|
|
|
|
|
|
by PeterisP
4621 days ago
|
|
|
I see your argument why shouldn't be that way, but I don't see there an argument that it in reality is this way, at least not for most women. It may quite well take a village to raise a child, but in practice for most people there won't ba a village to do so; One person shouldn't have to sacrifice the rest of their life, but more likely than not one you will have to do that; and while I can agree that 'no one should be staying home full time while the other is at work all day' and Scandinavian countries have very nice results with such policies for both parents, in USA most people will be forced to choose between either that or poverty. So, to answer the question, you're stating "clearly the answer should be b" ... but is the answer b in reality? |
|
|
I didn't say that it should be B, I'm saying that unfortunately it is B. I can guarantee few women in the US want to support a man. However, I think the inverse is making more ground. Meaning I think less men are interested in highly dependent women.
The leveling of the double standard is happening not by women accepting dependent men, but by men expecting an independent woman.