Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Friday Genius Ten “Once More Unto The Breach, Dear Friends, Once More” Edition Previous entry: Sexism, the weirdness

What this rush to marriage gets you

I'm usually wary of trend pieces, but this one in Marie Claire by Kimberly Goad has some meat to it,  if only because it has some research indicating that 30% of now-divorced women married knowing from the beginning it was a bad idea.  I want to bring attention to it, because I want to address the real dangers that strem from the slew of books and articles and TV shows that are dedicated to making women fear that they're never going to fall in love and get married if they don't hide their intelligence, downplay their ambitions, abandon feminism, and lower their standards. 

This pressure has really reached a saturation point where you can't turn around without someone telling women they expect to much and they need to tone it down (usually without an ounce of evidence).  You get it from conservative scolds like Kay Hymowitz feigning concern that men don't make passes at women who wear glasses in order to scold women for getting too educated.  Dating advice aimed at women is often built around the "don't ask for too much" theme.  The entire whine of the Nice Guy® is built around the assumption that women's bodies are collectivist property to be distributed to men according to who needs orgasms and housework, and certainly not on the basis of what the women themselves want.  Entire books have been written encouraging women to marry a guy even if the idea of having sex with him makes you shudder, so long as he's a good provider.  You know the drill.

I think that it's hard not to look at all this pressure and read this article and see a connection.  This kind of pressure is downplayed by Goad, but at least one of the women she interviews cites misogynist propaganda as part of the reason she got married to a man she didn't really love.

Then there's the usual suspect: the biological clock. Clark's was ticking and she was ready to start a family. "The number 30 reads like an expiration date for unmarried women," says Gauvain. Not only are your baby-making years racing by, but you're leaving behind your 20s — a decade of experimentation, one-night stands, and making mistakes, professionally and personally. In the next decade, you're seen as an adult and can't do those things."

And the unspoken bum's rush to the altar makes things worse. "Although women won't say it aloud, there's often a huge sigh of relief once they get their ring," says Gauvain. "Getting engaged can be a triumph, and if he's the wrong guy, the high from the attention of the engagement can minimize that fact."

But when people create loveless partnerships out of a sense of obligation, no one benefits. I'm skeptical of the claim that the pressure on women to marry quickly and not worry too much about love, maturity, and compatability has nothing to do with "family values".  There's just no family that's being valued when you're escalating the possibility of an unhappy marriage and/or divorce.  Valuing families means wanting those families to be quality families where there is actual stability and intimacy. 

I think the pressure for women to marry quickly is about fear and of course, sexism. And more than a little resentment of people who are assumed to be footloose and fancy-free.  Take rape apologist and misogynist galore R.S. McCain's screeching retort to Monica Potts for her humorous assessment of Hymowitz claiming, without a fact to back her up, that things were better when people married young under duress.  McCain really, really wants you to get married, young women with professional jobs and active social lives!

In the American Prospect, Monica Potts gets all sarcastic about Kay Hymowitz’s new book, Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men Into Boys., describing Hymowitz’s thesis:

Hymowitz argues that a generation of parents who spent their time empowering girls has left men adrift and unable to understand their proper place in society. . . . Feminism, she says, has created a perpetual child-man unable to grow up, leaving scores of women partner-less. Apparently, Hymowitz believes, positive stereotypically male traits — courage, fortitude, stoicism — can only be enforced through traditional family structures. Left to their own devices, men fall into their natural irresponsible state, unable to commit because society has sent the message that they are unnecessary.
For this, she blames women!

Whether or not Miss Potts has accurately described Hymowitz’s argument, I’ll leave to others to decide. (I haven’t read the book, so I’m unprepared to defend it.) But I will note that Miss Potts provocatively headlines her article, “Why Aren’t You Married Yet?” — and never answers her own question.

This attitude is far from being atypical among young professional women who, like Miss Potts, are in their late 20s and make a great show of being indifferent to their marital prospects.

They have plenty of opportunities, such women would have you believe. Why, she can’t walk two blocks down the street without encountering some lovestruck man who, as soon as he sees her approach, falls to his knees and begs for her hand in marriage.

So . . . when’s the wedding, sweetheart?

My friends in Washington will laugh at that. Whenever I’m at a cocktail reception and encounter a young couple (who may or may not be dating) I inevitably ask, “When’s the wedding?”

This is asked in a half-joking manner, but only half-joking. Some social conservatives merely talk about traditional family values, but I feel compelled to actually try to do something to reverse America’s slow slide into moral decadence.

“When’s the wedding?” I ask the young couples. This typically provokes laughter — 20-something professionals in D.C. do not, as a rule, think much about their near-term marital prospects — but I persist as if in deadly earnest: “Seriously, there’s no waiting period in Virginia, you know. You two could go to the courthouse in Arlington tomorrow morning and be on your honeymoon before lunch. Time’s a-wasting!”

So what does this tell us, besides the fact that McCain sounds like a horrible bore and if you see him at a party, you should either avoid him or gear up your enthusiasm for shutting down his rudeness with your own.  (If he corners you and starts badgering you to get married ASAP, please feel free to throw your drink in his face and say, "Well, I never!" No one will think less of you for it.)  Well, I can't know for sure why it's so damn important to McCain to bully other people into marriage.  But I do know that I'm always suspicious of the hard sell.

In fact, Lindsay and I were talking about this last night.  (By the way, she's blogging at Dissent now, so check it out!)  The hard sell always makes me think that someone doesn't have faith in the product.  Like, if you walk into a store and there's immediately 15 people dangled over you, shoving stuff in your hands, then I automatically think the product is probably shit, because they're using personal pressure instead of highlighting the actual benefits of the product to get you to buy.  And reading McCain braying about how he delivers the hard sell on marriage, all I can think is he hates marriage and privately thinks it sucks and no one would get married just because they want to.  His ready assumption that women want to be bullied into marriage because they're all secretly craving the validation isn't so much a real belief, but a weapon he's using in the hard sell.  Reading his post, I'm so convinced that McCain thinks marriage is a miserable trap and that he's all about misery loving company that I'm beginning to wonder if he knows anyone in a happy marriage at all. You wouldn't know it to read him. I'm definitely convinced that he's bitter about all the fun he presumes that other people are having---his rant about "fornication" makes that especailly clear---and he wants to bring as much of it to an end as soon as possible. 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 03:57 PM • (76) Comments

Whenever I’m at a cocktail reception and encounter a young couple (who may or may not be dating) I inevitably ask, “When’s the wedding?”

