We get emails fairly often, actually. Most are nice. Some are weird. But a few, like this one, are extra-special. (The post he’s referencing is this one). Check out MRA-in-training Vincent explain why career bitchez are screwing over teh menz:
You all might recall me from some postings I made under the name “Vincent” to an August 23, 2006 blog entitled “Why You Should Marry a Doormat” which attacked Michael Noer’s article in Forbes warning against marrying a career woman. Well, my soon to be ex-wife and I are nearing a settlement. I will be getting 60% of the marital assets, she will be paying me alimony and child support and we have a 50/50 custody arrangement, which I fought seeking primary custody, but because of my incompetent woman lawyer and the bias of the courts against men when it comes to custody, the best I could do was 50/50. My wife’s words to me as we left the courtroom–”I am going to remarry a man who can financially support me.” So much for career women, huh! And therein lies the problem, women have the option of marrying a man who can financially support them, can declare it and aggressively pursue such an option and society will think it natural. How would society view a man who publicly declared he was going to marry a woman who could financially support him and aggressively sought out women who would financially support him?
As for me and my kids they are in psychotherapy, as is my wife and I. I take anti-anxiety medication and an anti-depressant. To my oldest son who is now in his early teens and taken an interest in girls I caution him not date girls who are “too smart.” With what I am going to get from this settlement I plan to open my own practice and try to resurrect my career.
So for my ex this whole aggressive pursuit of a career didn’t work out so well, nor did it for me or my kids and until women can accept the burdens of being a primary breadwinner, avoiding career women may be some good advice. So as I say to my son, I don’t care if the girl you date is tall or short, or pretty or ugly, she can be blonde, a brunette or redhead, just so long as she doesn’t have career aspirations.
Can you believe those biased courts and those incompetent woman-lawyers who only gave Vincent here 60% of the marital assets, child support, alimony, and a 50-50 custody arrangement? If there were any justice in the world, that bitch would be out on her ass, sleeping in a box on the street, and Vincent — who is obviously the Best Dad Ever — would get all the marital assets and sole custody of the kids. “Giving Dudes Whatever They Want” is how we define “fair” in MRA-ville (town motto: Puttin’ Bitches In Their Place).
Because, you know, Vincent’s wife = All of Womankind. And if you act like Vincent’s wife, or if you have half a brain, you may never score an eligible bachelor like Vince. So strip off those pantsuits, renounce your feminist overlords and put on an apron, ladies, because he won’t be single for long!
I’m sure the reason Vincent’s awful wife left him is because she’s a career bitch — not because he demeans women, thinks 50/50 arrangements are “unfair” (even when he’s getting 60% of the assets plus support), and tells their son to marry someone stupid so that he has a live-in maid instead of a partner.
No, it’s definitely the career that convinced her to leave this gem of a guy. Back in the good old days, she would have been totally financially dependent on him, and so she wouldn’t have been able to leave. And that, friends, is how a family should be.
{ 91 comments }
And therein lies the problem, women have the option of marrying a man who can financially support them
Apparently, just like he did since he’s getting alimony *and* child support (alimony in all but extreme cases is pretty damn well extinct these days).
Poor Vincent. Previously married to a crazy woman who’s now going to look for someone to support her, since she’s going to be supporting him and the kids, even though she’ll be looking after them half the time.
So he doesn’t want women to look for careers, without which his ex-wife wouldn’t have been expected to pay *him* support, I’m pretty sure. At the same time he begrudges women their socially-acceptable ability to look for a man to support them (and describes it as “the problem”), and yet tells his son that he should be dating less-than-smart women, presumably so that his future wife will rely on him for support, so that she can then be resented for her reliance on him… It’s a classic case of The Wimminz Is Wrong No Matter What They Do.
I feel bad for his kids.
my brain is full of rage and disappointment, but i can’t put it into words…the self-unaware idiocy of some people is so astounding it’s left me completely speechless.
8/23: NEVER FORGET
It’s men like him that make me extra motivated to have a successful career. I’d rather work my whole life in a career I find rewarding and be totally alone than be dependent on any version of an asshole like him. Thankfully I don’t have to make that choice though, because there are men out there who treat women as equals.
I can’t really tell though, is this an argument against women having careers because it goes against nature (hence her new desire to be supported and all the need for psychiatric care), or is he saying that he’s on to our little scheme to bring our Matriarchal Overlords to power? Both?
Something that makes me feel better when I see asshole antifeminists or asshole conservatives, etc. making asshole arguments like this – I don’t have to care what they think. I get to live my life how I want regardless of how steamed it makes them, and the march of progress is with us.
Everyone should have a partner who *can* support them, and would find a way if it came to it. Male or female. Because autonomy is good, but in a partnership, one or another partner might be out of work at any given time.
I feel awful for his poor son, getting all that poison dumped into his head.
‘No, it’s definitely the career that convinced her to leave this gem of a guy. Back in the good old days, she would have been totally financially dependent on him, and so she wouldn’t have been able to leave. And that, friends, is how a family should be.”
HAHAHAHAHA
Awesome :)
This guy is just stupid. He gets a majority of everything, half custody, and she pays him twice, once for alimony and once for child support, and he’s still complaining it’s not fair?
He sounds bitter. Hopefully his therapist is working on that.
