I think everyone should be pressured to go to college. I think there should be more opportunities (esp. federally) to make this happen, but everyone(in this day and age)should feel like doing some sort of schooling after HS, be it trade school, technical school or community college. Anyway, I know just as many guys that would've liked to skip college as I know girls--how do you explain that?

You nailed it perfectly--someone has his undies bunched up because there are women around who don't take his shit.

On another note, I'm really tired of the idea that to nurturing is only breastfeeding and doing laundry. Nurturing also means making money to feed and clothe oneself and one's family and being able to provide for oneself if "man who can't take feminist attitudes" leaves or dies.

My mother taught me never to rely on any man for economic security and I'm teaching my daughter the same.

This shit is so transparent.

Now that women and girls have the opportunity to attend school alongside men, they are outperforming their male peers.

Colleges and universities have begun increasing admission standards for female applicants, because there are far more exceptional female applications than exceptional male applications.

Colleges and universitites want to bring the ratio of women to men on campus closer to 50/50. In order to do so, they must reject highly qualified women in favor of less qualified men.
Even when they outperfor boys in K-12, women STILL lose.

This asshat is nervous because his future may not be what he's always imagined: an economically dependent women at home, supporting his ass while he chases his career dreams.
Newsflash, asshat! You're gonna have to learn to boil water and pick up your own damn socks.

My step-father went to Michigan Tech, this attitude is not surprising.

Someone needs to teach this douchebag that nurturing is culturally, not biologically ingrained into women.

I just love it when people like him make such broad generalizations based on his limited views of the world...

"Waxing idiotic." Heh, heh, heh.
On a more serious note, I wish I would stop being so appalled that many young men are still so sexist. Is it backlash? Idiocy? What??

The sad thing is, I attend a tech school as well...many of the women here and incredibly intelligent, and often more so than the men, and yet the men overwhelmingly expect that we're just biding our time until we can marry rich and start popping out babies.

is commenting on that article pretty much pointless?

what an ass.

Anyone who claims that "the younger generation" is less sexist (OR racist) than previous ones is blind.
Colleges campuses are a cesspool of sexism. Teenage and 20-something men are proud to be misogynists. They love to parrott evo-psych talking points to "prove" that Men Are Better Than Women (like the website!).

It's awful.

"When did feminism stop being about “we are worth just as much as you are,� and start being about “we can do everything you can do, and then some�?"

That would be right when it became apparent that to be considered equal and have equal rights, a woman must work twice as hard, give 200%, and be as perfect as possible at just about everything.

You know what? I bet you anything that he's like the same a**wipe that told me that women can't do Fourier transforms because, you know, girl brains can't handle doing complicated math.

I was one of the 25% female population at a tech school in an engineering curriculum. Fortunately, there weren't many of the aforementioned sexists, but they still exist.

Yep, college aged men (still boys in my mind) are awfully misogynist. It's very sad.

this is sort of a tangent, but it brings to light an observation i've made over the years. when most people picture the stereotypical misogynist, what does he look like? it seems like the stereotype is often a backward, redneck type or a jock-fratboy type or a religious fundamentalist or a dismissive "old boys' club" businessman type, etc. in popular culture, the "geeks" or shy/smart men are portrayed as nicer more sensitive or enlightened.

in reality though, misogyny comes in so many packages and in my experience (warning! anecdotal!), i find nearly as many "geeky" guys have completely outdated and uninformed notions about gender and the role of women as the more alpha-males.

These men are going to have a hard time convincing bright, motivated women that they're more suited to the home. That they should give up their career aspirations because of stereotypes.

It's pretty laughable. They're shaking in their boots because they see intelligent, driven young women all around them, "taking" what they believe to be rightfully theirs (as men).

Sadly, once they all enter the professional world, even the brightest, more determined women will earn less than the lazier, dimmer men.

What a pig. The even more unfortunate part is that I have met people just like him.
For a short period in middle school (before I became a feminist) I was actually so bombarded with stuff like this that I actually bought that whole 'women actually are stupider than the menz'

And yes college boys can be f-wits

When my mom was in high school in the '60s, she had a math teacher who would never give any female an A in his class, and basically said much of the same things as this guy at the start of every school year. The highest any female got ever in his class is a B (like my mom). She was discouraged from studying math and science, which is a shame, since she is natural when it comes to computers and the like. I can't even imagine how different her life would have been if she had been encouraged to go for the things that really interested her instead of the traditional stuff (like dental hygiene, which she pursued after graduating high school).

She told me that story when I was a little kid and I never forgot. Now I have my masters and know that I probably won't stop going to school in one form or another. Whoohoo! It's the librarian in me to be a lifelong learner. Take that asswipe.

A friend of mine is a female student at MT. I'll be sure to tell her about this.

God willing, she's got some enteraining stories about this assbag.

As a Michigan college-age student myself, I'm really not surprised to see this kind of attitude coming from a university like Michigan Tech. Though the author of this article fails to specifically target his own female classmates, there are plenty of joking, sexist sentiments about the female Tech students that exist (ie. "Michigan Tech: Where the Men are Men, and the Women are too!") The joke about the vastly disproportionate male/female ratio was explained to me by a friend of mine that "it's not really that bad because most of those men sit in their dorm rooms playing Halo or taking apart their computers, so the visibility around campus of the sexes doesn't quite fit the ratio." Perhaps Bustrak falls into this demographic and feels just a wee bit threatened by all the ambitious women attempting to break into stereotypically male-dominated professions rather than clean houses?

