Question for “traditional” men: Do you recognize that traditional gender roles put women at a disadvantage? If so, does this bother you? Or conversely, do you like the power imbalance?

Gravel_Roads · 2024-08-26T15:02:32+00:00

No, I’m bisexual and I like my relationship with women to be as equal as my relationship with men.

I definitely agree that it’s a huge sacrifice to be a stay at home parent, and that people have very little sympathy for divorced women, even if those women were from abusive environments. Hell, people even shit on the children of women who divorce.

I’d know, I was a child of divorce myself. I’m lucky my mother looked after us, because my father vanished and spent the next 10 years working under tables to avoid having to pay child support. As thanks for taking on the monumental task of raising two children on a single parent’s income, she was treated like garbage for being a single parent.

I wouldn’t encourage women to depend on “men” as a demographic. But I also wouldn’t encourage women to depend on other women, either. Individuals who earn your trust are fine.

But always have an escape plan and your own money. And avoid the sunken cost fallacy - that voice that says “but I put up with so much and I’m used to this - if I leave now, it will all be for nothing…” because that voice is not going to get you any more than what you’re already getting. So make sure you want what you’re getting.

guppyhunter7777 · 2024-08-26T16:09:55+00:00

There is a lot to unpack with this. My grandmother had her husband die in the early 50s after she had three kids. She was given nothing other than the charity of the church and a food box for the government cheese.

My mom’s cousin was ran off on but thanks to divorce laws in the mid-80s. She was left with the ability to pay for her house though she did have to re-enter the workforce and being a stay at home. Mom was no longer an option.

My neighbor mother of three, that lives down the street just recently divorced her second husband with apparently extremely favorable terms. she currently has the means to not work she’s keeping the house and just bought a new car.

I believe that there’s been a lot of evolution to this particular issue over the years That said to the OP’s point, I believe that a significant amount of planning for all contingencies should be taken into account when dealing with the life goals of a single income family. Not the least of which is extremely healthy life insurance payouts. Secondary in home businesses, passive income sources. Most importantly, constant vigilance by both parties on the health of the marriage. Basically at some level there does have to be some implied personal responsibility in planning for the unthinkable. Just my two. Cents.

Bitter-Hat-4736 · 2024-08-26T19:16:42+00:00

I'm not necessarily "traditional", but I still want to give my two cents:

The stay at home parent is almost always going to be at a disadvantage if the couple ever breaks up. That is why I want to normalize the idea that any parent can be the stay at home parent.

LevelCaterpillar1830 · 2024-08-26T15:01:06+00:00

Then life happened and I came to realize the unthought-about consequences. And these are things I’m betting many young women don’t think about either.

It's a classic scenario and a typical trap patriarchal systems lay at the feet of women, and plenty of them seem to be unfortunately biting the bait. Clearly not a majority, but a worrying amount.

To answer your question, of course it's about creating a power imbalance. When the woman is effectively powerless and unable to provide for herself (due to enforced cultural norms within said systems), then you have maximum leverage over her as her caretaker/husband.

There are very good reasons why women fought for their rights, kept going insane in abusive marriages, resorted to poisoning their husbands and it's often reasons women figure out too late on the "femininity" treadmill, where they hand over their freedom and autonomy to a dude who can do whatever he wants with you (or your offspring, for that matter; he's the leader of the household, right?)

It may be fun and dandy to be taken care of at first, while you're still young and pretty and he's still obsessed with you. But what about 5, 10, 20 years later? He may grow a little bored. He may grow a little unattracted to you. The stress from work may start to catch up with him. And guess what? He's your husband, and has complete power over you.

You accidentally make the soup a little colder once by mistake, and the rest is history.

Growing up in an overwhelmingly conservative environment has opened me up to the plethora of ways the patriarchal mafia sustains itself and how worthless, terrible husbands can cover for each others' behavior.

sine120 · 2024-08-26T15:31:55+00:00

I'm not "traditional" traditional, but I'm going through the motions of the typical marriage and at the having kids phase, so I can relate. The fact is, there will always be a power imbalance regardless of how much you make if you're planning on having kids. If you're approaching the relationship with a mindset of "how do I protect myself" or "how do I take advantage of my superior position", you're not following any tradition I'm aware of. If you're going into the marriage planning your exit strategy, why did you marry in the first place? Besides, if you're going to have kids, the courts are going to be involved in any split.

