Anyway - there's this stuff in here.
The willingness of New York women to enter what is essentially a nineteenth-century marriage market is surprising. After all, the cause of women's emancipation is more advanced in Manhattan than in any other city in the world. They might not describe themselves as "feminists," but if these women experience any form of discrimination they're straight on the phone to their attorneys. They're more ambitious, better educated and less oppressed than any previous generation of women and yet they're prepared to go to any lengths, however demeaning, to secure a husband. Why?
and in a footnote on the same page:
Katie Roiphe wrong an article for Esquire in which she discussed this paradox: "Seen from the outside, my life is the model of modern female independence... But it sometimes seems like my independence is in part an elaborately constructed facade that hides a more traditional feminine desire to be protected and provided for." "The Independent Woman (And Other Lies)," Esquire, February 1999"
I just found that all a pretty interesting observation. Especially from a male non-American.
A couple of days ago I had a conversation with Karl about the weirdness that comes from feeling like I'm not supposed to behave in a way that is natural for me. I have a basic "let me get that for you" sort of instinct. I want to cook dinner and get you a drink and do the dishes and all that stuff. But all the while I feel like I'm not supposed to want to do that. Because somewhere along the way feminism went from being about the freedom to do whatever you wanted to being just as rigid a mode of thought as the patriarchal bullshit is was setting out to change.
Women are always first and foremost about judging other women. And unfortunately it's gotten under my skin and I am sometimes really sheepish about how I feel.