Wow, what a difference a few days makes. I disappear for two days (due to working and starting clinicals for my nurse aide class, leaving me only time for sleep) and during that time Forbes first pulled the inflammatory article, and then brought it back, but now with a counterpoint essay.
It seems that word spread fast through the blogosphere – a little too fast for the comfort of those at Forbes.com. The backpedalling has begun, and I’m not sure they’re finished yet.
The counterpoint provided by Elizabeth Corcoran is good, but still falls short in addressing this issue. She hints at calling out his misogynist ideas, but then falls back on simply telling how her marriage, as a career woman, doesn’t fit his guide. I guess I was expecting her counterpoint to have more bite to it.
She does make an excellent point in this paragraph:
The essence of a good marriage, it seems to me, is that both people have to learn to change and keep on adapting. Children bring tons of change. Mothers encounter it first during the nine months of pregnancy, starting with changing body dimensions. But fathers have to learn to adapt, too, by learning to help care for children, to take charge of new aspects of a household, to adapt as the mothers change.
Absolutely. Marriage takes change and adaptation from both people. Mr. Noer took pleasure in declaring how women should change when they become wives in order to make their marriages successful, but implied that men should make no changes to their own behaviors and actions. Instead of worrying that his wife won’t take care of his health if she works full time, a man should be capable of keeping track of his own medical needs. Surely he did it while he was single, or did his mother do it for him, even when he was on his own?
And what about the wife? Should she expect her husband to work less and spend more time worrying over her health and well-being? I thought marriage was a partnership, where things may not always be 50-50, but equality is always a goal. (The frightening thing is, I know men who subscribe to Mr. Noer’s guidelines, and I’ve seen hints of it from the stories some mommy bloggers tell of their husbands, too.)
I didn’t care for the wrap up that Ms. Corcoran provided, though:
So guys, if you’re game for an exciting life, go ahead and marry a professional gal.
Game for an exciting life? What? I was a career woman, and I can say I had an interesting life, but it wasn’t exciting. (My life now? Far more exciting. Living with a toddler is only slightly less exciting than wrestling with a bear.) Plus, what about those women who aren’t career women? Are they boring? I’m sure you didn’t mean it this way, but that sentence nearly confirms Michael Noer’s assertions. Exciting could equal dangerous or risky, right?
While Elizabeth Corcoran’s counterpoint was good, I just don’t think it went far enough to really challenge the original article.
My primary question to Forbes is: who thought this article was a good idea? If I’m not mistaken, writers generally must get their article approved before it is released to the web on a supposedly prestigious site for the world to see. So not only did Michael Noer write a misogynist article about why career woman are bad wives because they won’t cater to their husband’s every whim, but someone else read it and said, “Hey, this looks good!” Did this come across the desk the afternoon the editors had an end-of-summer margarita bash at lunch?
So if I’m still not happy, what can be done to make this situation better? I don’t know. I’ve already lost a lot of respect for Forbes, which I’m not sure can ever be won back. An apology might help. Pulling the article wouldn’t help – it would only serve to hide the evidence of what was done.
My suggestion to Forbes? Be a little more careful with what you publish, and don’t let inappropriate content go out to the public. Oh, and you might start with getting rid of this article. A list of “hot” billionaire heiresses might be a better fit for Spike TV.
Do you think they might have allowed the article to “go to press” BECAUSE of the controversy in would stir up? I wonder.
I think they’re all a bunch of idiots. Back pedaling? Meh. I say swipe it off and apologize.
Move on. To sexy heiresses.
YEAH!
Well, at least we know who they think their audience is. And will most likely remain.
I’m disappointed in Forbes. I thought they were a Fortune-type, business magazine, but it does seem to be leaning towards Maxim-style content now!
I am still miffed about that article. It’s the kind of thing that really confirms the way some men still think about women. If my son ever grew up to believe the crap that article spewed, I think I’d have to make sure he never gets married!
I agree. You’re right on the mark. Working in publishing, though, I wouldn’t be surprised if Forbes (and other magazines) run articles like this just to get people talking about them.
That article makes me sick.
I am an entrepreneur with 2 kids with a professional wife (accountant) who works for her family business. I max out at 45hrs/week ’cause I would rather see my business go bankrupt than my family or my marriage.
Yes sometimes I or she has to work more and we adjust accordingly.
Prioritizing Daddy who is tired of male business people frowning when he says he works a max of 45hrs for his family time.
Hey there….LOVING your view on that Forbes garbage……
More stupid stereotypes…
anyway…if you wanna check out my mussings on it…
here you are…
http://www.crunchy-carpets.blogspot.com/
I’m sure Forbes doesn’t mind the publicity. Neither does the author of the article editor Michael Noer, who certainly is getting some attention.
The information he references in the article isn’t the problem and is actually quite interesting. The problem is how he spins it and comes up with a conclusion that feels a bit too personal for me. He sounds bitter. Perhaps one of these career women recently dumped him.
One can only hope.
I agree that Ms. Corcoran’s personal anecdotal evidence doesn’t provide adequate counterpoints to the studies cited in Mr. Noer’s article. However, you can make studies say whatever you want them to, especially sociological studies like those he cited.
I really like what daver19 said in his comment above. That’s exactly how Kyle and I have conducted our work-life balancing act for the past decade.
I’ve been so out of it for the past week that I totally missed it. Thanks for bringing me up to speed – and providing an insightful analysis. Cliff Notes of the best kind!
I agree with the above – I saw this article, too, and thought Liz Corcoran’s rebuttal was a little weak. And as for Michael Noer, based on his misogynist attitude, I was expecting another rebuttal titled, “Liz, you ignorant slut…” (I know I’m dating myself here with that reference). And I also agree that, since when did Forbes get into commenting on the current state of dual income marriages?
Anyway, glad to see another blogger from the capitol of the Buckeye State!