ideal and fall-back arrangements differ for men and women

Post Reply New Topic

Interesting article on a study about mens' and womens' ideal arrangements and what they would prefer to fall back on if they don't have enough time for childcare: men in general would rather fall back to a traditional arrangement, and women in general would rather get a divorce than be a housewife.
http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/20 ... fallbacks/

i saw that article too, and it interested me greatly. when our child was young, my ex-husband and i both worked for some periods, and at other times he was a stay-at-home dad. he liked it because he had art projects and writing to work on, but for me, the idea of staying at home felt like imprisonment. i gained a lot of pride and a sense of accomplishment from being in the workforce, and i would not have been prepared to give that up.

Most of your posts about your ex make him seem like a good guy.

he really is - we are very good friends still. he met bucephalus, and there is mutual respect there.

?
IIrc Bucephalus was a horse...?

bucephalus is a member here too, we met on the site. he is my boyfriend, and we live together.

Other articles suggest that young men are less interested in marriage. For example

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/04/ ... c-headline



At the risk of another spanking: this would seem to suggest that 3/4 of women are nuts.


This seems to be contradictory. Why insist on being a "breadwinner", when you don't value success in a high-paying career? Careers suck, anyway. They take up too much time, and you're stuck putting up with a bunch of ridiculous people.

ROFL,

Good morning, LKL.

He's alright - decent bloke. There is a likeness in him to an actor named Alan Igbon, who featured in the 1970s and 1980s here in Britain.

We created a society, that depends the worth of a human upon a number on a paper he receives at the end of a month. This is just the logic result, or why does it seems nuts to use, that someone does not want to be a worthless piece of s**t for the society because of missing numbers on his "end of the month" paper?

If you mean that its completely nuts to create such a society, that depends the worth of its members, on plain numbers on a paper, instead of them being a helpful and social part of this society, I fully agree with you.

It's also not very economical of them to [prefer to] leave their husbands and raise the kids on their own. I even find it somewhat disturbing because the woman's ego, in this scenario, seems to have a higher priority than the psychological and financial support of her kids.

Generally you should think about, that its not only the women, giving their job and according to our society their status, more priority, but both men and women.

So both sexes agree with each other, that its more important to care for his/her job and the according social status, then care for kids. So its not a problem of men or female, its a problem of our society.

the survey interestingly didn't give the option of allowing the man to stay at home, though. unless i read it wrong - i had a bit of trouble with it. it backed the women into a corner, not sure why it did that.

I argue the same for men as well. Any parent - male or female - who doesn't give proper priorities for his/her kids.

I don't like the idea of having kids at this stage in life, but if I ever did end up with any, I know I would want to make sure my kids are raised and have the psychological and financial necessities needed to stay well and healthy, even if it means I had to be the carer because my wife ended up being uncaring enough to make compromises for the sake of her kids.

"falling back into traditional arrangemenet" meant for me concentrating on payed work and ignoring unpayed "work" like caring for their own children.

So when forced to decide between children and payjob, they give their job as well more priority then their kids.

As long as we give work only an worth, if its payed, nothing will change. I remember my father ending discussions with my mother with the argument, that he is the one earning the money, meaning he and his oppinions are more important because his share of the work of a partnership is payed and hers not, so her work is worthless and her oppinion is worthless.

And now they are whondering why people dont choose to become worthless scum again for their partners, on their own? Sure earning money is an essential part of work that must be done for a family. But there are other essential parts of work, that must be done as well. If it must be done, it must be important. As long as we are not willing to understand, and see people that do work that isnt payed as worthless scum that do not have the right of equal opponions, noone will be willing to do so.

Were you able to find details on the survey? I was wondering how large the sample was and how the sample was selected. I'm thinking that it was a simple convenience sample, the results of which are not generally applicable beyond the sample itself.