Copyright © 2012 MoneyHoneyBlog. All Rights Reserved. Snowblind by Themes by bavotasan.com. Powered by WordPress.
The Royal wedding and accompanying media frenzy are finally over. The masses got to celebrate an opulent, fancy show and can now go back to their reality TV.
The Royal family has presented a fresh, modern face to the world, proving it keeps with the times… with a nice, politically correct wedding. Let’s wish the couple a long and successful marriage and hope the very modern, progressive wedding vows will not prove to have been a bad omen for their union.
Now, this may seem a silly little issue to pick on, but, would it have been too intolerably oppressive for Kate Middleton to have kept to the traditional vows including promising to ‘obey’ her husband? Yes, I know such a thing is not just hopelessly out of fashion but considered almost a crime against their human rights by feminists and millions of brainwashed modern women. But if the Royals won’t preserve the last remnants of tradition, who will? And what’s the point of Monarchy if not tradition?
Of course Kate Middleton wasn’t the first to break with royal tradition. No, she had a great role model at that; Princess Diana refused to promise to obey Charles in her wedding vows thirty years ago. And we know just how well suited she proved to be for her role and responsibilities. Some example to follow…
While Diana’s break of protocol caused a scandal at the time, Middleton was praised for her decision to ditch the promise to obey. We’ve become so much more enlightened and ‘progressive’ since then, after all. What modern woman could possibly accept such an offensive, oppressive, sexist, paternalistic monstrosity?
Undoubtedly the decision to modernize the vows was taken to show the Monarchy being in step with contemporary culture and to present the new Duchess of Cambridge as a thoroughly modern woman and role model for millions of young women throughout Britain. And that’s the biggest tragedy of it all… The country doesn’t need any more progressive ‘role models’ infected with feminist ideology. What we do need, if this society is ever to reverse the present degeneration, are those who stand up for traditional values and mores.
Of course vows don’t mean much these days anyway, and barely anyone entering into marriage really takes them seriously. But even the symbolic value is enough to offend feminist sensibilities and so vows must be ‘fixed’ and politically corrected. Am I alone in thinking that a bride’s revolt to say traditional vows (as well as, for instance, the increasingly widespread refusal to take the husband’s surname) is a bad sign for the health and longevity of a marriage?
Marriage today is, to many women, just an extravagant social occasion and party, their very own ‘princess’ fantasy. It doesn’t seem to include any consideration on what marriage really means, much less on how to be a good wife. Undoubtedly the mere concept of a ‘good wife’ would be deemed oppressive these days. (Are you saying women should have responsibilities and not just rights?!) After all, millions of women feel entitled to ditch their marriages and perfectly decent husbands for no better reason than feeling bored or ‘unfulfilled’. The princesses deserve to be happy – and if they harm their husbands and children in their insatiable quest for fulfillment, so be it!
To see to what extent our decaying society has succumbed to feminist ideas (and cultural Marxism/political correctness in general)… even the church has become completely infested with the misguided, morally bankrupt dogmas. Granted, if any church has eagerly embraced liberalism and political correctness it’s the Church of England; so one should hardly be too surprised to hear Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s views on the vow of obedience.
(In 2006 guidelines) he stated that a wife promising to ‘obey’ her husband was an outdated concept that could even justify domestic violence (!). Not surprising, I suppose, coming from a church leader who supports women- and gay clergy and gay marriages, in clear breach of Christian principles. It seems only a hopeless optimist could expect the (Anglican) church to promote traditional marriage and sound morality instead of trying to redefine Christian values to fit the moral inversion of our era. (And anyway, why should we, as the enlightened, progressive people we are, want to promote such an antiquated, oppressive institution as marriage?)
But why are modern women so scared of traditional marriage vows?
Apparently, ditching them is proof of being a strong, independent woman demanding ‘equality’ in marriage. Of course! What else? Our ever-present equality delusion! Gender is, after all, just a social construct (or so we are told) and no real differences between men and women exist; ergo, all traditional gender roles must be evil, sexist and discriminatory. Has there ever been a civilization suffering from as complete a denial of reality as we do?
