WHO SHOULD BE THE MAIN PROVIDER FOR A HOUSE?

investment

Should it be the male or the female of the house?

I see alot of guys marrying average looking girls with good jobs. which traditional was never seen before now. It was always the better looking women, and man being the provider of the house.

El Guapo!

What does their looks have to do with it??

cesc77

investment wrote: »

Should it be the male or the female of the house?

I see alot of guys marriaging average looking girls with good jobs. which traditional was never seen before now. It was always the better looking women, and man being the provider of the house.

Any cnut whose lucky enough to have a job

LiamIRL82

You should have put in a third option for both parents as providers.

Pherekydes

What's an average looking girl?

Whoever can earn the most should provide the most.

Running a household: It's not rocket science.

Mr. Manager

investment wrote: »

Should it be the male or the female of the house?

I see alot of guys marriaging average looking girls with good jobs. which traditional was never seen before now. It was always the better looking women, and man being the provider of the house.

Is that even a word?

ejmaztec

LiamIRL82 wrote: »

You should have put in a third option for both parents as providers.

He's posting from the 1950s.

jennyoo

investment wrote: »

Should it be the male or the female of the house?

I see alot of guys marriaging average looking girls with good jobs. which traditional was never seen before now. It was always the better looking women, and man being the provider of the house.

Since when was that a word?

Edit: Damn you Cereal Rapist!

PrincessPixie

investment wrote: »

Should it be the male or the female of the house?

I see alot of guys marriaging average looking girls with good jobs. which traditional was never seen before now. It was always the better looking women, and man being the provider of the house.

Bet your not married and I bet it's not for the want of trying either.

WindSock

The state.

investment

People should not go off topic, No its a typo I made on my phone, GET OVER IT!!

Kya1976

investment wrote: »

People should not go off topic, No its a typo I made on my phone, GET OVER IT!!

you'll never get a girlfriend with that attitude, so this is not something you need to worry about.

Snowie

WindSock wrote: »

The state.

pfffft thatle cost the hard right wingers to much :pac:

Micky Dolenz

Are you drinking?

westendgirlie

Got a feeling you're having a domestic about this at home right now. So in answer to your question..... You should pay OP without a doubt!

ejmaztec

PrincessPixie wrote: »

Bet your not married and I bet it's not for the want of trying either.

He'll be raring to go when he's collected enough bricks and cement.

Badgermonkey

PrincessPixie wrote: »

Bet your not married and I bet it's not for the want of trying either.

I bet he's 14 or so tbh.

wolfpawnat

I gave up my college when our child was born as his dad and I believe a child should have a parent at home with them while the other provides for the house. Even though he is still in college. His earnings post tax would have been far greater than mine and also we don't think children should be coming home to a au pair/nanny but to a parent.

SadieSue

Who ever is in charge of the capitals of course.

hatrickpatrick

It "should" be whoever the f*ck wants to be it.
Social convention is the plague of society and the utter enemy of freedom. Screw what anyone else thinks, if it works for your family and everyone in the family is happy with it then that's all that matters.

stevejr

It shouldn't really matter once you've a happy stable family.

WindSock

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

pfffft thatle cost the hard right wingers to much :pac:

Ok....ummm.......the banks?

blahfckingblah

the department of social protection

Eric Cartman

the man is the bread winner , and the woman is the sandwich maker

Snakeblood

THE LORD SHOULD PROVIDE. LEVITICUS, SOMEWHERE AT THE BACK.

ejmaztec

Snakeblood wrote: »

RICHARD DAWKINS SHOULD PROVIDE.

Fixed for the atheists.

Kevin Duffy

investment wrote: »

Should it be the male or the female of the house?

I see alot of guys marrying average looking girls with good jobs. which traditional was never seen before now. It was always the better looking women, and man being the provider of the house.

What are you trying to tell us used to happen - guys didn't marry "average" looking girls? Or those girls didn't have good jobs? Or the guys didn't have good jobs? Or the guys didn't get married? Or only "better looking women" were provided for?

C'mon, if you're gonna make shít up, do it right ffs.

ejmaztec

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

What are you trying to tell us used to happen - guys didn't marry "average" looking girls? Or those girls didn't have good jobs? Or the guys didn't have good jobs? Or the guys didn't get married? Or only "better looking women" were provided for?

C'mon, if you're gonna make shít up, do it right ffs.

He could have been watching a black and white Tarzan movie and got inspired.

WindSock

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the man is the bread winner , and the woman is the sandwich maker

The gardener provides the meat...

Solnskaya

To me, it should be the man. Say whatever, but I kinda look at men who's wives work through necessity as being a bit wet.
If the woman wants to work thats different, ie she is pursueing her own career/has her own business and is doing it because its what she wants. If she's doing it because he won't, can't, or can't earn enough, and she'd rather stay with her kids, but has to go out to work for them to get by, then maybe the guy should get his finger out and go get some cash, it's his job to, imo. And no, my wife doesn't work, because she doesn't have to, because I do. A lot.

