Michelle Obama is turning out to be quite a social evangelist. Now she is giving dating tips to young women. Her advice is rather regressive. “Cute’s good. But cute only lasts for so long and then it’s, ‘Who are you as a person?’ That’s the advice I would give to women - don’t look at the bankbook or the title. Look at the heart. Look at the soul.”She assumes that all women are gold-diggers and wish to be arm candy. In many professions there are women who are settling for men who are younger and therefore not as well-established in their work. Hollywood and the music industry have several examples where the women are more famous and the men have dated or married them for money.
She also discounts the fact that many men do want recognition for their wealth and their position from not just their peers, but their women. I cannot imagine a situation where a Mr. Money Bags who is also a Big Title would be even willing to expose his soul. That would make him vulnerable. It is much in the manner of women acting tough as defence mechanism.
Relationships are built over time. It is not as easy as what you look for, but what you are attracted to. What keeps you in it keeps both in it, maybe for different reasons. It isn’t a one-lane journey.
She also warned women against marrying “somebody who doesn’t make you completely happy and make you feel whole”. The concept of happiness alters over time. And why must a woman need a man to make her feel whole? Can they not be two individuals who share many things? Being completed by another is really closing the book when you should be merely moving from one chapter to another with the person.
FV, your response to the 'regressive' advice seems unnecesserily aggressive.. after all, it's only advice and not a prescription...
ReplyDeletei think your premise that Michelle Obama assumes all women are gold-diggers is wrong. There is no such implication. Probably, there ARE women who are gold-diggers and the advice is for them... not all women...
"What keeps you in it keeps both in it, maybe for different reasons"
Can you please give an example here? Isn't 'what keeps you in it' the 'reason' for keeping you in it? Then how can his 'reason' be different if it 'keeps you both in it'...confused.. :(
I agree her last statement about happiness is shallow...
Circle:
ReplyDeleteMichelle Obama’s “tackiness” is not really the point here. Do you agree with her views? If we emphasise on this aspect of her, then we will fall into the rut she has fallen into.
Atul:
Agony aunts do not prescribe; they advise. And when they talk generally, they address the young female population as a whole. She did not say, hey you gold-diggers, this is for you. It IS regressive in my opinion to tell women not to look at the bankbook or the title.
This is damning especially when they should be encouraged to be independent and many will be.
It brings us to your confusion, which is in fact not about examples but attitude and a result of her statements which make it seem like it is only about what women must look for. Here is my quote:
Relationships are built over time. It is not as easy as what you look for, but what you are attracted to. What keeps you in it keeps both in it, maybe for different reasons. It isn’t a one-lane journey.
The initial attraction could be one thing, but it takes time and it takes two to make it work and for dif reasons.
fv
ReplyDeleteexactly.
I definitely mean her views are tacky.
circle