I see your point, but all this doesn't apply to the woman in the original post.iqqi said:Someone mentioned here that you can't be against feminism, and also expect women to compete with men when it comes to success.
If I were a man, I'd be much more interested in a woman who seemed moral and intelligent enough to take care of my home and children. Not on a maid level, but I wouldn't expect a CEO to leave her career to raise the kids, and that is what I would prefer.
I was raised in a single parent household, so my own views for myself as a woman differ a bit. I would need to feel I alone could provide well for myself and children if it came down to it. But objectively, I admit I do not hold women who plan to marry and have a family in the same expectations bracket as men.
As such I also admit that my expectations for men are higher than my expectations for women when it comes to ambition. I'm not saying I think women should not have goals and ambitions. If a woman decided that aiming for the top, or aiming for DR or Lawyer status, wasn't for her because she knew she was going to end up taking off years to raise children, I wouldn't fault her. I would think a woman pursuing some kind of goal and education was more attractive than a woman who was floundering around in an entry level job.
I'd be interested in what you men here honestly thought about that yourselves.
If you're trying to defend that girl based on what you just wrote, I find it highly amusing that you are categorizing the man as a loser for not being ambitious, while giving every benefit of the doubt and a free pass to this woman when it seems very clear that this woman is just as, if not LESS motivated and ambitious than the guy.
For crying out loud, if she scored the national average on the SAT she'd probably have a better job than what she has now. For her to have the right to trade up at will while putting in a lackadaisical effort (and I mean on the bum level here) on her career is just sickening. She's just looking for a free pass in life.