|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 04:58 PM February 4th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
"not just because young women are earning more, but because young men feel less compelled to fit the mold of the traditional solo breadwinner."
I like the way it sounds like we have a choice... the article shows we dont...
bottom line...
why would you marry someone that wont treat you the way you would treat them? for once us guys finally have a way to divine who is a loser!!!! normally we get taken, but now by pretending to take her, we can tell if she really cares for you!!!!
its sad, but more and more there is less reason for us guys to have kids and be part of things.. and the amazonian thing isnt that great either (a woman wont share her man, so how could a society of them share the one they need for kids?)
the other thing the article doesnt point out is that generally when women earn more they are still hypergamous... so most want men that earn more or near what they do... the thing is men cant earn like this so even what would be acceptable is not...
there gonna be some real pissed women in the old folks home!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:56 AM February 5th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, here I go again.
What is "Hypergamous"?
'sounds like a monster from the Godzilla movies.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:46 AM February 6th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Hypergamous -- a woman seeking to marrying a man with more money and status than her. This pattern contributes to family/couple economic inequality when men and women have a similar distribution of earnings.
In simpler terms, rich men are willing to marry poor women. Rich women aren't interested in marrying poor men. To get a more equitable and fair society, women's attitudes toward men need to change a lot. You probably understand that, Thundercloud, and that makes you a lot smarter than a lot of professors, journalists, politicans, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:30 PM February 6th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. That I understand. Thanks.
As far as me being smarter than some professors and journalists..., I don't know.
At least I'm smarter than a rock. Well, most kinds of rocks. Lime stone is smarter than most journalists. (Sorry just being silly)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by LSBeene on 05:58 PM February 6th, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
ThunderCloud,
Personally I find your spelling TERRIBLE!! But, lol, that said, your REASONING skills are, IMO, based on equity, fairness, and well written.
Each of us has our talents, and I type for a living (lol, now watch me do about 10 typos!). But I suspect that you speak more than 1 language as you are so deeply involved in your Indian Activism issues.
And I barely speak 1 language. Plus, I'm blond.
(nice comment about the limestone btw)
Steven
Guerrilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 12:46 PM March 2nd, 2005 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
another way to put it!!!
though i do like the way you said it
men are willing to pay for the magic of beauty
women who are the magicians, and being closer, they dont see value in an illusion
ergo-ipso-facto...
women wont pay for an investment that has no returns for them (just like us men)
and unlike women
men get a return for getting a better mate, so what is a cheap illusion to the women, is a necessary accessory. like jewelry makeing a person look better.
women hate this trophy concept because no matter what they cant TAKE this advantage any more than men can take their sexual advantage. what they dont get is that the trophy wife doesnt have to be beautiful. she just has to be a wife. most big ceos and wealthy people are NOT married to models and are not that visible compared to the wealthy divorced man that still has enough left over to get a woman interested in him by proxy to his very fat wallet.
yeah it irks them. too bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 05:32 PM February 4th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Just what is so wrong with a woman supporting a lesser earning man?
Men have been doing it since time began. It is high time for women to start carrying their fair share of the load.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:59 PM February 4th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, early humans and our hominid ancestors had a different sort of division of labor. Men hunted, and women did most of the gathering and took care of the children.
When agriculture came along, men and women both had a lot of chores around the farm, but men had more and women took care of the children.
The Man-go-to-work-and-woman-stay-home phenominon is relatively recent. The earliest I heard of it happening was in some ancient Roman cities. Then the industrial revolution made it the primary way of life.
A household requires a lot of management and maintenence, not to mention all the work it takes to be a childcare provider. Recently it seems everyone is prejudiced against the traditional female role. Feminists because they don't think it is glorious or independent enough, and now some men's activists because they think it isn't much work.
I think people should be able to live however they want if it doesn't hurt others, and men staying at home is fine with me. But I don't think that they will find it easy.
-Harq al-Ada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:00 PM February 5th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
...I don't know.
Something about a man being financialy dependant on a woman sounds dangerous, in this day and age, the way things are now.
I wouldn't do it.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Dittohd on 08:35 PM February 4th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
>Research by Megan Sweeney, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of California, Los Angeles, shows a trend toward higher-earning women marrying at higher rates. Among white women, a $10,000-a-year increase in income predicted a 6.8% increase in the likelihood that a woman will marry in a given year. Among black women posting a $10,000-a-year income gain, the increase in the likelihood of marriage was 8.2%.
What happened to all the "strong" women that Maureen Dowd was just recently whining about no longer being attractive to men because they are so "strong"? What about all the wonderful women in their 30's and 40's who can't find a husband because they are so intimidating to men because of their new found "strength of character"?
No matter how women have it, they are always the victim! Seems like as always, women want all the rights but none of the inherent responsibility.
Dittohd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by frank h on 10:30 AM February 5th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I want to pay my wife a compliment here, though I know she'll never read it. In 2000, I left Lucent Technologies and went to work for a telecom startup. That lasted for about fourteen months. A combination of factors (the overall telecom downturn, 9/11, poor planning on the part of the managers) led to what is known as a "reduction in force" (lay-off), and I was unemployed, or should I say severely under-employed for about twenty months.
Marietta (my wife) works full-time in a supermarket, and therefore has health benefits, and so that (major) issue was really a non-issue. However, I really flailed about looking for something, anything, to get some income going, but I was very distracted and poorly focused all through the process. Not a word was said, not a blink, a barb, a complaint. Nothing.
Thankfully, I found something just as all the reserves were running out and I'm back to full-time status doing someting I like that, conveniently, pays well.
I'm not sure how she would have taken it if I'd said "I'm going to quit next year and hang out for awhile," but on the other hand, she's always been a hard worker and doesn't shirk at carrying her end of the load.
Just wanted to say that. Hope I don't annoy anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:48 AM February 6th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Your wife is a treasure. Please tell her that Trevor says so!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by bharati on 10:58 AM February 5th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Women welcome to the 21st century and the challenges and pains of being a breadwinner.
I am impressed at young guys how quickly they have learn't that if they do not want to subsidise another persons lifestyle then they have to find women earning higher then you.
GO GUYS you are making great progress in the 21st century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:49 PM February 5th, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Most men would rather have a wife who earns a lot of money than one who doesn't earn much money. Is this difficult to understand, especially with a 50% divorce rate?
I'm definitely looking for a woman who can offer me the choice of taking a few years off to care for our children. I'm not happy that that child custody decisions are grossly biased against men, but I would take the chance on marriage and family in the right circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by The_Beedle on 10:52 AM February 7th, 2005 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
If women tend to marry older men (and they do) and men die before women (and they do) should they retire as a couple? (Yet by and large they do.) So this fiancee was bringing the total time off closer to equity in that marriage - it's still not enough to balance the ledger, she'll outlive him by a lot more than a year!
I found the statistics from the dating websites encouraging, they say to me that an unemployed woman in her 20's living in debt and her parents basement can be seen as a loser just like a man is. That's a definate improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Ray writes "It seems more is changing in lifestyles than some women are happy with