Here We Go Again

[Christiane]

Again, I totally respect your views, and your experience is as valid as mine.

But I resent the blanket assertion that a SAHM is "living off a man".   Divorce happens.   People, of both genders, act like shits sometimes.   But I am no more "living off my man" than he is living off me.   It's a partnership.  And I respect him as head of our household.   I'm not an evangelical Christian, and I'm not alone in respecting my husband as head of our household.   There are millions of us out here, Galt.  Call it evolutionary, whatever, but we're here.

The vast majority of "traditional" households work because the marriage partners are just that:  partners.   My point is, and I see and respect yours, is the MRM is perhaps missing out on a source of support from SAHM's.   Whatever your personal views, this is a place you will likely find female support.

[Galt]

But I resent the blanket assertion that a SAHM is "living off a man".   Divorce happens.   People, of both genders, act like shits sometimes.   But I am no more "living off my man" than he is living off me.   It's a partnership.  And I respect him as head of our household.   I'm not an evangelical Christian, and I'm not alone in respecting my husband as head of our household.   There are millions of us out here, Galt.  Call it evolutionary, whatever, but we're here.

I'm not attacking you personally.  I don't know what your arrangements are.  Everything may be fine with you and your husband.

Please read the preceding paragraph again.

There ARE, however, situations with housewives that are not optimal for men.  There ARE women living off men, which may be OK, until something happens (like the husband loses his job, with no good prospects for the future) and he gets to see that love isn't exactly absolute love after all.

So please join in with me in condemning THOSE housewives.  LOL  I'm not attacking you personally.

For some reason, this is really deja-vu central.  But you're not Bisquit Queen (hmmm ... and I'll ignore the comma Galt, like she writes, LOL).

My views are REALLY not directed against you personally.

I think I'll go back down into an apathetic deep freeze for a while.

[TheManOnTheStreet]

I actually think that you two agree to some level.  Stay at home moms, implies a child is around.  Galt seems to agree that if she is at home TAKING CARE OF THE HOME AND CHILD, that isn't a bad thing.  His issue, as I see it and agree, is the woman that stays at home where there are no children around... in other words, no reason for her NOT to work and contribute to the household...

Yes?

TMOTS

[Galt]

I actually think that you two agree to some level.  Stay at home moms, implies a child is around.  Galt seems to agree that if she is at home TAKING CARE OF THE HOME AND CHILD, that isn't a bad thing.  His issue, as I see it and agree, is the woman that stays at home where there are no children around... in other words, no reason for her NOT to work and contribute to the household...

Yes?

TMOTS

That's pretty much it.

[contrarymary]

But I resent the blanket assertion that a SAHM is "living off a man". Divorce happens. People, of both genders, act like shits sometimes. But I am no more "living off my man" than he is living off me. It's a partnership. And I respect him as head of our household. I'm not an evangelical Christian, and I'm not alone in respecting my husband as head of our household. There are millions of us out here, Galt. Call it evolutionary, whatever, but we're here.

I'm not even Christian at all (I'm not anything), and I feel the same.
I don't know what to call it either - just kind of natural.

[Christiane]

Yo Galt - You've been in East Germany too long.   The Gestapo aren't coming for you.   Get a grip, my friend.

You're the second person to mention Biscuit Queen though.   I take it she was another stay at home, intellectually unfulfilled sap serving her master.

And I don't need to reread you.   I know you're not attacking me personally.   At least I don't think so directly...    

Please don't go into deep freeze.   There's no conspiracy here.   We're just OK people with a different arrangement than yours and it works for us.   I will miss you if you go away...

[Galt]

Yo Galt - You've been in East Germany too long.   The Gestapo aren't coming for you.   Get a grip, my friend.

You're the second person to mention Biscuit Queen though.   I take it she was another stay at home, intellectually unfulfilled sap serving her master.

And I don't need to reread you.   I know you're not attacking me personally.   At least I don't think so directly...    

Please don't go into deep freeze.   There's no conspiracy here.   We're just OK people with a different arrangement than yours and it works for us.   I will miss you if you go away...

Hmm.  Odd, sudden change of tone.

But anyway, it was the "Stasi" in East Germany.  The Gestapo was pre-war and during the war.

[typhonblue]

Unless you produce materially enough to maintain your lifestyle you are, logically, living off the partner who does.

Now if it's an arrangement you agreed upon, that's fine. (Although it's extremely suspicious that *so* many women get to stay at home and so many men don't. Particularly when you read statistics that state that 40% of men would scale back or eliminate their work and stay at home if they could.)

[Christiane]

Whatever.   They're not looking over your shoulder , metaphorically.   Jeese.   And no change of tone - my God, we can disagree, and I have no doubt we will continue to.    No doubt.   We see things very differently.   That's not going to change.   I try to understand your point of view, but your experience is so different from mine it's hard sometimes.   But I respect your opinions.   I'll just leave it at that.

[dr e]

Christiane - It's an interesting idea to try to market sahm's to be involved in working towards fairness around men's issues.  Do you have any suggestions on how to go about that?  It's something I have wondered about for some time and think that the only possible way to convince them to join with us is to point out the damages that are being done to their sons.  That will likely get them motivated but even that is a very tough task.  How does one accomplish that?

[Christiane]

Interesting idea?

That's not the only way, Dr. E.   Just point out unfairness.   In general.   Why do you think the only way they will see unfairness is as it relates to their sons?   I don't see that at all.   What about their husbands?  

I'm not sure why I'm here.  What do you mean by that?  Our sons mean something to us but our husbands don't?

[dr e]

The question was "Do you have any suggestions on how to go about that?" I'm curious to hear what you have to say about that.

[Galt]

my God, we can disagree, and I have no doubt we will continue to.    No doubt.   We see things very differently.   That's not going to change.

That's not necessarily bad.  I think I pretty much agree with your views, except on this topic.  You certainly don't sound like a feminist.

[Sir Percy]

There are some modestly happy, contented marriages. In most western countries the divorce rate is approaching 50%, true, but that also means 50% are OK.  I agree that some of these may well be MRM material. The 'traditional arrangement' people. The majority of the population, men and women are brain-dead when it comes to recognising the problems and the causes though and need to be shown what is happening to our laws, social systems, schools, universities, literature, moral probity etc.

A major factor regarding the traditional 'man work, woman keeps home', is that as the feminists make such a fuss about how stultifying it is for women, the men start to realise what a bum deal it is for men. So I agree with Christiane that there is a recruitment pool out there waiting to be tapped. There are up and down sides. When ignorance is bliss 'tis folly to be wise for some people.

[Christiane]

I will have to think on that.   How to go about it I mean.  I will think on it Dr. E.   It's a worthy question.

I came here in response to the injustice of the Duke Lacrosse "rape" case.

There must be a way to mainstream your cause more effectively than you're doing.   I mean, I don't see any press about men's rights issues.   Zippo.  Nada.  

So - some change in marketing is in order.  

And don't denigrate me for being new.   I AM new to this issue, and I'm telling you, I'm mainstream and your issues are not being heard.   I stumbled on you.   Somehow, you need to get people to see you up front and center.  In a way they can relate to.  In a way that affirms your cause as pro-family, normal, in line with fairness, justice.

And you're not going to progess through attack ads against stay at home moms....  

My husband just looked over my shoulder and said with a laugh, "you've got dishes to do, woman"...  Gotta go..  lol....

Seriously, we're your likely allies.   You're biting the wrong dog, forgive the analogy.   And I do have dishes to do...    :wink: