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.

Lecroissant - that does sound good. Sort of hope this way of working is the future. Changing the way we work to suit ourselves rather than working inflexibly for someone else's profit (probably offshore). Off to try and figure out if I have any skills I could turn into a business

Everyone, when I started this thread I didn't really want the focus to be purely on 'women as facilitators' put to see how many systems are in place that facilitate men, from policies at the workforce, to parents who treat sons different than women, to employees that make more concessions for men than women especially when it comes to recruitment (studies show recruiters tend to be more lenient with men and more willing to recruit men who have 'potential' versus 'experience'.) There are so many systems in place that promote and support the needs of men. Women at home is one of them but there are loads of other things that both give and facilitate male privilege.

you start to lose the sense that you are a meaningful person in your own right

Yes, this. 100 times this. Of course it doesn't help that most other people think this too (in the uk at least) and are very happy to imply it or say it outright. You can't win. If you SAH you're "just" a mum, if you WOH plenty of people are happy to imply you're neglecting your kids. Interesting how SAHDs are heros and men at work don't get asked how they manage childcare (or indeed get offered flexible working). I don't think this mindset helps any parents, Mums or Dads.

Anatidae - I don't disagree with you. I doubt you would find many women who don't believe in equality in the workplace in theory, but what goes on in their private sphere may not be an accurate reflection this. In different circumstances, I would have made different choices, but I'm still the same person.

Maybe people (men and women) seek out partners who are willing to facilitate the kind of lifestyle they want? We are born with different abilities, confidence levels and motivations and you navigate the circumstances you find yourself in throughout life. The 50/50 model sounds ideal in principle, but what if that doesn't suit the individuals in a relationship for whatever reason?

Le Croissant, you are so right. Somehow we tried running the business together, but it was even more stressful with the income unpredictable week to week. It was harder work than DH concentrating on work and me on home and family. At least in this set up we have stability and less of a mental load coupled with uncertainty about the future. The solution I think should be in changing society’s attitudes and making it valuable for men to choose to spend time with their family/ do housework even if it means slowing down their career or putting it on hold. Then there will be little difference for employers whether they employ a man or a woman as they would be as likely as each other to prioritise family over paid employment.

The 50/50 model sounds ideal in principle, but what if that doesn't suit the individuals in a relationship for whatever reason?

Then the individuals do what suits them.

The problem is that the choice of the bulk of those individuals is in fact restricted. If we had true equality we’d see a spread - some women taking on all the domestic stuff, equal numbers of men doing the domestic stuff, and all the permutations in between, as a free choice and according to what suited them.
But we don’t. We see vastly more women being facilitators and their contributions ignored while men take it for granted that they can carry on ruling the world without all the pesky admin of life weighing them .

This argument does not negate the fact that it works well for you and others. If you’ve made choices freely and they work for you that’s great, and the issue in wider society still remains.

'Maybe people (men and women) seek out partners who are willing to facilitate the kind of lifestyle they want? We are born with different abilities, confidence levels and motivations and you navigate the circumstances you find yourself in throughout life.'

If this is true, then why is it that it's so often the women who stay at home? Is it because women are born wanting that?

It's just too convenient to say women aren't equal at top level positions ( by which I mean positions that have macro level impact as opposed to those that pay the most) because that's the way they prefer it.

Do we think that about people of colour? Or disabled people? Or people born into poverty? Do they just not want a seat at the table?

Obviously societies should create systems and legislate for equality of opportunity - this goes without saying and there is still a way to go.

What you can't legislate for is how people should feel within their personal sphere. Nor can you force people to take up roles if they are more inclined to do something else.

I don't have all the answers. I have a Masters Degree which I worked hard for and I used to work in an area considered "worthy" if not particularly high paid. But when the DC came along, my instinct was that I didn't want anyone else to do the day to day with them. DH did not have that instinct in the same way. That was/is the truth of the matter for us. I accept not everyone will feel the same, but I know I'm not he only one.

The government could make childcare free, but they can't force women to use it if they don't want to or have to. My DH is self-employed. He has never had a fixed income or salary - how do you legislate for work / life balance in those circumstances?