This is asked in a half-joking manner, but only half-joking. Some social conservatives merely talk about traditional family values, but I feel compelled to actually try to do something to reverse America’s slow slide into moral decadence.

“When’s the wedding?” I ask the young couples. This typically provokes laughter — 20-something professionals in D.C. do not, as a rule, think much about their near-term marital prospects — but I persist as if in deadly earnest: “Seriously, there’s no waiting period in Virginia, you know.

This was surely, surely, not written in earnest.

...was it?

Comment #1: bomberE  on  04/21  at  05:18 PM

Ew. That bit about the young women telling him they have plenty of opportunities to get married is just skeevy. And he asks “when’s the wedding?” to every couple he sees, because, y’know, a man and a woman couldn’t possibly be standing together talking at a cocktail party unless they’re fornicating, or at least want to be fornicating. Ew. Talk about creepy-old-man obsessions.

I remember a couple of lawyer friends who for a while had a stormy relationship. In part because she didn’t think he loved her as much as she did him, or as much as he ought, or something like that. Because he was, in short, one of those guys who couldn’t commit. So during one argument he said, “OK then, let’s get married” to prove just how committed he was. Shortly thereafter they both came to their senses and broke up fairly amicably. But yeah, there are so many other reasons people get married than that they’ve found someone they want to hang out with for a long, long time. And it’s just a good thing there’s divorce and contraception…

Comment #2: paul  on  04/21  at  05:21 PM

Oh for the love of FSM. People who go around asking “When’s the wedding?” (of couples who haven’t announced their engagement) just irritate EVERYBODY. It’s just plain rude to ask that kind of personal question. I bet he also asks newly married couples when the baby is due. “Come on, you could go in the coat room and get started right now! Time’s a-wastin’!”

There are two good ways to handle it. Provide TMI (“Oh, the sex is better when you’re living in sin!”) or play dumb (“Excuse me?” [he repeats question] “I’m sorry, why would you ask such a personal question?”).

I also really like the attempt at implying that Monica Potts’s argument is invalid because she isn’t married and is therefore a failure, with bonus condescending “sweetheart.”

Comment #3: snowmentality  on  04/21  at  05:34 PM

I think it’s interesting that this particular brand of pressure - misinformation about biology/fertility, social stigma, the big assist from popular culture and so called “rom-coms”, the avalanche of “dating advice” books - is on the up. To me it signals that the old-fashioned route of straightforward bribery (through the various economic perks that getting married comes with in virtually every country - I recently found out that in France, you get a tax rebate!) is seen to not be working any more. And of course other, more old fashioned forms of social inducement, be it making marrieds feel privileged by denying the right to other groups, or making women financially dependent on having a husband, are kind of devalued currency these days.

So they put the guilt and fear thumbscrews on women, because women are the crucial link in this scenario. I don’t think anyone apart from true social conservatives and religious nuts really care about women getting married; but men who are married get their laundry done, their meals cooked, their kids raised and to work on time. The have time to play golf with the clients, they have better health because their medical appointments are taken care of, they can work crazy hours and still operate successfully in a demanding and unsupportive external environment, because someone else is doing a lot of the time consuming stuff for them. They are available to keep the system going.

So while I know for a fact that misogyny and anxiety about female pleasure is well out there, I think this particular pocket of industry is better suited to a Marxist analysis. Capitalism needs worker bees that are on the one hand flexible and free from extraneous obligations, but on the other hand conformist and loyal. The middle class “provider” type is just the ticket.

Of course women get jack shit from this arrangement - bullying or scaring them into it is the only way to keep the sausage factory running, hence the hard sell.

Comment #4: MarinaS  on  04/21  at  05:35 PM

oh man, i WISH i’d run into this guy at a cocktail party with mr. cutestory. 

creepy old mccain: so, when’s the wedding?

me: uh, never? when there’s a mortgage? idk?

creepy old mccain: *some creepy sexist advice about dude not committing, whatever*

me: well yeah, but we’ve been dating for like eight years so uh.  yeah.  not really a problem.  also, we’re child-free and non-monogamous!  do you want to see pictures of our cats?

creepy old mccain:  *head explodes*

seriously, the degree to which these people concern themselves with other people’s personal lives will never fail to astound me.

Comment #5: chareth cutestory  on  04/21  at  05:36 PM

“Don’t know. When’s your divorce?”

Comment #6: MissPrism  on  04/21  at  05:49 PM

No matter what heights I may go on to achieve in my life, and no matter what goodness and grace I bring into the world, the indisputable zenith of my virtue would be to respond to R.S. McCain’s question without socking him in the jaw.

Comment #7: Frogisis  on  04/21  at  05:52 PM

No matter what heights I may go on to achieve in my life, and no matter what goodness and grace I bring into the world, the indisputable zenith of my virtue would be to respond to R.S. McCain’s question without socking him in the jaw.

Honestly, at this point in my life, civility is something I no longer aspire to.  I’m forty-ish, but I’ve already reached that point where I just don’t give a shit.  If somebody says something as outrageously obnoxious as “When’s the wedding?” they deserve to have their jaw realigned.

Comment #8: adobedragon  on  04/21  at  05:58 PM

People need to rediscover the joy that is the cocktail party. If you’re so all-fired up to go to a fun party, why wait until a wedding to do so? Throw a cocktail party. Invite your friends, get drunk, have munchies, dance to music, hell, you don’t even have to buy a gift.

Comment #9: Mighty Ponygirl  on  04/21  at  05:58 PM

Thank Jeebus my wife and I didn’t get married when we were younger. I was certainly not capable of being in an adult relationship when we first met (I blame the drugs). I’m much better now though. grin

Comment #10: Mark  on  04/21  at  05:59 PM

”...but I persist as if in deadly earnest: “Seriously, there’s no waiting period in Virginia, you know. You two could go to the courthouse in Arlington tomorrow morning and be on your honeymoon before lunch. Time’s a-wasting!””

...um, thanks for that, Mr. Asshole.  Please leave us alone or we’ll be forced to get a restraining order…

Comment #11: MikeEss  on  04/21  at  06:03 PM

Argh! So I’m working on a freelance assignment for students this week about an Adrienne Rich poem from 1962. One of the things we do is point them to other contemporary works. So here I am writing about Rich’s period where she was realizing that marriage wasn’t all that, and Sylvia Plath (Ariel poems written during that same winter) and Doris Lessing. What happened to the collective memory? Who are these people rushing to the altar? They clearly had different parents than mine—who were married in 1960 and divorced in 1970. I grew up with a mother and an aunt who had terrible marriages, felt trapped in the house with kids and who did not leave me with any illusions about what domestic life would be like. Also my grandmother, now 100 still looks bewildered by the marriage pressure. “But why,” she asks, “would any of you girls get married now that you don’t have to?”

