Serious Tradcuckery is as retarded as black Americans thinking that whites shouldn't work and blacks should work to support them.

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

Title. Also applies to any other ethnicities who have a history of one of them being submissive/slaves to the other, I'm just choosing the best ones to talk about this here given that this is a Murican site filled with Muricans.

Seriously, when you look at the gender dynamics tradcucks idolize and wish to "bring back" (even though they never existed until feminists wanted them, will talk about this at the end of the post) and make them a race thing instead, it becomes the most pathetically cucked thing imaginable.

Like, imagine if you had black tradcucks who believed that whites shouldn't have to work. Instead, it's the blacks' role to work from the moment they come of age, then, after about 10 or 20 years of working every day, they are supposed to search for white teens to live with, and this is supposed to be done by them showing what good nigger workhorses they are to the parents of those teens, hoping that the parents of those teens will decide that they are good enough to take care of their kids for life. After that, the person that wins will have the white teen move in with him, and the guy will then have to go right back to work to support that white teen for the rest of his life and be mocked if he can't do that, while being supposed to take pride in how much he can provide for the white person assigned to be supported their entire life by him.



As I said, this can really work for any other racial combination as well, you could probably do the same with Africans/Europeans and MENAs, given how many foreign slaves there were in the Ottoman Empire, or, since I'm a Slav, I'd mention Slavs and Germans, given how many times to former were attacked and dominated by the latter. The only important thing is that one group is supposed to work their entire lives, show how good workers they are and how much they can provide to "earn the right" to live their entire lives with a member of the other group, and work their entire lives to support that member of the other group.

Sounds like a pretty shitty deal for the provider side, doesn't it? And yet, according to tradcucks, when it comes to gender relations this is supposedly what we should be striving for and the key to make the world better. Men should work as soon as they can, show off how good workers they are to "earn" some woman, and then spend the rest of their lives working to support her while she never works in her life and spends her entire life being supported by him, and men are even supposed to take pride in and be praised on how much they can provide for their woman.

It's the exact same dynamic in both cases, yet curiously, it only ever gets mentioned when it comes to gender. Could it be because, if you ever brought this up in other contexts than the one where people in general agree that one group (women) should be supported by other (men) and is the price the other group has to compete for, it would reveal just how unfair such an arrangement is? f it can solve all gender issues in the world, why couldn't it solve the race ones as well? After all, in the "good old days" you had a lot of ethnicities enslaved to work their entire lives for others, why aren't tradcucks fighting to bring that back as well?

I actually wanted to make this thread for some time, but finally decided to do so after seeing @GeckoBus once again mention this thread of his:

EARLY FEMINISTS WANTED WOMEN TO WORK LESS - NOT MORE -> REPLY OR U GAY

"The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930. During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10...

incels.is

"The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930.

During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10 per cent. This was regarded as a huge step forward for womankind, an opinion shared by the women whose writings Dr Bourke researched.

Freed from mills and factories, they created a new power base for themselves at home. This was, claims Dr Bourke, "a deliberate choice. . . and a choice that gave great pleasure."" --

- Extract from David Thomas' book, "Not Guilty - The Case in Defense of Men"

So women literally wanted to work less, only to demand more workforce participation one generation later

Which nicely ties with what I wanted to say here. There's barely any historical justification for women not working to support either themselves or their families. Tradcuckism is literally just gynocentrism presented as a pro-male ideology. Women were pretty much never barred from working. Instead, they chose to leave the workforce in the 19th and 20th centuries, which the feminists at that point celebrated. Tradcucks completely ignore the hundreds of years of history when women worked, and present the time when women chose to leave work for men while they were just NEETs taken care of by their husbands as something great for men, that men should wish to go back to.

You know all the videos of women complaining about having to work and talking about wanting to be tradwives? Literally what the first wave feminists wanted, not having to work and being taken care of by their husbands. When tradcuck rightwingers push those videos as women "seeing the light" or "regretting feminism", they are literally just doing what the OG feminists were, pushing for women to be pampered and taken care of without having to work for anything, and unironically pretending to be pro-male while doing that.

Spoiler: Boyos here who might be interested

@OutcompetedByRoomba @Mortis @Orzmund

 

[juche necromancer]

Sounds like a pretty shitty deal for the provider side, doesn't it? And yet, according to tradcucks, when it comes to gender relations this is supposedly what we should be striving for and the key to make the world better. Men should work as soon as they can, show off how good workers they are to "earn" some woman, and then spend the rest of their lives working to support her while she never works in her life and spends her entire life being supported by him, and men are even supposed to take pride in and be praised on how much they can provide for their woman.

In the traditional, agricultural lifestyle women would have and do plenty of work. They'd wake up early, prepare food, do housework, do work on the farm, cook meals and bring them to their husbands, take care of 5+ children.

You're saying you'd rather have your wife slave away for a kike corporation, be unable to bear any children due to time and financial constraints? All because the capitalists took away the possibility of a single-earner household.

 

[Mortis]

I am reading up on this stuff and it has been very eye opening so far. Great thread.

Pin worthy.

 

[glowIntheDark]

The problem tho is that when men start earning more they don't change in relation to their wives.

Look at Market Zuckerberg the richest fucking Jew on this planet can afford to marry the hottest 18 yr old virgin yet he has a fat gook wife. U know why? Because she was his wife when that nigga had nothing

But foids when they start earning equal or more money than their husbands they cheat or just up and leave

 

[faded]

Niggers should be enslaved in gulag Soviet style death labor camp

 

[OutcompetedByRoomba]

Title. Also applies to any other ethnicities who have a history of one of them being submissive/slaves to the other, I'm just choosing the best ones to talk about this here given that this is a Murican site filled with Muricans.

Seriously, when you look at the gender dynamics tradcucks idolize and wish to "bring back" (even though they never existed until feminists wanted them, will talk about this at the end of the post) and make them a race thing instead, it becomes the most pathetically cucked thing imaginable.

Like, imagine if you had black tradcucks who believed that whites shouldn't have to work. Instead, it's the blacks' role to work from the moment they come of age, then, after about 10 or 20 years of working every day, they are supposed to search for white teens to live with, and this is supposed to be done by them showing what good nigger workhorses they are to the parents of those teens, hoping that the parents of those teens will decide that they are good enough to take care of their kids for life. After that, the person that wins will have the white teen move in with him, and the guy will then have to go right back to work to support that white teen for the rest of his life and be mocked if he can't do that, while being supposed to take pride in how much he can provide for the white person assigned to be supported their entire life by him.



As I said, this can really work for any other racial combination as well, you could probably do the same with Africans/Europeans and MENAs, given how many foreign slaves there were in the Ottoman Empire, or, since I'm a Slav, I'd mention Slavs and Germans, given how many times to former were attacked and dominated by the latter. The only important thing is that one group is supposed to work their entire lives, show how good workers they are and how much they can provide to "earn the right" to live their entire lives with a member of the other group, and work their entire lives to support that member of the other group.

Sounds like a pretty shitty deal for the provider side, doesn't it? And yet, according to tradcucks, when it comes to gender relations this is supposedly what we should be striving for and the key to make the world better. Men should work as soon as they can, show off how good workers they are to "earn" some woman, and then spend the rest of their lives working to support her while she never works in her life and spends her entire life being supported by him, and men are even supposed to take pride in and be praised on how much they can provide for their woman.

It's the exact same dynamic in both cases, yet curiously, it only ever gets mentioned when it comes to gender. Could it be because, if you ever brought this up in other contexts than the one where people in general agree that one group (women) should be supported by other (men) and is the price the other group has to compete for, it would reveal just how unfair such an arrangement is? f it can solve all gender issues in the world, why couldn't it solve the race ones as well? After all, in the "good old days" you had a lot of ethnicities enslaved to work their entire lives for others, why aren't tradcucks fighting to bring that back as well?

