I think that what most men want is a sweet, sexually available woman who provides the unconditional love Mom did, but does not actually mother them. Excessive mothering behavior--telling a man to "take your umbrella, did you take your vitamins today, stop that, do this, pick up your socks, you didn't do a very good job on this thing so do it again, let me do that for you, honey"--is, for many men, a turn-off. If a woman can provide the apple pies and comfortable home a mother does but shows that she looks up to him and is sexually available to him in a way a mother never does, she'll have a happy husband. If she also shows that she has complete faith in him and admires him as well, he will grow in strength and confidence through the years. That's my theory, anyway.
What I'm seeing is that many men are as conflicted about what they want in a woman as women are about what their role should be. I run into so many men who want the sweet, compliant wife to keep the bathrooms clean and the kitchen smelling of hot bread while wearing nothing but a little apron (what man wouldn't?)--but they also want her to bring home a big fat paycheck. It's interesting to talk to a woman who is out in the world doing exciting stuff every day, it's impressive to one's friends to have a high-powered wife, and it lightens the economic load, so I can understand why they'd want a woman like that.
As I am dating I meet a lot of successful men who are quite indignant when they learn that my job does not net me six figures, so I must necessarily be a golddigger. I gently point out that they can't have it both ways: taking care of a house, children, and husband at a high standard is a full-time job, and earning a six-figure income is more than a full-time job. There are only 24 hours in a day, so if they want someone who is going to have the time to spend with them and the energy to chase around the bedroom seven nights a week, something has to give.
American men need to ask themselves what they really want. Either choice, the executive or the traditional wife, is valid, and each man is going to have to think carefully about his own psychology and what will really make for a happy marriage for him. My frank opinion is that the woman who is a high-ranking executive, diplomat, professional, or scientist may have a little more trouble looking up to her husband than the woman whose accomplishments are not quite so impressive. Not saying it can't be done--I've seen it being successfully done--but it's not common.
You've obviously spent some time thinking about the problem.
Something I found out from an HR seminar once: the HR consultant got us all to rank certain "satisfiers" (TT). All the biggies were there: prestige, job security, duty, wealth, expertness, et cetera. Afterwards, we compared and discussed.
Then the HR consultant, a serious guy with a long resume both consulting and on staff at Fortune 500 companies, tossed out the composite ranking settled on by our own company's senior executive group. The top three values were all leadership values: leadership, independence, and self-realization. The fourth value was affection -- family, wife, children, friends and lovers. (It was second on my list, third on my peer group's.) That was the fourth value among the top men -- and these guys were spending 84 hours a week in the office!
That was something of an eye-opener, and I think it made the same point you just did in a slightly different way.
Where are you meeting these freaks? They are only a tiny, tiny percentage of the population. Go for normal guys, you'll have better luck.
Actually the "demand" that women earn money is also a product of divorce laws. Allow me to explain. In older days in a divorce a man would be responsible for alimony because the women would have stayed home and have no prospects for support for herself as a result of raising the children. Then permanent alimony gave way to temporary alimony which provided for the woman to get education/training to get a job and be independent. Now, if a woman comes into the marriage as pre-trained in something and already earning an income then its far less likely she will recieve permanent alimony or need as much rehap alimony.
(in fl the rule of thumb is less than two years no alimony, at five years temp alimony considered, at 12 years permanent alimony considered. Not hard and fast rules just guidance.)
It is not a complete analysis but it is a factor. I consider it a sad development when you have to have the consequence of ending a marriage in the begining of starting courtship.
There is more to this but that is for another time.
You are so right. Change locations.
Didn't you hear the gal on Rush who called with this same sort of complaint? she lived in New Jersey. She moved to the midwest and met a guy. We still live on earth here in the midwest. Or at least, a greater percentage of us do. Get out in the wide open spaces where people act like they're supposed to for the most part, instead of living high pressure lives where all their priorities almost *necessarily* get screwed up.