Jan 25 2008
What Makes a Good Wife
Do you consider yourself as being a good wife? Of course, there is this list of qualities of the good wife that makes an interesting read from a magazine back in the 50’s but we have certainly come a long way from that. Husbands today do not expect wives to take off their shoes or arrange their pillows so, what makes a good wife now?
If the attributes of a good wife include keeping the house neat, being a good cook and raising obedient children, I think I would never qualify to be one. My place is always a mess with toys strewn all over the floor, I make edible but tasteless meals and my kid is not one who sits quietly and allows you some peace. On bad days, I even argue and give my man a good scolding.
But nobody, including my own husband, have complained that I have been a ”bad” wife. So, I guess a good wife nowadays has nothing to do with how proficient she is in house chores or how to act timid but more of how she could relate, talk to and understand her husband on an emotional level. And with the concept of equality today, I think the qualities of a good wife would only come to the fore when complimented by a good husband. It would certainly be pretty hard to be a good wife when you have a lousy husband at your side.
By the way, I came across this definition of a good wife posted (cynically) in a discussion forum by someone who goes by the name of Fluene:
“The good wife : Someone who never nags, capable of cooking a meal out of nothing, never spend the husband’s money, obeys the husband no matter how ridiculous the request is, has the face of an angel, body of a devil, has the ability to disappear into the thin air or appear at once with the click of the husband’s fingers, a 24 hour maid and prostitute, agrees to whatever the husband say or do, etc.”
Well, could that be men’s secret wishlist after all, no matter what century we may be living in?
Related Posts:
Oh brother. I’m all for equality, myself. And I think my husband and I have done a fine job of keeping our responsibilities separate while maintaining an equal partnership.
Misty’s last blog post..Thusday, Take TWO.
He,he….definitely that comment from Fluence is really ridicious….I won’t be like that….for me, a good wife, is to share with my hubby: his stress, sorrow and happiness….as long as he feel comfortable having me around him, it is really more than enough liao….
The definition by Fluene is more appropriate for genie in a bottle. hahaha I totally agree that u can oni be a good wife alongside a good husband. Women of today is no longer the yes-lady. So if u hv a good husband, then naturally u’d be a good wife (patient, understanding, caring, etc) to complement ur man.
slavemom’s last blog post..Realistic Advert
I can never agree with that definition. To me, a good wife a a good companion. Easily said but difficult to practice.
JO-N’s last blog post..Cultural Shock!
Haha! That list is such crapola
I think being a good wife is an even balance of friend, lover and cook. Throw good mommy in there for the couples with kids.
Huckdoll’s last blog post..The True Colours of Suburban Oblivion
Heh..that sounds like the stepford wives…aka robots! That being said, there are crazy ‘martha stewarts’ around..so, to each her own?
Me..if my hub doesn’t think I make a good wife..he can podah lah!
WAKAKAAKKAKAKAKAKAKKAAKAKAK!!!
Oops..sorry..I hopped over from Shireen’s blog!
mott’s last blog post..Quick! Get a LIFE!
Proverbs 12:4 An excellent wife is the crown of her husband, But she who shames him is like rottenness in his bones.
a good wife is someone who supports him and make him successful in life.
miche’s last blog post..Homework Caused Her To Lie
I think a good wife is one who appreciates her husband. I am working on it
Emily’s last blog post..My little party animal
I think that the definition of a “good wife” is different for each man. Some may like the “Martha Stewart” types, and some moght like other things.
I should hope my husband appreciates me for more than just being a maid and I should hope I would appreciate my husband for more than just he paycheck he brings home.
Jacki’s last blog post..Aloha Friday - Economic Edition
Hope Fluence never plans on getting married…..
As far as whether or not I am a good wife? Probably not. I am an excellent cook..(as evidenced by our ample waist lines…) however…Martha Stewart I am not. I am a better muscian then a house cleaner…my teens don’t obey me…and I argue too much…
Fluence wouldn’t appreciate me at all.
However…my husband seems too….
Robyn’s last blog post..Friday Feast! Second Edition
A good wife is as good as her husband thinks she is good.
Know of a bitchy woman whom her husband just adores her?
Leah’s last blog post..How to stay on top of SERP by pure luck
should I ask my husband whether I am a good wife or not…haha …
that definition, I can’t accept it …
Martini’s last blog post..Good Bye to Kakak Sikar
That defininition is such crap. I would like to see the definition of a good husband. Of course there are roles each married couple plays in each household, but to be thrown into a silly box like that Fluence states is just stupidity.
Funny, the first thing I thought of was that a good wife should know how to listen.
Then I thought that all the qualites I think, big stress on the word, think my hubby would like in a wife…me, , are the same qualities I would look for in my best friend - honest, reliable, helpful etc…
I think he likes it that I wash his dirty undies too….
That description is of a slave not a good wife!
Akelamalu’s last blog post..Friday 55 Flash Fiction # 11
I think I am like you. I think in a lot of ways I am a good wife and in some ways I am probably not. I think it is not easy all the time to be good at all of it. Take care and have a good weekend. Kellan
Good Wife or Bad Wife… Argghh..
If you are a good husband, I will be a good wife.. Hahahaha
Isn’t that simple!
Bon Weekend!
Jasmine’s last blog post..Mood Swing and J
Those old definitions of a “good wife” crack me up. I actually used to read a few blogs from women who actually seem to still follow those definitions. I had to stop reading those blogs after a while. Too 1945 for me.
I think now, a good wife is really a good friend, a great supporter, a confidant. Yes, I have many other responsibilities as a SAHM. But I don’t think they are my responsibilities just because I am a wife, but because it is just the way we have worked things out. If my husband had any desire to cook, I would love to pass on that, along with many other responsibilities to him. But we can’t live on cereal and frozen pizzas.
Irene’s last blog post..Blogging about blogging
here a Big Bang - World Record Tag for u. Have fun.
I’d say a woman who loves, accepts and values her husband for what he is and what he brings is a good wife.:PI think I am learning to become a good wife.
sweetiepie’s last blog post..Appoinment With The Doctor
i might not be the best wife,,,,but definitely a very good wife
chinnee’s last blog post..Equal love?
The Marriage Strike
By Matthew Weeks
For those of you who know me in real life, this will not come as a surprise, but I have no designs on ever getting married. Now, it appears I am not alone in my disposition.
“Why Men Won’t Commit: Exploring Young Men’s Attitudes About Sex, Dating and Marriage,” a study released by researchers Barbara Dafoe Whitehead and David Popenoe of the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University, concludes that men are, indeed, more apprehensive about getting married than before.
“The median age of first marriage for men has reached 27, the oldest age in our nation’s history,” Mr. Popenoe remarked in the Washington Times. “If this trend of men waiting to marry continues, it is likely to clash with the timing of marriage and childbearing for the many young women who hope to marry and bear children before they begin to face problems associated with declining fertility,” he continued. You know this is a collegiate study when an examination of a trend that is affecting men is used to fret about the state of women.
The study contains several possible explanations for this phenomenon, based on interviews with 60 single men, 25 to 33, who live in four parts of the country. While that level of measurement certainly is not statistically significant enough to reflect any kind of a national trend, responses generally revolved around the possibilities of suffering huge losses if the marriage ends in divorce. (”An ex-wife will take you for all you’ve got” and “men have more to lose financially than women” were common
refrains, the study reports.)
To humor the study’s results for a few minutes, let’s examine whether or not these young men’s concerns are justified. If we accept the old feminist argument that marriage is slavery for women, then it is undeniable that — given the current state of the nation’s family courts — divorce is slavery for men.
Take a hypothetical husband who marries and has two children. There is a 50 percent likelihood that this marriage will end in divorce within eight years, and if it does, the odds are 2-1 it will be the wife who initiates the divorce. It may not matter that the man was a decent husband. The reality of the situation is that few divorces are initiated over abuse or because the man has already abandoned the family. Nor is adultery cited as a factor by divorcing women appreciably more than by divorcing men.
The new trend that has taken hold of the court system is what as known as the “no fault” divorce, in which the filing party needs only to cite their general discontent with the marriage in order to be granted a hearing. Women initiate these unilateral divorces-on-demand 3 times as often as men.
While the courts may grant the former spouses joint legal custody, the odds are nearly 40 to 1 of the wife winning physical custody. Overnight, the husband, accustomed to seeing his kids every day and being an integral part of their lives, will now be lucky if he is allowed to see them even one day out of the week.
Once the couple is divorced, odds are at least even that the wife will interfere with the husband’s visitation rights. Three-quarters of divorced men surveyed say their ex-wives have interfered with their visitation, and 40 percent of mothers studied admitted that they had done so, and that they had generally acted out of spite or in order to punish their exes.
Then, of course, there is the issue of financial losses due to court-imposed payments. In the end (99 times out of 100), the wife will keep most of the couple’s assets and –if they jointly own one — the house. The husband will need to set up a new residence and pay at least a third of his take-home pay to his ex in child support, on top of whatever alimony payments the courts impose upon him. These can run as high as another third of his income. (Add the cost of taxes to that and the man gets to keep exactly 13% of his take-home pay — he’d better pray that’s enough to keep him alive.)
But as bad as all of this is, it would still make our hypothetical man one of the lucky ones. After all, he could be one of those fathers who cannot see his children at all because his ex has made a false accusation of domestic violence, child abuse, or child molestation. Or a father who can only see his own children under supervised visitation or in nightmarish visitation centers where dads are treated like criminals.
