Why are gender roles viewed negatively?

[reddragon7]

I read and see so many threads and real life examples, where men and women feel the need to be “equal.” The man about to become a father, refuses to become the main earner, even when he has the means, and insists that his wife also work and contribute financially. Doesn’t this seem imbalanced to anyone, and that society is being brainwashed to accept this as the norm.

I have nothing against a woman wishing to work post-children, however, I don’t understand why society and some men put pressure on their wives to work, if she would rather stay home with the children. This has now become and expectation. If a woman is contributing financially, it is never really 50/50, as she is also doing most of the domestic work.

People condemn gender roles as though they are ancient, but seem to forget that, biologically and psychologically, women are naturally better caregivers to children. They are the ones pregnant, produce all these hormones, and better equipped to raise a child than a man. Of course, there are exceptions, but as a general fact, people seem to ignore this.

In view of all this, I believe more men should offer to be financial providers, giving women the option to not work after children, as childcare costs aren’t exactly saving them much anyway. Otherwise, it feels we are moving away from our gender roles, which may actually be more helpful in a marriage, than people make out.

I think some of the earlier comments went too far but overall? I wouldn't say so, especially as she is the OP and has returned many times.

I don't feel it's important at all. If a comment is sexist or homophobic, I will challenge it.

@SouthLondonMum22 I completely understand and you have every right to. I agree that some comments went a bit far.

I would like to apologise to @monsteramunch and @Mycathatesmecuddling because it was never my intention to upset anyone and I feel that I may have caused upset. I could have perhaps worded things better or expressed my views differently and for that I do apologise.

I disagree actually, that the earlier comments went too far.

If the OP had merely stated that traditional gender roles were better in her opinion, then she would have got a different reaction. However, when you present unsubstantiated opinions as fact, as she did in her OP, then people will inevitably point out that it's bullshit. You can't expect to make such controversial statements as if they are generally accepted facts without sparking a relatively strong reaction.

As others have pointed out, these are not just nice, interesting ideas for discussion around the dinner table. Gender stereotypes have direct negative impacts on people's lives, as many of the women on this thread have testified. You can't just expect people to nod along politely as if it doesn't matter when people make these outrageous statements.

The OP is absolutely entitled to her opinion and she is entitled to express it, but equally, others are entitled to express the fact that her opinions make them feel very angry.

No.

o/p said women are biologically better at nurturing children, and that there is research to back this up. She said women should have the right to unilaterally decide they are going to drop all obligations to contribute financially, and men should be obliged to shoulder the entire financial load, whether they want to or not. Because biology.

nothing to do with culture, but some incorrect belief that gender roles are driven by biology. And that this biology means children suffer if they don’t have a sahm.

this is what people are vehemently objecting to. She can’t back up her statements, and it turns out her beliefs aren’t based in science as she initially claimed.

if o/p or her culture believe in strict gender roles, i couldn’t care less. But to make the above statements with no evidence, purely based on what she has seen within her culture, then yes, she will get torn apart. Especially when her own “research” she posted actually contradicted the “mum as main carer” theory.

if I made broad sweeping statements about British culture and suggested anyone who did it differently was wrong, I’d be put right pretty quick sharp too.

post bollocks, you’ll get called out on it. Culture doesn’t come in to it.

waves at OP

Of course not. If a culture has misogynistic practices and someone points that out, that's not racist.

@AnorLondo I'm definitely not the OP. We were commenting at the same time earlier in the thread.

I understand getting angry. It makes me angry too but calling OP names? That's going too far for me.

You can get angry, challenge opinions etc without resorting to name calling. The majority here have managed to do just that.

The OP is absolutely entitled to her opinion and she is entitled to express it, but equally, others are entitled to express the fact that her opinions make them feel very angry
Agree with this.

If someone wants to have a transactional marriage where they demand the right to give up work for popping a child out and meeting their husband's sexual needs, they can. I couldn't care less, beyond the obvious problems regarding consent and coercion into sexual activity.

If they think people like me and my husband should be subjected to backwards, misogynistic stereotypes and unfair and unreasonable expectations of men, then I'm going to challenge them.

And also make the statement that these backwards, misogynistic stereotypes are in fact based in biology, and that children who don’t grow up in a traditional gendered household somehow suffer from it.

she’s been told that her opinion is just that, opinion, and her own research showed she was incorrect. But she’s doubled down and come back repeatedly to make ridiculous comments that any other way of raising children is wrong.

it’s bollocks. I’ll challenge anyone who posts “science” but clearly has no understanding whatsoever of “research”.

Fair enough, I agree that name calling isn't necessary. I don't recall seeing that on this thread but I may have missed it.

It is inevitable that there will be some strongly worded posts!

Lastnamedidntstick
I agree with you. There was lots of doubling down and quite a lot of backtracking later when the beliefs at the heart of OP's views emerged.

I can't remember if the OP said she was married or not, but the overall argument has all the incoherence of someone who might be married but is clutching at straws to try and push a spouse/future spouse into a situation they might not be happy with.

I have several friends who follow traditional gender roles at home. Interestingly their husbands are still involved parents when they're home from work and contribute fairly at the weekends and my friends are not the type of women to think they're obliged to offer sex in exchange for the bills being paid. All say they've picked the right arrangement for their family. None of them have ever come out with the sort of nonsense the OP has.

It was many pages ago now at the start and like I said, it was definitely a minority.

To be fair, it was also before the various backtracking OP has done.

If I don’t want to support homosexuality, that’s my opinion and choice. I am not actively campaigning against it. I did say each to their own, so I just don’t get involved in that. Simple. I even a gay friend, who had opposing views to my traditional ones - not once did it affect our friendship for those reasons because I believed in gender roles and he was obviously against it. Just because you don’t agree with something, doesn’t automatically mean you’re abusive of it. I just stay out of it.

I did state biologically women make better caregivers, because that’s what I personally believe. I am not forcing others to believe the same, just trying to assert my views and open to the opinions of others.

I can understand all these points.
This I why I said financial expectations and arrangements need to be discussed in detail and agreed upon before a couple enter marriage.

This is why I’d encourage education in females too, so they will have some sort of start up, if they are out of work for a while, due to maternity. And if that’s the worry - part time work from home is an option to stay on a career path, as I still hold the opinion of them them being the primary caregiver to children.

Therefore, men should also be skilled in domestic and childcare work, should they need to have full time responsibility for this, should the situation arrive. It’s handy for both genders to know how to handles both the roles of earning and childcare, should the situation require it, but ultimately I favour the traditional roles.

Yes, 💯
Thank you for understanding

So you've given up on pretending this is some kind of scientific fact?

Yeah, this is why I made the point that if women do end up contributing more domestically and for childcare, at least they should be relaxed from financial pressure too. Obviously, if this happens and they have no choice but to help financially - the husband should step up towards the domestic and childcare.

I didn’t even make the original post to prove it scientifically with sources, as I thought it was common sense. But that I strongly believe this, due to the biology in the anatomy of women, having the capacity to give birth, go through pregnancy - so I believe, since women biologically give birth etc, produce all the hormones, breast feed - that to me is enough proof, that they are naturally better suited as caregivers, in most cases, ofc, there are exceptions, but in the general case. I believe that’s enough science for me to follow this opinion.

Again, my views are being skewed to mean something different to what I’ve been saying. My personal view is that women be caregivers, it doesn’t mean every other women has to follow the same. I said umpteen times, that if others have a different arrangement, then they are fine to follow that. But I personally believe in gender roles. If a woman doesn’t want to stay at home, then she doesn’t have to. My post was aimed to discuss why women who want to, may not always get the support they need, even if it’s available.

What a ridiculous post 😂😂 everything has been taken out of context. Yes, maybe I used controversial terminology - but I cleared myself repeatedly to mean that when I said sex, I meant to say it’s something that can be enjoyed and fair to expect from each spouse as a marital advantage - since I don’t believe in sex outside of marriage. As I said, couples y have a clear cut discussion about financial expectations beforehand anyway, to find out what they are, or are not comfortable with.

What on earth??? How are people making assumptions about my life, when I clarified, it’s not a situation that applies to me, just because I feel a certain way. And that the provider/nurturer is our cultural norm anyways. Your assumptions are total nonsense

I am not forcing anyone, simply for holding strong views towards something. When ok earth did I force homophobic changes, simply by stating I am not in support of homosexuality.

No, it isn't that I want to change society, but that I have certain views and wanted an insight onto others views. That’s just my belief that married women having more financial rights is an advantage.

What an unfair extrapolation to suddenly claim the poster sees racism as “relatively unacceptable” just because they said I don’t support homosexuality. Even if they were inclined to ask my views on interracial marriage, how does that even link to my views on homosexuality. Just to clarify, I am NOT against interracial marriage and would support that. I am a person of colour myself, but if someone didn’t support interracial marriage, I wouldn’t suddenly declare them as being potentially racist.