Girlfriend Wants to Get Married, Dilemma

[Cortes]

[quote]atypical1 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Absolutely agree. In fact, I cannot think of any job that is more valuable to society on the whole than that of a mother raising her own kids.

I also can appreciate the fact that it is NOT easy. In my family, we are blessed with the ability to be able to have my wife stay at home and take care of our boys most of the time. I work (constantly), she stays home and takes care of our three year old and three month old. [/quote]

I would argue that a father raising his kids is equally as important.
[/quote]

I said that. Like three times.

I would also argue that you working constantly is taking away an important part of the equation.

Since we own our own business, I am still able to get away quite a bit and make more time for my family than many men are. I work a lot, but anyone who has followed my posts here in any small measure could tell you that I am nothing if not balanced. And again, I agree. I sure hope you did not get from my post some sort of trivialization of the role of the father during the formative years of a child’s life. Both parents are necessary.

I was talking more about SAHMs as opposed to day care/nanny/babysitter surrogates.

My mom stayed at home and my father was constantly deployed and both he and I missed out on a lot because of that. It’s something that he regrets to this day.

My wife and I are lucky in that we both work but I have enough flexibility in my job to be able to devote a lot of time with my son (I do often do work at night after he’s gone to bed though). He’s in preschool during the day (it’s a small Christian school) which is great because he gets to play with his peers and learn all of the socialization skills that he needs.

TL:DR - Both parents are necessary and it’s not enough to simply have one stay at home and the other be absent.

james

Glad we agree

[therajraj]

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:
Maybe this needs to be said. Low divorce rates doesn’t mean more happy marriages.[/quote]

Go read what I wrote on the last page. Women’s expectations and standards of men have gone through the roof.

If they’re unhappy, its largely because expectations have been warped.[/quote]

I think men’s expectations and standards for women have gone through the roof too. And especially in the bedroom.

Really, both sides are causing problems.

Without being too facetious, I think the internet is in part to blame. Marriage has become more and more about “choice” over time, rather than necessity, and people are making choices based on information that’s subject to very heavy selection biases.

But because of that, I wouldn’t be surprised if the happy marriages today are actually much happier than the happy marriages of yesteryear.[/quote]

And I disagree completely with men’s expectations going through the roof, in fact I see men settle constantly. Why do you think that.? I would say men’s expectations have FALLEN.

With all these fat chicks everywhere the amount of competition for thin women has increased dramatically. With all the suitors thin women have lined around the block for them, why should she stay with you over the rest?

[Cortes]

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]kpsnap wrote:
folks who don’t like the idea of birth control and abortion but are all about cutting the social programs that help underprivileged children.[/quote]

Who is against birth control and helping kids in bad situations?[/quote]

This is how she argues. She throws a little jabs at unnamed “folks” then either won’t stick around to defend her claims or whines about the vindictive treatment those with opposing opinions have.

She never sticks around a PWI argument past about this point.

[atypical1]

[quote]Cortes wrote:
I said that. Like three times.
[/quote]

Sorry that I missed that in the 16 pages of posts. I was commenting specifically on the post that I quoted and the bit about how your wife stays at home and you are “constantly” working. I took “constantly” to mean that you didn’t spend too much time at home.

I haven’t read every word in every post but I get the feeling from a few of you that you’re in favor of the new model of traditional families where the wife stays home and the husband works. I’m saying that I think that is a failure of a model.

james

[Cortes]

[quote]atypical1 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:
I said that. Like three times.
[/quote]

Sorry that I missed that in the 16 pages of posts. I was commenting specifically on the post that I quoted and the bit about how your wife stays at home and you are “constantly” working. I took “constantly” to mean that you didn’t spend too much time at home.

I haven’t read every word in every post but I get the feeling from a few of you that you’re in favor of the new model of traditional families where the wife stays home and the husband works. I’m saying that I think that is a failure of a model.

james
[/quote]

Why?

[Derek542]

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]atypical1 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:
I said that. Like three times.
[/quote]

Sorry that I missed that in the 16 pages of posts. I was commenting specifically on the post that I quoted and the bit about how your wife stays at home and you are “constantly” working. I took “constantly” to mean that you didn’t spend too much time at home.

I haven’t read every word in every post but I get the feeling from a few of you that you’re in favor of the new model of traditional families where the wife stays home and the husband works. I’m saying that I think that is a failure of a model.

james
[/quote]

Why?[/quote]
Because it is a pipe dream and unrealistic view of the world, it will never be 1950’s again. To focus on the past is to lose focus of the future IMO.

[LoRez]

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:
Maybe this needs to be said. Low divorce rates doesn’t mean more happy marriages.[/quote]

Go read what I wrote on the last page. Women’s expectations and standards of men have gone through the roof.

If they’re unhappy, its largely because expectations have been warped.[/quote]

I think men’s expectations and standards for women have gone through the roof too. And especially in the bedroom.

Really, both sides are causing problems.

Without being too facetious, I think the internet is in part to blame. Marriage has become more and more about “choice” over time, rather than necessity, and people are making choices based on information that’s subject to very heavy selection biases.

