• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Men and women, money and happiness

Lately, I've been reading, "The Myth of Male Power" by author and former board director of NYC's chapter of NOW, Warren Farrell.

In the book, Farrell makes some of the following points about male-female power dynamics at home and in the workplace:

Men work more (and yes, get paid more) than women, but women live a more balanced life that incorporates family, friendships, and a career.

Women today are empowered to make a choice of how they want to balance their life. They can work full-time. They can work part-time. They can work not at all and stay home to raise the family, or some combination thereof.

Men are expected to seek one path in life: money. According to Farrell, they have three choices in life: "Work full-time. Work full-time. Work full-time."

I do not want to take away anything from the women's movement, or what the women's movement has accomplished for women. More choice. The author feels the same way, and argues that men have yet to go through a critically needed transformation movement that revolutionizes men's role in relationships and society. I agree.

Men are trained from a young age and beyond, by parents, siblings, friends, colleagues/supervisors, and strangers, to be warriors. Men are needed to fight a nation's war and therefore must be bred to be strong physically and mentally. Little boys pick on each other. Teenagers punch or wrestle each other. Young men compete academically and professionally, to be the most talented doers and productive hands (think engineering, carpentry, technology). Attempts to test and train the male's strength to protect and ability to provide.

Feminists may argue that men are the ones who create war in the first place. Yet they forget that the most basic purpose of war is survival, and a democratic nation cannot wage a war without the support of both sexes. When wars are fought, men are dying not to save their own life, but to save the lives of their mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters back home.

Alcoholism, drug addiction, and suicide are the methods men use to cope with their pain. In stark contrast, women rely on the support of their families and friends to remind them that they are important in life. They feel appreciated, needed, wanted, loved. Women are more likely to feel rewarded by their life decisions and career paths. They often choose nursing, teaching, and other selfless careers. Careers that provide fulfillment whereas war and the cutthroat corporate culture do not. Interestingly, it appears to me in my day-to-day interactions with women in the male-dominated profession of corporate IT, that they are not generally happy. Women who serve as successful leaders in male dominated corporate jobs are often notorious for being extremely rigid and unfriendly (perhaps thinking they need to overcompensate?). Men have dealt with the daily grind of this emotion-less, "cutthroat," hazardous and competitive working culture for thousands of years. It does a number on a man's health, happiness, and the overall well-being of his family. Sure, we get paid more. But we also get fired more, starve more, sleep out on the cold streets and kill ourselves far more often than women (killing ourselves literally or through our own work).

When society pressures men to be physically aggressive (war, athletics, etc.) or mentally aggressive (academia, work), the last thing we wish to do is to come home and dump all of our emotional stress on our loved ones. How much of a "protector" would we be if we showed vulnerability and an inability to handle the stresses of daily life? Instead, we bottle up these emotions and frequently fall into a vegetative state while we consume our next serving of television's flavorful assortment of brain candy (escapism). Unfortunately for our spouses, their work doesn't end at close of business, and subsequently they feel under-appreciated and ignored after we fail to listen, shirk our responsibilities for the home, and refuse to open up.

In short, we are, as Warren Farrell put it, the "disposable sex" trained from an early age to sacrifice ourselves- sacrifice our bodies in war and in sport, sacrifice our feelings to show strength, and ultimately sacrifice our lives to protect society from criminals, fires, terrorists, foreign enemies, and any entity intent on inflicting harm on our families. Women may complain that they do too much to help others while sacrificing their own needs, but the truth is, the many paths women choose to take in family planning, education, and career development are usually far more rewarding than the few paths men are expected to take. In essence, women generally tend to live longer, happier lives than men because of the different choices men and women make. Remember that more money doesn't always buy happiness, especially when you have to sacrifice a piece of yourself to get it.

One side note: In the traditional dichotomy of the husband bread-winner and wife homemaker nuclear family, after the mother has raised the children, she then tends to explore educational and career options that provide her with a new life and almost a new identity. As the man progresses up the business ladder and spends upwards of 40 years living the same life and experiences, he then becomes prone to the notorious "male mid-life crisis" and realizes upon his retirement that he is an empty nester who did not benefit enough from spending more time with his children.

The women's movement was a stand-up to proclaim there are serious women's issues that need to be addressed and resolved. The men's movement is a stand up to proclaim there are serious men's issues that need to be addressed and resolved, but unfortunately this latter movement is marginalized and viewed as controversial. Many liken the "masculinist movement" to the "white rights movement." The major difference is that men and women exhibit personality traits directly tied to their biology, whereas the "white rights movement" and all other race rights movement are based on power struggles formed from social constructs. To empower these race movements would be to further divide people into specific groups based solely on superficial physical characteristics. Men and women (unlike blacks vs. whites) must live together under the same roof, and must develop solutions to connect physically and emotionally in order to keep the human species alive. Therefore, all of us must listen to the other side, and promote support groups that raise awareness of all of these important issues. We must come together to formulate solutions based on empirical evidence rather than harp on who's at fault.