I actually wanted to make this thread for some time, but finally decided to do so after seeing @GeckoBus once again mention this thread of his:

EARLY FEMINISTS WANTED WOMEN TO WORK LESS - NOT MORE -> REPLY OR U GAY

"The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930. During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10...

incels.is

Which nicely ties with what I wanted to say here. There's barely any historical justification for women not working to support either themselves or their families. Tradcuckism is literally just gynocentrism presented as a pro-male ideology. Women were pretty much never barred from working. Instead, they chose to leave the workforce in the 19th and 20th centuries, which the feminists at that point celebrated. Tradcucks completely ignore the hundreds of years of history when women worked, and present the time when women chose to leave work for men while they were just NEETs taken care of by their husbands as something great for men, that men should wish to go back to.

You know all the videos of women complaining about having to work and talking about wanting to be tradwives? Literally what the first wave feminists wanted, not having to work and being taken care of by their husbands. When tradcuck rightwingers push those videos as women "seeing the light" or "regretting feminism", they are literally just doing what the OG feminists were, pushing for women to be pampered and taken care of without having to work for anything, and unironically pretending to be pro-male while doing that.

Spoiler: Boyos here who might be interested

@OutcompetedByRoomba @Mortis @Orzmund

Trads are pro-male in the sense that they demand working men, as the second class citizen of the sexual world that they are, at least be payed in pussy and respect instead of just nothing at all. They aren't interested in addressing the underlying inequality between men and women though, their lefty opposition pretends to care about that kind of thing but they all have left to explore the shores of Insanity Island.

 

[BELOW_Average_Joe]

In the traditional, agricultural lifestyle women would have and do plenty of work. They'd wake up early, prepare food, do housework, do work on the farm, cook meals and bring them to their husbands, take care of 5+ children.

You're saying you'd rather have your wife slave away for a kike corporation, be unable to bear any children due to time and financial constraints? All because the capitalists took away the possibility of a single-earner household.

Exactly

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

In the traditional, agricultural lifestyle women would have and do plenty of work. They'd wake up early, prepare food, do housework, do work on the farm, cook meals and bring them to their husbands, take care of 5+ children.

You're saying you'd rather have your wife slave away for a kike corporation, be unable to bear any children due to time and financial constraints? All because the capitalists took away the possibility of a single-earner household.

In that hypothetical scenario, I'd expect my wife to pull her weight as much as possbile, which, yes, would very likely involve financially helping the household, unless the housework were truly that overwhelming or something. I can understand and have no problem with caring for children, elderly and so on, but I genuinely see no reason why I, solely because I'm a man, should be required to take care of and support another able-bodied adult who would have the privilege of not having to support me in a similar way.

 

[GeckoBus]

great thread
I have a video by a foid that illustrates how foids see marriage


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x0ZrxfINEI



Tradcopers will never understand this, even with foids directly saying it like this. Marriage is an amazing deal for foids.
Like it's literally the "momies tendies" shit from the NEET memes, but with switched genders.

 

[juche necromancer]

In that hypothetical scenario, I'd expect my wife to pull her weight as much as possbile, which, yes, would very likely involve financially helping the household, unless the housework were truly that overwhelming or something. I can understand and have no problem with caring for children, elderly and so on, but I genuinely see no reason why I, solely because I'm a man, should be required to take care of and support another able-bodied adult who would have the privilege of not having to support me in a similar way.

This isn't a hypothetical scenario, it was the way of life of all of your ancestors from the dawn of agriculture until the 20th century.

What do you mean she should help you "financially"? She works all day alongside side you on the field, you lead a self-sufficient life from your land. You are not "taking care of her" in any way.

 

[Restart80]

The problem tho is that when men start earning more they don't change in relation to their wives.

Look at Market Zuckerberg the richest fucking Jew on this planet can afford to marry the hottest 18 yr old virgin yet he has a fat gook wife. U know why? Because she was his wife when that nigga had nothing

But foids when they start earning equal or more money than their husbands they cheat or just up and leave

Exactly.

 

[Restart80]

Title. Also applies to any other ethnicities who have a history of one of them being submissive/slaves to the other, I'm just choosing the best ones to talk about this here given that this is a Murican site filled with Muricans.