Looks like he DID look for a woman to totally support him. Looks like she got tired of him leeching…though it appears he will continue to leech. And now he’s all butthurt because the gravy train isn’t as lavish as he would like. BAWWWWW, the poor menz! *eyeroll*
Don’t date smart girls, because they’re bright enough to figure out who the pricks are and leave them! Date a stupid girl so that you can get away with being a prick *and* soak up all her income, or else dominate her because she lacks adequate income to get away from you.
Vincent, you’re a giant wuss. Pull up your panties and get over yourself.
I feel bad for those kids.
Good luck, Vincent and Unnamed ex-Spouse.
Vincent: Stay in psychotherapy. You’ll uncover much more underneath the blanket of rage directed at her “career.”
If you treat your “woman lawyer” with as much respect as you do your ex-wife, buddy, I wouldn’t be surprised if she lacked zeal in pursuing your OMGZ RIGHTS!!!.
What a charmer.
My step-dad got his first wife pregnant very young (that’s actually why they got married, I believe), and their marriage didn’t end well. He decided that he didn’t actually need to deal with that pesky “child support” for the first few years after they divorced, and now he’s up to his ears in debt, even though both of his daughters from that marriage are in their 20s. Naturally, he blames this on his ex. Now, he consistently gives my 17-year-old brother (his son) “advice” that essentially comes down to, “Don’t trust those crafty women, son. They’re all out to get pregnant so they can get your money. Also, they’re dirty, and sex is dirty, and it will lead to them getting pregnant and taking your money.”
Hopefully Vincent’s son responds to his father’s advice the same way that my brother responds to his: always with an eye roll, and sometimes with a snappy comeback.
Why would any of us doubt the veracity and objectivity of an anonymous, vitriol-spewing MRA’s self-serving account of his own divorce?
All I can say is: ewwwwwww, creepy guy.
What a wonderful argument for community property. As a law student studying family law, it always amazes me that douchebags like this can make off with these kinds of deals. 60% *and* alimony!?? POOR BABY.
Look out, Vince! This here career woman is- horror of HORRORS- a children’s psychotherapist! All of my fancy college learnin’ can only help me to fill your children’s minds with all of my strong womanly flibbidyjib! We’re coming to get youuuuuuuuuuu!
John McCain?
But what if his son *wants* to be a stay at home dad? Isn’t that something his son and future wife should figure out for themselves?
@gathchiq: Please don’t use gendered insults on this site. “Pull up your panties and get over yourself” as an insult is framing femininity (symbolized by panties in your comment) as inherently weak and degrading.
He reminds me of my brother, who spent his 9-year-long first marriage being supported solely by his wife while he worked toward his PhD (oh, yes! 9 years–and it was another 3 before he actually *turned in* his dissertation. He’d also spent the previous 26 years of his life being supported entirely by our parents–all college degrees included.) His first wife finally kicked him to the curb and he *had* to get a full-time teaching position.
My brother has always relentlessly pointed out the hypocrisy of others, while ignoring the constant hypocrisy emanating from himself. So this should not have surprised me. I’ve always been the primary “breadwinner” in my marriage. It’s nice because I love my job and all of my co-workers; it’s also allowed my husband to take jobs that fulfill him but don’t have high salaries. So when my husband became unemployed while back, it didn’t really affect us much, and he didn’t have to take just anything so we could make ends meet. I was happy, my husband was happy. Who wasn’t happy? My brother. He told me that I should leave my husband because I “deserved to be married to someone who could support” me. Just…wow.
But back to the email: Here you have a man who, apparently quit his “practice” (though I find it *highly* unlikely that he is in the medical or legal profession) in order to be supported by his wife. Maybe he was a stay-at-home-dad; maybe he just eventually became one. And now he’s complaining because he got a crappy (read: AWESOME) divorce settlement. Though I do kinda love this: “As for me and my kids they are in psychotherapy, as is my wife and I.” Grammar aside, this is there to pacify your obvious concern about how he and his kids are doing after all this mess. He *knows* you don’t care about how his witch-of-a-wife is, but he can hardly tell you that he and the children are (stigma alert!) in *psychotherapy*, without telling you that his ex is equally stigmatized.
(I also love that they’re not just “in therapy”, or “seeing a therapist”…they’re in PSYCHOtherapy…as if we might have otherwise assumed that they were all in Physical Therapy.
I’m hardly going to try and address it all, but the funny in this email never stops. I wasn’t written by Jonah Goldberg by any chance, was it?
What a delightful man. I can see why you’d all regard him as such a catch.
It’s a different world and I don’t think any of us can really say what the effects of women being in careers is having on families. There will be both good and bad things, and we should all try to find ways of diminishing the bad things (such as the stresses kids will feel and the anger the parting married people may feel from the situation.) I would suggest less anger at this person for saying what he thinks and more attempts at trying to understand something that maybe a lot of guys are experiencing when married to career women.
“You all might recall me making comments in a post from over two years ago”??? Sounds like Vincent is a real narcissist, and I think Vincent’s ex-wife is dancing in the streets as I type this.
I don’t think any of us can really say what the effects of women being in careers is having on families.
Perhaps you meant to say the effects of having two working parents. Or perhaps you were just being sexist.
Economically, most families need two incomes. Those of us who have single parented, even while making more than average, can tell you that one income is generally not enough to take care of the family and plan for the future.
understand something that maybe a lot of guys are experiencing when married to career women.
As opposed to what a lot of women are experiencing when married to career men?
I love the advice to his son to not marry a bright woman. Vincent – I hope you didn’t want bright grandchildren either.
