The Atlantic has a new piece up titled The Scourge of the Female Chore Burden:
All over the world, women are doing work they’re not getting paid for. In rich countries, it might be folding the laundry or staying home to take care of a sick child. In developing countries, unpaid labor tends to be more physically arduous, like hauling water and chopping wood. Wherever you are, it’s considered women’s work.
This is standard fare, and part of the constant bombardment women receive encouraging them to be discontent. It is also part of a very long tradition, going back to the Serpent and Eve in the garden of Eden. This particular piece is noteworthy however because the stand in for the Serpent is billionaire Melinda Gates complaining about the patriarchal oppression of being married to Bill Gates:
For those who think it can’t be done, Gates offers an example from her personal life. Though Bill and the couples’ children would always help with after-dinner cleanup, she nevertheless was always the last person left in the kitchen, “doing those last few little things.”
Finally, she issued an edict: No one leaves the kitchen until mom does.
The Atlantic piece whispers that if only men worked more around the house and slept less, women would finally be content. This is a lie even the Serpent would be proud of.
Gates is a feminist; what about complementarians?
But the whispering doesn’t stop when women enter the modern church. Complementarian pastor Matt Chandler explains in his sermon Women’s Hurdles that feminist resentment isn’t a hurdle for women; it is a sign that men are oppressing them. If men work hard enough, do enough of the housework, and are loving enough, the temptation of feminist rebellion and resentment will not occur (emphasis mine):
Where this happens, where men exercise biblical headship, where they are sacrificially loving, they are creating environments that honor and uplift the name of Jesus Christ, they’re establishing a place where the Word of God is seen and honored, and we understand God as he has revealed himself, and where they provide for, where that happens, and where women come underneath that, the idea of male headship might be attacked as a philosophy, but if they came into our homes, our wives would not want to be freed from anything.
Really, men, here is a great way to gauge how you’re serving, loving, and practicing your headship. If the most secularized feminist in the world showed up in your home and began to kind of coach your wife toward freedom and liberation from your tyranny, our wives should be so well cared for, so nourished, so sowed into and loved, they would say, “What you’re describing is actually tyranny. I love where I am. I am honored. I am encouraged. My man sacrifices so that I might grow in my gifts. He will oftentimes lay down his own desires in order to serve me more. My husband goes to bed tired at night. He pours into our children. He encourages me. All that comes out of his mouth, sans a couple of little times here and there, is him building me up in love.”
Chandler immediately follows by telling men they need to repent if their wife feels the temptation of feminist rebellion.
Men, here is a good opportunity. If you’re like, “Well, gosh, I don’t think she would say that at all,” then, men, I think on the way home, you should probably repent and confess before the Lord to your wife. Quit asking me about you, though. We’ve already covered you. We’re here to talk about the ladies.
In the last “Quit asking me about you” bit, Chandler is making light of the fact that this is supposed to be a sermon about women’s temptation to sin. Even the Serpent would high five Chandler for the brilliant tactic of setting the couple up for a fight on the drive home from church. I don’t see how this could have been accomplished any better.
Leaving aside what this does to the husbands in the congregation, marriage as an institution, and the children who will grow up in a home filled with strife because of what Chandler is teaching, consider how cruel this is to the wives themselves. All of the constant whispering to women (from all angles) is a source of great torment. No doubt some of the women watching the sermon have figured out how to fight this temptation. For such a woman, here is her pastor explaining that her efforts to combat this sin aren’t real; her husband can take the credit for her ability to overcome this temptation. It is even worse for a woman who struggles more with this temptation, as her pastor is telling her that her temptation to feel resentment has been her husband’s fault all along!
Aside from the Serpent and Pastor Chandler, who profits from this message?
“patriarchal oppression of being married to Bill Gates”
LOL
love the site cant stop reading it but man do articles like this piss me off. not dalrocks commentary but the subject and all these people out there trying to make it impossible to get and stay married. while its facetious, need divine intervention for a marriage to work these days in this culture.
Pingback: Stoking feminist resentment | Neoreactive
Dalrock, brother, you have been on some next level Apostolic stuff lately. Prophetic too, like the spirit of Elijah in the house!
People like Mad Dog Chandler are enemies of all that is righteous and good. It seems that their entire objective is to put asunder what we’d like to think that the Father put together.
Divorce Lawyers and people like Mad Dog.
I. I. I. I. I. Me. Me. Me. Me.
Shuuuut Theeeeeee Fuuuuuuck Uuuuuuuup!
“Leaving aside what this does to the husbands in the congregation, marriage as an institution, and the children who will grow up in a home filled with strife because of what Chandler is teaching, consider how cruel this is to the wives themselves.”
Remember also that single women both juveniles and adults hear the same message and use it as a template of how they think their husband should behave. Think of what single Millennial Christian men have to deal with when Millennial laydees eat this up like catnip and bring these unspoken expectations with them into dating and/or a relationship.
I’m starting to appreciate why Mentu got a vasectomy.
Pingback: Stoking feminist resentment – Manosphere.com
I have some great advice for feminists. Don’t fucking get married! There done. Now stop complaining you whiny cunts!
Stupid bitches will always find something to complain about. They cannot stop.
SHuut the fuccccck up! Indeed!
I don’t recall any stories of Bill Gates making his wife stand around his office for 90 hours a week while he was trying to launch windows 98. But then I guess that was making Bill (and her) billions of dollars.
Maybe she is on to something with the household chores. Next time I have to change out my wife’s dead car battery, and clean the corroded clamps in 20 below windchill, I am going to make the whole family stand out there with me until I am done. But it could be 10 years before I have to do that again. Perhaps something a bit more current. I know, the wife and kids can stand around while I do our tax return next month. It only takes me about 7-8 hours.
marriage is unsalvagable. it’s already too late.
Gosh, are churches really teaching this crap. This stuff destroyed my 35 year marriage by instructing my wife that everything is my problem and if she is unhappy it’s because I somehow failed. My wife became so entitled that nothing I did made her happy. Though she lived in a 2.5m dollar house and lived very comfortably that didn’t count. She took no responsibility for any of her own stuff and every issue in the marriage was my fault. She (as instructed by modern Christianity) kept creating whoops for me to jump through. I thought that surely these Christian leaders are correct and the problem was me so I kept taking on more and more weight until finally I just broke. And none of it worked as the more hoops I jumped through the more unhappy and mean she became until it was finally impossible to stay married.
Modern Christianity just keeps piling on buy putting more and more and more burdens onto husbands and yet releasing wives from any responsibility. Wives are no longer responsible to obey the word and the Church supports rebellious wives in their rebellion all the while blaming husbands for anything and everything that goes wrong in the marriage.
If the wife refuses sex it’s somehow the man’s fault.
If the wife seeks a divorce it’s somehow the man’s fault.
If the wife cheats it has to be because the man was __________(you fill in the blank).
If the wife bitches and nags her husband it’s somehow the man’s fault.
If the wife is in anyway unhaaaaaaapy it’s somehow the man’s fault.
If a single women get’s pregnant and doesn’t marry it always because a man didn’t want to commit. Couldn’t be she was riding the cock carousel, etc.
I can’t believe the absolute blindness of modern day pastors and Christian leaders. They don’t understand the basic human condition or even the basics of human intersexual dynamics. It’s sickening.
This is truly cruel to everyone. It takes a great deal of personal insight on the part of the wife to fight the message being sent here. You hear some form of this in most churches today, though I don’t think it is usually this blatant. Many pastors seem to feel it necessary (when mentioning wifely submission) to qualify their statements so that no one supposes that they are condoning genuine abuse. This shouldn’t be the case. I wish they would just state what scripture says about it and leave it at that. If someone wants to complain let it fall on deaf ears.
@Dalrock
On a long enough timeline not even they profit. I understand that is not what you’re asking, but it’s necessary to keep that in mind when answering that question. I’m also presuming that this query is a step towards the ultimate question of why he says these things.
Keeping all that in mind: Who profits? All those husbands who want to believe that their wife’s contentment is within their control. All those husbands who want to be given some system, some technology, some prescription, some magic, some anything that will give them power over another’s happiness and will evoke gratitude from their ungrateful wives. The man who feels that if he cannot have control he may as well cut off his balls…
One may retort that Mad Dog Chandler’s Game doesn’t “work”, but “work” for what? It works for giving husbands a sense of control. It may be false, but they have the feeling and it’s enough for them for the moment because the one thing they really don’t want to do have one more argument with an scornful bitch with every other man on her side.
If I memory serves me right Gates eventually married a woman who was on the wrong side of the wall – well, certainly not cute, although that applies to a lot of the geeks indeed I was just reflecting as I am reading a biography of Turing – the man who was primarily responsible for Enigma and Colossus and the first electronic computers – that those men must in the main have been anathema to young women – though oddly enough Turing himself at one time had a fiancee: love the reference to The Serpent.
Funny thing: when she became cross, my Mother always told everyone to get OUT of the kitchen.
It is even worse for a woman who struggles more with this temptation, as her pastor is telling her that her temptation to feel resentment has been her husband’s fault all along!
…and some here would want me to redirect my contempt from this charlatan and his ilk to the PUAs. Gimme a break, people….
Yike. The reverse would obviously be laughed off. Something like:
Ladies. Imagine you hired the most beautiful, kind, demure supermodel as a live-in nanny, and then left town for a month. If she were to try to seduce your husband, would he be in any way tempted to commit adultery with her? He wouldn’t if you were loving him the way he needs to be loved. If you hesitated for even a moment before responding that he would not, it’s time to examine your conscience and repent to God and your husband for your failure to fill him with love.
God loves us completely. Yet we still sin. And even when we don’t, we still are subject to temptation. Is this an indictment of God’s love for us?
It works for giving husbands a sense of control.
It works for giving Chandler a sense of control. He’s running an emotional harem, and the husbands in the pews are the court eunuchs.
@Opus
Melinda Gates was 29 when she married Bill who was 38 at the time. She was far more attractive then than Zuckerberg’s wife was at 28 when she married him. Ms. Chan wouldn’t even do Zuckerberg the honor of taking his name, and in a complete kick in the nuts it is the Bill & Melinda Gates’ Foundation, but it is The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.
Churchian culture has a penchant of co-opting elements of popular culture, slapping the Jesus Fish branding on it and calling it Christian Kosher®, but like everything from secular society they co-opt, Christians even screw up the trope of Choreplay.
http://therationalmale.com/2013/01/30/choreplay/
Secular Choreplay: Do more ‘women’s work’, wash dishes, do laundry, wear an apron, help out with the kids and she’ll have “an unbridled lust” for you.
Christian Choreplay: Do more ‘women’s work’, wash dishes, do laundry, wear an apron, help out with the kids and she’ll actually honor the wedding vows she swore to before you, God and all present when you got married.
@Poke Salad
He is right on this. The husbands flock to Chandler’s sermons because they love the message. I covered this here and here.
Thank you Lord Jesus! I’m not married! Thank you.
That’s because those cucks use the same playbook, just a different flavour.
PokeSalad,
Just because one party deserves scorn doesn’t absolve another party. You act like one deviant deserves praises while another doesn’t. Both are despicable.
TLDR: WOMEN ARE NEVER HAPPY. GIVE THEM THE PARADISE AND THEY WILL COMPLAIN. MARRY THEM TO A BILLIONAIRE AND THEY WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT OPPRESSION.
This guy is poison Dalrock. Absolute poison.
Original sin- man’s failure to lead.
Women unhappy = man not doing enough housework. I thought this claim had been resolved and not even the feminazis are claiming that a man doing the dishes makes them horny.
When I’m in the kitchen at night feeling sorry for myself, the LAST thing I need is encouragement to stew in my selfishness. The answer isn’t to hate women for our selfish rebellion, we have sin natures, but what we need is the truth from the Scriptures and to be told to repent. Only the most evil of pastors would try to stir up strife on the car ride home from church.
@ Bill Smith
Heathen and heretic both start with “h” but the latter has worse to fear from God. One has no faith and acknowledges it. The other has the faith and betrays it.
Jeremiah 3:11: “The Lord said to me, ‘Faithless Israel is more righteous than unfaithful Judah.'”
Here is the next step up on the ladder of feminism: Women will now start demanding that they get PAID for all their “emotional labor”, or as I call it, NAGGING and WHINING and POSTURING (on facebook, in particular). All that emoting out loud is really laborious, I tell you, and they do it for the good of mankind, of course.
Mark my words, the concept of (paid) emotional labor is going to be big in 2016. And it will be coming soon to a pew near you.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/08/women-gender-roles-sexism-emotional-labor-feminism
I know servant leadership gets eye rolls here, but I think it’s a fairly important part of the message of Jesus. From “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve” to “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you” and the washing of feet, the laying down of life on the cross, and so on. Because of these, my pre-Neo self would have been very sympathetic to Chandler’s message. I am coming around on some of this.
Now, modern pastors turn the servant message into “doing everything your wife’s way” and the above “he will often lay down his own desires to serve me more.”
Cane wrote:
In other words desperate men…and if you substitute “have to gain” in the place of profit, then not even these men do. They are deluded, and the only reward they have is in being able to say they tried, and even their trying is folly.
So, again, in the long term no one gains, but in the short term Divorce Lawyers and people like Mad Dog who are practicing and teaching lawlessness for pre-eminence and profit are winning.
While these desperate husbands seeking to tame the hamster are temporarily insane, I’ve no doubt that the former know exactly what they are doing.
@PokeSalad
People keep saying things like that, but the facts don’t support it. Where is Chandler’s Paula Jones? Where is Piper’s Lewinsky? Men who are looking for a harem wouldn’t be able to resist the temptation to engage in what you believe they are practicing.
It also doesn’t explain why these husbands bring their wives to church on Sundays, but not to bars on Friday nights. Besides: If women in Chandler’s audience sexualize him, it is based purely on his fame and not on his actual presence; which is effeminate.
No. That’s not what is going on. It draws in the husbands because the husbands want peace at any price. And the sort of men who go to churchin the first place know they are sinful. They know they have aspects of themselves that need work. It is upon that which Chandler is preying…to the delight of the women, to be sure, but that momentary delight doesn’t keep the pews full of families, i.e., men and their children.
@Rollo
You have your cooptions reversed. Choreplay has been a (bad) recommendation in church circles for a long time now; in overt forms since at least the 90s. Besides, there’s plenty of it in old Westerns which presumed a Christian worldview.
“Really, men, here is a great way to gauge how you’re serving, loving, and practicing your headship. If the most secularized feminist in the world showed up in your home and began to kind of coach your wife toward freedom and liberation from your tyranny, our wives should be so well cared for, so nourished, so sowed into and loved, they would say, “What you’re describing is actually tyranny. I love where I am. I am honored. I am encouraged. My man sacrifices so that I might grow in my gifts. He will oftentimes lay down his own desires in order to serve me more. My husband goes to bed tired at night. He pours into our children. He encourages me. All that comes out of his mouth, sans a couple of little times here and there, is him building me up in love.”
Do I even need to point out how this would sound if the roles were reversed and put into a comparable context?
At first pass I read it as “you should probably repent and confess before the Lord your wife.”
…which, I suppose, is what he’s really saying.
Reluctant Neo,
It is important to look at how Jesus served those who followed him. He washed their feet a grand total of ONCE! His service was going to the cross and dying for their sins, not doing chores for them. That is a twist many preachers miss today. We should server our wives, but not in the way they think.
The Question,
Both heretics and heathen need to be converted. Both need to be told they are in sin and must change. Allowing either to continue without note is not productive. Going after only the heretics leaves a religion that heads toward the error of the Ephesians that Jesus noted in the letters at the start of the Book of Revelation. We are called to make disciples, not just be Scripturally pure.
That should say “serve our wives”. Though the typo may have merit for some here.
Melinda Gates is one of the most fortunate people in the world.
Average-looking, she married the world’s richest man, *after* he was already rich. Hell, even Hillary Clinton married Bill before he was anyone.
Plus, Melinda gets to be the CEO of the Gates Foundation, as a figurehead of non-essential presence, just so that she can be someone important and keep appearing on TV.
Man, just when I think that I have over-estimated the negative risks of marriage, and perhaps made a wrong choice, I see an article like this that makes be grateful that a) I don’t have to hear all this whining, and b) Doing the dishes is all of two hours a week…
@Cane:
I wouldn’t characterize it as “control” but “understanding”. Men rarely show up at regularly at a Church without an understanding that “they don’t understand it all”. The pull is that “something doesn’t work and this guy is showing me a way to make sense of it”. Reluctant Neo gets one of the vectors, but the core of the problem is that the Men understand that “something is wrong” and Chandler et al produce a First Order Logic that appeals to the Men and “makes sense”.
It’s only at the Second Order and beyond that it all breaks down. Because, frankly, how could an advanced society all be so utterly wrong about how Relationships work? How can all of these Older Church Members be really wrong about how this all works? They must know, right?
Yeah, they can all be wrong because they never understood the question in the first place. When you’ve convinced yourself that Chandler et al are living “God’s Way”, then obviously you’re just not implementing it well enough. Obviously, right? You don’t end up in this part of the Internet unless you figured out “this really doesn’t work, there has to be something better” or you were brutalized by the System into the start of understanding of how evil we all can be.
It all comes back to gratitude, doesn’t it? The best thing any woman could do for herself is be grateful for what she does have; a husband, children, enough square footage in her house, food in her pantry and pots in the cabinet to require her to spend time cleaning her home. Those aren’t insignificant things. Those things matter.
If you find yourself always displeased with what you have, nothing will ever make you happy. But that sense of dissatisfaction drives so much in the world; if people are unhappy with reality, it’s very easy to control them with fantasy.
This pastor probably understands that if he keeps his flock dissatisfied with their lot, they’ll keep coming back in the hopes of finding that illusory happiness he says is coming.
@Reluctant Neo
The problem isn’t with the words “servant” and “leader”. The problem is the term “servant leader” has been given an entirely different definition than headship by complementarians. Acts 29 has the following as one of its “five theologically driven core values”:
What is male servant leadership? We should ask the president of Acts 29. His name is Pastor Matt Chandler, the same man I quoted in the OP. This sermon and the one I quoted here are part of his series on the biblical roles of men and women. In the other sermon you may recall he even backed away from “servant leader”, because he wasn’t comfortable with the word “leader”.
Servant leader doesn’t mean biblical headship. If it did, they wouldn’t have coined a new term. “Servant leader” no more means headship than “sanitary napkin” means a clean piece of cloth or paper to wipe your hands and mouth with while eating.
This is a brilliant game of motte and bailey, and nearly everyone falls for it one way or another. One group of men hears non threatening headship and decides this is the real deal. Another hears “servant” and rejects the idea of a man serving his wife, especially in our age of feminist rebellion. The former use the foolishness of the latter to justify their own foolishness.
That’s NOT FUNNY!
@ Bill Smith
“Allowing either to continue without note is not productive. ”
The entire focus for the last few decades by the Church has been going after the cads while coddling the women who provide them with a free supply of sex. It has also been a total disaster. The priority should be on those who claim to speak for God, not so who are intellectually honest about what they believe.
PUAs know what the Bible says about their behavior because that’s the only part of the problem that’s been discussed. But it’s hard for them to take it or anything else about the religion seriously when the deacon’s daughter sends them nude photos on her way back home from church.
People keep saying things like that, but the facts don’t support it. Where is Chandler’s Paula Jones? Where is Piper’s Lewinsky? Men who are looking for a harem wouldn’t be able to resist the temptation to engage in what you believe they are practicing.
It also doesn’t explain why these husbands bring their wives to church on Sundays, but not to bars on Friday nights. Besides: If women in Chandler’s audience sexualize him, it is based purely on his fame and not on his actual presence; which is effeminate.
I guess my ‘harem’ metaphor didn’t come across as intended. I don’t see this as a binary either/or situation…there could be elements of both in play. But:
First off, the fact that we don’t know of a Jones or Lewinsky doesn’t mean there isn’t one. You can’t really spin the current lack-of-evidence for one as a “fact.” Lewinsky herself didn’t exist…until she did.
But, even if we stipulate to this, men like Chandler don’t always seek physical gratification as the ultimate payoff. If he truly believes the nonsense he spews, he may honestly believe he’s doing God’s work amongst the couples there, and the emotional AMOGing is the bonus (I must be bringing the Word, they pack my pews every week!). I don’t think any of these guys went overtly “looking for a harem.” If women are all about the FeeLZ, wouldn’t some emotional stroking every Sunday on how much ‘closer to God’ they are and how their sinful husbands are failing them fill their spiritual tank for the upcoming week?
