Hot Potatoe
Suggested subtitles for this article:
Like, Duh!
The Smarter They Are, The More They Cheat -- Could It Be Because The Men They Marry Somehow All End Up Being Impotent Dorks Who Don't Pick Up Their Socks?
What Ho, Feminism?
Or, Why Michael Noer Never Got Laid Again, Except By That One Girl Who Works at The Piggly-Wiggly and Cain't Read so Good
Any submissions of your own, dear readers?
xoxo, A
(link via Gawker via Boing Boing via, y'knaw, the internets , yo)
*UPDATE*
Muchas gracias for all the love, dear Internet Denizens. But guess what, Forbes yanked the story! All hail the power of femme-wrath shitstorm. Anyway, Gawker re-uplinked. Have fun.
Ugh. I just saw that. Makes me sick.
If you really want to throw things at a wall though, read this one:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=398998&in_page_id=1879
Posted by: Jenny | August 23, 2006 at 03:25 PM
Thanks, A. -
Do you ever feel like it's gone from date to job interview? I do. I feel like I'm being interviewed for the position of Wife, and if I answer one question wrong, another guy is going to cross-check me with his Laundry List of requirements, and I'll be Checked Off.
No, you're right, I don't really need one of those male-units but it does get lonely out here sometimes.
Posted by: Siobhan | August 23, 2006 at 03:54 PM
The Nietzsche quote: "One seems not to realize that worldview is a confession of character" seems to apply here. Them damn uppity career wimmen!
I guess it shouldn't be a surprise to me that this kinda crapola is back out from the stale meme dustbin; the whole "rise of the conservative movement" thing we've been having to endure fits right in with all this ... all the guys voting Republican and driving H2s and trying desperately to prove that they measure up to their hairy-chested he-man fantasies find nothing quite so terrifying as a woman who just won't fit into their little proscribed categories.
I hate to say it, but I know of a lot of men in L.A. who are the perfect target audience for this kind of tripe...
Posted by: The Wordyeti | August 23, 2006 at 08:03 PM
Re: Why Michael Noer Never Got Laid....
Kindly warn a person before she takes a sip of coffee whilst reading it and damn near shoots it out her nose. On her desk.
That would be her desk. At work. Where she makes more than $30K a year, is single and, for the most part, very, very happy.
~C~
Posted by: Catharine | August 23, 2006 at 08:25 PM
Oh dear, Catherine, so sorry for violent nasal coffee-shooting reaction. That was never our intent.
It is batshit crazy, though, that this sort of thing is up for debate in our times. Who ever thought, after all, it would be a question, whether women should work or not? And coming from a national, supposedly neutral publication? Horrible, M. Noer!
And yes, Sioban, dating SO can be like a job interview. Either one is too Domestic and not Ambitious enough, or the reverse. And fie on that. Are we not evolved enough to allow for different dynamics than previous generations? And were our parents and their parents so happy after all?
Posted by: A. | August 23, 2006 at 10:58 PM
My word! I hardly know where to begin. Apparently, we are all still subjugated to the will of MAN, and should all go be good little wifeys, except those fickle women will never be happy because they don't know their own minds and need a man to tell them what they want, via statistics, and create a fullfilling life through sacrifice for him and the kids because, really honey, you'll be happier that way. . I love that in his entire "article' there is absolutely no hint of a husband's contribution to a marriage's failure. It's like he's saying, "keep your wives at home, without income of their own or self-esteem, and trust me fellas, they won't go anywhere. They can't go anywhere."
sorry girls, I am so very irate at this nonsense, I'm just sputtering!
L
Posted by: lizzie-pooh | August 24, 2006 at 10:01 AM
Hmmm. I have a PhD and make over $30,000 a year. I may have waited late to get married (34), but we've had a child now and will have another. I adore being a mom, and I adore my husband, who splits the job with me on a more or less equal basis.
Posted by: Flummoxed | August 24, 2006 at 01:29 PM
I usually ingore this sort of tripe but seieng as how the article got taken down makes all the uproar quite entertaining. Well done dear A. for joining in! I just hate all these dumb statistics - where is the data on say, for example, how women do with men who read Forbes at all?
Posted by: E. | August 24, 2006 at 02:35 PM
Bravo.
I like the assumption that all men like a clean house. The author clearly has never met any actual men.
Posted by: Mom101 | August 25, 2006 at 04:52 PM
" Why Michael Noer Never Got Laid Again, Except By That One Girl Who Works at The Piggly-Wiggly and Cain't Read so Good [and Lived HEA and RAISED Great, Normal, Happy, Well-adjusted Children.]" Whoever suggested the unedited title sounds like a conceited, arrogant, denigrating bitch!
Posted by: Jim Smith | August 27, 2006 at 05:36 PM
Wow, Jim Smith! We do love a personal attack.
Your comment makes a whole lot of sense, you know, cause it's *really* well documented that Americans living below the poverty line (which would sadly, be the case for our under-educated, and dare we say, FICTIONAL Piggly-Wiggly gal) live HEA. We won't even go into the typical situations for the children in these circumstances.
Posted by: A. | August 28, 2006 at 01:10 PM
Hey, E., surely you remember the Daily Mail from your trip to Urop. Sister paper of the Daily Torygraph? Look further down their webpage.. "Hitler and Stalin were possessed by the Devil, says Vatican exorcist".. "Bisexual? Olivier had his demons, says widow".
It might be best to call it a Fair And Balanced (TM) newspaper ;)
Posted by: Danny | August 28, 2006 at 05:55 PM
Ha ha ha. A -- is this better than the Post?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=402602&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
Its all news I tell ya!
Posted by: E. | August 29, 2006 at 11:04 AM
Holy Moly! That's awesome. The Post would call the article POPE GOT NO DOPE ON THESE DEVILS or something like that.
Posted by: A. | August 29, 2006 at 12:33 PM
Well, Jim, you certainly told HER.
Myself, I would have gone with: sactimonious snatchbucket, terrifyingly smug twat, holier-than-thou ho, etc...
I mean, if you're gonna insult, go with some awesome alliteration.
(Finally my years in advertising come to SOMETHING)
Love you A! Congratulations on the online attack. We're totally having a dance party when you get your first stalker!
Posted by: KiKi | August 29, 2006 at 02:47 PM
Never mind the original article, which is as ridiculous as it is hilarious, but what's with the world wide feminist hysteria about it?
Now that's pathetic...makes the self-perceived rational, intelligent and independent woman look like a screeching mud-fight whore...get a grip...
Posted by: alloy | August 29, 2006 at 08:50 PM
Sure thing, alloy, will do. Because if we've learned anything, it's that keeping our mouths shut makes everything all better.
Ah, "hysteria" is such a handy word to sling. Because of course no rational person could possibly get irritated about an ostensibly non-biased publication printing a 'ridiculous' article like Noer's.
Say, Kiki, what do you think about 'screeching mud-fight whore?' Has a pretty nice ring to it!
Posted by: A. | August 30, 2006 at 09:15 AM
Well Jim and alloy...you like yer wimmin a bit dimmin', hey? Defenders of the Piggly-Wigglyverse?
I bet you're a bunch of impotent dorks, not able to stand some strong, dry-witted gals having a bit of fun.
Good on ya, sistas...all hail the femmes of fatality!
Posted by: DynamoHummm | September 01, 2006 at 05:29 AM