Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is it an inconvenient truth that women would prefer to be homemakers?

Announcements Posted on
Complete this short survey for a chance to win an iPad mini! 22-09-2014
Got a question about Student Finance? Ask the experts this week on TSR! 14-09-2014
    • 57 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm a woman, but no thanks, I'd rather have a high-flying successful career. I'm not the most domesticated person.

    Don't assume that we all want the same thing.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:


    It is not saying that women SHOULD be at home, like the OP thinks. It is just saying that there shouldn't be pressure either way.
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by csea)
    Determining the 'natural place' for anyone is withdrawing their freedom. While some women will prefer to do so, I can vouch that at least one wouldn't: me. Women should have the choice to either enter the workforce or stay at home, and they should be congratulated for either choice they make. Nonetheless, one cannot determine that the woman's natural place is anywhere.
    Is there an alternative for the term 'natural' that I can use to get my point across without causing offence?

    How could we describe a family with 2 children where the wife goes out to work everyday on a building site and the husband stays at home cooking, cleaning and raising the kids? It's not normal is it? And I suspect that most men and women would be unhappy with such an arrangement, therefore in the majority of cases it's an unworkable and unwanted contrived scenario, whereas the reverse wouldn't be true.

    While the tradition "chauvinist" model of a male breadwinner and female housewife might be offensive in this pc age I suspect that a lot of people would be perfectly fine with such an arrangement as long as it was founded upon mutual respect.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Historophilia)
    Both my parents work, and my mother has always been the high flyer and i had nannies when I was an age for them. I in no way feel neglected or abandoned by my parents, I am very close to them and I admire hugely what they have achieved in their careers (particularly my mothers) and see them as excellent role models.

    Time spent with children doesn't automatically equate to quality of parenting.



    They are only seen as 'male traits' because wanting a career etc. is traditionally seen as being the preserve of men. Therefore if a woman wants a career and not to be a stay at home mum you assume she is acting like a man, when in fact she is just acting as is natural for her as a person.

    Ideas about 'male' or 'female' character traits are bizarre, people don't fit ito these neat boxes. Anyway, why does it matter if, as you say a woman appears 'hard' if she is also a good mother? And what exactly do you mean by 'domestic'? Do you really expect women to bring home-made cakes to board-room meetings?

    Saying career women are 'more like men' is ridiculous, career women are more like people who want to have successful and fulfilling careers, saying that wanting this is 'being like a man' is frankly insulting.

    What you are implying is that women who don't fall into your ideas of what is normal for a woman in terms of personality and behaviour are somehow 'less of a woman'. Whether you mean to or not, this is what you are suggesting.

    Women of all personality types and outlooks on life work rather than staying at home, there is in no way a personality type that all of them fit into.

    And your comments about Testosterone are rightly being ridiculed, since you have no evidence to back them up, have no knowledge whatsoever of the average testosterone levels that these 'hard' women have.

    And anyway, there is no reason for high levels of testosterone to make people want a career. Testosterone is linked to agression, being aggressive does not equal wanting a career or being good in the workplace.

    The reason you are making this link is because again you view wanting a career as being a 'male' trait and since Testoserone is found in higher levels in men, women who want careers must on some level be physically like men! they must in someway be abnormal and different from normal women!

    In my view that's pretty insulting to any woman who is a working mother or plans to be one or who aims to be successful and respected in her future career!



    First of all, there is no such thing as Nymphomania, there is no medically recognised condition regarding having lots of sex that solely affects women. Ideas about 'Nymphomania' stem from a time when women wanting lots of sex was seen as unnatural or dangerous.

    What this woman may have suffered from is Sex Addiction, which afflicts both men and women and is a lot more complicated that just wanting lots of sex, which is a perfectly natural thing in itself.

    In addition, this example is completely unconnected to the issue we are disscussing.

    Unless you are an expert on Behavioural Endocrinology I doubt you are qualified to claim that 'hormones matter' since you clearly have idea of how they actually do work, what they do and how they affect people.
    You make some good points but it just seems like you're taking the whole liberal 'equality' PC argument to the extreme, even going as far as to say men and women don't have any general difference in hormone balance. What's next, men don't have a Y chromosome because it's sexist and unequal? It seems like most people on The Student Room go out of their way to demonstrate how liberal they are, bathing in positive reps whilst anyone who says anything to the contrary of the argument "we are all exactly the same" is consistently negged. I have seen it time and time again, no matter what the subject matter (race, sex, age, you name it).

    I don't see how you can deny that, even amongst men as well, there are the paternalistic types who value family over work, and the career driven types who value their career over raising a family, often opting to have children much later in life (they can still do both but both men and women tend to value one above the other). It is particularly hard for women to raise a family (given maternity leave etc) and work extremely long hours, which is why you often see many women in the public sector opting for flexible/reduced hours.

