| by JustAThought on February 4, 2010, 5:28 am in Dating
|
14 comments |
The black community has had a different story, so why do we assume that following the “white” playbook is the best thing for us? Some sociologist and theorists would say that minority groups should reject social institutions and behaviors of the majority. I would not go that far. I will say that black families have different social factors, so different strategies and roles may be needed. But how different can these strategies really be? We do not live in a vacuum. Black women and black men have their relationships in society. Our lives may have different realities, but these realities exist in a larger world that imposes values, lifestyles, and points of view. How can we best navigate these conflicting pressures?
What does this specifically mean in the roles of “man,” “woman,” “husband,” and “wife?” In a society where black men have their manhood denied and denigrated, how can they function effectively as partners when the main currency of manhood in our society – earning superiority – may not be available in their current relationship? In a society that systematically destroys black women physically, socially, and psychologically, how can a man value something that he has been told is OK to devalue and take for granted? How can a woman who is told, through many ways and situations, to “take care of herself, depend on no one, and get her own” etc., choose a subordinate role for herself to when in relationship with someone who, according to the majority narrative, be someone you submit to?
I wonder this as I see my friends married off or entering the point in marriage post-honeymoon but pre-children. Or as I watch older women continue their marriage balancing acts. Of the five or so black women – married women – who's relationships I've observed closely, all but one have the woman as the higher earner. I watch these women present their husbands as the head of the household and decision maker when all evidence points to the contrary. I watch women painstakingly defer to their mates, and I wonder what these women get in return. I'm an outsider, so I don't know what goes on behind closed doors. And yet, when I hear a high school acquaintance talk about “we” when describing the house she bought (pre-relationship w/ fiance), the rental home she bought (during relationship where fiance was not working), the savings she accumulated, the fiance she pushed to get his stuff together and get back into school, and the plans for their future family that really are her plans, part of me has to struggle to not call her a hypocrite when she spouts all that “man needs to lead” stuff while I smile politely.
Is it enough that a woman just makes a man feel like the traditional male head of household? Is public perception of the relationship the biggest part of doing that? What does a woman get in return besides the tenuous security of having a man/husband? Is it worth it? What does a man need to do to properly manage his own feelings and emotions when he earns less than his partner/wife? How can a woman enjoy her accomplishments and earning ability without being a jerk to her partner? How can a man communicate his needs to his partner in a relationship that society would judge as defective without becoming domineering? What adjustments do black people need to make in how they educate young men and women about what a successful relationship looks like? As a community, what should be our goals in having black partnerships, marriages, and families? How do we support black relationships, individually and collectively, so that money isn't the end-all and be-all?
In theory, I know that each relationship is different, and that each couple has to navigate their own path based on their personalities, relationship history and goals, and individual challenges that they face. But, is there a way to address the larger narrative that can make this navigation less tumultuous and constricting? So that the road maps match our reality?
|
On February 4, 2010, 6:35 pm JustAThought says:
@ Mass:
I definitely agree with a lot of what you said. When I initially wrote this blog, I had so many more angles that it would have taken up three or four posts. I consolidated some of those down into just salary in some places. In other places, I just focused on salary to the exclusion of other factors. And you are right that salary isn't the only thing that matters. As you said, I'm a student, I have loans, and I have a plan to get that debt load. But if I were to meet Mr. Right right now, I would hope that he would evaluate more than jsut the loan total. As far as looking at men who bring in less than their wives in respect to their "deserving" to be head of household, my question lies not with whether they deserve the title, but with how the women who make more than their husbands define that. Because it's not financially, but that is the picture they portray. The only person who has not is an older lady who talks about the emotional support, leadership, et. al that her husband demonstrates. He also is fiscally responsible, so he helps her manage what they have. I have a much bigger problem with the other woman who talks a good game about a man being the head when most of what is shown to the world is otherwise. I'm ina unique position because I knew her and her fiance, know more of their business than I should (downsides of living in a smallish town). So I know that the image she presents doesn't line up with history. Anyway, I'm asking these questions because of family experience, dating history, and my adult experience. The traditional role was often touted as something that should be in place, but growing up I never saw a healthy or functioning model of it. THe men I've met since I've been an adult who were amenable to staying at home were louses. So, I'm looking for what else I should be looking for besides salary. |
|
On February 4, 2010, 6:40 pm JustAThought says:
@ Mass: (cont'd)
I'm also wondering if the list of what I'm looking for will have unique "wrinkles" because of the realities facing black relationships. |
|
On February 6, 2010, 6:56 pm Dashon says:
JAT: I could really go deep with this one, but I'll respond to your comments instead.
"I watch these women present their husbands as the head of the household and decision maker when all evidence points to the contrary" What evidence? "I watch women painstakingly defer to their mates, and I wonder what these women get in return." Partnership, companionship, friendship, unconditional love, emotional support, good/regular sex, etc., etc., "I'm an outsider, so I don't know what goes on behind closed doors" Prior to being married, I had very different ideas about WHAT a marriage should be & the roles each of us should play. Some were similar to the thoughts you've expressed. In hindsight, I can say that until you've been married, its hard to fully understand what you're seeing from the outside. "when I hear a high school acquaintance talk about “we” when describing the house she bought (pre-relationship w/ fiance), the rental home she bought (during relationship where fiance was not working), the savings she accumulated, the fiance she pushed to get his stuff together and get back into school, and the plans for their future family that really are her plans, part of me has to struggle to not call her a hypocrite when she spouts all that “man needs to lead” stuff ." IMHO, its the folks who insist on defining mine and yours, versus adopting a mindset of we & ours. Couples that keep track of who does or has what...are the ones that end up in divorce court the quickest. Its unrealistic to say let's merge our lives...but keep a list of who has what. I can hear it now..."Welcome to the home I bought that me and my husband live in". Not a good look & pointless to boot...just my 2.5. |
|
On February 6, 2010, 7:12 pm Wood says:
Of the five or so black women – married women – who's relationships I've observed closely, all but one have the woman as the higher earner. I watch these women present their husbands as the head of the household and decision maker when all evidence points to the contrary.
JAT: It is very apparent that there are a few elements of a man's disposition that you or many sistas just can't wrap your minds around; the desire of a man to be the head of his household is inate, and does not comes from social or economic positioning. It is not a modern financial event. It is not one of those things that you can educate or be promoted into that gets flip-flip back and forth as each party exchange position as each periodically get promoted to higher earnings over each other. No one is telling, requesting, insisting that the sista-hood has to accept this, but the brotha-hood will be the head of his household with or without a woman... it is something that you will have to acccept if you want to be with us. It is something that doesn't keep us from having relations with the sistas, but it is something that keep you listening to Mary J. when things doesn't work out. I earn more than my girl, but she has more education and will eventually earn more. When we get married, I will be the head of the household, and when she earn more...even if she manage to earn twice as much, I will still be the head of the household. She has to make sure she chooses the man who she is willing to let lead her, because I will lead my household with or without her...and that is exactly what I told my ex wife. |
|
On February 7, 2010, 12:41 pm Wood says:
I have to agree with Dashon in more ways than one. JAT, don't be pissed at me, but you have questions, but you are so far off the mark with your perspectives, that I don't think you would even recognize the answer... don't hit me...lol.
This is just another example of the various dimensions that many of us black folks are getting "caught up". I know you didn't get a chance to address everything in your blog, but your reference and inferences on how you conclude that a sista's resent finances freedom and liberties should intertwine with man's inate disposition that has been in place throughout man kind... you are caught up and don't even know it. From a cave man living in his cave, a homeless drunk claiming his position for his spot under a bridge, to a CEO living in his ten bedroom mansion, a man will natually attemp and seek to be in charge of his domicile, and there is nothing a woman's financial and social status can do about it. You don't understand that or you would have never raised those questions. As a man, I have to have some since of understanding about the inate qualities and disposition of women and even if I don't understand some, I have to proceed forward blindly in many aspect. In my relationship, I'm bringing the home, a larger income... for now, and I have a house full of furnishing just like she has. We have double just about everything. Yeah, it is so-called "my house" before she came, but I know women, and I know she want to put her decorative "stamp" on a whole lot of what goes in the home. Yeah, I'm the man of the house, but it is very important that the woman feel she has significant influences as to the what, why, when, etc that goes on in order for her to feel at home. Her existance in the home can't be fragile. Why? the hell if I know, but that is the way women are. |
|
On February 7, 2010, 1:22 pm Wood says:
A story.
