I often wondered why some women were with blokes who were frankly just unemployed wasters but I guess when you have benefits to provide the basics such as food and shelter then the traditional role of "man the provider" having to go out and graft to provide food etc becomes redundant
I've often wondered myself how unemployed, layabout, deadbeat guys sometimes manage to maintain very one-sided relationships with women, as that seems to fly in the face of everything conventional wisdom (and evopsych) has to say about the man as protector, provider, etc.
One such example came from a personal mate of mine - great guy in many respects, but the way he treated his poor ex-wife was incredibly shabby. She would go out every day, work a fulltime job, and immediately on returning home start cooking and cleaning for my mate who would usually be horizontal on the sofa playing Xbox. This situation lasted several years while he "worked through" mental health issues and coasted between studies. How did he get away with it? Basically, by
playing the role of protector and provider despite doing very little of either. He would spreadsheet the household expenses and make financial decisions, he would make a point of jockeying for status within our friendship group to occupy the role of leader or decision maker, and he would talk up a good fight about people he disliked. Apparently this paper tiger persona he had crafted was enough to keep his wife (mostly) mollified. Worth noting also that the wife was a functional alcoholic with poor self esteem, so there was ample opportunity to implicitly remind her "you're not perfect either" and "I need you, but you also need me".
A messy situation, and one that ended in divorce, eventually.