Of course promising to ‘obey’ one’s husband has nothing to do with being oppressed, a second class citizen with no power or say in a relationship, or a servant to a man. It’s a statement of trust and respect, acknowledging the authority of the man as head of family, responsible for and dedicated to his wife’s and their children’s welfare. Despite us wanting to pretend otherwise, a woman’s natural role is to be loving, nurturing and supportive in a relationship. When women usurp the masculine role (power and leadership) and emasculate men it doesn’t bode well for marriage.
Women are deluded in thinking they have been ‘liberated’ from some imaginary shackles, when in fact they’ve only sabotaged themselves and contributed a great deal to the rotten state of our society. The anti-male bias is ever present in the West today; we are ‘empowering’ females at the expense of males and conditioning women to disparage men.
The self-absorption and sense of entitlement of today’s women make it nearly impossible to form healthy, sustainable marriages and relationships. The results can be seen all around us; disintegration of family, sky-high divorce rates (over 70% of divorces are initiated by women, and nearly 90% among college-educated couples), rampant single motherhood, culture of welfare dependence, damaged children growing up without a father figure, sexual depravity (especially exhibited by young women), drug abuse, and a general lack of values and mores. It is well documented that children brought up by married parents fare considerably better in all aspects of life than those raised by single or co-habiting parents. But who cares about children? As long as women are ‘empowered’ and feel good…
Of course I don’t expect the progressive women of today to agree with any of this. After all, if they did, they would have given up one of their favorite excuses to scream ‘discrimination!’ Imagine the catastrophic consequences of admitting women have long been enjoying – and often abusing – a privileged and protected status (as the ‘oppressed sex’): less ability to blame men for any and all problems and bad outcomes, less affirmative action benefiting the undeserving, fewer rewards for ‘discrimination’ claims.
The truth is that a woman can be intelligent, independent and strong and yet find it perfectly natural and satisfying to let her husband lead and be the head of the family. You may think that traditional marriage is an oppressive, antiquated institution that should be rooted out. But if you don’t, here’s an idea: Let your man be a man, show him the respect he deserves… it will do miracles for your marriage. And, if replicated enough, it might just save our fallen society.
—-
P.S.
Isn’t it ironic that so many self-proclaimed ‘strong’ women consider themselves entitled to special treatment and privileges yet are unwilling to accept any corresponding responsibility? And what about pride of being ‘independent’ from any one specific man while demanding support (in a myriad different ways) by the state apparatus (paid for by many men – taxpayers)? How about intelligence? Would an intelligent person pursue their short term gratification at the cost of destruction of family, morality, social fabric (while dooming their own offspring to suffer the consequences)? So much for the myth of the strong, independent and intelligent modern female.
What’s truly sad is that women don’t realize they have been serving as an instrument of cultural Marxism and, having swallowed its propaganda, allowed themselves to be manipulated and used to destroy society.
Gramsci and other Marxist disciples realized that the Christian culture in the West was an obstacle standing in the way of a communist conquest, and in order to succeed Marxism had to make a “long march through the culture”, discrediting and undermining all foundations and values. The culture and institutions had to be radically transformed and the social and cultural order turned upside down (Gramsci envisioned a ‘new proletariat’ of women, racial and sexual minorities and even criminals placed in power).
And indeed today our schools, colleges, academia, media, entertainment industry, civic organizations and government have been fully converted to cultural Marxism and are almost universally hostile to family, traditional sex roles, Christianity and traditional morality.
People can’t be taken over by Marxist ideas while they have refuge in their religion, families, culture and convictions; once they lose those traditional supports they only have the government to go to, and the path to socialism and communism is cleared. Family is the building block of a nation’s middle class; by destroying (family and hence) the middle class one can ruin the economic engine and capitalism itself.
Marxists clearly identified family and religion (as well as nation, property) as targets for destruction. The chief tactics – invalidating traditional gender roles and promoting dysfunctional social structures as normal (including single motherhood, same-sex marriage etc), endlessly portraying marriage and family as oppressive, painting fathers as restrictive and controlling and men as exploiters, propagating sexual revolution and ‘free love’, legalizing abortion and making it acceptable and accessible, attacking Christian institutions and values, encouraging youth and women to reject Christian morality, monogamy, parental and church authority, etc. Divorce, promoted as understandable and always justified, was made ridiculously easy (no-fault) and wives have been incentivized to leave their husbands (taking their money and children with them).
The bored baby-boomers were the first generation to really have swallowed the cultural Marxist propaganda whole. Hundreds of millions have since been indoctrinated with the new morally inverted ‘values’. Today cultural Marxism has completely overtaken Western society.
Women, who eagerly jumped on the ‘empowerment’ and ‘liberation’ bandwagon (just as Marx and his disciples foresaw), have been instrumental in the dissolution of family and traditional values. Worst of all, not only are they unaware of what’s taken place, they are seemingly proud of the hubris they helped create.
——
[Note: Naturally this may not apply to all women; but to shockingly many.]
——
Before I sign off, here are just a few of the countless recent examples of the absurdity and intolerance of the sickening brand of feminism that has taken over life in Britain.
Glencore chairman attacked over “sexist and primitive” views (i.e. for stating perfectly obvious truths)
Sky Sports football pundit sacked over “sexist tirades” (off-air comments about female referee)
Outrage over David Cameron’s “hideously sexist and patronizing remark” (‘calm down, dear’)



May 6, 2011 at 3:38 pm
My father left my mother (his wife) and his three children to marry another woman and adopt and raise her three children when I was nine. In my experience it is MEN who do not care to be “good” husbands that are destroying marriage. Your essay reads like that of a misogynist, sir
May 6, 2011 at 5:33 pm
Well digi, my mother left my father for the very lame excuses listed here. After that colossal screw up, she married a complete asshat, mainly because she was able to get drugs through him.
Ultimately, vows mean nothing anyways. It does not matter what is said. In this regard, Petra is wrong. Vows are only words. She is correct, though about women not wanting to take responsibility for their actions. being equal is always great but that also means taking equal responsibility. This feeling unfulfilled or bored is not a women only feeling and if this feeling exists, it is the fault of BOTH men and women.
May 11, 2011 at 6:45 am
Well, I didn’t say that today’s men were exactly an example of morality and traditional values. However, fact is the vast majority of divorces are initiated by women, and more often than not for no good reason. Also, female morality and virtue are more essential to the success of a civilization.
Cooperation, productivity, investment in future generations are not possible when men can’t count on their wives’ commitment, loyalty and faithfulness (and have to doubt whether their children are really biologically theirs). That is exactly the state we’ve reached today. Can anyone be surprised that less and less men are willing to invest years and decades of hard work, time and resources into marriage and family? They have no incentive to do so given the behavior of modern women.
Men also adapt their behavior to whatever is rewarded by women. The stable, solid, hard working provider type favored in the past is now hopelessly out of fashion; “bad boys” and “sexy” men are what many women now pursue… unsurprisingly we get more and more of such types. Yet a civilization built on such men (and women) is destined to failure.
May 15, 2011 at 2:35 am
Where are you coming up with this garbage? And what “responsibilities” are you insisting that so-called modern women are unwilling to accept? I share household duties, income generation, care, support, and love with my husband, bu you’ve got to be delusional if you think it’s in any way acceptable to expect women — just because we’re women! — to OBEY their husbands.
And enough with this “emasculating” nonsense. You do realize there exist multitudes of men who are not so emotionally fragile as to feel as though their “manhood” is shattered because a woman doesn’t agree to obey him, don’t you? I assure you, us “feminist” women have little problem finding guys who aren’t into ruling over us because of some half-baked idea of what’s “natural.” Give me a break.
May 18, 2011 at 1:03 pm
Nice!
Here in Brazil is the same thing. But worst! Here the moral values were almost totally destroyed. The government dependence is shocking. The conservatives youngs live in hell. Like the Savage in Brave New World. More and more state intervention law by law. Do not leave this marxists do in your country what they do here. Where they get the control, you lost your soul.
PS: My english is bad, sorry.
May 22, 2011 at 9:34 am
Thanks for your comment, Ben. Didn’t realize things got quite that bad in Brazil too. Unfortunately marxist ideas hold wide appeal in our fallen world.
PS. Nao se preocupe, o seu ingles e otimo.
August 3, 2011 at 6:25 am
Gee-Whiz April,
Could you be more emotionally fragile and historically uninformed? Cultural Marxism is a well documented program. They didn’t teach you about The Frankfurt School in gender studies class but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or that references to it are “garbage” talk.
The person who writes this blog doesn’t need me to defend them. And so I’m won’t. I will however offer you, April, some advice: Think before you shoot. When you come off as bitter it makes you look intimidated.
J