Customer Reviews

Why Women Shouldn't Marry

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I highly recommend the book to all "coming of age" girls. In our society they are victims of a barrage of false information and advertising
as to what constitutes the values to which they should adhere.
This book definitely advises to "know thyself" firstly, develop your God-given talents and then make wise choices in regard to male companionship and possibly marriage.
Hopefully a similar book will one day be available for "coming of age" males.

There are two version of this book. The one from 1988 expresses view from the 80's. The newly rewritten April 2008 version is of course expressing current day views. And is worth the read.

Cynthia S. Smith
Why Women Shouldn't Marry

(Secaucus, NJ: Lyle Stuart, 1988) 223 pages

A breezy, entertaining, outspoken book
encouraging women to keep their freedom
instead of succumbing to the traditional pattern of wedlock.
Discourages both first and second marriages.
Lots of examples of people in bad marriages
and women loving their freedom and independence.

Looking for more such books? Search the Internet for:
"The Best Books Critical of Traditional Marriage".

The book is one anecdote after another.

"Jenny finds she has a flair for computers!" - is a typical example in this book, where the Feminist's 'wholy-grail' is ALWAYS a career. The thing that will solve all her woes.

Aside from Feminsim's misapprehension that "If we all just do the things men do, then we will be fulfilled" - Cynthia's anecdotes seem to only serve as re-affirmation to her & her minority feminists that they are not alone.) The realities of an unnatural descision don't matter all that much to Cynthia, so long as a sect of like-minded sisters can share in your experience.

Cynthia Smith, repeatedly, asserts how women 'need' to change their nature (A familiar mantra of Feminism) - and let go of everything that is innately feminine in order to be 'unsupressed', and somehow emerge (in Cynthia's mind) as a more fulfilled person . Her personal examples of putting on classical music while she eats a dinner alone, are somehow supposed to paint a picture of feminist utopia.

Yeah -it's seems right up there with watching t.v.
Very fulfilling.

Rather than teaching the younger generation of women NOT to make unnatural descisions, and instruct them on their choices if they DON'T decide upon marriage, Cynthia berates her reader with the same uncompromising vitriol of a pushy bible-basher.

While not the most exteme 'fringe' feminist book you could read, (like S.C.U.M Manifesto) - This book simply comes off as a bitter feminist's whining against men, because of the book's utter lack of objectivity, reference or reason.

Girls - if you need an emotional feminist shoulder to cry on after a hard break-up.... then this book will make you 'feel' better.

.

This book is an excellent example of how feminism has degenerated into a male-bashing ideology. Essentially, the purpose of this book is to instruct women how to shirk the traditional institution of marriage and live a "self-reliant and independent" life as a single. That's all well and good; but there's more to this book than just that. Whether this is simply to appeal to the tastes of the reader, or whether a reflection of the writer's own attitudes is not quite clear, but the underlying theme of this book is misandry. That's right, the hatred of men. Here are some quotes to clarify what I mean:

"What exactly do men contribute to marriage? Sex, and companionship are readilly available and socially acceptable without the bonds of matrimony... Years ago he brought home the bacon and she cooked it, but today she does both equally well." (p.3)

"What happened to men between thirty and forty-four who should have been husbands and fathers? They are still little boys playing aimlessly with their electronic toys and living in a state of perpetual adolescence, afraid to grow up and take on the responsibilites their fathers assumed unquestioningly."(p.8)

"Hot flash! The whole fuss about the inability of today's men to grow up is laughable to women who have always known that fact." (p.8)

And under the sub-heading "The Bachelor as a Jerk":

"The dictionary defines the word jerk as "dull, fatuous, stupid, numbskull," which must be viewed as an acceptable description of men who spend their lives avoiding commitment..." (p.9)

And so on, and so forth...

Now while the author feels herself justified in portraying single men in such a negative light, she then devotes the rest of the book to explaining why women are justified in pursuing the single-life. They do so, she claims, for a multitude of reasons: because men are boorish, refuse to communicate with and understand their devoted partners, are abusive, have daughters (harridans, is what Ms. Smith refers to them as) from previous marriages whill question her every purchase; or that it allows the single woman to lead a productive life in the workforce, spend evenings alone chugging back red wine and downing a TV dinner, pursue self-fulfilling interests, etc.

Needless to say, this book is filled with hypocracies, contradictions, paradoxes--you name it. The writing, moreover, is quite low-brow.

Now, I'd like to dismiss this as simply being a stupid book--and seeing that there are so many cheap copies of the book available, my guess is that many other people felt this way as well--but unfortunately, from all taht I've seen and heard over the course of my short life, I do think that it has relevance. It does seem to reflect the way women think. The book, therefore, would be a good one for men to read who want to understand why relationships with women have become so unpredictable and tumultuous.

I came across this book at a flea market but trashed it after I read it. Not worthy of my bookshelves!

The author praises the "single" life and does make a few good critical remarks about marriage in general, but I do not agree with her definition of "single." (Also, she was particularly hard on the doctor husbands. I refuse to believe that all doctor husbands would be like the miserable ones she describes.)

My definition of a SINGLE woman is a woman who is not dating at all - she's perfectly content being single. She is no one's girlfriend, significant other, whatever you want to call it. It's true that unmarried women have to choose "single" as their filing status for tax and other forms, even though it could mean that they are living with someone. But what about the people who are truly single? Her book did not mention the women who choose not to date at all.

Personally, if I had a boyfriend, numerous relatives would NOT consider me single, since they see having a boyfriend as a "positive pairing" or something. This doesn't even get into the marriage phase yet.

According to dictionary.com, some definitions of single are:

Unmarried.
Lacking a partner: a single parent.
Relating to the unmarried state: enjoys the single life.
Of or relating to celibacy.
Not accompanied by another or others; solitary.
Consisting of one in number.

She definitely missed the "lacking a partner" and "of or relating to celibacy" options. How can you be truly independent, solitary, if you have a boyfriend? Some of her negative marriage examples could have happened with your live-in boyfriend. I know people who have moved for their boyfriends, who have given up their career so he can do what he wants. Why wasn't this book about women who feel that men/dating are not priorities or goals in life? Don't just bash marriage, because having a serious partner can take almost as much commitment sometimes. There are "free" marriages AND suffocating dating relationships. The second is easier to get out of, but the first might not be so bad if you find the right person.

I was also irritated that nearly all the examples were of "handsome" or "attractive" women with great jobs (and no problems getting dates, of course). Give me a break. You can be average-looking, have an average job, and turn down marriage. Not everyone needs the self-confidence of good looks or a great job to make "feminist" choices. You have to believe in yourself, not those shallow, material things.

I'm average-looking, but some people still expect me to have a boyfriend. It's pathetic (and discriminatory!), because beautiful people are not the only ones who are expected to have husbands. There are other people in the world.

However, I did like one comment Smith made about how to respond when people ask, "So when are you getting married?":

"So, when are you getting divorced?"

Might use that one.