My wife and I make similar amounts, but right now she is leagues more vulnerable than I am. She will be physically impaired to some extent. She has to be guarded to make sure her employer won't pull anything shady while on Maternity leave. She will physically be needed by the baby more than I will be for the first several months. She could have the safest job and plenty of money saved, but if she lacked my support with these matters her quality of life would plummet when the baby is born.

Power imbalances don't matter in a decent relationship, because the power is just another shared asset.

Goonerlouie · 2024-08-26T23:55:28+00:00

I wouldn’t say I am traditional but look at that lifestyle as a positive. It’s because of shit economic policies from governments where most people in the middle class and below need to work.

If money wasn’t an issue I would love to be a stay at home dad. Who the fuck wants to work

KamuiObito · 2024-08-26T16:33:03+00:00

Yes. I dont understand why any womem would be trad..its like npc mode. You basically are a teen again and when he leaves or stumbles youll be a 18 year old practically. As you wouldnt have much experience doing things you should have as an adult because man do things i dont..which is always stupid.

No-Rough-7390 · 2024-08-26T22:22:36+00:00

Posts like these kind of show how the culture of fear has made marriage practically pointless. There is no sense of duty or even a serious intention to honor the commitment beyond what is convenient. The fact of the matter is, all choices in life come with costs and benefits.

If a woman has the opportunity to be a SAHM (which in my field that is dominated by women, the ones with kids lament they cannot do this ad nauseum), yes she costs herself experience as a wage slave and harms her earning potential down the road if she deems that her main goal. However, the return is that you get to be with and raise your children, which is both priceless and one of the highest virtues imaginable.

On the other hand, men in this scenario would earn and have their career, but would both miss a lot of time with their kids due to supporting their family (another cost that cannot be quantified) and the responsibility of the family being supported squarely on their shoulders.

If money is your number one virtue, then sure go for it but the dual income parenthood dance is not a fun one. The jury has stated the verdict on that one.

That said, this is why most people who do get married and have kids don’t think about most things (like what marriage actually means and entails) prior to doing so. I’d also say some kind of pre-marriage agreement that sorts out what would happen should you guys split would be optimal if this was both parties mindset going into it.

cast-away-ramadi06 · 2024-08-26T15:42:33+00:00

I wouldn't say I'm traditional by any stretch, but I would say it's inappropriate to consider only the cons and specifically only the cons for women. No matter traditional or egalitarian, there are pros and cons for both men and women.

Proudvow · 2024-08-26T14:57:38+00:00

These factors conspire to make divorce less palatable economically for a stay-at-home wife and provide more incentive for her to stay in an unhappy situation.

Marriage was not intended for people who break up for frivolous reasons.

Cunnin_Linguists · 2024-08-26T15:14:13+00:00

Current marriage landscape is designed with trad marriages in mind. When men divorce women and men are the breadwinners, women get half EVEN if they work. So women are favored in divorce heavily regardless of if they're trad or not.

Fun_Push7168 · 2024-08-26T17:12:02+00:00

I'm watching the opposite unfold in real time.

My SO is your fairly typical liberal, feminist, academic type.

Last night she made a comment about a " spoiled stay at home wife" that seemed a little jealous. I replied that was not what she ever wanted , right? I mean it was obvious from her path, and she could have went for that if that's what she wanted.

She replies " well, that was before I knew how much of a pain in the ass it is to go to work everyday" " I don't want to work"

The longer she has her job the more I see her POV change on this.

Problem is she hasn't grasped the opposite end. So I asked some questions.

What about housework?

She hamster wheels some reasons why he would still be expected to do half despite paying for her existence.

You realize there's only one kind of non-conservative guy who agrees to this right? I'll give you hint, he's definitely not attractive.

Bear in mind most of the conversation is half-hearted and in jest but I can definitely understand that choosing the kept path could seem tempting for a woman at any stage.

Without going into a whole list of crap I'll just say it's always a give and take between the choices. There's no free ride really.

At least as a woman you typically have a choice between them. The option to be kept is basically non- existent for men.

Do what you like, I'm not a hard backer of any particular arrangement but for goodness sake be happy the option exists. No sense in trying to talk the handful of men who want traditional out of it.

Visual-Community-743 · 2024-08-27T01:45:34+00:00

I don't care about gender roles, I just don't want my woman to be a sloot that has fucked around with BDE guys and taboo guys.

The people in my class typically the man and women both work and make decent money and can hire baby sitters to help with kids.

That is the typical upper middle class american life style

OkProfessional9405 · 2024-08-26T14:55:40+00:00

Providing for an able bodied adult as well as children is quite difficult. It's an incredible gift to give another human being. It opens the door for a partner who sees their life's purpose to raise healthy, well adjusted children the option to do so. The courts also heavily protect this non working party (some would say too much, for example if the stay at home partner is cheating, they still are fully protected).

A woman who focus' on her career very well may be a fine person, she's probably just not as good of a partner choice for a man who wants to create the best environment for raising his children.

Remember women abandon marriages far more than men. The disadvantage you talk about don't seem to weigh heavily in actual women's minds.

laec300191 · 2024-08-26T18:22:42+00:00

Do you recognize that traditional gender roles put women at a disadvantage?

It is more a matter of perspective. You choose to look at it from the point of view "I forfeit my independence, I forfeit my capacity to make serious decisions, I forfeit my freedom, etc", but you never really stop to think that providing for a family is a huge responsibility, you have to make sure the mortgage is paid, the car is paid, taxes are paid, you have to pay health care for the whole family, and if you don't have healthcare then you have to figure out a way to pay if someone gets sick or they are involved in an accident (children falling from their bycicles, someone trips at home and hit their head, etc), if someone breaks into your house, as a man you have to face the danger and push out the intruder, then there is also the risk that a drunk man or a psycho may try to hurt your family like it happened a few days ago in Germany and there were a couple of people dead, you have move the heavy stuff at home, you have to plan any vacation trips, pay for the vacation itself, at the same time you have to be very aware of possible dangers while on vacation, etc.

Women look at all the negatives of being a stay at home mother, but they never look at the privileges they get from having someone provide everything for you.

Hell, have you ever stop to think that being a provider is servitude? Basically I go to work, and buy you clothes, food, put a roof above your head, and give you a nice bed so you can live comfortable at home with the kids?

One could argue that men have lived in servitude since the dawn of man, because we have always had this role of provider and protector that was given to us by nature, by biology. I assure you there are men who wish they had a sugar mama to provide for them while they stay at home, but those things are rare, not many women want to provide for a man, and when they do, they lose respect for their husband.

Also home chores have become easier over the last couple of decades. This isn't 1800, we have washing machines, dryers, so women don't have to wash clothes with their hands anymore, there are microwaves, ovens, women don't have to cook with wood or coal, you have modern iron unlike the old iron that would use coal and produce a lot of smoke, you can iron your clothes and they release water vapor that is not toxic at all, you have blenders, food processor, dehydrators, etc... so technology is there to make the life of mothers easier, this argument that being a stay at home mother is so hard would apply maybe 70 years ago, but not anymore.

If so, does this bother you?

Does it bother me this puts women at a disadvantage? Not really, if a woman chooses to be a stay at home mom, then that's her whole issue, I can not tell her how to live her life. If a woman chooses to slave for a boss then that's her issue.

Does it bother women that men have to work and provide for women? I don't think so. Women want providers, they see nothing wrong to have a man in servitude.

Or conversely, do you like the power imbalance?

Is there power imbalance, yeah sure, but this power imbalance comes from the responsabilities a father acquires when he takes the role of provider. There's a reason the CEO of a company gets paid millions of dollars, because he has a lot of responsabilities with investors, board members, stock holders, etc, his decisions can make the company millions or drive the company into bankruptcy. It has happened many times that a bad decisions makes a company lose millions of dollars, just look at the debacle with Bud Light.

If women want to have power in a marriage they have to accept more responsibilities, or even provide for their husbands, you can't be a stay at home mother and expect to make the rules at home.

