3 ms·

That's one of the great things about traditional gender roles. It's well defined about what's expected of you in the relationship and addressing the other perso

by monksy 9y ago

That's one of the great things about traditional gender roles. It's well defined about what's expected of you in the relationship and addressing the other person's needs becomes easier. (Rather than mixing the two and neglecting based only on what you don't want to do.. which is going on today)

danbolt 9y ago
That's certainly true about traditional roles, but I think they ultimately do a disservice to people that don't feel comfortable with them. It strikes me as an unnecessary restriction, and I'm optimistic that people can be socially and emotionally responsible without having to follow a script they don't like, although I'll admit it might take some more existential grit and communication.
- monksy 9y ago
  I used to agree with you. However, I don't anymore. I think they're better if they're understood about what is expected on each side, and negotiation is based off of each exception. Completely ignoring them and making up things as you go along leads you to have the same issues before that the roles solved.
  - danbolt 9y ago
    Right. If you run on assumptions with what you think is true, or that you just assume you both don't need to communicate, then things will probably be really toxic! That's not really what I hoped to express though. Or, I don't mean to say that we can ignore responsibility and just "do what feels good" until it doesn't. Would it be possible to discuss or figure out what's expected on each side without using existing gender roles? I don't think it's an excuse to be neglectful, but I feel like putting people into boxes by default so you have to do less emotional legwork seems a bit dogmatic. I can imagine a lot of same-sex couples have to define their relationships without existing guides, and I wish that was more of the norm for the rest of us.
tptacek 9y ago
Careful. There aren't a lot of longstanding systemic injustices you can't defend with the argument "at least everyone knew what was expected of them." Women choosing to function in their "traditional" marital roles isn't inherently unjust, but women being in any way pressured to give up self-actualization (through career, personal freedom, &c) in the service of those "traditional" roles sure is.
- monksy 9y ago
  I'm in no way defending anything who requires people to accept particular roles. Have respect for all roles. (Right now the traditional roles, and the people who choose them, are being aggressively being bashed) My point is that traditional gender roles solved a lot of problems and attempting to just cherry pick what you want (just because you want that) or to expect different behavior has lead to many bad/toxic relationships (which affects others and creates even more of a barrier to a relationship) and sociality issues. (If you'll allow for me to stretch it that far) I'm of the opinion that if you want to change something, you should be very sure that it is a good change. Previously these kinds of changes took forever as that adoption is slow, but it prevents massive breaking changes.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    The change that occurred was a reduction in pressure and coercion for women to accept "traditional" roles. I think we can be confident that reducing that pressure is a positive step.

by monksy 9y ago

danbolt 9y ago

That's certainly true about traditional roles, but I think they ultimately do a disservice to people that don't feel comfortable with them. It strikes me as an unnecessary restriction, and I'm optimistic that people can be socially and emotionally responsible without having to follow a script they don't like, although I'll admit it might take some more existential grit and communication.

monksy 9y ago
I used to agree with you. However, I don't anymore. I think they're better if they're understood about what is expected on each side, and negotiation is based off of each exception. Completely ignoring them and making up things as you go along leads you to have the same issues before that the roles solved.
- danbolt 9y ago
  Right. If you run on assumptions with what you think is true, or that you just assume you both don't need to communicate, then things will probably be really toxic! That's not really what I hoped to express though. Or, I don't mean to say that we can ignore responsibility and just "do what feels good" until it doesn't. Would it be possible to discuss or figure out what's expected on each side without using existing gender roles? I don't think it's an excuse to be neglectful, but I feel like putting people into boxes by default so you have to do less emotional legwork seems a bit dogmatic. I can imagine a lot of same-sex couples have to define their relationships without existing guides, and I wish that was more of the norm for the rest of us.

tptacek 9y ago

Careful. There aren't a lot of longstanding systemic injustices you can't defend with the argument "at least everyone knew what was expected of them." Women choosing to function in their "traditional" marital roles isn't inherently unjust, but women being in any way pressured to give up self-actualization (through career, personal freedom, &c) in the service of those "traditional" roles sure is.

monksy 9y ago
I'm in no way defending anything who requires people to accept particular roles. Have respect for all roles. (Right now the traditional roles, and the people who choose them, are being aggressively being bashed) My point is that traditional gender roles solved a lot of problems and attempting to just cherry pick what you want (just because you want that) or to expect different behavior has lead to many bad/toxic relationships (which affects others and creates even more of a barrier to a relationship) and sociality issues. (If you'll allow for me to stretch it that far) I'm of the opinion that if you want to change something, you should be very sure that it is a good change. Previously these kinds of changes took forever as that adoption is slow, but it prevents massive breaking changes.
- tptacek 9y ago
  The change that occurred was a reduction in pressure and coercion for women to accept "traditional" roles. I think we can be confident that reducing that pressure is a positive step.