In recent discussions of Michael Noer’s article “Don’t Marry Career Women” , a controversial issue has been whether or not Noer’s sources are credible. One contributing factor is that Noer does not include a reference paper. Although it does not necessarily discredit it, in no way does it help strengthen it. In his article, Noer states, “If they [career women] quit their jobs and stay home with the kids, they will be unhappy.” This statement is his own interpretation of the studies recorded in the “Journal of Marriage and Family”. A number of people have suggested that Noer is lying about what his sources say. From this perspective, the people will believe that his argument is invalid and should not be taken seriously. Others claim that his sources are credible and his theory should be taken into consideration. In sum, the major issue is whether or not Noers article is credible, and if it is, then how will it affect our lives.
The “Journal of Marriage and Family” covers a broad spectrum of the different aspects of marriage and family. In one part, “Satisfaction With Work and Family Life: No Evidence of Cultural Reversal”, it covers the work of professor Arlie Russel Hochschild. Hochschild observes that more people are starting to use their as their haven from the house, whereas it used to be the other way around. When conducting her studies, Hochschild surveys part of the nation. With this sample, Hochschild found many facts about labor force change and individual change. One fact she was able to discover with her sample was that employment of women had increased twenty-five percent over a 24-year span. With a deeper look into the studies, she found out that the employment of women rapidly increased with married women that have...
... middle of paper ...
... Corcoran ( puts it herself, “I’ve been working since the day I graduated from college 20-odd years ago. I have two grade-school-aged children. Work definitely takes up more than 35 hours a week for me. Thankfully, I do seem to make more than 30,000 dollars. All of which, according to Michael, should make me a wretched wife. In spite of those dangerous statistics,my husband and I are about to celebrate our 18th wedding anniversary.” (Counterpoint: Don’t Marry a Lazy Man). In her article, she bases all of argument around one person, herself. She appears to not realize that studies do not cover everyone, they cover the majority of people. So she is one of the few career women that have a strong family life. One can argue that Corcoran’s argument is less valid than Noer’s because she is claiming opinions and does not consider looking at studies performed on the topic.
finally the opportune moment for individuals to build a stable family that previous decades of depression, war, and domestic conflicts had restricted. We see that this decade began with a considerable drop in divorce rates and rise in marriage rates, which is often assumed as the result of changed attitudes and values. However, this situation cannot be only just attributed to women’s
DeVault, C., Cohen, T., & Strong, B. (2011). The marriage and family experience: Intimate relationships in a changing society. (11th ed., pgs. 400-426). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth cengage learning.
In “Exploiting the Gender Gap” Warren Farrell argues that the issue of disparity between men and women’s wages does not exist. Farrell provides multiple statistics and research that contradict the ever prominent “fact” put out by the media that women are paid less than men. He then covers a range of personal examples that strengthen his argument. He, subsequently, moves beyond the simplicity of wage disparity and brings the focus of his attention to the focus on discrimination.
In “The Real Reason So Few Women are in the Boardroom,” Marty Nemko states the reasons why men are more prosperous in the workplace. He says that men choose work over personal relationships, and women often choose personal over business. Although Nemko uses rhetorical strategies to make good points about why some men are more successful in the workplace than women, he unnecessarily downgrades women about the decisions they make to be more family oriented.
At what point does work life start interfering with family life to an extent that it becomes unacceptable? Is it when you don’t get to spend as much time with your family as you would like, or is it the point where you barely get to see your family due to long hours at work? Is it even possible to balance work with family life? Anne-Marie Slaughter, the author of “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All”, believes this balance is impossible to achieve in this day and age. In contrast, Richard Dorment, the author of “Why Men Still Can’t Have It All”, believes that there will never be a day when someone will have it all, certain sacrifices will always have to be made. Both of these articles are similar in the respect that they both examine balancing a demanding career with raising children. The two authors’ views on the subject differ greatly, especially regarding how gender roles have a significant impact on our society.
College degrees, jobs, and income stream are all quantifiable items, however, a gauge on work-life balance, parenting abilities, and dedication at home cannot be measured by a number. In the past, men have been viewed as the backbone of the family. The typical day consists of getting up the earliest, going to work, coming home late at night, maybe missing out on trivial matters, but ultimately paying the bills. As time progresses, roles in households have shifted significantly. Now more than ever women are extremely active in the workforce, local communities, and politics. The obstacles faced by men and women are inherently different, but men seem to fall under an intensified microscope when it comes to intertwining family life with a career. Richard Dorment dives deep into these issues in his piece, "Why Men Still Can't Have It All." Although the argument may seem bias in favoring the rigorous lifestyle of men, the
Marriage, jobs, and politics are all areas of a culture that are influenced by a person’s environment. In the U.S., monogamy is the “normal” structure of marriage, and is a logic choice considering the type of environment we live in. Independence training is emphasized to prepare people for obtaining the highest standard of living in the U.S. Being better than another is important in this society, and is stressed to most people from a very early age. Living away from one’s parents is not only expected but also often desired by both the child and the parents. Mobility is a huge factor in the work force, and the less one is “tied down” to, the easier it is to make the necessary transitions.
