Do Men Really Fear This Stuff?

[MsHeartBeat]

Recently I was told that men have a fear that all women want is for a man to support them and make babies with so they can be at home all the time. Is such an irrational fear true?

One woman responded with "They also seem to fear that all women are money hungry b*tches who can't wait for the "pay day" aka divorce date, since women of course never have any assets themselves and are lazy and don't like to work. We also have secret relations with the pool boy and will live with him after the divorce (without getting married to him because then we lose our alimony). And we will make up a story that the husband abused the kids so he will never see them again. Oh, and before when we just dated we made the boyfriend pay for everything, including Prada bags. Basically, we're just after his money (sarcasm, sarcasm, lol).

Well!

Anyway, what do you think men's real fears are when it comes to commitment and marriage? 

[Informed Investor]

Last time I checked the divorce rate was what 50%. I don’t think men have fear of a failed marriage but the possibility is in the back of our minds. I know so many men who got phucked up the azz on the divorce that I have decided I want a prenuptial prior to getting married. There are a lot of shady women (I’m sure same applies to men to) in the United States right now.

I have experienced a woman being head over heels in love with me one minute and then hating my guts the next (without any acts of infidelity or disrespect from my end). I think an unwritten statistic on dating is often times you will end up with a mate close to your socioeconomic status. We talked about that on this website a while back. My last X gorgeous as she was barely had a pot to piss in and a window to throw it out of.

When men date women of lesser means there is a high potential for problems. What I just said was a very controversial statement but its very true to life. Its okay to be early 20s and not established but if you are pushing 30 and you don’t have a stable job, place or car that is a serious issue. Men have to be careful because a woman will juice you.

From my observation it seems for women the best men in their eyes are the ones who aren’t about sh-t and on the inverse the best women in mens eyes are often the ones who don’t have sh-t.  If you drive through a lower class neighborhood you will see what I’m talking about. Aren’t many prospects in the suburbs but go through the ghetto you could throw a rock and get a woman or man lol.

I saw a Spanish woman going store to store the other weekend with her son. She was hot as hell. I was going to approach her but when she walked to the back of a Popeye it looked like she was begging for food. That was a huge red flag for me. Hell I could have bought her a thanksgiving dinner but would she wanted me or just what I could provide? Of course I left her alone and didn’t stop to find out what her situation was. I exercised what I felt my better judgment was and avoided her problems altogether.

I have had women tell me that after the breakup of their marriage they didn’t want anything from the man they wanted to forget he existed! They refused to accept his money or anything else in connection with him.  I agree with something Crown said a while back marriage is to easy to get into. Marriage should cost a lot and that way people would take it more seriously.

I brought up some other factors but my real fear about marriage is that I will come home to my wife phucking another man. I can't honestly say that I would be a big enough person to walk away. If you cheat at least have the common decency to do it at a hotel.

[philnation]

Recently I was told that men have a fear that all women want is for a man to support them and make babies with so they can be at home all the time. Is such an irrational fear true?

Wow - that's a new one, and one I wouldn't figure in this age of fiercely independent women who make no secret of how they "don't need no man" to support them and wouldn't be caught dead being stay-at-home moms (and who think stay-at-home moms are practically sellouts).

I can't say it's true for me.  If anything, I fear just about the opposite - that I'll constantly run into women who are the "Boss Lady" type, ones I'd rather hire than date because they're all business and no fun and care more about competing with me.

[MsHeartBeat]

Phil, I think the situation is more that stay at home moms are a dying breed. In our current economic climate, families require two incomes to stay afloat, or one person working double time by him or herself.  Is that fair? Does it make sense for the children to be stuck with their mother all day and all night and Dad to be out killing himself, too exhausted to be of any use to his wife or children, just so she can stay at home with them?  The children want his energy and time too, and it makes them suffer.  Would it not be better for Mom to at least work part-time so that Dad can be at home with the family for dinner and homework and a quick romp in the backyard before dinner?

[philnation]

Phil, I think the situation is more that stay at home moms are a dying breed. In our current economic climate, families require two incomes to stay afloat, or one person working double time by him or herself.  Is that fair? Does it make sense for the children to be stuck with their mother all day and all night and Dad to be out killing himself, too exhausted to be of any use to his wife or children, just so she can stay at home with them?  The children want his energy and time too, and it makes them suffer.  Would it not be better for Mom to at least work part-time so that Dad can be at home with the family for dinner and homework and a quick romp in the backyard before dinner?

I don't think the current economic climate is really an influence here.  Even in good economic times, people have said the exact same thing about families requiring two incomes to stay afloat.  Also, it's not like stay-at-home moms were demonized for it by other women for the first time within the last year or so.

The answer to what you pose isn't so cut-and-dried as some might think.  There have been studies done over the years that suggest that two incomes are required for families to maintain a certain standard of living with a lot of luxuries, more than they care to admit, as opposed to being required to get by with the basics and perhaps just a little more than that.  But all we really need to do is take a look at some of what's involved.

Think about what happens when one parent stays home (and it doesn't have to be the woman, if she makes more, but in this scenario it is the woman).  It's not necessarily the case that the man has to work 80-hour weeks, either.  You cut out day care costs - not exactly small peanuts - and you get tax breaks for a stay-at-home parent, for starters.  You cut out the cost of commuting to the day care in the event that it's not right next door to home or one parent's job.  You cut out the cost involved in commuting to the job, which might even mean you do away with one car or save on public transportation expenses like the monthly pass.  You cut out a lot of risks of your kid being in someone else's environment for 30-40 hours a week during the time which doctors and development experts say are the most important years of a child's development, which would take down health care costs a notch.  And you might have to sacrifice some of the luxuries that two income earners might lead - maybe you take one or two less big vacations a year (difficult to do that with children anyway), maybe you cut out part of the premium cable service, maybe you downsize from the suburban assault vehicle to a smaller vehicle.

At the end of the day, how much more does a second income - along with the added expenses you then bring into the mix by virtue of having it - really give you?  How much of that second paycheck is left after taxes, daycare and the other work-related expenses that aren't present with the second partner working eat away at it?  It might not be as much as one imagines, and it most certainly won't be the full after-tax income of the second working parent.

I'm also not sure stay-at-home moms are a dying breed, either, but admittedly I don't have stats on that.

[devineone]

Anyway, what do you think men's real fears are when it comes to commitment and marriage? 

Admittedly I’m not a man but I do have brothers who are married and a lot of male friends who are married or in long term relationships.  I’ve heard that men fear the following:

1.They won’t get as much sex with the woman once they are married to her (keep in mind that men don’t consider that their own sex drive goes down while a woman’s rises)

2.Once they are married they are bound by marriage to only have sex with that woman so the door to more sex is closed to them.  A lot of men like to keep that option open. (even if it is only a fantasy in their own mind) that they always have the potential to get access to a variety of sex.

3.Their woman will turn into a nagging harridan and get out of shape by letting herself go (Keep in mind they don’t consider their own bodies, with the dunlap bellies)

4.The fantasy that single men somehow have more fun than married men.  It doesn’t help when you have TV shows that for almost as long as we’ve had television, depict marriage as being a boring monotony of routine with little sex and a nagging wife and demanding obnoxious kids. (Think as far back as The Honeymooners, I love Lucy,  Married with children, The Simpsons and other shows of this ilk). (Where are shows like the cosby show when you need them?)

5.Men are fearful of wrapping their mind around the responsibility of being husband and possibly father and all that entails.  He can’t walk away as easily if he were a boyfriend or baby daddy who is only responsible by law to pay child support.  As a father married to the mother of his kids, men have to actually raise the kid and support the household.

6.Marriage will interfere with their hobbies and time out with the guys

7. His wife will make him get rid of his porn stash.

8. His wife will cheat on him, they get a divorce and she takes him to the cleaners.

At the end of the day, how much more does a second income - along with the added expenses you then bring into the mix by virtue of having it - really give you?  How much of that second paycheck is left after taxes, daycare and the other work-related expenses that aren't present with the second partner working eat away at it?  It might not be as much as one imagines, and it most certainly won't be the full after-tax income of the second working parent.
I'm also not sure stay-at-home moms are a dying breed

Good points, when my sister decided to have her children, she and her hubby took into consideration all of those factors you named in your post and decided it was far more beneficial for her to stay home and raise her children.  She is glad that she did.  Most women that I’ve spoken too are not so fiercely independent when it comes to child rearing that they would be against being a full time mother. 

