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 would like a return to traditional gender roles where the husband works and the wife stays home and raises the children. It seems to me the root of much of the decay of this society is due to how there is no one at home taking time with the children. It saddens me to see so much of this.
the thing is, this was really only 'traditional' for a few privileged families in a brief period in history. This blog post explains it very well (and I have no idea what it has to do with Sarah Palin):
To answer your question (not the right or the wrong as some posters are debating) it would depend on what fills the void of government and current laws.
If you are in a place where anarchy rules you will be at the mercy of those stronger then you and what is dictated.
If some form of control by the majority in your area is developed it will be the will of you and your neighbors.
So, if any is worried about such a situation ever developing, take a look at your surroundings, neighbors, majority beliefs in your location. What would you expect from them in crisis now?
Knowing how we screwed up, would they want to procreate? I think the women would be raiding anywhere they could get BCPs, when you are fighting for survival, making babies is hardly high on the agenda and with our knowledge of the birds and the bees, folk would know how to avoid pregnancy.
The traditional roles may kick in with the kids as by that time, sex would lead to babies.
The weird thing is all these apocalyptic movies are set in the USA in an area 51 type setting. Put that in Africa and you have oodles of natural resources to feed from.
Yes, gender roles would revert to the traditional - because traditional is the natural order of how things should be.
Women actually WANT to be the housekeeper whilst the man goes off hunting.
The only reason this has changed is because of the off-centre fems.
People don't work for fun. They do it to...eat and such/pay for kids college/rent/car payments.
Secondly, and again, it doesn't matter what women want. With our high divorce rates, that's quite a risky endeavor to not begin a career.
I know a woman with ten kids. She liked the idea of being primarily supported by her husband. She decided not to go to college because her husband was doing so well. Then he got laid off, and their family is deep in the hole. She regrets not going to college.
People will do what it takes to get by. If that means traditional roles, perhaps to add comfort and familiarity to society in otherwise unendingly stressful times, that will happen. If it means training the women to be sharpshooters, that will happen.
You can't speak for all women. There have always been some women who didn't want to be housekeepers but had no choice in the matter. If the zombie apocalypse happened tomorrow I'm not going to forget everything I've ever learned and put on an apron while my man defends me from zombies. There will be Lories, Andreas, and Michonne types if the zombie apocalypse goes down.
I would fall somewhere between the Michonne and Andrea type...Lorie was pretty much useless and I couldn't stand her.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenneth-Kaunda
Yes, gender roles would revert to the traditional - because traditional is the natural order of how things should be.
Women actually WANT to be the housekeeper whilst the man goes off hunting.
The only reason this has changed is because of the off-centre fems.
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.