Cinderella Marriages A Thing Of The Past?

[Annie]

I was listening to talk radio this afternoon on my way home. Michael Medved was speaking of a book or something, that indicates that nowadays more men are choosing wives that have similar education/earning power as themselves. It makes sense, since 2/3 of college grads are now women.

Which presents a new dilemna. Many women are saying they will pick a husband with a good rear and willing to do housework.

Any thoughts?

BTW, I can't imagine marrying a man I thought was less intelligent than myself, though I strongly believe that degrees have zero to do with intelligence, just a sign of many, of an ability to 'stick with something.'

 

[jillian]

I was listening to talk radio this afternoon on my way home. Michael Medved was speaking of a book or something, that indicates that nowadays more men are choosing wives that have similar education/earning power as themselves. It makes sense, since 2/3 of college grads are now women.

Which presents a new dilemna. Many women are saying they will pick a husband with a good rear and willing to do housework.

Any thoughts?

BTW, I can't imagine marrying a man I thought was less intelligent than myself, though I strongly believe that degrees have zero to do with intelligence, just a sign of many, of an ability to 'stick with something.'

I don't think there ever was such a thing as a "cindarella marriage". Women thought the guy on the white steed was going to "rescure" them. Instead, they were left financially unable to extricate themselves IF a marriage went bad. Now women get to choose based on whatever criteria criteria they wish (some might make sense, some not... same as men). The good news is now we go in as equals and not as subservient... most of us anyway.

 

[Annie]

I don't think there ever was such a thing as a "cindarella marriage". Women thought the guy on the white steed was going to "rescure" them. Instead, they were left financially unable to extricate themselves IF a marriage went bad. Now women get to choose based on whatever criteria criteria they wish (some might make sense, some not... same as men). The good news is now we go in as equals and not as subservient... most of us anyway.

I disagree. There were plenty of marriages where the woman was quite a bit younger and less educated than the man, yet managed to keep herself up to date on things that interested him, raise the kids, help with his work-especially if he owned the business. I knew lots of parents like that when I was a kid. The marriages worked and the kids ended up educated.

Interesting by product of the marriages of 'equals', they may well account for the fact that their is a growing divide between the 'haves' and 'have nots.' So many wish to blame any institution, but the real culprit is most likely our own culture.

I know both my sons are only interested in women that are determined to have careers and family-in that order. Of course, they haven't chosen a partner, are not finished with school, and do not have children.

 

[Nienna]

I know both my sons are only interested in women that are determined to have careers and family-in that order. Of course, they haven't chosen a partner, are not finished with school, and do not have children.

Children make all the difference, I think. I have more education than my husband, yet, once we had kids, my heart was in the home. Men are more capable of going off to work without worrying about the house and how well the children are being cared for. I, and many of the women I know who work, are able to do well in the workplace, but still feel torn between involvment with the kids and their careers.

Most women base a large part of their identity on their relationships. Most men base a large part of their identity on their work. Just the difference between pink and blue. (Read The Essential Difference: The Truth About the Male and Female Brain, by Simon Baron-Cohen, and Family, Socialization & Interaction Process, by Talcott Parson & Robert Bales.)

As far as women being subservient slaves, I don't think ANYONE is happy in that situation-- men, women, or children. Men place more value on capable, intelligent, informed women, and women are happier when men are INVOLVED with the family.

 

[dilloduck]

I was listening to talk radio this afternoon on my way home. Michael Medved was speaking of a book or something, that indicates that nowadays more men are choosing wives that have similar education/earning power as themselves. It makes sense, since 2/3 of college grads are now women.

Which presents a new dilemna. Many women are saying they will pick a husband with a good rear and willing to do housework.

Any thoughts?

BTW, I can't imagine marrying a man I thought was less intelligent than myself, though I strongly believe that degrees have zero to do with intelligence, just a sign of many, of an ability to 'stick with something.'

Sweet !!!! I have a nice rear and do housework !!!!

 

[jillian]

I disagree. There were plenty of marriages where the woman was quite a bit younger and less educated than the man, yet managed to keep herself up to date on things that interested him, raise the kids, help with his work-especially if he owned the business. I knew lots of parents like that when I was a kid. The marriages worked and the kids ended up educated.

Kids still end up educated if their parents take an interest. But you don't know if those marriages worked behind closed doors. It isn't our job to "entertain" our men.....

Interesting by product of the marriages of 'equals', they may well account for the fact that their is a growing divide between the 'haves' and 'have nots.' So many wish to blame any institution, but the real culprit is most likely our own culture.

Two people work in a marriage largely because they need to in order to provide what a single income would have provided in my mother's day. The growing divide between haves and have-nots is a result of economic policy, not equality in marriage.... nor have I ever seen anything indicating that would be the case.