When did feminism stop being about “we are worth just as much as you are,� and start being about “we can do everything you can do, and then some�?

I imagine this knob sitting across from a female co-worker who has the audacity to be competitive with him... If it were a male co-worker, would he think he should concentrate on his family life?

The truth is, there are these guys out there that think it's possibly cute that a "girl" has a job in his office; but then when they are up for the same promotion, it's not so cute. This attitude is not isolated, particularly among the traditional family types where they think the woman's place is in the home. In fact, like this guy, they start to get into the argument that only a natural woman would be un-ambitious except for anything but her husband and family.

This is the knobby foundation upon which very real pay gaps and promotion gaps are laid.

my brother went to MT for one semester about 15 years ago. Back then they called the female students 'snow cows'. The university is in the back woods of the upper peninsula of Michigan, a place where even other Michiganders know the population is more than a little strange.

Oh, this reminds me of a really irritating conversation I had in college. My roommate mentioned wanting to be a stay-at-home mother in the future, and our male acquaintance suggested that she shouldn't be in college. "Don't you think you're taking the spot of someone who could put an Ivy League education to good use?"

I find the notion that "feminist" and "wife and mother" are oppositional infuriating.

I am neither a wife nor a mother, but if I ever become either I will certainly still be a feminist. It's not like I have to hand over my membership card to wed and breed.

I agree with everyone's comments and I would further add that this guy has misunderstood that feminism would tell his completely fictional female friends that they can skip college if they want to. It is all about choice and equality after all. Women and men should be able to go to college but if they decide they want a life of nurturing and picking up socks then they should go for it. It is about doing what fulfills you and not conforming to any stereotypes.

Of course I don't believe for a second this idiot has any female friends.

Kjalepepper your story about you mum is sad - I can match it with a more uplifting one. My mum was sent to seamstress technical college after high school by my grandparents. She did it for a week then came home and told them she was going to university instead! She's my hero.

Oy. And there's another reason why women's colleges are still needed. (To have a place apart from people like that.)

But seriously, women have these attitudes too, which many of us see if either we a) attend a tech school or b) attend a women's college. I had a high school classmate tell me that she couldn't believe that I was going to a women's college, since the only reason she was going to college was to find a husband.

My grandparents were both professors at MT, in fact my grandmother was the first woman to receive tenure there. And she had to really fight for it. Sad to see things probably haven't come much further, if they're publishing crap like this in their school paper.

Ah, the false dichotomy, beloved of many an asshat sexist.

Yeah. Nurturance is not exclusive to people who forego careers, even demanding, math-heavy ones. Beyond which, the opportunity to mentor is more attractive to some women (Me! Me!) than the chance to fulfill more stereotypically female (and less culturally valued) nurturant roles (No offense to those of you who are into that). So driven career women, asshatish generalizations notwithstanding, are not ipso facto without opportunities or capacity for nurturance.

I'm with you all. Five bucks says this guy's ill-concealed misogyny flips a lot of women's switches from, "I like to help" to the "Fuck you" position.

This guy is an ass, obviously. However, let's not bash all people who attend Michigan Tech or the people who live in the UP of Michigan....idiots can reside anywhere, as we are all well aware. My fiance went to Michigan Tech and he is a wonderful guy and feminist. His friends who went there are all great too. Just had to stand up for my boys!

However, you know I'm going to tease him about this when he gets home from work. ;)

"On another note, I'm really tired of the idea that to nurturing is only breastfeeding and doing laundry. Nurturing also means making money to feed and clothe oneself and one's family and being able to provide for oneself if 'man who can't take feminist attitudes' leaves or dies."

...or stays and puts her at risk if she stays too.

"in reality though, misogyny comes in so many packages and in my experience (warning! anecdotal!), i find nearly as many 'geeky' guys have completely outdated and uninformed notions about gender and the role of women as the more alpha-males."

Yeah, I learned that when I tried to be friends with the "geeky" guys in high school (I bought the "unpopular people are less superifical and more accepting" stereotype at first). IRL there are both feminist geeks and misogynist geeks, feminist jocks and misogynist jocks, etc.

"Oy. And there's another reason why women's colleges are still needed. (To have a place apart from people like that.)"

Hell yes!
I love attending an all women's college. It's an amazing opportunity. Yet, somehow, people treat it like it's the PLAGUE. I get rude comments from people all the time... "But... how will you find someone to date?" Um, heterosexist much? Or, here's a novel idea, I'm not IN IT to date. Or the implication that women's colleges are no longer needed because women have achieved full equality. Hell, even some of the women I go to school with think that!! Ugh, beyond frustrating.

This article makes me cringe- not just because it's this one asshat shooting his mouth off, but because I've met far too many people [mostly men] who think just like him. Every time I have a fleeting thought in the back of my head that jerks like this guy are better off ignored, I remember that it's one of a million other--sometimes small--things that happen EVERY DAY that contribute to sexism in this country and around the world. People think feminism should wither away because there's no sexism? We need to call it out. That's one reason I love Feministing.

well,

I just tried to leave a comment on their website, and it told me comments had been temporarily disabled. Bummer.

I would have liked to tell him what an asshat he is directly. Too bad I'll just have to call the student paper myself. Here is the phone number if you would like to join me (906) 487-2404.

honestly, his views are not that surprising. Michigan Tech is like 90% male. I'm not saying every man that goes there is chauvinistic- my brother went there- but it's hard to be enlightened where there is little female representation.

