• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do Degreed women have a harder time finding a Husband?

Do Degreed women have a harder time finding a Husband?

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 27.3%
  • No

    Votes: 24 72.7%

  • Total voters
    33
Just to note for all, a key point in that Forbes article.



If a host of studies are to be believed, marrying these women is asking for trouble. If they quit their jobs and stay home with the kids, they will be unhappy (Journal of Marriage and Family, 2003). They will be unhappy if they make more money than you do (Social Forces, 2006). You will be unhappy if they make more money than you do (Journal of Marriage and Family, 2001). You will be more likely to fall ill (American Journal of Sociology). Even your house will be dirtier (Institute for Social Research).
 
Ah well you got a woman to agree that women are not serious and spend a hundred grand to be a glorified prostitute.

women waste taxpayers time faking education and honestly should just walk the streets like proper whores.

That is very sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself. Better hope the other members of the PC collective don't see your post--they'll demote you from spokesperson to envelope licker.
 
That is very sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself. Better hope the other members of the PC collective don't see your post--they'll demote you from spokesperson to envelope licker.

Hell yeah it is sexist.

Women don't have the sense to point out 80% women are not in grad school to be whores. Well maybe 80% are there to be whores. It's OK to be a whore just don't waste tax money on your whoredom.
 
That is indeed unfortunate, since the observations which you blithely mislabel are grounded in pitiless Reality.

If we look throughout history and across the majority of cultures, women's status has been less than men. In fact, we see democracy as being an abnormal state.

Are you suggesting that "human nature" will reassert itself and we shall return to systems where women are subordinate to men in all instances, and the vast majority of men are relegated to the position of being serfs or slaves?
 
That is very sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself. Better hope the other members of the PC collective don't see your post--they'll demote you from spokesperson to envelope licker.

LOL - he's not at all being serious or I would have jumped his **** already. He's highlighting how some men come across: 'it's ok to be a tramp - but not ok to be educated.' (yes, that's how some men seem to feel when they voice their opinion)
 
That is very sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself. Better hope the other members of the PC collective don't see your post--they'll demote you from spokesperson to envelope licker.

I agree with captain absolutely. My sole purpose in getting an education was to gain access to higher paying clients.:mrgreen:

curb crawlers just don't pay enough - and NEVER buy diamonds.
 
Hell yeah it is sexist.

Women don't have the sense to point out 80% women are not in grad school to be whores. Well maybe 80% are there to be whores. It's OK to be a whore just don't waste tax money on your whoredom.


So you think women are whores. That isn't just sexist, it is misogyny. You really should do something about your hatred of women--the bitterness will consume you.
 
LOL - he's not at all being serious or I would have jumped his **** already. He's highlighting how some men come across: 'it's ok to be a tramp - but not ok to be educated.' (yes, that's how some men seem to feel when they voice their opinion)

I was laying the sarcasm on pretty thick. Glad someone got it.
 
I was laying the sarcasm on pretty thick. Glad someone got it.

It's ok - I got it! Because I am an educated woman - I'm only a slut when it comes to my writing.

I agree with captain absolutely. My sole purpose in getting an education was to gain access to higher paying clients.:mrgreen:

curb crawlers just don't pay enough - and NEVER buy diamonds.

Hehe. "It's not a diamond, it's a moissonite." ... "a what-a-nite?" ... "...A moissanite is an artificial diamond, Lincoln. It's Mickey Mouse, mate. Spurious. Not genuine. And it's worth... ****-all..." - Snatch
 
It's ok - I got it! Because I am an educated woman - I'm only a slut when it comes to my writing.

might be interesting to start a thread on the correlation between education and having a sense of humour ....
Hehe. "It's not a diamond, it's a moissonite." ... "a what-a-nite?" ... "...A moissanite is an artificial diamond, Lincoln. It's Mickey Mouse, mate. Spurious. Not genuine. And it's worth... ****-all..." - Snatch

lols - that's why high class call girls need a degree in geology!
 
