CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 (edited) I'm preparing myself for the backlash I'm gonna get for asking this question, but I really am curious. What is wrong with a man wanting to "take care of" his woman? Now I guess "take care of" could mean several things, whether its pay the living expenses, or pay for all the dates, or take her on trips, etc. If a man makes good money and is successful and WANTS to do this, what is wrong with that? Why is there such hatred for it? Are men that can't afford to do this, jealous? I mean if you make good money and don't think you should, than thats fine and great, its your money and your decision. You should live how you want to. I'm talking about the men that WANT to. Sometimes even women want to do this for the man in their life. I just don't understand why so many people are angry about it. I think the women on the receiving end get the most backlash. But it is HER life. Do what you wanna do with your life, but why be so opinionated of the way someone else lives? Edited August 10, 2011 by CatNtheHat
serial muse Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 Well, it depends on what you mean by "take care of." Frankly, I totally understand the frustration about double standards (I'm a woman) on the part of some guys here. I can imagine that it would be completely frustrating to feel obligated to "take care of" your partner in a traditional, paying-the-dinner-bill way, while she's not "taking care of" you in a traditional, cleaning-the-house way. That leads to an unfair balance of responsibilities and a lot of confusion about one's role. Personally, I'd axe all those traditions and the traditional roles. They don't suit me, and I'm perfectly happy with societal progress away from them toward individual responsibility, and with the idea that each person in a partnership bring their best to the relationship, without delineating what that "best" is based on an X or Y chromosome. But I have to agree with the idea that it's unfair to pick and choose among traditional gender roles. I don't think there's anything "wrong" with a couple choosing to lead their lives one way or another, per se - just that it ought to be fairly balanced so that both partners feel equally taken care of. I'm not saying you're doing that, OP - just that I understand the frustration.
Woggle Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 It's okay to expect that if a woman is willing to do the traditional things on her end.
rafallus Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 Nothing is wrong, if a man actually WANTS to do that. It's a different story, when he doesn't really, but is pressured into it.
donnamaybe Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 It's okay to expect that if a woman is willing to do the traditional things on her end. Now now, Woggle. One couple's "traditional things" may differ from another couple's. I was going to say, as long as the woman takes care of him back!
GorillaTheater Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 I have no issue with it; my wife and I carry out pretty "traditional" roles. But I think it's a fair question for the man to ask what his SO is bringing to the table.
Ruby Slippers Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 I see nothing wrong with it. I know a woman who owns a very profitable business, and she supports her long-term boyfriend, who is a low-earning professional musician. She definitely "wears the pants" in the relationship, but they both seem pretty happy with it, and have been together for years.
SteveC80 Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 Nothing is wrong with it if the guy wants to i just dont like when women demand it And as woggle said allot of women only want gender roles that benefit them
Author CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Author Posted August 10, 2011 (edited) Well, it depends on what you mean by "take care of." Frankly, I totally understand the frustration about double standards (I'm a woman) on the part of some guys here. I can imagine that it would be completely frustrating to feel obligated to "take care of" your partner in a traditional, paying-the-dinner-bill way, while she's not "taking care of" you in a traditional, cleaning-the-house way. That leads to an unfair balance of responsibilities and a lot of confusion about one's role. Personally, I'd axe all those traditions and the traditional roles. They don't suit me, and I'm perfectly happy with societal progress away from them toward individual responsibility, and with the idea that each person in a partnership bring their best to the relationship, without delineating what that "best" is based on an X or Y chromosome. But I have to agree with the idea that it's unfair to pick and choose among traditional gender roles. I'm not saying you're doing that, OP - just that I understand the frustration. Well I will say that my bf is generous and wants to pay. Since I met him, my life has changed, in that I go out alot and go on trips often (with him). I have had a couple friends that have made comments regarding my lifestyle and I have summed it up to jealousy. I have always been a good friend, and I don't brag or throw it in anyone's face. But yet in my real life and what I have read here, there is such disdain for this. I don't think I'm "entitled" to anything. When I met my bf I didn't know what he even did for a living, so I wasn't looking for it. I liked him not what he could give or do for me. Its just a plus that he is generous. I have always dated men that were just the opposite of my bf and they were always broke or didn't have a job. Edited August 10, 2011 by CatNtheHat
Enchanted Girl Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 I don't think there's anything wrong with someone wanting to financially take care of their girlfriend or boyfriend. Two of my friends are in homosexual relationships with other women, where they financially take care of their partners and that's fine by me. But that doesn't mean that men who don't want to do this are bad people. They should butt out of other people's business, yes, but they also usually view it as a way women use men and have often been used by other women for their money themselves. I think it has nothing to do with jealousy and a lot to do with past pains and struggles. It's hard to make a living and to have someone take parts of it from you is awful. Also, the majority of men see relationships in terms of money and maybe sex. They think of these two things as the only valuable things someone can bring to a relationship. Women can do all the housework and have all the patience, kindness, and gentleness in the world in a relationship, but they'll say she's doing nothing if she's not contributing any money to the relationship, ESPECIALLY if she's not giving them all the sex they desire.
