Page 4 | We need to talk about men needing to be partners, not 'providers and protectors'

Echobelly · 2025-12-04T19:32:34+00:00

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 In this day and age, though, that's an outdated model.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.

itsthetea · 05/12/2025 08:17

Partnership absolutely
provide and protect is so old fashioned and doesn’t help men navigate the modern world
and yes it’s clear from the behaviour of many men that women as well as men are failing to bring up boys well

gannett · 05/12/2025 08:23

Bringemout · 05/12/2025 07:43

I have been in situations where other men have had to step in, I’m 5ft 2 and was being hassled by someone who must have been 6ft 4, there is no way I would have been able to handle that entirely by myself. I think it’s more to do with unlikely but catastrophic events iyswim. I also don’t think it’s a conscious decision or thought women have. I don’t think women set out to find someone to protect them but on some level the belief that they would at least try to is there somewhere.

I think theres a reason most women prefer their partners to be taller than them. Why? If we didn’t still have some hardwiring that said it’s important? You would expect women to then not be fussed about male height. I think men make much more of a big deal of it to feel sorry for themselves than is actually the case but there is some truth to it. Maybe it’s just male beauty standards but women will fall in love with all sorts of men (as I said I don’t actually like men who would be considered traditionally attractive) why is height such a sticky standard for women?

I think perhaps we are evolving. Once women can gain and control their own resource a male is not much of a prize for just providing resource. Men perhaps haven’t caught up with this. I was reading an evolutionary psychology book on this and it placed resource and status (or potential to be able to acquire it as the most important thing) but things like stability and industriousness (I think I made this point before but trad men don’t actually go home and then do nothing, they are fully involved with the household as well) were rated extremely highly by women.

Perhaps the manosphere have basically stopped at the first step and didn’t bother thinking much further than that. They are thinking in terms of an imagined tribal societies where physical protection or hunting is required (I read somewhere even with the hunting, women gathered 80% of the calories a tribe ate which was interesting). It’s basically half arsed evolutionary psychology they picked up from the internet. A lot of womens value for men (according to evolutionary psychology) is not just providing resource but dependability, stability, trustworthiness etc. theres no point in having a man with resource if he won’t share it, directs it at other women, is lazy, unable to maintain shelter, unable to manage children or teach your children anything (tribe would have died out fast if men didn’t spend time teaching their sons how to hunt, how to create and maintain weapons, how to build shelter for example) etc. These manosphere types just don’t think like that.

I would say you do need someone who is geared to being a provider when it comes to for example having children. I’ve seen women on here saving up before having a child so they can continue paying half their bit of the bills whilst on maternity leave. These men did not see the family as a joint enterprise at all. There have always been men who don’t want to pay for the new school shoes, or hoard their own money away from their family (again seen on here multiple times) or spend their wage on themselves whilst their families struggle. Theres research on aid, when given to women it will go on the family when given to men the men spend it on themselves. So actually I would say a man with a provider instinct can rapidly become important when children are involved. Do you strictly need it as a woman in a western society with a welfare state, probably not, but is it ideal for a family to function optimally, well yes I would say so.

Show quote history

The problem with evolutionary psychology is that it doesn't take social conditioning, cultural differences or significant outliers into account, and just makes broad-brush generalisations and calls them "biological hardwiring" despite all the evidence against it.

It can't explain matriarchal societies throughout history across the world. It can't explain LGBT people. It can't explain the correlation between female education and women choosing to be child-free.

It can barely explain women who don't care about a man's height, really - of which there are far more than the very loud TikTokers would have you think, judging by the number of short men I know who've had no issues finding girlfriends and wives.

Ohthatsabitshit · 05/12/2025 08:27

I don’t recognise the “traditional roles” you are espousing OP. You seem to have missed huge parts of the story and what you are describing isn’t the set up nor has been in my family for several generations despite. In most adult partnerships of any kind the partners don’t have the same role but that doesn’t make one intrinsically less than the other. What ruler are you measuring with?

FracasFracas · 05/12/2025 08:30

YorkshireGoldDrinker · 05/12/2025 08:02

Yes, of course. Women have always worked and they are absolutely well within their rights to get a job. I mean the women who chase high-flying careers, who become CEOs, you know, the 'girl boss', 'yass kween' types. I think they are some of the most overworked, fatigued and generally miserable women on the planet at the moment, but they'd never admit it as that would shatter the illusion that feminism is the best thing ever.