‘But the vast majority are either divorced or don't have kids. Individual decisions I know, but a clear sign that they had to make those choices that men at the same level did not.’

I find this interesting because divorced women of course often do have kids they are raising alone. I wonder how much of living with a man is a huge emotional and self esteem cost for many women, not just a matter of raising kids.

'Maybe people (men and women) seek out partners who are willing to facilitate the kind of lifestyle they want? We are born with different abilities, confidence levels and motivations and you navigate the circumstances you find yourself in throughout life.

The first part of that argument doesn’t lead logically into ‘men get facilitated.’

We are all born different. We all want different things. At the same time, I dont accept that women want less than men across the board. I dont think that women’s abilities are lesser than men’s. I dont think that a woman is less able to run a major company than a man, and I dont think that women are less ambitious than men. We certainly aren’t less smart or able than men.

I think what people want is actually similar across sex, age race and religion. We want to matter, we want our contributions to be recognised. We want fairness and we want equality.

Right now white middle class and up men hold most of the power. I dont accept that’s because women/people of colour/poorer people don’t want a seat at the table. It’s because society is structured to keep them out, because letting them in means a tiny bit less for the people at the top.

This whole argument is about entrenched power and the ways in which that power is maintained, as society is structured so that women are effectively serving men at every level.

‘I think what people want is actually similar across sex, age race and religion. We want to matter, we want our contributions to be recognised. We want fairness and we want equality.’

These aren’t the things people generally want most in life though, surely?

In what way, Silvia? I’m talking about people’s relationship to the sources of power in society.

I recognise this depressing picture Windy. Work at senior level in a pretty enlightened and forward thinking sector. See all the time my male peers able to just join in more/add in extra hours/do stuff at short notice and it means they gain extra opportunities, chances and visibility. Recently arranged a two day event with overnight stay (lots of arranging my DD's childcare far in advance) only to have the other members of group decide on the day to change to be one day event and not overnight after all. Grrrrr. All men and all possible coz of wives at home. Didn't occur to any of them that I would have wasted a nights childcare, couldn't 'unorganise' it by then. And they are all nice right on guys who would view themselves as supportive of women in leadership roles. They just have never had to think that way. Ditto with early morning meetings - lost count of number of times I've been the only woman who just made it in time after doing school run and bombing it to meeting sweaty and stressed. To see my male colleagues who have been at work for a couple of hours looking relaxed and composed! Refuse now to do any before 9.30 since being senior enough to set the tone in my place.

People want their material needs met and they want loving relationships (not necessarily romantic ones). In terms of work, many people will make decisions based on that.

Many people are not prepared to move away from family and friends when choosing a career. Many working class people won’t choose riskier jobs in creative, media or academic fields because they have no safety net to get their material needs met, and so on.

'But when the DC came along, my instinct was that I didn't want anyone else to do the day to day with them. DH did not have that instinct in the same way. That was/is the truth of the matter for us. I accept not everyone will feel the same, but I know I'm not he only one.'

So do you think there's a fundamental (biological?) difference between you and your DH? One that makes you care more about your children than he does?

‘This whole argument is about entrenched power and the ways in which that power is maintained, as society is structured so that women are effectively serving men at every level.‘

This is the whole problem, in a nutshell.

LeCroissant - Again, I can only speak from my own experience, but yes, I would say there are definitely fundamental biological differences between my DH and I.

I'm not really talking about domestic "stuff" such as housework - this is up for debate!

I am talking about responsiveness to all our babies from day one. Did DH ever lie awake all night to check the babies were still breathing in the Moses basket next to the bed? No? Was he able to preempt when the next feed would be? No, because he never breastfed. It goes from there really. He's not tuned in in the same way.

Maybe we're extreme examples because when I met I used to work in a therapeutic setting with children and he was in the military back then. I do think some men are probably capable adapting to babies more naturally than him.

I don't think I care more about the DC than him, no. We just have different strengths. For instance, he's obsessive about long-term financial ways of securing their future and opportunities in a way that wouldn't come naturally to me.

