FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com
Belle of the Blog: What's a Modern Girl to Do?

Sunday, October 30, 2005

What's a Modern Girl to Do?


This morning in the New York Times Magazine is a fascinating article by Maureen Dowd.

Here is an excerpt:

"At a party for the Broadway opening of "Sweet Smell of Success," a top New York producer gave me a lecture on the price of female success that was anything but sweet. He confessed that he had wanted to ask me out on a date when he was between marriages but nixed the idea because my job as a Times columnist made me too intimidating. Men, he explained, prefer women who seem malleable and awed. He predicted that I would never find a mate because if there's one thing men fear, it's a woman who uses her critical faculties. Will she be critical of absolutely everything, even his manhood?

He had hit on a primal fear of single successful women: that the aroma of male power is an aphrodisiac for women, but the perfume of female power is a turnoff for men. It took women a few decades to realize that everything they were doing to advance themselves in the boardroom could be sabotaging their chances in the bedroom, that evolution was lagging behind equality.

A few years ago at a White House correspondents' dinner, I met a very beautiful and successful actress. Within minutes, she blurted out: "I can't believe I'm 46 and not married. Men only want to marry their personal assistants or P.R. women."

I'd been noticing a trend along these lines, as famous and powerful men took up with young women whose job it was was to care for them and nurture them in some way: their secretaries, assistants, nannies, caterers, flight attendants, researchers and fact-checkers."




So, I'm wondering if this is true. Can successful single women blame their singleton status on their careers? Or is it the fact that when forced to choose between a relationship and pursuing their career, they choose their career? And do men really prefer a woman who is not their equal when it comes to intellect? Or ambition?

I think its kind of a cop out for women to make that assumption. But what do I know...

4 Comments:

At 11:22 AM, Blogger Richard Laurence Baron said...

Between work projects, Jo, I read your post about Maureen Dowd today. I can't say I'm overly fond of her myself - but the subject matter you quote is interesting.

The questions you ask are at the end of the Dowd quote are important. At the risk of appearing simplistic, Dowd's key word is "nurture." All good relationships require nuture on both sides. It has taken years for me to get a glimmer of understanding myself - if my conjecture is true. Those humans (men and women) who focus closely on career over affection often lose out in the marriage game.

I don't think it's a question of preferring a partner who's not your equal. I wonder if it's a question of priorities. Let me add my "wonder" to yours, then - and wish you a happy Halloween. RLB.

 
At 11:51 AM, Blogger Youssef said...

Combination of the two, Jo. Self-selection, inclination. Then comes the corporate lifestyle and that has a tendency to turn other selves off. Permanently.

That's what I've seen.

 
At 12:50 PM, Blogger Kim said...

Interesting thoughts...

Richard, I understand what you mean when you say that when either a man or a woman can't find balance, they lose out in the marriage game. But I also think it is easier for a man to have both, and there is some statistical evidence to support that. Your comment about "priorities" is intriguing. I'm wondering what you mean...

Joseph, self-selection? hmmm. possibly.

 
At 4:44 PM, Blogger Kim said...

I don't think it's about compromise. I was at a conference last summer. An honor award recipient tearfully thanked his wife, and said (for real) that he know that he never would have acheived what he did professionally, if she hadn't quit her own academic pursuits when they started having children.

Most of the successful women I know in acadamia do not have children.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home