Men are the providers. If that is true, why is that so wrong?

So I was recently on a thread that claimed women who looked for financial security from a man were not gold-diggers and though I do not disagree with the original poster's position I was definitely interested in the responses from the men that disagreed and that is the reason for this post.

I was not that interested in the men's response that used the "OK, we will go back to when women couldn't vote" argument. I find this to be a nonsensical argument. A woman still had power over her man and her family even if she could not vote. Heck, women still dictate when a couple has sex or not so she has a lot of say in things, I would say. *cough cough. Happy wife, happy life is not a saying because it is not true.

However, the men that did not care for the burden of being the provider, those answers I found extremely interesting and I hope more men will share and expand their thoughts on that.

Men may or may not want the burden of being the provider but they still are the provider today. I am not talking in salary or education. I am talking in the fact that if you take a girl that has no athletic ability or know how and pair her with a guy that loves sport, you now have a female that has not only a favorite sports team but a favorite player. lol! Also, statistically speaking, wives will take on the political beliefs of their husbands more often than the other way around. Men take women under their wings; is not often the other way around. Ergo - you are the provider.

So my point is, whether you want the job or not, you are the provider. It just is at least in male/female dynamics.

So what exactly is so scary about it? What is it that is unfair? What is it that do you do not like about it? And what do you love about it, if anything.

I would love to hear your opinions.


Most Helpful Guy

  • I'm fine with being the provider of the family but I also want my wife to have a degree of some kind or at least a basic education and basic life skills and such so that if something should happen to me like I get killed in an accident or get in an accident and get injured to the point of not being able to work for a while. That she can and will be able to provide for the family in my absence. I also want her to be able to pull her weight around the household you know? like if I'm going to be working all day and providing for everyone then she needs to be taking care of things at home if she isn't working, this is the balance of that kind of marriage the man is the provider, protector and head of the household, the woman is the caregiver, caretaker, the nurturer and the heart of the home.

    • Thank you for your thoughtful answer. I have some follow up questions for you. I have no agenda in asking these questions and do not believe there is a right or wrong answer; I am just genuinely interested.

      You: I'm fine with being the provider of the family but I also want my wife to have a degree of some kind or at least a basic education and basic life skills and such so that if something should happen to me like I get killed in an accident or get in an accident and get injured to the point of not being able to work for a while. That she can and will be able to provide for the family in my absence.

      Question for you: Let's pretend that financially you are super rich or had an incredible life insurance policy so that your wife would not need to go back to work to support herself or your kids. I am going to assume your wife does have basic life skills, so what I am wondering is will you still want her to have a degree? And if so, why do you think that is?

    • @Phoenix98

      You: I also want her to be able to pull her weight around the household you know?

      Question for you: Yeah, I know what you mean by this. I am assuming when people are advocates for a male provider and female homemaker they are assuming both play their roles well. After reading the responses in that other thread and the few so far that I have had in my thread I am now realizing that this fear that these roles would be unbalanced is a great fear for many guys.

      Do you think that it is because the roles themselves are inherently unbalanced or do you think that the female is likely to take advantage of her role and the man will have to do that role as well?

Most Helpful Girl

  • My opinion: Relationships are generally more healthy, more stress free, and easier when both partners provide for each other and strive to be balanced and fair when it comes to giving.

    • Hi @CoralSun

      I can't disagree with that you said. :) However, I do want to ask, since you said "fair when it comes to giving" does this mean you think traditional roles in themselves are unfair?

      Just curious. Thanks for responding.:)

Have an opinion?

What Guys Said 9

  • I have wondered about gender roles. When I grew up in the 80's, my mother started out as a stay at home mom doing everything for the household and waiting on everyone. As the need for health insurance (father was self employed) loomed large, she went to work, but still assumes all of the duties she had before. She also differed to my father on many major decisions. Not because she couldn't make them, but because that was how things were done. To me, that seems an unfair position, but she handled it with grace. The women I meet that are my age predominantly (but not exclusively) seem to want the man to be the provider (like it was when I was young) but also have the man perform the household duties - what my mother did, except with the addition of being either the sole or primary provider. This strikes me as odd and regressive. Perhaps there are aspects of yet to realize.

  • I am old school, so I don't disagree with the idea that men are the providers, but part of that is that some men will not reproduce. Those men used to have no voice. They just drank themselves to death or whatever. Nowadays they are expected to live, as thy do.

    • @Intraluminal I believe I understand your point. You are saying it is a biological thing that men are the providers and they bad men use to drink themselves out of the gene pool? I think. lol! And it is true that most humans are living longer these days, for better or for worse that is true. However, I think that most drunks would not have drank themselves to death until after they are usually done producing children. lol

  • I am good with all of those things, I just want her to financially contribute to the relationship/family as much or more than I would. I don't want to spend all of my time just making money, but have no time left to spend with my family/kids. I want to be the kind of father that my kids will grow up with many good memories of what we did together, not of what I bought with the money and all of the important life events that I couldn't be there for and missed out on.

  • I don't want to be the sole "provider" i'd like my wife to be a provider as well. Technically, if you have children, you should be providing for them regardless of gender.

    • Thanks for responding @MrAtticusLebowski. :)

      I did want to ask for clarification on what you meant by "Technically, if you have children, you should be providing for them regardless of gender."

      Do you mean if you have children then both the male and female should be contributing financially for their gender or did you mean that both the male and female should be contributing to raising their children? I was unsure what you meant by that part.

      Thanks. :)

    • Show All
    • Thanks @MrAtticusLebowski for the clarification. I just wanted to let you know that I read it and found what you said interesting.

      I want to think about what you said for a bit and I may come back and ask you some follow-up questions but in the meantime, I just wanted to say, I read what you wrote and I enjoyed it.

      So thank you. :)

    • You: if either of us is making 6-figures then maybe one of us can stay home and take care of the kids/house.

      Me: Why is 6 figures the threshold? Is it because you think it takes 6 figures to survive or because it takes 6 figures to survive well? Meaning, if it is possible but difficult for one parent to stay home, would you want them to? Or would you prefer them to work so life is not difficult but comfortable/easy?

      You: resentment builds. Each partner feels they're carrying the majority of the burden while dismissing their partners contributions.

      Me: I think resentment builds in almost all marriages regardless of whether traditional roles are done or not. I think if we can change resentment to gratefulness a marriage will thrive.

      You: If she can work and bring in money, id' like her to work if only to make her feel she's contributing.

      Me: So she needs to be contributing financially for you to feel like you is contributing to the relationship? Is that a fair question to ask you?

  • No one likes to be someone else's plow horse. In a real partnership things are done together. If you were asked to do a job with someone else, and they demanded you do a majority of the heavy lifting, would you be happy?

    • @howzit2015 I definitely would not be happy if I had to do the majority of the heavy lifting. lol!

      Lets assume that with your wife and you, you guys are equals in things and everything is as close to fifty-fifty as it can possibly be. Then a zombie apocalypse happens and she looks to you and says, what do we do? Does it bother you that you are the one she looks to for these answers? You are the one in the relationship that is going to decide what to do so you guys can provide for the family?

      That was really ultimately what I wanted to know. Regardless of whether jobs, income, cleaning, child rearing, etc is 50/50 or not, you guys still have that role as provider. I wonder if that maybe is what ultimately is so daunting about the traditional roles. Or maybe it is the one good thing? Who knows. lol! But that really was what I wanted to ask but obviously I was not clear enough in my original question.

      I hope it makes sense and I am curious to hear your response if you care to share.

    • There's nothing wrong with traditional gender roles. As long as everyone is providing to the greater whole (which is the household). If she looked to me for advice I would't be angered or offended, because everyone, in a perfect scenario, would be providing the entire group and would play an important role in its daily functioning. I easily look to others when I begin to question a certain thing I have doubts about.

  • I think most men don't want to be the sole "financial" provider.

    • I understand that and I should have been more clear. I was trying to remove financial provider from this question but I obviously was not clear enough.

      My feeling is you guys have this burden whether you want it or not and it has nothing to do with financially or not taking care of a woman. It is an ideal. And it is ingrained so not changeable even if we try.

  • The problem arises when the woman isn't submissive. Two dominant people clash. If the man is going to be the leader and provider, the woman needs to be a helper and be submissive.

  • I think a man should pay for everything and feed his lady. And the lady should take care of the kids and keep the house clean. That's honestly how I feel

  • Well honestly, it's because I don't want to empty my wallet out on everything and she doesn't. I'm not like most of these men who answered I'm a modern unconventional guy and want a woman who's willing to share her money with me.


What Girls Said 4

  • Financially? Yeah I'm quite traditional is I assume the man must be the provider de facto but I wouldn't mind helping.

  • What's scary?

    She could become a limp noodle that feels like being married to a defendant child than a sexy woman...

    She could make you broke by reckless spending...

    She could make you feel broken by expecting luxuries you cannot afford despite working hard...

    She could live off of you and not love you - or even love someone else

    Women generally WORKED throughout history. They grew elaborate gardens, picked fruit, raised chickens, sewed, mended, washed (much harder before washing machines which aren't that old), canned, drew water, etc. Many also took on outside work - laundresses, seamstresses, helping their husband with his trade, etc. Even poorer women also worked as domestic servants, mill workers, nurses, teachers...

    This idea that wifey just tickled babies and waited for daddy to come home is historically inaccurate.

    • You: This idea that wifey just tickled babies and waited for daddy to come home is historically inaccurate.

      Me: True. However, in defense of the people against traditional gender roles, in today's age, the woman is not churning her butter, beating her dough for bread, killing and plucking her chicken for dinner, hand washing her laundry and etc. If we are honest, we are saying the role today is that the mother is raising her child. She is spending time with her child and loving him. And that is what is important today. I think this is important and if a couple has kids, I think the idea to strive for is to have one parent stay home. I think this is the best case scenario for the child.

      However, in your argument, the woman of that day didn't not have time or inclination to spend the day playing with their child. It just did not happen. So your argument is not that great of argument for today since it is not pertinent anymore, I do not think.

    • I think it's as important as ever, if you have the luxury. Today's food is poison, for instance. Loaded with things we aren't meant to eat or aren't meant to eat in those quantities. If a wife can stay at home, she can do so much to help. Growing an extensive garden, making homemade bread, possibly even having fruit trees.

  • Because they're insecure and incapable. But on top of that, the way, not society but the whole world is running, relationships require two workers to maintain a living. On top of that, no one is content with what they have, more money just equals more bills, nobody wants to simplify their life, and woman don't want to accept that.

    This law is only for those who believe in the bible, that men are not just providers but the head of the house and relationship, and wife. They don't want that position, women do

    • One other thing, because men where considered the financial, and spiritual provider, woman generally would stay home and take care of what the man was to busy to do.

      When God created man, he said it's not good for a man to live alone let me create a "helper."

      The world is so far from perfection, relationships are inbalanced, men are disrespected, woman want to run the relationships, and men fall out of love.

      Simple, but no one believes in the bible

  • I don't have a problem with it actually