Why are men expected to provide for women?

[bmcnicho]

Women are adults with equal rights and abilities, so why are men, at least to a certain extent, still expected to provide for them?  Why would men do this? What do men get in return?  Men aren’t the parents of the women they date, so it just seems really stupid and unnatural.  Sure women provide men with emotional support, companionship, affection, and various other things depending on the individual, but men provide all those things to women too.

Of course there are lots of women with successful careers who don’t expect this, but in general men are largely judged based on what kind of job they have, whereas women, with the exception of shallow men who care mostly about appearance, are evaluated more so for their personal qualities, which I think is a much more reasonable standard.

This phenomenon could be explained in terms of evolutionary biology or as an after-effect of traditional gender roles, but isn’t it contrary to the values of modern liberal democracy?  Doesn’t that standard suggest that women are inherently more valuable, while men have to give the products of their labor to women in exchange for their attention? 

Edited July 31, 2020 by bmcnicho

[electroBeam]

infinite love. 

Don't worry about what men and women should do, just focus on what men and women actually DO, and adapt yourself to it. Everything else is distraction, suffering, delusion and foolishness. 

[bmcnicho]

@electroBeam Isn’t an aspect of Infinite Love its continuous transformation and evolution?  A crucial aspect of growth and change is questioning the status quo.  I don’t think it’s inherently unspiritual to point out a social issue.

[Roy]

8 minutes ago, bmcnicho said:

This phenomenon could be explained in terms of evolutionary biology or as an after-effect of traditional gender roles, but isn’t it contrary to the values of modern liberal democracy.  Doesn’t that standard suggest that women are inherently more valuable, while men have to give the products of their labor to women in exchange for their attention? 

The traditional patriarchal relationship roles that you described have existed and been the norm for literally thousands of years, now women are finally catching up (economically & getting more favorable rights/treatment) and the pendulum is in the midst of swinging in the other direction.

There is going to be confusion, contradiction, and bypassing of logic as a result of this.

Accept it and adapt like @electroBeam suggested.

[electroBeam]

4 minutes ago, bmcnicho said:

@electroBeam Isn’t an aspect of Infinite Love its continuous transformation and evolution?

your version of transformation and evolution(expressed in your post) /= Infinite Love's version of transformation and evolution

6 minutes ago, bmcnicho said:

 I don’t think it’s inherently unspiritual to point out a social issue.

Aiming to be spiritual is itself a trap. Your notions of what "spiritual" is, is largely garbage.

8 minutes ago, bmcnicho said:

I don’t think it’s inherently unspiritual to point out a social issue.

Its not an issue in God's eyes. Its Infinite Love. You're projecting 'issue' onto the situation. And then getting sucked into and trapped in your projections about social issues. 

[Gesundheit]

Lol using infinite love to dodge a valid discussion as if it explains or has anything to do with anything. When will we ever move out of this silliness?

To the OP, yup I agree. I guess it's an after effect. There are no valid reasons for staying the way we are today. Men being the providers is becoming an injustice to men and a bias towards women. I shall start protests for Masculinism, Men's rights, and against women's abuse of feminism.

Edited July 31, 2020 by Gesundheit

[Preety_India]

 

This is a confusing question and there are a lot of things involved in this. Too many elements. 

First is gender roles. These are divided. The woman can also ask the question "why does she have to give birth and raise children and not the man?" maybe the man compensates for the biological role that the woman plays on her own. 

Also woman don't need men as much as men need women. You can see this in the dating pattern itself. Women need more resources. This is obvious because they have responsibilities of raising kids and that's a big job in itself, in a way she is raising the children of the partner because she could choose to raise anyone's children if her desire is to only be a mother. Of course she has to choose a more reliable partner for her children. 

And during child bearing as well as while raising kids, it's not very hard o understand that women will have problems in handling both responsibilities of making money as well as raising children. 

The other question is what is a man going to do if he is not even going to be a provider. A woman does not wait for a man to give her emotional support. Because with motherhood she needs a strong shoulder not to cry on, but to handle responsibilities.. She needs resources. Even in nature, a female animal chooses a male who is more resourceful. This is to ensure survival of the species.. 

If you look at nature, in the biological context, the male has the responsibility of protecting the female animals and the young ones. This is how gender roles were created. 

A woman also invests her time and resources in creating the family. Women who make money also invest their money into their families. It won't be fair for her to contribute everything in creating a family whereas a man doesn't do anything, his role in raising children is very minimal because most family responsibilities are handled by women. 

