21–30 of 83 posts
Why won't those women sit on important boards and earn real money? They surely have enough education and social capital, some of them at least. Maybe it's the question of who they will marry in this case, if they will?
There are many successful women who have stake and sit on notable companies' boards. These wives are not always those kinds of women.
The sold themselves for their bed: let them lie in it. They've certainly managed to get a better price than many others who see marriage this way.
The question here is: why did they "sell" themself to someone of comparable stature instead of "buying" or "merging"? They aren't some Cinderellas, they are highly educated and capable.
It's a modern, (and sexist) myth that only desperate, destitute women are capable of pursuing materialistic relationships.
A wildly unpopular view on why women behave this way was put forward by Esther Vilar's book "The Manipulated Man". It was written, when this kind of gender inequality was the norm, rather than something people in priviledged positions could afford. Arguably today there is noone forcing the women described in the article to behave this way, their actions and choices are their responsibility alone.
You're not even trying to make a point, you're just flat denying these women are being oppressed, without any argument to back that up. Is the oppression of women in America such a sensitive topic that you feel the need to reflexively deny it's happening whenever the subject crops up?
if you want to retain any credibility for your views, you need to learn when and where to apply your reality-distortion efforts.
A wildly unpopular view on why women behave this way was put forward by Esther Vilar's book "The Manipulated Man". It was written, when this kind of gender inequality was the norm, rather than something people in priviledged positions could afford. Arguably today there is noone forcing the women described in the article to behave this way, their actions and choices are their responsibility alone.
You're not even trying to make a point, you're just flat denying these women are being oppressed, without any argument to back that up. Is the oppression of women in America such a sensitive topic that you feel the need to reflexively deny it's happening whenever the subject crops up?
To deny the women in question agency and not see their situation as a direct consequence of their actions is in many ways more sexist, than to actually see their situation as the result of a concious choice that is available to them because they are women, highly valued by certain types of men.
If you don't want to be in this position then don't marry one of these guys. Find a man that values your career and will take care of the kids. Pretty simple.
And it's not even like these women couldn't support themselves (and their kids) if they had to. They are smart, they have degrees. They have enormous and powerful social networks.
No, they are exactly where they want to be - they get all the material benefits of having a successful career, minus the stress, plus the family time. It's a strange life, but to call it oppressive is offensive to women who are truly oppressed. Oppression is not having options, and these women have every option possible in this world.
A wildly unpopular view on why women behave this way was put forward by Esther Vilar's book "The Manipulated Man". It was written, when this kind of gender inequality was the norm, rather than something people in priviledged positions could afford. Arguably today there is noone forcing the women described in the article to behave this way, their actions and choices are their responsibility alone.
You're not even trying to make a point, you're just flat denying these women are being oppressed, without any argument to back that up. Is the oppression of women in America such a sensitive topic that you feel the need to reflexively deny it's happening whenever the subject crops up?
The OP doesn't involve any kind of abuse. Women who can afford to choose the most powerful and fulfilling partners do so.
Yes, in public the men and women may be segregated, but behind closed doors, wives and husbands talk and plan. Although not always obvious, it is very likely that their husband's social and economic stature is bolstered by activities of their wives, which according to this article have no value.
His social and economic standing because of her actions is probably much higher than if they were to both have a separate job. Not to mention that they get to raise children who get to spend plenty of time with at least one parent, the value of which is almost never taken into consideration these days.
If you don't want to be in this position then don't marry one of these guys. Find a man that values your career and will take care of the kids. Pretty simple.
You infer that men made the decision that defines the women's lifestyle. Whereas the women say, “It’s easier and more fun,”