# Men who cook, clean and raise the children



## curious0610 (Jun 27, 2010)

*What are your thoughts on this? 
*
1. I once met someone whose mentality towards marriage was: "I'll cook, clean and raise the children - I want my wife to be the primary bread-winner"

2. I also met someone once who was extremely comfortable with household stuff - for example, he was very "motherly" - it's hard to explain. His view towards marriage was a desire for equality and shared tasks, but he was way better than I was with managing his house, making meals, and all the traditionally female roles of the marriage. Given his skills, it seemed like a natural balance he sought was someone who "wore the pants" and was assertive

My own thoughts on this.... I found both scenarios to be a bit uncomfortable (the first one just had me running out the door and I couldn't even help but find this scenario a bit repulsive). *How about you guys? I'm curious to hear people's thoughts on this. How would you feel if you were in either of the scenarios? *


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

curious0610 said:


> What are your thoughts on this?
> 
> 1. I once met someone whose mentality towards marriage was: "I'll cook, clean and raise the children - I want my wife to be the primary bread-winner"
> 
> ...


Why on earth would you find the first one repulsive? Is it due to gender roles and societal expectations?


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

I would be ecstatic to have a partner who would be willing to do all the things I refuse to do. It doesn't matter what gender or sex I would be with in that situation. I'm content with cooking, but I wouldn't mind having a stay-at-home partner to raise our offspring. 

I think I would also have a deeper appreciation for someone who would be willing to go against social norms to better our family rather than worry about what others think. Of course it's not common, but it beats a lot of other situations one could be in. 

There is nothing wrong with a female being the breadwinner, it just depends upon how the partner will take it. I know it also varies if you are into structured gender roles, a male may have feelings of inadequacy because they're _usually_ the one who brings home the bacon. I'm not one for following gender roles too strictly, so I would prefer a male who could accept that and enjoy being a stay-at-home father.

I can't see myself settling down anytime soon though.


----------



## L'Empereur (Jun 7, 2010)

I would have no problem with cooking, cleaning and taking care of my own children. I would prefer to be the breadwinner as well.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

L'Empereur said:


> I would have no problem with cooking, cleaning and taking care of my own children. I would prefer to be the breadwinner as well.


Aww....i should have met you a few years ago ; )...J/k..i have a great guy, although not sure if he is willing to do all
of that ....time will tell i guess.


----------



## curious0610 (Jun 27, 2010)

L'Empereur said:


> I would have no problem with cooking, cleaning and taking care of my own children. I would prefer to be the breadwinner as well.


Just as an interesting corollary - what if it was a scenario where you were JUST cooking, cleaning, and caring for your own children and your wife was doing the only work to support the family? (I think that clarifies what I meant)


----------



## curious0610 (Jun 27, 2010)

*Clarification*

I find the first scenario disturbing, actually, whether it is either the man or the woman staying at home for the sole purpose of taking care of the house and the family, with the other partner being completely responsible for the livelihood for the family.

In the case where it's the man staying back and the woman out earning their living, I just find it uncomfortable.


----------



## L'Empereur (Jun 7, 2010)

curious0610 said:


> Just as an interesting corollary - what if it was a scenario where you were JUST cooking, cleaning, and caring for your own children and your wife was doing the only work to support the family? (I think that clarifies what I meant)


That is acceptable.


----------



## Mr.Xl Vii (Jan 19, 2011)

I always viewed marriage as a two way streak. When you have one person acting as the bread winner and the other as the homemaker it's too conventional for my tastes and it brings about unrest. Someone always feels they're in the position of power. My father taught me to cook and I want my marriage to be an equal share of the load between my wife and me. I'm okay with taking care of children, doing laundry, cooking, washing dishes. Gender roles are fucking archaic.


----------



## bengalcat (Dec 8, 2010)

I'd find it cool. 

Ideally I'd be with someone flexible, co-operative and open-minded, because situations might arise where we both would need to work. Or maybe I'd like some home-focused time for a while. But I've always admired men who are happy to hold down the homefront, particularly given that it's a job not much respected in either men or women (but especially not in men). 

If I made enough money for a guy I was with to do this, I'd be cool with it. I'd probably be jealous though. I don't want to be a 100% stay at home parent, I'd like some ideal mix of both work and taking care of things at home, but I'm pretty sure that as a working parent I would wonder a lot about what I'm missing out on and if I'm doing a good enough job as a parent. 

But I love the idea of a guy who is devoted to his kids and who doesn't have archaic, icky ideas about chores being women's work. And it is sooooooooooooooo handy having a guy who will cook for you. At the end of a long-ass, dreary day.... ah, to not have to worry about feeding yourself something good and healthy because you know that your guy will put a plate of something good in front of you? Times like that are when I feel rich.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

L'Empereur said:


> I would have no problem with cooking, cleaning and taking care of my own children. I would prefer to be the breadwinner as well.


You could open up a home business or work from your computer. *EXTREME MULTITASKING!!!*


----------



## devoid (Jan 3, 2011)

If one person is better than the other at caring for children or likes working more, I don't see a problem with them falling into those roles. However, predetermining these roles before you actually have a marriage or children is useless. You can't know for certain what your partner and children will need from you in the future, and where you'll end up. A certain amount of flexibility and mutuality is required in a relationship. Otherwise, what happens when the "breadwinner" is out of a job? Or when the "caretaker" gets sick and someone has to watch the children?


----------



## Compassionate Misanthrope (Mar 2, 2011)

My sister is a Dr. and my brother in law takes care of the kids and cooks. I think that it's a wonderful arrangement. He's a very kind and gentle man with a great deal of empathy and patience. I know that sometimes he struggles with the stigma placed on their arrangement but I think that it works out very well for them and for their children. 

I also know that while women's lib is a wonderful thing, here in Murka the corporations have taken advantage of it. We have been made to compete against one another (men vs women), instead of working for our mutual benefit. As families we do twice the work for the same pay (adjusted for inflation). 

The income disparity between the wealthy and poor/middle class has grown at an astronomical rate in direct proportion with outsourcing, and female penetration into the workforce. Most people now no longer have the option to have one bread winner as a result. 

This has also had the result of allowing for less time to spend enjoying life and in raising our children. I would very much like to see a world where men and women each have the unstigmatized option to either go to work, or work at home by raising a family as nature designed. 

