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.

billy- same here.

My OH has facilitated my fun.

Careful Billy, the use of the word "teamwork" here gets some people retching on MN. They are deliriously happy (honest Guv) not being in a team themselves. By being in one... you are the "perpetrator"...

The word is perpetuates - to keep something going. I think an unfortunate typo. No one is blaming women.

Sure it’s “just teamwork” but why are the women nearly always in one role and men in the other? Why? Think about it.

Thanks grumpy. I did mean to write perpetuates. For all the people on here writing 'supporting my dh works for me' that's a bit like a female CEO saying 'I made it work for me who cares about the other women' or it's like saying 'as a white woman I've not had an issue' while ignoring concerns of race or class.

But some of the women on this thread don't really understand feminism and I'm fairly sure melody hasn't read a single feminist text. And probably doesn't want to ask herself questions such as;

• who holds the power in Your team?
• when you stop doing the facilitating does the fun then end?

-could you look after yourself and your children if you needed to; I mean pay their way of someone else didn't pay for you. Otherwise wow what a risk to have children and not be able to pay their way. -if it goes tits up who will be better off?

• does supporting this construct perpetuate male power?

-might it have been helpful to read a book on feminism before commenting on feminism???

Sorry I take back my example below about being a CEO and not caring if other women make it. Melody is more like a woman who doesn't want to work and has no ambition not giving a shit about the gender pay gap or women's issues in the workplace because it doesn't affect her. Why care about things that don't affect you, right??

Bumble, does your DW have a genuine choice though?

She does not do domestic chores, has rarely had to take time off to look after our child (never as an emergency), and I am responsible for all the school runs, appointments, clubs, meals, laundry, etc. She is going away on holiday next week for two weeks, and I am looking forward to it. There will be one less mouth to feed and clean up after for a while.

So, to answer your question, she does have a genuine choice. She is just not very ambitious. Ideally she would like me to be earning a lot more money than I do now (though she does not recognize the fact that my career choices are limited by my responsibilities in the home) and she bemoans the fact that I am not in a position to get her a comfy job in the public service.

melody:

You’re not really understanding the point of this thread. It’s about the structure of society not your own personal circumstances.

It’s a bit like the people who huff that homeopathy definitely worked for them/the dog/their auntie’s gerbil’s hairdresser and therefore the huge bulk of painstakingly collected epidemiological evidence is just wrong. Because they think they experience x, x is all there is.

There are big structural problems in our society. Your own family setup is beyond irrelevant.

Windy, can I try and give some honest answers to your questions -

Who holds the power in your team?
Both of us. Who goes to work has nothing to do with how decisions are made.

When you stop doing the facilitating, does the fun then end?
Well, life would get more complicated, as it would if DH stopped facilitating me.

Could you look after your children yourself if you needed to, I mean pay their way if someone didn't pay for you?
In my case, yes because I would stay in the house (mortgage free), school fees are paid out of a fund in both our names, DC have trust funds and DH is simply not the type to let his DC go short. I accept that not all women are in this position, but nor do I think it's helpful to assume that women who are SAHMs have no foresight about these things. SAHMs are no more naive than the next person and being a SAHM can be a long-term economic advantage to the woman and her children. Please don't assume we are victims and too stupid to comprehend the future.

If it goes tits up, who will be better off?
As above. Granted, I don't have a "career" I've been working on for the last 15 years. But I would still be better off financially than if I had been working all those years as a single person.

Does supporting this construct perpetrate male power?
Yes, absolutely, but only in an economic sense. It depends what you mean by "power". For me power is choice. I have had the power to live the life of my choice, which ultimately was to be with my DC. I realise this choice was not made in a vacuum - of course I do- but nevertheless I would not have wanted it any different. If I had been at work, I would have missed out on what is important to me. DH did not feel as if this "choice" was equally viable for him - because he was the higher earner and because being male makes it less socially acceptable for him to stop providing financially step out of the economic rat race.

I completely get the argument you are putting forward - of course I do. But you can't force women to want what you think they should want. Having children changes your life -it is what it is. Not all women want to "juggle" work and childcare. Not all women want to leave their DC, even if their husbands are willing to step in and take care of the kids while they are at work. Should we pretend we want that because it's the politically correct thing to say, or should we just be honest? The reality is that women are not simply victims of patriarchy - the situation works two ways and is more complex than that.

Well said vashna.

No one is going to force you to work vashna.
There isn't going to be a knock at the door to drag you away to forcibly make you CEO of Google or DP on the latest Spielberg movie .

What we are talking about here is entrenched male privilege. And asking men who have it and women who facilitate it to at the very least acknowledge it.

I completely see why men are resistant to do that. But I find it quite depressing that women are similarly reluctant. Why would women not want to see more women in decision making positions even if they don't want to do them personally.

Are they so committed to the status quo? Would they really not wish to see more women involved on the larger stage in the world?

So Bumble, in other words you are feeling just as resentful facilitating your DW as the majority of women on this thread facilitating their DHs. Which tells me it is not about the gender, it is about the role and it does not matter if it’s a man or a woman performing the facilitator role.

This thread shows that women who have it good are also just as capable as men to dismiss the invisible support and help they have benefited from.

Sorry I have got no answers, it’s shit. Unless I made a point spelling it out to my DH what I do for him and for the family, I am sure he would have taken it completely for granted and not given it a second thought. He grew up in a family where the Dad was Lord and Master and the Mom the maid, cook and free childcare. He is not a bad person and his heart is in the right place, but he has never experienced the disadvantaged position most women find themselves in once the children arrive. So all I can do is educate and demand respect for the very important, although unpaid labour of raising the next generation and ensuring the well-being of my family. What else can you do as an individual?

