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

I'm not clicking on a Fail link just cos some troll trying to tell women we hate each other tells me to. Thanks but no thanks.

"Bitterly squabbling" could be reframed as debate you know, or discussion. It is a forum after all and we don't have to hold hands and sing together.

Look at MN. Women expect men to pay for dates.

They expect the man to propose because it's "traditional", even if they're living together and even have children outside of marriage.

They want their partners to ask their father for permission to marry them because "it's the respectful thing to do" and "it would mean a lot to my dad", yet it would never enter their heads to ask his mother for permission.

They give the children their surname because "mine is too hard to spell/too unusual/not unusual enough" (and strangely, the man's surname is somehow always nicer than the woman's).

I genuinely believed for a long time that marriage rates were falling because both sexes were increasingly considering marriage outdated. I was stunned when I reached my thirties and realised that a lot of "modern" women, who'd had children outside of marriage, had been secretly hoping for years that their partner would get down on one knee.

Women, broadly speaking, don't want to let go of traditional gender roles.

It’s a job they are paid to do. Assisting people for compensation is rather different to simply coming to aid of somebody in distress with no ulterior motive. For the latter it’s primarily women who have assisted me.

Sometimes all is revealed when you actually read the article. 🤗 There was also a 'no preference' choice.

Sometimes all is revealed when you actually read the article. 🤗 There was also a 'no preference' choice.

Sorry, what exactly are you trying to prove with all of your Daily Fail links?
Nearly 40 per cent of female workers in America would rather be led by a man, a Gallup survey found.
So60% would prefer a female boss. Not sure what your argument is.

I am not talking about police or fire officers simply doing a job they are paid to do.

Yup, simply running into a burning building or disarming a knife wielding nutter. Not like they have a choice in their career and actually chose to do a dangerous job saving lives.

Why don't women choose these jobs? They moan enough about them being male dominated. Why not lead by example?

The below thread may be of interest. Funnily enough it turned into a load of women bitterly squabbling because some disagreed that women often don't get on. 🤣🤣🤣

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3080265-Women-prefer-working-for-male-bosses

Note, there's a typo in the opening post where OP says women prefer female bosses when she actually means they prefer male bosses.

Some excerpts from said thread....

Women dislike having a female boss at work even more than men do, a new study has revealed.

Nearly 40 per cent of female workers in America would rather be led by a man, a Gallup survey found.

In contrast, just 26 per cent of men would prefer a male boss.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2797279/women-dislike-having-female-boss-workplace-men-study-finds.html

CBS Local — A survey by MSN found that both men and women prefer to work with men rather than women in the workplace. The survey is believed to be as accurate as a scientific poll. Nearly 500,000 people supplied answers.

MSN found that 20 percent of men and 21 percent of women preferred to work with men, compared to just 6 percent of each men and women preferring to work with women.

minnesota.cbslocal.com/2017/08/04/men-women-work-study/amp/

A study found two women are less likely to cooperate than two men when one is more powerful than the other.

Similarly, two females of different rank are less likely to work together than a man and a woman.

The finding contradicts the widely held belief that women’s nurturing nature makes it natural for them to help each other out, while men are too competitive to have time for each other.

Harvard University researcher Joyce Benenson, one of the study’s authors, said that women’s instinctive distrust of females in power may make it more difficult for them to scale the career ladder.

www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2572235/Women-HATE-office-Females-operate-better-male-bosses-study-finds.html

The below thread may be of interest. Funnily enough it turned into a load of women bitterly squabbling because some disagreed that women often don't get on. 🤣🤣🤣

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3080265-Women-prefer-working-for-male-bosses

Note, there's a typo in the opening post where OP says women prefer female bosses when she actually means they prefer male bosses.

Some excerpts from said thread....

Women dislike having a female boss at work even more than men do, a new study has revealed.

Nearly 40 per cent of female workers in America would rather be led by a man, a Gallup survey found.

In contrast, just 26 per cent of men would prefer a male boss.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2797279/women-dislike-having-female-boss-workplace-men-study-finds.html

CBS Local — A survey by MSN found that both men and women prefer to work with men rather than women in the workplace. The survey is believed to be as accurate as a scientific poll. Nearly 500,000 people supplied answers.

MSN found that 20 percent of men and 21 percent of women preferred to work with men, compared to just 6 percent of each men and women preferring to work with women.

minnesota.cbslocal.com/2017/08/04/men-women-work-study/amp/

A study found two women are less likely to cooperate than two men when one is more powerful than the other.

