Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Should You Financially Support Your Man?

Taking up a line of thought from a previous blog entry, I thought I'd present this question: Should you financially support your man?

Which leads me to further questions: Is it ever okay to financially support a man? Is this biblical? Is it practical? Could a man gracefully accept being supported by a woman?

My feelings on the matter are this: I think it's okay - depending on the circumstances. I think every relationship should be about give and take. And that each partner should contribute something to the relationship, whether that be money, time, housekeeping duties, child-rearing, organizing the finances, etc. So, following that logic, it would be okay (in my mind) to financially support a man as long he is contributing something equally valuable to the relationship. Just as it would be okay to financially support a woman who is contributing equally to the relationship. Nothing is worse to me than someone who sits at home doing nothing (man or woman) while someone else foots the bill.

What are your thoughts? I'd love to hear stories from anyone who has supported a man (or has been supported by a woman) and how that worked out.

, , , , ,

11 comments:

Gina Burgess said...

Deep question, Sonya. I'll stir up the hornet's nest :)

I supported my dead beat ex husband for almost 5 years. It wasn't good for him or for me. He never looked for a job and only talked about going back to school, but he never did.

I think supporting the man is not Biblical because there is a heirarchy of family. Jesus is the head, then the husband, then the wife is under the protection umbrella of the husband and Jesus and the children are under the protection of Jesus, husband and wife.

It is too easy for the wife to think she is wearing the pants of the family when she is bringing home all the bacon.

If, the wife can allow the husband the place of authority that God gave him (Genesis 3:16 ladies), then it would be okay to support him financially. I do not think that it is possible to do this for very long without the husband losing his self-respect and the wife exerting some authenteo 1 Timothy 2:12.

ms mimi the mocha soulchild said...

Oooh Sonya! I just responded to a similar question on another blog! We must all be on the same wave length! (I reposted it from superspade for reference.)

I think the Bible is right when it says god put two together so that when one falls, the other is there. Taken in that context, there is nothing wrong with mutual support.

When a couple is on one accord, I think that is fine. The problem comes from us not being in agreement with each other in our plans, and usually that means we are not in alignment with God's goals for us as a couple.I think the problem happens when one partner expects the other to always bear that burden.

I dated a man who said he respected the fact that I was independent, but when I begin making upward moves in my life, I think he felt he was no longer needed. What I needed most from him was not his money, but his support and love! I don't know how we change that mentality.

Now I could use a little extra cash quite honestly, but I would never look for a man to provide that to me. If someone was willing to help, I would no longer turn it down if I felt it was in the context of a serious relationship. Unfortunately, I think that progressive as we'd like to think the world is, men need women to be needy to feel like men.





Tuesday, March 28, 2006
A good Black man?
Can someone tell me the difference between a Black man and a “good” Black man? After seeing two articles this past week talk about the plight of Black men in the New York Times and how marriage is for White people in the Washington Post, that phrase is rearing its ugly head again.

Let me begin by saying that for this post, the phrase “good Black man” will be limited to love interests of Black women. Which makes me wonder, why don’t we hear the phrase, I want “a good Black woman?” That doesn’t sound right does it? I digress, but if you are Black man/woman, I would venture to say that your answer to my original question would allude to some socioeconomic factor in some way or form.

And this is what I hate the most. You got people who are 25, who are 2 or 3 years removed from undergrad that are appalled at the idea of seriously dating/marrying a person who also does not have at least an undergraduate degree. What happened in two years that you are so all that that you couldn’t see yourself dating someone who doesn’t have a B.A.? The same goes for salaries and the list goes on. Now I’m not saying that people shouldn’t have any standards but it seems that being with a person who makes you happy is an afterthought after we sift through religion, family, age, education, income, FUTURE POTENTIAL, friends, geography, etc. You get my point.

I believe there is someone out there for everybody but the problem I see in the Black community is that too many of us are either trying to marry a clone of ourselves or we get so caught up in the idea of a “good” Black woman/man that we don’t act like ourselves when we come across one, however defined.

