Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was having this discussion with a female friend of mine -- both of us are gainfully employed, BTW -- the other day. I was quite astounded by the number of female acquaintances we had who didn't believe that they should work. They believe that a man should take care of them financially, apart and aside from the raising kids issue. I even know one childfree woman who thought this.
I think that men these days are far less tolerant of women who think that they're put on earth to be taken care of them, and maybe it's just because we live in a conservative part of the country that I seem to run into so many of these types of people.
I also think that it's a really foolish idea. If you believe in statistics, roughly fifty percent of married couples end up getting divorced, and women need to be prepared for this potential outcome. My own mom told me to always make my own money -- it didn't matter if I made less than my husband, but I should make at least enough to support myself, if I ever needed to.
What do the rest of you say? Are the days of women staying at home and being support by a man (for their entire lives) pretty much over?
They're pretty much over, but that's because women wanted it that way more than men did. So to put this on men who are "far less tolerant of women who think they're put on earth to be taken care of" puts the cart before the horse -- this sentiment is a reaction to the women's lib movement, not a driver of it. It's men saying, "OK, if you want to be an equal part of the workforce, then you need to be an equal financial contributor to the household."
What's more, the housewife role was never a "free ride" to begin with as you seem to imply. A housewife was expected to take care of the man and the family by providing household services in exchange for the financial security provided by the man. The "sitting around eating bon-bons" cliche is BS. Maintaining a household is not an easy task and it provides its own economic benefit and value to the family unit. So women have always been economic contributors to the household; the only difference now is where and how they make that contribution.
Just as there are some women who would still prefer the "old-fashioned" arrangement, there are some men who would still prefer it too. Hopefully they're able to find each other when seeking out a mate.
They're pretty much over, but that's because women wanted it that way more than men did. So to put this on men who are "far less tolerant of women who think they're put on earth to be taken care of" puts the cart before the horse -- this sentiment is a reaction to the women's lib movement, not a driver of it. It's men saying, "OK, if you want to be an equal part of the workforce, then you need to be an equal financial contributor to the household."
What's more, the housewife role was never a "free ride" to begin with as you seem to imply. A housewife was expected to take care of the man and the family by providing household services in exchange for the financial security provided by the man. Maintaining a household is not an easy task and it provides its own economic benefit and value to the family unit. So women have always been economic contributors to the household; the only difference now is where and how they make that contribution.
Just as there are some women who would still prefer the "old-fashioned" arrangement, there are some men who would still prefer it too. Hopefully they're able to seek each other out when seeking a mate.
You don't really differentiate between a SAHP and a 'housewife', but when I was living with my ex we had a 3 bedroom house with a rather large yard (it was just the two of us) and I managed to maintain the household, do 90% of the chores (which included cooking, cleaning, shopping, yardwork and repairs, and paying of the bills etc.) while working full time and attending college full time. He would occasionally do the dishes or mop the floors (which nearly always had to be re-done because he half-assed everything) but I basically maintained the entire household by myself.
Now, with children that would basically be impossible, but for a single person maintaining the household is a fairly simple task and I honestly have no idea what housewives would do all day. SAHP are a whole different issue, though.
I agree with this and it's also because women have the ability to escape when they have economic independence. Back in the day if your man slapped you around on a Friday night, had a side woman, or was a drunk you lived with it. These days you don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmachina
Imo, the divorce rate has skyrocketed since more women entered the work force because of the stress it adds to a marriage. I do not have children, but I cannot even imagine trying to raise kids, maintain a clean house and do laundry on top of working.
I have actually noticed this as well... except I think a large part of that is that a lot of these men were raised by Mothers who doted on them and they simply want a 'wife' who will pick up where his Mother left off. I've talked to a few guys who think it's proper for a woman to stay at home and take care of the household/children (which is perfectly grand if both parties agree) and one also said he would refuse to pay for anything for her because he wouldn't marry a 'leach'. For some reason, he expected her to pay for all of her own stuff, but he didn't want her to have a job. It was a very weird line of reasoning and I just came to the conclusion that he wanted to marry a woman with an inheritance.
I just figured they want the best of both worlds. They want a live-in maid/housekeeper/babysitter/teacher/life coach/supporter, but they don't want to actually put in any effort for it. These were all guys in their early-mid 30s, btw.
I agree, Though sometimes it's both parents raising the kid not teaching him and preparing him to survive in the world. It's very important for a man to go out in the world and not only earn a living but learn the skills out in the field to survive and thrive. Dating, socializing, How to throw and take a punch etc help them to learn things they will teach to their children if they have them. Life can be harsh for the unprepared and guys who are left alone in their 40's or 50's having been sheltered their whole lives will find it very difficult. I have a cousin who is like this, Through he has several college degrees and is intelligent my Aunt and Uncle never gave him a push. He is well over 40 now and his mom is ill and dad is way up there in his years. I worry about how he will fare when they are gone. he still lives at home and does not work or even date or socialize.
At least twice a day i think about what might happen to him.
You are working on your third marriage and you never had children. Really, speak for yourself.
The reason this is my third marriage is because the first two did not respect my desire to be who I am, and instead and some false mold that they wanted to shove me into. Fortunately, my third (and last) husband appreciates me for who I am. It has nothing to do with this topic.
To me, making a happy, healthy household for my husband is just as important as being a mother. Part of the reason that the divorce rate is 50% is the fact that women often relegate their husbands to the status of "second class citizen" after the children. They deserve a clean, comfortable house and hot meal on the table too, last I checked.
20yrsinBranson
Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yrsinBranson
The reason this is my third marriage is because the first two did not respect my desire to be who I am, and instead and some false mold that they wanted to shove me into. Fortunately, my third (and last) husband appreciates me for who I am. It has nothing to do with this topic.
20yrsinBranson
Actually it has everything to do with this thread as you are the one touting the fact the divorce rate is so high because of WOMEN. and the fact they don't stay home and dote on their husband.
Actually it has everything to do with this thread as you are the one touting the fact the divorce rate is so high because of WOMEN. and the fact they don't stay home and dote on their husband.
The reason this is my third marriage is because the first two did not respect my desire to be who I am, and instead and some false mold that they wanted to shove me into. Fortunately, my third (and last) husband appreciates me for who I am. It has nothing to do with this topic.
20yrsinBranson
You have to be kidding. So, in your case it's not your fault, but in the case with women who aren't weak do-nothings let the judgements fly? You are superimposing your opinions and judgements onto women at large, women you don't know, and it's bull. Maybe if you weren't a serial cheater, knew how to pick a decent, sane man, or were a better woman you would not be a part of the statistic you're chastising. Really, glass house hypocrisy at its finest.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