If my wife gets to the point, before I do, that she can support both of us monetarily while I work to ensure that our family is happy and healthy, then I would happily stay at home and greet her at the door in my sexiest bananna hammock with a martini in hand.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

Compassionate Misanthrope said:


> My sister is a Dr. and my brother in law takes care of the kids and cooks. I think that it's a wonderful arrangement. He's a very kind and gentle man with a great deal of empathy and patience. I know that sometimes he struggles with the stigma placed on their arrangement but I think that it works out very well for them and for their children.
> 
> I also know that while women's lib is a wonderful thing, here in Murka the corporations have taken advantage of it. We have been made to compete against one another (men vs women), instead of working for our mutual benefit. As families we do twice the work for the same pay (adjusted for inflation).
> 
> ...


I figured you were into banana hammocks. I hope you used banana flavored vodka in that martini as well. Mrs. Compassionate Misanthrope would likely appreciate it very much. Especially working all day in her _monkey suit_ while you take care of the little monkeys and pick their fur clean of bugs.

As you mentioned, it's not always feasible in this society to have a _banana breadwinner_ and a stay-at-home partner. There aren't a lot of well paying careers that allow for that much family time and it's a shame. I don't recall my parents spending a lot of time with me during my childhood because they both worked all the time.

I will try to cut back on the monkey jokes. It's just too damn hard.


----------



## Ormazd (Jan 26, 2010)

I would much rather stay at home and do the cooking, cleaning, taking care of children, and whatever else. I think I would be pretty good at it and would enjoy it immensely.

Being the "breadwinner"? Ehhh, I'll avoid it if I can.


----------



## Compassionate Misanthrope (Mar 2, 2011)

Fizz said:


> I figured you were into banana hammocks. I hope you used banana flavored vodka in that martini as well. Mrs. Compassionate Misanthrope would likely appreciate it very much. Especially working all day in her _monkey suit_ while you take care of the little monkeys and pick their fur clean of bugs.
> 
> As you mentioned, it's not always feasible in this society to have a _banana breadwinner_ and a stay-at-home partner. There aren't a lot of well paying careers that allow for that much family time and it's a shame. I don't recall my parents spending a lot of time with me during my childhood because they both worked all the time.
> 
> I will try to cut back on the monkey jokes. It's just too damn hard.


Lol you know I do make a lot of monkey references in my daily life.... I'm going to have to get all introspective about it this weekend...  

I had the same sort of experience growing up. I know that it doesn't have to be this way. I can get you some great charts and graphs if you really want to nerd out on the "why's"!


----------



## bengalcat (Dec 8, 2010)

Compassionate Misanthrope said:


> If my wife gets to the point, before I do, that she can support both of us monetarily while I work to ensure that our family is happy and healthy, *then I would happily stay at home and greet her at the door in my sexiest bananna hammock with a martini in hand.*


If a guy did that for me _just once_ that would totally make my year :tongue:


----------



## bengalcat (Dec 8, 2010)

Compassionate Misanthrope said:


> I had the same sort of experience growing up. I know that it doesn't have to be this way. I can get you some great charts and graphs if you really want to nerd out on the "why's"!


I would like to nerd out on the whys please. You can pm me the details if you're not sure you want to put them in the thread.


----------



## Compassionate Misanthrope (Mar 2, 2011)

bengalcat said:


> I would like to nerd out on the whys please. You can pm me the details if you're not sure you want to put them in the thread.


Here I was looking for old articles and stumbled across this great wiki with graphs, citations, and all  



> Household income changes over the course of time, with income gains being substantially larger for the upper than for the lower percentiles.[14] All areas of the income strata saw their incomes rise since the late 1960s, especially during the late 1990s.[12] The overall increase in household income is largely the result of an increased percentage of households with more than one income earner. While households with just one income earner, most commonly the male, were the norm in the middle of the 20th century, 42% of all households and the vast majority of married couple households now have two or more income earners. With so many present day households having two income earners, a substantial increase in household income is easy to explain.[11]





> "The typical middle-class household in the United States is no longer a one-earner family, with one parent in the workforce and one at home full-time. Instead, the majority of families with small children now have both parents rising at dawn to commute to jobs so they can both pull in paychecks... Today the median income for a fully employed male is $41,670 per year (all numbers are inflation-adjusted to 2004 dollars)—nearly $800 less than his counterpart of a generation ago. The only real increase in wages for a family has come from the second paycheck earned by a working mother." - Elizabeth Warren, Harvard Magazine.[11]


Ah I love wikipedia. It's like a giant throbbing hive mind. 

Whom whom whom (that's what robotic throbbing sounds like)

Affluence in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whom Whom Whom :crazy: 

Also see:

Gini coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whom Whom Whom


----------



## Sanskrit (Feb 6, 2011)

My profession allows me to perform all duties, as I have also arts studio in my own apartment. But I am not too concerned with my current life about reproduction.
I have no preference over what the female counterpart might want to do with her time as long as it is something else than sitting on her ass watching soaps. I may make decent cash, but I do not intend to share it without seeing effort to contribute from the other party as well. Mostly because if I am already taking care of the household and children I am not going to add another child to the bunch in form of an adult.
Adults make expensive children to my experience.


----------



## Sanskrit (Feb 6, 2011)

Novalis said:


> I'm sorry to break it to you, but Webster was wrong. :bored:
> 
> EDIT: The idiots in Oxford, too. :wink:


So everyone but you? World English dictionary allows both ways to spell it. But most others go with Z. There's no wrong, just common way and then you. :wink:


----------



## Sanskrit (Feb 6, 2011)

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> Don't say I didn't want you when you're outnumbered, or the assailant is determined. Anyway, I never have been bribed for love. If someone tried, it didn't work; I could tell when someone had ulterior motives pretty quickly and I hated that.


Tazer gives you advantage even if the assailant is determined. And when you are outnumbered no handgun is going to help, you're swiss cheese anyway with only difference being that you wasted good money on a handgun that now will be carried by some goon to kill more people with.

If you are so determined to be safe wear a riot suit every time you step out, a handgun is not going to stop the bullets heading to your address.


----------



## Novalis (Feb 17, 2011)

Sanskrit said:


> So everyone but you? World English dictionary allows both ways to spell it. But most others go with Z. There's no wrong, just common way and then you. :wink:


It's a "P" thing. :wink:


----------



## vastcat (Feb 7, 2010)

I enjoy making money, but hate my job. I like cooking and baking and am good at it. I like having a clean place but not obsessed about it so I do all the major cleaning and hire housekeeping to come out once a month to do the dusting, mopping and cleaning the shower and windows and all the little things I can't be bothered with. Plus I'm good at finances so I'd want to be the one sending out the checks for bills and managing the savings accounts.

I've been pretty independent since a young age so I know how to do it all, I do the man chores such as yardwork, repairs, installations, car and computer maintenance. I cook, bake, clean, sew, shop and decorate. The only thing I can't do is afford to take a risk in my career. I'm smart, hardworking and have some marketable skills. However, being independent for so long means I've always had to focus on paying the bills first. That means I end up working for somebody else, being overworked and underpaid and going home mentally exhausted. 

