To wonder if the majority of women might be happier without men

[Mummylookatmex1000]

I like men and always have, however, ever since I became a mum I’ve noticed the complete unfairness in life for females.
I think back to my mum and although my father’s a good man and was a good dad in his own way, it was my mum who was often in the background and busted her ass more.
In my group of friends, even the ones in happy relationships, they seem happier in the home or things run more smoothly when their dh’s/dp’s aren’t around.
In the less happy relationships, the women prefer when their partners aren’t around or weekends are filled with moodiness/stresses etc.
I remember in my own childhood, having to work around my dads moods or it affecting the family if he was stressed etc

Would we be happier if we were just a large community of women, with our friends and family?

When I was choosing a partner in my 20s, I was looking for somebody who was cool, interesting, shared my politics, wanted to talk about books and films etc. When what I SHOULD have been looking for was somebody who was kind, reliable, into having a family, shared my life goals. It seems so obvious looking back.

Surely it is not an either or scenario like above. Having shared interests, being interesting, being on the same page politically is not a bad thing and should be attributes you look for along with being family oriented, kind and reliable?

I've often thought that I would quite like to live with women rather than men. It would be great to be in a relationship where the expectation from the outset was that domestic responsibilities would be split 50/50 and that wasn't something I had to fight for and 'enforce' (and be seen as the nagging wife).

Many men do help, yes, but it's rare that they take their share of 'ownership' of family and domestic responsibilities. So the women ends up doing her share and managing his share.

There are some people (and I think this applies to both men and women, possibly, anecdotally for different reasons) who feel they 'have to be' in a relationship, and are more keen on the idea of being "in a relationship" than they actually are fussy about the person themselves.

For a significant chunk of the population (and by the way its women -- men don't give a shit about this) "being in a relationship" is elevated to an artform and pretty much a full time job. It's handed on from mother to daughter like ancient wisdom and there's a whole lifetime's worth of learnings: when to speak (and when not to speak) to what to wear, how to smile, what interests to have, how early to have sex with someone etc. There's a whole industry that's evolved to service this. The whole hideous valentines industry wouldn't exist without anxiety about "being in a relationship".

A lot of this probably evolved out of a pragmatic need for women to find husbands to support them which until recently was a perfectly practical objective for most women. But its now increasingly redundant but still takes up a huge and part of our mindspace. Dating books and websites. Vast amounts of money wasted on clothes/makeup and other things which are supposed to enhance your appeal. All that guff.

This wouldn't really matter if it was just naff lifestyle window dressing. The problem is that this forces women to elevate the importance of "being in a relationship" in their own minds which gives it more weight than it deserves. Which leads us to compromise in so many ways. To keep our mouths shut. To not to for the promotion. To do work for men in the home that they ought to to for themselves. To tell our daughters not to do something because its unfeminine or unseemly. The whole "being in a relationship" ethos limits us all.

And ironically a lot of the women most preoccupied with "being in a relationship" don't even really like the person they're in a relationship with. They just want to tick the box.

@saveourtrees

Have you watched that wierd film with Nicolas cage? wicker man? You might like it

Nobody could like that film...

@FindingMeno

There's nothing more supportive than an all-women environment. The spanner in the works is if you are a heterosexual woman not prepared for celibacy.

have you ever worked in an all-female team or office?

My dad and my brother were pretty useless and not nice people.Both chosen by their partners as they were. My mum had an excuse as due to old social standards she couldn't live together or truly know who he was prior the wedding.
I have therefore chosen very carefully.My partner is absolute gold.His mother and father dressed him well and I haven't let him walk over me.As bad as it sounds every bad relationship around me has not happened by accident.If one gender is raised by 'boys will be boys' attitude and their partners let them get away with things what do you expect.I love and truly respect men in my life now.If anything I know women who could do with a kick up their backside

No thanks I love my DH and my son's ,when I was a nurse I worked in a predominantly female environment , some women can be incredibly bitchy .

