Traditional relationships

Post Reply New Topic

I don't think it's important for the roles to be so distinct. It's not important that one person provides money and no cooking/cleaning/childcare, while the other person does all cooking/cleaning/childcare and no money provision.

What's important is that all the bases are covered and that the relationship is balanced: you have sufficient money, and you have sufficient domestic work being done. It doesn't have to be split all or nothing, it can very easily be split down the middle, 50-50. Both people can take part in doing both income earning and domestic work. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't even have to be man-woman, it's just easier to cover the bases when you have two people sharing the responsibilities.

I wrote about what i prefer, not what everyone should prefer.

I think you should take out the word should and just say what everyone prefers. Anyway why shouldn't people have the right to post their own insights and feedbacks on what they prefer?

You did.

You wrote that this arrangement would make most people happy and wopuld solve the problems you see described in this forum. That is the same as saying people should prefer it.

If you dont like my views just say so.

^ I think that's what they are saying?

I am not opposed to traditional relationships or atypical ones. Whatever works, I say.

I don't see women taking care of the kids as being demeaning or unfufilling as some others have said. Many women would prefer it and only *have* to work because of their financial situation or whatnot.

I hold a bit of a traditional view myself, I suppose, in that I see women (=myself) as being more responsible for domestic duties. But I agree with stinkypuppy in that it shouldn't be so clearly defined by gender but rather it should be defined by each individual person's respective responsibilities. If I work more hours than my husband, then I don't see why he shouldn't be able to clean up the house. I suppose that it's simply because I feel like I want to "take care of" my husband that I feel like I should be the one to cook dinner and such things.

Anyway, my point is I'm a bit traditional myself but I dont see any of the options as being better or worse than any of the others.

Sometimes, friends with benefits may be the better solution. Depending on the friends, the benefits may be pure fun, with few risks of a 9mo "infection" to one of the parties...

No-body Knows the trubble Ah've seeen...



Especially for someone so completely non-confrontational that they become an easy target for abuse - just a whipping boy for the partner's frustrations.

Traditional relationships are pretty much toxic for a person who, by the very nature of their brain's configuration, is incapable of consistently conforming to social convention.

*strikes the OP's name off her list of potential boyfriend material*

CG,

Now that is pretty harsh.

Is it? Why? I've been vocal about my personal opinion on relationships which definitely doesn't mesh with the OP's ideas of what he wants and there's nothing wrong with that. I made a joke about it. No harm done. I'm sure he's a nice guy. I never said he wasn't. Besides, if he read my thread on non-traditional relationships he would be thinking the same thing.

Well, if that is what you want to do you could probably find someone who wants to fit into that role with you.



Personally I would never consider being with someone who just stayed at home cleaning while I worked. Maids are not hard to find.



I can't see how any of the problems discussed in this forum could be fixed with forced gender roles. Perhaps you could explain.

CG,

I was just trying to joke back.

Feebly, I guess.

Yes, the OP is certainly entitled to his opinion. However, based on the posts here, he isn't likely to find many who agree with him. Male or female. Well, maybe Fickle Pickle, but that is about it.

What we like to think of the traditional roles are really anything but. They only fit a fairly narrow range of industrialization that generally corresponds to the immediate post-WWII period in the US and likely Canada. It sort of applied to my parents generation, but certainly not to any of my other ancestors. My parents grew up on farms, mainly subsistence farming. While the men were the ones who worked the fields, the women worked the garden(which grew everything but the corn/cotton/black eyed peas/pecans), managed the chickens, turkeys, pigs and cows. The basic division was that if it required a lot of physical strength, that was a man's job. If it required fine motor control, that was a woman's job. If it was somewhere in-between, it depended on who was idle at the time. Until the post-WWII period, the typical diet was in excess of 3500 calories per day. So there wasn't all that much idle time.

Bottom line is that the 'traditional' role division is not so traditional. In fact, the most pure expression of this is not anywhere in the West, but is expressed in Japan. In the post-WWII period, the division between the working man and homemaker reached its peak. But even that is falling apart. Japanese women are finally finding their feet and the traditional roles are hitting pretty serious rocks. Politically speaking, which is always the ultimate bastion of "the old boys network" was recently upended in Japan when the entrenched old farts were challenged by a slate of relatively young females who garnered the nickname of the "assassins" because their elderly male opponents suffered from foot in mouth disease. In their attempts to neutralize their opponents, they tended to say some really stupid things. And they lost. Change has been long overdue in Japan. Their economy bellyflopped in the 1990s and has never really recovered. They need a change.

Traditionally a Japanese woman takes her husband's paycheck and gives him back an allowance, which seems at odds with the American "Father Knows Best," model. The 'homemaker' role, despite western stereotypes isn't a Stepford Wife analog -- it's quite dominating and tough. Why the western idea of the submissive Asian woman won't fade away, I don't know -- I've never seen it IRL. There is sexism of course, especially in employment, but as far as the homemaker role goes, the traditional Japanese version is better than the traditional American one.

I think comparisons between America and Japan are always tricky, since the cultures don't have any common roots.

I read 2 relevant remarks: its stress reducing (peko) and the easiest (a norwegian guy).

My mum always had an important job and so had my dad. They probably made similar money. Because of my mum's demanding job, my dad had to take over some of the housework. One time an old friend came to visit and said to my dad that he likes his wife to stay home and do the housework, do the 'woman's job'. My dad said he likes to know that if something happens to him, his wife is capable to provide for and look after the kids.

It is the same in my family. We share the housework and both work full-time. I had to stay home with my younger daughter until she was 3 because she couldn't cope in child care. The noise, the kids running, the new rutine was too much for her. I loved the time we spent togheter every day but I missed my job very much.