a controversial topic: what's wrong in choosing to become a housewife
Scroll to see replies
Original post by the bear
there is nothing wrong at all with that. today's housewife has a wide range of gadgets to help with her duties, leaving her plenty of energy for her husband and children.
there is nothing wrong at all with that. today's housewife has a wide range of gadgets to help with her duties, leaving her plenty of energy for her husband and children.
the other TSR members gave a mature answer. You seem to be trolling. What a stupid thing to do for someone with a higher status than I. At least be an example of HOW TO USE TSR. I did get the sarcasm but still, you've painted yourself a fool.
Original post by SiminaM
I can't take anyone who writes like that seriously 
Maybe you should. Valid points were made.
Private couples can do what they want.
The problem is, if there are considerably more men wanting housewives than there are women willing to be housewives, it should be the men who make the compromise, because they already have the right to determine their own life and career path and what they really want is a servant on top of that.
I would prefer to not marry than to be a housewife. However, I (and virtually everyone else) have no problem with people who do want to be one.
The problem is, if there are considerably more men wanting housewives than there are women willing to be housewives, it should be the men who make the compromise, because they already have the right to determine their own life and career path and what they really want is a servant on top of that.
I would prefer to not marry than to be a housewife. However, I (and virtually everyone else) have no problem with people who do want to be one.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Shellshocker93
I'm exclusively a Daily Sport reader
please be a joke
I'm feminist and I think if you wanna be a housewife then that's your right 
Original post by abc101
I guess it's the idea that it's effectively prostitution - you make your living not through going out to work, but through cooking, cleaning, and laying on your back for a man. There's nothing wrong with wanting to cook and clean for your partner (and obviously I should hope you want to do the sex with them) but it just has a slight 'whoring oneself out' feeling to it. Plus it's pretty dumb, especially in an age when a lot of people will end up getting divorced - why would you want your lifestyle to be completely dependent on your partner? Why choose to have no financial independence?
This would be the Marxist Feminist argument. You believe the woman is simply submitting to the man, being exploited and acting as free labour, right? A pretty bleak scenario considering those children are the woman's children too. Most single mothers I know get quite defensive about them, saying they would have it no other way than to raise the children themselves. Which brings me on to selfishness, but I'll get to that in a moment.
Firstly, what time period do you believe we still live in? "laying on your back for a man": are you implying that women don't want sex? It's a one-way street, men want it and women don't? I guess you're either a lesbian misandrist or such an individualist that you don't want children to tie you down from achieving "success".
On financial independence: are you ever truly independent? You may be able to earn some nice bux, but here's the thing: what happens when it is commonly accepted that half the population are not suitable to work because they must care for the next generation? The value of labour increases. Not necessarily by 50%, but the cost of living will go down immensely. Before marriage, you are tied to your parents and much of your life and opportunity in it is paid for by them. Your husband will then take on this burden from your father. Having your own pocket money is fine, but you have to consider what feminism has done (ironically Marxist Feminism who hates capitalism is getting women to work) to the quality of life of both sexes.
Original post by SiminaM
I think being a housewife lacks ambition and maybe self respect, since you basically depend on a man.
The whole cooking/kids/cleaning thing... At least in my case, my mom did all that by herself while having a great career and I've seen housewives who still get a maid to help, so personally I look down on housewives. It's personal though.
And what if the man dies/wants to divorce you? What are you going to do then?
A husband wanting a housewife... Idk it's a bit selfish imho.
The whole cooking/kids/cleaning thing... At least in my case, my mom did all that by herself while having a great career and I've seen housewives who still get a maid to help, so personally I look down on housewives. It's personal though.
And what if the man dies/wants to divorce you? What are you going to do then?
A husband wanting a housewife... Idk it's a bit selfish imho.
So, housewives lack ambition? I agree. They clearly do not have a grasp of the future, long term future goal. How do they not understand that jobs and money are more important than offspring? I'm sure some government facility will take good care of those babies from cradle to coffin.
