Men who prefer non-career women - can you afford to have what you want?

[sb129]

I agree. I figure this issues resolves itself for each individual couple. When my wife and I married, she was fully intending to go career-track. Once we had our first child, she fell in love with the idea of working half-time in office work and hasn't looked back.

 

Absolutely. And its dangerous to say "I will/will not do this" or "these are my requirements" because things change.

 

As it stands now, I have every intention of returning to work if/when my fiance and I have kids. Who knows? Maybe I will, maybe I won't, and whatever happens we will deal with it together.

[Shygirl15]

And its dangerous to say "I will/will not do this" or "these are my requirements" because things change.

No, there's nothing dangerous about it. If you're absolutely sure on what you want, then there shouldn't be any 'maybe' about it. Things cannot change unless you allow them to.

[Woggle]

Men who want stay at home wives only do so because they feel that if she needs him she won't become a walkaway wife. It is their way of trying to lessen the odds of divorce but a stay at home woman is just as likely as a working woman to become a walkway and a man will pay through the nose after the divorce.

[sb129]

No, there's nothing dangerous about it. If you're absolutely sure on what you want, then there shouldn't be any 'maybe' about it. Things cannot change unless you allow them to.

 

I disagree. With regards to having children, nobody knows anything for sure until they have been in that situation. Life has so many variables. Priorities change.

 

You can be "absolutely sure" about lots of things, and then change your mind. I was 100% definitely never going to live in this country again, nor was I going to marry a man from here. Guess where I am living now after 7 years away, and guess what the nationality of my fiance is?

 

I know women who were adamant they would go back to work after having kids, and didn't. I also know women who cut short their maternity leave because they took more than they thought they would need and were desperate to get back to work.

 

I can't be absolutely sure either way, because it hasn't happened to me yet, therefore I won't say I will definitely return to work after I have children.

[Tomcat33]

And so do all those career women who are making the most of what they have to offer employers - they know it's very difficult to thrive without money, and even more difficult to raise a family on one income and no other savings. That's why they have careers. It's mind-boggling to me that there are men who don't find women who have careers attractive because they have careers.

 

 

You know something you raise some extremely good points:

 

I have come to the realization that it's not that men prefer a woman without a career, younger men at least or immautre ones is probably a better way to describe them, is that they confuse a woman who is not independent and career oriented with the idea that if she is not into her career as much she will make a great, maid, prostitute/mom/psychiatrist/ mom to him, when they decide to form a marriage and family. They are under the misconception that a woman who is career driven is not going to be into those things when she marries and has children. The best part is, and I have seen this with some of my female friends who gave up their careers to become a SHM, that these women have children, run around all day long taking care of the kids at an exhausting rate, they do all the cleaning all the shopping all the cooking etc and their Hs come home and expect to plop their azzes infront of the tv/computer and zone out from their hard day and also expect to be taken care of on top of it, because "THEY" are the ones with the full time job not the wife.

 

I think some men just have this natural chauvenistic tendency to think "she is career driven and independent therefore the moment we marry and decide to have kids she will completely neglect me. The thing is that women who end up doing it all at home also are seen as "neglecting him" because at the end of the day some men are just babies in grown up bodies looking for a mom and a woman cannot win either way.

 

So no matter what it is that drives these men to think "I want a woman who is very dependent" or the other side of the spectrum "totally independant" in both cases these men have and will always have very unhealthy expectations out of a partnership they will never see their union to a woman as a partnership they will just see it as a vehicle of social convenience one in which they are the protagonists and their women are simply a tool they need to fit in to the rest of society.

 

The healthier male expects a woman to not only be an individual and one who has her own set of interests and financial as well as personal goals, but also one who embraces a woman's indiviual needs because he loves her for the person she is and respects her as a whole, as he can also expect from this woman he chooses to be with.

 

A lot of golddigger types think they have it made finding a man who is willing to support them while they do it all, they later come to the shocking surprise that while their money making machine is off in increasing frequency business trips or after work get-aways, she's confined to the home and all the responsibilities that it takes to keep a home going thinking her life would be shared with this man when the furthest from that happens.

 

be careful what you wish for

[allina]

I'll just say there is tremendous value in a smart, stay-at-home spouse who both manages the family's finances and supports the income-producing spouse emotionally and logistically. The conflict comes when the working spouse doesn't appreciate that value, or, conversely, when the SAHS doesn't appreciate the singular efforts the income-producing spouse is making. Note that I don't call them "working" and "non-working" because both work very diligently and with the same respective intelligence.

 

The first sentence in your post sounds good, on paper, but I feel like it rarely works this way in real life, especially today.

