Men whose lives are facilitated by women - how did this happen??!

[windygallows]

Now that I'm in my mid-40s I look around at my peers and am astounded that so many men my age have their lives facilitated by women: wives who don't work or who work part time who manage the household and make lunch for their DHs and do all the childcare and prop men up. It's just amazing how many men have a leg up by this support.

And they become blind to what it's like not having that support. My boss has a female PA, two female assistants, and a wife at home who looks after the household - leaving him totally supported and completely free to focus on his job. He thinks he's responsible for his success and doesn't understand why others can't mimic what he's achieved or even the time he dedicates to work.

How did we let this happen? How did we create a situation where so many middle aged men have such a leg up over women because they've been given so much support?

I've put this in Feminism because for me this is a feminist issue. If anything this situation it creates an absolute imbalance in life but also in the workplace, with men given much more freedom to dedicate to work and devoid of many domestic responsibilities that burden women.

I've also put this in Feminism because I'm trying to avoid the usual comments by women like 'We're a team' (referring to her and her DP) or comments like 'It works for us' or 'DH works hard and makes enough for both of us - should I go out to work just because you want me to.' blah blah blah I appreciate too that some women benefit from a set up where a DP/DH is 'looking after you' when you then facilitate/prop up his life in return, but I'm not quite sure it's really helping anyone in the grand scheme of things.

For context I'm in my mid40s, single with 2DCs and work FT and definitely frustrated when I see the advantages that 'facilitated men' have in the workplace and in life.

Who are these people judging though?

I don't feel judged. In RL no one has made any comment to me.
I have gone from great career to SAHM / Part time .

And I have stayed part time. My youngest is 17. I have no intention of working full time again Life is too short.

Meanwhlle my OH is trudging on until retirement. I think he has the short straw.
I'm off for a shower to get ready for the gym.

I really think it’s just down to personal preference

Perhaps on an individual level but the entire point of feminism is that on a macro level, personal preference is shaped by society's expectations, that enable men to flourish in the workplace and perpetuate the paradigm that employers promote people who have a helpmeet at home at the expense of those who don't - so women miss out and society is shaped by men who continue to hold the reins of power.

This thread is not about judging individual's 'choices' but looking at the impact of the way we unconsciously support men to opt out of the challenges of maintaining a functioning family unit and the impact that has on women's access to power and influence. It matters.

TheLuminaries- yes of course the personal is political.

I don't have any answers and it is sad.

But as long as that set up continues to be the "least worst" , then it will continue. It is a set up that I have chosen, because the alternative was worse.
So women are complicit in patriarchy?
Are we as much to blame for not leading the revolt?
This to me is when things are unpalatable.

I agree that this patriachial system is fucked, but choosing to focus on our lives at a personal level is the best we can do for us and our familes.

And for what it's worth has actually suited me very well. I am in a far better position than I would have been if I had stayed in the corporate system.
I know that's not the norm, but on many levels being a " facilitator" has enriched my life.

It is so frustrating, op. My DH earns 3-4 x what I do. I work 3 full days a week, I would love to work full time and apply for promotions, but my DCs would hate it. There's no question of us swapping roles, as i couldn't earn even half of what dh does in the forseeable future. I love my job and i resent the drudge work that falls to me at home.

Luminaries has hit the nail on the head 🙌🏼

I told my junior report to do the same thing cheminotte.

We really to set up a system where people - both sexes - with children are expected to work part-time for the 10-15 year that their children are small. I know that's cloud cuckoo land, but that's the only fair system that is a win-win for everyone. Mum and dad who both get to keep their careers moving but also spend loads of quality time with family, kids who get to see both parents in fulfilling jobs as role models but also have lots of time together and not stuck in childcare.

Sadly the business sector is set up for profit, not people.

But, women really do need to think long as hard about why they're always the one who has to sacrifice themselves on the alter of the family, usually to their long-term financial detriment.

But, women really do need to think long as hard about why they're always the one who has to sacrifice themselves on the alter of the family, usually to their long-term financial detriment.

But whether they do or not sometimes it works out fine.
Horror stories of a poverty stricken old age are not very inspirational.

And for many of us it's a risk we want to take.

And for some of us we can even find opportunities through a life re direction.

"But whether they do or not sometimes it works out fine."

Of course it does.

But if it was that brilliant men would be clamouring to do it!

@windygallows - I don’t think I’ve thanked you for starting this thread yet. Thank you, it’s very interesting and thought-provoking

But whether they do or not sometimes it works out fine. Horror stories of a poverty stricken old age are not very inspirational

I know, all those impoverished singles mums and kids with wealthy non contributing fathers . And these poor older women, they should just shut up already because I only wanna be inspired.

La la la la la < fingers in ears >

I'm not saying it's brilliant- and I know the system is fucked.
But often it is the best option, making the best of a bad lot.

And I hate the threads full of faux concern for the SAH wifey- so worried about our old age or OH running off.
It's so patronising.

Again it's down to the personal.
In an ideal world OH and I would both be part time research scientists three days a week.
Given that won't happen then we have to be realistic with the alternatives.

