All male Fox News panel freak out over the numbers of women providing the main income in households

[Lieju]

I believe women are dominant because raising a family has to be one of the hardest things you'll ever do in life.
Men swan off to work everyday thus leaving the woman alone with a temperamental human being. You don't stop - they are demanding little cretins from dawn until dusk.

I don't see any shame in a woman's expected role in life.
If she wants something more then all the best. But maintaining a household, working on a marriage (which isn't easy! I've seen my parents fight, struggle and cry) and raising children to be acceptable people of society is not easy.

If that's what you (or any woman or man) wants to do, great.

But if you're being pressured into it, or do it because it's your 'expected role' in life, you're not really making a choice.

OT: 4 out of 10? Now let's work on getting that to 50/50, okay?

Also, captcha keeps telling me to describe brands that I don't know. Let's see, I just write 'cheap' like I always do,a nd we see if flattery let's me post this...

 

[Sir Pootis]

Adding this to the LIST.

What is the LIST?

Occasionally, someone pops into the R&P Dungeon with the statement: "Fox News is no worse than any other news outlet." So I respond with the LIST.

The LIST now takes up almost two full Escapist pages.

May you send me this list? I'm kinda interested in reading the whole thing.

OT: Did they actually saw why this was bad at any point? I will admit, I was just sorta listening to it in the background, not really paying attention. I was extremely surprised by the comments in the second link, though. I mean, seriously, it almost makes me look at FOX News as the more respectable group, purely out of shock that people actually act like that IRL and in such great numbers.

 

[Henkie36]

Well, here's a good reason never to watch Fox news: they don't get progress. If they think this is a bad thing, they are in for one hell of a time. I like how the rest of the world treats this as a great improvement (hell, in Sweden there are even laws to make this happen) and then we have some conservative old farts telling us it's the first sign that the Antichrist is approaching. (I do like to take a few liberties in interpretation)

 

[JoesshittyOs]

i'm sorry for sounding so harsh, but America comes across as really stunted with regards to equality

The Baby Boomers are -to put it simply- a pretty fucking stupid generation. These last twenty years have really showed us their true colors. As it stands right now, we're just waiting for this generation to die out. Give us a few decades and America might make it all up.

Or we'll get worse. Who knows.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

This is why I don't watch the news. Ever... unless it's Colbert, or John Stewart, and even then it's occassional.

 

[xPixelatedx]

I don't see why everyone is acting shocked at this... Would you be equally as surprised if they said something racist, homophobic, or belittled poor people? Fox news has made their stance very clear, as well as who they align themselves with. Of course they think this about women, what did you think they thought?

 

[FancyNick]

I think people just watch Fox News for the comedy these days. Not like there is any real "news" going on there anyway.

OT: This is ridiculous but it did make me giggle.

Darn these hard working Women they're tearing our nation apart!

 

[Legion]

I believe women are dominant because raising a family has to be one of the hardest things you'll ever do in life.
Men swan off to work everyday thus leaving the woman alone with a temperamental human being. You don't stop - they are demanding little cretins from dawn until dusk.

I don't see any shame in a woman's expected role in life.
If she wants something more then all the best. But maintaining a household, working on a marriage (which isn't easy! I've seen my parents fight, struggle and cry) and raising children to be acceptable people of society is not easy.

If that's what you (or any woman or man) wants to do, great.

But if you're being pressured into it, or do it because it's your 'expected role' in life, you're not really making a choice.

OT: 4 out of 10? Now let's work on getting that to 50/50, okay?

You understand that is a contradiction, do you not?

Your first two lines say that if people want to have one role or another, then that's their choice. Whereas your third line says that it should be equal in number, which suggests that it shouldn't be a choice. After all, as long as more of one gender wants to stay at home and look after the children/house, then it won't ever be 50/50.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

Good thing we aren't spiders eh? Where the female eats her mate? HAHAHA!

Wait they dont? I think I need to have a talk with my girlfriend...

No but seriously this whole thing is just fucking dumb. WOMEN MAKING MONEY! OH THE HUMANITY!!!!

I am going to be controversial now and say... why is it that women are now making more money than men? Don't get me wrong -- it's marvellous and as a woman I hope to do the same.

