Are working women ruining marriages? (loving, single, husbands, family)
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.
Someone on this forum in the past week or so said something along the lines that women have to choose between having a successful career and a successful family. That idea is still floating around in the ether. Nobody tells men that they have to make that same choice. It's a throwback to the idea that a guy can "have it all!" because he's got a wife at home to take care of all the day-to-day unpleasantness and drudgery. If the two people in a relationship are a team, both of them really can have a good marriage without anything being ruined.
I've always understood "having it all" to mean career, marriage, and kids. Men have never had it all. They had a career and marriage, but they weren't much involved with the children directly. Many Baby Boomers will tell you that their fathers were a bit distant, more there to back their mothers up when discipline was necessary. On Saturdays their fathers mowed the lawn, trimmed the hedges, and did the heavy lifting, so Sundays were really the only "family days" they had. Otherwise, "wait until your father gets home," was about as far as the men's roles went.
That old Enjoli commercial is quite a sociological statement:
When women were told they can "have it all," the implication is that they can have careers (bring home the bacon/work 'til 5 o'clock), nurture their families, including children (fry it up in the pan/come home and read you Tickety-Tock), and have great marriages (and never let you forget you're a man/and if it's lovin' you want I can kiss you and give you the shivering fits).
It's a bill of goods that expects too much of any one human being. I don't think women are any more capable of all three than men were and are. That's why if both spouses work, the husband simply must become more involved in his children's lives than Ward Cleaver was ("tonight I'm going to cook for the kids").
To say marriages are ruined by women working is ludicrous. Marriage takes two. Both spouses play a role when a marriage fails. That means the man is just as much at fault as the woman when a marriage ends.
There needs to be nobody's fault - there's a no-fault. Unfortunately when no-fault occurs the procedure continues as if the husband was at fault. That is one huge scam that nobody tends to address. How on earth can one spouse be considered completely unnecessary and completely being without right to voice out any issue on it, but when obligations come to their mind that same spouse needs to pay for a child that he doesn't participate.
There are multiple criteria that people assume when they consider having a child of their own - two most general conditions are that it's their biological child and that they aren't barred from participating in their upbringing. This is why so many guys AVOID such institutions, that is unless they stay brainwashed by the media and society because we all pretend it's not true and it's men who ruin it because they are retarded and women are evolving so greatly. Once guys figure out how it goes, various folks react on various ways - either completely avoid anything, or they simply engage for casual sex, some might try to deal with it via "trial marriages" etc.
fletiebelle disregards the obvious - man should SUCK IT UP. Woman should bring a tv to lament about the fact that she cannot find a husband to sacrifice his career. While still seeking for at least an engineer or an outright entrepreneur/executive/wealthy inheritor. This just doesn't work. Seek for a guy who works at McDonald's and you'll see he's gladly going to quit his job.
Another is the story of stan4 and stay-at-home dad. The story is really great while it lasts, however advertising this to any guy is an outright TARRIBLE. Society doesn't work that way and custody isn't awarded based on who works and who's stay-at-home. The guy is unfortunately depending on his wife's whim and he'll be forced to enter the workforce to pay child support and leave their mutual house if they ever separate. That's the reality. I've been reading how media glorify stay-at-home dads. Seems that media want more and more miserable men who get destroyed worse and worse by the legal system and their wives.
I don't see how come more IT guys, most notably programmers, wouldn't retain child custody. Some of the guys I work with are either part-time or full-time stay-at-home and they do the work from home. Power to the couple who manage to work it out, but I think that stay-at-home dads are generally the group with the worse divorce statistics out there. This means that promoting "stay-at-home dads" in a topic about ruined marriages is plan wrong way.
All in all, when you combine societal attitude AND legislation, permanent relationships/marriages are generally designed to fail. Primary reason is societal attitude. Secondary reason is legislation which makes it quite predictable.
I was listening to this radio talk show yesterday and they had a discussion where they think that working women are ruining traditional marriages. I don't understand how is this possible. So what do you think about this topic?
Don't listen to conservative talk radio, problem solved! (Or was it a religious station? -- same deal.)
Working men ruin their share of marriages, too, don't forget.
There was a thread on the Canada forum about how in Canada these extremist talk radio programs wouldn't be allowed under Canadian broadcast standards. I'm starting to appreciate Canada a lot more.
It's a bill of goods that expects too much of any one human being. I don't think women are any more capable of all three than men were and are. That's why if both spouses work, the husband simply must become more involved in his children's lives than Ward Cleaver was ("tonight I'm going to cook for the kids").