    Out of interest, have you had a job yet working in an office environment? Have you worked for a corporate company? Do you have actual empirical knowledge that you have gained first-hand yourself?
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by localfox1000)


    It is not saying that women SHOULD be at home, like the OP thinks. It is just saying that there shouldn't be pressure either way.
    I've amended the OP and got rid of the word 'natural' as it did stick out like a sore thumb.

    I don't believe women should be forced into housewifery against their will, I just don't see anything wrong with the much maligned nuclear family. If women do want to stay at home while the children grow up I certainly would think any less of them for making this choice.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:

    (Original post by chefdave)
    Despite the couple of decades' worth of propaganda we've been subjected to on 'equality' and 'positive discrimination' deep down wouldn't a lot of women much to prefer to be in the home raising children and performing necessary and often rewarding domestic tasks?
    Just like the couple of millenia worth of propaganda from religion and society that has dictated that women should do domestic tasks and yield to men?
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighestKungFu)
    You make some good points but it just seems like you're taking the whole liberal 'equality' PC argument to the extreme, even going as far as to say men and women don't have any general difference in hormone balance. What's next, men don't have a Y chromosome because it's sexist and unequal? It seems like most people on The Student Room go out of their way to demonstrate how liberal they are, bathing in positive reps whilst anyone who says anything to the contrary of the argument "we are all exactly the same" is consistently negged. I have seen it time and time again, no matter what the subject matter (race, sex, age, you name it).

    I don't see how you can deny that, even amongst men as well, there are the paternalistic types who value family over work, and the career driven types who value their career over raising a family, often opting to have children much later in life (they can still do both but both men and women tend to value one above the other). It is particularly hard for women to raise a family (given maternity leave etc) and work extremely long hours, which is why you often see many women in the public sector opting for flexible/reduced hours.

    Out of interest, have you had a job yet working in an office environment? Have you worked for a corporate company? Do you have actual empirical knowledge that you have gained first-hand yourself?
    Good post.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    Good post.
    Thanks mate .
    • 29 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighestKungFu)
    You make some good points but it just seems like you're taking the whole liberal 'equality' PC argument to the extreme, even going as far as to say men and women don't have any general difference in hormone balance. What's next, men don't have a Y chromosome because it's sexist and unequal? It seems like most people on The Student Room go out of their way to demonstrate how liberal they are, bathing in positive reps whilst anyone who says anything to the contrary of the argument "we are all exactly the same" is consistently negged. I have seen it time and time again, no matter what the subject matter (race, sex, age, you name it).
    Whether what I say is 'liberal and PC' is irrelevant, it's what I think and believe to be true based on what I have seen.

    I have no interest in trying to appear liberal to gain reps, as it happens I am in fact a Tory and don't feel any need to do so.

    However I am also a Feminist, because I believe in the right on individuals to choose what they want to do in life, to not be judged for their choices and not be condemned as being 'like a man' or for being 'less of a woman' for doing so. Equally I believe that men should be able to make the choice, to stay at home with their children wwhile their works if they want to or need to and not be judged either. Not be judged a 'wimp' or 'effeminate' or even a 'sponger' for doing so.

    People are individuals and entirely themselves, there is no need to pigeon hole people and make assumptions about what they do and what they want becuase they happen to belong to either sex.

    Gender stereotypes are entirely pointless as most people don't conform to them. They are also damaging as they can lead both men and women to feel inadequete or abnormal if they find that they don't fit in with them.

    Think about cases of domestic violence against men. They are basically never reported, because any man who spoke up about it would be seen as weak and a wimp, less of a man because he was being subjected to violence by a woman. If men weren't expected to be the strong ones who should 'man up' and tough things out and not be bothered by things more men would report it. The same goes for male rape.

    I don't see how you can deny that, even amongst men as well, there are the paternalistic types who value family over work, and the career driven types who value their career over raising a family, often opting to have children much later in life (they can still do both but both men and women tend to value one above the other). It is particularly hard for women to raise a family (given maternity leave etc) and work extremely long hours, which is why you often see many women in the public sector opting for flexible/reduced hours.
    I have never denied it, and i'm not quite sure what point that it is you are trying to make here as regards my other arguments. I never said that no people want to concentrate on their children or that no-one should. I was saying that those who do not (and the people we were talking about were women who work when they have children) should not be regarded as or assumed to be more 'manly' or somehow abnormal for doing so.

    Of course it is very difficult to do both, I know that it will be, I never said that it wouldn't.

    Out of interest, have you had a job yet working in an office environment? Have you worked for a corporate company? Do you have actual empirical knowledge that you have gained first-hand yourself?
    I am on TSR of course I'm not working full time yet. I have however had first hand work expereince of the corporate sphere and have done so since I was 16. I was even employed for several weeks by one of the world largest Telecoms comapanies in order to fill in a junior role in one of the departments in their global office while a member of staff was on holiday. I have considerable work place expereince and also due to my mothers work I have met many working women of all levels in companies and of all personalities. They were all different, there is no such thing as the 'archetypal career woman'.

