We need to talk about men needing to be partners, not 'providers and protectors'

Well that's great for you, but you only have one little girl, as you say. So, I imagine you're quite young....
Problems develop as more children come into the equation, costs rise, and perhaps one parent earns more than the other, or health issues develop. Later still, elderly parents may well be an issue. Does the modern man also go part-time to look after his ailing in-laws? I imagine precious few do, or to suport their teenage child who is struggling with psychological/ study issues. It's commonplace for women to adjust their career expectations to accommodate things like that. Women then need someone to care for them to balance the caring the women are doing themselves. It doesn't upset me to think of an arrangement like this and, frankly, I think it's an aberration to be upset by it.
As for why it should be the mother who has the primary role, well, we have biological reality to think about.

I agree, you can be equal partners if you both work part-time, earn similar amounts, stick to one child, don't do extended breast feeding, have no long term emotional or physical after effects of giving birth. But then you are in a niche , carefully-controlled situation.

@SixtySomething What I meant was partners can only be truly treated as "equals" if both protect and provide. Also, why the assumption that it is the mother who both works and cares for their children? My husband and I both work and we also share care of our little girl (as we are equals in our marriage). As we share everything neither of us need to be any sort of superhero.

I know right? Is there another mumsnet where people aren’t constantly told to leave their husbands if they don’t pull their weight?!

Er yes, of course the relationship breaks down if the provider fails to provide. Of course working Mums are parents. But the trouble is that they are also only human. If working mothers are working and looking after their children, then they need someone to look after them. This superwoman fantasy is nonsensical. It only works if the Mum has considerable financial and/or other resources eg Granny is around to take care of everyone. There is a great lack of candour and openness about this.

@SixtySomething That only works if the partner "protects and provides", however.
Also, working mums are also parents - they do both.

Then you made a poor choice of 'protector provider', didn't you. You're telling women we're wrong in wanting men to be more multi-faceted because you don't. You're asserting the PP male is better for all women (assuming you believe all women dream of being housewives) while complaining that you aren't being provided for. That ain't our fault, sorry!

Who "pushed you to get into the office"? Were you frogmarched there by the army? It sounds like you're saying that women are forced to get jobs, and women having jobs stops men earning enough to be PPs. I'd love to see how that logic works.

A man can 'protect and provide' and still see his partner as his equal. There seem to be a lot of things getting mixed up on this thread.

I may be misunderstanding you but you seem to be implying that relationships where the man is the 'provider and protector' are not partnerships?
The numerous posts here belittling the SAHM are doing a disservice to Feminism.
I don't think there is anything particularly clever about paid employment, although it has obvious advantages.
As many of us realise, parenting is the hardest job in the world and that's why lots of women prefer to be a SAHM.

@aurynne I'd hate it, personally.

Oh @GaIadriel are you still going off on one? Haven’t you got any forest fires to put out or orphans to save from floods instead? I’m not sure you’re going to persuade anyone to think differently, you know….

If men are such brilliant protectors and providers in all cases without exception, how come so many mothers need to use the Child Support Agency to get the (frankly meagre) financial support their children are entitled to?

Shouldn’t those lovely men be honoured to support their progeny?

Isn’t this just another example of the rhetoric not matching up to the reality? Eg “I say I’m a provider but I’ll go self employed to avoid paying anything for the kids with my ex”. Charming.

All too often, they leave their children in poverty and expect DWP to pick up the tab instead - what deadbeats.

Probably

Although maybe we should focus on the more serious stuff. Presumably we'd start with the group experiencing the highest victimisation rates of violence, right?

No doubt somebody will pop out the old "b..b..but it's men perpetrating the violence". They'd be correct but my understanding is that victim blaming is out of fashion nowadays, so sadly we must separate the perps and victims.

Bit annoying tho tbh, because it's much easier to shrug off a gay man being thrown off a building or a black man having his head stomped on by racist thugs/being shot by the police if we can just say "oh well, own goal....he was killed by his fellow man innit".

What about honour killings? Studies have shown them to take place within the Muslim community in 90-96% of cases. Is it OK as long as she was murdered by a fellow Muslim? 🤔

How many times have you been killed if you don't mind me asking?

Most people worry about things that affect them day to day. Or are you going to say we shouldn't worry about the budget etc because somewhere in the world a stranger is getting murdered?

@aurynne Would you genuinely want a world with no men at all?!

You're right, but it’s about changing the way we raise our boys now—which many of us are. It’s too late for the adult men in our lives because so many were socialised that way. My DP is very ‘evolved’ but he’s still uneasy with me out-earning him and he feels redundant because I take care of a lot of my own “blue tasks” like car maintenance, DIY etc. He was raised with a SAHM who went to work after his parents divorced, by which time he was in secondary school. I’m afraid we’re in a bit of a gap generation. I find it really difficult but all I can (and did) do is raise DC to expect to and know how to do everything.

LOL at discussing that men start wars, murder and rape and commit all kinds of violence in an absolutely disproportionate rate compared to women being contested with "yes, but women quabble a lot". I don't know you, but I'd much rather have a "quabble" than being raped and killed.

And no, a world without men would not be a peace utopia, but in my opinion would be immensely more peaceful and with less violence and criminality. My sources? Every single country, culture and era's stats which show the overwhelmingly male rates of all kinds of violence.

