Feminism

[Duke87 1,070]

This discussion started tangentially in another thread, but being a major topic with a lot that can be said about it, it deserves its own home. So, here we go. Let's try and discuss this intellectually, discuss the issues not each other, etc.

 

 

 

Women owe men nothing. A guy who believes girls owe him sex is the same guy who will never get laid. I think it is disgusting that anyone can think of this as a legitimate school of thought.
 

 

 

I'm proud of you guys.   Several of you have expressed this point of view.

 

It's a relatively new point of view.    I believe it was uncommon a century ago.

 

In some places, it still hasn't caught on. 

 

Time was, a woman didn't have enough economic independence to say no.   It was give the man sex or she wasn't going to have food, clothing, and shelter.

 

Not quite the same thing as men believing women owe them sex but it's getting close. 

 

And, just for the record, when I was younger, a lot of guys believed women owed them sex.

 

But, getting back to my point, I'm proud of you guys.   Your generation gives me hope.
 

 

Starting point here: the statement "women do not owe men sex" is an empowering and not incorrect one, but the issue is far broader than such simple soundbytes. For one thing, consider that society depending on the circumstance not only places pressure on women to say yes but can also place pressure on women to say no (reality check: how often do you hear a woman called a slut? How often do you hear a man called that or something equivalent?). Being able to say no without undue fear of consequence is only one half of empowerment, being able to say yes without undue fear of consequence is also important. If you only have the former, you aren't completely free to make your own choices, eh?

 

This, I think, is more the lesson we should be teaching young women, and men too: your self worth should not be determined by your ability to meet other people's expectations of you (with regards to sex or otherwise). It should be determined by your ability to meet your own expectations that you set for yourself.

 

 

[KonstantinII 1,106]

Natural reproduction is necessary for all creatures and people to continue their lineage. Feminism commercializes it, while Gay removes it entirely.

[ROFLyoshi 1,760]

Natural reproduction is necessary for all creatures and people to continue their lineage. Feminism commercializes it, while Gay removes it entirely.

Considering the population of the world these days, I don't think homosexuality is a threat to the survival of humans.

I do think people need to take a look at sex from another angle. A girl is a slut if she sleeps with someone, whereas if she doesn't she's frigid. A man is also considered somewhat of a loser if he hasn't slept with someone (usually by a certain age), too. Why is this so?

[KonstantinII 1,106]

Sex is a kind of cooperation between two individuals of opposite sex in order to produce offsprings, and should not be commercialized

[LexusInfernus 908]

The worst bit of our culture is that women get punished either way. She is a slut if she says yes, but she can expect to be assaulted if she says no. I suggest you read this. 

 

 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

A lot of this is still an echo of the suppression of the cult of the Mother goddess that occurred sometime before the Trojan War.  If you examine the position of women in the reputed "first" democracy, you'll find they were kept in purdah.  Men were afraid of their women in those days because the Mother cult had just been suppressed and there was chance of resurgence and loss of male dominance.

 

In ancient Rome there was a secret cult of the Mother, which was strictly among women married to powerful men.  They actually ran a lot of the republic from behind the scenes.  (Archaeology is such fun, at times.)  At the same time, the Romans practiced promiscuity and homosexuality openly.  A real mixed up bunch as far as sexual mores were concerned.

 

In the middle ages, the Christian puritanism grew into a set of taboos, and the reformation began to destructure that but very slowly.  IMHO, after the excesses of the Puritans and the Shakers (no sex at all), things began to go downhill for the chastity movements.  IMHO the sexual mores of the current times have very nearly reached Roman proportions except for the hypocrisy evident in many areas.

 

Full equality of women is fine with me, by the way, but I don't think as long as babies are born of women, it can never happen.  For an exploration of this idea I recommend Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. 

 

As long as there are exceptions made for child-bearing in the business world, how can any equality be achieved?  Because they are the Mothers, how can women be less than men?  Men are an auxiliary service like any male animal.  You'll never have equality until a man bears a child.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Full equality of women is fine with me, by the way, but I don't think as long as babies are born of women, it can never happen.  For an exploration of this idea I recommend Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. 

 

As long as there are exceptions made for child-bearing in the business world, how can any equality be achieved?  Because they are the Mothers, how can women be less than men?  Men are an auxiliary service like any male animal.  You'll never have equality until a man bears a child.