Show quote history

Can you honestly have no idea how misogynistic a term ‘girl boss’ is? Try ‘boy boss’ on for size and see if this helps you check your internalised misogyny. Exactly what is it that you think is anomalous or misery-inducing in women CEOs, QCs, professors? Do men not ‘Chase’ these careers to exactly the same extent?

Feminism got you the vote, the right to equal pay and to control your fertility. Or do you misunderstand that too?

Fleurdeville · 05/12/2025 08:31

This is black and white thinking when most relationships exist in the grey area, I think - some particular balance where both protect and provide based on how they can do this and what they bring to the relationship. It’s different for everyone.

Abhannmor · 05/12/2025 08:32

Spot on. Apart from the ethics of it , that model is simply impractical now. Women tend to do better in education for example. And it's nigh impossible to run a home on one wage these days.
The manosphere gurus give young men advice which is really of no use to them and just leaves them feeling inadequate. You can't reverse the effects of AI on the job market by lifting weights and following a keto diet.

Ghrun · 05/12/2025 08:36

I don’t think you have to be black and white about it. My DP is an equal partner at home and I out-earn him. But I have found our marriage has become much happier since I’ve accepted that we are not interchangeable. Some of this is just personality but ingrained sex differences matter. We have different approaches to our children. I rely on him to do some physical tasks because he is stronger than me. ‘Provide and protect’ doesn’t have to mean ‘do nothing at home’.

I also think it’s important to listen to the men who feel the current culture doesn’t work for them.

Screamingabdabz · 05/12/2025 08:46

My DH is both - equal partner/parent and protector/provider (provider only because he is the higher earner).

He is a grown up who doesn’t need a mummy or housemaid, he has me as his teammate. He would have no time for the ‘manosphere’ dweebs.

SparkleSpriteDust · 05/12/2025 08:49

😴

People can talk about that all that like; personally I feel no need to sit around tables and endlessly analysis what men are or should be.

But that is probably because, like most women I know IRL, I am surrounded by very good men who are providers and protectors and also empty the bins and bath the kids.

Genevieva · 05/12/2025 08:50

I think the 1950s paradigm was very unusual in historical terms. For most of history, especially prior to industrialisation, everyone in the family had to pull together. The precise jobs done by men and women might have different, but it was definitely a team effort.

Genevieva · 05/12/2025 08:52

SparkleSpriteDust · 05/12/2025 08:49

😴

People can talk about that all that like; personally I feel no need to sit around tables and endlessly analysis what men are or should be.

But that is probably because, like most women I know IRL, I am surrounded by very good men who are providers and protectors and also empty the bins and bath the kids.

My husband defrosted the car for me this morning. That’s modern day chivalry as far as I’m concerned.

YorkshireGoldDrinker · 05/12/2025 08:53

FracasFracas · 05/12/2025 08:30

Can you honestly have no idea how misogynistic a term ‘girl boss’ is? Try ‘boy boss’ on for size and see if this helps you check your internalised misogyny. Exactly what is it that you think is anomalous or misery-inducing in women CEOs, QCs, professors? Do men not ‘Chase’ these careers to exactly the same extent?

Feminism got you the vote, the right to equal pay and to control your fertility. Or do you misunderstand that too?

Show quote history

The suffragettes got me the right to vote, yes. They also put explosives in letterboxes. That's a hard pass from me. I spoil my ballot in protest, so my vote isn't discarded. I leave the actual voting to everyone else.

Screamingabdabz · 05/12/2025 08:58

Genevieva · 05/12/2025 08:52

My husband defrosted the car for me this morning. That’s modern day chivalry as far as I’m concerned.

Show quote history

Aw love that. My DH does that too and despite being a hard-ass feminist I will let him! I could defrost the car myself, but it’s his love language and I appreciate it.

Bringemout · 05/12/2025 08:59

gannett · 05/12/2025 08:23

The problem with evolutionary psychology is that it doesn't take social conditioning, cultural differences or significant outliers into account, and just makes broad-brush generalisations and calls them "biological hardwiring" despite all the evidence against it.

It can't explain matriarchal societies throughout history across the world. It can't explain LGBT people. It can't explain the correlation between female education and women choosing to be child-free.

It can barely explain women who don't care about a man's height, really - of which there are far more than the very loud TikTokers would have you think, judging by the number of short men I know who've had no issues finding girlfriends and wives.