If we look throughout history and across the majority of cultures, women's status has been less than men. In fact, we see democracy as being an abnormal state.

Are you suggesting that "human nature" will reassert itself and we shall return to systems where women are subordinate to men in all instances, and the vast majority of men are relegated to the position of being serfs or slaves?

!!! *DING* *DING* *DING* !!!!

We have a winner!

This is the wrong thread for the topic, but you are correct. Prosperity, freedom, representation, abundant food, security and long life are all thoroughly abnormal, and can be maintained only through enormous, endless and expensive effort. Many people assert that they can only be maintained through the expenditure of blood, as well.

And yes, given sufficient time, all manner of horrible things will recur: subjugation of women, genocide, slavery and so on.

Militant Muslims fight to reestablish such things as we write. They have succeeded in a number of countries. No one should bet that given time they'll not do the same where we sit.

Rome was a republic before it was an empire. Athens was a republic before it was a vassal state. Germany was a republic before it was a dictatorship. Despotism recurs because it is natural to us.

This does not mean that we should surrender to our nature, it just means that that is our nature.

By the way, you made a small error, probably syntactic.

Democracy is wholly natural, if generally short lived. A riot is a democracy. A gang rape is a democracy. Sadly there is no compact term for "democratic republicanism," and because of Party names, the term itself leads to confusion.
 
Last edited:
!!! *DING* *DING* *DING* !!!!

We have a winner!

This is the wrong thread for the topic, but you are correct. Prosperity, freedom, representation, abundant food, security and long life are all thoroughly abnormal, and can be maintained only through enormous, endless and expensive effort. Many people assert that they can oly be maintained through the expenditure of blood, as well.

And yes, given sufficient time, all manner of horrible things will recur: subjugation of women, genocide, slavery and so on.

Militant Muslims fight to reestablish such things as we write. They have succeeded in a number of countries. No one should bet that given time they'll not do the same where we sit.

Rome was a republic before it was an empire. Athens was a republic before it was a vassal state. Germany was a republic before it was a dictatorship. Despotism recurs because it is natural to us.

This does not mean that we should surrender to our nature, it just means that that is our nature.

By the way, you made a small error, probably syntactic.

Democracy is wholly natural, if generally short lived. A riot is a democracy. A gang rape is a democracy. Sadly there is no compact term for "democratic republicanism," and because of Part names, the term itself leads to confusion.

ok ... so in your mind, gang rape is democracy. I see why you have a problem with women being educated. they may challenge "natural" male democracies.
 
ok ... so in your mind, gang rape is democracy. I see why you have a problem with women being educated. they may challenge "natural" male democracies.

Of course it's a democracy. The victim gets one vote, the rapists get the rest. Were you aware the the Founders were largely contemptuous of democracies? That's why we have a democratic republic. We have rule by the majority -- sort of. The expression of the public will is restricted, channeled forced to move a a sedate pace, and work through progressive levels of representation. And once expressed, it generally takes greater effort to gainsay in the future.

In a democracy, slavery and the repression of unpopular minorities is guaranteed. In fact, in a true democracy, that word, "unpopular," is often lethal.
 
ok ... so in your mind, gang rape is democracy. I see why you have a problem with women being educated. they may challenge "natural" male democracies.

:doh he was pointing out that as an argument against democracy.
 
Why do I feel like some people have yet to make it out of the 19th century?

Take this source for what it is worth. It's late and just found it from a quick search. It is an editorial, and I do not claim any of it is necessarily accurate. if I get more time tomorrow I will fact check it. it bis however an interesting starting point: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/o...suits-educated-women.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

The result has been a historic reversal of what the economist Elaina Rose calls the “success” penalty for educated women. By 2008, the percentage of college-educated white women ages 55 to 59 who had never been married was down to 9 percent, just 3 points higher than their counterparts without college degrees. And among women 35 to 39, there was no longer any difference in the percentage who were married.
 