My girl has two daughters, one is in college and is planning to transfer to Alabama on an academic scholarship, the other is going to stay in her High school in the district where her father lives. My girl wanted them to have separate rooms, eventhough one is going off to college, and the younger will be there on week-ends. I wanted to put them in one room to share, but my girl expressed a strong disapproval. Yeah, I could have went with the "it my house", " I don't want or I don't like" route, but felt that would have been a bad move, so let it go. Its a four bedroom, and one will be the exercise room, and they are eating up two whole rooms for damn part-time usage... got damn!!! women and their clothing shit!!! I feel that they have too much shit for kids that don't have damn jobs. How in the hell do these parents buy kids a dresser and a damn chest full of shit?...and the dirty cloth basket is always full...WTH. How in hell can each kid have enough cloths to fill two dirty cloths basket... our whole house-hold utilized one damn basket... WTF. Closet full of cloths purses, and shoes like working grown ups!!! Hell, me and my two brothas shared a five drawer chest, and our closet floor was never full of shoes, because we didn't have a whole lot of shit to cluttter the floor... and we still lived. Hell, we always had a clean room because there weren't enough shit to make it junky. Rant over...lol. We decided to have a sunroom added because I was really looking forward to using one of those bedroom as a sitting room. |
|
On February 11, 2010, 6:30 pm JustAThought says:
@ Dashon:
For three of the couples, the people are living the wife's pre-marriage life plan. LIke, all she did was add husband and stir. But, again, I don't know what goes on behind closed doors. Also, I know you cannot look at things as mine and yours in a marriage (or even a serious relationship). My biggest thing with the last example I listed is when she spins this revisionist narrative to me in one-on-one conversations. I'd rather she not tell me certain parts of her story with this dude because she forgets that I know a lot of their timeline. She can call their residence "our house" because that is what it is. But saying how much he lead when they bought a home before they started dating just trips my BS meter. |
|
On February 11, 2010, 6:48 pm JustAThought says:
@ Wood:
I"m more prone to shoot, not hit, lol. J/k And I'm asking because I don't know. For all the talk about a man wants to be head of his household, most real-life examples of this boil down to financial means (or control of the finances). Outside of that, I have not seen an example of a man providing anything besides finances that would qualify him as head of household. From my perspective, it seems like women want the [tenuous] security that comes with the legality of marriage, and a live-in sperm donor. Marriage is supposed to be about more than that, and yet I keep finding anecdotal reasons that it really isn't. I guess I'm wondering what love looks like, because I keep running into examples that reinforce the idea that a relationship will be nothing more than me pouring into a person - physically, emotionally, financially, and psychologically - without any reciprocity. |
|
On February 11, 2010, 7:44 pm Dashon says:
"She can call their residence "our house" because that is what it is. But saying how much he lead when they bought a home before they started dating just trips my BS meter."
@JAT: LOL...I feel ya Sis! Hard to respect a lie, and sounds like that's what it is...LMAO! I have a friend who used to lie about being married to a man she was kicking it with & had a baby for (even wore a wedding set)....now she tells new guys that she's divorced....I'm like WTH? Why?!? |
|
On February 12, 2010, 9:35 am Wood says:
For all the talk about a man wants to be head of his household, most real-life examples of this boil down to financial means (or control of the finances). JAT, believe me, I feel where you are coming from. Actually, your sentiments are very common amongst sistas... "control" of the finances. From my perspective and from the talkins and conversations I've had with my brother friends - 80% of our friends are mutual - the men does not control the finances, but they desires to set the "tone" of the spending and direction on how things are done.
