
Why does the relationship last longer when the man is the provider?


Relationships last longer when both people take responsibility for their share of the load, and appreciate the hard work their partner does to be responsible for THEIR share.
However you want to divide up the authority and responsibility (the two go together) is up to the two of you, but you'd better sit down and have some in-depth discussions about what each person is responsible for (and, thus, in charge of), which things you want to do together, and make sure that each person's load is reasonably balanced compared to the other.
Now, I *do* think that most women would prefer their man be the provider, or at least, the primary provider. While women may love their careers in their 20s and even 30s, a LOT of women get to their mid/late 30s, and when they realize that they have 30 more years of work in their future, they realize it's not as fulfilling as they used to think it was. This is especially true if those women don't have families - because women are biologically programmed to find fulfillment in relationships and families and children.
Of course, there will be a few exceptions - like all generalizations, it's not going to apply to everyone. And for women who know they don't want children, it's certainly easier to divide the work load/"providing" equally. I'm not discounting any of that - as always, it's up to each couple to find their own balance.
But keep in mind (both sexes!) that the decisions you make when you are younger, in this area especially, are going to have long-term consequences for your lives, so make sure you really think about where those decisions are going to put you 5, 10, 20, 30, even 40 years down the road. Make sure you are investing for your retirement. Here's some math: if you retire at 65, and you live to 85, then you need to have saved 20 years worth of income. And if you can live on $50,000 a year (and this would have to be able to pay for medical care, long-term care if you have serious physical or mental health issues when you're older, etc.), then you need $1M of retirement savings. Of course, 20 years from now, $50,000/year would be like making $20,000/year today, so you'll need far more than $1M. The sooner you start saving, and letting compound interest help you out, the better off you'll both be.
Lots of opinions. Mine? Women want to have a strong man control them. A confident, capable, hot man that can and will control the life around them and provide a good safe happy life. It sounds bad but think about it. We give government the ability to tell us what to do why? We give our freedom to others because we realize it’s necessary to have limits. Suffering, hardship, pain, effort... these are annoying limits but overcoming them is fulfilling.
Don’t get me wrong they don’t want to be owned and controlled. They want to just let go and feel safe and comfortable. A relationship is a balance between this. Your freedom from stress and danger and “life” comes at the cost of your free will. Everyone is willing to give up some of their free will for security.
I’m curious. Would you rather work as hard as say I work hard physical labor 12 hour shifts 5-7 days a week or be a homemaker? You can’t always find a good paying job that isn’t shitty in some way the hours, effort involved, people... as a homemaker you get all the benefit of his effort and work without the workplace stress. This comes at cost that many women today arnt willing to pay. It’s such a bad thing to take care of your man who takes care of you.
Studies show that if the woman is the breadwinner, she's usually still the one doing most of the housework.
So those relationships don't last for obvious reasons. Women don't like working all day and then coming home to do all the housework and childcare on top of it.
Are there any studies that show where the man gets excited to work long hard manual labour jobs then come home to do all the upkeep repairs on the house vehicles and everything else? And if he's not helping take care of the children, he was her choice. She should have chose someone that loves and appreciates children including being around them. And it's also women too, I see a load of women on here too that don't appreciate children.
@ThisAndThat the vast majority of jobs among Americans are sedentary so the manual labor job point is mute
"He was her choice" sure, and it's her choice to dump him...
That's right. The majority of American jobs are sedentary jobs which most men don't do. Feminism pushing open borders and socialism deporting American jobs was the reason for it too. Now women want to complain that it's men's fault. I am most men don't have time for that. I quit the idea of relationship and marriage over 30 years ago when my circumstances wasn't popular. And now I'm joined by an avalanche of men doing the same. And now with an added bonus because things are way worse than 30 years ago, they know why I did.
I think a lot of men like being the woman’s hero, whether that is providing for her or protecting her or helping her carry groceries or holding her when she is scared. And woman love men who make them feel valued and cared for.
Opinion
85Opinion
I believe it's more to the point that there is order and not chaos in the relationship. When a man provides he obviously also LEADS. This tends to to give a good flow and harmony to the relationship as both move toward their goals.
Its cause men need to feel helpful. Once they no longer have that they feel useless in a relationship.
This is true. I heard a saying I feel is accurate. Men want to be needed and women need to be wanted.
Also it’s not just in a relationship. Our friendships, our jobs, our day to day lives are all about what we can do to contribute. If you take that away you leave a husk of a man. My last relationship ended because my ex didn’t make me feel needed.
@VanillaSalt yes that is super true! It's just in y'alls DNA to want to be needed
Lol the number of times I’ve been told I don’t need a man or your pathetic if you need somebody. I’m disgusted with society right now.
Another thing that is skewing the statistics is the fact that many women don’t really have any place to go without their man. They don’t have a degree or any understanding of how to operate in modern times. They have become dependent on them and must stay, especially if they have kids that they don’t want to lose because they can’t afford to house them. Women have become more independent in recent times, and many places around the world still have them dependent on the male, especially on the Indian subcontinent that I come from. In fact, the wife comes to America and becomes totally dependent on the husband, not even able to fully speak the language. Also, many men get flack for not being the bread winner, and they become insecure and leave the relationship. Additionally, since female bread winners are so few, smaller number of cases are needed to skew the statistics. The real question should be if both parties in the relationship are happy, which can only happen if they both full fill each other’s individual needs. A relationship that lasts a long time might have both people hating each other, with the women never showing concern for the man and only seeing him as a wallet she can opportunistically use and the man never feeling empathy for the woman and seeing her as his sex object and personal punching bag to dump his frustrations on.
Just curious but is there anything to support that? It is well established that women are the most frequent gender to seek divorce.
It is also currently believed that one of the main reasons is a shift in the power equilibrium in which the man due to the traditions of marriage, being less affected by age and typically having higher earnings end up in a more attractive position. This shift then causes the other partner who perceive their own relative self-worth to have declined to feel stuck. Of course things like women often being the main caretaker also go here.
All in all though if we look at current research it stands to reason most relationships might last longer if the woman was the main provider or, of course, if the levels of income were fairly even.
That was a bunch of very aggressive nonsense. But since you want a source I was referencing in particular multiple sets of studies by Dr. Michael Rosenfeld from Stanford University dating from 2009 to 2015. Take your pick among them, since they all show the same thing. This again is not isolated data or cheery-picking. It may be slightly dated.
As for studies on how long relationships lasts when who is the main provider, I am struggling to find any that specifically address that issue. However since you appear confident in the "actual current research" on this very niche topic perhaps you would enlighten me?
It doesn't. Me and my oldest sister bouth earn more money than are boyfriends and we are both extremely happy in are relationships and are boyfriends aren't lesser for it.
My boyfriend runs his own business and that's why he earns less because he has to make sacrifices to keep the company going especially in the not so busy seasons I don't mind helping out hear and there because I support and love him. I want him to know whatever happens he can always rely on me to help him get back up again and but there's no shame in asking for help either.
Money shouldn't mean power in a relationship it should mean safely and stability. If either one of us falls down we got each other to help back up again. Whats mine is his.
It's very common now a days for women to earn more as men are more likely to take risks than a woman like start up a business etc. a lot of Women like stability so are more likely to go into a stable job were the money and hours are decent.
@WAT88 Oh yeah I forgot my age ment my opinions weren't valid. So being 23 Im clearly don't need money anyway because driving lessons, first time buying a house, dates , traveling, having children all that stuff I'm starting to think about in my life that's all free right untill when? When I turn 40 or something or when you actually don't decide to use my age as a pointless excuse to dismiss my opinion
Because women resent providing for a man. Once they take on the provider role, they begin to "feel like the man", which reduces their attraction for the guy they're with and they begin to question whether they can do better. Then hypergamy kicks in and they swing for a higher branch.
Women love the idea of being taken care of financially. It unburdens them of responsibility and allows them to go through life with less stress than they otherwise would have if they had to provide. And less stress means happier, longer-lasting relationships.
Depends. Sometimes it's because that's what she's into, him leading and her following. That works for some people. And other times it's because the women has nowhere else to go because she decided to get married before getting her education or any sort of career. That's where my mother fucked up. She got married young, had kids and then realized she was stuck because she had nothing to fall back on. I'm not at all saying it's my dad's fault, she made her choice and it bit her in the ass because she didn't think about her future.
It mainly has to do with the couple,
I have found out that women like the security that they are not living on edge of financial ruin. A man that is a provider makes her feel like she's not going to be without the basics in life. She wom't need to stress if she loses her job and has no home, food, or essentials. Risk os easier to take at a young age, what if she has dreams? She can depend on her SO for her to try and not worried where her next meal or a roof over her head. If the guy is a terrible man he won't empower her. I like strong independent women, it keeps me always trying to be my better self. Also, if she is always growing I believe she will be happy spiritually.
Personally, I would be way way more stressed out if I was dependent on someone for money.
@BlackCatBone the intention of my statement was a man that was a provider can be great if she had aspirations.
I thought about this, I wouldn't want to be the only support she has. But I could see myself being a provider. If my SO wanted to she could take tge opportunity to pursue what she wanted out of life. I think that is what support is all about. I have seen where the man is the sole provider in the relationship, it's harder for the family.
In a word... Hypergamy. Not all women will seek out better safety/protection and resources, but they have a bilogical imperative to have access to both. It's not a conscious need.
It's also at a specific period for a woman. When she is young she is less hypergamous, but she will become more and more as she intends to mate and have offspring.
Right now, many women feel more financially and personally safe. The government can help ease her concerns before and during children. Her reliance is less, so the need is not overly understood well.
Hypothetically speaking, if women were unable to get additional resources from the government, if they had little to no access to the workforce/income and there was little laws to protect them, hypergamy would be very pronounced.
I can only speak for myself. I think it would last longer as women in my experience seem to do a lot in the relationship. So in my opinion it would be a huge contribution. All the guys I've been in a relationship with are pretty lazy and or don't look after themselves and I tend to be automatically the leader of the relationship. Which like yeah I can but it doesn't mean I want to. I'd like a man with vision and to look after me and my son as long as it wasn't a point for control and more so because he loves and care for us. Even though us women are pretty capable of a lot doesn't always mean we want to do everything. That's just my opinion on the matter
I don't know how many times I have written about this. 99% of the questions on this site involving male and female roles can be understood by simply looking at nature and evolution. Nature designed the family unit to be the foundational building block of the human species. Nature and evolution designed men both physically and mentally to be the providers and protectors of the family and women to bear and raise the children and nurture the family. Men are protectors and providers, women are child bearers and nurturers. If this wasn't true we wouldn't be here today. Once you realize this is so, all of the mystery of these questions disappears.
Knowing this the answer to this question is easy. When a male and female are living their natural roles, there is harmony in the family because that's the way nature designed them.
This, by the way, is why the key element in Marxism, which has taken over the Democrat Party, is to destroy the family unit. If they can break up the family unit, there is chaos and anarchy and it opens the door for a dictator to rise to power and oppress the population. Once they do that, the government controls the people, the people no longer control the government.
The founders of BLM describe themselves as "trained Marxists." Need you know anything more. Already almost 3/4 of the children born to blacks in America are born out of wedlock with no father in the family. The Democrats are trying to make it 100%. It is their policies that are responsible for splitting up black families to keep them weak and under their control. That's why although black men make up only 6% of the population in America they are responsible for 50% of the violent crime and murders. The Democrats have them right where they want them. Murdering themselves in epidemic proportions. And the press they control is completely silent about it instead focusing on the tiny handful of incidents involving police.
Because men are dogs to their women that appease their laziness.
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FtctvupaQe8A%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DtctvupaQe8A&tbnid=hSrn5fREly0ApM&vet=12ahUKEwjgrOzbv_LwAhXFEbcAHa_qBawQMygAegQIARAZ..i&docid=62GUswBLmYXnHM&w=1280&h=720&q=magua%20understand%20white%20women&hl=en-GB&ved=2ahUKEwjgrOzbv_LwAhXFEbcAHa_qBawQMygAegQIARAZ
FOR THE SAME EXACT REASON THAT YOU DON'T QUIT THE JOB THAT YOU HATE:
YOU NEED TO SURVIVE.
