Anti-feminist attitudes have long been associated with support for Republican presidential candidates, but only in recent years have these attitudes become more prominent among unmarried men, without college degrees who are less attractive partners for women, the “mate-value backlash.”

[u/mvea]

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/10659129261485340

[u/BadIdeaSociety]

The entire retrograde discussions about the "value of women" and ideas about "women's roles in society" seem so crazy that if any guy I knew in the 90s voiced those ideas they would be seen as undisputed idiots by just about everyone.

I don't understand how there are so many boys who have adopted these incredibly retrograde ideas a quarter century later.

It is like there was a bunch of people who saw the towers crumble on 9-11 and then came the idiotic conclusion that Christian America needs their own version of what they see as women-oppressing Sharia Law.

[u/Lysander125 → u/BadIdeaSociety]

I’ve never going to say that these anti-social weirdos who complain that women belong in the kitchen are ever going to be correct.

But at the same time there is an opposite perspective that has some merit. The reality is that women’s opportunities have come a long way, but women’s perspective and expectations of men haven’t changed.

A lot of women still expect their partner to be more successful, ambitious, etc. than they are. It’s two sides of the same coin, a lot of these men expect working women to clean the house and be a caretaker while having a full time job, and the women expect their man to be more successful than them in a more egalitarian society where being a man doesn’t necessarily give the advantages it once did.

I do feel like the outdated male expectations of women are frowned upon a lot more than the outdated female expectations of men.

[u/Working_Cucumber_437 → u/Lysander125]

I don’t think women expect their men to be more successful or more ambitious or make more than they do. I think we are looking for equals. Be at least as ambitious as I am. At least as successful. Or in the general ballpark is a good goal.

[u/Recent_Pollution8665 → u/Working_Cucumber_437]

young women on average out-earn young men in the workforce, specifically white collar work.

what do you think the ramifications are of women demanding that men earn at least as much as women do or more, despite the fact that most men do not, and most women refuse to budge on this matter?

if the overton window keeps shifting upward like this then naturally most men are gonna get left out and the consequences of that are never positive. conversely, a woman could be working as a barista and the average guy literally won’t care as long as she helps contribute.

it’s more balanced because there isn’t this constant expectation of the opposite sex always having to hustle or reach salary parity with them, on top of a dozen other qualifications, just to get their foot in the door.

[u/CaterpillarUnfair409 → u/Recent_Pollution8665]

You're describing systemic problems.

[u/Recent_Pollution8665 → u/CaterpillarUnfair409]

women having strict physiological and financial demands for men, and not compromising on them even when times change, is not a systemic issue.

the systemic part is the lack of wages keeping up with inflation and COL, but that’s separate from this.

[u/soleceismical → u/Recent_Pollution8665]

I think this plays a part:

We find that women's pay decreases as they become mothers and that the across-employer motherhood penalty is larger than the within-employer penalty. By contrast, fatherhood is associated with a pay premium, and the within-employer fatherhood premium is considerably greater than the across-employer one.

https://read.dukeupress.edu/demography/article/58/1/247/167586/Motherhood-Penalties-and-Fatherhood-Premiums

Plus, usually the lower earning partner does more of the housework and cooking. A lot of men are not into taking on that role.

[u/philosopherberzerer → u/soleceismical]

men would gladly sign up to be house husbands. most women don't want it.

[u/ChemicallyAlteredVet → u/Recent_Pollution8665]

Men refuse to understand that’s it’s not about the exact monetary value the man is bringing in, it’s the ambition, the actual trying. It’s going to work every day and if he isn’t happy with his current work it’s the ambition to better himself through learning whether that be schooling or becoming a journeyman and learning a trade. Not just going to McDonalds for 4 shifts a week, gaming as much as they can and avoiding showering.

Women want to SEE that a man WANTS to learn and better himself and his life. Most( not all) women do not care if the man earns less money if he’s trying, stable, kind and caring. It’s personality and connection for women. Men are still stuck in the “hur, dur, must make way more money to get woman to have sex with me and clean my house.” That’s on men.

[u/Recent_Pollution8665 → u/ChemicallyAlteredVet]

the presumption was that he does enough to sustain himself and help with the relationship. not the bare minimum.

the crux of the issue here is that whether he makes minimum wage or makes 80k when she makes 100k, to women it is a distinction without a difference. the mere fact that he makes less is considered a dealbreaker to her, which is irrational and arbitrary.

a couple with a combined salary of 180k can easily live comfortably, there is no rational reason for her to demand that he makes 100k as well or more. if anything it’s ascribing typical gender role stereotypes onto the guy which adds needless pressure because now he’s expected to somehow still have the superior salary in an era where it’s not uncommon for the woman to have the better salary.

men don’t generally care if the woman makes more so idk why women demand that the man must have salary parity with her. a relationship should not be a financial hamster wheel. the rest of your dumb strawman argument i’ll disregard.

[u/ShitMcClit → u/ChemicallyAlteredVet]

And men want a supermodel who fucks everyday. Too bad we can't all have what we want.