And don’t think that the “nobody leaves the kitchen until Mom does” rule will end the resentment.
The next step is that this arrangement puts the mental load of determining when the kitchen is “good enough” on Mom. Yes, other people are doing the work, but it’s still Mom who is ultimately responsible for ensuring everything is done.
The only solution is for everyone in the family to develop clairvoyance over what exactly Mom’s standards are (since overshooting could also be seen as a form of judgment) and execute it perfectly.
I’d like someone to do that for me, too. I just don’t think I’m entitled to it, or other people’s failure to do that is a vector of oppression, and would justify sinful behavior on my part.
Addendum: It’s ironic that many here (including me) spent half a blog making fun of Chandler’s effeminate and Gamma-like behavior and mannerisms, then some turn and claim that such-and-such can’t be true unless he’s banging half the congregation. 😉
Remember that if Melinda really is doing anything in the kitchen, that is only because she has made a conscious decision not to have any household staff do it.
People of such wealth usually have a household staff of 30-50 people, including a Butler as a supervisor.
Complementarian pastor Matt Chandler explains in his sermon Women’s Hurdles that feminist resentment isn’t a hurdle for women; it is a sign that men are oppressing them. If men work hard enough, do enough of the housework, and are loving enough, the temptation of feminist rebellion and resentment will not occur.
Great assessment. I’ve noticed this myself, and it makes me angry as well. Telling the women that the men are responsible for their happiness and contentment allows them an option to pass the buck on their own sins and sets their husbands up for frustration when they have to answer for something they don’t have any control over.
But one of the most maddening things about this is that you can always be sure that if the shoe is ever on the other foot, the rule Chandler applies to the men will suddenly be seen as sheer ridiculousness. No church authority will ever propose that a woman could have kept her husband from beating her or cheating on her if only she had done a better job of being a good wife. The religious journal First Things even published a piece a while back where a supposed “Christian wife” encountered a group that put the onus on the wives to behave well for the sake of their family’s happiness . . . and was predictably infuriated by it:
But since this is a conservative Christian publication, the author must stress that these obedient wives aren’t just odious to feminist notions of freedom and independence for women. Their notions about proper marital service are also a pernicious offense to the eyes of a holy and righteous God:
For what it’s worth . . . why not? Pastors like Matt Chandler already applied that standard to the husbands, and I didn’t see anyone outside of Dalrock’s blog finding fault with it. By that measure, the ladies of the church shouldn’t be too dismayed to find that the rules they applied to others may one day be applied to them as well. Here’s to equality!
Link to the First Things article is here: http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2012/08/obedient-wives-helpless-husbands
Bill,
That is an important point to be sure. When Jesus went to wash their feet, everyone objected. Why would their leader act like a servant? It wasn’t something He was in the practice of doing. Now, men are expected to be washing feet and laying down their desires all the time. Women expect it, they don’t try to stop it when it happens.
The Matthew 20 passage indicates that those called to be leaders will be tempted to use their authority in sinful ways, so I want to be careful about that as well.
Here is a related thought: Do these complementarian church leaders practice servant leadership and sacrificial headship? If they were truly doing things right, wouldn’t it be unheard of for someone in the flock to practice sin, to leave the church, or to fall away from Christ?
@PokeSalad:
Empath has the topic nailed down a little better: it’s about the Lift. The “Lift” is about affirmation & vanity, but shifted enough that the person searching for it can convince themselves (with little trouble) that they’re following God. They’re doing the Lord’s Work! For their own vainglory. That’s the core of the “Lift”. (There’s also a biochemical aspect to it. Think the tingling excited feeling.)
@PokeSalad:
Yep, most of us got it. A pastor running a “Gamma harem” (an oxymoron, obviously) doesn’t bang half the congregation. He gives the women a shoulder to cry on then turns around and blames men for her own mistakes. AKA lift-chasing.
Words like “emotional tampon” and “gay boyfriend” immediately spring to mind.
Yeah, what LG said…
Another great insight, thanks Dalrock. I go to a church pastored by a prominent TGC writer. Fortunately we don’t here this from the pulpit but I hear it all the time in conversations about marriage or small groups. So the position is silence and the result is shown in the inconsistent outcomes. We have a lot of SAHMs on stage at membership ceremonies, that is on the plus side. But headship is frowned upon strongly through unconscious peer pressure. It’s always servant leader and pushing a talk about women’s dissatisfaction is usually quickly sidestepped with academic sounding concern for abused women and that men are responsible for half the problems (that is the “reasonable” response to my saying women initiate 70 percent of divorces).
These men that go along with this crap are clueless idiots that get yanked around by their wife. They buy into all this crap. When a woman complains about something 90% of the time it is about something entirely different. When a guy complies with his wife does that stop her complaining? No not by a long shot it gets worse. Figure it out. My neighbor’s wife left him a couple of years ago and he complained to me that he was the most accommodating guy in the world. I replied that is the problem you were too accommodating- she does not want to make every decision no matter what she says. Basically don’t believe most of the crap that comes out of her mouth and challenge it with logic and you win most of the time.
It’s funny how often feminist writers use 1950s imagery to prop up their essays. It’s as if they have a deep longing for the lost patriarchal world the images represent.
Just to add… We know that Churchian women do, at some level, very much enjoy the cutting down of husbands and ‘gina worship that now passes for mainstream Christian thought.
Because if they didn’t, their Cuckservative husbands would be bending over backwards to find one of the few churches that do teach traditional sex roles, just to appease her.
Churchian culture has a penchant of co-opting elements of popular culture, slapping the Jesus Fish branding on it and calling it Christian Kosher®
THIS. It’s the simplest, most pithy, most complete encapsulation of modern churchianity imaginable.
This prevails for one reason and one reason only: the deliberately engineered extinction of godly men in the modern western church. Had Chandler peddled this crap even 75 years ago, multiple men in the congregation would have stood up mid-sermon and called him on it, ordering him to knock it off or risk being branded a false teacher. Obstinance on his part would have led to him being escorted out of the church with instructions never to return upon pain of a pummeling.
THIS is why the church has been purged: men –REAL, GODLY MEN– stand up to the satanic false teachings that have infected the body through and through, challenging the authority of these usurping frauds.
We had this guy do a guest sermon a couple weeks ago. About what I expected for the predictable pre-Valentines run-up sermons on love, marriage, sex, *fill in the relationship context*.
For the most part his delivery is a standup routine, but the standard Ephesians 5:21 feminized pablum starts at about the 35:20 cue mark:
Bear in mind, this is a ‘guest’ pastor. No direct female congregation incentives (but a lot of indirect ones) to deliver it like this.
For those who think it can’t be done, Gates offers an example from her personal life. Though Bill and the couples’ children would always help with after-dinner cleanup, she nevertheless was always the last person left in the kitchen, “doing those last few little things.”
Finally, she issued an edict: No one leaves the kitchen until mom does.
Either this author is a gullible imbecile, or he thinks his readers are. Melinda Gates no more does her own cooking and cleaning than does Queen Elizabeth II.
Hard to believe no one responded with “you’re full of shit, you lying bitch.” As Eddie Murphy put it 35 years ago in Raw, referring rich men’s wives: “your only chore is to f*** your husband.”
Then again, that probably explains why Melinda is so miserable.
If the most secularized feminist in the world showed up in your home and began to kind of coach your wife toward freedom and liberation from your tyranny, our wives should be so well cared for, so nourished, so sowed into and loved, they would say,
“I’m already there, I’ve got all that plus a preacher to back me up”.
This article is yet another example in how we swim in feminism. Chandler is preaching 1970’s – 1980’s equity feminism, a prominent part of 2nd stage feminism. This is far beyond choreplay. This is “Husbands, submit to your wives”.
It is certain that Chandler would disagree. Words / actions. He’s teaching men to submit to women, in the name of “equlity”, and slapping a Jesus fish on it.
Steven Dutch has a nice piece of this idea http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/MomsDay.HTM
It works for giving Chandler a sense of control. He’s running an emotional harem, and the husbands in the pews are the court eunuchs.
This needs to be repeated frequently. These churches would make the Scribes and Pharisees of Jesus’ day blush. I don’t even know where a 21st C Reformer will come from, b/c the colleges and seminaries teach this same garbage.
Melinda Gates could hire someone to clean the kitchen for her and her complaints are more about wanting to be seen as relatable to the average woman. The average woman could use some more help with housework and childcare. Gratitude might keep her from complaining and blaming her husband, but it won’t make the problem go away. The pastor’s attempt at solving the problem might be misguided, but at least he acknowledges the problem.
Kindasortafeminist,
Men are not stones, nor robots, nor mules. If you overload a mule, it will refuse to move. A man will carry that overload until he dies. Then the pastor will finally talk about what a good man he was, and then the widow will finally tell her sisters what a good man he was.
The average man could use some more respect and encouragement. More building up and a whole lot less tearing down. A bettert match between authority and responsibility. The pastor doesn’t even recognize that problem. Apparently you don’t either. But, then, most women don’t…
Kindasorta go the fuck away.
Kindasortafeminist ,
This is the logic of many Trump supporters.
Plus, read the quoted paragraphs again. They are not about wives’ overwhelming burdens; they are about the men. Are the loving enough? Do the empty themselves? Do they go to bed tired?
Again, it’s a motte-and-bailey. Is it possible for a housewife to be overburdened, and would a proper response be for the husband to pick up some things? Sure. Just like it’s also possible for husbands to be starved of respect and affection.
Neither justifies sin. And in many cases, they are excuses for people who want to misbehave anyway.
kindasorta what problem? is the wife pulling in 50% of the cash the family needs to survive? if you want equal division then all should be equal. you fix the car 50% you shovel the walk 50% you cut the grass 50% you clean the eaves 50% then you can talk about what is lacking inside the home.
money must be put on the table and there are duties outside the kitchen that are taken care of by men that get 0 credit. give your head a shake. the average woman lives a better life now than almost any person that has ever existed on this planet.
women don’t need more gratitude they need to learn how to be content.
@Kindasortafeminist
We’ve been trying to solve the Problem With No Name for over five decades now, and have made this a top national priority. It is so important that it must be substituted for Scripture on the pulpit. It is still around because it is female nature to be discontent and feel envy of men. We have mobilized our economy and society around making this feeling of discontentment go away, and yet it hasn’t, it has only gotten worse. That even Melinda Gates feels the Problem With No Name should prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt. We know why this is the case, as the Apostle Peter explained 2000 years ago what the solution was in 1 Pet 3:1-6.