A husband demanding a housewife: the wife should think herself lucky. She is paid for and given free-reign to do as she pleases, as long as she's not an idiot. Life has been made easy, but raising children is hardly easy, some would argue- with many anecdotes to hand. The man depends on you just as much as you depend on the man. You seem to be degrading yourself as a daughter when you claim that being raised by your mother meant she had no respect or ambition. Why demean yourself in that way? You're removing all sense of importance of raising children to be the best they can be: which many believe requires their mother to be present.
If that isn't a noble calling, I don't know what is. Housewives are the best wives. I think you're trying to project your broken home as the perfect model, or attempting to validate it, by pushing a wedge between the idea of male-female synergy in the household. You don't want that life for yourself- your child can have it better. Don't be selfish by chasing ideological goals at the expense of your family.
Original post by HigherMinion
This would be the Marxist Feminist argument. You believe the woman is simply submitting to the man, being exploited and acting as free labour, right? A pretty bleak scenario considering those children are the woman's children too. Most single mothers I know get quite defensive about them, saying they would have it no other way than to raise the children themselves. Which brings me on to selfishness, but I'll get to that in a moment.
Firstly, what time period do you believe we still live in? "laying on your back for a man": are you implying that women don't want sex? It's a one-way street, men want it and women don't? I guess you're either a lesbian misandrist or such an individualist that you don't want children to tie you down from achieving "success".
On financial independence: are you ever truly independent? You may be able to earn some nice bux, but here's the thing: what happens when it is commonly accepted that half the population are not suitable to work because they must care for the next generation? The value of labour increases. Not necessarily by 50%, but the cost of living will go down immensely. Before marriage, you are tied to your parents and much of your life and opportunity in it is paid for by them. Your husband will then take on this burden from your father. Having your own pocket money is fine, but you have to consider what feminism has done (ironically Marxist Feminism who hates capitalism is getting women to work) to the quality of life of both sexes.
So, housewives lack ambition? I agree. They clearly do not have a grasp of the future, long term future goal. How do they not understand that jobs and money are more important than offspring? I'm sure some government facility will take good care of those babies from cradle to coffin.
A husband demanding a housewife: the wife should think herself lucky. She is paid for and given free-reign to do as she pleases, as long as she's not an idiot. Life has been made easy, but raising children is hardly easy, some would argue- with many anecdotes to hand. The man depends on you just as much as you depend on the man. You seem to be degrading yourself as a daughter when you claim that being raised by your mother meant she had no respect or ambition. Why demean yourself in that way? You're removing all sense of importance of raising children to be the best they can be: which many believe requires their mother to be present.
If that isn't a noble calling, I don't know what is. Housewives are the best wives. I think you're trying to project your broken home as the perfect model, or attempting to validate it, by pushing a wedge between the idea of male-female synergy in the household. You don't want that life for yourself- your child can have it better. Don't be selfish by chasing ideological goals at the expense of your family.
Firstly, what time period do you believe we still live in? "laying on your back for a man": are you implying that women don't want sex? It's a one-way street, men want it and women don't? I guess you're either a lesbian misandrist or such an individualist that you don't want children to tie you down from achieving "success".
On financial independence: are you ever truly independent? You may be able to earn some nice bux, but here's the thing: what happens when it is commonly accepted that half the population are not suitable to work because they must care for the next generation? The value of labour increases. Not necessarily by 50%, but the cost of living will go down immensely. Before marriage, you are tied to your parents and much of your life and opportunity in it is paid for by them. Your husband will then take on this burden from your father. Having your own pocket money is fine, but you have to consider what feminism has done (ironically Marxist Feminism who hates capitalism is getting women to work) to the quality of life of both sexes.
So, housewives lack ambition? I agree. They clearly do not have a grasp of the future, long term future goal. How do they not understand that jobs and money are more important than offspring? I'm sure some government facility will take good care of those babies from cradle to coffin.
