Do men truly still desire a wife that is a homemaker while they must work and be the sole source of income in 2024+? Is that not a lot of pressure on your shoulders? Is that what anyone wants? What happens if you get sick or injured? What if your wife gets sick or injured (you would still have to work and take care of everything in that case) with no extra income from her side.
It’s not that simple though is it , it could never be. A man may want to be the sole breadwinner to support his wife and 5 children but it may not be financially possible to do so. A man may want his wife to be the home maker for their single child but the woman may want a career and responsibility other than looking after the home and child while the father works. A couple may , with one income , be able to afford the basics in support of themselves and their child or children but they might want to have a “better” standard of living , a bigger house , a nicer car , a holiday every year.
The point is it’s majoritively , in modern times it’s not a decision that can or should be made by one half of the relationship.
My gut feeling is that perhaps it was more expected in the past or perhaps they were financially “easier” times but for the greater majority of us in Modern Times it’s either not realistic or worth the compromise. People generally want to provider better for their kids than they had themselves assuming that’s possible.
No guy is UPSET if his woman also makes money, just as no woman is upset if the guy cleans the house. The biological reality is that kids--especially very small kids--benefit enormously from having their MOTHER around. So mom and dad aren't perfect substitutes for doing the task of child-rearing. And since the vast, VAST majority of households need BOTH to rear children AND to make money, it makes perfect sense for many families to have mom at home with the kids and dad at work. Sometimes if mom ALSO works, you get other people in to help with the kids. That might make sense if that second income is great enough to pay for all the additional childcare and household support (on an AFTER TAX basis, of course) and still have lots of money left over. But as that is frequently not the case, it would make sense for the household (INCLUDING the man) for the man to be the sole breadwinner while the woman takes care of the house and kids.
It's really bizarre to me why that view is so offensive to so many people. It OBVIOUSLY doesn't make sense for everyone, but it DOES make a TON of sense for a LOT of people. This shouldn't be a problem.
Real men LOVE being providers! "Men" who are the 50/50 type are the equivalent of gold diggers. It's sad that they want women to be put in a masculine role. The men who are providers realize the value of a feminine woman and want to care for her.
@HighValue same with men too
@HighValue it doesn't. It's unnatural for a woman to be a provider
@HighValue sure lol I don't vote anyways
I don't know men are really lazy these days. i make more than my partner. a lot of women make more money than their partners. it kinda sucks because we feel like we're just mothers to them now.
Opinion
26Opinion
Basically, doesn’t matter to me.
If she finds success in her field I’m happy for her and cheer her on & support her through even if I make less or she makes less I’m neutral like that. If she didn’t seek any field and remained a stay at home partner then I’d be happy for her & support her even if it makes me the provider regardless of the money I make.
Idc because my love for her goes above and beyond the amount of money one could hold, second if we both are working to make the dream work then it shouldn’t matter who makes the most amount of money. What should matter is it keeps both of us sheltered, happy, and flexible with our finances.
It depends on whether you are having kids. Most men would prefer, if possible, that his wife stays home with the kids at least until the youngest is in school full-time - 1st grade, generally. It's such an important time in their lives that they really need a parent around all the time.
Once the kids are in school for 6-7 hours a day, most men would appreciate some help, even if it was only part time. That's going to look different for everyone, but something like that would be ideal. Once the youngest is about 12, then if she wants to work full-time, that's completely fine. It's mostly about the needs of the children.
And for couples without children, then, yes, her working too would be preferred, for all the reasons you've given.
I don’t look at it that way , I only date girls’ that want to be a partner with me , not girls’ that are users , I don’t mind if she wants to stay home and take care of the house as long as she understands the concept of money and doesn’t blow it like their is no tomorrow. But I prefer a girl that works with me , and not against me. if she doesn’t bring any money to the table , then I probably won’t date her at all. I won’t stay with a girl that holds her hand out like I am her walking ATM machine , she is in for a rude awakening if that’s the case. She might get my dick but she won’t get my heart
The precursor question is what do men want in a wife?
I don't think this has changed in several millenniums. We don't care about what she earns or what she does but we do care about her feminine virtues. Any number of men have said the same here. Her earnings are not in my mate selection criteria.
It is just not earnings but also spending. I have known girls that have earned well but spent everything they earned. So moderate frugality is a virtue
I do earn well myself in the tech sector but need to deliver and have a rep of delivering on time. To do so at times I need to work extended hours.
I might be earning 5X per hour than what my chosen girl does if she is a waitress. So it does become economic if she enables me to work an extra hour a day.
So I'd be quite happy to be sole breadwinner provided she does her part. Supporting me is her job.
I would guess many would be up for it. Too many promiscuous, feminist, career first women now for that to ever happen. All studies show that women who put off family for years of college and who make a good income when then only date men who make the same or more so the pool of matching partners goes way down. Too many women doing online dating who get so many matches, whose choices are too endless to ever pick one person, who let that online attention fool them into thinking they are (10) women who should only pair up with 9 or 10 men (even though in reality she is a 6 but she ignores all the 6-7 men.
It is too far gone in the west for it to ever be the norm. Many women are more interested in killing the kid they had due to promiscuity then wanting to have families.
I'd prefer her be equal partners with me. But it isn't a must. And frankly I think I'd be hard pressed to find a woman who could match my net worth. Because I'm not an easy match to begin with. But to be honest I'm less concerned about the money she makes than the money she spends. I didn't get to where I am because I'm frivolous. The type of woman I'd probably fall in love with is the type where we'd go out to dinner and I'd pay but she'd reach into her purse and pull out a coupon.
I can't speak for all men. I don't think you'll find a consensus on this.
The pressure is higher when both have to work full or almost full time and still have to do all the housework.
If you could have the option to split the work one does the housework and one does the salary work this would be better and less work for both.
Problem is jobs pay so shitty you need both people of the relationship working.
it's a lot of pressure, but if she is working at home with the kids, then that makes sense.
the cash you save alone on day care really adds up.
If you didn't have kids I would get board just being around the house all day and would want to feel productive.
I no longer plan on pursuing marriage. However I had that dream from the time I was little until the dream was inverted into a irony nightmare. Though sabotaging of the system thereby emasculating men it has been made impossible for most men to live up to their standard of being the bread winner.
So are you a single man nowadays or all these decades? Say man ain't you close to pension age anyhow as a *good thing* ? I mean at least you are nearing pension and not having to "have to" work another day
@paledreams Yes I am single never married I made the decision to never marry around the age of 21 you could argue I was among the first of MGTOW long before the acronym existed. And yes I am nearing the retirement age that is the truth however as you can probably guess I have zero children and that did more damage than having never married as far as the pain.
Every good many would prefer to have a homemaker and SAH mother for his children IF he could afford it. Unfortunately that is out of reach for most couples today, so most quality men will settle for a woman whose values are consistent with his in terms of putting family first. What most quality men do NOT want is a career focused woman who would puts her career ambitions above her children.
I was the sole breadwinner when my kids were little. It was hard at times and I really lived by my wits. When our youngest went to first grade my wife worked 3 mornings s a week. The extra paycheck really helped
Not the sole breadwinner. That's simply not possible for most guys. They do generally to be more comfortable when they make more money than their wives though.
If the woman didn't save herself for marriage, she isn't traditional enough to ever deserve a man that provides for her.
I think if they a woman gives them what they really want they'd be willing to do that. It doesn't matter to me that much but I know some girls like it.
I find it easier when both couples work part time or both couples have reached an understanding on employment matter 😋👀👑👑
It's a tremendous responsibility. One that makes us feel purposeful.
If I got sick or injured I'd hope she'd nurse me back to health, but would understand if she chose to move on.
Not me. Money talks.
In "modern times" a family will need more than one "breadwinner" just to survive!!!
He better have a good career if he does.
Some do, but with the costs of housing compared to what our parents paid it often requires either two incomes or one substantial one.
I think it is more of a team aspect, and split bank accounts, so that is less of an “ownership” and more of a true partnership.
Fuck no, dual incomes from both of us working from home would be the ideal.
I live alone. I am my sole provider. I love the peace…
I would say yes. But the economy makes it impossible for most people.
Like I'm for equality. If she wants to work, she should. But I feel bad for not even being able to give her the option not to. And I'm not poor. I am on the upper end of median salary in my country. I mean I guess I could if we'd really dial down our standard of life but who wants that?
Yes but they want to be the king in their own castle.
I do want a housewife or someone who can work from home preferably
Even if they so wished, most often they can't today.
Some do, but they'll also complain about it.
Not for modern women.
Why do u care? Omg so many qs jesus
I don’t think most can afford to be.
Next to impossible in modern times
Holidays 
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