The ideal situation would be for my spouse to make enough to support me while I manage the home and start working towards a real career or starting a business. Then once my new career is full swing she keeps her job as we become financially secure until we're ready to start a family. Once we're financially secure, she can do whatever she wants, stay home, work part time or continue her career.


----------



## AussieChick (Dec 27, 2010)

My estranged husband never allowed me to go back to work,after i had the children.Good little dutiful me toed the line and agreed to stay home,while he fed the family.If i had my time to do over again i'd never let him degrade me like that.It's this kind of patriarchal BS that led women to shout for their right to work and have a social life.Unfortunately i was one of those submissive,passive agressive types that these sorts of control freaks prey on.Next time i enter into another relationship,i will make it clear that we both equally share the household responsibilities,and both work if we wish.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

Sanskrit said:


> Tazer gives you advantage even if the assailant is determined. And when you are outnumbered no handgun is going to help, you're swiss cheese anyway with only difference being that you wasted good money on a handgun that now will be carried by some goon to kill more people with.
> 
> If you are so determined to be safe wear a riot suit every time you step out, a handgun is not going to stop the bullets heading to your address.


The chances of being mobbed and gunned down are pretty low. Your chances of surviving a robbery and holding onto your property are greatest if you resist with a gun. I used to think that guns were bad, but then I did the research. I understand that guns are tools and a good gun or a bad gun is that way because of how it is used. I therefore will have my gun and use it justly and for good. If I get mobbed, a gun gives me a better chance than a stunner which I can only use on one guy at once. Most criminals are cowards and will run when you open fire on them. And if I am shooting in serious self-defense, then I'm going to shooting to kill, center of mass, middle of chest, no mercy. Execute the collapsed and put up the biggest fight you can.


----------



## Hokahey (Oct 8, 2010)

I would definitely do these things, though I would have trouble dusting. I wouldn't care if my wife was the "bread-winner" though today's cost of living would make it hard. I do hold out on the "raise the children" part though. That is up to both parents.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

As I have stated earlier, I would raise the children if that was the optimal course of action to take. I would also push for their literacy and erudition.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

Hokahey said:


> I would definitely do these things, though I would have trouble dusting. I wouldn't care if my wife was the "bread-winner" though today's cost of living would make it hard. I do hold out on the "raise the children" part though. That is up to both parents.


Don't forget the sexy maid outfit, it's required.


----------



## Hokahey (Oct 8, 2010)

Fizz said:


> Don't forget the sexy maid outfit, it's required.


They have sexy maid outfits for men, would these have women thinking their men are sexy? I mean if it's sexy sure, I'll wear it. Haha...


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

Hokahey said:


> They have sexy maid outfits for men, would these have women thinking their men are sexy? I mean if it's sexy sure, I'll wear it. Haha...


If the man looks good, then I'd be down with it :laughing:


----------



## Sanskrit (Feb 6, 2011)

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> The chances of being mobbed and gunned down are pretty low. Your chances of surviving a robbery and holding onto your property are greatest if you resist with a gun. I used to think that guns were bad, but then I did the research. I understand that guns are tools and a good gun or a bad gun is that way because of how it is used. I therefore will have my gun and use it justly and for good. If I get mobbed, a gun gives me a better chance than a stunner which I can only use on one guy at once. Most criminals are cowards and will run when you open fire on them. And if I am shooting in serious self-defense, then I'm going to shooting to kill, center of mass, middle of chest, no mercy. Execute the collapsed and put up the biggest fight you can.


And go to jail for murder for the act of executing after disabling, you sure sound like a level headed and a healthy individual.
Even if someone points a gun at you doesn't mean you need to point a gun at them. You've clearly seen too many movies. In reality, the time you reach for the gun after you already see it necessary is enough to get you killed. People who are already willing to shoot someone are already set on the thought that you might be armed and that you will shoot them so they aim to shoot first.

Best way to prevent loss is to not carry cash, only plastic. Best way to prevent robbery is to not wear iPod and other stupid shit that can be pawned. And best way to dodge a bullet is to not have one shot at you. 
Rare cases of street muggings are done with guns, and even fewer with guns drawn. Usually you are just surrounded by 2-4 individuals with knives and firearms. And you are not going to benefit from a gun then unless you are some gunslinger with V.A.T.S skills.

I wish flash grenades would become legal. Now that's a tactical tool.


----------



## cam3llia (Mar 5, 2011)

I think it's very important that both genders contribute equally to the household eg.cook,clean as opposed to there being a bread-winner and someone who stays at home and does everything. 

Or one could always hire a maid, and a nanny to do everything while both partners work. ^^''


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

Sanskrit said:


> And go to jail for murder for the act of executing after disabling, you sure sound like a level headed and a healthy individual.
> Even if someone points a gun at you doesn't mean you need to point a gun at them. You've clearly seen too many movies. In reality, the time you reach for the gun after you already see it necessary is enough to get you killed. People who are already willing to shoot someone are already set on the thought that you might be armed and that you will shoot them so they aim to shoot first.
> 
> Best way to prevent loss is to not carry cash, only plastic. Best way to prevent robbery is to not wear iPod and other stupid shit that can be pawned. And best way to dodge a bullet is to not have one shot at you.
> ...


Accuracy is rarely good in the case of civiliants attempting to kill in a high pressure situation. I am going to be quite well trained by the time I take it up. Here's one good bit of advice I'd give you to avoid muggings: Don't go to where you are liable to be mugged and don't look like a target. My primary defensive concern is somebody breaking into my home or school. Neither will let me have a gun.


----------



## MissJordan (Dec 21, 2010)

I'm probably going to be the cleaner and the bread-winner and I'm also going to really put an effort in to raise the kids.

But as far as cooking goes... Not happening... Not unless I want to cause serious illness...


----------



## vastcat (Feb 7, 2010)

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> Accuracy is rarely good in the case of civiliants attempting to kill in a high pressure situation. I am going to be quite well trained by the time I take it up. Here's one good bit of advice I'd give you to avoid muggings: Don't go to where you are liable to be mugged and don't look like a target. My primary defensive concern is somebody breaking into my home or school. Neither will let me have a gun.


Where do you get all this irrational fear from? You are so afraid that you're already planning your response to an unlikely and imaginary scenario. If you're this scared now, imagine if it ever happened, there is no way you could execute these plans. Even if you did, you would be more likely to be harmed or killed trying to implement it.