Warren Farrell is a well educated man who focuses his attention on gender. In his essay “Men as Success Objects,” he writes about gender roles in male-female relationships. He begins, “for thousands of years, marriages were about economic security and survival” (Farrell 185). The key word in that statement is were. This implies the fact that marriage has changed in the last century. He relates the fact that post 1950s, marriage was more about what the male and female were getting out of the relationship rather than just the security of being married. Divorce rates grew and added to the tension of which gender held the supremacy and which role the individuals were supposed to accept. “Inequality in the workplace” covered up all of the conflicts involved with the “inequality in the homeplace”(Farrell). Farrell brings to attention all ...
However, social conditions made it less feasible for families to live this way. As the 1960s approached and consumption was in high demand, women were yet again, forced to join the work force; but only a quarter of the women joined the workforce, whereas in the 1990s about “two-thirds of women who had children were in the work force (Coontz 55). Coontz (1997) explains how by 1973, “real wages were falling for young families, and by the late 1970s, government effectiveness had decreased (Coontz 54). It was because of economic factors that the nuclear bread-winning family could only be a lifestyle a few can afford. Nonetheless, women joining the workforce created a new understanding of women-hood, changed women’s status in society, and created conflict within the household. Women did not have the time to complete all the household tasks which contributed to the increased divorce rates, but left women happier due to the fact that they had that ultimate
Both interviewees, claimed to come from equal based relationships, nonetheless, the way the interviewees answered to the subject was in a sense conflicting. Monica claimed that her husband and her shared similar views and supported each other, nonetheless that changed when her days were completely scheduled. During the interview, Monica described a situation where she had to readjust herself, her focus and her time in order to fulfill her gender roles in regards to her family. Brooke Conroy Bass (2015), in Preparing for Parenthood: Gender, Aspirations, and the Reproduction of Labor Market Inequality, focuses on the impact of children on women’s work. Bass found that women tended to let go of opportunities due to their parenting responsibilities. In a similar way Monica said, “I was constantly focused on other stuff, so I, at one point my husband did felt like he was left out from my life, because I was dedicating way to many time, too much time to work.” Monica’s statement demonstrates how she had to reduce her work time in order to fulfill her family role. In Thinking About Gender and Power in Marriage, Veronica Jaris Tichenor argues that gender is embedded deeply into society, and therefore, for a man to have a wife that makes more money, that represent a threat to his gender identity, that of being masculine (412). Similarly, Monica’s husband might of claimed to be left out as a technique to bring Monica back to reality, it might have been was a way to align her back up to her gender role, and force her to readjust in order to have the time for a healthy
The present structure of the average family in America is changing, mainly due to the growing number of mothers who now work outside the home. The current mark of dual-earner families stands at 64 percent, making it a solid majority today. This alteration of the "traditional" structure of the family is a channel for other changes that may soon occur.
...d had no evidence to back them up. With interviews, Ranson (2005) provided views from different women, but by using a small sample size the opinions still appeared to be biased. She also solely focused on the effect children would have on the women’s careers but failed to mention the financial penalties children would have on the women as well. This review considered the strengths and limitations of stating that motherhood is barrier to women’s careers, critiqued the methodology of the article and stated different approaches the author could have taken.
There was a time when women typically maintained the home and raised children while the husbands were the sole bread-winners for the family finances. However, times have changed and so have women’s rights and expectations for divorce, education, an...
Today, many women choose their own lifestyle and have more freedom. They can choose if they want to get married and have kids or not. Coontz said “what’s new is not that women make half their families living, but that for the first time they have substantial control over their own income, along with the social freedom to remain single or to leave an unsatisfactory marriage” (98). When women couldn’t work, they had no options but to stay with their husband for financial support. Working is a new way of freedom because they can choose to stay or leave their husband and make their own decisions.
Inside the article “Why Marriage is Good for You”, Maggie Gallagher makes claims that marriage improves many facets of an individual’s life; including both mental and physical health, longevity, finances, and reduced chances of infidelity (Gallagher). The statements made throughout the article reference many statistics and studies conducted by various organizations and individuals, however, Gallagher falls victim to a number of common logical fallacies. While this weakens Gallagher’s argument in the article, it does not necessarily make it false.