. . . than men in modern marriages. By "traditional marriages", we are referring to those marriages where men are the sole bread winners of the house and women are subjected to domestic roles per prescribed gender roles.
They are more likely to undermind and hold back women in the work place in comparison to men in more modern marriages. Most notably, the three researchers (who hold positions at Harvard, NYU, and the University of Utah) found after a series of four studies that "husbands embedded in traditional and neo-traditional marriages (relative to husbands embedded in modern ones) exhibit attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that undermine the role of women in the workplace."
Here is the abstract from the research:To assess this hypothesis, we conducted four studies with a total of 718 married, male participants. We found that employed husbands in traditional marriages, compared to those in modern marriages, tend to (a) view the presence of women in the workplace unfavorably, (b) perceive that organizations with higher numbers of female employees are operating less smoothly, (c) find organizations with female leaders as relatively unattractive, and (d) deny, more frequently, qualified female employees opportunities for promotion. The consistent pattern of results found across multiple studies employing multiple methods and samples demonstrates the robustness of the findings.
More from the article:
The authors arrived at these startling findings by examining the issue of "stalled progress toward gender equality" - or the fact that while women account for a growing number of advanced degrees and share of the labor force, they remain an endangered species at the ladder's highest levels: Among other notable numbers, women are fewer than five percent of Fortune 500 CEOs, occupy barely 15 percent of board seats of the Fortune 500, and make up not even 20 percent of Congress.
The researchers asked whether this lack of progress might in part be caused by "a pocket of resistance to the revolution," namely "husbands embedded in marriages that structurally mirror the 1950s ideal American family portrayed in the 'Adventures of Ozzzie and Harriet' sitcom.'" They write that a 2008 paper spurred them to wonder "'whether a domestic traditionalist can also be an organizational egalitarian?' The answer we posit is 'no.'"
So this return to traditional marriage and this 1950 nostalgia holds women back. So when politician propagate this, they are essentially trying to reverse social progress.
I will note that a living situation where a man works and a woman doesn't isn't always a "traditional marriage" but for many people it is. What I like about this is that traditional marriage isn't about about just one man and one women. It's about one man and one women upholding archaic gender roles. Same sex marriage destroys that automatically because it can't set up a man/women dichotomy. If you think about it, if traditional marriage is actually harming positive progress for women, shouldn't we proudly say we are destroying it?
