From 3rd world country here, there a lot of cases in my country where the woman expect the man to provide her, accommodate her, buy her a lot of things, only to found out the man doesn't receive any good treat from the woman, even the woman often lash out and belittle the man, but once the man had enough and decided to confront them, suddenly the woman flip the script like she was the victim. Many men once reached this phase, they decided to cut her off, leaving the man with bad reputation due to the woman were already way steps ahead of him and told her and his friends like she was the victim and the man was the bad guy even though she was the first one that made the conflict.

Been on this redpill forum since mid 2020, a lot of users gave advice to the young man to not marry in this era. The more I grew older, the more I get the perspective and agree a lot more (i'm 25 this year), also the divorce rate in my country is way way higher than ever before. Also recently a lot of cases in my country where the man had enough and did a physical abuse to the woman. In a case, the man received a sentence for 12 years, and the woman has been hospitalized while receiving support, but in this scenario, the man had already shared the chronology to his social media (Tiktok) prior to attack hoping that it will go viral after the incident, so the public knew how bad she was and why the man decided to attack her physically. And yes, it did go viral after the incident. Before the public knew the chronology, there were a lot of framing and accusations that made the guy was the bad guy, but luckily now it flipped, even though the man now is in jail. Also adding some context to this scenario, the girl already had boyfriend but she was cheating to this man whom later attacked her, after the incident, her boyfriend broke up with her, and the other man whom she cheated on got sentenced.

I knew a lot of men out there who were a victim of a manipulative woman (i.e. divorced then became homeless due to the assets distribution, being slendered, being scapegoated, wrong accusations, etc), and I just can't imagine what will it be if I were the man that was being manipulated. Last time I was in a relationship, the girl was so self entitled and manipulative, want me to do x y z to her, but I knew this just her attempt to test me how compliance I was. Luckily since I knew this test, I didn't really follow her saying or get manipulated by her, and just did what I want, yet she tried to frame me as the bad guy of how stubborn I was and hard to compromise, even her friends agreeing her framing towards me. Contrary to what this sub saying, in my opinion, there were a diminishing returns where I was being tested again and again without her respecting me afterwards (I already did agree/amplify, amused mastery, ignore, etc), and I had enough of it. Once I had enough and I didn't think she lessen her test (too much test), I cut her off completely without even hoping her to chase me (of course that would be me being desperate if I were hoping her like that, just goes on with my life afterwards).

I think nowadays it's best just to be a side man, where you just close to a girl for some period, then move to the next girl without giving her any real commitment, only there for fun. A lot of girls are fun and kind when they meet me at the first time, but after some times, if I see diminishing return before they breed familiarity and contempt toward me, I move to the next new girl immediately, the novelty effect plays a role in here. I don't do plate like this sub says due to having less resources (time and money) just 1 girl at a time, but once I decided to end, I move to the next girl. Even a lot of my girl friends who already have boyfriends, when their boyfriends are afar, they sometimes invite me to go to a "date" where the man doesn't even acknowledge it. Marriage nowadays are scam, just some shitty power play that place the convenience to the woman side.

For context, I'm 25, fit body, not too focusing on bodybuilding rn, my goal is to just have some lean toned body and I'm keeping it that way without solely be autistic increasing my muscle mass. I don't even spend so much time at the gym anymore, just do some bodyweight workout in my home compared to 4 years before where I focus too much on bodybuilding and I spend about 1.5 hours at the gym. In my experience, as long as I'm lean, where I have low body fat, exposing chiseled jawline and cheekbones, women go crazy for my attention, so I just like to keep it that way, also my cardiovascular is much much better compared to years ago after I add cardio program, with vo2 max metrics of 44, not really high but in a healthy range.

Jesus. First feminists glamorized divorce. Then they glamorized single mothers. And now they're glamorizing becoming a porn star to feed your kid you got from fucking your teacher?! I mean, if the patriarchy ever did this to women, they would be howling from the rafters and jailing every man in sight. I guess telling women to find a man, stay home, and raise some kids is oppression, but telling them to sell pics of your butthole to random dudes in India and Saudi Arabia in order to afford diapers is liberation. It seems that being a feminist means never having to acknowledge hitting rock bottom.

Roger Ebert had a movie term to describe movies whose premises or central conflict were so weak that in the real world, they'd be solved in 5 minutes (like horror movies where the kids just had to turn on the light, or run away from the forest instead of into it, or a romcom where if the two characters just talked for 5 minutes, everything would be cleared up). In this case, in the real world, her problem would be solved in 5 minutes: McDonald's is hiring, they pay above minimum wage these days, and certainly far more than the average onlyfans girl makes.

But a movie about a single mother trying to make ends meet by working 2 jobs at McDonalds and WalMart wouldn't land on AppleTV with glamorous stars portraying her life. At best a documentary to be quickly forgotten in some obscure film festival. No, to be worthy of millions of dollars spent to glorify you as a liberated hero, you need to really fuck up. You can't just be a single mother living with her parents. You need to further annihilate your future chances of a decent life by permanently placing pictures of your vag in the ether, forever available for future college admissions officers, employers, and romantic partners (not to mention your kid's future classmates) to find and recoil from.

That's what it takes to get a feminist to endorse your life as a shining example worth glamorizing. Got it.

At the risk of tooting my own horn, a while ago, I wrote about those supposed golden years of the 50s: https://www.forums.red/p/whereallthegoodmenare/268190/what_feminism_forgot_the_glass_floor_is_far_more_important_t

tl;dr: that golden era was very, very short-lived, a product of a unique set of circumstances (namely the destruction of most of the industrial world outside of the US by WWII, as you mentioned, the rise of unions, and household technology), and even in those days, plenty of women had to work (~30% of all women). This was the era, after all, of female schoolteachers, nurses, secretaries, etc.