The "tone" includes paying for things that are not emotional purchases before logical. My girl was on the phone yapping to her sister about how her many boots doesn't exactly matches her new dress, and that she needed a new belt, and maybe a purse to match. When she got off the phone, I start rattling off some more significant sh.t that she has been putting off and need to purchase first...she was like oh, yeah, I don't need to get that done. A women will spend and need to do things, but you women tends to focus of the things that you want and like first. From what I've seen over the year, my sister included, if you guys spent your money on things that you really need to do as oppose to the things you want, you would have less money for all that sh.t you guys purchase. JAT, for the most part, it is usually the woman who start pushing for marriage, so you can inquire to the sista-hood who "got my home", "got my own car", "got my this", "got my own that", and find out why they are always pushing past the BF/GF relationships. JAT, now tell me if I'm wrong, if you sistas were to leave it up to the brotha-hood, the subjects of the man of the house, or who is the head of the house-hold wouldn't even be an issue... the brotha-hood ain't even going there. Leave it up to us, it would be all booty calls...lol, damn a GF/BF...lol |
|
On February 14, 2010, 12:56 pm JustAThought says:
@ Wood:
I get what you are saying about setting tone. But don't act like men don't lose their marble when they see some new gadget or toy that they want. Most dudes I know got a nice TV before decent furniture when they got their first job after college. And dudes may not have a couch, but he will have a video game console. Women just have more opportunities to spend frivolously because of the society that demands we be primped and primmed within an inch of our lives. But I digress. As for the rest of your post, you seem to reconfirm the idea that I have to basically work damn hard to get a dude to agree to commit to me before God and man, and then that's it on his end, because he has no desire for all the other things that I may want. Again, what is the benefit in this for me? Just sayin... |
|
On February 19, 2010, 10:39 am Wood says:
As for the rest of your post, you seem to reconfirm the idea that I have to basically work damn hard to get a dude to agree to commit to me before God and man, and then that's it on his end, because he has no desire for all the other things that I may want. Again, what is the benefit in this for me? Just sayin... Ok, I agree if after a few years in a relationship you are still feeling this way, so why think about marrying. I would wonder, why continue unless you were content with the BF/GF. I would wonder why other sistas are still holding on to this two or three year relationship termination date if no marriage is in sight. Why can't the brotha-hood just let it be known right off the bat that he is limited to BF/GF and the sista-hood being very receptive to that... you know the sistas could actually do that to the brothas, really. |
|
On February 21, 2010, 2:33 pm JustAThought says:
@ Wood:
I am very clear at this point in my life that I want a serious relationship that will be evaluated for marriage. If a dude says he doesn't want that, I will give myself a month or two to find out if that's what he really means and if I can deal with that (I am a woman). But, once it's clear in my mind that there will never be a wedding, I'm out. I'm too grown to waste my time on someone who doesn't even want to go there. You need time to figure out if a particular person is right for you, but both parties need to at least want to get to the same destination, even if the relationship doesn't get there. And I should be more like dudes - selfish, heartless, out to get mine. LOL, just kidding, all men are like that, but some will make you think that. |

You got real deep with this blog, made a few valid points but you know I must play devils advocate.
You mentioned that income is just a part of the equation but you didn't break down the entire holistic view when it comes to finances. Annual salary is just one way to look at it and shouldn't stop right there. Salary means nothing if a person has a high amount of bills, credit card debt, car notes, poor spending habits and with you being a student...let's remember to take student loans into consideration. It's all about how people manage their money and hopefully people have multiple streams of income like investments and home equity.
Regarding a man who shouldn't be considered the head of the household because he's not bringing in a larger amount of income is slight sighted. Like you all always mention here on blogs about forming these partnerships, a man brings much more intagible assets that a real woman would appreciate, especially if he's there raising his kids and being a good husband. Especially with this economy. Even if he's only able to provide emotional support towards his wife to make that higher income it should be considered important and valued. There's no way you could ever measure the value of his worth towards being the man of the household based off of salary when there's many other intagible factors to consider.