Tag Archives: husband provider

It’s Not About the Housework

If there’s one thing that people just never seem to understand, it would be that me being at home for all of these years has nothing at all to do with housework. Whether I spend 5 minutes or 6 hours a day doing housework is completely irrelevant. You always see people attempting to justify the position of “stay at home mothers” by means of what money they might make doing the same jobs outside of the home. They’ll say things like “stay at home mothers spend x amount of time washing dishes” or “x amount of time running the kids to school and x amount of time cooking and sweeping floors,” and etc…etc…etc… But what is never mentioned is that women working has nothing to do with housework but everything to do with independence from men.

I cry all the time at work, but not because I “don’t want to work.” It has nothing to do with that. I could get on my hands and knees and scrub my house from top to bottom, and while I might complain about the work itself, I would be happy. I would be happy because I was doing something that was worthwhile. Sweeping my own home and doing the dishes and scrubbing down the bathroom and doing the laundry for my own household has value and merit. I’m “going somewhere” when I do those things even if I do them day in and day out. What is the value and purpose of me doing those things outside of the home? If I was a man it might have more value and merit because it would enable me to move up in the world, have power and independence and provide for a family or something. But I’m not a man, nor do I want to be a man. I don’t want to be “powerful.” In fact, it’s quite the opposite. I’ve always felt happier being powerless.

When I was younger I loved working. I loved going out and making money and having independence. But that all changed once I became a wife and mother. After I became a wife and mother I began to break down in tears (the same as I’m doing right now, even after all these years) at the very thought of going out and making my own money. It’s not because I’m somehow “lazy” or any sort of bullshit like that. It’s because I feel the femininity inside of me. It’s because I don’t want to be independent. I wanted to be feminine and nurturing, depending on a man and having my sexuality belonging only to one man.

They push the two-income model of families on all of us because they don’t want women to be dependent on men, and that’s what it’s all about. If women went home, then men could control women via money and the regulation of women’s sexuality by making women dependent on men. Me being home all of these years has never been about housework, it’s been about me depending on a husband to care for me, and me having paid employment of any kind (even part-time) destroys all of that, and that is why women have to work in our society. That is why it is pushed on us. Because if women didn’t work, especially after marriage, then feminism couldn’t exist.

I wouldn’t mind making less than a man, if I knew that it was generally accepted and understood by society that men were supposed to be taking care of women. Not at all. I don’t want to be any man’s “equal,” and I would never want to be in a position of power where I was some man’s boss or anything. It wouldn’t feel right. The first thing that happens when I’ve ever been attracted to a man is that I feel like I want to submit to him, to be taken care of by him, like I’m safe with him and don’t have anything to worry about. It’s just this natural instinct that I feel when I feel that polarity and attraction. I don’t want to be independent. That’s why I never went out and worked, and that’s why the thought of working sickens me and makes me cry my eyes out. Because I feel it, I feel it so deeply inside of me, that femininity, as if it determines everything about me- and I love it.

And more power does mean more responsibility, but that’s part of being a man. Women hand over a great deal of rights to be taken care of and provided for, and are usually happier for it. It’s pathetic that the men of our society would send their wives out into the workforce to help provide for the family. What kind of a man would do such a thing? Apparently not much of one given how emasculated the men of society are today. A man should feel like an utter failure, like he has lost a part of his masculinity, by needing the “help” of a woman, especially his own wife and mother of his children, to help provide for him or his family. Any man that would expect his wife to be out in the workforce should be beat- and that’s the truth. Why would any man want to send his wife out there like that??

That’s what it’s all about. And I would really like to understand why on earth paid employment is always supposed to be the cure for boredom? I don’t see anybody in the workforce except for the biggest losers in history not being able to find something to do when they aren’t working. When I’m not busy with housework or errands I simply find something else I like doing, which is the same thing anybody else does after work. How is this even an issue?

Also, me marrying young and having no income or independence of my own has protected me. It’s forced me to stay under the authority of one man and kept my family intact and prevented me from having all kinds of failed relationships and multiple sexual partners, not to mention the “blended family” where people have children from different fathers/mothers. I’m as old as I am now having only slept with my husband. If I had been an independent woman or had waited until later in life to get married (even if I only waited until my mid-20s or something) that probably wouldn’t be the case. Therefore my innocence and femininity was protected, and I was protected. I always took my sexuality very serious and still do. I can’t imagine allowing any man but the most important and beloved to penetrate me! Dear God, how can that be casual???