As I said, I totally accept that there is entrenched male privilege in the workplace. Do I think that's fair -no. But then, balanced against that, I take responsibility for my own life and the choices I made. Would I have liked to have followed through on my career? Yes, in a way, I don't deny that. The truth is, I'm not sure I would actually have been happier for it though. It would just have been different. Empowering in one sense, but restricting in another. Every choice has its negative side. In some ways, I would argue that women have more choice than men.

Vashna, I hope you realise that you are in the 5% of households in terms of wealth and are in no way representative of average or ordinary. I am sure footballers’ and millionaires’ wives will too be better off after divorce than not having married, what with the millions of the divorce settlement It does not mean that’s the reality for your average woman.

vashna I agree that all choices are multi faceted. And for some women the balance will favour not working.

However, this thread is about women who do want to work or have to or at least feel like they'd wish to try and work and have a family. And how male privilege negatively affects those women personally and on a societal level.

And, as ever, when women try to raise this they're shut down. They're told there isn't really a problem.

You can see it very clearly on this thread. Women telling other women that their struggle isn't real. That it doesn't matter. That it shouldn't be raised. Even in the face of the majority of posters stating that it is real and it does matter to them.

Think I read on a similar thread on this one woman said " I accept there is a glass ceiling I would love to break it but I do not want to use my own and my children's heads as battering rams". Summed it up for me.

But I think when women envisage working in a "high powered" or high earning job they picture it very differently to how men do Vashna.
You used the phrase " juggling work and childcare", understandably, because that's what women do . When did a man with a wife ever really worry about juggling?
I don't want to be out working 12 hours a day either. I also don't want to facilitate a man I share children with to do so. I would want him to be around for his kids too.
I guess the way forward is a more Scandinavian style equal set up where both parties can work if they want to rather than the set up I read about on here over and over (seems endemic in the south east) whereby he works a gazillion hours and is away half the time and she is 100 % responsible for the domestic side.
Some women want that, some don't, and if you don't it doesn't mean you nessecarily want to be a massive career bitch in shoulder pads who eats puppies.
Just that you want
A) choices that are really choices
B) for the whole world to stop assuming you are the Junior member of the team.

Does supporting this construct perpetrate male power?Yes, absolutely, but only in an economic sense
I'm not sure what other kind of power there is?
Damn my Marxist upbringing!

kerala I think that's a fair reaction by any woman.

But when does that tip into hindering other women who might want to try. Or might have to.

Denying the existence of the ceiling. Refusing to give it a name. Shutting down discussions about it. Constantly referencing personal circumstances to refute the issue as if no other woman were worth considering.

I don't get it. Why would women wish to preserve the ceiling just because they don't want to have a crack at it? Do they really not give a shit?

Think I read on a similar thread on this one woman said " I accept there is a glass ceiling I would love to break it but I do not want to use my own and my children's heads as battering rams". Summed it up for me.

Exactly.

It’s all very well saying ‘oh but I chose to stay home with my children’ but what if you hadn’t? How would your husband facilitated you making a different choice?

Could you look after your children yourself if you needed to, I mean pay their way if someone didn't pay for you?
In my case, yes because I would stay in the house (mortgage free), school fees are paid out of a fund in both our names, DC have trust funds and DH is simply not the type to let his DC go short. I accept that not all women are in this position, but nor do I think it's helpful to assume that women who are SAHMs have no foresight about these things. Please don't assume we are victims and too stupid to comprehend the future.

Baahhaahaaahaaa. So you're certain you'll get a house that's mortgage free, that DH would continue paying for your children but don't seem to have any sense of how your day to day costs will be covered. But you're not naive. I love that you didn't even mention going to work if that happens. Hilarious.

I can see that the male power structure is really working for you - until it doesn't any more, of course!!

I totally get wanting to be at home with children. However, in the society that we currently live in staying at home with children and therefore having no personal income is very very risky. If your husband leaves/dies no one is going to give a flying fuck how wonderful your time with your children was, all they're going to see is a huge gap in your CV that is going to harm your ability to earn anywhere near what a man who worked all the time is earning. So you are at an automatic disadvantage. It shouldn't be that way, but it is.

What many people are arguing here is that it should be possible for people (women and men both), spend time with those children and care for them as is essential, and not have their prospects in the working world irreparably harmed. It makes no sense for a couple to have a child and for one of the couple to spend all their time at home and the other to spend all their time at work. That's not teamwork, that's splitting the load unevenly and disadvantaging one part of the couple for no good reason.

It's worth remembering that there's actually no reason for things to be as they are now, beyond the fact that men decided it should be that way (when women had absolutely no say in these things) and that's how it's worked out. It can be different. It can be the case that couples can have children and enjoy bringing them up while both still having access to the job market and other pursuits in life. The setup where each half of the couple just does their own separate thing isn't a very sensible one IMO.

Every choice has its negative side. In some ways, I would argue that women have more choice than men.
well, isn’t that the point of the thread? Women do not have more choice than men, BECAUSE MEN ARE NOT EQUAL AT HOME. Women can’t blindly rely on their male partner to pick up the slack for domestic tasks for them and bring up their children for them while they are having a whale of a time enjoying their career LIKE MEN CAN AND DO. There are some wonderful exceptions on this thread where a woman is having it as good as a man, but this is exactly that, an exception!

You said yourself keeping in your career would have stressed you out. It DID stress me out because nobody stepped up at home, I still had to do the majority of running the household, career or not. This is why women ‘are not ambitious’, they are already working at capacity or indeed burning themselves out doing too much. If I could only concentrate on my work like my DH, I wouldn’t feel stressed in the slightest, I will be a happy content ambitious woman ‘who has it all’.