Show quote history

Yeah I agree, I’m just pointing out that this where a lot of the manosphere is getting it’s ideas from but they haven’t fully engaged with what evolutionary psychology says. I think it does leave space for individual behaviours and preferences but can’t explain everything. I think it talks about on average behaviours and drivers which if I’m being honest probably would cover about 70% of people. I also think a lot of the stuff is confusing around for example preference for youth, you would see every single wealthy man with a 20 yr old on his arm but thats not actually the case, high earning men tend to prefer women with similar levels of education etc to them or women who have equal careers with much smaller age gaps than you would expect vs what incel twitter thinks.

I think the tall short thing is most women want a man who is taller than them not tall in an absolute sense. My best friend only wanted to date men her height maybe an inch or two taller max, I have a cousin who’s married to a woman who is taller than him so it’s not that these things are absolutes even in evolutionary psychology. I don’t think it’s as prescriptive as that. The evolutionary psychologist I follow on twitter generally caveat statements they make because humans are varied.

My natural instinct is to say yes men shouldn’t be talked about as protectors and providers and should be talked about as partners instead. I do actually agree with OP. I just think there are probably a lot of subconscious psychological drivers we are dealing with which mean that people default to a particular position when they are actually selecting a mate (and this is sticky because it involves what we find attractive in potential mates). But the thing is we are conscious beings and can alter our behaviour, we don’t just behave reactively. So I think men can shift their behaviour to be partners, it’s just that many don’t want to. It’s too much effort.

Ghrun · 05/12/2025 09:04

gannett · 05/12/2025 08:23

The problem with evolutionary psychology is that it doesn't take social conditioning, cultural differences or significant outliers into account, and just makes broad-brush generalisations and calls them "biological hardwiring" despite all the evidence against it.

It can't explain matriarchal societies throughout history across the world. It can't explain LGBT people. It can't explain the correlation between female education and women choosing to be child-free.

It can barely explain women who don't care about a man's height, really - of which there are far more than the very loud TikTokers would have you think, judging by the number of short men I know who've had no issues finding girlfriends and wives.

Show quote history

Short men certainly do find wives, but most of the short men I know have wives who are as short or shorter than they are! All the things you mention matter, but they don’t take away from the fact that across the whole population, sex differences also matter. This includes psychological sex differences. Ideally we’d have societies that allowed everyone to find relationships that worked for them, including men and women who want to have distinct roles. None of this means that you can’t have outliers. Outliers always exist in nature.

DryIce · 05/12/2025 09:06

I don't have much patience with men like that, I think it's basically laziness. For millennia they got away with claiming all the benefits of civilization due to their "protecting and providing".

But in 2025, especially in rich countries, as women have started participating more fully in the working world - We've realised , actually providing isn't that difficult. And we don't actually need that much "protection", being not at war or having to deal with wild animals.

It also seems very convenient for men - I personally much prefer the providing and protecting part of life, i.e. working/financial independence/making decisions for my family, than the endless domestic drudgery of housework. How convenient if I could claim this was naturally biologically my role and someone else should deal with the rest, and be grateful for it!!

BeNoisyFish · 05/12/2025 09:09

I think men's height matters more in casual dating which is what a lot of men hope for and measure their desireability by the number of conquests. In marriage if he is rich or really nice his height can be overlooked.

Ghrun · 05/12/2025 09:14

Bringemout · 04/12/2025 21:37

Yes, thats the problem, these manospnere chats never think about what a trad man actually did. They have this 1950’s middle class notions about manhood. i’m from a non western culture and my dad was dragged out of bed at 5am to plant seeds or harvest from when he was about 5. Men didn’t bitch and moan, men worked from when the sun was up, ate and then worked after their wives were done for the day. They guided their children and taught them how to do what they did. Women had their own jobs, everyone was working, no-one was sitting around drinking maritnis, it was actually tough, much tougher than moaning on x about hot women not wanting to have sex with them. None of these men want to be THAT man. It’s too hard. In the modern world responsible men use the time they aren’t in the fields/down the mine etc parenting and taking care of their households. DH’s father taught his kids carpentry(girls too) we still go to a place where FIL can point out which bits his own children made.

I think anyone too deep in manosphere chat should be sent to the amish for a month to think about it.

I think it depends what content you look at. I’ve heard a lot of men in this space (eg Nick Freitas) talk about a type of masculinity that is very appealing. They talk about providing materially, but also being emotionally strong, physically fit, being a present father etc. In that sense I think it’s not just going backwards to the 90s/2000s, when men and women both worked but women also did everything else, it’s an evolved masculinity that also talks about what it means to be a good person. You might disagree that there is any need to define ‘goodness’ differently for men and women, but im inclined to listen to the young men who say there is.

