The Fate of the Traditional Female

[Herbie]

There is a trend that the career minded women change into wanting a family at around the age of 30.

It is interesting reading this and thinking the women who need a strong provider but these men are probably very independent and self reliant due to having to be this way in order to be independent but will find it hard to let go of the freedom.

 

[mostlylurking]

Men, especially the family oriented ones, seem to have strong attraction and devotion to women who don't really want to have a family or reciprocate their love.

The dysfunctional ones can be that way. They are stuck in the mode of wanting only what they can't have. These men don't have a healthy ego and believe, on some level, that they are not good enough to deserve a healthy loving relationship.

I think when women are like this men are not attracted to them.

Well, yes, neediness can be a real turn off. Even when the needy person is married to you and very pregnant. It helps to have managed to gain some maturity, wisdom, and capacity for empathy before impregnating someone.

Something about the desire to be loved and have a family is off putting to men energetically.

Maturity can be helpful. Having had some life experiences tends to deepen some people's capacity for empathy and love.

Also, when people have a singular desire like that, it evades them. Something about how the universe works: the things you desire run away from you, while the things you don't care about are given freely/chase after you

It is helpful to have developed some maturity and wisdom to understand what it is that you really want and need in your life. The capacity for kindness was top on my list when I decided to be open to finding my second husband. I prayed a lot about it. And he came into my life. We have been happily married now for 37+ years.

 

[mostlylurking]

There is a trend that the career minded women change into wanting a family at around the age of 30.

That biological clock's ticking. Those eggs are cranked out for only so many years.

It is interesting reading this and thinking the women who need a strong provider but these men are probably very independent and self reliant due to having to be this way in order to be independent but will find it hard to let go of the freedom.

It's pretty alarming to figure out that highly functioning psychopaths do very well in business and make lots of money but they make horrible husbands. There's more of them out there than first meets the eye. They don't let go of their "freedom" after marriage; they just keep doing what they do. Been there, done that.

 

[Regina]

The dysfunctional ones can be that way. They are stuck in the mode of wanting only what they can't have. These men don't have a healthy ego and believe, on some level, that they are not good enough to deserve a healthy loving relationship.

Well, yes, neediness can be a real turn off. Even when the needy person is married to you and very pregnant. It helps to have managed to gain some maturity, wisdom, and capacity for empathy before impregnating someone.

Maturity can be helpful. Having had some life experiences tends to deepen some people's capacity for empathy and love.

It is helpful to have developed some maturity and wisdom to understand what it is that you really want and need in your life. The capacity for kindness was top on my list when I decided to be open to finding my second husband. I prayed a lot about it. And he came into my life. We have been happily married now for 37+ years.

nice.

 

[T-3]

I liked seeing @mostlylurking's recommended reading regarding purposeful/productive anger, which is Harriet Lerner's book: Amazon product ASIN 0062319043View: https://www.amazon.com/Dance-Anger-Changing-Patterns-Relationships/dp/0062319043


Michael Samsel is another author (coming from a different psychological approach, the Reich/Lowen tradition) with many clear links to the bioenergetics of Ray Peat and RPF. Samsel's take on authentic anger as a potentially productive emotion (insofar as it can be accessed authentically in service of cultivating self-possession) is well worth reading:

Anger the Healing Emotion

Feeling and Purpose

I found Samsel thanks to other posts on RFP. He became one of my favorites in addition to Harriett Lerner. Samsel has generously posted most or all his writing on the Reich/Lowen tradition at the links above (with no self-promotion or sales/marketing angle as far as I can tell). Both Lerner and Samsel are some of the most learned and useful I've run across on self-possession and authentic anger.

Has anyone seen Lerner's work referenced elsewhere on RFP? Mostlylurking's post is the first mention of Lerner's work on RFP that I've seen. Any further RFP links to Lerner, Samsel or others writing on authentic/productive anger that anyone has found useful with respect to the topic posted by the OP (or otherwise) would be most welcome.

 

[EustaceBagge]

2. the women who are family oriented, feminine, caring, who dream of a traditional marriage do not attract men in their lives, particularly the devoted husband kind. The few men they attract don't want to commit or are abusive. Usually they have such a strong desire to have children that once their fertility is about to drop sharply, they're willing to get pregnant from men who don't want to marry them just so they can experience motherhood. The rest of their life consists of hardship and poverty since they lack the ambition and financial means of the careerist western woman and therefore struggle to handle single motherhood. Despite the poverty and difficult fate, due to their high maternal instincts and loving nature, their children grow up to be well adjusted

Firstly, why would a family oriented woman wait until her fertility starts to drop to realize she wants to get pregnant? Most "traditional" women around me marry very early.

