Started By
Message

re: When men worked and women took care of the family. Are we better or worse?

Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:31 pm to
Posted by Zarkinletch416
Deep in the Heart of Texas
Member since Jan 2020
8476 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:31 pm to
Worse.....

What a mess!
Posted by Ten Bears
Florida
Member since Oct 2018
3353 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:31 pm to
My kids would be juvenile delinquents if I was poor and my wife had to work.
Posted by choupiquesushi
yaton rouge
Member since Jun 2006
30831 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:34 pm to
That’s not the issue it’s the families with NO dad.
Posted by ChEgrad
Member since Nov 2012
3290 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:35 pm to
The problem isn’t that two incomes are needed. The problem is that we want so much more stuff. Houses are twice the size. Every kid has his own bedroom. Cell phones for elementary school kids. Kids playing expensive sports. Much nicer vehicles.

If people were willing to live like it was in the 1950s and 1960s then they could live on one income.

Also, government interference to make college “affordable” has in resulted in college costs increasing way higher than the inflation rate.
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48349 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:37 pm to
quote:

It’s really not.

Pre-WWII, women were in the home almost exclusively. When women had to take over jobs as men went off to war and then men returned, they figured out they could raise prices with more than one income to a household.

Add to it supply shortages and high demand in post-war, it was a perfect storm. The two parent working household began to escalate from there.


It’s nonsense. Mothers in the homes was the norm until the 1970s. It has little do with corporate strategy and everything to do with moving away from the gold standard and the stagflation of the 1970s.
Posted by TomRollTideRitter
Member since Aug 2016
12635 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:38 pm to
We’re worse off, but I’m not sure it’s inherently worse. If we had the following, it wouldn’t be an issue for both parents to be working:

1) Exceptional and affordable care options
2) Universal values within the country’s culture
3) A corporate culture that doesn’t expect employees to sacrifice family values to move up the corporate ladder
Posted by BluegrassBelle
RIP Hefty Lefty - 1981-2019
Member since Nov 2010
99766 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:39 pm to
quote:

The problem isn’t that two incomes are needed. The problem is that we want so much more stuff. Houses are twice the size. Every kid has his own bedroom.

Cell phones for elementary school kids. Kids playing expensive sports. Much nicer vehicles.

If people were willing to live like it was in the 1950s and 1960s then they could live on one income.


Eh. Things like internet, computers, and even smart phones have become a necessary evil even for low income households. Particularly if you want those people to be a functioning member of society. Those are all necessary costs that you can’t roll back.

Add to it population sprawl that requires more than a clunker to commute back and forth to work with consistency. Most people in the US, unless you’re in NY or Chicago, can depend on public transportation for regular, consistent transportation. And most cities and rural areas are not “walkable”.

They’re little things but they add up compared to the 50s and 60s. It’s why the comparison is a bit apples and oranges.
This post was edited on 5/9/23 at 7:42 pm
Posted by fallguy_1978
Best States #50
Member since Feb 2018
49052 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:40 pm to
quote:

One of the things I’m most grateful for was my wife stayed home with both our kids when they were little

I grew up in a neighborhood filled with middle class families with young kids. We hit the roads on bikes right after school or the ballfield.

But there were plenty of moms around the neighborhood to beat our asses if necessary, and they all had permission to do so.

We all knew each other. The kids, the parents. People didn't move around as much.
Posted by ThinePreparedAni
In a sea of cognitive dissonance
Member since Mar 2013
11099 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:41 pm to
quote:

One of the biggest reasons our society is collapsing is the death of the nuclear family where a husband works to provide for the family while the wife stays home to manage the home and children.


Sacrificing kids are still a thing to some (even symbolically to worship the secular/$$$)…
Posted by BluegrassBelle
RIP Hefty Lefty - 1981-2019
Member since Nov 2010
99766 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:41 pm to
quote:

It’s nonsense. Mothers in the homes was the norm until the 1970s. It has little do with corporate strategy and everything to do with moving away from the gold standard and the stagflation of the 1970s.


The norm in low cost of living areas because it hadn’t caught up.

It was absolutely a strategy to get women out of the home to produce more income, to sell more products, etc. As silly as it sounds, look at innovation in places like the kitchen that allowed women more time out of it. All happened around that time.

