Are women becoming unhappier?

[manowar821]

That entire website is full of horseshit. I cannot believe I actually read the whole article before thinking "smells like shit, to me".

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Sounds like a load of bullshit if you ask me.

Oh? Why?

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. With women 'in the home' we had a similar economic standard of living, but didn't have to bust ass every weekend to knock out all the chores that pile up during the week because both parents are working. We had a better sense of community and I believe a better system of raising our children.

I'm no cheauvanist, but I think we'd have been better off sticking with a single breadwinner per household. Keeping it a single sex would make for a simpler societal arrangement but isn't necessary. I'd even go so far as to say that women would be better in the home specifically on the issue of raising children, as most women I've known have been better nurturers than most men.

All together, I think the spouse in the home - male or female - has an easier life than the breadwinner. There's no boss, there's no office politics, there's no competition for jobs, etc. It's not all poolside daiquiris and naps, but it's certainly lower stress than "working for a living".

Please be sure and let me know when your fairytale version of life becomes reality.

Fact is, with a near 50% divorce rate that lifestyle is impossible for many families.

 

[Fritzo]

See? You take them out of the kitchen and let them wear shoes and they get all unhappy! The grass is always greener.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Sounds like a load of bullshit if you ask me.

Oh? Why?

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. With women 'in the home' we had a similar economic standard of living, but didn't have to bust ass every weekend to knock out all the chores that pile up during the week because both parents are working. We had a better sense of community and I believe a better system of raising our children.

I'm no cheauvanist, but I think we'd have been better off sticking with a single breadwinner per household. Keeping it a single sex would make for a simpler societal arrangement but isn't necessary. I'd even go so far as to say that women would be better in the home specifically on the issue of raising children, as most women I've known have been better nurturers than most men.

All together, I think the spouse in the home - male or female - has an easier life than the breadwinner. There's no boss, there's no office politics, there's no competition for jobs, etc. It's not all poolside daiquiris and naps, but it's certainly lower stress than "working for a living".

Please be sure and let me know when your fairytale version of life becomes reality.

Fact is, with a near 50% divorce rate that lifestyle is impossible for many families.

I'm not sure what you're arguing. I'm not sure you read my post any better than some of the earliest people to quote it. I understand today's reality is that of a two-income home being the norm; I'm just lamenting it.

What lifestyle is unsustainable for many families? That of both people working or a single breadwinner as I'm suggesting would have been better to stick with?

 

[Redfraggle]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Sounds like a load of bullshit if you ask me.

Oh? Why?

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. With women 'in the home' we had a similar economic standard of living, but didn't have to bust ass every weekend to knock out all the chores that pile up during the week because both parents are working. We had a better sense of community and I believe a better system of raising our children.

I'm no cheauvanist, but I think we'd have been better off sticking with a single breadwinner per household. Keeping it a single sex would make for a simpler societal arrangement but isn't necessary. I'd even go so far as to say that women would be better in the home specifically on the issue of raising children, as most women I've known have been better nurturers than most men.

All together, I think the spouse in the home - male or female - has an easier life than the breadwinner. There's no boss, there's no office politics, there's no competition for jobs, etc. It's not all poolside daiquiris and naps, but it's certainly lower stress than "working for a living".

Please be sure and let me know when your fairytale version of life becomes reality.

Fact is, with a near 50% divorce rate that lifestyle is impossible for many families.

Keep in mind that skyrocketing divorce rates also have a lot to do with the fact that it's possible and acceptable. People don't stay married now just because "that's what you do" or because the women literally can't make it on their own. I think that stat is often thrown around without thought as to why it's so high.

I think that this idealistic nostalgia about the US in the 50s is also wildly inaccurate -- which is basically the fairytale being described.

Wouldn't it just make more sense to figure out what's best for you in the current situation as opposed to yearning for a past/time that you can't have?

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: Dirigible

Originally posted by: Blackjack200
Interesting. I live in my house all by myself and I don't think I have to "bust my ass" to get things done. Yeah, I don't watch a lot of TV or veg out a whole lot, but once you learn to enjoy the chores a bit, it's not too bad.

