The Awesome Rule
I don't fancy myself a feminist but I wouldn't consider myself to be one of those females who needs a man to live her life. It's helpful, don't get me wrong. But that's got nothing to do with gender. It's just easier to work in a team. And relationships can be a lot like teamwork.
This might come off as sexist, I really don't care. To me, this makes the most sense when it comes to finding a happiness in a relationship. And please forgive me that this isn't sensitive to those not in heterosexual relationships.
The man should be the "provider." That means he should make a majority of the money and should spend it on his woman and/or family. Work as many hours as it takes for everyone to be comfortable (I'm not talking living a life of luxury, but whatever seems the most livable for both partners). He should pay the necessary bills (rent, utilities) and have enough left over to go out to whatever extracurricular activity the couple deems fit for them to share together. For me, that's going to the movies once a week, and it doesn't have to be more than matinee, it just has to be a movie out at a theater.
If he wants to do other activities in his personal time, he needs to work as many hours extra over what he works to provide for the basics. That's his responsibility. He should also make enough to cover the cost of decent birthday and Xmas presents for his child(ren) and wife/girlfriend/WomanPerson. If she requests something that isn't extravagant, he should get that for her.
In exchange, the woman should work. I by no means approve or condone or think that sitting at home on your ass when you have children who are school aged (I can understand staying home for a maximum of two years after a child is born) is ok. You are only going to hurt your children more if you don't have any experiences outside of being a mommy. Plus, you should never leave yourself to be COMPLETELY dependent on someone else. Get some kind of employment with which to keep yourself busy. No, being the PTA president is not a job. No extensions of mommyhood. Something that brings home a paycheck.
If the woman wants anything frivolous, she needs to pay for it. Her hobbies, personal maintenance, that should all be taken care of with her own income. Getting your nails done, unless it's something that your ManPerson considers to be a part of his hobbies, is something that you like doing for yourself and you should be the one to pay for it. Why? Because you appreciate it better when you pay for your own shit. Nothing in life is ever OWED to you, especially not the twenty bucks that you cough up at the chop shops to have Asian chicks speak Cantonese around you and paint your nails.
That isn't limited to only your nails, but I hope you get the picture. If you ring up a credit card balance on clothing or shoes, you should pay for it. The major things in life that you need to survive and feel supported are being provided by your ManPerson, anything else is your responsibility.
In exchange for paying all of the main expenses, the man will get fucked properly.
Yeah, you heard me right.
Women, once they have to live with your stinky asses, deserve to have their bills paid. They deserve to drive the nicer car than you, especially if they're chauffeuring the kids around, buying the groceries so that the house is well stocked, making sure the checks are in the mail for the utilities, and all those other never-ending chores that come with running a household. Women DESERVE to not have to worry about the handful of big things when they're busy with armloads full of minor things.
In exchange for providing properly, going to work and putting in as many hours as it takes, women will fuck their men properly. We will give it to you well and often. As long as it isn't painful or degrading (which is really a question of subjectivity), then there's no reason not to loosen up and take one for the team. If it's easier for some women to deal with, think of it as yet another one of the minor things on your long list of items that you need to fret over.
Because let's face it... it takes very little to keep a man satisfied sexually. Show them your tits, put your back into it and give a blowjob that has a purpose other than being the warm-up lubrication. Give them some verbal praise and show some enthusiasm when you do it. I'm not saying LIE about it, I'm saying to mutter whatever truthful statement comes to mind, even if it's a simple "that feels good," said in all sincerity.
Why is it that this formula never seems to work? Not like I've had a great deal of varied opportunities to use it, but it seems fucking logical to me.
I'm not asking my man to spend any more on me than the basics. Granted, they make up the largest part of the cost of things, but still. I'm not asking him to buy me all the trimmings. Just the turkey. I can take care of myself with everything else.
And if you've got my back, if you hold up your end of the bargain, I will hold up mine. I will not ask for more than the basics. I will not require being tethered to your hip. And every night that you want some action, I will willingly give it up to you.
Now... if you're not holding up your end of the bargain, I don't have to. If I'm stressed out all the time because I've got to work harder to make up for what you're not covering, chances are I'm not going to feel like bending over backwards or in any other position that you want me in. You want lots of the sweet stuff without having to negotiate for it? Then do your fucking job and provide. No stress on me = assloads of snoo snoo for you.
I think this is fair. Or course, I'm mentally unstable and haven't had a healthy adult relationship in... um...
Comments
Agreed...
I agree with your blog. Having had a six year marriage.. and knowing there are things I would change the next time around. If there ever is a next time around.
Yes, the man needs to be the provider, because I don't want to be supporting him. I can't support him. I've broken up with deadbeat guys that couldn't find a job if the life depended on it, just for the sole fact that it wouldn't work out in the long run.
If I ever got married again, I would insist on having a job. For one I would be coming into the marriage with three children of my own. I would want to support my children and not make some other man support them. I should be able to afford to clothe and feed my children myself.
