This is not meant as an attack on "modern" men/women any more than it is meant as a defense on "old-fashioned" men/women.
But at least the way I mean it, I can understand a historical and biological precedent to the way that roles developed over hundreds (or thousands) of years. Men doing hard labor, women staying home to raise kids, women changing their names, men paying for everything, men ruling the home, virginity, promiscuity, etiquette, dating, marriage, you name it. I know these roles aren't right for everyone, but that doesn't mean they're wrong for everyone.
Times are changing, but there is a reason why this is how it's been for a long time: it might actually be the BEST and MOST STABLE way to raise a family.
I'd like to hear some of your thoughts on what you define as "traditional" gender roles, and whether or not you think they still apply to society in general, or your own life.
2007-12-26
04:20:27
·
23 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Social Science
➔ Gender Studies
Okay, well maybe the issue that some people have is because they feel that they're being forced into a role that they never signed up for. And I can understand that, there exists that potential.
But I don't know how many people nowadays are "forced" into those roles. If you don't want to do it, then don't do it.
2007-12-26
05:09:02 ·
update #1
Hubby brings home the bacon and takes out the trash. I do the rest. I don't mind the traditional role. However... My eight year old son knows how to do laundry and can already tell you how to make a lasagna. Do you know why? When he does decide to get married, I don't want him to settle for someone because she can cook well, pick up after him, or because she can sew a button on. Likewise, my mother made sure I took an automotive class in high school, and I'm pretty handy with a hammer too. Do you know why? So I wouldn't have to settle just so I could be provided for. Everyone, man or woman should be completely self sufficient. When a person marries it won't be for lack of anything except companionship and love.
2007-12-26 04:34:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
9⤊
1⤋
Nothing wrong at all.
Recently, we decided that I would give up my job & take care of the home.
It was my preference to stay home, cook & clean etc. & honestly, I was really sick of working.
Starting out, we were a very unconventional couple. I was further along in my career, made & had a lot more set aside in investments than my husband.
I suppose, on paper, we now fit the traditional mold of gender roles. This deliberation wasn't over whether this was the best & most stable way to raise a family.
We simply agreed that while he enjoyed his work, I prefered to & enjoyed taking care of the home. Who made more money wasn't an issue...
If you were to scratch the surface, we aren't really a "traditional" couple.
I cook, clean & do the laundry. When I feel like it, I do some ironing, but that's mainly his job (his work clothes), he does the dishes, takes out the garbage etc...
Yes, he goes out to work however I continue to contribute financially with project work & investment returns. I would say we contribute 50/50. 100% of our income is pooled. Monthly budgets have been long established.
We discuss all matters & he makes all major decisions. However, I control all our finances & make all investments decisions...
This is very "untraditional" but it's worked for us. Why we came to be "this way" was simply our circumstances, I'm in finance, while he's an engineer.
From the day we met, it was our commitment to go together where ever life took us & compliment each others attributes. Since then, we've opperated as a single unit.
2007-12-26 05:53:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
There's nothing wrong with it if that's what each person wants, but in the past and sometimes now mainly the woman was forced into this traditional role when it wasn't what she wanted. That's why people object.
Also, the roles wern't bred into us, they were taught to us by society. So, it's important people shook off these shackles of labels and thought for themselves 'Do I really wanna do this?'
I personally stay at home while my husbands works in an office but I am stil the more dominant partner in the marriage so it doesn't mean that just because a woman stays at home, she is the submissive one.
2007-12-28 00:04:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
>>But I don't know how many people nowadays are "forced" into those roles. If you don't want to do it, then don't do it.<<
THAT was what was wrong with the gender roles before they became "traditional", people WERE forced into them. And the only promiscuity and virginity that a man should rule over is his own, he has no rights to another's sexuality, and has no right to dictate to someone what their sexuality should be. Also, when it comes to dating and marriage, it is a partnership. If the people involved in the relationship don't mind that one of them is "ruling" it, that is fine, but it shouldn't automatically be assumed that someone has to be ruling it, it is something that is decided between the parties involved and isn't a view that should be imposed on the population at large. As for paying for everything, that too is something that should be decided between the parties involved in the relationship and isn't a view that should be imposed on everyone to do it one way or the other. "Traditional gender roles" should be a choice, not something that everyone has to do.
