the initial article caused a great uproar and then they had to post a rebuttal in order to save face. what cowards.
anyway here are my two cents:
The first article cites numbers, figures, and research data. THAT is what I like to see. And career women are less likely to provide the home environment that every well brought up career man yearns for based on what his parents told him to do when he was a boy.
this article is HIGHLY unfair to women at large because while there are Wall Street harlots out there, not ALL women do this and there are definitely exceptions to the rule.
BUT, he cited a statistical phenomenon and is merely warning men to watch themselves and play the percentages if you want to find a mate who fosters a healthy family relationship. is it wrong? you bet. but for the individual, playing the percentages is the EASIEST way to be efficient and ensure you get what you want.
Now women say this is sexist. Well what about women who ONLY look at older guys because they are more "mature" (see my previous thread discussing the reasons why women like older guys, and it's not just $$$) and they view all men with an age lens. How is that not playing the percentages? don't start sh it if you're not going to finish it.
as for the rebuttal: i feel her anger and can definitely understand. because I support women's emancipation as well.
however, I do NOT support ignorance and name calling. This women essentially spends her article throwing around subtle insults at men and brings up a few abstract examples. A FEW. the dude CITED NUMBERS AND FACTS. The woman brings a stick to a gun fight. Weak rebuttal.
Men, if you want a healthy marriage, then the chances seem greater than 50% based on a few studies that you should not marry career women.
But this is a sexist notion and the author of the first article should really think about what he is doing with his life.
and the second article is a piece of sh it. the right convictions and the right ideas but very poorly represented. but full of name calling and insults and LACK OF CITATIONS that severly weaken her argument and make it seem like nothing more than