So yeah, I cry my fucking eyes out because of paid employment, but it’s not because i’m lazy or anything of the sort, and I won’t be told that by anybody. I did take on a part-time job that I do like. It’s simple and laid back and I might stay there just as a way of having a little bit of spending/saving money. But even then the woman training me today was giving us advice on how not to get bored!!! But I still stopped by at my husband’s work and sat in the parking lot crying my eyes out outside of the shop. He came out to my car and held me for a minute and told me to call the place I had been working and tell them that I wouldn’t be coming back.

And no, I don’t want to go back, but I am for a week or two because I promised the owner I would be there when she needed me for the next couple of weeks. I wasn’t just going to walk out on her. I’m keeping a promise (something some people in this world are still honorable enough to do) even though it’s killing me. After that I will probably keep my other small part time job (only about 24 hours a week) because it’s more laid back and fun, and a place I’m familiar with and close to home. I know that working was a mistake, but in some ways I guess it was a lesson I had to learn. I just don’t have that drive of independence and probably never will have.

Yet Another Reason Why MRAs Are Full of S***

http://www.forbes.com/sites/emmajohnson/2014/10/27/are-you-a-stay-at-home-mom-facing-divorce-dont-expect-alimony/

A fan of mine (a MAN as yes there are actually traditionalist men left) just sent this article to me and it made me very sad (he expressed the same opinion as well). For centuries women could count on lifetime financial support (unless they were unfaithful) and the primary aspect of marriage was men providing for their wives and women caring for their home and children (if there were any but childless women were still provided for regardless) and now it’s regressed to such a point because of feminism that women at home are looked at as lazy bums who just won’t “get a job.” It’s been bad for a while but unfortunately is getting worse. This is also yet more evidence that MRAs are full of BS and make outlandish claims about courts favoring women that can’t be backed up by a shred of evidence. Sure, you know someone who knows someone who… Yeah, OK. As NYMOM said in one of her posts a few years back “a man has a better chance of getting struck by LIGHTNING than ever paying a dime of alimony.” Almost all married women are either co-providers or primary providers and how is it “divorce theft” when she’s been paying the bills, birthing the kids and paying for the home, car, food, etc..??? She paid for it yet it’s not her stuff too? Get real. Men aren’t victims and the courts aren’t stacked against them because of feminism. Not only are most men not paying any support, how many are ******* RECEIVING it (which, in my opinion, is beyond absurd)? NEWS FLASH if your wife has a job and is paying the bills then she is providing for YOU- at least partially. So, no, men aren’t providing for women. You aren’t being providers so stop acting like victims and like women are the enemy because neither of those things is true. Women are providing for themselves, their children AND for men- which is why marriage is seen as obsolete today. This is what feminists have ALWAYS wanted- the complete eradication of the provider ethic so women will be forced to have careers and be forced out of the home despite the desire to stay home, as Graglia explained so well in her book “Domestic Tranquility.” But women CAN change this and the primary way is to use man’s sexual need. No financial support, no marriage, no p****.

What Kind of Society do We Want?

Is there anything more pathetic in this world than a man who doesn’t even want to provide for his own?; than a man who would become hostile and explode in a rage or become aggressive against a woman just at the very thought of ever supporting a woman? What kind of a man would do such a thing? I’d say there’s something severely wrong with a man who would become hostile against a woman who’s only crime is that she actually likes men and wants to be in a stable relationship with a man; a woman who actually is feminine, a woman who actually wants to care for her own children. 

The truth is that you’d pay for it and you know you would. Even to this day men pile into strip clubs and throw their money at beautiful (or even not so beautiful) women in the hopes of enjoying their beauty or convincing them to do some kind of sexual favors, etc.. Even with all the free sex many men would still give a woman money for it if the woman said that’s what it would take to get it. The truth is that you know if women demanded you pay for dates or marry and provide for them in order to get the [censored] that you’d do it. You hate it and it drives you insane that a woman might ever have any actual rights or choices over her own body or reproduction. It drives you nuts that women are the gatekeepers of sex and you’d do anything to get back in (or even get in at all). 

You complain women are so butch, unfeminine, out of shape, masculine, assertive, aggressive, career-driven, hate men, etc… yet you men are feminine, unmotivated, unwilling to be responsible for women and 3/4 of you look like you might be expecting triplets any day. You complain about the career-driven woman who just doesn’t want kids or can’t get in touch with her feminine side. Well, how is a woman supposed to be feminine, happy, in-shape and love men if no man will provide for her? Why would she want kids if she doesn’t have security to raise them properly? She can’t put kids and family first if she knows her only choice is to pursue a career and provide for herself. She must put career first as it is her only option and she knows it and she receives harassment from all sides so that she might never forget it. 