I wonder if the reason that women are less happy is because their men are not as good at pleasing them anymore...

If any women out there think that might be the case, please feel free to send me a PM and set up some "therapy" sessions

LOL. Get married and have kids. Report back on how many chores you have to do and how much free time you have to do them in.

+1
when I was single I use to go home to relax and chill. now that I have a newborn I go to work to relax and chill.

+2

The difference is that it takes weeks for a single person's habitat to get messy, but it takes maybe an hour to disrupt my house with 2 young boys in it. Laundry, wiping down tables, cleaning floors, and taking care of the boy's needs is a full-time job.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Sounds like a load of bullshit if you ask me.

Oh? Why?

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. With women 'in the home' we had a similar economic standard of living, but didn't have to bust ass every weekend to knock out all the chores that pile up during the week because both parents are working. We had a better sense of community and I believe a better system of raising our children.

I'm no cheauvanist, but I think we'd have been better off sticking with a single breadwinner per household. Keeping it a single sex would make for a simpler societal arrangement but isn't necessary. I'd even go so far as to say that women would be better in the home specifically on the issue of raising children, as most women I've known have been better nurturers than most men.

All together, I think the spouse in the home - male or female - has an easier life than the breadwinner. There's no boss, there's no office politics, there's no competition for jobs, etc. It's not all poolside daiquiris and naps, but it's certainly lower stress than "working for a living".

Please be sure and let me know when your fairytale version of life becomes reality.

Fact is, with a near 50% divorce rate that lifestyle is impossible for many families.

I'm not sure what you're arguing. I'm not sure you read my post any better than some of the earliest people to quote it. I understand today's reality is that of a two-income home being the norm; I'm just lamenting it.

What lifestyle is unsustainable for many families? That of both people working or a single breadwinner as I'm suggesting would have been better to stick with?

Then what's the point of the argument if it's unattainable for many people?

Reality is what it is. I was calling bullshit on the completely subjective point in the article that stated women were happier in the 1970s. How do they measure that anyway? They didn't ask my wife...then again, she was 3 years old in 1970.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Redfraggle

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Sounds like a load of bullshit if you ask me.

Oh? Why?

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. With women 'in the home' we had a similar economic standard of living, but didn't have to bust ass every weekend to knock out all the chores that pile up during the week because both parents are working. We had a better sense of community and I believe a better system of raising our children.

I'm no cheauvanist, but I think we'd have been better off sticking with a single breadwinner per household. Keeping it a single sex would make for a simpler societal arrangement but isn't necessary. I'd even go so far as to say that women would be better in the home specifically on the issue of raising children, as most women I've known have been better nurturers than most men.

All together, I think the spouse in the home - male or female - has an easier life than the breadwinner. There's no boss, there's no office politics, there's no competition for jobs, etc. It's not all poolside daiquiris and naps, but it's certainly lower stress than "working for a living".

Please be sure and let me know when your fairytale version of life becomes reality.

Fact is, with a near 50% divorce rate that lifestyle is impossible for many families.

Keep in mind that skyrocketing divorce rates also have a lot to do with the fact that it's possible and acceptable. People don't stay married now just because "that's what you do" or because the women literally can't make it on their own. I think that stat is often thrown around without thought as to why it's so high.

I think that this idealistic nostalgia about the US in the 50s is also wildly inaccurate -- which is basically the fairytale being described.

Wouldn't it just make more sense to figure out what's best for you in the current situation as opposed to yearning for a past/time that you can't have?

Exactly! My Mom threw my Dad out in the early 1970s when she found out that he was having an affair with a younger woman. She had no job, no income, no support, and 3 young children to raise. She spent years working and going back to school to further herself so that she could raise us out of the situation we were in...and she suceeded.

I'd be willing to bet whoever wrote that article didn't poll my Mom when they were compiling that data either...assuming they asked anyone at all and didn't just pull the data out of their ass.

What I find amusing is that everyone here just assumes that it's true without any further research or even questioning it.

 

[oiprocs]

It's cuz they wanted independence, so we gave it to them. Now they're bitching because they have to work, watch the kids, AND take care of the house.