A husband demanding a housewife: the wife should think herself lucky. She is paid for and given free-reign to do as she pleases, as long as she's not an idiot. Life has been made easy, but raising children is hardly easy, some would argue- with many anecdotes to hand. The man depends on you just as much as you depend on the man. You seem to be degrading yourself as a daughter when you claim that being raised by your mother meant she had no respect or ambition. Why demean yourself in that way? You're removing all sense of importance of raising children to be the best they can be: which many believe requires their mother to be present.
If that isn't a noble calling, I don't know what is. Housewives are the best wives. I think you're trying to project your broken home as the perfect model, or attempting to validate it, by pushing a wedge between the idea of male-female synergy in the household. You don't want that life for yourself- your child can have it better. Don't be selfish by chasing ideological goals at the expense of your family.
Hear hear. Very nicely put.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by HigherMinion
This would be the Marxist Feminist argument. You believe the woman is simply submitting to the man, being exploited and acting as free labour, right? A pretty bleak scenario considering those children are the woman's children too. Most single mothers I know get quite defensive about them, saying they would have it no other way than to raise the children themselves. Which brings me on to selfishness, but I'll get to that in a moment.
Firstly, what time period do you believe we still live in? "laying on your back for a man": are you implying that women don't want sex? It's a one-way street, men want it and women don't? I guess you're either a lesbian misandrist or such an individualist that you don't want children to tie you down from achieving "success".
On financial independence: are you ever truly independent? You may be able to earn some nice bux, but here's the thing: what happens when it is commonly accepted that half the population are not suitable to work because they must care for the next generation? The value of labour increases. Not necessarily by 50%, but the cost of living will go down immensely. Before marriage, you are tied to your parents and much of your life and opportunity in it is paid for by them. Your husband will then take on this burden from your father. Having your own pocket money is fine, but you have to consider what feminism has done (ironically Marxist Feminism who hates capitalism is getting women to work) to the quality of life of both sexes.
So, housewives lack ambition? I agree. They clearly do not have a grasp of the future, long term future goal. How do they not understand that jobs and money are more important than offspring? I'm sure some government facility will take good care of those babies from cradle to coffin.
A husband demanding a housewife: the wife should think herself lucky. She is paid for and given free-reign to do as she pleases, as long as she's not an idiot. Life has been made easy, but raising children is hardly easy, some would argue- with many anecdotes to hand. The man depends on you just as much as you depend on the man. You seem to be degrading yourself as a daughter when you claim that being raised by your mother meant she had no respect or ambition. Why demean yourself in that way? You're removing all sense of importance of raising children to be the best they can be: which many believe requires their mother to be present.
If that isn't a noble calling, I don't know what is. Housewives are the best wives. I think you're trying to project your broken home as the perfect model, or attempting to validate it, by pushing a wedge between the idea of male-female synergy in the household. You don't want that life for yourself- your child can have it better. Don't be selfish by chasing ideological goals at the expense of your family.
Firstly, what time period do you believe we still live in? "laying on your back for a man": are you implying that women don't want sex? It's a one-way street, men want it and women don't? I guess you're either a lesbian misandrist or such an individualist that you don't want children to tie you down from achieving "success".
On financial independence: are you ever truly independent? You may be able to earn some nice bux, but here's the thing: what happens when it is commonly accepted that half the population are not suitable to work because they must care for the next generation? The value of labour increases. Not necessarily by 50%, but the cost of living will go down immensely. Before marriage, you are tied to your parents and much of your life and opportunity in it is paid for by them. Your husband will then take on this burden from your father. Having your own pocket money is fine, but you have to consider what feminism has done (ironically Marxist Feminism who hates capitalism is getting women to work) to the quality of life of both sexes.
So, housewives lack ambition? I agree. They clearly do not have a grasp of the future, long term future goal. How do they not understand that jobs and money are more important than offspring? I'm sure some government facility will take good care of those babies from cradle to coffin.
A husband demanding a housewife: the wife should think herself lucky. She is paid for and given free-reign to do as she pleases, as long as she's not an idiot. Life has been made easy, but raising children is hardly easy, some would argue- with many anecdotes to hand. The man depends on you just as much as you depend on the man. You seem to be degrading yourself as a daughter when you claim that being raised by your mother meant she had no respect or ambition. Why demean yourself in that way? You're removing all sense of importance of raising children to be the best they can be: which many believe requires their mother to be present.
