[OasisG]

Then party like it's 1950.

ETA: With the growing number of men who refuse to pick up every check, plan every date/event, act as sole provider for the family, purchase gifts regularly for their other half, etc. for fear of marrying a woman who is too focused on money... I'm really beginning to wonder what women are getting out of this marriage deal anymore.

[Dylanlacey]

Wow, I don't know, the same thing the men are getting, an equal life-partner who they have a very strong emotional attachment to? There's the legal benefits for both partners, social recognition of your relationship, legal benefits for any children, possibly the sanction of your chosen religion...

Sure, if what you want from a relationship is things, stuff, and to not have to work, more power to you... But I have no respect for you.

[OasisG]

You are missing my point. The comment isn't about me. It's about men who have these old-fashioned expectations of women, but don't reciprocate by fulfilling the traditional role for a man.

That is, if I have to sit quietly, look pretty, and clean house, what am I getting in return? Not much these days.

[Dylanlacey]

Sorry, your original comment seemed to be about men in general, not the old fashioned type.

[tptacek]

I would like to know more about the 4 people that voted this comment up from zero.

[dpritchett]

I'd like to know why my comment pointing out the inherent flaw in the GP's argument (this advice works equally well for married people of either gender) was killed.

[OasisG]

I'd like to know more about the dating lives of the guys who DON'T think this line of thinking belongs in the previous century.

[Swizec]

Perhaps it's just that, you know, nowadays they don't have to feel like prostitutes?

Because I sure would if my spouse kept buying me things just so I'd put out.

[OasisG]

You're right, women DON'T have to feel like prostitutes because the options for women have greatly expanded. We no longer have to be confined to the "traditional" roles that encourage us to be passive doormats content to be totally dependent on our spouses.

My point, anyway, is that the men in the WSJ article cheering this drivel on are often the same guys who don't want to assume the traditional provider role for men. They don't want a wife, they want a maid that "puts out".

[neutronicus]

>> My point, anyway, is that the men in the WSJ article cheering this drivel on are often the same guys who don't want to assume the traditional provider role for men. They don't want a wife, they want a maid that "puts out". <<

I could roll with "fuck it, let's neither of us clean". I want a wife, not a barracks inspector.

[neworbit]

...sounds like a nice daydream, but in real life, that would be pretty boring.

[colinplamondon]

50% after the divorce?

[smallblacksun]

Plus alimony for the rest of their life?

[klinquist]

no kidding :(

[pyre]

I can only speak personally, but once you actually make the commitment, you personally feel more of a responsibility to work things out with your partner. Prior to marriage, you aren't necessarily 'tied down' and you could easily just break-up over something that could have been worked out if one (or both) of you decided not to be so pig-headed.

[Psyonic]

You do realize that the reason men no longer do those things is precisely because women changed their role first?

That said, you have a point. Outside of child-bearing (and even there...) marriage seems less and less useful. I don't see this as a bad thing, but YMMV.

[nhangen]

I don't know a single man that wouldn't do all of that given the opportunity.