2007-12-26 05:35:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by littlevivi 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
They're always wrong for those of whom they're not meant for. I don't believe they're out dated or incorrect. An anti-feminist has to be realistic when referring to that link you have. I must admit I've seen women do the ten finger pick up making sure that each speck of fluff was off the floor in fear he'd turn around and walk back out the door had they not. Oh the vacuum bit in case some are thinking that, those particular men didn't want to spend the money on one. In reality; we just have to do the best we can.
2016-04-11 01:24:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I enjoy the traditional role of being a woman, but I must work. I still cook, clean and enjoy being a wife with my husband's last name. I think women (and men) have been led to believe that somehow traditional roles limit the power and opportunity of women. If you look at the traditional Victorian woman she had the responsibility of running the entire household. She not only was in charge of all servants hiring/firing/paying/ ect she was also in charge of buying goods, planning meals, and coordinating social events.
Today the media and industry wants us to think individually because if each of owns a TV and a car and a stereo, its what they call "Good for the economy".
Lets face it. The more households, the more goods sold. SO... THis means that industry and commerce do not encourage traditional roles based on the idea that more individuals equals more goods needed/produced.
Thats my thought. Heck, you asked!
2007-12-26 04:34:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by t. 4
·
6⤊
1⤋
IIn my mind, the traditional household wive is a stay at home wive who takes care of the house and family while the husband works all day to provide.
These roles work for some people, like Stepford wives, but for the majority, I would say that both partners work to provide for a family.
I think that with both parents working (not all day though) a more stable family would be raised since the parents are working together as a team.
2007-12-26 04:33:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by 161992 2
·
5⤊
1⤋
I personally think women and men who stick exclusively to their 'traditional roles' (i.e. Childcare and good little housewife; breadwinner and 'handyman' respectively) are denying themselves a right to independence, especially if they feel like they could be doing more with their lives.
However, the 'traditional roles' might work for one couple, but not another. It's all about finding what suits them best.
Traditional female gender roles don't apply to me. I'm not out to marry the first guy that comes along, I never want kids and I'll never be the good dutiful little housewife. I'm not that good at hard labour, but I'd be very willing to learn.
If I was a guy, I'd dump a woman who insisted I paid for everything and did everything for her because she was too weak to do anything for herself (Obviously, this wouldn't apply if she was really disabled. I'd just make the girl do as much as poss for herself).
My mum (Strong, independent, handywoman) and dad (does -seemingly - nothing but watch TV, did very little in raising my brother and I, hates housework of any form) separated when I was 4 and effectively I was raised by my mum. However, my brother and I used to see dad every 3 weekends.
I don't see him nearly as much as this because I'm away at uni, whereas my brother's been seeing him a lot more than this so mum can have peace from him at the weekends... until brother moved into his new assisted living house earlier this month.
He's only been there a week or two (but has come home for the holidays).
P.S. For those wondering, my brother's 21 and autistic. I'm 20 and have Asperger's Syndrome.
2007-12-26 04:55:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by swelwynemma 7
·
7⤊
2⤋
"Men doing hard labor, women staying home to raise kids"
In most traditional communities women work really hard raising children AND doing other work. Working class families couldn't afford not to. Outside the West it is 'traditional' for women to most of the work - in hunter gatherer communities for eg men go off to hunt - they are quite frank about the fact that they lie around most of the time
and women do arduous jobs like gathering, pounding grain, washing clothes etc. You are talking about a very narrow definition of traditional - lower middle class (because middle class men by definition do not do hard labour, and working class men mostly could not afford to be the only wage earner) and Western.
2007-12-26 05:20:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by Fanny Blood 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
I like those general gender roles in a family situation. It's the best way to raise a family. Sadly with the high divorce rates and people reproducing without marriage in the first place chances are very likely the kids will be raised by a single mother/father. Being a single mother/father raising kid(s) there is no way that parent can stay home with the kids.
If there was no separation then there is still the issue of raising a family on one income. Most people in their early 20's (one of the highest fertility times for women) have roommates because they can not afford to live on their own. If they can't support them self then they probably can't support a wife/husband and kid(s).
I would love to settle down with a good husband and raise a family as a house wife, but that's just not realistic. So I have a career.
2007-12-26 04:46:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
5⤋