# Traditional Relationships versus Modern Relationships



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

I wanted to see how people were split along this issue, so this poll is asking you -

"In a relationship, do you prefer a more traditional relationship (gender roles abided by, 1950s-type relationships), or a more modern relationship (gender roles ignored, equality between partners, teamwork and co-operation)?

I'm not asking about sex, I'm asking about relationships, so ignore what goes on in the bedroom for the purposes of this poll.

Whilst a more traditional relationship may seem to exclude homosexual couples, I don't think it has to, and for the purposes of this poll, it can include them, as they can quite easily have a more traditional relationship if one person plays the more traditionally masculine part and the other plays a more traditionally feminine part.

The poll is divided into five possible choices - Fully Traditional, Mostly Traditional, Neutral, Mostly Modern and Fully Modern.


----------



## Eerie (Feb 9, 2011)

How about both? My relationship is a wonderful mixture of both. While for the most part at home I sort of adhere to gender roles, at least for myself as a homemaker and mother, I don't see the masculine/feminine gender roles as a bad thing. And there's definitely still equality in everything we do.

*votes neutral*


----------



## twoofthree (Aug 6, 2011)

If there's a better way, then it's not worth doing it another way for the sake of tradition.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

First one would have to define traditional versus modern ? 

If traditional (monogamous) = woman stays home, man is sole bread-earner ... 

then no way! In today's world that's just too much burden on one person alone. Until and unless that's what both want. It's just not for me.

If modern (monogamous) = both work and share equal burden of housework and financials and have an equal say in life / lifestyle decisions .. That's the way it will be for me. My mom worked all her life and maintained a strong balance b/w home and work and raised us practically on her own [dad was only interesting in providing finances, nothing more]

However, if modern relationship involves both to be in a consensual open relationship --- then that's not a problem either. It's not for me because of a strong cultural influence on what I can, or cannot do. However, I have absolutely no quips against people who involve themselves willingly in such relationships. 

It's all about happiness in the end, isn't it? As long as things are consensual and both find equal happiness in a traditional / modern / hybrid / open relationship, then I see no harm in it.

Personally, I would prefer to not be in a relationship again ... ever [though I'm quite fickle about that at the moment because I'm unbalanced]


----------



## Valdyr (May 25, 2010)

Mostly modern, if a relationship's modernity is defined by gender roles. I only say mostly instead of fully because even though in an ideal world I'd like to go largely without gender, in the real world it is impossible to go through one's life without gender, given how malleable our minds are when it comes to subtle social expectations, pretexts, etc. I'd have to put all my effort into deconstructing gender.


----------



## angularvelocity (Jun 15, 2009)

Hmm.. I'm torn into neutral. I believe regardless of traditional/modern that both people are equal and both are respected equallly. I'm usually a very traditional individual but I also try to break boundaries and be modern. With using traditional and modern in terms of who works, I always tend to think the guy should definitely be working and frown upon house husbands. I only think this because the woman will someday go on maternity leave so the guy should be working, and I also think a parent should be there to raise the kid.. I'd never want a day care or grandparent to raise my child.

Back to the OP for gender roles such as cooking, cleaning, yardwork etc.. I tend to lean more modern because I enjoy cooking and yardwork and sometimes cleaning. When I look at chores and stuff, I see it more as a thing to split between two people. I don't think the sterotypical gender roles have to apply to chores like woman need to do cleaning, cooking, laundry, etc while men do yard work, take out trash, fix things around the home, etc. I think the couple should split the chores evenly with each of the individuals selecting the task that they "enjoy" or prefer to do. Or tackle each task together.


----------



## Fleetfoot (May 9, 2011)

I'd probably prefer mostly-modern or fully-modern relationships. I enjoy doing things like washing dishes and cooking, but there's some things I just cannot do (like doing my boyfriend's laundry...do your own, I'll do my own...or we'll do it together). Things should be done by whatever each person prefers doing, and if both people really don't want to do one thing, then sacrifices can be made. 