He could be one of those fathers whose ex has moved their children hundreds or thousands of miles away, in violation of court orders, which courts often do not enforce. He could be one of those fathers who tears up his life and career again and again in order to follow his children, only to have his ex-wife continually move them.
He could be one of the fathers who has lost his job, seen his income drop, or suffered a disabling injury, only to have child support arrearages and interest pile up to create a mountain of debt which he could never hope to pay off. Or a father who is forced to pay 70 percent or 80 percent of his income in child support because the court has imputed an unrealistic income to him. Or a dad who suffers from one of the child support enforcement system’s endless and difficult to correct errors, or who is jailed because he cannot keep up with his payments. Or a dad who reaches old age impoverished because he lost everything he had in a divorce when he was middle-aged and did not have the time and the opportunity to earn it back. Our imaginary man might consider himself lucky if he knew what his life could have been.
Over five million divorced men in America are currently experiencing the situation I just outlined. Without a doubt, their stories and experiences are heard by unmarried men. Can anyone truly blame the men for having apprehension? They stand to gain little and lose everything they’ve worked for in their entire lives should they “take the plunge”, so to speak.
So ladies, if you have a problem with this, speak to your feminist brethren. This is the legacy which they have left behind. By erasing the stigma of premarital sex and encouraging physical liberation, they have eliminated one of the most powerful incentives in history for men to tie the knot. By advocating government as a surrogate husband in the case of single motherhood, they have eliminated the disincentive for women to file for divorce. And through decades of litigious activism, they have given rise to the bloated and intrusive family court system and stacked it so egregiously against the men of this country that it now appears they are subconsciously engaging in what could be called a “marriage strike”, preferring to play the odds rather than assume a massively disproportionate amount of risk.
As for the men, make no mistake, they are slowly beginning to realize that the power is now in their favor. They have more and more perfectly legitimate reasons for remaining unmarried every day. Given a choice between not marrying one’s lady friend — assuming no risk whatsoever and still having the historical benefits of marriage (sex, companionship, etc.) available to them, or marrying the woman and having a 50-50 chance of their lives being utterly destroyed should the woman so much as be “unhappy” with the marriage, the decision is a no-brainer. What women perceive as a “fear of commitment” is really nothing more than a pragmatic assessment of the odds facing men in the prospect of a marriage.
Therefore, the trends evident in this study are not much of a surprise. I would wager that if the study were conducted nationally, similar results would be produced. Of course, such a study would invariably seek to address the grievances of the dejected single women of the country. My advice to them would be simple: offer to sign a prenuptial agreement that outlines the exact terms of a possible divorce: how assets would be divided, how any alimony and child support would be handled, and other vital elements that may be causing apprehension. And don’t be insulted if your potential mate asks you to sign one, or if he desires terms that will be equitable to him. No matter how strong your love may be for one another, the demand for eligible bachelors willing to commit to marriage is currently exceeding the supply, and if you won’t sign it, odds are that there’s another woman out there who will.
NOTE: Statistics in this article (and, in effect, much of its text) are drawn from Glenn Sacks and Diana Thompson’s Philadelphia Inquirer op-ed of 7/5/2002 entitled: “A Marriage Strike Emerges as Men Decide Not to Risk Loss”
I hear lots of whining from Western women these days about the supposed “man shortage” — the unavailability of “suitable” males with whom to have “relationships.”
But it is Western females who have themselves created such a “shortage.”
Thirty-five years ago, when I looked at the state of Western Genderwar, I thought that men just Didn’t Get It. I scolded them for their linear, rationalistic rigidity, for their sheep-like conformity, and for their too-frequent mistreatment of their wives, girlfriends, and subordinates in the workplace.
Twenty years ago, I thought that at last men were Getting It. They still had some ground to cover, but it was clear that strong-hearted men had made enormous progress in re-inventing themselves and masculinity. At about the same time, I began to have concerns about increasingly supremacist attitudes amongst Western women.
How speedily the floppie flips in these enatiodromic days, when seeming is not, good is evil, and shit is sold as soap.
By the early Nineties, I knew the worm had turned and started digging for China. In a couple horrendous decades, men had largely Gotten It – at great personal and collective price — and a huge chunk of the Western masculine had reformed itself radically, raising its consciousness on various fronts. This involved much sacrifice and courage on the part of the masculine, for manhood is ever defined according to the moment’s cultural need.
Nineteen-sixties America marks the first instance in recorded history in which men attempted to define masculinity according to their own natures and needs, instead of allowing females, kings, “nobles,” or States to fashion of us what they would – fodder if there was war, laborers if not, “fathers” that have no power, lovers sold “love.”
That nascent attempt at male self-definition terrified the West sufficiently to send it scurrying back, full tilt and blindfolded, into the ancient matriarchies. The feminine was artificially elevated and empowered, served by weak men. Authentic manhood was demonized and sent to Scapegoat PIt. There it remains, undergoing transformation.
Just as men were Getting It, women were Losing It. In this new Millenium of onrushing Genderwar, women assume their moral, spiritual, and practical superiority over males. They have now have reached “just Don’t Get It” central.
Instead of re-aligning with the transformative masculine, the feminine embarked on a rampage of vengeance, selfishness, censorship and self-entitlement the likes of which even the Paleolithic matriarchies hadn’t seen. Men got trampled, and masculinity, rather than being created anew, instead was annihilated. In the wake of the glorification of all things feminine, the scattered remnants of masculinity were driven underground – to cage, gutter, and graveyard.
Of course there were options – there always are. One could hide behind the wife’s hem, or one could whore oneself to the very institutions whipping one’s back, and the back of one’s brothers. I chose the latter — though a combination provides the greatest social protection for males.
In Femamerica, the new matriarchy, every male became fair game for the Empowered Witch, who wears the armor of a “War on Women” while wielding the legal knife.
By 1990 I knew that the nation had gone mad, and that the Empowered Witch ruled unopposed. The remnants of “patriarchy” were conserved only in organized athletics, and the neo-matriarchy was entrenched, back in business, an extraordinary coup pulled off virtually without resistance. The few men who did resist were – and are – easily isolated and picked off. Even the most docile attempts at brotherhood were either banned or ridiculed into extinguishment.
The Battle of the Sexes has been over for more than a decade now, in case you’ve been busy watching “Law and Order” or “Ally McBeal.” Women won.
It was a slaughter. One side was Empowered, the other trussed and muzzled. The modest advances made by masculinity over the paltry last few thousand years now have been neutered. No aspect of the culture, with the exception of athletics and a little art, authentically reflect the needs and values of the masculine. Everything else – law, relational customs, education, commerce, communication – though fronted by men — are institutionalized to serve the feminine.
After hearing for so long how it’s a “man’s world,” it comes as a shock to modern Western men to learn that civilization is not really about them. It’s about women and “their” children — the matriarchal kinship unit. It takes no magus to scrye the signs, only an ability to confront the everyday reality of a culture fractured into a thousand points of greed, triple-think, and identity politics, where excellence and merit fall prey daily to the mediocrities of entitlement, privilege and power.
The new caste system in America is gender, with class running a distant second.
San Francisco, my city of residence during the Eighties, is the politically correct capital of the West, along with its near northern satellite Berkeley, and distant satellites Eugene and Boulder. Denigration of the masculine became an art in San Francisco during the Eighties, and The City was not the open, fun place advertised. It was, in fact, a hellhole for single masculinity, tolerant only if you were the correct gender.
I wish I had a buck every time a raging single female in San Francisco told me, “There are no single men in The City. They’re all either gay, married or losers.” Now I knew lots of available single guys, including myself. So this mantra translated was: “I can’t attract the males I want, therefore I will subtly demean all of them, including you. That way my problem becomes your fault, and I get to unload my dumptruck of psychic crap on you. You, of course — being male — are prohibited from defending yourself. That’s why we have laws, you know.”
It’s the same interpersonal strategy a three-year-old employs: I can’t Get My Way every instant, therefore You’re an Asshole.
Amazingly, these same females would become even more enraged because I wouldn’t ask them out. Talk about Not Getting It. By then, I was exhausted from two decades of feminist girlfriends. I’d run clean out of apologies for being born male.
Any chance comment in the workplace could easily cost me my job. It all depended on how any female within hearing range “felt” about it. Ditto for the universities. To varying degrees, they enacted “interpersonal behavior codes.” On some campuses, if I even looked at a female I was liable for disciplinary action, including expulsion. Again, it all depended on how any female “felt” about it.
Astoundingly, Western females never stopped to consider what their agendas of complete control might have on my desire to interact with them.
While living in Portland during the mid-Nineties, I noticed a subtle shift in the dynamics of power and desire between Western males and females. Women, flush with victory and its spoils of power and wealth, were becoming much more aggressive in initiating relational contact. To be sure, by the standards of initiating to which men are held, the signals of women were, and are, weak indeed. But they were definitely making overtures less deniable than before. Additionally, I began to notice that females in their twenties were increasingly loathe to embrace the gender-supremacism of their Baby Boom elder sisters. The new generation had witnessed the destruction that feminism had wrought in their own families, schools and workplaces, and they wanted no part of that brand of “liberation.” Meanwhile, however, their elder sisters clung tenaciously to their privileges, preferences, furious attitudes, and airs of victimization and moral supremacy.
