Normally, I wouldn't link you to Fox News. I have standards.
This gem of a piece is worth a click for the shits and giggles, however, because it is internet GOLD. Go forth and read it, then come write us your best comeback in the comments. The OP does not have comments enabled, so show off your ladywordsmithing badassery for us, where it will be appreciated. I'll make some egg nog and Bill O'Reilly gingerbread men.
Thanks for rating this! Now tell the world how you feel via Twitter.
How does this post make you feel?
-
Inspired
-
Smart
-
Tickled
-
Hungry
-
Empathetic
-
Smash!
![Avatar of [E] Selena MacIntosh](http://images.persephonemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/avatars/2/525b390ed076747baf7acbfaaa75cb17-bpthumb.jpg){kind=avatar}
This is a very poorly written article. Maybe there’s something wrong with the men she spoke with instead of women in general. In marriages you have to be willing to compromise and willing to try different ways of doing things to make things work. If someone isn’t open to these things, he or she isn’t worth marrying.
So, men don’t want to get married because I don’t want a life tied to a kitchen? More women than men are getting college degrees, true, but I don’t think that’s due entirely to women scaring off men. And if they are scared of me being too smart for them…haha oh well that’s their loss!
Also, linear career goals? Since when is that necessary or even good? And who says women don’t have linear career goals? What does that even mean?! (I guess this is why I need a man, to explain it to me…/s)
Venker lost any credibility by claiming her conclusions are based on interviews with ‘hundreds, perhaps thousands’ of people. Does she not know how to count?, or is she just living in that rarified Fox News atmosphere where details like facts are less important than whatever point you want to make? (Not that there isn’t plenty of other material there to pick apart as well!)
That was some USDA Prime horseshit.
I actually read a response to this article before reading the original, thanks to the magic of Facebook. And this says it way better than I ever could: http://www.salon.com/2012/11/26/what_this_guy_needs_to_succeed_less_competition/
This response was pretty funny, I thought: http://feministing.com/2012/11/26/how-to-write-a-trend-piece-on-gender-relations-for-fox-news/
Good news , Everybody!! Women can turn around this crazy, unnatural War on Men if we just surrender to our nature! Our femininity!!
Phew- I’ve been doing it wrong all these years! Good thing Ms. Venker how to make it all better so I can get me a husband to take care of me, protect me, support me (but only financially!), and make me the mother I am naturally supposed to be! Now marriageable men will be coming out of the woodwork!
I mean, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?! Amiright?
The whole idea of “surrendering” myself to a man’s will is quite shocking in and of itself. It connotes not being in the marriage as equal partners, that the man gets the final say in nearly everything because of x, y, and z, regardless of whether or not his decision is good or bad. What next? Will she be writing relationship advice books aimed at women with Dr. Laura?
Man, if my blood pressure was ever low, all it’d take would be crap like that to put it into the stratosphere. Just SO much wrong with it. But the nutshell is the same BS nutshell it always is; men should always get their way, because they’re the default and women are second-rate and less important.
Plus, if men provided for a spouse in that ‘traditional’ manner, FOX would call that woman a freeloading, gold-digging, do-nothing. It’s only okay to them to be a SAHM (or worse yet, SAH non-M) if you live in the servant’s quarters and never yapped about needing anything or wanting basic human rights.
I’d just love to hear those people explain why exactly being an equal partner is such a bad thing. Not a ‘everyone has to do the same thing’ partnership, but an equal one, where both people have needs that are met, talents that are used, sacrifices and compromises that are made. etc. Why can’t men help fulfill the needs of their partner too, instead of feeling entitled to having their needs met at the expense of others? Why can’t each party be responsible for communicating and respecting the other? Ugh. Just, ugh.
I stopped at’ since feminists first took to the streets in the 1970′s’. Yeah, that was *totally* the first time women marched for their rights. Totally. And if you believe that, purple monkey dishwashers gave us the vote, too.
But QoB, suffragettes don’t real! When in doubt, blame feminists. The men folk like that. Plus everything was beautiful I’m the 50s, so whatever I don’t like mist have happened after that.
Ok autocorrect had a field day with that reply…
It is glorious. Want me to set it straight? I mean, can’t you edit it yourself?
My edit button seems to have disappeared.
Hmm now you mention it ..I only have one instead of my regular two. To the bat mobile!
Was it autocorrect? Or was it your angry man-hating womaness getting in the way of rational thought? ;)