Untitled

if you thought you were signing up for a partnership of equals where you shared the responsibilities and financial burdens, the other person does not have the right to pressure or manipulate you into becoming The Breadwinner.

like, in my case it was super duper obvious that what my ex was doing was wrong because they would watch me come home from 50+ hours of work every week while they did three, and then expect me to do all the grocery shopping, cleaning, and life admin shit as well.

but even if they hadn't. even if they had decided to be The Housewife while I was The Breadwinner. that would still be bullshit because when we got married it was based on explicit agreement that we were planning to be a two-income, split-everything-equitably couple. no matter what, I didn't consent to burning myself out trying to provide for two people, and no one had the right to force me to do that.

it's not just bad if you happen to marry an asshole. it's bad because (mostly) women are pressured by society to make themselves (and possibly their children) completely financially dependent on a man who has been taught from early on that he has to make the decisions for the family because he is the rational one while women (and children) are too emotional to make smart choices. and then the woman can't leave without risking to put her children into poverty. (yes, there are laws to protect women but they do not always work well enough)

The Breadwinner is typically gendered as a male role and I think men are more easily manipulated into taking it on. because the societal pressure is already there, and there are specific gendered social scripts that abusers can rely on - women wanting their husbands to be "ambitious" is a whole trope for example.

and yeah, once you're in that situation, a lot of the being trapped is mental like you say - "it would be wrong to leave this person who depends on me" type stuff - but some of it is structural and very hard to escape. my personal example: in Scotland, it's hard to get a divorce without being separated for at least a year first. and, if you own a house, your spouse has the legal right to live there, even if their name isn't on the deed and they aren't paying the mortgage. that's a huge catch-22: can't get your spouse out of your home without a divorce, can't get a divorce while your spouse is still in your home. the person wanting the divorce could move out, of course, but with what money? that trap kept me in an unsafe situation for years.

and there is real danger in the role itself. financial danger where the other person drags you into debt and your housing and food become precarious, but also danger of illness or even death from overwork. there are plenty of jobs where being chronically tired at work can literally kill you (eg long haul trucking) but even where it's not quite so direct, the danger to health is very real.

one big difference is history. The Housewife has always been a dangerous position to occupy; The Breadwinner was much, much safer even just 60 years ago, when it was normal for a single income to be able to support a family without constant overtime or gig economy side hustles.

I was allowed full access to any books, movies, and internet I wanted fully informed about our family beliefs and practices but I was given no supervision once I reached about 13 because my parents trusted me to stick to the rules or not as I felt and come to them if there was anything that I had questions about.

As long as I said where I was going, who I was with, and when I was going to be back and then phone if anything changed I was allowed to do pretty much as I pleased from 13 onward.

I moved back in with my parents after university and the first conversation we had was my dad telling me that if I felt like they were treating me like a child to please tell them because they had no intention of doing so.

password protected my computer so i had to get permission every time i wanted to use it

put a passcode lock on our pantry so we couldn’t eat without permission

regularly checked our internet browsing history

shut off the internet at regular intervals, including when i needed it for university homework

did monthly checks of our bank statements and would confiscate money if they didn’t approve of our activities

in response, i went behind their backs and opened a new bank account, got a secret job, bought my own groceries, and used the wifi from the school across the street. they didn’t succeed in disciplining me. all they did was force me to distance myself from them.

To me, as a child, respect meant: “please treat me like a person/a human being.”

However, to most adults respect meant: “treat me like an absolute authority.”

What was confusing is that many of those adults were the ones teaching me that respect, to me, should mean: “treat others like people, the way you want to be treated”, but to those same adults that definition seemed to be one they thought themselves as being exempt from! It didn’t apply to them! And when I tried to apply it to them I’d be scolded, verbally berated for it, as though I was supposed to just understand that there was a difference! That there were rules that didn’t apply to them!

So, I concluded, that when adults said: “respect is not given, it is earned.” What they meant was: “personhood is earned, humanity is earned. You earn it by treating me like an authority figure. If you don’t then I will refuse to treat you like a person.” And it baffled me as to why seemingly no one thought that this was an incredibly fucked up and unfair way to treat a child!

I was expected to just Understand this on a subconscious level, to not only tolerate it but accept it without question. And especially without getting upset. However, as a child I also had a very, very small number of adults (and an older brother and sister) who DID unconditionally treat me like a person, so I knew that not only was this rule not universal, but that it didn’t even have to fucking exist at all!

It was a choice! And the majority of adults in my life chose to be unfair to me on purpose for no good, discernible reason! And it’s just… how is a little kid supposed to not be incredibly angry about this? I and my peers were expected to endure unfairness and mistreatment from toddlerhood, and never, ever express anger, frustration, sadness or even bewilderment about it! I wasn’t even allowed to ask “but why?” To try and understand it, that was misinterpreted as a challenge that adults immediately became defensive about.

they say respect and mean authority, while also saying respect and meaning basic human decency.

"Respect is a two way street."

"If you don't respect me as an authority, I won't respect you as a person."

"You have to respect me, I don't have to respect you."

If parents follow the unwritten rule of "leaders can blame underlings for failure", your children learn not just that you don't respect them.

They learn it's a bad idea to TRUST you.