You complain about child support, divorce, abortion, alimony (as if it actually still exists) but who do you think legislated it in the first place? I’ll give you a hint, it wasn’t women! Men created the laws, not women. Men legislated feminism, not women. Very few lawmakers, politicians, lawyers, etc.. were women and there were NO Supreme Court justices that were women until the 1980s. Even today women are hopelessly in the minority in these fields. If men have a problem with the way things are today then their problem is with other men, not women. Yet instead of attacking the problem at its root and forcing other men into their appropriate roles and responsibilities you go instead and become hostile and aggressive against women and you hate the very women that would be good to you- the very women who wouldn’t do you wrong. 

There are countless homemaking blogs out there, but where are all the breadwinner blogs, exactly? I’d say for every one traditional man there are probably about ten traditional women. Well, I propose a different solution. If men don’t want any responsibilities I say fine! You can become useless wastes of space who sit around living off of daddy and mommy until you reach middle age. You can have no motivation in life to ever actually get a job or provide for a family. Instead the women can all go out to work while you lounge around playing video games. You can have absolutely no role in life. The women will bear the children (and that’s if they even want to have them at all), work everyday to support families and even go to war. You can have no useful role or purpose in life and just drift aimlessly until you die. How does that sound? The women will work and you can just take it easy. Sex will be free and easy. One can experiment, with several different partners, even of the same sex if that is what they choose. When you get tired of one partner you can easily walk away and find another. Kids can all be raised in day-care centers or passed around the community to be raised by others while women work and men are demotivated. Paternity will never really be certain in many cases. The women are all promiscuous sl*ts, after all. That’s the way our primitive ancestors did it. I think they set such a wonderful example! Men had it made. They never had to work. Instead maybe men can just spend their days starting pointless wars that women and children end up paying the price for. Maybe men could go out hunting every once in a while and come home and toss the meat at their three different wives and say “get to work b****” then spend all night having sex with various women and we can all live in grass huts and have a lovely egalitarian society. Does that sound good? Every day can be constant drudgery and fighting just to survive. Society will never go anywhere nor will our population. And from what I’ve seen it seems like there are many who actually want us to resort to being a primitive society, as they praise primitive societies as if they were egalitarian paradises (despite evidence that they certainly were not).

Oh you love to experiment when the women say they’ll give you sex, but when the women turn around and say they’ll control their own bodies and reproduction then you throw a fit! You want women to be nothing more than mere slaves who both have careers and are good little traditional girls that do what they are told. If you had your way women would be nothing more than slaves with no rights. They should work and be equally responsible to provide yet should have no rights to property, children, divorce or rights to their own body. You love the free and easy sex and living with your girlfriend with no responsibility until she says she’s going to have a baby, and there’s nothing you can do about it (or until she says she’s going to have an abortion and there’s still nothing you can do about it). You love teaching your fellow boys about how to identify sl*ts (so you can have easy sex with them) then turn around and complain about all those illegitimate, fatherless children! You want to treat women as nothing more than disposable sex objects then wonder why so many women turn to feminism and hate men. 

We in the first world do not know and understand oftentimes the problems of the third-world. Most of us have never been starved or known those kinds of hardships. We are blessed and we are blessed because we reap the benefits of our ancestors. Well, guess what, our grandfathers were providers for their families and the ethic was a very strong one and very reinforced and accepted by society as well as law. That’s why we have everything we have. It is the primitive and impoverished third world countries that send their women out to do what we here in the West consider men’s work. It is those societies where men don’t work and have no provider ethic that generally are bad off. If we have luxuries, if we had a better life and more stable society then it is because men actually provided for their families. You can’t have it both ways. We’re resorting to primitive ways because you men stopped being the breadwinners; because you have no care or drive to provide for women. We are now accepting of and living many practices and lifestyles that were only to be found in primitive societies. 

What kind of a man is it that would claim to love a woman but become hostile at the very thought of providing for her financially? What kind of man would claim to love a woman then pressure her non-stop to “get a job” and allow his relatives to harass her about it as well? What kind of a society is it where we have whole groups and organizations of men who attack and become hostile against women just for being women and wanting to be home with their children and care for their families? What kind of a society is it where men view their own women as competition and feel nothing inside of them to even so much as stand up for a woman nor protect her, much less provide for her? Where does that leave our families? Where does that leave our children? A man who does not provide for his own is the worst kind of scum there is. There is nothing worse. Women can only be feminine if men are masculine. Women can only be homemakers and care for their children if men are providers. There is no other way. The nuclear two-parent family with the man standing alone as sole provider built up our civilization and society. It made our society and our families stable. It made our communities peaceful. You can’t have it both ways. Either we want stable families and a first-world existence with men being providers for both women and children or we want an unstable impoverished existence where men are unmotivated. You can’t have it both ways.