I think I found where Vincent came from. (yes, I have nothing better to do. Don’t judge me!)
He found that entry because some privileged boy linked to yours just long enough to call your analysis “shrill” and to say that the article was more reliable because it cited studies. Asshat.
I’m still torn between laughter and tears. Or maybe I’ll settle for laughing through my tears. Or just laughing so hard I cry.
“Perhaps you meant to say the effects of having two working parents. Or perhaps you were just being sexist.
Economically, most families need two incomes. Those of us who have single parented, even while making more than average, can tell you that one income is generally not enough to take care of the family and plan for the future.”
No – I meant what I said and it wasn’t sexist. The change at issue is about women with careers. Perhaps you are looking to pick a quarrel?
You presume to know much about me in your response. I am a single parent, but I suppose I should thank you for just assuming I’m ignorant and maybe only wondering if I am sexist.
“understand something that maybe a lot of guys are experiencing when married to career women.
As opposed to what a lot of women are experiencing when married to career men?”
Again – what is at issue is women with careers and how men are responding. Trying to answer every idea with an all encompassing make everyone happy to be included response would only make for a long and off the point response.
Nah. What’s at issue is that he’s a misogynist twit. If he’d said nothing other than “my marriage ended because my wife’s career took her away from me” that’d support your point. But that’s not what he was on about. He insisted that all career women were bad news. Which is misogynistic nonsense.
Also, coming to a feminist blog and telling women feminists to stop being so angry is just lame.
Wow, I am feeling less surprised that comments to an article about changing the law to make breaking a restraining order a crime in Ontario focused on how the courts are so mean to men. Oh, and women are evil people who want restraining orders just to keep fathers away from their children. OMG. Sadly, there are a lot of Vincents out there. I honestly don’t know what men expect if they are not satisfied with 50/50 custody.
This guy may be a rare find, but his very existance shows that women have indeed made great gains in the corporate/financial world. Most recent statistics show that 60% of newly graduating college graduates are now women. In select cities like New York, Boston, San Francisco, women now make more than men on average (comparing similar career-levels, educations). So there is a silver lining.
That said, I think anybody man or woman, paying alimony to an ungrateful ex is unjust. I feel sorry for this poor lady. She has to work like a mule to send him monthly paychecks, so he can show her how grateful he is (not).
As women become the higher earners more and more (right now this is only at 33% of families), we will see more of this. Wifey pulling 60 hour workweeks and weekends to meet her alimony obligations, while the ex-hubby parties away on the beach with young pretty things on her dime. Gotta love our family laws!!!!
I used to think they were anti-male. Now it is clear they are merely anti-career.
Andrew, I very seriously doubt this sniveling twit is parting on the beach with drunken iguanas on an LSD trip, let alone ‘pretty young things.’
Tim, I don’t have much sympathy for men who whine and complain about career women. The world does NOT revolve around you, the Menz, or your fee-fees. Certainly it’s no big deal when fathers work a ridiculous number of hours, but when mothers do it they are bad parents.
And everyone, I know of women who were primary caretakers of the kids, and they got partial custody or 50/50 custody of the kids after the divorce (and little child support, and ZERO alimony). So even if this guy was a SAHD, um, yeah, he got a sweet deal. He shouldn’t call his lawyer incompetent, he should send her flowers and thank her for a job well done. But she’s just a woman, which means she’s incompetent, because if she was a MAN he would have gotten a million dollars. AND A PONY.
Oops, I meant David, not Andrew. My bad.
Yeah that female lawyer did a stellar job for him. Really, Feminists and MRA’s should get over hating each other. Their common enemy isn’t each other, it’s customs/laws that keep either gender down. (for different reasons).
As someone helping a friend out of an abusive marriage, I would say Vinny got the sweet deal he is so bitter about because his wife kindly agreed to it.
Our judge never *once* made any rulings.
He took the car and all functional appliances/furniture and left her with the stuff he didn’t want to pay to dump. She has residence, but not ownership, of the house and is currently paying mortgage on a property she will have to split the proceeds on. She agreed to the short end of the stick in the hopes she’d be taken seriously when asking the court to protect her son.
But the custody was based on expert (psychologist) recommendation…which led to her having full custody due to his craziness, but also insisted her son be forced into supervised visitation…didn’t stop until the kid took a bottle of pills to avoid visitation one weekend. And even then the narcissist fought it because he just couldn’t fathom the boy really didn’t want to see him.
“That said, I think anybody man or woman, paying alimony to an ungrateful ex is unjust.”
Hear, hear. What’s up with assholes who can get their due just like saints? It’s like letting annoying people have freedom of speech: not cool.
In other news, I’d be hella suspicious of a judge who decided that, for whatever reason, alimony was merited, but then backtracked on that because the recipient was not willing to engage in a requisite amount of ass-kissing. Paying alimony to an ex who doesn’t appreciate it is nobody’s idea of a good time, but the rubric used to determine these things is not supposed to involve a gratitude quotient.
It’s a different world and I don’t think any of us can really say what the effects of women being in careers is having on families.
What are you comparing it to? Women have always worked – it was only in the 50s with its post-war boom that allowed middle-class couples to live like the rich of previous eras – not being forced to have a day-job. But the housewives didn’t have maids like the upper-classes, and all housework had to be done by hand. So even in the single decade women didn’t have to find paid employment, they still had full-time jobs. The only thing that’s changed is that women now have unprecedneted financial independence. But they have always worked.
An excellent point, Kim – the “good old days” our Conservatives hearken back to was a statistical blip, 20 years of an anomalous “Leave it to Beaver” lifestyle that was very much at odds with the majority of previous experience. Only the upper classes could afford to have “live-at-home-not-working” Moms before the 1950s – those mothers who did stay home worked arduously to maintain the house, cook, and clean, and often took side jobs (such as piecework manufacturing) or tending chickens to make ends meet.
Those Conservatives that idealize the 1950s idealize a time when “women knew their place” and is very much contradicted by the large expanse of human experience.
Not to mention, tannenburg and Kim, the very real possibility that we form our ideas of the past from what we’ve seen on television or in films. It’s fauxstalgia, it’s memories based on a fictional perfect world that never was.
(…I’m having deja vu with this comment, forgive me if I’ve said this before.)
I’m a bit surprised that anyone here would take this person’s e-mail as plain fact. He may be lying. He may be just confused. He may be angry and at this point just not able to see things so clearly.
Lots of men and women qualify as idiots – but at no point are we more so than when we are hurt and angry. It can lead to saying really foolish things that are regretted later.
And we know nothing of the ex’s side of the story – does it make sense to assume sainthood on her part? She was apparently foolish enough to marry this person – isn’t that a bit suspect?
And I think what is at issue is the change for women and its effects on the family and men. Just because this man said his story in a bad way or is perhaps a bag of crap shouldn’t push the bigger change and what may be happening out there into the realm of non issue.
Kim – what is different is the rise of women in the professional classes and what that brings to it. Women always worked, but the freedom that comes with money and personal security is having effects (which I am not trying to argue as being a bad thing). I am asking the reasonable view to consider the effects are likely both good and bad, and that we would do best to concentrate on addressing the bad things. Disruption in lives – breakup of families – who knows what else – are probable results of this change.
The writer of the e-mail to this site appears to live a bit more in the world of the middle class and some money and perhaps has experienced something newer – a spouse with money and power who did not really need him. That could hurt anybody – and historically that situation hurt women – so perhaps we might let ourselves cut him some slack. Bitterness and anger over a failed marriage is not something limited by gender. Who knows what this person is really like without those feelings?
And – crazy as it seems – I actually have a mother who worked. And that was likely before most of the posters here were born given my geezer age of late 40s. No need to assume my gender is a mark of ignorance and lack of experience.
Jesus Christ what a whine-fest. This was stomach churning, is this dude a man or a mouse? Suck it up dude. I don’t mean to sound old fashioned, but whining and self-pity aren’t very masculine. Actually whining and moaning pretty much sucks from anyone, for that matter.
No, Tim, we don’t know the ex’s side of the story. We’re hearing Vinnie’s side, and Vinnie’s own words are making him look like a whinging, entitled nitwit. It says a lot that he’s emailing a feminist site to unload about how hard his life is when he’s “only” getting 60% custody, child support AND alimony (when most of the women I know–including a former SAHM–certainly never got alimony, get very little child support, and get 50/50 custody even if they were the primary caretaker (if they are lucky–again, I know one woman who doesn’t have custody and there was documented abuse at the hands of her ex). No sympathy here.
I’m skeptical of lots of parts of Vinnie’s story. Do you really think his ex told him she was going to find a man to support her?
That he posted here? I don’t know what that says, but the standard complaint about him that seems to be posted in comments is a stereotype that this person seems to be failing. What? He’s not a strong guy who is silent? He is a failure as a man and a spouse! I spit on your weakness!
I’m not sure why everyone feels so strongly about calling him a whiner. If it were a woman with the same story and response to a crappy situation would we use the same terms?
Romantic entanglements, marriage and divorce are full of conflicting stories, false facts, he said and she said problems. No anecdote is really that useful when thinking about a particular tale of relationship woe. Gay and lesbian friends have tales not that dissimilar from the traditional couplings and breakups and it has caused me to think gender politics isn’t clearly the decisive factor in such matters. Often times it is a tale of economics and loss.
There are millions of horror stories about divorce and a good many of them have the women getting the short end of the arrangement – but again – I am only trying to think about a change in society and what it means for all of us. The change is women gaining access to money and power in relationships.
what is different is the rise of women in the professional classes and what that brings to it. Women always worked, but the freedom that comes with money and personal security is having effects (which I am not trying to argue as being a bad thing). I am asking the reasonable view to consider the effects are likely both good and bad, and that we would do best to concentrate on addressing the bad things. Disruption in lives – breakup of families – who knows what else – are probable results of this change.
I don’t know, I think the freedom that comes with money and security is a GOOD thing.
Let/s see . . . . my mother spent years with my abusive dad because she quit her job to be a SAHM and could not afford to leave. I didn’t have a career woman for a mom. It wasn’t until she restarted her career and had some security that she was capable of getting out.
So, what was more disruptive for me? Watching my father abuse my mother who did not know how to get out? Or their divorce?
I danced with joy the day those divorce papers were signed. And I’m grateful that she was able to have a career again.
earlygreyrooibos,
Yeah, I had a similar experience. My brothers and I were happy as all get out when my mom and dad finally divorced. He was a controlling asshole who liked to punch holes in the walls whenever he got angry. Though my mother had to start working our household was a much more peaceful place. My mom was still there for us when we got home during our elementary school years and when we got a bit older, she was able to work more and improve our economic situation even more because my oldest brother was able to care for us until she got home in the evening.