"Feminism has gone too far"
I swear, if I hear that statement again, I'm gonna flip my lid. Womenz trying to go to college with us menz?! Wha!? Didn't women start going to college decades ago?
Going to college saved me. I had undiagnosed learning disabilities from Kindergarten through graduation, and when I got that high school diploma, I told myself I'd never sit in another class again. I was going to make documentary films, have a DIY clothing store, or hell, be a rock star. Yeah, that never panned out, and I found myself very depressed.
With the persistence of my parents I agreed to try to college. Having been diagnosed with ADD and discalculia (a math disability) I knew what I was working with and how to handle them.
I tried hard, (unlike the half-assed attempts from high school) and I freakin' rocked. All A's. All the sudden, I had all this self worth. I was trying hard, and it was paying off. I was actually learning things! I had self esteem!
It wasn't all easy. I was doing poorly in my algebra class, so my teacher pulled me aside and asked if I was having a hard time understanding her thick Chinese accent. But, it wasn't her accent it was the damn math I couldn't understand. I fell behind and dropped the class, only to try it again next semester. Mrs. Wang was so pleased, and with the help of my female tutor, I was able to get a B+ in the class.
I'm still working at this degree. Going to college was the best thing I've ever done, and I encourage all of my younger friends who need guidance to check out the opportunities for education.
So, in closing, Mr. Nutsack (sorry, Bustrak?) I will respectfully decline your offer to forget about this education stuff and start folding my boyfriend's underwear or whatever. Not only am I gonna get my teaching degree, I'm going to then go to night school for my masters, and hopefully teach Women's Studies someday, so that I may counteract your drivel!

That is why gamer guys are cool. Hot, Asskicking Women? They are ALL about that.

=)

Minervasp73 - misogyny among gamers is a whole other can o' worms.

Fantasizing about animated "women" is not the same as loving and respecting actual women.

Does anyone else find it pretty freakin' hilarious that it starts off sounding as if he's only thinking of the well-being of women? Like "Oh, my poor female friends who wanted to be housewives! It's so horrible that they fell under the pressures of feminism!"

Ya know, if you're pissed off about women having an equal place to you, then say it outright. Don't try to sugarcoat it by pretending you're just thinking of the poor little womenzzz.

Does this mean I should also sympathize with men who are pressured into college and getting a job? Apparently not.

No complete generation ever has solely relied upon men's ability to fully support his family. It's a total myth that women of all classes have ever "stayed home" for the duration of their lives. Women have always worked to support their families, in agriculture, in industry (even children were pressed to work, and in many countries women and children make up the bulk of industry). Women have always produced consumer goods, from cottage industries, to quilts and canned goods for use in the home or for trade.

Without women's ability to produce goods, it is likely that the colonial boycott against English goods and revolution would have resulted in failure. Industry reliant upon women soon followed (Lowell Mill Girls). My grandmother worked, her mother worked, my mother was the first NOT to work, and is sorry she does not have a pension.

"Further, I have seen women who have decided that they need to one-up men for aggressiveness and become almost psychotic in their brash confrontationalism."

Sounds like somebody stood up for herself when she should have shut her mouth, eh?

I'd wanted to write more on this, but got sidetracked and had to cut what I wanted to say short. I've said this to my friends a thousand times, the college atmosphere encourages this idea (women should stay home and make babies) in ways that the workplace and highschool do not. First, there's the frathouses/sororities, then the internet (anonymity inspires brazen hatred of women) sites which cater to college kids, then there's just the classroom environment in general. I can't figure out why the most liberal environment one is in breeds the most backwards, mysoginistic attitudes. It's not just men, I don't have one female friend that isn't biding her time trying to find a man. They definitely weren't like that at the beginning of college. WHy is this happening?

Transparent and ridiculous. To blame feminism is nothing less than disgusting.

HOWEVER, I will venture to say that there is a real social problem here. There DOES now exist outrageous pressure on women to pursue post-secondary education and enter the workforce, whether they want to or not. Single income families are severely handicapped in the emerging neoliberal global marketplace. I would, of course, lay the blame for this at the feet of late capitalism, where it belongs. Believe it or not, a lot of women WOULD like to be housewives focused on raising children; and that's a legitimate personal choice; but it's a choice that's getting harder to make or defend.

I just got accepted into Michigan Tech last week, and I will be transferring from my community college in the fall. The only thing people say to me when I tell them that I'm going to go to Michigan Tech is, "Well, you know that you're going to be one of the only girls there, right?" You all might be interested in the Tech's Society of Women Engineers or the Technobabe Times if you want to hear from the female part of campus.

http://swe.students.mtu.edu/
http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~tbt/tbtissues.html

Wow. I was unaware that a college education and motherhood were mutually incompatible. I hope I'm not warping my son's fragile mind with my uppity B.A. education.

There DOES now exist outrageous pressure on women to pursue post-secondary education and enter the workforce, whether they want to or not.

Do men not face the same pressure?

There DOES now exist outrageous pressure on women to pursue post-secondary education and enter the workforce, whether they want to or not.

Yeah, it's called survival. Gotta work if you want to eat! Within a family system there may be an exception (children, those who care for children, elderly, etc.) but within society as a whole, the way we get food/shelter/etc is by working.

And the problem with that is....?