I think this is true, but even when men kick in I also think that when both parents work it needs to become just accepted wisdom that the couple will need outside help. You WILL need someone to help clean and or you WILL need backup care for the kids and/or you WILL need to accept that not all your meals will be cooked from scratch by one of the parents. I think there is still an expectation for too many people that all the work of a family should be taken care of within the family, but in modern times that's way too much of a burden to put on 2 working people with kids and expect them to not be tired and stressed all the time. And usually mothers are the ones carrying the guilt when everything doesn't get done or when they have to hire someone to do something. Either you are going to have family or friends helping or you are going to pay someone else to do some of it. Its not a luxury expense, it should just be automatically assumed as a necessity IMO. A lot more people would be married longer if they were realistic about the workload and stopped resenting each other over it IMO.
I think this is true, but even when men kick in I also think that when both parents work it needs to become just accepted wisdom that the couple will need outside help. You WILL need someone to help clean and or you WILL need backup care for the kids and/or you WILL need to accept that not all your meals will be cooked from scratch by one of the parents. I think there is still an expectation for too many people that all the work of a family should be taken care of within the family, but in modern times that's way too much of a burden to put on 2 working people with kids and expect them to not be tired and stressed all the time. And usually mothers are the ones carrying the guilt when everything doesn't get done or when they have to hire someone to do something. Either you are going to have family or friends helping or you are going to pay someone else to do some of it. Its not a luxury expense, it should just be automatically assumed as a necessity IMO. A lot more people would be married longer if they were realistic about the workload and stopped resenting each other over it IMO.
I was listening to this radio talk show yesterday and they had a discussion where they think that working women are ruining traditional marriages. I don't understand how is this possible. So what do you think about this topic?
how are women supposed to make ends meet if they don't work?
I think this is true, but even when men kick in I also think that when both parents work it needs to become just accepted wisdom that the couple will need outside help. You WILL need someone to help clean and or you WILL need backup care for the kids and/or you WILL need to accept that not all your meals will be cooked from scratch by one of the parents. I think there is still an expectation for too many people that all the work of a family should be taken care of within the family, but in modern times that's way too much of a burden to put on 2 working people with kids and expect them to not be tired and stressed all the time. And usually mothers are the ones carrying the guilt when everything doesn't get done or when they have to hire someone to do something. Either you are going to have family or friends helping or you are going to pay someone else to do some of it. Its not a luxury expense, it should just be automatically assumed as a necessity IMO. A lot more people would be married longer if they were realistic about the workload and stopped resenting each other over it IMO.
No. It's not "too much work" at all, as long as you know how to do it. But the fact is that it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to i.e. be on your work post and be home to supervise/interact with your children. I think this is what parents know already and they already do it this way - it's just the media who haven't "caught up" because they like to make retarded articles without any grounds in reality.
When parents want that teaching/playing with the kids stays within the family, they usually mean that they will likely trust their parents far more than a random nanny or a neighbor. That's very logical though, and quite economic... as long as it's plausible and everyone agrees with it.
Same goes for cooking the meals. I really don't get it but I see the school is more like childcare institution for many parents, especially the lower grades, than it is anything else.
But that's not what causes divorces. It's the general attitude and it's ingrained in both guys and girls. In fact, a lot of new generation of guys would generally be even worse if they could reverse the roles in legislation because they'd repeatedly cheat and cast their wives out. I can see the stance among a big part of native guy population where I was - monogamy is a failure to them, only reason why it's there is because of impossibility for guys to stay with children OR to avoid paying child support and they force you to make a choice, a guy cannot fight biology and avoid having sex with another woman if she is willing, blah blah. This is how many native U.S. young men think and it's not normal, but I've noticed it's the media, society and mere role that guys have in family that contributes to a downward spiral. Then you have a big part of the guys who are raised without a parent present at some point in their lives, etc.
You have very unhealthy foundations and you wonder why people cheat or why marriages fail in the age of greatest prosperity in every term of life - people are raised in a social conditioning where so many women think of a husband as a unnecessary member and so many men think that marriage/relationship is a way to blackmail them with no family life if they keep being promiscuous.
On top of all that, there's a common BOREDOM and personal fulfillment. You cannot afford to admit that you have a boring life or that it's boring because you make it such. Growing apart is a good way to address it, you cannot miss out on something, you live only once, etc.
This all contributes to the fact that U.S. society is very hostile society for "normal" life. Normal became undesirable to many people. Your "friend" went to travel once again, they bought something new again, they have this and that. I think the people generally have miserable lives because they want to "have it all" - it's not about family, work, etc - it's about fulfilling any wish they get. This is what ultimately makes many people incapable to live with someone else and this is why I find U.S. society toxic for a family life. It's great to earn money and living standard, but terrible for family things.
I agree. It says a lot about an "institution" if you can only keep someone in it by limiting their financial independence and making it difficult for them to obtain a divorce.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrzDefector
If "traditional" marriages were so great, women wouldn't have wanted to work outside the home. Looks like "traditional" marriages ruined themselves.
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.
Are working women ruining marriages?
