- Joined
- Jun 11, 2009
- Messages
- 19,657
- Reaction score
- 8,454
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
I've asked this question before in a different way, and I was met with pretty much no rational response. However, given the recent Prop 8 decision in which Walker concluded that the state had no interest in mandating gender roles in marriage, I wanted to give people one more shot. This thread is not about sexual orientation or gay marriage. Once you get through all the rhetoric and fallacies, the question of those issues ultimately comes down to the roles that each gender is suppose to play in society.
This thread is simply to ask what roles men serve that women can't serve and what roles that women serve that men can't serve? You can extend the question to the family. What can a mother offer a child that a father cannot and what can a father offer a child that a mother cannot?
Beyond that, any gender can do pretty much anything.
Evolutionarily speaking, human males went off to hunt and human females stayed behind to look after the children. Are these roles of the male provider and female nurturer now obsolete or are they based in our very biology?
Except breastfeed.
It was a stupid system even back then. Logically, the most capable hunter should hunt and the best with children should look after them. Even assuming your average person of one gender is better at a certain task than another, that is no reason to exclude the exceptions. You would be an idiot to declare that everyone over 6 foot must play basketball and everyone under 6 feet must be a jockey, even if they have physical advantages in each sport.
I considered that, but it isn't nearly as intrinsic. You can satisfactorily feed a baby with formula, even if it is somewhat inferior to breastfeeding. Eggs, sperm and wombs have no such substitute.
This thread is simply to ask what roles men serve that women can't serve and what roles that women serve that men can't serve? You can extend the question to the family. What can a mother offer a child that a father cannot and what can a father offer a child that a mother cannot?
The Bible argues that a woman's role in society is to be the submissive helper to her husband, and the man's role in society is to be the leader of his household. Is there merit to this view outside of religion? Does marriage and family crumble if these roles are not upheld?
Evolutionarily speaking, human males went off to hunt and human females stayed behind to look after the children. Are these roles of the male provider and female nurturer now obsolete or are they based in our very biology?
I think there is merit to the idea of different roles. An opposite-sex parent is uniquely suited to provide a child with a healthy image of what his or her future mate should be. I'm sure there are other things, too. In a very general sense, the different sexes tend to have different perspectives, and it's good for a child to grow up with both.
My wife and I both see marriage as a cooperative endeavor or partnership, but we also realize that disagreements are inevitable and that someone has to make a final decision when they can't be resolved. When that happens, she's agreed to follow my lead. We both see this as a net benefit, though for her it's obviously a benefit with some sacrifice involved.
I think we both see ourselves as nurturers and providers. My wife would like to spend pretty much all her time with the kids if she could. I love spending time with them, but I'd never want to do it 24/7. I think that's a difference between the sexes, which would make a single-income family ideal.
That is the first legitimate sounding argument I have heard as far as needing both genders in the home.
I've seen it work either way. Is there an inherent flaw that I am missing in relationships where the wife takes the leadership role instead of the husband?
I've also seen fathers who prefer to spend time with the kids and mothers who prefer to work. Is there an inherent flaw in that situatoin or are the gender roles switchable as long as both partners agree?
My working hypothesis is that, all things being equal, men tend to be more rational than women. I know I may draw some disapproval with this remark. It's not something I would hold to dogmatically, nor would I expect it to apply in every case. But assuming that both are mature, fully functioning adults, preferably with some education, I think that men generally are less distracted by extraneous issues and are able, if not to make better decisions, then at least to make good decisions quicker.
Just speaking anecdotally, I find that I'm slower to anger or panic than my wife. On the other hand, my reaction can be more extreme once I do reach that point, so I sometimes need her to calm me down. I've seen a couple of relationships where the wife was in charge, one of which was a very close family relationship, and in my opinion there was a lot of wasted energy and frustration resulting from the husband's having to deal with the wife's impulsive decisions after the fact. Again, this is not to say that many men aren't irrational; they are. Mature men, though, are probably more rational more of the time than women.
I think you should qualify your statement as follows: "In MY experience....." Your generalization is wrong, IMO. Men don't tend to be more rational than women. I might go for "Some men....some women," but not all-encompassing. That's just been your personal experience.
I really have to smile, because I know darned well you're coming from a really good place. But you are showing a gender bias that's, well, kind of comical. I don't doubt this is the way your marriage is, nor that it works wonderfully that way, but....
If by a really good place you mean a lucky situation with my marriage, I certainly agree. I'm very blessed to have someone so kind and supportive. You may be right about the comical aspect, too. I could sense that as I wrote it. These things are complex and somewhat mysterious. But I think there's a lot of truth to it.
There is another practical reason, too, for not letting women be in charge. We know from studies that women talk more, which suggests that they have more to say. In my own experience, few things happen in the course of a day that my wife doesn't have an opinion about. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's just that she has a hard time not weighing in. I feel like things would get kind of insane if we had to act on all those opinions all the time.
That was old Testament, it doesnt apply to us
There is another practical reason, too, for not letting women be in charge.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?