But here in the states it’s hard and a luxury for a mother or a father to do so.  With the average job only allowing for 6 weeks maternity and paternity leave, it’s hard for parents to juggle working and parenting.  I have friends in Canada and they get 9 paid months leave after the birth of a child!!  In England they get up to a year!!  We need to catch up here in the states and not make working people have to choose between loss of income and being a parent.  This is something legislators ought to be working on instead of wasting tax payers money with introducing legislation that make a presidential candidate have to prove he’s a US citizen!!   I don’t mind paying higher taxes if it will give me benefits like what they enjoy in Canada and in England when it directly benefits me. 

[MsHeartBeat]

Phil, I had to laugh at your naivete on issues of child rearing and income.  The vast majority of people in the U.S. make less than $40,000 a year. Even here in the Bay Area most people make no more than $12 per hour.  So with average rents of $1,200 a month for a studio apartment, groceries, lights, health insurance, clothes - most people don't HAVE the money to even take ONE vacation, let alone cut down from two "luxury" vacations to one.  That was hilarious to me!

Secondly, since these people are making so little with children have to have a larger place.  So rent goes up.  So does utilities, food, medical expenses, school supplies, hygiene products, laundry soap, water, diapers, health insurance premiums and co payments.  You get the idea. Necessities.  There is little to nothing left over for anything fancy.  People have bucket cars that they are barely keeping running.  The children wear hand-me-downs from other relatives and each other.  Shopping is done at Costco as much as possible. Grandma is the day care because she doesn't charge and sometimes cooks a meal.

The world is not as rosy as you paint it, and most parents are low to middle income and cannot afford to have the wife stay at home and not work.  Its a NECESSITY if they are to even keep their heads above water. 

[devineone]

The world is not as rosy as you paint it, and most parents are low to middle income and cannot afford to have the wife stay at home and not work.  Its a NECESSITY if they are to even keep their heads above water. 

Good points as well. My sister and her husband were military at the time and enjoyed the luxury of having military housing so that took a huge expense off their hand (no mortgage or rent payment) and thus made it easier for her to give up her job to be a full time mother.  Most family's don't have that option so it does take two incomes to make it work. 

[philnation]

Phil, I had to laugh at your naivete on issues of child rearing and income.

Sort of like how I had to laugh at your idea that I, ever the cynic, paint the world as being rosy!

The vast majority of people in the U.S. make less than $40,000 a year. Even here in the Bay Area most people make no more than $12 per hour.  So with average rents of $1,200 a month for a studio apartment, groceries, lights, health insurance, clothes - most people don't HAVE the money to even take ONE vacation, let alone cut down from two "luxury" vacations to one.  That was hilarious to me!

You might laugh, but let's take that example.  In the case of making so little a year, how much is really left of that second paycheck after all the expenses involved with a second person working eat away at it?  That's not to say that an analysis is sure to yield that the family is better off money-wise with one parent staying at home, but my guess is that the effect of having second income as a $40,000 annual salary is far from being equivalent to having the one working person making $40k more (pre-tax, of course) than they had been because of expenses you don't have with just one parent working and tax breaks you don't get with both working.

And let's not even get into the fact that plenty of people are pretty irresponsible with how they spend in the first place, kids or no kids, which was part of what I was alluding to in mentioning the luxuries many of us have and might try to preserve.  (Which reminds me - I never said anything about cutting down from two vacations to one, but no matter.)  Lord knows there have been plenty of people who have done things like use a home equity line of credit to pay for a big vacation or help pay for a car they don't need.

My main point, though, is unchanged: folks have been saying this even in good economic times, and not just the folks in the lower economic classes.  Hence I don't think the current economic situation isn't really much of an influence with the ideas people have of stay-at-home moms, if it even influences them at all.