We know why this is the case, as the Apostle Peter explained 2000 years ago what the solution was in 1 Pet 3:1-6.
I’ll save UnquestionablyFeminist the trouble of a response and just do it for her:
“The Apostle Peter lived 2000 years ago when women were kept slaves of a barbaric patriarchy. What he (and every other man) says in the Bible is as irrelevant to the present and to modern women as mules are to modern transportation.”
The were never desperate housewives, they were Ungrateful Bitches. It. Is. That. Simple. Strip away all the rest, the biblical references, housework, all the little things they complain about. From Gate’s wife on down, (Bill Gates, the ultimate Man-With-A-Vadge in his own damned house), there it is, the problem, in a nutshell. Ungrateful Bitches.
Chris Rock has accurate takes.
@Freeriker
Two other possible replies:
or
Not that it would solve the problem, for Emotion beats analogy, and analogy beats logic, and logic beats nothing… OR no one can be reasoned out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into …
But reading about ‘whose chore is this’ is a little.. ok. A person has limited hours in the day to chores, the ‘honey do list’ which is usually the ‘manly chores,’ like replacing a battery or mowing the lawn, and then she goes and adds her to do list on to him and is confused why things don’t get done- not to say he should be doing any of those chores, just trying to point out that with limited time, there are limits to what he could do. Again, reason isn’t the tool. Emotion is, so this line of reasoning falls flat.
Dalrock-
It is human nature to feel discontent. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t real issues that need to be addressed. Not the problem with no name but the problem where the wife is overworked and additional help is needed with housework and childcare. Submission won’t keep someone from being overworked and stretched too thin for their health and the wellbeing of their family. Gratitude and contentment won’t solve that problem either.
“The average woman could use some more help with housework and childcare. Gratitude might keep her from complaining and blaming her husband, but it won’t make the problem go away.”
The inventions of men over the last century have made the problem go away by about 80%. Housework occupies nowhere near the amount of time it did in 1966, and far, far less than in 1916. Ultimately, Melinda Gates does housework for play, no different than Marie Antoinette cavorting about the ‘Hamlet’ at Versailles in shepherdess garb. Her complaint is purely for virtue-signaling to others.
I would say we have the gist of kindasortafeminist’s argument down. No need to chase her further down the rabbit hole.
@Cane Caldo
Regarding your top post – very well said. I actually think Game is in the same delusional category – useful skills to have but can never overcome choices of your wife. They just give you the illusion you are in control of another person. Influencing sure, just like my wife influences me.
@Reluctant Neo, @Bill
You are correct, but the phrase servant leadership is poisoned. How can we respond to scriptures such as Matt 23:11 “But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.” Christ says the world has one way to lead but he has another, service. I think because the world has turned headship and service into flagellation and submission, people in the manosphere tend to emphasize other aspects of leadership, but clearly Christ taught service was an important aspect of the role of a leader. Its not the only aspect, which is why the manosphere is continually calling out trying to get someone, somewhere, to recognize that it includes service but is more than service. I don’t do all the chores because of specialization and my wife does not come to work and do my job. But, I love my wife and if I can help out the only reasons to with hold service are generally too calculating for me (of course, choreplay is retarded. But after the bedroom, if my wife wants me to help finish up dishes, sure. But as a way to get there- ridiculous).
@AR
Nice link. Yes, a live in nanny and house cleaner can be had for $60K. Motherhood is vastly devalued – I mean good loving mothers. However, I like to think my wife, not being a hireling is worth more. But if she went to work she could easily afford the nanny and have extra. Economically her being a mother is bad sense, but we do it for the love. over our lifetimes it will probably cost us 100s of thousands of dollars to have my wife NOT work. But its a preference choice for how we want to live. This also touches on the condescension of working women towards mothers – they both admire them “I could never do it, its so hard!” but also are dismissive of them for doing a menial job that anyone can do.
In regards to women needing more help at home…not really. In ragards to Mrs. Gates – that is just amazingly funny. Next she will talk about how she need the kids to help vaccum their 66,000 sqft house.
I spoke with my brother about this – both of us hard driven into difficult professions. With so much modern technology being a stay at home mom is only as hard as you make it (the technology probably ironically contributed alot to our problems – addressing the “Problem without a name” often meant going to work). If it were back breaking work there would be no pintererst. Taking care of kids can be a challenge because children are children, but I did it as my wife worked to help pay for grad school and I really loved it and thought it was…easy. My job is more demanding in most ways. However, I am very grateful she does it and put our children ahead of the path of most money.
@Kindasortafeminist
Submission won’t keep someone from being overworked and stretched too thin for their health and the wellbeing of their family. Gratitude and contentment won’t solve that problem either.
So nice to finally hear a woman admit that nothing in this world will ever be enough to satisfy her. The real question now is: Why are so many men still foolish enough to even try?
DrTorch @ 2:17 pm:
“I don’t even know where a 21st C Reformer will come from, b/c the colleges and seminaries teach this same garbage.”
Few Protestant heroes were professional clergy. Come to think of it, even in the OT almost none of God’s heroes are known to be Levites.
The pastor’s attempt at solving the problem might be misguided, but at least he acknowledges the problem.
I’d also challenge the assumption that “acknowledging the problem;” i.e., giving people reasons to be resentful and miserable that they haven’t yet thought of, while either not offering a solution, or offering a cure that’s worse than the disease, is all that helpful.
If I go to a poor village where children are content and tell them how much more people in developed countries are eating, and suggest that this is due to the village elders holding out on them, or not doing enough to get them food, I don’t think I’ve done a good thing.
Does this mean that hunger doesn’t exist and demand to be addressed? No. But “raising awareness” of a problem can result in a lot of discontent and destructive “cures” that make things worse.
An intact household where the wife is shouldering 51% of the load may not be entirely fair, but it is a much better situation than a broken home, or one stewing with resentment.
@AmicusC
I won’t predict our future, but I think there is a real bright side to all of this. We already know marriage is under assault. Chances are you knew this well before you found my site. There is a tendency to double count as you read about it in detail though. On the positive side, the nonsense in the sermon works because there has to date been no real pushback. I think this is likely to change. The cost of make believe continues to go up, and constant feminist drift means men like Chandler have already overshot what can be sustained. What he is saying is flat out anti Scripture, not to mention anti-reality.
It is trivially easy to explain what is wrong with what he is teaching, and eventually I think we will see a generation that sees through this. At that point while it will be tempting to try to dial it back to the good old days of complementarianism when the ideas Chandler is teaching were implied but not stated outright, this will be extremely difficult. The path is already worn. I don’t think conservative Christians will get it perfect after that (in fact I know we won’t), but I think it will be very difficult to pretend to fight feminism without being anchored in Scripture (and/or RCC doctrine for Catholics).
“All over the world, women are doing work they’re not getting paid for. ”
Nonsense. When her husband or father sacrifices his earnings, whether in the form of cash or the fresh deer he just killed, for her food, upkeep and entertainment he is in effect paying her for her services. As confirmation of this, if they should decide she should work outside the home her services would be replaceable by PAYING an outsider to do them (e.g. a babysitter or nanny). In fact, I can hardly think of a place or time in which homemaking was truly unpaid work. Slavery comes closest, when the woman was repaid in food and lodgings and little more. So basically these women are equating the plight of raising their own kids to a condition worse than slavery.
As someone mentioned above, feminists should just not get married. Problem solved.
It is trivially easy to explain what is wrong with what he is teaching,
About five of the commenters here could team up and found a new church that actually follows the Bible. Dalrock’s archives have all the materials needed, and someone else can just draw from them to make a new church, with sermons broadcast online to reach multiple geographies.
Unlike most other opposition red-pill thought faces, this church could just keep pointing to actual scripture to silence the protests. They cannot say your church is ‘patriarchal’ without also saying that the Bible is wrong.
I would say we have the gist of kindasortafeminist’s argument down. No need to chase her further down the rabbit hole.
Hopefully she got the tingle she was looking for by trolling here.
“Remember that if Melinda really is doing anything in the kitchen, that is only because she has made a conscious decision not to have any household staff do it.
People of such wealth usually have a household staff of 30-50 people, including a Butler as a supervisor.”
If not that, then at least a massive, high-tech dishwasher that you can probably put a loaded, untouched chili-pot into that will come out sparkling like diamond. Her 18 minutes a week of ‘labor’ is just her planting some seeds for indignation tingles later on. That’s exactly what happened. I wonder if her kids are mystified at her stomping, glaring anger over the four minutes a night of labor in their massive kitchen that you could drive trucks through.
One of American females’ greatest accomplishments is to use a hobby that many of them enjoy (cooking) as a chip on their shoulder and a battle of the sexes gauntlet. So they decide to spend the afternoon shopping for their seafood gumbo that they want to take three hours cooking while drinking wine and watching TV. They never discussed it at all, just decided to pursue their hobby while the husband chilled on Saturday afternoon, relaxing. Later in the evening they get to bitch about how much work it took while the husband ‘sat around scratching himself…hmmmphh.’
Imagine men grumbling about heading off the to golf course (“Well if I don’t tee off, it’ll never get done. Hmmph..”)
Cry me a river, Melinda Gates. You have gourmet kitchen, staff, probably a butler and a dishwasher. You also have washing machines and vacuum cleaners. The history of the washing machine is interesting: it was actually invented by men to make women’s lives easier:
https://www.timetoast.com/timelines/history-of-the-washing-machine
Many of these improvements were made before male children 12 years and over were excluded from mines, and before ventilation for mines was invented.
If you scan over the typical Western suburb anywhere in the Western world, you will note the proliferation of take-away dinner places, reataurants, laundromats and laundry services – all so that women don’t have to work. Supermarket freezers are lined with heat-and-eat foods to minimise women’s labor. What the hell do they have to complain about?
Finally, she issued an edict: No one leaves the kitchen until mom does.
Does this mean that Bill Gates is an Apex Beta Provider, rather than an Alpha?
And does anyone believe that the Gates family are without servants?
I clicked over and read the whole transcript of the sermon. For a guy who says he’s going to address the temptation and sins of women, he sure spends a whole lotta time talking about men’s failings. It was awful. Especially since he kind of glanced off a few REAL issues with women that could have formed the body of his sermon instead of telling women how their real sin is Lack of Moxie!