Seriously, when you look at the gender dynamics tradcucks idolize and wish to "bring back" (even though they never existed until feminists wanted them, will talk about this at the end of the post) and make them a race thing instead, it becomes the most pathetically cucked thing imaginable.

Like, imagine if you had black tradcucks who believed that whites shouldn't have to work. Instead, it's the blacks' role to work from the moment they come of age, then, after about 10 or 20 years of working every day, they are supposed to search for white teens to live with, and this is supposed to be done by them showing what good nigger workhorses they are to the parents of those teens, hoping that the parents of those teens will decide that they are good enough to take care of their kids for life. After that, the person that wins will have the white teen move in with him, and the guy will then have to go right back to work to support that white teen for the rest of his life and be mocked if he can't do that, while being supposed to take pride in how much he can provide for the white person assigned to be supported their entire life by him.



As I said, this can really work for any other racial combination as well, you could probably do the same with Africans/Europeans and MENAs, given how many foreign slaves there were in the Ottoman Empire, or, since I'm a Slav, I'd mention Slavs and Germans, given how many times to former were attacked and dominated by the latter. The only important thing is that one group is supposed to work their entire lives, show how good workers they are and how much they can provide to "earn the right" to live their entire lives with a member of the other group, and work their entire lives to support that member of the other group.

Sounds like a pretty shitty deal for the provider side, doesn't it? And yet, according to tradcucks, when it comes to gender relations this is supposedly what we should be striving for and the key to make the world better. Men should work as soon as they can, show off how good workers they are to "earn" some woman, and then spend the rest of their lives working to support her while she never works in her life and spends her entire life being supported by him, and men are even supposed to take pride in and be praised on how much they can provide for their woman.

It's the exact same dynamic in both cases, yet curiously, it only ever gets mentioned when it comes to gender. Could it be because, if you ever brought this up in other contexts than the one where people in general agree that one group (women) should be supported by other (men) and is the price the other group has to compete for, it would reveal just how unfair such an arrangement is? f it can solve all gender issues in the world, why couldn't it solve the race ones as well? After all, in the "good old days" you had a lot of ethnicities enslaved to work their entire lives for others, why aren't tradcucks fighting to bring that back as well?

I actually wanted to make this thread for some time, but finally decided to do so after seeing @GeckoBus once again mention this thread of his:

EARLY FEMINISTS WANTED WOMEN TO WORK LESS - NOT MORE -> REPLY OR U GAY

"The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930. During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10...

incels.is

Which nicely ties with what I wanted to say here. There's barely any historical justification for women not working to support either themselves or their families. Tradcuckism is literally just gynocentrism presented as a pro-male ideology. Women were pretty much never barred from working. Instead, they chose to leave the workforce in the 19th and 20th centuries, which the feminists at that point celebrated. Tradcucks completely ignore the hundreds of years of history when women worked, and present the time when women chose to leave work for men while they were just NEETs taken care of by their husbands as something great for men, that men should wish to go back to.

You know all the videos of women complaining about having to work and talking about wanting to be tradwives? Literally what the first wave feminists wanted, not having to work and being taken care of by their husbands. When tradcuck rightwingers push those videos as women "seeing the light" or "regretting feminism", they are literally just doing what the OG feminists were, pushing for women to be pampered and taken care of without having to work for anything, and unironically pretending to be pro-male while doing that.

Spoiler: Boyos here who might be interested

@OutcompetedByRoomba @Mortis @Orzmund

This definitely gets overlooked way too much due to the aforementioned subversion, but it's true.

Vacuuming the floor and running the fucking dishwasher isn't even real work; it's a joke, yet females act like it's the hardest thing imaginable... unlike back when they actually used to do real work alongside men, way before these inventions.

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

This isn't a hypothetical scenario, it was the way of life of all of your ancestors from the dawn of agriculture until the 20th century.

What do you mean she should help you "financially"? She works all day alongside side you on the field, you lead a self-sufficient life from your land. You are not "taking care of her" in any way.

