Talk:Stay-at-home dad

message: This article assumes that all stay-at-home husbands have children they care for at home, but their have been husbands who stay-at-home who did not have children and simply played homemaker/maid/cook/etc around the house for their wives, who where they breadwinners. The terms househusbands or house-spouses, while not yet recognized by many dictionary yet, have been informally used to describe such men, though it seems that sexism has resulted in the many people never even considering that it'a possible to be a childless male homemaker these days, even if the wife earns more then enough between the too live comfortably. Either we should try and address issue here in some way as well as point to the homemaking article too. --Notcharliechaplin (talk) 17:19, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This was almost 5 years ago but I just corrected it. 2603:7081:1603:A300:ACCE:C908:CA51:9CF (talk) 02:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Male childless househusbands/house-spouses 

message: "Pre Industrialisation, the family worked together as a unit and was self-sufficient."
This claim at the beginning of the article in such sweeping generality is obviously nonsensical, and seems politically motivated. (The whole introduction reads like an attempt to make gender roles appear to be a byproduct of industrialization.) "Pre Industrialisation" spans over thousands of years across all the cultures on the planet - and "the family worked together as a unit"? When exactly, in which professions? Counterexamples are obvious and countless.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.118.82.249 (talk) 16:53, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-Industrialization 

message: family members had to work outside the home to support their families. As a result, husbands and wives began operating in separate spheres of activity. The husband became the "breadwinner" by going out and working, while the wife stayed home and took care of the family
Though the above doesn't say "that husbands going out and working while the wife stayed home and took care of the family was a result of family members having had to work outside the home", it does not offer any explanation as to how it went from "husbands and wives beginning to operate in separate spheres of activity" to "husbands going out while the wife stayed home and took care of the family".
Why did for example it not happen that 50% of husbands stayed home and took care of the family while 50% of wives went out to work?
The introduction of this article says "beginning with the Industrial Revolution, mass production replaced the manufacturing of home goods; this shift, coupled with prevailing norms governing sex or gender roles, dictated". Even this is cumbersome.
Did physical fitness (i.e. literal traveling towards work, or operating heavy machinery) have nothing to do with this? Or the danger for a woman to go out which is something that is still often (anecdotally) a common way for people to think? Or the perception of "if something happens to a woman the baby gets hurt as well (9 months of pregnancy, 2 years of breastfeeding, meaning a man has 3 years of experience less in these areas to begin with)". To be explicit this paragraph is not a reliable source, probably would officially qualify as original research/opinion. But I think none of the things I have said are very far fetched.
Something more than "they began to operate in separate spheres of activity" followed by "the husbands went to work and the wives stayed at home" seems to be something that shouldn't be missing from an encyclopaedia. Wallby (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  A gap in chronology/logic in evolution of family roles