Yes, life is full of tedious chores that have to be redone constantly in the struggle against entropy. Thankfully my husband has a seemingly endless pool of witty “First World Problem” rejoinders whenever I start whining about such things. It’d be pretty miserable to stew in resentment against having to wash my modern nonstick pans in a climate-controlled house with electric lights as well as hot and cold running water at the touch of a faucet – all while wearing plastic gloves to protect my delicate skin! Oh, the humanity. e_e
It’s not the housework that’s the problem, it’s the feelings. The feelings are real, and the reason the problem exists is due to the misalignment between the feelz and reality. The way feminists talk about housework, you’d think their mother-in-laws drop by unannounced wearing white gloves and whip them through the public square for inadequate dusting or something.
And does anyone believe that the Gates family are without servants?
Apparently, the femidiots who believe this crap do.
There are some billionaires who choose to live a minimalist/reclusive life, and perhaps don’t have household staff. However, once one decides to have a 66,000 sqft mansion (more than an acre, mind you), one obviously needs a double-digit number of staff to keep it running.
“I think on the way home, you should probably repent and confess before the Lord to your wife”
This sentence contains a superfluous “to.”
So basically these women are equating the plight of raising their own kids to a condition worse than slavery.
Fantasy scenario #1,123:
Woman, a married SAHM with two kids under the age of 10, hubby earning $100K-plus per year, has been bitching and whining for weeks about how “boring” and “unfulfilling” her life at home is, how “unappreciated” she is, and how “sick and tired” she is of running the kids hither, thither, and yon to school, soccer practice, music lessons, etc. She has found a job she wants to interview for and has told her husband that she will interview for it whether he “gives [her his] permission or not.”
Hubby, grinning ear to ear, gathers the family together in the den after dinner.
“OK, kids, I know that this is the first time we’ve ever had a family meeting like this, but I have some important news to share. You’re mother is going back to work.
“You see, she feels ‘unfulfilled’ staying here at home taking care of you two. You’ve let her down, kids. You’ve disappointed her. Your lives are just not exciting enough to stimulate her passions and you’ve become a burden to her.
“You served your purpose as trophy offspring after she gave birth to you and she put up with your daily dirty diapers, vomiting baby food in her face, and waking her up in the middle of the night screaming to be breast fed because being able to show you off to her old college sorority sisters and Facebook pals made her feel fulfilled AND gave her an air of superiority over other women.. Well, now things are different.
((At this point mother leaps out of her sofa chair in a shriek of protest. Dad, without missing a beat and without looking at her, reaches out and Vulcan death grips her face with one hand and shoves her back down onto the couch))
“She thought that there would come a point, about the time that you reached your second birthdays, when you would go on autopilot and start taking care of yourselves so that she could “get her groove back” again. Apparently that didn’t happen. You STILL are demanding to be fed, taken to and from school and after-school activities, helped with your homework, and have your arguments with each other and friends refereed.
“Well, Mom didn’t sign up for that. She sacrificed a career to bring you into the world and believes that about two years for each of you is more than enough sacrifice. Let’s get it together, kids. It’s time for one of two things to happen.
“Either 1) you start to lead more exciting lives that justify the unpaid time Mom spends with you and that she increasingly believes is being wasted on you without her gaining anything in return, or 2) you start taking care of yourselves and leave her out of your lives.
“I was going to suggest a third alternative: that you start paying Mom out of your allowances for what she does for you, but that’s not really practical. You wouldn’t earn enough allowance to keep her happy if you were frozen in childhood and lived for another million years. She actually suggested that I pay her, but that would be unethical. I can care for you –for all of us, actually– without paying a cent. In other words, it’s not ME who needs your mother’s services, so why should I pay HER?
((Mother is by now rushing husband shrieking obscenities at the top of her lungs. Dad applies duct tape to her mouth and sits her back down on the couch again))
“Sorry, kids. Your mother tends towards hysterics sometimes. Anyway …”
“I know that neither of the two options is really palatable, but I fear that if you don’t decide on one of the two, your mother will suggest one of two even less palatable alternatives: auctioning the two of you off to the highest bidder, or paying some other family to take you. I don’t like either of those alternatives either, but your mother isn’t going to let things continue as they are, so I strongly suggested that you both get together tonight and decide on what it will be: adopt more exciting lives that will make your mother feel “fulfilled” again, or start shifting for yourself so that Mom can uncramp her style and go be a fulfilled career gal again like she’s always wanted to be.
“Personally, while number two is probably the more sensible option, it would mean that your mother would have to train you, which isn’t really her forte. It wouldn’t pay her anything either, so she’ll probably be reluctant to do it, even if it will lead to her getting what she says she wants (suffice it to say, kids, that your mother and ’cause and effect’ have never been introduced). I WOULD train you if I thought it necessary, but then again that would raise an interesting question: if I’m the one training you to do what your mother does for you, WHY IS SHE HERE WITH US IN THE FIRST PLACE?
“Anyway, I’ll leave you two to decide what you want to do and will check back with your before bedtime. Time to take your mother upstairs and help her get ready for the big interview. Wouldn’t want to make a bad impression, now would we?”
“As someone mentioned above, feminists should just not get married to men. Problem solved.”
FIFY. If they want to get married to each other, that’s fine. Just leave men out of it. A heterosexual marriage for a feminist makes about as much sense as the paring of a cat with a mouse and expecting a happy and prosperous union.
WillBest says:
February 24, 2016 at 10:42 am
I don’t recall any stories of Bill Gates making his wife stand around his office for 90 hours a week while he was trying to launch windows 98. But then I guess that was making Bill (and her) billions of dollars.
Maybe she is on to something with the household chores. Next time I have to change out my wife’s dead car battery, and clean the corroded clamps in 20 below windchill, I am going to make the whole family stand out there with me until I am done. But it could be 10 years before I have to do that again. Perhaps something a bit more current. I know, the wife and kids can stand around while I do our tax return next month. It only takes me about 7-8 hours.
Good point, WillBest. No mention is ever made of the husband’s contribution to the household. House needs painting?- Husband. Carpentry?- Husband. Car breaks down? Husband. Dog dies under house while family is on holidays, and starts rotting, causing flies to gather in house? Husband crawls under and removes it (yes, I did this). Leaf removal from eaves – Husband. Tree pruning? – Husband. Lawn mowing – Husband.
Amount of credit husband gets from wife – 0. Women seem too preoccupied with all of the other crap they stick in their lives to notice the husband’s labor, because they can’t multitask. If they do notice, they don’t consider it worth commenting or being gracious about because that is what a husband does anyway. They are entitled to his labor because they married him and showed up with…vag, even if it was a little used beforehand in most cases.
Women need entitlement like a fish needs a bicycle
Oh!
A-man-jaw Marcotte says MRAs are the reason she can’t get a man :
http://www.alternet.org/how-bitter-men-mra-movement-ruin-things-other-guys
Spike,
Exactly.
This reminds me of those insufferable “studies” that come out each year showing how much a stay-at-home mom is worth. The accounting is truly – ahem – creative.
Just ONCE I would like to see the same accounting methods used to tally up dad’s worth, to include:
– his actual take home pay
– his chores around the house which for most guys includes
IT support
plumbing
yard work
mechanic
family accounting / bookkeeping
domestic help (i.e., all the cleaning stuff that many men help with – inside and outside the house)
trash/junk removal
medical insurance coordinator
misc repair of electronics and gadgets
home security
pet walker
medic
therapist
coach
taxi driver
cook
mediator
psych ward orderly
entertainment coordinator
travel planner
tutor
Seriously, the women in those studies get monetary credit for everything – possibly even wiping their own butt at prices that assume a private nurse. I would like to see the astronomical bill if a typical family hired someone to do all the things that a dad does, and then assume that each and every one of those tasks is worth full market MSRP if outsourced, the way the “mom studies” do.
The women go crazy on Facebook whenever those studies are published. I would like – just once – to see the same math and accounting used to show what the average dad is probably worth. My guess: $300K per year.
But that would be inconvenient if printed and spoil the whole “under appreciated women” narrative.
Oh, I forgot these as well:
– tax planner / accountant
– pest exterminator
– painter
– furniture mover
– roof repair
– gutter cleaner
– carpenter
– comparison / research shopper for big-ticket items, like appliances
– HVAC duct cleaning
– car washing
– electrician
– horticulture consultant
I do all of these things in a typical year.
A-man-jaw Marcotte says MRAs are the reason she can’t get a man :
Leaving aside the obvious question of why a man-hater like Manjaw would even want a man, I’m pretty sure she was married to one as of a couple of years ago (or was that Lindy West? I can’t tell any of them apart), some West African green card-grabber obviously devoid of all self-respect. Or was he? Maybe he finally said “f*** this shit, I’m outta here. No green card is worth THIS.”
My ex tried to claim that I did not do enough chores as she frivorced me. I was not a great repairman, but I did enjoy mowing the lawn, blowing snow, and raking leaves. I don’t doubt that she resented that I did those things. She also tried to claim that I never did the kids laundry or emptied the dishwasher, when I did it at least as much as she did. (She never did my laundry, I did my own.)
Now I worked and she did not. Still doesn’t, content to mooch off her parents, the guy she left me for, and her child support. Moreover, she did not clean. We had a cleaning service. So since I was paying for the cleaning service, I was actually doing more of the cleaning than she was. Nevertheless, she felt entitled to point figures.
Women, you just don’t bring enough to the table anymore.
Just ONCE I would like to see the same accounting methods used to tally up dad’s worth, to include:
I noted that your list (quite correctly) includes things that wifey/mom likes to claim she does, but that more likely and often than not hubby does just as often because wifey/mom is “busy” doing something outside the home she has no real business doing or because she “just doesn’t feel like it.” This of course leads inevitably to a practical question: should wifey/mom’s imputed compensatory value include experience for which hubby/dad can be substituted because of equal experience? Wouldn’t having overlapping qualifications with hubby/dad actually REDUCE wifey/mom’s value (“Stop thinking like an economist, you misogynist neanderthal!”)?
Reducing women’s responsibilities with the invention of technological conveniences, and the resultant “free” time, obviously contributed to the problem in the first place. Further reducing their responsibilities by overworking yourself to an early grave is merely the next logical blunder.