Similarly, two females of different rank are less likely to work together than a man and a woman.

The finding contradicts the widely held belief that women’s nurturing nature makes it natural for them to help each other out, while men are too competitive to have time for each other.

Harvard University researcher Joyce Benenson, one of the study’s authors, said that women’s instinctive distrust of females in power may make it more difficult for them to scale the career ladder.

www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2572235/Women-HATE-office-Females-operate-better-male-bosses-study-finds.html

Source for the claim “women fall out with each other more often than men do.”

I showed this comment to DP and we had a discussion about it, as I didn't want to just speak for him, but he finds this idea horrifying (which is borne out by everything about our relationship). He doesn't want to lead a woman, and I will absolutely not be led. We both prefer a partnership, where we both end up happy with decisions, and no one has the final say on making them. That's been my general experience of relationships, and my friends' - rare partnerships with men who want to "lead" are looked at as concerning aberrations.

Source for the claim “women fall out with each other more often than men do.”

It's men who start wars. Remove men from the picture, and there wouldn't be wars to fight, let alone soldiers to fight them.

Women would just start wars with each other. The only reason we can't dominate men is because they're naturally a lot stronger and more aggressive.

Despite men killing their partner more often (unsurprising due to the strength disparity) women are actually more likely to assault their partner and....well, have you not seen all the MIL threads on here lol. We fall out with each other much more often than men do and often over silly things.

Taking into account that most female murders are comitted by a male partner or ex parter I find it quite laughable the idea of men being "protectors".

I need protection against these "protectors".

Yeah, but men committing the vast majority of homicides isn't the same as the majority of men being violent.

There were 83 women murdered by their partner in the UK in 2024. With 33,105,000 men in the country that's 0.0002% of men. It's probably more logical to worry about driving to work.

How many men do you think are firefighters, police officers, soldiers, surgeons, etc? A lot more than 83! So you're actually much more likely to have your life saved by a man than taken by one.

If a nutter starts trying to break down your door at 3am it'll probably be men that turn up to arrest him. If you need cut out of your car after a nasty crash it'll probably be men again. Rescued from a burning building? Men.

What if you get held hostage when terrorists take over the theatre you're in? Will the special forces/armed police be primarily female? Doubt it somehow lol.

In fact why is it always men that come to the rescue?

Well yes it does, so the old fashioned notion of not hiring women incase they took maternity leave. Even if you never had children or wanted them you could still be discriminated against because of your sex when you aren’t offered a job “just in case”.

I think when looked at through a historical lens, the view of women working has somehow become really skewed by a brief period in the mid-20th century.

Most of history = most men and women worked to earn money to live
Mid 20th century = men could have careers; some women could stay at home without working to earn money; women's jobs devalued and not viewed as careers
Later 20th century - present = men and women can have careers

For some reason, that tiny, anomalous period of history is held up as the traditional standard (backed up by Victorian idealised ideas of family and mothers/motherhood, which again didn't apply to the vast majority of people in reality). Women working really isn't a new idea.

But she has to do that, because it’s fiction, and if a world without men was in fact a strikingly egalitarian, peaceful society, there’d be no plot. Like Naomi Alderman’s The Power, where women develop electrical powers and use them to disempower men and restrict their civil rights. If they went ‘Oh, that’s interesting’ and continued as usual, there’s no conflict, therefore no novel.

That first paragraph will be news to infertile women!

Medical technology also enables many women to choose motherhood. It enables most of us to live what we consider normal lives, right down to something as basic as glasses enabling me, a short-sighted person, to function at all. So I don't buy the implication that contraceptive technology has suppressed my true identity as a woman.

Sandra Newmans book 'The Men' explores the concept of a world with no men (they literally all vanish one day). Its interesting insofar challenging the notion that a post men society would be some kind of peaceful utopia. She presents the idea that physical violence, war and cruelty wont simply go away in the absence of men, rather than relocate to another (female) host. Hierarchical structures would still present themselves in the absence of men and plenty of women would still be willing to be misuse that power for their own advantage.

Anyway, its an interesting book.

Are you a man? Women don't want to "dominate" men, that's a very masculine notion. Women, in general, want to live a quiet life, and tend to respect life far more than men.

Men are responsible for over 80% of violent crime in the World. About 98% of sexual abuse. Why on earth are you even trying to excuse that? Are you really wanting to imply that women are more violent than men? Have you ever looked out the window at the real world?