Where, asked these Baby Boom women, were all the men? I could have told them, of course, where the men were and are, but being already in possession of all correct wisdom — not to mention Incarnated Goddesses — no female ever bothered to ask me. To date, not one has. What could I know? I am, after all, only a male.
The men – what’s left of them — are in hiding, of course. That’s what any refugee population does when war is made on it, and its homeland is laid to Waste. Sister, understand: only the weakest of males serve the totalitarianism of gynocracy. No real man, confronting his betrayal by Western culture and femininity, will teach in your schools, for the lessons are false, and he knows he is conditioning more kids – especially more boys – into further betrayals. No real man will drone in your corporations, corrupt collectivities hiding behind the stained skirts of “market forces.” Go to any indigenous town on the planet. The market is the locus of women, their interests and their power. As for the coercive “forces” of the market — well, modern Western men know all about social coercion.
Man shortage? Fuckin’ A there’s a man shortage. America rapes anything even vaguely masculine.
Sister, you’ve spent the last four decades codifying masculinity out of existence. You carry our balls in your purse, and now you’re infuriated because we don’t feel like having sex, much less a “relationship”? As recent census figures confirm, men spent the Eighties and Nineties backing away from women, and right now they are in Full Flee — not in vengeance, but in self-preservation.
Across the Pond, the song’s the same. Five-hundred women responded to an Edinburgh restaurant’s promotion for a Single’s Night mixer in “honor” of Valentine’s Day 2002.
Two males responded. TWO. The owner of the restaurant – a woman – said: “We’re a bit disappointed because we thought we’d get so many more guys than girls – after all, they’d have a room full of single women. But I think men take themselves too seriously these days.”
Ms. Owner Does Not Get It. Western women criminalize masculinity, emasculate their men, assign males fourth-class citizenship (behind females, “their” children, and household pets) – and then are stunned that men are not crawling after them, demanding “relationships?” Single women have spent the last forty years relieving Western men of their jobs, houses, children, money, basic civil rights, and self-respect. Under highly advantaged conditions, enforced by their State, females now “compete” with males for the necessities of survival.
From a position of assigned inferiority, we must deal with over-empowered single females in every facet of our lives. Why would we voluntarily pay to enter a room with FIVE HUNDRED of them gathered in power? For a “romantic relationship?” Under tyranny of the matriarchate’s interpersonal, sexual and social Gulag?
Of course, it cannot be that males are simply avoiding females, out of disgust and very real fear. That is an unacceptable conclusion, not to mention inappropriate and offensive.
Despite confirmation by the last Western census, Western cultures MUST pretend that nothing is amiss between males and females. To admit that males are desperately seeking escape from females and the neo-matriarchy is to admit that the West’s endless empowerment of females and disempowerment of males may not be the progressive, everybody-wins bonanza that was, and is, shoved down our throats each day.
As Ms. Restaurant Owner smugly asserts, the problem – as ever – is with men. This time, we are “taking ourselves too seriously.” Females and Western feminist cultures, as always, share no responsibility for the sundering of male and female.
Western females want to rule over males, and simultaneously expect – not want, but EXPECT – men to repond to them with chivalrous, puppy-dog romantic devotion. They do not understand why their slaves do not to love them.
Much of the “man shortage” also stems from the fact that females rarely “trade down” in social and financial status. Despite their protestations they want, as ever, for their mates to inhabit higher positions of power than themselves. Empowered women of the new female upper middle class – the SUV Set – do not want janitors, fry-cooks, and hospital orderlies as intimate companions.
As females were artificially awarded positions of power in the West, the pool of “acceptable males” from which to choose shrank drastically. As formerly middle-class males were divested of their jobs, kids, bank accounts, homes, and self-esteem by the matriarchate and its servants, women began to find the pickings falling somewhere between slim and none – and Slim didn’t leave town, either. He sleeps in its streets, under the very noses of his empowered sisters. He’s not feeling especially romantic.
While you were busy “liberating” yourself, dear Sister, our streets and prisons – the Male Shelter Movement — filled up with the men whose jobs you took, under legally advantaged circumstances. The remaining tatters of masculinity went underground. Now you own the SUV, own the house, own the children, and own the nation. The Escapees are no longer interested in, or restricted by, your versions of sexuality or relationship. They love women, but make no mistake: Things Have Changed. Romance is the furthest thing from their minds, as well it should be, for romance is a predatory ideology in sheep’s clothing, a subjugation of the masculine and a deification of the feminine. The feminine must be elevated ONLY upon merit, not by coercion, the mass shaming of males, or codification. When the feminine is elevated by force, or self-elevates, the Empowered Witch of the negative feminine is constellated. Given any opportunity or pretext, the Empowered Witch will proceed to wreak bloody vengeance on the masculine, and upon all Creation, ever under cloak of righteousness, goodness, and the “protection of children.”
The Baby Boom Generation wanted to revolutionize the world through love, to bring heaven to earth, but when push came to shove, it found – literally — that it lacked the collective cojones to pull off the transformation. Instead of male leadership, the Boomers produced Bangin’ Bill Clinton and his scary wife.
The spoiled Boomers thought Eden would be rebuilt in a day, and when it wasn’t, and the Powers broke out the Big Nightstick, they turned tail and ran back to institutional America. The revolution – that still must be borne — quickly fractured into identity power politics, fundamentalism, intolerance, hypocrisy and coercion. Led by feminism, the Left imploded and began, like the Right, to feed on its own citizenry, by instituting domestic tyranny and calling it “progressiveness.” Expecting heaven to reappear spontaneously, the Boomers faltered in 1968 when the Powers laid the Boot on them, and went scurrying for fundamentalist hideyholes, cocooning with desperate denial and isolationism.
Likewise Boomer women – even while chanting the mantras of peace and love – instead chose power and made war. White females rule America. They own everything except love. Now their bank accounts are jammed, their careers have peaked, their wrinkles have deepened, and suddenly they’re Ready for Love – whatever they decide that now means.
Now the “Women Seeking Men” columns in the personal ads often exceed the “Men Seeking Women.” Overwhelmingly, the women placing ads are Baby Boomers. Four decades of sending the best of Western masculinity to the prisons, gutters, and graveyards, and suddenly the culture has recognized a problem … not that masculinity was massacred, of course … but that there seems to be a “man shortage.” Which is to say, there’s now A Problem because females are beginning to be impacted and dissatisfied.
Indeed. But there’s been a Man Shortage in the land for decades. I can walk all day in America without encountering a real one.
The survivors of Western masculocide — The Escapees – have been underground a long time now. These men who have opted out of Femamerica, who have repudiated its Empowered Witch and Toxic King, are left with only one sovereignty, only one area of culture and existence not under subjugation. Their love is their last prerogative, and they will no longer have their love – nor their bodies — used against themselves. They will no longer permit relationship by commerce, much less pay for sex, either overtly or covertly. Who needs a “date” when one might as well arrange to be financially mugged? When one can be arrested, and imprisoned, merely upon the word of a female or a child? As for marriage, males are finally recognizing it for the matriarchal institution it is. They are learning the hard way – as they had to learn eons ago under the yoke of matriarchy – that feminine institutions like marriage will not protect their sons, nor themselves.
Nolo me tangere said the Christos, following his betrayal and resurrection. Touch me not. He was still within the magnetic fields of materia, not yet “ascended to the Spirit Father.” Likewise, The Escapees will no longer let unclean hands — the hands of power — touch them.
Only Western women, in the madness of their powerlust and self-absorption, could imagine that men would repay betrayal with slobbering romantic submission. Recently, one notices desperation creeping into Madison Avenue advertising spins, especially in liquor and automobile commercials. Western men are constantly told how fabulous and superior women are, how we should fall all over ourselves seeking female favor, how we should be pulling our brothers down so we can ascend the bloody man-rungs and win the favor of the Alpha Female. Buy my car and women will love you! Drink my beer and the babes will go ga-ga!
Same old game – males pay for “love,” and then are supposed to feel grateful and lucky. What kind of worm begs, mewls, and pays for “love”?
The “Man Shortage” – the lack of authentic masculinity in the modern West – is at the root of our cultural problems, especially amongst Western boys. And no wonder. Manhood has been systematically denigrated, outlawed, and destroyed by the culture in the past half-century. The void of authentic masculinity is filled by gangs, suicide, violence, substance addiction, depression, and schoolyard shooters.
Hunker down for the long haul, ladies. Pickings are going to be scarce for quite a spell to come. The “Man Shortage” ain’t goin’ away. Men are goin’ away, and many have no intention of coming back. The Escapees will not meekly tiptoe back into the fold, begging forgiveness like the pathetic “Promise Keepers.” Many of the Escapees do not want relationship with you under any terms – even if you could break the addiction to your Rules, your privileges, your power. Which you cannot.
The good news about Genderwar? Some young women are beginning to rebel against the feminist party line. Our true Sister, who loves us without reservation, is constellating, composing herself like a walking symphony. At last Gretel has sighted the Empowered Witch, and she will yank her Brother from the oven if she can.
Baby Boom females want to believe that men have abandoned them in search of fresh, nubile young’uns. There is some truth to that – it’s a bio-evolutionary fact. But the deeper truth is that we are dead tired of your Me-First act – backed up by the increasingly totalitarian forces of your State.
“Man shortage?” You bet there is, baby. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Five hundred single females, and two males. Consider and get used to it.
Leading feminists have stated explicitly that the world would be better off without males. Perhaps they will get their wish.
