|
rudatron posted:I think that post/article about housework was 50/50, from the standpoint of actually making a fairer home. The implicit assumption is that the reason the work isn't been done is malice, and that, rather than listening to your partner, you have to go through an elaborate 'decoding' ritual, where you replace what they say with what you think they're saying. And who should do that labor, the woman or the man.
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:54 |
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:The labor of making the system? Both of the people in the household should work together to come up with a system that divides the household chores equitably. So you didn't read the article then
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:You mean the article that was never posted in this thread? So you didn't read the OP then
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:The Politics of Housework? I read it. I'm not sure how it disproves my answer. If these are your information processing skills I honestly don't think communication is going to fix anything, since the article you claim to read very clearly states that they did start out with a plan to divvy up the housework, which mysteriously did not solve the problem. I'd quote it for you, but I'm not your wife, so do your own work.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 03:28
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Even though we aren't married, I'm willing to quote stuff for you anyway. It's really no trouble I'm gonna fast-forward to the end here since poor helpless babymen need everything spoon-fed to them apparently: If you aren't doing your share of the work, saying "you just need to manage me better" is not a solution. That wouldn't fly at your job so you have no business thinking it would fly at home. You are an adult, you should not need your partner to write you out a chore chart like you're a toddler. The chore chart doesn't make you do your housework, you do. A chore chart doesn't solve the problem of ignoring the work, or of demanding to be "taught how" every time something needs doing, or of whining to your partner that she's just so much better than you are at all those boring unpleasant jobs so why doesn't she do them, or of telling her any jobs you don't want to do really don't need to be done at all and why is she so unreasonable about it. You know, the things the article you're pretending you read was about. Rudatron has a long track record of being a sexist idiot and if you guys are going to buy into the sexist idiots' take on every issue FAU should just close this thread now because it will be an MRA cesspit by the end of the week. Sexism and toxic masculinity are very very deeply ingrained into our society. If you're going to try and solve that, you need to be very suspicious of any solution that sounds comfortable to you, because our society's current comfort zone about gender roles is poison.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:This is why I suggested that both the man and the woman work together to come up with a division of labor that both can agree with. That's what I said when you asked who would do the labor of divvying up the housework. Because, yeah, you're right, if the woman just assigns the guy a bunch of chores, that's probably not gonna work out great. You're arguing against something I never said Yes and as I have said in very clear words written right here in this thread in English (what was that about "communication skills"?) , a chore chart is not the solution. The man in the article, whom you very obviously act just like, did not shirk his chores because they weren't written down for him. You don't do whatever filthy lazy dickheaded things you do because you don't have a checklist either. If that was the problem, a big swingin' dick like you could probably use some of your throbbing brainpower to write himself a list, couldn't he? You are doing the exact thing the article is about, right here. Learned helplessness. You're pretending you can't read, can't understand, that the problem with your obstinance is only that a woman has failed to cater to you enough. FAU put together a nice thread to help you be less godawful in this way. Why did you click on it if you aren't interested in learning anything?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
rudatron posted:The easiest set up is just going to be having a list of chores, which you rotate through who is responsible for what depending on the date. I read 'the politics of housework', it suggests 'timesheets' but only as a kind of last resort. It also presents the problem as entirely stemming from some kind of personal failing of the man, which I don't think is necessarily true, or the best takeaway from the situation. The reason businesses have clear, delineated responsibility is because that leads to less hassle in the long run. Treating a system as something only for 'toddlers' (ie inherently infantilizing) is not constructive, if you're wanting to change people's habits then that's going to take time. What's also not constructive is this assumption you have of my sexism, that's just not true. I take all prejudice seriously, because it leads to a lot of suffering in this world, and i don't like being accused of it out of the blue. It's not an "assumption," rudatron, it's repeated observation. You are consistently, doggedly terrible about all forms of humanity except white men. You are a horrible person and anyone listening to you will become a worse human being.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
Tarantula posted:So uh thread seems to be nosediving off target perhaps a change of topic is in order. Unemployment and homelessness don't have much to do with educational attainment levels. It's a small factor, but far from the biggest one. One of the reasons men are less likely to go into higher ed may be that they have more job opportunities that don't require a college degree. Manual labor jobs are still mostly only open to men.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:But a chore chart is very helpful for making the guy understand the issue. If they already agreed who would do what, it's a lot easier to get someone to recognize that they are shirking their agreed upon duties. As opposed to something vague, like you don't do enough housework. It also makes clear how much work the woman is doing. No dude, this is exactly what that article you lied about reading is about. You are an adult. You already "understand the issue." You just don't like the solution to the issue, which is doing chores. You are employing learned helplessness, pretending you're too feebleminded to comprehend something entirely simple that you have no trouble with in other contexts. Again, you are doing a very fundamental thing that is very obvious to everyone but you: There is a problem with your behavior: You don't do your share of chores. The solution you propose is for your SO to change her behavior to make up for your choice not to contribute. Your SO can make you a chart, draw you a picture, do an interpretive dance, or write it in the sky, but if you want to be a spoiled lazy rear end in a top hat you're still going to be one, because the problem is with you. You are in charge of what you do. Not anyone else. And this, my friends and crazy internet MRA stalkers, is toxic masculinity. the trump tutelage posted:In university, my roommates and I couldn't get an equitable distribution of housework until we made a literal chore wheel and put everyone's names on a white board with their responsibilities. Entrenched misogyny does not explain why four men couldn't clean a bathroom without such childish measures, but they worked. Sometimes poo poo needs to be spelled out like that. It actually does, because if you were raised like girls are you wouldn't have thought you could get away with acting like this. Tiny Brontosaurus fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:I think you're way off base in assuming that lack of concern about the relationship or the partner or misogyny is the only reason someone doesn't do their share of the housework. Coming up with an equitable division of chores and writing it down is just good common sense. Otherwise you've got both people just sort of doing whatever, and it's basically guaranteed that they're gonna have different standards of cleanliness. A woman might end up doing all the vacuuming because she thinks you need to vacuum every week and the guy thinks every month, and so he never vacuums just because he always thinks the carpets are fine. That doesn't mean he doesn't care about his wife. If only someone had written a nice clear article about why that exact specific attitude is a problem.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:Are you interested in fixing the situation or indulging in righteous indignation? If it resolves the issue then make the chore wheel and pat yourself on the back for making concrete progress. Are we at this stop on the "goon gets asked to learn new thing" temper tantrum train already?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:I wanna make this clear. Here is my suggestion for how to deal with inequitable division of household chores: When two people start cohabitating, they should sit down and decide how to divide up the chores in a way that they both think is fair. That should happen at the start of the cohabitation. If they cannot come up with an agreement that is satisfactory to them both, them they probably shouldn't cohabitate. Again you loving moron, there's an article you lied about reading that explains why this doesn't work. And no assumptions needed dude, you are being a giant loving sexist right here in this thread. Any mention of you having an SO is entirely hypothetical. I can only hope no poor woman has to suffer your pigheaded assholery in real life.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:If it works, why not? What kind of bizarre marriage are you party to where it's incumbent on you to perpetually anticipate whatever your partner wants instead of just hashing it out openly like mature adults? Hahahaha jesus christ. Some of you are revealing quite a lot about yourselves here.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:How... else do you treat people you love? He loafs and sulks and whines and takes endlessly while never giving, duh. I'm sure he's dynamite in bed.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:I can see it being sexist if you are simultaneously a slob and you expect your living area to be clean. That is, in fact, a very near cry to misogyny. Guy Goodbody posted:Goddamn dude, you need to actually read that article. The lady got her husband to agree to "splitting the housework", there' not a single mention of them actually discussing what that would mean or divvying up specific duties. If anything, it actually is a lesson in the importance of having a chore chart instead of just expecting it to work out organically. Why the gently caress are you lying to me? Do you think I'd dislike you any more if you just admitted "nope, tldr, lol"? The entire goddamn article you didn't read is about how the man chose not to do his share and all the excuses he came up with for it. The wording of the agreement doesn't loving matter, his choice not to follow it does. Christ almighty I hope you're single. Tiny Brontosaurus fucked around with this message at 04:29 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:Do your best, and when that fails, use your words? Haha is this your best? Because dude. Dude.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Let us English posted:Your projecting of bad behavior onto other posters in neither productive or informative. Bonus points for non-sequitur dig at the posters masculinity in a thread made for the express purpose of discussing toxic masculinity on men. I suggest sticking with the classics and insinuating he has a small penis next. What you guys never seem to get is that there's no projection needed, you display more than enough bad behavior right here in these kinds of conversations. And the problem with being a selfish lover is not lack of virility, but it says quite a bit about you that you think it is.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 07:38
|
|
|
Aging Millenial posted:How do we fix the fact that women appear to be more sexually responsive to men who are strong, capable, and have high social status? Men who often command other men. It's as if women, by their very existence, fuel toxic masculinity, because men who succeed at that version of masculinity tend to be more sexually successful, which creates a huge incentive for the continuance of toxic masculinity. I am happy to be open about my lack of caring about sports, or my eagerness about reading poetry by the lakeside, but the result of that would often be that most women would consider me a fruit. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:FAU should just close this thread now because it will be an MRA cesspit by the end of the
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 09:10
|
|
|
Tarantula posted:Mayhaps as this is the thread to discuss Patriarchy and its effect on men it would be more productive to discuss toxic masculinity how and why it forms and what can be done to combat it, y'know instead of flaming and shitposting in order to make the prophecy of this thread becoming an MRA cesspool come true? Yo I didn't post the "why won't girls suck my dick even though I'm unbearable to be around" post. Thread's turning MRA just fine all by itself. And I have been talking quite a bit about toxic masculinity. Toxic masculinity is refusing to read something before criticizing that thing, and insisting that a woman speaking plainly is incomprehensible because you don't like what she's saying, and placing the blame for your misbehavior on women not managing you well enough, and all the other stuff that's shining with that bright neon toxic glow right there for anyone to see if they can man up and face it. Tarantula posted:I was actually hoping people could just ignore the obvious troll and move to being productive but I guess this thread is just going to be gassed so be it. I'm the author of half the OP you cool rad guy. I'm not a troll just because you don't like what I have to say. Tiny Brontosaurus fucked around with this message at 09:37 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 09:25
|
|
|
Tarantula posted:I apologize for not coming across succinctly enough, in no way did I mean to say you were the troll, I've rather liked reading many of your posts and found them informative but I suppose this is enough out of me then. Oh all right then v  v
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
Luxury Communism posted:I'm open about liking anime of all loving things and I'm doing just fine. I mean, I agree that it's trivial to recognize that sexual charisma derives in part from extremely gendered performance standards, but there's plenty of women who fantasize about a sensitive man who reads poems by the lake you dummy! Who did the convincing? Did it feel like there was a gendered aspect to it?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
Luxury Communism posted:I'm sure there was, but I'm not too keen to look a gift horse in the mouth when I am universally more liked this way and feel more fulfilled in having control over myself. Whatever works!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 09:44
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:FFS he wasn't calling you a troll he was talking about the loving visible-from-loving-space MRA poo poo and run troll. Yes, it may surprise you to know that I did in fact read the post I quoted. Did you read the post you quoted?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 09:48
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:It may surprise you to learn that when you act like a sarcastic hateful rear end in a top hat in 99% of your posts the 1% when you are being sincere sometimes slip through the cracks. I'm only a hateful rear end in a top hat to the assholes I hate, and I only hate assholes for being bigots. You're on my ignore list apparently so hoo boy you musta been a bad one.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
Oh hey Jarmak your friend is back.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 09:58
