Are working women ruining marriages? (wives, how to, cheat, husband)
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 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?
More women in the workforce - more women making equal pay for the same jobs - this is changing the face of traditional marriage, but not "ruining" it.
Couples can still have great marriages when both spouses work.
Now, not all do because they forget to work out a game plan and don't function as a team.
But when couples take the time to work together and show respect for one another's preferences/needs, their marriages can be successful. They just might not look like relationships looked in your grandmothers generation.
Oh I think there is some relevance to women working. At one time, women couldn't just leave a ****ty husband. They wouldn't have been able to earn enough money to support themselves and their children and courts always ruled in men's favour anyway. So they were walking away from their children and heading for poverty.
I for one am glad that there is a choice now. Women don't have to get married and don't have to stay. They get married and stay if they want to.
You don't know what you're talking about. When a woman would depart from her home, most women would have one thing in common in middle ages - massive "movable wealth". Money, livestock, jewelry, etc. Those possessions would be put as evidence to third party (church official or your feudal landlord) as a proof and they'd be your guarantee. Those possessions were used to either "marry into rich family" or to "have a secure place in case of dissolution". Those were also ways to repay the departing clan members. In case of dissolution, the man was OBLIGED to provide.
That being said - it was working women who gave better working conditions. Society was always chivalrous and chivalry has nothing to do with "woman's higher social status". Woman has always had lower social status by society in human history and society considered a male members superior to female members (blame the real economical productivity and physical strength factors). However, society demanded that those who are supposedly "superior" in social life to display more responsibility - thus the adult male members were considered completely disposable when it comes to societal or family safety.
How did working women gave us better working conditions? Well, if you ever checked on history books, you'd see countless worker strikes done by men and nobody cared. It was when female workers would strike than the society didn't know what to do and they'd slowly alter working regulations.
On top of all - vast majority of women ALWAYS worked. And prior to industrial revolution, very few people were actually PAID by money - most of everyday transactions were done by exchange of natural resources, taxes were often paid by natural resources as well, etc. On top of that, society always had disproportional number of men and women - number of widows or single women in middle ages was staggering. A whole myth about independent women is just a myth.
I.e. Serbian army had the battle of Kosovo in 1389, it's a common myth in Serbian history... and a true story: results were catastrophic for demographics because number of men shrank up to 90%! In ww1, number of Serbian male population was above 50% as well. You can't say that it equals ANY divorce rate today, and it occurred in times when no social security, link/food stamps existed. Demographic disasters were quite common in the past, and generally affected male population far more at any time in human history.
Divorce rates in today's world are NOT related to women in workforce or "new generation of independent women". It's based on other factors and on different mental reasoning.
One thing is for certain though - she couldn't walk away from husband and proofs were always "word against word" so that was the real problem. And obtaining divorce was very, very tough - at some places it was either impossible or no remarriage was possible. This is why being with an alcoholic was nothing new, and in case of domestic violence she had to resort to her own family defending her, because law considered it "family matters".
The happiest couples I know have both spouses working.
I also have to say that while the happiest couples I know sometimes have children, the childless couples I know almost uniformly rank among the happiest couples I know.
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.
More women in the workforce - more women making equal pay for the same jobs - this is changing the face of traditional marriage, but not "ruining" it.
Couples can still have great marriages when both spouses work.
Now, not all do because they forget to work out a game plan and don't function as a team.
But when couples take the time to work together and show respect for one another's preferences/needs, their marriages can be successful. They just might not look like relationships looked in your grandmothers generation.
Hey, life is all about change
Couples generally readjust regarding their work-time schedules and obligations. This happened naturally as more and more women stayed in the workforce. In fact, I can argue any day that nobody "increased" their workload in home, including guys. It gets decreased each year. It's just that they never included changing oil/oil filters/air filters, cleaning up the car or washing its exterior, fixing the roof, painting the house, mowing the lawn, various plumbing/elecrticity/door fixing, etc as either "unpaid work" or "housework". Check out how many of those things are "outsourced" or you have various machines to help you out do it faster and easier.
People are outsourcing many things - or they employ machines to do the job nowadays. Cleaning, vacuuming, cooking, washing dishes, you name it. An increasing number of couples is sending children into daycare and it's very self-explanatory that a third party must stay with children if both spouses are at work.
There is an ongoing myth of the super-woman and retarded man, and thus media keeps spewing BS repeatedly for years and years.
Truth is this - social conditioning makes it work in such a way that woman can walk out with no-fault and it only affects the financial aspect - but she can supplement it with the new husband and child support if any children are included. But believe it or not - main reason for it is rather that people are just BORED to live with someone (so they grow apart from each other, etc), they get annoyed by the fact that they have to live with someone etc. And women are taught that husband is a disposable family member. They wouldn't be thinking the same way if the husband would be taking children by default. Legal system considers that both parents are necessary as long as the mother says so. When divorce procedure goes on, residential custody goes to mother by default, there's no equal share. This is "in child's best interest" - quite much the social construct to appease the mother's wish, otherwise she wouldn't be so eager to leave once she gets bored. Now let's see what "child's best interest" means - same parent who was considered acceptable at one point, becomes part-time parent as soon as divorce occurs... or is effectively denied being a parent. In child's best interest. Guess what kind of message does it send to girls? Well, daughters of divorced parents have close to 80% divorce rate. Guess what kind of message does it send to sons? Self explanatory.
This, and the media conditioning, created new generations of "guys" who consider family life as something they can't be part of with their right mind - because they depend on someone else's whim. An incredible number of idiots is to be seen around on the streets of U.S. and I guess you may notice it only if you compare them and their socio-economic status with people from different backgrounds. Media AND society produced those guys and now they are a problem to new generations.
Real issue is that people THINK that there's someone out there for them. If people were truly capable of marriage, they'd not be able to "live with only 10% of available prospects". They'd be able to be with 90% of normal folks, while other 10% of society would consist of people with serious mental issues, criminal/violence history, substance abuse, etc, usually overlapping each other.
And to answer this one:
Quote:
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.
Your wife makes that choice. Unless you take surrogacy route. Think again.
Your wife makes that choice. Unless you take surrogacy route. Think again.
What? I don't think you quite understood the concept. Women are often told that they can't "have it all." They are advised that if they focus on their careers that they'll never have a family. A woman who works long hours is seen as neglecting her husband and her home, while a man who does the same is a good provider. Men are never (or at least rarely) told that if they want marriage, they shouldn't be career-minded.
I also have to say that while the happiest couples I know sometimes have children, the childless couples I know almost uniformly rank among the happiest couples I know.
Makes ya think.
That's another thing, the couples put off children for a while.
I also have to say that while the happiest couples I know sometimes have children, the childless couples I know almost uniformly rank among the happiest couples I know.
Makes ya think.
I have close friends that are childless. They have more quality time with each other than any of the couples with children I know.
What? I don't think you quite understood the concept. Women are often told that they can't "have it all." They are advised that if they focus on their careers that they'll never have a family. A woman who works long hours is seen as neglecting her husband and her home, while a man who does the same is a good provider. Men are never (or at least rarely) told that if they want marriage, they shouldn't be career-minded.
This is true. And ironically, the one marriage I have the most respect for (out of all my friends' marriages) and the family I'd want raising my son if something happened to my wife and I are composed of a wife that works and a husband who stays at home and raises their kids. It wasn't how they planned it, but it's how it turned out and they are simply awesome.
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?
It is hard to evaluate it when you only tell us their position - but not their arguments for it. Can you recall any arguments or evidence they presented to support this idea?
I certainly can not think of any. As one poster already pointed out - women working means that women have the autonomy and independence with which to escape bad marriage which they may not have had in the past - but that is hardly the same thing at all is it and I have yet to see anyone suggest that this freedom to escape is in any way a BAD thing.
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.