Since I cannot sleep, at least followed the clickthrough at my source: The Reversal of the College Marriage Gap | Pew Social & Demographic Trends

There are gender differences associated with the reversal in the college marriage gap. Young women with college degrees are now just as likely as less-educated women to marry, and the timing of their marriages are increasingly similar. This was not the case in 1990. Back then, less-educated women were more likely to marry than were better-educated women, and they tended to do so at a younger age.

and

There is also a correlation between educational attainment and the likelihood of divorce. Newly available Census Bureau data show, for example, that in 2008, 2.9% of all married adults ages 35-39 who lacked a college diploma saw their first marriage end in divorce in the prior year, compared with just 1.6% of a comparably aged group that had a college education. There were similar gaps in divorce rates in 2008 among adults in other age groups. Unlike with marriage data, however, divorce data have not been collected by the Census Bureau in a way that permits comparisons over time in the divorce rates of those with and without a college degree.
 
I guess career women pay penalties for rejecting offers while pursuing their careers. Based on two of few anecdotal evidence, these women are not yet married. After they score high with diploma's all the good men may have already be married leaving less for them. I knew 2 surgeons and a pharmacist that are still single.

But why reject for careers I wonder? Why cannot it be a long term relationship (secure a mate) and be married after securing the titles. I do not see how us men have a problem with this approach.
 
I guess career women pay penalties for rejecting offers while pursuing their careers. Based on two of few anecdotal evidence, these women are not yet married. After they score high with diploma's all the good men may have already be married leaving less for them. I knew 2 surgeons and a pharmacist that are still single.

But why reject for careers I wonder? Why cannot it be a long term relationship (secure a mate) and be married after securing the titles. I do not see how us men have a problem with this approach.

both redress and I have posted articles which refute these outdated theories.

Of course, from personal experience you can pick out individuals that "prove" any theory you want to prove .... but when the representational value of these samples is countered by proper research, they just aren't relevant.
 
both redress and I have posted articles which refute these outdated theories.

Of course, from personal experience you can pick out individuals that "prove" any theory you want to prove .... but when the representational value of these samples is countered by proper research, they just aren't relevant.

It is true that my statement resides in anecdotal evidence. But you mention research that refutes my statement? Where is it?
 
It is true that my statement resides in anecdotal evidence. But you mention research that refutes my statement? Where is it?

both redress and I have posted links to research showing that in the last few decades, higher education is not linked to lower rates of marriage. in fact, some research suggests there is a slight positive correlation.

the research I quoted refers to people being married by age 40, which would not preclude people marrying later than the norm in previous generations. IN my generation, an "elderly prima patura" was 30 - now it is not unusual at all for a woman to have her first child in her thirties.

there are distinct advantages to marrying later and starting a family when financially secure, and although research shows more 18 - 34 yo women regard a successful marriage as important than do 18 - 34 yo men Love and Marriage | Pew Social & Demographic Trends they still seem to value education.
 
Just to note for all, a key point in that Forbes article.



If a host of studies are to be believed, marrying these women is asking for trouble. If they quit their jobs and stay home with the kids, they will be unhappy (Journal of Marriage and Family, 2003). They will be unhappy if they make more money than you do (Social Forces, 2006). You will be unhappy if they make more money than you do (Journal of Marriage and Family, 2001). You will be more likely to fall ill (American Journal of Sociology). Even your house will be dirtier (Institute for Social Research).

Where's the Debbie Downer music when you need it?
 
But why reject for careers I wonder? Why cannot it be a long term relationship (secure a mate) and be married after securing the titles. I do not see how us men have a problem with this approach.

Perhaps they want to get their career going before they have to be out of commission for awhile to pop out some chillins. :)
 
Well, my ex-wife always gave me the third degree if I was so much as 5 minutes late from the time she expected.

I figured she must have had one to spare, her having a bachelors, a masters and a Phd.
 
Back
Top Bottom