NOTICE: This article has been updated and moved to The Masculine Principle. Please click here to read the new version or scroll down to continue reading in the old format..
***
A FEMALE WRITES: "As long as mothers and/or wives don’t allow their careers to consume their lives and interfere with their God-given duties, then I don’t see a problem. Women have their own aspirations and dreams as well just like men (and no I don’t believe that the only reason people have careers is to make money)."
.
I agree with much of what you say. There is nothing inherently wrong with women having jobs, or their own money, or pursuing their dreams and aspirations.
Now, what those types of dreams and aspirations are sometimes irks me enormously, when one stands back and has a good long look at what society has transformed itself into.
One of the reasons that women earn less in the workplace is because of the jobs they choose. Women are often reporting that they want to have a job that will have some sort of a social impact, or benefit the community (who doesn’t, by the way?), as well as needing "flex-time" in order to meet the needs of their families. Women will take lowered pay in order to find a job that meets these criteria.
Now, that is all good and fine – in fact, it might even be noble.
But look at the friggin’ absurdity of what we have done since those dreaded, awful, horrible 1950′s. (Arguably the zenith of Western Civilization).
.
A man back then was able to earn enough money from a mere blue collar job that his wife could stay at home, he could pay for raising 4 kids, they could go on a nice family vacation once a year, he could pay for a decent home, and have a new car in the driveway. On his wage alone!
And often, after the kids were off in school, the house was nice & clean, and the fridge was properly reloaded, what did those oppressed women go off and do with the rest of their time?
Well, some of them gossiped like the dickens, I suppose, but many others did things they found socially rewarding. They raised money for charities, they volunteered time to help the elderly or the needy, they organized groups that enhanced the lives of their communities – from hobbies to sports, and so on and so on. In other words, they sought social rewards of their own volition, and had money in their jeans, er, pleasantly sexy sundress pockets, to boot!
And today? They have “liberated themselves” into halving the income of men by flooding the job market with labourers, forcing both men and women to work full-time jobs in order to live in a crappy condo with their 1.6 kids, and the two cars they need but can only afford on the never-never plan. (A lease). And what do they want out of their careers? To do something socially rewarding that benefits the community! See the irony here? And now, if they get to do such a thing called “social rewards” even marginally from their job, they have to do it in march step to their jerk-off boss under far less pleasant circumstances, while their kids are raised by strangers-for-pay.
Oh well, Ladies. I guess you’ve spent the last 50 years proving that men have been right for the past 5,000 years.
---
QUOTE #2, A MAN: Women get paid less because they work fewer hours in less dangerous jobs. It has nothing to do with their noble humanitarian spirit (excuse me while I gag) to help others.
Women are often over-paid for the amount of work they do, leaving men to pick up the slack and subsidize women’s bloated paychecks.
If women were as altruistic as you claim, they’d recognize the atrocious abuses of the current feminist regime in large numbers, but that hasn’t happened because women largely live in their own self-obsessed little worlds. In contrast, men gave women the “women’s liberation movement” because men actually DO have compassion and noble intentions."
No doubt, I agree with much of what you say. Also, women will always put themselves first. And they are plagued with narcissism and are often self-obsessed – either with themselves or their own sex.
Also, I don’t doubt that often times the “charity work” they did in the past was often done for other than purely altruistic reasons. For example: Most men can instantly understand what I mean when I say, “It’s not charity if you talk about it.” I’ll bet that a lot of them ladies clucked very often, trying to one up the other hens with tales of how perfect they were, while they cackled about the hens that weren’t doing enough to be as good as them. They are, after all, social creatures far more than men, and need the approval of the herd, er, flock, to decide what is right and wrong.
But, at least the way it was before, it took features of “woman-ness” and harnessed them for the betterment of society – including their own families. Much like how patriarchy put sex to work. I don’t think the women of old cared so much about “keeping the door stoop swept” because of respect for what their husbands would think, but more to make sure that the other women thought well of them, and had nothing bad to gossip about when they knocked on the door. Also, as an added bonus, it kept them out of our hair all day, until we came home and got what we men wanted out of them.
....................
..oooO...........
..(....)...........
….\..(............
…. \_/...........
….\..(............
…. \_/...........
………....Oooo..
………....(....)…
…………..)../....
..........(_/......
………....(....)…
…………..)../....
..........(_/......
....................