Also, I've been in a marriage where my husband held the purse strings and it's no fun to ask for money so you can be him a christmas present. I'd work here and there and he'd do different things to thwart my jobs so I'd have to quit.
If a man came into my life saying that I shouldn't work, I'd start thinking he was trying to control me. I want to work, that's why I'm going to school so I can do exactly that...
If I ever get married again I'm going to insist on working so I can have my own money to spend...
Anyways, good blog
"Women who behave rarely make history"
____________________________________
the _missygail aka: Missygail
http://www.geocities.com/missygail25
Wow, that is just
one of the dumbest things I've ever read! You obviously haven't any kind of long term relationship nor to you have a full grasp of what a relationship is. You're definition is very much lacking in what a marriage is. It's more then "support" and sex. Grow up.
What I find interesting is
What I find interesting is that you broaden it with the term "support" then say that there is more than that... The word support could be defined in so many ways that your whole argument is flawed, now that I have left your shit thoroughly in ruin, I bid you good day.
Puh-leeze!
You signed up just to jab at Zara and this is the best you could come up with?
shaman312
Its all in what you want. If
Its all in what you want. If thats what you need, and your man partner can handle that then go for it.
Welcome back 1957, I've missed you.
Who wouldn't want a wifestitute? That's why I ordered my little woman from Asia. When she's not busy sexing me up and keeping the house spotless, she's sewing Nikes for pin money.
Ahem.
The last line saved you from a semi-severe tongue lashing. Your little jaunt makes it sound simple and easy, but in all actuality any partnership or relationship requires harder work than going at it alone, save being a single mom with a deadbeat dad or a single dad with a deadbeat mom. But even then that is still considered a relationship. If I am correct the roles described above are simply put; the man is the provider, the woman is the nourish-er. We all know there is more to it than that. Children themselves change that equation.
For a good relationship to work both man and woman need to take roles in being the provider and the nourish-er. Partners need to be flexible and realize they can't always get what they want. But if they try sometime they just might find they get what they need. Sorry, I just couldn't help myself.
**To each their own, as long as I agree with it.**
**I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire**
Ah, how I've missed you. I
Ah, how I've missed you. I remember that blue thingy so fondly.
There are every day exceptions. This was something that I've just been thinking would make all the every day bullshit go along easier. Once you have the basics out of the way, then you can argue the finite details, however and whichever you would like them to be.
I agree to most of this . . .
Being a stay at home mommy at one time, I completely agree that there needs to be a balance of in home/out of home. I hated having to rely on hubby for everything and not having some of my own personal spending money. I tried to stay home for all of the kids as long as I could without it being a financial hardship. I think taking the baby (my last baby) to daycare was the hardest part for me.
I think that there also needs to be some sharing of the house duties. I am only one woman and with four kids, I can't do it all. This has been a source of contention in our house as of late. Working full time and actually having to work a couple evenings a week makes it difficult to stay on top of the house. I do mounds of laundry on the weekends so I don't have to do that during the week, but I do expect him to do the dishes - esp. if I am the one cooking.
Starting to ramble, but I enjoyed this. It's fun to see your brain switching modes. :) I'm happy for you!
Lesley from Minnesota :)
Lots of "what if's," I agree
There are a lot of variables in the equation, I understand. Much like I pointed out with Joel though, I see what I detailed above as being the basics. You do this and I'll do this and then we'll work out the finer details as they come along.
Remember, I'm not a preplanner. This is about as far into shit as I am willing to analyze because I never see myself getting far enough to have to argue these things. I'm insanely independent and yet I'm immature as all get out and need someone to "take care of" me.
It's already been determined that my impending domestication will include him doing the above and me reciprocating with the above. I don't expect him to buy or provide anything other than safe habitation for all of us, the other expenses for Midget I will be solely responsible for.
As for the cooking and the cleaning, I'm not a big fan of grudge work. (It's a classic ENFP thing.) He, however, loves to do "chores" and has already said that in addition to providing the rent and utility money, he will be doing dishes, laundry and other household chores. In exchange for that, I will do a good portion of the cooking and will make sure that all of the items needed for the cleaning are well stocked in the home. Because it's more than just the cleaning, it's the driving to Target (or wherever) to buy everything that everyone needs (toothpaste, shampoo, toilet cleaner, detergent) that can take up time and energy as well.
There will be plenty of other problems that we are going to encounter, but I'll jump off that bridge when I get to it.
What If...
You make equal or more than your man? Don't you think the expectations of him responsible for all the bills a little unfair? I mean, it sounds great, this way I would actually prefer, but unfortunetaly I haven't met any men that really make more than me... And when they start spending their hard earned cash on me, I feel guilty and usually start footin the bill....
But there are times I want to have a man take care of things, because it makes me feel good...
I mean, women are good doing the little extras that men lack in returning more than usual like affection, nurturing, catering...etc. So it feels nice when a man does a little something extra in the department where he is better... like earning money... Men tend to make more than women naturally... not always... but more than not.
Domestication Station
I think of the above for when you're in a living arrangement with a man. If you're not, then I just see all of your expenses as being your expenses. I would never ask someone to take care of me if I wasn't burdened by living with them.
In a dating situation, I feel that if the date is wanted by both, suggested by either and a reasonable activity, then the man should pay. Although I tend to do a crazy exchange rate on that. I get the tickets, you get the popcorn. But dinner? Yeah, that's on you. But I also don't ever order the most expense thing, I don't order cocktails from restaurants because I feel they're overpriced and women generally spend more money on maintenance than men do, so dinner is the least they can do to even the scales. (**Add up the cost of a woman's outfit, shoes, stockings, make-up, facial care, hair care, hair cut & color and compare it to what a man would pay for his outfit, shoes and care products and I GUARANTEE you that we spend at least double what they do. Unless they're metro fabulous.)
So you should never feel guilty about someone spending money for the privilege of being with you, especially since you've most likely already footed a fairly extreme bill to entice them into wanting to spend time and money on you in the first place.
Teamwork
How come we haven't had a relationship, a really nasty year-long shack up, or got married? Jeeeezzzzzussss AZ...I'm fucking falling in love with ya! LOL
Hmmm
Because beards remind me of my ex, and that isn't a good thing.
I think this can also apply to friendships in general...
...because I have just had to learn this recently. Except, not the same situation, but same basic idea. Maybe I'm perceiving your points completely wrong, but it's what I take of this here bloggy goodness.
Rather than money, though, I'm talking about time. (Just rephrase everything you said slightly and make it about time with friends and it will pretty much make sense.) Time spent with friends is important in maintaining a healthy relationship. I have had to learn this just recently, the hard way, with one of my closest friends.
Each person involved in the friendship deserves their fair share of time and attention, as well as their needs met properly. I can't go demanding all of my friend's time and attention when they have basic life needs to fulfill. But they can't go ignoring me for so long without stopping by and saying hello once in a while because that will make the friendship fade away into nothingness, and I'm going to get lonely and depressed. And vise versa! Neither of us wants to lose each other as a friend, but we need to learn to even things out so that it's not too much or too little. We should be able to maintain our own lives, and still have quality time with each other. If this isn't happening, we can't expect each other to be so willing to do all the things friends do for each other, or even be able to maintain a healthy friendship for long.
Like your sisters, I don't date, so this is the best I can relate it to.
Alas...
I am a horrible friend in regard to your qualifications. I'm too egocentric and when you have a child, it's hard to give additional time to other people. Well, in my case it is, since I don't really have another person to fall back on to give me the extra time it would take to sustain a deep and meaningful friendship.
The majority of my friends live in the little box in front of me, and I don't give them enough of my time either.
I'm going to my corner now.
The mentally unstable
Yeah we mentally unstable always seem to have the best advice!!
As for me, I think whom ever has the greatest earning potential should be the earner. I would love to be a house husband!! I promise, I would put my back into it!! Or what ever she needed....
Hopefully we could have our well rounding experiences before we have kids. I would like someone to be home at least until they get into school.
Other than that, sounds good to me. I gotta go find a woman to put her back into it!!
Ahem...
I don't advocate women or men being house husbands. If you wife has the greater earning potential and you can flip this, then go for it. But note that I said that women should have a paying job as well. Unless you're born loaded, I can't see a reason NOT to have a job.
I was 25 (nearly 26) when I had Midget and I still think that was too young. I also think that having more than two children is delusional. Some people might be able to work it out (Lesley, nod...) but it's too demanding on my independent and egocentric (there's that word again) ways. Hell, I'm not really built to have children at all, I just got impulsive and had my daughter and now am having to learn how to be a better person because of it. (Dammit.)
Have you heard about the
Have you heard about the politician in europe that want's to put term limits on marriage? Seven years then you have to either renew or go your seperate ways. I think that I'll just live with someone for the rest of my life but she'd have to agree to the Awesome Rules too.
Interesting...
I hadn't heard about that.
Personally, I think marriage is silly. I think you can make a commitment to a person and love them and live with them as long as you are both down with the terms as you set out. (This is allowing for some changes as major things occur along the road of life.) Marriage is just a silly piece of paper. It's not important or significant to me at all. However, if it was something that the Man Person really wanted, I'd go along with it because I'm not aggro about it. I just think it's unnecessary.
Makes sense..
Hey, straight to the point, it makes sense to me... the only kind of man that wouldn't like a relationship like that is... well... I don't know because it sounds like a damn Awesome Rule.
WOW
Yes it is an AwesomeRule!! Logical, makes sense, seems good for both sides...hmmmm
Can all women have a copy of this to have signed by any and all manpersons immediately upon relationship status. Of course the women would sign it too....Hell i think if marriage is something that is to continue in this world between two people that this should be the new "typical" marriage vows!!! Or at least added to them LOL
Nice read!!
Kfun