Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife makes most of the day-to-day decisions. I make more of the long-term decisions. I think that's a fairly traditional arrangement. Does that make one of us "the head"?

Not sure why your wife allows you to make more of the long term decisions.

But you're not confused why I allow my wife to make more of the day-to-day decisions? If that's correct, I'm interested in your thought process where one makes sense and the other is a source of mystery.

Long term decisions, like how aggressively or conservatively to invest money for retirement, have a bigger impact than day to day decisions. You would be involved in the day to day decisions if they were important.

scientists say equality was the archetype:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/early-men-and-women-were-equal-say-scientists/ar-BBjNsq2?ocid=UP74DHP

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people just question why owning a penis makes one the default leader in anything.

yes

I'm sure transgender people would be very interested in your assertion that genitalia alone determine whether one is a man or a woman.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife makes most of the day-to-day decisions. I make more of the long-term decisions. I think that's a fairly traditional arrangement. Does that make one of us "the head"?

Not sure why your wife allows you to make more of the long term decisions.

But you're not confused why I allow my wife to make more of the day-to-day decisions? If that's correct, I'm interested in your thought process where one makes sense and the other is a source of mystery.

Anonymous wrote:I think people just question why owning a penis makes one the default leader in anything.

yes

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If femininity means I'm the one solely responsible for scrubbing the toilets & tubs, vacuuming, laundry & cooking, picking up socks and other things strewn about the house, then I have to say no thanks. I'll share these tasks everyone else in the household, but don't tell me these are my natural duties based on my female brain. I have no desire to be a maid.

And I'm glad to have feminism there to support me in my lack of desire to embrace traditionally defined femininity while still defining myself as being all woman.

Who likes that arrangement? I wouldn't call myself a feminist and that's not how my household runs. My DH is in charge of the laundry. Even though he is the head of the household, it does not make him king.

What's the difference in your house between head of the household and king? How do you interact differently that you would if you said your household had equal partners instead of a head?

How is a quarterback and a running back different? Do kings change diapers, do laundry, repair the dishwasher, take out the trash and walk the dog?

have you had such male trauma in your life that you cannot understand how a man can be a participating leader in his home?

Are you brainwashed into thinking your marriage couldn't survive if YOU were an equal leader with your DH?

"Men are by and large the violent ones. Men are the problem. And they know it."
Correct - if "the problem" means violence.

"Men know women are just as capable and smart, perhaps more so."
Just as capable and smart, yes. "More so" - I don't see any evidence of that. If I had to guess, I'd say the bulk is pretty much even with the outliers -- both the dumbest and the smartest being men. I think, biologically, men are expendable (sperm is plentiful, eggs and incubation more resource-intensive), so nature gambles with men, hitting the jackpot some and going bust some.

"We are less prone to be destructive and anti-social."
Less destructive - yes. Less anti-social - doubtful. I see more toxic relationships between women than between men. Basically, women tend to be more indirect with their aggression.

"We can make more humans if we want with very little contribution from men. We don't need you. Oh the irony that for centuries religion insisted that women needed religion to resist their baser natures. When we have proof every day that it is men who are unable to govern themselves, and women can do just fine without them."
You just went off the rails. Yes, you can make more humans. But supporting them and protecting them requires a little more support. I think the religious oppression of women has more to do with the association of religion with the state, and the state's mission to protect the property interests of the elite. In particular, control of female reproduction has been a means of attempting to assure that a man's resources pass to his biological children and not to the biological children of the man who cuckolded him.

"This is why you are seeing angry tirades and backlash. This is why everyone talks about Obama "coming for my guns!" when in reality, no one has touched your guns. They are actually coming for our birth control. Everyone knows a woman who is unable to control when and how she becomes pregnant/a mother is at a serious disadvantage. And many men instinctively want women at a disadvantage. Just like the good old days."
Agree with most of that, though the Obama/guns thing seems like a bit of a tangent. I don't see most men regarding themselves as particularly advantaged. Instead, there is a smallish segment of (mostly white) men who hold most of the advantages. Sure, you can't get into that club without being a man. But most men won't ever be part of that club.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a feminist, but my DH is head of the household. What it means is this: sometimes you just can not come to an agreement. Some times both of you feel the other is wrong. When we get to that point, we go with his decision because he is the head.

Every family must have a way to cope when this happens. If this has never happened to you, consider yourself very lucky. It happens to most couples at least at 1 point in their marriage.

In some families, even families with very feminine Stay at home women, the woman really is the head and her decision carries. In my family, it is DH.

Why can't you sometimes go with your decision even if your DH disagrees with it? I'm asking out of real curiosity.

I personally would feel resentful if my DH always got the final say when we couldn't come to an agreement. Instead sometimes I give in to him even if I disagree and sometimes he gives in to me even if he disagrees. It feels like a real partnership, as messy as that can be.

'

What if it is something where you both feel very strongly? For example, what if you had a great job offer in another city while your DH had a great job here? In the end, one of you must sacrifice for the other.

I think I sacrifice because, frankly, I am stronger than my DH and I know somehow I will make it work, even if I don't like it.

Conceding makes you the "strong" one? Huh? You and I do not agree on the definition of strength. You're just giving in to keep household peace.

