As little girls playing with our Barbie dolls, we vicariously acted out what we wanted our future adult lives to look like – 2.5 kids, awesome wardrobe (sold separately), hot & fashionable friends.. and, of course, our man Ken. Now, it was never really clear what Ken did for a living but we knew he had enough suits and cashmere sweaters to stay fly, a nice convertible to keep our hair blowing in the wind and, most importantly, enough cash to keep us securely in that dream house. Fast forward to 20 years later and many of us have exactly what we wanted, with 2 major adjustments: 1) we’ve bought our own dream house, wardrobe and convertible and 2) Ken & those kids are still things of girlhood dreams. Along the way to womanhood, no one gave us the roadmap to actually getting everything in the packaged, plastic dream that was advertised to us as children… I guess that manual was definitely sold separately.
With statistics and cover stories awash with bad news for black love, I often collect sista-girl theories about why things are the way they are. Most point to the educational and earnings potential gaps that exist in our community – ratios that mathematically prove that someone is certainly getting left out in the cold. But does the math really add up? Is dating and compatibility really that cut & dry or have we women of a certain status preconditioned ourselves to look for (subconsciously or not) only one kind of man, therefore significantly limiting our own options? I wonder if Ken had been the stay-at-home dad, 3rd shift hard working brotha or the one tending to the garden in front of the dream house through his own landscaping business, would we be so quick to refuse his advancements 20 years down the line. Author Jimi Izrael outlines a theory called the “Denzel Principle” in his book which illustrates that 95% of black women are looking for 5% of black men (The “Denzels”), leading to more single situations than necessary. He calls the brothas out, too, but for the most part he places the burden of singledom in perpetuity with black women and their oftentimes “unrealistic” expectations in a mate:
“Sisters decry the shortage of good men and say there is no way she is settling for less than a good Black man. Not just a good one, but the BEST one: Denzel Washington. She, of course, has no idea what that means, what she wants or what a good Black man truly looks like. So what does your very own Denzel look like? Well, he’s rich but earthy, handsome but not pretty, doting but not docile, tough but vulnerable, political but not radical, passionate but not hysterical, ambitious but not overbearing, well-read but not nerdy, manly but not macho, gentle but not feminine, Black but not militant, sexy but not solicitous, flirtatious but particular…and all that on cue and in proper measure.”
If you are from a certain generation, you may remember there were many characters in movies and TV showcasing black love at different levels of the economic spectrum. Eleanor and Roc had a modest but loving union, we were rooting for Lem and Bird to make it in Soul Food, Stomp the Yard’s groundskeeper got the girl, Gina kissed Martin on her way out to her corporate 9-5 and Julius was arguably the most loveable character on Everybody Hates Chris. Hell, even Sanaa Lathan dropped her Tres Bouge Negro for a down-to-earth (literally) Something New! Couple these fav film images with real life examples of men in our families and friendship networks holding it down, regardless of profession …but yet the notion of white collar women dating blue collar men seems foreign, if not forbidden in today’s rules of love.
In researching this article, I intentionally tried to get representative viewpoints from many sides of the debate; and one thing is for certain, this is a hot button issue that everyone feels passionately about! From my own findings, I concluded of the single black women surveyed (min stats of at least a bachelor’s degree and a professional career) 89% cited economic security as a main requirement for a serious union, while only 11.5% of their black male counterparts seriously considered the woman’s profession or bank account status while looking for a mate. When it came to traditional blue collar roles like tradesman, city workers or good old hourly-wagers (think Subway and Starbucks) women were more prone to ask for supplements to the equation: “Is he getting a night MBA?”, “well, you say he’s a plumber.. is he looking to own his own plumbing business one day?”, “Subway?! You mean he owns a franchise, right?” …lol! With no supplements, women were less likely to take the man seriously, however, if it seemed like he was on a tangible path to something “better” than his current situation women were willing to work with a brotha (and even pay most of the bills!) to help him achieve his goal – e.g. Michelle Obama. **Disclaimer: back when he was just Barack, yes he was kind of okiedoke and broke BUT he still had 2 degrees to fall back on in case his 1st plan didn’t work out. Fellas, please be mindful of comparing yourself to President Obama when you are trying to get your lady to support your half-baked dream with no concrete markers of success or track record of follow-thru to show for yourself**
If the option of professions became more flexible, I found women were more willing to date across the collar line if the man were making significantly less money than they were, yet had a notable public servant position such as a police officer, fireman, teacher or soldier (there’s apparently something sexy about saving lives with good government benefits). Only a few women actually asked for more about the man’s qualitative traits (like family values & morals) when making their decisions without prompting. In general economic & educational compatibility were consistently top 3 (besides looks and personal values) in the women’s ideal mate traits.
Contrarily, men on the other hand were more concerned with looks, personality (no attitudes, divas & drama queens, please!) and a woman’s ability to take care of family & home. Education and class status were decidedly not a deal breaker and was something that could be upgraded by him naturally along the way if need be. So where is the disconnection? Why are professional women willing to date a blue collar man for, ahem, a temporary walk on the wild side or “pipe dream” situation but are less willing to take him seriously as a candidate for the life partner position – even if his values and personal goals align with hers? Many cited that the difference in worlds and social circles are just too great. One woman used a bachelor’s degree as her base criteria for dating because she thinks it speaks to more than just a man’s intellectual pursuits. In her opinion a college degree shows, “ability to see through a complex task, organization, discipline, fortitude…and acknowledgement that he could inevitably rise to the top. These traits are helpful not just in business; they are essential in love and in navigating long-term partnership.”
