"여자들은 낚시하는 남편을 싫어해요."

Translation: Women hate husbands who go fishing.

[Shlomo_]

Is this a proverb?

[nleconte]

Don't think so. It's probably random. If you want to associate a meaning to it, there is the belief among certain people in Korea that cheating partners choose lonely and private hobbies to have more freedom to act on their urges, e.g. hiking. And fishing maybe?

[mcnbns]

It is also that fishing is an expensive, time-consuming hobby.

My Korean wife says that if cheating could be so easily covered up by pretending to go fishing, her dad would've gotten into it.

[vikungen]

Fishing really doesn't have to be expensive though, it's what you make of it.

[oee16]

낚시가는 남편 = husbands who go fishing.

낚시하는 남편 = husbands who fish. ?

[Doussa2003]

But I love Yoongi and Seokjin

[Christein5]

Me as well

[dryanlee]

fishing husbands flagged 12/28

[Philkyriak]

Woman hate husbands that go fishing is wrong?

[Jaikandi]

Yes 여자들은 is plural

[oee16]

Why the need for a plural particle with "women" and not "husbands"? Is it to indicate the singular possession of each individual in the group of women (1 husband per woman) or is it simply because Korean is a pro-drop language?

[kiibubble]

남편 here is general (referring to any/all husbands who fish), so the plural form is implied and 들 is dropped. The plural particle is added to 여자 to clarify that the sentence is not referring to a certain woman in particular, but multiple.

[slowsummits]

doesn't the 는 come with an implication that it is a general statement, anyway?

[oee16]

여자들은 낚시하는 남편을 싫어해요 => The women hate having a husband who does fishing.

여자는 낚시하는 남편을 싫어해요 => Women (/A or the woman) hate(s) having a husband who does fishing.

[ggh443065]

Y'all continue hating, I'll take Kim Seokjin, thanks

[Ollivierr]

with all do respect this sentence is rubbish

[Sanjana0901]

why is this wrong: Women hate husbands who know fishing

[oee16]

"To know", is a mental function. "To do or to go" is a behavioural process.
They are different types of verbs.