When or if you get mugged it isn't going to be a 1 on 1 situation. There will be 3-4 people with concealed weapons, you won't know who has a gun, who has a knife and who is unarmed, even if you get the drop on them you're just as likely to kill an unarmed person because hesitation means the person with the gun has already shot you. And if you shoot the unarmed person you're likely to get murdered in jail by the rest of his gang.

I've been in that situation twice, once was in an affluent neighborhood and once in a crowded city during Mardi Gras surrounded by hundreds of people. You can't plan for it, the best thing you can do is minimize your loss, don't panic too much and be compliant, this is how most people react and what they're expecting, as soon as you start acting like Mr Toughguy they're going to escalate the violence until they gain compliance.


----------



## perennialurker (Oct 1, 2009)

Monte said:


> Yep, house sat for about a month while a mother's friend was in the hospital. It was over the summer, it was just me and three kids.
> 
> It isn't really that hard. Tiring? Sure. Hard? Lol.
> 
> ...


Good. Now try doing that with no pay and for the rest of your life while being held responsible for the development and wellness of the children. After that you can tell us how easy being a stay-at-home is.


----------



## curious0610 (Jun 27, 2010)

as a corollary, men.... what are your thoughts on being the sole provider and protector for your family then?


----------



## Compassionate Misanthrope (Mar 2, 2011)

curious0610 said:


> as a corollary, men.... what are your thoughts on being the sole provider and protector for your family then?


I have done so for a total of about 2 years out of a 10 year relationship. She's been a part time worker the last two years while going back to school. I wish I made enough money that she didn't have to work at all. 

So long as I have enough money to go out somewhere decent 1 or 2 times a week, to travel somewhere cool 1 or 2 times a year, and can eat, etc I don't really care about the rest of the money. I would rather that only one of us has to work because work sucks. Life isn't about money - it's about the stuff you do with money. Not working is one of those things lol. 

And of course I very much want her to not have to work when we start having kids. Daycare is no substitute for parenting. Hopefully after the first couple of years she'll have a stimulating career working from home as a freelance designer, but the first years of childhood are so important. I don't think that people should have kids if they're not at least willing to take a couple of years off when they're first born.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

vastcat said:


> Where do you get all this irrational fear from? You are so afraid that you're already planning your response to an unlikely and imaginary scenario. If you're this scared now, imagine if it ever happened, there is no way you could execute these plans. Even if you did, you would be more likely to be harmed or killed trying to implement it.
> 
> When or if you get mugged it isn't going to be a 1 on 1 situation. There will be 3-4 people with concealed weapons, you won't know who has a gun, who has a knife and who is unarmed, even if you get the drop on them you're just as likely to kill an unarmed person because hesitation means the person with the gun has already shot you. And if you shoot the unarmed person you're likely to get murdered in jail by the rest of his gang.
> 
> I've been in that situation twice, once was in an affluent neighborhood and once in a crowded city during Mardi Gras surrounded by hundreds of people. You can't plan for it, the best thing you can do is minimize your loss, don't panic too much and be compliant, this is how most people react and what they're expecting, as soon as you start acting like Mr Toughguy they're going to escalate the violence until they gain compliance.


I've been in similar situations too. I've also lived most of my life under a violent, unpredictable physically and emotionally abusive brother. I've gotten tired of being the victim. It's not out of fear that I seek a gun. I seek a gun because I am fed up with being a walking acceptable target.

SUMMARY: I'm tired of being the victim and I won't put up with this shit anymore!

EDIT: I realize that this makes me sound like a psychopathic loose cannon, so I am adding that I really am tired of being the victim of violence and abuse. I have a strong belief in rights and the liberty to protect yourself if you so choose.


----------



## vastcat (Feb 7, 2010)

It doesn't make you a psychopath at all. I can understand not wanting to be victimized, but with that mindset you go from being bullied to being the bully and creating more victims. Which I know is the opposite of what you intend and want to do. The worst thing about being abused is that mental and emotional abuse stays much longer than the actual pain itself. I know it is probably the hardest thing for you to do, but you really should start opening up and showing some weakness to your close friends or if that is too uncomfortable, maybe even strangers. Very few people are going to jump to exploit it like those who victimized you before. 

Try using self-depreciating humor and you'll find that when you display your weaknesses people tend to downplay them and have a better opinion of you. Last week I bought a bottle of YooHoo and I was starting to get frustrated when the lid wouldn't come off for me and I felt like people were noticing. Instead of getting angry or making excuses, I went to the skinniest girl who sat by me and asked her loudly if she could help me open the bottle since I'm obviously too weak. Everybody got a good laugh and shared their bad luck with opening bottles. I managed to get it open after some struggle but people came away with a higher opinion of me than if I would have acted like a tough guy and got angry.

I think it works with a lot of things.
If somebody asks you a question say. "You know this subject better than me, but if you ask my opinion...." They're going to think you're way smarter than if you give them the answer outright.
If you laugh at somebody's joke, tell them you wish you were that funny then bring the joke up at a later time in a different context they're going to think you're way funnier than if you created a whole new joke on your own.

The whole point is, your past events have trained you to see weakness as a flaw that will be exploited by the strong. With that mindset you're left with only too options, be the exploited, or the exploiter. Hopefully that rant made some sense and you can open up a little bit to some friends and strangers and stop being afraid of being a victim.


----------



## Listener (Jan 13, 2011)

Ideally, if I was ever in a relationship, I'd prefer we both be at home, regardless if one or both of us made the income.


----------



## Sanskrit (Feb 6, 2011)

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> I've been in similar situations too. I've also lived *most of my life under* a violent, unpredictable physically and emotionally *abusive brother*. I've gotten tired of being the victim. It's not out of fear that I seek a gun. *I seek a gun because I am fed up with being a walking acceptable target*.
> 
> SUMMARY: I'm tired of being the victim and I won't put up with this shit anymore!
> 
> EDIT: I realize that this makes me sound like a psychopathic loose cannon, so I am adding that I really am tired of being the victim of violence and abuse. I have a strong belief in rights and the liberty to protect yourself if you so choose.


So in a sense you got yourself a gun so you can kill your brother?


----------



## Monte (Feb 17, 2010)

perennialurker said:


> Good. Now try doing that with no pay and for the rest of your life while being held responsible for the development and wellness of the children. After that you can tell us how easy being a stay-at-home is.


 No because then it just becomes stupid in my opinion.

I could maybe understand until children are a certain age, but for the rest of your life? Completely idiotic. On top of that you're just crippling your family into leaning on you anytime something needs to get done. And, again, I can't feel bad for people who choose this path, THEY CHOSE IT. I'm sorry you wasted your life at home pleasing others instead of making yourself happy. Now, if that's what truly makes you happy, that's one thing, but don't whine about having dreams when you're the one who set yourself up for this.


