Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Did our grandparents get it right re marriage and dating?
Options
Comments
-
-
-
ohnonotgmail wrote: »1976
I was born in 1977. So, not quite my lifetime
But I get the point. Quite shocking actually considering it's only 40 ish years ago. Although, I'd be curious to see the limitations before then for property ownership.. i'll do my own research.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
One eyed Jack wrote: »I pretty much get the rest of where you’re coming from, even when you’re saying that people shouldn’t be shoehorned or I suppose I would add they shouldn’t feel pressured to take on roles which they feel they aren’t suited to or they feel isn’t right for them. I don’t believe in equality though. I believe in encouraging everyone regardless of any arbitrary traits like gender or whatever to be whatever they want. At the same time, I know that comes with a cost, or a trade-off - by all means I say do what you want, I figure if they’re that passionate about something, they’re aware of say for example in primary school teaching that the hours are long and the conditions of employment are crap - low pay, bureaucracy, expectations that they double job as unpaid social workers, y’know, all the reasons which are unattractive, but it happens that more women see the same job differently than I do - they’re imagining all the positives. Women just don’t appear to care about the pay and conditions as much as men do.
Oh come on! Women definitely do care about pay and conditions as much as men. That's a fairly sweeping statement right there. Those reasons may make the job unattractive to you or me but realistically both men and women do it for other reasons. Women were often encouraged into teaching, especially early years teaching, because it was seen as a motherly type roll.One eyed Jack wrote: »The careers and roles you mentioned above are primarily dominated by women not because men feel they would be ridiculed (and if that’s the way a man feels about a career where they have to put other people before themselves, then they’re definitely not suited to teaching, nursing, social care, etc), but simply because the pay is generally crap, the rewards definitely aren’t financial (and childcare is another good example), but one of the things I hear constantly over and over again is how they love working with children (paediatric care being the exception, that’s a tough one).
Great example of the ridicule in society is the film Meet the Fockers. Think about the amount of jokes that are made in that film about the fact that the lead male is a nurse and not a doctor. It definitely reflects an attitude. And don't tell me it's coz women are happy to take on crap paying jobs. I don't know anyone who wants a crap paying job. Roles like nurses and teachers are more on the vocational side so you feel you can really give back and do some good. But again they were seen as the caring roll and historically that fell on women to be the more caring side. Also up until 2002, nursing wasn't even a degree in Ireland. It only became a diploma in the 1990's, before that it was a certificate.One eyed Jack wrote: »The problem as I see it for people who believe in equality, is that nobody else does!
Yes of course everyone says they believe in equality and all the rest of it, and they’ll argue that circumstances today are the way they are because of the marriage ban that hasn’t existed for the last 50 years, but it’s an inescapable fact that the marriage ban hasn’t influenced society to such a degree where 98% of parents who choose to stay at home and raise their children, are women. That’s not an insignificant number of women either - half a million. The other 2%, or less than 10,000, are men. Not only do women believe they are more suited to raising children, men do too, and it’s simply not the case that the vast majority of people feel they actually are shoehorned into one role or another that they haven’t chosen to take on themselves. The equal opportunities are there, the Government assistance is there, the employers willingness is there, and it’s simply the case that you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them drink!
I agree you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Realistically though it's mainly women who stay at home because their job is the lower paid of the 2 individuals and it doesn't make sense to have the main breadwinner give up work to look after the children. You can't tell me that doesn't show that there is some level of pay inequality. Also mostly the decision is made while a woman is on maternity leave and it can be easier to flow straight into stay at home mode rather than her go back & the husband take over.
And the equality works both ways on this - the amount of paternity leave in this country has improved but it's still very low. It's hard for a man to fully bond with his newborn with only 2 weeks (now 4 weeks) of paternity leave. In countries like Sweden, for example, where the leave after a baby is born is a year which can be split any way between the parents (with the mother having to take the first 6 weeks as a healing period), there are a lot more stay at home dads because it's being recognised as important for them to be the caregivers too.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
In my experience it not possible to have it all.