Well, technical equality like that is probably impossible. But, as a society we can create rules, laws and support systems that compensate for this. A women that gets pregnant has to take pregnancy leave. But after that, we could give fathers days off as well, so women can go back to their careers relatively quickly while fathers can spend some time with their children. That way one can also create a more equal distribution between career and house hold tasks for both men and women. Promote part time work for all of society. Base an economy on part time careers. By breaking down gender stereotypes and gender roles we can come very close to equality up until a point where in the only difference between men and women are biological differences. 

[Ocram's Razr 963]

1. I agree with the ideals of feminism, though some of the most vocal and visible feminists say or do such outrageous things that they give the movement a bad image. Now we have radical feminism that is gaining traction with some people but since it became its own thing, all the crazy extremists joined that movement. Therefore, I would consider myself a feminist who disagrees with RadFems.

2. I don't know how to describe sex but it is reasonable for some couples to use it as part of the equation of contribution. I believe if a couple is dating and one person is supporting the other completely and only asks for companionship in return and get nothing, they should break up. It is an inequal relationship. Ideally, both would contribute economically and both would do chores.

3. Many famous women are afraid to call themselves feminists because of the crazy extremists in the movement.

4. Certain gender roles such as mothers nurturing their young or fathers providing for the mother are seen almost universally in the animal kingdom. Brave New World is an example of something we should try to prevent. The author, Huxley wrote it as a cautionary tale. The book 1984 was also supposed to be a warning, not a guidebook.

--Ocram

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

LexusInfernus makes some good points.  The present situation is leading to more shared and part-time careers.  Why not allow parents with young children to work alternate months so that both parents are involved in rearing their children?  This would require some serious adjustments in the wage/slave model.  Also, work from home (cottage industry) can become more common.

 

When my wife left her full-time job in order to raise the kids, she continued to work for her old employer on a contract basis and mostly from home.  After the kids were in high-school, she returned to work full-time.  Both our kids are now married with kids of their own.

 

Several things are already in place in many employers:  flexible hours, cottage industry, paternal leave as well as maternal leave, job sharing, etc.  It is only a matter of time before the drive for more leisure time makes this sort of thing much more commonplace.

[Fatherted 129]

All this radical feminism is stupid. Crying rape if you regret a drunken flutter? Sucks to be you, you can't do that.

I totally believe in equal rights for all, but why all this "Women's Day" stuff? Where's my "Men's Day"? Parents should totally be able to share in the rearing of their offspring. If women want equal pay, men should be allowed some of their bonuses (days off to look after children etc.). Also, I want to be able to skip fines by looking handsome ;/

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Such a sour attitude.  What women's day?  We have Mother's Day, and Father's day is coming up.  Then there is Labour Day at the end of summer for all the wage slaves.  And Kid's day should be every day.  They are the future.

 

One of the most effective managers I ever worked for was of the female variety, and she had a family with grown kids as well.  Her husband worked out of our industry and I don't think I ever met him.

[ROFLyoshi 1,760]

Also, I want to be able to skip fines by looking handsome ;/

I don't think I've actually ever seen this happen. Besides a man can charm an officer in other ways too and show influence.

[AkemiAzula 280]

Well now this a problematic topic. You see purely scientificslly speaking survival and sex are utilitarian functions thst evolved. Society evolved as variations on the theme becoming more complex yet still serving the same cause. We have reached a state of intelligence as a species that we understand our world and ourselves yet wr still lack a reason for living beyond survival for some misty asgard. We feel its future force but dedcribe glory by battle and sex and wine unable to envision our goal. Culturally the concepts of sex gender and marriage snd family exist in a spectrum. In england we consider ourselves advanced. I do not claim to know the answer but i will say that i always got a good vibe from girls and hated my fellow boys wishing extetmination and suffering upon them. I daresay this is normal though we social creatured are usually unwilling to admit as much. Life is a game with no purpose few of us win. Girls struck me as being closer to godliness. I always envisioned asgard populated thus. To see my own kind at valhalla made me cringe. I dont know what to make of gays and the idea of evolving out of a two gender system or abolishing it. Sex however is obviously a vestigial function in future society where creation is digitized. It may well however evolve. I believe in education but i do not know if there is any point in progress or if humanity is just a plant that will withet come what may.

[Beren Erchamion 12]

All this radical feminism is stupid. Crying rape if you regret a drunken flutter? Sucks to be you, you can't do that.