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I'd like to think this whole topic is a case of people talking past one another. Better communication isn't a magic bullet, but incidents of bad or dishonest communication are no reason to just shrug and blame some formless spectre of toxic masculinity. Giving "gutter-cleaning" and "weekly vacuuming" equal weighting is stupid in its own right; "Let's split housework equally" "Yeah sounds good" is a non-conversation that resolves nothing - of course the arrangement went sour, it didn't exist in the first place! You are assuming that if a problem exist it must be the woman's fault for not solving the problem well enough. If a man isn't doing his fair share it's the woman's fault for not communicating well. Why is it not the man's fault for not asking what chores need to be done and checking that he's doing a fair amount of them? Lt. Danger posted:The shirking partner is the one not communicating honestly - agreeing to a division of chores and then not doing it. If this partner is not able to commit to a basic arrangement that's been explicitly spelled out for them in writing, then maybe they are not capable of an equal relationship? Regardless, it has nothing to do with the efficacy of honest communication. So it's the woman's fault for choosing a bad partner. Lovely. Do you have any self-awareness at all? Do you think you might get any at any point? Because this thread was created to help men realize the exact problem with their thinking that you are exhibiting, but it doesn't seem like you picked up on that at all. BarbarianElephant posted:Cleaning is perfectly manly when done in manly contexts. The same guys who "don't see dirt" when at home would polish their gear to within an inch of its life when in the army and not see a contradiction.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Ahh, but you're thinking too small scale! Suppose you have a community, and suppose every single housewife in that community goes on strike. That is mass action my friend, and that sends a very different message. You're such a loving creep. Can you go back to the racism? That was honestly much better to deal with. rudatron posted:Well okay, but that means you need to have a negotiation about what the best standard of cleanliness is, for the both of you. Give and take, right? Tiny Brontosaurus fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
Truly the only women who are burdened by an unfair share of the chores are "housewives" because this is 1955. Unfortunately, that means pulling a Lysistrata will be ineffective, because marital rape isn't illegal yet.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
rscott posted:OK honestly how much extra poo poo is there to do, we have to be talking about a couple hours a week tops unless you have kids Look at this poo poo. Again, you assume if there's a problem it must the the women who are wrong. Silly women's vaginas clog up their brains and make them hallucinate chores that don't exist. Or maybe they're just lying about chores to drag men down into their evil femi-lairs.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
Even if a task only takes 30 seconds, why should it always be her 30 seconds and not his? If it's really such a trivial task why is he throwing a fit instead of just doing it?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Yikes brae. How about you go shitblast on some other thread? An actual klan member, everybody.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:What if the husband is the cleaner one and the woman is the slob? Then they don't have this problem. I don't currently have cancer, should we stop trying to cure it?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:It is? People in general are bad at communication and need strategies to help them, especially when it comes to something that's unpleasant or boring like housework. Lt. Danger posted:I didn't say this? Yes you did. Lt. Danger posted:The shirking partner is the one not communicating honestly - agreeing to a division of chores and then not doing it. If this partner is not able to commit to a basic arrangement that's been explicitly spelled out for them in writing, then maybe they are not capable of an equal relationship? Regardless, it has nothing to do with the efficacy of honest communication. What's a woman who wants the drat dishes out of the sink supposed to do with that? I've seen this progression, and I'm certain any poor SO of yours has to. 1. The dishes need to be done. 2. The man ignores it. 3. The woman, dreading being a "nag," drops a gentle hint 4. The man ignores it. 5. The woman, risking being a "nag," asks him to do it 6. The man whines that now's not a good time/he doesn't know how/she's so much better at it 7. The dishes still need to be done. 8. The woman confronts the man about how he'd agreed to do his fair share, and he's not doing his fair share, and what's up with that 9. The man melts down, calling the woman a nag and having a huge fit, capping it off with "well maybe we're just incompatible if silly things like dishes are going to make you get so mad!" 10. The woman internalizes another sexist lesson that everything she wants, no matter how reasonable, is silly and selfish and stupid and she'll never keep a man if she keeps acting like this 11. The woman washes the dishes herself, and another layer of their relationship erodes away I eagerly look forward to your response in which you absorb none of this information and yet tell me I'm wrong. Because you're such a great communicator.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Is that a settled part of the discussion? I mean, if you have the conversation about cleaning poo poo the moment you move in together, the woman wouldn't actually have had time to do "more than their fair share". If the woman's the one who started the cleaning conversation and did the mental labor of thinking up what chores need to be done, and the emotional labor of handling manly-man's fragile feelings about the horrible torture of being expected to do chores then yes she very much did.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:You're not even twisting people's words at this point, you're straight up just making poo poo up. You've been a pigheaded idiot for every single page of this thread so I don't expect you to suddenly decide to let the concept being discussed here actually enter your brain, but the entire loving problem here is there's a pattern that men want to treat as an infinite series of one-off standalone special cases. Within a relationship there's a pattern of a man not doing his chores because each time he had a really good excuse, and within the world there's a pattern of relationships containing men who act like that. But why would you let yourself believe that? As long as patterns don't exist every single instance of every single problem in the entire world is just a woman being too picky and not solving the problem right. You'll never ever have to learn or grow or change, shhh hush baby don't cry shhh. falcon2424 posted:I don't see any mention of fault. What many people, including the loving OP of the thread, are saying, is that this is not an "oddly-specific" problem, it is an incredibly common one. This is the frequent behavior of men who are in adult relationships. This is such common behavior that you and your shithead brodeo can't even imagine a man ever not acting that way. The problem must lie entirely with the women who expect them not to. And seriously falcon do you and the ku klux kru and Jarmak the Pussy Destroyer just get like a google alert whenever somebody on the internet ventures the opinion that women or minorities are humans or what? Because you're never later than the first few pages and you always have the same bag of tricks every single time. Tiny Brontosaurus fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:This is the other reason I brought up other arrangements, I was having trouble elucidating it as well as you did. This is very much not just a men and women issue, though we all seem to agree that it roots into outmoded concepts of stay at home wives. Do you think FAU started this thread to help specific individual relationships divvy up the chore chart? How many more versions of "let's say the problem doesn't happen. would you say there's a problem then?" are people going to post in here? Do you think I'm going to hiss my forked straw-feminist tongue at the men who are actually not being lazy sexist assholes just because? If a man comes up with a list of chores and then does them, congratulations, he has achieved minimum basic adult competency.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
rscott posted:I have to be drastically underestimating the amount of time I spend on making dinner every night or something, that seems excessive This is exactly the kind of poo poo we're talking about. Instead of just doing the work, you're arguing whether the work needs to be done. If a woman thinks a thing and you don't, she must be wrong. Because women are stupid.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Yes, in that specific case, she did. She didn't in the case where the man brought it up because he knew from experience that people have different standards, so you might as well figure that poo poo out before it becomes a huge issue, and had them sit down together and hash out what work needed to be done and how often. Like, you seem to be specifically railing against a very specific type of man, in a very specific situation, when in reality a lot of men are in the "willing to do poo poo, different idea of how often poo poo should be done" category. Yes what IF problems didn't exist.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Yeah, just making poo poo up again, this time you've taken "man sounds like toxic (possibly even sexist) rear end in a top hat, only solution is to sever" and magically turned it into "it's the woman's fault for not figuring out how to solve his toxic bullshit". For the billionth time, your superior male brain is ignoring that most men act like this. Just take a look at this thread with your superior male eyeballs. Saying a behavior that most men do is something that makes men unfit for relationships is saying women can't be in relationships with men. So, hey, look at this neat trick! If a woman is in a relationship with a man who acts like that, it's her fault for putting up with it! Because men can't learn and change. They're much too smart for that. OwlFancier posted:Well there's not very much you can cook from raw ingredients that cooks in less than 30 minutes and even prepping a few ingredients takes a while for each one, and creates mess you need to clean with boards and knives and such. So 30-45 minutes to cook. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Even if a task only takes 30 seconds, why should it always be her 30 seconds and not his? If it's really such a trivial task why is he throwing a fit instead of just doing it?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:54 |
|
|
And the whole point I brought up in my post in the feminism thread which was copied over to the OP is - when household labor is studied, researchers consistently find that men overestimate how much they contribute by a wide margin. A man saying he does "most of this" or "all of that" is actually a reliable indicator that he does far less than half the work in the home. Men respond to this by arguing that the chores they aren't doing don't really exist or don't really need to be done, or can't be done by them because excuse excuse excuse. So much of the work women do men don't even recognize as work at all. Who remembers birthdays and picks out gifts? Who stays home from work when a repairman has to be let in? Who soothes the bad moods? Who makes sure people are carrying everything they need when they walk out the door in the morning? When someone has a health issue, who schedules the doctor appointments, goes to the pharmacy, studies and manages the care plan? The answer should be "both of us" and if it is that's great, basic human decency achieved. But it frequently isn't, and treating those all as individual special cases is just avoiding confronting a problem. Aren't men supposed to be good at confrontation.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2016 18:16
|
|