 

I feel like there is so much disconnect, misunderstanding and resentment among coupes that have this sort of arrangement. I feel like the SAHM starts to lose herself among the housework, forgets who she is, misses adult conversation and real responsibility. I think she also becomes less interested in sex, often lets her self go and has little to stimulate her husband with, both intellectually and sexually.

 

In turn the man feels like his wife doesn't understand him and his work stress, doesn't value what he does for the family. It's hard for him to relate to her and he feels like she has it easy, she just sits at home all day. He gets frustrated that she nags him, never wants sex and never looks sexy anymore. They start having nothing to talk about except for bills and the kids. All the things that brought them together start to disappear.

 

I think it's better for a couple to be on the same page. I'm not saying that a woman shouldn't take a year off after having a baby but this arrangement on a permanent basis isn't good for a romantic relationship. I think it would be better for both partners to work part time, anything other than taking on completely separate roles.

[sb129]

I agree Allina. My mum did it and I turned out OK.

 

We live in a time where everything can be shared, so why should this be any different?

 

Thats another reason i wouldn't be 100% with my partner being a SAHD, I think we should share it so we both get the best of both worlds.

[carhill]

I can say the possibilities are as endless as the people involved. I've lived them and grew up in them. Definitions only limit us.

 

 

I actually did live the perspective of the OP (the preparation part) until the hope for such a life faded from my psyche. Those years are long gone. Today, the value and compatibility of a partner would be all that matters. Money is irrelevant. I've never worried about money, save for making sure my mom's taken care of. I've been the gainfully unemployed SAHS for the entirety of our marriage and found my experience to be exactly the opposite of that asserted, in that I'm extremely aware of and in tune with the world "out there", just as my mother was with my father's world in accounting and finance. It all stems from desire and love for one's partner, and those qualities flow in both directions in a healthy relationship. Each couple defines that for themselves.

 

If most people (presumably) today can't or don't want to figure out that dynamic, there's nothing I can do about that. I accept that it's not their path. Lots of room on the existence highway

[allina]

I agree Allina. My mum did it and I turned out OK.

 

We live in a time where everything can be shared, so why should this be any different?

 

Thats another reason i wouldn't be 100% with my partner being a SAHD, I think we should share it so we both get the best of both worlds.

 

My mom worked as well and I know that I have amazing parents who did an amazing job raising me. My mom was never a cold power bitch or anything but she is brilliant and has always been very successful, same with my dad.

 

Further, being a SAHM wouldn't provide me with the lifestyle I want, even if we could live off only my SO's salary. I don't want to just get by financially. Saving money is important to me, saving for a child's education is important tome, having no debt is important to me. Besides the money I enjoy working, I like having the responsibility, I feel good accomplishing things at work and I enjoy my work environment. I even like getting dressed up with my SO every morning and seeing how hot he thinks I look in my work clothes and stilettos. I like going out to a nice dinner after work with my SO and talking about work, getting advice and laughing about our days. I just enjoy being a contributing, functioning adult. Plus, with both of us working we can afford to hire someone to clean the house, we can eat out, buy quality food, go on vacation and so on.

[norajane]

Absolutely. And its dangerous to say "I will/will not do this" or "these are my requirements" because things change.

 

This is what I was taught growing up. That over the course of a lifetime, things change. And you're better off being as prepared as possible to deal with those changes as they occur.

 

Both my parents worked because they HAD to. They knew that life throws you curve balls, and they've had their share. So they put my sister and me through school so that we'd be capable of having well-paying careers in case of divorce, unemployment, husband is injured or becomes ill and can't work, death, any number of things that can and do happen to people. Or just so we'd be able to have easier lives financially than the ones they had.

 

It bothers me that because I and all those other women who have careers and can weather the vagaries of life, some men assume that we wouldn't be good wives and mothers and find us less attractive as mates.

 

As you said, we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

[BoooredGuy]

Men who want stay at home wives only do so because they feel that if she needs him she won't become a walkaway wife. It is their way of trying to lessen the odds of divorce but a stay at home woman is just as likely as a working woman to become a walkway and a man will pay through the nose after the divorce.

 

That's an interesting opinion, pretty cynical in fact, but not the reason why I want someone who isn't career-focused.

[Trialbyfire]

It bothers me that because I and all those other women who have careers and can weather the vagaries of life, some men assume that we wouldn't be good wives and mothers and find us less attractive as mates.

 

As you said, we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

nj, if you consider the attitudes of men who want SAHMs, are you certain this is the kind of man you want?

[norajane]

nj, if you consider the attitudes of men who want SAHMs, are you certain this is the kind of man you want?

