Excerpts from an article which captures the worries and fears of most career women I know, including myself.

What's a Modern Girl to Do?
by Maureen Dowd (New York Times)

Men, he explained, prefer women who seem malleable and awed. He predicted that I would never find a mate because if there's one thing men fear, it's a woman who uses her critical faculties. Will she be critical of absolutely everything, even his manhood?

He had hit on a primal fear of single successful women: that the aroma of male power is an aphrodisiac for women, but the perfume of female power is a turnoff for men. It took women a few decades to realize that everything they were doing to advance themselves in the boardroom could be sabotaging their chances in the bedroom, that evolution was lagging behind equality.

I'm getting increasingly doubtful about any woman's ability to raise a family and still be successful in her career; however, I fervently reject being a stay-at-home housewife for fear of being dependent on my future husband's income, while carving out and maintaining a career is, as any person can tell you, very life-consuming and exhausting.

At this stage in my life, the most important thing is my career. I do not intend to let anyone distract me from my goal of reaching a senior position in the industry I'm working in, and that, quite simply, means that I don't have the time or the luxury to contemplate getting a mate I'll be spending the rest of my life with. And given that a friend of mine once said that you should plan to meet the one you want to marry three years before you want to get married (i.e. meet The One at 27 if you want to get married at 30), it sure does look as if I don't have that much time left if I intend to get married between 30 to 35 years old.

A study by psychology researchers at the University of Michigan, using college undergraduates, suggested that men going for long-term relationships would rather marry women in subordinate jobs than women who are supervisors. Men think that women with important jobs are more likely to cheat on them. There it is, right in the DNA: women get penalized by insecure men for being too independent.

Hewlett quantified, yet again, that men have an unfair advantage. "Nowadays," she said, "the rule of thumb seems to be that the more successful the woman, the less likely it is she will find a husband or bear a child. For men, the reverse is true."

Someone I met two years ago once remarked, after we had been talking for half an hour, that if I didn't change my independent and assertive ways, I would find myself bitter and regretful at the age of 30 because I was unable to find a man. He also said, by then, I would be too old to change, and too old to be attractive to other men. I don't for a minute believe a word of what he said, but it did strike me as odd that someone living in this day and age would say something like that.

A 2005 report by researchers at four British universities indicated that a high I.Q. hampers a woman's chance to marry, while it is a plus for men. The prospect for marriage increased by 35 percent for guys for each 16-point increase in I.Q.; for women, there is a 40 percent drop for each 16-point rise.

And again, what is this? I once asked my guy best friend why is it that some guys I go out with flake out after the first proper date, and he said that while they're attracted by the looks, they also realise that I'm an intelligent lady who doesn't ever stop thinking, which means that it'll take too much effort to hoodwink me and therefore, they bugger off, looking for an easier target.

I mean, are men really so fickle that they choose to penalise women for being smart, intelligent and independent? I, for one, would not be able to tolerate anyone not near my level of intellect, nor would I be able to handle someone who didn't have any passion or an opinion of his own. While I see the appeal that submissive women have for men, still, that just turns my stomach so much. And the notion of buying a bride? Vile and pathetic.