Unfortunately, a lot of relationships I see in college (not all, but a good number) the girl seems to be the guy's mother, and a good number of guys seem to be looking for that. I'm not the motherly type. -_-


----------



## clicheguevara (Jul 27, 2011)

Unless the man is making a lot of money, I'd say it's pretty impossible to have a traditional relationship these days (assuming that by traditional, you mean the man is the breadwinner and the woman the homemaker).

But in general, whatever works for two particular people is fine with me as long as it's not propagandized as the ideal form of relationship for everyone. Having said that, I'd prefer my own relationship to be mostly modern.


----------



## tuna (Jun 10, 2010)

fully modern.


----------



## LotusBlossom (Apr 2, 2011)

neutral

i don't think i ever want to be solely homemaker, i.e. housewife with no income. To be totally financially dependent on my partner sounds like one of the worst situations I could imagine being in - it would suffocate me and make me anxious, as it takes away my leverage in the relationship. Doesn't matter if he can afford it and is happy for me to be one, I just don't want it. To be able to contribute financially tilts the dynamics relationship in my favour - it gives me comfort with the knowledge that with the money that I earn, I can do whatever the hell i want with it (after paying my share of the household bills, of course) without feeling guilty that I'm using his money. I don't want to have to answer to anyone.

If he is insistent on it (which I doubt any man is these days), I would run far, far away.

But at the same time I don't particularly care for nor actively seek a modernized relationship.


----------



## Disfigurine (Jan 1, 2011)

Hmm...

none of the above? :/


----------



## twoofthree (Aug 6, 2011)

Valdyr said:


> Mostly modern, if a relationship's modernity is defined by gender roles. I only say mostly instead of fully because even though in an ideal world I'd like to go largely without gender, in the real world it is impossible to go through one's life without gender, given how malleable our minds are when it comes to subtle social expectations, pretexts, etc. I'd have to put all my effort into deconstructing gender.


Modern doesn't mean that some traditional associations wouldn't remain. It doesn't have to be totally opposite.
In my opinion you could have a modern relationship and still maintain most of the traditional roles because that's what each person likes and is capable of doing best.

So you things in the most practical way and not just follow set roles.


----------



## Valdyr (May 25, 2010)

twoofthree said:


> Modern doesn't mean that some traditional associations wouldn't remain. It doesn't have to be totally opposite.
> In my opinion you could have a modern relationship and still maintain most of the traditional roles because that's what each person likes and is capable of doing best.
> 
> So you things in the most practical way and not just follow set roles.


This is not substantially different than what I'm saying, it merely uses the word "modern" differently. I'm suggesting that the total absence of gender roles, given society, is impossible for all practical purposes, and thus I'm hesitant to call it "fully modern" _according to my understanding the definition provided in the OP_. If we shift our understanding of "modern," then we don't disagree. For me, "mostly modern" means "modern for all practical purposes," minor theoretical quibbles aside, in that I have no conscious gender-based expectations of my partner or our broader relationship dynamics, but recognize that we will always unconsciously be influenced by society.


----------



## viva (Aug 13, 2010)

avalanche183 said:


> Hmm.. I'm torn into neutral. I believe regardless of traditional/modern that both people are equal and both are respected equallly. I'm usually a very traditional individual but I also try to break boundaries and be modern. With using traditional and modern in terms of who works, I always tend to think the guy should definitely be working and frown upon house husbands. I only think this because the woman will someday go on maternity leave so the guy should be working, and I also think a parent should be there to raise the kid.. I'd never want a day care or grandparent to raise my child.
> 
> Back to the OP for gender roles such as cooking, cleaning, yardwork etc.. I tend to lean more modern because I enjoy cooking and yardwork and sometimes cleaning. When I look at chores and stuff, I see it more as a thing to split between two people. I don't think the sterotypical gender roles have to apply to chores like woman need to do cleaning, cooking, laundry, etc while men do yard work, take out trash, fix things around the home, etc. I think the couple should split the chores evenly with each of the individuals selecting the task that they "enjoy" or prefer to do. Or tackle each task together.