Honestly, just compare a all-girls party with any party which includes men in it, and the aftermath of it. And come back to tell me there's no difference.

Indeed.

The one that gets me is all the moaning about having sacrificed one's job to become a mother (which I do understand). But so often the other side isn't really discussed.

Going to work is always portrayed as some huge privilege/embodiment of freedom, yet everyone ignores the women saying how they lucky they feel in having a high earning husband and how this allows them to focus on this hobbies/have spa days etc while their 'privileged' husband sits in meetings. Nobody will ever acknowledge that giving up their job/going PT is often a choice and that many women benefit massively despite losing some independence.

Yes, these decisions don't happen in a vacuum and some families can't afford to sacrifice the higher wage, but in most cases it's just women choosing quality of life/comfort over feminist principles. Which makes sense because 'making a stand' that loses you significant disposable income whilst only being a drop in the ocean to society is one hell of a sacrifice. But nonetheless it is a choice and many of the things we hear people moaning about are situations brought on by individual choices made of free will.

@GaIadriel The "feminists" that bother me are the ones that only seem to want equal rights when it suits them. Example: "As a feminist I can choose whether or not I am in paid employment and yes, I do expect my husband/partner to be the sole earner. I can choose whatever it is I want, when I want"
My take: As a feminist I am capable of working and earning in exactly the same way that my husband does. I do not need, nor do I want, to be provided for.

The problem with some feminists is that they've become a bit like the transwomen who are used to everybody falling over themselves to listen to them. They don't like being told no or disagreed with.

Thankfully, it's usually just the ones that are in it to berate people rather than actually help women.

People on here can be bonkers. 🤣

Usually, it's something like pointing out that you can't tar all three million of a demographic due to something less than 100 of them do. But people take great offence in not being agreed with and it turns into a bunfight where you get accused of being some kind of spokesperson for said group. Or a man. 🤣🤣🤣

@Viewsaremyown Why do it? Why tolerate it? Tell your husband to step up! My first husband did pretty much naff all at home - one of the many reasons he is an ex.

So here’s a radical concept: not all men are naturally protective, and not all women expect to be protected. Perhaps it’s possible that we all want different things from relationships, and that’s ok?

But in my personal opinion, it goes beyond women being able (in some cases) to be able to earn as much as a man, and therefore not requiring ‘protection’ or ‘looking after’. That’s very simplistic. I’m a woman, I earn more than my partner, but I also take on WAY more of the housework, childcare and life admin, AND I have one week in four where I am ruined through menstrual and perimenopausal bollocks, brain fog, fatigue, etc etc. And on that basis I think men should pick up some slack, open doors or whatever and acknowledge that it’s really fucking hard being a woman.

@GaIadriel I've had this too! Because I said that I had a duty to provide for my own biological children and don't expect it from a stepparent - then I must be a man. No - I am a woman who takes financial responsibility for my own kids.
I see myself as a feminist - but in the sense of equality rather than the typical "when it suits me" brigade - I then was torn apart...for being married to a man!!

But anyway I think you've hit the nail on the head with your below quote.

A small group of persistent offenders, typically male and often with substance abuse or personality disorders, commit a large percentage of violent crimes.

It's a small group of persistent offenders and most men are normal functioning members of society that we don't need to worry about. 👍

Where to even start....

Well, first off I was right that somebody would call me a man. 😂 Typical response when somebody disagrees on here, which is a bit odd considering that nowadays most women don't identify as feminists and instead espouse 'equality' - obv they believe the two aren't synonymous. So it's highly likely that somebody who disagrees with the typical feminist dogma is actually female.

Secondly, where on earth have you got the idea that women falling out at work is anything to do with violence? Maybe reread the thread and refresh yourself on what I was replying to - hint: it's actually quoted in the reply.

Thirdly, maybe actually reply to the point being made rather than post a load of random stuff everyone already knows.

Men perpetrate most of their violence against other men. In terms of DV, women actually perpetrate it more often than men going by the vast majority of studies, including the biggest DV metastudy ever conducted which involved over 100 university academics from 20 universities in UK/US/Canada working alongside DV associations and charities.

They read over 10,000 previous studies and analysed in detail the data from 1,200 of these studies, all peer reviewed. Look it up for yourself. It's called the 'Partner Abuse State of Knowledge' and is by far the most detailed analysis to date.

People usually only use crime stats which are the only ones that contradict the thousands of other studies. In the UK, women perpetrate about 30% of DV according to these. However, it's well known that men under report, usually for fear of being seen as 'weak', fear of being separated from their children, and also because there just aren't really many services for them - some in the past have literally been told "sorry, there's no local services that can help you".

The charity Mankind have done extensive research in this area and state that men are 2.4x less likely to report DV than women and most of their service users answer that they wouldn't have got in touch if the service wasn't anonymous.

So, you have DV associations/experts stating that men are much less likely to report abuse and the crime stats seemingly support this claim. Then you have thousands of studies showing that women are slightly more likely to perpetrate DV, even though men are more likely to kill their partner (which you'd expect with the size/strength disparity).

Surveys usually need to be taken with a pinch of salt, but when you have thousands of them all showing similar results it's hard to dismiss. Especially when women are more likely to report being abusers than men are to report being victims - supports the claim that men are too embarrassed to report as really the number of abusers should be quite close to the number of victims.