Second, the women may not be ambitious as they are family oriented, but why does that automatically mean the husband is not career oriented? How come we assume they are going to live in poverty? For me, as long as you can eat red meat and drink milk freely you have what you need to grow up decently, at least here in the Netherlands.

Thirdly, most career oriented women neither get good positions, neither do they end up in stable marriages. Most of the 35-40+ ones abuse antidepressant medications and can't get into a stable relationship. Very unhappy (and annoying) bunch.

Even though the second point ends up well where the children grow up "well-adjusted", the story is very rigid and, in my case, not true at all. As a counterpoint I could even make the claim that "soccer moms" exist, where the quality of motherhood is not bad while the women still have a decent career going for them.

 

[animalcule]

just want to say WOW to this very deep insight @animalcule
my experience is so similar. the social structure is extremely important for creating men capable of leadership and responsibility. right now, nothing is better than anything else (relativism) so whatever they want goes.
I can't fully articulate it (because the mind stops, as you know) but would love to hear anything more you have to say about this.

Thank you! I don't really know what else to add to it. @mostlylurking has added a lot more to her story that I wasn't aware of, but does align somewhat with things I've noticed in family/acquaintances.

I remember always feeling somewhat hardened as a girl/young woman, but in fact I was quite soft and sensitive. And I felt it almost impossible to stand up for myself, which I could attribute to any number of things in my upbringing, but perhaps, as @mostlylurking suggested, there's a strong hormonal component as well. Many young women are like this, and it has to be trained out of them if they want to succeed in the workplace,

I knew a man in his 30s who believed in many 'red pill' concepts, traditional male/female roles, subservience of women etc. He had a girlfriend who was much younger than him, who he believed he was molding into the perfect partner - got her to lose weight, wear the clothing he liked, behave how he liked, etc. She was a very passive woman, who'd had a poor upbringing, and clearly just wanted someone to care about/for her. He showed me a picture of her once, and the first thing I noticed was how sad her eyes were, despite a stiff smile. When he talked about their future, it was always in terms of what he wanted (for example, he knew she wanted children, but he was holding off because he wasn't sure he wanted to be a father, and unless he wanted kids, they weren't having them). He was very honest about the fact that when she got older, if he was no longer attracted to her, he would leave her, or open the relationship. He was very matter-of-fact about this. This was around the time I was beginning to wake up from the trad-lite programming I'd been consuming. Here was this perfectly compliant, subservient woman, who wanted to be a mother. Who did she attract? A stable, conservative man? No -- she got an abusive narcissist who will almost certainly leave her if she ever gets fat or unattractive to him in some way. Another interesting note: she developed MS shortly after they became a couple. Hmm... Maybe it would have happened anyway, but given the look in her eyes in that photo, I suspect that the stress of being with this man may have triggered it. But who knows.


Everyone in the gender wars space likes to throw out generalizations as though they're true: "All women are like X. All career women are Y. It's better to be Z, obviously." There's a lot of noise, and not a lot of signal. It's easy to be captured by an ideology that promises to be preaching the right, and true, and natural way of things. Especially when the preaching happens to align with a route that seems easier.

It's true that many women are unhappy, and on antidepressants. It's true that women in the workforce tend to be stressed, and that it's not really compatible with motherhood, and that in order to succeed you have to harden yourself in ways that you otherwise wouldn't. And that the years a woman puts into growing her career are when she's most fertile. All true, all true.

And yet: I see, in my own life, case after case of passive/meek/'traditional' women getting ground up by the world, or by men who ultimately don't care about them.

So, I don't know the correct path. I'm just trying to salvage my own life, myself. I just know that passivity should not be encouraged in women. Ambition should not be discouraged. Have to accept the world as it is right now.

 

[L_C]

Back when gender war threads were trending on the front page, male members shared numerous times their sentiments about traditional females- the loving wife, nurturing mother and subservient homemaker.