But because of that, I wouldn’t be surprised if the happy marriages today are actually much happier than the happy marriages of yesteryear.[/quote]

And I disagree completely with men’s expectations going through the roof, in fact I see men settle constantly. Why do you think that.? I would say men’s expectations have FALLEN.[/quote]

Maybe we have differing definitions of “expectations” here. Or I misused the term. Or something.

Or you can just forget I made that statement in the first place. Probably for the better. What I was really trying to say with what I said was a rebuttal that “the problem isn’t just women”.

As far as what I actually said, I think I was confusing expectations and standards with ideals. I think the ideal that men want in a woman is actually quite a bit higher now than it was before.

But back in reality, I agree that men settle constantly. I think men’s ideal got higher, then something (feminism?) discredited that ideal… and as a net result, the average American woman is now much much further from that ideal.

And since men still want women, AND men somehow forgot how to actually be competitive and stand up for themselves (another major problem), most end up settling.

With all these fat chicks everywhere the amount of competition for thin women has increased dramatically. With all the suitors thin women have lined around the block for them, why should she stay with you over the rest?

For the bling.

[Cortes]

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]atypical1 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:
I said that. Like three times.
[/quote]

Sorry that I missed that in the 16 pages of posts. I was commenting specifically on the post that I quoted and the bit about how your wife stays at home and you are “constantly” working. I took “constantly” to mean that you didn’t spend too much time at home.

I haven’t read every word in every post but I get the feeling from a few of you that you’re in favor of the new model of traditional families where the wife stays home and the husband works. I’m saying that I think that is a failure of a model.

james
[/quote]

Why?[/quote]
Because it is a pipe dream and unrealistic view of the world, it will never be 1950’s again. To focus on the past is to lose focus of the future IMO.
[/quote]

I don’t want to hear why it’s difficult to achieve such an arrangement anymore. I want to hear why it is fundamentally wrong.

Because, while a number of posters here seem to want to paint us as radicals or extremists, our views have been the dominant ones that have seen us throughout thousands of years of history without too many complaints. It is only in the past 50 years or so that this has even become an option, and all of a sudden it is an outmoded, backwards parenting style?

I do believe that these kinds of assumptions get at the heart of the issue we were discussing with our criticisms of the feminist movement. The assumption being made is that a mother staying home to raise young kids while the father works (not ALL the time, just works) is somehow inferior to a new kind of dual income earning/parenting, in which duties are equally shared by both parents.

The above model neglects to account for the very real difference in personality, desire, inclination, happiness, suitability, skill and all manner of other factors that make men men and women women.

Most men would not make good mothers. Most mothers do not make good fathers.

[atypical1]

[quote]Cortes wrote:

Why?[/quote]

Because it takes at least two parents to really raise a child. Hell, it takes more than just two parents but to have two parents present is a start.

I’ve got a son. Boys have certain requirements and play in certain ways that my wife can’t teach or doesn’t play like. That was awkwardly phrased and it’s easier for me to restate it. My son loves to roughhouse. I play with him like that and teach him how to roughhouse without intentionally hurting someone and how to take being hurt on accident. My wife doesn’t play that same way. There’s also things that I teach him like peeing standing up (he loves to use urinals now) that my wife can’t really teach. And a lot of what I teach is simply by being an example for him. There’s also things that my wife can teach that I can’t. Like how to have a bit of a woman’s perspective.

If I was to spend all of my time at work and my wife was to spend all the time raising him then there wouldn’t be a balance. I think that was missing from my childhood because my parents used the traditional model to raise me. I think that was a failure and my father (who has now got the benefit of hindsight) also believes it to be somewhat of a failure.

That’s why I think the “new” traditional model is a failure. I say “new” because it’s fairly recent in human history that men worked totally separately from the family.

james

[Cortes]

[quote]atypical1 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

Why?[/quote]

Because it takes at least two parents to really raise a child. Hell, it takes more than just two parents but to have two parents present is a start.

I’ve got a son. Boys have certain requirements and play in certain ways that my wife can’t teach or doesn’t play like. That was awkwardly phrased and it’s easier for me to restate it. My son loves to roughhouse. I play with him like that and teach him how to roughhouse without intentionally hurting someone and how to take being hurt on accident. My wife doesn’t play that same way. There’s also things that I teach him like peeing standing up (he loves to use urinals now) that my wife can’t really teach. And a lot of what I teach is simply by being an example for him. There’s also things that my wife can teach that I can’t. Like how to have a bit of a woman’s perspective.

If I was to spend all of my time at work and my wife was to spend all the time raising him then there wouldn’t be a balance. I think that was missing from my childhood because my parents used the traditional model to raise me. I think that was a failure and my father (who has now got the benefit of hindsight) also believes it to be somewhat of a failure.

That’s why I think the “new” traditional model is a failure. I say “new” because it’s fairly recent in human history that men worked totally separately from the family.

james
[/quote]

Okay well we don’t have an argument with each other then, because I’m not arguing for fathers to be absent from their children’s lives. See above.

[Cortes]

So how much time should the mother spend compared to the father?