There are differences definitely, otherwise things wouldn't have panned out the way they did. Some of it is down to our upbringings and cultural hangover, but there is more to it than that.

So if for some reason you had not been there when your kids were newborns, would he have done a bad job of looking after them Vashna?

Ah yes sylvia I get what you mean... of course those aren’t all our needs, I meant from an ‘interaction with the system’ sense, rather than our emotional closeness to our families and security (which of course is important too!)

I really think we need a societal shift at many levels.
Girls should NOT grow up thinking that when they get married they will stop working and Boys should NOT grow up thinking that when they get married their wife will look after home and kids. Employers should not expect that their employees are facilitated domestically. Both men and women should have paternity leave with stronger incentives for men to take theirs up until the pay gap narrows. Equality means equality, it is not good enough that men are in the workplace making decisions on a macro scale that affect our futures and women are at home. Men should be looking after their children too and women should be in the workplace too. It's so simple yet so far from where we are.

vashna again that’s your individual circumstances. Dh did lie awake listening for ds. He does do a lot of the ‘nurturing’ stuff. The initial gestating, birthing and breastfeeding I had to do but he did and does all the rest.
The system hurts men too in that sense - a man who wants to be more hands on and close to his child can do it - he may have to step back from his career to do it, but he can do it.

All the data from here in Sweden shows that men who take parental leave earlier in the child’s life benefit from that early bonding AND they understand the process, the drudge work, the hard graft, or being with little ones. And that feeds back into society in beneficial ways, because a bloke who has had six months at home with a baby while the wife is at work *understands

• what is involved.

Equality has to start right the beginning of life. Society has some changing to do

I really don't think he would have managed on his own LeCrois and Anatidae. I would like to say otherwise, but he probably would have had to involve his mother. The first time I left him alone with DS1 for 10 minutes he let him roll off the bed. There were all sorts of things like that. I never felt as if he was tuned in enough minute to minute or had the patience to interact with them all day. As they've got older, he's great though.

From a purely anecdotal perspective for me, I have become a facilitator for my boyfriend because having fallen into a Home-maker role with XH, where his Very Important Job meant I always had to wake in the night with the DCs and not disturb him, had to do all childcare as he worked odd shifts and weekends etc so we had no routine etc, I ended up without a career path.

As a low earner I don’t have as much to offer a relationship in a material sense so my contribution was my time and energy rather than money.

When we split his VIJ meant I still do most of the childcare and work around school hours etc.

When I went for a recent interview I was told that this was a very family friendly firm as they sometimes allowed the young men who worked there to finish in time to go home and put their kids to bed. And that if there was ever an important family occasion such as a wedding, that I would be able to book a Saturday off.

When I explained that, as a single mum, I need to be home to do bedtime every night - and actually dinner too - and that I would happily work from home for an hour or two after that if needed, suddenly my very positive interview went downhill!

I was also asked how my boyfriend felt about me getting a full time job and having to step up at home. Not sure why he presumed I had a boyfriend or that he lived with me?!

Anyway, obviously I didn’t get the job (or two others that went the same way) as despite being told I had all the right qualities and would fit in well, the ridiculous hours expected of me were not feasible.

So I am still a low earner, with nothing material to bring to my relationship, so I end up offering support and time and energy to my BF while he pays for things and ‘treats me’.

Without real family friendly work women will inevitably end up facilitating men because we can’t contribute as well financially and so have to make up for it with packed lunches, ironed shirts, childcare and listening to their issues.

I can almost hear the timer when I talk to my DP about my day! It’s like he has only so much attention to give before it has to be back on him. He visibly drifts off if I say too much, so I’ve learned to keep it short and sweet. God forbid I should expect the same level of emotional support from him. He will give me money though.

To use the ‘teach a man to fish’ analogy, I don’t want him to give me a fish, I want him to give me the support so that I can go out and fish for myself, but as they’re not his DCs it’s not his job to support me. And it’s not my XH’s job to support me any more. So I’m trapped taking his fish and saying thank you, and making him a pie with it!

So if he'd had to look after them on his own (without you or his mother), he'd have let them die?