I totally believe in equal rights for all, but why all this "Women's Day" stuff? Where's my "Men's Day"? Parents should totally be able to share in the rearing of their offspring. If women want equal pay, men should be allowed some of their bonuses (days off to look after children etc.). Also, I want to be able to skip fines by looking handsome ;/

 

So there's this really brilliant comic someone did a couple of years ago.  Basically, there's some magic overhead ice cream dispenser, a man standing on one side and a woman standing on the other.  Scoops are dispensed from the dispenser at random intervals.  So it begins, the man sticks his cone under and catches the first scoop, then the second, then the third.  On the fourth, the woman manages to beat him to the punch and stick her cone under before he does.  Outraged, the man screams "MISANDRY!  FEMINAZI STOLE MY ICE CREAM!"

 

You're the person screaming "FEMINAZI STOLE MY ICE CREAM!"

 

This is privilege blindness--male-dominance has become so taken-for-granted, so naturalized, that even the most minor and insufficient attempts to rectify the situation appear, to those who enjoy unexamined privilege, to actually be oppressive.  It's not, of course--it's the exact opposite, it's correcting oppression (there have been males that have been victims of systemic oppression, yes, but not of oppression directed at males specifically, which is kind of important).  It's like, imagine Jordan and Taylor are roommates, and and Jordan's hogging the shower 18 hours of every day only giving Taylor six hours--and those six hours just happen to be during the time she absolutely needs to sleep so she can be well-rested to perform at work the next day.  Feminists are trying to create a schedule that will guarantee Taylor an extra six hours (assume for the purposes of this example that installing a new bathroom or moving to a new apartment are not feasible alternatives), and you're saying, "Well, if Taylor gets an extra six hours a day then in the interests of fairness and equality Jordan should get an extra six hours a day as well."

 

Ask yourself what the purpose of "Women's Day" is, and if you can answer correctly then the absurdity of a corresponding "Men's Day" will become obvious.

 

And it's feminists who are pushing for e.g. paternity leave, precisely because the gender roles that associate infant nurturing with women and not men are artifacts of the very patriarchy that feminists oppose.

[Fatherted 129]

Obviously someone misread my point. I am a man of the 21st century (and extremely late 20th), I take no responsibility for what my ancestors may or may not have done. We are very close to being on an even keel, and because of "years of oppression", does not give women a right to take away anyone else's rights.

In an earlier post I stated women owe men nothing. True. Equally, men owe women nothing, and as long as the #YesAllWomen is floating about, I will continue to oppose it as it is blatant hypocrisy and misogeny, which the feminists are supposedly so adamant in avoiding.

Maybe when the radicalists realise fighting fire with blue fire is an idiotic idea will we see some of their complaints dealt with. But being accused of being a "chauvinist pig" and a "dirty sexist" every time I state a view in saying women are not superior (note, nor are they inferior, I consider us equal) does not make me particularly interested in furthering their cause (a cause based on the exact values they supposedly want to eradicate).

[LexusInfernus 908]

All this radical feminism is stupid. Crying rape if you regret a drunken flutter? Sucks to be you, you can't do that.

I totally believe in equal rights for all, but why all this "Women's Day" stuff? Where's my "Men's Day"? Parents should totally be able to share in the rearing of their offspring. If women want equal pay, men should be allowed some of their bonuses (days off to look after children etc.). Also, I want to be able to skip fines by looking handsome ;/

Oh you like to be sexually assaulted by police officers so you don't have to pay fines? Because that is what happens. Its not like in movies where the guy just walks away when he sees its a pretty girl behind the wheel who shows a little cleavage. No, they ask those women to perform sexual acts for not getting  a fine. How nice, getting raped by the effing police. 

 

So there's this really brilliant comic someone did a couple of years ago.  Basically, there's some magic overhead ice cream dispenser, a man standing on one side and a woman standing on the other.  Scoops are dispensed from the dispenser at random intervals.  So it begins, the man sticks his cone under and catches the first scoop, then the second, then the third.  On the fourth, the woman manages to beat him to the punch and stick her cone under before he does.  Outraged, the man screams "MISANDRY!  FEMINAZI STOLE MY ICE CREAM!"

 

You're the person screaming "FEMINAZI STOLE MY ICE CREAM!"

 

I assume you meant this one:

 

 

 

In an earlier post I stated women owe men nothing. True. Equally, men owe women nothing, and as long as the #YesAllWomen is floating about, I will continue to oppose it as it is blatant hypocrisy and misogeny, which the feminists are supposedly so adamant in avoiding.

Maybe when the radicalists realise fighting fire with blue fire is an idiotic idea will we see some of their complaints dealt with. But being accused of being a "chauvinist pig" and a "dirty sexist" every time I state a view in saying women are not superior (note, nor are they inferior, I consider us equal) does not make me particularly interested in furthering their cause (a cause based on the exact values they supposedly want to eradicate).