Many women do share those sentiments and have a genuine desire to live that kind of life. How does the that play out nowadays when there's two kinds of women out there: those women who deep down feel compelled to be mothers and wives and the second type of women:
independent women who seek to "live like a man": pursue a career, reach the highest qualifications they can get, and earn a lot of money/gain assets.

There's both kinds of those women in my family, for the purpose of this analysis I'll use two sisters as an example.

The surgeon female of average intelligence but extreme ambition achieves the second highest academic title becomes a respected professional in multiple countries, wealthy and reaches some level of fame. Very ambitious, values money and prestige above all. Never wanted children or a family, had a harsh cruel character and zero empathy. How did things turn out for her in terms of creating a family? Attracts an accomplished and brilliant husband who treats her kindly all her life, is devoted to her, is very loving and puts up with her abuse for half a century. Not out of genuine desire, but because it's "the normal
thing to do", she births two children (grow up with mental illness because she abused them) and 3 grandchildren.

The loving, feminine and prettier sister who is empathic, takes care of the home, her siblings and her old mother, cooks, loves children, dreams of being a wife and treats everyone kindly. Not much ambition career-wise despite decent level of intelligence, gets a bachelor's degree and works as a secretary, an interpreter, a librarian and some other such jobs. How did those housewife ambitions play out ? Decades of being alone, family minded men didn't gravitate to her and she received little to no male love or affection. Finally once she's approaching her late 30s, a man that's 13 years older than her impregnates her but doesn't marry her. Has one child and lives in poverty for many years, struggling to get by if not for the support of her brother who later adopts the child. No romance, no care, no love, no traditional family. Continues to be a loving, nurturing mother, and on top of that takes care of her sick olde mother, her careerist sister's children and grandchildren despite having very limited means. The child that she raised was more mentally healthy.



Many more such examples in my family and among family friends. The main thing in common is:

1. the low empathy, domineering, ambitious career women who don't want children attract many men, get marriage propositions, receive care and love from their devoted husbands for decades despite not being caring themselves and have multiple opportunities to create a family, most of which they turn down, until they finally agree to it reluctantly. They tend to mistreat their children due to their non-existent maternal instincts and as a result the children grow up to develop mental illness

2. the women who are family oriented, feminine, caring, who dream of a traditional marriage do not attract men in their lives, particularly the devoted husband kind. The few men they attract don't want to commit or are abusive. Usually they have such a strong desire to have children that once their fertility is about to drop sharply, they're willing to get pregnant from men who don't want to marry them just so they can experience motherhood. The rest of their life consists of hardship and poverty since they lack the ambition and financial means of the careerist western woman and therefore struggle to handle single motherhood. Despite the poverty and difficult fate, due to their high maternal instincts and loving nature, their children grow up to be well adjusted

I would say that the culture (and religion) plays a big part on what is expected from women. And unfortunately women obey these rules.

We women don't really know ourselves very well. We are not here just for procreation...if you read the book 'womb awakening' by Azra and Seren Bertrand many things will become clear. Both of your carrer oriented and humble family wanted family members are culturally conditioned.

 

[animalcule]

This resonates. That sphere barricades women in a burning house. When I went into a depression and lost all my ambitions I got into that space; I legitimately deluded myself into thinking I was becoming more feminine. Took years to see the way out and get myself into school etc

Depression played such a role in my delusions as well. Instead of questioning why, after having ambitions for myself, and academic drive, I was suddenly completely rudderless and apathetic... I convinced myself that maybe this was just growth, haha... Ah, I've gained the feminine wisdom that I shouldn't want to do anything ambitious at all! Hah... What a mind melt.

 

[animalcule]

I was in that subsection in my first marriage. I'm well aware of this issue. I finally realized, after 10 years of marriage that I was married to a highly functioning psychopath. So I divorced him. And left my friends and family of origin and took my child and moved to another town and started over. And spent 5 years in psychotherapy. Not only was I strongly estrogen dominant during the years of my first marriage, but I also suffered from heavy metal poisoning. It took all I could muster to extricate myself from that disastrous situation but I did it.

I keep a flock of chickens; 19 hens and one rooster (God bless him). You can learn a lot by watching chickens. When a hen becomes fertile and starts laying eggs, she becomes extremely subservient. They squat down and the rooster mounts and does his thing. They also become timid and get picked on by the other hens. They have a very hard time standing up for themselves. It's a hormonal thing. Many women of child bearing years find themselves in this situation. They have a very hard time standing up for themselves and they get mistreated. All they want is to have a family and to be loved. But it is a very vulnerable position to be in and you need your wits about you to be able to choose a mate who will step up to the plate and also not take advantage of you/mistreat you. Discernment is a life saving skill that can be difficult to practice if you are in the process of cranking out eggs.

I think that the "low empathy, demanding, career centered woman" has been brainwashed and has shut down her empathetic side in order to survive. Weak people get taken advantage of in the professional world. "It's just business".

I'm all for a more traditional concept of marriage with the woman being able to rely on her husband and be loved, cherished, and protected by him. The Powers that Be have done a number on people's heads by turning this healthy normal relationship upside down by promoting the "professional" career woman who can make it solo. Their goal is to destroy the family unit so the State can get their mitts on the children at an early age. Or, better yet, just do away with children altogether, for the sake of the planet.

Ah, I misinterpreted your comment. I'm sorry to hear about what you went through with your first husband, but what a joy to read that you ended up finding a kind man to marry afterwards. Very hopeful. All of your comments have been very insightful.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

The old roles were an adaptation to a world long gone.

New situations require new behaviours. How people can adapt is not clear to me, though a would suggest hippie adjacent and spiritual paths would provide some helpful guidelines.

 

[Jennifer]

And yet: I see, in my own life, case after case of passive/meek/'traditional' women getting ground up by the world, or by men who ultimately don't care about them.

It’s strange to me how passivity is being equated to traditional women here when none of the traditional women I know were passive and meek, and none of their husbands expected them to be. I’m talking about the boomer generation and older. I don’t recognize the two types of women that ursidae described, not even among the boomers I know (my parents, aunts and uncles). The career women I know (my contemporaries—gen. x and early millennial) have both a career and a family, and they are married to men who are equally career driven, and the traditional women from pre boomer generations were strong and assertive women. They didn’t have the luxury of being passive. We’re talking large, French Catholic families (14+ children) who worked the farm and in factories, while raising a family. Because the men were off fighting a war (WWII), they married and had babies later in life—they were having babies well into their 40s. I even have friends who were born from mothers who were in their 60s when they conceived them so I agree with what Ray said about a woman’s eggs and fertility, but that’s a whole other topic.

 

[ursidae]

I never described her as passive, I'd say she was average. Not that assertive, but not passive either. Definitely some level of assertive when it came to raising children/family dynamics/household matters. And obviously some strength of character was needed to persevere and cook, clean and take care of children/grandchildren/aging mother/siblings while having limited financial means

 

[ursidae]

“The way my mother always explained it, the traditional man wants a woman to be subservient, but he never falls in love with subservient women. He’s attracted to independent women. “He’s like an exotic bird collector,” she said. “He only wants a woman who is free because his dream is to put her in a cage.” - Trevor Noah

 

[Peatful]

Many of these views are a small worldview.
Very western.

 

[EustaceBagge]

Thank you! I don't really know what else to add to it. @mostlylurking has added a lot more to her story that I wasn't aware of, but does align somewhat with things I've noticed in family/acquaintances.

I remember always feeling somewhat hardened as a girl/young woman, but in fact I was quite soft and sensitive. And I felt it almost impossible to stand up for myself, which I could attribute to any number of things in my upbringing, but perhaps, as @mostlylurking suggested, there's a strong hormonal component as well. Many young women are like this, and it has to be trained out of them if they want to succeed in the workplace,

I knew a man in his 30s who believed in many 'red pill' concepts, traditional male/female roles, subservience of women etc. He had a girlfriend who was much younger than him, who he believed he was molding into the perfect partner - got her to lose weight, wear the clothing he liked, behave how he liked, etc. She was a very passive woman, who'd had a poor upbringing, and clearly just wanted someone to care about/for her. He showed me a picture of her once, and the first thing I noticed was how sad her eyes were, despite a stiff smile. When he talked about their future, it was always in terms of what he wanted (for example, he knew she wanted children, but he was holding off because he wasn't sure he wanted to be a father, and unless he wanted kids, they weren't having them). He was very honest about the fact that when she got older, if he was no longer attracted to her, he would leave her, or open the relationship. He was very matter-of-fact about this. This was around the time I was beginning to wake up from the trad-lite programming I'd been consuming. Here was this perfectly compliant, subservient woman, who wanted to be a mother. Who did she attract? A stable, conservative man? No -- she got an abusive narcissist who will almost certainly leave her if she ever gets fat or unattractive to him in some way. Another interesting note: she developed MS shortly after they became a couple. Hmm... Maybe it would have happened anyway, but given the look in her eyes in that photo, I suspect that the stress of being with this man may have triggered it. But who knows.


Everyone in the gender wars space likes to throw out generalizations as though they're true: "All women are like X. All career women are Y. It's better to be Z, obviously." There's a lot of noise, and not a lot of signal. It's easy to be captured by an ideology that promises to be preaching the right, and true, and natural way of things. Especially when the preaching happens to align with a route that seems easier.

It's true that many women are unhappy, and on antidepressants. It's true that women in the workforce tend to be stressed, and that it's not really compatible with motherhood, and that in order to succeed you have to harden yourself in ways that you otherwise wouldn't. And that the years a woman puts into growing her career are when she's most fertile. All true, all true.

And yet: I see, in my own life, case after case of passive/meek/'traditional' women getting ground up by the world, or by men who ultimately don't care about them.

So, I don't know the correct path. I'm just trying to salvage my own life, myself. I just know that passivity should not be encouraged in women. Ambition should not be discouraged. Have to accept the world as it is right now.

So your anecdote or even anecdotes of traditional women being used and unhappy means it is bad to be trad?

I can guarantee that under the right circumstances a woman like that would be happier, no matter how triggering this may sound. You simply won't beat nature, and being a mother of healthy kids is a good feeling. Of course, if the husband is not abusive.

But I don't see how this can't go together with a career, just a less intense one, and I also don't see how a career focused woman would not get an abusive husband or be "weak" and "unhappy". The stereotype sexy secretary, or whore that uses her body to advance in the workplace doesn't scream strong to me.

Basically what I'm saying is that if the husband was an upright person, a traditional role for the wife wouldn't be bad. So how does a career oriented woman guarantee a good husband, especially if she marries late?

So you accept many women in the worplace are unhappy, while claiming the other side is worse, or at least that is the implication I'm getting. But these "traditional" women, are they traditional compared to you or traditional compared to 50-100 years ago where people married early?

Going away from Christianity enabled the sexual revolution and it's consequences have been a disaster.

 

[Jennifer]

I never described her as passive, I'd say she was average.

I wasn’t referring to your post when I said passive. When I mentioned you, I was referring to your grandmother’s and grandaunt’s experiences that you described. Their experiences do not match the experiences of the people I know, was my point. The family oriented women have attracted family oriented men. Getting married and raising a family, where both parties want the same thing and share responsibilities, was the norm here, and still is to a large extent. I’m the one who isn’t “normal.” Even men have had a hard time understanding it when I don’t have a boyfriend or why I’m not married, and this includes men who are my contemporaries. As much as I was raised to people please, I was never willing to settle for an abusive, one-sided relationship. Instead, I worked hard to unlearn what was modeled to me that helped shape my view of what I deserved, i.e., I got right with myself, and I did it physically disabled and dependent/in poverty. To me, the picture you paint of an empathic person is one of a victim with no choice. Of course your grandaunt was desperate for love. She was giving all of her love away. People like us aren’t taught that we need to fill our own cup, as well, so we allow ourselves be drained by others because we feel so deeply. It is as much a gift as it is a curse, if left unchecked. So no, it is not the fate of the “traditional” female (or empathic male), unless she chooses it.

“The way my mother always explained it, the traditional man wants a woman to be subservient, but he never falls in love with subservient women. He’s attracted to independent women. “He’s like an exotic bird collector,” she said. “He only wants a woman who is free because his dream is to put her in a cage.” - Trevor Noah

Perfect example of how our parents and their parents and their parents’ parents etc. gift us their dysfunctional ways of seeing and moving through life. My mother said x, y, z so it must be the absolute truth, right? No.

 

[Regina]

I wasn’t referring to your post when I said passive. When I mentioned you, I was referring to your grandmother’s and grandaunt’s experiences that you described. Their experiences do not match the experiences of the people I know, was my point. The family oriented women have attracted family oriented men. Getting married and raising a family, where both parties want the same thing and share responsibilities, was the norm here, and still is to a large extent. I’m the one who isn’t “normal.” Even men have had a hard time understanding it when I don’t have a boyfriend or why I’m not married, and this includes men who are my contemporaries. As much as I was raised to people please, I was never willing to settle for an abusive, one-sided relationship. Instead, I worked hard to unlearn what was modeled to me that helped shape my view of what I deserved, i.e., I got right with myself, and I did it physically disabled and dependent/in poverty. To me, the picture you paint of an empathic person is one of a victim with no choice. Of course your grandaunt was desperate for love. She was giving all of her love away. People like us aren’t taught that we need to fill our own cup, as well, so we allow ourselves be drained by others because we feel so deeply. It is as much a gift as it is a curse, if left unchecked. So no, it is not the fate of the “traditional” female (or empathic male), unless she chooses it.



Perfect example of how our parents and their parents and their parents’ parents etc. gift us their dysfunctional ways of seeing and moving through life. My mother said x, y, z so it must be the absolute truth, right? No.

I was modeled similarly. "Family hold back" was a sort of motto. It was okay to be a Christian servant inside the family. We had a huge exteneded family, so that seemed to work with seemingly a large group of people. But once we dispersed beyond the garden wall, we were preyed upon in 'you give; I take' relationships.
Eventually, the light bulb goes off that God does not want us to make peace with evil. Even though growing up, both parents would say things like, "they need it more than we do" when my stuff would get stolen or smashed." Or "pray for them."

 

[mostlylurking]

The old roles were an adaptation to a world long gone.

The Powers that Be forced the "adaptation" upon a world that was more sane and their handiwork has caused great damage. I believe the best thing for humanity is stable healthy family units. There's a lot of work, both physical and mental, that is required to rear a family unit that includes children. Children need their fathers. They need to experience the quiet strength of a caring adult father. Boys reared by single mothers miss out on this roll model so they are at a disadvantage because they do not understand how a healthy well balanced male is supposed to be so when they marry themselves they are at a disadvantage.

To me, the picture you paint of an empathic person is one of a victim with no choice. Of course your grandaunt was desperate for love. She was giving all of her love away. People like us aren’t taught that we need to fill our own cup, as well, so we allow ourselves be drained by others because we feel so deeply. It is as much a gift as it is a curse, if left unchecked. So no, it is not the fate of the “traditional” female (or empathic male), unless she chooses it.

It takes great strength to be an empathetic person. Empathy means that you actually experience the other person's pain and have the strength to let them lean on you in times of trouble and help them get through it.

I think females come to feeling the other person's pain more naturally. I think it is tied to having intuition. So they provide empathy for their mate. If he is unable to respond in kind, the woman is inclined to think, "well, he's new at this, I'll teach him how by showing him". But the male I think tends to avoid empathy because he equates it with weakness. It isn't weakness; it requires emotional strength. Some men simply never figure that out, to their detriment.

 

[chococat]

I can guarantee that under the right circumstances a woman like that would be happier, no matter how triggering this may sound. You simply won't beat nature, and being a mother of healthy kids is a good feeling. Of course, if the husband is not abusive.

But I don't see how this can't go together with a career, just a less intense one, and I also don't see how a career focused woman would not get an abusive husband or be "weak" and "unhappy". The stereotype sexy secretary, or whore that uses her body to advance in the workplace doesn't scream strong to me.

Basically what I'm saying is that if the husband was an upright person, a traditional role for the wife wouldn't be bad. So how does a career oriented woman guarantee a good husband, especially if she marries late?

So you accept many women in the worplace are unhappy, while claiming the other side is worse, or at least that is the implication I'm getting. But these "traditional" women, are they traditional compared to you or traditional compared to 50-100 years ago where people married early?

Going away from Christianity enabled the sexual revolution and it's consequences have been a disaster.

What’s being said is that the right circumstances don’t really exist right now. And no one is saying that career women are guaranteed good relationships, but what is being said is they are guaranteed the ability to pack up and leave if things get dodgy and they may have stricter standards (which lead to them getting better partners). Both routes can lead to fulfillment or unhappiness but one woman has the agency to change her situation while the other is kind of stuck.

People are talking in absolutes in terms for the sake of discussion. There are more than two ways to go in life for women of course. Most people fall somewhere in the middle. A family oriented lifestyle could go with a lighter career and often times it does ( I know personally I benefited from the undivided attention of my mother during my childhood but what works for some might not work for everyone).