A woman with no job with the husband being the sole supporter is a woman who, in a bad marriage, lives in fear. Fear that if she goes on her own (and possibly have to support kids as well), she will have to start over from scratch.
This is why lots of women wait to divorce their husbands the moment the last kid graduates high school and becomes a legal adult.
Your opinion isn’t relevant to the post.
You didn’t base your answer on the post
You did not loo
Lol**
@Giselleselfish Sure I did.
Here. This is what you wrote:
"Why does the relationship last longer when the man is the provider?"
Implicitly in this, when you say "is the provider", the "the" implies he is the ONLY provider and by "provider", we mean the person who brings in money.
You also wrote "last longer".
Last longer than what?
Implicitly, a relationship in which the woman is the only source of income or the woman adds income to the relationship.
So, let me rewrite your question:
===
When a man is the only source of income in a relationship, that relationship will last longer than one in which the woman is the only source or she is also is a source of income. Why is that so?
===
First, that's false generally, but may be fine statistically. As an example, E. Stan Kroenke is a billionaire, but not worth what his wife, Ann Walton Kroenke (she of Walmart), is worth. They've been married for decades.
* continuing *
When a woman does not have income, she is living off of the man's money.
If the relationship ends and becomes single/divorced, she cannot support herself (*) until she gets a job and can support herself. Life immediately becomes more difficult for her as she starts over. Especially if she also has to support children.
So, a woman who is in such a marriage and is unhappy is more likely to stay in the marriage because, as bad as the marriage may be, the uncertainty of the future and the work needed to start over may be considered by her to not be worth it, so she stays in the marriage.
(*) This is why there is alimony. Being unable to support yourself in an unhappy marriage is a form of slavery and, for the reasons I outlined, many people would stay in it. Alimony helps liberate the person who leaves the marriage.
=============
Now, I want to be clear. This same logic holds if the woman is the only source of income.
Many a man would be reticent to leave the relationship under those circumstances.
A significant difference though is that women are generally more cautious than men. Many men will risk starting over rather than stay in an unhappy marriage.
Makes no sense, because she asked WHY the partnership lasts longer when the man is the PROVIDER. She’s asking why they REMAIN A COUPLE when HE’S the provider and not WHY HE MAKES MORE MONEY.
You can’t take defeat.
You are not answering the post.
Haven't heard of that before,
But with my best friends parents, her mom stayed with her dad even though he was an alcoholic who hit them because without his money they'd have no where to go🤷♂️
I've seen it a lot where the women aren't financially secure so they stay with their husband since they don't thunk they'd be able to make it on their own.
Yea. Things have changed so much though. Nowadays women can work lol. It wasn't that long ago women couldnt even work without government permission.
I guess my question would be than, is why do women seem to still have that provider fantasy? Is it a relic of the culture we only recently emerged out of, where women weren't supposed to work, into what we have now, where everyone expects that women are in the work force doing their thing and living their life just as men did.
Where does the desire for a man who has that provider ability come from?
Is the desire for that kind of man now changing in women? Now that society has become so much more equal, has women's preferences and fantasies about being rescued by a prince and all that kind of stuff, has that changed?
I feel like this is what OP is ultimately asking...
Because evolution doesn't stop at the neck. We evolved to fulfill certain behavioral patterns, and while we can choose to defy them on an individual basis, we can't on a mass level- and those who do will find that fighting their instincts is difficult and feels unnatural. Few will stick with it- some, but few.
Because this is a mans world. Man are intimidated by providing women because they feel pressure and shame from other men that are providers around them. If men had judgement free zone they'd probably feel less threatened to leave and seek someone below them. It's pride too
I feel absolutely no issue with being stay at home safe or a woman out earning me... if she can anyway. If not if I’m still working my 60-80 hours a week to put food in her belly, cloths on her back, and fun in her day then I’m not coming home to do dishes. I work hard make pretty good money and I’m not looking for someone that can’t perform the basic duties I need.
Guys, don't come at me this is just an opinion. I feel like men have a natural instinct and need to provide. So maybe when the woman is the provider, the man feels jealous or insecure. Not because there's anything wrong with them but maybe they don't feel like they're doing enough, and it causes problems in the relationship.
I feel like that comes so much from a person's own insecurity.
One guy can easily be married to a rich woman and be a stay at home dad. Another guy is filled with fear and anxiety because he thinks that his wife will cheat because he has less than she has and so therefore hypergamy demands that she cheat on him or leave him for someone who has more than she does.
What causes one guy to be one way, and be confident and not have fear of her cheating or leaving, and the other guy to be paranoid and lack confidence.
I dont know. I dont know if its instinctual biological shit or not. I feels more to me like social pressures where we are taught that we must provide otherwise we are worthless.
And so if you're not the provider, you re worthless and boom, there goes your self worth if you have been brainwashed to believe that.
But I mean it's true isn't it? Women dont want a broken guy who is lazy. Hid personality doesn't matter if he has meager means and lives a simple life.
So why shouldn't men believe they must provide? We know that without it, we are seen as childish little boys.
Is it in our nature? Do women force us to "be mature" in their eyes, in order to have access to her love?
I feel like all toxic masculinity is, is the idea that a man who can't provide is worthless. And that's true, he is worthless to women. You can see them complaining about these worthless men all the time.
I dont know. That can't be good for peoples mental health.
Probably because they are gold diggers and can't support themselves and need male approval. Good women who work can support themselves and don't need no man to do so, but obviously having an extra income in a house does help but if the woman is relying solely on his income thats bad
Although I don't agree with men being the providers nowadays, especially in these days of equality (in western society at least) it's a fact that MOST females are attracted to dominant traits. Taller, stronger, bigger, older, being able to provide for them and potential kids, etc. That will never change. It's biologically inherent.
Because that's what men were suppose to do. We were suppose to be the providers. men would work for women because they love her. They wanted her to be happy, they wanted her to not have to work like they do. He wants to see her in a pretty outfit, so that he has a reason to work. That's why gender roles were invented and they work. Today tho that's not the case and that's why so many relationships aren't working out. Because the gender roles that work are no longer their.
Biological Fundamentalism. Men Protect and provide for a woman for exclusive mating rights. Been that way since the dawn of time, and still is in most of the world.
Which makes me beleive that women not be able to respect a man she provides for.
Men are usually the breadwinners. It's not something I'm not proud to say but this is the reality. There are some relationships where things are more equal like if both have the same profession, but a lot of times you have the man having a very high career status versus a much lower status partner.
Well how many relationships are there where the woman is the provider?
I think most of the time it's either the man that provides or if they both work then the man takes home more money.
Even if a woman brings in good income she still prefers a man that makes more than her.
A lot of that depends on the expectations of the people in the relationship. A relationship can last just fine with the woman as the provider, but it requires that she not resent him for it being that way and that he's not insecure about her being the provider. It always goes back to communication bring key. Literally any relationship can last a life time if there is full communication between both people and they both accept that as time passes, their partner will change in various ways.
Because women are not developed to operate the way feminism has tried to and successfully convinced them they are. Women are not providers. There’s also don’t have very good self discipline and at the end of the day women are proficient where men are not just as men are proficient where women are not.
Because there is more mutual respect. The woman also has to earn the relationship in ways men find more appealing such as through nicer personality and doing the caretaking activities instead of "buying" it off via a paycheck. The woman also feels safer and more protected and less stressed. And she also has an incentive to be a good girlfriend because she doesn't want to cheat or something which would put her out on the street. So yeah all around it makes relationships more stable.
Unconditionality pours in when he is the provider.
Historically its the male who provides love and care rest in females hand.
Love is more heavy a concept and flows from within effortlessly and you cannot control to make it stay too
Once he doesn't feel any movement or is unsatisfied for a long time that evades and girls start to feel he doesn't loves me anymore.
That can't be true all of the time. If he's the provider, there's more at stake for him to make sure his family is taken care of and healthy. He has a deeper investment into the well-being of his family.
it's just the natural flow of things. one stat i read showed that religious families have a much hire success. look at this post: https://www.goldbergjones-wa.com/divorce/divorce-by-generation/
Probably because women don't get much out of a relationship. Hence, it would work if she's submissive and obedient but not if she's strong and independent. If she's the provider, there's nothing for her in a relationship. If she's not, she's needy enough to have to stay in the relationship.
This made me think. What do women LOSE from a relationship?
@VanillaSalt Is this question for me or for women in general?
I wanna know. Because in regards to marriage. Men lose all power. The relationship prior to marriage compared to after is the exact same except now the law is completely against men. When I think how easy it is for women to ruin men many times with lies and no consequence... I question if women are worth the effort.
But I’ve never before considered what women lose when they choose monogamy... so perhaps you can enlighten me what you lose. And what you gain be nice too.
@VanillaSalt Marriage isn't good for women.
Didn’t see an answer to my question. Let me rephrase it. Is there any benefit to marriage compared to a relationship for women? What’s lost by getting married again compared to a ltr.
Do they? I've never seen any stats.
It seems weird. Do guys have fragile egos or something? I don't know.
I think it should be equal but some men like to be the only provider. As long as they are both happy with what ever situation the relationship will last
Because it’s unnatural for a woman to provide as it’s not how God created her. Naturally she will find dissatisfaction in having to do this.
Because women are usually more satisfied with their man when he is providing for them and they can lean on him and a man is usually more satisfied when he feels like a woman relies on him.
It lasts shorter because of financial problems. Few families can survive on one income nowadays. Studies have proven that financially stable couples tend to divorce less
Not true. If the female is the provider, it last longer and has a better connection.
Men having the control and telling you how life should be, tears everything apart.
The ones I provided for. I didn't mean to imply ALL men.
You implied many things that were both untrue and disgusting.
Because they get financially dependent on them, thus they are unable to leave, especially if they have kids together.
It's easier to leave relationship when you can provide for yourself. Lots of women and men stay in abusive relationships simply because they don't to work and provide for themselves.
Because it's only natural that men feels the satisfaction and appreciation when they provide amd girls being the supportive ones. Also because we have been doing that for millions of years
long relationships should last from both partners because at some point in your life if you can't do something for her or whatever the thing is and she start getting mad do this do that not here, there etc its like she's using you
It's no guarantee. You're mixing up situations and cause and effect.
But to answer your question... if she's dependent on him she's less likely to cheat or bail. After all, he's her meal-ticket.
Because deep down, that IS what women want, rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding. That's why.
Because men are used to it/expect to have to be providers. Women havn't yet grown into the responsibility that comes with The power feminists been asking for.
Not in my experience lol for me it’s when both provide equally.
I assume that part of it is because women generally don't respect men they out earn.
There's no significant difference between "there is at least one provider" and "the man is a provider".
Obvious reason, if you can't feed, clothe and put a roof over your head then you are by default are at the mercy and dependence of another person.
Because God has always INTENDED the male sex to be the provider of the family
She gstgered the fruit for herself and her enhanced knowledge she thought she would receive above Adams provisional commanded commandments. Women today are doing exactly the same thing with education and trying to be head of household... witch incidently is directly and rebellious against GODS intended design and intention for both male and female. A woman is from Man , not the other way around
.
Because that’s how it works. It’s the evolutionary and natural order of things.
That's how God created things. Just look at the animals. Males go hunting while female animals take care kids.
Maybe because when it's the other way the girl starts to feel resentful that she has to be the provider?
Its humorous how people think they're going to obstruct GODS will on earth.
Yes. How could anyone side with satan 😂its actually hilarious
Because lots of women are gold diggers looking for a free ride.
Funny that you noticed that but it’s true from what I noticed too, once women become independent it seems to be over
That doesn't matter. It depends on the relationship and the understanding of the two
I dont know. In my experience I would say no. I've been the provider in a few relationships and it hasn't turned out well because of that.
No I didn't. It was that each woman I was with wanted to control the money I made and spend it on just themselves
I know that now. At the time in those relationships I wasn't as self confident as I am now.
I think I nee more clarity over this question...
I am missing onto something...
Sorry , donnot feel offended..
Wouldn’t last for me.
They feel like they r getting something. They have different stuff to complain about. They can complain about not getting enough gifts instead of other shit when the man is rich
Because women will lose respect and fall out of love with a dude that doesn't satisfy her hypergamy.
You can also add your opinion below!