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

[Echobelly]

I see a lot of messaging, especially in the 'manosphere' but some outside it too that men's role in relationships is to 'provide and protect'. In this day and age, though, that's an outdated model. Marriage has for a very long time not been the only way for women to get money to pat for anything, so we're not going to swoon over a guy just for earning money. For most couples, both need to work, plenty of women now outearn men and men can't expect to be forgiven having to give any help at home because they are out 'providing' (this was never a particularly fair deal anyway given women's unpaid labour). And we're not going off to war every 5 minutes these days, so the 'protect' part seems a bit redundant, especially when we know that intimate partners are the biggest risk to women.

But too many people still talk about things as that's all women want or need and - a man with a job who might be able to shout threateningly if you happened to have a break in at your house. And it sets men up to fail because the parameters are so different from the world this idea was based on.

I think a key source of disappointment and disillusionment for women is men just not being real partners in a relationship and as parents. And it seems they need to be told this - to know that their wives/partners are working (whether earning or not) and you don't just get to come home and say you're too tired from 'working hard' to help. Or that if you don't have kids, female partners aren't there to run your life with you or do all the management of your family and social life. Men need to be full participants in relationships, not virtual bystanders whose only job is to bring in money - and the way we talk to men and boys and bring up our kids should reflect this.

Thank you for your sensible and realistic perspective!

Well, I may be wrong on every point , although I still suspect there’s an X factor not being mentioned which enables you to lead such a well- organised life.
However, the real point is what happens when difficulties arise, and I’m unsure that your felicitous situation has anything to say about this.

@YorkshireGoldDrinker

Men are protectors and providers, and we do need them, anyone who says otherwise has either had terrible luck with finding the right man to settle down with (my sympathies if so) or is coping hard. Sorry to say.

This is such a load of bullshit, as so many people have pointed out already.

Just to take these point by point: what "protection and provision" am I supposed to need? provision: I out-earn my partner by a factor of three to one. I have deliberately gone out of my way never to be financially dependent on a man: my mum was financially dependent on my dad and couldn't leave and I knew instinctively as a child I didn't want that.

I've always provided for myself and my child, I always will. I love my partner, he pays his share of the mortgage and bills, he plays his part at home and with my child (who is not his biological child). I have a house in my name only and that way it will stay. I have a pension and savings for my child, which he will never touch. I love my partner to bits and I completely trust him but damned if I would ever depend on his goodwill to raise my family.

Protection? From what? I live in a safe house with people I trust, with friends near me I live in a safe city, I don't live in a war zone and I'm not surrounded by wild animals. What would he protect me from? In the unlikely event that someone tried to jump me in a dark alley, what is he supposed to do if he's not there? If some guy verbally assaulted me in a pub, would you want him to go and threaten him to defend my honour?

Many of us do want and need men in our lives. We want them as friends, lovers, companions champions, partners in life. But "protect and provide"? Anyone who thinks that's why they need men for is honestly asking to be taken advantage of.

*@SixtyPlusI *do lead a well-organised life as a working parent, made possible by the fact that I have a husband who shares the load of everything equally. This is not through luck but by judgement (on both of our parts). I recommend it.

@Thepeopleversuswork Absolutely the same as you in every single regard, including the partner with non bio child/children part and being fully financially responsible.
But can I ask the inevitable question now?
"Are you a man?" 😄

Maybe. @YorkshireGoldDrinker will probably be along to tell me I am a man in drag. 😂

I'm getting huge smugly ignorant vibes from this thread.

Does anyone purposfully look for a 'provider and a protector', I think that is just odd frankly but even if a man is a PP, why does that automatically mean they will not view their wife/partner as equal?

@Goldenbear It creates a power imbalance for a start and is a very risky strategy should the relationship fail.
If I want to be treated as an equal, I act like an equal. That includes working for a living.

That's a pretty amoral take on equality you have there - so a woman shouldn't expect equal rights to apply to her if she is a SAHM?

I was at home with my DC (due to gaps in age being quite large) for 7-8 years (did some freelance in that time at the end) but I certainly deserved equal rights in that time, bizarre to think I wouldn't. DH and are spontaneous people so we struggled a bit at first to get the balance right, I certainly wouldn't say in the early days he pulled his weight because he didn't but I'm not exactly someone that will take that quietlyand unlike you I believed despite my SAH status I deserved respect! I am sure many complete spreadsheets on their compatibility for having children but it just wasn't like that for us, I mean having our first was an impulsive decision based upon love!

@Goldenbear I said nothing about equal rights - I said about being seen/treated as an equal. Two different things.

That's just an argument in semantics!

@Goldenbear They are two different things - like comparing apples and pears.

No they aren't, equal rights is the right to be treated equally. What is shocking is that you think it is justifiable for a woman not to be treated equally if she is a Mum without employment!

Don’t be silly. Of course you’d have equal human and societal rights but within the parameters of that relationship you weren’t equal.

There's a difference between being someone who would step up and protect/provide for your partner as required - which I would also do, as a woman - and being a man whose identity and masculinity are tied up with his self-image as a "provider and protector". The latter kind of man absolutely will see women as weaker, in need of protecting; and if his "natural" role is to provide (by earning money), then the logical corollary is that her "natural" role is to look after the domestic sphere. Absolutely not for me.

@Goldenbear Nope - didn't say that at all. And equal rights is not the same being treated equally.

What is the difference?

That is what you are implying though, what's the difference?

Being perpetually indignant is not real life though is it, well it isn't for some of us that can see how corrosive individualism and intolerance to others is and can see how such a stance doesn't play out in relationships with any longevity!

@Goldenbear So are you suggesting you have to be a SAHM in order for a relationship to have longevity? Or perhaps that a man has to be regarded as a protector and provider?

Where did I state that? I hope not as I'm in a full time profession now and have been for the last 10 years!

I think for cultural, socialisation reasons DH is probably a PP but he has enough self awareness not to state this in any form and is perpetually apologising to me for any imbalances that arise in our domestic life so I certainly don't think the default mindset is that he thinks I am lesser. It's hard to explain but it's down to background and principles rather than anything sinister!

I think at heart it is much easier for a woman to adopt "masculine" traits than the other way round. Probably down to basic survival of the species instincts as it is usually the woman who is left holding the baby, therefore having to be protector, provider and nurturer. The problem seems to be men are off the hook for a lot of provider responsibilities now but trying to get them on the hook for domestic/nurturing responsibilities instead, is a work in progress. Men supposed to be freer to express their emotions doesn't seem to be seen yet as particularly appealing to many of them, or many women either. Also a work in progress.

How is wanting a relationship where all duties across the financial, child-rearing and household spectrum are shared equally being “perpetually indignant”? It’s a really, really basic bar to have

In the UK I'd largely agree.

In South Africa (where I have many relatives) I'd feel much safer with a man who could handle himself. Can give multiple examples off top of my head.

Cousins awoke age 14 to find a burglar in their room. Had given the dogs poisoned meat and jumped fence. They both tried to tackle him as he was a skinny guy and they were both big sporty lads. He tried to pull a knife out his jacket and they were holding onto his arm. Uncle (ex rugby player and amateur boxer) came in and sparked the guy clean out. Would my aunt have managed? Likely not.

Most of my cousins have also at some point had people try and get them out the car to carjack them - hiding behind trees near gates, waiting for them to get out and enter gate code, or trying the car door to see if unlocked etc.

Depends where you live IMO.

I wanted a provider (alongside my wages) and protector. That’s just what I wanted. I got neither tho. divorced. YABU