In the case of farmers living off of their land, yes, basically everyone was supposed to work and help in the way they could. That's why I linked this thread:

EARLY FEMINISTS WANTED WOMEN TO WORK LESS - NOT MORE -> REPLY OR U GAY

"The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930. During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10...

incels.is

And I'd also mention this one:

https://incels.is/threads/oh-no.542111/

Since they are talking about how, even well before the start of 20th century, women were working in cities, industrialized areas and paid occupations, only for them to eventually move away from it, leading to what tradcons refer to as "the good old days" when men were expected to provide for them, which is something I'd very much not want. Basically, I much prefer the "everyone contributes" system you are talking about in relation to self-sustaining farmers, expect I'd prefer it in other areas as well, and which definitely seems to already have been a thing even in the more distant past.

 

[juche necromancer]

In the case of farmers living off of their land, yes, basically everyone was supposed to work and help in the way they could. That's why I linked this thread:

EARLY FEMINISTS WANTED WOMEN TO WORK LESS - NOT MORE -> REPLY OR U GAY

"The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930. During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10...

incels.is

And I'd also mention this one:

https://incels.is/threads/oh-no.542111/

Since they are talking about how, even well before the start of 20th century, women were working in cities, industrialized areas and paid occupations, only for them to eventually move away from it, leading to what tradcons refer to as "the good old days" when men were expected to provide for them, which is something I'd very much not want. Basically, I much prefer the "everyone contributes" system you are talking about in relation to self-sustaining farmers, expect I'd prefer it in other areas as well, and which definitely seems to already have been a thing even in the more distant past.

Women never "moved away" from wageslaving, this phenomenon could only be seen in the 50s after they quit wartime production in some parts the US and before the neoliberals stole everything from the working class.

With the material wealth we possess today every household could in theory be single-earner, had the neoliberals not stolen the vast majority of it.

Mothers should be focused on nurturing and teaching their children, not wageslaving. Your anger should be directed at those above and not tradcucks.

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

Women never "moved away" from wageslaving, this phenomenon could only be seen in the 50s after they quit wartime production in some parts the US and before the neoliberals stole everything from the working class.

With the material wealth we possess today every household could in theory be single-earner, had the neoliberals not stolen the vast majority of it.

Or conditions for workers could be improved to a point where both parents have some income, but they also have enough time for kids and so on. In those types of discussions, it's frequently pointed out that the real incomes of feudal peasants were higher than those of the workers in early capitalist societies that followed them for the first few centuries after that transition. As you yourself had mentioned, in medieval times, both men and women were mostly self-sustaining farmers, so there wasn't really an inequality in somebody getting a much better deal and being supported by the other person. Given the levels of current day technology and wealth, I'd much rather see us try to get back to that, with both people having much better working conditions and everybody seriously contributing in some way.

Mothers should be focused on nurturing and teaching their children, not wageslaving.

That's a good arrangement in theory, but not so much in practice. Ultimately, the man has it much worse, having barely any free time while his wife gets a lot of that, as well as much greater responsibilities, much less time with his own children, and so on. Housework really isn't hard, as was already said in the thread, and children can perfectly have fun by themselves quite young already, with the parent mostly just checking in on them during the day.

On the other hand, an arrangement where both parents have a manageable job and a fair amount of free time is much better and fairer to me.

Your anger should be directed at those above and not tradcucks.

It very much is, which is why I have dozens upon dozens of threads where I don't talk about this at all. However, it annoys me, which is why I give my thoughts on the topic from time to time.

 

[Restart80]

Or conditions for workers could be improved to a point where both parents have some income, but they also have enough time for kids and so on. In those types of discussions, it's frequently pointed out that the real incomes of feudal peasants were higher than those of the workers in early capitalist societies that followed them for the first few centuries after that transition. As you yourself had mentioned, in medieval times, both men and women were mostly self-sustaining farmers, so there wasn't really an inequality in somebody getting a much better deal and being supported by the other person. Given the levels of current day technology and wealth, I'd much rather see us try to get back to that, with both people having much better working conditions and everybody seriously contributing in some way.


That's a good arrangement in theory, but not so much in practice. Ultimately, the man has it much worse, having barely any free time while his wife gets a lot of that, as well as much greater responsibilities, much less time with his own children, and so on. Housework really isn't hard, as was already said in the thread, and children can perfectly have fun by themselves quite young already, with the parent mostly just checking in on them during the day.