I think with no men a lot of women would still rule like men (like Maggie Thatcher) under the imposed belief that you need to rule like a man to be successful and effective (aggressive, competitive etc) but if women actually ruled with the empathy we have (generalisation I know) in a way that Jacinda Ardern has, I do think the world would be a better place.

However I love all the men in my life so let’s keep the men but let us be the ones in power 🤣

@ChorltonWheelie exactly!
Like humans in general women can be tribal and be supportive etc of people who are like them - and dismissive of those who aren’t. They’re not particularly welcoming and inclusive to all and sundry unlike these mean exclusionary men.

Everyone’s lived experience is different and if you’re a woman who fit in, and found your tribe of likeminded supportive female friends etc etc well done. Many of us haven’t and quite the opposite have been bullied by groups of women.

I always strive for a diverse environment. Diverse means people of different personalities and backgrounds. An all-female team of a similar profile is equally un diverse as an all old white male exec teams. Both a no from me.

@dropitlikeitsloth

I think with no men a lot of women would still rule like men (like Maggie Thatcher) under the imposed belief that you need to rule like a man to be successful and effective (aggressive, competitive etc) but if women actually ruled with the empathy we have (generalisation I know) in a way that Jacinda Ardern has, I do think the world would be a better place.

However I love all the men in my life so let’s keep the men but let us be the ones in power 🤣

No leader rules in a vacuum - they don’t just dictate what they want. It’s a team decision despite the fact the PM gets the credit for everything.

Ardern may be a good leader but the fact that she can be is thanks to the efforts of her team - comprising of both men and women

I’m intrigued by this notion that women living together would lead to a harmonious and equal split of domestic duties. It would certainly remove the expectation that women undertake most of those duties solely because of their sex. However, I’ve lived in all female households and trust me, there isn’t a fair distribution of chores and some always do more than others.

I think without men we would be quite a different dynamic in most homes .I adore my DH/DS and my own DF and feel that life has to have ying /yang balance . I think on here we get a lot of women having a hard time with DH/DP etc .Those with good RL wont usually post!

Science backs up your theory, OP.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/may/25/women-happier-without-children-or-a-spouse-happiness-expert

Gosh yes.

I'm afraid I'd sacrifice the good few to enjoy the sight of every twat man with a gun strutting his rapey violent ass around Sierra Leone, Iraq, Myanmar, Kashmir etc. etc. etc. suddenly disappear in a puff of green smoke and all the millions of oppressed women he world over breathe a sigh of relief, come out of their homes and start just living their lives. War? How about we just don't?

@Skeumorph

Gosh yes.

I'm afraid I'd sacrifice the good few to enjoy the sight of every twat man with a gun strutting his rapey violent ass around Sierra Leone, Iraq, Myanmar, Kashmir etc. etc. etc. suddenly disappear in a puff of green smoke and all the millions of oppressed women he world over breathe a sigh of relief, come out of their homes and start just living their lives. War? How about we just don't?

What’s more likely to happen is that the women will take their place Maybe not with guns but the infighting that would occur …

But I do think the majority of women are ultimately happier living without men. Men haven't really evolved properly to cope with sharing properly with a woman in an equal environment. It's remarkable how many women, after having kids and hitting menopause, want a life without men.

I think this is pretty spot on. It's not men per se, it's the domestic dynamic that tends to happen when men and women live together in a relationship.

And yes, there are always exceptions (not all men, obviously), but in general the women carry the domestic load and the mental load of children and chores etc. However nowadays we are also expected to earn as well, but many men have not adjusted to carry their weight on the domestic end, they just leave it all to the wife/ girlfriend.

I dunno, I think men are great, have some lovely friends, but I'm not interested in living with a man if it means I end up cleaning up after him. That's where the resentment sets in. Anecdotally, pretty much all the women I know ended up being the de facto mother, even in relationships that started out as equal.

I don't believe it's a coincidence that married men are happier than married women, and single women are happier than single men. They get something out of it (a domestic worker) that we don't.