I’m glad that my mom was able to be a career woman after my dad left. It would never have happened if he had stayed because, even as a stay-at-home-mom, she was strong-willed and he wasn’t mature enough not to feel threatened by that. Good riddance, as far as I’m concerned! It took him years to see the error of his ways and now he talks about my mother as the best woman he’s ever met and he regrets causing the divorce.
I am happy for you, earlgrey, you have a good result. Do you think it’s the same situation in every case?
I can’t speak for all families. I can only speak for my families, and the other nuclear groups in my extended family.
In my family, there is a chronic history of women marrying abusive men and not being able to get out. One of my grandmothers had a breakdown from years upon years of abuse, and was given electroshock therapy, which only makes things worse. And I think the reason that women in my famly have continued to end up in bad marriages, from which there is no escape, is because they see their mothers and aunts and think that that’s normal. My grandmothers had less recourse to get out of their marriages than my mother ever did. My one grandmother and her 4 kids (including my mom) spent years on welfare because it was so difficult for her, as a woman, to find a career that would allow her to support her 4 children all on her own (she did not receive any alimony or child support, and this was back in the days when alimony was pretty par for the course). She simply did not have the education or career opportunities available to her. I have seen the cycle get broken by my cousin (who ended up in an abusive marriage) because she had more opportunities than the previous generation.
So in my family, women have both suffered from 1)not having the resources to escape from abuse; and 2)seeing family members being abused and thinking it’s normal. There are multiple causes. And every family is different. But I could literally witness a repetition of history abuse in part because women had such difficulty getting out and supporting themselves.
One reason why I will always be a career woman is because I want to be able to support myself if I have to leave my marriage. That, and I love my career – I would work even if I didn’t have to (right now I am the breadwinner and “have to,” but I would keep my career even if my partner made more). But it’s good to know that I have the freedom and financial resources in place to help me if I am ever in a bad situation and need to get out.
Your personal and family history with such men is scary. It’s just that nothing comes without a cost and that is the point I’m making about the change in society. In your case it looks like all upside, but in other cases there may be unobserved costs that should be addressed.
I haven’t seen it, but I wonder if there is a whole new sub category that may develop of spousal abuse when men – feeling hurt and impotent – take out there anger and rage on the woman dumping him because he is superfluous and maybe even a drag on the family? Or maybe that has always existed and the change in relationship power just makes it more clear (maybe that’s similar to your story, earlgrey)? Not a pleasant thought, but again – I’m wondering about the bad things that will likely need to be addressed by the change in society.
Tim, of course a change in society will occur now that the law insures that women are supposed to have every opportunity. But many of your comments are sounding more than a little bit like “oh the poor menz.” Here are some examples:
“I am happy for you, earlgrey, you have a good result. Do you think it’s the same situation in every case?”
Of course not, but not everyone has a good result from any situation.
“What? He’s not a strong guy who is silent? He is a failure as a man and a spouse! I spit on your weakness!
I’m not sure why everyone feels so strongly about calling him a whiner. If it were a woman with the same story and response to a crappy situation would we use the same terms?”
Depends on her language. Seeing as he got the really great end of the stick in the settlement, and is still whining, probably would treat a woman the same. He didn’t lose, but he thinks he did.
“I am only trying to think about a change in society and what it means for all of us. The change is women gaining access to money and power in relationships.”
The women in question are getting money and power over their own lives, screw the relationships part. They are no longer forced to submit because of financial inbalance. Women now have choices, the choice to get married at all, choice to choose a partner based on love or finances or both, the choice to stay at home or not, the choice to follow her passion. I’m sorry but you aren’t going to get much sympathy here for “what that means for (the rest) of us.”
“The writer of the e-mail to this site…has experienced something newer – a spouse with money and power who did not really need him. That could hurt anybody – and historically that situation hurt women – so perhaps we might let ourselves cut him some slack. Bitterness and anger over a failed marriage is not something limited by gender. Who knows what this person is really like without those feelings?”
No the bitterness and anger isn’t limited by gender, but the privilege is. Oh my god, his wife didn’t need him, Poor Baby! Divorce and dissolution of relationships happen, for many reasons. The point of his email was how he was a VICTIM of a system he believes favors women, even though in his case it absolutly didn’t. And frankly, we don’t need to give anyone slack on saying misogynist things, and we don’t need to consider who he is outside of the internet. The internet is where we are, the internet is where he contacted us, the internet is where he chose to portray himself in this light.
If you are going to continue urging us to to “think of the poor menz. The wimmenz uppityness is going to hurt us,” I urge you to take it elsewhere.
“The change is women gaining access to money and power in relationships.”
“I haven’t seen it, but I wonder if there is a whole new sub category that may develop of spousal abuse when men – feeling hurt and impotent – take out there anger and rage on the woman dumping him because he is superfluous and maybe even a drag on the family? Or maybe that has always existed and the change in relationship power just makes it more clear (maybe that’s similar to your story, earlgrey)?”
Tim, Tim, Tim…..
You’ve spoken like a truly afraid middle-aged white man. I will add to the number of children who’ve had to deal with abusive fathers and only benefited from our mosthers having a career and my parents marriage ending. No, the marriage did NOT end due to my mother’s career; in fact, she was the main breadwinner in our house due to my father’s incompetence in finding work. I turned out just fine, thank you, and I assure you that any subsequent issues I have dealt with are due to the emotional abuse I suffered at the hands of my sire.
I’m noticing as I get older that some white men get REALLY bitter around their 50’s, and I’m going to assume that this is due, of course, to expsoure to the social mores in the 1950’s that seem to be finally fading into the sunset. Your intentions for your contributions to this subject may be good, but I hear a bit too much latent hostility and confusion in them for me to just take them as automatically benign. Alas, I don’t think your postings are as simple as you playing “devil’s advocate”. Something else is going on here.
And I too would remind you that this is a website designed to garner support and community for feminists. If your criticisms were constructive in nature, I would have no problem with them; however, you seem only determined to point out what is WRONG with the notion of career women in relationships. That’s neither relevant nor helpful here. Again, this website (unless I am mistaken) was created for SUPOORT for feminism and those who practice the notion that women are equal creations along with men. It seems to me as though you would do better to go to a traditional white male supportive website and express your ire there. But your comments are being wasted here. Please be utilitarian or leave. Thank you.
Ok if we are going to draw gender lines here, can anyone explain to me why 70% of all divorces (US) are initiated by women? Against the backdrop of a majority of marriages also demanded by women, isn’t this a little absurd?
Too simplistic, David. While I’m not saying that women are completely blameless in this regard, traditional marriage continues to be impressed upon women in this culture as the epitome of female sucess and desire in this country. In other words, American culture does it’s best to instill upon women the idea that we NEED to be married in order to have the best life possible. Singleness, even in the 21st century, is still considered second-rate living for females. Unfortunately, many women still for whatever reasons buy into this notion (again, societal pressure doesn’t help matters), and once the reality hits that they’ve bought into an unrealistic tradition–well, at least they have enough sense to leave the marriage before things get worse. Marriage has ALWAYS traditionally benefited the American male more so than the female. Stop blaming women for everything–men KNOW what the truth is.
Also, David 1) where did you get your info? Please cite your source, and 2) what are you even doing on here??
1) Here is my source:
http://www.divorcenet.com/states/nationwide/the_walkaway_wife_syndrome
Also, Discovery Channel Health has similar statistic on a piece called “10 Divorce Myths” if you want to google it.
2) This topic is interesting to me and this blog comes up prominently on web searches on such topics. So I can only stay if I don’t ask the tough questions right?
1) Go to DivorceSource.com and search for “walkaway wife syndrome”. Also go to Discovery Channel Health and search for “divorce myths”.
2) This topic is interesting to me and this website comes up prominently in web searches.
Suki T & 10G: I am a but surprised to be attacked as such. If this site is only for choir responses then it is probably not a place I should spend time in, but I think it’s not supposed to be that way. Please instruct me if I’m wrong.
Some responses to my posts have been in the vain of “don’t you know how horrible it has been for my familoy and me (or for women)”. Perhaps the matter is just too close for people to step away from and talk. I think earlgrey, for example, has an important story, but I have been trying to stay on the bigger point that huge changes in society should be considered for all their effects. Doesn’t sound that radical to me, but maybe it does to you. Dare I say you both appear very dogmatic?
I am somewhat surprised to be the “afrain middle aged white man”. I am being attacked for having an apparently non supportive point that there might actually be something to talk about in the matter and apparently I have a race problem too. Stereotypes and caricatures are not typically that productive – do you really feel that good about using one on me?
Well, Tim, I’d wager that most of the people here see increased opportunities for women, at home and at work, as a net positive. Perhaps you could be a bit more specific as to the “unobserved costs” you’d prefer to see discussed?
I think it’s my economics training – it make me think there is always a cost to every choice.
I’m not sure how anybody here has the idea that I think women gaining power over their lives is a bad thing – I’m only pointing out that nothing is free. Open discussion would likely reveal some of the costs. My guess is that the traditional family structure is taking a hit, but then who among lives in such a structure today anyway?
I am happy to play devils advocate against even my own positions, but the comments by some people were unnecessarily personal in my opinion.
Tim, there’s overt sexism (like the kind espoused by Vincent), and then there’s the subtler variety which comes through in statements which reinforce a sexist double standard. The notion that the only “normal” way to raise a family is for men to work and women to stay home is so ingrained in our culture as to be all but invisible. Intentionally or not, your statement implies that women who choose to work outside the home are the ones who are responsible for any negative effects on the American family. The men are effectively blameless.
Maybe so, but don’t be surprised if your own assumptions about who bears responsibility for these costs are challenged as well. Believe me, any argument with a whiff of male privilege will get cut down and quick. There’s much more to it than an “all-encompassing make everyone happy to be included response”.
But when everything you smell has the whiff of male privilege then how do you know youre sense of smell isn’t wrong.
I recommend you re-read my point and say exactly where the subtle sexism is . . . if the change we wanted to discuss is men staying home with the kids then I would have addressed it as such. The change at issue is women gaining power and money – so it’s difficult to not make that the point of departure for discussion. If your re-read concludes the sexism is just there and you know it then I cannot do much – everything I say will appear sexist to you when you disagree with me or feel the need to disagree simply on the basis of gender unity.
… and that there are “costs” associated with this that we need to be concerned about.
Your implication is that there is something wrong with women (not men) gaining power and money. Can you not see how this might be interpreted as sexist?
Uhhh…Tim? I’d say that this site being a place for “choir responses” (talk about caricatures!!) is a bit extreme, but yeah, I consider it a place for SUPPORT for female equality. So yeah…I’d reiterate that this is NOT the place for you. But I’m quite sure you’ll live..;).
