Hello members of Think Atheist. I don't remember this topic being brought up before so here it is.
The reason I am asking this is because on the Ok Cupid dating website, after browsing quite a number of female profiles - they were able to answer a question and the question is as follows:
"Do you think the man should be the head of the household?"
Well, to my surprise, I have seen quite a few females answer 'Yes' to the question and haven't yet seen a female answer 'No'.
In my opinion, I think it makes no sense to call a man the head of the household and that it is also sexist.
But apparently the females who answered the question wish it were true.
1.) Why do you think this is so? Because females have this innate desire to be submissive? Or is it because females want to hold onto the traditional so called 'values' associated with marriage? Does this somehow go along the lines of the females wanting what they call an 'alpha male'? Or something else entirely?
2.) If you feel you want to answer the question as a 'Yes', then why? If you say 'No' , then why?
3.) What is your definition of 'head of the household'? Does this mean all decisions are made by the male? Does this imply the party who is working full time and earning the money get's to make the decisions?
I look forward to reading the replies!
Isn't it possible to NOT generalize? Okay, you've expressed that you prefer the take-charge kind of man, which is fine for you, but it doesn't make it universally true... nor is it universally "best".
Why can't we just say that SOME men are the heads of their households? There are many women heads. I get the intention behind saying the woman is the backbone, or even the neck (she turns the head, after all)... but I also find that phrasing patronizing. It's like being told winning silver is just as good as winning gold, and "you get an 'A' for effort!" It's the whole smile and nod, "Sure, you're in charge, dear... in your own, 'special' way!" *wink*
In my relationship, we're partners. We both have our strengths and weaknesses. Never will I defer to him simply because he's male. If he's shown himself to be more informed on something (like gadgets and technology), I'll defer to him because I know it's an area he's well-versed. My domain is writing, art, argumentation/debate, etc. I'm actually more logical... and, as it turns out, logic is learned, not inherited or attached to a certain Y chromosome.
Oh I know the spirit in which you meant it. I think you're awesome, Belle. It's hard to disagree with someone without sounding poopy... so, I'm not trying to sound poopy. :)
Hello, I have two things to say: first, if you want to hear some interesting answers, you should make an account on Fetlife and ask on there. I guarantee there are women on there who will answer no.
Second, to answer your question. I truly believe in equality between the sexes, this would lead one to think that dual leadership would be my preference. I don't believe in equality of personalities, so whichever person is better suited to lead will probably naturally take charge. Traditionally this has been the male but in the modern world, there's no reason the female couldn't/wouldn't naturally be a better fit for the role.
Marriages should always consist of three (or some other odd number of) partners. That way there can never be a tie and every important decision is arrived at on a democratic basis. No need for a head of household. Whether the marriage consists of 2 men/1 woman, 2 women/1 man, 3 men, 3 women, 2 trannies/1 plushie...(you get my point, and we can add in homosexuality for variety as well) is a matter for the people who ally themselves to settle.
The dominant party will end up being the head of the household. That's simply the way things work among mammals, and we are mammalian.
People are crazy i think the men an the women work together there is no head of anything.
Perhaps distressingly, both men and women prefer to be led by the person with the deeper voice:
People tend to prefer to follow the deeper voice:
Cara Tigue from McMaster University in Canada, who conducted the research, said: "We're looking at men's low voice-pitch as a cue to dominance, which is related to leadership.
Women with lower voices tend to do better as leaders:
Researchers at two US universities made recordings of both male and female speakers and then altered the pitch of their subjects' voices. In the study, published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, listeners "voted" more frequently for the "candidate" with the lower voice.
Sweet! Then I'm totally the head. ;)