ETA: Wage stagnation later contributed to the growth, but it started at WWII.
This post was edited on 5/9/23 at 7:44 pm
Posted by Mike da Tigah
Bravo Romeo Lima Alpha
Member since Feb 2005
59093 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:44 pm to
quote:

That’s not the issue it’s the families with NO dad.




Seems to me that if you don’t have a dad, you probably don’t have much of a mom in your life either as someone has to make money, but then a lot of that can be attributed to our casual attitudes toward marriage and sex as well. That’s another subject all together right there.


Posted by mahdragonz
Member since Jun 2013
6962 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:51 pm to
Are you kidding?

Hell no. Why? Because things are better now than they have been at any time in the past.

What's with all this sad sack nostalgia? If women want to stay home and raise babies, nothing is stopping them. But to have a society where women are home and not allowed to work is really stupid.

You think those old guys with quaaludes popping wives were getting laid?

Give me a woman with a libido and a job.

Posted by urinetrouble
Member since Oct 2007
20513 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:55 pm to
quote:

The problem isn’t that two incomes are needed. The problem is that we want so much more stuff. Houses are twice the size. Every kid has his own bedroom. Cell phones for elementary school kids. Kids playing expensive sports. Much nicer vehicles. If people were willing to live like it was in the 1950s and 1960s then they could live on one income.


I think this nails it more than any explanation. American consumerism is a hungry beast.
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
25569 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 7:55 pm to
Two people in the workforce is net negative. It’s not close. I actually think this is what has caused our nation to spiral out of control. I won’t argue what led up to the breaking apart of those traditional roles, BUT…here’s how I see things.

-dad worked, mom was at home raising kids
-economy worsened and women wanted out of the home
-two incomes became necessary for most households
-kids are unsupervised more and more
-kids had more idle time and that coincided with the technology boom
-kids were no longer raised by mom, or spent the majority of their time outside
-kids are fortified inside more and more and left to bad TV, video games, and now and endless stream of pointless videos on the internet
-kids are not socially adjusted, and instead absorb what is on the internet and have nobody to tell them it’s bullshite
-the result is kids that have no direction, no care of consequences of poor decisions/actions
-those “kids” become adults, and we see that play out negatively at times with mass shootings, the trans movement, the “quiet quitting”, etc.
Posted by sashabaroncohen
Member since May 2023
19 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 8:00 pm to
I wonder how much of the mental issues among younger generations are the result of infants being physically separated from their mothers from the time they're born.
This post was edited on 5/9/23 at 9:25 pm
Posted by TexasTiger08
Member since Oct 2006
25569 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 8:00 pm to
quote:

The problem isn’t that two incomes are needed. The problem is that we want so much more stuff. Houses are twice the size. Every kid has his own bedroom. Cell phones for elementary school kids. Kids playing expensive sports. Much nicer vehicles. If people were willing to live like it was in the 1950s and 1960s then they could live on one income.


I think this has some merit. Again though, the cost of things that we had in the 50’s and 60’s is out of control. Housing prices are outpacing inflation, same goes for cars.

You are correct in that parents (especially those that work) are giving their kids TVs, video game systems, laptops, phones, iPads…in a sense, redundancy is at play with those devices.
Posted by Revelator
Member since Nov 2008
58339 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 8:02 pm to
quote:

When men worked and women took care of the family. Are we better or worse?


Much much better. Not even debatable
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425369 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 8:02 pm to
That traditional setup can be better, but how much better depends on the husband. Lots of women were completely trapped in terrible, abusive situations and that wasn't better.
Posted by NPComb
Member since Jan 2019
27566 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 8:03 pm to
it's not comparable how much worse we are as a society. The world has gone apeshit.
Posted by BabyTac
Austin, TX
Member since Jun 2008
12416 posts
Posted on 5/9/23 at 8:05 pm to
My wife and I have defined roles. I’m great at what I do. Make an unbelievable living financially. She’s a great cook, home manager and loves it. Support her occasionally as a hobby at the local farmers market. We meet in the middle and understand each others challenges and respect them as such.

We’re perfectly happy vs couples that both want to conquer the professional world and continue to fight each other egotistically.
This post was edited on 5/9/23 at 8:10 pm
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram