Daily affirmations of a word mercenary
Andreas and my discussion of a Forbes article that has since been yanked offline (they put it back up with a rebuttal).
[16:41] Ariel Meadow: holy fuck: http://www.thestranger.com/blog/2006/08/forbes_to_men_whatev.php
[16:44] *Dre: Well, forbes is making itself irrelevant with stuff like this
[16:44] Ariel Meadow: yeah, they’ve actually taken the article down.
[16:47] Ariel Meadow: I mean, wow: “wives working longer hours not do not have adequate time to monitor their husband’s health and healthy behavior, to manage their husband’s emotional well-being or buffer his workplace stress.”
[16:47] *Dre: It almost sounds like a joke
[16:47] Ariel Meadow: They should add: “wives working longer hours not do not have adequate time to monitor their husband’s back hair and ear cleanliness.”
[16:47] *Dre: What would happen to me??????
[16:48] Ariel Meadow: destitution.
[16:48] Ariel Meadow: Hairy, waxy destitution.
[16:48] *Dre: ewww
[16:48] Ariel Meadow: I’ll save you!
[16:48] Ariel Meadow: Despite my selfishly working a job.
- Previous: Scroll down to Figure 7:
- Next: Wake-up call
3 Responses to “On being a “career girl””
Leave a reply
Hey there. I'm Ariel Meadow Stallings, a native Seattleite who's written my way up and down the Left Coast. Electrolicious is where I post daily randomata, but I also write for a living. My first book, Offbeat Bride, was published last year.
You're reading a page from the archives. Check the homepage for current content.
Sarah
August 24th, 2006 at 6:42 am
as a social scientist, that article made me want to repeatedly bang my head against something very, very hard.
as an unemployed career woman (read: abd grad student), it made me want to cry.
Lori
August 24th, 2006 at 7:05 am
Wow, thanks for the link to this! The original article is back up, along with a rebuttal from a female editor at Forbes. It’s hard to pick a favorite among all the idiotic statements in the original article, but the last paragraph, ironically, sums it up best: “A word of caution, though: As with any social scientific study, it’s important not to confuse correlation with causation. In other words, just because married folks are healthier than single people, it doesn’t mean that marriage is causing the health gains.” Dude, you just spent THE ENTIRE ARTICLE confusing correlation with causation!
Morphea
August 28th, 2006 at 1:03 pm
Quite right, Lori. What a funny man. I liked the woman’s rebuttal, mostly, though I hate being called a ‘gal’.
Statistics, feh. Sarah (as a social scientist), are statistics really THAT IMPORTANT? Seriously, every other article quotes them quite terribly seriously.
Ariel - I found your blog via Neb and JCarwen. Nice to meet’cha.
Cerise