This Forbes story with the provocative title "Don't Marry A Career Woman" has raised a ruckus in cyberia. Much has already been written about/on this article both on the Forbes's discussion boards, and in blogssphere. If I were to put these opinions/responses into categories, the first category (the vast majority) can be termed "WTF", the second (the minor minority) can be termed "Don't shoot the messenger, misogynist or not, stupid! Go look at the research cited", and the third category (the major minority) can be termed "Me Cro-Magnon man, dem working women be biyatches; kudos for bitching about women for us just as Cosmopolitan does about men for women". Further, it is hard to figure out what the motives of the Forbes editor who penned this piece might have been; did he want to give offence with his phrasing? Or was this an attempt at locker room humor that somehow infilitrated the Forbes webpage?*

Hard to say. But since I found a very minor part of my judgment tending into the second category from the first "WTF" category, as defined above, I plan to read the research cited, and see if I can share any provocative ideas sans the misogynist writing. To begin, I have downloaded the papers of Gary S. Becker on the subject of division and specialization of labor within marriages, and will try to provide some views on these soon.

*For an account of another 'humorous' line that go out of hand back in 1980s, take a look at this Newsweek article: Marriage by the Numbers. The line on the firing range was: a 40-year-old single woman was more likely to be killed by a terrorist than to ever marry”.