Do our resident conservatives and republicans truly believe women are biologically suited to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen?

[MRT144]

Appearing on a Fox Business panel Wednesday evening, Fox contributor Erick Ericksonsuggested it is “anti-science” to reject the biological claim that men should be in the “dominant” role in the nuclear family.This particular panel segment of Lou Dobbs Tonight took on a recent Pew study claiming that mothers are now the primary source of income in 40 percent of American households. Dobbscharacterized the findings as “troubling” while panelist Juan Williams asserted that it indicates “something going terribly wrong in American society.”
Erickson added to that by suggesting female breadwinners are antithetical to biology:

“I’m so used to liberals telling conservatives that they’re anti-science. But liberals who defend this and say it is not a bad thing are very anti-science. When you look at biology — when you look at the natural world — the roles of a male and a female in society and in other animals, the male typically is the dominant role. The female, it’s not antithesis, or it’s not competing, it’s a complementary role.”

He continued on to lament that “We as people in a smart society have lost the ability to have complementary relationships in nuclear families, and it is tearing us apart.”
He concluded: “Having mom as primary bread winner is bad for kids and bad for marriage.”

Say it aint so Dino and HC

[Ben Kenobi]

You're asking me what I think?

"For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior."

I also think this:

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her."

I should be willing to die for my wife if necessary.

[DinoDoc]

Say it aint so Dino and HC

He's probably referring to this study:

Doing household chores may mean less sex for married men

Does the sight of men doing traditional female chores turn women off? A new study suggests that the more time men spend on household tasks, the less sex they have.

"Our findings suggest the importance of socialized gender roles for sexual frequency in heterosexual marriage," lead author Sabino Kornrich, junior researcher at the Center for Advanced Studies at the Juan March Institute in Madrid, said in a press release. "Couples in which men participate more in housework typically done by women report having sex less frequently. Similarly, couples in which men participate more in traditionally masculine tasks -- such as yard work, paying bills, and auto maintenance -- report higher sexual frequency."

The study, which was published in the February edition of the American Sociological Review, surveyed 4,500 heterosexual married U.S. couples from 1992 to 1994. The average age for men was 46, and women were around 44.

On average, couples spent 34 hours on traditional female household chores, like cooking, cleaning, shopping and sewing. They spent another 17 hours doing men's tasks, which include household repairs and working outdoors in the garden. Men spent did about one-fifth of the female tasks, and only a little more than half of the male tasks. This suggested that women did more housework overall.

Men and women reported on average having sex five times the month before the survey was taken. In households where the women did all the female chores, they had sex 1.6 times more a month than the households where the men did all the traditionally female tasks. Households where men did 40 percent of the housework had one less sexual event on average.

"Marriage today isn't what it was 30 or 40 years ago, but there are some things that remain important," co-author Julie Brines, a UW associate professor of sociology, said in a press release. "Sex and housework are still key aspects of sharing a life, and both are related to marital satisfaction and how spouses express their gender identity."

Researchers ruled out forced sexual coercion because similar levels of sexual satisfaction were determined in houses with traditional and non-traditional divisions of household tasks. In addition, two-income households and households where one spouse was working had the same level of sexual frequency and division of household chores. The wives' income did not play a factor on how often the couple had sex, and happiness in marriage, religion and gender ideology did not play a role at all in sex or housework, the researchers said.

Kornrich told HealthDay that the reduction in sex frequency may be a result of fatigue when both spouses work outside the home.

"I suspect that in cases where people are too tired to do any chores, they just don't have sex," Kornrich said to HealthDay. "Our research and earlier studies find that couples who do more housework overall have more sex, suggesting that those who have more energy to do housework also have more energy for sex."

But, Brines said in an interview with the Toronto Star that the division of household chores has remained the same for the last few decades, and that gender-connected chores may have more sexual connotations that we realize.

"If the activity is coded as masculine or feminine and it expresses ideas about what makes the opposite sex interesting, attractive, alluring mysterious...that seems to be related to sexual activity and possibly sexual desire," Brines says.

She added that for couples where everything is equal and they share same interests and close friendships, they too have less sex on average.

"There's a sibling-like tonality to the relationships," she said. "They're really good best friends, but the sexual charge is missing from the relationship."

Sharon Sassler, a sociologist at Cornell University, said to the Toronto Star that there is evidence that traditional women's household chores have become some of men's today, meaning that some of the survey responders might have considered what the researchers thought of as a female task to be a male task.
"I'm not so sure about their uptick in cleaning, but I think they have increased their share in cooking and perhaps even laundry (thanks to years of living on their own, they now know how to do it)," she said.

Or he's just a boob. I'll let other people who know him better judge.

[Tupac Shakur]

Women are quite obviously biologically suited to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, while men are not. Both can go barefoot and be in a kitchen, but only women can be pregnant.

[kentonio]

It amuses me that the same people who are too stupid to accept evolution are equally quick to point to the animal kingdom for comparisons.

[Ben Kenobi]

Perhaps Kentonio can provide an example as to how the monkeys become men.

[Tupac Shakur]

It amuses me that the same people who are too stupid to accept evolution are equally quick to point to the animal kingdom for comparisons.

No animals are suited to being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. Very few of them have feet, and none of them have kitchens.

[DinoDoc]

No animals are suited to being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. Very few of them have feet, and none of them have kitchens.

I only have 1 thanks.

[N35t0r]

Perhaps Kentonio can provide an example as to how the monkeys become men.

Perhaps you can provide an example of how a sun-like star becomes a red giant.

[kentonio]

No animals are suited to being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. Very few of them have feet, and none of them have kitchens.

I wasn't aware you were a FOX news commentator, or any of the other people I was actually referring to.

Perhaps Kentonio can provide an example as to how the monkeys become men.

And in a single sentence Ben illustrates just how poorly educated and idiotic he really is. Want to go for the title champ and start talking about how the banana was designed by God for the human hand?

[regexcellent]

It amuses me that the same people who are too stupid to accept evolution are equally quick to point to the animal kingdom for comparisons.

A bit of a strawman, don't you think? DD and HC aren't creationists.

[-Jrabbit]

You're asking me what I think?

"For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior."

I also think this:

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her."

I should be willing to die for my wife if necessary.

So when you say, "this is what I think," you actually mean, "this is what Catholic Bible canon tells me to think."

[Tupac Shakur]

So when you say, "this is what I think," you actually mean, "this is what Catholic Bible canon tells me to think."

What's your point? The vast majority of what all of us think is something we read in a book somewhere.

[Alexander's Horse]

I'd like to reply to this thread but I'm married and Mrs Horse is psychic....

[-Jrabbit]

Too late for me, Horse.

What's your point? The vast majority of what all of us think is something we read in a book somewhere.

Saying "You're asking me what I think?" but responding with literally nothing but Bible quotes seems to suggest a total lack of actual thinking. I guess it's Ben's way of justifying his "yes" response to the OP question. He's certainly entitled to his opinion.

I suppose you can make a case that somebody, somewhere, wrote something that I once read and am now parroting agreement to. But even if that was the case, at least I don't point to it as an indisputable article of faith and pretend that should substitute for reason.