Golden handcuffs

From this article.

“A penis and a full-time job in a patriarchal world endows men with the freedom to decline cleaning up after themselves, after others, or the house … etc. etc. etc.”

Yes. I remember one Christmas, when I came home at the end of the week, and the work year, to find my mother-in-law doing some childminding, a cleaning lady working away, and then my wife arrived and cooked my dinner.

And on business trips, I have had women make my bookings, serve my meals on aircraft, and had my wife wash my clothes on my return.

So the whiny feminist does have a point.

But what she is missing, as usual with these women, is the broader context. Most women still want their husbands, whatever else they do, to be the main breadwinner. So, naturally men concentrate on this, sometimes obsessively. (It is what they are being “graded” on, after all, by most of society, as well as by their wives.)

Being the main breadwinner does have its privileges, and traditional wives understood that part of their job was to keep the man able to do his job and concentrating on that. But in reality the man is wearing “golden handcuffs”. He is restricted to a demanding role, but he is given some apparent compensation.

As I said, the writer misses the broader point. If a woman wants a man to tie himself socially, sexually and financially solely to herself; she needs to sweeten the deal for him somehow. If she fails to do that, why would he sign on to the marriage?

It can’t be all the woman’s way. Not in real life.

Even a mousetrap needs some cheese.

Men are often accused, in a jocular way, of knowing nothing of how a household is run. But surely this is what economists call “rational ignorance”. How many wives know the detail of what their husbands do in their paid jobs?

So, yes, men do get privileged treatment. As the writer says, “A penis and a full-time job in a patriarchal world endows men with the freedom to decline cleaning up after themselves, after others, or the house …” But the freedom is somewhat illusory. He is not free to choose not to go to work and obey his boss’ directions.

Husbands are like gladiators in suits. While they perform in the arena, they get well-fed and offered various comforts. But they have to perform. And if they start to fail, they can expect very little sympathy.

It is a commonplace in the Manosphere that “women don’t do cause and effect very well”. I suspect this is why feminist “theory” (such as the example quoted at the start of this post) is so deadly to women, because it never provides the context, but focusses on only half or part of the issue. Women don’t see that. As I said in another recent post, one ends up with absurdities, like a young woman who “uses her mobile phone to talk to her friend about her business flight the next day, and they spend a little time agreeing on the evils of patriarchal capitalism.”

12 responses to this post.

  1. Good article


  2. MGTOW. Because women should have what they said they want: a career, and nothing else.



    “Equality Between Men And Women Is Not Achievable” …

    “And if ever there came a time that men spent more hours at home looking after the children, the feminists would suddenly discover that children were not a burden but a pleasure.

    “This is outrageous,” they would say. “Those poor women are out at work while the men are at home sitting in front of the TV and having a good time bonding with their children.”

    You have to understand the mindset of these feminists. They are driven by a hatred of men. This hatred is the only thing that unites them and it is the only thing that explains what they say, think, and do.”


  4. A nicer kind of woman:

    “I love taking care of my husband. I love that he likes me to iron his shirts. I have brought him breakfast in bed for almost every morning of our married life (16 years) when I am home. I love putting dinner on the table and calling him in from the office to eat it while it’s still hot. I love how he smiles at me and thanks me so much for doing these simple things and has absolutely no expectation that they happen, even though they keep happening. If I am not here or I don’t get to it, or I am just too busy or too tired, he can make his breakfast, fix his dinner, iron a shirt.. and he will.. and he’ll be happy about doing it.

    But why would you not want to wake someone with a welcoming breakfast tray when the first thing they do when they open their eyes and see you is tell you how beautiful you are, or how thankful he is, or tell you how good you are to him? How could that be a burden to do? How could it be considered anything but the greatest of mutual service and love?”


  5. I am not sure where to place this, so I will put it here. It is a little overwrought, but I have come to realise that even wild shots sometimes hit their targets:

    “Women were not put in their place because men were mean but because women are mean.”

    “If women are not put in their places as helpmates, there is no free economy and with enough time and mounting corruption and exploitation no slave economy either. We are seeing that now.”

    Perhaps. Perhaps not. But worth considering.


  6. Yes, that terrible “allow” language. To be fair, men make things worse by telling other men things like “you need to get your wife to give you a pass”.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: