image AP
“I am never writing a breakup record again, by the way. I’m done with being a bitter witch,” Adele said this week in an interview with Vogue.
She swept the Grammys and had her man at her side, Simon Konecki, a former financier and founder of Life Water, a British bottled water company. Or the bearded guy who has been the good man in the background while Adele won awards for heartbreak at the hands of her past boyfriend who had the gall to ask to get paid for his bad behavior.
“For about a week he was calling and was deadly serious about it,” Adele told the Sun last year. “Finally, I said, ‘Well, you made my life hell, so I lived it, and now I deserve it.’”
She also made clear that rumors her bearded man is still married are false, saying he has been divorced for 4 years.
By all accounts he’s a good guy and as Adele has skyrocketed in fame and fortune he’s been the rock behind the scenes providing loving support.
So let’s turn the sexist thought about behind every great man there is a great woman around and ask the question, what do you need to do to be the good man quietly supporting a great woman?
Please discuss.
I dunno what makes her “good” or him “good”. They’re just strangers to me.
But hey, if she’s rich and wants a man to be available for her then I don’t think that’s a bad deal. It’s just very rare for women to actually marry down.
Maybe he’ll be just like the Housewives or Orange county, going shopping, planning parties an stuff. I don’t really see much advantage to having a kept man.
i would suggest (since the question of definition comes up so often on here) that being a man who supports the calling of a woman, maybe one out in the limelight, doing notable works, is a choice – and one that does not require the acceptance or praise of others. a man firmly in his masuline will know his purpose, follow his heart and find contentment in giving, in whatever way is his own. a child will resent his “burden” and blame others for his lack of credit. good men are everywhere. while i’m not in the limelight, i am… Read more »
And a good woman is one who supports the calling of a man, right?
The ‘reverse-sexism’ angle just gets more and more tiresome. No one asked you why you’re pathologically bitter and fewer people are listening.
How do you be a supportive husband when your wife is more successful than you? The same way as you would if she were less successful: with all your might. That’s why you chose her as a partner not an accessory.
So let’s turn the sexist thought about behind every great man there is a great woman around and ask the question, what do you need to do to be the good man quietly supporting a great woman? Simple whatever qualities she wants/needs in her man. The same thing that great woman who is behind her great man, whatever it is she brings to the relationship. The thing that something(s) is going to vary from relationship to relationship. What’s working for Adele and Simon may not be what works for Sue and Bill and Tonya and Terrence will likely have a… Read more »
“But out of curiosity what do you find to be sexist about, “Behind every great man there is a great woman.”? The idea that she is behind him (implying she is not his equal)? The idea that without he could not achieve greatness?” This is getting away from the original question, but hey that hasn’t stopped me from commenting yet. lol. Anyway, I’ve actually always thought of that phrase as being the opposite of sexist. More like saying, see even great men couldn’t do it alone. They had a support system…they both played their parts and he achieved greatness. I… Read more »
I suppose the sexist aspect would be that he achieved greatness while she didn’t….
I get what you’re saying here but if she didn’t achieve greatness then that would contradict the remark itself. The remark already says the woman in question is great. Perhaps this is depending on one’s definition of “greatness”?
Yeah, I guess I should have said something like….she didn’t achieve socially acknowledged greatness though her actions.
Or perhaps it’s a bit sexist in that the phrase “behind every great woman there is a great man” doesn’t apply as often? I mean throughout history a lot of the great people we learn about and talk about are men. But as I said, that’s mostly a product of their time/culture/region as compared to our time/culture/region.
As for the average every day man/woman support/soar deal, I’d be idealistic enough on this Valentine’s Day to say each member of the relationship would take turns soaring and supporting based on the interests inherent in the couple. If you dig being a supporter, do it. If you have vision, it’s awesome to have someone supporting you. Most of us in average every day America have to take turns though, both working…trying to support families…that’s the beauty of a partnership. That being said, the role of “wife” as a traditional stay at home supporter does allow for the other spouse… Read more »
Thank you for some sanity to mute the trolls with.
That’s pretty much my view of an ideal heterosexual couple, or really any couple (triad, etc), mostly because that’s pretty much how my parents have worked.. They worked together, supported each other, shifted their goals around to help each other out….all to work toward their joint goal which was to have a successful marriage and family. And then they solved world hunger and world peace. Okay, not that last bit…and they aren’t perfect…but that is always what they have worked toward and are still working toward.