Art_Critic Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 I have no issue with it; my wife and I carry out pretty "traditional" roles. But I think it's a fair question for the man to ask what his SO is bringing to the table. Same here.. I really wish she would cut the grass though
Author CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Author Posted August 10, 2011 Same here.. I really wish she would cut the grass though Why don't you teach her?
Author CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Author Posted August 10, 2011 I don't think there's anything wrong with someone wanting to financially take care of their girlfriend or boyfriend. Two of my friends are in homosexual relationships with other women, where they financially take care of their partners and that's fine by me. But that doesn't mean that men who don't want to do this are bad people. They should butt out of other people's business, yes, but they also usually view it as a way women use men and have often been used by other women for their money themselves. I think it has nothing to do with jealousy and a lot to do with past pains and struggles. It's hard to make a living and to have someone take parts of it from you is awful. Also, the majority of men see relationships in terms of money and maybe sex. They think of these two things as the only valuable things someone can bring to a relationship. Women can do all the housework and have all the patience, kindness, and gentleness in the world in a relationship, but they'll say she's doing nothing if she's not contributing any money to the relationship, ESPECIALLY if she's not giving them all the sex they desire. Not all women are "using" men, that live this way. Thats what kills me about that attitude. I don't use my bf. I love him for the person he is, not for whats in his bank account. And a trade off might be that I do all the housework at home. The only thing he does, is at times, cook for himself. But thats really only because our food tastes are so different, and I have alot of food allergies.
donnamaybe Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 The only thing about one party financially taking care of the other is that if the R goes downhill and these people are married, alimony still exists and SOMEONE is gonna get taken for a ride - BIG time. Then they'll be on LS talking about how all men/women suck.
Author CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Author Posted August 10, 2011 The only thing about one party financially taking care of the other is that if the R goes downhill and these people are married, alimony still exists and SOMEONE is gonna get taken for a ride - BIG time. Then they'll be on LS talking about how all men/women suck. I think that is a problem if someone doesn't work. I do have a job. Maybe if the other person wasn't working that will be an issue or even if they do. I don't know I have never been married.
donnamaybe Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 I think that is a problem if someone doesn't work. I do have a job. Maybe if the other person wasn't working that will be an issue or even if they do. I don't know I have never been married. That was the situation I was referring to. Someone who has no income being "taken care of" by the other person. That's their right, of course, to live how they see fit for them, but if the you-know-what hits the fan, then the person who's been "bringing home the bacon" all this time is still going to be expected to fill up the other person's frying pan - at THEIR house.
Author CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Author Posted August 10, 2011 That was the situation I was referring to. Someone who has no income being "taken care of" by the other person. That's their right, of course, to live how they see fit for them, but if the you-know-what hits the fan, then the person who's been "bringing home the bacon" all this time is still going to be expected to fill up the other person's frying pan - at THEIR house. haha, got it.
