“YES, I wanted to leave her, but I stayed because she
has an income, a good salary.” A man said this to
my hearing only last week.
Naturally, this statement aroused my interest in
what two people were discussing. I don’t know who
they are but from what I later understood, a mother-
the woman this man was talking to had confided in
him about her daughter.
And from what I heard, her daughter had just been
proposed marriage by a well-heeled man. But this
was not the mother’s trouble at all. Her concern was
that the girl who had helped in the family’s small
business has stopped contributing.
Although she is a university graduate, her mother
who was visibly agitated, observed, she has refused
to get other jobs because she says that the pay was
not worth her leaving home in the morning and
braving the traffic for peanuts. It was beyond her
who has trained her children to be independent, she
bemoaned.
The way I saw it, she wanted this man’s advice
urgently on how to handle her daughter’s
foolishness. In the end though, I could not say if her
daughter’s stupidity or the man’s cold-hearted
calculations that darkened her face further.
She winced and looked at him with an open mouth
when he told her that he married his wife- a woman
she knows, because of her money.
I have thought about it since and I see that man as
very wicked too because I believe it is still the
man’s duty to provide his family’s need and even
want.
We know now that as women become more and
more civilised, that their wants and needs may
increase from the occasional pair of shoes to buying
a whole collection before she can feel satisfied.
And it has fairly been acknowledged that the man
cannot or should not buy these luxuries; not when
there are children to bring up.
But we should state also that the woman having
proved that she can be independent and support her
herself by make money which may some times be
higher than her man’s income.
Taking care of the family however is still seen as
the man’s role while the woman may support him
with her own money.
It occurred to me that we criticize women who
marry for money and as I thought about this issue,
and that also that a female gold digger would never
have announced that fact so openly- people like this
man would have torn her to shreds in condemnation
should she have been bold enough to declare that
love was not a motive in her union.
I wanted to talk to that man and tell him that his
advice could have worked in the 1970s or 1990s-
when the woman had just emerged from the first
flush of Female Emancipation; then she has realized
that she could be herself, remain true to her beliefs
that a woman can demand her personal rights and
still be happy in a marriage.
I wanted to remind him that at that time some of
then recently emancipated women- the first in their
families to get a higher education and who were
worried that they may not find a man to marry would
have been glad to tie the knots and happily sign
away their wealth to man because he did a favour by
marring them.
I still remember a saying that education without
marriage or specifically without a husband was
nothing. It was one of the ways the society tried to
remind the woman of her position in the home-
doing house chores and rearing children.
However, the woman of this century is
independent- she wants her own money even when
her spouse is rich and she wants to work to earn it.
But uncertainties like the relationship breaking down
irretrievably- it happens.
So, she wants to be prepared in case of bad
weather.
That is the advice that I would have expected that
man to give the troubled mother; not confiding that
he is there solely for the money. How long would the
relationship last? I wonder.
It is contemptible enough when a woman is the
gold digger. But if it is the man, a whole lot of
issues could crop up because she may not be able
to satisfy his wants on the long run.
He is definitely a lazy man who wants a life of
scrounging on a supposedly weaker sex. He has
never intended to work for a living in the first place
and is not likely to cultivate the habit of work; not
when he sees that his partner will give him.
Men like this have a way of bulling their partner to
get what they want. If such a union lasts long
enough and they have children, he will expect his
wife to bear the cost of running the home; he has
never cultivated the habit of work and he will not
start from the blues.
On the long run, money may become cause for
fights and this will bring unhappiness into that life.
When they can’t control issues, domestic violence
may rule their home.
So, I say guy, dig a real mine. You are well
equipped to work with your hands; better prepared
than your woman. It is still a man’s world although
women are struggling to be seen. But men still have
more opportunity to make it than women.
If you are lucky to meet a woman more financially
secure than you are, ask for help; but it is possible
she is not aware that you are after her money or that
you have not a kobo to your name.
Still, propose sellable business to her and make
sure that you give her back her money with profit to
prove who the man is.
has an income, a good salary.” A man said this to
my hearing only last week.