I mean, I guess marriage *can* work, but how did we get from “who needs it” to “everyone MUST get married! It’s your Happily Ever After!”

Comment #12: cmf406  on  04/21  at  06:07 PM

This typically provokes laughter

I think he’s one of those people that need to have it explained to him that there are different kinds of laughter. I doubt his question probing into their private lives is provoking “Haha this guy is funny!” laughter. It’s probably more of a “Hehe. God I hope this creepy fucker doesn’t follow us home and make a suit out of our skin.” kind of nervous chuckle.

Comment #13: JThompson  on  04/21  at  06:07 PM

I’m in a long term relationship, and I’ve got a number of other friends in long term relationships.  The “When’s the wedding” joke is regularly kicked around.  But it does inevitably bring up the question in earnest.  And it is bizarre.  There’s this weird self-imposed social pressure.  I don’t really even understand WHY you get married, except as an excuse to take advantage of the tax break.

I mean, I’ve rarely dated a gir-er-woman that was ok with me sleeping with someone other than her.  And with sex-with-someone-not-your-spouse off the table, there’s not a huge difference between being married and being exclusive from a day-to-day perspective.  Marriage is just a legal arrangement of assets.  I mean, imagine getting hassled over not having a Last Will and Tantamount, or not starting a Business Partnership, or not Incorporating yourself.

From a social aspect, I’m already “married”.  I’ve been “married” half a dozen other times.  I just didn’t have to hire a lawyer and get a new checking account in order to get “divorced”.

Comment #14: Zifnab  on  04/21  at  06:11 PM

So his big plan to curb “America’s slow slide into moral decadence” is to hassle twentysomethings about getting married at cocktail receptions?  Wow, what a fucking superhero.

Comment #15: Secret Agent Norman  on  04/21  at  06:14 PM

Sweet mother of hip hop jesus wingnuts are some sad, sex obsessed freaks.

Comment #16: DonnaDiva  on  04/21  at  06:18 PM

I think this McCain guy honestly can’t tell that when the 20-somethings laugh at him, they’re laughing because they are extremely uncomfortable and don’t know what else to say/do to get him to go away and stop asking rude personal questions. It’s inappropriate to ask a couple when they’re going to get married. It’s even considered somewhat overbearing/nosy if you are a close family member asking the question, but it’s WAY WAY WORSE if you don’t even KNOW the couple. No matter how “jokingly” it is said, it is still a very personal question. I consider it akin to walking up to a couple and asking them when they last had sex, or asking them about the state of their personal finances.
This is because “When are you two getting married” is a question that might very well have a lot of baggage associated with it for the couple that you just don’t know and can’t predict, so it’s really better to not bring it up, even in jest, just in case. What if one half really wants marriage and the other doesn’t and they just fought about it the whole car ride to the party and you just ruined their entire night by bringing up a sore topic of great personal importance? Even joking around about stuff like this can provoke a fight or super awkward party interaction/moment—I’ve seen it happen before, and it’s not pretty at all. Would not recommend.

The only polite and, indeed, the only reasonable response to someone asking you about marriage is to laugh gently while searching for the nearest exit. I’m not entirely sure what McCain was expecting the couple to do. Scream, “MY GOD, YOU’RE RIGHT, THERE’S NO TIME! NO FUCKING TIME! WE HAVE TO GO NOW NOW NOW” and then run out the door in the direction of the closest courthouse? I suppose that would also be an acceptable response. I may try that if I ever run into this guy.

Comment #17: Samus  on  04/21  at  06:28 PM

You know, as creepy as McCain, he’s at least got a consistent point.  He describes those young DC couples as social conservatives.  You know what?  Fuck these Young Republicans and their desire to impose reactionary morality on other people while hypocritically enjoying their own personal freedom.  Fuck it, I’m going to ask every young single conservative I know why they’re not married yet and the married ones why they don’t have any or more children.  In a non-creepy ironic way, of course.

Comment #18: DonnaDiva  on  04/21  at  06:42 PM

And Samus, McCain states that he doesn’t know whether the “couple” is even dating, but he asks the question anyway.  Not only does he not know these couples, he doesn’t even know if they ARE a couple!

“Uhhh, this is my brother. And I have no idea when he’s getting married.”

Comment #19: Secret Agent Norman  on  04/21  at  06:59 PM

@Secret Agent Norman - why is she out with her brother and not home barefoot and pregnant ironing her husband’s shirts?

Comment #20: DonnaDiva  on  04/21  at  07:24 PM

My father sits at night with no lights on
His cigarette glows in the dark.
The living room is still;
I walk by, no remark.
I tiptoe past the master bedroom where
My mother reads her magazines.
I hear her call sweet dreams,
But I forgot how to dream.

But you say it’s time we moved in together
And raised a family of our own, you and me -
Well, that’s the way I’ve always heard it should be:
You want to marry me, we’ll marry.

My friends from college they’re all married now;
They have their houses and their lawns.
They have their silent noons,
Tearful nights, angry dawns.
Their children hate them for the things they’re not;
They hate themselves for what they are-
And yet they drink, they laugh,
Close the wound, hide the scar.

But you say it’s time we moved in together
And raised a family of our own, you and me -
Well, that’s the way I’ve always heard it should be:
You want to marry me, we’ll marry.

You say we can keep our love alive
Babe - all I know is what I see -
The couples cling and claw
And drown in love’s debris.
You say we’ll soar like two birds through the clouds,
But soon you’ll cage me on your shelf -
I’ll never learn to be just me first
By myself.

Well O.K., it’s time we moved in together
And raised a family of our own, you and me -
Well, that’s the way I’ve always heard it should be,
You want to marry me, we’ll marry,
We’ll marry.

Carly Simon and Jaccob Brackman

 

 

Comment #21: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  04/21  at  07:33 PM

I can’t help thinking that this general ratcheting up of Culture War Heat has to do with Obama’s Presidency.

Comment #22: Punditus Maximus  on  04/21  at  07:50 PM

Is Robert Stacey McCain married? If not, why not? If so, where’s his wife while he’s going to all these cocktail parties and fighting the nation’s slow decline into moral turpitude? Shouldn’t he be mowing a lawn somewhere?

