Women Aspire To Be Housewives - Withut Any Of The Housework

Article 1354126 of soc.men:

http://www.nomarriage.com/article_housewives.html

Mothers are rejecting equality in the workplace and prefer the idea
of becoming full-time housewives - but not ones who actually do
housework.

This is the overall conclusion of research among 2,100 British adults
that says women are happy to abandon the workplace but not if it means
spending all day at home cooking, cleaning and looking after children.

Instead they want to play the "role" of housewife with a little help
from, for instance, a nanny, and someone who does the ironing. And
unlike Kylie Minogue, they don't want to do any dusting either.

The report, by Marian Salzman, chief strategic officer of Euro RSCG
Worldwide, the world's fifth largest advertising agency, describes
these women as princess-style "domestic divas" who effectively
exploit their husbands. "Today, 'women's lib' means wanting to be
liberated from the intense pressures of the modern-day working mum,"
she said.

"And what we're seeing is a serious gender divide regarding women in
the workplace. This time around, it is the women who want to stay at
home and the men who want to keep them in the offices and factories."

Miss Salzman, 45, who does not have children, is well known in the
United States for spotting trends before they go mainstream. She
predicted the rise of 1970s fashion nostalgia and, on the eve of the
Bridget Jones phenomenon, spotted that single professional women
would become the new, free-spending yuppies.

Her report last year, the Future of Men, predicted that
"metrosexuals" - straight men who care about fashion, food and
grooming - would be the new target of advertisers.

Yesterday she said 69 per cent of women thought it perfectly
acceptable for females to be housewives and not to earn a salary. In
contrast, only 48 per cent of men felt that women should remain
outside paid employment.

Her research suggested that the motivation to spend more time at home
was "self-centred" for some women. "There are many women who choose to
stay home out of concern for their children's quality of life," she
said. "But there are plenty of others who are paying lip service to
being the 2004 version of the perfect mum.

"In reality they are domestic divas who want the flawless kids,
courtesy of the nanny; a spotless home, thanks to a cleaning service;
and a reputation for being a fabulously put-together homemaker.

"These are the women who are becoming a target of disdain and rage on
the part of spouses who didn't expect to be shouldering the financial
burden single-handedly."

She said she was not talking about mothers with very young children
but those whose offspring were older and in full-time education.

"My two closest friends are stay-at-home women and I have no idea what
they do all day. One of them has a daughter at university and a second
daughter at high school."

Jill Kirby, the chairman of the family group at the Centre for Policy
Studies think-tank, said: "It's very clear that women who have the
choice between working and being at home with their children still
want to prioritise their home life and life with their children."

She denied claims that women who wanted to be at home were often lazy,
with their reliance on paid help. "We can't create a world where people
just do what they want," she said, "but women do need fulfilment."

Last week the actress Gwyneth Paltrow reignited the debate over
career versus children for working mothers, saying: "I can't understand
mothers who put their career before children. There are certain women
in this business who have children and I just think 'you must never see
them'. You can't do movies back to back and see your child if they go
to school."

Holly Hamilton-Bleakley, of Full Time Mothers, a lobbying organisation,
said she abhorred the idea of women buying in child care so that they
could simply sit in a coffee shop, but she did not believe this was an
accurate picture.

"The dual income, two-career family is becoming outdated. Parents are
finally recognising that children need time with them. Time spent with
children is well spent and makes a major difference to a child's life."

But Miss Salzman said the reality was that women with older children
were increasingly becoming self-indulgent. "They look at the realities
of paid work - the stress, the politics, the pressure, the dress code -
and they say that it would mean less 'me' time.

"And we are not just talking about women who earn lots of money. Women
who earn £27,500, or £55,000, or more than £55,000 did not want to work,
and men are feeling a great deal of financial pressure.

"Women think: 'What's mine is mine, and what's his is mine.' "

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Andre



--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

(Andre Lieven) wrote in message ...

Yesterday she said 69 per cent of women thought it perfectly
acceptable for females to be housewives and not to earn a salary. In
contrast, only 48 per cent of men felt that women should remain
outside paid employment.

Well, guess I'd fall in the majority here. But then I also think it
is perfectly acceptable for males to be househusbands and not to earn
a salary (well, so long as SOMEONE in the family is earning one!) I
imagine that's the minority opinion, and therein lies the problem.

"The dual income, two-career family is becoming outdated. Parents are
finally recognising that children need time with them. Time spent with
children is well spent and makes a major difference to a child's life."

If we can swing it we'd like actually like a one- or
one-and-a-half-income family - i.e., both of us part-time.
Unfortunately American employers as a group are not prepared for this
model, so we'll see what happens when the time comes...

Michelle

Mike ) writes:
In message , Andre Lieven
writes

galaxies1973 ) writes:

Well, guess I'd fall in the majority here. But then I also think it
is perfectly acceptable for males

You MS-spelled " men ".

It is an all too common dehumanising device, to refer to men as
" males ". While you did not do it this way, its often common to
use it in contrast to " women ". Thus suggesting that men aren't
as human as women.

Just as man (not so long ago) would introduce himself and a colleague
using the form "my name is Smith and this is *Mr* Jones", so women refer
to men as "males" but to themselves as merely "women". It's only polite
for men to repay the compliment by referring to "men and females".
Females will, no doubt, appreciate it.

I would rather correct the " males and women " usage, that the poster
I was replying to did not use, rather than match one wrong with another.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Well, guess I'd fall in the majority here. But then I also think it
is perfectly acceptable for males to be househusbands and not to earn
a salary (well, so long as SOMEONE in the family is earning one!) I
imagine that's the minority opinion, and therein lies the problem.

Right or wrong, "househusbands" are looked down upon as a lazy sob's
sponging off of a successful woman, "she could do so much better than that
lazy good for nothing". Hmmm, wonder why that same attitude doesn't pertain
towards women?

Dave

"Bill in Co." ) writes:
Mike wrote:
In message , Andre Lieven
writes

galaxies1973 ) writes:

Well, guess I'd fall in the majority here. But then I also think it
is perfectly acceptable for males

You MS-spelled " men ".

It is an all too common dehumanising device, to refer to men as
" males ". While you did not do it this way, its often common to
use it in contrast to " women ". Thus suggesting that men aren't
as human as women.

A lot of men aren't.

Wrong, and thats pure bigotry.

Get a clue.

Nope. Not one of bigotry.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Wilson" ) writes:
Well, guess I'd fall in the majority here. But then I also think it
is perfectly acceptable for males to be househusbands and not to earn
a salary (well, so long as SOMEONE in the family is earning one!) I
imagine that's the minority opinion, and therein lies the problem.

Right or wrong, "househusbands" are looked down upon as a lazy sob's
sponging off of a successful woman, "she could do so much better than
that lazy good for nothing". Hmmm, wonder why that same attitude
doesn't pertain towards women?

" Why are the two largest male events of recent years- Promise Keepers
and The Million Man March- concerned with how men can do a better job
of *giving*, while the two largest female efforts- NOW and The Million
Women March- are about how women can do an even better job of
*getting* ? "

Jack Kammer, " If Men Have all The Power, How Come Women Make All
The Rules ", 1999, page 60.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Wilson" ) writes:
Indeed, and good luck. The point of the article is that a *trend*
of women demanding not only to be the SAH wife exists, but that
many of them simply refuse to do any work at all.

Its an extended... childhood. Oprah-time, now and forever...

Andre

Amen! The new age women wants all the equal right.....and all of the
unequal ones as well.

Over on soc.men, Mark Sobelowski has told of his experience with
professional women who want to be " traditional " when it came to dating...
Meaning, though they make good money, the guy " gets " to ask, and pay.

He took a pass on that offer... :-)

The problem with women (and I'd never say this to my wife)....is that
they act and must be treated sometimes like children, when you see a
man giving all he can to please his spouse you will more times than not
see a woman who appreciates it less and less.....and expects more and
more.

Indeed. Its a sense of unearned entitlement. Along with a huge
lacking in basic empathy, to imagine the effects of such behavior
on the recipient of it.

No this isn't "just" true about my wife (as I can see it coming), many
of my friends say the exact same thing about their spouses. I should
however be politically correct and say the "taker" of the relationship
which could be the man.

Of course. However, society and the socialisation that men and women
get, don't tend to view that form of behavior as acceptable, when
it's exhibited by a man.

" Take it like a man " is an exhortation towards strength and
stoicism in a man, yet there is no such common phrase to use
at women/girls, to get them to develop similar strengths and
stoicisms.

" For thousands of years, complaining was functional for women-
it attracted a protector; complaining was dysfunctional for men,
it attracted nobody. Women avoided men who complained, and selected
for men who were *responsive* to women's complaints.

Complaining and asking for help, then, are not evolutionary shifts
for women, complaining and asking for help are evolutionary shifts
for men. "

Warren Farrell, " The Myth Of Male Power ", page 399-400 paperback
edition.

Flame me until the cows come home, but that doesn't make it less
true.

Indeed.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

In message , Wilson
writes


Well, guess I'd fall in the majority here. But then I also think it
is perfectly acceptable for males to be househusbands and not to earn
a salary (well, so long as SOMEONE in the family is earning one!) I
imagine that's the minority opinion, and therein lies the problem.

Right or wrong, "househusbands" are looked down upon as a lazy sob's
sponging off of a successful woman, "she could do so much better than that
lazy good for nothing". Hmmm, wonder why that same attitude doesn't pertain
towards women?

Because females are expected to be idle layabouts sponging off a
successful man.

--
Mike

imho, that would mean she's made hereself into, you got it, a royal bitch.

only royalty get to live free of mundane activities like housekeeping...
(even then, they usually pay for the service - approriately in their
opinion, with the publics 'tax dollars.'

now all you have to do is figure how to make her find the money somwhere
other than you... like marry her off to some other sucker... it's called a
swindal. don't blow your mark.

jd


"Andre Lieven" wrote in message
...

Article 1354126 of soc.men:

http://www.nomarriage.com/article_housewives.html

Mothers are rejecting equality in the workplace and prefer the idea
of becoming full-time housewives - but not ones who actually do
housework.

This is the overall conclusion of research among 2,100 British adults
that says women are happy to abandon the workplace but not if it means
spending all day at home cooking, cleaning and looking after children.

Instead they want to play the "role" of housewife with a little help
from, for instance, a nanny, and someone who does the ironing. And
unlike Kylie Minogue, they don't want to do any dusting either.

The report, by Marian Salzman, chief strategic officer of Euro RSCG
Worldwide, the world's fifth largest advertising agency, describes
these women as princess-style "domestic divas" who effectively
exploit their husbands. "Today, 'women's lib' means wanting to be
liberated from the intense pressures of the modern-day working mum,"
she said.

"And what we're seeing is a serious gender divide regarding women in
the workplace. This time around, it is the women who want to stay at
home and the men who want to keep them in the offices and factories."

Miss Salzman, 45, who does not have children, is well known in the
United States for spotting trends before they go mainstream. She
predicted the rise of 1970s fashion nostalgia and, on the eve of the
Bridget Jones phenomenon, spotted that single professional women
would become the new, free-spending yuppies.

Her report last year, the Future of Men, predicted that
"metrosexuals" - straight men who care about fashion, food and
grooming - would be the new target of advertisers.

Yesterday she said 69 per cent of women thought it perfectly
acceptable for females to be housewives and not to earn a salary. In
contrast, only 48 per cent of men felt that women should remain
outside paid employment.

Her research suggested that the motivation to spend more time at home
was "self-centred" for some women. "There are many women who choose to
stay home out of concern for their children's quality of life," she
said. "But there are plenty of others who are paying lip service to
being the 2004 version of the perfect mum.

"In reality they are domestic divas who want the flawless kids,
courtesy of the nanny; a spotless home, thanks to a cleaning service;
and a reputation for being a fabulously put-together homemaker.

"These are the women who are becoming a target of disdain and rage on
the part of spouses who didn't expect to be shouldering the financial
burden single-handedly."

She said she was not talking about mothers with very young children
but those whose offspring were older and in full-time education.

"My two closest friends are stay-at-home women and I have no idea what
they do all day. One of them has a daughter at university and a second
daughter at high school."

Jill Kirby, the chairman of the family group at the Centre for Policy
Studies think-tank, said: "It's very clear that women who have the
choice between working and being at home with their children still
want to prioritise their home life and life with their children."

She denied claims that women who wanted to be at home were often lazy,
with their reliance on paid help. "We can't create a world where people
just do what they want," she said, "but women do need fulfilment."

Last week the actress Gwyneth Paltrow reignited the debate over
career versus children for working mothers, saying: "I can't understand
mothers who put their career before children. There are certain women
in this business who have children and I just think 'you must never see
them'. You can't do movies back to back and see your child if they go
to school."

Holly Hamilton-Bleakley, of Full Time Mothers, a lobbying organisation,
said she abhorred the idea of women buying in child care so that they
could simply sit in a coffee shop, but she did not believe this was an
accurate picture.

"The dual income, two-career family is becoming outdated. Parents are
finally recognising that children need time with them. Time spent with
children is well spent and makes a major difference to a child's life."

But Miss Salzman said the reality was that women with older children
were increasingly becoming self-indulgent. "They look at the realities
of paid work - the stress, the politics, the pressure, the dress code -
and they say that it would mean less 'me' time.

"And we are not just talking about women who earn lots of money. Women
who earn £27,500, or £55,000, or more than £55,000 did not want to work,
and men are feeling a great deal of financial pressure.

"Women think: 'What's mine is mine, and what's his is mine.' "

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Andre



--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.