If you ask Roy Den “Worst Dating Strategy Ever” Hollander, the answer is “YES [because I hate and fear wimmins].” But instead of missing the point, Jamie “Econ major” Keiles of Teenagerie does the math. Behold:

A+.

H/T Feministing.

Really, New York Times? The Gray Lady is at it again, telling women — in a dippy, unmoored “trend” piece — that you can be successful in work. Or love. Not both. See, because successful women scare the men away. That’s the price we pay, ladies, for liberation. “Is female empowerment killing romance?” asks the article, in a sentence so backlashtastic it’s not easy to cut and paste on a full stomach. I don’t know, I thought when female empowerment brought us the freedom to date and marry for love, not to mention use the Pill (speaking of which, must read this), that was kind of romantic. There’s so much else to eviscerate in this piece that I’m not even sure where to start, other than to say that when I opened the page and started reading, I literally had to scroll back up to the top to see if someone had accidentally sent me a link from 1997. Or 1957. Or — whatever.

Look, I’m sure there are men who are put off by “successful” — “ambitious,” “strong” etc. — women. I’m sure there have always been men like that. Even since before women were “liberated.” So, um, maybe that’s their problem? And even, even to the degree that men, en masse, are scared by female success, again: THEIR PROBLEM. Why is always women who have to dial it down? What’s more, the suggestion that so many menz are SO SCARED of SCARY SCARY WOMEN is ridonkulously insulting to men, too.

And then there’s this advice, annotated by BG in brackets:

Leave the snazzy company car at home on the first date [because MEN HATE SNAZZY CARS]; find your life partner in your 20s, rather than your 30s, before you’ve become too successful [show of hands: who in her 30s wishes they’d married that guy from their 20s?] [also, by the logic herein, that guy from your 20s will dump you when you become “too successful”]. And go after men who draw their confidence from sources other than money, like academics and artists [avoiding people who draw their confidence from money is sound advice for anyone; however — oh, for God’s sake, this is just silly].

The article does showcase some excellent boyfriends (who appear to be European. COINCIDENCE?!). See:

Ms. Kiechel in Paris says her boyfriend actively encourages her career and brags to friends how intelligent and hard-working she is. Ms. Haag and Ms. Domscheit-Berg both earn more than their husbands and report that their men actually enjoy watching the waiter’s reaction when they say their wife will pick up the tab.

That’s great and all, but it’s kind of like saying “How nice that your husband HELPS OUT with the baby!” The above attitudes should be a given, not a plus. And I know they are held by far more men than this article gives credit to. The day we’ve really achieved — or at least driven our snazzy cars closer to — liberation is the day we start to see articles telling the fellas that if they’re scared of successful women, they’re just gonna have to man up.

What we learned from watching the Super Bowl: women are frigid, scoldy bitches, unless you drink beer. What we learn from most media analysis of studies of women’s (waning?) libido is often — if less uncreative and nasty — equally reductive.

How refreshing, then, to read, in yesterday’s Washington Post, about Daphne Miller, M.D.’s thoughtful consideration — and successful treatment — of her 47-year-old patient’s complaint of waning desire. Her point, however, is not her success; it’s that when it comes to finding a “cure” for stalled libido (exercise? counseling? drugs?) one woman’s mrrrrrrow! is another’s meh. Dr. Miller writes: “A woman’s sexual experience depends on a complex interplay of her neuroendocrine system, her multiple sex organs and any number of social circumstances, and it stands to reason that there might be many places where the process can go awry.” In other words: women are complex! Also, a unicorn! Brava.

Bonus quote from Rosemary Basson, director of the Sexual Medicine Program in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. “Look,” she explained to Miller, “if there was a drug that was so potent that it could overcome all misgivings we have about ourselves, our sexual image, our uncertainty about our sexual partners, the kids banging at our bedroom door, you could not make it legal. It would be slipped into drinks. What are people looking for?”

Broadsheet’s Amy Benfer recently highlighted some antediluvian romantic advice from Countess LuAnn de Lesseps, star of “The Real Housewives of New York City.” Apparently the countess thinks she’s just dripping with gems of wisdom, which she shared with two women sitting together at a bar (one of whom happened to be surfing on her Blackberry).

Without tearing into the racist, sexist, ignorant comments that framed her words, I will attempt to deflect her message in its entirety with my Wonder Woman bracelets.  Fwing! Zing!

Sayeth the Countess, “When men see females on their BlackBerrys working hard, it really turns them off. Men like women to be females, to not be like workaholics, as that comes off as being uptight in the bedroom and control freaks.” How confused is the countess? Let me count the ways:

1. Smartphones are usually indicators of success, money, and social connection (attractive things, unless we’re in bizarro world), and in bars they are kept handy for social reasons, and also for looking up which actor from that show played the guy in the movie.
2. Dear men, have you ever been turned off by a woman who could settle your bar bet with her Bat-phone?
3. No one likes to feel neglected or ignored in the presence of a Crackberry, but she’s not saying “don’t be rude.” She’s saying, “Men won’t want to rescue you if they think you don’t need it.” The countess also doesn’t see the difference between “workaholic” and “gainfully employed.”
4. The work/life/love balance deserves thoughtful advice, preferably from those who actually walk that tightrope every day. I’m sure our readers have some valuable insight and anecotes.
5. It’s dismissive and just plain unhelpful to say that all men like a certain thing. Figure out what you like.
6. “Uptight in the bedroom” HA. HAH! HAHahahahahahahhaha! Honey, if you only knew!

I guess I shouldn’t be flabbergasted that a woman with an old-world title has a damsel-in-distress outlook on marriage, but I like to think that’s part of why people set out in pursuit of happiness to the new one.

Courtney E. Martin had an interesting piece at The American Prospect the other day about the ways in which the legalization — here and there (but not there) — of gay marriage and has prompted her to reevaluate her own aversion to the tying of the knot. As a feminist wary of wedlock myself, I can’t help but nod along with her argument that historically, marriage is both heterosexist and just plain sexist. At the same time, it’s hard for a straight gal to condemn an institution that once considered women property at the same time that her gay friends are happily flocking to California to make their love public, official, and legit in the eyes of the very law that heretofore shut them out.

(more…)