That is... until I get married.

Perhaps it's because of the strict conservatism I was raised in but I do believe that a woman's role is to look after the children. If the mother wants to work then she gets a part-time job because that way she can still be there for the children.

If children are part of the equation that makes a little more sense. The woman as the primary caregiver is obviously partially societal, but by nature they fall into that role just because of biology. I mean, before they even have the kid they have to carry around the thing for 9 months, putting them physically out of commission for a while, and after that keeping in mind that baby formula is a human invention, it's biologically intended for them to breastfeed the child. I don't necessarily think it's controversial to think that women would generally be the primary caregiver and thus would probably statistically not be the family bread winner as much as those statistics show.

But isn't that a good thing? I mean if the statistics are exceeding natural expectations and it's for the benefit of that group I don't see how that's a bad thing. In this hypothetical perfect world where gender plays no role in anything and there is no difference between men and women it would be 5/10 households, but I don't necessarily think that's a realistic issue because some women are going to wholeheartedly embrace the role of being a housewife, and taking that into account would say 4/10 households demonstrates that we've got a pretty good system for equal opportunity.

 

[Lieju]

I believe women are dominant because raising a family has to be one of the hardest things you'll ever do in life.
Men swan off to work everyday thus leaving the woman alone with a temperamental human being. You don't stop - they are demanding little cretins from dawn until dusk.

I don't see any shame in a woman's expected role in life.
If she wants something more then all the best. But maintaining a household, working on a marriage (which isn't easy! I've seen my parents fight, struggle and cry) and raising children to be acceptable people of society is not easy.

If that's what you (or any woman or man) wants to do, great.

But if you're being pressured into it, or do it because it's your 'expected role' in life, you're not really making a choice.

OT: 4 out of 10? Now let's work on getting that to 50/50, okay?

You understand that is a contradiction, do you not?

Your first two lines say that if people want to have one role or another, then that's their choice. Whereas your third line says that it should be equal in number, which suggests that it shouldn't be a choice. After all, as long as more of one gender wants to stay at home and look after the children/house, then it won't ever be 50/50.

No.
The first is talking about an individual level, the second on a larger scale.

It would be nice if people were able to make the choice, and that in large scale the choice would be about 50/50.

And let's face it, it's not just your personal choice whether you will end up being the bread-winner in the family, what the job market and the expectations of society are like will have a huge impact.

But if on a large scale we see that it's one of the sexes that are more likely to end up carrying the financial responsibility, it's not about individual choice, it's about a trend in the society.

 

[TheBlueRabbit]

Keep in mind, Fox News' viewing audience is basically a rapidly-aging slew of Bill O'Reilly clones.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

i'm sorry for sounding so harsh, but America comes across as really stunted with regards to equality

The Baby Boomers are -to put it simply- a pretty fucking stupid generation. These last twenty years have really showed us their true colors. As it stands right now, we're just waiting for this generation to die out. Give us a few decades and America might make it all up.

Or we'll get worse. Who knows.

to be honest, i feel bad for making such a sweeping generalisation

 

[Legion]

I believe women are dominant because raising a family has to be one of the hardest things you'll ever do in life.
Men swan off to work everyday thus leaving the woman alone with a temperamental human being. You don't stop - they are demanding little cretins from dawn until dusk.

I don't see any shame in a woman's expected role in life.
If she wants something more then all the best. But maintaining a household, working on a marriage (which isn't easy! I've seen my parents fight, struggle and cry) and raising children to be acceptable people of society is not easy.

If that's what you (or any woman or man) wants to do, great.

But if you're being pressured into it, or do it because it's your 'expected role' in life, you're not really making a choice.

OT: 4 out of 10? Now let's work on getting that to 50/50, okay?

You understand that is a contradiction, do you not?

Your first two lines say that if people want to have one role or another, then that's their choice. Whereas your third line says that it should be equal in number, which suggests that it shouldn't be a choice. After all, as long as more of one gender wants to stay at home and look after the children/house, then it won't ever be 50/50.

No.
The first is talking about an individual level, the second on a larger scale.

It would be nice if people were able to make the choice, and that in large scale the choice would be about 50/50.

And let's face it, it's not just your personal choice whether you will end up being the bread-winner in the family, what the job market and the expectations of society are like will have a huge impact.

But if on a large scale we see that it's one of the sexes that are more likely to end up carrying the financial responsibility, it's not about individual choice, it's about a trend in the society.

That is still very much an assumption, because even if society became completely equal, where literally nobody batted an eyelid in regards to who had what role, I genuinely cannot see the numbers being entirely equal, purely because people are just not that simple or predictable.

Although I get the point you were making about why it is not a contradiction.

 

[launchpadmcqwak]

Me going into this:
"Ahh some dumb fox news guy said something non PC who cares he's just being honest about his opinions."

Me halfway through:
"ohhhhhhhhhhh........maybe sexism does sort of exist.

 

[xplosive59]

Wow. Just Wow.

Do these people not realize that a high percentage of women in work is a global indicator for an advanced country? We know what the real deal is here, these cunts don't want women to be seen at the same level as them or even go so far to take their jobs eventually.

 

[Childe]

I...I...I don't fucking even.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/30/fox-female-breadwinners_n_3358926.html

Long story short, a recent survey show that 4 out of 10 households have women as the primary or lone sources of income in the household. And these people (All of them men by the way, go fucking figure) are trying to paint this as a BAD thing. Saying "The politicians won't admit this." Frankly if I were a politician, this is a statistic I'd be waving around with a smile on my face.

They also share such pearls of wisdom as "something going terribly wrong in American society, and it's hurting our children, and it's going to have impact for generations to come"

And "When you look at biology, look at the natural world, the roles of a male and a female in society, and other animals, the male typically is the dominant role. The female, it's not antithesis, or it's not competing, it's a complementary role. We as people in a smart society have lost the ability to have complementary relationships in nuclear families, and it's tearing us apart."

Congratulations Fox News, you've reached a whole new level of stupid!

Granted a co-worker (And a woman, imagine that!) responded with can basically be summarized as WTF

http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/video/have-these-men-lost-their-minds-and-these-are-my-colleagues-oh-brotheri-need-to-have-a-little-chat-with-them/

But...fucks sake.

I have to agree with the women and men compliment each other bit. We seem to have forgotten this but life is not men versus women and relationships are not men control everything or women control everything. That's what life HAS become but it's wrong. Women and Men are supposed to compliment each other hence why each gender has their own skill sets and what they are good at.

 

[MetalMagpie]

Fox News. Lol.

I can't really think of anything better to say. Apart from to point out that at least free speech is alive and well!

 

[Childe]

Hey at least they're not talking about reproductive rights.
There's nothing that says Faux News better than five old men telling me that birth control shouldn't be covered by health care, but Viagra is 100% a must.

I have half a mind to send them the links on how they have now successfully fertilized an egg using only female cells making men no longer necessary for sperm.

http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/sciencetech/men-no-longer-necessary-for-sperm-production/750

If their reaction to women working is that bad, can you you imagine their reaction to reading that?! HAHAHAHAHA!

They've actually managed to do this already? I'd read about it in a science magazine, but didn't think they'd been successful yet. This is pretty awesome and quite likely good news for lesbians who want children of their own, but don't want to adopt or use stand ins(I forgot the name of the term used for it.... surrogate fathers?).

As for the fox news reaction.... Pretty much what one should expect from those crazies given they don't seem to know what reality is or anything else for that matter...

First sorry about the double post.
Second While this is cool news i don't think this will change much in the long run. The only thing i see this allowing is lesbian couples to have their own children without adopting. Regarding men/women relationships i think they will continue going on as dysfunctonal as always. Just as their is the saying regarding women: "you can't live with them and you can't live without them" it can be flipped to saying that of women in regards to men.

 

[kingpocky]

Here's the funny thing - Conservatives are decrying the fact that women are now going to work and no longer staying at home to raise children. WHY do you think more and more people are doing that? Gender roles are changing, sure, but the much stronger motivator is the fact that for most people, it is no longer economically feasible to have only one worker supporting a full family. But mention anything about income inequality to these people, and watch how fast their heads explode.