I have a grandmother who was born during the Wilson administration and in many ways has not caught up with the times, to put it delicately. When my sister, the oldest kid in my family, went to college, it was all well and good... until my brother, who's two years younger than she is, dropped out of community college after his sophomore year. Then my sister, who lived with my grandmother after college and took care of her house, had to listen to months of, "Why'd your parents let him do that? A man needs an education! He's got to support a family! How can they send you girls to college and not their only son?" Never mind that he dropped out of his own accord and has no plans to get married in the near future, whereas she's graduated, is pursuing a career, and lives with a boyfriend she's hoping to get engaged to. (Which was particularly hard for Nonna to take. "Foolish! *elbows me* Will you tell her she's foolish? Tell her get married first!" Honestly, I owe my sister a huge debt of gratitude. She's been the trailblazer for me and my little sister in all these sexist battles with ancient relatives who haven't updated their views on womanhood since they themselves graduated high school, got married and started making babies. Sure, they started asking me when I was going to get married at about age fifteen, but for some strange reason they sort of backed off after noticing how Sarah was twenty-three and nowhere near doing anything of the kind.)

Hahaha...

Yeah, my grandmother is the sexist in the family and I continually have to tell my mom not to take her comments personally.

It's strange though where the sexism pops up. My mom has been supporting my grandmother for 25 years and grams still seems to think that mom is incapable of manual labor (like fixing the sink). Silly grams.

My mother's ingrained sexism confuses and annoys the hell out of me. She's a self-proclaimed feminist and a successful doctor, but, upon hearing that I had decided to go to an all-women's college, replied "Where do girls there get their boyfriends?" Moreover, every time I'm home, I try to talk to her about my amazing math and compsci courses, but all she seems to care about is whether or not I've found a nice boy yet.
Um....does it matter?

You know what bothers me about this particular topic? [Other than the blatant sexism and enforcement of ridiculous gender roles...]

IT'S A PRIVILEGE TO BE ABLE TO STAY HOME INSTEAD OF DOING PAID WORK.
It's something not everyone can afford to do, especially in the world we live in today. For most people, it would be literally impossible to exist on one person's salary! The entire concept is classist. It assumes that these women who attend top schools and get good jobs [like the author of the article implies] will find partners with top-notch schooling and top, high-paying jobs, and that these women will then HAVE THE PRIVILEGED ABILITY to be stay-at-home mothers, or engage in any other non-paid activity.

I totally respect women and men who make the decision not to pursue a career, and I think part of feminism is making it possible for women [and men!] to explore ALL the options and make the right choice for them. But what people seem to forget is that many people who WANT to become "nurturers" and stay at home CANNOT because it's unrealistic for their financial situation.

"'There DOES now exist outrageous pressure on women to pursue post-secondary education and enter the workforce, whether they want to or not.'

"Yeah, it's called survival. Gotta work if you want to eat! Within a family system there may be an exception (children, those who care for children, elderly, etc.) but within society as a whole, the way we get food/shelter/etc is by working.

"And the problem with that is....?"

That the food doesn't launch itself right onto dishes and instead requires some farming, fishing, gathering, and/or hunting work before it's edible?

Or that the people who do this work beyond subsistence levels often want the results of other work (goods and services in barter and/or currency in less direct payment) for their surplus food, instead of wanting to feed everyone else for free?

LlesbianLlama, while I agree with the general idea that not everybody is able to stay home to watch the kids... I think you've oversimplified it.

Granted this is a personal example (so have your grain of salt ready).

I think that if you have more than a couple kids, or several very young kids, the cost of childcare is so much that it can make sense to have one parent stay home (assuming that one is willing, and you start out with at least two to begin with).

Insert personal example here: My oldest sister is married with twin 2-year-olds. Before she found out she was pregnant she was in grad school. Her husband was already working full time and doing his masters). They live in the midwest where it's pretty darn cheap to live. And while they have to live really really simply, they can (barely) make it work on just his salary (which is just barely middle class I think) and her staying home with the kids.

So it is possible, assuming one of you has a BA or BS, and a whole lot of other qualifiers (like being able-bodied and in good health and not living in an expensive area, and being willing to live simply).

The important part about it that struck me was that considering that they had two small infants for awhile there, it was vastly cheaper for her to stay home and postpone the rest of her education, than to try and finish and have to pay for infant-care times two.

So while staying at home may be a privilage for a lot of people... there are situations where it ends up being the cost-effective thing as well.

What are you talking about, John Bustrak? We just go to find husbands, anyway!

/snark

In college, I worked very hard to be on the dean's/honors list every semester and to graduate with honors.

At a time when I fell ill (due to my heavy workload) and was talking to a professor about adjusting my schedule to recover and still pursue my coursework, I was given the "advice" that it really didn't matter since "Your future husband isn't going care about about your GPA." (word for word).....like I was working hard in college to score a husband!

That ill-conceived advice I still remember to this day even though it was nearly 15 years ago.

There have been many times since that statement I've seen first hand that sexism and racism are still alive even among those who are supposedly educated.

Technical knowledge does not necessarily equal moral/ethical knowledge.

However, I still also remember the advice of one of my first female bosses:
"What you need to have...is chutzpah." And that actually was some very helpful advice.

Faerylore, I totally understand what you're saying. I might have been a bit inarticulate in my previous post.

My mom actually did stay home when my sister and I were very young. From my experience, though, I come from a lower-middle class family, and my dad's income was enough to support us in terms of literally having food and shelter, but we had to make MAJOR sacrifices in other areas. I personally would not be willing to live that way, and I would not choose that for my family. Childcare is RIDICULOUSLY expensive [sadly, and that is definitely another conversation, but something I feel very passionate about], but in some areas of the country and in many peoples' circumstances it won't necessarily be enough to make it more economically possible for a parent to not earn income. In our situation it would have been less expensive for her to get outside childcare and continue to work outside the home, but she made the choice to stay home. I TOTALLY respect that choice! Then again, my dad's salary is definitely higher than the salaries of many other Americans, despite us not being well-off. The reality is, many people do live in expensive areas, and the cost of living is rising far faster than wages are rising. For many people it really *isn't* possible to exist on one income. The fact that people constantly use the word "choice" in discussing this topic is irritating to me, because it ignores an entire subset of people for whom this is NOT a viable option. Women are often expected to stay home, especially when they have children, and to imply that people who don't stay home are somehow bad parents or un-womanly, or whatever rude label they choose to slap on them [which people often do] effectively ignores the people who cannot do this, even if they want to. Are they bad mothers because they're in a lower financial bracket? It's not fair. [I am not implying that anyone here is advocating that stance, it's just something I've heard a lot.]

While circumstances like those you described your relatives in definitely exist, the flip side is that not everyone can or is willing or able to live a life of sacrifice, and it's not always the most financially practical solution. In many cases it is simply not possible at all.

I think what bothers me the most, though, is that girls, especially those who attend expensive schools, are assumed to be seeking men who will do very well financially and be able to support them as they become homemakers and stay at home mothers. I think it's absurd and offensive that I am assumed to be pursuing higher education in hopes of snaring some guy who will be successful so I can fulfill what is *obviously* [eyeroll] the thing I desire most in the world-- to be a June Cleaver-type wife and mother. While some people DO want this, the fact that it's just assumed that I'm "gold digging" so to speak is offensive. It also says A LOT about the stereotypes and expectations people have of intelligent women.
Furthermore, to suggest that women who DO desire to stay home shouldn't pursue higher education is impractical, at best. Schooling/career and nurturing/stay at home mothering are not mutually exclusive. In fact, it gives women an additional way to protect themselves if the aforementioned provider becomes unable to provide, or is abusive and unkind, or if there is a divorce- etc, etc. It's at least some form of protection against being left with nothing and no skills or limited skills that would allow a woman to be successful in supporting herself without outside help. That's a GOOD thing, and likely one of the reasons men are so threatened by women who DO have good educations and careers. It makes them less dependent on men, and therefore, men can't just do whatever the hell they want all the time and expect women to deal with it without fear of repercussion from the woman.

The important part about it that struck me was that considering that they had two small infants for awhile there, it was vastly cheaper for her to stay home and postpone the rest of her education, than to try and finish and have to pay for infant-care times two.

Let me jump in here with some personal experience. I dropped out of my Master's years ago, and discovered that when I re-entered, none of my credits would apply. I would suggest that the woman with the twins take another pencil to the math and calculate how much she'll lose if she doesn't complete her Masters soon. Add in inflation costs if she re-enters college and if she has to re-do and re-apply to everything she's accomplished. Many larger schools have mothers in the same boat and there is child care share. Some even have subsidized child care and if they have a Masters in Childhood education, you might be able to get in very cheaply.

There's even another option to take things slower, one class, two classes, or take night or online classes, when she can hand the children over to the care of her husband. I can say this from experience, it only gets harder to go back and don't get caught in a blur of unclear thinking about quiting your education. The cost of day care is NOT the only calculation of loss or of the value you'll get. In fact, if you lose your Masters, the cost of a couple of years of day care for some odd hours a day is probably much less, and you can take out student loans to help. The cost of going back will only get higher.

Obtaining an education is not necessarily about moving on to a career. Education is a window to the world, and it's obvious that idiots like Bustrak want that window to be shut for as many women as possible.

I remain 100% certain that an individual woman can seek knowledge for the sake of knowledge and still decide that she wants to be a stay-at-home mom or housewife. There will almost certainly be fewer of them than before other opportunities were available, but choice is not about maintaining the status quo.

I believe *people* shouldn't feel pressured to go to college just in hopes of getting a "better" job that pays more. When I was in Japan at an international conference for teachers of English, a lot of people from the UK or Commonwealth countries could not understand the American expectation that most/all kids go to university, pointing out that people with a trade (like plumbers) could actually earn much more than the average pencil pusher (note they all had university degrees themselves).

I was disturbed during my time in Japan (1993-2005) to see the growing emphasis in the US on not just going to university, but entering the PROPER university, as seen in all the national rankings and standings published in annual special issues of certain news or business magazines. It was disheartening to see the measures that students through high school were going through to "study the test" or write winning essays according to what became a formula. It was also disturbing to see how a bachelor's degree has become a basic requirement for many jobs that should not otherwise require a degree, which is to say there is no real reason that skills could not be learned on the job if one for example, already understands the basics of using a computer and popular office software. Even someone fresh out of school *with* a degree will need to gain skills and experience to perform effectively.

What was strangest and most ironic was that Japan, which has a VERY demanding system of entrance exams to enter university, pressuring families to send children to go to supplementary study "cram school" as well as a system of white collar employment which also requires a degree (preferably from the "proper" Japanese version of ivy league schools), was at the same time starting to turn AWAY from this education system of studying and test taking for the sake of learning to take tests (it is as dumb as this sentence reads), and they modeled THEIR progressive changes on the old US system.