----------



## LiteratureNerd (Nov 14, 2010)

Sanskrit said:


> Hell, my kitchen is sacred ground, if you do not know how to cook at least as well as Jamie Oliver, keep outta' my kitchen! Those instruments are sensitive and need care, love, skill and experience to be fully utilized. Cooking is more than just a few nice tricks, it is art!


I agree with you 100% - and I've been known to throw people out of my kitchen who try to help me. They mean well, but dammit, I am in a "zone," and I am the one putting the love and care into the food!

Although I love it when my SO and I cook together - we make a pretty good team. It's watching two skilled surgeons at work...except it smells better.


----------



## Sanskrit (Feb 6, 2011)

LiteratureNerd said:


> I agree with you 100% - and I've been known to throw people out of my kitchen who try to help me. They mean well, but dammit, I am in a "zone," and I am the one putting the love and care into the food!
> 
> Although I love it when my SO and I cook together - we make a pretty good team. It's watching two skilled surgeons at work...except it smells better.


And I hope there's less blood and guts involved.


----------



## LiteratureNerd (Nov 14, 2010)

Sanskrit said:


> And I hope there's less blood and guts involved.


Well, yeah...I'm a city girl and prefer my meat pre-killed.


----------



## Hokahey (Oct 8, 2010)

Scissors........Stuffing.........set the timer...........alright lets rinse, clean, and close up. Put in the oven for observation for a few hours. We just saved this dinner's life. Woot Go us!


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

Sanskrit said:


> So in a sense you got yourself a gun so you can kill your brother?












You just don't get it, do you?

If I killed him without extreme legal justification, it would be murder, which I do not want on my record. However, if I make it clear that I have taken a strong stance for my own rights, then the threat of force can be used to make him stop abusing me.


----------



## Jolie (Mar 26, 2011)

Mmm... I find a man doing housework to be very sexy...

This aside, I like cooking, I loathe cleaning and I think it's very important for children to be raised as equally as possible about both parents. I also tend to be passionate about my work and will most likely be devoting a lot of energy in the future to an academic career. I think I would appreciate a man who would be just a little bit less career-obsessed than I am. I pretty much agree with @bengalcat on this


----------



## Philosophaser Song Boy (Jan 16, 2011)

I am a Food Science major with an emphasis in Culinology... naturally, I would love to cook. Raising the kids? Suuuure! It has been a long time goal of mine to be a father one day, and my inner child would always be willing to have fun with the kids. Consider me a slacker when it comes to cleaning though! I would really REALLY have to muster up most of my idealism in order to clean and organize things. As for being a breadwinner... I honestly hate the concept of money, so I could care less who makes the most money in the house.


----------



## Philosophaser Song Boy (Jan 16, 2011)

Oh... I can see myself in this situation one day. In fact, I hope I am.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

I tend to be the one who is most comfortable in a nurturing, supportive role, and I think I would be completely satisfied being a homemaker. I think if I never have the opportunity to be in that position, I will feel like some part of me will remain permanently unfulfilled, and I will keep trying to make up for the lack by selecting live-in caregiving jobs.

Having said that, I acknowledge that there are some men who feel the way I do, and I would hate to deny any person the ability to feel fulfilled as a nurturer. I would love to have a husband who was just as nurturing as I am, because there are times when that is what I need. There is no reason to think that only women should ever be allowed. There is no fundamental difference, beyond hormonal variations, that would prevent a man from feeling the same urges.

I only wish that it were possible for both of us to stay home and take care of each other, without anyone having to run off to make money doing something else. If there were any way to make it work this way, I would choose this lifestyle.


----------



## nallyha (Apr 23, 2010)

those are the men who i'll fall in love with!


----------



## Alexz (Mar 2, 2011)

I'm quite homey, I love kids, I'm pretty good at household chores, and I cook fairly well. 

I don't care who is the breadwinner, I think societal norms are silly. :3


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

I do not want a a parent/child relationship or any relationship built on need or power imbalances. I think it's better to have equal partnership and better on the sex life if one person doesn't have to ask for an "allowance."


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

^ Exactly. My ideal system is whoever gets home first cooks dinner and does the chores they can. No point in letting things atrophy because of tradition.


----------



## Ezra (Mar 19, 2011)

To me, it's about eliminating gender roles, and playing your part. Cooking and cleaning anyone can do well. It's just bullshit stereotype that women are better. Sometimes in a house the man is the better cook, sometimes the woman. I don't particularly enjoy cooking that much, and neither does my girlfriend, but if we have children, we will be taking it in turns and raising our skill level. When kids reach 13ish, they'll learn just as my siblings and I learned. In terms of raising children - men and women have undeniably different focuses for this, but they should each play their part and spend time doing what they're good at. Sometimes the man does what in another family the woman does. Doesn't matter though. Partners who compete in one area and are both weak in another tend to be shitter as parents and give their kids neuroses. A balanced husband/wife/child(ren) dynamic always works best. Do what you're good at, talk about what you're weak at.

Shit, I will make a great parent.  I do relish the opportunity to see how good I am.

Any man or woman who does not subscribe to this view is, in my eyes, wrong. I know it sounds dogmatic, but what person in the right, progressive thinking way would seriously doubt this? I think it's a recipe for a great family.

ETA: Of course, stay-at-home husband/wife + breadwinner husband/wife.. that's a different matter, and a personal choice. And the breadwinner should expect to do less mothering/fathering than the SAH, but still play an active role at, say, weekends.


----------



## Hokahey (Oct 8, 2010)

Aren't the children suppose to learn how to clean when they are old enough, woot chop off one item from the list right there. :tongue:


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

What my father told me was that a man who can't cook or clean is single or soon to be. I haven't really picked up cooking yet though because im not obsessed with food that much.
Growing up my parents done a pretty good job sharing the load and even they don't know how they pulled off raising me when they both worked full time. They have always worked and both had their role in raising me. I'd find it odd if a man didn't help clean or cook or at least try to before being palyfully shvoed over because he sucks at cooking and the kids dont like what daddy cooks.
It's more of an oddity seeing families where both parents dont work.


----------



## angularvelocity (Jun 15, 2009)

curious0610 said:


> *What are your thoughts on this?
> *
> 1. I once met someone whose mentality towards marriage was: "I'll cook, clean and raise the children - I want my wife to be the primary bread-winner"
> 
> ...


Interesting!

I'm a male and I intend on cooking, cleaning and raising children! I also intend on working.. haha.

To me, I enjoy cooking a lot.. I enjoy gardening and yard work and I love to play with children. It's something I WANT to do... not something I feel compelled to do because I'm a Feeler male or because I feel I need to live up to some gender role. Those just happen to be things I like to do. 

