AIBU to be depressed that women atre STILL appeasing men for a quiet life?

[Hakluyt]

When I was a young woman a million years it was considered quite normal for women to put their wishes, even in quite trivial things, second to their husbands' and then third once children arrived. Men were often expected to get the best chair, the best bits of food- the household tended to revolve around their needs.

And it sometimes seems to me that not much has changed. The number of threads on here where people talk about doing things "for a quiet life", giving in because "it's not worth the hassle- I can't be doing with the sighing and huffing". Even women putting up with crap and then getting secret revenge instead of talking about things like grown ups!

I just find it so depressing that little seems to have changed. Why are we still doing this?

However it seems to other men that this is hugely unequal for him
actual equality seems unfair, unnatural or just 'wrong' to men who believe that they are inherently deserving of privilege

Good questions, BabyTuckoo, but mostly irrelevant, in my case. I'm older than most posters (in fact, I'm older than most people), and the youngest offspring is 45.

We split the laundry, and most housework. My wife does the grocery shopping, mostly, and is the default cook. When I retired, I wanted to get into cooking, but my wife very definitely did not want me invading her domain.

I'm the default decorator and home maintenance person.

Friends, hobbies? We both have cars, and have as much freedon as we want.

Your questions make me realise how little my life is like the lives of most posters.

I think the saddest thing is when someone has to take "secret revenge" with passive aggressive sabotaging behibd the scenes, because they don't feel empowered enough to be honest and say if something makes them angry or frustrated.

I agree with pp's who say that MN isn't a true reflection of the RW. There is no way of being certain that half the stuff posted on here isn't exaggerated. I bet a lot of it is. But even if only 20 or 30% of it is true it is still very sad.

My DP says I'm far more vocal about what I don't like. He says he keeps quiet and just get on with stuff "for a quiet life" I believe him - he is far less bothered than me about stuff he sees as low priority. That said, I don't abuse him (to my knowledge) so he does have freedom of speech even if he chooses not to exercise it!

I am incredulous at any "man" dictating how much of the take-away their DP should have compared to them. What an arse. That would definitely be an LTB (and he can leave the take - away behind !)

Interesting thread. I think that, as well as social pressure that men coming first is the norm (even if that's not said outsight) many of these men/women would have seen it modelled in their own parents relationships and are, unconsciously in many cases, repeating the pattern.

For instance, at a Board I volunteer on, I've noticed that if a woman goes into the staff kitchen she will offer and make tea for everyone and clean up any dishes there; if the men do it they just make their own tea and don't offer or even clean their own mug - no-one seems to notice the disparity. And if we have to go away for conferences, women are expected to share rooms if space is tight (we love to have girlie chats dontcha know) and the men get their own room (you couldn't have MEN sharing a room!). I've done my little bit by highlighting these disparities with a puzzled tone of voice and frown but no change yet. It's so ingrained.

One hope is that as women become more aware of the issues and don't accept this uselessness from some men (whether by kicking them into touch or kicking them out) the younger generation will see less and less of this at home and more of their mums standing up for themselves (though I know it's not always that easy), and that men need to step up their game a bit to keep a partner, and things might improve as time goes on....,hopefully.

I suspect that some people take secret revenge because they feel that overt revenge is just too risky, the other person has too much power to make their life unpleasant.

Ask yourselves. How often in the history of the world has a wife said to a husband "Have I got any clean pants?" Brilliant hak

We all compromise in relationships but I generally don't see much of this behaviour in the couples I know. If one cooks the other does the washing up and childcare is split or there is GP's to help take the kids to school.

Each to their own and it's none of my business how your household operates but I hate the attitude that a SAHP must be responsible for all childcare and housework. Even if the other partner works long hours they can help with clearing up dinner dishes and bathing and putting the kids to bed as looking after kids all day can be relentless but there are so many posters who seem to excuse, especially if it's the man going to work, them any kind of domestic duties.

Why are we only talking about who does the laundry? What about who does the 90 minute commute in hiddeous traffic every day for 48 weeks a year? What about the hours sitting in an airless office on beautiful sunny days when an afternoon in the park would be so much better for your health and spirit? What about the kow-towing, the long hours, the office politics and the sheer stress of having to provide for two or three other people besides yourself?

Why are women so quick to give this up I wonder.

Both my brothers have wives who would probably never have earned much above minimum wage had they continued to work. Both wives are living in million pound houses and have two holidays a year. They chose that. Both my brothers would do anything to be able to give it all up and just do something different after twenty years of the rat race - but the wives say it isn't an option. ( School fees, life style, uni fees etc). neither wife would dream of going and getting a real job.

It works both ways

YANBU. I'm considered 'high maintenance' because I don't roll over and let DH (or any person for that matter) take the piss. I wasn't put on this planet to please him or anyone so I do what feels right for me and I certainly don't give in for an easy life, I'm far too stubborn for that.

Interestingly I grew up with an extremely passive mother who let people trample all over her on a regular basis and let men treat her like shit. I'm now the opposite. DH knows his place and he knows he can't get away with squat . We've had a few people do the whole "you can see who wears the trousers in that relationship." . No, I'm just willing to say no and put DH in his place if needs be. I expect the same from him fwiw, we're equals.

I think people who put other people in their place are arseholes.

My OH actively dislikes weak women. He is a strong man, but knows that he is not always right and he wants to be challenged. He has had women in the past who have tried to be doormats and he has run a mile. His worst nightmare would be a woman who wanted to be his surrendered wife.

I see this in lots of couples. Many say things are equal, but they look to me anything but equal. I see it all the time. The couple are both out with the kids, but it is the mother who is actually doing all of the work.

Why are we only talking about who does the laundry? What about who does the 90 minute commute in hiddeous traffic every day for 48 weeks a year? What about the hours sitting in an airless office on beautiful sunny days when an afternoon in the park would be so much better for your health and spirit? What about the kow-towing, the long hours, the office politics and the sheer stress of having to provide for two or three other people besides yourself?

Ah, the 'earning a living is so stressful' riff?

I would much rather spend the afternoon at my desk than in the bloody park with a bunch of toddlers, actually.

But then I do live in a slightly different pant-washing scenario.

mousefinkle you'll be adding to the divorce statistics then. "Putting people in their place"....wtf?

Many mothers saying going to work is a rest.

Before I had kids I stuck up for myself in my marriage. Now that the kids have grown up, I stick up for myself in my marriage.

However, while they were young, somebody had to put them first,and when H decided it wasn't going to be him (and seeing as I was at home, I could do all the housework too), what choice did I have?

Yes, I could have left, but having been out of the work place for a few years, my salary would barely cover the nanny's costs.

Plus divorce doesn't mean the end of your relationship with the bastard. It would just have meant that the kids spent every other weekend with a man who wouldn't raise a finger for them, would give them burger and chips for dinner every night, because it was easy, and never stop them watching crap on TV/playing computer games for hours, because he just couldn't be bothered.

My kids have all turned out great, which they wouldn't have done without me doing anything for a quiet life for 20 years. There are no easy answers. Our kids make us vulnerable.

orange perhaps your ?brothers chose women with low earning potential so that they could hold the economic power, then again how can you know that their partners couldn't have had high flying careers with the benefit and support of a 'wife'?

Women can collaborate in this misogyny, as well.

Rather than seeing their partner as a human being to form a working relationship with, and see clearly (but lovingly) they feel they have to build him up to save face amongst other women as they think they will be judged on his social status.

So by ensuring all his needs are met and he gets X career, it will reflect well on them . It's co-dependent, not a relationship of human beings.

I've noticed women who feel they need to compete with other women (not in a healthy way) and struggle with authentic life direction often end up with partners whose needs override theirs, and then are forced to blether on about "My hubs is so clever and hardworking and wonderful I am honoured to serve him and belong to him" to the world to justify themselves.

They're using their men as a status symbol and a defence mechanism against connecting with the world. Six of one and half a dozen of the other!

Maybe my SiLs could have had high flying careers but neither wanted that. They both left school as soon as they could and their priority was to find a man who would provide the house etc.. Fair enough. My brothers were both fine with that and bought into the "family life" dream.

My DP and I split everything 50/50 when the kids were young. I didn't want to give up work, nor did he. We both worked part time. It wasn't a power game.

My SiLs could work now but won't. It suits them better. Their choice.

I hate the idea that all women are victims when many choose their life.

Hmmm I'd not really considered that. Good point avrilmarine

By the way - is it only the men who earn a living who are mocked with the "earning a living is so stressful riff" or does that comment also apply to women?

If we write off what men do as a nothing more than a power trip and decide that all women do is them being a victim then we will never make any progress.

Orange, people are talking about doing the laundry because the 'commute and airless office' type of work is considered valuable by society and is financially rewarded. Women's work within the home is unpaid and unvalued, apart from a vaguely condescending-but-holy nod to the notion of it being terribly important for children to have a parent at home when they're young. But apparently not important enough for it to be of any economic worth or anything other than a minor 'women's issue'.

I had to take two years out of work after my son was born, not through choice, and I can honestly say that my professional work is easier and more stimulating than the day to day work of looking after a small child.

It has always been the other way around in my experience.

Men do everything for a quiet life. I guess my husband does more for me for a quiet life than I do him.

I always said I wouldn't marry my Father and I didn't.