On the other hand, an arrangement where both parents have a manageable job and a fair amount of free time is much better and fairer to me.


It very much is, which is why I have dozens upon dozens of threads where I don't talk about this at all. However, it annoys me, which is why I give my thoughts on the topic from time to time.

Very based ngl, it's 2024 and with the technology we have, there's no reason at all why two partners couldn't live well with each working part-time. This is even more viable today with the explosion of remote work. The Jews don't want it to be so.

It's a raw deal for a male today to work some shit job full-time while the female just stays home to run the dishwasher and washing machine. What a joke.

 

[faded]

Very based ngl, it's 2024 and with the technology we have, there's no reason at all why two partners couldn't live well with each working part-time.

It's a raw deal for a male today to work some shit job full-time while the female just stays home to run the dishwasher and washing machine. What a joke.

The Jews just don't want it to be so.

Stfu gentile
How do you expect my family to uphold our expensive nyc lifestyle you antisemites need to learn to care more about how your elites need to survive or we will crush you

 

[Piratecel]

Title. Also applies to any other ethnicities who have a history of one of them being submissive/slaves to the other, I'm just choosing the best ones to talk about this here given that this is a Murican site filled with Muricans.

Seriously, when you look at the gender dynamics tradcucks idolize and wish to "bring back" (even though they never existed until feminists wanted them, will talk about this at the end of the post) and make them a race thing instead, it becomes the most pathetically cucked thing imaginable.

Like, imagine if you had black tradcucks who believed that whites shouldn't have to work. Instead, it's the blacks' role to work from the moment they come of age, then, after about 10 or 20 years of working every day, they are supposed to search for white teens to live with, and this is supposed to be done by them showing what good nigger workhorses they are to the parents of those teens, hoping that the parents of those teens will decide that they are good enough to take care of their kids for life. After that, the person that wins will have the white teen move in with him, and the guy will then have to go right back to work to support that white teen for the rest of his life and be mocked if he can't do that, while being supposed to take pride in how much he can provide for the white person assigned to be supported their entire life by him.



As I said, this can really work for any other racial combination as well, you could probably do the same with Africans/Europeans and MENAs, given how many foreign slaves there were in the Ottoman Empire, or, since I'm a Slav, I'd mention Slavs and Germans, given how many times to former were attacked and dominated by the latter. The only important thing is that one group is supposed to work their entire lives, show how good workers they are and how much they can provide to "earn the right" to live their entire lives with a member of the other group, and work their entire lives to support that member of the other group.

Sounds like a pretty shitty deal for the provider side, doesn't it? And yet, according to tradcucks, when it comes to gender relations this is supposedly what we should be striving for and the key to make the world better. Men should work as soon as they can, show off how good workers they are to "earn" some woman, and then spend the rest of their lives working to support her while she never works in her life and spends her entire life being supported by him, and men are even supposed to take pride in and be praised on how much they can provide for their woman.

It's the exact same dynamic in both cases, yet curiously, it only ever gets mentioned when it comes to gender. Could it be because, if you ever brought this up in other contexts than the one where people in general agree that one group (women) should be supported by other (men) and is the price the other group has to compete for, it would reveal just how unfair such an arrangement is? f it can solve all gender issues in the world, why couldn't it solve the race ones as well? After all, in the "good old days" you had a lot of ethnicities enslaved to work their entire lives for others, why aren't tradcucks fighting to bring that back as well?

I actually wanted to make this thread for some time, but finally decided to do so after seeing @GeckoBus once again mention this thread of his:

EARLY FEMINISTS WANTED WOMEN TO WORK LESS - NOT MORE -> REPLY OR U GAY

"The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930. During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10...

incels.is

Which nicely ties with what I wanted to say here. There's barely any historical justification for women not working to support either themselves or their families. Tradcuckism is literally just gynocentrism presented as a pro-male ideology. Women were pretty much never barred from working. Instead, they chose to leave the workforce in the 19th and 20th centuries, which the feminists at that point celebrated. Tradcucks completely ignore the hundreds of years of history when women worked, and present the time when women chose to leave work for men while they were just NEETs taken care of by their husbands as something great for men, that men should wish to go back to.

