Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm curious...how many women on this Board would be okay with a "hunk" for a husband who (1) did not make a lot of money; (2) did not want to make a lot of money; and (3) did not have the credentials to make a lot of money (let's say he has a degree in art history and works as a docent in the local museum).
Let's also assume he's of above average intelligence. He's a good person and generally motivated when it comes to work. He just values work-life balance more than making the partnership, and as a consequence, he only makes $40,000 per year. For the most part, he's perfectly content with being an employee and not moving up the ladder to run the museum. He'd rather spend time with his family.
For purposes of this thread, let's assume that you, the woman, make around $250,000 per year, so money's not an issue. You come home one day and your hubby says, "You know, you're making a lot of money these days. I'm not. How about I just stay at home, pick up the kids, make dinner, and clean up the house?" Your husband also lifts weights every day and maintains a perfect six-pack. Basically, he'd be the male version of Betty Draper.
Would this be an acceptable arrangement for you? Do you think you'd be more attracted to your husband if he were more ambitious and gave the orders at work instead of taking them?
Sure. He doesn't have to be a hunk either. If I can make enough money for our family to comfortably live on one salary, then it's better for the kids to spend more time with a parent.
I dont know who Betty Draper. He wouldnt even have to be that good looking or lift weights. I would jump on that opportunity to have a stay at home husband/father if he actually worked at home and fullfilled the responsibilities of a stay at home spouse.
Sure. He doesn't have to be a hunk either. If I can make enough money for our family to comfortably live on one salary, then it's better for the kids to spend more time with a parent.
Perfect answer. This has been working the other way around for centuries.
No. I prefer doing the housecleaning and etc myself because I find it relaxing. And I would not want to make the transition of 290K down to 40K life if that had to happen.
Sure. He doesn't have to be a hunk either. If I can make enough money for our family to comfortably live on one salary, then it's better for the kids to spend more time with a parent.
I'm curious...how many women on this Board would be okay with a "hunk" for a husband who (1) did not make a lot of money; (2) did not want to make a lot of money; and (3) did not have the credentials to make a lot of money (let's say he has a degree in art history and works as a docent in the local museum).
Let's also assume he's of above average intelligence. He's a good person and generally motivated when it comes to work. He just values work-life balance more than making the partnership, and as a consequence, he only makes $40,000 per year. For the most part, he's perfectly content with being an employee and not moving up the ladder to run the museum. He'd rather spend time with his family.
For purposes of this thread, let's assume that you, the woman, make around $250,000 per year, so money's not an issue. You come home one day and your hubby says, "You know, you're making a lot of money these days. I'm not. How about I just stay at home, pick up the kids, make dinner, and clean up the house?" Your husband also lifts weights every day and maintains a perfect six-pack. Basically, he'd be the male version of Betty Draper.
Would this be an acceptable arrangement for you? Do you think you'd be more attracted to your husband if he were more ambitious and gave the orders at work instead of taking them?
Depending on what part of the country and if the other spouse works, 40k a year isn't all that hard to live on....
Unless you put the value of your man on his ability to treat you to nice cars, toys, mcmansion, jewelry, botox, etc....
I would respect that guy because he has learned that life isn't all about the material things and that time for ones relationships and family is valuable.
I am not sure about the work-life balance versus making the partnership? Are you saying that men should earn a certain amount?
You could be very happy with someone like this if you value the right things, but if you prefer the material gifts and things then go in a different direction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If that is the case then San Francisco, Washington D.C., New York or Boston would fit the equation.