AreOut · 2024-08-26T16:10:26+00:00

I'd say 80/20 is a principle I'd also apply here, a woman should contribute about 20% of the finances(or time dedicated to work) to the household and the father would be busy with the children on average about 20% of the time.

Not exact numbers of course 90/10 and 60/40 would also do depending on circumstances.

Live_Guidance7199 · 2024-08-26T16:52:50+00:00

Why is this a question for men? All we care about is that you bring us peace and not chaos; while traditional is more likely they aren't a hard lock nor is it impossible for a professional woman to not be a pain in the ass.

Ask women what they value - family, love, companionship, kids, security, and safety or a slightly bigger social security check.

a_minty_fart · 2024-08-26T15:43:28+00:00

I reject the premise of your post because it presents an optimal situation for men and a worst-case situation for women.

Inomaker · 2024-08-26T15:31:21+00:00

Every choice in life puts you at a disadvantage somewhere. When you choose to be a SAHM you choose to give up professional career prospects. If that's what you personally consider a success, then yes it's a disadvantage. Choosing to be a SAHM at that point becomes a career choice when it shouldn't even be considered that way. If you don't measure your success by the money that ends up in your bank account, then you've been living successfully the entire time because you've spent all the time you could ever want with your family. The only thing that bothers me about the scenario is entitlement. Just because you choose to spend time with family instead of working doesn't mean you should keep the benefits of having someone provide for you if they no longer decide to provide for you. It's a choice to be a SAHM, your choices have consequences. That's life.

abaxeron · 2024-08-26T18:12:14+00:00

Do you recognize that traditional gender roles put women at a disadvantage?

No. Ten thousand reasons why, but I'll name one. More excess men die supporting their families than women giving birth.

Her own Social Security may be negligible.

This is not the fault of "traditional gender roles" that SS system is established in a way that benefits dead-end paper-pusher childless catlady over and at the expense of a SAHM and her husband.

If her marriage lasts 10 years or more and then she gets divorced, she can get her own SS or half of whatever amount her husband is entitled to. Note: he gets his full amount.

Dumping one's husband just because benefits clocked in is not compliant with women's traditional gender role; the woman that acts like this is not a woman following traditional gender role.

If she needs to enter the workforce after being out for any length of time, she can easily be earning tens of thousands less per year,

Or tens of thousands more. Learn to code.

Alimony is usually granted for only a few years and in no way makes up for the remaining lifetime of reduced wages.

No mention of division of assets.

I hadn’t ever thought about these issues when I decided to become a SAHM, because… happy, plus excitement, plus baby, plus husband earned a lot at that point in time.

To quote Tom Leykis, "Well I'm SHOCKED!"

LowCreddit · 2024-08-26T20:27:00+00:00

My wife and I have an extremely traditional relationship. I work. She is a SAHM. Other than cooking and big cleaning for guests, she does the chores. She also does most of the childcare. It has nothing to do with money or power. It's about children.

In case you haven't noticed, society is attacking you from birth, to integrate, to lower yourself, to submit. This used to be okay when society was a bit more orderly and sensible, but it is no longer. My children will have an enormous advantage over everyone else. They will be more psychologically stable. They will have a better education. They will have better nutrition. They will have more physicality. They will have lives others can only dream of in today's nightmare. We love our children and want them to have the best lives they can. We know in our hearts that this effort will be rewarding now and especially in the future.

What will the DINK couple have? A little more income? A more expensive resort to go drink their stress and problems away? And when they do have kids, who will raise them? The bottom of society. That's who. Their children will be washed into a dysfunctional society's madness and just cause even more pain.

When you focus on what's actually important in life, your mission, you realize that your spouse is your teammate, not a competitor. Know what you want. Find a spouse that wants that too. Work together to make it happen. If you want to win over your spouse, you are your own problem.

babazuki · 2024-08-26T14:59:41+00:00

Men go to work to keep their wives happy and support their family.

Women go to work so they can keep the option to divorce their husbands.

Yeah, I don't give a shit what my future ex's life is going to be like after a divorce. No one does.

I'd much rather have a partner that spends their day focused on supporting the family and our relationship. Could be by caring for children or by making money to help out. But women almost never want to be the primary breadwinner.

Don't care at all about her job if she's just there to build an escape plan. It's devious.

Only-Plate590 · 2024-08-26T15:42:44+00:00

So your husband's earnings went down and you started to struggle financially?

Unable_Evidence_4028 · 2024-08-26T22:36:43+00:00

I would call having literally almost the entire day to do whatever you feel like. Including working from home, business or just doing whatever. Is just a privilege.

Also there is nothing hard about housework. Not even dull cause it can easily be done in an hour of work a day at best. I cared of my parents and grandparents until their deaths. All alone and without breaking a sweat while working full time. Women proven themselves to me just incredibly entitled.

I dont mind being the one to do their and mine job right. But I have issues with attempts at reframing all this as anything but privileged people trying to get even easier lives.

ibookmarkeverything · 2024-08-26T15:14:47+00:00

You're seeing it as a disadvantage because your worldview is fundamentally based on the state playing the role of your provider and protector instead of the husband, while your business potential and career success plays the role of your children, family, and legacy.

Feminism has fooled women into viewing a loving husband as an obstacle, and it's done this by convincing women that the very thing that makes them unique and valuable (aka their primary function) is actually pathetic and weak, and that to live like a man is actually strength.

DoinIt989 · 2024-08-26T14:54:37+00:00

Yes, I like the power imbalance. Why wouldn't I like having an advantage?

DietTyrone · 2024-08-26T16:28:18+00:00

Do you recognize that traditional gender roles put women at a disadvantage?

Implying that it's an advantage for men? It's an advantage to pay for all dates whether they go anywhere or not? It's an advantage to be the only one going to work everyday and supporting a wife and kids on a single salary? It's an advantage to take all the blame if any major decision goes south? Because because the power to have final say in decisions comes with the responsibility to take full accountability of any negative outcomes that result from that. It's an advantage to be the sole person responsible to protecting that family and taking care of any difficult household or automotive malfunctions or work?

It's a female victim fantasy to always paint gender roles as solely negative for women, while being nothing but beneficial to men. It comes with pros and cons for both men and women.

If her marriage lasts 10 years or more and then she gets divorced, she can get her own SS or half of whatever amount her husband is entitled to.

How is a woman getting half of everything including SS, investments, and retirement a negative? She might also get the house. Nit to mention, she can also get permanent alimony for the rest of her life after 10 years. That's a negative?

These factors conspire to make divorce less palatable economically

I wish this were true. But it isn't, which is why women file the majority of divorces. Rarely do they lose anything and often gain more in the divide because they date up economically more often than not.

pg_throwaway · 2024-08-26T19:08:07+00:00

I'm relatively biased towards traditional relationship roles though my own marriage probably couldn't be called traditional. I think it's completely dishonest and shows a totally ignorance of how traditional gender roles work to claim that they disadvantage women or that there is a "power imbalance". In reality, it's about trading certain things for others based on the life that a couple wants to live.

I think part of the failure to conceive how traditional roles benefit women is this delusion that the only things which matter in life are money, control and consoomerism. The main argument you're using using against traditional gender roles shows an obsession with money and power and a total failure to comprehend that some people choose their lifestyle and happiness over hording wealth, power or material things for themselves.

If traditional relationships were actually as bad as the haters claim, they would have never lasted for so long, and there wouldn't be such a huge movement of both men and women in places where traditional roles were abandoned to go back to them.

If I was a woman, I would 100% seek a traditional relationship with someone kind, honest, smart and successful enough to take care of me and kids. I would happily be a housewife, take care of the home and gratefully accept my partner's love and support. Honestly, that's sounds like a pretty great life.

In the end, though, I think how a couple runs their relationship is their own business, as long as they're happy. I don't think anyone should be pressured to live any particular kind of way by outsiders / strangers who don't care about them and just want to meddle in their life. That said, I think it's totally dishonest and disingenuous to claim the millions of women who choose by themselves to seek traditional relationships are somehow "being taken advantage of".