So the least that a man can do is provide for his family and this also includes the woman. 

Now to say that women can do everything on their own and make the same money as men is actually an unfair argument 

Because if you take historic context, then women were never given the opportunity to make money. It was men who made money. Women were never given the empowerment and resources to make money on their own. 

So it's kinda unfair to expect that suddenly out of the blue, all women will have the ability to work as men or make money like men. 

When it comes to money, the power and the social structure or hierarchy is designed in such a way that men tend to have more wealth than women. It's only in modern times that you see women making money but not on the same level as men. This could be  because of the fact that women are not empowered enough or it could be that the society is designed in such a way that it is tilted in the favor of men when it comes to accumulating wealth. Often women get discriminated in jobs or workplace and the pay ratio is always higher for men.. Now you can always argue and say that men work harder. But you cannot compare  the ability of a woman to the ability of a man. Maybe from the female perspective, whatever she is putting in is equal hard work given her capacity. There is also a historical context as to why we have lower expectations from women and higher expectations from men. 

In the end this is not about male versus female or man versus woman but more about creating a society that gets contribution from both gender. Women contribute in their own ways and if this contribution can be supported and complemented then that's what needs to be done. 

In a way if you say it's not fair for a man to support a woman then in another way its also not fair for a woman to be giving birth and raising kids on their own just because it's biology. Women can also complain how men don't have to bear children. The thing is that women can't complain because it's biology. 

It's always much easier for men to complain. 

In some context, traditional gender roles actually favor men more than women. If I look at my situation in my country, i feel like it's a man who benefits from the traditional gender role. Because he only has to give a minimal amount to his family and the woman survives on a minimal amount whereas in return she bears him children, raises the kids, takes care of his home, sacrifices her career in order to create his family and does not have any skills or options to make money and is completely dependent on the favors of the husband. Meanwhile the husband gets a career, a woman, sex, a family that is children, emotional support, money and everything that he can get in life. It's the woman who suffers. Because the kids grow up and have their own lives and after the husbands death she has nothing left for herself in terms of emotional and financial support since the daddy money has to be divided among the kids. In a way she sacrifices her life for basic survival with the man which she can do anyway by just doing some odd job. 

Take my example. I make my own money. Hence I don't feel the need for marriage. Because traditionally in my country women married only for survival. 

Now I see a ton of young girls my age around me. They make money and they don't want to marry. They know what their mothers went through and they don't want to go through the same thing.. 

That's why guys around me are finding it very difficult to get a woman to marry. 

 

The reason is feminism. Women in my country are now ready to work because it's safer to work now than before and they feel more empowered. At the same time they don't feel they need a man anymore because they see marriage as a traditional system that they don't want to be a part of. If they can survive on their own, they don't need a man anymore. 

However a lot of men resent this because that way they don't get women. Oppressive societies were beneficial to men because there was a way to pressure women into marrying them 

Now there is no such pressure. So women are free and not wanting to marry. 

If this situation continues let's say for another 200 years, it is not women who will suffer, because they will enjoy single status as well as motherhood if they want it but men will find difficult to get women 

In a way men would resent the independence and freedom of a woman because they won't have a way to control her or a way to establish a neediness in women 

If a woman wants emotional support she can rely on her girl friends. Or family 

If she wants sex, she can use a man as a sperm machine.

In order to get sex and romance, a woman doesn't need to be bounded by traditional roles of wife and motherhood. She can simply fuck a guy. She can refuse marrying him. Men won't be happy with such a system because they not only want the woman but they also want kids and marriage and a sense of ownership. 

So in a way, the traditional system of gender roles was actually meant to benefit men at the expense of dependency of women 

It's men who chase women. It's not the other way around. 

Men won't be happy with a system where a woman is totally sexually independent and has many male companions for sex. Because men want a sense of ownership. Women also want it but they can have it when they want it. 

The rejection primarily comes from a woman. Women see men as an option to choose from whereas men see women as an opportunity they don't want to miss. 

Therefore in a way the traditional system actually benefits men and they would rather want to be the provider than have it the other way around. 

If women get all the power in terms of resources, the opportunities for men will further decline 

 

Maybe that's the reason patriarchy existed in the first place 

Edited July 31, 2020 by Preety_India

[Gesundheit]

30 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

First is gender roles. These are divided. The woman can also ask the question "why does she have to give birth and not the man?"

Are you serious? I could not read any further into your post after this.

[Artsu]

Simply put, given that women bear children, and oftentimes are more involved in raising them, it is reasonable to place more pressure on men to provide financially.

Historically, men have been the providers, and it is only recently that women are often finding careers. Find someone who suits you.

etc etc

[Preety_India]

 

19 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

Are you serious? I could not read any further into your post after this.

It's better if you don't read my posts because I don't like to argue with you. Find someone else to argue with 

 

[Leo Gura]

@bmcnicho Carry a baby for 9 months and squeeze it out through your legs. Then let's talk.

[Member]

59 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@bmcnicho Carry a baby for 9 months and squeeze it out through your legs. Then let's talk.

?

[bmcnicho]

I find it interesting that I didn’t mention marriage or children in the original post, yet that’s what a lot of people used as an explanation.  The standard of men being providers applies to a certain extent to all age groups and regardless if the people involved are considering marriage and family.

Also, once the kids are in school this no longer applies, so this is only a valid justification for a few years out of 60+ years of adulthood.

[Leo Gura]

16 minutes ago, bmcnicho said:

I find it interesting that I didn’t mention marriage or children in the original post, yet that’s what a lot of people used as an explanation.  The standard of men being providers applies to a certain extent to all age groups and regardless if the people involved are considering marriage and family.

It doesn't matter that you didn't mention it. It's still an operative force because what you're talking about is cultural norms. And cultural norms are shaped by survival necessities which have existed for thousands and hundreds of years.

Your thinking about this is far too short-sighted and self-centered. This isn't about you or your desires. This is about how the human species deals with survival challenges.

Sex and intimate relationships don't exist for your amusement. They exist for the survival of the species.

The standard of men being providers applies to the last 300,000 years of human evolution. Good luck unwiring that.

You might as well be asking, why are women expected to be youthful and sexy? Why should they do this? Why is that fair? What's in it for them? It seems stupid and unnatural.

[Gesundheit]

1 hour ago, Preety_India said:

It's better if you don't read my posts because I don't like to argue with you. Find someone else to argue with 

Don't argue with me. Just answer a simple question in a direct way without overthinking it, if you are authentic.

[Artsu]

17 minutes ago, bmcnicho said:

I find it interesting that I didn’t mention marriage or children in the original post, yet that’s what a lot of people used as an explanation.  The standard of men being providers applies to a certain extent to all age groups and regardless if the people involved are considering marriage and family.

Also, once the kids are in school this no longer applies, so this is only a valid justification for a few years out of 60+ years of adulthood.

What's the purpose of dating, if not looking into marriage and children? (not a rhetorical question)

I think the children answer is basically it. Apart from that, it is still based on this being what the parties are wired for. Maybe you're just dating, and not looking to get married to the person. But in the long run, you're both looking to marry someone, aren't you? So the family answer, well, that's what it is. The woman gives birth, the man provides. The woman might also provide, but this is modern.

So, why date apart from courting for marriage?

[Gesundheit]

23 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The standard of men being providers applies to the last 300,000 years of human evolution. Good luck unwiring that.

Women have also been oppressed for thousands of years by "cultural norms" too, yet we deny the norms and support feminism and don't think it's impossible to find equality.

Edited July 31, 2020 by Gesundheit

[Member]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You might as well be asking, why are women expected to be youthful and sexy? Why should they do this? Why is that fair? What's in it for them? It seems stupid and unnatural.

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

Women have also been oppressed for thousands of years too, we support feminism and don't think it's impossible to find equality.

Most women these days in developed democracies are taking care of themselves. I've never had to support a girlfriend financially. So the idea that women are somehow demanding that you buy them things is simply untrue. If you're buying stuff for women, you're the one who's playing into that provider frame. I expect my girlfriend to pay for her own stuff most of the time.

Nevertheless, I don't have a problem providing for the woman in certain cases as long as she's able to maintain a job/career of her own. Like, if I had children with her, I'd certainly expect to provide more for her and the child since she's providing her body and emotional energy to raise the child, and probably taking time off work and sacrificing her career.

You can find women of various kinds. Some women are more traditional and want to play the old patriarchal role where she is the house wife and you are the provider. But many women today don't want to play that role. These are stage Orange & Green women. These the ones I like. I would not date a stage Blue woman. But you can certainly find one if you want one.

So really, today, we have the best of both worlds. It's just a matter of knowing what you want and then going for it.

[Gesundheit]

@Leo Gura

Sure, I understand that. I believe a portion of women would do the same regardless.

This has to be the norm, yet it isn't.