Comment #23: Matt T.  on  04/21  at  08:02 PM

I like how committed couple = moral decadence. Shouldn’t you be popping out of bushes and screaming WHEN ARE YOU GETTING MARRIED at drunk people coming home from a bar together? You shall know it is a One Night Stand by the red As affixed to their chest. The Caped Moral Crusader strikes again! Run off into the night, thou masked protector of marriage! Live to be a dick another day!

Comment #24: twg_  on  04/21  at  08:07 PM

When is the marriage, sweetheart? Like, for real, sweetheart? Really?

OK, so I’ve been in DC for about six months and I have no idea - how does one go about getting invited to one of those “cocktail receptions” full of young social conservatives and this dude? Because I’m dying to ask him when he last had an orgasm.

@MarinaS, I agree that Marxist analysis applies here, but I think it’s a both/and situation. Just look at all the recent freak-outs about “hookup culture” and college women; fear of female pleasure and the general pearl-clutching about someone, somewhere having fun have a lot to do with this.

Comment #25: elena  on  04/21  at  08:12 PM

Miss Potts. MISS. Jesus H.

Comment #26: Menshevixen  on  04/21  at  08:33 PM

The 100 year old grandmother wins for best point evah.  If people understood how fucking serious marriage can get, how it can completely destroy your life and how dangerous it can become over time, only conservative assholes who despise happiness and love would promote it at all.  Oh, wait.

This is a great post, Amanda.  Heavy shit.

Comment #27: entrails  on  04/21  at  08:48 PM

I think there used to be a lot more pressure on men to get married; we can probably thank the post-Stonewall world for some of that decrease (if you’re not married by 40, no one is going to think you’re gay unless you have a boyfriend; they’ll just think you’re a loser).

But elena and MarinaS: that marxist analysis needs another piece, imo: the worker bee (ignoring the actual bee sexes) is free to work all kinds of crazy hours under miserable conditions, but even more important they have to work all kinds of crazy hours because they have something they care about (family and home) that they will otherwise lose. The unattached bees can still (at some cost) say “screw this”. Whereas once you have the family and home even two fulltime incomes aren’t really enough. Which is great for capitalism, because it layers guilt on top of the survival panic.

Comment #28: paul  on  04/21  at  08:52 PM

If so, where’s his wife while he’s going to all these cocktail parties and fighting the nation’s slow decline into moral turpitude?

Taking care of their six children.

 

Comment #29: keshmeshi  on  04/21  at  09:16 PM

“Don’t know. When’s your divorce?”

Even better:

“Matters are unsettled as of yet.  How’s your prostate?”

 

Comment #30: bekabot  on  04/21  at  09:38 PM

“Well, fingers crossed, Reverend Moon will select us this year!”

“November, most likely. How’s sex with the wife? *move in uncomfortably close. whisper* did you put it in her last night? Was it warm and comfortable, like a sweater fresh from the dryer? Is she loud? *pause* Can I touch your face? I want to know your image.”

really, this could be a fun game.

Comment #31: karpad  on  04/21  at  10:15 PM

For better or for worse if he asked me that question if I was with my boy/friend the first retort that popped into my mind was “Why? Do you want to fuck me or him?”

I’d love to see McCain’s facial expression on that one.

Comment #32: UltraMagnus  on  04/21  at  10:25 PM

When the human race has a negative population growth, then maybe I ought to worry about when people are planning families.

Until then; man, what a busybody.

Comment #33: Crissa  on  04/21  at  11:02 PM

Wow—I haven’t heard this prick’s name in a while…

Robert Stacy McCain on interracial relationships:

“[T]he media now force interracial images into the public mind and a number of perfectly rational people react to these images with an altogether natural revulsion,” McCain wrote. “The white person who does not mind transacting business with a black bank clerk may yet be averse to accepting the clerk as his sister-in-law, and THIS IS NOT RACISM, no matter what Madison Avenue, Hollywood and Washington tell us.”

More here:
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2006/04/guess-who-i-saw-on-cspan-today.html

So if you’re a white woman and he asks “When’s the wedding,” just tell him you’re marrying a black man and moving into his neighborhood.  That should be enough to make his head go all asplodey.

Comment #34: Sour Kraut  on  04/21  at  11:52 PM

The 100-year-old grandmother reminded me of a friend’s account of her grandfather’s funeral.  At the wake, her grandmother leaned over the body of the man to whom she’d been married for decades, and sneered, “You’ll never hurt me again!”  And you young’uns want to pass up the satisfaction of traditional marriage for love and compatibility and passion and all that stuff, or just go home alone to your safe apartment after a day at your interesting job.

Comment #35: gretchen  on  04/22  at  03:30 AM

but I persist as if in deadly earnest: “Seriously, there’s no waiting period in Virginia, you know. You two could go to the courthouse in Arlington tomorrow morning and be on your honeymoon before lunch. Time’s a-wasting!”

Don’t know. When’s your divorce?”
Even better:
“Matters are unsettled as of yet.  How’s your prostate?”

Or, “I don’t know. You’re married. When are you going to die? In Virginia there’s only a 24 hour hold on your remains if you die of natural causes. You could be cremated by this time tomorrow. Time’s a-wasting!”

Comment #36: shakahi  on  04/22  at  04:09 AM

...compatability has nothing to do with “family values”.  There’s just no family that’s being valued when you’re escalating the possibility of an unhappy marriage and/or divorce.  Valuing families means wanting those families to be quality families where there is actual stability and intimacy.

AMEN!

Comment #37: tesseral  on  04/22  at  04:49 AM

I have a few friends who got married to someone they knew to be absolutely the worst person for them.  Amanda has explored the topic before, but it goes back to (a) the social pressure on women to be married before they’re 30 (or, in my case here in my state, 28 seems to be the cut-off) and (b) the fact that for that whole day and the weeks leading up to it, she is finally the center of attention and people actually listen to her.  I honestly think they don’t care that this marriage will end up in a divorce, because then they get to get married again and have ANOTHER big party at which they are the center of attention.

Comment #38: speedbudget  on  04/22  at  08:05 AM

If he asked me that question, I would pretend that he was asking it in a genuinely interested way, and answer it truthfully.  I’d explain to him that I don’t really see the need to make it official with a legally binding document unless and until we decide to have a child, to make things easier when he does his half of the childcare work.  Then when he got a dumbfounded expression on his face, I’d say “Oh, sorry, I thought you were genuinely interested in my opinion.  I didn’t realize that you only wanted to pressure me into something”.  Basically, I’d point out exactly what he’s doing in a polite way.