Outside of those so-called golden years, women worked their asses off just like men (albeit in different tasks). What we're seeing now is basically a reversion to historical norms, and pining for that brief historical outlier isn't going to bring it back.

That said, part of why it will never come back is because women's expectations of what a "housewife" life will be have also expanded. Men expect that if they marry a housewife, she will raise the kids, cook, keep a tidy home, etc. That is, she will still be spending time working, but those tasks will be unpaid work like childcare, household stuff, etc. while he brings the money for the family.

But a modern woman doesn't feel that way. A lot of these modern women expect that being a "housewife" means the man brings home enough money for an expanded life (expensive cars, vacations to europe, a mansion, designer clothes) and enough to outsource domestic duties to an army of nannies, house keepers, cooks, etc.

IOW, ask these women who pine to be a housewife if she's planning on scrubbing the kitchen floors, like the housewives of the 50s did. What you'll usually find is that their expectations aren't to live like a 50s era housewife, but rather a 50s era lady of the manor. That class of the idle rich still exists, but it is now, and has always been, exceedingly small.

That linked image of the lamentations of a newly minted 30s female doctor is doing a lot of work in what is left unsaid: female doctors are leaving the field in droves, or drastically reducing their hours. Of course, the only way they can do this is by marrying a rich husband (either a doctor in a more lucrative specialty like surgery, or an entirely different field altogether like tech or finance). But because they're a doctor, they're not looking to retire to a plumber who can provide a small house (average house in the 50s was < 1000sq ft, and they would raise 4 kids in it) (https://www.newser.com/story/225645/average-size-of-us-homes-decade-by-decade.html) that she'll have to clean and maintain while taking care of the kids. She expects a large house in an expensive neighborhood, private school for the kids, nannies and house cleaners for her, expensive cars, vacations, and clothes, and of course, enough left over to pay her school debts and fund a retirement. Even if she intends to stay in fulltime medicine, that's a lot of burden on a man, doubly so if she wants to become a "housewife".

And of course, if you're a man who can actually provide that life without needing your wife to contribute, then why would you be interested in a 30-something woman (who will likely still demand to be treated like an equal due to her degree, regardless of the fact that she explicitly sought to marry someone better than her) when you will have hot 20-somethings scratching each others' eyes out to get to you?

Another well thought out piece here. I like the way you give some references as links. Thanks.

I agree that there is no going back and no one sane man should want to. The 1950s were just a blip in history, a transitional time when great prosperity and technical advancement met with an old system where an man and a woman divided their labour to keep the family.

By the 1950's there was actually already little need for such a great division of labour. A transition was already happening. Families were shrinking, so a woman was only needed in the home for a few years when a few children were small. There was a car that would take her to the shops. A refrigerator that would cool the larger amount of perishable food she could buy in one go and transport in the car. She had a vacuum cleaner, maybe a washing machine (or access to one in a launderette), she had a gas or electric cooker not a range that needed to be fired up and kept burning. She actually had very little to do. She was enormously privileged compared to any generation of women before or since because she had all of this and her husband's job earned plenty enough and the economy was growing and new consumer products were coming out every day, holidays were affordable and so on. It was a time like no other.

If women today look back on this they are looking at an unrealistic time. Today to have this, you have to marry a pretty unique man -a rich man who has already made it and will take you one when you have not really shown any aptitude yourself yet. He is not likely to be a man you grew up around as to have made it he must be older, so how is he to know if you are really worth the commitment, especially when the penalties for divorce are so high for men today.

One observation I would make is that actually it is still more possible than men and women like to think for a family to live on a single income. For whatever reason I seem to have ended up with housewives. Perhaps I am just too willing to please? But for whatever reason I have lived with 3 proper "housewives" (only legally married the first of course because I learned my lesson then). I am a pretty low income blue collar tradesman. It works out fine if you are prepared to live more like a family might have in the past in certain ways -no holidays past pretty local camping trips, few new clothes for kids, few optional school trips, few meals out, all food home cooked, heat the house with wood, only use the boiler to heat water, shoot a lot of wild meat, buy no alcohol except as presents for others, that sort of thing.

Like this it is actually very possible these days to live as a sole provider for a family on a low income. I pay myself well under $30k a year and keep a household on it. I personally miss very little that others have. I only wish I could travel more. Otherwise, I have all I need and the internet brings me all the knowledge of humanity for the price of a connection. BUT and I put it in capitals because its a big but, you have to get a lady who sees it that way too. None of the ones I have had have ever really bought into it. The present incumbent certainly is very jealous of what other women have and harps on about how she has messed her life up by becoming a poor housewife (not that she has done anything about stopping living for free). She does a bit of cleaning and a bit of gardening and keeps all the money for herself while complaining that she has messed her life up. What she means is she wishes she had not chosen a man like me who actually thinks that wearing old clothes is a virtue because it shows moderation and valuing internal things that matter not external appearances. If we were both to be honest; find her shallow, she finds me a disappointment.

So, while it is perfectly possible to be a housewife and still live better than most women did in the early 20th century, it will not be to the taste of most women. A double income gives you so much more power to consume and to be seen consuming. Life off one income, please yourself off the other. What is there not for a girl to like when the man will shoulder most of the burden of provision and you will be the one with the power to spend?

Today's women don't want to try any more for their families. Its all about her and finding herself, about first world problems that need "therapy" and not about being a successful female who raises strong young. Men have given up too since the women are not worth it. A real traditional wife wanted to build a strong family. Today's trad wife wants to do nothing. She wants to keep the home she wanted to keep anyway, buy the clothes she wanted to buy anyway, take the holidays she wanted to take anyway but do it on someone else's labour. She is a parasite not a help mate.