@Nubias Yes that is the way it has gone. Maybe I am a soft touch but it would be harsh to force a change. When children are small, it is ideal if their mother is with them and I was happy to maintain her for their sake. Getting her to return to gainful employment afterwards has proved hard.
There is always a reason why each job that come up is not suitable but it is also fair to say that those reasons would not exist if I died. She sells a few eggs and does a little gardening in the village but I never see a penny of the money. It seems a bit harsh to say "pay in" when she earns less in a week than I might in two hours, so yes she lives for free. The challenge is that what one might tolerate from a girlfriend with no shared children is one thing but when it is a mother of your children, you are also doing whatever you do to her to your children. So I am just the mule that pulls her wagon.Read More
It’s hilarious that he challenged her about her unwillingness to marry a carpenter. (For you heathens out there: Jesus was a carpenter.). Claiming to be a very observant Christian while declaring that not even God Himself is good enough for her…
@Nubias I'll leave it up to the moderators to decide on whether this is valid content (weekend or otherwise). It's a neat sister post to the one I made. One thing about modern "traditional-modern" women is how they cherry pick various privileges of both including the notion of the man "finding" the woman. Read classical literature for a century ago and women were told they'd be old maids at 25 unless they put in as much effort as PUA's of today to find a husband. They flirted with men and would at least hint a lot to get asked out. You know, dropping the handkerchief trick. Or they sought matchmakers and networked.
The notion of a princess in a castle sleeping all day while the prince fought dragons and climbed a tower to present her with a lifetime of luxury is the ultimate entitlement and goes hand-in-hand with the idea of a woman being a housewife with maids and machines working around her while the "king" works all day to provide for her.
And that's the Big Secret about the brainwashing of modern men: Convincing them that being a serf to a "lady" somehow makes him "King". "I'm a King, I get the privilege of working the fields all day while the oppressed Lord HAS to sit in his castle and spend the money I earn for fun!"
I hate to use the term "woke", but so many men are in a state of centuries old brainwashing from classical literature going back centuries. Don Quixote was supposed to be a joke, not an instruction manual!Read More
@Typo-MAGAshiv you never seen a man that is happy and crave a stay at home doing nothing and shopping wife??? Internet it's full. Lots of men complain that "crazy feminists want their career and don't want to stay at home, I want my female to stay at home while I provide for her because I'm a traditional man and want that traditional wife"
Other says "The government invented this think to send females to work to get more taxes but it's not traditional" it's impossible that you never heard that
@Nubias that's what most of them actually do, now.
My wife is not traditional at all (previously divorced and older than me), but despite our problems over the years, she does pull her weight work-wise. I'm fortunate in that regard.
But most modern women are lazy and entitled.
I wanted to say that many men think "traditional wife" is a wife that stay at home doing nothing
I have yet to come across a man who thinks that. However, many men have seen and experienced for themselves that when a woman calls herself "traditional", she really means just that, that she'll be lazy at home while the man works and provides. That's essentially what @First-light was saying in the post to which you first replied.
@Typo-MAGAshiv maybe I was misunderstood. I wanted to say that many men think "traditional wife" is a wife that stay at home doing nothing and go shopping and the traditional husband must work hard all day to provide for her. And this thinking is stupid.