"Marry Him and Be Submissive - "One Italian Wife’s Countercultural Message to Women

[ShrodingersCat]

The author of the book in the OP is a working woman and (as I recall from a previous thread) she says her husband helps out a lot.

Also, if a woman is supposed to “marry him and be submissive” and he says to keep working, then that probably means continuing to work. If you look around real life and the internet, it’s really not that difficult to find women who are working because their husbands insist that they do so. (My husband, for example, is very eager for me to start helping with our third set of private school tuitions.) There are not a lot of men happy with the idea of their wives never working a day after the first baby.

Furthermore, I think you should have a look at a list of female Nobelists in the sciences. While it is true that there are not a lot of female physics Nobelists (2), there are a few more female chemistry Nobelists (4–two of them are Curie family members!), and then there’s a fair number in the “physiology or medicine” category (12). Interestingly while all but one of the chemistry and physics Nobel prizes awarded to women were pre-1965, only one of the medicine/physiology prizes was awarded pre-1965. Here’s the distribution of medicine/physiology prizes awarded to women: 1940s (1), 1970s (1), 1980s (3), 1990s (1), oughts (4), teens (2). To my eye, it looks like there hasn’t been a lot of movement of women into the tippy top of research chemistry and physics over the last 50 years BUT that is exactly what has happened in medicine/physiology. While there is a lot of complaining/bragging about the lack of women in STEM, the people who do so are ignoring biology and medicine, which are fields that have seen a tremendous influx of women.

Also, why does “great things” need to mean the stuff that you personally value (being a CEO or inventor)? Those people are very unusual, even among men. There was only one Steve Jobs, there is only one Elon Musk, etc. It really is not true that employment consists purely of the two categories you describe–female Power Point presenters versus world-changing male CEOs, Nobel prize winners and inventors.

I used to be just as gungho as anybody about how every mother ought to be home with her kids, but then at some point as a SAHM, I started realizing that why yes, I did appreciate all these female preschool teachers, school teachers, principals, psychologists, physical therapists, occupational therapists, nurses, pediatricians, OB/GYNs, mammogram techs, ultrasound techs, phlebotomists and lab techs, x-ray techs, etc. who are making my and my family’s life better than they would be if all of those people just stayed home. (Really–I do not want a male mammographer or lactation consultant!) That, too, is civilization, just as much as it is to make a really thin cell phone or a snazzy electric car.

Furthermore, your view that employment of mothers causes female depression is a bit lacking in empirical grounding. For one thing, women just are very prone to depression.

mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/depression/in-depth/depression/art-20047725

If you’ll look at that link, you’ll notice that female depression seems to be largely driven by hormonal issues–puberty, pregnancy, postpartum and perimenopause are all associated with depression.

Interestingly, if anything, being a SAHM is associated with more, not less depression among women and depression seems to be an occupational disease of SAHMs.

“The study found that 28 percent of stay-at-home moms reported depression a lot of the day when asked how they were feeling the day before, but only 17 percent of employed moms did. Of the group, 26 percent of SAHMs said they experienced depression, vs. just 16 percent of working moms. And 41 percent of the at-homers reported worry, compared to only 34 percent of their counterparts.”

metroparent.com/daily/parenting/parenting-issues-tips/stay-home-moms-depressed-angry-sad-study-says/

Obviously, there’s a casuality issue there (women with depression or other serious problems may be unable to work, triggering deeper depression), but this does demonstrate that staying home is not some sort of mental health cure-all for women and that SAHM’s mental health is something that we should be a lot more concerned about.

I was going to quote my favourite bits… but this whole post is excellent!

 

[Xantippe]

I was going to quote my favourite bits… but this whole post is excellent!

Thank you!

 

[Elena321]

I actually wasn’t making any statements about whether it would be “oppressive” or “unreasonable” for a man to ask his wife to work outside the home.

I was pointing out the irony, for lack of a better word, of certain socially conservative Christians tending to assume that “being submissive” for a wife always equates to her accepting a traditional “homemaker” role. However, I do know of many working mothers who actually DO want to stay at home but keep working because their husbands want them to.

There also seems to be this assumption that a Christian husband would never dream of asking his wife to work outside the home, that it’s better for the man to work overtime, work 2 jobs, maybe even 3 jobs, that even if he puts his health at risk and hardly ever sees his wife and kids.

There are also cases of workaholic men who claim to be working hard for their families, but actually spend little time with their families, think nothing of spending money on luxuries for themselves because “I earned that money, I can do what I want with it” while leaving their family members to scrounge by as best they can on what remains.

There is a sad case of this recently brought up on this very forum.

I think the mentality by some that a Christian woman should be a homemaker is largely confined to the USA.Or maybe a few Asian or South American countries also.

Where I am (Australia),Christian/Catholic women work,Muslim women work etc and I have never heard anyone say anything negative about that.
I’ve never heard any priests state that Catholic women should be housewives.
I think the general mentality is just that the children should be first priority.
If anything,it’s a bit the opposite here,with some people being judgmental to stay at home mums,viewing them as lazy etc…

Also,my background is traditional Slavic background.
In my European country background,it is common and accepted -especially by older generations- for a woman to take a traditional role of homemaker.
At the time though,40 % of women do work and the country has a woman President.
Even though it’s perfectly accepted to be a homemaker,and there is less feminism etc not many people state that a woman ideally should be a housewife.

 

[ThePCWife]

Much of the American (Protestant mostly) Christian idea that wives=homemakers is because a great deal of American Christians are influenced by frontier myths, especially the Little House on the Prairie books, where Ma Ingalls was, of course, a homemaker, because there wasn’t exactly a lot else to do out on the frontier.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Much of the American (Protestant mostly) Christian idea that wives=homemakers is because a great deal of American Christians are influenced by frontier myths, especially the Little House on the Prairie books, where Ma Ingalls was, of course, a homemaker, because there wasn’t exactly a lot else to do out on the frontier.

But it was the east coast that was populated not necessarily the frontier.
What jobs did women have then or on colonial times, or back in England or in the Holy Roman Empire, or in the Roman Empire,
What of other cultures who had housewives without the frontier “myths”
India, Japan, China,
Or the European cultures prior to ww2?

 

[ShrodingersCat]

Back in the day, you were either v rich and ran a household with many servants and nurses for your kids, you worked on a farm (self employed) or you were poor, living in a town and working 6 days a week in a factory to make ends meet. I suppose there would have been some middle ground - husband has a modest clerking job which pays the bills but no money for servants. But this was in a time when women weren’t educated, couldn’t vote and when housework was a lot more involved than it is today.

I’m not really sure what my point is I suppose I’m just pointing out that there were just as many varying family situations then as now.

 

[pensmama87]

But it was the east coast that was populated not necessarily the frontier.
What jobs did women have then or on colonial times, or back in England or in the Holy Roman Empire, or in the Roman Empire,
What of other cultures who had housewives without the frontier “myths”
India, Japan, China,
Or the European cultures prior to ww2?

The husbands and wives typically worked together on whatever was most pressing for everyone in the household to survive. I’m comfortable noting that due to the biological reality of bearing and raising young children in particular, women may have been closer to the actual physical residence of her family, but it’s just as weird that over the past several hundred years men disappear from their homes for 10+ hours a day to work for someone else.

Before the Industrial Revolution, it was usually dire straits that sent men away - war, famine. Ordinary family life - for just about everyone - was pretty close to the home.

 

[ashleyxo]

I think the mentality by some that a Christian woman should be a homemaker is largely confined to the USA.Or maybe a few Asian or South American countries also.

Where I am (Australia),Christian/Catholic women work,Muslim women work etc and I have never heard anyone say anything negative about that.
I’ve never heard any priests state that Catholic women should be housewives.
I think the general mentality is just that the children should be first priority.
If anything,it’s a bit the opposite here,with some people being judgmental to stay at home mums,viewing them as lazy etc…

Also,my background is traditional Slavic background.
In my European country background,it is common and accepted -especially by older generations- for a woman to take a traditional role of homemaker.
At the time though,40 % of women do work and the country has a woman President.
Even though it’s perfectly accepted to be a homemaker,and there is less feminism etc not many people state that a woman ideally should be a housewife.

from my friend’s experience (from asia), women are not ‘forced’ to be a housewife if they are from a wealthy family/country. If they are poor, they only give education to the boys and force the girls to be a l housewife. for the richer families, they tend to encourage women to work to get more money, but because of the sexist attitudes typically found in societies like that they still hold, the women are still expected to do all of the things a homemaker does while working. so she has more work to do compared to the guy who is only encouraged to work.

 

[starshiptrooper]

from my friend’s experience (from asia), women are not ‘forced’ to be a housewife if they are from a wealthy family/country. If they are poor, they only give education to the boys and force the girls to be a l housewife. for the richer families, they tend to encourage women to work to get more money, but because of the sexist attitudes typically found in societies like that they still hold, the women are still expected to do all of the things a homemaker does while working. so she has more work to do compared to the guy who is only encouraged to work.

Typically in those Asian countries, a son is expected to support his parents when they stop working in addition to providing for his own family. High expectations all around. Somehow those expectations are a problem only for women.

 

[Xantippe]

Typically in those Asian countries, a son is expected to support his parents when they stop working in addition to providing for his own family. High expectations all around. Somehow those expectations are a problem only for women.

At least in South Korea, it looks like that is shifting.

There was initially a boy preference, with abortion leading to the fact that “In the 1990s, there were 116 boys born for every 100 girls in South Korea.”

“Now fast-forward 25 years to a new generation of parents, and many young Korean couples would prefer daughters. My cousin Seoyoung, who is a young mom, shares a new Korean saying with me: “There’s really no use in having a son, because they just grow up to leave you, to take care of their wives.””

Compare to the English language proverb that says that, "“A son is a son 'til he gets a wife, but a daughter is a daughter all her life.”

"In the past in Korean society, a son was required to carry out your family’s ancestor worship. It’s a set of elaborate Buddhist rituals in which the eldest son offers sacrificial foods to the family’s deceased ancestors. Only men could make the offerings, while the women were required to prepare the food, often for days in advance.

“But as Koreans are holding less tightly to Buddhist traditions — many have converted to Christianity — and people living longer, they’re less concerned about being honored after death, and more concerned about being cared for while alive. As it turns out they say daughters are better for this than sons.”

"As a result, in 2016, the ratio of boys born in South Korea, compared to girls, is back on par with global averages. There are 105 boys born for every 100 girls each year.

“The laws of nature dictate that a few more boys are born than girls, but overall, the numbers are almost even.”

pri.org/stories/2016-12-08/south-korea-parents-are-increasingly-saying-we-hope-girl

 

[Lea101]

Typically in those Asian countries, a son is expected to support his parents when they stop working in addition to providing for his own family. High expectations all around. Somehow those expectations are a problem only for women.

My darling, I know you probably ODed on all of these red pills, but women in Asia do get the short end of the stick. It’s probably hard for a guy in the West (women from the West do have it better) to understand, but Asian women face so much nonsense (sexism from diff areas besides gender roles) that they are obviously more angry at the expectations place on them vs males. Although males are becoming rightfully tired at the box they are made to fit into.

Women from these countries are also expected to support their families if they have a job. It’s an “Asian” thing to keep your parents in your lives until you basically die. We live with them until we are married blah blah, you get the idea.

But if you compare a working woman who is expected to have lots of kids (typically sons although that is dying now), work (and be successful at it) + but constantly be there for her kids (or else she is not being a true woman)+cook, clean and open her legs for her husband VS a man who is expected to work and support his parents + kids, you can see that the women have it harder in terms of time + energy. Not to discredit the amount of work our men put of course, in case your mouth is foaming up at the fact that nobody seems to care about your ‘oppression’, but man, mothers do go through a lot especially since they do face rather contradicting expectations in a “traditional but kinda modern” society.

Fathers in these cultures are not really expected to be “active dads”. Their role is to strictly provide. Which is why Asians from traditional households will probably describe their fathers as a “supporting character”. Moms feel the burn because their income matters in the family + are expected to be the perfect mother as well. There IS a double standard because mothers are criticized for being “part time moms” while dads are not criticized if they spend the whole day working. Heck, you even see it in America in bits and pieces, I’m sure. Even though research has shown us that fathers play a critical role in the family.

Being a stay at home mom/dad is hard enough.

So the struggles between man and woman (in such a culture) are different. Men: pressure to be rich
Women: pressure to work + spend whatever time she has left to be a home maker+mom

And it’s no rocket science to see that hence, the type and level of outrage is different. This is a thread about women, don’t be triggered if men’s issues are not a focus here.

 

[Xantippe]

With regard to some traditional Asian cultures, it occurs to me that it wasn’t just the case that the son was supposed to take care of his parents (while DIL did as she chose)–the assumption was that DIL would be at MIL’s beck and call, so that having a son would generate help from at least two young adults, whereas investing in a daughter was (in the Indian proverb) like “watering the flowers in your neighbor’s garden,” as she would be leaving to work for her in-laws. So traditionally, son = 2 helpers, while daughter = 0.

Here’s an Indian parody video (it’s based on Call Me Maybe) where the prospective MIL describes all the plans she has for her future DIL:

youtube.com/watch?v=ARWwmOsGZGw

One of the lyrics is “Once you step into my house, you’ll have no life.”

 

[Lea101]

With regard to some traditional Asian cultures, it occurs to me that it wasn’t just the case that the son was supposed to take care of his parents (while DIL did as she chose)–the assumption was that DIL would be at MIL’s beck and call, so that having a son would generate help from at least two young adults, whereas investing in a daughter was (in the Indian proverb) like “watering the flowers in your neighbor’s garden,” as she would be leaving to work for her in-laws. So traditionally, son = 2 helpers, while daughter = 0.

Here’s an Indian parody video (it’s based on Call Me Maybe) where the prospective MIL describes all the plans she has for her future DIL:

youtube.com/watch?v=ARWwmOsGZGw

One of the lyrics is “Once you step into my house, you’ll have no life.”

as an Indian, I can assure you this is true. My poor mom had to put up with my grandma!

 

[starshiptrooper]

One Asian country out of many. Not particularly surprising that a country with a shortage of women combined with decades of American influence and the spread of what has become an essentially feminist religion now prefers girls to boys.

The opposite preference would be considered horrifically sexist. Rather telling was the fact that women outperforming men was passed over without comment and treated as normal rather than the crisis it would regarded as if the genders were reversed.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

The husbands and wives typically worked together on whatever was most pressing for everyone in the household to survive. I’m comfortable noting that due to the biological reality of bearing and raising young children in particular, women may have been closer to the actual physical residence of her family, but it’s just as weird that over the past several hundred years men disappear from their homes for 10+ hours a day to work for someone else.

Before the Industrial Revolution, it was usually dire straits that sent men away - war, famine. Ordinary family life - for just about everyone - was pretty close to the home.

I think there is a lot of revisionist history.
In world history men would be gone far away from home for months, perhaps even years. Especially in times of military action.

I find it fascinating all of the different ideas about history. I was in an nfp conversation a while ago where the person was convinced that people in history lived celibately before nfp was a method. ( it was always a method I mean just our modern named methods)

 

[starshiptrooper]

My darling, I know you probably ODed on all of these red pills, but women in Asia do get the short end of the stick. It’s probably hard for a guy in the West (women from the West do have it better) to understand, but Asian women face so much nonsense (sexism from diff areas besides gender roles) that they are obviously more angry at the expectations place on them vs males. Although males are becoming rightfully tired at the box they are made to fit into.

Women from these countries are also expected to support their families if they have a job. It’s an “Asian” thing to keep your parents in your lives until you basically die. We live with them until we are married blah blah, you get the idea.

But if you compare a working woman who is expected to have lots of kids (typically sons although that is dying now), work (and be successful at it) + but constantly be there for her kids (or else she is not being a true woman)+cook, clean and open her legs for her husband VS a man who is expected to work and support his parents + kids, you can see that the women have it harder in terms of time + energy. Not to discredit the amount of work our men put of course, in case your mouth is foaming up at the fact that nobody seems to care about your ‘oppression’, but man, mothers do go through a lot especially since they do face rather contradicting expectations in a “traditional but kinda modern” society.

Fathers in these cultures are not really expected to be “active dads”. Their role is to strictly provide. Which is why Asians from traditional households will probably describe their fathers as a “supporting character”. Moms feel the burn because their income matters in the family + are expected to be the perfect mother as well. There IS a double standard because mothers are criticized for being “part time moms” while dads are not criticized if they spend the whole day working. Heck, you even see it in America in bits and pieces, I’m sure. Even though research has shown us that fathers play a critical role in the family.

Being a stay at home mom/dad is hard enough.

So the struggles between man and woman (in such a culture) are different. Men: pressure to be rich
Women: pressure to work + spend whatever time she has left to be a home maker+mom

And it’s no rocket science to see that hence, the type and level of outrage is different. This is a thread about women, don’t be triggered if men’s issues are not a focus here.

Now now cupcake, I simply pointed out that men in Asia typically had additional responsibilities, and that was the reason why a family who could only afford to educate one child would choose the son over the daughter, not out of some insidious scheme to oppress the poor wimenz. It was primarily a dispute about culture and history, and the reasons behind choices.

 

[Wesrock]

Now now cupcake…

:banghead:

 

[BlueEyedLady]

One Asian country out of many. Not particularly surprising that a country with a shortage of women combined with decades of American influence and the spread of what has become an essentially feminist religion now prefers girls to boys.

The opposite preference would be considered horrifically sexist. Rather telling was the fact that women outperforming men was passed over without comment and treated as normal rather than the crisis it would regarded as if the genders were reversed.

Still mad that a Western man just can’t get a fair shake in this world?

 

[Lea101]

Now now cupcake, I simply pointed out that men in Asia typically had additional responsibilities, and that was the reason why a family who could only afford to educate one child would choose the son over the daughter, not out of some insidious scheme to oppress the poor wimenz. It was primarily a dispute about culture and history, and the reasons behind choices.

You’re not quite there yet. Men get education in poorer families because women were not seen as an investment. Woman’s job was to have babies + be “owned” by men (for the lack of a better word), so it made sense for the men to get the education, if a family had to choose. A woman’s value was tied to her fertility + looks, she would be nothing without a husband. Women were taught to be a wife instead. Their advancement was simply not a priority. One may argue that people think that women were less capable, too. But I can’t say that because I personally did not see this mentality in mt country, but it won’t be surprising.

So yes, it is due to sexism, not just men having additional responsibilities. Although it is not as simple as “i hate da femalez, let’s oppress them bc i am man”, it’s more of a very ingrained view towards gender roles that sincerely affected the way people viewed woman.

You are not completely wrong because women “marry in” to her husband’s family. It is just not the main reason.

(It is also not unique to asian societies. Look at the muslim countries or other poor countries for example. Honorable mention, lol.)

 

[BlueEyedLady]

You’re not quite there yet. Men get education in poorer families because women were not seen as an investment. Woman’s job was to have babies + be “owned” by men (for the lack of a better word), so it made sense for the men to get the education, if a family had to choose. A woman’s value was tied to her fertility + looks, she would be nothing without a husband. Women were taught to be a wife instead. Their advancement was simply not a priority. One may argue that people think that women were less capable, too. But I can’t say that because I personally did not see this mentality in mt country, but it won’t be surprising.

So yes, it is due to sexism, not just men having additional responsibilities. Although it is not as simple as “i hate da femalez, let’s oppress them bc i am man”, it’s more of a very ingrained view towards gender roles that sincerely affected the way people viewed woman.

You are not completely wrong because women “marry in” to her husband’s family. It is just not the main reason.

(It is also not unique to asian societies. Look at the muslim countries or other poor countries for example. Honorable mention, lol.)

You’re not wrong, but you’re dealing with people who believe that societal male dominance and female subjugation, complete with not being able to vote, is the best possible order.

Showing that what you described is true isn’t hard. Getting these people to acknowledge that a woman should be more than property of her father and then husband is the sticking point.

Fortunately, most of these guys are single.