I know both my sons are only interested in women that are determined to have careers and family-in that order. Of course, they haven't chosen a partner, are not finished with school, and do not have children.

Good on your sons! Maybe it's because they've seen how hard their mom has worked and wouldn't want a woman who isn't an equal partner.

 

[red states rule]

Rosie O'Donnell, Man of the People
Congratz to the lesbian Gandhi, Rosie O'Donnell, who married her longtime Significant Other Domestic Life Partner, Karen Carpenter, in the face of overwhelming opposition from that fascist hatemonger Bush!

"We were both inspired to come here after the sitting president made the vile and hateful comments he made. Sometimes civil disobedience is necessary to insure freedom for all. Isn't that right, babycakes?" Rosie snarled at the press while holding her blushing bride in a loving head-lock.

"Merp!" Carpenter agreed. Carpenter, a former dancer and marketing executive for Nickelodeon, has produced 9 of Rosie's 17 children, impregnating herself with a turkey-baster filled with sperm purchased on eBay. "We just want to be treated like normal people, is that so much to ask?"

Although the two had been cohabitating for six years, it was George Bush's sudden support for a Constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage that forced the couple to tie the knot.

"We should conduct this difficult debate in a manner worthy of our country, without bitterness or anger," Bush spoke to reporters at the White House last Monday. "In all that lies ahead, let us match strong convictions with kindness and goodwill and decency."

For the folks at home, that's secret code for "Let's exterminate the queers". Good ol' Rosie saw right through it.

"I think the actions of the President are, in my opinion, the most vile and hateful words ever spoken by a sitting president," O'Donnell hissed in response to Bush's speech. "I could just rip his head off and shit down his neck!!"

The newlyweds celebrated their nuptials along with thousands of San Franciscans by castrating Bush in effigy, followed with a dildo sword-fight on the steps of City Hall.

This open-minded, tolerant blogger wishes the O'Donnell family all the happiness in the world, and may God protect them from the right-wing Christians who only want to spoil everyone's good time.

http://blamebush.typepad.com/blamebush/gaylesbitransherm/index.html

 

[007]

I was listening to talk radio this afternoon on my way home. Michael Medved was speaking of a book or something, that indicates that nowadays more men are choosing wives that have similar education/earning power as themselves. It makes sense, since 2/3 of college grads are now women.

Which presents a new dilemna. Many women are saying they will pick a husband with a good rear and willing to do housework.

Any thoughts?

BTW, I can't imagine marrying a man I thought was less intelligent than myself, though I strongly believe that degrees have zero to do with intelligence, just a sign of many, of an ability to 'stick with something.'

I wouldn't marry a woman with a low income, no continuing education. I sure don't want a dependent. Money is too tight these days. I'm looking for an asset, not a liability. But, and I say butt, she better have a nice one... :cof:

 

[Mr. P]

Cinderella Marriages are a Hollywood movie fantasy for the most part.

Birds of a feather...and all that stuff is more realistic. IMO.

 

[Bonnie]

I disagree. There were plenty of marriages where the woman was quite a bit younger and less educated than the man, yet managed to keep herself up to date on things that interested him, raise the kids, help with his work-especially if he owned the business. I knew lots of parents like that when I was a kid. The marriages worked and the kids ended up educated.

Interesting by product of the marriages of 'equals', they may well account for the fact that their is a growing divide between the 'haves' and 'have nots.' So many wish to blame any institution, but the real culprit is most likely our own culture.

I know both my sons are only interested in women that are determined to have careers and family-in that order. Of course, they haven't chosen a partner, are not finished with school, and do not have children.

I think this raises a disturbing point in that we as a society are much more interested in qualifying who we marry based on status, etc, first, then love second. It seems this is what modern feminism has brought us, not sure if it's a good thing, or a bad thing? Maybe it's best for women to not worry about how marketable they are to a man, but rather decide early on to always be able to take care of themselves without one, and then the men will naturally gravitate towards them, hopefully with love the first thing on their minds, not her income potential. ?

 

[Bonnie]

I wouldn't marry a woman with a low income, no continuing education. I sure don't want a dependent. Money is too tight these days. I'm looking for an asset, not a liability. But, and I say butt, she better have a nice one... :cof:

Oh you romantic fool you!!

 

[Trigg]

Two people work in a marriage largely because they need to in order to provide what a single income would have provided in my mother's day. The growing divide between haves and have-nots is a result of economic policy, not equality in marriage.... nor have I ever seen anything indicating that would be the case.

I would say most marriages are between two people with the same social and economic background simply because people are comfortable around people who are like them and have the same experiences for the most part.

I'm just going to disagree with you on the point above. I don't think most people have to have two incomes because of the economy. MOST of it has to do with people wanting everything they see on TV and going into debt to get it.
It really isn't difficult, I do it every day, to have one income with children and still go on vacation, out to eat and have a nice house. But it does take having a budget and sticking to it which sadly this ME generation isn't willing to do.

 

[Nienna]

I would say most marriages are between two people with the same social and economic background simply because people are comfortable around people who are like them and have the same experiences for the most part.

I'm just going to disagree with you on the point above. I don't think most people have to have two incomes because of the economy. MOST of it has to do with people wanting everything they see on TV and going into debt to get it.
It really isn't difficult, I do it every day, to have one income with children and still go on vacation, out to eat and have a nice house. But it does take having a budget and sticking to it which sadly this ME generation isn't willing to do.

I agree, Trigg... And, the standard of living is higher now than back in the day. My mom had one tv, one car, not NEARLY as many toys, clothes, etc as are considered standard these days. It is harder, because other kids get all this STUFF, and my kids feel they need it, too. But, they have survived so far having had to share bedrooms, take some hand-me-downs, and with only ONE tv in the house. They are in surprisingly good health, even with these deprivations.

 

[Trigg]

I agree, Trigg... And, the standard of living is higher now than back in the day. My mom had one tv, one car, not NEARLY as many toys, clothes, etc as are considered standard these days. It is harder, because other kids get all this STUFF, and my kids feel they need it, too. But, they have survived so far having had to share bedrooms, take some hand-me-downs, and with only ONE tv in the house. They are in surprisingly good health, even with these deprivations.

Amazing isn't it!! I see people everyday with two kids and both parents working full time and they look at me and wonder how we do it with 4 and me not really working. It's all about finances and being able to handle money. I hope and pray that my kids absorb some of what they see and are told about money and don't just run head long into the world thinking a credit card will solve everything.

Nothing wrong with hand-me-downs either my sister who just had her 3rd hauled away a bag full of things my son can't wear anymore. My daughter is the lucky one, being the only girl she usually gets new, unless I luck out at a garage sale.

 

[Bonnie]

I agree, Trigg... And, the standard of living is higher now than back in the day. My mom had one tv, one car, not NEARLY as many toys, clothes, etc as are considered standard these days. It is harder, because other kids get all this STUFF, and my kids feel they need it, too. But, they have survived so far having had to share bedrooms, take some hand-me-downs, and with only ONE tv in the house. They are in surprisingly good health, even with these deprivations.

I remember when buying a new vacuum was a big deal, now you just need to go to Target, and for about 45 dollars you can have a new one within an hour and be back home using it.

 

[dilloduck]

I agree too---you can make it without both parents working. I see it all the time. Doing with "less" isn't going to land you in the poor house and you might even learn the true value of things compared to the true value of people. We've already got all the spoiled kids that we need.

 

[Mr. P]

There is a great deal of truth in ‘most couples are only one pay check away from bankruptcy’.
No way is a two income family needed just to survive and live well today. It is about I want, I want.

It’s about financial responsibility. You wouldn’t believe the ‘professionals’ that walk into my wife’s office with $50 or $60 thousand in credit card debt, some exceed $100K. Same with many blue collar workers making $60k or so a year. It boggles the mind.

 

[Nienna]

There is a great deal of truth in ‘most couples are only one pay check away from bankruptcy’.
No way is a two income family needed just to survive and live well today. It is about I want, I want.

It’s about financial responsibility. You wouldn’t believe the ‘professionals’ that walk into my wife’s office with $50 or $60 thousand in credit card debt, some exceed $100K. Same with many blue collar workers making $60k or so a year. It boggles the mind.

We struggled with a difference of opinion on this subject for years. I finally won. We just have a mortgage and one car payment, and we are comfortable. Our kids can't have everything they want, and neither can we, but we have everything we NEED, and more.

 

[Bonnie]

We struggled with a difference of opinion on this subject for years. I finally won. We just have a mortgage and one car payment, and we are comfortable. Our kids can't have everything they want, and neither can we, but we have everything we NEED, and more.

Same here, mine wants no debt at all, which seems unrealisitc, especially if car repairs are needed, so from my prespective a couple of thousand is manageable.

 

[Trigg]

There is a great deal of truth in ‘most couples are only one pay check away from bankruptcy’.
No way is a two income family needed just to survive and live well today. It is about I want, I want.

It’s about financial responsibility. You wouldn’t believe the ‘professionals’ that walk into my wife’s office with $50 or $60 thousand in credit card debt, some exceed $100K. Same with many blue collar workers making $60k or so a year. It boggles the mind.

Good Lord, my husband and I hate to get up over 1 thousand.

SAVINGS ACCOUNT PEOPLE!!!!!!!