Relationships are not a contest or a battle. that is where you and I differ.

Of course it isn't for you. You've already lost. How would you feel about this "head of household" garbage if your daring husband came home one day and told you he was leaving you for another woman?

I think people just question why owning a penis makes one the default leader in anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a feminist, but my DH is head of the household. What it means is this: sometimes you just can not come to an agreement. Some times both of you feel the other is wrong. When we get to that point, we go with his decision because he is the head.

Every family must have a way to cope when this happens. If this has never happened to you, consider yourself very lucky. It happens to most couples at least at 1 point in their marriage.

In some families, even families with very feminine Stay at home women, the woman really is the head and her decision carries. In my family, it is DH.

Why can't you sometimes go with your decision even if your DH disagrees with it? I'm asking out of real curiosity.

I personally would feel resentful if my DH always got the final say when we couldn't come to an agreement. Instead sometimes I give in to him even if I disagree and sometimes he gives in to me even if he disagrees. It feels like a real partnership, as messy as that can be.

'

What if it is something where you both feel very strongly? For example, what if you had a great job offer in another city while your DH had a great job here? In the end, one of you must sacrifice for the other.

I think I sacrifice because, frankly, I am stronger than my DH and I know somehow I will make it work, even if I don't like it.

Conceding makes you the "strong" one? Huh? You and I do not agree on the definition of strength. You're just giving in to keep household peace.

Relationships are not a contest or a battle. that is where you and I differ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If femininity means I'm the one solely responsible for scrubbing the toilets & tubs, vacuuming, laundry & cooking, picking up socks and other things strewn about the house, then I have to say no thanks. I'll share these tasks everyone else in the household, but don't tell me these are my natural duties based on my female brain. I have no desire to be a maid.

And I'm glad to have feminism there to support me in my lack of desire to embrace traditionally defined femininity while still defining myself as being all woman.

Who likes that arrangement? I wouldn't call myself a feminist and that's not how my household runs. My DH is in charge of the laundry. Even though he is the head of the household, it does not make him king.

What's the difference in your house between head of the household and king? How do you interact differently that you would if you said your household had equal partners instead of a head?

How is a quarterback and a running back different? Do kings change diapers, do laundry, repair the dishwasher, take out the trash and walk the dog?

have you had such male trauma in your life that you cannot understand how a man can be a participating leader in his home?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a feminist, but my DH is head of the household. What it means is this: sometimes you just can not come to an agreement. Some times both of you feel the other is wrong. When we get to that point, we go with his decision because he is the head.

Every family must have a way to cope when this happens. If this has never happened to you, consider yourself very lucky. It happens to most couples at least at 1 point in their marriage.

In some families, even families with very feminine Stay at home women, the woman really is the head and her decision carries. In my family, it is DH.

Why can't you sometimes go with your decision even if your DH disagrees with it? I'm asking out of real curiosity.

I personally would feel resentful if my DH always got the final say when we couldn't come to an agreement. Instead sometimes I give in to him even if I disagree and sometimes he gives in to me even if he disagrees. It feels like a real partnership, as messy as that can be.

+1. We do have a rule that at the end of the day, whoever cares the most about the particular subject gets the final vote. This has always been an effective tie breaker. But most things are by consensus.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a feminist, but my DH is head of the household. What it means is this: sometimes you just can not come to an agreement. Some times both of you feel the other is wrong. When we get to that point, we go with his decision because he is the head.

Every family must have a way to cope when this happens. If this has never happened to you, consider yourself very lucky. It happens to most couples at least at 1 point in their marriage.

In some families, even families with very feminine Stay at home women, the woman really is the head and her decision carries. In my family, it is DH.

Why can't you sometimes go with your decision even if your DH disagrees with it? I'm asking out of real curiosity.

I personally would feel resentful if my DH always got the final say when we couldn't come to an agreement. Instead sometimes I give in to him even if I disagree and sometimes he gives in to me even if he disagrees. It feels like a real partnership, as messy as that can be.

'

What if it is something where you both feel very strongly? For example, what if you had a great job offer in another city while your DH had a great job here? In the end, one of you must sacrifice for the other.

I think I sacrifice because, frankly, I am stronger than my DH and I know somehow I will make it work, even if I don't like it.

Conceding makes you the "strong" one? Huh? You and I do not agree on the definition of strength. You're just giving in to keep household peace.

Anonymous wrote:My wife makes most of the day-to-day decisions. I make more of the long-term decisions. I think that's a fairly traditional arrangement. Does that make one of us "the head"?

Not sure why your wife allows you to make more of the long term decisions.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a feminist, but my DH is head of the household. What it means is this: sometimes you just can not come to an agreement. Some times both of you feel the other is wrong. When we get to that point, we go with his decision because he is the head.

Every family must have a way to cope when this happens. If this has never happened to you, consider yourself very lucky. It happens to most couples at least at 1 point in their marriage.

In some families, even families with very feminine Stay at home women, the woman really is the head and her decision carries. In my family, it is DH.

ACK, such subservience! In my family, since we have no head of household, we default to the person who feels most strongly about the decision getting his or her way. Doesn't that make much more sense? Unless your husband is smarter or better educated than you are, which, if true, ACK!!!!