Sanctity, my ass

Although this post could go toward my anti-marriage rants because nothing should be sacred that isn't a right for EVERYONE, it isn't. So, those of who have been waiting for me to write another liberally-slanted article supporting gays or abortion, you will have to wait just a little longer until Bush attacks homosexual marriage (AGAIN).

Oh, and don't even get me started on the religious right claiming that my somewhat well-rounded and highly educated ass is dysfunctional because I'm a product of divorce.

No, instead this post is about a fancy little Forbes article by Michael Noer I found via Slate.com, which can be found here. By the way, the article has been removed from the Forbes Web site from what I can gather from the articles I've read, so that's why my link is to another blogger instead of the site.

At first I was truly, truly offended by the Forbes article, which is titled "Don't Marry Career Women." But after reading the Slate article about it by Jack Shafer, I feel calmer, but only slightly.

Mostly, the Forbes article has the weakest lead and nut graf I've ever encountered, considering what the article should really be about. The beginning, as the article title suggests, says basically that women are more likely to be divorced if they're career women. It's written as if because I have a college degree and a full-time job and half a brain and ambition that I'm a plague upon men, that men would, in fact, be wise to avoid me, and actually a majority of my co-workers.

And although the rest of the article is QUITE suggestive that these career women are to blame, many of the statistics actually don't apply to a specific gender. In fact, one such factoid explains that a married person who works outside the home is more likely to have an extra-marital affair (where they come up with these genius observations, I'll never know -- if you rarely leave the house, who are you meeting other than Rosey Palme or your wife/husband?). Another one says that houses are less likely to be cleaned - well, thanks, asshole - it's really too bad I don't fucking dust every day because I have better things to do. What the hell kind of observation is that? And anyway, if not dusting is going to lead to a divorce, should I ever get married, I'm quite certain there's more to it than merely not dusting often enough.

I disagree with Shafer on the point that women are just using "backlash journalism." Basically (and I might not be making his exact point on this one), he's saying that women who don't like this Forbes article are offended by it without even thinking and don't have a logical argument to back it up - it's just bra-burning for the sake of an offensive-sounding title. In his defense, I started this blog because I was going bitch and moan about sexism without thinking anything other than the Forbes writer is a dickwad and if he were happily married and/or getting laid he might not have such a grudge against a pretty little journalist who happens to like and (if I do say so myself) be pretty damn good at my job. But, where I disagree is that in thinking about it, it is still suggestive of sexism if not outright sexist. And, there's plenty left out of the article that isn't explained or justified. Shafer points out one (Okay, he points out more than one, but this is his strongest and best argument that never came to me):

Before my female readers break their nails pounding out angry e-mails to me, they should consider the piece's fundamental weakness. Forbes' definition of a career woman is extraordinarily broad, including any woman who has a college education, works 35 hours a week, and makes more than $30,000. So, if you define non-career women as all the "undereducated" who work part-time and make less than $30K, it becomes painfully obvious why female careerists are more likely to divorce than non-careerists: They can better afford to get out of an unhappy marriage than their sisters.

That may be bad news for all the schmoes getting dumped, but it's great news for the gals. So, go ahead, young ladies. Get your degree. Even go to grad school. Gun for that corner office if you want to and get the guy. If you divorce, make sure to stick him with the shared subscription to Forbes.

The first two arguments that come to my mind are 1. Where's the statistic that says how much more likely a career woman is than a non career-woman to get divorced? The divorce rate in America is more than 50 percent, which is quite a number. Are career women 70 percent more likely to end up in divorce, making it 20 percent higher than average? Or is it only a few percentage points more - and perhaps the writer was taking liberties with a few stats that might support his case? 2. Are there any statistics that might show whether it was the male or the female that was looking for the divorce? And, I guess from that, the larger point is, what was the reason for these alleged many more divorces involving women with careers? Were the women bitchy at not wanting to clean house? Where the men intimidated by a woman who was ambitious?

In all honesty, I don't think divorce is nearly that cut-and-dry, but shame on an author for taking a few statistics and building a weak and (in Shafer's word) broad case against women with careers.

I welcome any comments, especially as I'm sure I forgot some additional snarky remarks. And if you're looking to take a dig at an alleged career woman (I don't meet one of the qualifications - salary - but I think that'll change someday), who is single and in many regards quite the pain in the ass, touche.