    However, I fail to see why this is relevant.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    Is there an alternative for the term 'natural' that I can use to get my point across without causing offence?

    How could we describe a family with 2 children where the wife goes out to work everyday on a building site and the husband stays at home cooking, cleaning and raising the kids? It's not normal is it? And I suspect that most men and women would be unhappy with such an arrangement, therefore in the majority of cases it's an unworkable and unwanted contrived scenario, whereas the reverse wouldn't be true.

    While the tradition "chauvinist" model of a male breadwinner and female housewife might be offensive in this pc age I suspect that a lot of people would be perfectly fine with such an arrangement as long as it was founded upon mutual respect.
    I don't think it is only the term 'natural' which appears offensive, because I feel like I understand your point and it still seems wrong. You suppose that there is something which is 'normal' when you say that the scenario you mention is not so. But who are you, or anyone for that matter, to say what is and is not normal? Does normality even exist today? Furthermore, you suggest that the family would not be happy in a household which reverses the common gender specified roles. What is your authentication for such a statement? Most of your points to me seem fabricated and based upon an unsteady, prejudiced foundation.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    It's dependent on the age-range. Women under 30, on being a housewife vs working it's 30 (housewife)/70 (working). This is because in our current society we are pressuring women to work and painting a negative image of housewives, look at screenager2004 post describing it in a pejorative manner "unemployed baby-pumping, glorified house-cleaners". One could pretty much say the same thing to a working women, someone who is slaving a way because that's what the majority of people are doing and will continue to do. There are very few jobs that you can do repeatedly and still enjoy and if you think you're going to get your dream job then you're deluded or don't understand what your dream job really entails.

    Having said all this, although our natural state is for women to be homemakers (evolutionary purpose, men hunter gathers and women looking after the child etc), we aren't in our natural state hence it's irrelevant. We aren't hunter gathers no more. To deny that women were pressured these last few 1000s of years to be homemakers, is to be ignorant of history. That's a fact. Women were and are still in most parts of the world, pressured to be homemakers. But, alternatively men are also pressured into working and being the primary provider.

    What would happen if women weren't pressured to work or pressured to be homemakers (assuming the man is working and can more than provide)? Probably be a homemaker. Although, equally what would happen if men weren't pressured to work or be homemakers (assuming the women is working and can more than provide)? Same thing, most likely be a homemaker. However, there are always exceptions and some people want a career more than they want a family and value their career more than their family (don't mean it in a negative way).
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'd rather die than to be confined in a house. Doing the same kind of things everyday, cleaning, ironing, shopping... what the hell? that would bore me to death, so no thanks. I have a friend whose dream is to be a housewife. I can't understand her, but meh. Good for her!
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by csea)
    I don't think it is only the term 'natural' which appears offensive, because I feel like I understand your point and it still seems wrong. You suppose that there is something which is 'normal' when you say that the scenario you mention is not so. But who are you, or anyone for that matter, to say what is and is not normal? Does normality even exist today? Furthermore, you suggest that the family would not be happy in a household which reverses the common gender specified roles. What is your authentication for such a statement? Most of your points to me seem fabricated and based upon an unsteady, prejudiced foundation.
    We're all perfectly entitled to observe the world around us and then advance what we believe to be normal based upon the empirical evidence. If i said it's normal for the weather to be clement in the summer and lousy in the winter based upon my experiences of both summer and winter would my opinion be a 'fabrication' based on 'prejudice' because we experience the odd rainy day in June? No. Similarly when I say that most builders are men while most housewifes are women I'm not making derogatory sexist statement based upon discrimination, this is an empirically true provable fact. I'm not saying that all builders should be men or that only men can build I'm simply saying that most builders are men. This isn't sexism, despite what the brainwashed Cultural Marxist uber-feminist crowd might say.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    Despite the couple of decades' worth of propaganda we've been subjected to on 'equality' and 'positive discrimination' deep down wouldn't a lot of women much to prefer to be in the home raising children and performing necessary and often rewarding domestic tasks?

    In their eagerness to spread the ideals of feminism are 'liberals' devaluing an important social role that has historically been the preserve of women?

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with females wanting to stay at home raising children while the husband supports the family with a full time job.
    I want to work, I want to raise children, in today's society women can do both. The idea, however, of staying at home raising children and doing domestic tasks everyday of my life sounds like pure and utter hell. Even if I married a wealthy man and had that opportunity, I would never be inclined to take it.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Historophilia)
    Whether what I say is 'liberal and PC' is irrelevant, it's what I think and believe to be true based on what I have seen.

