Aug23 |
 |
If You Want To Be Happy For The Rest Of Your Life, Never Trust Forbes When Choosing A Wife
I’ve been trying to get my head around this pseudo-advice column from Forbes with the snappy title, “Don’t Marry Career Women.” There are, really, too many questions about it to ask in one post, but I’ll try a few: Who approved this article? What search terms did they use to find the excellent stock photography in the slideshow? Is the writer of this piece ever going to get laid again? If your wife works as well, why is your house more likely to be messy — wouldn’t the extra cash allow you to hire a maid? Who goes to Forbes for dating advice? Isn’t that like going to Maxim for in-depth geopolitical commentary? And that’s just a sampling of what’s going on in my head. But, really, the best part — besides the slideshow, which you should watch — is the article’s closing paragraph:
So, after an article where the writer has confused correlation with causation, he warns us not to confuse correlation with causation. Thanks, Forbes. Update, 6-ish: The article appears to have been taken down, furthering speculation that the staff of The Onion hacked into Forbes.com and put up that article. Don’t Marry Career Women [Forbes via Gawker] |
|
|
|
Ugh. Seems like Forbes is trying to reinstate the “trophy wife” idea. Cuz we all know that bored housewives never cheat.
Maybe the reason for the higher rate of divorce among “career women” is the fact that these women are financially able to become independent. They don’t depend on their husband to support them, so if they’re unhappy in a marriage, they are able to leave it. Whereas a housewife with no career skills may have a much harder time convincing herself to leave an unhappy marriage for the uncertainty of independence.
Also love how it makes it sound like a bad thing for women to have high standards. Jeez. Maybe we really are the devil.
For Forbes’ sake, I hope none of those “career women” out there subscribe to their magazine.
Funny, I just blogged on this too. It just boggles the mind that the article got past editing. Was it because the author is the editor (?). God help them.