The dyas, the unit of the couple which has dominated since the late matriarchies, is broken. The dyas, the twosome, is the fundamental unit of civilization, and of the family. It is also the primordial expression of the opposites in human beings, which means that the couple as foundation of social structure necessitates Genderwar.
It is the responsibility of the feminine to share her home in matter with the masculine. This is the balance for the sacrifice of male body and spirit. If the feminine shirks her responsibilities, the masculine will withdraw first spirit, and then body — perhaps for a very long time.
Not a day passes that I do not fail to pray that women and men will conjoin under new – and radically different – agreements. I hope that real love will grow from this cultural dung and blossom again. A new world groans in its birth-pangs, but it will remain inanimate until female and male finish their War.
Although women won the Battle of the Sexes, modern bi-lateral Genderwar is only now taking full shape. Feminism has constellated the Empowered Witch and her Toxic King. Likewise, it has awakened the male from his slumber in cultural chains. Now, he too stands up. He too scents his freedom.
That will not please women, and it will not please the Powers. Both feed from male body and spirit. There will be conflict of unprecedented proportion and kind. This primal confrontation between female and male cannot, and should not, be avoided.
This time around, Genderwar will force all the cards to the table. Face up.
To borrow from David Crosby, it’s been a long time coming, and it’s going to be a long, long time gone.
Where Have All The Young Men Gone?
March 31, 2004
by Carey Roberts
Remember that lyrical ballad by Peter, Paul, and Mary? That was back in the 1960s. Forty years later, hundreds of thousands of unmarried WESTERN women are asking themselves exactly the same question.
One of the reasons that so many women can’t find a husband is that millions of men have declared a Marriage Strike. Men believe that family courts have become so unfair that in case of divorce, they will lose custody of their children and their ex will take them for all they’re worth.
But there’s a second reason for the marriage gap. Most people have heard that gloomy statistic: WESTERN women outlive men by over five years. But maybe they haven’t considered the effects of that longevity gap on women.
Throughout his life, the WESTERN male is relentlessly stalked by the Grim Reaper.
In his late teens, car accidents, suicides, and homicides claim three times more male victims than females. Beginning in their 30s, men must face the scourge of heart disease. In their 50s and 60s, it’s the looming specter of cancer. And men’s overall suicide rate is four times higher than among women.
It’s a public health disaster of epic proportions: For every one of the top 10 leading causes of death, men have a higher risk of death than women.
This demographic imbalance wreaks havoc on the lives of WESTERN women.
Consider this fact: The Census Bureau reports that among WESTERNs in their 40s, there are 523,000 more women than men in that age group. If you are one of those half-million women, the sad truth is this — you may never find your Prince Charming.
And as women age, their predicament worsens. In their fifties, the number of WESTERN women who have no prospect of finding their marital bliss tops the one million mark. That’s a lot of women who must now face the prospect of spending their Golden Years alone.
Given that politicians often trip over each other to woo the woman’s vote, one would expect to see a stream of government programs dedicated to helping men to live longer, healthier lives. But oddly, that’s not the case.
In fact, the reverse is true. The litany of women’s health programs reveals a gender agenda run amok:
1. The Department of Health and Human Services sponsors five offices of women’s health, but has no office designed to help men.
2. The National Institutes of Health spends three times more money on breast cancer research than for prostate cancer.
3. NIH-funded research studies included only 31% male subjects in 2001, which violates a 1994 Congressional mandate to include both sexes equally in medical research.
4. Last year the DHHS launched a campaign to educate women about heart disease, while men’s risk of dying of heart disease is 70% higher than women’s.
How did this topsy-turvy situation arise?
Beginning in the early 1990s, feminist politicians like Pat Schroeder of Colorado and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland began to spread the rumor that women had been routinely excluded from medical research. Shrill headlines began to fill the New York Times and the women’s magazines. Soon everyone was believing the story, since everyone knows that feminists never tell a lie.
But the claim that women were shortchanged by medical research turns out to be one of the biggest deceptions ever foisted on an unsuspecting WESTERN public. This urban legend has been debunked by Cathy Young, Sally Satel, and myself.
But the myth lives on, thanks to groups like the Society for Women’s Health Research. Victimhood is so important to the feminist creed that it must be invented even where it never existed.
So for now, millions of WESTERN women are destined to live out the rest of their lives in solitude, betrayed by an ideology that once promised female liberation and a gender utopia.
I’m inclined to believe that women just don’t understand us men. Women just can’t seem to understand that the only time smart men are willing to sign on the dotted line is when they’re young and horny, when they have no real assets to lose and before they really understand the principles of wealth creation (ie. early 20s). By the time smart men have a degree or two, a 401k and IRA, a house and a 6 figure income (or at least when they’re closing in on it) they’re not so keen to just give it away for yet another woman.
Then when the smart men hit their 30’s and their sex drive drops (from being “yeah i’ll sign anything to get a bit” to “wait a minute, this means you get everything”); all of a sudden, life is under the control of the “big head” and women don’t seem perpelxed by us. Many women can’t seem to understand why we don’t act like horny teenagers anymore and these women refuse to accept that they have lost their power over us.
Brothers, in a special posting for dumpyourwifenow.com, Christian J out of Australia writes and delivers a newsworthy article on the affect of Feminism on women. With his kind permission we proudly post.
Feminism’s Affect On Women by Christian J of What Men are saying about “Women”.
Once more my hat is off to you. You were right, again. Although, like most of my species, I will never fathom comprehension of the female mind - I have seen the dynamics that perpetuate the Feminist Movement. They are Petulance and Envy.One of my friends is married with 4 (yes, four!) children - 3 girls, 1 boy. The oldest girl will turn 16 soon, and the boy will be 15 on his next birthday. The phrase ‘Chalk and Cheese’ is one that springs instantly to mind. The girl is outgoing, gregarious, outwardly confident, doing well at school and socially adept. The boy is morose, withdrawn, not doing well academically, exhibiting all of the classic attention-seeking, alienated behavior patterns; and rumor tells me he is bullying younger children at school. I look around the household and wonder why the siblings should be so markedly different. The answer is of course, gender. The mechanism of this disparity is the one who loves them most - their mother.
Visiting one evening, the girl was discussing her exam options and, spurred on by her mother (”Don’t get married too early, darlin’!”), her plans for the future; her career, her house, her husband, her children - IN THAT ORDER! There seemed to be an almost maniacal glee in the mother as the girl outlined the next 20 years of her life, almost like a train timetable. It later dawned on me that the mother had been married in the mid-80’s, and had chosen the wife/mother option, owing to her lack of academic achievement and poor employment prospects locally. No surprise then that after 20 years of Feminist “you can have it all - all you have to do is go out and get it!” propaganda and brainwashing, punted out to her generation and beyond, that the mother is more than a little resentful of her current situation.
According to this mother, her husband is to blame for holding her back. The Feminist propaganda and brainwashing machine told her so. I wonder if that was what she considered as she trotted down the aisle to her future ‘hindrance’?
It became all too clear to me that, like many generations of men previously living out their thwarted sporting fantasies through their sons, that this mother was attempting to live out her “alternate life fantasies” through her daughter.
And, what of the future? For the boy; probably a life touched by delinquency, unless something happens fairly quickly to steer him away from that path. For the girl, following the current pattern, early success to further fuel her sense of entitlement; intelligent, outgoing, assertive, attractive twenty-something females (as if there’s a shortage of them!) have the world at their feet. Her easy tendency to lift her hands and fists, to anything male she takes umbrage with, bodes ill for boyfriends and spouses and any future children when “The Reality Crash” comes.
The Bridget Jones Future.
As she joins the ‘Bridget Jones Club’ in her late twenties and early thirties, and her biological clock deafens the neighborhood, her perfect man will still be what he always is, a Feminist illusion. So far, everything has fallen into her lap as the Feminist handbook predicted. The career is established and the house being paid for. Life is looking pretty good for the modern girl; she’s got it all!
Then one morning, she realizes that her looks are fading, the next generation of ‘bright, young-things’ are snapping at her heels and the ‘romantic opportunities’ she cast aside in favor of her career are not sitting around with their thumbs in a certain orifice and their brains in neutral; waiting for her to change her mind! Perhaps, the hard reality of the situation will impact quickly and she will understand that human relationships are worked hard for, and earned - not a god-given right. The likelihood is that the 20 to 30-odd years of Feminist brainwashing will remain intact. It will never be her fault!
“Where are all the good men?” she will whine, as she stamps her little footie. As time passes, her search for Mr. Perfect - that wonderful physically perfect, caring and loving, intelligent and wealthy specimen of manhood that will keep her and her children in the style she would like to become accustomed to - will transform into the desperate search for Mr. Breathing-In-And-Out. Those ‘recreational’ sexual encounters, that she was in control of in her twenties, will become the out-of-control nightmares of her thirties, and beyond - each rejection tearing deeper and deeper into her inflated self-esteem and generating greater and greater resentment towards men ‘who only wanted her for one thing!’
Thus, her resentments are likely to create a self-fulfilling prophecy for her future relationships. It goes like this: If men are only out to use me, then I will be suspicious of men until one of them proves to me otherwise. The men, at the prospect of being treated like criminals by this woman for simply existing, will either shy away from, or drop out of the relationship fairly quickly. Thus, further reinforcing her resentments - and the vicious circle gets tighter and tighter.
