Gender roles in marriage. Do some men just have a problem with women?

[EmilyAlexandra]

I read something on a thread which has been nagging at me ever since. Unfortunately, I can’t track down the post. Perhaps it’s been deleted or edited. It was not the thread where someone was talking about chemical castration and wanting other people not to have sex. However, that thread did bring this back to the forefront of my mind.

In the thread that I now can’t find, a man in his late 20s/early 30s was saying that it’s really hard for him to find a “traditional Catholic girl” to marry. One thing that irked me was the way he kept talking about “girls” rather than “women”. I don’t know if that’s an individual or cultural thing. However, the thing that sticks in my mind is that he said that women (“girls”) do not marry a man out of love, but solely because of what they think a man can provide for them. That really annoyed me, because, in my experience, it is completely untrue. However, I did begin to wonder whether, for some Catholics, it is true. Is there an expectation for some Catholics (especially “traditionalists”) that marriage is essentially a commercial transaction?

Let me explain where I’m coming from. My husband was my childhood best friend and sweetheart. We were engaged at 19 and married at 21. At the point at which I decided to spend the rest of my life with him, I wasn’t thinking about practical things like how he would provide for me. After we married, I chose a career to make money and he continued in graduate study (supported by studentships, scholarships, income from teaching, etc). He ended up with a good job, but he hated it and I couldn’t bear to see what it was doing to his mental health. So he is now working at a zoo and studying part-time for a degree in biology. He works very hard, but doesn’t contribute much to the household income, which is fine. When we have children, we plan to share our parental leave/pay, and then he will take a career break while I continue to work full-time. It’s the only arrangement that makes financial sense, and he’ll be better with children anyway.

The guy who thinks that women just want a man to provide for them would presumably find my kind of marriage hard to understand. I also responded to a poster on another thread who believed that the reason why he doesn’t have a girlfriend is because “the lesbian culture” tells women that we have more fun without men. Searching old threads, there a number of hateful posts by angry, embittered men who cannot find a woman and have decided that women are the problem.

It began to occur to me that I have seen quite a few threads and posts that I find hard to reconcile with my attitudes. I know these forums are not always representative, but I think I have seen enough to wonder whether my attitudes are out of step even with mainstream Catholic attitudes. For example, there’s a current thread about how college women should prioritise marriage and family. I also see countless posts that are very negative towards feminism, often portraying feminism as something malign.

 

[DarkLight]

I definitely guarantee this thread is going to stay calm and civilized

Anyway. I definitely think some men have issues with women. I also think it’s especially easy for catholic men to see the objectified, in your face, nearly pornographic displays our modern society pushes, and thing that’s representative of your average modern woman’s attitudes. And even secular culture often pushes the idea that women want to control men, or that listening to your wife somehow makes you less of a man, or something.

This forum does lean significantly more conservative than mainstream Catholic attitudes, I would say. Online platforms in general frequently attract those who are upset or dissatisfied and feel like they’re not getting what they need. How many people go to a forum to post about how successful their love life has been and how happy their marriage is? So you’re going to be seeing a heavy bias towards people who are unsuccessful in romance and unhappy about it.

A lot of the animosity towards feminism has to do especially with its attitude towards abortion as well. Catholics are called to be pro-life, and modern feminism has firmly aligned itself with abortion rights as a fundamental platform. It is difficult for Catholics to understand how to promote certain feminist values without being swept up in that.

So yes, for various reasons, some men have issues with women. A lot of these ways are encouraged by society, and I don’t think that as a Church we are right now doing a great job of providing alternate models of masculinity. And I think it’s often easier overall for men who are not successful in the dating realm to blame women than it is for women to blame men.

 

[StudentMI]

I also see countless posts that are very negative towards feminism, often portraying feminism as something malign.

Feminism is malign as long as it seeks to erase the difference between men and women.

The bit about girls vs women is just cultural. Like it or not, it is what it is.

Some women do indeed marry for stability etc. Some do it for love. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

 

[AdamP88]

In the thread that I now can’t find, a man in his late 20s/early 30s was saying that it’s really hard for him to find a “traditional Catholic girl” to marry. One thing that irked me was the way he kept talking about “girls” rather than “women”.

That could possibly be because he is immature or just a harmless turn of phrase.
There are definitely a few posters on the forums who one might describe as incels, and who have a very unhealthy view of women and marriage.

However, the thing that sticks in my mind is that he said that women (“girls”) do not marry a man out of love, but solely because of what they think a man can provide for them.

That annoys me too. But the people who hold that view will find it very difficult to actually find a woman to marry because of their unhealthy views, and this will, in their minds, legitimise their views.
It’s a vicious circle.

I also see countless posts that are very negative towards feminism

Because modern feminism is toxic and anti-catholic. My wife and female cousins would agree with this.

For example, there’s a current thread about how college women should prioritise marriage and family.

