«Home

Is It Compulsory For A Man To Provide For His Family?

This thread is in response to a thread started by a feminist.She is against women washing their husbands clothes and she seems to be having a lot of supporters on there.Therefore, since the world wants to bring down the very foundations of a lasting relationship, i hereby ask this question :

Is it compulsory for a man to provide for his family?

All replies (both positive and negative are welcome).

Avatar
Newbie
55 answers

Why do people frown when a man refuses to provide for his family and yet some people (feminists naturally) support the idea that it is a woman's right to abandon all her duties in the home? Why?

0
Avatar
Newbie

And the question remains :

Is it compulsory for a man to provide for his family?Is it a must?Is it by force?Can't he just sleep at home all day while the woman works 18 hours of the day?

0
Avatar
Newbie

GL, the above assertions are totally unfounded, I must say.

What happened to the guy who "hustled", the one who probably did some illegal runs (and got caught or not by the law) or bent some rules at work in his favour, or the guy who borrowed and was immersed in bad debt, for the sake of his family? What happened to the guy who asked his elder brother to loan or give him money to save his neck in financial crises, just like the woman who asked her young niece to live with them and reduce her workload? And yet you speak as if the wife is the one who always saves the day, while still upholding her end of the deal.

I do not like how you seem to be bending the resolution of all marital crises in the direction of the wife. The conjectures you proffer are entirely spurious!

0
Avatar
Newbie

i can't say it is COMPULSORY because if a man earns 30k/month and the wife earns 300k/month obviously the onus is on her to be the breadwinner. however, my experience is that having a woman as the breadwinner of the family emasculates most men. and that causes problems in the family,

i can't get married to a man who can't provide for a family. that's my personal choice though. but if after marriage we're in a situation that calls for my stepping into the bread-winning role, i would willingly do that.

i don't consider myself a feminist, but i'm all for equal rights. i think this thread is quite different from the washing husbands' clothes thread. usually whether a woman decides to take on the traditional female roles or not, she is still responsible for them. when a woman can't cook/wash, she employs maids, nannies and cooks. she doesn't expect the man to do the housework. if a man can't provide for the family, the woman does. and even while providing financially she still remains responsible for ensuring the housework is done. how's that for equality?

0
Avatar
Newbie

^^^Okay

@NL

Is it compulsory for a man to provide for his family?

0
Avatar
Newbie

@ michelin89

You said it all

shying away from our individual responsibility in

any giving relation;marriage or courtship won't anyone.

And so the better everyone(guys & babes) starts facing the

the there are some responsibilities that are un-debatebly ours

in the relationships that we currently find ourselves, the better

for us all and for our children.

0
Avatar
Newbie

@harakiri: Sincerely, I think we need to consider the fact that although advancements in the modern society seem to be remoulding traditional roles in content, the roles have never really shifted in context. So, whether you have a traditional viewpoint or a modernistic viewpoint, it will be wise to consider the context and not the content. Examining the content of the roles can be confusing if you try to look from those two viewpoints at once.

IMO, considering the contexts of the roles: basically the man is the inward-to-outward person of the family, he controls what comes in and goes out of the home, and how it comes in and goes out; while the woman is the inner-person who controls/manages/improves resources within the home and ensures that the man's efforts are not wasted.

If you critically examine these contexts from a traditional viewpoint, one may say that the man is the sole provider and the woman should sit at home to take care of it. But from a modernistic viewpoint we know this can't always be so.

And that is where responsibilities come in. In summary, I will say, it is the responsibility of the man to ensure that the contexts he ought to fulfill are properly catered for, and it is the responsibility of the woman to see that the contexts she ought to fulfill are not neglected. Whatever means they will agree upon to process their contextual roles is left in their hands e.g. a medical surgeon wife who is always very busy STILL has the contextual role of ensuring her family looks presentable. If she will get a clothier to examine their wardrobes from time to time, or she will do it herself on some free weekends, is another matter. An husband who just lost his job has the responsibility of looking for how to get his family's needs fulfilled till he gets a new job, even if his wife is an oil tycoon. The plan may or may not involve speaking to her about it (or for a sensible wife, she volunteering to help), but his responsibility is to ensure that the family does not lack.

And let me add, for the other thread, it is compulsory for the wife to KNOW that her husband's clothes need to be clean, that is her contextual role. If people see a married man at work, with a rumpled or dirty shirt, or a married man who is famished and growing lean, the first questions are "I thought he is no longer a bachelor? Is his wife ill? Does he have marital problems?" and similarly, an unkempt wife or a wife who cannot afford to attend to female necessities will be asked such questions, and kids who are kicked out of school for fees will never be asked about their mum, it must be the dad, unless they have a single parent.

There. A long post. I hope my points about contextual roles and responsibilities are clear. There is no hard and fast rule, I believe.

0
Avatar
Newbie

off-topic:

@Fl Gators: Here is the first sci-fi novella, I forgot I posted one on NL. http://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-371703.0.html

@Fl-Gators: Please stop the dustup against Harakiri. I think he is just trying to prove a point, howbeit subtly but exaggerated to clarify/magnify his point. Personally, I see it like SATIRE, and in satire, insults and scorn will definitely be wittily passed along to drive home the point. You have gotten his message, but others may not so readily see his point if the thread does not exist. I think you are over-reacting. Really. But that's my 2 cents sha.

@Topic: Hmm. I ask, "Why is he called a MAN?"

0
Avatar
Newbie

Back to the topic of discussion :

Is it compulsory for a man to provide for his family? Is it a necessity? Must it be enforced?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Madam Gators. . .Does since when did FL Gators = Everyone on NL ?

I have told you to get back to the good work wey you send yourself.Run along and spend your precious time reporting.Come on now. . .don't be shy.Keep reporting.Keep up the good work.

0
Avatar
Newbie

It does, sweety

Mon ami, if almost everyone on this thread criticizes the level of maturity of your thread, then obviously, you need to check yourself out and stop attacking your sincere fragile FL Gators. Okies?!

0
Avatar
Newbie

I thought you were reporting this thread.Wetin happen?No response?

0
Avatar
Newbie

What does Oprah have to do with this?

Oh, you were competing with her. . . .

Ode, other men are worrying about making something with their life to provide for a family, this one is worrying about how much dough his wife will be bringing back home to him.

Igbesi aiye lo fin sere. . . . eyi to ba ku lara e, awon eye aiye ma kuku fi se onje.

0
Avatar
Newbie

You would be rather more productive reporting this thread.Run along now.Go get it girl.Oprah Winfrey is right behind you.

0
Avatar
Newbie

HaraKiri What is it that you have against women?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Even my baby sister (who is much older than you by the way), replies with more common sense than this.Is it the 10,000 posts you have that makes you feel "grown"? A woman that refuses her duties and a man that refuses his duties are the same thing.Quit your selfish feminism and work that empty shell you call a head a bit.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Stop blabbering like a fool.

It's not even the fact that you created this thread out of revenge that boggles me. . . . its the fact that you're comparing family provision to laundry that worries the heck out of me.

Grow some balls, be a man, and stop thinking like a rebellious teenager.

Nonsense and ingredients

B,T,W Dont bother replying. . . .

0
Avatar
Newbie

So, it is compulsory for a man to provide for his family?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Keep reporting.Don't give up! Some day, your dream might come through.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Is it compulsory for a man to provide for his family?

0
Avatar
Newbie

@ poster

You should have found a better analogy because I can't even see how important clothes washing is compared to providing for your family.

@ topic

Since you have not asked if the man should provide entirely for the family and I'll go by logic and say it is compulsory for a man to provide for his family. He may do a part or the most, but he must not fail to satisfy the primary their needs. Afterall why did he create one in the first place?

That is a responsiblity he shares with his wife and there is no excuse to stop it. Gender equality won't help you either.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I hear you.

But, at the same time, t!t-for-tat threads are pretty childish. I didn't respond to the other thread, because it wasn't for me.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Dude, ask a question that relates to the thread you've opened here, not one opened elsewhere. I have already answered the question you raised here.

How many times will you ask this question, and how many times will people answer the same question you've raised?

0
Avatar
Newbie

So, is it compulsory for a man to provide for his family?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Thank you very much.It's always refreshing to know some brothers till have their thinking caps on.All i asked was a very simple/straight forward question plus i also explained in brief my reason for opening the thread.What is so complex about that to understand?I guess some of the "21st brothers" here are the types who would say or do anything just to be in the good books of ladies (what a bunch of low lives) especially that one calling himself the lord of Pyrates.Useless internet gangster.

0
Avatar
Newbie

You have really messed yourself up.And to think you call yourself a Pyrate.You are an embarassment to the brotherhood.You are too destructive abi?Dude, i don't care how drunk you are from cheap rum, i will break every bone in your body (best believe that).

0
Avatar
Newbie

@hariki

i'mma answer you wit 6 dumb questions.

Did i tell you i got an identity crisis?

Must you start a dumb topic in response to your silly idea of a feminist?

Must you go mad each time a woman is mentioned?

Are you having a relapse?

Ever been charged for felony?

Must you even give a Damn bout my questions if they all dumb?

0
Avatar
Newbie

I'll answer your question with three questions.Do you have an identity crisis? Must you always answer questions with questions? Must they be dumb questions all the time?

0
Avatar
Newbie

@topic, der ris no need to squabble o'er dis topic but i got a personal question for Ya. . . Have you got a complexity problem?

0
Avatar
Newbie

you are starting to reveal the true you. fagot.

0
Avatar
Newbie

you are typing like a turd now.  are you getting irate?

stop embarrassing yourself homo. fagg0t a%s downlow brother.

0
Avatar
Newbie

@myne white

no mind the useless felonist. He's acting to childish thinkin he wished.

Omode n se egbon yen.

I just wished he knew me well cuz i'm too destructive to be checked.

I don't even need to bother myself over the slowpoke.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Doofus, piru gang member wanna-be. . .Go suck some bloodz d**k.

0
Avatar
Newbie

@topic

you're missing my point. I don't care if yo answer is yes or no. It only depends, but orders might change with time.

If yo answer is yes, then the answer to the topic is yes. If your answer is no, then its no to the topic as well, Don't you get it?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Clearly my reply was to someone else but you just love coming for more don't you?A little advice. . .

Get off my Joystick Naughty Lady and go suck on something else!

B****H!

0
Avatar
Newbie

I love this war of the sexies. Most people replying cant be married. Marriage on its own na war when u have some kind of stance na double wahalla. Like i said in the lundary thread, Nothing is compulsary in marriage, just two imperfect people comimg together deciding to compliment each others strenghts and weaknesses. Hmmm, u guys and my dear sisters, calm down oh, take it easy with each oda, makes the world a better place

0
Avatar
Newbie

I haven't seen a "man" (until you) sweating so bad, feeling so effeminate because women ask to be respected.

0
Avatar
Newbie

You might be very wrong there man.There are more than a few on here who strongly believe the woman should eat her cake and have it.They feel that since a woman goes to work like a man, he should share all the house work like her.Therefore, it's two captains in one boat.You are in a better position should know the result of such a malady.

0
Avatar
Newbie

@topic

is it right for the wives to obey their husbands?

The answer to my question, answers your question.

0
Avatar
Newbie

like the woman washing her husbands clothes? lol

0
Avatar
Newbie

And I wouldn't use the word "required". Both the man and woman should be considerate. Wife should not feel inferior because she washes her husband's clothes. Husband should not feel belittled if he has to pick up the kids from school.

I will remain under the impression that there are some responsibilities better suited for women, just as there are others more suited for men.

0
Avatar
Newbie

what of situations where the woman and man equally contributes to the financial stability of the family, should the woman still be required to wash her husband's clothes or should everyone wash theirs?

0
Avatar
Newbie

To be fair, if a man is solely responsible for providing financial stability in his marriage, the wife should be ready to do the more menial tasks around the house. Male traditional role begets female traditional role.

0
Avatar
Newbie

how you can compare the need for a man to provide for his family with whether its necessary for a woman to wash his husbands clothes?

havent you heard of men who washed their own dirty clothes and still provided for the family?

0
Avatar
Newbie

So you know? I thought you were supporting them on the other thread!

0
Avatar
Newbie

There is nothing complex about my post.I am AWARE that it sounds weird and awkward.I deliberately made it that way because of one silly thread where women and even some so called "21 century men" are in support that a woman can choose whether to do her house chores or not.And also she in "today's world", everything must be "shared equally" and you begin to wonder why so many marriages are crashing here and there.Two captains cannot be in one boat.It will capsize.Two generals cannot lead a battalion.There will be anarchy.There CANNOT be two bosses in a marriage.It will fail.This is the biased thread i'm talking about :

http://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-374266.0.html

I'm in no way against a man providing for his family. . .HELL. . .i am not married yet and i still make sure my woman doesn't lack anything.It's the double standards and hypocrisy i see on here that gets to me.They want to eat their cake and have it and i'm not HAVING it.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Really?And what do you feel about women washing her husband's clothes?Does washing his clothes make her a slave?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Wat kind of question is dis? is it rhetorical cause it sounds silly 2 me why wuld a man marry if he doesnt knw dat taking care of a family is part of his responsibility dis questiom doesnt make sense

0
Avatar
Newbie

You know all this NL feminist ladies will accept that only men should have compulsory roles, but they would never accept that women should have compulsory roles.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Absolutely. Why take on more than you can handle?

Financial accountability is a must for marriage.

0
Avatar
Newbie
Your answer
Add image

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.