Oct 15, 2009 at 07:15:08
“You know what's funny about evolutionary psychology? That we can't have any data from those prehistoric times! No fossils about who did what in the tribe. No actual knowledge. Hence, evolutionary psychology is speculation, and often from one very specific biased angle.
But if we take those stories seriously, what is nature's purpose for men?
I also wonder why you see women working for pay as competing with men. Could it just be that they are earning money to buy food, for example? And, as I have posted elsewhere on this thread, the study all this started from found that women who stayed at home were no happier than those who are in the labor force, so your solution wouldn't work.”
Oct 15, 2009 at 05:37:52
“Let's return to some facts here: First, the statement "women are unhappy" is NOT true. A small percentage of women in those studies list themselves as not too happy, and so does a small (somewhat smaller) percentage of men. Second, and this is VERY IMPORTANT, the study all this was based on found that it was not possible to find ONE group of women which would have accounted for the slightly higher unhappiness ratings in the most recent surveys. Young women, old women, women who work outside the home, women who don't work outside the home, women with children, women without children, single mothers. NONE of these groups appeared to be where the greater unhappiness figures lie.
In particular, women with careers scored no more unhappiness than women without careers. This directly works against the basic premise of the above post.
In short, the whole discussion is based on a misunderstanding of just one topic.”
MadMadMan on Oct 15, 2009 at 09:23:12
“Right - because women will ALWAYS find a way to be not happy enough and then blame it on some external source. For some reason, women's expectations of life seem to always exceed the reality of human existence, yet they cannot see that this would be true of all human beings with misplaced expectations.”
Sep 21, 2009 at 20:50:37
“But note that the original study found the somewhat reduced happiness trend among all groups of women, including those who stay at home, those who are single parents and so on. No one life choice made a difference in that.”
Sep 21, 2009 at 20:15:22
“It is very important to understand what the underlying raw data tells us, which is that men and women are really roughly equally happy these days, assuming that we can interpret survey answers to measure something as difficult as happiness. See this website for an explanation as well as access to the Stevenson-Wolfers study:
It is also very important to understand that the Stevenson-Wolfers study which is the basis for this post found that the slight trend toward less female happiness applied to ALL groups of women in their data. Thus, women who stayed at home also experienced reduced happiness, women who worked did the same, women with children the same, women without children the same, old women the same, young women the same. The only difference applied to African-American women when compared to African-American men.
This means several things: a) there is no great crisis of female unhappiness and b) there is no great crisis of female unhappiness only applying to uppity career women .
I find it truly astonishing how something like this particular post can bring about arguments that all women should return home, that biology constrains women (but not men), that we should focus on boys rather than on girls and so on ad infinitum. Or the whole idea that there somehow IS this terrible crisis of unhappiness among women. Please do have a look at the raw data I link to above.”
rpmcestmoi on Sep 24, 2009 at 10:33:19
“Very smart analysis. Thanks.”
JuniperSunshine on Sep 23, 2009 at 22:42:55
“Perhaps living in a society where women are now expected to juggle two full-time jobs (paid work and mothering), be ambitious and assertive at work, yet gentle and patient at home, and do it while looking young and sexy, is just downright depressing to ALL of us!”
bbaker2580 on Sep 21, 2009 at 23:27:55
“with forty-two pages of comments going into the sixth day now, and given the article is no longer prominently highlighted on the HuffPo opening/splash page - there certainly is something going on!
reading through the posts - they have been candid, honest and raw through and through. agree or disagree with the methodology and findings of the study, it has elicited a wider range of well-reasoned, heart-felt, honest, genuine comments than i have seen anywhere in a long time. forget the study, the comments posted here far surpass it.
the statements you make above are SOOO far out of tune with what has been posted here that you couldn't possibly have read many of them, the agenda you put forward in no way reflects what's been going on here...”
Sep 18, 2009 at 17:02:47
“Imagine this scenario:
Huffington Post decides to do a series on why men seem to come across much unhappier than they have in earlier studies. What do you think many of the comments on that series would blame for men's increasing unhappiness?
I think it would be feminism. Now, if an explanation is equally good both ways, how good an explanation is it?”
“abates17, you misunderstand. I was referring to the fundamentalist base of the Republican party. You can read yourself what they say about working mothers, but the summary is that they do not like them.
dwatkins9, it gives you insights not about the left-wing feminist mind (given that I'm middle of the road) but about what I have read the right-wing views on premarital sex and responsibility are.”