The Marrying Kind: (Ghettoization of the working class)

[Nay]

2. Well, well, well. "Financially independent women who both earn the bulk

Last edited Sat May 4, 2013, 11:45 AM - Edit history (3)

of the family income and assume the majority of the domestic tasks don't want -- or need -- men who are unable to support their families, emotionally or financially" and "Men with stable jobs are harder to find and recently laid off or semi-employed men help out less around the house than those who work full time."

I've made both these points several times on various boards and IRL, and each time I was basically accused of the crime of bashing men. I was then treated to the usual stories from men who insisted they did all the housework and cooking, etc., all of which were anecdotal and totally irrelevant. I mean, I'm glad some men are stepping up to the plate (the dinner plate, that is), but statistics continue to show that many men are not doing that reliably. Survey after survey reveal that unemployed/underemployed working class males (and middle-class males as well), as a group, do not contribute much to the family, financially or logistically, and this is why so many working class women have decided not to marry. It is simply too much work for her, and she knows it. We all have limits to our energy levels.

Does Murray think these women are stupid, or just immoral? Most of them have seen female friends, relatives, and coworkers go through the agony of finding a suitable husband/boyfriend and fail. Rather than contribute to the family unit, a shameful percentage of men suck out all the emotional energy, money and time from it, and women of all classes have become understandably wary. It's not some figment of women's imagination -- it's a real problem. It started when women entered the workforce and found out, to their dismay, that most husbands did not pull their weight in the domestic sphere. Women overlooked this, rationalizing that he worked at a decent job and contributed that way (even though she worked, too), but now, he doesn't even have a job? And he won't watch the kids or make dinner every day, like housewives did in the 50's? What, exactly, would be the purpose of marrying someone like this? To provide a bad example for the male children in the family and a worse example for the female children in the family?

Like I said, women aren't stupid, and Murray's crap about how "family norms" are horrible in the working class should be treated like the shite it is -- it was totally caused by the elite's destruction of decent-paying union-type jobs in this country. Women will accept men who work full time, even if they don't do a lick around the house, although it's not ideal. IMHO, Murray and his bunch should be tarred and feathered. AND run out of town on a rail.