MSN advice for women

[starang21]

that's pathetic, a lot of weak minded and weak hearted men who can't handle a intelligent, succesful, and professional woman. get a grip, fellas...your panties are showing.

[Munchkin03]

Originally posted by KSig RC
On-topic, I think that, when taken in context, the advice is (*gasp!*) not in any way misogynistic or anachronistic, but even perhaps 'correct' (in terms of strategy for getting a mate, not like morally etc)

Exactly. This is the woman who wrote a book about getting married after 33, and how she found her husband at HBS. Women write to her for advice on how to get a man--nothing more, nothing less.

[IvySpice]

The advice may be good advice from a practical perspective and still be a frustrating reminder that the advice is necessary because some men just do not have it together in the self-esteem department and need to feel smarter/richer/more prestigious than their date.

I think the advice is likely to help the writer. I also think it's a crying shame that women should have to minimize their achievements so as not to scare men away. And they do get scared away. When I was in law school, I met plenty of men in clubs who seemed very interested, danced with me, asked for my number, etc., and then vanished into thin air after they asked where I was in school. The word "Harvard" messes with a lot of men's minds. Maybe the smart "advice" would have been for me to lie or refuse to answer the question, but I just wouldn't do it.

[starang21]

Originally posted by IvySpice
The advice may be good advice from a practical perspective and still be a frustrating reminder that the advice is necessary because some men just do not have it together in the self-esteem department and need to feel smarter/richer/more prestigious than their date.

I think the advice is likely to help the writer. I also think it's a crying shame that women should have to minimize their achievements so as not to scare men away. And they do get scared away. When I was in law school, I met plenty of men in clubs who seemed very interested, danced with me, asked for my number, etc., and then vanished into thin air after they asked where I was in school. The word "Harvard" messes with a lot of men's minds. Maybe the smart "advice" would have been for me to lie or refuse to answer the question, but I just wouldn't do it.

i agree with this. but that leaves the strong, confident, intelligent and successful women for the us men who can handle it.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by IvySpice
The advice may be good advice from a practical perspective and still be a frustrating reminder that the advice is necessary because some men just do not have it together in the self-esteem department and need to feel smarter/richer/more prestigious than their date.

I think the advice is likely to help the writer. I also think it's a crying shame that women should have to minimize their achievements so as not to scare men away. And they do get scared away. When I was in law school, I met plenty of men in clubs who seemed very interested, danced with me, asked for my number, etc., and then vanished into thin air after they asked where I was in school. The word "Harvard" messes with a lot of men's minds. Maybe the smart "advice" would have been for me to lie or refuse to answer the question, but I just wouldn't do it.

And congratulations for not doing it, because you've identified the gender politics involved in this sort of 'transaction' but not acting on it would make it all for nothing. That said, I think it's absurd to deride the author as somehow subversive to some sort of larger sense of feminine self, as some seem to want to do. The advice is a 'coping' strategy for working around an endemic problem - whether for better or worse, that's her solution. You and I seem to desire not to bow to gender imaging, but then again when I'm 45 I may have changed perspectives . . .

[starang21]

Originally posted by KSig RC
And congratulations for not doing it, because you've identified the gender politics involved in this sort of 'transaction' but not acting on it would make it all for nothing. That said, I think it's absurd to deride the author as somehow subversive to some sort of larger sense of feminine self, as some seem to want to do. The advice is a 'coping' strategy for working around an endemic problem - whether for better or worse, that's her solution. You and I seem to desire not to bow to gender imaging, but then again when I'm 45 I may have changed perspectives . . .

the problem that the author is facing is a surplus of individuals who can't get past the nature of her position or her achievements. the problem does not lie with her, so why should the author settle and introduce people in her life who can't get over the fact that they aren't as successful in their professional life as she is? it's a fact of life.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by starang21
the problem that the author is facing is a surplus of individuals who can't get past the nature of her position or her achievements. the problem does not lie with her, so why should the author settle and introduce people in her life who can't get over the fact that they aren't as successful in their professional life as she is? it's a fact of life.

See, you've inverted the issues here - obviously the overriding problem is outside of her, and she should not be punished for being successful. I think all of us have agreed, however, that the unfortunate reality is that many men do carry this bizarre bias - and I'll go on record saying that this bias grows more widespread as you move into older segments of the American population.

So she shouldn't 'have to' settle, in the perfect-world sense of "have to" - however, it appears that she's actively seeking advice on how to obviate this egocentric male bias, and since she is being faced with such a surplus, where does she go from here?

It's sad that both the author and the woman in question are facing this dilemma, but I don't think the advice is misogynistic or negative in and of itself. The 'fact of life' does not come in your desire for her not to settle, but rather in the fact that this bias does exist, and she's going to either have to hold out for one that doesn't exhibit it (which is possible, as you and I have both stated) or find a way to cope. They appear to have chosen the latter - sad, but not necessarily a bad 'strategy' (even if we don't necessarily agree).

You're missing the key point here - when you say, "why should she have to settle?" and make the correct point that it's not really her fault, you are implying that these guys can somehow all the sudden not be biased or misguided in their views on successful women to change the situation. I just don't see these guys 'turning it off' like it's a light switch - it's a cultural bias, it will take generations to be eliminated. So I can't blame her for working around it as it were.