You know all the videos of women complaining about having to work and talking about wanting to be tradwives? Literally what the first wave feminists wanted, not having to work and being taken care of by their husbands. When tradcuck rightwingers push those videos as women "seeing the light" or "regretting feminism", they are literally just doing what the OG feminists were, pushing for women to be pampered and taken care of without having to work for anything, and unironically pretending to be pro-male while doing that.

Spoiler: Boyos here who might be interested

@OutcompetedByRoomba @Mortis @Orzmund

brutal no ping pill

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

Very based ngl, it's 2024 and with the technology we have, there's no reason at all why two partners couldn't live well with each working part-time. This is even more viable today with the explosion of remote work. The Jews don't want it to be so.

It's a raw deal for a male today to work some shit job full-time while the female just stays home to run the dishwasher and washing machine. What a joke.

 

[Buried Alive 2.0]

I don't support this tradcuckery today, but it worked in the past because the provider had power and leverage over the supported part. Women would get beaten and kicked out if they didn't play their part right. It was also more acceptable for men to have mistresses if they were discreet about it.

All this is of course completely inviable today. Any attempt to create a traditional relationship will make the man a slave cuck.

 

[Raider919]

I'm not a dumb trad christard. i am about modernizing ancestral ways so they can be paired with modern technology

 

[Raider919]

i get what you're saying about the deal. that's why I am not a chritard. I am a reconstructionist.

 

[Raider919]

people don't want to work anymore. it's a modern trend. I am not against that. I have a problem with racist integrationists trying to integrate racist city people and invader fucking scum who are just going to cause problems

 

[Raider919]

i believe that femitards and christscum reactionary trads are both stupid pieces of shit and they're both failing while more people are getting into more modern prog and conservative stuff. thankfully, there are more reconstructionists than there were in the past, so pairing the old with the new may finally happen on a large scale.

 

[Raider919]

I don't support this tradcuckery today, but it worked in the past because the provider had power and leverage over the supported part. Women would get beaten and kicked out if they didn't play their part right. It was also more acceptable for men to have mistresses if they were discreet about it.

All this is of course completely inviable today. Any attempt to create a traditional relationship will make the man a slave cuck.

it's because he can't get paid enough to make it all happen like in the past. all this shit with feminism and christard reactionaries are just old money brats whining about how their stupid thing is dead. modern progs and cons are the future of the mainstream

 

[SmhChan]

This isn't a hypothetical scenario, it was the way of life of all of your ancestors from the dawn of agriculture until the 20th century.

What do you mean she should help you "financially"? She works all day alongside side you on the field, you lead a self-sufficient life from your land. You are not "taking care of her" in any way.

It's okay to make this sort of statement. But I'd rather, at least in this space, people don't show too much respect to foids' "past struggles". Not only do foids shit on men's historical contributions, like the pieces of shits they are, they false rewrite men's contributions and credit other foids in the past. Foids have made their intentions quite clear, and they should be seen as nothing more than enemies.

 

[TBIcel]

Pretty sure almost all niggers tend to think the inverse, that YT should work to subsidize their worthless existences. In all fairness but I get your argument.

 

[mlcurrycel]

Title. Also applies to any other ethnicities who have a history of one of them being submissive/slaves to the other, I'm just choosing the best ones to talk about this here given that this is a Murican site filled with Muricans.

Seriously, when you look at the gender dynamics tradcucks idolize and wish to "bring back" (even though they never existed until feminists wanted them, will talk about this at the end of the post) and make them a race thing instead, it becomes the most pathetically cucked thing imaginable.

Like, imagine if you had black tradcucks who believed that whites shouldn't have to work. Instead, it's the blacks' role to work from the moment they come of age, then, after about 10 or 20 years of working every day, they are supposed to search for white teens to live with, and this is supposed to be done by them showing what good nigger workhorses they are to the parents of those teens, hoping that the parents of those teens will decide that they are good enough to take care of their kids for life. After that, the person that wins will have the white teen move in with him, and the guy will then have to go right back to work to support that white teen for the rest of his life and be mocked if he can't do that, while being supposed to take pride in how much he can provide for the white person assigned to be supported their entire life by him.