The people that proffer this chicanery are nourished in no small part by the people’s general ignorance of economics, which is a problem unto itself. One might think that common sense would be enough in some cases, but why be so optimistic? The enemy is brazen enough to imply that the richest woman on the planet can relate to the plight of women in third world countries who carry diseased water up from a creek. Obviously, they’ve learned not to fear anyone’s BS Detector.
Women, you just don’t bring enough to the table anymore.
One of the worst aspects of modern women is that they bring no gratitude to the table.
I guess this selfish ingratitude stems from their inflated, yet groundless, self-esteem. So conceited, so self-entitled, so full of their own sense of being amazing and awesome. So delusional.
Ordinary women see Oprah and Ellen and Angelina, and other celebrities on TV, leading amazing, exciting lives. They think, “Hey, I’m just as amazing and awesome. Why aren’t I rich and famous? Why aren’t I married to Brad Pitt? Someone cheated me out of my rightful due.
So these women grow bitter over being ordinary. They can’t admit they’re not special snowflakes. They lash out at their ordinary Beta husbands, just because those men were willing to marry them after Alpha FantasyRockStar didn’t show up with a ring.
I think most men would happily do more work around the house, if only their wives were forever sweet and pleasant, always asking nicely, as if for a favor. Grateful for any help the husband gave. Gracious whenever the husband’s answer was no.
Feeriker fantasy 1,123: Wow, you are unfortunately describing my situation right now. I’ve been given the ultimatum that our 3 year-old will be raised by day care because she feels her life is being wasted. This is what I was getting at in my previous comment describing my church. It’s silent on this and the women always ask her about going back to work. She has a Phd she finished prior to giving birth. So most men in my TGC church counsel me to be understanding and to help her with it. None back me up, save one friend. I come here ,thank God, for encouragement to counteract the heavy discouragement I get from church. Our small group meets in a huge spacious home of a working couple with young kids and where the husband has a lucrative career that could easily sustain her staying home to raise her kids. She also trains for triathlons. The thing is, she really is nice and cares about God’s word, which perversely discouages me.
@Dalrock
We’ve been trying to solve the Problem With No Name for over five decades now, and have made this a top national priority.
This is because we’ve taken away their pride in solving the Problem With No Name. How many women can hold their heads up high and say “I cooked for my husband delicious nutritious meals every day! I made sure my man always had what he loved!”
See, this is what the Matt Chandlers of the world end up doing. We don’t realize it. Whenever anyone allows someone else to degrade them, the end result is that we allow the evil person to degrade all our friends. What woman on earth would ever want to cook and clean for a man who would be willing to subject himself to such disgusting abuse and lies? What normal women would want to be dependent on an emotional weakling? If she does that, then she will be at the mercy of every man or woman who can manipulate her man-child. Hence, while good women would like to be with a good man, they’ll settle for a bad man, provided he has the “man” thing going for him.
I believe that by nature, every woman on earth would love to be able to say that they cook and serve and love a genuine man. They’d love it. It’s something to be proud of. But here is where the Matt Chandlers get their con in. What is actually a “real man”? Mad Dog Chandler says that in effect a real man is someone who acts like a whipped broken dog, preferably his whipped broken dog, in the name of whatever god he claims to worship. Now there are men that seek guidance, and so they go to his church and he speaks these lies, and these men are desperate enough for guidance that they accept that filthy crap. But as you pointed out, he is a serpent that is deceiving them.
I imagine that your wife is quietly very proud to be married to you. She has a man. A real man. Who also happens to be a good one too. This is significant, because if you are a true man, then you have options, if you have options then it means something that you want to be with her. It says something about her that someone like you loves her.
@Red Pill Latecomer
why should they have gratitude to do something that we take no interest in? If any of us really cared about ourselves we would never allow half of these laws to get off the ground. We would ruthlessly hunt down and smash any man that tried to tell our women to betray us.
I saw an interesting episode of Fantasy Island, the character Tattoo was allowed to become chief of an island as his fantasy. Now Tattoo is a perpetually sexually frustrated midget. He likes the ladies, and they like him, but only as a little brother. So here he is in charge of an island of savage Hawaiians. The first thing this asshole does, is try to make the women “equal” to the men. His very first move is to betray the men that serve him. Why? Because otherwise his character hasn’t got a chance in hell with those women. So his first move is to cut off the balls of as many of his competitors as he can. Just like the chimpanzees will actually do literally, so he does figuratively.
If we look at male feminists, they tend to be emasculated, feminine, non-competitive men. One look at the face of such a man and we can tell where he stands on this issue. He is a weak man. And so his strategy is the strategy of envy. He probably doesn’t even realize it. Which makes him even more dangerous to the men around him because like any good little white knight he will convince himself of his own righteousness. Now it’s not just about gutting his brother and stealing what his brother rightfully earned, oh no. He’s doing the work of the lord and God help any man that tries to stop him (literally, I mean that. May God help those men trying to save themselves from such a devil).
My sister says she is a Christian but that I am a Sexist, so I’d like to know what she thinks of Peter 1 chapter 3 (I had to look it up as I have never read the NT indeed had no idea that Peter of whom I had heard had ever written anything).
Being single I get to do all the cooking and housework so how much should I be paying myself for the oppression which I suffer daily.
Men always tend to overrate the intelligence and ability of their spouse. History has failed to support the view that John Stuart Mill had of his mistress. One must suppose likewise that Melinda Gates appointment as CEO at Gates Inc had more to do with marital status than ability.
I have now come across a photograph (in my book on Turing) of the first commercially available Computer – a Manchester built Ferrranti from 1948 – and sitting in front of it is a young woman, the forerunner of corporate cubicles to come. Men, once again, creating the ground from which their problems arise.
@Swanny River
Brother, I’m so sorry that you’re going through my fantasy scenario, and doubly sorry –though not at all surprised– that your “church” is siding with your wife. I would ordinarily suggested at this point that you look for a real church that operates on scriptural principles and that recognizes and supports your headship, but I realize tol that that’s a holy grail-type quest.
In the interim I recommend what is probably a drastic solution, but it will certainly drive a point home: since your wife has decided that she’s more important than her family, especially her child, you make it known to her that your child is more important than she is (one of the most memorable lines of the movie Gone With the Wind, among many others, is the remark made by the prostitute Belle Watling to Rhett Butler as they’re discussing his little daughter Bonnie Blue and his marriage to the conniving and selfish Scarlett O’Hara: “the child is worth ten of the mother”).
Throw yourself into being the best father to your child that you can. Make him or her the number one priority in your life. At the same time I recommend all but ignoring your wife’s existence, since she has demonstrated by her decision that you two are of at best secondary importance to her. Drastic and harsh? You bet. It might even lead to divorce. But she has made a statement: it’s all about her. So let her alone to care about the one thing she loves best – the figure in the mirror. I did this to my now ex-wife who had made it known that she and herself were the only two people in her life that mattered. Today I’m a free and happy man, she’s a miserable and lonely catwoman.
You might mot even have to take things as far as I did. Perhaps your wife will wake up and smell the coffee once she sees that she’s no longer the center of your world. Either way, my prayers are with you.
My sister says she is a Christian but that I am a Sexist, so I’d like to know what she thinks of Peter 1 chapter 3 (I had to look it up as I have never read the NT indeed had no idea that Peter of whom I had heard had ever written anything).
Opus, you’re probably now one step ahead of your sister: you’ve read an actual passage of Scripture out of the NT. That’s something most churchians never manage to accomplish.
In the eyes of our ruling class, unpaid work is evil since it is untaxed work. They do not get their cut.
(I like the way Melinda pretends to be a typical middle class housewife; if Bill won’t hire any servants, she does have a complaint.)
Ah, where even to begin on this tired exchange about household chores? I won’t even dignify the “unpaid labor” argument with a response, because it conveniently leaves out the “unconditional support” side of it, as if the value of everything we do ought to be calculated in terms of remuneration. Judging from the family I grew up in, my current family, and the families I have been able to observe at close range, it is more often the wife than the husband who gets to decide what counts as work around the house, who gets to decide what does and what does not need to be done, and who gets to decide the standards of doing it. How many times have I seen my own wife overload herself with busy (and in my judgment often unnecessary) tasks, finally to complain: “Why do I have to do everything?!?” I would like to respond: “Well, darling, that’s because only you seem to know what ‘everything’ is.” But I refrain from saying that, because it would only set off a tiresome argument, and besides, she seems to need to feel that her indispensability is enhanced by such trivial tasks.
An interesting aside: men often dismiss (usually rightly, I think) women’s busy work around the house as “fussing,” while women dismiss men’s (often important) domestic work as “puttering.” So, men’s contributions are often not recognized. And, she reserves for herself the right to set standards for every task. My standard chore is doing the dishes. (I would be happy to cook, but there is no way I could ever meet her standards.) I’m not allowed to use our dishwasher, because she is convinced that it doesn’t get things clean enough. So, I wash everything by hand. I’ve either put in too much detergent or too little. Everything has to be washed in a certain order to insure that the water doesn’t get too greasy. If I touch a clean dish with suds on my hands I hear about it (oh no! we’re all going to die!). Kitchen work time is her time to talk to me as if I were her teenage son instead of her husband, to treat me like a bumbling idiot.
So, there’s another side to these “domestic chores” arguments. But I’m sure that no matter what men say, it would only be met with a chorus of victimhood.
somewhat comforting to find out that Mr. gates lives in hell
Dear Freeriker:
Lindy west is married; however, her husband is not an African green-card hustler. On the record, she is married to a flaming gay homosexual.
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/jul/21/my-wedding-perfect-fat-woman
Note the photos, which expose the myth that gay brothers have superior aesthetic judgment to us straight bros. If I were ever to attend a wedding where people dressed this horribly, I’m sure I’d never speak to bride and groom again.
Boxer
it is more often the wife than the husband who gets to decide what counts as work around the house, who gets to decide what does and what does not need to be done, and who gets to decide the standards of doing it. How many times have I seen my own wife overload herself with busy (and in my judgment often unnecessary) tasks, finally to complain: “Why do I have to do everything?!?”
It is this exact scenario that a proper pastor would have addressed in a sermon about the temptations of women, following the part where he talks about the hell of a nagging wife. This behavior is a territorial/dominance/control issue for women and hardly anyone addresses it as a serious sin and source of misery in the household.