Fearfulsaints · 05/12/2025 09:14

I dont know if its because we housed a mother and child in the homes for ukraine scheme whilst the dad couldn't leave the country.

But I am slightly surprised by how in the west we dont do war comments.

In the uk, most of us are not involved in a fighty war right now. There's lots going on for or security though. I assume lots of our intelligence is women still and cyber security involves women. We clearly have women in the armed forces also so im not suggesting this is all men.

GaIadriel · 05/12/2025 09:16

I don't have much patience with men like that, I think it's basically laziness. For millennia they got away with claiming all the benefits of civilization due to their "protecting and providing".

Well, tbf there was the 'dying in trenches fighting against the Nazis' bit too.

PlazaAthenee · 05/12/2025 09:18

I don't think I've ever seen anyone on here talking about men needing to be protectors, maybe you’ve muddle mumsnet up with another (much more sexist) forum.

Ghrun · 05/12/2025 09:18

DryIce · 05/12/2025 09:06

I don't have much patience with men like that, I think it's basically laziness. For millennia they got away with claiming all the benefits of civilization due to their "protecting and providing".

But in 2025, especially in rich countries, as women have started participating more fully in the working world - We've realised , actually providing isn't that difficult. And we don't actually need that much "protection", being not at war or having to deal with wild animals.

It also seems very convenient for men - I personally much prefer the providing and protecting part of life, i.e. working/financial independence/making decisions for my family, than the endless domestic drudgery of housework. How convenient if I could claim this was naturally biologically my role and someone else should deal with the rest, and be grateful for it!!

Ok but if Putin attacked us tomorrow, who would you expect to go and fight? It’s weird imo to talk about war as if it’s something in the past, when right now in Europe there is a real war in which men are being conscripted.

Lemonysnickety · 05/12/2025 09:20

YorkshireGoldDrinker · 04/12/2025 21:23

"For most couples, both need to work"

That's because the other 50% of the population were encouraged into high-flying careers to make a point that they can be equal to men. Men and women have different qualities, the union of marriage brings those qualities to the fore so they can be applied equally within the marriage, which then forms the foundation for a family, ie children. That's genuine equality between the sexes and that's what it means to be equal to the other sex. Women and men aren't equal in the physical sense and never can be, but each intrinsic quality, characteristic and attribute can be applied evenly, ie men can do things women can't, and women can do things men can't, bring them together, they help each other out = equality.

The trouble is, when you get 100% of the population in work, prices go up because they can, more money passing through more hands (we're all economic units whether working or not) equates to high GDP, but with a dual income, it's all affordable. House prices go up, taxation goes up etc so then being a SAHM becomes unaffordable, couples who desperately want kids have to make the heartbreaking decision to abandon plans to start a family because they don't want to bring a child up in poverty.

It wasn't really that long ago a big house, decent car, 3 or more kids and a handful of foreign holidays were all affordable on a single income. Even mortgages were tiny without crippling interest, so they were paid off in a couple of years, now we have 30+ year mortgages.

We're heading down a very dark path if women keep being lied to about shunning marriage and children.

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.

Women when competing in direct comparison to men in end of school exams typically are doing better on this academic playing field. For generations men tried to convince women that their strengths were in thinking and cognitively they were more able but that is not borne out when there is direct competition.

It is a big waste of intellect not to have women pursuing positions where if the smarter people don’t take on the jobs that require the level of intellect, careers like science, medicine etc etc will become of inferior quality because you have to take on less academically able men to do the jobs which does not serve anyone.

I am paid extremely well because of my skills and education and have significant holidays per year that I can ensure align with my children’s school holiday. I’m off when my children are off for each school holiday to spend time with them. They are in school when I work.

My husband ran his own business from our home that he tied in with meeting our children’s needs when they were young.

My children have benefited enormously from having two parents significantly involved in their day to day lives and particularly now they are older they can see these paths put in front of them as potential ways to live their lives.

Partners not traditional gender roles all the way for me.

GaIadriel · 05/12/2025 09:21

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

I'd say it's still an accurate statement.

Ghrun · 05/12/2025 09:21

I also think it’s basically misandrist and historically illiterate to say that men only reaped benefits from the old system. They had to do things like go down coal mines and died in their millions in war.