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.
Women...you cannot “have it all”. Pick one. Career( work) or raise good people. And I have felt this way for over 40 years even during the feminist rants in the 70’s.
Go ahead and rip me now. ...I can take it.
I'll join you; you're right but what is right is unpopular. I am so very over the whole "gender roles as a novelty toy" thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALStafford
So fathers have no responsibility for raising their children? And, if they do, why can they "have it all" and women cannot?
Why do you think they can? It sounds like you are insinuating that the traditional male role as the provider was the real ALL & the traditional female role was menial & mitigated. I guess the thread's question has just been answered.
I have a "severe needs"14-year-old who requires 1:1 supervision 24/7. I guarantee you that if I bailed tonight?
His dad won't "have a da**-thing-at-all", for the rest of his life. Unless he can afford to pay $25/hr to whoever he out-sources to. I'm providing for this household the same as he is; if not more.
As a guy, the money she would bring certainly helps a lot but I wonder if that's what women really want?
You can only get an answer according to someone's experience. And it likely has to do with what sort of career or work the woman would be doing, if not raising kids. If she were an executive or lawyer, she might prefer to do that, since the money is great and the work interesting, with some power and decision making attached to it. But if she were a cashier, she might prefer to be a stay at home mom.
If a woman has done only one or the other, they wouldn't know which they'd prefer. No basis of comparison.
Most people have to work these days. "People" includes women. So the question is moot, except for the wealthy.
I personally think it's wise for everyone to be able to take care of themselves financially and in every other way. So if not working while the kids are young, then maybe working before kids, and then working again after the kids are older.
Location: In a city within a state where politicians come to get their PHDs in Corruption
2,907 posts, read 2,067,707 times
Reputation: 4478
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi
I'll join you; you're right but what is right is unpopular. I am so very over the whole "gender roles as a novelty toy" thing.
Why do you think they can? It sounds like you are insinuating that the traditional male role as the provider was the real ALL & the traditional female role was menial & mitigated. I guess the thread's question has just been answered.
I have a "severe needs"14-year-old who requires 1:1 supervision 24/7. I guarantee you that if I bailed tonight?
His dad won't "have a da**-thing-at-all", for the rest of his life. Unless he can afford to pay $25/hr to whoever he out-sources to. I'm providing for this household the same as he is; if not more.
My wife hasn't made a "dollar" in a very long time. But, if I were to stop making money tomorrow, we'd be ok for a while. If my wife stopped doing her "work", oh boy, s**t would hit the fan.
A woman's 'deep down' does not make black and white choices. That's why life is hard.
And if you think your individual situation can be boiled down to a black and white answer, that can be applied to all humans please don't have children in the first place.
One of the privileges that are afforded to women is that they have a choice in this matter. I would argue that men have less of a choice in this matter. Being a stay at home dad is really frowned upon in most cultures.
I attempt to view this issue objectively. I've always been a working man, so I know what sort of personal fulfillment is derived from working. I think the personal fulfillment derived from raising a child is much greater than the fulfillment derived at work. I would think that a woman who is afforded the option to take care of children full time would choose to take care of children full time. Culturally, we really should applaud for going this path, and I think it produces the best outcomes for children.
I have always preferred to date women that were not Type A, career oriented women. A lot of working women are not even good in the boyfriend-girlfriend childless phase, let alone a relationship phase that involved children. Have any of you ever tried to go on a date with a female lawyer? Years ago, before I stopped using online dating sites/apps, occasionally I'd interact with a female lawyer and they'd never be able to go on a date, or they'd want to see you for a drink in 3 weeks.
I have three degrees and if my future husband could afford it (and I had enough personal savings) I would stay home with my children in a heartbeat. At the very least, work part-time to keep up my skill sets. Not ashamed to admit it. I work to live not live to work.
The OP questioned about WOMEN and what they would want. Work vs stay home and raise children. Pretty succinct.
And what you are commenting on was a response to post #8, had you bothered to read the entire thread. May want to brush up on your reading comprehension. And the title the OP chose sets up false equivalence.
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.
