article and her readers were very vocal on the subject too.

Again...more of the strange sort backlash agains 'modern' woman that seems to be going on.

Link Text

Great Post. Hard to believe this crap still exists. Check out the great discussions on their message boards.

http://forums.forbes.com/forbes/board?board.id=respond_marry_career_woma...

Honestly, is it really so difficult to just not be a lazy bum? Seriously.

And I honestly can't believe anyone still cares who makes more money or who stays home with the children if someone does.

GET WITH THE FUTURE, PEOPLE.

It was a real drag for plantation owners to give up slavery, but that didn't mean it didn't have to be done in the name of FREEDOM.

Liz Rizzo

Everyday Goddess

SexySmart Blog

Why would a magazine intentionally insult a part of their readership? They have to know that Career Women make up part of their readership, right? Intelligent men will realize this insults them as well, afterall it doesn't really paint men in such a good light either.

This article implies that the only way a man can keep his wife from leaving and acheive martial bliss is to make sure she's uneducated and locked in the house away from all men who could be his competition. That's the only way she can't prove a threat to his manliness. Not exactly the biggest ego boost.

And let's take a look at the whole, you're house is messier, thing. Like, what, the vacuum automatically stops working if pushed by a man instead of a woman? At any rate, the theory is, I guess, that the woman is spending all of her energy outside of the house working instead of inside it cleaning, so it's messier. This means that:
A) The man is too stupid to figure out how to clean the house himself
B) The man is too lazy to bother to clean the house himself
C) The man is too much of a slob to really notice that the house needs cleaning in the first place OR
D) Some unfortunate combination of the above.
That's not exaclty a flattering view of the male of the species.

So, I swore this had to be a joke. Then again, maybe not. Maybe it's aimed at beer-swilling fratboys and smug, narcissitic jerks who are too unsophisticated to understand the implications of what this article is really saying.

I don't read it but have convinced by brother to abandon it.

I personally think it was a publicity ploy; it appears to have backfired.

cooper

www.boycottforbes.com