If that isn't a noble calling, I don't know what is. Housewives are the best wives. I think you're trying to project your broken home as the perfect model, or attempting to validate it, by pushing a wedge between the idea of male-female synergy in the household. You don't want that life for yourself- your child can have it better. Don't be selfish by chasing ideological goals at the expense of your family.
Spoken very well.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by moneus
the other TSR members gave a mature answer. You seem to be trolling. What a stupid thing to do for someone with a higher status than I. At least be an example of HOW TO USE TSR. I did get the sarcasm but still, you've painted yourself a fool.
i was not being sarcastic. i believe that society would be far less damaged if women fulfilled their natural calling to be wives and mothers.
Thats the best thing you can come up with.......seriously
Original post by SiminaM
I can't take anyone who writes like that seriously
Original post by the bear
i was not being sarcastic. i believe that society would be far less damaged if women fulfilled their natural calling to be wives and mothers.
I think that's actually true. I think housewives are crucial to society, and the lack of them has caused the society we're living in today. If raising the next generation in the world is not the one of the most important jobs there is, I don't know what is. I dread to think what would happen if all mothers decided to let the government take care of their children from toddler age whilst they work to practically pay taxes to the government.
If they have no choice then of course they can work, and I'm not looking down on women who want a career; it's entirely their choice, especially if they don't have kids. But I think any responsible woman who has kids would not choose a career over her kids. Kids need lots of love, care and attention for them to grow into the best adults they can be, and it'd be rather selfish if a woman disregarded that job in order to pursue a career in order to be seemingly 'independent'.
Original post by the bear
i was not being sarcastic. i believe that society would be far less damaged if women fulfilled their natural calling to be wives and mothers.
Original post by moneus
the other TSR members gave a mature answer. You seem to be trolling. What a stupid thing to do for someone with a higher status than I. At least be an example of HOW TO USE TSR. I did get the sarcasm but still, you've painted yourself a fool.
Bear's point was most valid. Don't ridicule him by claiming it was 'clearly' a joke or that he's immature. Hell, if you think he was being immature, I can't wait for your expert analysis on my post. You've painted yourself intolerant.
Original post by Mochassassin
Original post by Ki Yung Na
The single most important thing anyone can undertake in their lives and the nation is dependent upon it.
Original post by moneus
apart from the feminist argument which is flawed. Anything wrong in choosing to be a housewife. or a husband choosing/wanting a housewife.
No It is a traditional women's role. Nowadays society allows women to work which is great but also frowns upon women who prefer to have a traditional gender role. But there is nothing wrong with it, just something wrong with society that frowns upon these women.
I personally wouldn't want to marry a "traditional housewife" because a) the household income would be lower, b) any resulting offspring would become closer to their mother than me 
Original post by moneus
apart from the feminist argument which is flawed. Anything wrong in choosing to be a housewife. or a husband choosing/wanting a housewife.
People say it's golddigging nowadays if you stay at home raising kids whilst your husband goes out to work. Apparently it's sex in exchange for him putting you up. This is at least what i had rammed down my throat by a bunch of mysogynistic ignorant men -.-
Original post by Dima-Blackburn
I personally wouldn't want to marry a "traditional housewife" because a) the household income would be lower, b) any resulting offspring would become closer to their mother than me
So you'd rather they be closer to...neither of you?
Definitely not ready for kids lol....
Original post by HigherMinion
This would be the Marxist Feminist argument.
I'm staying neutral on the rest of your points, but I don't see what Marxism has to do with Feminism here. You're just using 'Marxist' as an insult, as if equality was a bad thing.
Personally I'm not too bothered by what my wife would be doing as long as she's happy, fulfilled and contributing to the family.
Original post by Lulu24
So you'd rather they be closer to...neither of you?
Definitely not ready for kids lol....
Definitely not ready for kids lol....
All about dat balance and equality
Also, money.Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
