Why Men Are Attracted to High-Earning Women
( TIME )

Today’s high-earning women are justly proud of their paychecks -- I
explore the rise of the female breadwinner in this week’s TIME cover
story -- but they still often feel that men will be intimidated rather
than attracted to them as potential mates. They think their success
will seem too threatening and be held against them. As a result, some
women in the dating pool devise camouflage mechanisms. A young ob-gyn
working in Pittsburgh tells men she meets that she “works at the
hospital, taking care of patients” -- subtly encouraging the idea that
she’s a nurse, not a doctor. When a university vice president in south
Texas was on the dating market, she would vaguely tell men she worked
in the school’s administrative offices and avoid letting them walk her
to her car for fear they would see her BMW. “I want them to give me a
chance,” says the Pittsburgh doctor. “I want them to at least not
walk away immediately.”

But a growing body of research shows that while there may have once
been a stigma to making money, high-earning women actually have an
advantage in the dating-and-marriage market. In February 2012, the
Hamilton Project, a Brookings Institution initiative that tracks trends
in earnings and life prospects, found that marriage rates have risen
for top female earners -- the share of women in the very top earning
percentile who are married grew by more than 10 percentage points --
even as they have declined for women in lower earning brackets. (The
report also suggested that the decline in those lower brackets may be
because women can support themselves and are dissuaded from marriage by
the declining earnings of men.)

We got the first indication of a major shift back in 2001 with a study
by University of Texas at Austin psychologist David Buss that showed
that when men ranked traits that were important in a marital partner,
there had been a striking rise in the importance they gave to women’s
earnings and a sharp drop in the value they placed on domestic skills.
Similarly, University of Wisconsin demographer Christine Schwartz noted
in a 2010 study in the American Journal of Sociology that “men are
increasingly looking for partners who will ‘pull their own weight’
economically in marriage” and are willing to compete for them.

posted by K.Andoh | Comment(0) | 米国 | このブログの読者になる |


オバマ大統領が語る 大国アメリカの外交政策の転換

Inside Obama’s World: The President talks to TIME About the Changing
Nature of American Power
( TIME )

Fareed Zakaria: When we talked when you were campaigning for the
presidency, I asked you which Administration’s foreign policy you
admired. And you said that you looked at George H.W. Bush’s diplomacy,
and I took that to mean the pragmatism, the sense of limits, good
diplomacy, as you looked upon it favorably. Now that you are President,
how has your thinking evolved?

President Obama: It is true that I’ve been complimentary of George
H.W. Bush’s foreign policy, and I continue to believe that he managed
a very difficult period very effectively. Now that I’ve been in office
for three years, I think that I’m always cautious about comparing what
we’ve done to what others have done, just because each period is
unique. Each set of challenges is unique. But what I can say is that I
made a commitment to change the trajectory of American foreign policy
in a way that would end the war in Iraq, refocus on defeating our
primary enemy, al-Qaeda, strengthen our alliances and our leadership in
multilateral fora and restore American leadership in the world. And I
think we have accomplished those principal goals.

We still have a lot of work to do, but if you look at the pivot from
where we were in 2008 to where we are today, the Iraq war is over, we
refocused attention on al-Qaeda, and they are badly wounded. They’re
not eliminated, but the defeat not just of [Osama] bin Laden, but most
of the top leadership, the tightening noose around their safe havens,
the incapacity for them to finance themselves, they are much less
capable than they were back in 2008.

Our alliances with NATO, Japan, South Korea, our close military
cooperation with countries like Israel have never been stronger. Our
participation in multilateral organizations has been extremely
effective. In the United Nations, not only do we have a voice, but we
have been able to shape an agenda. And in the fastest-growing regions
of the world in emerging markets in the Asia Pacific region, just to
take one prominent example, countries are once again looking to the
United States for leadership.

posted by K.Andoh | Comment(0) | 米国 | このブログの読者になる |


米議会のソーパオペラ ハリウッドからシリコンバレーに移る政治力

Washington SOPA Opera: Lobbying Power Shifts from Hollywood to Silicon Valley
( TIME )

Hollywood loves a good yarn about pirates on the high seas. Piracy
online? Not so much. Every day, people around the world effectively
steal countless movies, songs and other copyrighted content through
websites offering illegal downloads. The big movie and music studios
have fought this thievery for years, with some success. They hounded
Napster out of business. Their high-profile (if unpopular) lawsuits
against music downloaders -- remorselessly targeting people of all age
groups -- produced a clear deterrent effect. Major websites like
YouTube are quick to take down copyrighted content when asked. But the
music and movie industries have struggled to combat overseas-based
pirate sites that are mostly beyond the reach of U.S. law. So they have
turned to Congress for help, and rallied support for two measures: the
House’s Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), and the Protect IP Act (PIPA).
Both would create new legal powers to give American companies --
including TIME’s parent company, Time Warner, which supports this
legislation -- the ability to fight back against these foreign
“rogue” sites.