MrAnonPoster · 2024-08-26T14:52:32+00:00

A woman who stays at home does so to her own financial disadvantage. Her own Social Security may be negligible. If her marriage lasts 10 years or more and then she gets divorced, she can get her own SS or half of whatever amount her husband is entitled to.

Nonsense. She gets half of his shit that he has left after he paid for her life the entire time.

Lets say that over a period of 10 years he earned on average 10k/mo after taxes of which he spent 50% of the "family" and saved 50%. Lets say of spending on his "family" she derived the same value as him. So he spent 10*12*5k = 600k and saved 600k. Of the 600k she derived 300k of value and he derived 300k of value. We are going to presume that they are renting and all the $$$ spent dont create any assets ( if it does create assets, the numbers would be even worse as all those assets would be divided 50/50 after depreciation which both of the parties *at best* gain equally from ).

So, now there's a divorce - the 600k gets divided 50/50. He gets 300k and she gets 300k.

So he ended up with 300k out of 1.2 MILLION he made over 10 years. She also got 300k out of ... $0 that she made. If out of 600k that were spent during their 10 years there were assets, then she gets 50% of that as well. So in fact she would have even more.

If they have kids it will be even worse for him as courts *hate* when one co-parent has a significantly different economic position than the other co-parent. Hence until the kid(s) are 18 there are going to be equalization payments from him to her etc etc etc in addition to the child support.

Tl;DR: getting married well while playing trad-wife is the best EV $$$$ out job the woman can get which is why men who can easily have a stay at home wife tend to avoid those as it is too much risk.

AutoModerator · 2024-08-26T14:37:18+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Barely-moral · 2024-08-26T16:04:44+00:00

Do you recognize that traditional gender roles put women at a disadvantage?

No. I believe they are at an advantage. Not having to work at the job marketplace is a huge positive. People work to live, to have a family. Traditional women get to do that without working.

If so, does this bother you?

It bothers me that women believe it to be a disadvantage.

Or conversely, do you like the power imbalance?

It is what it is.

A woman who stays at home does so to her own financial disadvantage.

Again. No. You earn money at a workplace to live. If you get to live without working you are in an advantageous position.

Her own Social Security may be negligible. If her marriage lasts 10 years or more and then she gets divorced, she can get her own SS or half of whatever amount her husband is entitled to. Note: he gets his full amount. She gets an amount that is half.

Pick the right man and keep it. Women have options and brains. Nothing is stopping them from using those.

If she needs to enter the workforce after being out for any length of time, she can easily be earning tens of thousands less per year, every single year going forward, than she would have if she had no employment gap. Alimony is usually granted for only a few years and in no way makes up for the remaining lifetime of reduced wages.

You know what makes up for that? Years without having to work because someone else work to provide for you.

These factors conspire to make divorce less palatable economically for a stay-at-home wife and provide more incentive for her to stay in an unhappy situation.

That is good. Leaving a marriage should not be incentivized.

Also, the incentive is to make the situation happy because there is no happiness outside it.

I hadn’t ever thought about these issues when I decided to become a SAHM, because… happy, plus excitement, plus baby, plus husband earned a lot at that point in time. Then life happened and I came to realize the unthought-about consequences. And these are things I’m betting many young women don’t think about either.

As I said. Women have options and brains and nothing stops them from using them.

FirmQuarter6623 · 2024-08-26T15:39:14+00:00

So, a man working his ass off, while a woman is doing a pretty easy work at home. After 10 years you decide that he's not the one, you're not feeling it anymore, you fill for divorce, get the half + possible alimony + child support. Not enough. Power imbalance. Bla bla bla. You went far beyond of wanting a cake and eating it. You prove a theory that women are never satisfied, physically can't be, and should be just shut the fuck down when open their mouth. I live in the country where women are dreaming to be sahm, but can't afford it. They have eaten enough of equality and want to be a woman again.

DeathcoreOnly · 2024-08-26T15:46:10+00:00

So let me get this straight, you have minimal responsibilities, your entire life is bankrolled, you have barely and burdens, you get whatever you want rich husband and yet you’re oppressed. Amazing, truly amazing.

