Did Women's Rights Destroy Traditional Marriage?

[Mish]

Marriage also has a potential of being a lot more than it is today. A kind of a positive force that binds two individuals in a positive sphere of influence. Not just as a legal contract and tax benefit, but as a family like binding of two people. Not just as a cold legal recognition of relationship, but as a work in progress that needs to be supported and nurtured for maximum positive effect. Who would want to leave their partner if their relationship was properly supported, they were happy in the relationship (as any issue would be resolved quickly before it develops into a problem) and their goals had a practical chance of fruition? All of that is possible with the right infrastructure I think.

[Lipp]

Aaargh, this reminds me of IB HL History essay titles...I can see it already!

"To what extent did the increase of women's rights affect traditional marriage in the 20th century?"

[IndiReloaded]

You are kidding, right? Not "any woman" can raise MY kids, at least not as well as *I* can. A woman who would actually leave her child so she could take a job in a another state hardly qualifies as a mother, IMO. She'd be more like an egg donor.

My husband has many female employees over the years, and he says most wanted to stay home when their kids were little, and he's had to do quite a bit of counseling with crying women in the workplace after maternity leave ran out. These are science women, BTW. He said the women claim they couldn't afford to stay home, and with the price of housing in this area, I don't doubt it although I agree that in most cases, a change in lifestyle expectations would have allowed them to sacrifice the money, but not many husbands these days are willing to live in an apartment rather than own a house so their wife can stay home while the kids are little. Of course these women go back to work when the kids are older. After you pay for an education, you generally expect to use it. I'm not sure how going back to work when your husband wants you to represents proof they preferred working to raising their babies.

BTW - I usually see nurse practitioners for my health care, and my two favorites regret they worked when their kids were little (younger than school age). The stay-home moms I hung around with when my kids were little were probably 1/3 professional women, and 90% with degrees in higher education.

I was not referring to allowing another woman to take care of one's offspring. I meant that there is a prejudice against homemakers by professional women. The idea that "any woman can bear children", it doesn't require any special training therefore its not much of an achievement. I think that mindset exists.

Raising children well is another issue. But honestly, many of the stay at home moms I've seen don't do as good a job as I think they could. For many, if these women were professional nannies, they would be fired from their jobs. So perhaps the stereotype has some justification.

I agree that women who get an education can and should use it. That was my point, in fact.

As for your husband's experience, I'm not quite sure your point except that I can personally relate. I am head of a dept of which >100 of our employees are women. They drive my managers nuts, actually. I would trade any 10 of them for 1 intelligent, hard-working male that is drama free. And I bet if you asked your husband he would tell you the same thing. A lot of these women trying desperately to balance work/home end up doing a rotten job at both. And I *do* think they are under pressure from their spouses, which was also my point. You will find this out for yourself if you ever become a nursing manager. You will greatly value the drama-free nurses who are single-minded in their approach. These tend to be the gals who know they don't want children, or their kids are basically grown up.

[Gribble]

I'm way too lazy to read this entire thread, so if I'm reiterating what's all ready been said, pardon moi.

Yes, if women were less independent there would be fewer divorces. Why? Because dependent women have few options. An uneducated, inexperienced homemaker can't hope to find a decent paying job. So if she wants to leave that means she's going to be roughing it and she probably won't be able to bring her children along. So she's stuck living with a guy who sleeps around, talks to her like she's garbage, or maybe even physically abuses her.

[doppelgaenger]

I'm way too lazy to read this entire thread, so if I'm reiterating what's all ready been said, pardon moi.

Yes, if women were less independent there would be fewer divorces. Why? Because dependent women have few options. An uneducated, inexperienced homemaker can't hope to find a decent paying job. So if she wants to leave that means she's going to be roughing it and she probably won't be able to bring her children along. So she's stuck living with a guy who sleeps around, talks to her like she's garbage, or maybe even physically abuses her.

Isn't this common sense?

I guess the nice way to look at it, is now, intelligent women who deserve good guys have the right to find one and marry one. They also have the right to screw themselves over, get pregnant by some chump who doesn't think twice about her, too (kind of like some of the stuff we see on here)

If you ask me, marriage is a hell of a lot better than it used to be.

