So, the latest backlash against women is the recent article in Forbes.com proclaiming that men should not marry "career" women. (http://www.forbes.com/home/2006/08/23/Marriage-Careers-Divorce_cx_mn_land.html) While I was wondering aloud what exactly a "career woman" was, I read futher to find out it means any woman who works more than 35 hours a week and makes more than $30,000 a year. So technically, both before and after my divorce I wasn't a "career" woman (whew) - but heck, why did I end up in divorce court anyway? I'll tell you why. Because stupid generalizations like the ones stated in this article do nothing to help today's family. Being a stay-at-home mom working part time jobs to make ends meet didn't stop my husband from straying. Working part time jobs that kept my income under $30,000 only served to make me totally unprepared for the day I suddenly had to become the main breadwinner for my children and myself. And supporting my ex through school and helping him fulfill some of the duties of his "career" did nothing to help me prepare for the fast approaching "golden years."
It is very convenient for the "career" man to blame the collapse of his marriage on the fact that he married a "career" woman, but in reality, there is no such simple answer. Perhaps there should be more pre-marriage counseling - actual classes that address the realities of life once the glow of infatuation fades. Couples should know before they tie the knot what each other's expectations are for household responsibilities, child-rearing, even how to handle business trips and long work hours.
If this article is to be believed, then divorce should only be a problem for the upper middle class and above - and without a statisical expert sitting next to me, maybe that is true (but I doubt it), since the working poor, women AND men, don't have the luxury of deciding whether or not to marry a "career" person - they are just trying to survive. And that, in itself, is a career.
No comments:
Post a Comment