How is it hypocritical of women to share stories about how they, their friends or other women in general got assaulted, attacked or in some cases even killed for saying no to a guy? How is such a hashtag even misogyny? I mean sure, the stories are obvious examples of misogyny, but how is the hashtag itself misogyny. Or did you perhaps mean misandry? If so, why? Because guys are the bad guys in those stories? Why is it misandry if that is what really happened? 

 

And no, people do not call you a chauvinist pig or dirty sexist for saying women aren't superior, they call you that because you are spouting all the MRA nonsense. They call you that because you act entitled, you are extremely privileged and you do not even recognize the extend of your own privilege. 

 

Indeed, check your privilege. 

[Fatherted 129]

I might be privileged but my only thought in this matter is fighting fire with lava is pointless. Whatever.

[Flat Raver 59]

People are so hostile against feminism because of the "fem" part. Some just can't accept the fact that it was women who were the oppressed gender when this term was invented. The fact still stands, though, Feminism is the ideology that strives for the absolute equality between genders. That's all it means, and because of this, feminism takes many shapes and forms. So much that, yes, you have feminists disagreeing with each other in different subjects. Some feminists wants to legalize prostitution, others don't. Some feminists believe porn does nothing but harm, others don't. Some feminists believe that wage equality must be reached through political measures, other say that this is rather a cultural issue.

 

This nothing new, this occurs in other ideologies as well. You see liberals disagree with each others; you see conservatives disagree with each other. Same for socialists, fascists, libertarians, anarchists, environmentalists, religious fundamentalists, I could go and on.

 

Also, after I saw that MRAs blaming the Isla Vista massacre on autism, I, as an autistic myself, finally said, "I give up. I am now officially a feminist".

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

All these modern feminist movements have now outlived their original purpose and are nothing more than 'agitprop' any more.  They want women to be more like the pigs in Orwell's Animal Farm.  They want to be "more equal", and there is no such thing.  Equal is unique and cannot have comparatives applied.

 

I grew up in a society were women were becoming the breadwinners because of necessity.  All the men were at war.  I can say, quite proudly, that my mother was a truck driver.  She was also an assistant to a construction boss, and an executive secretary (now called executive assistant euphemistically).  At the end of WW II Tilley the Toiler discovered that she liked getting paid for all the work she did and many stayed in the jobs they had if they could.  At that point in time, with a lot of men suffering from shell-shock (now euphemized as PTSD), many wives had to be the breadwinner because the husbands couldn't hold a job.

 

Hey, folks, I've seen all this before.  If a woman wants to be equal, she has to take the same slings and arrows of outrageous fortune with the same stoicism that men do.  The tough ones do.  And it is not a matter of glass ceilings or anything else.  It is a matter of drive.

[Fatherted 129]

All this bravery on Twitter is hilarious. Like being aggressive over the Internet is anything to be proud of, especially when imitating your supposed enemy.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Citing Twitter isn't much use.  That is just a lot of vapid chatter most of the time.  I've now killed it almost completely.  I even killed their come-back e-mails.  There are too many armchair quarterbacks on the Internet anyway.

[Fatherted 129]

Nevertheless, it shows what people would do if they went mental, effectively.

-Feminists often resort to name-calling

-Racists often show their true colours

-I swear more than I do in real life (hopefully not too much)

Effectively, it's the mental-asylum image of yourself.

[Meg 368]

I grew up in a society were women were becoming the breadwinners because of necessity.  All the men were at war.  I can say, quite proudly, that my mother was a truck driver. 

 

I grew up in a society where women were struggling to get back into the workplace.   As a teenager in school I was actively discouraged from pursuing science.  ("You qualified for the school science award but we aren't going to waste it on a girl.   You are very talented but I don't see what good it is going to do unless you pass it along to your son some day.")   Such teachers would get fired now.

 

While I was attending university, people sometimes noticed the school parking permits on my car's bumper.  The response I sometimes got: "Oh, so you are going to be a teacher!"  When I said I was studying information systems management, I would get a blank stare.

 

I have a cousin, about 10 years older than I am, who is a retired nurse.  Not because she was interested in medicine but because she wanted to work and didn't want to teach.  Those were her only options.  (okay, make it three.  She probably could have been a secretary too.)