 

[Redfraggle]

Originally posted by: scorpious
It's cuz they wanted independence, so we gave it to them. Now they're bitching because they have to work, watch the kids, AND take care of the house.

You call this independence and you wonder why women are unhappy or stressed out?

Women got into the workplace and excelled, but how many dads picked up the slack at home in a manner equal to women's role in the corporate world?

 

[soulcougher73]

Originally posted by: TehMac
It's because Feminists have filled their heads with a lot of bull shit nonsense. People tried to talk sense to them about it, but they immediately set about yelling their ideas louder. Some women joined eagerly in a militant attempt to re-identify themselves. Others became confused, "realizing" that they should feel bad because they wanted to serve their husband (and ideally, vice versa).

That is the problem, instead of society focusing on the positives of each individual, we perverted those positives (being a good wife, serving/loving your man (vice versa)) and now a woman who wants to stay at home and cook and clean feels guilty about that.

No wonder the Islamists point and laugh at our 'corrupt' culture; we're attempting to defy nearly 20,000 thousand years of anthropological development in a mere 40-50 years! I'm all for individual rights, women's suffrage, etc., but at some point the line needs be drawn or else our society's fabric will just implode into a bunch of unhappy marriages and people only willing to please themselves.[/q]

Think we've already acheived that for the most part

 

[JulesMaximus]

I think the article is clearly slanted simply to validate the following conclusion drawn by the author:

First of all it informs us that the traditional gender roles gave women a higher subjective happiness than men, a finding that flies in the face of feminist theory.

I don't believe it. There are far too many variables and it is far too subjective to draw these conclusions IMO.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: Titan
What, women decided to go be more masculine and go get jobs and climb the corporate ladder and work in an office world full of BS, and they became less happy? Gee, I wonder why.

There's a reason baking cake is easy as cake.

This.

 

[JTsyo]

I think it's kind of silly to put very different people under the same umbrella. There are bound to be women who enjoy working and many more that would enjoy working if they had a job they enjoyed.

 

[sandorski]

Take away the Vote, remove their shoes, get them pregnant, place them in the kitchen. Return the Bliss to your Miss!!!

I can accept that they are less Happy, but this study is BS. > Responsibility = >Stress = < Happy.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: PingSpike
Oh course, they're not as happy. They have to work now. Working always sucked ass, I'm not sure why they thought it didn't! So much horseshit with work. Man, if it was an option I'd stay home all day and bake and cook and raise kids. And I don't even like cooking, baking nor am I that great with kids. I don't have to fill out forms every time I need to wipe a kids ass, or worry about being promoted to head baker. I don't have to go to a meeting decide how to fold laundry or sit in traffic. No office politics, hell, only ONE other person to answer too! And if I want to get drunk at 2pm I'm going to do it.

About the only thing that really blows ass for the old arrangement is you don't really have any money/power. But you know what they say about power? "With great power comes a great drinking problem." Thats right. And today's divorce courts who really has the power?

I think the whole idea of the movement was they lacked choices, which they did. Of course, they still do. Now that most women can work they have too. I'm not sure who would have signed up if you said that was the end result though. But cheer up! At least you can afford a cool car with the second salary. You'll need it, that traffic is a bastard and I need you to pick the kids up from daycare on the way home.

n yusef, leave Riven alone and go after this guy. Find real bias where real bias is.

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: meltdown75
my ex wife is the most successful woman i know.

we worked towards a common goal for 10+ years - 5 dating, 5 married...

she never did end up becoming happy... the harder she worked, the more miserable she became. she put her career aspirations ahead of everything else.

now we're both alone... she is unhappy... i am just starting to get used to being alone.

if you were to ask me i would certainly say that there are more unhappy women these days, even though i only have one example to go from - but it's a good one IMO.

tougher to satisfy & they don't know when they have a good thing. my 0.02

I worry about this for myself (not divorce, but wasting my life on a career.) My husband and I don't want kids so I don't have an "excuse" to be a housewife, but I'm not particularly happy stressing about my high-pressure job all the time. But it feels like I'm slacking and not doing my part if I were to find a lower-pressure job that's beneath my actual abilities, especially since my husband and I make about equal amounts right now and stepping down would feel like putting more of the financial burden on him unfairly.

Caught in the culture trap, I suppose. 50 years ago I don't think there would have been any pressure involved in taking a lower paying job or staying at home. Now I can't justify it in my head in any other way than me being selfish/lazy so I keep working.

I can't resist....I tried, but I can't. LOL, is this a trap?

No. But people like you perceive "stay-at-home" to be a get drunk at 2pm do whatever you want freeforall whereas I perceive stay at home mom to be a full time, difficult, worthwhile and rewarding job, just not the one for me. Our posts aren't the same, though your wrong perception causes my neuroses.

 

[SuperSix]

I.FUCKING.KNEW.IT.

"Classic" (read: "sexist" by popular view) gender roles succeeded for thousands of years.

Destruction of those is causing destruction of our species.

Edit - spelling

 

[Crono]

The feminism movement doesn't bother me today so much as the "metrosexual" (really poor name) movement.
Pretty soon men and women will not only have the same roles, but look and act the same. That's when the world will really be messed up.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: PingSpike
Oh course, they're not as happy. They have to work now. Working always sucked ass, I'm not sure why they thought it didn't! So much horseshit with work. Man, if it was an option I'd stay home all day and bake and cook and raise kids. And I don't even like cooking, baking nor am I that great with kids. I don't have to fill out forms every time I need to wipe a kids ass, or worry about being promoted to head baker. I don't have to go to a meeting decide how to fold laundry or sit in traffic. No office politics, hell, only ONE other person to answer too! And if I want to get drunk at 2pm I'm going to do it.

About the only thing that really blows ass for the old arrangement is you don't really have any money/power. But you know what they say about power? "With great power comes a great drinking problem." Thats right. And today's divorce courts who really has the power?

I think the whole idea of the movement was they lacked choices, which they did. Of course, they still do. Now that most women can work they have too. I'm not sure who would have signed up if you said that was the end result though. But cheer up! At least you can afford a cool car with the second salary. You'll need it, that traffic is a bastard and I need you to pick the kids up from daycare on the way home.

n yusef, leave Riven alone and go after this guy. Find real bias where real bias is.

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: meltdown75
my ex wife is the most successful woman i know.

we worked towards a common goal for 10+ years - 5 dating, 5 married...

she never did end up becoming happy... the harder she worked, the more miserable she became. she put her career aspirations ahead of everything else.

now we're both alone... she is unhappy... i am just starting to get used to being alone.

if you were to ask me i would certainly say that there are more unhappy women these days, even though i only have one example to go from - but it's a good one IMO.

tougher to satisfy & they don't know when they have a good thing. my 0.02

I worry about this for myself (not divorce, but wasting my life on a career.) My husband and I don't want kids so I don't have an "excuse" to be a housewife, but I'm not particularly happy stressing about my high-pressure job all the time. But it feels like I'm slacking and not doing my part if I were to find a lower-pressure job that's beneath my actual abilities, especially since my husband and I make about equal amounts right now and stepping down would feel like putting more of the financial burden on him unfairly.

Caught in the culture trap, I suppose. 50 years ago I don't think there would have been any pressure involved in taking a lower paying job or staying at home. Now I can't justify it in my head in any other way than me being selfish/lazy so I keep working.

I can't resist....I tried, but I can't. LOL, is this a trap?

No. But people like you perceive "stay-at-home" to be a get drunk at 2pm do whatever you want freeforall whereas I perceive stay at home mom to be a full time, difficult, worthwhile and rewarding job, just not the one for me. Our posts aren't the same, though your wrong perception causes my neuroses.

You're reading a bunch of shit into my tongue-in-cheek post that was never even there, I would have to guess in an effort to feed your own inane insecurities or something. At any rate, if "my" perception is so wrong, it should be quite easy to ignore and add to no one's neuroses. You're the one that pretty came out and said you weren't happy with your job and only keep it due to the responsibility social pressures apparently forces upon you.