The problem is that Silicon Valley hates Internet regulation. And its
dot-com business leaders, including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg
and Google chairman Eric Schmidt, particularly hate these bills. They
liken provisions that would block links to pirate website from Google
search results to the online censorship of Beijing and Tehran. They say
a measure that would force advertisers to cut off their payments to
pirate sites is open to abuse and misapplication, and could drive
innocent web companies out of business. And they accuse Hollywood of
exaggerating the economic harm it’s suffering. In the new print issue,
I’ve done a fuller rundown of the arguments the two sides are making
about the merits of passing SOPA, PIPA or some variation of the two,
which all-access subscribers can read here.

Silicon Valley also has a weapon that is perhaps even more powerful:
the ability to shape public opinion in a hurry. Yesterday’s blackout
by Wikipedia and related protests by countless other sites drove this
issue into the consciousness of millions of Americans who have never
picked up a copy of Roll Call in their lives, and wouldn’t otherwise
have known or cared about the SOPA fight. Now it looks like a burst of
public outrage -- Google says that 4.5 million people signed an anti-
SOPA petition yesterday -- has members of Congress running scared.
Whether the studios can regain the political momentum in this fight
should reveal just how much, when it comes to the Washington influence
game, the balance of power has shifted from Hollywood to Silicon Valley.

posted by K.Andoh | Comment(0) | 米国 | このブログの読者になる |



Why the Death Penalty Is Slowly Dying
( TIME )

California is having problems with its death penalty. It hasn’t
executed anyone since 2006, when a federal court ruled that its method
of lethal injection was improper and could cause excessive pain. The
state spent five years coming up with a better method -- and last
month, a judge threw that one out too. One indication of just how
bogged down California’s capital-punishment system is: the inmate who
brought the latest lethal-injection challenge has been on death row for
24 years.

It isn’t just California. The Death Penalty Information Center
reported last month that the number of new death sentences nationally
was down sharply in 2011, dropping below 100 for the first time in
decades. It also reported that executions were plummeting -- down 56%
since 1999.

There has long been an idea about how the death penalty would end in
the U.S.: the Supreme Court would hand down a sweeping ruling saying it
is unconstitutional in all cases. But that is not what is happening.
Instead of top-down abolition, we seem to be getting it from the bottom
up -- governors, state legislatures, judges and juries quietly deciding
not to support capital punishment.

Then there is the ick factor. In other eras, executions were public
spectacles -- and people turned out in droves. But we tend to be more
squeamish these days. Ohio briefly suspended its death penalty in 2009
after a gruesome episode in which technicians spent two hours trying,
without success, to find a vein to use to administer a lethal injection.

posted by K.Andoh | Comment(0) | 米国 | このブログの読者になる |


実業家スティーヴ・ジョブズ ジョブズなきアップルの繁栄は続くのか?

Steve Jobs the businessman: Can Apple thrive without him?
( TIME )

As Apple fans mourn the unfortunate loss of Steve Jobs, the great
innovator will be remembered most of all for how his ideas changed
people's lives. But in the world of business, he will also be honored
as an absolutely brilliant CEO. Jobs possessed the rare ability to link
emerging technologies with consumer habits and tastes in a way that
built a powerful corporation and an internationally beloved brand.
There aren't that many people in modern corporate history who can claim
that skill. In fact, Jobs was probably unrivaled in the world today in
matching great ideas with savvy marketing and pristine execution. And
that's why there is reason for uncertainty about Apple's future.

The question is: Can Apple keep the Steve Jobs spirit without Steve

There is a long history, of course, of entrepreneurial companies not
only surviving their charismatic founders, but thriving after they
passed on. Ford did just fine after the death of Henry; Disney is still
a force in entertainment long after Walt. Apple will remain a major
player in the world of computing and electronics without Steve. The
firm is simply too established, too much a part of a consumer's life,
to just wither away, even with the exit of a towering figure like Jobs.

But the question remains if Apple can continue to be an industry leader
as it has routinely been under Jobs. Can Apple keep its edge? Apple's
success has always been based on being first, by solving problems
others thought unsolvable, and introducing products that changed how
people worked, played and communicated. It is not easy for any company
to continue to produce innovative hit after innovative hit, even with
its visionary leader still in the corner office. It will be even harder
for Apple with Jobs gone. That isn't to say that current CEO Tim Cook
can't get the job done. But Jobs is just a very hard act to follow.

posted by K.Andoh | Comment(0) | 米国 | このブログの読者になる |