Sunday, February 16, 2014

Alpha Mail: Don't feel pity for the single cat lady

Chances are, she's been warned many, many times and fully merits her fate. This was the response to an article in the Wall Street Journal which advised college women to spend more time focusing on their future marriages than their careers:
What follows is an interesting string of comments about that article that I lifted from Facebook. I know some of these people. Names have been replaced with initials to protect the ignorant.  My comments are in italics:   SS (posted the article to Facebook): I had to check the date on this article incredulously a couple times. Eff this. Although I'm pretty much a 1950's housewife myself. [This woman met her husband in college, dropped out, held a few clerical jobs, and is now a stay-at-home mom, but the article is crazy?]
    BPK: Oh God. This isn't satire? Yikes. [I'm slightly impressed that the first response wasn't "Wow just wow" or "What the actual fuck" or involved the word "bullshit"]

    KJ: That's bullshit and a half. [There it is. It's bullshit, case closed, end of discussion.]

    AB: WTFH?!?! OH HELL NAW - FUCKTHATSHIT [The feminists fall into formation quickly]

    SS: Can't believe the Wall Street Journal published this. [I'm not entirely sure why she would consider herself an expert on what the WSJ would or would no publish. I can almost bet my life that she has never read an article from the WSJ web site that wasn't brought to her attention by a feminist/Democrat associate]

    AB: I can't either. This is appalling.

    RM: "It's okay if you don't want to make marriage your primary goal in life, but here's how to structure your entire life to ensure that you'll get married." [Liberal Catholic, failed first marriage, gained a lot of weight, public school English teacher. Is for some reason appalled that Susan Patton is offering advise to the large number of women that are making marriage the primary goal their in the life.]

    SS: "Because admit it, married is the best thing you can be."

    JM: That was disgusting. I couldn't even read half of it! [This was one of my favorites. It's strange the things different people find disgusting: killing children and rewarding irresponsibility would be on my list. Giving women who want to have a family the advise to not fuck around because time is short is what disgusts her. And this strong empowered suffragette "couldn't even read half".]
    PL: Well I'm going to say I agree with the concept. I didn't start looking until I was done with college and my internship and we see there that got me. Most then were already married. College has the best mix of men who are more like you. I tell young women now. Find. Him. In. College. Because after, it's horrible awful frustrating nightmare of a dating world. [First dissenter. This one is 40-something, no kids, never married. No cats, but a French bulldog, which is arguably worse. She's a goofy sort of welfare and free healthcare type of liberal, but not a bitter feminist. Usually there's no seriousness in anything she says, so this comment really stuck out to me.]

    PL: If you want to be married that is. Haha.

    CBW: That HAS to be a joke. I cannot wrap my head around it any other way. She's trolling us. [She can't believe everyone doesn't think just like her. Women aren't supposed to be empowered to think outside the orthodoxy I guess.]
    PL: I agree the article is horribly written. But the concept that college is the easiest place to find a husband if you desire to be married? Yah. Cause after is a crappy dating world. I. Know. Girl I could tell you stories. Not dating a lot in college with eyes open to find someone is one of the very few things in life I regret. [A woman admitting regret and making mistakes, and the rest will have none of it.]

    SS: Keeping in mind that I got married when I was 20 and am being a hypocrite, isn't college a little young to be making a decision on a life partner? (I fully accept that I was married remarkably young and I am very lucky that it has worked out as well as it has. I would not recommend getting married at 20 to others though. [My husband] and I have managed to somehow grow up together instead of growing apart.)

    ML: I'd like to hope that whoever picked the stock photo for the article agrees with our shock and disgust and went out of their way to find the 50s-est looking picture they could find. [Any break from feminist articles of faith elicits "shock and disgust"]

    AH: Bullshit artcle. What kind of world us  that author from in thinking that a man/marriage is the most important thing you need in your life? This just cannot be a serious article.

    PL: I don't think so [SS]. A whole lot of people do. And we decide what our life's work will be in high school when we choose a major and a college.

    ML: [addressing PL from above] No we don't, we may pick a major and a college but it's how we grow and evolve while actually IN college that chooses our life's work, and even our life's work is rarely a static thing. Even if you end up in your chosen field I can't believe there's anyone who's doing exactly what they thought they'd be doing in high school. And that's the problem with the article too. It's taken something that's part of the organic natural progression of something and making it a static goal. Instead of general dating tips which may lead to more complex, vulnerable, mature relationship it's teaching young women how to land a husband. [Who wants to succeed in obtaining their desires? Just let shit happen.]
    CBW: If my divorce taught me anything, it's that there are FAR more important things in the world than being somebody's wife. [If it's not important to her, it's not important to any woman. So says the statistically likely instigator of the divorce.]

    SS: Right. 50% of marriages end in divorce. If we groom ourselves from a very young age to become something that has a 50% chance to fail we're taking a big risk.

    RL(male) I don't know, if you figure her target audience is young women heading into the corporate world I think her advice is spot on (but poorly written). Actually for young men and women. Approach your personal life like your professional, network and network now. Dating in the corporate environment is a mine field.

    PL: Well, I'm doing what I said I'd be doing in the 7th grade - I'm an architect.  But I'm not married and THAT I regret. Telling young men and women who want to be married and have a family that they can wait and meet someone later in life is just a damn lie.

    SMM: "Once you're living off campus and in the real world, you'll be stunned by how smart the men are not." True story.

    RL: Esp if you're female, every year you get older but 20 y/o's stay the same age.

    ML: As a 26 year old who is no longer in college and who does indeed have trouble dating now and who WOULD like to be married and have a family I'll be damned if I'm going to interpret that it's because I wasn't marriage-minded enough when I was 20 and now I've just missed the boat. [This one missed the boat at conception because "she" is a post-op transsexual. I doubt being an older saggier transexual in 10 years will lead to more successful dating.]

    RL: Maybe not missed the boat, just that there isn't as many boats in the port. I did it, I was there.

    PL: What [RL] said. It's just so much harder is all.

    RL: There's a lot of finding someone that's single and then finding out WHY they're still single.

    ML: Well, I'm still looking for The One and I think like I always did that he'll be someone that I just find naturally...I'd feel like if I went at it like this article suggests I'd end up clinging to someone out of desperation than love, but that may just be me.

    RL: That's why I'm saying the article is poorly written and I'm saying "network". I would have written it to say,"while dating in college, make a point to keep in-touch with the ones that share your goals/values/interests. Why? Because when you're in a place that you want to get married he might not be still available, but he might have a buddy that is."

    CBW: The idea that women are too focused on being intellectual, or shouldn't have career aspirations that would allow them to earn more than their (potential) husbands is absurd and patently offensive. I can't believe anyone is even trying to defend this article. Sure, it's easier to meet people in college. This is why online dating sites now exist. Every other premise she poses in this article is b.s.

    ML: Haha if I lost the chance to be with the guy I would SO not want the guy's buddy...I suppose that's my main block with this, the EPIIIIIIIIIIIIIC sexism of the article aside, I'm immensely put off by a rational, risk-assessment approach to dating with the goal being marriage, it feels very unnatural to me-plus, I feel almost like I'm using people when I try to network as it is, I'd definitely not be able to bring that into the dating sphere. Perhaps I'm a hopeless romantic. Or na├»ve. Either way, I do not regret any past decisions that may have led to me being single, nor will I ever, even if my dreams of having a family never come true. Also, I just read the comments, which are full of men explaining that feminism has ruined marriage because a woman who cares about a career is not marriage material and women need to refocus on motherhood and relearn 'feminine patience' and so now I'm too upset to rationally discuss this without using a large amount of violent swear words except to say that I feel the very idea of teaching anyone to be 'marriage minded' is dangerously regressive no matter how it's presented, and I'm out.
What a great bunch of gals! Notice how some of them can't even write correctly, but repeatedly try to claim the article is "poorly written".


jaybeespancakes said...

