MORRIS: Is there a problem with men earning less than women in the household, and do you think that it could throw off -- that it actually could cause big marital problems?Yes, it absolutely could. If the husband is an insecure jackass whose sense of self is tied to money and having his wife be subordinate to him.
I get the cultural argument, guys. I mean, I can see how -- we can all weave our way through cultural issues. But isn't there some sort of biological, innate need for men to be the caveman? Go out and bring home the dinner and actually go out -- Is it emasculating if we don't do it?Isn't there a biological, innate need for men to be the caveman, says the man who earns a (very good) living sitting in a suit and makeup while running his mouth according to what he's told to say. Does he stop and kill some pigeons on his way home from the studio so that he has fresh-killed meat to bring home to his wife?
Seriously, Morris is arguing that there's an innate biological caveman urge, and it's survived all the economic changes human beings have gone through, from hunting and gathering to farming to industrialization to service work and, yes, entertainment. And even though the nature of men's work has been completely transformed over the years, we're to believe that what persists, biologically is a need to be a provider? And being a provider doesn't matter unless you're more of a provider in a specific financial way than your wife is? Men's biology is flexible enough to make the transition from spearing an animal to having a paycheck direct deposited, but not flexible enough to have that direct-deposited paycheck be slightly smaller than women's direct-deposited paychecks? Yeah, I think what you're talking about there is culture, dude. It's not even a very elaborate justification for thinking men should be in charge and women should be paid less and kept down.
I never thought I'd say this, but maybe Fox should stick to talking about Benghazi?