Verified by 
My weekly rotation of podcasts contains a few in which the hosts provide advice to callers-in, many of whom are disclosing romantic problems and most of whom are young straight women. I’ve been routinely dismayed by the propagation of tired and downright sexist ideas about gender roles and courtship rituals that occurs during these calls.
The first red flag was that he let me split the check on our first date…
He always initiated our hangouts and now he’s stopped…
I’m super ambitious but he’s happy to stay in his construction job. Ick…
He’s asking me to split our bills?!...
He has no timeline for a marriage proposal…
Given the automaticity with which 'The Patriarchy' is invoked among self-identifying feminists while lamenting everyday sexism, I guess I would expect to see more young women actively resisting relationship dynamics that place men in the driver’s seat and women in a more submissive or passive role. It is the year 2024, after all.
Rather, the impetus for these calls is typically that the caller is distressed about a man’s refusal to follow a patriarchal relationship script, in which they have traditionally been expected to take charge in relationships and prove their capacity to provide for their female partners.
I can’t help but notice an obvious double standard at play here. That is, while I expect that many of these callers would likely criticize and actively resist power dynamics that favor men in their workplaces, there seems to be a lot more acceptance of – and even a preference for – these dynamics in the context of romantic relationships.
This notion that men should take charge and prove their ‘provider’ capacity in romantic relationships often persists long past the initial courtship stage, too. Men are sometimes expected to orchestrate Instagram-worthy marriage proposals and spend upwards of $3,000 on an engagement ring. And speaking of engagement rings – there might be no greater symbol of capitalist patriarchy, but most women still want to receive them.
And then, of course, there’s the wedding. Here, patriarchy is apparent in the practice of brides being escorted down the aisle by their fathers, traditionally meant to signify the transfer of property from one man to another.
When I think about the persistence of patriarchal romantic rituals, and how these stand in sharp contrast to increasingly loud calls for gender parity in every other domain, I worry that many men might, at best, feel confused, and, at worst, suspect that gender equality is not a cause to be treated with much seriousness in their own romantic relationships. Perhaps this is part of the reason why the division of household labor remains virtually indistinguishable from decades past, with women performing most of it.
Don’t get me wrong, I realize that men bear just as much responsibility for perpetuating traditional gender roles. But if we’re to expect their full-throated support for gender equality, perhaps the double standards that women tend to tolerate or even embrace must go.
If we’re serious about eliminating sexism, we’ll have to do the uncomfortable work of challenging gender roles wherever we see them, be it at work or in our personal lives, and regardless of whether they have the appearance of providing us with some personal benefit. Solving gender inequality is not an endeavor that can be compartmentalized or re-scheduled for our convenience. It’s not an imperative that can exist Monday through Friday, nine to five, and then disappear on evenings and weekends. The list of actions we’ll have to take is not a menu from which we select only the most appetizing options.
Rather, achieving gender equality will demand some tough sacrifices from women. We’ll need to eliminate practices that we’ve long been comfortable with and others that we derive outright pleasure from. Are we up to the task?
