Perhaps a significant part of these disputes is the discussion about whose job of providing the family with the necessary benefits is more difficult and difficult: traditionally female or traditionally male. This implies that traditionally women's work is considered to be caring for children and husbands, cleaning the house, cooking and all work related to the provision of everyday life. Men's work is considered earning money and physical labor, for example, carrying heavy loads or electrical, carpentry and plumbing work, regardless of the level of theoretical knowledge of a man in this area.

For a long time, such a conditional distribution of duties was the basis of the socialist way of life, which we inertia inherited along with the touching habit of stoically enduring queues. But with technological progress, cars, grocery carts in supermarkets, light drills and screwdrivers, which even a child can master, dishwashers and multicookers fit into modern life, which, in fact, greatly "confused the cards" for those who were still guided by Domostroy instructions (It was they who at one time were transformed into the "moral code of the builder of communism", where the place of a woman and a man in a family was determined by class, and parasitism, however, as well as careerism, were considered a mortal sin). At the same time, women confidently competed with men in matters of material support for the family, and this gave them confidence that they could also desire equality in everyday life.

Nevertheless, the vast majority of men are very skeptical, for example, of women driving, suspecting ladies that, they say, they couldn’t buy a car themselves, and behind this purchase there is always a real earner of benefits - a man, be it husband, father or lover. On the other hand, women are indignant: if my husband and I earn equally, then why, for example, washing dishes is still the prerogative of the wife, provided that both spouses have two hands?!

These disputes, having a real basis, are nevertheless a monopoly of educated and reflective people, and in general, society lives according to intra-family laws, passed down from generation to generation, where the male and female roles in everyday life are strictly predetermined by an unspoken family charter. Yes, such families may experience discomfort, but they have no time to understand the reasons for it. A man, undermining his health, earns his daily bread, and a woman, experiencing constant dissatisfaction, washes, rubs, erases, strokes and, alas, then she simply does not have the strength for a simple, but so necessary for the family well-being of sex. But there is an excuse: I'm tired.

In fact, such relationships have long turned not into partnerships, but into commercial ones, where a woman "sells" dinner and sex to a man for the material well-being of the family. It is no wonder that more and more often the family boat crashes into everyday life and marriages break up, with mutual reproaches: “I washed, stroked, cooked for you, and you ...” or “I ruined my health so that the family lived in abundance, and you ...” This always raises a tough question: whose money is in the family then, and what will a non-working family member be left with after a divorce? Perhaps the growing popularity of marriage contracts is due to this? After all, it is material security that is the cornerstone of all divorces, where the one who leaves takes everything.

At the same time, oddly enough, in the modern world there are enough young people, both women and men, who are quite ready to fulfill certain roles in the family, provided that their financial condition is stable. The modern version of the "kept woman" is quite a desirable way, which at one time attracted foreigners to the market of Slavic brides, and became a disappointment for many brides who could not live according to the European laws he proposed. After this failure, a huge number of girls began to impulsively look for home-grown princes, looking for, seducing, pleasing and tearing them literally with meat from their wives and girlfriends. Why climb the hierarchical ladder by walking on the stairs, if you can use the high-speed elevator - appearance and youth? True, the princes themselves, sitting in an armchair with a psychologist, ask themselves the eternal existential question: "Does she love me for my pure soul or for my money? And what will happen if I lose this money, the hour is uneven?"

The paradox is that if earlier families with the standard Tolstoy way of life were much stronger than families with conditional equality, then at the moment it is precisely the families where the woman does not work, is completely dependentfrom a man and is busy with life and children. An essential argument in favor of finding a favorite pastime for unemployed women. Plus, the popularity of men after 35 among young nymphets is steadily growing! They do not want to give up the hierarchical elevator.

At the same time, the loss of a husband's job is very difficult to bear even for quite successful and working women, which is often the same reason for divorce. Women are sensitive to men's crises and searches for themselves, not wanting to bear the burden of financial responsibility on their own shoulders, even if she herself is the chairman of the bank's board. For such a man, the label of gigolo is firmly fixed, and he is defiantly condemned by society, even if before that he himself was the chairman of the board of the bank. And where, may I ask, is justice? Doesn't treating a man like an ATM become the reason for treating a woman like a housekeeper? What did they fight for, as they say ...

With a special eye you need to look at a modern man about forty years old. His socialization took place in the criminal nineties, where the sign of a "real man" and "alpha male" was a rigid hierarchy and the presence of his "place in the sun", for which you need to fight to the last, defending your territory. This means that the ability to strike first, to strike the weak, was also valued, and any emerging laws prohibiting this simply could not be born in these conditions. A stern appearance, reticence, lack of empathy, homophobia and lack of communication skills were signs of a "real man". This one needed a silent and submissive girlfriend who gives him "enough signs of respect", demonstrates subordination and is initially ready to stand a few steps lower. Women had only one thing left - to love what they got, and consider it a rare success. And older men seem unique against the background of forty-year-olds: gallant, understanding, sincere.

At the same time, very young men, the sons of forty years old, have features of infantilism. After all, it is incredibly difficult to grow up adequately in an environment of tolerance for domestic violence. Where does an alpha male come from in a family where there is already one alpha male? At the same time, the young man accurately scans the behavioral line of his father, having absolutely no strength and means to implement it. As a result, he cannot marry in any way, or marries late, but at the same time he has absolutely no idea about family responsibilities, the rules of coexistence in the family. He demands, but gives nothing in return.

And now let's imagine an option when a young, beautiful nymph met, counting on the fact that the well-being of the family of her chosen one would become her property, and a young infantile sloth, who sees service personnel and an object of sexual attraction in this nymph. How long will their marriage last? Are they able, with such different initial settings, to hear each other? Yes, Svirid Golokhvastov and Pronya Prokopovna had a million times more chances to be happy than these modern people! At least they were able to live up to each other's expectations!

Any lovers see life together in a separate apartment as a perfect paradise, but, alas, they do not always understand that a partner is not a mother who will insure, feed, stroke and soothe. That the partner has character and habits, mood and desires. That under these desires it is necessary, despite your moods, to somehow adjust, treating them at least with respect. But the life of newlyweds often turns into pulling the blanket over to their side, with the assertion that it is I who is more cold (I work, get tired, benefit the family). And the attitude to money looks like this: everything that is yours is ours, and everything that is mine is mine! A common budget is a delicate matter and the great art of cooperation. And some household problems and affairs, if desired, can be outsourced by hiring a housekeeper, plumber or nanny. This will more unite than create problems.

Yes, it is no longer possible to create an illusory "pleasant impression", you need to actively join in life together. And if sometimes there is not enough strength to do something very important for a partner, a compromise can be an elementary gratitude for what has been done, for help, and not accepting it with a sour look of a winner. If your husband meets you from work with a dinner made from products for which you had completely different plans, you should not arrange a "debriefing", just thank you. And next time he will have the strength and desire to do everything right. If your wife has a desire to give you an expensive but unnecessary gift, thank her and teach her to understand what you really need.

Yes, in any relationship there is a leader and a follower. And if the lead partner is well educated, intelligent, able to hear and perceive what he hears, then peace in the family is ensured. After all, family relations are a system of mutual compromises, which will not be superfluous to agree on even before marriage, given the peculiarities of upbringing in parental families. And if you are initially unsympathetic to the relationship in your parental family,o partner, it is foolish to hope that you will be able to break this age-old stereotype. Better run. After all, no love can rest on a sheer cliff of misunderstanding ...