Saturday, January 15, 2005

Independent Women Can Bet on Being On Their Own

My parents were in Flatbush for shabbos, which they usually try avoiding at all costs. But they had very close friends’ son’s aufruf…and my mom (and I) had made the shidduch. So, there they were when a good friend of my grandmother approached my mother in shul to tell her that she has a friend with a son she thought would be good for me. Apparently, she mentioned my name to his mother who said, “Oh, he already went out with her. He really liked her a lot but she’s a militant vegetarian, and that wasn’t for him. So he said no.”
It took me a while to remember who this guy was and I went out with a total of how many shidduched guys--three, perhaps four? Then it dawned on me. He was the guy who told me that when he comes home late from law school hungry, he can’t just reach into the fridge and prepare himself something to eat because his mother makes food ahead of time and if she opens a container with food for Wednesday on Wednesday and it’s missing a portion, she’ll be upset. Instead of solving this by, say, making his own food for his own 20-something self, he tells his mother he’s hungry and she prepares a dinner for him. He also told me that his sisters are really accomplished--they can already cook like his mother and they’re only in high school! Needless to say, I didn’t go out with him again.
My 16 year-old brother teases me often that no one’s ever going to want to marry me because I won’t cook meat or chicken. I usually respond that I’m not looking for a son; I’m interested in marrying an independent man who won’t need me to wipe his tushy, pick his laundry off the floor, or cook for him.
As for me being referred to as a “militant vegetarian,” I was a bit upset. How stuck in his own little world does a guy need to be not to notice that a vegetarian who suggests a non-dairy restaurant (on a first date) because he’s the hungrier one is probably not all that militant? And besides, I’m way too laid back to concern myself with what other people eat. And I only preached how gross the process from birth to feed house to slaughterhouse is once at a table--and I was out with my family who were bugging me about not enjoying the delicious, amazing Prime Grill steaks they were all eating. As a matter of fact, I’m only a vegetarian because when I look at meat the voices in my head that usually sing me songs when I walk start up a chorus of “moos” and when I look at chicken I hear “baaawk, baaawk” and subsequently get very nauseated. If I cared so much about being a “militant vegetarian,” I’d get rid of my suede skirts and leather bags and shoes. It’s pretty obvious from meeting me that I’m no militant when it comes to saving animals.
Hence, my theory: Shidduch Boy was afraid he’d have to do something for himself if he were to marry me (namely, cook).
Maureen Dowd’s op-ed for the January 13th New York Times is called, “Men Just Want Mommy.” In it, she writes, “as Dr. Stephanie Brown, the lead author of the study, summed it up for reporters: ‘Powerful women are at a disadvantage in the marriage market because men may prefer to marry less-accomplished women.’” Unless, of course, like Shidduch Boy, you consider accomplishments to mean cooking abilities.

Dowd’s article was interesting--but nothing I didn’t already know. I mean, doesn’t everyone know that “a high I.Q. hampers a woman’s chance to get married?” Weren’t we all already in the know that “women who challenge men are in trouble?”
A beautiful, educated, genius of a girl I know never went on more than one date with any of the guys she was set up with except for the one she ended up marrying. Apparently, guys were not that interested in a girl who was intelligent, intellectual, and enjoyed conversations. (And if you’re thinking it was her looks, I can guarantee you that with her soft brown curls, humonganoid brown eyes, and beautiful body that that wasn’t the issue.)
I cannot imagine that there are no men out there who like girls who challenge them intellectually, or who talk to men with no less assertiveness than they talk to women with, or who don’t plan on cooking for them. As a matter of fact, I’m certain of it. But then…I am still unmarried.

8 Shpeils

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Um, I cook pretty well and often cook for our family. I don't have to "expect" it from my educated and intelligent wife because she also knows how to cook well and often cooks for our family. There are times when I am very busy and need her to take over the cooking, and yes, even make sure there is something for me. There are times when she is very busy and I take care of the cooking.

Point is that while you are right about this schmuck, you probably need to re-evaluate the whole no-cooking-for-him posture. First of all, it's nice to be able to cook well for yourself and for others. Second, cooking for somebody is a form of caring for them and even mature, serious adults need somebody to care for them sometimes. Third, you will have guests over, and it's nice to be able to treat them to good homemade food. Fourth, hopefully, you'll have children, and it's important they eat real food, cooked lovingly by their parents, both for health reasons and for the memories. Fifth, it doesn't have to be an ideological battle, it's just cooking.