As a side note, this is a perfect example of why feminists aren’t being “too sensitive” or “overreacting” when people make seemingly innocent comments.  Usually when people ask a question like this, it’s because they have exactly this warped agenda behind it.  So when someone says “it’s just a joke” or “he’s just socially awkward”, I’m extremely doubtful.  It’s more likely that it’s their way of testing the waters to see if outright misogyny will be socially acceptable in that situation.

Comment #39: bananacat  on  04/22  at  08:46 AM

Sour Kraut #34 brought up the racism, so I’ll just add that this fucker writes even worse racist shit on his own blog than what is quoted above.

And let’s please not forget that this is the same man who said of Ben Roethlisberger’s accuser, “You buy the ticket, you go for the ride.” In case anyone is still wondering how low his opinion of women really is. RS McCain thinks it’s just super fine and dandy for a man to corner a woman in a bar and do whatever he wants to to her. Which IMO makes it justifiable assault for those of you planning to kick him in the balls if you run into him at a cocktail party.

Comment #40: serious bette  on  04/22  at  09:36 AM

Zifnab@ 14:
While you may have socially been “married”, without that legal bit of paper, you were not in any way legally related.  That person was not part of your family.  That’s the only real difference, IMO, in our serial momogamous culture (wither the long term relationships or marriage-divorce cycles). 

Also IMO, the only personal reason to get married is to make unrelated people family.  There are lots of other pros and cons - economic, legal and social.  All those other pros and cons basically come down to do you want this person as your legal next of kin, to able to make decisions for you if you are incopacitated, and to able to own property et al other legal partnership type things without a bunch of extra paperwork.

Comment #41: helen w. h.  on  04/22  at  09:40 AM

Getting married isn’t even enough for these pushy rude idiots - then you have to spawn within a short time or its “what’s wrong with you - what’s wrong with your marriage - are you infertile - why do you hate your husband - blah blah judgy blah judge”. 

That’s because marriage = baby in their heads.

I married rather young (23), but waited six years before the first child.  I wouldn’t have done it any other way, but there would be something all feministically wrong about that to these twits.  They need to mind their own business!

Comment #42: Ms Kate  on  04/22  at  10:03 AM

Seconding this last comment (#41). I’m not sure if I’d get married again, but I must admit that it made things simpler when my husband died—there was no question of my getting his stuff, retirement savings, SS benefit, etc. Then again, I also had to sign the death certificate and the cremation papers, and that was pretty horrid.

Comment #43: Nimue  on  04/22  at  10:07 AM

So his big plan to curb “America’s slow slide into moral decadence” is to hassle twentysomethings about getting married at cocktail receptions?  Wow, what a fucking superhero.

I’m going to second that.  It takes a strong man to hassle acquaintances in situations where you’re pretty sure they’re not going to tell you to fuck right off.  I’m sorry, did I say strong?  Because I meant crotchety.

Comment #44: Kyso K  on  04/22  at  10:37 AM

Also, these moral scolds think that what they’re saying is so new and refreshing—“politically incorrect”—and not the same shit that women have been hearing for centuries.  Jane Austen made an entire writing career out of skewering the social pressure to marry well.

Getting married isn’t enough, as Ms Kate indicated above.  Then everyone wants to know when you’re having a kid.  Then you have the kid and everyone wants to know when you’re going to have another one—little Timmy needs someone to play with!  The judging will never end.  Then there’s the drive by mommying and you’re ruining his life because you let him play dress up or have a Barbie doll.  I think humans just love to cluck their tongues and judge each other.

Comment #45: Blitzgal  on  04/22  at  11:03 AM

Jane Austen made an entire writing career out of skewering the social pressure to marry well.

Yeah but the problem with books is they’re so long and sometimes they won’t just come out and tell you what their point is. The result being that you end up with a bunch of conservatives who are convinced that Jane Austen was totally not feminist and was celebrating “family values” rather than mocking patriarchy.

Of course that’s not Jane Austen’s fault.

Comment #46: Triplanetary  on  04/22  at  11:24 AM

Plus, it’s not as though conservatives actually read Jane Austen, any more than they’ve read The Wealth of Nations.

Comment #47: Jerry Vinokurov  on  04/22  at  12:08 PM

I think humans just love to cluck their tongues and judge each other.

When my family took in an older cousin of mine to live with us, people use to say that Mom had a ‘built-in-babysitter’ meaning that she could go do her amateur theater thing and leave my cousin to keep an eye on us without paying for a babysitter, like she ‘should’.

That surprised me(that anyone would care how our family lived in the first place, but then this is Red California) as well as amusing me because that was so untrue.

In fact, Mom would pay for a babysitter if she was rehearsing and Dad was teaching a night class, because my cousin had better things to do than deal with 4 children and trying to get her homework done as well.

But, yeah, it’s ironic the people who are against “It takes a Village” have their own form of collectivism when it come to ‘family values’. 

No groupthink there, no siree Bob.

 

Comment #48: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  04/22  at  01:20 PM

i assume the author of that piece has really, really good health insurance, to cover all his trips to the emergency room, to get his broken nose reset. i can’t imagine attending any party this arrogant, self-inflated twit was also invited to.

Comment #49: cpinva  on  04/22  at  02:50 PM

God. The marriage pressures I was under really fucked me up for a good part of my 20s. I stayed in a relationship I shouldn’t have for far too long partly because I was screwed up about getting married. My mother cornered two of my exes at various points and grilled them about asking my dad for my hand in marriage. “Not as young as once you were” and “on the shelf” started coming in conversations at around age 25.

Of course, in Mormonland, where I grew up, kids get married so damn young because they can’t have sex otherwise. Why parents or anybody think this is a good idea is beyond me. My sisters and brother have all been considered fairly old because t hey got married at 22, 24, (sisters) and 30 (brother), while I was antideluvian at 33. (My siblings were sensible for the most part and had longer engagements.) Half my graduating class was married by age 22. And….well, not to be unkind, but many of my friends who got married younger, numerous of them are getting divorced or are divorced by now. I was with my husband for four years before we decided to get hitched, and my Mormon family was strongly disapproving of the fact that we lived together. My Mormon friends—almost none of them lived with or even boinked their husbands before marriage—only to discover a number of incompatibilities. I can’t even wrap my head around that now, even though that was what I was raised to expect. I learned so much from the three committed relationships where I lived with my boyfriends, and even if two didn’t work out in the long run, they prepared me for how to communicate and how to live with somebody and how to negotiate and spine up.

My mother actually used the “Why would he buy the cow when he gets the milk for free” line on me. I rather horrified her by pointing out I was getting milk for free too. (Which is silly because she and Dad had an otherwise excellent sex life—I don’t know why she didn’t think I wouldn’t want sex, when I probably inherited her sex drive.)