If you’re on CEO incomes, well, 250k+ a year then you’d probably hire help and not need your partner to be at home all day with the kids.
Should probably mention a decent income, not all CEO’s get that much probably:P
But I doubt many people want to hire people to manage their kids. Well, I wouldn’t. Lots of male CEO’s have stay at home wives. What would be wrong about at a SAHD?
“But I doubt many people want to hire people to manage their kids. Well, I wouldn’t.” You’d be surprised what people want when they have access to abundant resources and can be freed from the drudgery of personal child care. The mother of the son of CEO Francois-Henri Pinault demands $46,000.00 per month so she can have a nanny present at all times, 24/7. In her words, she never wants to be alone with the child. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/linda_demands_monthly_from_ex_8lWhicZ0088EQTIU1kouNI “What would be wrong about at a SAHD?” I guess we are not supposed to think there is anything wrong about a Stay-At-Home-Dad.… Read more »
And it’s a real damn shame. Makes me sad. Will take a lot of time to change, is my guess.
What’s wrong with being a sahd? The same thing that’s wrong with being a sahm. You know: they’re oppressed, dependent, unfulfilled, financially vulnerable, unequal, the whole litany of misery that feminists have been denouncing for the past 50 years. It’s hard to advocate for something you’ve been condemning and criticising as oppressive and outdated.
What is the alternative to a SAHD/M, childcare? Not everyone wants their child with someone else all day. The only fix I see is either welfare for parents and/or employment that allows them to still care for the child. But the role itself is dependent, but the breadwinner is also dependent n the SAHP which seems to be forgotten.
And who says they’re unfulfilled? Many breadwinners wish they could spend more time with their kids and feel unfulfilled….
He sounds like he’s a pretty wealthy fellow, capable of running businesses and making his own decisions. I’m with Eric. Just because he isn’t onstage doesn’t mean he’s quiet. He’s just not buying into PR/star culture necessarily. Some people love the limelight and some don’t. I don’t see why it matters.
If they are a good pair and can successfully navigate the hell that music stardom can be, more power to them. They both have earning potential, money and resources.
I’m thinking that Tom means that the guy isn’t grabbing for limelight at her expense, unlike her ex who famously tried to sue her for royalties for causing the heartbreak that fueled her album.
Ah!
Good question. Thanks for asking. But, explain again why the former is sexist but the latter is admirable, making one a good man? If the former is sexist, the latter is as much or more so. Also, who says you would have to be quiet? Why can’t he noisily do what he does and let her do noisily do what she does, and they support each other? On the other hand, if they feel that they would be separated too often if she were to go on long tours, for example, they could decide (as some couples… Read more »
“But, explain again why the former is sexist but the latter is admirable, making one a good man? If the former is sexist, the latter is as much or more so.”
Ah, but don’t you see? Women have been oppressed into these secondary, support roles for men. Therefore, when men today limit, compromise, and confine their lives so as to be secondary, supportive and subordinate to their female partners’ lives, it is considered progressive. And it is considered to be proper punishment and comeuppance applied to men for the crimes of their gender.
“what do you need to do to be the good man quietly supporting a great woman?”
Be like Margaret Thatcher’s husband.
“Be like Margaret Thatcher’s husband.” An excellent example. I lived in England in between 1979 and 1980, and it was hard to find one issue of any popular weekly tabloid that did not have a cruel article about Denis Thatcher’s domesticity, impotence, or irrelevance. Twenty years later, the dehumanization continues. Examine Margaret Thatcher’s wikipedia page, and compare it to her predecessor and her successor (James Callaghan and John Major). The three web pages are set up identically — with one exception. Thatcher has no “Personal Life” section. Both Callaghan and Major have a “Personal Life” section that says something about… Read more »
” … what do you need to do to be the good man quietly supporting a great woman? … ” You need to be a fool. When the relationship crumbles (and it will), the court will eagerly swallow the ex-wife’s story about her deadbeat husband who lived off her money and was too lazy to keep an orderly home or properly nurture the children. He will be catapulted out of the window of his home, the same way as a bread-winning husband. Except that he will not have an income with which to pay child support and keep himself out… Read more »
I have to concur with Antz, albeit less provocatively.
When women list men supporting them socially rather then financially as ‘financial exploitation’ and a form of abuse then it doesn’t take a genius to realize men should probably avoid it for their own sake.
Behind every great man there is a great woman, but behind every great woman there is a sore loser.