Are you planning to have a career? Will that career prevent you from cooking? Maybe that's what this op-ed to which you refer is discussing? It's missing the point, by the way. It's not that men don't want to marry powerful women, it's that powerful women often have to forego aspects of homekeeping and child-raising in order to achieve the success to which she is referring. In some cases, that is acceptable to the couple of the man, and in some cases it isn't. The reason it might not be is not that the man is selfish or wants to be able to work the long hours himself, it might just be that the man wants a partner who is there for the family on a regular basis and on an equal basis with him. That is very difficult to achieve with many high powered careers like senior business executive, law firm partner, senior doctor, etc.

TM

Sunday, January 16, 2005 2:32:00 AM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Anonymous Anonymous said...

or the man not of the man.

TM

Sunday, January 16, 2005 2:34:00 AM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Blogger BrownsvilleGirl said...

Thank you for being so thorough, you make some really true points (cooking for somebody is a form of caring for them and even mature, serious adults need somebody to care for them sometimes).
So, here’s how it really goes. I’m addicted to baking and cook every chance I get...and I don’t only make one cookie or one portion of what ever it is I cook.
The issue really surfaced when my brother started making fun that I’d have to learn how to cook meat and chicken for my husband. That, naturally, upset me because it’s hard for me (as a serial reader of Gourmet magazine since I was 17 and total food-phile) to imagine marrying someone who is incapable of preparing a piece of meat well. As for my future husband making himself meat and me making myself something else for dinner--I think that’s perfectly fine (I make myself dinner every night because even when my mother makes dairy food the caloric content is too much for me to stomach--but that’s getting into something totally different).
When I have my babies...I am pretty sure it’s going to kick in on its own. I realized that the definition of mother is one who selflessly gives of herself to her children whether they obviously need her or think they don’t (father, of course, would be the masculine form of the word) when I experienced a strange misfortune that forced me to make a choice between living my life for myself or (hating it at the moment but) living for my hypothetical babies. It wasn’t a fun decision, but when faced with it--it wasn’t hard for me to choose.
With regard to career paths: I started college with the intention of becoming a producer for a news program one day. I knew television broadcasting is a tough field to break into, so I applied for internships before my first semester even began and through a fluke and amazing luck, landed an internship at CBS News. My department and I got along so well that they had me come back as their intern for the next semester. While I loved it, I realized that I’d never be able to raise a family and be home with my children enough if I’d continue in television and I'd have to think of something else. I doubled up my major so that I’d be both a Media Studies and English with a concentration in creative writing Major with the intention of doing something journalism related (something I can do somewhat from home). Then, after getting (a bit too) involved in our Israel Advocacy on campus, I realized that I would have difficulty just sitting back and writing about things that are happening. I need to be making those things happen. Around then I realized that I’d make a great campaign manager. But that idea had to be crossed off my list of jobs if I want my children to know me by more than my voice. It took me this long, but I finally realized that the Yiddish saying, “man plans and God laughs,” applies to moi just as well as others.
Although your take on Dowd’s article is sound--I’m pretty sure, after reading the whole thing, that she is not referring to anything like what you say! The women these men fall for are seemingly just as busy as other women. Only, they’re busy working as personal assistants and secretaries and housekeepers for these men. Two key paragraphs in her article:
“I'd been noticing a trend along these lines, as famous and powerful men took up with the young women whose job it was to tend to them and care for them in some way: their secretaries, assistants, nannies, caterers, flight attendants, researchers and fact-checkers.
Women in staff support are the new sirens because, as a guy I know put it, they look upon the men they work for as "the moon, the sun and the stars." It's all about orbiting, serving and salaaming their Sun Gods.”
While you may be one of the many exceptions to this commonality, MOST men (hence the usage of the word: commonality), are not. It’s unfortunate, and sad, but truuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuue! I had a discussion once with the woman I learn with about dating and she said that she was often times told, “If a boy wants a chavruta, he’ll get a chavruta. He’s dating girls because he wants a wife.” Understandably, when you look for a potential spouse your only concern shouldn’t be intellect, but I think it should be a part of it. I'm not so sure my point is still clear now that I've rambled so much. I hope so, though.

