more of the world I am happy to have opted out from

[rm]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/14/opinion/14dowd.html

Comments

[rosepurr.livejournal.com]

I'm more ambitious than my husband. He loves that about me. We both tend to think that we're intellectual equals- but he has his strengths, and I have mine.

I know that my relationship is an exception and that makes me very, very sad.

[mme-furiosa.livejournal.com]

I've been thinking about these themes a lot lately. I thought I was a feminist as a teenager. I had no idea what femenism meant back then. As I inch towards thirty, I am increasingly aware of the disparities between men and women.

But what shocks me the most is not men's subjugation of women, but women's hostility to other women.

Thoughts?

[rm.livejournal.com]

As I said in the comments to my LJ Idol entry this week, women are scaaaaaaary.

But women are scary because they believe -- and this is probably both nature and nurture -- that they are competing for a scarce resource: men.

Historically, this is a pretty accurate thing when you think about war. Very roughly, figure that American's have had a shortage of men present and available do to war about every other generation for at least 100 years. That means every woman who could afford to do something other than whatever was necessary to get a man was raised by a woman who didn't have those luxuries.

Similarly, if you resd Regency novels. One had to have a good season and land a good catch because there were so few catches available.

Today, men continue to be unavailable because life patterns have changed. Or, in neighborhoods like mine (which has the highest rate of male incarceration in the city) because they are in prison or otherwise absent.

Women who feel they need or want men, who have been raised to believe they are not a success without one, are still competing for scarce resources.

And it's frightening. The problem is that it also makes perfect sense.

[feyandstrange.livejournal.com]

And if you factor in wanting a "good" man - i.e. one who didn't fool around too much and was a good provider and didn't beat you too often - it makes the pool even smaller, thus making women even more competitive for those top slots. And factoring in the historical restrictions on unmarried women making any living or owning property, and realizing that it was pretty much "get married or live with Mom forever if she lets you"... things get ugly and desperate and tragic.

Sadly, I don't seem to be able to prove the opposite, that losing about 15 IQ points makes you more attractive. Then again, there's the wheelchair, I think we'd need someone with a more pure IQ-only loss that didn't affect their physical stats for proof...

[editrx.livejournal.com]

What stood out for me in the article was a throwaway line about how women surveyed thought the salary gap in business "didn't matter much."

Huh? Unless, of course, it was a man asking that question to women in front of other men in their place of business. Which is sad. ("Oh, I don't mind being so discriminated against that I earn less money for the same job! No, really!" ::tossing hair::)

[reudaly.livejournal.com]

My husband is also the rare bird -- he doesn't care who makes more money (as long as there's enough to pay bills and do some fun things). He's happy with his job that makes decent money. And he's kind of excited that his wife has the potential to make obscene money with her writing.

We both look forward to the day I can quit the day job and make equal or more money at the writing thing solely again.

Again -- rare bird.

But then, I also married late and was never in the mindset of "needing" a man. So that competition never really entered my thinking.

[coridan.livejournal.com]

First, this is a major media article, which means that it has been massaged (ie, the scientific study probably taken out of context) by an editor.

That said, this makes things easier for me - I'm down with smart women, to paraphrase Sir Mix-A-Lot. Many standards of so-called 'beauty' tie into spending of money and packaged beauty. Passion turns me on much more, as well as smarts!

CB

[clothing5.livejournal.com]

You were a flight attendant?

[saltbox.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, I saw that study when it first went out on Slate. Pretty depressing. I somehow lucked out of that, and am constantly grateful.

[crazycatlady.livejournal.com]

This is off topic and I hope you don't mind my asking, but when you were diagnosed with celiac disease, what kind of tests did they do? The only reason I ask is I think I have a food allergy and I'm trying to glean information from wherever I can before going to a doctor.

[upstart-crow.livejournal.com]

Heterosexual behavior like that described in the article is very confusing to me.

(Said tongue in cheek... well, sort of).

[magnetgirl.livejournal.com]

What the hell was up with that "Queen Bee wants men as slaves" in reference to Hillary Clinton line? Um, Ms. Dowd, did you take your meds this morning? I don't care much for Hillary, but that was some serious sexism!

[rm.livejournal.com]

celiac is a not a food allergy, but an auto-imune disease that is not detected by standard allergy testing, so I'm not sure how useful this is.

I am "presumed celiac" because I refuse an intestinal biopsy that is required for diagnosis in America as my blood tests for it and elimination diet were exceedingly conclusive. The intestinal biopsy process (biospy while ill, another biopsy after 6 months gluten-free, then a third biopsy after eating gluten again for six months) is, in my opinion, barbaric. I will not poison myself to the point of being unable to work for the official diagnosis.