Is there anything wrong with promoting marriage and family over career though? I wouldn’t have married a career driven woman who didn’t want to stay at home with our children as I believe putting kids in daycare while the parents work is possibly not the very best for the children. Is it wrong to encourage a society where parents are enabled to stay at home rather than being forced into the workplace through financial necessity?

 

[AdamP88]

I will just add to my previous post by saying that many men feel a strong desire to provide for their families and would prefer to be the ones out doing the work if possible. Obviously not all men feel this way so strongly and there are situations where it’s not possible. Personally I would feel odd about my wife being the main earner as I take particular pride in providing and that is part of my role as a husband in my mind. I don’t think there is anything wrong with wanting that and identifying my career with my role as a husband. I do think that modern feminism attempts to demonise the idea of the man as provider and the woman as homemaker. But the issue is that many men and women want to have those roles.

 

[AdamP88]

How many people go to a forum to post about how successful their love life has been and how happy their marriage is?

It seems boasty maybe. But I would if I could.

I don’t think that as a Church we are right now doing a great job of providing alternate models of masculinity.

Definitely true. There are probably more priests encouraging the LGBT agenda, a la James Martin than there are addressing the crisis in masculinity.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Because modern feminism is toxic and anti-catholic. My wife and female cousins would agree with this.

The problem with discussing “feminism” is there is no accepted definition. For some people it just means that women are equal to men. No issue there. For some it refers to radically pro-abortion, anti-family beliefs. Obviously, most Catholics aren’t going to sign on to that.

We can’t have a discussion because the term itself is a constantly moving target.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Yes, some men have issues with women.
Some women have issues with men.
Many people who post on this forum are struggling with issues or problems in life.
Some of them are mentally unwell.
It’s like that all over the Internet.

Those of us who are happy and well-balanced in our relationships and don’t have issues with relating to the opposite gender or with finding a partner don’t tend to start threads. I had plenty of dates and a long happy marriage but I’m not going to be starting a thread on here to announce that. Why would I? It’s my personal business. I’m also not a fan of how people use these forums sometimes as a “Dear Abby” agony aunt advice forum for everything that’s going wrong in their dating and marriage lives.

Emily, people have told you dozens of times in the past that you would be better off going out and meeting some Catholics in person at your local churches if you want to know how Catholics think, at least within your culture. The forum does not give any sort of balanced picture.

In my areas of USA, the Catholic women are often Irish-American and Italian-American. They are not shrinking violets. They were “feminists” in the good, independent sense of the word (not the pro-abortion sense of the word) before the word was invented.

 

[Peeps]

This is a good, thought-provoking thread. Thanks to the OP (EmilyAlexandra).

OP, I’ve been married for 41 years to the man that I dated in high school. We have two grown daughters who are our joy–one of them is married and we love our son-in-law!

My husband and I both work, but while our children were young (under age six), I stopped working outside the home so that I could raise our daughters. I did a good job at that, and my husband constantly praises my “mothering” skills, as do my daughters and my son-in-law.

When my daughters were in school, I went back to work, but not to pay for family expenses like groceries, mortgage, etc. My husband’s decent paycheck would not cover the costs of two daughters in the sport of figure skating, and also their private secular school tuition and expenses. (Our city has abysmal public schools–see my other threads!). So I went to work to pay for those “extras.”

Way back in the 1970s, a financial expert that we admired (and still admire–not Dave Ramsey!) stated that a married couple should live on ONE income, and if both spouses decide to work, that second income should pay for “extras” like vacations, children’s extracurriculars, hobbies, etc… He said that living expenses like mortage/rent, groceries, car, insurance, etc. should be covered by just ONE income (not necessarily the man’s income).

This was not “chauvinism,” it was pure practicality. In many marriages, situations arise which make it difficult or impossible for both spouses to work outside the home.

A good example of this is babies. Many women have a baby and assume that the child wil be sleeping 10 hours a night at six weeks and will be happy to be in a daycare center–and then reality sets in!! The child is still waking up 2 or 3 times a night at six months, at one year, and no matter WHAT the parents try, it doesn’t work, and the parents are exhausted trying to go to work on 2-3 hours of sleep a night!

Or the baby cannot adjust to daycare and cries constantly and loses weight.

Or the parents cannot find a daycare situation that works for them.

Or sometimes, the mother can’t seem to get her energy back after giving birth, and gains weight and feels tired all the time and cries a lot–(PP depression?) and working outside the home just isn’t working out at all.

There are other reasons than babies why a couple may end up with one of them at home; e.g., an injury or illness for one of the spouses.

So I believe that our 1970s financial guy’s teaching is still very valid, and that every couple should plan on the possibility that one of them may end up at home instead of working.

If all the stars align and God works it all out for them so that both spouses are able to work outside the home at jobs that they love, and the babies/children are doing well and loving their lives–well, that’s great.

But I think there are a lot of homes where the quality of life would improve a lot if one of the spouses simply stayed home and did the work of taking care of the family.

 

[WingedHussar]

What was wrong with the old-school model other than the fact that it was the bane of feminists?

 

[StudentMI]

What was wrong with the old-school model other than the fact that it was the bane of feminists?

That’s exactly what was wrong with it.

I’ll say this: I deny equality as commonly defined between men and women. Equality in dignity before God? Yes. Equity before the law? Yes. Equality as commonly meant? Nope.

 

[MeganCecilia]

I feel like people take the experiences they have and then generalize. For example, I’ve had guys that only showed an interest in me because they wanted to “hookup” (gross!). I could say “all men want is sex and that’s all.” Its a generalization but it does not represent the whole.

I see that both genders do this about the other. :woman_shrugging:t3:

 

[Tis_Bearself]

What was wrong with the old-school model other than the fact that it was the bane of feminists?

I just read DarkLight’s post twice and I’m not seeing where she said there was something “wrong” with the “old school model”.

Did you mean to reply to someone else?

If some couple wants to use the “old school model” (Whatever that is; my Irish-American grandparent’s marriage in the early 1900s wasn’t all that different from my own marriage in the 1990s except that Grandma didn’t work outside the home and I did) in their marriage, and it works for them, great, go for it. Just don’t assume that however you do your marriage, old school or new school, is the way all couples should do it, or that if you’re single, every person you meet is going to be okay with whatever model of marriage you want to have.

 

[WingedHussar]

The poster in question said that the Church is not doing a great job of providing “alternate models” of masculinity. I see no reason for alternatives when the road was paved by those who came before us.

I will definitely not assume that every single person I meet is going to be okay with my way. The Bible, written during times that were not exactly feminist, speaks quite frequently on the dangers of picking a wife poorly and how difficult finding a good candidate was.

 

[StudentMI]

Not to mention a great ‘model’ of masculinity being supplied by God Himself.

 

[Allie1]

It began to occur to me that I have seen quite a few threads and posts that I find hard to reconcile with my attitudes. I know these forums are not always representative , but I think I have seen enough to wonder whether my attitudes are out of step even with mainstream Catholic attitudes

People marry and not marry for a variety of reasons. When reading online forums, I think that it is important to keep in mind that everyones situation is unique.
Many marry for love, some marry out of loneliness, some marry for financial security, some marry because their biological clock is ticking, some marry because they are pregnant.

You have a very nice marriage.
Some women do reject potential male partners because of their ability to provide for them and future children. I have a 40 year old Catholic friend who rejected a very nice guy because of this issue. He was also 40 and didn’t have a good career. She has a a very traditional view of marriage and wants to be a stay at home mom.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

I’ll say this: I deny equality as commonly defined between men and women. Equality in dignity before God? Yes. Equity before the law? Yes. Equality as commonly meant? Nope.

If you believe in spiritual and legal equality I guess I’m unclear in what sense you believe women are inferior.

 

[StudentMI]

Where did I say I believe women are inferior? Such is a common misunderstanding of the opposite of egalitarianism. It’s not the case.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

When reading online forums, I think that it is important to keep in mind that everyones situation is unique.

In addition to that we have a vast number of countries and cultures represented on the forum. In USA, even among those who are born here, there can be vastly different cultural expectations depending on ethnic background, how long the family has lived in the USA, etc. I’ve known people right here in USA who did not marry for love but instead had arranged marriages, either through their families or through a marriage broker of some kind, and those marriages worked out well, the couples often seemed to become attached to each other.

As for the concern about a husband being able to bring money into the house, if one comes from a less well-off background and/or has known a lot of men who were out of work, often through poor planning, or because they are essentially deadbeats looking for a woman with a good job as their “meal ticket”, then it becomes rather important that a man show he doesn’t fall in those categories. It would seem from the OP’s past posts that she has lived a rather privileged life. My husband and I were from the Rust Belt, an economically depressed area with a lot of working class folks. I was concerned to make money because I didn’t want to end up broke and wanted to be able to take care of my aging parents who didn’t have a lot of resources.

My husband liked to joke with me that I married him because he was the only man I dated who could hold a steady job, and sadly that was mostly true. A lot of the men I met were in the creative professions, which meant their jobs and income were really spotty. Some of the men I met who had professional jobs decided they didn’t like their job, chucked it and moved back with their family or took up couch surfing. Some of them got their lives more settled by age 40 or so but I didn’t want to wait that long. Some of them married other women with good incomes who were willing to pay most of their joint bills. And some of them died from irresponsible lifestyles.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Where did I say I believe women are inferior? Such is a common misunderstanding of the opposite of egalitarianism. It’s not the case.

If they’re unequal, it seems to imply that one is superior and one is inferior. If you were to say that men and women are equal but different, that would be something else.

A hand and a foot have totally different functions and roles to serve the overall body, but I don’t think you could say that one is “better.” They’re just different.

I’m not trying to trap you in a “gotcha” here, just trying to understand your point of view.