For Women Lawyers, Marriage Sucks
Ladies, whatever you do, steer the hell away from it, particularly the traditional heterosexual sort.
March 10, 2020 at 03:10 PM
4 minute read
|
Want to find a life partner who'll make you deliriously happy—emotionally and sexually—and be a helpmate in your career?
If you're a man, the winning recipe is this: Be gay. But if you're a woman, whatever you do, steer the hell away from marriage, particularly the traditional heterosexual sort.
Wacky advice? Not at all. I'm basing this on research by members of the sociology department at the University of Texas at Austin, published in the Journal of Marriage and Family. (The study's authors Michael Garcia and Debra Umberson analyzed the diaries of 756 middle-aged men and women.) Recently, Stephanie Coontz, the author of "Marriage: A History," wrote about it in The New York Times.
In a nutshell, here's the marital bliss ranking:
- Lowest stress: Men in gay marriages.
- Middle stress: Men married to women; women married to women.
- Highest stress: Women married to men.
Surprised that women in hetero marriages are the most miserable? I doubt it. That's because we know that women in hetero relationships usually get saddled with the dirty laundry and the dirty dishes—all that dreadful housework. (Need I remind you that female lawyers bear most of the home responsibilities, according to a study by the American Bar Association and ALM Legal Intelligence?)
As the Times reports, studies show "that the happiest and most sexually satisfied couples" divvy up housework and child care "the most equally," while relationships where the wife does most of the chores display "the highest levels of discord."
And, ladies, if that doesn't dissuade you from marrying Mr. Right (or Mr. Wrong), consider this: "When a never-married man married, he reduced his routine housework, on average, by three and a half hours a week," reports the Times. And for the wife? You guessed it: She picked up 3.5 hours more of housework!
What's more, having children will make the problem worse. "Married mothers spend more time on housework than single mothers and have significantly less leisure time than cohabiting mothers," reports the Times about how gender roles become reinforced with offspring.
So what's the better alternative? As you might expect, those entrenched gender roles are far less pronounced in gay unions. "Almost half of dual-earner, same-sex couples shared laundry duties, compared with just under a third of different-sex couples," reports The Times. "And a whopping 74 percent of same-sex couples shared routine child care, compared with only 38 percent of straight couples."
But the happiest, most ideal situation, as I alluded in the beginning, is marriage between gay men. So what makes those arrangements so blissful? Ah, let's count the ways:
Gay male couples are the most satisfied about division of labor. They tend to be more communicative about job duties at home, even though there's the same percentage of stay-at-home parents among gay males as heterosexual couples.
Gay male couples are more honest about sexual matters, including preferences. In non-monogamous relationships, gay men tend to have "detailed agreements" about what's permissible.
Gay male marriages are quite stable. Contrary to stereotype, gay men in "formalized unions are as stable as those of heterosexuals and more stable than formalized female-female unions."
That last point raises this issue: Why aren't lesbian marriages as happy and secure as gay male ones?
"Having a double dose of masculine or feminine socialization in a relationship can pose its own problems," reports the Times, adding that women tend to "put more energy into maintaining and deepening intimacy" and have "more extensive expectations of empathy and emotional support." All good stuff, except "they also consume a lot of energy and can generate stress or disappointment."
So even in the LGBTQ world, gay males trump lesbians when it comes to marriages. But lesbian marriages are still more tranquil than hetero ones, though their longevity is no better or worse.
All things considered, maybe women should skip all the agita and simply stay single.
Contact Vivia Chen at [email protected]. On Twitter: @lawcareerist.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDechert 'Spark Tank' Competition Encourages Firmwide Innovation Focus
Akerman Opens Charlotte Office With Focus on Renewable Energy, Data Center Practices
4 minute readDLA Piper Sued by 2 Houston Companies, Alleging a 'Fake Lawyer' Represented Them in Argentina
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims
- 2Dallas Jury Awards $98.65M in Botham Jean Killing by Dallas Officer
- 3In Talc Bankruptcy, Andy Birchfield Skipped His Deposition. Could He Face Sanctions?
- 4Pharmaceutical Patents: Benefits and Challenges
- 5Where Do Web-Tracking Class Actions Belong? 8th Circuit Weighs the Issue
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250