The so-called, and much touted, historical ‘oppression’ of women by men will be brought into sharper focus and her perceived sense of ‘victim hood’ further stimulated. Once again the Feminist propaganda and brainwashing machine will pander to her now well-established misandric prejudice; absolving her of responsibility for her situation - blame the guys why don’t you? She may even find herself a Feminist therapist to help her deal with her depression; again reinforcing her resentments, pandering to her prejudices with constant ego-boosts - telling her that she has low self-esteem and that ‘all feelings (and, therefore, all behaviors) are valid’ and that she is entitled to feel the way that she does!! This also justifies her previous, and now future, behavior of doing whatever she wanted with scant regard for the feelings of others.
All too soon the window of reproductive opportunity closes, leaving a bitter lonely, resentful, man-hating woman to face a childless - and hence biological family-less future. She may meet a man seeking only companionship, however, her resentments and self-inflicted disappointments combined with her energies diverting into her career are likely to put paid to this fairly swiftly.
She may meet a man who already has children. She is, however, unlikely to relish the role of unpaid babysitter (to interfere with her career) - and further add to her other resentments - the fact she has no children of her own. It probably won’t last long!
In the end she discovers that she cannot cheat ‘Mother Nature’.
The Single Mother Future Alternatively, she may meet her ‘wayward, bad-boy, gorgeous hunk’ in her twenties and commit that most ridiculous of female errors, that she can “change him through marriage!”. They’ll make a fairy-tale couple, and the marriage will be exactly how it began, a totally unrealistic fairytale. When reality finally bites, many years later, and she admits to herself that the handsome, immature, philandering jerk she married is still an immature, philandering, jerk - and she hot foots it to the divorce court - the damage is already done.
She now faces a future with her children growing up without a father - and all the emotional, social and physical safety risks associated with that. The courts will give her custody of the children and the family home - after all the wastrel husband didn’t pay for it! As for the maintenance payments ordered by the courts, well, if he’d had a job he’d be able to pay! Her looks will be starting to fade, and she won’t be getting any younger! She will be carrying a truck-load of emotional baggage to dump onto either her offspring and/or potential boyfriend/spouse. Her career, which she put on hold, or curtailed, for the children, has stagnated; people will have been promoted over her; and the prospects don’t look good. Her standard of living will probably fall further, owing to increased costs as the children grow, and her stress levels will multiply manifold as she becomes not only primary career for her children, but also sole breadwinner.
Once again the Feminist propaganda and brainwashing machine will spring into life to support her. Her husband was a jerk, but, no matter, all men are jerks - you and the children are better off without him! The Feminist support groups and therapists will give her the ‘all feelings are valid’ nonsense (you know the rest!); and her lack of career success is down to the “Glass Ceiling” - she is being discriminated against by the patriarchal system that oppresses women like her (hallelujah, sisters!) Once again, it’s not her fault! She now makes the decision that her children need a real father, and the ordinary guys that slaved through their twenties to build a career structure and financial stability, although not as attractive as her ex-husband, suddenly become targets for her attention. She is then completely gob smacked, and deeply wounded, when these men want absolutely nothing to do with her, except perhaps for some ‘recreational’ sexual adventure - after all, why should they slave their guts out to be the dumping ground for her emotional baggage and a piggy-bank for her surly, snot-nosed brats? Faced with rejection - really, for the first time in her life; her resentments against men begin to grow and fester, the relationship expectations become self-fulfilling prophecies; once again, you know the rest.
The Feminists are again on hand to support and absolve her of responsibility for her crappy life, and help her to pass her prejudices of misandry onto her daughters, and also alienate her sons from society. The damaged adult produces damaged children, who grow into damaged adults, to produce damaged children. Then again, it wasn’t her fault; after all she was cheated of her ‘well deserved’ future by the patriarchal conspiracy, and her wastrel husband - conveniently forgetting that no one forced her to marry him! In the end she ends up with the worst of both worlds, and some very damaged children!!
Editor’s note: A fellow brother at the Don’t Get Married Forum named anarchiste sums it up best: “I would say that the greatest achievement of feminism has been to uncover the true nature of the human female. What we see now is the real nature of those creatures. Not a pretty sight to see, but how much better off we are now with that knowledge. And we are much better equipped now than we have ever been to deal with them.”
Why Modern, Western Marriage Has Become A Bad Business Decision For Men
This writing seeks to educate men about the realities of what they may be getting into when they marry a Western Woman. An informed decision is less likely to be one that may be regretted later in the marriage. The intent is not to dissuade men from marrying, but to encourage them to communicate frankly their concerns and expectations regarding marriage with their potential spouses. The secondary aim of this essay is to enlighten women to a few of the reasons why increasingly larger numbers of successful, eligible, unmarried men, who would otherwise prefer monogamous long-term relationships, are turning their backs on marriage.
Society typically paints a negative stereotype of men who hesitate, delay, or elect not to marry.
They are labeled as either:
A) Womanisers who are unable to participate in a long term relationship, or
B) Selfish, childish or irresponsible men who can not take care of themselves or another person.
No other explanation is ever explored.
The cost of proclaiming your undying love
In University, in professional sports, in politics, in the workplace; women have the same educational and professional career opportunities as men. Contrary to commonly believed feminist propaganda, women do indeed get paid the same salary as men, given that they are willing to work the same types of jobs as men, and work as many hours as the men do. Despite this reality, many women come into marriage with very few assets, and often are saddled with substantial quantities of debt. In general, men are the ones who save and invest. Don’t believe me? Count the number of women of marrying age that you know who subscribe to financial services magazines or newspapers. A significant number of 20-something and 30-something women spend all of their disposable income on luxury rental apartments, upscale restaurants, frequent exotic vacations, leased cars, spa treatments, and excessive amounts of clothing, purses, shoes and accessories. Yet ironically, in the media, men are the ones who are portrayed as reckless, irresponsible spendthrifts.
When marriage enters the picture, double standards and financial imbalances leave responsible men to pick up the slack and fix the mess she may have made of her finances. Men are forced to spend their hard-earned savings, or take out an usurious loan, on a diamond ring. Women justify this relatively recent, mid-20th Century ritual, which was spawned by a brilliant 1940’s mass-brainwashing campaign launched by DeBeers, by insisting that a man wants to buy her a diamond and that it makes him proud to be able to proclaim his love and affection towards her in this fashion. Granted there are some men who may be inclined to declare their commitment to a life-long partner in this way, but there are plenty of men whom seek a lifelong partnership and commitment who have no interest in buying diamonds. What choice do these men have? None! To many young men, the ring, catered wedding, and honeymoon in an exotic locale at a five-star hotel is an unwelcome land mine on their journey towards adult financial stability and independence. To add insult to injury, he is now locked into a lifetime of insurance payments for this grossly overpriced jewelry. Contrary to popularly held belief diamonds are not rare at all, but instead are common and inexpensive. Their high price is due to their supply having been artificially manipulated. Some men are more concerned with realising their dream of owning a home and becoming financially stable enough to begin a family and responsibly provide for their welfare. Men worry about these matters, because, ultimately, it becomes their sole responsibility.
The purchase of the diamond ring is a predictor of things to come. Immediately after buying it, the man may be rewarded with bridal demands to finance all or part of a lavish wedding, depending upon the size of his bank account and the ambitions of his fiancée. The average costs of today’s Western Weddings frequently exceed that of a house down payment or, in certain parts of the world, the entire cost of the house itself. If a man enters a marriage having saved up a down payment for his dream home, it can suddenly be snatched right out from underneath him. Many men may object to spending such a large sum of money on what is basically a very expensive one-day, four-hour party. He also will be spending a year of his life planning it, when he could use the same time to further his career or education. However, what a man wants is really not of any concern anymore at this point in the proceedings. His wants, desires, hopes and dreams are ignored almost in their entirety. Her opinions regarding the wedding are frequently non-negotiable. A wedding is no longer an event that is equally for the bride and groom. As many of today’s Bridezilla’s will gleefully remind you, “Today is MY day!”. This gives her licence to become selfish, irresponsible, demanding and childlike. A man who balks at spending his entire life savings, or shouldering a five-figure debt load, for the ring, catered wedding and honeymoon in an exotic locale at a five-star hotel, can and will be labeled as a selfish cheapskate or not a “Real Man”. If a woman leaves such a man for him suggesting that they try to keep their costs under control, she would have the full support of everyone around her as she dumped him.
“She can do better”, “Clearly, he doesn’t love her”, “He doesn’t deserve her”, and similar sentiments will be muttered in quiet circles just out of his earshot. This is a sign of her good self-esteem and healthy self-image, and a sign that she won’t settle for anything less. She is the poster girl for the Modern, Independent Woman.
Imagine if a man demanded equal treatment and asked that she buy him a new bass boat, and a two-week bear hunt in Siberia as a condition of marriage. This would be viewed as absurd, yet women do it every day. Modern Western Marriage is supposedly an equal partnership, isn’t it?
