And this is a "why Maureen Dowd is a writer I don't like as much as some of my liberal brethren" post

Speaking of an article Dowd wrote for the New York Times magazine, Roger L. Simon posts:

...this time Dowd is baring her soul in a sense, trying to make heads or tales of the fact that some attractive, intelligent, powerful women like her find themselves alone in their fifties. Men, as she tells it, are threatened by them and would prefer to marry the likes of the Latina maid in "Spanglish." Dowd seems to have missed the key detail that the maid's daughter was headed off to an Ivy League education, but no matter. The movie wasn't Brooks' best anyway. Meanwhile, to augment Dowd's view, she trucks out some statistics to show that feminism is dead and that we're all sliding back to the land of Ozzie & Harriet. Evidence of this is that a few more women these days are staying with their maiden names after marriage. Ms. is out and Mrs. is making a comeback.

This all reminds me of a time I found myself out with my best friend's girl and a group of her friends. At one point during the evening they were all complaining about how they thought they were good girlfriends, and the men in their lives should treat them better.

And I found myself saying, "Well, maybe you're with the wrong guys. Did you think of that?" I'm also reminded of one of my favorite speeches from one of my favorite romantic comedies, Steve Martin's "Roxanne". When Martin is asking Daryl Hannah how she could have been so foolish as not to realize that the letters that made her fall in love with her hunky but clunky boyfriend were in fact written by him (Martin).

He says (this is approximate), "You wanted it all, didn't you? All wrapped up into a pretty little package...with a cute little ass; and a cute little nose." My point is: My sympathy for women who claim they can't find men who love them for their minds is not that high.

Ladies, we're out here. I swear to you, we're out here. Men who have as one of our life's goals the desire to find a good woman and treat her as well as we can for as long as we can. And "good woman" means "smart woman."

The thing is, in my experience, you smart women are just as likely to be caught up in lust for that hunk who has never had to treat a woman right in his life as a man is for the likes of Daryl Hannah (one of the most wicked jokes in Roxanne is that she plays, literally, a rocket scientist). And then you complain that he doesn't treat you right.

Or you go for the man with (I'm sorry, but it happens) money and power and a nice house and a nice car. Well, honey, the man with money and power and the nice house and the nice car doesn't need to treat you right, because there's a long line of girls where you come from.

Like Simon, I'm just sick unto death of hearing that the reason these poor, miserable lonely women can't find themselves a real man is because we're threatened by smart women. Fuck you, real men aren't threatened by smart women. Almost by definition.

I realize personal stories may have little relevance in the grand scheme of things, but from my own experience I'm highly suspicious of the assertion that most men are looking for dumb, unsuccessful women as mates, whatever statistics might say (I'd want to have a serious look at the questions that were asked). In my case it's quite the reverse and I doubt that I'm that weird (well, a little weird). Almost all of us have made a few mistakes in our lives, but serious adults - male and female - finally come to the conclusion that if you marry someone, you're going to have to live with him or her for a long time. You're going to have to talk to them before and after sex, negotiate and share thousands of things. In my case I always preferred intelligent women. And they're a hundred times sexier, especially after the first twenty minutes or so and maybe even before that.

Ladies, your problem is, you're looking for real men in the bodies (and brains) of boys. I'm not saying men don't do the reverse (although, you know, there is that whole "women are more mature than men" thing).

Or that you're not entitled to get out there and have a little fun. By all means. But just don't come whining to me because the jarhead high school drop-out with washboard abs dumped your ass for your best friend. If you want to be treated like a lady, date a gentleman. If you want to date a punk, be preapared to be treated the way a punk treats girls.

Elsewhere, in a blog with the great title of What Would Phoebe Do?--I was hoping it was a reference to Phoebe "definition of nubile" Cates or even Phoebe Buffay, but no lucksuch--we find this entry:

It seems the whole Kass, etc., debate is really about this: young women are not planning for the future. Reasonably attractive college-age women have endless options, from abstinence to promiscuity, but older women either have a spouse or they don't. Too much emphasis on pleasure among young women will lead to a fun 20s but a lonely 50s. Men can be convinced that their college girlfriends won't put out until getting a ring, but they cannot be convinced that older women are as desirable as young.

Sez you. Of course, it depends a lot upon who the older or young women actually are. For instance, Blythe Danner has always been more desirable to me than her daughter, Gwyneth Paltrow...