MN has been an education for me wrt what women put up with from their male partners, and also what they give up when they take on the shitwork that so often falls predominantly on the woman.

There's an argument for not living with a man. Dh is great, but if I ended up single, I am certain I'd stay that way. Because the odds against finding a partner who ticks all the good boxes are small, and the process of finding out if they do is fraught with difficulties.

But also this:

As a woman who isn't really into anything stereotypically 'feminine' & definitely has a big 'inner bloke', I've always found all-female environments a bit meh.

I find it hard to make female friends. Not because I'm one of those 'Oh I prefer the company of men' women. And not because I think women are bitchy. I just don't seem to meet ones I have much in common with.

There will always be hierarchies, bullies, abuse, survival of the fittest, winner takes it all, doms and subs (not in a kink/sexual way but that too) system in the human race whether men are around or not. They are present in female only environments everywhere you go. There may not be as much violence but other things are available.

What people are happier without isn't the male sex itself but those concepts.

Once you're not in an environment where you're responsible for everything and everyone, not valued or appreciated or abused, not expected to be subservient, etc you're happy.

I don't believe it's a coincidence that married men are happier than married women, and single women are happier than single men. They get something out of it (a domestic worker) that we don't.

True. But it's perhaps a bit of a taboo on MN to say that some women also get what they want out of it: company, children and in quite a lot of cases the relative luxury of not working, or of working part time. I've ended up being accidentally very part time. I do virtually all the housework, but I have a very, very easy life compared with dh. Whatever MN (rightly) thinks about the precarious situation women put themselves in by not working much or at all, that doesn't mean they don't enjoy not working.

My dad was so dreadful that I made sure I married someone who was nothing like him. He’s dead now and my mum is still living under his rule - we thought she’d relish the freedom but she’s been dominated for so long she apparently has no idea what to do with herself.

Many women settle for shitty relationships - some, because they don't know any better, others because they don't want to be alone.

That wasn't aimed at littlepeas. I was typing and posted before I saw your post.

[quote PorpoiseWithPurpose]Science backs up your theory, OP.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/may/25/women-happier-without-children-or-a-spouse-happiness-expert[/quote]
That’s also without children as well though which people seem to fail to point out! Unmarried childless women are happier on their own

I don't think it's that men are 'bad' as such, so much as the models of behaviour we're given.

So much of the time we grow up with mum as default parent - dad is always busy, dad always says no, dad yells at you when you interrupt him or at best he'll say 'Wait until I'm finished' but that always seems too long. But mum will stop what she's doing to help you, mum will get you that juice etc. Also we see mum bustling around doing all the things while dad relaxes.

I must say DH and I have totally failed to model gender equitable parenting - he is more 'hands on' than my dad, but I still ended up totally the default parent.

I have got better at asking for what i want from him as I have got older, but wish I had been when the kids were younger and took more energy. I will definitely be teaching daughter to ask for more from partners in her life, and son to offer more upfront and notice what a partner is doing if he's putting his feet up.

It's total nonsense that all-female environments are bitchier and cliquier.

Not saying they're not bitchy and cliquey but all-male environments have just as much gossip, in-groups, exclusion of those perceived not to measure up and even more rigid policing of gender norms. They just get away with not being labelled "bitchy" because it's a gendered term. They often call it "banter" instead. And yes, it's subtle, behind-the-back stuff that rivals anything I've seen in all-female environments. Talk to any man in your life who's felt like they don't fit in.

There are some people (and I think this applies to both men and women, possibly, anecdotally for different reasons) who feel they 'have to be' in a relationship, and are more keen on the idea of being "in a relationship" than they actually are fussy about the person themselves.

Completely agree. In my experience it's the people who aren't fussed about being in a relationship (in the abstract) who have ended up in the happiest relationships. I include myself in that - if for whatever reason DP and I split, I really wouldn't feel the need to hustle around on OLD to get back into the social unit of the couple. Not because I don't want a man in my life, I'd be open to one, but only one I specifically wanted because I felt he could enhance my life.