The injustices go from bad to worse when children enter the picture. If he can afford to carry the entire familial financial burden, the woman may now elect to stop working entirely. She will often make this decision regardless of how he may feel about it. The day she stops working is the day that all of her past financial baggage unequivocally gets tossed onto his shoulders. If the woman has racked up substantial credit card debts, these are now his payments to make; if the woman has not bothered to pay off her student loans, these become his responsibility; if she owes an enormous sum on her luxury car note, it is up to him to pay it off. Irony of ironies is that he is now paying for her degree and she isn’t even working anymore! Can he object? Can he say: “No Honey, you made your mess, and it should not be my job to clean it up. You knew that you wanted kids even before you met me, and you should have planned ahead.” No, he cannot. The payments can’t be deferred until she is once again able to continue repaying them herself, not if he wants to retain a clean credit rating to get a loan for their dream home. If he even suggested that she return to work to pay off some of her own debt load, he opens himself to criticisms of being an unsupportive husband and bad father who is endangering the welfare of his children. Now the noose tightens and the responsible husband compensates for the mother’s freewheeling and irresponsible past, and begins slowly to pay off her old debts. In the most twisted turn of events yet, the debt he is paying off may often be on credit cards used to finance Vacations, Hotel Rooms and Christmas gifts shared with previous husbands, boyfriends, fiancés and lovers. Caveat Emptor! This is the reward for today’s man who works hard, makes sacrifices, plans ahead, and invests wisely. By getting married to the typical Modern, Western Woman, the man is certainly susceptible to being railroaded into this situation, because it is completely acceptable within today’s gender roles and societal norms.
Marriage can mean career slavery
Anyone who says, “Slavery is dead” clearly has not contemplated the predicament of the average Western Husband, where a good paycheck can mean career slavery. Merriam-Webster’s English Dictionary defines slavery as “…(T)he state of a person who is a chattel (an item of tangible movable or immovable property) of another person.” If the husband earns enough to support both of them, he would be hard pressed to make an argument to preserve equality and have her continue working as he does. If the wife decides to stop working, the man who has been left holding the financial bag finds his options very limited. He may find himself working in a career that he hates, for abusive and exploitative management, excessively long hours, in a position that is physically dangerous or demanding, in an organisation that has no growth potential, far away from home. At this point, considering the corner he’s been painted into, he is often powerless to affect any positive, meaningful change in his own life. He may have been harbouring delusions that once his wife was able to return to work, he would be able to gain some flexibility to rectify some of the shortcomings in his own career. Perhaps changing careers or accepting a lower salary at a different firm in exchange for better hours, a shorter commute, or more fulfilling work. Nevertheless, the distinct reality is that he will continue to shoulder the financial responsibilities of his family alone. His reward for working hard and getting ahead is to become trapped into his career, and become a specialised beast of burden to an emotionally and financially dependent family. Does it really pay to work hard anymore and apply oneself to his full potential?
If she stops working, she may never work again.
There are many debates about the merits of a stay-at-home mother vs. a working mother. My goal here is to simply educate the prospective husband on frequently unseen risks he is taking on when he agrees to accept 100% of the financial burden to allow his wife to stay at home. An informed decision is less likely to be one that may be regretted later in the marriage.
Every parent will agree that staying home with children is backbreaking and often mind-numbing labour. Many new fathers may concede that it is much easier to go to work than to stay at home with several children. However, the greatest imbalance in efforts and contributions to a marriage can manifest once all of the children are of school age. The house is now empty from 8am-3pm. The wife has 7 hours to herself while the kids are at school and the husband is at work. After a few years of hard work at home, many wives may feel entitled to “kick back” and take it easy. The good, supportive husband, however, has worked those same years, has done his 50/50 of the housework, and is still working just as hard to support the family once the kids are in school. His workload has not diminished, and it may have even increased as her expectations rise. He is rarely afforded the same option to scale back his daytime efforts.
What motivation does the modern wife have to return to work? Very little. For several years now, the man’s salary has been enough to live on. Otherwise, she would have been working to make ends meet. Unless tight finances dictate that she must return to work, the husband really has little say in this matter. The wife can hide behind many different excuses in order not to work, despite having little to do from 8am-3pm. Among the commonest are:
“I’m busy with the housework”
It is easy to exaggerate the labours of daily housework. Yet how long does it take to throw clothes or dishes into the washer, and remove them later? Vacuuming can be done in 1 hour a week. Grocery shopping is another hour per week. A decent meal can be prepared in under an hour. Does all of this add up to 7 hours a day? The lie that housework is hard, time-consuming drudgery is no longer as persuasive as it may have been in the past, because in an age of later marriage, many men are already experienced in cooking, cleaning, and general housekeeping and know that it doesn’t take that much effort or time. Humourously, not every stay-at-home-wife even performs all of these duties.
“I can’t find a job”
She has been out of work too long, and therefore is unable to find a job. This may be true, but many men do not consider this risk when they agree to support her while she “temporarily” stops working. Hopefully now they will, and can make a more informed decision. Many wives may use this as a convenient scapegoat to stop looking for any job at all. The next section describes how this can be used against him in the event of divorce.
“It doesn’t pay for me to work”
In the short run, the expenses of returning to work such as gas, lunch, clothes and day care may not make it worthwhile for her to return to the workforce. This may be true, but does that justify her playing tennis, drinking lattes and ‘catching up with her friends’ while her husband toils away? Many couples may be too shortsighted to thoroughly and comprehensively think through this issue. Initially, the cost to benefits ratio may not be ideal, but her returning to work will improve her job skills and network of contacts and over time the return on investment will improve. More so than strolling through the local mall every afternoon and window-shopping for new window treatments. Over time, as her career gets back on track, and she becomes qualified for better jobs, her salary should also improve.
It should be duly noted that some working wives view their salary as “personal spending money”, and still expect the man to pay all or most of the bills. Western Women are often heard to claim that, “What’s mine is mine, and what’s his is ours.”
Even more unfair double standards that favour wives
Cheating
If a married man cheats, he’s the scum of the earth. He is a selfish jerk that has jeopardised the family unit, done his ‘thinking with his little head’, and disrespected his wife and children. However, when the woman cheats, she’s portrayed as the victim of an insensitive and inattentive husband. “Poor thing, he ignores her. It is for her empowerment, to boost her ego. She deserves it after bearing and rearing his children.” It’s good for her self-esteem. Worse, her cheating is portrayed as the man’s fault. If he works long hours to provide for her and the children, he works too much. If he is tired at the end of the day from 13 hours of manual labour, then he doesn’t compliment her as much as she wants. Into this vacuum of conflicting expectations steps the first man who “makes me feel like a Real Woman again…”. You read that correctly; the man who is scrambling to pay the mortgage and car payments and is working double shifts to pay for the consumer goods she demanded to have is now considered a negligent and emotionally abusive husband. The man who may be working two jobs to allow her to be home with her kids is now considered a candidate for Domestic Violence.
When a woman cheats, the first thing people ask is what he did, or more often, didn’t do, to drive her into the arms of another man.
When a man cheats, no one ever asks the same question.
When a woman cheats, the reaction will be; “Oh, poor thing, I guess her husband couldn’t get the job done in the bedroom”.
When a man cheats, no one ever stops to think; “Oh poor fellow, his wife was horrible in bed.”
Let’s not forget what happens if a man were to leave his wife for a younger woman. This will become fodder at the coffee shop for months. It is automatically assumed that he is a shallow sex maniac whose only motivation was to be with a younger woman. The possibility that his wife was of a generation of women who were taught to hate men and that younger women do not, that she was lazy, or a reckless spendthrift, or verbally or physically abusive, or grossly overweight, or an incompetent mother, are rarely considered and are often totally ignored. The myth is that the only reason a man leaves his wife is to be with a younger, more attractive woman. Never mind if she is a better match for him and a more supportive, nurturing mate.
Pre-Nups
If a man insists on a Pre-Nup, he is selfish and unromantic. However, when is the last time a woman who demanded a Pre-Nup was called “unromantic”? On the contrary, if a woman requests a Pre-Nup, she is being fiscally responsible, sensible and looking out for herself. (Note: If your fiancée refuses to sign a Pre-Nup, she has just shown her hand. Best to leave now.) Why is it that a woman can refuse a Pre-Nup, and it is accepted by society? In reality, the man should be outraged that she is after a legal contract, and not love.
What is astounding is the hypocrisy of the usual reaction towards Pre-Nups. Women can conveniently assert that a man is unromantic if he suggests a Pre-Nup. After all, how can a man pollute true love with the signing of legal paperwork! However, what is a marriage licence? Nothing more than a legal contract entered into between the man, woman and local and state government authorities. A woman does not seem to balk at signing this legal paperwork, which entitles her to at least half the assets a man has accumulated as well as half of everything he earns in the future, and obligates him to support her in perpetuity in the event of a breakup. Why aren’t men allowed to note how unromantic this contract is? The distraction of bridal magazines, place setting selection, floral arrangements, wedding dresses, receptions, wedding showers, and honeymoons have clouded the legal reality of what men are getting themselves into. Marriage is as much an unromantic legal contract as a prenuptial agreement is.
Initially, Pre-Nups were devised as a way to protect women. Nuptial agreements were popularised in the 19th century, mostly to protect heiresses from marrying men who were “out for their money”. Until the Married Women’s Property Act of 1848, under English Common Law, a woman’s property, upon marriage, was usually transferred to her husband.
“Stupid, Irresponsible” Men
Men are severely abused in our media, quite frankly. Just watch any TV commercial or sitcom and see how they portray men as idiots, dolts, or well intentioned, if bumbling, buffoons. If women were portrayed in commercials in the same fashion, “Women’s Organisations” would have a fit. If it weren’t for their wives in these shows and ads the men would be lost “animals”, unable to feed themselves or perform even the simplest of tasks. Other commercials make it appear that men act without thinking, only responding in an impulsive and irrational manner, and that the wife is the brains of the family. Even many women will agree that women often are the ones who act upon emotions and make judgments solely based up on emotional attachments and not logic or reason. Almost every “couples budgeting” article will portray the woman as the one who has to rein in the man’s childish spending, when in truth it is usually the woman who cannot control her expenditures.
Job Loss
If a husband loses his job and is having trouble finding work, the wife is completely and totally justified in threatening to leave him. However, can you imagine the reaction if a husband threatened to leave a wife who was in the exact same position? He would be vilified! If a man loses his job, the woman is justified in resenting the fact that the financial burden lies on her. He is no longer a ‘good provider’. When is a man allowed to resent this very same predicament? If a man is laid off and cares for the household and kids while the wife is working, he may be accused of not pulling his weight! Yet this is exactly the same situation that women demand more recognition for with each passing year! No matter what role the man plays, he loses!
Traditional Roles
It is perfectly acceptable for a woman to demand that a man make a certain salary, drive a certain car, live in a certain part of the city, have a certain job, have the ‘right’ manners, talk a certain way, walk a certain way, behave a certain way, have a degree from the ‘right’ University and dress in a stylish fashion, to be deemed “marriage material” and be able to provide her with the stability she feels she deserves. If a man demands his wife do the cooking and cleaning, he can now be labeled old fashioned and sexist. If he asks her to carry her weight financially, just as he does, he may be criticised as an inadequate provider. If a man insists that his wife honor the conjugal requirements of the marriage contract, he can and will be accused of sexual abuse, sexual assault or rape.
To add insult to injury, some women have gotten so pampered that they not only quit their jobs the day they find out they are pregnant, but they then go out and hire as many nannies, cooks, gardeners and pool boys as their husband can afford. Many Western Wives stay at home and hire someone else to rear the kids and clean up, while they drink lattes and go shopping all day with other pampered “stay-at-home” mothers. Does it pay to work hard and get ahead anymore, if this is how your hard-earned money is squandered?
The concept of the pampered wife is a relatively new one. Most of Western Civilisation was primarily an agricultural economy even up until the 1920’s and 1930’s. Western Wives contributed to the well being of the household by helping on the farm. A man needed a wife as an equal partner. It was not until the 1950’s that the first generation of Western Wives, first in The States and later in Europe, Australia and New Zealand, began to emerge as dead weight. Perhaps this coincides with the spiking of the divorce rate in The States, and later Europe and the other English Speaking Nations, and the rise of Feminism. Perhaps men have become tired of giving so much, while getting so little in exchange.
Divorce
43% of Western Marriages end in divorce, and 70% to 93% of these divorces are initiated by women.
All men should consult a legal professional before marrying, and understand the implications of divorce, because the chances are 1-in-3 that they will participate in one whether they like it, want it, inititate it or not.
Upon divorce, all assets accumulated during and prior to a marriage are subject to division. It has become, simply put. a licence to steal. Even if the woman has not worked in years, and has spent the intervening decade(s) shopping and lunching from 8am-3pm, she is entitled to half, or more, of everything the man worked for during the course of the marriage. Is this fair? How many people would ever agree to a job contract that stipulated that in the event of separation that one party would have to return 50% of the gross amount of everything in the pay packet? No one in his or her right mind would knowingly sign such an agreement. Yet Western Men unknowingly agree to the exact same insanity each time they sign their marriage contract!
“Assets accumulated prior to a marriage are exempt from a divorce”. In theory this is true, in practice it is not. If funds from an account are commingled or combined, it can become marital property. How do funds become commingled, or mixed? If even the smallest sum from a prior account is spent towards the marriage, all of that account will now be considered marital property. Buy your child a lollipop from your own account, and a good lawyer will take one-half of it for your ex-wife when you divorce. If a woman moves into a home the man owned prior to the marriage, it is not safe from divorce. If she so much as hangs up a sheet of wallpaper, puts up draperies, paints a wall, or installs a light fixture, the home is now classified as joint marital property, and is now subject to equal division. Worse actually, the man can be ejected from the home if she makes a false claim of domestic violence, physical abuse, verbal abuse or child abuse. Where is the equality and fairness?
Note: “Equal Division” is also somewhat of a misnomer. Often, she can get upwards of 70% - 90% of the assets, while the man gets the majority of the debts! She gets all of the benefits, he gets all of the responsibilities. This, of course, is just and right and is his reward for working so hard all of those years. He can afford it; she can’t because she was not working.
If you pamper your wife, it can be used against you
Imagine that in the spirit of generosity and kindness that you gave a beggar a hot meal. A generous act, indeed. Now imagine your reaction if that same beggar sues you in court. He is petitioning the judge to have you keep providing him with the food that you gave him willingly, freely, out of a big heart. The judge orders you to keep feeding the homeless man meals, indefinitely, forever, because he has become accustomed to eating those meals! This is categorically absurd, yet this happens to Western Men in divorce court every day. Instead of thanking you for paying her bills for all those years, what you get is the privilege of being legally forced to pay her bills forever!
After having children, many women demand to quit working and stay home. Before the kids came along, many of these same women may have been in careers they hated, working long hours, and enduring long commutes. It is the man’s generosity and dedication to his own career that enables her to walk away from her own career. During a marriage, a man with a stay-at-home wife might work long and grueling hours in order to support her. He will pay the mortgage, the property tax, grocery bill, phone bill, cable bill, Internet bill and electric bill. He also pays for her car, gas money, clothes, and vacations.
As one final slap in the face, the man may be punished for working hard enough to allow his wife to have the luxury of staying at home with the kids. As noted above, after the children are in school, the wife may enjoy a life of leisure and relaxation that is afforded to her by her man’s hard work. In the event of divorce, he will be legally obligated to support her for years or decades to come. Because she stopped working and led a life of leisure, the ex-husband is now responsible for supporting her, forever! History has a tendency of rewriting itself. Originally, a woman may have had a career that she may have hated, and was begging to leave. Western Women often “play” at work and career for a few years after University, and then when they near 30 or grow tired of the workplace they seek out a man to “take her away from all of this”, whatever “all of this” may be. In fact her desire to leave the world of work may have been her motivation to have kids in the first place. But now, in her eyes, and definitely her lawyers eyes, she “gave up” her career for her man and his kids. She is now “owed” all of her “lost income”. His gift of leisure and support to her has now become twisted and is viewed as her sacrifice! Another way in which the situation is turned against him is that he will be characterised as being threatened by her having her own career, and that he forced her to quit her “lucrative career” and stay home with the children. Her lawyer will now attempt to convince the judge that he wanted to “oppress” his wife and “keep her down”. Truthfully now, how many men do you personally know that are upset at having a wife that earns a good living? Many of these misleading stereotypes still run rampant in our society, and are routinely used to the woman’s advantage during a divorce. As a result of her not working, regardless of whether she was minding the home or not, she remains a financial liability.
Generous, caring men who spoil their wives should certainly think twice about how this generosity can later be used against them. The phrase used in divorce court is “She has become accustomed to a certain lifestyle”. A husband’s reward for spoiling his wife today is the legal obligation to spoil her indefinitely, forever. Buy her a luxury car today, and you may be obligated to buy her luxury cars after she leaves you for another man! Yet, imagine a husband that became accustomed to eating a home cooked dinner, or regular conjugal visits. Now imagine the courts obligate the ex-wife to continue cooking for him and sharing her bed with him and his new girlfriend each night, despite being divorced! Inconceivable, but it happens the other way around every day!
The ultimate insult, however, comes when the man loses half or more of his life’s assets even when she has decided to leave him. Yes, a wife can unilaterally decide to kick a man out of his own home, and have the courts force him to continue paying the bills, while she is sleeping with her new boyfriend in the very house the husband worked so long and hard to buy! She can, and often does, spend her alimony check on gifts for her new boyfriend or lover! How is it that the legal system supports a woman who feels entitled to this?
The risks are clear, yet what exactly are men getting out of marriage? Many times, the reasons men get married are unfounded.
Many of the traditional reasons why a man gets married are a myth.
“I won’t die alone”
Wrong. The simple fact is that one spouse WILL die alone. Visit the hospital and go to the terminally ill or cardiac departments. Few people have the time to sit with an ill relative all day and all night. Yes, you may get visitors, but they aren’t having the same thoughts as you are. You’re contemplating your mortality, while they’re wondering what food the hospital cafeteria offers. In the end, even with a loving and supportive family, most of us will leave this world alone, unless you both die simultaneously in an accident of some kind. Your spouse may die fifteen years before you, or you may be in the hospital for your last year. Ultimately, we all die alone. Married or not.
“I won’t grow old alone”
Not necessarily. A marriage can self-destruct at any time. Your partner may initiate divorce at age 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65 or 70. Many married people end up in the same position (alone) as if they had never married at all. Now they enter their twilight years broke, as a result of being stripped of half or more of their life’s assets, losing half their retirement and pension funds, and being assessed alimony payments. Experiencing financial devastation from one divorce often may preclude a man from ever marrying again. This is a common observation of many middle-aged Western Women. Q: “Where are all the men?”. A: “He is broke from the divorce settlement, alimony and child support payments.” Thus these women don’t find him marriable, and he grows old alone and poor.