It’s all about socio-sexual rank, an epiphany for me. Women, yes, are hypergamous. Their grasping for rank as evidenced by Melinda knows no bounds. God Himself is not worthy of their devotion.
People in Churchianity like Matt Chandler demand men to “Man Up” in a weak attempt to meet the hypergamous demands of the female sin nature. We must rank HIGHER not only socio-sexually, but also be nothing; fried ice.
Meanwhile, in the manosphere, men consistently guage thoughts, arguments, and men on this socio-sexual scale. “You argue like a Gamma”, is common. Everything is inclined towards how we rank sexually. Even often among the “Christians”.
Jesus was God, the highest status individual to ever set foot on this planet, and He washed the feet of Peter. Where do you suppose the typical manospherian (or slut) would rate this homeless, celibate man who lowered himself to serve other men? He didn’t play this game, if He had He would have won…..how ALPHA is that?
The thing is, she really is nice and cares about God’s word, which perversely discouages me.
Bible even addresses people like her:
James 1:22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.
Dear Freeriker:
Lindy west is married; however, her husband is not an African green-card hustler. On the record, she is married to a flaming gay homosexual.
Thanks for the clarification, Boxer. Maybe it was Manjaw who is/was married to the greencard grubber after all.
Egads, that wedding picture of Lindy and her flamer could put syrup of ipycac out of business!
Feeriker, thanks for the response. I don’t want to push for divorce even though she has unwittingly set up a situation where it is the more preferable option. I don’t want to gloss over my own cowardice when I say I think I’d be biblically correct to stand my ground and then let her walk if she so chooses (1 Cor 7). I have told her a couple of times she s free to leave if she’s so miserable. That helps for a while but I also tire from battling like that. The sad thing about my church, where Piper and CBMW is big is that most Christians and maybe even those here at this site would call it good. Lots of SAHM, no female elders or leaders, a pastor with 6 kids and a SAHM. Thank you for your prayers, it is complicated.
Roger, I feel your pain regarding the kitchen haranging. My wife gets me for suds, eating off my son’s plate AFTER he is done, etc. It’s really a constant dripping like Proverbs describes it.
@stevo. “somewhat comforting to find out that Mr. gates lives in hell.”
Hahaha
While not a co-creator of one of the biggest personal fortunes in the world, this woman nevertheless co-owns it. Quite literally any material desire she can imagine, she can have.
And yet, … she is so discontent that she must become a petty tyrant of her household in order to fill the hole in her soul.
I think we are all — men and women alike — susceptible to creating our own hells.
Opus
Being single I get to do all the cooking and housework so how much should I be paying myself for the oppression which I suffer daily.
You should take that up with yourself, at the earliest possible moment. You must! This current situation simply wont’ do!
Perhaps this weekend, you simply must sit yourself down with yourself, and gently but sternly inform yourself that you are running your fingers to the bone with all this work, and that it is high time either you chip in to help yourself or hire the work out. Or as a third alternative, you could find out what it would cost to hire the work out and pay yourself that rate.
However, bear in mind that however much you pay yourself to do this work in the home, in time it won’t be enough, and you’ll grow restless and unhaaaapy with yourself again. By that point you’ll probably have to take yourself on a trip to the Bahamas or Spain just to cheer yourself up out of the fog of depression that results from your Problem With No Name.
Be sure to keep us up to date on how this all plays out. If you decide to divorce yourself, rest assured we’re all here to support you against that lousy bum you live with.
“Swanny river says:
February 25, 2016 at 2:21 am….”
Well, you got married and look what happened.
On the topic of female chore burden, just saw this over at Yahoo Finance.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ariel-laundry-ad-share-the-load-163942249.html
Dear Swanny River:
Before you leave your wife and file for divorce, try this…
The next time she “gets you” for doing something harmless, immediately stop what you’re doing, look at her solidly in the eyes, and with a cold, businesslike tone in your voice, say “you’re making yourself really unattractive to me right now,” Then, go back to normal, as though nothing had happened, and keep doing whatever it was that she was so offended by/upset about.
I’m not married but have had several medium term flings, some women need to have clear boundaries drawn up, and if this is making you contemplate divorce, this would be one of those times.
Good luck bro,
Boxer
God is Laughing: Jesus was God … Where do you suppose the typical manospherian (or slut) would rate this homeless, celibate man
Jesus was NOT homeless.
Modern liberal preachers love to call Jesus homeless, trying to link Jesus’ lifestyle with today’s typical homeless men. But today’s homeless are mostly alcoholics, druggies, psychos, and/or criminals.
Jesus lived at home, employed as a carpenter, until he was 30. He spent the next three years as a traveler. Not homeless. Because he was on the road, he stayed in the homes of followers. Sometimes, I suppose he camped out. But he was not homeless as that word is used today.
Neither was Mary a “homeless single mother” as some preachers put it. She and Joseph were not “homeless” just because there were No Vacancy signs up at every inn when they entered Bethlehem. Nor was she a “single mother” though I’ve heard some priests bizarrely describe her as such.
OT:
Dear TFH,
Your assertion that technology will reverse feminism in the future may have been blown out of the water if this medical technique is proven viable.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/scientists-claim-can-create-babies-7441572
The stem cells requires a man’s DNA, Testosterone and Testicles to develop properly for now, but this could develop into a checkmate for Gynocentrism. Placing your faith in technology instead of God is foolish.
Roger says:
February 25, 2016 at 7:26 am
‘Ah, where even to begin on this tired exchange about household chores? I won’t even dignify the “unpaid labor” argument with a response, because it conveniently leaves out the “unconditional support” side of it, as if the value of everything we do ought to be calculated in terms of remuneration’
The trouble with not dignifying anything feminists say with responses is that they are too stupid to realize the statement you are making. Like playing chess with the pigeon, they will strut, shit on the board, knock over the pieces and tell everyone they’re “outspoken”.
For what it’s worth I will put my side of dishwashing in: My wife cooks. I clean. When we were poor, I did it by hand. Now we have a dishwasher.
If my hand-cleaning standards didn’t meet hers, she was welcome to wash them herself. If I can’t pack the dishwasher to meet her standards, she is welcome to pack it herself. The same goes with hanging up the laundry (“You’ve hung it up wrong. The socks need to go to the blah blah blah…”) – Rearrange them yourself. Driving: – “I’m more than happy to be the passenger. In fact, another word and you can either drive yourself or walk to your destination…”
You will get an initial explosion, but who cares. What’s she going to do ? Yell? So what. Eventually you get peace.
RPL, He became nothing, poured out to death. The God of Creation chose to be born in low circumstances. His accusers called Him illegitimate. He was not high ranking socio-sexually.
He said of Himself that He did not have a place to call home. At the time of His death the only property he had was His cloak and His robe…..something like 5 pieces of cloth. The Bible in every way shape and form framed Him as a loser on any women’s hypergamy scale.
Feeriker,
Yes, that is another problem with those ridiculous studies. They don’t stop to consider that if the mom wasn’t there, the husband would not necessarily outsource 100% of what she was doing because he can do it himself – and often far better but without the drama and whining from “the most responsible teenager in the house.” Which is itself sometimes an overstatement. And he certainly wouldn’t pay $106k or whatever outrageous sum the “mom value” accounting tally comes to this year. Hubby would not hire a nanny in most cases, but if he did, I would imagine that he could get a line around the block of young women willing for $40k per year to give him a very clean house, nice meals, ironed clothes, well-fed children, and a pleasant demeanor when he got home. Is the sex (or more likely, lack of it) really worth the $66k delta? Talk about a marriage tax.
@Roger: Your wife is mistaken. Dishes that go through a dishwasher are far more sanitary than those washed by hand. If you are washing the dishes, it is your choice. If your wife wants to wash them again “her way” when you are done, let her do it and then laugh at her.
@Dalrock et al: A real distinction needs to be made between a SAHM whining about run-of-the-mill chores, and the endless drudgery of the woman who spends 45 hours per week at a miserable office cubicle job followed by cooking, cleaning, shopping, errands, kids doctor/dentist/orthodontist appointments, etc., in the time that she has left over. It is two different worlds and all the fancy appliances in the world won’t fix the overscheduling and the general chaos of that lifestyle. (And Melinda Gates lives in a world of her own — 66,000 square feet is equivalent to a Stately Home in England. Nobody lives that way anymore. As my father once said to me, “You don’t own a house like that — a house like that owns you.”)
A lot of female paper shufflers would strongly prefer to be SAHMs, and in many cases the net contribution that they make to the family exchequer is negligible once child care, transportation, wardrobe and other costs are factored in. If there are infants or toddlers at home, Mommy working full time against her will is a recipe for marital disaster, especially if there is no money for domestic help and the husband isn’t home much or doesn’t do much when he is home. Some professional women want to continue their careers rather than cook and clean at home, but others are surprised to find that they lose all interest in their careers when Baby is born.
Discussing this issue thoroughly prior to marriage is a real must, because the potential loss of the wife’s income needs to be factored in before deciding on the size of the mortgage. And even if the issue IS discussed ahead of time, you can still be thrown for a loop by a change of heart, or by a child with medical problems, or by job loss, etc. I went back to work six weeks after my first child was born at the insistence of my husband, even though over half my paycheck went to the housekeeper. One of the older ladies at the office made snide remarks about “my decision” to work outside the home during my child’s infancy that I remember to this day.
Another issue involved is sleep deprivation. It can be tough for a mother of an infant to catch up on the sleep that she is missing due to night feedings if there is a toddler or preschooler in the house. If she works outside the home, she is simply going to be sleep deprived for the first year or so because there is no opportunity during the day for her to nap. Without adequate sleep, logical thinking is the first casualty, careless mistakes of various kinds abound, and every problem that comes up is blown out of proportion.
I will say that the Millennial men that I know pitch in around the house and help with the children to an extent that would have been fairly unusual amongst the Boomer generation, and was simply unheard of in my parents’ generation.
I used to have four Christian sisters-in-law. They hung out together at family parties complaining about their husbands. They watched Oprah and bought the books and drank the kool-aid, and at about the 20 year mark one after another of those marriages fell like dominoes to divorce. To this day they will all blame their ex-husbands for the problems. In contrast, I never heard my brothers say a bad word about their wives, and when it was all over they were also pretty sure it was their fault.
But I’d been watching and listening – and it wasn’t. It was a contagion.
The upside is that all my brothers are now with women who actually like them. The downside – even grown kids hate divorce, and the extended family is shattered beyond repair.