Sunday, January 16, 2005 3:38:00 AM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Um, yeah, you did ramble, but what the hell, we all do.

Dowd's evidence about "support staff" is cute but meaningless. There are plenty of support staff women who are quite intelligent and well educated. They are simply younger and at an earlier stage of their career so they serve in a capacity that requires less responsibility or are simply on a low rung on the career ladder at this point.

Maybe it's the men I know, and admittedly, there are few Orthodox men among them, but we are all married to intelligent and educated women who can more than hold their own in a conversation, in the household, or in the world out there.

In some cases, these women have more education than their husbands and have higher earning potential. In all of these cases, save two, the man works harder than the wife and the wife tends to find flexible or part time employment. This is a conscious decision reached independently and separately by the couples because all realize the importance of having one parent who dedicates more time to the children, and the women tend to prefer to be that parent. It might be that this group is the exception to the rule, but I don't think so. The two families that don't have this arrangement have two spouses with flexible schedules. They split schedules and duties evenly or fairly. These people are the highly educated individuals Dowd is talking about and I can tell you that the people I describe are far more typical than those she describes.

Now, I've seen Ms. Dowd. She's attractive, she's a good writer, she's as smart as a whip. I'd date her in a minute. I would think many men would do the same. Maybe the problem is that men back away not from intelligence but from ascerbic or militant feminism - you know, the kind of feminism that talks about how most men are something or other and that something or other always has negative connotations (like claiming that men don't want to marry or date highly intelligent or successful women). I wouldn't want to marry or even date (well, maybe grudge-date to prove a point) somebody who can make these negative generalizations about men.

Finally, a woman might "look up" fawningly at a man because she's still younger and serves on his support staff. Why wouldn't a man find that appealing? The question is why Ms. Dowd thinks that woman is less intelligent or capable than other women who, say, might choose law or academia as a career? That woman might be less intelligent and might not be less intelligent, who knows? As you pointed out, people have to intern somewhere and have to move up the career ladder in most careers. If one is bitter and sour, no matter how successful, that person will have a poorer chance of finding a life partner than somebody who isn't, regardless of age, wealth or education. One simple truth regarding this is that younger people tend to be more positive and less jaded and cynical than older people. That may be one of the attractive features about younger women or support staffers to men. That has nothing to do with intelligence or capability.

I hear you about your challenge in cooking meat and don't have an easy answer. Hopefully you'll meet somebody who isn't interested in you because of your cooking, and who is understanding about this matter. If you set this as a minimum benchmark, however, you may be challenged to find a partner simply because I don't think this is a very common consideration. How about falling in love, getting to know each other, finding things in common that matter, and then bringing this issue into the relationship?

TM

Sunday, January 16, 2005 11:37:00 AM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Blogger Mesiach said...

OI VEY

Sunday, January 16, 2005 4:19:00 PM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Blogger Mesiach said...

Honestly dina i think one of the sexiest things about you is that your self sustaining and semi independent... Though i think a good cook is important and you've got that down too...I mean your the sweetest girl in the world and a hottie to boot. (i think thats the expression) This un-hollohic O-guy was a heartless "richard"...:)(not TM; the guy she went out with) TM is really intelligent and makes great points. And i know you and i know that you are far from a vegitarian militant. you should stop of the o-buys and go for a secular guy...PS it might seem that im inlove with dina but shes really a good friend, so dont take things out of context.

Monday, January 17, 2005 12:20:00 AM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Blogger BrownsvilleGirl said...

TM-

Thank you.
Thank you so much for your very thoughtful response! After this sentence: "These people are the highly educated individuals Dowd is talking about and I can tell you that the people I describe are far more typical than those she describes." I felt better and after your whole response, I felt excited.
Of course, I know there are people out there who are not like the ones Dowd described...it was more of a series of bad experiences (mine, a friend's, and my sister's) that confused me and I just seemed to find my answer in the wrong place.
Anyway, thanks.

Monday, January 17, 2005 10:36:00 AM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Anonymous Anonymous said...

We all have bad experiences. And then we have good ones. It's life...


TM

Monday, January 17, 2005 1:35:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Check out our Punks tees!

And our really cool MFFC:HCC tees!

Powered by Blogger Listed on 
BlogShares