As I said, this can really work for any other racial combination as well, you could probably do the same with Africans/Europeans and MENAs, given how many foreign slaves there were in the Ottoman Empire, or, since I'm a Slav, I'd mention Slavs and Germans, given how many times to former were attacked and dominated by the latter. The only important thing is that one group is supposed to work their entire lives, show how good workers they are and how much they can provide to "earn the right" to live their entire lives with a member of the other group, and work their entire lives to support that member of the other group.

Sounds like a pretty shitty deal for the provider side, doesn't it? And yet, according to tradcucks, when it comes to gender relations this is supposedly what we should be striving for and the key to make the world better. Men should work as soon as they can, show off how good workers they are to "earn" some woman, and then spend the rest of their lives working to support her while she never works in her life and spends her entire life being supported by him, and men are even supposed to take pride in and be praised on how much they can provide for their woman.

It's the exact same dynamic in both cases, yet curiously, it only ever gets mentioned when it comes to gender. Could it be because, if you ever brought this up in other contexts than the one where people in general agree that one group (women) should be supported by other (men) and is the price the other group has to compete for, it would reveal just how unfair such an arrangement is? f it can solve all gender issues in the world, why couldn't it solve the race ones as well? After all, in the "good old days" you had a lot of ethnicities enslaved to work their entire lives for others, why aren't tradcucks fighting to bring that back as well?

I actually wanted to make this thread for some time, but finally decided to do so after seeing @GeckoBus once again mention this thread of his:

EARLY FEMINISTS WANTED WOMEN TO WORK LESS - NOT MORE -> REPLY OR U GAY

"The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930. During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10...

incels.is

Which nicely ties with what I wanted to say here. There's barely any historical justification for women not working to support either themselves or their families. Tradcuckism is literally just gynocentrism presented as a pro-male ideology. Women were pretty much never barred from working. Instead, they chose to leave the workforce in the 19th and 20th centuries, which the feminists at that point celebrated. Tradcucks completely ignore the hundreds of years of history when women worked, and present the time when women chose to leave work for men while they were just NEETs taken care of by their husbands as something great for men, that men should wish to go back to.

You know all the videos of women complaining about having to work and talking about wanting to be tradwives? Literally what the first wave feminists wanted, not having to work and being taken care of by their husbands. When tradcuck rightwingers push those videos as women "seeing the light" or "regretting feminism", they are literally just doing what the OG feminists were, pushing for women to be pampered and taken care of without having to work for anything, and unironically pretending to be pro-male while doing that.

Spoiler: Boyos here who might be interested

@OutcompetedByRoomba @Mortis @Orzmund

Holy shit
Yeah, Marxists are always simultaneously complaining that women were trapped in the house while also cheering for women working in British factories in the early Industrial Revolution. That women were slaves in the 1950s but that they were also working as typists etc and the stay at home mother was a media lie.

I always thought it was weird how Marxists think farmers were exploited by landed gentry because farmers had to work outside while the lords stayed at home, but somehow the farmer was oppressing his wife by letting her stay inside washing dishes and clothes while he did the harder work of sowing and reaping

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

I always thought it was weird how Marxists think farmers were exploited by landed gentry because farmers had to work outside while the lords stayed at home, but somehow the farmer was oppressing his wife by letting her stay inside washing dishes and clothes while he did the harder work of sowing and reaping

A damn good observation brocel.

 

[stalin22]

Women do work in a trad society

 

[Namtriz912]

Women do work in a trad society

What do they work as?

 

[stalin22]

What do they work as?

Houses keepers
Sex providers
Babysitter
Cook
Personal support
Punching bag
Emotional labor

 

[Namtriz912]

Houses keepers
Sex providers
Babysitter
Cook
Personal support
Punching bag
Emotional labor

Me when I want to reach the word limit on my essay