Post WW2 Generations up to the late 1970's left scholl earlier , started work earlier , got married earlier and had theior children earlier. Their expectations for themselves whilst rearing their families were limited. They understood what defered gratification meant and hoped to experience a better standard of living in their middle years. From my observations most achieved this unless they were affliced by bad health , bad luck or relaationship issues.
Whilst the vast majority of men and women that have reached their 20's and 30's in todays world are well educated to 3rd level standard a good percentage of them are committment shy , want everything now and are slow to mature .
I have interviewed some individuals for jobs with 3rd level qualifications that I would not trust to post a letter without getting lost.
Having said all of the above , [B]there is one other major factor influencing society and that is the , lack of secure pensionable employment and its replacement by a culture of short term contracts and low pay. This does not help the issue with young people not wanting to take on the committments and resposibilities associated with marriage and raising a family.
[/B]
Good post.
Although, I would add something else. Faith or trust, in the institution of marriage is rather low for many people. I'm not going to pretend that I know what most Irish people think about it. I don't spend much time in Ireland anymore. The vast majority of westerners I know are expats (professionals) living in Asia, Eastern Europe, and to lesser degree, Africa. Most of them (Male and female) are between 30-50 and they're single. Never married, and little interest in getting married. I only know three married couples who have remained married during the time I've known them. Compared to another 17 couples who have divorced during the time I've known them... It was interesting to actually consider how and why people stayed together or broke up (from the limited and biased information I had received previously from one or both people)
They have long-term relationships, sometimes with children associated, but marriage isn't the automatic step. Those who did get divorced have been quite vocal about the whys, and their opinions on marriage have spread across to influence most of my circle. There is a general feeling that marriage has an expiry date, and when that expiration happens, that they (the males) will get screwed financially. Just as there's the feeling that there's little consideration for men, when it comes to child custody and financial support.
So, rather than get married, they've got long-term relationships outside of a formal agreement... although there is a rising trend of having a signed contract stipulating what will happen once the relationship ends. Pre-nups or agreements with regards to marriage are often disregarded or dismissed in divorce settlements. However, within the framework of a informal relationship, a contract has more weight, and is actionable (especially if their funds are banked in the same country as the contract, Singapore being the most common).
For the single women I know, they're also uninterested in formal marriage simply because they see little point in engaging in it. There's no longer the stigma with children being born out of wedlock. I know three different women who had children from artificial insemination, are raising the kids themselves, and don't want any legal considerations with regards to a father. Others simply have no interest in having children, and so, see little reason to have a formal marriage. They can get their relationships without the need to marry.
I think there is a hefty chunk of society who are expat minded, in that they're happy not to conform to a traditional system of marriage because it doesn't suit the lifestyles they want. Personally, and in spite of friends comments, I still hold out a certain romantic notion about marriage (based on my parents success), but I'm still unmarried. I've always been very careful about committing myself to any serious relationship, although i was engaged once before. Thankfully that ended before actual marriage because it would have been an unmitigated disaster. 0 -
-
-
Deleted User wrote: »Good post.
Although, I would add something else. Faith or trust, in the institution of marriage is rather low for many people. I'm not going to pretend that I know what most Irish people think about it. I don't spend much time in Ireland anymore. The vast majority of westerners I know are expats (professionals) living in Asia, Eastern Europe, and to lesser degree, Africa. Most of them (Male and female) are between 30-50 and they're single. Never married, and little interest in getting married. I only know three married couples who have remained married during the time I've known them. Compared to another 17 couples who have divorced during the time I've known them... It was interesting to actually consider how and why people stayed together or broke up (from the limited and biased information I had received previously from one or both people)
They have long-term relationships, sometimes with children associated, but marriage isn't the automatic step. Those who did get divorced have been quite vocal about the whys, and their opinions on marriage have spread across to influence most of my circle. There is a general feeling that marriage has an expiry date, and when that expiration happens, that they (the males) will get screwed financially. Just as there's the feeling that there's little consideration for men, when it comes to child custody and financial support.
So, rather than get married, they've got long-term relationships outside of a formal agreement... although there is a rising trend of having a signed contract stipulating what will happen once the relationship ends. Pre-nups or agreements with regards to marriage are often disregarded or dismissed in divorce settlements. However, within the framework of a informal relationship, a contract has more weight, and is actionable (especially if their funds are banked in the same country as the contract, Singapore being the most common).
For the single women I know, they're also uninterested in formal marriage simply because they see little point in engaging in it. There's no longer the stigma with children being born out of wedlock. I know three different women who had children from artificial insemination, are raising the kids themselves, and don't want any legal considerations with regards to a father. Others simply have no interest in having children, and so, see little reason to have a formal marriage. They can get their relationships without the need to marry.
I think there is a hefty chunk of society who are expat minded, in that they're happy not to conform to a traditional system of marriage because it doesn't suit the lifestyles they want. Personally, and in spite of friends comments, I still hold out a certain romantic notion about marriage (based on my parents success), but I'm still unmarried. I've always been very careful about committing myself to any serious relationship, although i was engaged once before. Thankfully that ended before actual marriage because it would have been an unmitigated disaster.
That is a load of nonsense.
Marriage is very popular in Ireland.
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/mar/marriages2018/0 -
-
witchgirl26 wrote: »Oh come on! Women definitely do care about pay and conditions as much as men. That's a fairly sweeping statement right there. Those reasons may make the job unattractive to you or me but realistically both men and women do it for other reasons. Women were often encouraged into teaching, especially early years teaching, because it was seen as a motherly type roll.
They don’t appear to, that’s my point. But you’re right, it’s a sweeping statement based on the fact that nearly two thirds of all low paid jobs are dominated by women. Two thirds of those jobs are in the caring professions such as teaching, nursing, social care and childcare. At the time when women were being encouraged into teaching (as an example), it was primarily dominated by men, and in the last couple of years there’s been a sustained campaign to try and get more men into teaching. They don’t, not because teaching is seen as a motherly role, but simply because it’s a low paid role. My mother was a teacher (retired now with a decent pension before Government changed the rules and newly qualified teachers got thrown under the bus), and she put my uncles and aunts through teacher training college, they’re all teachers now too (some have gone on to lecturing, but I’ll give you one guess what all their daughters chose to do...). My mam still tries to convince me that I should become a teacher (they had six boys and one girl, who became a nurse), no teachers in the family. I’d have loved to become a teacher, to teach, I love working with children too, but the desire to become a teacher is overcome by the reality of low pay and bureaucracy up the wazoo! There’s also the issue of identity politics creeping into education which just drives me bananas altogether and I want no part in. I wrote this a while back in another forum on here about the Athena SWAN initiative -One eyed Jack wrote: »The above sort of tokenism reminds me of a conference I was at last year regarding the future of education in Ireland, and one of the speakers was from the UK, and she was giving it welly about the lack of women and BME at third level, which was definitely more relevant in a UK context. It's as though she hadn't even thought of her audience and tailored her presentation accordingly, when the room was filled with Casper white Irish women and only a handful of men.
Now granted it was a teacher training college so I didn't expect much variance in the audience, but that didn't stop this woman going on to talk about how there weren't enough women in STEM, and how it was mostly socially awkward men (I'd lost the will to listen at this stage), before she moved on to the topic of 'unconscious bias', without so much as stopping for a breather to spot the irony.witchgirl26 wrote: »Great example of the ridicule in society is the film Meet the Fockers. Think about the amount of jokes that are made in that film about the fact that the lead male is a nurse and not a doctor. It definitely reflects an attitude. And don't tell me it's coz women are happy to take on crap paying jobs. I don't know anyone who wants a crap paying job. Roles like nurses and teachers are more on the vocational side so you feel you can really give back and do some good. But again they were seen as the caring roll and historically that fell on women to be the more caring side. Also up until 2002, nursing wasn't even a degree in Ireland. It only became a diploma in the 1990's, before that it was a certificate.
But Meet the Fokkers is a comedy? Everyone in it was ridiculed, from his new age parents to the stick up his arse ex-CIA future father in law making the point that he had nipples, could he be milked? Not to mention the housemaid who it’s inferred had sexual relations with Greg as a teenager which potentially resulted in him being the father of her short shorts wearing son showing off his derrière while serving refreshments... and I’m really sorry to anyone who hasn’t seen the film for the spoilers but it’s comedy gold Of course it reflects an attitude, it ridicules stereotypes of all sorts, and like I said if a man were put off teaching or nursing because he was worried about being ridiculed, then he’s not suited to a career where he has to put other people before himself in the first place. The profession is better off without him, so are the children, so are the patients. That’s a reflection on him, not a reflection on the profession.
Yes I agree that nobody wants a crap paying job, and that’s why I was making the point that anyone who goes into these jobs could hardly be accused of doing it for the money. The sweeping statement I made earlier still stands - consistently I hear again and again from women working in these professions, that they do it because they love working with children. My brother and my sister trained as nurses, one did their training in Scotland, traditional training as it was distinguished from the “Project 2000” training that my brother did in Wales. He left nursing after someone in one of the big London hospitals called him a Paddy, my sister left nursing when she got married. She’s signed back up again due to recent circumstances over there, my brother is still scratching his hole. No mental health issues, he’s just allergic to work.witchgirl26 wrote: »I agree you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Realistically though it's mainly women who stay at home because their job is the lower paid of the 2 individuals and it doesn't make sense to have the main breadwinner give up work to look after the children. You can't tell me that doesn't show that there is some level of pay inequality. Also mostly the decision is made while a woman is on maternity leave and it can be easier to flow straight into stay at home mode rather than her go back & the husband take over.
And the equality works both ways on this - the amount of paternity leave in this country has improved but it's still very low. It's hard for a man to fully bond with his newborn with only 2 weeks (now 4 weeks) of paternity leave. In countries like Sweden, for example, where the leave after a baby is born is a year which can be split any way between the parents (with the mother having to take the first 6 weeks as a healing period), there are a lot more stay at home dads because it's being recognised as important for them to be the caregivers too.
I agreed with you though in the first place that there is pay inequality when you’re not even comparing like with like. There’s pay inequality between a childcare worker in a crèche and a nurse working in a hospital, they’re not paid the same, nor are cleaners paid the same as CEOs - because their remuneration package is generally based upon demand. I see lots of initiatives trying to encourage more women into STEM, as though low paying jobs don’t exist in STEM - there are an absolutely huge number of low paid roles in STEM. I honestly don’t know where people get the perception that most roles in STEM are well paid, they’re just not.
I’m still at a loss as to why you imagine the husband would take over when your point basically answers itself - the couple are in a relationship where the man is the higher earner, so it makes sense to them that instead of paying eye-watering sums for childcare that would mean it wasn’t worth paying for, they decide between themselves that rather than the higher earner giving up his job, it’s just not worth their whole her going back to her lower paying job, meaning a lower household income, but at least she gets to raise their children. I don’t want to put words in your mouth but I am wondering is it because you see this as a bad thing for families, or a bad thing for men, or a bad thing for women, or just a bad thing for society?
Because I’m genuinely confused - people are choosing to do what works for them, but you appear to want them to do something different which it would make sense they would do if they thought there was any merit in the idea. Just like they are finding in Sweden where they’re practically dragging the horse kicking and screaming to the water by making paternity leave mandatory for fathers, and it’s still not enough to convince enough people of either gender that stay at home fatherhood offers their families any benefit whatsoever. Plenty of people who argue for equality have argued that Swedish policies are doing quite the opposite -
Sweden’s parental leave may be generous, but it’s tying women to the home
The reality is that plenty more people acknowledge that their roles complement each other, they are caring for their families by providing for their families by fulfilling roles which suit them. Those that want to be stay at home fathers should probably make that clear early on in the relationship if it isn’t already, and see how many women find them an attractive prospect then. I have a suspicion they won’t be having to beat the women off with a stick :pac:0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement