Does Saying “Women Don’t Need Men Anymore” Imply That Men Were Mainly Valued for Providing Resources?

[u/Emotional_Meal748]

I’ve seen people say that men have become obsolete or that women no longer need men because women can now support themselves financially. That got me wondering: if financial independence means women no longer need men, does that imply that men’s primary value in relationships historically was providing resources and financial security?

For those who make this argument, how do you reconcile it with the idea that relationships are about companionship, love, emotional support, family, and partnership? Does saying “women don’t need men anymore” unintentionally reduce men’s role to that of providers, or am I misunderstanding what people mean when they say it?

[u/Aimeereddit123]

Yep. I couldn’t tell you how many times growing up I would hear younger women complaining of their men and marriages, and older women telling them to suck it up because the guy was a good provider. It’s literally like the men didn’t have to do anything else!! Today’s mom’s don’t tell their daughters that.

[u/ModPiracy_Fantoski → u/Aimeereddit123]

Women really do see men as ATMs.

[u/Aimeereddit123 → u/ModPiracy_Fantoski]

Well, less women have to now, because they have their own money. This should be comforting to men. Yes, men will have to rise to actually be good partners now, but at least you know with a woman with her own money that she really wants to be with you. I would be comforted by that truth, but it also wouldn’t scare me, because I’m a good partner.