A Male Identity not fully Recognized or Acknowledged Alan Millard

If a woman is not to be defined by her sexual value and her maternalistic duties, or by a role supporting the unity of the species, then why would the same not apply to men? Or, is this even the equivalent analogy? A discrepancy must also be recognized here. Women have had the luxury of riding on the backs of men for many decades leading up to modern times. It was not until modern conveniences created by men redefined the female’s role to be something much different from its prerequisite. With many of their burdens lifted and more time available, instead of figuring out ways to further complement their mates, women became self-absorbed and competed with one another to see who they could outdo, often at the further expense of men, with pressure placed on their husbands to financially perform better and provide even more to their liking, ‘keeping up with the Jones’. This was especially the case during the ’60s and ’70s when feminism met the call of many spoiled women and no-fault divorce was created to suit their selfish demands. The government then provided women assistance and coerced men to subsidize women’s so-called ‘independence’. Men were deemed slaves, obligated to provide for women who were no longer obligated to them in any capacity. Women were in no way devoted to them. Women then realized that what men didn’t provide women the government would. (The government replaced men.) Women were rewarded for being unfaithful (bored) in which case the government provided them a standard of living consistant with what they experienced during the time they were married which they were not entitled to. The standard would be rightfully split and the ex-husband would no longer be obligated to serving her in any way, no more than she would in any way be obligated to providing him any of her female role obligations (that is if women are really held to any) as were provided while married. Why hold the man to any if the woman is not held to any?
In divvying up the left-overs of divorce, we must take some often over-looked matters into consideration. We seem to forget that within the unified arrangement of marriage women are not just taking care of men but themselves too, cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, and that when on their own (separate from men) they still perform these duties too. It’s often conveyed that women as wives take care of their husbands for years as some maid service. That is not accurate. Keep in mind that women are not only provided sustinance by men but that women as housewives are provided by their husbands all they need to do their tasks–a dishwasher, microwave, automatic clothes washer/dryer, and any repair service these may require too, often provided by the husband, directly or paid for by him, which she wouldn’t have provided to her if she were on her own. Also realize that many women now even expect their husbands to share in some of their household chores, although they fail to take on any other tasks previously delegated to men. (If a woman is involved in a business and works in the business with her husband, that would be different and she would have a shared part due to her in separation and divorce.)
Humanity has been influenced by only one very biased perspective that has been taken out of context, not only of the past but of human dynamics.

Leave a Reply