This is one of the first generations in which the vast majority of women HAVEN'T all had to work, though, isn't it? I thikn it takes time for any major change in society to happen. Also, it's natural that women tend to stay at home with their babies/children instead of the man - for practical reasons (breastfeeding, bonding) and I think women are generally more nurturing and better with babies than men.

Your boss, OP, COULD have a male PA. It's just coincidence that he has a team of women looking after him.

Also, I'm sure there are female bosses whose partners stay at home with the dc and whose lives are facilitated - there just aren't so many women in this position.

You could try educating your boss about logistics, though - if he 'doesn't understand why others can't mimic what he's achieved or even the time he dedicates to work' then tell him why!

It's just coincidence that he has a team of women looking after him.

No. No it's not. Have you read the thread?

.It's just coincidence that he has a team of women looking after him It really isn’t.

I think I’ve tead most of the thread and not seen any reference to state “facilitation”? I’m really interested and n how Nordic countries and adjacent Northern Europe manage more balance. Is it all down to state facilitation through childcare?

Or attitudes at work? Clearly companies CAN succeed in the global market place without driving their senior employees away from their family duties in these countries.

Someone mentioned pensions lower down. My MIL sometimes gets snarky comments from women her age about her clothes and holidays. They were both public sector workers but because she carried on working while having children her and FIL each get a full pension, which combined is quite a lot. It allows them to live very comfortably, to help their children out and to buy in help now FIL is ailing. Which is not to be sniffed at - she is likely to be retired for almost as long as she was in work.

Norway has a quota system, state childcare from age 1 and (I think) some of the first year must be taken by the father.
I hate breastfeeding being used as an excuse here, what percentage even feed to 6 months in the UK? I fed both mine to 12/13 months but was back at work after 6 months with my first.

You could try educating your boss about logistics, though - if he 'doesn't understand why others can't mimic what he's achieved or even the time he dedicates to work' then tell him why!

reach - My manager wouldn't get it though precisely because this is his NORMAL and it has been for 30 years and he doesn't understand because the work that supports him has become invisible. That's really the crux of the problem - the facilitation is now ASSUMED and NOT RECOGNIZED.

jiggly - thank you! So glad to see so many interesting comments on this thread. This has been an issue that has been really niggling me over the last few years as I've kept working FT while being a single parent. It's been so frustrating to look around at all the men my age who have everything but seem far less burdened, with the freedom to do what they want, whether succeed at work or pursue hobbies (all the cyclists out in Oxfordshire on a Sunday morning - 90% who are men). And it's just taken for granted.

On another note - now being single I realize how critical male wealth is for women to have comfortable lives. I was always academically strong and told that my brain was going to be by 'meal ticket' - but no one told me that if I want to have a comfortable life then I better 'get a man'. In a way we're lying to our daughters by suggesting they can have it all themselves without telling them that it's not a career but latching onto a man that will probably make the biggest difference in terms of the comfort of their life and their wealth. Sorry this is a bit of a tangent and something for another thread!

i would not stop work or compromise my career too much unless my husband was a very high earner so that I wouldn't have to worry about my financial position if things went south. For me it's all about enduring my own and my children's financial security and not putting all my eggs in one basket financially speaking.

Whilst I have a fairly 'high powered' job from which I derive a fair amount of satisfaction I would be much re than happy to be facilitated to stay at home with my children and leave to my husband and others the 'baubles' of status and promotion. I probably think this way though because I don't think my job is particularly valuable in the scheme of things. If it were something more 'worthwhile' I might think differently.

To answer the OPs question I think those choices suit individuals but are clearly not made in a vacuum. Social expectations are that men work and achieve (and women may work too). If things seem tricky or are not going well at work then women have kind to of an 'opt out' to stay at home. Men probably less so. Taking your foot off the pedal for a bit can have long term consequences as others have noted which then drive the logic of future decisions.

Very interesting thread.

I think it is high time that men started recognising the extent to which they are facilitated.
And not just privately.
Perhaps if they publicly admitted how little they do at home and with/for their DC they might be a bit more inclined to change things.

And the facilitators need to start acknowledging the reality of the situation too. Stop calling such men 'hands on' - they're not. Being hands on means being around and doing your share of the grunt work.

I don't judge any family for having a SAHP if it works for them. But let's at least be honest about facilitating and what that means on both a micro and a macro level.

Because whilst there is no transparency men ( predominantly rich white men) will continue to make important decisions that affect the lives of all of us and our DC.

Do we think that's a healthy state of affairs going forward?

I'm a single woman in my 50s, working in a very highly qualified & senior fairly high pressure role. I have known this since I was in my 30s. Try being a single woman competing in the workplace with men with wives.

I don'tthink anyone has sneered or derided SAHMs on this thread. In fact, many of the PPs are SAHMs themselves.

I think BertramRussell has made a brilliant point though. If giving up financial independence, possibly facing a poor old age, having a much reduced lifetime wealth while all at the same time cleaning toilets, wiping noses and mopping floors... "if it was that brilliant men would be clamouring to do it!" But as we know, they're not, in the main

HouseholdWords My guess would be that it's not a level playing field eh?

I think the main problem is that our current capitalist patriarchal society only values work, not housework/childcare. If women were paid for facilitating men (because if we outsourced our work, someone else would be paid for the exact same!), it would be fairer.