Hey... I feel the exact same way about everything. Can I get your number? We should get married


----------



## twoofthree (Aug 6, 2011)

Valdyr said:


> This is not substantially different than what I'm saying, it merely uses the word "modern" differently. I'm suggesting that the total absence of gender roles, given society, is impossible for all practical purposes, and thus I'm hesitant to call it "fully modern" _according to my understanding the definition provided in the OP_. If we shift our understanding of "modern," then we don't disagree. For me, "mostly modern" means "modern for all practical purposes," minor theoretical quibbles aside, in that I have no conscious gender-based expectations of my partner or our broader relationship dynamics, but recognize that we will always unconsciously be influenced by society.


I know. . . just slightly different definitions. That's what I was getting at. . .


----------



## Valdyr (May 25, 2010)

twoofthree said:


> I know. . . just slightly different definitions. That's what I was getting at. . .


Okay, then we agree.


----------



## SuperfineConcubine (Aug 8, 2011)

Mostly Modern. 

-I'm the breadwinner. My boyfriend works as well, and makes enough to support us both if I were to quit my job. I wouldn't do that though, as I really love my job. 
-We split bills, however our finances are completely separate (different bank accounts) and will be even if we were to marry.
-Chores are split, and typically done when they're needed to be done, by whoever has time to do them. He doesn't think it's a woman's job to iron or do laundry, just as I don't see it as a 'mans job' to take out the garbage or clean the garage. We both share yardwork duties.

There are some 'traditional' dashes of gender roles in our relationship. He pretty much deals with fixing things, or anything with cars. I pretty much an unobservant to those things. I let my car go 5k over an oil change (he flipped out). He also told me I needed to put softner salt in, because the water was getting harsh, and I grabbed a can of table salt. He just shook his head. I have no idea how to do those things. He is teaching me though. I'm teaching him how to cook, as he would eat pb&j all day long.


----------



## Drewbie (Apr 28, 2010)

Fully modern. My gender and the genders of people I'm typically attracted to can in no way fall into any traditional mold. 
We'd just hurt ourselves trying.


----------



## angularvelocity (Jun 15, 2009)

vivacissimamente said:


> Hey... I feel the exact same way about everything. Can I get your number? We should get married


You likey? 









And you can only get my number if your name is Darrell.. pronounced DUH-rell but spelled like Darrell.



SuperfineConcubine said:


> -We split bills, however our finances are completely separate (different bank accounts) and will be even if we were to marry.


I find this very interesting. Why keep it separate if you're married? Is there a specific reason for it?
This is just a personal insecurity of mine which is why I ask. I believe if we are joined together and are married as a union, everything should be together. We make decisions together, we plan together and we even finance together. Just my two thoughts and curious to know yours on that. 



SuperfineConcubine said:


> I'm teaching him how to cook, as he would eat pb&j all day long.


Lol!!!!! Tisk tisk tisk.. if my lady ate PB&J all day I'd gladly let her.. less for for me to cook :wink:


----------



## SuperfineConcubine (Aug 8, 2011)

avalanche183 said:


> You likey?
> 
> I find this very interesting. Why keep it separate if you're married? Is there a specific reason for it?
> This is just a personal insecurity of mine which is why I ask. I believe if we are joined together and are married as a union, everything should be together. We make decisions together, we plan together and we even finance together. Just my two thoughts and curious to know yours on that.
> ...


Hmmm, I'm not sure why separate. We've discussed what we would do after marriage and we've concluded that our methods are working just fine. We both go over bills together, and are open with purchases. Maybe it will change? Who knows. How we do it now is fine. We have decided a joint bank account for large home savings would be alright. 

PB&J has no nutritional value! ! Well, enough to keep you healthy daily.


----------