(As an aside, was talking with my little still-Mormon brother last night about whether or not his fiance is gonna keep her name. He thinks she should if she wants, as it is an awesome last name. He even said if it wasn’t for the annoying paperwork, he’d consider changing his name to hers. I’m worried she’ll change it just because of all the pressure from OTHER family and because people in Utah glamourise taking husband’s name, but it’s nice to know that bro is behind her on the keeping of the name if that’s what she wants to do.)

Comment #50: PixelFish  on  04/22  at  04:25 PM

The number one reason I got married was that I trusted my (now ex-)wife completely when it came to things like medical decisions and property management.  It’s honestly a shame how our marriage worked out, though I think socialized medicine might have saved it.

Well, one more thing to blame on Obama, I guess.

Comment #51: Punditus Maximus  on  04/22  at  04:58 PM

I can’t help but think that the objective of the McCain guy’s rudeness and nosyness is the idea that all the women should be at home, married with the kids, leaving him in an all-boys club at every party with plenty of closeted partners.

Comment #52: Ms Kate  on  04/22  at  05:02 PM

Obnoxious to suggest marriage asap, if you have a dating partner/housemate get married already. Yuck.
But there’s little reason to shun or dread it either if you have someone you’re committed to.  We lived together for a couple of years, bought a house together and then decided to get married when we were ready to start trying for kids.  It doesn’t have to be a horrible life. 

Sometimes family pressures start because they like to see you validate their own choices to get married and have kids.  Thankfully, all of our parents knew well enough not to ask.  Of course, we were both over 30 when we married.  The ‘rents were probably glad we finally did one traditional thing that they didn’t want to push their luck.

Comment #53: MiddleageLiberal  on  04/22  at  05:53 PM

“When’s the wedding?” I ask the young couples. This typically provokes laughter — 20-something professionals in D.C. do not, as a rule, think much about their near-term marital prospects — but I persist as if in deadly earnest: “Seriously, there’s no waiting period in Virginia, you know. You two could go to the courthouse in Arlington tomorrow morning and be on your honeymoon before lunch. Time’s a-wasting!”

I hereby submit that Mr. R. S. McCain is a liar of the blackest variety as he is clearly not posting that from the hospital, which he would be if he got beaten within an inch of his life like he deserved for something that assholish. He is clearly trying to act like he would be a moral scold instead of hiding from the young people and seething at them for enjoying themselves, and wishing that the power of his impotent sneer could send them packing off to the altar so they can be as miserable as he is.

Thus, I hereby submit that Mr. R. S. McCain is even worse than a nosy, crotchety old man. He is FANTASIZING about being a nosy, crotchety old man.

Comment #54: StarStorm  on  04/22  at  06:50 PM

cmf406 @12

The shift in how marriage is viewed is ironically thanks to a shitload of feminist cultural victories that gets people waiting before marriage, viewing marriages as more egalitarian (sadly not perfectly egalitarian), and people even trying different models that work better with their relationship (long term non-marriage, polyamorous setups either with or without marriage, and so on). Not to mention gay marriage being highlighted a lot so the socially positive sort of dreams of marriage are being highlighted so less people are imagining “keep your freshness” rushes into a patriarchal ownership model that is without love or respect and everything is about the kids and more imagining a union of equals based on respect and love.

Which is why every patriarchal marriage defender is running around trying to do the hard sell even though marriage in general is being viewed more positively than it has for a good long while. Because the very things that redeem it are the very things that make it unacceptable and “threatened” for those who care more about relative male power than anything to do with “marriage”.

It just doesn’t count when people are happy, egalitarian, and enter into the union at a time and place of their choosing if they so choose by the model that works best for their needs (monogamous, polyamorous, mixed, other).

In the minds of people like RS McCain and Hymowitz, those don’t count. Real marriage is shotgun weddings, jumping in because no one else will have a washed up bird like you so learn to enjoy being an underrespected domestic servant/live-in whore where all of your bitter washed-up dreams and “values” end up getting force fed into your children who are “your life” until they disobediently flee from home at 18 desperately seeking to come home as little as possible to a bunch of miserable other-people-obsessed sad sacks who blame their personal misery not on the worldview they tried to squeeze themselves into for the sake of conformity, but on all those damn others who remind them that there was another way.

Thankfully, every year, this view is becoming more extinct.

Comment #55: Cerberus  on  04/22  at  06:50 PM

I agree; RS McCain is in all likelihood making stuff up. It’s by far the most popular pastime in the wingnutosphere, after all.

Comment #56: weirdnoise  on  04/22  at  06:55 PM

To be fair, RSM’s whole internet career is about creeping out young people who just want to have fun. So, I’m more inclined to believe he does it as a hobby, too.

Comment #57: Lindsay Beyerstein  on  04/22  at  08:21 PM

I also really like the attempt at implying that Monica Potts’s argument is invalid because she isn’t married

Yeah, how does that work exactly? Wouldn’t it be more likely that Pott’s argument probably has some validity because it’s working for for her right now? “Nyah nyah, you’re wrong that marriage is unnecessary because you’re unmarried right now and having a great life!” is kind of an ... inane thing to say.

But there’s little reason to shun or dread it either if you have someone you’re committed to.

Please don’t mansplain. Having someone we’re “committed to” hasn’t stopped marriage from being soul-killing and life-ruining for unbelievable numbers of women. It’s a bad, bad scene to legally assign next-of-kin status and shared ownership of all financial assets to someone who has privilege over you.

 

Comment #58: kristin  on  04/22  at  09:07 PM

Kristin, please womansplain your accusation of mansplaining.

The simple fact is that marriage, however defined, works for a lot of people and fearing and dreading it is a red flag.  Not fearing or dreading it is a good sign. Your cultural baggage and situation may vary.

Just because it isn’t for you, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t work given that it is the only way to acquire durable rights and benefits that doesn’t involve shared genetics.

Comment #59: Ms Kate  on  04/22  at  10:09 PM

Heeeeuw.  Marriage is inherently patriarchical in our society.  We as individuals can carve out our little spaces within it, but let’s not get carried away.

Comment #60: Punditus Maximus  on  04/22  at  10:48 PM

Just because it isn’t for you, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t work

Well, I guess I’ll amend It’s a bad, bad scene to It *can be* a bad, bad scene. But, after all, MiddleAgeLiberal didn’t say “Hey, it works for some people”. He essentially said there, there, don’t panic your little woman head about it, you’ll love the idea of marriage too once you get someone who’s committed enough (or you commit to someone enough).

dreading it is a red flag

... that you live in a patriarchy. Where the woman has more than the man to lose in almost any binding arrangement between the two. Just because she doesn’t end up losing it doesn’t mean she didn’t have it to lose.

