Yes, there have been a few articles in the British press about how stay-at-home men end up losing their partner and/or being cheated on. I haven’t seen any proper research on this yet, but I’m sure it will come. Evolutionary psychology suggests that women don’t tend to be attracted to stay-at-home men, at least not if that is his long term ambition.

And I have seen this in few examples.
Some of the people I know, well educated but without a decent job(Balkans is in a major economic downturn), ended up single because their partners made more money. Usually doing work where visual beauty is a requirement (PR for example).

Later on, most of those women ended up with über-successful businessmen. Sometimes even the newly rich “overnight with a bit of risk involved” guys. Engineers, programmers and anthropologists can not hope to get that rich doing decent work. Even harder when they have to work dead-end jobs because the economy is in the gutter.

When(and I seriously doubt that), stay at home guys become just as desirable(seriously, not just a short fling or a few years before the “I don’t love you anymore, and I’ve met someone else who makes $hit load of €£$¥”) as stay at home women, that is when the equality will happen. This way, men are STILL traped in their gender role.

If that theory holds up, it would be another indication that points to that women havent come as far in their fight against their own genderrolls as the continusly claims while at the same demanding men to change. Personally I believe men have come much further in this gender liberation movement, women hardly havent scratched the surface, they have been to busy dismissing responsibility for their own situaitons or society at large and blaming men, to do any kind of relevant soul-searching.

Im thinking this headstart for men will be good for something. In the future. But first we need to get rid of the artificial guilt that are placed on us, after that life and happiness is ours for the taking.

If a woman wants to have a successful career she should marry a stay-at-home husband, except that women don’t tend to be attracted to that kind of man.

It never even seems to occur to the “have it all” advocates that if a woman wants to have a career and a family on the same terms as a man, she can’t be the children’s primary caregiver, and can’t expect to be financially supported by a higher-earning spouse. Virtually no man in the world has ever “had it all” on the terms they’re demanding, but they seem to take women’s role as primary caregiver and right to financial support completely for granted.

Exactly my experience as well, no doubt about it. There’s a silence, a disbelief, a kind of “are you serious?” or “you’re a male chauvinist pig” look to their face, and then it’s ignored and it’s business as usual.

But somehow all of this is really paradoxical and quite funny when you think about it. Many of my feminist friends are well aware that statistics can’t be trusted. They are well aware that newspapers lie now and then (actually they think that 99% of what the newspapers say is a lie). They even sometimes say that facts can’t be trusted because there are hidden agendas, ideologies, that twist the way we view the world. And so on and so forth. HOWEVER, if Aftonbladet writes that the wage gap is still 80/20 and that it’s discrimination, this fact/story/narrative is NEVER questioned. It’s never questioned how they arrive at that conclusion. As long as it jives with Judith Butler, Gudrun Schyman or whatever, then it’s positively a truth and an undeniable fact. Brainwashing anyone?

Your facts Bjorn, and mine, and a lot of the people on here wrinting and commenting, are all highly subjective and socially constructed.

Have you ever noticed that you never get any replies when you talk about the reasons their is a wage gap with most feminists? Though ive mentioned this so many times, every time the wage gap comes up, Ive never heard a feminist disscuss it with any kind of argument. Its just ignored, and the original dogma of the wage gap repeated. “There is a wage gap. Wage gap is discrimination.”

It is just not possible to claim to work for equality if you are not interested in the facts. Thats a part of the unhealty, or pathological feminism, it has turned into something more similar to religion than to politics. Facts are only interesting as long as they fit in with the established view, if they dont they are dismissed right off hand.

Female “empowerment” seem to be more important than equality, not realising that empowerment without equality is discrimination.

I truly cannot believe how easy it is to dismiss the 77cents/1 dollar (or in Sweden 80/20) argument. For example, if you’re a Swede (or can read the swedish language), go to http://www.scb.se (statistiska centralbyran). There you will find rapports about the wage gap, especially the one from the year 2004 if I remember correctly, adresses this issue.

If you take into account some of the measurable factors you get a picture that says that women earn 8% less than men. So just by looking at some of the obvious FACTS, we can immediately dismiss the 80/20 argument. Now, this doesn’t mean that women aren’t discriminated against (this is of course a lot more complex) but it at least balances the discussion.

So even if we are sceptical that the wage gap is, like Bjorn says, between 0-2%.. we can probably safely say that it’s well below 10% in Sweden. The feminists need to acknowledge this and get with the facts BEFORE they throw their statistics around the room.

There are even some numbers suggesting that women earn more (in some type of jobs) than men when looking at the age span 20-30 year olds. Isn’t that discriminating against the male gender? The same factors taken into account and men get less pay? *sigh* When will we ever learn that if we have a theory (however wrong or right it may be) and apply it when looking at statistics, we will get the results WE are LOOKING for! Take off the feminist glasses and try some other glasses on for a change, switch back and forth and observe which differences arises when interpreting the data.

Ja, troesklet foer oeverlevnad aer ju mycket laegre aen det. Haer paa USA vaestkusten arbeter man med folk som staendigt tar fel paa verbtempus, och aennu gaar det.