Full text to show intro after the cut.
Let’s imagine a couple in the “taken in hand lifestyle.” Otherwise known as the surrendered wife lifestyle or the traditional lifestyle.
The wife submits to her husband and he sacrifices for her. That kind of thing.
In this traditionalist system the husband is defined by his wife’s vulnerabilities. Her vulnerabilities are how she grants him the opportunity to sacrifice and feel like he is a good man, a righteous man, a just man.
And what are vulnerabilities but abdications of agency(sometimes real, sometimes affected)?
So in exchange for serving her uselessness, he gets to feel good about himself.
The people who practice a traditional lifestyle will sometimes talk about the benefits it gives men.
- They get to lead.
- They get to choose what benefits women best.
Let’s look at the first benefit: Men get to lead women.
We believe that a man leading a woman is of benefit to him and that’s how we justify extorting material, measurable benefit to women in terms of protection and provision in exchange.
But what does our traditional man give up to be the so-called leader?
There is a peculiarity to human psychology. When we perceive a group as having more agency, more ability to act, more dominance … we have less sympathy for that group.
The more power, the less sympathy. The more we can justify doing violence to that group.
When we want to destroy a group of people, we cast them as having almost god-like powers. That they’re using against us.
That’s how we justify crushing them like bugs.
Every culture has its way of casting men as dominant and “superior” to women in order to justify their disposability.
In fact all cultural traditions of male dominance are a way of seducing men into being exploited as expendable.
The more relative dominance, the more you can expect the men in that culture to be treated as disposable utilities. The more likely a man will find his manhood in strapping explosives to his chest and blowing himself up for God, Mother and Wife.
Leading someone who has skills and abilities and the will to use them is a joy; leading someone who defines a man by her uselessness is a nightmare.
Let’s look at the other benefit Traditionalists say men get.
The other benefit that’s usually described is that men can chose what benefits their wife best. Even over her protests.
He gets to decide what benefits his wife best. He gets to decide what benefits his wife best.
This is usually trotted out as some sort of benefit for the man to the “taken in hand” lifestyle.
He gets to decide what benefits his wife best.
(Wow you traditional women really spoil your men.)
Let’s examine that so-called benefit.
Let’s imagine she’s protesting. Why would she be protesting against her best interests?
Either she doesn’t understand them, in which case it’s probably best that her husband be the one in control at that moment. Fair enough, that’s the kind of give and take you have as a couple.
Making it specific to men, however, is an added burden on them.
Now if he’s benefiting her over her protests because she sees how the benefit could go to him instead, that’s sorta sweet.
Again, I wonder why he always has to win out and the benefit has to go to her but regardless…
There’s a final scenario in which she is protesting against something that he knows will benefit her… because she’s an irresponsible, entitled brat who hasn’t a clue about life.
And if he’s in a relationship with an irresponsible, entitled brat who doesn’t have a clue about life I can predict two things:
- She will never let him get his.
- He’s going to have a heart attack before he hits fifty-five.
To me this seems like all downside.
There’s a final benefit to men that traditionalists generally don’t openly acknowledge.
And that is that all this sacrifice earns men a positive identity.
But the question becomes, why is his identity tied to a woman in the first place?
And if a man earns his identity through service to a woman, how can he ever be her superior or dominant or leading her?
That’s the great joke. Having your very identity held for ransom is the most disempowering position you can be in.
It’s not just that men in this system are beneath women; it’s that they don’t even exist outside of women at all.
Only exist in fleeting moments when women have needs. At all other times they are nulls, non-entities and voids.
This is not the relationship between lady and vassal or master and slave; this is the relationship between Goddess and mortal.
She breathes life into you by her needs. And when her needs vanish, so do you.
- What will Dior’s decision regarding Johnny Depp mean for male survivors? - August 10, 2022
- Chauvin Released, Teen bullied for supporting trump, False accuser forced to apologize| HBR News 277.5 - October 13, 2020
- What Jordan Peterson checking into Rehab can teach us all - October 26, 2019