Gays and relationship roles.

[David3K]

Yeah TwisttheLeaf you're right. Thats how things are. But lets forget the fetish side of it, and just take a look at the relationship from outside. Many gays disapprove these kind of relationships without even knowing personal details. They dissaprove it right from the start.

[yourname]

Yeah TwisttheLeaf you're right. Thats how things are. But lets forget the fetish side of it, and just take a look at the relationship from outside. Many gays disapprove these kind of relationships without even knowing personal details. They dissaprove it right from the start.

Wut? O_O

You must truly be bisexual, because you don't know the first thing about being gay: we love in the face of "disapproval", in spite of it....it's the tide we're constantly swimming against. It doesn't matter if it's society, family, or friends: we get to define our individual relationships for ourselves. It's our reward for wading through all the shit poured on us for not conforming in the first place.

[TimeSage]

I'd want a guy that could protect me. But... I'm horrible at housework. So he'd need to do that too, or at least not have expecations beyond "meh, it's ok"

[Eromir]

D/s is not necessarily a fetish, it's a type of relationship.
I also disprove of relationships with strongly defined provider and housewife roles. Most examples I know are of heterosexual relationships, but I believe that the same principles apply. Wherever you see a patriarchal society with strongly defined gender roles, you also see gross inequality. This type of relationship is often combined with abuse and domestic violence. I have seen this much too often is straight couples - the male thinks he is the good provider and is doing everyone a big favor, but also has a short fuse for when things don't go his way, so it often ends up in verbal or physical abuse. It's a democracy vs. an autocracy. The autocrat always thinks that he knows best and ends up hurting a lot of people in the process.
Yeah, that's the general case. I personally know of only one gay couple where such role division works and seems to make both sides happy, but both guy consciously choose to act that way, while still respecting each other as individuals.

Also, I'm curious about what you want to protect your partner from. In my experience, "protection" is just a superficial excuse for taking charge. Bears and viking raiders aren't much of a threat anymore.

[HumbleTangerine]

Basically, people nowadays are less willing to sacrifice their independence. Living the life of a "house-wife" (also, note how all examples pertaining to domestic labour are stereotypically female) is essentially just that; a sacrifice of independence. While your partner makes all the money you stay at home handling the domestic chores. He's the provider and therefore you have to depend on him. If the day comes when he leaves you, you'll be left with no savings and no practical work experience, which is a nightmarish position to be in. Once he's old and his retirement funds kick in, he'll be financially secure from a life-time of working, while you, the house-wife will struggle to pay the bills.

Some decades ago when the house-wife phenomenon was more common, the financial issues of house-wives being left by their husbands were well-known. French feminist Simone de Beauvoir received hundreds of letters from desperate women who used to rely on their husbands for financial support but had since been abandoned with no means of providing for themselves.

I don't necessarily care about sharing the duty of housework equally. If me and my boyfriend work as much, then I expect us to do more or less the same amount of housework. If he works 75% while I work 100%, then I naturally expect him to take on more of the housework, and vice versa if it was the other way around.

If I'm employed and he's unemployed I would obviously help him out financially. What I would not allow would be for him to SETTLE for a state of unemployed dependence on me, as a prolonged state like that would have haunting consequences for him later in life. THIS, dear OP is why a lot of guys you talk to don't wish to be protected by and dependent on their husbands. Norms around love no longer prohibit us from leaving relationships that aren't satisfactory, and it's never a good idea to be completely dependent on someone else no matter how much you love each other at the moment. We all want our relationships to last throughout our entire lives, but if the day comes when we're left all alone we need to able to care for ourselves.

[LJay]

Yourname, I understand what you are saying about living in the face of diasapproval, but I come from a strong willed Midwestern background that, once a decision is made forthrightly, does not give a damn about outside opinion. Should I decide to live with someone in x,y, or z style, it really does not affect me how it is viewed. I hope you will agree with me that the disapproval is much less of a factor when you mind is really made up.

As for roles, I think Tangerine has a point. No matter what, you have to have enough of your own basis to deal with what comes, whatever it may be.

[MikeW]

Some of this cold be cultural differences between the US and other countries. The US began going through a sort of 'social revolution' in the 1960s. Prior to this there were very few people who questioned traditional social roles (class, race, sexuality, and etc.). Also, prior to this, economics in the US were such that a working class man could support a family on his income alone. That is seldom the case anymore. (Professional class, maybe, but most professional class men want professional class partners who are generally not content to be homemakers without income of their own.) Since most often there are now two bread winners in the family, all the other family responsibilities have to be sorted out. It is no longer *assumed* that the 'wife' will do all the housework while the 'husband' mows the lawn or watches football on the TV.

All this may appear odd to more traditional national cultures. But many of the freedoms that have come with this on-going 'social revolution' (such as the recognition of gay rights) have been fought for and hard-won.

I'm trying not to make any value judgement about whatever type of relationship other people choose for themselves. Just want to put it in a cultural and historical context. Without that context, personal opinion can appear to be more arbitrary than it actually is.

[CellarDweller]

I wonder if this relates to how people are raised?

Those who are raised in a home where the father is the 'bread-winner' and mother the 'housewife' would be more inclined to think they should have a similar relationship, whether it is same sex or opposite sex.

I never looked at relationships that way, but I was raised in a home where both parents worked, and therefore both shared the domestic chores.

Mom frequently helped dad with home repairs and yard work, while dad helped with cooking and cleaning inside the house.

That's what I was raised with, so it's my instinct to feel that this is the 'ideal' relationship, if there is such a thing.

[Bhp91126]

I wonder if this relates to how people are raised?

Those who are raised in a home where the father is the 'bread-winner' and mother the 'housewife' would be more inclined to think they should have a similar relationship, whether it is same sex or opposite sex.

I never looked at relationships that way, but I was raised in a home where both parents worked, and therefore both shared the domestic chores.

Mom frequently helped dad with home repairs and yard work, while dad helped with cooking and cleaning inside the house.

That's what I was raised with, so it's my instinct to feel that this is the 'ideal' relationship, if there is such a thing.

My parents had the traditional roles, even though later on my mom worked part time as well. She did all the housework, while my dad worked more in the garden and on the house. My dad was and is a traditional man, which is something I wouldn't accept from my man, because I'm sure I share some of my dad's traits, even though I hate gardening.

[David3K]

Eromir: I agree D/S doesnt necessarily have to be a fetish, but lets be honest, Im sure most people who enjoy this kind of relationships also translate it to the bedroom too. Its only logic. And by "protecting" I mean it like symbolic, it doesnt mean the bottom has to be some weak ass loser who can't do anything on his own, what I meant is someone who seeks for the 'feeling of safety', which is different than being useless and insecure.

Yourname: I actually replied to this (by mistake) on the other post you made. But I'll say it agin: Just because you're gay doesnt mean you have to be against everything just because you want to be different. Some things are good just the way they are, even if it was invented by heterosexuals! So the hate on "heteronormative" stuff I see SO OFTEN from gays is ridiculous. The gay world need some objectivity to decide what's good or not, not being rebels without a cause.

MikeW: Actually Uruguay is in many ways more modern and liberal than USA. We have 40% of atheists so religion don't affect us the way it affects you. Gay marriage, gay adoptions and laws have been legal and celebrated for years. Even weed is legal. The age of marriage is incredibly late because people prefer to live together and "try" before committing, and both partners usually work. So these cultural differences don't apply here. However Im a Christian myself and for some reason I might be more structured than the rest.

CellarDweller: I wasn't raised with classic roles at all, so that can't be a reason.