by exploited » Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:10 pm
What do you mean no one says this?
A poster literally just said he wouldn't marry a girl if she wasn't willing to put her career on hold in order to raise children. It seems that you are arguing that this isn't sexist, because it is a personal preference. What I am arguing is that it is a sexist personal preference, just like it is sexist if a woman wouldn't marry a man that she loves for the sole reason that it is his job, as a man, to be a provider, and he thinks they should both work.
Irrespective of our past dealings in this thread, surely you can agree that those decisions need to be negotiated, and that your partners obedience to traditional gender roles should not be a defining factor in a relationship. Thinking otherwise is sexism, at least de facto sexism, and I just don't see a way around it.
The point is, if both people want to work, and both people want kids, there is no way to say that the woman should stay home and take care of the kids, and make this an ultimatum, without adhering to some sort of sexist logic.