In article ,
 "bluesmama"  wrote:

> Mark Sobolewski wrote:
> > In article ,
> >  "bluesmama"  gets up on
a pulpit and says:
> >
> > > What I said was that the most important things in life - things
> such as
> > > love, self-confidence, supportive family, true friends, inner
> balance
> > > (just in case you can't think of any) can neither be built nor
> bought.
> > >
> > > Though I suppose if you don't mind deluding yourself, you can use
> money
> > > to rent facsimiles.
> >
> > That's all very nice and good, but I think you admitted that
> > you expected the man whose currently the love in your life
> > to produce money for the privilege of seeing you.
> >
> > So apparently, his love for you wasn't worth risking
> > your own bankroll.  At least that's what I think I heard.
> > Am I mistaken?
> >
> > regards,
> > Mark Sobolewski
>
> I have no idea what post you're referring to, but I'm quite sure you
> have mistaken me for someone else.

I did.  I had you confused with GoddessBaybee.  Sorry.

That said, what is your position on men doing most of
the paying for first dates?  I'm honestly not asking
this to attack you "a ha!" but just to understand your
overall position.

> I've supported myself financially. I've supported myself and a daughter
> financially. Now, I'm a stay-at-home mother of two, financially
> supported by my husband. So I'm aware of the responsibilities involved
> in being the financial provider, and of the responsibilities involved
> in being financially provided for.

You have an "awareness" but it's not on the same level as men
who not only support their children (their own flesh
and blood) but also their able-bodied spouse as well.

Children and sick spouses cannot reasonably earn an
income to support themselves. To financially support
another non-relative-by-blood adult is a huge step.

> Scoff if you like, but there ARE responsibilities involved in being
> financially provided for,

Oh no!  I appreciate your point.  In fact, I've been
making a similar one for years. So there!

The problem is that society doesn't support men in this
role anymore.  On the contrary: In the states, men
are subject to reverse discrimination in the workplace
even as many of the women who benefit from such preferences
desire to drop out of the workplace later to be supported
by men or in the very least, expect the man to
successfully "compete" with her.

So do you now see why I was scoffing at your notion that both
women and men have contradictory expectations placed upon
them?  Men don't create these contradictory "social"
expectations: women and the law do.  Some men are now
arguing that there's no good reason for a man to marry
since the burdens and legal liabilities are so high.
At least you got custody of your children.  Imagine
if you lost the children and were then required to give
up your home and half your income as well!
(Note: I can see how feminism had made life more
difficult for women, but not in the way that
you may think.  Read on please.)

Anyways, back to the point: I was dating professional
career women 15 years ago who thoughtlessly argued on
dates that they could have it both ways by creating
a double standard: Equality in the workplace but when
she got home (or on a date), the man should live
up to 1950's chivalrous standards.  (And they actually
used that word!)

My head spun around for a number of years until I figured
out a clear way to express my thoughts: Even if such
a one-sided expectation came true, SHE would not be
capable of living up to both roles!  Was she prepared
to come home from work and then whip up a delicious
meal aka June Cleaver and be kind and feminine and interested
in how his day at work went?  Would she be capable of
doing all the household and family duties to the same
level?  (I have a cute 50's song on this theme if you'd
like it emailed to you.  Have you ever heard
the "Retro lounge series?")

A woman friend of mine who was trying to "double dip"
then came up with the changing role theory: During
courtship and in the workplace, the woman should
get equality at work and chivalry on dates but
after marriage, he should continue to bring
home the primary bacon AND help out with chores at home.
Then, some women added the nasty threat that if he
didn't go along she could divorce him later.

This caused a lot of strain in relationships between
men and women for my generation (the 30 somethings).
Granted, this is anecdotal from what I know about my
associates and from my perception.

Additionally (don't sigh), many good hearted traditionalist
women did find themselves between a rock and hard
place created by the feminist agenda: Young men
were often no longer capable of easily supporting a family
by the age of 21 or so even as by traditional standards,
these women were ready.  Is that part of what you mean
by women caught between double standards?

> IF you're aware of them and dedicated to
> living up to them. My husband works hard both for his own support and
> satisfaction, and for our support. That's the choice he made, and made
> willingly. He gets fulfillment from being competent at his work, and
> talks with pride about providing for his family.

I hate to be dictionary man, but here's the definition
of "willingly":

   1.    Disposed or inclined; prepared: I am willing to overlook your
mistakes.
   2.    Acting or ready to act gladly; eagerly compliant: łThe spirit
indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak˛ (Matthew 26:41).
   3.     Done, given, accepted, or borne voluntarily or ungrudgingly.
See Synonyms at voluntary.
   4.     Of or relating to exercise of the will; volitional.

I don't doubt that you didn't have a gun against his head
and I'll even say that I don't think you pressured him either.
However (you know there was that or a "but"), what choices
did you think he had? Be supported by you?   It's like
cleaning the kitchen: I willingly do it, but I know
it has to get done.  You know what I'm saying?

> I gave up a job I loved, as well as the country I was born in and lived
> in for almost 4 decades, and agreed to remain at home with our children
> until they were in school. Being a wife and mother is a job like any
> other, if you take it seriously, and has both perks and drawbacks, just
> like a paid job.

Of course.  Which country if you don't mind me asking?

> I might get to take a nap in the afternoon some days, but he gets
> regular coffee and lunch breaks - and he doesn't have two children
> hanging on his leg while he drinks his coffee or goes to the bathroom.

Hanging on your leg?  Ewwww!

Most men I know with kids try to work at home some days
and then go insane and are happy to retreat back to
the office.

Another way feminism has made life harder for all of us
is how it's broken up the culture making it more difficult
for you to see community assistance.  Many of the homes
during the day are now empty while during my mother's
time, there were at least 8 other women in yelling
distance to help co-share chores and look after the kids
along with her own for a few minutes while she maybe
ran to the store for something.

Bluesmama, do you see now why I'm a bit pissed?
I would like to take all these social engineers and
have them shot.

> I spend whole days outside, gardening, reading, going for nature walks,
> playing with the kids - some days are very enjoyable. He gets a regular
> paycheck, profit-sharing, adult conversation, acknowledgment from
> co-workers, and a feeling of purpose.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Acknowledgement from co-workers.  Did you ever read dilbert? :-)

I enjoy my job too.  I consider myself very fortunate.
I've had some jobs that really stank though.

> He enjoys providing for us as
> much as I enjoy providing a happy home and emotional support for him
> and the kids - some days it's harder to be enthusiastic about work (his
> or mine), but that's the deal we made, and the good times outnumber the
> bad by far.
>
> Then there are the days when the kids are sick, or cranky, or fighting,
> there are all those diapers and endless verses of "Deep in the Heart of
> Texas" sung to distract them...my days may not be dangerous, but they
> can be stressful, monotonous, and unappreciated - and if you've never
> been home with children for any length of time, then you have no idea
> how much you can miss regular adult interaction, and the satisfaction
> that comes from a job well done. Whatever I do, my kids undo. But
> they're growing and learning while they're making me crazy, so that's
> my sacrifice - my husband's sacrifice is paying for our room and board.
> It evens out, as far as we're concerned - and seeing how our
> relationship is nobody's business but our own, our concerns are all
> that matter.

Growing up, I generally tried to help out around the house
and this began from an early age.   Do you think this
is unreasonable for most parents?  Are most kids
TOTALLY terrors until the age of 5 or so no matter what?

> Yes, this is yet another anecdote, no quotes, no citations, no studies,
> no proof. And yes, I'm sure there are as many women who see men as
> walking ATMs as there are men who see women as walking pussy-support
> systems;

It may have a lot to do with the circles people run in.
I'm white middle class who works in a corporate environment.

That's why I recommended that maybe men who are sick of
being viewed as an ATM try to dating women outside of
their normal hunting ground.  Try a different perspective.

> they're quite welcome to each other. I prefer a real man, and
> an honest relationship, however politically incorrect it might be.

And I can respect that.

Sometimes, I try to put things into perspective by remembering
that men of the past often had it harder: war, extreme
poverty, etc which is precisely why so many men
who have problems living up to manhood may be caught
up and not realize the challenge they're faced with.
Their bellies are full so they don't see any problem.

regards,
Mark Sobolewski


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 4/3/05 5:00:44 PM ---