She shouldn't have to settle - but she might have to. Sucks.

Also - while this is great conceptually, let's not discount the fact that she might just be a bitch . . . much like successful men can be unattractive when they're dicks about it, she might just be bad about her success. We don't know, so let's keep it hypothetical for now.

[XOMichelle]

Originally posted by IvySpice
When I was in law school, I met plenty of men in clubs who seemed very interested, danced with me, asked for my number, etc., and then vanished into thin air after they asked where I was in school. The word "Harvard" messes with a lot of men's minds. Maybe the smart "advice" would have been for me to lie or refuse to answer the question, but I just wouldn't do it.

I hear you IvySpice. I can't tell you how many guys have just stopped talking to me and walked away after hearing 'Stanford'. Also, I have another large pile of guys who stayed to talk, but had to bring me down with insults to make it ok (tell me they didn't think I was street smart for example).

[starang21]

Originally posted by KSig RC
See, you've inverted the issues here - obviously the overriding problem is outside of her, and she should not be punished for being successful. I think all of us have agreed, however, that the unfortunate reality is that many men do carry this bizarre bias - and I'll go on record saying that this bias grows more widespread as you move into older segments of the American population.

So she shouldn't 'have to' settle, in the perfect-world sense of "have to" - however, it appears that she's actively seeking advice on how to obviate this egocentric male bias, and since she is being faced with such a surplus, where does she go from here?

It's sad that both the author and the woman in question are facing this dilemma, but I don't think the advice is misogynistic or negative in and of itself. The 'fact of life' does not come in your desire for her not to settle, but rather in the fact that this bias does exist, and she's going to either have to hold out for one that doesn't exhibit it (which is possible, as you and I have both stated) or find a way to cope. They appear to have chosen the latter - sad, but not necessarily a bad 'strategy' (even if we don't necessarily agree).

You're missing the key point here - when you say, "why should she have to settle?" and make the correct point that it's not really her fault, you are implying that these guys can somehow all the sudden not be biased or misguided in their views on successful women to change the situation. I just don't see these guys 'turning it off' like it's a light switch - it's a cultural bias, it will take generations to be eliminated. So I can't blame her for working around it as it were.

She shouldn't have to settle - but she might have to. Sucks.

Also - while this is great conceptually, let's not discount the fact that she might just be a bitch . . . much like successful men can be unattractive when they're dicks about it, she might just be bad about her success. We don't know, so let's keep it hypothetical for now.

my entire thought process revolves around the fact that there are plenty of men in the sea who can handle a woman of her caliber. she shouldn't settle, and if the only type of men she meets are those who can't handle someone such as her, then she should keep it moving until she does. all men shouldn't and won't be able to have that sort of self confidence in themselves that would cause them to see past this sort of tomfoolery. that's what the root of the problem is, and you're correct....it's an socieital mentality that is outdated. a lot of men in this society have such fragile egos that a woman who possibly could be better than they are financially would be a huge turn off. unfortunately, it does exist. is it ignorant? yes.

[AGDee]

If you have to change who you are to be in a relationship with any particular person, for any reason, that relationship is doomed.

Be who you are and you'll end up with the right person for you. You have to be true to yourself, first and foremost.

Dee

[James]

What of the expression of your personality is caused by really neurotic tendencies as well as high amounts of uncontrolled stress and anxiety?

Remember that a lot of personaity traits are outward expressions of internal turmoil.

Originally posted by AGDee
If you have to change who you are to be in a relationship with any particular person, for any reason, that relationship is doomed.

Be who you are and you'll end up with the right person for you. You have to be true to yourself, first and foremost.

Dee

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by AGDee
Be who you are and you'll end up with the right person for you. You have to be true to yourself, first and foremost.

Agreed, but I'd also say that even if you don't end up with the right person for you, what is so bad about being alone? I'd rather be alone living in a house full of cats than be with some guy who couldn't deal or wanted some dumbed-down version of me.

[AGDee]

I agree Val.. as I'm very verbal about...

James: I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you calling me neurotic? I probably am.. which is why I haven't found a man that I can tolerate living with! But I'm aware of that and am much happier alone!

Dee

ETA: I think, James, that you are actually asking "What if there is a good reason to change yourself?" Well, I am fully supportive of self improvement, if you're doing it for yourself, not for someone else. Therapy is pretty ineffective if you're just doing it because someone else wants you to change. Same with breaking addictions. You can't quit smoking for someone else, you have to be internally motivated, for example.

[James]

No no no. Not you. I mean that generally a lot of personality quirks are an expression of uncontrolled anxiety or stress.

So it would make sense that you might want to control that . . and then all else may change with it.

Originally posted by AGDee
I agree Val.. as I'm very verbal about...

James: I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you calling me neurotic? I probably am.. which is why I haven't found a man that I can tolerate living with! But I'm aware of that and am much happier alone!

Dee

[AGDee]

Just edited my earlier reply.. I think I interpreted the question correctly there.