Won’t be able to answer till later, gotta get to bed

[Alpha_F]

I don’t think that Cortes means the model of a wife who stays at home just watching TV and looking at the rock on her finger and waiting for her husband to get home to take her out for an expensive dinner.

A capable wife can run a small business from the home. Or freelance services like teach swimming, personal training, massage therapy, etc.
If having land, she can cultivate the ground, have a small farm, etc.

Like Jackie said, even volunteer work in her community- if more women cared this way, we would not need so many “government programs” to care for our neighbours.

[therajraj]

[quote]Cortes wrote:

I don’t want to hear why it’s difficult to achieve such an arrangement anymore. I want to hear why it is wrong [/quote]

Exactly what I’ve been arguing.

The decline is happening, theres no going back, and I’m content on enjoying the ride down.

I wouldn’t advise any man living in the west to get married in this current environment or have children.

Feminists wanted to destabilize the family unit, well you’ve got your wish.

[therajraj]

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:
Maybe this needs to be said. Low divorce rates doesn’t mean more happy marriages.[/quote]

Go read what I wrote on the last page. Women’s expectations and standards of men have gone through the roof.

If they’re unhappy, its largely because expectations have been warped.[/quote]

I think men’s expectations and standards for women have gone through the roof too. And especially in the bedroom.

Really, both sides are causing problems.

Without being too facetious, I think the internet is in part to blame. Marriage has become more and more about “choice” over time, rather than necessity, and people are making choices based on information that’s subject to very heavy selection biases.

But because of that, I wouldn’t be surprised if the happy marriages today are actually much happier than the happy marriages of yesteryear.[/quote]

And I disagree completely with men’s expectations going through the roof, in fact I see men settle constantly. Why do you think that.? I would say men’s expectations have FALLEN.[/quote]

Maybe we have differing definitions of “expectations” here. Or I misused the term. Or something.

Or you can just forget I made that statement in the first place. Probably for the better. What I was really trying to say with what I said was a rebuttal that “the problem isn’t just women”.

As far as what I actually said, I think I was confusing expectations and standards with ideals. I think the ideal that men want in a woman is actually quite a bit higher now than it was before.

But back in reality, I agree that men settle constantly. I think men’s ideal got higher, then something (feminism?) discredited that ideal… and as a net result, the average American woman is now much much further from that ideal.

And since men still want women, AND men somehow forgot how to actually be competitive and stand up for themselves (another major problem), most end up settling.

With all these fat chicks everywhere the amount of competition for thin women has increased dramatically. With all the suitors thin women have lined around the block for them, why should she stay with you over the rest?

For the bling. ;-)[/quote]

Feminism has taught women they should no longer bother to Tailor their appearance for the opposite sex. Most girls nowadays can’t even bother to wear anything but sweatpants. Even managing long hair has become too much work

[debraD]

[quote]therajraj wrote:

Feminists wanted to destabilize the family unit, well you’ve got your wish.

[/quote]

I’m a feminist and I’m pretty happy :). But the family unit is just fine. Sorry you’re unable to adapt.

[therajraj]

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

Feminists wanted to destabilize the family unit, well you’ve got your wish.

[/quote]

I’m a feminist and I’m pretty happy :). But the family unit is just fine. Sorry you’re unable to adapt.[/quote]

Glad to hear youre happy. How many kids ya got?

[atypical1]

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Exactly what I’ve been arguing.

The decline is happening, theres no going back, and I’m content on enjoying the ride down.

I wouldn’t advise any man living in the west to get married in this current environment or have children.

Feminists wanted to destabilize the family unit, well you’ve got your wish.
[/quote]

That’s bullshit. Seriously. That’s utter bullshit and it’s a cop out for maintaining a real relationship.

First, the term feminist is overused. I think that you’re referring to the more militant ones. My wife considers herself a feminist because she believes that women should have the same rights as men do. I don’t think anyone can argue against that. She’s most certainly not for destroying the family though.

I’m also proud that my wife sticks up for herself. I’m also proud that she works full time because I believe that it helps to round out her life. But if she quit her job and did volunteer work that would be equally cool with me (and probably even cooler with her).

I don’t see where the average feminist is destroying the American family unit.

james

[therajraj]

DebraD do you like Canadian culture?

When it eventually dies will you still be happy?

[atypical1]

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Feminism has taught women they should no longer bother to Tailor their appearance for the opposite sex. Most girls nowadays can’t even bother to wear anything but sweatpants. Even managing long hair has become too much work
[/quote]

And I see just as many men wearing ripped jeans, sloppy t-shirts, flip-flops, etc. Do women find the slob look appealing? Maybe they do. I definitely find a woman who can look good in sweatpants and no make up to be quite sexy.

james

[LoRez]

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Feminism has taught women they should no longer bother to Tailor their appearance for the opposite sex. Most girls nowadays can’t even bother to wear anything but sweatpants. Even managing long hair has become too much work
[/quote]

Agreed.

But there is another aspect to it… what’s in it for them? Why should they beautify themselves? Right now most women can get a gentle, caring, sensitive man without doing that.