Comment #61: kristin  on  04/22  at  11:47 PM

StarStorm:  Did you read McCain’s whole post?  There’s a just-so story in there that is priceless.  I think he made most of that up, so in the spirit of the both/and blog let’s assume that he is both fully capable of being a prissy scold at stuffy DC parties and making stuff up.  He’s crotchety and meddlesome with fantasies of this being a productive force for social good.

My favorite part of the just-so story is that the woman who was goaded to action by his wheedling intrusiveness breaks it off with the non-committing boyfriend and GETS! ENGAGED! WITHIN MONTHS! and there the story ends.  It has to be a happy ending because she’s engaged!  Nevermind that a woman who would end a relationship because McCain cornered her at a party should probably give herself a cool-down period before agreeing to marry the rebound relationship.

Like T-Rex says, “The time for questions is over! Now is the time for unbridled optimism!”

Comment #62: Kyso K  on  04/22  at  11:56 PM

Go .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).  My partner rocks (most of the time, anyway) and I worry even about moving in with him, let alone getting married.  Over the last two years I’ve had a few encounters with people who made it clear they thought I was the bottom member of our dyad and he was the top.

Comment #63: Unree  on  04/23  at  12:45 AM

StarStorm:  Did you read McCain’s whole post?  There’s a just-so story in there that is priceless.  I think he made most of that up, so in the spirit of the both/and blog let’s assume that he is both fully capable of being a prissy scold at stuffy DC parties and making stuff up.  He’s crotchety and meddlesome with fantasies of this being a productive force for social good.

I mostly skimmed it , but yeah, I remember that. Well, that and him calling Amanda bitter for talking about the Regressive war on pleasure.

I would have read it further, but I had a train of thought that was particularly compelling: “I want to make my first UV win on DoomRL. Why am I reading about how an Old White Fucker is going about being a Creepy Fucker.”

Comment #64: StarStorm  on  04/23  at  01:30 AM

Marriage can work—I married a feminist in 1980 at age 20 (he was 21) and we’re still going strong—but the assumptions of my parents and others would have buried us if we’d let them.  The biggest issue was children, and I’m still surprised at the number of people who inquired about the state of my womb.  We’re childfree, which turned out to be a grave affront to my mother and all her friends.  Bless my father and my in-laws, who kept their noses out of our reproductive business.

My mother hassled me for years about producing grandchildren.  Her final foray into the subject involved telling me about a cocktail-party acquaintance who pronounced, “What are they waiting for?”  I gave my mother the look intended for the cocktail-party asshole, and it so put her off that she never inquired about grandchildren again.  Yay for dirty looks!

For awhile, when challenged about why I hadn’t had children, I quoted a childfree colleague: “Oh, we figured out what causes that, and we take steps to prevent it.”

Comment #65: GeoKaren  on  04/23  at  03:59 AM

It is always exciting to see Amanda called out as a bitter harpy, but I also enjoyed the links provided in the update.  Someone, for example, was kind enough to provide a list of dealbreakers and earnest advice for anyone whose eyes were opened by McCain’s refreshingly un-PC meddling.  And I for one appreciate it because if there’s one thing women don’t get enough of, it’s lists of random advice about how to get and/or evaluate men.

Comment #66: Kyso K  on  04/23  at  10:11 AM

Look, I’m happily married.  But I’m not going to pretend that a large part of how my relationship developed with my now-spouse wasn’t because of pressure to be in a long-term relationship and the idea that if a relationship didn’t end at the altar, it was a failure.

That despite these fucked up ideas I still ended up in a relatively equal marriage with someone I love and who loves me is frankly sheer luck.  Like how I got a tattoo on impulse at 18 and despite the impulse-buy, I still like it a decade later.

Comment #67: Karinna A.  on  04/23  at  11:55 AM

Marriage is inherently patriarchical in our society.

It has been certainly, but doesn’t have to be.  Ask Ellen Degeneres or Jane Lynch if they would still agree.  Thankfully no one dictates how tasks or roles are taken within a marriage, any more than those tasks are divided between roomate/lovers who haven’t married. 

kristin, it seems like your the one who has an image of marriage stuck in the paradigm of man dominating woman, not me.  That f’d up dynamic can still exist in a non-marriage live-in situation. If you can never trust another person, man or woman, to share life’s journey with in all ways, then for sure don’t marry one, man or woman.  I don’t fear for civilization if you don’t.

If you need me to say it I will:  different strokes for different folks.  Do what works for you but don’t assume those who freely make other choices are either sadists or masochists.

Comment #68: MiddleageLiberal  on  04/23  at  12:49 PM

Different strokes, definitely, MiddleageLiberal.  When I’m invited to a wedding I’m happy to go, send a gift, have a great time at the party.  But if you know a woman who seems reluctant to get married even though her relationship with a man looks fine, you might direct a little empathy her way.

Comment #69: Unree  on  04/23  at  01:58 PM

And if she loudly and continually insists no woman ever should get married, pity her and give her space, especially if you are a woman in a happy and fulfilling marriage and pointing that out is going to send her into torrents of accusations about how you are lying to yourself, deluded, ad infinatium.

Nimue @ 41: You have my sympathies. 
However horrid it was though, how much more horrible would it have been to not be able to do those thing or to have to fight to get even his stuff, much less the SS, retirement benefits, etc.  From horror to gastly horror.

Comment #70: helen w. h.  on  04/25  at  08:28 AM

“Then there’s the usual suspect: the biological clock. Clark’s was ticking and she was ready to start a family. “The number 30 reads like an expiration date for unmarried women,” says Gauvain. Not only are your baby-making years racing by, but you’re leaving behind your 20s — a decade of experimentation, one-night stands, and making mistakes, professionally and personally. In the next decade, you’re seen as an adult and can’t do those things.”

Maybe I’m uninitiated but I can’t, for the life of me, see how this is “misogynist propaganda.”  The author does not even attempt to tackle the most difficult part of this passage—the very real biological constraints on a woman’s child-bearing years.  For woman who don’t want a family or plan to adopt I freely concede that the “biological clock” is irrelevant.  But to deny the deeply engrained desires of many people to have and raise their own biological children is an exercise in futility.  That is not some social construct that can be challenged and changed over time, that is the driving force behind the success of the human species for millions of years, so good luck taking that on. 

