I thought “who wears the pants in the relationship” pretty much means “who has the last word in domestic affairs”, which is independent of employment status.
Traditionally only men wore pants and were the primary breadwinners. The person who “wears the pants” is the one who is the “man” in the relationship. E.g. the one who makes the money, the one who makes decisions, etc.
If you’re heating enough to be comfortable with naked legs in early February, you either have extremely strong thermal isolation or you’re wasting energy (which costs money and is bad for the environment). Or you have the constitution of an Inuit, I guess.
i have 3 hot-water radiators (connected to district heating of course) in my 1-room apartment, we just actually insulate our houses in the nordics.
It’s just barely enough to keep the temperature at 21°C which is to be fair a bit too low for me to be comfortable without a tshirt and long johns, but then that’s also because i just sit at the computer and thus don’t make much body heat.
Dude I live in Germany, you think we don’t insulate our houses?
Sounds to me like you’re wasting district heating, I doubt they have much waste energy that they actually don’t have a use for.
Granted, 21°C would be too cold for me to consider wearing just a tshirt on top. It’s 20°C in my apartment and I usually wear tshirt, sweater, long johns, pants and a bathrobe at home.
Yeah, that’s how I think of it too, but I guess in the patriarchal stereotype of heterosexual relationships, the man occupies both the roles of the primary earner and gets the last word, so they may be conflated by others?
I thought “who wears the pants in the relationship” pretty much means “who has the last word in domestic affairs”, which is independent of employment status.
Traditionally only men wore pants and were the primary breadwinners. The person who “wears the pants” is the one who is the “man” in the relationship. E.g. the one who makes the money, the one who makes decisions, etc.
It’s sexist shit.
deleted by creator
I had always interpreted it as wearing work pants for a factory job or putting on suit pants for office work.
Implying unemployed men / house-husbands don’t wear pants?
spend long enough at home and you realize the folly of wearing pants
Is it not the middle of winter where you live?
yeah?
we have insulation and heating lol
If you’re heating enough to be comfortable with naked legs in early February, you either have extremely strong thermal isolation or you’re wasting energy (which costs money and is bad for the environment). Or you have the constitution of an Inuit, I guess.
i have 3 hot-water radiators (connected to district heating of course) in my 1-room apartment, we just actually insulate our houses in the nordics.
It’s just barely enough to keep the temperature at 21°C which is to be fair a bit too low for me to be comfortable without a tshirt and long johns, but then that’s also because i just sit at the computer and thus don’t make much body heat.
Dude I live in Germany, you think we don’t insulate our houses?
Sounds to me like you’re wasting district heating, I doubt they have much waste energy that they actually don’t have a use for.
Granted, 21°C would be too cold for me to consider wearing just a tshirt on top. It’s 20°C in my apartment and I usually wear tshirt, sweater, long johns, pants and a bathrobe at home.
It’s true. We don’t wear pants while on house husband duty.
I always assumed the other person wore an apron (aka took care of the house) instead of pants to go to work.
Men literally wear pants to bed, while women used to wear skirts or dresses at all times, including work…
I dont think anyone has ever claimed in either interpretation that the phrase is 100% accurate to real life and depicts a healthy modern relationship.
IMO it doesn’t even make sense as a metaphor to interpret it the way you do.
That’s how I’ve always known it as well. Probably regional?
Yeah, plus the undertones of wifebeating/manbeating
Yeah, that’s how I think of it too, but I guess in the patriarchal stereotype of heterosexual relationships, the man occupies both the roles of the primary earner and gets the last word, so they may be conflated by others?