Part of the Obama perma-campaign (I truly believe this man has never governed) is the claim that women make less than men for doing the same job. I saw a report on Fox the other night that proves that they really don’t have true data to back that up. The data we do have, however, is that women on the POTUS staff are in fact paid a weaker salary than the men folk. We often accuse others of actions of which we’re guilty, so maybe that’s what’s going on here.
But then you have this article from The Atlantic, citing yet another conflicting stat:
In nearly 40 percent of American marriages, the wife earns more than the husband.
Naturally that seems to fly in the face of the POTUS’s campaign claim where he openly tries to pander to women. They go on to report that women who are financially dependent on their husband are more faithful, and if the man is financially dependent on his wife, he tends to stray. Apart from that being a broad brush with which they’re painting, I have this newsflash: water is wet.
The feminist movement never seems to pick up on the fact that if you emasculate a man into submission, it’s not good for a relationship. Now I’m not saying that making more than your husband is an automatic ticket to emasculation, but if you DO make more, you have to create balance in other areas to ensure he knows he’s the man. That’s not caveman mentality, that’s common sense.