 

Not necessarily; however, I'm tired of hearing career women called ball-busters just because we're doing the best we can for ourselves, and the generalized assumption that we'd be bad wives and mothers also grates.

[Trialbyfire]

Not necessarily; however, I'm tired of hearing career women called ball-busters just because we're doing the best we can for ourselves, and the generalized assumption that we'd be bad wives and mothers also grates.

I can understand that. It's like a lot of things expressed on this site. Generalizations that make the posters feel better about themselves, particularly insecurities.

 

Realistically speaking, there's only a small number of ball-busters aka misandrists, just like there's only a small number of real misogynists v. insecure men.

[flc]

I think it is important that if possible the women stays at home for first few years after the child is born. The couple have to decide if that is possible and depending on the wifes income and the number of small children you may not even break even with daycare and the job, so not working may make sense financially.

 

In general though I don't see how someone would be satisfied staying at home as it both limits your interests and activities and also decreases the disposable income and limits what you can do as a family. So I am all for a working spouse.

[Tomcat33]

I think it is important that if possible the women stays at home for first few years after the child is born. The couple have to decide if that is possible and depending on the wifes income and the number of small children you may not even break even with daycare and the job, so not working may make sense financially.

 

In general though I don't see how someone would be satisfied staying at home as it both limits your interests and activities and also decreases the disposable income and limits what you can do as a family. So I am all for a working spouse.

 

 

And what is your take on the man's role once he gets home from a long day at work, but encounters the wife has also had a long day at home looking after the newborn and the daily chores?

 

Because..... deciding "I stay home you go to work, we can do that financially" is ONLY half the battle.

[carhill]

Can't speak for other men, but my role expectation (no kids here, though I've always wanted them) is the same as that of my father, that being joint parenting. I don't remember, but I saw pictures of my dad bathing me, playing with me and, later, things I do remember, like sharing homework and reading books and playing games (like board games) with me after his days at the office. At my parents house, is was pretty simple. When the parents were together, they were a team and the parenting was shared. When they were apart (mom was SAHM), mom parented me and dad supported the family financially. Later, as I got older and could stay alone (during high school), my mom went back to work. The shared parenting continued. They were always a team. I never got away with anything

 

We ate hamburger instead of steak and didn't take vacations often and I worked from a young age to get what I wanted but those sacrifices afforded me a private education and the college of my choice and a real good start in the world. Nothing is perfect but I feel very lucky they made the choices they did. I really wanted for nothing and, interestingly, can live life small or large (I've done it both ways) with equal happiness.

 

IMO, a couple which is really a team will approach any challenge, with child-rearing being a huge one, as a team, as one entity. It's a tremendously formidable collaboration.

[sb129]

This is what I was taught growing up. That over the course of a lifetime, things change. And you're better off being as prepared as possible to deal with those changes as they occur.

 

Both my parents worked because they HAD to. They knew that life throws you curve balls, and they've had their share. So they put my sister and me through school so that we'd be capable of having well-paying careers in case of divorce, unemployment, husband is injured or becomes ill and can't work, death, any number of things that can and do happen to people. Or just so we'd be able to have easier lives financially than the ones they had.

 

It bothers me that because I and all those other women who have careers and can weather the vagaries of life, some men assume that we wouldn't be good wives and mothers and find us less attractive as mates.

 

As you said, we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

 

Hear hear.

Great post.

 

My mum worked from when I was little, and due to the weather- dependent nature of my dads job, her income gets them through the years (and there have been a few) where he makes no profit.

So she HAD to work, some years there were two incomes, some there were one. No way of knowing which way it would go some years.

 

She brought me up to value independence and education. And i refuse to back down on that. I am getting married at the age of 31- if I had been simply waiting for a man to financially support me I would be in one heck of a lot of debt right now, and probably be blamed for the state of the economy!!!

I turned out OK, and my kids will have the same upbringing I did.

[Woggle]

I think in many ways women or rather feminists are to blame for this. For the last couple decades all men have been hearing from women is how we useless now that women make their own money and how men are disposable and obselete. This gives men a complex and causes them to think that they only have worth if a woman needs them financially. Financially independent women are these intimidating figures who have need for a man in their life anyway so why even try with them? If you do happen to find one of these women they will most likely treat you as disposable and cheat on you the entire time because you are just an accessory to them. I certainly don't agree with these sentiments but many men do feel this way and they tend to go with what feel is the safest bet which to them is a traditional, dependent woman who needs a man to support her. I can understand why hardworking and successful women who are not misandrists with a chip on their shoulder againstmenwould be dismayed by this attitude. That being said I wish they would understand that men are just trying to better the odds of a marriage succeeding.