politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Naïve man children who need validation because being with someone their equal is scary, and the "tradwife" insofar as they exist, wants to be completely dependent on this manchild. Sounds like a great idea I'm sure it works out well all the time. The idea of being with a woman like this hell to me, and any of the associated sexual fantasies involved are hotter when power is willingly relinquished, from either person, not in some weird coercive context.
This is their real fear. And that if women are given a chance to live their life in freedom, the men might actually have to offer something on the relationship table that they might not be able to manage.
I think the "men" here is them specifically because they don't have confidence in themselves, thus the need for an outside force to determine their status. If you know of the Steven Crowder article on how they got married the "right" way, that's a great glimpse in to this mindset, especially now that him and his wife are separated. He makes it a point to highlight how they're so much better than others, that he's proud to say that, and how he's writing the article while presumably on his honeymoon. Not even all these tradwife guys want to wait to marriage for sex either, like at least Crowder supposedly followed through with that part of it. I feel like the commodified tradwife brand is sort of just a secular fantasy of what religious traditional marriages would be but without the actually hard things that come with that.
Surely it's easier to demand a submissive partner who won't talk back rather than spend time on grooming, personal hygiene, and not being a fucking massively immature man-baby though?
It's funny cause I grew up where the traditional husband and wife arrangement was what you were expected to perform, and I still have some friends who've followed through with it into adulthood. I'm talking 3+ kids, wife might be part time involved with the church, and the husband is just working so much, plus he's involved in church activities and "leadership" stuff. I've basically seen the best cases of this working and worst cases too.
The thing that turned me against this initially, is it just sounded so fucking miserable as the husband, you're expected to demonstrate leadership in the community, provide for your family, budget your household and wife's spending, know how to be a handyman around the house, do all the yard work and heavy chores, provide your wife the "tools she needs" ie renovate and get the fancy stuff. You never see your friends and it becomes your whole life, plus you don't even see your kids as often as you might if you were trading time with a working spouse. Oh and you likely are part of a church men's group and bible study where you have hosting and leadership tasks, and you are as a group working through problems in marriages and providing support.
That's not the arrangement these tradwife fetish guys want, they imagine it like the husband is just this individualist dom sex pest and the wife does all the boring stuff so they can go be "men" in a juvenile fantasy way. They don't realize in these traditional arrangements that actually work, the commitment goes both ways and you are giving up those man fantasies. They don't think about how you're involved with a whole community that provides structure to your life.
They definitely do
They do, I mean the ones in the article are running online brands based on it, but I grew up in an environment with strict traditional marriage ideals and the tradwife in that context doesn't match with this.