We have to stop buying into the notion of a good Black man because it makes the brothers who are think they are successful more arrogant and it makes the sisters feel like, “What’s the fuss?” And then you have sisters crossing over to date other races or feeling a sense of hopelessness such that they will never find a “good” Black man. Ladies, let me tell you this, the brother out there who is looking for you right now may not be a “good” Black man, but if he is good for you, THEN WHO CARES!!! Fellas, we have a host of other issues but I will get to you later. But seriously fam, the constant filtering of love via status and self is killing our future families.

In closing I will repeat my question; what is the difference between a Black man and a good Black man?

Stay up fam,
Brandon

5:15 PM, March 28, 2006
ms mimi said...
Well...

I have always been one of those die hard, I support a brotha that is trying to do well from himself, dutch paying, have my own thangs kind of woman.

This extends to education. I have maintained that we should not become cultural snobs because we earn a diploma, because a degree doesn't mean that a man or woman is qualified to be relationship material.

However---
But the older I get, I realized several things about life

1.) You shouldn't ask for more than you can offer.

2.) It is alright for a man to have less education ONLY if he doesn't have a problem with you having more.

3.) The "S" factor counts. (As in stability.) As we start moving from the early twenties to the late twenties and early thirties, you do want to find somebody who at least is thinking about, you know, having a health plan.

4.) As much as I would like to believe otherwise, and wish it were otherwise, most men still feel like the biggest contribution they make to a relationship is as a provider. I'd rather have somebody who co-contributes and is a companion, but hey, if y'all figure that out let me know and I'll patent the dang thing.

5.) In a relationship the four "c's" and one "s" mean the most.

You gotta have communication, commitment, things in common,
cain't be crazy, and you have to have spirituality. God needs to come first.

http://worthwatering.blogspot.com/

TT said...

Sure, this is 2006. What if a man is a househusband. If he is secure enough in his manhood to take care of the house while his wife works a nine to five, than more power to him. My brother is a stay at home Dad and a lot of people in my family give him a hard time about it. My thing is, as long as his relationship and his son is ok, then that is the most important thing. Of course, if your man is a deadbeat, you should kick him to the curb, but if you have a good husband who cooks, cleans, does laundry, reads bedtime stories, etc, doesn't that have just as much importance to a successful marriage as bringing in income?

sonya said...

Gina:

I definitely believe there should be leadership and direction in a household, but I struggle to conceptualize what that structure will look like. Does it mean that I will willingly submit to everything my (future) husband thinks? Probably not. And does it mean he will give in to my every desire and whim? Again - probably not. I envision something as close to a partnership as possible. Is it realistic? That remains to be seen.

Ms Mimi:

As usual, I am in agreement with most of what you have said. I think most probelems come in a relationship when a couple is out of sync with each other and/or with God. A little balance, a lot of spirituality and some humility on both parts would go a long, long way (I think).

TT:

I applaud your brother for bravely taking on the stay-at-home parenting role! That requires an immense amount of commitment, stability, nurturing and patience. I'm all for a brother who is willing to share his portion of the load!

A real man (to me) is one who keeps his commitments, is honest, faithful, loyal and up-front with his feelings and intentions. And if such a one is found, I think it is quite alright to support him mentally, emotionally and even financially should the circumstances call for it.

Thank you all for your comments!

Blackhoney said...

This is an excellent question Sonya and one that I can answer quite easily.One thing I have never done in my entire life and probably never will do is financially support a man.

However, I do admit there are cases where it may be okay.Supporting your "Man" is an absolute no-no.I will not put money into the pockets of just some guy I am dating... even if we have been dating for a long time.I am not gonna play wifey to anyone.

Now supporting your "Husband" in his time is need is a must for a Wife.It is not uncommon for a man to lose his job and even his will at times.I think it's a wife's obligation to be there for him and that means emotionally and financially.

Where problems may arise is if you are a woman who is just married to a no good man who wants to reverse the roles of the family and in that case... you are just in trouble.

Basically each relationship is different and has to be judged as such.In the end, do what your gut tells you to.

confederateson said...

As Christians we need to look at all things from a Biblical perspective. The man is the head of the family because God has put him in that position. He can do a good job or a bad one, but he is still responsible. Normally, the husband should be the provider - I Timothy 5:8. There is nothing wrong with the wife working, provided she can fulfill her duties to her husband and children-Titus 2:5. They come first, just as for the husband the wife and children come first.

sonya said...

Confederateson:

Thank you for your thoughtful remarks. I am looking up the scriptures you gave me (particularly Titus 2:5) to see what the Bible says about a woman's duties at home and with her husband. I conducted my reasearch on Crosswalk. It the New American Standard Bible version, it says that women are to be 'keepers at home', which Strongs further defines as '1. caring for the house, working at home; a. the (watch or) keeper of the house; b. keeping at home and taking care of household affairs; c. a domestic'.

I'm always fascinated by what the Bible reveals about a woman's intended role in a marriage (mainly because I am single and am wondering when I marry my wonderful boyfriend if I am 'supposed' to cook, clean and take care of the household - did I mention I'm not very domestic?). So, of course, I have my own biases in this matter (obviously), but I am choosing to look at the woman's role in this passage more as a keeper of the home (figuratively) - the one who keeps the home together.

This of course makes it easier for me to live with :)

I will be doing further research on this topic and keep on the lookout for a new entry in the next week!

Thanks again for your comments, confederateson.

confederateson said...

You're welcome.

I read a book about marriage and family by a pastor who was in New Orleans at the turn of the century. He said that getting married in no way belittles or demeans a woman. She is actually elevated to the role that God has blessed her with. He says that the wife is the Co-Regent of the family "Kingdom" and should be shown the respect due to her.
By the way, I have done plenty of cooking and cleaning in my 22 years of marriage. It is not exclusively a woman's job. Since the husband is responsible for the family he is obligated to do whatever needs to be done to make things go as they should. Cooking and cleaning included. Christ said if one wants to be a leader, he must serve as Christ himself did. Is not Christ our leader, yet is He not the greatest servant? The husband is to love and cherish his wife as Christ does the Church. And as Proverbs 31 shows, the wife can earn money to assist her husband in providing.
One more thought. We have some friends where the husband has rumatiod arthitis (spelling?). They do not know how long he will be able to keep working. His condition is becoming advanced. So they decided that she should keep her job (our church's elders in hearty agreement) so if and or when the day comes, their family can be taken care of. So you see, they are going to be okay in God's providence. Nowhere does the Bible say or imply it is sin for the wife to be the bread winner! In their situation she is obligated to provide. And he will make a great stay at home dad!

nimmy719 said...

this is right what you said!, now days maintains the family has too tough. men and woman both people should work outside the family. this time woman give financially support if she have so much of money. a man gracefully accept being supported by a woman this meaning is very good. when they are supporting to each other the family will become heaven.
***********************************
nimmy719
http://www.christian-drug-rehab.org

Melanie Ramsey said...

I know some of the comments made so far are coming from a christian perspective, the idea that men should be the head of the house, hence the bread winner. However, the current economic client does not always allow this arrangement and most house holds require two incomes in order to make ends meet. I know quite a few women that have supported men and the reationships tend to be miserable; with the women feeling over used and the men inadequate. Also, forgive me, most men are polygamous by nature (due to their higher sex drive - more testosterone) the idea of a man being financially supported by a woman and then being sexually interested in other women is direct exploitation of the poor woman that is providing. If all the women are providing for the man then he is a 'ponce' as we would say in England. The contribution of both men and women should be equal or the man contributing the most - never the woman. Men have provided for women for thousands of years, men are biologically wired to support their women and offspring. In past 20-30 years the tabes have reversed and it is causing mayhem.

Anonymous said...

Helping men financially, I think makes and gives them a sense of irresponsibilty. I have supported my boyfriend for the past two years financialy and all I got was cheating on me with a young lady whom he is twelve years older than and also a bad name in his family. I am greatful for the gospel that I have. It gives me peace of mind and although he is leaving with me, I don't really care about him or what he does. He is always in a hurry to go out and comes home late and also, always hiding his phone. What an unconcern person I have as a boyfriend?