Friday, September 26, 2008

So this is why I don't know any rich men

Last week there was a study that found that men who think women should stay at home and raise the kids earn more money than men who are egalitarian. I wondered at the time about cause and effect (could the more sexist men be more attracted to higher-earning occupations, or the less sexist men less attracted to these occupations?) but it didn't seem worth blogging.

But it just occurred to me that this might explain another phenomenon I've noticed.

A while back, someone mentioned to me that a lot of people have the tacit assumption that men necessarily make enough money to support their family single-handedly, and want to make policy based on that assumption. I kept an eye out for that assumption, and I have seen it around underlying other discussions. For example, the whole Mommy Wars construct assumes that your husband can make enough money to support the whole family, and when people complain about single mothers on welfare they're assuming that the baby-daddy earns enough money to bring the family out of welfare, or enough that they'd be better off than on welfare.

The concept of a man earning enough to support his family single-handedly isn't foreign to me. Most of the households in my extended family have done this at one time or another, including my own parents. However, it always seemed unreasonable to me to use it as a basis for policy, because I don't know anyone - not one person - who a) is male, b) would make a compatible mate for me, and c) earns enough money for two (to say nothing of children - although children would make them an incompatible mate).

And I'm using a broad, arranged-marriage type definition of compatible mate. Within the xkcd age range, shares basic core values, we can have a conversation without boring or infuriating each other, and there is at least one sexual activity that we would both enjoy doing (i.e. with each other). I know absolutely no one who meets these criteria, is male, and earns enough to support a couple.

So maybe this recent study explains why. I don't get along with men who think women should stay at home and raise the kids, and they don't get along with me - and we seem to mutually get this vibe before we even know how the other person feels about these issues. Even men who think this subconsciously - who would never say this out loud but when they picture what life will be like when they have kids, there's a stay-at-home wife in the picture. Even among family members and other people who aren't prospective mates, we grate on each other. They vaguely dislike me, I vaguely dislike them, even before we've discussed our respective family statuses. Even on the internet, if they're not disregarding me they're flaming me, and I write off their posts when I see the name at the top.

So maybe these two things are related?

2 comments:

laura k said...

This is an excellent post! I really think you're onto something. I've seen it in my own life, too - or did when I was younger and single - without being able to articulate it.

I wondered at the time about cause and effect (could the more sexist men be more attracted to higher-earning occupations, or the less sexist men less attracted to these occupations?)

I do think that's part of it. Being completely stereotyped here, which man chooses to become a social worker or a nurse, and which chooses to be an investment banker or corporate lawyer?

Anonymous said...

You're definitely onto something.

The stay-at-home wife/moms perform an inordinate amount of services that are otherwise quite hard to obtain in the much-vaunted marketplace. She does all the emotional work of the relationship, for one thing, so he can "concentrate" on work while still seeming to be a "regular" guy.

The SAHWM also remembers all family birthdays, tends elderly relatives, raises the children, manages and maintains the house/vehicles, performs hospitality-related chores for business and social gatherings, and often does a lot of the financial "housework" as well.

The more ambitious and calculating men clearly realize what a deal this is because, except for an occasional hamburger or a pedicure, it's ALL FREE, so they go seeking it deliberately.

This is the "vibe" you sense; they want someone they can enslave and are not interested in anyone else.

Honey, when you sense that vibe, run for your life. They're doing you a favor unless you really want this "job."

The selected SAHWM does these tasks because of a (shifting) combination of natural inclination, intense social pressure, and lack of real options once trapped in the job.

"Enslave," upon reflection, may not be too strong a word. The SAHWM can be fired at will. She has no personal money and nothing to put on her resume, but that's not hubby's problem.

These calculating men are not stupid. They're not nice, definitely, but they're not stupid.