Kevin Duffy

ejmaztec wrote: »

He could have been watching a black and white Tarzan movie and got inspired.

Are you saying that if I offer to provide bananas, a treehouse and all the monkeys she can eat, I can have an average looking woman? Don't dangle the dream then take it away from me!

strokemyclover

Where's the Child option?

When I lived with the folks I used to work in a bread factory. As an employee, I was allowed to bring home one free loaf of bread every day. When I mentioned to my dad one day that I was the main "breadwinner" of the house he kinda didn't see the humour in it. Everyone else had a good laugh though!

I couldn't give a flute who was the main earner in a house, just once there is provision through honest work not welfare (or drug dealing, robbery, etc..)

admiralofthefleet

looks are shag all op

Hail 2 Da Chimp

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

looks are shag all op

Well... Not really if you plan on marraging the person.

admiralofthefleet

Hail 2 Da Chimp wrote: »

Well... Not really if you plan on marraging the person.

whats that in english?

Hail 2 Da Chimp

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

whats that in english?

Did you even read the thread?

MonaghanPenguin

Solnskaya wrote: »

To me, it should be the man. Say whatever, but I kinda look at men who's wives work through necessity as being a bit wet.
If the woman wants to work thats different, ie she is pursueing her own career/has her own business and is doing it because its what she wants. If she's doing it because he won't, can't, or can't earn enough, and she'd rather stay with her kids, but has to go out to work for them to get by, then maybe the guy should get his finger out and go get some cash, it's his job to, imo. And no, my wife doesn't work, because she doesn't have to, because I do. A lot.

So the whole point of a marriage for a man is to provide money? I'd rather both partners worked and got to spend some quality time together than one of us be off working all the time and never see each other.

ejmaztec

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

Are you saying that if I offer to provide bananas, a treehouse and all the monkeys she can eat, I can have an average looking woman? Don't dangle the dream then take it away from me!

Hail 2 Da Chimp wrote: »

Did you even read the thread?

I'm surprised that you thanked KevinDuffy's post:eek:

RichieC

couldn't care less who... though logic would dictate that whoever earns the most if you're dead set on the single parent working system.

More to the point, why is the thread title shouting at me? :mad:

Hail 2 Da Chimp

ejmaztec wrote: »

I'm surprised that you thanked KevinDuffy's post:eek:

I was too scared not to...

wolf moon

investment wrote: »

Should it be the male or the female of the house?

what difference does that make? it's 21 century, men and women are equal. time to grow up and end this bullsh1t with male paying for everything.
ideally both should be contributing the same if it really bothers you op.

Solnskaya

MonaghanPenguin wrote: »

So the whole point of a marriage for a man is to provide money? I'd rather both partners worked and got to spend some quality time together than one of us be off working all the time and never see each other.

working all the time?? Nah, I'm home a lot, I spend more time with my wife and kids than most, but when I'm working, I work. And I make sure to earn enough for us all, cos I'm the Daddy.

Rants in my pants

OP's post is such an obvious troll it's painful. i mean the lack of a "neither" option is a dead giveaway.

As a man, i would happily love to have my hypothetical future wife working full time while i get to stay at home with the kids. Only my lack of selfishness and the fact that i have never been brainwashed into thinking this is a fair arrangement would stop me from doing this.

AnnyHallsal

Stupidest thread I've seen in some time. And that's saying something :rolleyes:

Solnskaya

AnnyHallsal wrote: »

Stupidest thread I've seen in some time. And that's saying something :rolleyes:

Seriously? More stupid than "should sanitation be taught in schools"? Wow.

AnnyHallsal

Solnskaya wrote: »

Seriously? More stupid than "should sanitation be taught in schools"? Wow.

I didn't see that thread.

Solnskaya

Thats fair enough, I can't see it either, but I still see a lot of other sh1te threads.

Aoifey!

Your poll is shouting at me, OP.

AnnyHallsal

Solnskaya wrote: »

Thats fair enough, I can't see it either, but I still see a lot of other sh1te threads.

Hence the "And that's saying something", indicating that there are many, many stupid threads.

Not many are quite as grammatically and logically incoherent as this one though.

Logical Fallacy

LiamIRL82 wrote: »

You should have put in a third option for both parents as providers.

Some people aren't parents.

It's pure ****ing awesome.

raveni

investment wrote: »

Should it be the male or the female of the house?

I see alot of guys marrying average looking girls with good jobs. which traditional was never seen before now. It was always the better looking women, and man being the provider of the house.

What? Just because you apply the word "traditional" to something doesn't make it ok, or acceptable. People will laugh their fcuking asses off at this kind of attitude in decades to come. Of course some of us already are:cool:

Anyway, who is anyone to say who should be the main provider for a family, or that one parent should stay at home, different ways work for different families.