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.
Actually, the way to do it is to marry within your socioeconomic status. Your way doesn't make sense because you're expecting the man to earn the money AND take care of the home while the woman supposedly just studies. What is he, her parents?
How this any different than what happens now in most households? Usually the man works a little more and the while the woman also works, she works (on average) few hours less a week and is the primary person who does housework and raises children. Among full-time workers, men worked on average 8.3 hours per day while women worked 7.8 hours per day in 2011. (US Bureau of Labor and Statistics).
The main reason this makes sense is because of children... a woman needs time to recover after birth, if breastfeeding things are easier if the woman stays at home, and traditionally, maternity leave is offered but not paternity leave. And women still earn less, on average, than men. Even when doing the same jobs. I think it's 77 cents on the dollar.
But things are changing. Women are moving up the corporate ladder and making more money... with technology, home recovery from child birth can be done while working from home, breast pumps solve the issue of breast feeding (the dad can stay at home with a bottle) and paternity leave is more standard now.
So if the wife has a better earning potential, it makes better economic sense for her to be the primary breadwinner and to nurture her career and the man to work the secondary job and be the prime caretaker of the home and kids. It doesn't make sense to have the potential higher wage earner work less just because of sex. Of course, this is just looking at the numbers and setting aside personal preferences (like maybe the man likes to feel like the provider or the woman likes to be the primary homemaker).
How this any different than what happens now in most households? Usually the man works a little more and the while the woman also works, she works (on average) few hours less a week and is the primary person who does housework and raises children. Among full-time workers, men worked on average 8.3 hours per day while women worked 7.8 hours per day in 2011. (US Bureau of Labor and Statistics).
The main reason this makes sense is because of children... a woman needs time to recover after birth, if breastfeeding things are easier if the woman stays at home, and traditionally, maternity leave is offered but not paternity leave. And women still earn less, on average, than men. Even when doing the same jobs. I think it's 77 cents on the dollar.
But things are changing. Women are moving up the corporate ladder and making more money... with technology, home recovery from child birth can be done while working from home, breast pumps solve the issue of breast feeding (the dad can stay at home with a bottle) and paternity leave is more standard now.
So if the wife has a better earning potential, it makes better economic sense for her to be the primary breadwinner and to nurture her career and the man to work the secondary job and be the prime caretaker of the home and kids. It doesn't make sense to have the potential higher wage earner work less just because of sex. Of course, this is just looking at the numbers and setting aside personal preferences (like maybe the man likes to feel like the provider or the woman likes to be the primary homemaker).
Sure, I think it's perfectly fair for the "roles" to be reversed, if that makes sense. My only point was that it makes no sense for the man to be doing both the breadwinning AND the housework while the woman just studies. They could do it if they wanted to, but I doubt many people would agree to it. Now, certainly there are instances of such things if the other person is going to, for example, law school or medical school -- but that's a tricky situation because you're basically banking on the other person's good will. There's no guarantee they won't get a "trophy wife," so it's at your own risk.
You mentioned that women both work AND do the majority of the housework. That's true in many instances. But keep in mind that often the man is still earning more than the woman, even if they're working approximately the same number of hours in some instances. So it's basically a "trade-off" by the woman, whether conscious or unconscious. She wouldn't, for example, work at a higher paying job AND take care of the house. But she will work at a lower paying job and take care of the house, which makes things "equal."
Now, at the end of the day, a good relationship has nothing to do with "equality" so much as it does with "roles." I mean, you can have a perfectly good relationship if the woman or man is a stay-at-home mom or dad who technically earns nothing. But those are relationships built on mutual understanding and respect, which have nothing to do with the original question from the woman in the Craig's List ad, I think we can all agree. She's "in it to win it," so I have no problem approaching her situation from a similar evaluation. And that evaluation is: your hoo-haa isn't worth it, so you can rent it to a guy, but that's about it. He'll get a new one when he's done with the current one.
If JP Morgan is out looking for a woman then I am going to stockpile food and get a shot gun... the zombie apocalypse has begun! Why? JP Morgan died in died in 1913
As for the CEO of the company JP Morgan... Jamie Dimon... he's married and has been married to his college sweetheart since 1983.
But as a lesson on gold digging, I get the point.. and it's a good one. But it sounds like one of those urban legends where a perfectly good point gets associated with someone else (usually someone famous). I just can't see a CEO like that wasting his time on some bubble-head gold digger.
I agree with you, and assume if the response is bogus, so was the original post. Probably cooked up by some "struggling guy" (LOL) who fears and despises women but also fancies himself very clever. Icky combination.
Very few women care about $ in THAT manner to that extent, and the CEO of JP Morgan has better things to do than write up idiotic responses to idiotic letters, especially considering he has no problems I'm sure getting women.
BTW, 'struggling guy' means you struggle to get dates, just as struggling woman means you struggle to get dates. There could be a number of reasons. Perhaps a struggling woman didn't get asked to the prom and the few guys she asked turned her down. That sucks for her.
Please don't judge our character of person by our choice of adjectives.
Very few women care about $ in THAT manner to that extent, and the CEO of JP Morgan has better things to do than write up idiotic responses to idiotic letters, especially considering he has no problems I'm sure getting women.
BTW, 'struggling guy' means you struggle to get dates, just as struggling woman means you struggle to get dates. There could be a number of reasons. Perhaps a struggling woman didn't get asked to the prom and the few guys she asked turned her down. That sucks for her.
Please don't judge our character of person by our choice of adjectives.
I don't consider dating or not dating to be a "struggle." What exactly are you struggling with? Who or what is the opponent? Now I could see someone struggling with a chronic disease, or struggling to raise a family one income. That implies you are exerting a level of human strength and perseverance, doing (acting) everything you can to overcome the challenge.
But I just can't for the life of me look at casual social interaction as a "struggle." Unless one already considers himself a victim of some sort. Most of these "struggling guys" are actually sitting around watching porn in their underwear getting the heebies over the idea of talking to women. That's not a struggle, that is the height of terrified passivity.
I don't consider dating or not dating to be a "struggle."
That's fine. I think it can be hard, definitely sometimes. Some females definitely share my view. And quite a bit more difficult for certain persons. But you are entitled to your opinion.
Most of these "struggling guys" are actually sitting around watching porn in their underwear getting the heebies over the idea of talking to women. That's not a struggle, that is the height of terrified passivity.
Congratulations, you're some amazing psychiatrist. Next, tell us how depressed people are just losers who need to buck up and stop being a drag.
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.
.