My post was mostly about how I hate working and why would anyone want to do it instead of stay home...and how we all have to do that shit now because shit costs to much. But if it helps you to sleep better at night I can make some jokes about being barefoot and pregnant and getting us menfolk some sandwiches so you can shake your fist at me for being a caveman. I was thinking about doing it anyway so all you have to do is ask.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: PingSpike
Oh course, they're not as happy. They have to work now. Working always sucked ass, I'm not sure why they thought it didn't! So much horseshit with work. Man, if it was an option I'd stay home all day and bake and cook and raise kids. And I don't even like cooking, baking nor am I that great with kids. I don't have to fill out forms every time I need to wipe a kids ass, or worry about being promoted to head baker. I don't have to go to a meeting decide how to fold laundry or sit in traffic. No office politics, hell, only ONE other person to answer too! And if I want to get drunk at 2pm I'm going to do it.

About the only thing that really blows ass for the old arrangement is you don't really have any money/power. But you know what they say about power? "With great power comes a great drinking problem." Thats right. And today's divorce courts who really has the power?

I think the whole idea of the movement was they lacked choices, which they did. Of course, they still do. Now that most women can work they have too. I'm not sure who would have signed up if you said that was the end result though. But cheer up! At least you can afford a cool car with the second salary. You'll need it, that traffic is a bastard and I need you to pick the kids up from daycare on the way home.

n yusef, leave Riven alone and go after this guy. Find real bias where real bias is.

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: meltdown75
my ex wife is the most successful woman i know.

we worked towards a common goal for 10+ years - 5 dating, 5 married...

she never did end up becoming happy... the harder she worked, the more miserable she became. she put her career aspirations ahead of everything else.

now we're both alone... she is unhappy... i am just starting to get used to being alone.

if you were to ask me i would certainly say that there are more unhappy women these days, even though i only have one example to go from - but it's a good one IMO.

tougher to satisfy & they don't know when they have a good thing. my 0.02

I worry about this for myself (not divorce, but wasting my life on a career.) My husband and I don't want kids so I don't have an "excuse" to be a housewife, but I'm not particularly happy stressing about my high-pressure job all the time. But it feels like I'm slacking and not doing my part if I were to find a lower-pressure job that's beneath my actual abilities, especially since my husband and I make about equal amounts right now and stepping down would feel like putting more of the financial burden on him unfairly.

Caught in the culture trap, I suppose. 50 years ago I don't think there would have been any pressure involved in taking a lower paying job or staying at home. Now I can't justify it in my head in any other way than me being selfish/lazy so I keep working.

I can't resist....I tried, but I can't. LOL, is this a trap?

No. But people like you perceive "stay-at-home" to be a get drunk at 2pm do whatever you want freeforall whereas I perceive stay at home mom to be a full time, difficult, worthwhile and rewarding job, just not the one for me. Our posts aren't the same, though your wrong perception causes my neuroses.

You're reading a bunch of shit into my tongue-in-cheek post that was never even there, I would have to guess in an effort to feed your own inane insecurities or something. At any rate, if "my" perception is so wrong, it should be quite easy to ignore and add to no one's neuroses. You're the one that pretty came out and said you weren't happy with your job and only keep it due to the responsibility social pressures apparently forces upon you.

My post was mostly about how I hate working and why would anyone want to do it instead of stay home...and how we all have to do that shit now because shit costs to much. But if it helps you to sleep better at night I can make some jokes about being barefoot and pregnant and getting us menfolk some sandwiches so you can shake your fist at me for being a caveman. I was thinking about doing it anyway so all you have to do is ask.

I was mostly looking for any post that had actual hints of bias to point n yusef at, since Riven was dead on target. The dig in my comment was intended to be at n yusef who can see bias in the pure driven snow, not at you. Friends?

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Crono

If it takes that long a response, then the answer is probably "no".

No, it doesn't. But it's good to explain things, because this article has serious implications and even if it is flawed, it's stimulating to explore them. If your brain wasn't the size of a nut and as empty as a shell you would better understand this.