For example, in Japan, Saturday used to be a school day, for at least half a day (with extracurricular activities in the afternoon), and Japanese had 240 school days a year to America's 180 (many considered it unfathomable that American children had three consecutive months off during the summer which could/should be used for studying or group building school activities). Public schools nationwide did away with Saturday classes to allow more family time, and truly revolutionary schools (they were few) completely did away with tests or grades, instead rating students on accomplishment of goals for the term individuals had set for themselves. All these efforts to ease burdens on Japanese students and families were in the name of encouraging more personal growth and individuality in youth (as could be seen in many children abroad), though the results are still being debated - many adults feel this increased free time is not being used "productively" by youth, resulting in an even greater push to enter children in private schools where standards have not been relaxed.

It was/is so sad to see that education in the US is moving in the direction that Japan was in (South Korea and China have even more extreme education systems - some urban Korean teens may spend up to 15 hours a day studying at school), where so much emphasis is put on study and academic success, ironically adopting a number of measures the Japanese did, such as supplemental studies or lengthening the school year (or maybe not ironic - officials of the Bush Sr. or Clinton administration looked to Japan as their own model), just in hopes of getting a "good" job and earning money.

Like the earlier poster, I blame the capitalist system where both/all adult members of the household (even the kids if disadvantaged) are pushed into the workplace just to make a living. It was a patriarchal system which kept women in the household, but at least it used to be possible to earn a living, buy a home, send kids to college, as well as retire, on ideally just one full time income in the post WWII period. It was possible in Japan too, until their economic slowdown which began in 1991. I was doing just fine in Japan supporting a family of four, ready to buy a house, and saving mad money, on only about $36,000 a year, depending on the exchange rate.

It may be the norm today in the US and especially here in Hawaii where the cost of living is as high as parts of California, but the idea that I will need supplemental income even as an RN or federal agency employee, with my wife working full time, just to make a living; and never being able to afford the local average $650,000 new or used home (inflation up to 40% a year, no lie, my mom's unremarkable termite eaten home is worth about 30 times what she paid for it in 1965, and is taxed accordingly), with no assurance I will be able to afford college for my kids or able to retire at 67, and imagining my kids will never be able to afford to live anywhere in the entire state, pisses me off.

Another ironic thing about Japan, which I wish were more true in the US: Japanese went to university because it was required to get a "good" job. However, unless one went into a technical field such as engineering, law or medicine, it didn't really matter what one studied or did. A French literature or Russian history major is welcomed and can do just as well as a business or economics major working side by side in some generic office. Many can get by without attending classes except for tests. Japanese college students considered it a time to explore (or enjoy) themselves before settling into a career, a time to make new friends and develop new interests or skills (such as study English, where they met me). It is a kind of four year vacation (funded by parents) between the studies and "examination hell" of childhood, and the responsibilities of the adult working world (or motherhood, for many).

Posters in this tread seem to understand that a dual income is likely required for a household or family to make ends meet. If one understands this, and is not already some high earner such as a physician or company executive, able to support a household on your one income, what is the problem with accepting the practicality of finding a compatible partner (let us assume male) who also has an income that would allow you to exercise more choice in the way you would like to spend your career or life, perhaps even be a SAHM? By mutual agreement, of course - perhaps he'd like to be an artist or writer, or a SAHD like my brother.

I get that feminists do not want to be "dependent on a man," but what is the difference, if two incomes are required anyway? (Fathers and mothers in Hawaii may work two or three jobs for the family to live comfortably.) A woman would need a man for his money, but he sure as hell would also need the woman for hers, particularly if they expect to buy a home or raise and educate children, and retire comfortably. A man concerned about his or his family's future would do well to find a high earning woman, as well. I see no shame, none at all, in admitting I need my wife for my family to avoid living on government assistance or in a shack, and would hate to imagine life without her. This practicality, and seeing her willing to work so diligently, is just one more reason why I love her. (Actually, as I have written, it was one of the reasons I first noticed her 13 years ago. The first was, she is taller than I am.) Am I mistaken? Or am I not manly enough?

And my brother also was proud of the fact that he was a full time dad to his daughter, living off the earnings of his bigshot accountant wife. That's right, my 43 year old brother lived off his wife, by mutual agreement. Until she decided/realized that after moving into the same condominium complex as her millionaire retired parents, she no longer needed him (at least, to watch their daughter), and surprised him with divorce papers after coming home from work one day. Though I foresaw a separation as soon as I realized her family was reunited, the execution was ice cold. I guess she (or her dad) was not able to overcome gender expectations of a man of the house despite her own considerable skills and success to support the household financially (she did not cook at all, and the house was eh). Again, my SIL is a very nice woman, and we hugged, smiled and talked as if nothing had ever happened when she bumped into me and my brother by chance during one of my brother's visitations. I had to ask my brother if they were still getting divorced.

"The fact that people constantly use the word "choice" in discussing this topic is irritating to me, because it ignores an entire subset of people for whom this is NOT a viable option. Women are often expected to stay home, especially when they have children, and to imply that people who don't stay home are somehow bad parents or un-womanly, or whatever rude label they choose to slap on them [which people often do] effectively ignores the people who cannot do this, even if they want to. Are they bad mothers because they're in a lower financial bracket? It's not fair. [I am not implying that anyone here is advocating that stance, it's just something I've heard a lot.]"