And for people interested in having children and raising a family there is a limit on the years in which pregnancy is possible.  There is also a very real increase in complications for mother and child with advanced maternal age.  Once notable example is the sharp increase in the incidence of Down Syndrome which really takes off around age 35. 

http://www.ndss.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=61&Itemid=78

As far as the rest of the passage I cited at the beginning of this post.  I’m a 29 year old man and that sounds like a pretty good description of society’s expectations towards me in terms of 20s vs 30s.  True?  Healthy? Realistic?  Probably not.  But misogynistic?  Please.  That’s equality wink

Comment #71: velo16  on  04/25  at  02:10 PM

@71: Um, you’re baby making years are not ‘racing by’ at only age thirty, it’s dishonest to frame as if it is. Not to mention that stupid biological clock is also misogynist because it implies women are ‘willed’ by something inherent in them that makes them want to have children when it’s a choice like any other. They’re not ‘willed’ by their inherent femaleness, it’s hyped in our entire freaking culture as one of the most fulfilling things for women in general ever. It’s not a ‘deeply ingrained desire’, it’s a desire women are taught to desire, a choice that is not really a choice when half the bloody world is pressuring you do it and do it quick, and is fine with instilling fear to do it. In our society it’s held as one of women’s highest callings (if not the highest) and they are expected to do it and as young as possible. If they don’t want to, they’re either told they’ll grow out of it or treated as if something is wrong with them for doing so. Designating women’s highest honor and general purpose as baby-making is pretty misogynistic. Pretending as if men have the same pressure on them is laughable and shows only your ignorance.

Thanks so much for your mansplaining but be sure you actually know what you’re talking about before you comment.

Comment #72: LilithXIV  on  04/25  at  10:36 PM

velo16 @ 71: Birth defects do not only track with maternal age, by the way.  Recent studies have shown there is some corrolation between them and fathers of advanced age (genetics shift for both sexes, just seemingly later for men).  The big issue really is for maternal health IMO.  Both extremely younger (mid-teen and below) and older (late-forties and higher) mothers tend to hae higher rates of complications from pregnancy.  As with all things, statistics are a reflection of observed effect, not a guarentee of what will happen.

Comment #73: helen w. h.  on  04/26  at  09:51 AM

And how many women who have problems with pregnancy in their 30s would have had the same problems in their 20s, if they were trying to get pregnant then?

Comment #74: syfr  on  04/26  at  10:34 AM

@ helen: You are right, not all birth defects increase in prevalence with advanced maternal age.  That said, the risk of aneuploidy—the child having an abnormal number of chromosomes—does correlate tightly with advancing maternal age.  Trisomy 21 (Down’s Syndrome) is the most common of these birth defects and as cited in my earlier post the incidence increases sharply in the mid to late 30s.  How people feel about this increasing risk is a personal matter—some might not bat an eye at a risk of 1 in 500 that their child be born with Down’s while for others it might factor into their decision to have a child. 

@ Lilith: I think I am touching a nerve I didn’t intend to with the specific phrase “biological clock” so let me re-phrase:  For women who have made the decision that they would like to have children there are very real biologic constraints on the timeframe in which this is possible and acceptably safe.  That can make people apprehensive around age 30—not unreasonably I might add. 

Maybe I can illustrate this by example.  I’m a physician in training and about half of my fellow residents are women in their mid to late twenties.  Think smart, capable, driven, and career minded women.  Some of them would like to start a family and prefer to have a biologic child.  So when do they do it?  Let’s say you’re done with college at 22, medical school at 26, residency anywhere between 30 and 33, and then you start practicing.  Wait until you’re done with training and if you haven’t started planning at all for a family it does start feeling like the remaining years are “racing by.”  Plus life happens:  you have trouble conceiving, you realize your partner isn’t right for you, you are still looking for a partner, etc etc.  Once 30 hits each one of these delays seems a bigger and bigger deal. 

Even in the best case where you know what you want early on and get married to the right person during medical school or residency I have a lot of friends who have opted to have their children during residency (high stress, 80hr work weeks, etc) because they feel that is the best route for them.  In response a lot of medical training programs are anticipating and planning for female residents having children—maternity leave, lactation rooms, child-care options, etc.  Lots of work is left to be done (and paternity leave, as you can imagine, is non-existent) but acknowledging the dilemma leads to solutions and that makes it better than ignoring it. 

You seem to want to have a debate about how terrible it is for society to tell a woman their “highest calling” is to be a mother.  I’m not interested in that debate.  I think it’s silly to tell anyone what they should want or how to live a fulfilling life.  The decision to have a child or not should be a personal choice. 

BUT

1. Plenty of women are going to choose to have children
2. Plenty of women are going to choose to have careers
3. The safest time to get pregnant—both from the standpoint of maternal and fetal health—is also the same time most of us are figuring out what we want out of life and building our careers

If you want to dismiss those truths as “misogynistic propaganda” you’re free to.  Personally, I think acknowledging these competing priorities is the only way to eventually arrive at solutions for women who value building both a family and a career. 

Oh and BTW the stuff about similarities in societal expectations in your 20s vs. 30s was in reference to the portion of the article reading:

“But you’re leaving behind your 20s — a decade of experimentation, one-night stands, and making mistakes, professionally and personally. In the next decade, you’re seen as an adult and can’t do those things”

As I said, I don’t see the above impression breaking down gender lines to a great degree.  I was not talking about pressure to procreate wink

 

Comment #75: velo16  on  04/26  at  04:38 PM

To number 1 I will simply say this. Choice is a murky thing, pressure from the society, cultural myths, and scare tactics (30 is an expiration date all you unmarried ladies, be afraid! Oh but dudes go ahead and be bachelors, whatever.) and their large influence. Choice is not as simple as you present it.

“The safest time to get pregnant—both from the standpoint of maternal and fetal health—is also the same time most of us are figuring out what we want out of life and building our careers. If you want to dismiss those truths as “misogynistic propaganda” you’re free to.”

Again I question why you label this as truth, or why you think 1 and 2 were the things called ‘misogynistic’ propaganda. They were not. This part was: And women at the age of 30 should see that age as an ‘expiration date for unmarried women’? You don’t see anything wrong with that statement at all? You don’t see anything manipulative about that? Not to mention dishonest. Do you really think women in their 30s are held to the same standard as men in their 30s? I’m pretty sure there’s more than one unfortunate implication in that statement.

Comment #76: LilithXIV  on  04/27  at  05:50 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.