In the end, the women's movement is more powerful politically because women are far more unified under this front. Men are either apathetic or fearful of reaction if they were to provide credence to the "men's movement," despite the refusal of many to confront the glaring emotional and social issues facing our men and boys.

To tie it all together, men are trained to strengthen in order to protect, and chase money in order to secure their families. Women are trained to nurture and love and now, thanks to a progressive society, empower themselves through choice. A life based on strength and money do not usually produce happiness. However nurturing and caring for others, expressing feelings, and maximizing one's life choices does promotes a happier life. Men represent money and women represent happiness. Both need love from one another. :kissy:
 
Social conditioning is very much to blame for all of this.

Men are taught to pursue money, then women, then power, but in fact that approach never works. Men (and women) should focus on their personal power first, and the money will follow. So will the healthy relationships and romances.
 
Thanks Mensch- interesting read, and good points. Although I tend to agree with the last statement (regarding representations), I'm not sure that representations reflect reality. I believe that women tend to be more nurturing, mostly as a result of hormonal drive and maternal instincts, but I also believe that men love just as deeply, if not moreso, but perhaps just express it differently.
THanks for the pov.
 
Generalizations can be drawn, but are always inaccurate at times. Such is the nature of generatlizations. There are always exceptions.

I would pit my work history against any man's, and challenge any man to say he has worked more than I have. I have worked harder and longer, and more skillfully, than most men I know, for a fraction of the pay. This means my standard of living was lower, and my Social Security will be lower. The Social Security that men, mainly, want to cut. Remember that it was only recently that it became illegal to pay women less just because they were women.

Women are now expected to earn money, too. Maybe not in your world, or the world of the author's, but for most families. And men are expected to be more involved in the care of their children. So things have changed on both fronts. My father, who was in his 60s or 70s at the time, was horrified that my brother-in-law changed his baby's diapers while he and my sister were visiting him. To him that meant my sister was a bad mother and the son-in-law was henpecked. In his day, real men didn't do such things. Things have changed.

Men are expected more so than women to make money. I suppose this is because of tradition, because women used to not work, because women when they worked didn't get paid much, and because men were not hindered by childbirth or the care of children. It's common, now, though, for married partners to both work, and the women to make the same as, if not more than, the husband. I worked in the legal field, where male lawyers were often married to professional women.

Men physically fighting and such when they're young has more to do with how they are raised than anything else. Later on, it's because of that AND testosterone. That's one of the effects of testosterone. It's biological. If a woman "changes" to become a man and gets shots of testosterone, "she" will become the same way.

Yes, wars are necessary.....sometimes. But not lately, it seems. Men tend to want to respond to situations physically and violently more so than women, who are more verbal, communicative, and maybe seek to find solutions before resorting to violence. However, women as heads of state will wage war, when necessary (Queen Elizabeth I, Margaret Thatcher, etc.). And quite successfully.

I do think that women are more nurturing. It might be because of maternal instincts. Or it could be the way their brains work (remember that the male and female brain work differently - the female brain in stronger in the section controlling communication and verbal ability, while the male brain is stronger in the area controlling logic, I think). Although, as a woman, I seem to be more logical than most men I've known. Logic comes naturally to me, as does verbal ability (maybe it's because I'm left handed; the brain of the left handed person is different). So generalizations, by their nature, don't apply to everyone.

I do not think that men love as deeply as women, generally speaking. But it's hard to say for sure, since you can't measure that. They are not as loyal, IMO, and fall out of love more quickly, and move on more quickly. Most divorced men remarry fairly quickly, seemingly barely remembering they ever loved that other woman they were married to for years. Case in point: Michael Landon, who had several families, and each time left and started a new family, barely having anything to do with the family left behind. That's a story I've heard many times. Women tend not to do that. They remember deeply how they had loved a prior spouse, and it is rare for a woman to leave her children behind and have new kids to replace them.

Men tend to view women as regards children, but many women don't have children.

Women did have to fight for every right they obtained, from the vote to equal pay (which was just recently granted, believe it or not). It wasn't just about full citizenship, which is reason enough, but it comes down to earning money and providing for a family. Pay matters. Not just for today, but it affects everything in your life, from birth to death, and especially Social Security and retirement accounts. As we all know, it is not uncommon for men to leave families behind and not support them. It then falls on the woman, who is often underpaid and/or more unskilled, to provide for the children.

Many American men fought against women's rights, and still do. But a great many American men supported women in their struggle to vote and get paid equally. And for this, I commend American men. There are a lot of men in the world who hate women and regard women as lowly beings unworthy of full citizenship. A woman's lot in many countries is little more than slavery and drudgery. First World countries have offered women the opportunity for life, liberty, and happiness. American men have had a hand in making that happen, so they join the ranks of special, secure men like those in Sweden, Canada, and other First World countries.

Men are physically stronger and are indeed the boots on the ground in wars. Women are now involved in combat as fighter pilots and such, is my understanding. That seems strange to me, since it wasn't done when I was a young gal. But I suppose that's progress. As long as they're good at it, that's a good thing. We need all the help we can get. (Though why they want to do that is beyond me. But we are all different, I suppose.) Still, it's mainly men who fight the wars. And it is mainly men who start the wars. It is mainly men who are terrorists. Serial killers and violent criminals are most often male. Men are just more violent. (It's that testosterone thing.) I've long thought that if more women were heads of state, there would be fewer wars.
 
JumpinJack, thank you for your response. I wanted to note that it's been a while since I've returned to this blog, and I've made some edits that I hope will better clarify and support my position.

First, I'd like to reply to your first point about women working more than men. I won't argue that, especially if you take into consideration all work (household and otherwise). However, my post does not pertain to the number of hours worked by men vs. women, but rather the different choices men and women make in the workforce, and how these choices directly impact the health, happiness, and overall well-being of both genders. Women often make decisions that create, raise, and save lives. Sure, men do all of those things too, but not nearly to the level of self-fulfillment as women. For instance, a man creating life is nothing more than 5-10 minutes of physical pleasure. Women creating life is extremely painful, and I won't dare deny that. But it's also one hell of a lot more rewarding experience than the 5-10 minutes of physical pleasure that men experience during conception. There are actually a few philosophical and psychological theories related to the man's alleged jealousy of women's ability to bear children. Every pregnant woman I've ever known talked about the pain, nausea, and discomfort of bearing a child and giving birth. But they also talked about the experience of being pregnant as one of the most powerful, exciting, and self-fulfilling experiences of their whole lives. Men will never get to have that experience, and will never benefit from the rewarding awesomeness of being creating life.

Men also raise children, but not nearly to the extent of women. And as the male homemaker identity has yet to be fully embraced by society, we will continue to spend more time outside of our homes choosing jobs that require us to be away from our families and away from our children. Many jobs are very rewarding, but not nearly as much as raising your children.

Finally, men also save lives as women do, but we often sacrifice ourselves in the process (think police officers, soldiers, firefighters, etc.). I admire all hardworking women, but statistics still indicate that men take the jobs most hazardous to our health. I'm sure being a fisherman is rewarding in some ways, but how rewarding can it be if it's one of the most deadliest professions? How rewarding can it be when you're dead? Likewise, out of the 10 most deadliest jobs in the world, it is men who are more willing to volunteer for these life-taking jobs. We admire the hardworking career woman, but when was the last time any of us thanked our garbage man for taking a dangerous job with a mortality rate 100 times higher than the average job?

In terms of equal pay and the gender pay gap theory, this is largely a debunked theory with very little merit. Yes, aggregating all of the pay data, women do make on average about 77 cents for every dollar that men make. However, that overly simplistic theory does not control for factors such as family planning decisions, educational choices, different career paths, and the different desires to work full-time vs. part-time. Wages are determined by market prices like any other commodity. People are paid based on what they're willing to do, what they've proven they're able to do, their level of experience, and how well they can negotiate. Of course, some people are blatantly guilty of discriminatory hiring and discriminatory pay practices. But these companies generally do not last long in the marketplace. If women were truly, as a whole, willing to sacrifice themselves to work the same job, same hours, with the same level of experience and education as their male counterparts, then ALL businesses would hire mostly women. Why hire a male when you can hire a female instead who will do the exact same job, produce the same results, and accept a salary 25% lower than her male counterpart? JumpinJack, if you feel you are not being paid adequately for the work that you do, there are options to improve your position. You can stand your ground and demand a higher wage, or explore options to join another company and/or become more competitive in the workforce (i.e. obtain a certification, advanced degree, etc.). Granted, I don't know where you stand in life, but I know you have options in a free country. Don't let yourself think that because you're a women, you are destined to make only 77 cents for every dollar your male colleague makes. Instead, leverage your talents and find a company willing to pay you what you're asking. If none are willing to offer, reevaluate your approach. There is NO FATE but what WE MAKE. Don't let the MAN bring you down. ;-)

In response to your theory that testosterone drives man's violent behavior, you may indeed be right. But men are also socialized to take on certain roles in society. In addition to basic biology, we're also pressured by society (by both our mothers and our fathers) to be strong characters willing and able to sacrifice ourselves to protect our families. And sacrifice, we indeed do often. You undermined your own point by bringing up the fact that women can be just as ruthless of a political leader as men, and women heads of state have waged wars and exhibited an aggressive nature we thought only existed in men. And in a democratic nation such as the U.S., we cannot wage war without the consent of our female citizens. "A woman's lot in many countries is little more than slavery and drudgery." You may want to expand on this and consider the fact that life in general is worth very little in many third world countries that are dominated by extremism and religious fanaticism, whether you're a man or a woman.

I'll try and address your other point about male infidelity on another day. But just consider how the sexual revolution and downfall of the nuclear family have contributed to the rise in broken homes and failed marriages.

Thanks again for your response.

Eli
 
Last edited:
JumpinJack;bt3092 said:
Generalizations can be drawn, but are always inaccurate at times. Such is the nature of generatlizations. There are always exceptions.

I would pit my work history against any man's, and challenge any man to say he has worked more than I have. I have worked harder and longer, and more skillfully, than most men I know, for a fraction of the pay. This means my standard of living was lower, and my Social Security will be lower. The Social Security that men, mainly, want to cut. Remember that it was only recently that it became illegal to pay women less just because they were women.

Women are now expected to earn money, too. Maybe not in your world, or the world of the author's, but for most families. And men are expected to be more involved in the care of their children. So things have changed on both fronts. My father, who was in his 60s or 70s at the time, was horrified that my brother-in-law changed his baby's diapers while he and my sister were visiting him. To him that meant my sister was a bad mother and the son-in-law was henpecked. In his day, real men didn't do such things. Things have changed.

Men are expected more so than women to make money. I suppose this is because of tradition, because women used to not work, because women when they worked didn't get paid much, and because men were not hindered by childbirth or the care of children. It's common, now, though, for married partners to both work, and the women to make the same as, if not more than, the husband. I worked in the legal field, where male lawyers were often married to professional women.

Men physically fighting and such when they're young has more to do with how they are raised than anything else. Later on, it's because of that AND testosterone. That's one of the effects of testosterone. It's biological. If a woman "changes" to become a man and gets shots of testosterone, "she" will become the same way.

Yes, wars are necessary.....sometimes. But not lately, it seems. Men tend to want to respond to situations physically and violently more so than women, who are more verbal, communicative, and maybe seek to find solutions before resorting to violence. However, women as heads of state will wage war, when necessary (Queen Elizabeth I, Margaret Thatcher, etc.). And quite successfully.

I do think that women are more nurturing. It might be because of maternal instincts. Or it could be the way their brains work (remember that the male and female brain work differently - the female brain in stronger in the section controlling communication and verbal ability, while the male brain is stronger in the area controlling logic, I think). Although, as a woman, I seem to be more logical than most men I've known. Logic comes naturally to me, as does verbal ability (maybe it's because I'm left handed; the brain of the left handed person is different). So generalizations, by their nature, don't apply to everyone.

I do not think that men love as deeply as women, generally speaking. But it's hard to say for sure, since you can't measure that. They are not as loyal, IMO, and fall out of love more quickly, and move on more quickly. Most divorced men remarry fairly quickly, seemingly barely remembering they ever loved that other woman they were married to for years. Case in point: Michael Landon, who had several families, and each time left and started a new family, barely having anything to do with the family left behind. That's a story I've heard many times. Women tend not to do that. They remember deeply how they had loved a prior spouse, and it is rare for a woman to leave her children behind and have new kids to replace them.

Men tend to view women as regards children, but many women don't have children.

Women did have to fight for every right they obtained, from the vote to equal pay (which was just recently granted, believe it or not). It wasn't just about full citizenship, which is reason enough, but it comes down to earning money and providing for a family. Pay matters. Not just for today, but it affects everything in your life, from birth to death, and especially Social Security and retirement accounts. As we all know, it is not uncommon for men to leave families behind and not support them. It then falls on the woman, who is often underpaid and/or more unskilled, to provide for the children.

Many American men fought against women's rights, and still do. But a great many American men supported women in their struggle to vote and get paid equally. And for this, I commend American men. There are a lot of men in the world who hate women and regard women as lowly beings unworthy of full citizenship. A woman's lot in many countries is little more than slavery and drudgery. First World countries have offered women the opportunity for life, liberty, and happiness. American men have had a hand in making that happen, so they join the ranks of special, secure men like those in Sweden, Canada, and other First World countries.

Men are physically stronger and are indeed the boots on the ground in wars. Women are now involved in combat as fighter pilots and such, is my understanding. That seems strange to me, since it wasn't done when I was a young gal. But I suppose that's progress. As long as they're good at it, that's a good thing. We need all the help we can get. (Though why they want to do that is beyond me. But we are all different, I suppose.) Still, it's mainly men who fight the wars. And it is mainly men who start the wars. It is mainly men who are terrorists. Serial killers and violent criminals are most often male. Men are just more violent. (It's that testosterone thing.) I've long thought that if more women were heads of state, there would be fewer wars.

JumpinJack, I've responded to your post above. Thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom