If a man pays exactly half of the bills, can he still be called a provider?

[moonpie89]

Yes

No

[Grobmate]

Depends how you look at it. A man provides more than financial stability, (AND... so do women). Both are providers and each brings stuff to the table.

The undertone of keeping score is a toxic one. Why would you want to be in competition with the man or woman you love. I've never understood that.

If there are kids, well, the man will work longer and harder over the lifetime of the relationship, whoch is where the pay gap comes from.

The way I see it the essential truth is that Men provide things women can't and women provide things Men can't.

Financial stability is not the only thing in traditional gender roles.

[Grobmate]

Ty for MHO

[RedThread]

He provides any percentage he's a provider. That's the definition of the word. The woman is also a provider in your scenario.

[mistixs]

Lol, no, because she's paying the other half. So either both of them are providers, or neither of them are.
The man is also not fulfilling his God-given role. Men are expected to provide the house & all necessities for the family (Ex 21:10, & Eph 5:28-29), and while women can have jobs if they want to (the virtuous woman commended in Prov 31 ran a business), they're not obligated to. Instead, women are obligated to make the house a home (Proverbs 14:1).

[Lover_not_a_fighter]

To provide means to give, and he's contributing how does that make someone not a provider?

[mistixs]

He can only boast the title "provider" if he's paying for ALL the means to live, as the Bible requires of men

[Lover_not_a_fighter]

What bible did you read? But needless to say he is still a provider if he is paying half

[Lover_not_a_fighter]

Wait so do you only date dudes who pay for everything?

[mistixs]

@Lover_not_a_fighter I gave you Bible verses that demonstrate that men are to provide for the necessities of his wife and kids: Ex 21:10 & Eph 5:28-29.
"If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her ***food, clothing and marital rights."*** (Ex 21:10)
"In this same way, husbands ought to ***love their wives as their own bodies.*** He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they ***feed and care*** for their body, just as Christ does the church." (Eph 5:28-29)
Add Prov 19:14 that says that shelter is provided by fathers: "House and riches are the inheritance of fathers: and a prudent wife is from the Lord."

Calling a man a provider for paying half is an insult to the millions of men who bust their backs working to pay all of it.

[Lover_not_a_fighter]

Okay what if he isn't ur husband does the logic to your reasoning still apply?

[mistixs]

@Lover_not_a_fighter @Lover_not_a_fighter well are they having sex? Then the Bible says he has to marry her and become her husband (Ex 22:16). If they don't want to get married then they shouldn't be having sex

[Lover_not_a_fighter]

But everyone is having sex.. are you not?

[mistixs]

@Lover_not_a_fighter no I'm not. I'll have sex only within marriage. Everyone who's having sex out-of-wedlock will have to pay consequences by God.

[Lover_not_a_fighter]

Okay I hope I'm not bothering you with all these questions, so fo the people how are sinful and having sex are they too believe in old testament when they dont believe in no sex before marriage?

[mistixs]

@Lover_not_a_fighter Premarital sex is strongly condemned in the New Testament too

[Lover_not_a_fighter]

Okay but my question is for sinful people in today's society who engage in causal sex, are they soppost to believe a man is to provide for them fully? And if we take sex out of the question pre marriage now and back then does the man only become a provider after marriage?

[Alpha09]

Wtf is it with all these women voting no? If both partners are bringing money in they are both providing. If he's paying half the bills he's a provider!

[OfDeath]

Exactly

[Grobmate]

Absolutely right.

[StingRayxoxo]

You're both providing for the future of the relationship. Yes.

[SueShe]

In theory no however

If the bills at the end of the period that is considered end with an amount that includes an odd value such as $642.13, you cannot divide 13 into 2 to give a full cent value.

Thus one of the party will end up paying more than 50% and that one is the provider

[Liam_Hayden]

Assuming that the question means "providing for her" I can think of several scenarios.

1. She has a child that is not his and he has none, so by paying half he is actually paying part of the support for her and the child.
2. Her expenses are more than his.
3. Her car payment and insurance are more than his.
4. Her clothing allowance is higher than his.
Any scenario in which he is footing all of his own expenses plus part of hers. I think you get the idea.

[lucas262]

I guess he still paying half.

My question is if a man is stripped of his god given authority over his home as a protector and provider, and head of the home

,, all that saying he isn t a dictator c'mon people,,

What is he then?
What is she?
On some level women will always find that part of their man attractive its human nature.

But seriously if you take away a husbands a fathers role in the home what is he then?

[Secret6620]

I provide for myself and he provides for himself. So yes he is a provider.

[hellacray]

Yes they can.

I mean if you're the one using the most electricity, water, etc...

Then paying half is a great deal.

[TheBlasian]

No because then you literally aren't providing anything. Unless you have subordinates then both of you are providers

[TheBlasian]

I meant dependants

[ThisIsMyOpinion]

Yes you are. You are providing your money.

[TheBlasian]

For yourself, not the other person

[TheBlasian]

Unless, like I said, you have dependants

[ThisIsMyOpinion]

I am providing it for the household. I provide money for me yes, bt also for the house expenses. If I stop there won't be money enough to pay the bills. If I stop providing my money for the household it colapses.

[GuidoThePizzaMaker]

Does he provide security?
I think providing is more than just bills.

But, in my opinion, the more a woman does financially the less she respects her man.

[Unit1]

I don't think so. It's general context refers to gold diggers--- errrr i mean lazy kept wome------ *sneezes*. Refers to housewives being completely unemployed while her husband brings in all the money To pay for all expenses they have made.

[ShortCircuit]

Well... no, but I don't see the importance of having the title of "provider". It doesn't mean jack shit.

[bamesjond0069]

This is retarded. Provider is someone who pays the majority of expenses. Not 50% not 52%. Someone who pays all the core expenses on their own. Rent food clothes basic other needs.

Whats this 50% shit? y'all dreaming. Lmao

[mobligator]

If he provides any percentage he's a provider by definition.

[Bananaman177]

If he provides one thin dime, he is a provider.

Would you like to be paying both halves instead?

[Ankitasingh466]

No he's isn't a provider. It's equal. My contribution to the house is as equal as yours.

[ThisIsMyOpinion]

Yes they can. I pay half the bills, so I am providing money to the house. Let me stop doing so then and see how fast I am called a provider.

[mistixs]

So is she also a provider because she's also paying half?

[ThisIsMyOpinion]

@mistixs Yes she is.

[HereIbe]

Yes, and the woman is also a provider.

If a woman insists that a man who pays half the bills can't be a provider, can she be called a gold-digging whore?

[Anonymous]

He STILL provides you with protection, so yes.
And don't pretend you are "I can take care of my self" because we all know in times of catastrophe, the MALE is the one you expect to save you and if he doesn't he is considered less of a man.

[mistixs]

Providing protection makes him a "protector", not a provider. Provider refers to financial provision.

[Grobmate]

@mistixs nope. Provider means that he provides. The provision of all things necessary for the family unit. By your logic, a house wife isn't a provider... which would be an obnoxiously absurd and incorrect statement to make.

[Hawky_]

Its called equality. Plus plenty of women out there now who are the main providers. 3 of my 4 bosses are female directors

[Kiran_Yagami]

Not really. He's a partner. That's ok too if that's what you want, but I've always thought of myself as a provider.

[llorando]

Yes he can, woman can also be called a provider since she provides half the funds to pay the bills.

[PoohBoy38]

Yes! Because you need to pay exactly half of the bills to be provided!

[Anonymous]

If you're at the point culturally, where you split bills, then why does it matter who is the "provider"

[moonpie89]

It doesn't, it's just a question

[Pejtu]

And you gonna do what
Lie down and smell beautiful
Fuck off

[mistixs]

She's paying half the bills too.

[moonpie89]

Rude as fuck and you don't know how to read. Question was if the man pays half not all. Read the question in full before you decide to be an asshole.

[Miristheiss]

They are both providers then.

[bangyourhead]

You want equality? That's equality

[Giggletr0n]

Yeah, he provides the pay for the other half

[needhelp777]

Yes he can

[Anonymous]

lol Men are delusional.

[OfDeath]

Yes because he is providing half

[pogosplayhouse]

Yeah, sure, whatever.

[scooogy]

He shouldn't do less than all that he can do.

[zagor]

Who the hell cares.

[Argyro00]

I think equally.