RecentDegree7990 · 2024-08-26T15:29:36+00:00

This is one of the many reasons why divorce should be banned

BlueParsec · 2024-08-26T19:49:56+00:00

Trying to spin "not working and getting to play with your kids all week" as a power imbalance is ridiculous lmfao.

Why don't you ask the SAHD's whether they think there's a power imbalance in their relationship? Good luck finding them...

The whole idea of the traditional gender roles is that there is no divorce, the family becomes one unit with people doing what they are best at. Divorce is not traditional.

Guess what, getting half of something you didn't have to work for is not a "disadvantage" of being a stay at home parent.

The insignificant amounts you hypothesize barely scratch the surface of the privileges to "stay at home" with your children that so many women of the past had no opportunity for.

Friedrich_Friedson · 2024-08-26T15:48:05+00:00

Simple: Either outright ban stay at home parents, or tax the person with a stay at home spouse more for imputed loses.

gntlbastard · 2024-08-27T03:07:51+00:00

Traditional marriages in a religious context views the husband and wife as one unit. In that setup there is no - my finances and your finances - there is just our finances. Everything the husband earns outside of the house is for his wife and kids. Everything his wife does in the home is for him and their kids. The idea of split finances and I need my money you need your money etc, is the modern twist on what marriage was inside of a religious sacrament.

-Kalos · 2024-08-27T05:35:18+00:00

I’m traditional in some ways, I don’t mind providing as I make more than most but I don’t expect to have a housewife. I’d actually prefer a life partner that has opportunities and a social life and hobbies of her own. If something ever happened to me, I wouldn’t want the mother of my kids feeling like she has to hop on the next man just to survive, I’d rather she be able to choose a man that’s going to be good for my children as well because she isn’t desperate

FreitasAlan · 2024-08-27T06:24:06+00:00

This problem you mention only makes sense if you assume a very extreme version of what traditional marriage is and you’re getting into a relationship where the probability of divorce is very high. In that case of course you should have your own money for when it ends. Although I rarely see people define traditional marriages that way as if the men really wants to stop the woman from working.

Even assuming all of that, not receiving for what you didn’t work is not a disadvantage. After divorce you can just work and I’m sure the market you pay you the market rate for whatever you are providing.

Now if you assume you’re getting into a relationship where things work, it’s not a disadvantage to be able to be with your family and have access to the all the shared resources. And be able to work if you want to (never seen a single men in real life be hung up of the ideia of the woman not working when they talk about traditional marriage). Any men would dream of a woman who would let him do that and finance it.

SecondEldenLord · 2024-08-27T08:22:54+00:00

How does it put women at a disadvantage? Being a stay at home mom is a disadvantage now? If the economy wasn't so ridiculously shit, things would've been so much better.

kochIndustriesRussia · 2024-08-27T12:13:05+00:00

We trad men like the power imbalance. And obviously.... our women do too. My sahgf had a career and was making real money...she's smart and has a great family (who love me).... when I told her she didn't have to work, she walked away from it all (working outside the home) in a heartbeat.

Neither of us are unaware of the dynamics... the costs... the risks.... we actually quite like them.

ClevelandSpigot · 2024-08-27T17:32:44+00:00

I thought women were already at a disadvantage, what with all the rapin' and murderin' going on.

Financial_Window_990 · 2024-08-28T02:50:09+00:00

No. Traditional gender roles put men at a disadvantage. Women have all the power in Traditional gender roles.

Bro_with_passport · 2024-08-28T11:14:00+00:00

I’d consider myself a traditional man. The only disadvantages you outlined for a SAHM can only come into play in divorce. So rather than tackling the question head on, I’ll make a list of things a woman can do to prevent divorce from happening.

-don’t file for divorce: most divorces are caused by women leaving their husbands. If you don’t end it, he’s much more likely to stay and fix things.

-don’t cheat: roughly 60% of the time men do file for divorce, it’s due to infidelity.

scwizard · 2024-08-27T04:16:17+00:00

I do, but it sorta begs the question of why women seem so much less happy now that they're no longer at a power disadvantage?

The answer in the Bible is that God didn't design women to share power equally with men. But even if you're not religious you have to wonder where the joy is that was supposed to come with this freedom.

Comments