I've never been a fan of one person being dedicated to jobs and the other being dedicated to the home. If that one person lost a job, the entire household would be at risk. If both people are working and someone loses their job, they at least have the other person's income to hold them over until a job is found for the newly unemployed spouse.

The idea of splitting chores and splitting the house stuff is most appealing to me. I don't believe it should be one person's responsibility. Call me modern and not traditional :X


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

curious0610 said:


> 2. I also met someone once who was extremely comfortable with household stuff - for example, he was very "motherly" - it's hard to explain. His view towards marriage was a desire for equality and shared tasks, but he was way better than I was with managing his house, making meals, and all the traditionally female roles of the marriage. Given his skills, it seemed like a natural balance he sought was someone who "wore the pants" and was assertive[/B]


I've found I'm a strange mix of late. This scenario most closely describes me post-divorce as a single dad except for the last sentence. I'm definitely the "one who wears the pants" in terms of overall personality.

During my marriage, I let my ex run the house - she's good at it, super organized, and in fact is one of those who can't sleep unless she knows everything's in its place. Lovely. Trouble was I was a bit extreme and let her do EVERYTHING, and was detached from the details and she started to feel resentful. 

I'm a single dad and so of necessity I cook (which I like, especially given that it saves money and I like to live healthily), I clean (well . . . some - I am an NTP after all!), and I raise my son. I've taught myself to do arts and crafts projects with him, to stay on top of what's going on at his school, and to generally look after him minute to minute, day to day. 

I said at the get-go with my girlfriend that I was looking for someone who would be an equal partner in a relationship, in every sense of the word, and not some accessory or subordinate. She likes to cook too and is a good mom to her kids, and so it actually does work that way although she likes to ultimately be able as a woman to rely upon my strength as her guy. 

There's no right answer to this - everybody's got to operate within their comfort level, and to find a partner for whom the situation is also acceptable. My sister wears the pants in her household and at times completely emasculates my bro-in-law - it makes me cringe and I'd never put up with it - but they genuinely love each other and accept their roles and work out their differences. It works for them.


----------



## Luke (Oct 17, 2010)

curious0610 said:


> *What are your thoughts on this?
> *
> 1. I once met someone whose mentality towards marriage was: "I'll cook, clean and raise the children - I want my wife to be the primary bread-winner"
> 
> ...


I wouldn't enjoy it, because I have ambitions beyond family life. But I don't believe in gender roles, so if a guy enjoyed these activities I see no reason for why he shouldn't do them. I have been in a relationship where I cooked, cleaned and was the bread winner, while she sat around and did nothing. I was being taken advantage of, obviously.


----------



## twoofthree (Aug 6, 2011)

curious0610 said:


> *What are your thoughts on this?
> *
> 1. I once met someone whose mentality towards marriage was: "I'll cook, clean and raise the children - I want my wife to be the primary bread-winner"
> 
> ...


I don't agree with gender roles for the sake of gender roles.

I think people should be allowed to play to their strengths.
If you know that you can do a good job of managing the household stuff - a better job than your partner - then you should be allowed to do it. 

My parents shared responsibility for raising us.
My father cooked sometimes and helped to look after my siblings and I. He prepared out lunch for school, took us to school, went to the school meetings etc.


----------



## killerB (Jan 14, 2010)

Marriage is a two way street. I would find it ideal for each person to have some time at home with the kids and cooking and cleaning, and also some time in the work force. I think it is important that each person has a viable career, because going cold turkey into the work force is bat shit crazy! I also find it very, very important for each parent to have some rearing time with their children. It teaches children various ways of doing things and allows them to realize that not both parents don't do things the same way but love them the same.

When our kids were smaller, my wife worked all the overtime to provide for us. I only worked part time, just enough to carry insurance for our children and me, as my wife could not carry insurance on us due to the lack of gay marriage in my state. I did the grocery shopping and cleaning, etc.(she still pitched in) Now, that the kids are teens, she is going to college, and I am working the overtime to provide for us all. She does the grocery shopping and cleaning, and I pitch in. The kids have really benefited form her being home and are pretty well rounded individuals. It has worked out great for us.

Even though I would not have a problem if my Mate stayed home and took care of our kids and I provided completely, I would not feel comfortable knowing the other parent to my kids had no work experience at all. What if some thing happened to me and she could not provide for them as she had no work history? Life insurance can't do it all.


----------



## Mendi the ISFJ (Jul 28, 2011)

idk, i think that youd really have to trust him to know how to do those things, that would make me anxious.


----------



## Luke (Oct 17, 2010)

Mendi the ISFJ said:


> idk, i think that youd really have to trust him to know how to do those things, that would make me anxious.


Lol. Some guys aren't completely domestically incompetent :wink:


----------



## Mendi the ISFJ (Jul 28, 2011)

Luke said:


> Lol. Some guys aren't completely domestically incompetent :wink:


maybe not, but i dont think that growing up as many are taught to care for children or domestic duties at the length that girls are. Not to sound stereotypical for my type... but i prefer the traditional role or both handling everything together.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Mendi the ISFJ said:


> idk, i think that youd really have to trust him to know how to do those things, that would make me anxious.


Said in true SJ fashion!


----------



## Luke (Oct 17, 2010)

Mendi the ISFJ said:


> maybe not, but i dont think that growing up as many are taught to care for children or domestic duties at the length that girls are. Not to sound stereotypical for my type... but i prefer the traditional role or both handling everything together.


I disagree. I think that's a stereotype. Many men are great with kids and love to keep a clean house and many women are poor at both those duties. I think it annoys me more than most people because I work in a female dominated industry and many of them have this perception that women are "naturally better" at this kind of work. I think perceptions like that are largely produced through confirmation bias where they ignore it when a man is good at the job or a women is poor at it, but take notice when a man struggles and a female is good at it.


----------



## Mendi the ISFJ (Jul 28, 2011)

Luke said:


> I disagree. I think that's a stereotype. Many men are great with kids and love to keep a clean house and many women are poor at both those duties. I think it annoys me more than most people because I work in a female dominated industry and many of them have this perception that women are "naturally better" at this kind of work. I think perceptions like that are largely produced through confirmation bias where they ignore it when a man is good at the job or a women is poor at it, but take notice when a man struggles and a female is good at it.


 I am not saying that there arent women who are bad at it, but as a child did your mother have you change the diapers of your siblings or help cook dinner, did you have dolls that you would dress and feed? Im just saying that there is conditioning from very young for girls to fill this role.


----------



## Luke (Oct 17, 2010)

Mendi the ISFJ said:


> I am not saying that there arent women who are bad at it, but as a child did your mother have you change the diapers of your siblings or help cook dinner, did you have dolls that you would dress and feed? Im just saying that there is conditioning from very young for girls to fill this role.


Many men do help take care of their siblings and help cook dinner. I would be careful of using social conditioning to justify stereotypes because similar arguments can be used to say that women are not suitable for leadership roles, which is obviously false.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Luke said:


> I disagree. I think that's a stereotype. Many men are great with kids and love to keep a clean house and many women are poor at both those duties. I think it annoys me more than most people because I work in a female dominated industry and many of them have this perception that women are "naturally better" at this kind of work. I think perceptions like that are largely produced through confirmation bias where they ignore it when a man is good at the job or a women is poor at it, but take notice when a man struggles and a female is good at it.


I'm going to dispute this here. The SJ's of the world are dominated by women. I want to say that ESFJ's are by themselves something like 30% of the population (at least in the US), and there's something like a 2:1 women:men ratio for that type. The ESFJ is the stereotypical June Cleaver homemaker/PTA/Cub Scout pack/church volunteer mom - I say that with the utmost respect as my mom was one. 

While there's certainly some social reinforcement of these gender roles, I also think that the gender roles are far more biological than we sometimes seem to think. Women do after all biologically bear and deliver children, and have some demonstrable temperamental advantages over men in making a home environment for children. 

Before anyone flips, we're talking about tendencies here. My girlfriend is an INFP and is lousy at uncluttering her house. It drives me nuts and I'm a freaking NTP and don't exactly live in a Japanese garden!


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Luke said:


> Many men do help take care of their siblings and help cook dinner. I would be careful of using social conditioning to justify stereotypes because similar arguments can be used to say that women are not suitable for leadership roles, which is obviously false.


And I would be careful if I were you about assuming that social roles are all the result of some oppression or gender discrimination. Make sure to keep the ideology out of this.


----------



## Luke (Oct 17, 2010)

redmanXNTP said:


> And I would be careful if I were you about assuming that social roles are all the result of some oppression or gender discrimination. Make sure to keep the ideology out of this.


I would say if a social role is placed on a group in the belief that they are generally inferior at a task, then that, in all but special circumstances, is oppressive. This problem is easily solved by viewing people as individuals, rather than as genders.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Luke said:


> I would say if a social role is placed on a group in the belief that they are generally inferior at a task, then that, in all but special circumstances, is oppressive. This problem is easily solved by viewing people as individuals, rather than as genders.


I view people as both individuals with a gender. Now what?


----------



## Luke (Oct 17, 2010)

redmanXNTP said:


> I view people as both individuals with a gender. Now what?


I would say you should be careful in any generalizations you make based on gender. There are overlaps in human behavior, for example, cross culturally men tend to be more physically aggressive, but there is an overlap between genders in that many women are physically aggressive and many men are complete pacifists. So if you use correlations like that to make sweeping generalizations about how members of a gender behave, then you are really misrepresenting the facts.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Luke said:


> I would say you should be careful in any generalizations you make based on gender. There are overlaps in human behavior, for example, cross culturally men tend to be more physically aggressive, but there is an overlap between genders in that many women are physically aggressive and many men are complete pacifists. So if you use correlations like that to make sweeping generalizations about how members of a gender behave, then you are really misrepresenting the facts.


I'm careful when making any generalization about people. 

Of course, short of citing each of 8 billion or so examples, how else are we to talk about them other than to use generalizations?


----------



## Einstein (Aug 10, 2011)

curious0610 said:


> Men who cook, clean and raise the children


Wouldn't you want to clean them before you cook them?


----------



## Luke (Oct 17, 2010)

redmanXNTP said:


> I'm careful when making any generalization about people.
> 
> Of course, short of citing each of 8 billion or so examples, how else are we to talk about them other than to use generalizations?


We shouldn't resort to generalizations just because they are convenient, especially when it is perfectly simple and more efficient to judge individuals on their merits.


----------



## Aedesia (Nov 17, 2011)

I'm not really one for gender roles, but I'm not really one for setting the expectation of 'I'll be the one making all the money and you're the one that gets to stay at home looking after the kids.' Ideally, I want equal relationship, with both pursuing our career goals and taking care of household things but also being flexible in regards to responsibilities. 

However, it would be nice to have a husband/boyfriend willing to give up his career to look after the kids, because I wouldn't. I want to pursue my career, I don't want to be a stay at home parent. Ever.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Luke said:


> We shouldn't resort to generalizations just because they are convenient, especially when it is perfectly simple and more efficient to judge individuals on their merits.


Jesus Christ, you certainly do like to lecture and moralize, don't you. 

Please kindly point out the individual that we're discussing and I'll be more than happy to discuss them. Until then, we generalize.


----------



## curious0610 (Jun 27, 2010)

haha hi all. thanks for the good discussion. 

I'm looking back on this thread and i think i was definitely going through a phase in my life. during that time i was in heavy self-preservation mode and VERY VERY VERY against ANYBODY, even acquaintances/colleagues/friends, who demanded more from me and wanted me to take care of them, when i was personally struggling through so many things and trying to keep MYSELF preserved and through some hard times. I guess i was just tired of always being the one giving, and so when it came to significant others: i disliked the idea of somebody who wanted to just stay home and take advantage of my ambitions, and let ME do all the bread-winning work while they just stayed at home, and in general whenever I got a vibe from somebody that they weren't willing to do hard work outside the home to contribute to a happy home life, I felt turned off by it. I just felt really turned off by seeing lack of ambition or hard work outside the relationship. I was in a somewhat unhealthy pessimistic reclusive mode during the time i wrote this thread. I was also working a LOT in a stressful place, in a financially difficult time of my life, so I felt a bit resentful at the idea of me having to be stressed out, laboring outside, solely on my own.

my thoughts on this have changed a lot though. mainly because of someone that came along and changed my thoughts on this. we both like to cook, and actually i believe he cooks better than I do LOL. It's more half/half... maybe even 60/40, with him doing more cooking. It's a gesture of appreciation and I feel really touched. When it comes to most things, cleaning... cooking... work... rent... etc. it's pretty much equal. With things leaning to 60/40 depending on our schedules, whoever is more busy. Im surprised things worked out this way, because in theory I imagined things to be different, but Im finding this "equal balance" things works well, or maybe it's just because an amazing person came along in my life that made this possible? who knows haha but yes, continue to discuss please..


----------



## braverip (Sep 10, 2011)

Weeeellll, the guy I love comes from a culture with very strict gender roles, mainly due to religion. Technically, women have far more rights in that country than people would believe, but most of the country is heavily religious. Still, while this is a long shot, if he and I were able to be together, he'd help out, because while there are gender roles, it's not like the men never do anything. I'd probably do a lot of the cooking, cleaning, etc. but he wouldn't leave me to do it all by myself. Basically, an ideal relationship for me, whether it's with him or someone else, would be one of equality. I wouldn't want either of us to be overwhelmed.


----------



## Fleetfoot (May 9, 2011)

Just as long as my partner isn't sitting on their ass all day, I really don't care what they do.


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

Ya gotta be able to do everything *and* handle business, specialization is for insects dawg
-Robert Heinlein


----------



## Luke (Oct 17, 2010)

redmanXNTP said:


> Jesus Christ, you certainly do like to lecture and moralize, don't you.
> 
> Please kindly point out the individual that we're discussing and I'll be more than happy to discuss them. Until then, we generalize.


Wow. That was an immature comment. Don't discuss things with me if you don't want to hear my opinion.


----------



## tissa (Nov 22, 2011)

I would adore my husband for cooking, cleaning and being a great dad.
I am against extremes tho and I would not want him to do JUST that. I am gonna work and I want my husband to work too. If he can't coz of medical issues it is a totally different thing and i would be greatful that he is still doing his best to be helpful and take on other responsibilities.
Other than that i think 50/50 is the best


----------



## Proteus (Mar 5, 2010)

A friend of mine lost his job a few years ago and shortly after his wife became pregnant. She already had a good job so they decided he would stay home and take care of their daughter for a few years then go back to school. Any income they would have earned from him trying to get a new job would all have gone to daycare and such, not to mention the logistical struggles that can often pop up. Now he stays home with their kid during the day and is planning to start taking classes again next year. It wasn't how the envisioned their situation, but it works for them and what's best for their family. I think as long as a family's needs are being met adequately it doesn't matter who does what.


----------



## jinjaNinja (Dec 31, 2012)

I suck at all things cooking, cleaning and kids, so a man who's good at those things would be Godsend. If having the woman stay home is better for the children, should I just cook crappy food, be miserable cleaning, and give my kids the impatient and non-feely parent as their primary caretaker?

Men who cook and clean are downright sexy in my book. If I get a guy who prefers bread-winning, we can compromise and rotate.


----------



## Arbite (Dec 26, 2010)

Honestly, the idea of being a stay at home dad is kind of appealing to me.


----------



## Dragearen (Feb 2, 2012)

It's appealing to me as well. I know some stay-at-home dads, my own is one (actually, both my parents work at home, so technically they both are). I don't see why it would be an issue at all.


----------



## Enigma Daddy (Oct 23, 2012)

I don't see it as a problem, in fact I welcome it as it goes against what society dictates as the norm. Personally speaking though, I would not like to stay at home and have my SO be the sole breadwinner, simply because I have an entrepreneurial spirit and enjoy working and learning new things. Plus I'd need a break now and again

At the moment I have my kids 3/4 days a week, work the other days and have always done cooking, ironing, cleaning etc.


----------



## Death Persuades (Feb 17, 2012)

I'm fine with either person being the provider. If she wants me to stay at home, I will, and if she wants to stay at home, I'll work.


----------



## The King Of Dreams (Aug 18, 2010)

L'Empereur said:


> I would have no problem with cooking, cleaning and taking care of my own children. I would prefer to be the breadwinner as well.


This....

I believe that these things are a shared responsibility among a husband and wife. Now, if I were married I would prefer that my wife didn't have to work. Then she could do her hobbies. Even if she did housework, I'd still help around the house. Raising children isn't a "woman's job" and so a father should be a FATHER. Both parents teach the kids. We are now in a society where many husbands are stepping up and being co-parents without being separated or divorced. I recall a Tide commercial where a husband and wife are folding laundry together..... A nice way to spend time with one another, wouldn't you say?

As a man though (now don't attack me for this) he should be the bread winner. It's his duty as a man to do so. Now if the wife wants to work, great. Even if she makes a TON of money, much more than the man, the man should still provide responsibly for the household they best way he possibly can. But that doesn't mean he shirks the responsibility of providing physically, spiritually, mentally and emotionally for his kids. He should also be a teacher within the home as well. Maybe washing dishes, ironing and some cooking.
So that was my two cents.


----------



## hela (Feb 12, 2012)

I couldn't care less how people negotiate the responsibilities in their relationships. If being a stay-at-home dad works for you, bully for you! If being a housewife works for you, good for you!

This is a dumb post.


----------



## pageofadiary (Jan 3, 2011)

One word...YUM.


----------



## Shinji Mimura (Aug 1, 2012)

A good majority of the women I meet don't know how to cook anything without a microwave, and are not keen on cleaning anything besides the floor of their bedroom, so I've taken it upon myself to learn how to cook and how to clean and to find some enjoyment in both tasks should I find a woman who lacks one or the either. Likewise, should I find a woman who already enjoys both, I have no problem, thus, not doing either.

Truly, I'd prefer that we share and do both duties, preferably simultaneously, but I've found that I expand my pool of women interested in me by possessing the duality: I can cook and clean if needed, or...not at all lol.

As for "raise the kids", assuming I'm not a single father in my future, this is definitely a double duty. But if my wife was, like, a surgeon, and worked long hours and on-call, and I had something more manageable, I'd totally be the one to raise the kids predominantly. I have zero problems with having a sugar momma ;D


----------



## goodgracesbadinfluence (Feb 28, 2011)

I know guys like that and good for them! They just need to make sure their future spouse is on the same page. Some women expect, even like/want the housewife role. Which is fine, as long as both people are on the same page. 

I'm not married, but I am not against the idea of being the breadwinner. I like "strict equality", so I'd prefer my husband and I work the same amount of hours (roughly) and do the same amount of household chores. But that's not always feasible. As long as I'm not expected to come home from a long day at work and cook dinner AND clean the house, I'm happy. 

I don't plan on having children, so for me personally that's a non-issue.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

I knew someone whose father was a SAHD while he was working on his Ph.D in counseling. His wife had a lucrative position as a doctor at a local hospital. When the children were in school and the husband had his Ph.D., he worked from about 10 am until 2 pm, and then again in the evenings after his wife got home from work. It definitely worked for the family, and the children are all healthy and well-adjusted.


----------



## Runvardh (May 17, 2011)

I'm open, especially if I get to run the kids ragged so that they'll take their afternoon naps and give me time to write. ^_^


----------



## thisisme (Apr 11, 2010)

I don't care a bit about gender roles and think its awesome if one of the parents can stay home and whoever is best suited for it should do it IMO. 

Im an sx and I tend to view my partner and myself as a merged unit. My money is our money and vice versa. I don't care who's making it... It's for us and our family.


----------

