More Complaining From Maureen Dowd
Maureen Dowd of The New York Times is doing what she does best. A few months ago, in her op-ed column, she lamented that successful men have taken to marrying secretaries, publicists, nannies and flight attendants, as opposed to female executives. I originally blogged about it here. And for the record, I still stand by what I said — being successful is one thing. Being a castrating bitch is a completely different story.
But Ms. Dowd is still fuming. She’s still mad at successful men for marrying “down.” It doesn’t seem right to her that despite decades of feminism, straight women still want to be attractive to men, and that they like it when men pay for them on dates.
Now I’m no relationship expert, but men and women do have their differences (aside from the physical). It doesn’t mean that women as a group are less intelligent than men. They just have their differences. And it’s not a bad thing. But the impression I get from reading this latest rant is that Dowd, and women like her want men who will be just like their girlfriends. Not suprisingly, these same women will probably get upset when their men buy them toasters for Valentine’s day.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:35 am
“Now I?m no relationship expert, but men and women do have their differences (aside from the physical).”
Evolution has created differences in a man’s and woman’s brains so that united together, they would be more successful in surviving and raising children to adulthood.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:39 am
“Dowd, and women like her want men who will be just like their girlfriends.”
Very insightful comment. I never thought of that, but it is probably true.
These women are doomed to disappointment because the men they want already have boyfriends.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:46 am
Jake,
I think Maureen Dowd has trouble raising herself to adulthood!
I like your second comment. After gay marriages are legalized, it is easy to see how the Dowd crowd will want to have legalized bisexual polygamous relationships as well.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:54 pm
Dowd would probably be ecstatic over polyandry, but would undoubtedly have relatively more trouble finding more than one husband than she would/did finding the first! That, and why would she want anyone to think she has lowered herself into “an equal partnership”, when it’s so obvious that no man could ever be her “equal”.