Stereoptype, you say? Nope–diagnosis, I call it, and an accurate one at that. And damn straight, I am not afraid to use it on you. Especially when you give me such obvious evidence to do so. Hey, it’s not like this is the ONLY website in the world for you–hell, the whole world is still suited to white male patriarchy! You’ll find more suitable digs out there if you search long enough. Go in peace, child.
No.
Please help me by re-writing into a non sexist version.
Maybe: “The change that may or may not involve women, but maybe also men, gaining power, but not to imply that men may not be at fault for denying women access to power and money, could possibly have an effect on society that is maybe, possibly, even a tiny bit negative, but not to imply that men do not do negative things in society when they make changes . . .”
If you see sexism in my statement then you have a very thick pair of ideological glasses on you that are keeping you from seeing things outside of your frame of reference. Not to imply that only women wear such glasses and that I too might not have my own thick set of glasses that impair my ability to see your point that heretofor I was completely unaware of subtle sexism. And of course I was sensitized to my sexism (and apparently racist) views by being referred to as an “afraid middle aged white male”.
I truly did not know this is your private plantaton, 10G
“About
Feministe is one of the oldest feminist blogs designed by and run by women from the ground up.
This blog runs on Wordpress, is hosted on Powweb, and is currently sporting the Mandigo theme by Tom. The banner illustration was designed by Lauren. We thank the internet gods for the Akismet anti-spam plug-in.
Our authors:
About Jill
About Piny
About Zuzu
About Kactus
About Jack
About Holly
About Cara
About Lauren
And many featured guest bloggers.”
Actually, it’s Jill’s private plantation, and she calls the shots here, no I. I was making a STRONG SUGGESTION that you read elsewhere. I still think your intentions here are questionable. And with your response above of “No.”, I’d say someone is having a bit of a tantrum. At any rate, none of your posts here have generated anything positive, ergo, I see them as unecessary. Am trying to avoid further conflict by suggesting you find a more suitable site that you might enjoy, but now you seem focused on having a boy v. girl brawl. Whatever….I’m not getting into that with you here. Do as you like, I find you childish and I’m done here.
“FEMINISTE COMMENT POLICY, subject to revision.
Safe, pro-feminist discussion is important to us. We will delete comments that are abusive, off-topic, or include ad hominem attacks. Foul language is not offensive to us unless it is used as a weapon against a writer or commenter. Because we value our community and will work to protect that community, sometimes we will delete comments that we believe to be harmful or trolling.”
Have I violated the rules? I don’t think so, but I think some of the comments directed at me are close to the line.
Not sure I can exactly help you with a “non-sexist” version of your thesis, Tim, as it sounds like you’re perfectly content to blame the dissolution of the American family on women who forgo their God-given child-rearing duties for a career outside the home. (As opposed to, say, economic times which require both parents to work outside the home.)
But hey, that waffling-indecisve-PC-jargon is a stitch!
Oh, and Dave? That “walk-away woman” “phenomena” has no specific documentation in any scholastic or professional journal that I can find. Sounds to me like the typical right-wing male response to women exercising their rights to try to find a life and not endure the horrors that our mothers did as a result of bad marriages. Jill posted a great blog yesterday on poverty; why don’t you see what you can do to alleviate the problem in your neck of the woods? Be creative!!!
I think you are racist and sexist 10G, but it should not stop you from open discussion with someone you disagree with at this site.
I try to entertain too, dreamweasle.
i just don’t think anything I posted has a hidden meaning or sexism and I am certainly not blaming any gender or group for the dissolution of marriage (I see it as an archaic institution).
And yes 10G the “walk away wife” thing seems dubious at best.
stop being such a classic “nice guy”, Tim. I’m not interested in reading your obsequious whinges. It reeks of classic pseudoliberal stirring…
10G,
Yes those right-wing nuts at the CDC came up with the divorce states.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm
What a group of wild loonies they are.
And the Discovery Channel. I can’t believe they would fall for a lie like that. Don’t they have editorial supervision? I can’t believe they are spreading all these lies:
http://health.discovery.com/centers/loverelationships/articles/divorce.html
“The change that may or may not involve women, but maybe also men, gaining power, but not to imply that men may not be at fault for denying women access to power and money, could possibly have an effect on society that is maybe, possibly, even a tiny bit negative, but not to imply that men do not do negative things in society when they make changes . . .”
All you did was add some unnecessary words to the same statement. If you take out the “may or may not, maybe, possibly, tiny bit, blah blah blah, then you’d end up with your actual point, which is that women gaining power is a negative thing. Nobody’s sense of smell is off, Tim. Your sexism is right out in the open.
hah8 says:
“stop being such a classic “nice guy”, Tim. I’m not interested in reading your obsequious whinges. It reeks of classic pseudoliberal stirring…”
Wheeee . . . surrounded by such bright people who know the world so well. No doubt you are Dr. Hah8 – and you also have a master’s degree in snark.
Everything that you don’t agree with Bushfire is probably sexist. It must be hard to get through the day.
Dreamweasel has a sense of humor – try it sometime, Bushfire. It’s not a bad thing.
Is whinges plural for wanker, Dr. Hah8?
It’s a different world and I don’t think any of us can really say what the effects of women being in careers is having on families. There will be both good and bad things, and we should all try to find ways of diminishing the bad things (such as the stresses kids will feel and the anger the parting married people may feel from the situation.)