Additional women from the survey said that being the primary provider would eventually get in the way of expected traditional gender roles (read as the man’s ego would eventually creep into the relationship if he were not the breadwinner/provider figure.) One BFF of the blog put it best:
“Men are naturally hunters, gatherers and protectors. They are providers and need to feel needed, wanted and appreciated. Suppose the Prince hops on his white horse & fights his way through the magical forest, rushing to save his beloved princess from her dungeon atop the tower. However, when he arrives, he realizes the Princess’s dungeon is really a penthouse apartment and not only has she slain the dragon herself…she’s turned it into some hot reptile skin stilettos and matching briefcase. What does the Prince do then? Chances are he hops back on his horse and rides through the forest in search of another chick that actually needs to be saved.”
Underscoring this thought, many women had anecdotes about how men who approached them seemed interested until the man found out the woman’s educational or career background. The key word that kept coming up was “intimidation”; they felt men were intimidated by their success. A professional consultant with a top firm explained her personal quandary of being on the road for months at a time. She would see the same attractive men around the local watering holes or airport of her current assignment and strike up conversation. Once they learned she was a senior consultant the vibe suddenly went cold and “their eyes glazed over … maybe they were calculating my annual salary.” Her social experiment: create a new identity. “For fun, I started telling men that I was a flight attendant just to see their reaction. They were immediately much more receptive and complimentary of me. They thought it was sexy and offered to take me out on dates whenever I was next back in town. One guy even told me he’d have to take me on a trip one day – one flight that I didn’t have to work on!” So what to make of it; are men (subconsciously or not) attracted to damsels in distress and turned off by a lady who can stand on her own? In a recent Nightline panel discussion, Steve Harvey addressed this theory head on: “I think’ it’s more shame than anything else. I think y’all confuse [intimidation with] shame. I’m sorry, I’ve been broke before. You don’t intimidate me, I’m just embarrassed that I didn’t have myself where I wanted to be or trying to figure out how I can get myself to where I can compete. But it’s not intimidation… If you meet a man who is intimidated by you, you haven’t met a real man.”
So if intimidation is the secret word (“ahhhh!”) from the women’s perspective, ask the men about dating high-powered women and the word they most used was “drama.” Some general themes about career women emerged with my conversations with the gents:
1) Men could really care less what your professional stats are. Really. They want to know that you are a cool chick with a sense of humor and are a private freak that will be cute for a lifetime. Being well-read and successful is actually a plus!
2) Career women bring their “big-bad-business- woman” act home too much. A man’s home is his sanctuary; he wants peace, comfort and someone who’s got his back waiting for him with a smile. They suggest that women with big careers make an effort to design clear personality separations between their businesswoman & wife/girlfriend roles. Drop the micro-managing mean-mug act; he loves you without the spreadsheet and power suit and is there so you can let your hair down, drop your defenses and feel safe doing it.
3) Yes, it’s 2010 but gender roles are still important to men. Ladies, you gotta cook and clean. Not all the time but you have to know how or at least demonstrate a willingness to learn. At the end of the day, your messy bathroom & sink of dirty dishes today may hinder your man’s future ability to put a ring on it because he needs to know his house and his kids will be taken care of. The good news is most men surveyed were willing to chip in with the chores but the Joan Cleaver gene in potential mates is a must-have. If anything, it is because that’s what his Momma will be looking out for.
A recent conversation with a successful, professional guy friend turned to blog fodder when he described his simultaneous casual dating situation with an Ivy League-educated dentist and a dental hygienist with an Associate’s degree (they were not in the same practice.) He found that the dentist had all of these pre-conceived notions and rules about what he should be doing with his career and a laundry list of expectations about how he should act. He felt that she was too high-strung, overly critical, too sassy/borderline rude at times and did not carry herself “with quiet strength and grace” (the way the older generation of black women he grew up around do.) He didn’t mind that she was accomplished; in fact, that is one of the reasons why he was attracted to her in the first place. However, he came to realize that she struggled to infuse her professional persona with “femininity” and ultimately, her personality was a deal breaker. In the end he decided to focus on the dental hygienist – why? Because she was “upbeat and kind-hearted, could laugh and {make him laugh}; carried herself like a lady, let {him} be the man … plus she had a big booty and could fry fish.” Period. Lol.
.. Ladies there you have it.
The collar line debate is never ending and does have varying levels of success. Some professional women have thrown their social rules to the wind and have tales of victorious, sustainable infinitely happy relationships with “regular” guys because they are focusing on what matters to them in the long-run (love, safety, support & family-driven values) not the often fleeting social status requirements and monetary wealth. Others struggle to still find a balance and let themselves completely be governed by unfamiliar territory (after all, financial problems are a leading cause of breakups behind infidelity.) Still others have been there, done that and decided it’s not for them. One thing is for sure, if that manual for getting Barbie’s life did exist, I bet there would be a rule about doing something you’ve never done to get something you’ve never had. And as one of Barbie’s most famous mottos goes, “We girls can do anything!”
So, play on.
by ANDREA MICHELLE
© Copyright Cupid ‘n Cleopatra, 2010