    I have no interest in trying to appear liberal to gain reps, as it happens I am in fact a Tory and don't feel any need to do so.

    However I am also a Feminist, because I believe in the right on individuals to choose what they want to do in life, to not be judged for their choices and not be condemned as being 'like a man' or for being 'less of a woman' for doing so. Equally I believe that men should be able to make the choice, to stay at home with their children wwhile their works if they want to or need to and not be judged either. Not be judged a 'wimp' or 'effeminate' or even a 'sponger' for doing so.

    People are individuals and entirely themselves, there is no need to pigeon hole people and make assumptions about what they do and what they want becuase they happen to belong to either sex.

    Gender stereotypes are entirely pointless as most people don't conform to them. They are also damaging as they can lead both men and women to feel inadequete or abnormal if they find that they don't fit in with them.

    Think about cases of domestic violence against men. They are basically never reported, because any man who spoke up about it would be seen as weak and a wimp, less of a man because he was being subjected to violence by a woman. If men weren't expected to be the strong ones who should 'man up' and tough things out and not be bothered by things more men would report it. The same goes for male rape.



    I have never denied it, and i'm not quite sure what point that it is you are trying to make here as regards my other arguments. I never said that no people want to concentrate on their children or that no-one should. I was saying that those who do not (and the people we were talking about were women who work when they have children) should not be regarded as or assumed to be more 'manly' or somehow abnormal for doing so.

    Of course it is very difficult to do both, I know that it will be, I never said that it wouldn't.



    I am on TSR of course I'm not working full time yet. I have however had first hand work expereince of the corporate sphere and have done so since I was 16. I was even employed for several weeks by one of the world largest Telecoms comapanies in order to fill in a junior role in one of the departments in their global office while a member of staff was on holiday. I have considerable work place expereince and also due to my mothers work I have met many working women of all levels in companies and of all personalities. They were all different, there is no such thing as the 'archetypal career woman'.

    However, I fail to see why this is relevant.
    You have argued your case well but it is easier to cite a contrarian argument using exceptions to general 'rules' or 'patterns' than to defend the actual patterns. My argument isn’t that there should be gender roles; my argument is that throughout nature there are predominant patterns of behaviour, which also predominate human beings as well, hence the stereotypes. Granted it is not always ideal and people do have the right to be individuals and choose how they want to live, but it still doesn't disprove that there are patterns in nature that dictate how living-beings behave.

    I am not surprised that you said you're a feminist either. I would have bet a lot of money on it, as your entire argument is rife with feminist ethos. My argument is anathema to feminists but I won't back down just because a wave of negs from feminists is on its way. Read through the thread again and you'll see my argument in action - I have noticed a dichotomy forming between women who are citing more typically 'male' perspectives (being inclined towards 'freedom' - travelling, a career, not being 'tied down') and others who are conforming to the 'stereotype' of preferring domesticity.

    I also asked if you had worked yet because I wanted to know if you have spoken to actual working women about their lives/ambitions/career aspirations.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I've read that women prefer to be homemakers because of the "make your man a sandwich" gene.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ahotaru)
    I'd rather die than to be confined in a house. Doing the same kind of things everyday, cleaning, ironing, shopping... what the hell? that would bore me to death, so no thanks. I have a friend whose dream is to be a housewife. I can't understand her, but meh. Good for her!
    What job are you planning to do that doesn't involve doing the same **** every day? 90% of jobs are repetitive and involve doing the same ****. Also, those things you mentioned won't take more than 2 hours so you'll still have much more free time to engage in other activities that you like.
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LaEstrella)
    I want to work, I want to raise children, in today's society women can do both. The idea, however, of staying at home raising children and doing domestic tasks everyday of my life sounds like pure and utter hell. Even if I married a wealthy man and had that opportunity, I would never be inclined to take it.
    I think this is true if you have meaningful well paid work. But if it's just a part time job in WHSmiths I think most people would prefer to be at home cooking and cleaning etc. The problem with the UK economy is that we have too many lowly paid demeaning jobs and it's becoming ever more difficult to start your own business and act independently in the workplace. But I definitely see what you're saying.
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _Student_)
    I've read that women prefer to be homemakers because of the "make your man a sandwich" gene.
    Hehe, brilliant!
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox)
    Personally, there's nothing I'd like more than to be able to stay at home with my children (in the future, obviously). However, my partner cannot get a job so I currently have to keep us afloat. Having said that, I still do everything a "housewife" would do, cooking/cleaning/gardening etc because he does absolutely NOTHING all day. So I'm basically holding down two major jobs, plus a degree, while he sits at home and plays on his games console.. but that's a rant for another day.
    Ya picked a winner there didnt you?

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 3, 2012
New on TSR

TSR Freshers' blogs 2014

Read what TSR's freshers have to say as they head off to uni

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.