Tim, the thing is, you’re claiming here that the anger of men (like Vincent) is an “effect” of women having careers. That’s certainly what Vincent claims as well. This is sexist because it seems to assume that the cause of the anger isn’t patriarchal ideas about what women and men should do/think/earn, but women’s choices themselves. Now, a lot of people hold those patriarchal ideas, so in that sense, yeah, there’s going to be a link between women having careers and some men’s anger. But to say that women’s autonomy is the direct cause of marital problems–without acknowledging that it’s bullshit patriarchal ideology that’s really the problem–is just wrong. For starters, many, MANY men seem to be able to deal with their female partners having money and power–and not through magic!
Tim @ 79: If you’re really here for discussion, way to miss the whole point that bushfire made–address the fact that if you cut the deflection out of your statement, it boils down to ‘gee, women getting power is bad’ or at best another verse of ‘but what about the menz’.
Or is that not what you were saying behind all of that superfluous crap?
Calm down, man. I can’t say for sure, because I’m not privy to the intent of the proprietors of this website. I just come here because there are some excellent writers, and there’s some news I probably wouldn’t find anywhere else. But, if you want to debate the merits of the stay-at-home domestic wife, the evils of taxpayer-funded rape kits, or the sanctity of the life of a blastocyst, there’s about a billion forums on the interwebs where you can do that. I get the impression that sometimes women want to have a space they can discuss issues that are important to them, without the traditional input from concern trolls or rightwing reactionaries. I’m sure in their everyday lives, and in about 99% of cyberspace, they have to deal with the traditional shouting matches and reactionary views of billions of goons and wingnuts.
you know, i think it’s clear why more women initiate divorce- as the poster stated above, societal pressure for women to marry is huge. therefore, a lot of women marry before they are ready and subsequently realize that marriage isn’t as awesome as they were expecting.
as a personal aside, i am the first person in my entire extended family to have a college degree, i went above and beyond that and got a master’s, i have a rewarding career, i support myself and live in a large, exciting city. i also have a live-in boyfriend who is awesome. we have decided not to get married and instead, we are focussing on maintaining a good, long-term relationship. i like my life quite a bit.
to my family in alabama i am a failure and a spinster. i have my priorities wrong and i will end up miserable and alone because i didn’t get pregnant with the first man who showed any interest in me and i chose an education over child-rearing.
if i had listened to their “advice” i would have married my high school sweetheart, birthed a few kids, eschewed college and been divorced and a quite possibly a single parent by now. sounds miserable to me, but if i had followed this script, i would have been doing the “right” thing by them.
less13lee – I am in a similar arrangement as you with my awesome girlfriend with whom I live together. She has also taken the path you describe and we are the happier for it.
I think the thread is probably dead (got here late) but David, if you are still here, could you clarify
The part about initiating divorce is well documented, but how do you know that women “demand the majority of marriages”? I’ve never seen any stas on that.
Hi Unree – The evidence is anectodal, but you are probably aware of the many different variants of magazines like Bride. Very colorful, very glossy, and very appealing. Now, how many issues of “Groom” have you seen lately? How many men go about dreaming about “the big day?”. The simple fact is that we just don’t.
I don’t know if anyone ever researched it empirically. I don’t know if any university or government body would fund such research. But if they did, I would expect that at least 70% of marriages have happened because the woman in the courtship eventually demanded it.
This is not a slander on women. As one of the above female posters pointed out, there is a lot of social/religious brainwashing and pressure on young girls that they must get married at all costs, and that they will be ruined/wasted nobodies if they don’t succeed. Many women get cheated out of their most fun, beautiful, young, and carefree years because they went with the program and pulled the trigger too early. Then one day, many years later, they wake up next to men they don’t find attractive (and perhaps never found attractive at a true chemical level) and say what have I done?
I know this person and all of you who said he is getting alimony are wrong, though I note he says he’s getting alimony he misunderstood. He is getting 60% of the marital assets in lieu of alimony and he will be seeing his kids 187 days fewer per year than he did before. If you read his posts from August 23, 2006 and obviously, few of you did, he made substantial sacrifices to accommodate his wife’s career ambitions. Any wife who made similiar career sacrifices would have ended up with primary physical custody and helluva alot more. He has been for most of his children’s lives the primary caregiver to his children and the reason why he is on anti-anxiety medication and anti-depressants is because he will be seeing alot less of his kids while he trys to resurrect a carreer while in his 50’s. Also, after making the sacrifices for his wife’s career that he did, his wife had an affair. So all you people who have castigated this good man should be ashemed! I don’t anticipate that this post will see the light of day.
Oh, yeah and legally speaking child support isn’t for him its for the kids.
Tim nails the issue. Most women don’t feel comfortable in the primary breadwinner role and equally true most men don’t feel comfortable in the primary caregiver role. There are a plethora of articles dealing with this recent phenomena of women in the primary breadwinning role wherein women express dissatisfaction with the role that they find themselves in. I link to one such articale here
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/CollegeAndFamily/LoveAndMoney/SecretLivesOfBreadwinnerWives.aspx
Vincent’s wife found herself in that role and decided she didn’t like it and dumped him after he had made sacrifices for her. Vincent, in many respects, was the wife here and I guess what many of you feminists are saying is no man should ever be a wife, right?
Comments on this entry are closed.