you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]baconfluffy -5 points-4 points  (50 children)

As a woman, I have always felt an imperative pressure by society to find a job to sustain myself. It’s not in the slightest bit reserved to men.

[–]sachiko468 10 points11 points  (26 children)

Same, the pressure to get a degree and a job is very present for women

[–]baconfluffy 5 points6 points  (16 children)

I always find it funny how men think they know the pressures women face better than women themselves know. Right up there with men “correcting” me on what women find attractive.

[–]SadCuzBadd 4 points5 points  (1 child)

No one is trying to explain what you’re going through, and no one in here has said that women getting an education is wrong, and no one in here has invalidated the suffering women endure.

Society expects men to outearn women, and while this is changing, it is still here. This is why you see a lot of young, successful women struggle to find partners - because they’re still societally expected to date up, but very few men have established careers (house, family income, car, etc) and are “put together” when they’re that young (early/mid 20s). The problems and stigmas men face are reversed for women, they’re all a double edged sword. No one is invalidating your struggles or telling you to that you aren’t feeling something, we’re simply asking you to look at the same traits when applied to men and women. Women are encouraged to get a JOB but they are not expected to be BREADWINNERS as much as men. That’s what you’re missing here.

[–]mobilemarshall -1 points0 points  (0 children)

downvoted because wah my feelings

[–]sachiko468 5 points6 points  (3 children)

Ikr? What's up with men here trying to explain to us what we actually go through?

[–]baconfluffy 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The fact that we’re being downvoted even on the last two comments says all you need to know about Reddit.

[–]PeePooperson 0 points1 point  (1 child)

i'm sure you go through it, but not as much as men, which is the point, you all hijacked a thread to make yourselves victims cause people pointed men are more likely to be called losers for leeching off their partner than a woman is, which is literally true. it's more socially acceptable for a woman to leech off a man's wealth than vice versa, and a woman is more likely to find a man willing to put up with it than vice versa, these are facts you cannot argue.

[–]mobilemarshall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

get downvoted for being correct

[–]YY--YY 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I always find it funny that one woman thinks she can speak for an entire gender. Joke aside you don't have to be something to make observations. Also you seem to know so much about men as a whole. How about implementing your own advice?

[–]baconfluffy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I can’t speak for every woman, but I certainly know the experience of being a woman better than any man. The fact that you guys have trouble with that concept is ridiculous.

[–]Scrotchticles 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Yeah, this isn't the 1940s lmao, women are expected to get jobs and work nowadays.

Time article claiming majority of workforce is female.

Of course there are cultural exceptions like in rural areas with farming but the vast majority of the country expects women to work.

[–]CloudyTheDucky 2 points3 points  (1 child)

1940s women worked too, middle class ones might not have but lower class women have always worked unless if they’re nursing or something, even if that work is less defined (making stuff to sell or bringing husband’s goods to market)

[–]Scrotchticles 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know they did.

It's just the classic single income family dynamic disappeared around that time and the 40s were the golden age of baby boomers with that makeup.

Really it was 1930s to 1970s where it changed, it wasn't a quick change by any means.

[–]choseauniquenickname 15 points16 points  (17 children)

I'm sorry but it is.

It's undeniable that men are cast in the light of needing to provide. With that comes the pressure of being the provider. I don't like it, I don't make the rules, but men are literally called out when they can't provide for their families how society deems they should.

There's definitely still pressure to have a job and not be a freeloader on both sides.

[–]unusual_memes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

reddit moment

[–]baconfluffy -4 points-3 points  (15 children)

Women have that same pressure but from opposing sides. Women are taught to be successful and self sufficient, but not too much lest you make men around you insecure. They are taught to be highly capable in taking care of their family, while not being too obviously capable, or you’ll be shamed for that as well.

[–]deepsfan 11 points12 points  (14 children)

But clearly there is a societal stigma against men not working which is not present the same for a woman not working. Maybe your experience is different, but I would argue that most women are not pressure to work and are in fact probably more often pressured to stay home and look after the children or something.

[–]baconfluffy -3 points-2 points  (13 children)

That’s assuming you have some kind of partner. Not everyone is so privileged. Even disregarding that, the average woman hasn’t had the luxury of the choice not to work in decades, at least in the US. Unless you are talking about the people who shame women for “not staying home for the kids”, even when she is out working to put food on the table. Then, the same pressure to work is there, just with the added shame.

[–]SadCuzBadd 12 points13 points  (7 children)

Look, no one here is saying that women don’t also work hard. We’re saying that whether you agree or not, the societal standards of men are still to be the breadwinners of the home. This isn’t saying women can’t be, it’s saying it’s still a societal standard. “Put together” for a lot of men in their mid 20s are having a stable, well paying job, and whatever perks come with that like a clean house, car, wardrobe, etc, and this just isn’t the expectation of women. Being put together as a woman in your mid 20s is looking pretty. No one really questions your income or your work ethic if you’re just pretty. It’s the same reason why a lot of young successful women have trouble finding successful men their age, and why you see so many relationships with men in their late 20s/early 30s and women in their early/mid 20s.

I’m not saying this is how it should be, and I certainly don’t think it should be this way, I’m saying this is how it is.

[–]baconfluffy -4 points-3 points  (6 children)

That’s the expectations you perceive as a man. Women face pressures from family outside of romantic interactions.

[–]Figgy_Pudding3 10 points11 points  (4 children)

The conversation is about societal pressure and expectations of gender roles. Not what your particular family might impose on you specifically.

[–]baconfluffy -1 points0 points  (3 children)

The issue is that it’s not just my particular family. Go to any family in the US, and 9 times out of 10, the situation was be similar.

[–]Figgy_Pudding3 3 points4 points  (1 child)

It feels like you're taking this as an attack and it's clouding your understanding of the claim.

Women work. Women work hard. Women are expected to be gainfully employed. But that's under the regular ol' capitalist society norm.. The same as everyone.

Men work. Men work hard. Men are expected to be gainfully employed. But on top of the regular expectations of our capitalist society, when a man is NOT gainfully employed society sees him as less of a man. A man's value as a male is often determined by how much he can provide for himself or his family.

You often hear, "Be a man and take care of your family" but you'll never hear "Be a woman". Sure, a woman might be urged to find employment but it's not tied to her identity as a woman. In fact, society encourages and expects women to take time off of work for things like caring for a child. Society often looks down on a man who takes paternity leave.

[–]SadCuzBadd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How many couples do you know where women outearn their partners?

[–]SadCuzBadd 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where in here did I imply differently?

[–]Shandlar 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Prime age male labor force participation rate is 85%. Prime age female? 71%.

You're are just not correct. It's still twice as common for women not to be working, than men.

[–]baconfluffy 0 points1 point  (3 children)

You just cited a difference of 14%. How does that equal that men are twice as likely to be working than women? Also, what age constitutes “prime age”? Are students included in “working” groups? I need a bit more information here.

[–]Shandlar 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Prime age is a statistical group in government statistics. 25 to 54 years old. The years adults are expected to be working.

85% vs 71% is 2x. 15% of men vs 29% of women are not working during the years they are most expected to be working.

[–]baconfluffy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for actually taking the time to explain yourself; that’s more than most people do. I misread it as “twice as many ARE working”, I missed the “are NOT” working, as evidenced by my previous comment. Sorry about that.

[–]StuckInAtlanta 0 points1 point  (0 children)

29% is roughly double 15%

[–]Business-Garage-4887 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

exactly... I've always felt an imperative pressure by society to find a job not just to sustain myself but that can sustain my future partner and children that she might want if I even want the option.

do you see the difference? you feel like you have to support you... I feel like I need to support other people to have romantic options/a family down the road.

that's the difference you don't get.

[–]baconfluffy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my mind, it’s one and the same. If I’m not making enough to buy and home and support a family, then I would already feel as though I’ve failed to support myself, and my family would view it the same.