Sanman Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 There is absolutely nothing wrong with a man or woman wanting to take care of their partner as long as their partner is comfortable with the situation as well. The entitled part comes with the attitude of those people. OP, you had stated that you were not sure that if this relationship ended you could go back to men who did not pay for you/treat you as well. For a lot of men, this is the same as a guy saying 'a real woman knows how to cook me a good meal and clean the house. I don't I can go back to these women who expect me to do these things myself'.' Many of us have dealt with women who are happy to take advantage of us financially. Sometimes this takes the form of a relationship and other times it is a few dinners on us before she disappears and won't return our calls. I think most modern guys appreciate a woman who can cook us a good meal, but no longer expect such a thing. In the same way, appreciate a man willing to take care of you, but do not expect it from every man.
Author CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Author Posted August 10, 2011 There is absolutely nothing wrong with a man or woman wanting to take care of their partner as long as their partner is comfortable with the situation as well. The entitled part comes with the attitude of those people. OP, you had stated that you were not sure that if this relationship ended you could go back to men who did not pay for you/treat you as well. For a lot of men, this is the same as a guy saying 'a real woman knows how to cook me a good meal and clean the house. I don't I can go back to these women who expect me to do these things myself'.' Many of us have dealt with women who are happy to take advantage of us financially. Sometimes this takes the form of a relationship and other times it is a few dinners on us before she disappears and won't return our calls. I think most modern guys appreciate a woman who can cook us a good meal, but no longer expect such a thing. In the same way, appreciate a man willing to take care of you, but do not expect it from every man. Well no, I wouldn't go back to dating guys who were always broke or had no job. Not ashamed to admit that.
rafallus Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 Well no, I wouldn't go back to dating guys who were always broke or had no job. Not ashamed to admit that. What if they are neither of that, but still don't believe in wine-and-dine? After all, just because someone doesn't buy this concept, doesn't automatically mean, he is "broke ass punk".
ptp Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 Why should a man have to pay for stuff? Don't women want equality? Being equal means pay for your half.
Author CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Author Posted August 10, 2011 What if they are neither of that, but still don't believe in wine-and-dine? After all, just because someone doesn't buy this concept, doesn't automatically mean, he is "broke ass punk". No I meant broke as in he can't even buy himself a bagel, because he spent it all the previous night on booze and cigarettes.
Author CatNtheHat Posted August 10, 2011 Author Posted August 10, 2011 Why should a man have to pay for stuff? Don't women want equality? Being equal means pay for your half. You missed the point, its not about HAVING to, its men that WANT to. If you don't want to that is fine for you.
ptp Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 You missed the point, its not about HAVING to, its men that WANT to. If you don't want to that is fine for you. No I got the point, I just making a statement about the modern woman. Women want equality until that equality actually is detrimental to them.
zengirl Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 Now now, Woggle. One couple's "traditional things" may differ from another couple's. I was going to say, as long as the woman takes care of him back! THIS. There are so many relationship dynamics out there! Nothing is wrong with any of them, so long as the two people in them feel happy, secure, taken care of, and like they're benefiting from it, and they are both being honest and caring with each other. I think boiling relationships down to financials is a bit silly. And it's even more silly to pretend there are only two modes: traditional or modern. There are so many different ways to support a partner. But if a guy (or girl) has a lot of money and a partner with a lot less money, and that person wants to share their wealth, support or even spoil the other, what's terrible about that? Nothing. It's a natural instinct to want to share what you have with someone if you've deemed them a partner, I think. Now, if the guy is working three jobs he hates and going in debt to pay for his wife's diamonds and furs, I'm a little skeptical. But if he's just sharing the wealth he earns/has accumulated, that seems perfectly natural. Or if a woman does it, for that matter. Also, the majority of men see relationships in terms of money and maybe sex. They think of these two things as the only valuable things someone can bring to a relationship. Women can do all the housework and have all the patience, kindness, and gentleness in the world in a relationship, but they'll say she's doing nothing if she's not contributing any money to the relationship, ESPECIALLY if she's not giving them all the sex they desire. Maybe the majority of men on LS. Or maybe the majority of men see it that way when talking about hypothetical relationships. Ask a man in love about his relationship, and he's not going to talk much about sex (though I assume he's getting plenty) or money.
Recommended Posts