Naturally, this statement aroused my interest in
what two people were discussing. I don’t know who
they are but from what I later understood, a mother-
the woman this man was talking to had confided in
him about her daughter.
And from what I heard, her daughter had just been
proposed marriage by a well-heeled man. But this
was not the mother’s trouble at all. Her concern was
that the girl who had helped in the family’s small
business has stopped contributing.
Although she is a university graduate, her mother
who was visibly agitated, observed, she has refused
to get other jobs because she says that the pay was
not worth her leaving home in the morning and
braving the traffic for peanuts. It was beyond her
who has trained her children to be independent, she
bemoaned.
The way I saw it, she wanted this man’s advice
urgently on how to handle her daughter’s
foolishness. In the end though, I could not say if her
daughter’s stupidity or the man’s cold-hearted
calculations that darkened her face further.
She winced and looked at him with an open mouth
when he told her that he married his wife- a woman
she knows, because of her money.
I have thought about it since and I see that man as
very wicked too because I believe it is still the
man’s duty to provide his family’s need and even
want.
We know now that as women become more and
more civilised, that their wants and needs may
increase from the occasional pair of shoes to buying
a whole collection before she can feel satisfied.
And it has fairly been acknowledged that the man
cannot or should not buy these luxuries; not when
there are children to bring up.
But we should state also that the woman having
proved that she can be independent and support her
herself by make money which may some times be
higher than her man’s income.
Taking care of the family however is still seen as
the man’s role while the woman may support him
with her own money.
It occurred to me that we criticize women who
marry for money and as I thought about this issue,
and that also that a female gold digger would never
have announced that fact so openly- people like this
man would have torn her to shreds in condemnation
should she have been bold enough to declare that
love was not a motive in her union.
I wanted to talk to that man and tell him that his
advice could have worked in the 1970s or 1990s-
when the woman had just emerged from the first
flush of Female Emancipation; then she has realized
that she could be herself, remain true to her beliefs
that a woman can demand her personal rights and
still be happy in a marriage.
I wanted to remind him that at that time some of
then recently emancipated women- the first in their
families to get a higher education and who were
worried that they may not find a man to marry would
have been glad to tie the knots and happily sign
away their wealth to man because he did a favour by
marring them.
I still remember a saying that education without
marriage or specifically without a husband was
nothing. It was one of the ways the society tried to
remind the woman of her position in the home-
doing house chores and rearing children.
However, the woman of this century is
independent- she wants her own money even when
her spouse is rich and she wants to work to earn it.
But uncertainties like the relationship breaking down
irretrievably- it happens.
So, she wants to be prepared in case of bad
weather.
That is the advice that I would have expected that
man to give the troubled mother; not confiding that
he is there solely for the money. How long would the
relationship last? I wonder.
It is contemptible enough when a woman is the
gold digger. But if it is the man, a whole lot of
issues could crop up because she may not be able
to satisfy his wants on the long run.
He is definitely a lazy man who wants a life of
scrounging on a supposedly weaker sex. He has
never intended to work for a living in the first place
and is not likely to cultivate the habit of work; not
when he sees that his partner will give him.
Men like this have a way of bulling their partner to
get what they want. If such a union lasts long
enough and they have children, he will expect his
wife to bear the cost of running the home; he has
never cultivated the habit of work and he will not
start from the blues.
On the long run, money may become cause for
fights and this will bring unhappiness into that life.
When they can’t control issues, domestic violence
may rule their home.
So, I say guy, dig a real mine. You are well
equipped to work with your hands; better prepared
than your woman. It is still a man’s world although
women are struggling to be seen. But men still have
more opportunity to make it than women.
If you are lucky to meet a woman more financially
secure than you are, ask for help; but it is possible
she is not aware that you are after her money or that
you have not a kobo to your name.
Still, propose sellable business to her and make
sure that you give her back her money with profit to
prove who the man is.
No comments:
Post a Comment