It was shocking to witness and it was where I realized my own female sex is vain, shallow, faithless, and susceptible to lifestyle fashion. And mean. Well, not me, but those ex-sisters-in-law . . .
A real distinction needs to be made between a SAHM whining about run-of-the-mill chores, and the endless drudgery of the woman who spends 45 hours per week at a miserable office cubicle job followed by cooking, cleaning, shopping, errands, kids doctor/dentist/orthodontist appointments, etc., in the time that she has left over. It is two different worlds and all the fancy appliances in the world won’t fix the overscheduling and the general chaos of that lifestyle. (And Melinda Gates lives in a world of her own — 66,000 square feet is equivalent to a Stately Home in England. Nobody lives that way anymore. As my father once said to me, “You don’t own a house like that — a house like that owns you.”)
I very much agree with the above. SAHM’s really have nothing to complain about given all of our modern conveniences, but women who hold full time jobs (the ones who don’t want to be there but feel it is necessary financially) are stretched pretty thin. And it is true that most men these days really do help out in ways that would have been unheard of in the past. It is still a lot of running around and feeling like you are chasing your tail most of the time, though. I suppose the desire to keep up with the neighbors is often the source of problem. Kids are involved in so many activities today that they are stressed out a lot of the time as well.
Being a SAHM is a real privilege in my opinion. Trying to combine raising a family while both parents work is tough. I know some families need both parents to work, but the kids often suffer for this especially if they have to go to daycare. I think that if the mother can at least stay home until they are in school it makes a world of difference. I’ve never really understood mothers choosing work outside the home before their kids are in school, unless it really is necessary financially.
I suppose the desire to keep up with the neighbors is often the source of problem.
It’s 95-plus percent of the problem. People –and I mean both sexes here– want to maximize the comfort level of their lifestyle, usually in a manner that requires them to live well beyond their means (if credit were to disappear as a financial option tomorrow, the world would plunge into an economic hyper-depression that would set society back to the pre-industrial era). While genuine economic hardship can be a factor in the decision to have both parents work, in the overwhelming majority of cases it’s because both spouses are averse to living a frugal lifestyle.
I’ve never really understood mothers choosing work outside the home before their kids are in school, unless it really is necessary financially.
See my last sentence above. Essentially, the children’s wellbeing is less important to Mommy and Daddy than living in a McMansion, having a pair of the latest luxury cars, or being able to dine out in expensive restaurants twice per week and take expensive vacations every year.
@Roger: Tell you wife to zip it or she can do it yourself. It is one thing to do necessary chores around the house like washing the dishes. It is quite another to tolerate being disrespected while you do them.
“Neither was Mary a “homeless single mother” ”
In fact, according to Pope Benedict, In his Book: “Jesus of Nazareth, the Infancy Narratives”: The whole trope of ‘no room at the inn’ means something entirely different. First, Mary herself likely made the decision to travel “home” to have the baby with her (and her husbands) family when SHE decided to travel late in her pregnancy. At no time was Mary or Joseph ever “homeless.” We forget why Joseph had to go “home” AND the consequences of extended families and tribal culture
Second, “The Inn” is translated from the Greek and actually means: “Upper Room.” So “No room at the Inn” becomes “no room in the Upper Room.” This implies Mary was taken down from the upper room because all of Joseph’s family was staying in Bethlehem, many or most gathered in the “upper room.” So in order to give birth, probably when she started hard labor, there was no room (for a grunting, laboring woman) in the upper room (with the rest of the family present) so they moved her to another room. In the lower room of such houses, animals would often be kept in the Winter months thus the whole laying in a manger thing. These lower rooms were often caves cut into hills which is consistent with tradition that the Nativity was in a cave on a hill.
Yup. Notice how the men almost never do this but the women constantly bitch and moan. Talk about spoiled little princesses. And now their ex-husbands are probably stuck with being lifetime ATM machines (alimony) for their ex-wives. Sigh, it’s fantastic being single. 🙂
Women…they are family destroyers (yeah I know. Exceptions, blah, blah but on the norm they are if given too many rights).
4 out of 5 in this case. Yup. Family destroyers. Doesn’t surprise me. At least your husband found a good one Marg (so far).
The evidence is all around us but men are just too cowardly to admit to themselves what needs to be done. Oh well. Suffer like idiots and learn the hard way yet again.
Pingback: Dealing with churchian frivorce. [I Cor 7] | Dark Brightness
BPP, you really should read the Bible for yourself. Luke 2:1-5 is explicit that Joseph & Mary traveled to register for Caesar Augustus’ census. If they went to be with family then why did they wait so late in Mary’s pregnancy? You can see on a map that Nazareth to Bethlehem was a serious journey. Mistranslating “ancestral family home” to “the manger of an inn” isn’t a trivial accusation and staying at an inn is likely because many people were traveling for the census. If Christ’s birth happened in his extended family’s home then why was his extended family omitted from otherwise detailed accounts?
And what’s up with “lower rooms were often caves cut into hills”? That makes no sense linguistically or architecturally, especially inside a town where buildings are close together by definition. We know from archaeology that ancient Israelis used mangers that we today would easily recognize.
I have no idea why Pope Benedict would lie about Joseph’s motivation for travel and the “no room at the Inn” bit but he apparently did.
They had a true house at some point after her birth, since the wise men came to the house where they were staying, not the stable. Tradition puts them at the same spot as the shepherds, but that is not accurate in the least.
Blaming Mary for the travel decision does seem a bit idiotic. They traveled for the census, due to Roman requirements. They stayed for a while and were supplied quite well for their trip fleeing into Egypt for a time. They then returned back up north, at least in part due to paranoia of Herod’s heir.
I suspect they settled down in Bethlehem and would have stayed there if not for the need to flee.
Lots of other myths around the situation as well, but this covers the ones noted here.
Reblogged this on MGTOW 2.0.
BPP, you miss the point. The Sovereign God of the Universe chose the circumstances of His birth. They were low. He chose to lay His head on a rock every night when He could have easily put the palace at Versailles to shame. He could have been a lion but instead was a lamb. He chastened His disciples, “Who among you that wants to be first should be servant to all.”.
Run that through the Heartiste matrix.
Wow … been off of ‘the net’ for @ one week and still catching up. Started reading this one .. and 2 hours later …
FANTASTIC insights guys.
I have said it before here and I will say it again … ‘pastors of today don’t have the balls to really tell the truth at the expense of offending the greater % of their congregations … women’. And when it comes to marriages that fall apart, in my experience the women keep attending church and we never see ‘the slug’ (the term/name used by one of the Bible toting, women’s Bible Study leaders/teachers in the church I attend when referring to her ‘x’), again.
Why ? Because the pastors don’t have the balls to seek out those guys … because (everyone now) : they don’t want to offend the greater % of their congregations … women.
So don’t get pissed off at Chandler, or Hybels, or Warren, or Meyer, or LaHaye or Keller … they have pews and collection baskets to fill, or books and conferences to sell out …
Be pissed off that women in general are not reading this blog and seeing the real anger and position of today’s man. Be pissed off that Satan is winning in so many areas – like Chandler’s words and during the car ride home and in the study’s and topics that are presented to women today.
So what do we men in practical terms ‘do’ ? Educate and pray for the next generation of guys to ‘not take it anymore’.
Regardless of whether a woman spends days in a cubicle then does a major share of the chores, when she is outside of rigid stipulations she will be inefficient. A woman can be too easily distracted. At work she feels accountable to someone, therefore she may be on task as assigned.
As an aside Ive known a few ruthlessly efficient women at work and at home, and they tended to be either unpleasant or bent towards helicopter parenting the kids and the husband, or all of the above.
More common is the woman just cannot get stuff done that pertain to the home for being so easily distracted…either by her ever present maelstrom of emotions or her tendency to flick her head and pursue every squirrel that crosses her path. Its like OCD and ADHD exist in her mind locked in epic battle for which has that days fractional primacy.
Throw in that the desire to feel empathy, as a receiver of it (preferably) or as a giver and then imagine a team of women (married with homes, kids and husbands) tasked with building a miles long bridge across a treacherous sound.
I’m thinking best to keep using the ferry, and of course, check in on those husbands from time to time. .
women are doing work they’re not getting paid for
And men are doing work they aren’t paid (in dollars) for as well – both men and women are paid in other ways, men are paid by women spreading their legs, women are paid by having their own private police force, auto-service, etc at their call. Everything along this ilk is just BS spouted by Feminists to try to get the unwashed, fugly, female masses screaming because they don’t have their own men to do these things as they are fugly. Plain and simple. The loudest ones are always the ugliest…
Isn’t it always a “well d’uh” moment when you see the women screaming – always makes you shudder…
I was working on the palliative care ward of my hospital tonight. It was a quiet shift for me. I had a bit of time on my hands. I popped in to check on one of the other nurse’s patients. She was a beautiful (read: feminine) elderly lady, probably in her 80’s or even early 90’s (I didn’t check my handover sheet). She had been watching TV, as you do in hospital. It was about news time, or shortly after. After brief introductions, seemingly out of the blue, but perhaps motivated by something she had seen on the news, she said, “Feminism has destroyed society. All these loose women getting around with no checks and balances on them. They’re running wild…I hate feminism!” She was music to my ears. A call bell rang, so all I had time for was to agree with her and leave. I would love to have had more time to talk with her. Even though I do meet elderly women patients who occasionally voice their anti-feminist sentiments, it’s as rare as hens teeth to hear such realities voiced in everyday life. It’s nice to get some validation that we’re not just imagining things; music to my ears.
In response to Dalrock, Kindasortadefinitelyfeminist says:
“Not the problem with no name but the problem where the wife is overworked and additional help is needed with housework and childcare.”
She must be talking about those stressed-out, exhausted wives I see when I have no choice but to go to the mega-shopping centre (mall) on a working day, who have the time and money on their hands to leave the kids in the crèche while living it up in the “health spa” come “beauty shop” come “hand and nail spa” etc etc. Poor, stressed-out, exhausted, overworked, things. My heart bleeds for them.
Pingback: The cause of feminist resentment. | Dalrock
Pingback: The fear of confonting sexual sin by women. | Dalrock
Pingback: CBMW’s evolving position on spiritual headship. | Dalrock
Pingback: Guarding her equality. | Dalrock
Pingback: Hierarchy equals abuse. | Dalrock