[vashti]

oh puleeeze, men get paid more statistically and more men are in charge of running things, you know it as well as i do

Men are not paid more for for doing the same work as women. Entry level jobs pay the same, regardless of gender. For example, male police officers make the same as female police officers, male nurses are paid the same as females, male firefighters the same as females, teachers, scientists, etc. It may be true that in the private sector, males are offered more jobs "running things", but this has probably got more to do with social networking than deliberate attempts to "hold women down".

Additionally, power is not merely a reflection of the job you are paid for. Those men in power have wives at home who very likely run the show.

Women have power - they just don't always know how to use it, and very often refuse to embrace it.

[doppelgaenger]

Additionally, power is not merely a reflection of the job you are paid for. Those men in power have wives at home who very likely run the show.

Without wives, those men would have hanged themselves already.

[vashti]

I agree that women who get an education can and should use it. That was my point, in fact.

I must not understand your point, actually. I thought you were trying to say that most professional women would prefer to work rather than be home with their children when they are small. If that is what you were trying to say, my experience has been otherwise. If you were trying to make a different point, I misunderstood you.

[Aeradalia]

I think women are still exploring all the implications of having equal rights to men, and all the social constructs throughout society are slowly being rewritten as a result.

True, women are physically weaker than men and yes they think in a different manner than men. I fail to see how physical strength matters in occupations where thinking is required more than physical labor. Also, as time goes by, with the assistance of more technology, we may find that many more occupations will be less reliant on physical strength. Women tend to be more intuitive than men on many things... and yes being more emotional (or drama queens) may not be helpful, but with discipline this can be tempered and made manageable. The intuitive quality in women is very useful in business... and the caring instinct has proven to be a useful quality for business women too... surprisingly.

This goes back to the old argument of which is better, men or women... Which really doesn't matter in the overall picture. Men and women are equal when you compare the sum of all their qualities. True, some men are better in certain things in life than women... and vice versa. Also, given resilience, I have found that both men and women can overcome shortcomings when they pursue things that their genders are not naturally best inclined for (i.e. men being caretakers... and women being cold, calculating business executives).

I think that marriage is being redefined as women assert new roles and find new ways to juggle these roles with having families... It makes sense that the idea of marriage would change as the women today are not in the same roles (or limited to them anyway) or even mindsets as those before the women rights movement.

[bluesummer]

I think women's rights definitely changed traditional marriage. I also happen to think the change was positive.

The 'traditional marriage' role of the wife was one that was forced upon them. Of course there are people that think women are better suited to be homemakers simply by using past example or by the stupid notion that they're best suited for it because they're the ones that birth the children. I happen to know plenty of women who despise cooking, or housecleaning, or would rather work while their husband stayed home to raise the kids. Actually I know a few stay at home dads, and the arrangement works well for everyone. Traditional roles aren't there because that's what people are best suited to. Some mothers make horrible stay at home parents.

I know I could not embrace that 'traditional' role.....I'm educated and need stimuli beyond grocery shopping, dusting, and chasing around after children. If we flashed back fifty years ago and I had to live that role, I'd be miserable.....always dreaming about what I COULD do with my life if society hadn't dictated I be a slave to my home and my husband. To me it seems so dull and ordinary. Being in a traditional marriage role would essentially be stripping me of the ability to do anything with my life.

Like Indi said, anyone can be a wife and/or mother. To be a wife and/or mother AND a successful, educated, self-fulfilled person takes much more.

[vashti]

Like Indi said, anyone can be a wife and/or mother. To be a wife and/or mother AND a successful, educated, self-fulfilled person takes much more.

I swear, sometimes I think women are their own worst enemies.

[bluesummer]

^ Why do you take my comment so negatively?

All I mean to say is that if men can be husbands and fathers and have careers and hobbies on top of it, why can't women? I don't understand why some women just can't see themselves being anything beyond someone's wife and someone's mother. They're people with aspirations and potential they should be living up to.

[Lite]

I swear, sometimes I think women are their own worst enemies.

They are...

[Lite]

They're people with aspirations and potential they should be living up to.

I think Vashti's point was that given the basic issues surrounding patriarchy, it is unfortunate that the generally biggest obstacle to a woman succeeding is another woman. There are a lot of women who are out to do nothing more than undercut any woman doing better than they are. Which isn't hugely prevalent in behavior by men towards other men.

[IndiReloaded]

I have no issue with ppl wanting to work and make contributions outside the home. I just think that doing so involves certain choices that folks are often not realistic about.

This was my original, main point. I don't care if you are a man or woman. But in my experience, women have much more trouble with this concept.