Reply
Wed 17 Dec, 2003 05:15 pm
Some of you may have heard of Rachel Greenblat, author of How to Find a Husband after 35 (or similiar title). For those of you who have not heard of either the book or its author, Greenblat applies principles learned at the Harvard B School to husband hunting.
I caught a bit of Ms. Greenblat on NPR while driving in my car (when do I have time to listen to the radio otherwise).
Until I listened to her, I thought I might give her book a try (and someone on abuzz said liberals are close minded!). As you might suppose, I've changed my mind.
While some of her suggestions are things I figured out myself and don't mind doing . . . getting afternoon coffee and reading the paper at Starbucks rather than in my house . . . or shopping at a time when men might be picking up something for their supper . . . there are other things that I think are just wrong.
For one thing, there is a difference between shopping at the supermarket in the evening when men are returning from work and eating at the local pizzeria on Wednesday nights when dads have visitation night and take their kids out. What sort of shallow moron throws herself in with a man and his kid? He needs time for the child, not for some bimbo. When I was a single woman in my 20s in Detroit, two men took me out on a first date when they had a child in tow. Sorry. A date is for adults. Visiting is for the children.
Worse is her suggestion that a woman looking for a husband always wear a push up bra. Does she think a man is fooled by padding and lace? Why would a woman want a man with that sort of value system? What happens when the bra comes off, which is the ultimate goal for both parties.
Rachel, Rachel.
No wonder some people hate Harvard and its business school. No wonder some people hate big business.
I am not familiar with Rachel, but I think the entire concept of finding a husband vs. finding a life partner a bit offensive.
cav,
I had a husband who signed my name as though he had power of attorney to more than $100,000 in loans. However, I have had more satisfactory relationships with men before and after that time.
I would like a man in my life for the rest of my life but I wouldn't shove my body parts in his face. How much would he be worth?
Yeah, that's bad. So this Rachel went to Harvard?
That's her story: that she's applying what she learned at Harvard Business School to finding a husband and that is how she found her husband.
There is a well known university here that many go to for their business degrees. The running joke is that the ladies only go to get their M.R.S.
Re: Really? Rachel Greenblat!!!
plainoldme wrote:For one thing, there is a difference between shopping at the supermarket in the evening when men are returning from work and eating at the local pizzeria on Wednesday nights when dads have visitation night and take their kids out. What sort of shallow moron throws herself in with a man and his kid? He needs time for the child, not for some bimbo. When I was a single woman in my 20s in Detroit, two men took me out on a first date when they had a child in tow. Sorry. A date is for adults. Visiting is for the children.
In an (obvioulsy half-hearted) defense of ol' Rachel Whatshername I don't think she was intending for anyone to throw themselves at a man or have the Wednesday night pizza shop be a date.
I would hope that if a guy saw a woman he was interested in he might attempt to arrange something for a later time when the kids aren't around. If not, well, he'd just be being a schmuck.
Don't blow Rachel off completely. I've never heard of her or her book but I remember a book I read many years ago, along the same lines, and much of the advice was difficult to swallow, along the push-up bra lines, but the author was very straightup about it. Men respond to many things about women that women may find superficial, even offensive, but the same holds true about womens' response to men.
One point made that I'll never forget is the idea of women, especially fashionable women, dressing for the approval of other women rather than men. I realized, altho it was difficult to admit, that this was true.
I'm gonna take a guess here cav and assume that her idea of a husband is a life partner.
fishin,
There is nothing wrong with doing what a woman I met recently does: she has cards with her name and email address on them to give to a man with whom she has talked and with whom she senses some connection. It's a good first step that's in line with what you're talking about.
Bringing your kid along on a first date is a real spoiler for any potential. In one case, I doubted that there would be anything with the man: I had met him the night before and wasn't physically attracted to him but he insisted we go out the next day. In the other, I knew the man a little better because we had talked several times in conjunction with an activity he was involved in. He should have waited, however, for an evening when we could have talked outside of a work setting and without his son to see if there was any reason to go on to a second date.
eoe -- Yes, there are the little physical things we like about the opposite sex. I personally love chest hair but I never encountered a man with a chest toupee, which is sort of equivalent to a push up bra.
I'd say that the sock in the crotch is more along the lines of a push-up bra.
A chest toupee? Yikes!
What's worse, a chest toupee or a merkin (pubic wig)?
IT'S ALL BAD, ESPECIALLY IF YOU ATTACH A GERKIN TO THE MERKIN!
I don't think a push-up bra is any different than high heels or hair dye or lipstick. We all know that the woman is not taller/red-headed/ruby-lipped but we keep using these things anyway.
I agree with eoe that women tend to dress for the approval of other women. But a short skirt has never hurt my chances with the men I've set my sites on. You can tell after about 5 minutes whether they want the skirt or the whole package. Everyone uses bait.
I also agree that using visitation times as a feeding ground is crass, but as fishin says, any guy that would respond to that is a loser anyway. Maybe those people deserve each other.
Hmmm. Not getting updates.
Sugar -- I don't think high heels and push up bras are the same thing. During the 1980s, high heels with a tailored suit and a floppy bow tie were part of the executive uniform for women.
Austin Powers wears a chest toupee, if memory serves. Seemed to work for him.
As far as Rachel's book goes...Haven't heard of it or her, and some of her advice seems a bit over the top. But other items seem reasonable enough. She probably overexaggerates some features to attact notice. Kind of like wearing the push-up bra...
High heels and push up bras are exactly the same thing, IMO. High heels were created to alter a woman's gait, causing the hips to rock and later, to accentuate the legs. Bait.
The First Ladies' High-Heeled Shoe
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace