Akward Situation...

duchy

FBaby wrote: »

That's a very interesting view as it poll apart from my experience speaking with my friends and colleagues both females and males which is that is is women who are the drivers in the dynamics of the family and them who want to stay home/work part-time. Most of the men colleagues I have spoken to would prefer their wives to work full-time to so they could have a higher income with the kids going to nursery/clubs, but their wives don't want to and they accept it.

Among all my female friends (almost all mothers), only the equivalent of about 20% work full-time and out of these, all but a couple are foreigners! I can't think of any who has considered going back to work full-time after their children started secondary school.

Now I am fully conscious that there might a a social class influence on this, but seems a cultural thing too as mothers working full-time seems much more a rarity in this country than in others I lived in.

The bit highlighted certainly goes against my experience.
Perhaps some of it is economic. With such high divorce rates most women with teenage children go back to work/increase to fulltime out of economic reality if they are the sole parent.

A man talking on a SAHM role is looked at sideways in many cases even when there are sound economic reasons for doing so (woman is the higher earner for example or as I've found at my local uni the man is the SAH as Mum is an academic so works university college terms only and gets decent sabbatical time every few years to engage in research).

I remember my son's nursery going down with chicken pox - every child had spots and they closed. My son had it very mildly. I went back to work (I job shared so worked 3 days most weeks) as I had no leave left and my husband had leave available and the reaction at work was "Your son is sick and you've left him with his FATHER ?????" I was amazed- my son wasn't sick (just contagious) and wasn't clingy so either of us were capable of caring for him so there was no good reason why it had to be Mum who stayed off with him (and a sound reason not to as i wouldn't get paid but his Dad would). It made me realize we still follow some pretty daft social conventions even when commonsense would indicate a less gendered approach.

Many people assumed I worked part-time when our son was small because I wanted to be a SAH at least part of the time and it was a compromise as my then husband did want me to work and improve our lifestyle- however the reality was with the cost of childcare we were better off nett with me working 3 days a week rather than full-time so my experience sometimes people make assumptions as to reasons (I never bothered explaining to the militantly SAHers my reasons -wasn't any of their business)

Lily-Rose_3

VestanPance wrote: »

He's been blunt, but he's just pointed out that most of what you've posted is gibberish, with your constant terrible attempts to twist "facts" to back up your claims.

'Blunt' my @rse! He has been downright rude and insulting and is continually mocking people who have opposing views, and has been particularly rude to 'quidsy.' Basically, he resorts to personal insults when he is losing the argument.

You sound a lot like him actually.

poet123

duchy wrote: »

Do they ....or is it more a couple would prefer their child to be cared for at home and we're still gender bound enough that the mother is the "obvious" choice .

No-one bats an eyelid if a woman decides to not return after Mat leave and stay home but if a man gives up his job to become the fulltime carer whilst his wife works plenty of people would still find that situation worthy of commenting on and even disapprove.

Most young men may feel they cannot do it- but the reality is the only thing stopping them is their desire to conform to society's expectations and their own social conditioning.

We can all only go off personal experiences but I agree with Fbaby, none of my friends wanted to work full time after having children. I certainly didn't. Most didn't go back at all until their children were of school age and then they went back part time. I think that unless there is a real financial imperative it is the best of all worlds.

I think that there are no issues with whoever is the highest earner being the one who returns to work, but it is a family decision.

PenguinJim

Lily-Rose wrote: »

Your comments are getting more rude and insulting with each passing moment. And so far, I have not seen you post any more 'proof' of your claims than quidsy or person-one or anyone else opposing the views.

Most of the words in my posts are black, but some of them are blue. If you move your mouse cursor over the blue words and click the left mouse button, that should open a "link" to the statistics I have posted.

Do you have user "quidsy" on some sort of 'ignore'? Her opinion of heartbreak_star's partner, quickly shown to be wrong:

quidsy wrote: »

I'm not talking about him protecting the little women I'm talking about the concept that you probably (although he may do it all himself) do most of the housework, cook, do the shopping, buy gifts from both of you are christmas & birthdays etc & the myriad other things that women do to make life more comfortable that men enjoy but would never bother to do themselves. Not to mention he can have sex whenever you agree. Pretty much all his needs catered for right? Without you he would prolly have to do much more for himself.

Is there a more fitting word than "lazy" to summarise that description? Oddly, even though this was a sexist generalisation used to attack an individual man, she later went on to say

quidsy wrote: »

The message I am getting (not just from you btw) is that as a women I should not say anything that could even remotely offend a man even when talking about gender statistics & not as a personal attack on any individual man, in any way shape or form.

As for "downright rude and insulting", I am very nice to nice people. However, quidsy is the senior member here and I've followed her lead. Or did you miss this:

quidsy wrote: »

I live in England, I can tell a chav when I see one

quidsy wrote: »

I haven't stopped anyones opinion but I am able to say I disagree. Do you know how the internet works?

quidsy wrote: »

nah, I'm sure everyoine is in a perfect gender balanced relationship where their "parter" does everything equally. Do you know any women,?

quidsy wrote: »

Ahh bless, you're trying to be b1thcy.

Other than her attack on heartbreak_star's OH, I feel the rudest is this one, aimed at me, even though I mentioned I'm an immigrant a few pages ago:

quidsy wrote: »

As for the rest of your rant on my nationality & spelling, are we about to be given another "anti immigrant" blather? There was one earlier about why men don't want to get married due to all those pesky foreigners.

Then followed without a trace of irony with:

quidsy wrote: »

If you think attempting to paint me a racists, making personal comments & basically putting words in my mouth as blunt then I have nothing further to add to you either.

But generally, she's posted many things in this thread which I interpret as sexist. Maybe she's right, and I have a "comprehension" problem (to be fair, her posts are quite challenging to read). But look at what she's written:

quidsy wrote: »

Men in general have a different awareness on what is necessary to running a household which usually means women pickng up the slack or being called "naggers" for asking them to contribute.

quidsy wrote: »

Many women are also too scared to "upset" their partner (urgh) by raising the issue or get accused of being a nag when they do so they "compromise" by taking it on in detriment to their health & well being.

This is not outdated, this is an actual, real life fact.

quidsy wrote: »

So no, not tradition or old fashioned but the fact still remains that in relationships, old & new, many men "allow" women to bear the brunt of the hh running & consider it a "favour" to do their part.

quidsy wrote: »

The sheer lack of education on what is still a real issue is troublesome, especially in women...

quidsy wrote: »

Alot of girls just aren't interested in computors & if you have kids, you will know that you can't force them to like or do something they don't want to, the odd few will pop up but as already mentioned, this is a predominantly male, geeky environ for a reason, mostly becuase boys are interested in techie crap more. That is nature imo.

I'm not quoting these as an attack on quidsy, but as a demonstration on how someone can claim they're not sexist or locked into a gender-biased mindset while making statements that some might interpret as being that way. My personal feeling on these kinds of posts is that they reinforce stereotypes and prejudice, and while there's strong momentum towards housework equality, pushing the ideas of women being scared and ill-educated on the issue and men being lazy actually slows its progress, rather than hastening it.

When teaching, I find that there's a genuine benefit to taking what someone has said or written, and showing them how others may interpret it in different ways. In quoting quidsy's comments, I'd hoped to show how she might be perceived differently to her own self-image. By educating her on how hurtful and damaging her comments can be, hopefully she will consider her comments and generally language in future, and we will be one step closer to inequality with her on our side.

FBaby

A man talking on a SAHM role is looked at sideways in many cases even when there are sound economic reasons for doing so (woman is the higher earner for example or as I've found at my local uni the man is the SAH as Mum is an academic so works university college terms only and gets decent sabbatical time every few years to engage in research).

He might be looking sideway, but if it is what he wants to do and his wife agrees, who is stopping him? I fail to believe that a man who is very keen on this arrangement, who would gain from it financially is letting the supposed view of society (because many would actually say good on him) that over a family decision that suits them all.

Lily-Rose_3

Despite you - Penguin Jim - trying to discredit quidsy by dragging up every last bit of lame 'evidence' you can to 'prove' that she is the one who has been rude, (post 425; ) YOU are the one that had your post (no 414 on this thread) edited to death by the MSE forum team.

And the reasons: 'personal abuse and language.' :rotfl:

Here is that very post (414.)

Nuff said. :cool:

PenguinJim wrote: »

It wasn't long ago that that was true, but it's surely not that common any more. As those older people die off hopefully they will take their sexism with them.

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

I've generally found the UK to be ahead of other countries in terms of equal rights. I type properly on forums as a simple courtesy to those reading. That it helps avoid making me look ill-educated is coincidental. I'm an immigrant myself, and am wholeheartedly in favour of more of a "one world" planet.

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

The majority of women here have weighed in on the subject without ridiculous sexism. You of course have the right to think that the difference in household work done is due to the men. I've quoted your post where you assumed wrongly that a man was being lazy. I have the right to think that's wrong, and probably sexist.

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

Last edited by MSE ForumTeam3; Yesterday at 12:08 PM. Reason: Personal abuse / Language

Carmina-Piranha_2

Person_one wrote: »

See, does that not sound a bit like you're blaming the OP for the fact that her partner doesn't pull his weight? Its not her responsibility to train him or supervise him, is it?

No, but it is up to her what she will put up with. She is responsible for her own life.

He lived on his own, so surely he managed to take his own bins out before OP moved in?

I am not blaming 'weak women' for over-mothering men, in case that's what it sounds like. In some of the couples I know that is the case, but I appreciate that's just anecdotal.

I'd have expected that nowadays with more pupils going on to university that more people will have lived on their own or in a shared house before they move in with their partner, and that everyone would know what's needed to run a household. In general, my male friends can do everything required because they fended for themselves before moving in with a girlfriend or boyfriend.

It's not just women who are clean freaks and men who are lazy either. Some people don't pull their weight, and while it's not up to their partners to 'train them' surely you would though? rather than do everything yourself. The gender inequality perhaps arose during a time when the majority of households didn't have both partners working full time. It doesn't take all day to keep house, so a stay at home mother would have free time for herself during the day, so I imagine that's where the stereotype of the wife fetching and carrying for her husband during the evening came from, while he was having the resting time that she'd already had for herself while he was at work.

If my partner whether male or female didn't pull their weight around the house (taking working hours into account) then I just could not be happy in that relationship. I wouldn't feel loved or respected. I wouldn't be able to happily make love with somebody who wanted me to skivvy and do their share of the chores. I wouldn't be able to look at them with love, or feel that they were worth marrying if they wanted me to do their share while they had free time that they simply did not think I should have for myself.

bloolagoon

I don't think genders are equal but I'm not sure I would want them to be. In areas I do want equality, for example parenting and careers. Then I want to be treat unequal when it suits me such as walking the dog in the rain, cleaning the guttering, carrying heavy bags. I'm very quick on a rainy cold evening to play the I'm a woman would you be a strong man and take mutts out whilst I iron your shirts.

So I guess I add to the unequal existence, I'm also a part time and it suits me to do more housework and fit into that role of doing more.

quidsy

Ignore him lily rose, he's quoting posts out of contect & not including the post it was replying to &, when you have an agenda it's not much of aleap to "find" meanings that do not exist. but I'm over this poster so save your breath.