 

Which leads to the point of "unexamined privilege".    When people talk about male privilege, white privilege, or western privilege, odds are good that the males, whites, and westerners don't understand what is being discussed because it is indeed "unexamined".     It has always been a part of life to the point where it is taken for granted.  Being unexamined, there is a high degree of not being aware that everyone doesn't have it.

 

Example of male privilege:   Having more than three careers to chose from.  Most teenage boys would not regard that lack of pigeonholing as a privilege.  But it was because not everyone had it.

 

Example of western privilege:  Having enough clean water that you can drink what you want and still have enough to take a shower every day.   Most of us have easy access to clean water to the point that we rarely think about it.   But, to many people on the planet, that is a luxury they don't have.

 

Many people who have privilege do think of it as such.   It is a lack of awareness.

 

On a different note:   "feminism" and "radical feminism" have been discussed here.    How are you guys defining those terms?    I just want to see if we are talking about the same things.

[Fatherted 129]

Feminism and radical feminism to me are the same things. They both make it women vs men. I believe in gender equality which is very different to accusing every man of being a chauvinist pig like the sofa superheroes on social networks.

Also, in the world I am growing up in girls are not frowned upon for wanting to be part of something or to grow up to be something. I have a friend (who is a girl) who plays the bass, and also plays football. I know a girl who wants to be a humanitarian lawyer (but I don't really like her, ironically). She who wants to be whatever is accepted. The only limits I have ever seen is on guys, who are gender restricted by society as they are not supported the same way women are. Therefore it is seen as wrong to be proficient at playing the flute for example, or to be gay. None of these restrictions apply to the girls. In my corner of society things have sort of flipped.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

From what I understand, Radical Feminists want to "overthrow the patriarchy." The RadFem movement attracts the extremists, anarchists, and misandrists. Feminism is about giving women equal footing to get opportunities as men. Feminism is a noble cause that has accomplished most of what it set out to do.

--Ocram

[LexusInfernus 908]

Feminism and radical feminism to me are the same things. They both make it women vs men. I believe in gender equality which is very different to accusing every man of being a chauvinist pig like the sofa superheroes on social networks.

You do not even understand what Feminism is and this post makes that blatantly clear.

 

Feminism, at its basic core is just about creating equality between men and women. That means it wants guys to examine their privilege, it means getting rid of gender roles and gender stereotypes and it means giving both sexes more rights. Of course, within feminism there are people with different opinions, some put more emphasis on certain issues than on others. Like someone else already said, its just like Liberals not always agreeing with each other over what course 'liberalism' should take. 

 

Then there are the radical feminists. Basically the people that want a role reversal. Women on top, guys at the bottom. 

 

Also, in the world I am growing up in girls are not frowned upon for wanting to be part of something or to grow up to be something. I have a friend (who is a girl) who plays the bass, and also plays football. I know a girl who wants to be a humanitarian lawyer (but I don't really like her, ironically). She who wants to be whatever is accepted. The only limits I have ever seen is on guys, who are gender restricted by society as they are not supported the same way women are. Therefore it is seen as wrong to be proficient at playing the flute for example, or to be gay. None of these restrictions apply to the girls. In my corner of society things have sort of flipped.

 

Oh if you only knew how wrong you are. Sure, women got it better than 40 years ago, no doubt. But they are still a very long way from being accepted as equals and there are still a lot of career opportunities closed to them. 

 

And see, this is why people have called you a chauvinist pig. Because in the topic that is based on the valid historical premise that women generally hold a weaker position in society than men, the first thing you do is complain about how men are treated unfairly. Because men can't play the flute. But sure, feminists, the people you dislike, got you covered. Breaking down gender stereotypes and gender roles also means breaking down things like it being considered unmanly to play the flute. But even then, you would be unwilling to accept that for every guy that can't play the flute because society frowns down upon guys playing the flute, there are women who have a hard time getting into a whole range of career fields, have less career opportunities, generally get paid less for similar work, face the constant threat of sexual violence and sexual harassment, get policed over what they do with their body, etc. So if you don't mind, guys not being able to play the flute are lower on the priority list than the things a lot of women face simply because that is the bigger issue here. 

 

Check. Your. Privilege. 

 

 

From what I understand, Radical Feminists want to "overthrow the patriarchy." The RadFem movement attracts the extremists, anarchists, and misandrists. Feminism is about giving women equal footing to get opportunities as men. Feminism is a noble cause that has accomplished most of what it set out to do.

--Ocram

Normal Feminism is also about overthrowing the patriarchy. The thing is that patriarchy simply refers to a society where males have more privilege than females. A society where men and women are considered equal by everyone is by definition not a patriarchy. I think radical feminism is about replacing the patriarchy with a matriarchy. Personally I support the kind of feminism that wants neither patriarchy nor matriarchy. Its best for everyone

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Both radfem and feminism are pigeonholes that no sane woman would want to be in.  The radfem group as has been stated attracts the nuts.  Feminism attracts the ones that feel disenfranchised but frustrated as to a path of recovery.

 

Women who are equal to men in any sense, which is a great many of them, get going especially when the going gets rough.  Sitting in some pigeonhole crying is not any kind of action that gets you anywhere. 

 

One of the latest crazes is complaining about the glass ceiling.  I don't hear this from the CEO of General Motors, for example.  I also don't hear it from the Premier of something like four Canadian provinces.  How many female governors are there in the U.S.?

[BLANKBLANK 4,414]

One of the latest crazes is complaining about the glass ceiling.  I don't hear this from the CEO of General Motors, for example.  I also don't hear it from the Premier of something like four Canadian provinces.  How many female governors are there in the U.S.?

 

Another good one is the wage gap. Just think, if there was a wage gap companies would prefer to hire women because it would be less expensive than hiring men. Cut-throat capitalistic companies, you are missing a trick here! <sarc>

[APSMS 1,892]

Another good one is the wage gap. Just think, if there was a wage gap companies would prefer to hire women because it would be less expensive than hiring men. Cut-throat capitalistic companies, you are missing a trick here! <sarc>

 

Normally I would agree, but there is, in fact a wage gap, at least in the US. Generally speaking gender-preference/superiority complexes outweigh cost-benefits, since the hiring men would probably consider the females less capable of performing said job. I have met people that had clear evidence of lower wages than their male coworkers of the same job tier (exact same position, actually). They are missing a trick, though.

 

As a final note I should point out that I am not a feminist, nor do I support elimination of sexual-based gender roles, though gender-biased wages and similar gender-based prejudices are egregious to me. I don't support feminism because I think it is the wrong way to address a major problem.

[Duke87 1,070]

With regards to the wage issue, there are two reasons why a gap exists.

 

The first is that, statistically speaking, men are more likely to fully develop a career until they retire than women are. A lot of women, once they start having children, will vastly reduce the number of hours they work or even stop working entirely and focus on their families instead. This is perfectly legitimate as a life decision but it does mean that, as a young woman, the market rate for your services is lower than for a man of equal age with equal skills because you, as a young woman, are statistically going to spend fewer of your future years working and therefore are less sound as a long term investment than a man is. Unless society retools itself such that men and women take equal time away from work to take care of their families, this basic fact of market value isn't going to go away.

 

But then, you do also have a major contribution of what are considered to be socially appropriate gender norms. Often, how much someone gets paid involves some degree of negotiation. If a man approaches his boss (who is more likely than not also male) with a request for a raise, or tries to negotiate up his contract at a new job, his boss is probably going to at least consider his case because this sort of negotiating behavior is considered normal and reasonable for men to engage in. But men tend to bristle when women attempt to engage in similar negotiaton because they expect women to be submissive, not assertive. Asking for a raise is seen as unfeminine and so a woman is less likely to be granted the request than a man.

 

There is also some surviving sentiment that "the man is the breadwinner", and a lot of men are uncomfortable if their girlfriend or wife makes more money than they do, because they see being the one who makes money as a key thing they bring to the table in their relationship and feel insecure if they do not dominate that role.

 

The basic fear is that if women are not dependent on men for some form of their well-being, that women will have no reason to keep them around and they will be kicked to the curb as useless.

 

 

This is objectively rather silly, though, since it plays into the old stereotype that women offer men sex in exchange for money, food, and shelter... as though each of those things are all each has to offer the other and there can be no other motivation for a relationship.

 

For one thing, lose the idea that sex is a benefit that women provide to men. This is false. It is a benefit that two people provide to each other. Just because female sexual desire is taboo doesn't mean it doesn't exist and isn't just as potent as male sexual desire.

For another, if all a man is providing in a relationship is money, food, and shelter, well that isn't very romantic, is it? No, it's a lazy way of avoiding having to make emotional connections by attempting to substitute physical needs for them. 

 

Indeed, the idea of men needing to feel needed is an unhealthy bit of insecurity. If two people are dependent on each other for their well being, the relationship is not healthy. A healthy relationship exists because two people have decided they want to be in a relationship, not because there are reasons why they have to be.