Men are led to believe that not marrying implies only one destiny; that of a solitary monk in a cave, a shunned loner. However, life is not so black and white. Not marrying does not mean you cannot continue to date or have meaningful relationships throughout your life. There are plenty of single people in all age brackets. A bad marriage can be the loneliest of institutions, because most of your emotional outlet and companionship is concentrated into one person who gives back nothing in emotion, affection or support. Young men in their 20’s and 30’s should be more aware of the alternatives that exist in life. They should be aware that marriage is a choice, and is not the only path life has to offer. An informed decision is less likely to be one that is later regretted.
“I’ll get regular sex”
Not from Modern, Western Women. Access to regular sex is the oldest and the most frequently cited reason to marry. Many men now know that Modern, Western Women frequently stop having sex after just a short time of being married. There are plenty of “sexless” marriages. Talk to a few married couples that are honest about their relationship. One or both partners may stop wanting sex after kids, or the sex may be as infrequent as once a year or once every six months, or the wife may only have sex when she wants the husband to buy her something, take her somewhere, or remodel the house. Read the honest opinions of married men on the Internet. Most Western, Married Men will have more sex with their Western Wives in the first six months of their marriage than they will in the next 40 years. Lastly, it remains to be seen whether sex with one exclusive partner for forty years or more is even a natural act, or just a man-made convention. In many Western Nations, the wife is no longer required to have sex with her husband. She can deny him at any time, for any length of time. She can, if she wishes, deny him sex forever and there is nothing that he can do about it.. In fact, if he inisists that she honor her end of the marriage contract by being available for sexual relations, he can and will be accused of, charged with, and arrested for Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault or Rape.
Marriage is hardly a guarantee of regular sex, as many people are led to believe.
“I’ll have someone to cook and clean for me”
Not necessarily. While a Modern, Western Woman is perfectly justified in quitting her job in the name of staying home with the kids, she can also demand that the husband pay for a cook, a maid, and a nanny. This leaves the man to earn the money, and leaves him to pay for maintenance of household and children, while the wife gets to play at being a housekeeper. Today’s woman is empowered by not performing the traditional housewife duties, regardless of whether she is working or not. If a husband asks that his wife perform traditional household duties because she is not working, he will often be labeled sexist, abusive or controlling, even if he is doing his “traditional role” of paying all the bills, providing for his family, and performing the traditional manly duties of vehicle repairs, maintaining the lawn and house upkeep.
“I have to be married to have kids”
Not anymore. Her ovaries do not physically need a contract at the government center in order to be fertilised by your sperm. Cro-Magnon man had children long before lawyers invented marriage contracts. Often, you do not need to be married in order to share health benefits. You do not need to be married to designate your partner on a life insurance policy. You do not need to be married to own a dream home together. It is ironic that responsible parents who raise a healthy family, but never actually sign marriage paperwork, get less respect than divorced parents or married parents who are ineffective, inattentive or incompetent.
-Having a lifelong, faithful, committed relationship has nothing to do with being “married”.
-Owning a beautiful dream home together has nothing to do with being “married”.
-Rearing healthy, happy, and successful children has nothing to do with being “married”.
-Building a family and life together has nothing to do with being “married”.
-Growing old together has nothing to do with being “married”.
In fact, recent changes in cohabitation, partner and marriage law have proven that the only tangible consequence of marriage is having a formalised separation process that usually requires the talents of an attorney.
You do need to be married in order to throw an extravagant four-hour party, and share the same last name.
You do need to be married in order to involve the state and government in your romantic affairs.
You do need to be married in order give away half of everything you own.
Besides that, marriage does nothing more than introduce lawyers and social workers into your life. These are people that otherwise would have nothing to do with your life or your relationship.
Men need to stop and ask themselves:
“Why exactly am I getting married? What exactly does marriage mean to me in today’s world? What is the benefit to me to get married?”
It is no longer a lifelong commitment, because it can be reversed overnight on her unilateral whim.
Marriage was originally created as a way for families to merge land, property, political power and influence; perhaps people should return to viewing it as just that and nothing more. The rest of it is fake modern TV Fantasy and Tabloid Gossip and Hype polluting the minds of today’s impressionable youth, and a way to keep the multi-billion-per-year wedding industry chugging along. Perhaps the only criteria should be to ask oneself: “How excited am I for us to merge our finances and assets?” When all the fluff and hype are boiled away, that may be the only remaining reality. Spend a day in divorce court, and you’ll see exactly what is real and tangible and lasting about marriage. You’ll see women who signed the marriage contract under romantic pretenses who are now expert laymen attorneys who can cite case law. Bouquet throwing ex-brides now embroiled in warfare to get everything that is coming to them and more! The rest are myths, lies, bold unsubstantiated promises, and maybes. “For better or for worse…”
The Western Divorce rate is 43%. It is higher in some parts of the world such as California, Great Britain and Australia. In Japan the recent change in pension law may have many pensioners out on the street. In India new changes to dowry law have men being threatened by their wives. Consider the number of people who are in a bad marriage, but elect to stay; Men who don’t want to lose 50%, women who know they can’t support themselves alone. Next, think of how many more couples stay together just for the sake of the kids. Of these “forced marriages”, consider how many of these marriages involve infidelity, no sex, or sleeping in separate beds or separate rooms. I estimate the percentage of happy and monogamous marriages to be under 5%. Are these odds you would take in a business venture, investment or loan? Most of the risk-averse population would not. Yet they seek this exception to the rule everyday through marriage.
Slightly off topic but I thought that yo may be interested
Professional women of 30-35+ cannot find husbands
I thought that this was not a wide phenomenon, but it seems that it is a problem throughout the industrialised world. I did a search on the internet recently on this subject and there appears to be many agencies set up specifically to cater for this issue. Also my own direct experience of meeting several professional women in their 30’s who are looking for boyfriends with a view to possible marriage and have been without one for several years.
I am a professional man of 31, with a degree in Civil Engineering and an MBA. I have 10 male friends aged 30-34 who are Accountants, Lawyers, Software Analysts, Engineers and Medical. Only two have professional women as girlfriends, mine is a Nurse and a friend dates an Artist. I helped my Nurse girlfriend to get her degree by doing her maths coursework for her and re-writing a couple of her assignments (she is from Thailand originally and has English language problems).
As a general rule, we all prefer not to date professional women, all though all of us did when we were younger, e.g. while at University and a 2-3 years after leaving. The reasons why we do not date professional women are broadly as follows:
• We made it through a feminized secondary education system, with some feminist teachers who sometimes unfairly gave the girls better marks than us, for lower quality work. At University we similarly had to put up with hostile feminists. As a result, we want to forget our educational years and get on with life. Having a professional girlfriend reminds you of University.
• As a result of a feminized education system, there are a larger number of younger female professionals than male.
• As a professional man, we have a comparatively deep pool of women from whom to choose. A professional man can marry down, at his own level and sometimes up in terms of our potential wives’ education and wealth. Marrying up is usually not a preferred option, however. A greater percentage of professional men are in a long term term relationship with a woman by their mid 30’s. Professional women mainly restrict themselves to marrying at their own level or up. If a professional woman does want to marry down, her choices are limited as most Tradesmen marry in their early 20’s.
• Professional men tend to be of higher intelligence and often of open mind. Thus more professional men than unprofessional do not see marriage and children as a good option. I live with my girlfriend but we are not married and we keep our finances separate. We do not intend to have children. This type of relationship is becoming more popular with professional men.
• Professional women generally work long hours and if a professional man wants children, the woman does not have time to look after them properly. The man thus has to spend more time looking after the children away from his career. Professional women also often expect more from their professional husbands in terms of childcare, e.g. attitudes like “This is a joint relationship, you should take your turn” prevail. This is not such an issue with an unprofessional woman.
• Many professional women are not as attractive as their unprofessional counterparts in terms of appearance and femininity. This appears mainly due to the fact that professional women work hard.
Just a thought about finances between husband and wife. I had a client who had gotten divorced and wanted to fix his credit now that he was on his own. His wife was always in control of all the money, bills, etc. There were a couple of major issues with that though.
For one, the wife was a compulsive gambler, and went off to the casino 5 times a month. Each time she would spend everything extra that they had, and sometimes even some they didn’t have. Then they would fight and scream for the next two weeks as she tried to scramble to get bills paid. Not to mention, she was horrible with money as it was. Even when she could pay the bills, she didn’t.
I don’t blame her totally though, he knew this for a long time and just refused to take over the bills. Was he afraid to? I don’t think so, he said that she even offered him the job a few times, but he turned it down. I believe he didn’t want the responsibility and stress. Plus, he would then have to deal with her asking for money all the time.
My point, if a couple is having financial problems, regardless of the the root cause, they should place the control of the finances with the spouse who is better with money, or get a financial advisor to do so. Financial problems, and credit problems, can ruin marriages and cause endless bickering and animosity. Making a few informed changes can make all the difference in the world. Communicate with your other half, and if you see an issue, address it.
James Junior
James Junior’s last blog post..The Average American’s Step-by-Step eGuide To Credit Repair – Step Two
sounds like that guy doesn’t want a wife, but a robot that has the qualities of a blow up doll. What an unfortunate soul who has never come to grips with the fact that the meaning of life is nothing more than your experiences.
I BELIEVE THAT EVERY WOMAN SHOULD KNOW WHAT IS GOOD AT THE RIGHT TIME.
MEN ARE VERY DIFFICULIT TO HANDLE BUT IS ONLY WITH PATIENCE THAT ONE CAN BE WITH THEM.