Why is it a virtue for those people to be so overcome with their emotions that they cannot complete an article, argument, or sentence? For people who think that the 19th Amendment was a mistake, this just provides more supporting evidence.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

OT: There's a good discussion on dating, marriage, and hook-up culture at National Review Online in response to a couple of articles on these topics.

Jason Roberts said...

The "poorly written" insult reminds me of a micro-aggression

Eric said...

I think the "poorly written" thing is all about establishing rapport. Same as "This guy is a nutcase, but he has a point" or "I against everything he stands for, but I agree that..."

tz said...

She's single, but there is no cat referred to, just an english bulldog (I wonder if she will try to get to use a litterbox), and "she ain't no lady". If she is a "single cat lady", she won't be after the acquisition of a second cat.

The exchange ... was ... I'd say surreal, but even that has a grounding in reality and the exceptions are the critical quality.

Ravings of a lunatic is closer.

LP 999/Eliza said...

Wait til the true self is revealed; cat chics (over age 60 something) will be so broke they will be eating cat food wondering why her 15 cats are unhappy with her.


Black Poison Soul said...

A good example of the denial of reality. See it everywhere and all the time.

Just for a joke: "too long; couldn't read". He. He. He.

cailcorishev said...

It's interesting to watch the herd instinct at work here. At first, they all just freak out; the whole thing is "disgusting." Then a couple of wiser, older women -- boss hens -- start stating the facts. The flightier members of the herd try to maintain their opposition while being respectful of the boss hens, which calms them down and forces them to focus on specific problems they have with the article. The ones that haven't actually thought it through fall back to lame criticisms like "poorly written" (as if anything posted to Facebook isn't). The ones with some ability to think concede parts of the article, like the fact that it is easier to meet someone when you're younger, while lamely nitpicking smaller and smaller things about it.

In just a couple dozen messages, a couple of dissenting women were able to calm the herd and turn it considerably in another direction. They probably didn't end up "winning" the argument, but I'll bet some younger girls -- maybe lurkers -- took what they said to heart.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

I don't know about you guys, but I'm going long on Friskies and vibrators.

Magister Wood said...

And don't forget batteries, Laguna Beach Fogey.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

MW ~ Indeed.

harry12 said...

Wondering if that bulldog is a male?


Paul, Dammit! said...

Holy hell, I'm so happy I married a foreigner. Even reading this made me pucker up so badly that I dragged my chair across the room when I got up to get a beer.

OH, man, I lol'd at Laguna Beach Fogey's comment, though.

2870b918-77c0-11e3-b9bd-000bcdcb8a73 said...

Pharyngula has a post on this article, with similar reactions. Imagine my amazement. Vox, you really should put that place back on your list of target-rich environments at VP.

Marissa said...

How do a bunch of science worshippers (Pharyngula) ignore biology so brazenly?

Some dude said...

I just realized. All of those responses are based on fear. They are terrified.

Live Fearless said...

Nice work... with clarity. Susan will be proud of this. Forwarding to her.

subject by design said...

I am surprised by the venom they have towards the notion of marriage being a goal for anyone. They seem to think that marriage is evil unless it just "happens" when two people meet and fall madly in love. It is ok for women to plan for an education or to plan for a career, but to make any plans or set goals about relationships like marriage and parenting is sexist? Their sense of importance is seriously skewed.

haus frau said...

"I am surprised by the venom they have towards the notion of marriage being a goal for anyone."

Sour grapes.

cailcorishev said...

Yes, for the older ones it's sour grapes, plus whistling past the graveyard of the fear that they've missed their chance. For the younger ones, it's resentment toward the idea that they ought to stop having fun and get serious already, instead of riding the carousel for another decade or so.

Post a Comment