I believe that posters living the life may agree with me when I say I hear quite the opposite here and elsewhere - feminists or other modern women may be critical of women who stay home to raise a family, as if being a SAHM were not a desirable choice (also, outside child care is available). Why should a SAHM apologize or need to justify her choice, for being able to make ends meet without her income, or for believing nurturing her children herself is best for her family?* Because she is "dependent on a man"? It would seem that being financially dependent on a partner's income as in a dual income household just to make ends meet, is the default in modern America. I for one, envy having such a choice (not to be a SAHD, but to have enough money to choose).

*And I have read members of SAHD groups (they had to create their own groups to feel like they belonged) say they feel completely ignored by society - not that I am saying, those poor menz, but traditional gender role expectations means SAHDs don't get a lot of respect as parents or men. Stay at home parents get it both ways.

The women I associate with think they're superior to men.
The women I associate with think they're better than me.

Statement A /= Statement B.
Sorry if the math hurts your brain.

Since you don't seem to be Ms. Valenti, may I ask you to elaborate?

All right, I'm sorry, you were referring to the final paragraphs of the original article. And your blog is nice, too.

Bustrak's article is serious stereotypical BS. And what's this?

"However, for a number of young women I have known, who have no interest in competing with men for roles in business, engineering, law or medical practice, they feel a tremendous pressure to go to college and earn the degree anyways."

What? Young women go to college so they can compete with men at work? I thought people got degrees just to get jobs, like my classmates who became RNs. I wasn't aware women had these ulterior motives to keep men from getting jobs, or to make others look bad.

"I get that feminists do not want to be 'dependent on a man,' but what is the difference, if two incomes are required anyway? (Fathers and mothers in Hawaii may work two or three jobs for the family to live comfortably.)"

The difference is that two incomes aren't always required anyay. I bet that in some cases a single adult who doesn't have children may work one job for herself or himself to live comfortably or at least survive, even in Hawaii.

After all, not everyone is sexy enough to get a partner (or sexy enough to keep a partner after a marriage is arranged) in the first place. I'm glad my parents let me learn to do more jobs than housewife, instead of keeping me one man (Dad) away from welfare. ;)

I thought this part was funny:
"Even a materialist, who does not believe in spirit and body, but only body, must admit that the female and male bodies are wired for different behaviors like this."

I guess he's mixing up the profession of nursing and the activity of nursing? Because I don't see how women could use their breasts for the profession of nursing, if their bodies are wired for the job.

Well, Mina, this brings us back to the old "working women are happier than SAHMs" article/thread: if a woman does have skills or experience to make it on her own (I am not saying under the current system that women or anyone else should be discouraged from furthering their education or working), and her income was NOT needed (as adults they and their partners can decide what is best for their own future re: saving or not for future home, college tuition, retirement, life insurance) what's wrong with being a SAHM if she believes it best for her children or just likes being with them herself? I happen to like feminism being about choice, and seeing some people questioning (non-exploitive) marriage, motherhood, or being a stay at home parent is odd.

Wait, if men are "hard-wired" to build things, then how do they explain pregnancy and childbirth? If I were to deign to give "hard-wiring" any credit, then I'd say that the ultimate natural builders are women. Since they, you know, BUILD HUMANS. But, essentialism is the enemy of equality, so I don't do that shit.

Faerylore, that still assumes that all women have husbands and children.

Nowadays, most women do not marry straight out of high school. They MUST support themselves somehow, just like men, after they leave their parents' homes. Bustrak assumes that all women marry and have children right after high school or something. They don't.

I am 25 years old and I live by myself. What would he have me do? How exactly am I supposed to "stay at home?" I went to college to gain knowledge and skills. I am putting them to use now.
Perhaps someday I will marry and have children; I may even stay home for a few years - who knows? But until then? I have no choice but to work hard at my job and earn a living to support myself.

This guy's whole argument is based on fantasy - the fantasy that all girls go straight from their parents' homes to their husbands' homes.

Women's colleges are great, but the only one I know of that has an engineering program is Smith, and its program just started within the last few years so hasn't built much of a reputation. Unfortuantely women who want to study engineering often find themselves at schools like MT where the ratio is still disproportionately male among the student body and there are few if any female faculty. There were a fair share of guys like this where I went at Georgia Tech too...

Wow, just wow. There are no words to describe how I feel, but on behalf of the community with external genetalia, I apologize.

I didn't get he thinks all. The original article is full of bad stereotypes, but I believe as in his opening, that Bustrak is talking about his few female friends (no irony intended) he claims have told them they would like to be mothers, but feel pressured to go to school and get good jobs. They may be shortsighted to make that decision before exploring other options such as continued education or a paying career, but some such women exist.

From the close of his article, pardon if my fonts have ruined the text:

"I have known a number of women who consider themselves not simply equal to men, but superior. Why? Because they are more 都ophisticated,�because they are more 途ational,�and less prone to violence. Further, I have seen women who have decided that they need to one-up men for aggressiveness and become almost psychotic in their brash confrontationalism.
When did feminism stop being about 努e are worth just as much as you are,�and start being about 努e can do everything you can do, and then some�"

Even if what he says is true, I see nothing wrong with the first. A "number of women" would by definition be superior to men, whether you are speaking of the extreme right side of a bell curve, or who is at the top of a pyramid. As for the second, manners aside, that would be defeating the gender role expectation of women to be ladylike and non-confrontational. And of the last sentence, so what if it were true? If a woman has the potential, is capable of achieving more, why stop at, as good as or as much as a man? The top student in my graduating class for two years running not only did better than classmates who were already experienced LPNs on their way to becoming RNs, but was the valedictorian for the entire college. There is also no reason Hillary Clinton needed to stop at student, college grad, lawyer, wife, mother, First Lady, Senator. (I wonder if Bill would ever have been able to get elected as a Senator prior to his second, successful term as governor?) Why not go all the way if she wants?

RE: "Because they are more “sophisticated,� because they are more “rational,� and less prone to violence."

---

It's fair to assume he's heard the opposite directed towards _his_ behavior. Probably something like: socially awkward, irrational, and prone to violence.

Ticking.Time.Bomb.

The university really should send the child for some psychiatric evaluation and/ot counseling.

"Faerylore, that still assumes that all women have husbands and children."

Opps, I thought I made it clear that I was agnolaging that assumption. You are of course right. But I was adding more to the discussion about whether it is always a 'privaledge' to be a SAHM or a SAHD. In a few situations (ie in this case multiple small infants) it was cheaper for their family for her to stay home and to put off finishing her dissertation for a few years. So I was thinking more of how expensive childcare is esp if you need infant care or (I've heard) have a special needs child. So I'm just saying that most families have a million and a half things they have to consider when they're figuring out childcare and that the one-size-fits-all isn't reality. I also bauk at the idea of a SAHM/D being a privaledge. People want to either drag it through the gutter or stick it on a pedistal, and it deserves neither. It's just a full time job like many others, it's just not paid. But I also see that it's also not an option for every family (you have to be able to make it work money-wise and have somebody willing to do it).

But yeah, I have no kids, so it would be foolish for me to want to stay home all day and overmother my dog. So the dude that thinks my education is prepping me to stay at home and take care of hypothetical children is assuming a bit much about how much care my puppy (who is not a puppy anymore) actually needs and/or wants.

I’m sorry, I usually stick my posts through Word to fix the spelling, but that went through uncensored….

I just wanted to add that this article was no surprise to me. I went to a poly tech school for undergrad (engineering and architecture were HUGE at my school), and it was pretty much assumed that if you were starting out in the college of liberal arts at my school, it was because you wanted a Mrs. with a math geek. And sadly enough, while they weren’t the majority of the college, I knew some girls who saw nothing wrong with going to college to ‘find a good man’.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. I guess.

It is a kind of four year vacation (funded by parents) between the studies and "examination hell" of childhood, and the responsibilities of the adult working world (or motherhood, for many).

My boyfriend was one of these students, and I have no problem telling him how I openly mocked some of the international students (getting a free ride - certainly not all of them) while I was working long hours throughout college (I honestly can't fathom asking your parents to fully fund such a venture). However, he stayed here to escape the rigid system you describe.

As much as I look at another country's traditions and often think how American society would benefit from such changes, you can't realistically expect to implement a sweeping set of rules to everyone, because of the variety we have in terms of cultures and economic backgrounds. I know very few people who come from families wealthy enough to fully fund an international education, let alone one on our own soil.

On Bursak, I googled him for fun and found some of his other very stimulating work:

http://www.mtulode.com/article.php?articleId=731

http://www.mtulode.com/article.php?articleId=1010

In spite of his drivel, I'm just not sure he should be given a wider audience in the first place. At best he's a half-wit, and socially inept to boot.

I also know a woman attending MTU, and if she is aware of this "editorial," she has probably eaten him for lunch by now. I also have family in the UP, and further publicizing this guy's work sheds a dark shadow on many fine "Yoopers." It's a shame we only hear about this area of the country when a bad egg comes along.

A Man, it's a shame what happened to your brother, but is it possible the marriage just fizzled? Women have been systematically dumped over the years for younger trophy wives after their "usefulness" as caregivers has expired. If she truly left him because of his non-earling potential, how is such "pressure" different than that of a male middle age "crisis" in which he feels the same pressure to "trade up?" I don't condone either scenario, and I have a male cousin who should have received full custody over his two sons during the time the mother was getting her shit together. Unfortunately the courts still operate on a precedence that mothers are by default the primary nurterers, which needs to cease. This guy's opinion isn't going to help his fellow male friends who might be deserving of more parental rights.

Change is gradual, and can be quite a bitch sometimes. Hopefully in my lifetime dads WILL complain about being pressured to go to college in lieu of being a stay-at-home dad, and that parents will just be judged on the merits of their parenting skills as opposed to supposed predetermined roles.

At first, I was going to show this thread to my amazing, feminist mother, but then I decided not to, because the whole topic of stay-at-home-mom-ery is a sensitive one for her. Before she married my dad (at age 32) she had a very successful career as a lawyer, and earned way more than he did (he was at Legal Aid). After I was born, she worked three days a week until I was two, when I started staying with my grandparents. This situation worked really well for everyone until we moved to another state, and my mother (practically simultaneously!) had my younger brother. She never became a member of the bar in our new state, because she was so busy with us, and has been a SAHM for the past 13 years. And she HATES IT. Her self-worth has plummeted, and now, at 54, she feels that she is so old that no firm will hire her. She's had a couple of almost-but-not-quite-successful attempts at landing a new job, and it's just awful. Basically, circumstance and the loss of my grandparents as childcare providers torpedoed her career, and she hates herself for it. On the whole, this debate is a really sensitive one for her. She's said time and time again that she doesn't understand why any woman wouldn't want a career outside the home. As a mom, she's pretty much the best, but since I know from experience that she can be an amazing mom and a kickass lawyer, I wish she would go back to work. Maybe then my college education wouldn't be sending us into a debt spiral of doom!

And becca, just so you know, I attend Smith and our engineering program is PHENOMENAL. Shout-out to all the