I was under the impression that the most controversial thing about the recent royal wedding was Princess Beatrice’s vagina hat (later apparently adopted as the official headgear of the Obama White House*). Not to Petra Gajdosikova, a guest commenter on The Spearhead who has worked herself into a snit over Kate Middleton’s refusal to pledge to “obey” her Prince. “Now, this may seem a silly little issue to pick on,” she says, at the start of what turns into an 1800 word rant,
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?
Petra acknowledges that Lady Di also refused to say the word “obey” when she married Prince Charles, snidely remarking, “[a]nd we know just how well suited she proved to be for her role and responsibilities.” (Yeah, that was the problem with that famously troubled marriage.) She continues:
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.
Yeah, because there’s nothing even remotely traditional about celebrating a gigantic, extravagant, broadcast-live-to-billions wedding involving about 8 hours of hymns and AN ACTUAL MOTHERFUCKING PRINCE. I mean, they might as well have had a “commitment ceremony” on a commune, or something.
But apparently making a big deal out of a wedding doesn’t mean that today’s degenerate women actually take marriage itself with any seriousness:
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!
Damn those women and their infernal desire to not be miserable!
So why on earth could any decent woman possibly have a problem with pledging to obey her husband? Petra assures us, in all seriousness, that
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.
Dudes, if you feel “emasculated” because your wife doesn’t unquestioningly follow your every dictate, you must have an awfully fragile sense of self – and an extreme sense of entitlement. Learning that other people have their own needs and desires, and that the world does not bend to our every whim, is one of the most basic developmental lessons we all learn in our lives. Most of us do it when we are babies.
But to Petra, the insistence of most contemporary western women that their marriages be partnerships of equals means that they’re the narcissists:
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.
What follows is a by-the-numbers rant about “sky-high divorce rates,” degenerate single mothers, “welfare dependency … sexual depravity,” human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together.
Sorry, I got carried away; those last bits were from Ghostbusters.(Not the bit about “sexual depravity” – she actually did said that.)
While Petra is perfectly comfortable preaching special treatment for men – having someone literally pledge obedience to you; how much more special does it get than that? – she’s incensed at the notion that “women have long been enjoying – and often abusing – a privileged and protected status (as the ‘oppressed sex’).”
To Petra, the fact that some women choose not to pledge obedience to their husbands means that men are the real oppressed class, facing pervasive “anti-male bias” and the “emasculating” power of women … demanding to be treated the same as men. In other words:
The explicit subordination of women in marriage = not oppression.
Equality in marriage = oppression of men.
I’m sorry, but Petra’s argument here is even sillier than Princess Beatrice’s hat.
And since when do the guys on The Spearhead give a shit about marriage? I was under the impression they all thought it was some sort of evil feminist plot. .
—
*Note to literal-minded Obama-haters: I was making a little joke there. That picture is not real. Also, Obama was not born in Kenya.
UPDATE: Fixed the link to that not-real photo of Obama and pals in Princess Beatrice hats. Which I’ll just link to here as well.
NWO, the divorce rate soared between the early 60s and 1980; it has come down considerably since then.
“Resemblance” not “relationship.”
@Kendra @Katz My husband and I had the same thoughts when we got married. The preacher actually wanted us to write our own vows, but I was taking 9 college classes and working 2 jobs and he was taking a bunch of classes as well so….that didn’t happen. I actually do not know what my wedding vows were, as the wedding was outdoors on a pavillion over a lake and there was a flock of berserk Canada geese honking like crazy through most of the ceremony. He doesn’t remember them either…but hey, “geese are ridiculous” is my most vivid memory of out wedding, so I think that’s a win.
Dave, I know the divorce rate is down but the marriage rate is down. Thats why those numbers are like that. A pretty good indicator is the 1/3 illegitmate child birth rate overall and the 90% illegitimate birthrate in the black community.
I mean c’mon Dave, I’m guessing the divorce rate in the black community is pretty darn low right now. Allthough I wouldn’t use that as an indicator of stable marriages making a come back in the black community.
In terms of deciding on a particular purchase, I’d say the default should be not purchasing the item, especially if it’s expensive. If it’s inexpensive, I usually don’t care, unless money is particularly tight that month. One solution would be to say “OK, I don’t think we should buy that, but if you really want it, then you can put aside x amount of money every month until we have enough.” It also helps if each person has a certain amount of “mad money” in the budget–money they can spend on themselves as they wish. That way, couples don’t have to quibble about every little purchase. Alternately, they could take turns: “OK, you get this major purchase and I get the next one.”
As I said: negotiation and compromise.
You’re kidding right Nobby? Feminist marriages have like a 95% failure rate, what stat did you just pull out of your ass. Have you been cruising feminisite? I’m sure they have a stat that shows feminist are less likely to get cancer and feminist shit cleans and disinfects better than lysol.
NWO, how exactly do you figure that high marriage rates are ideal? Or that children born of parents who didn’t decide to get married are “illegitimate”?
Ah yes, the evilness of expecting my husband to say please and thank you. Of course, he’s never actually said something like “do this woman” the way you phrased it and that request coming from my personal husband would generally be more like “Hey hon, when you’re at the store could you please pick me up some beef jerky?” But hey, I do still hold my husband to the same standards as I hold my 4-year-old nephew. If you want someone to do something for you, you say please.
But then I’m one of those evil feminazi bitches, so as you were.
Now Science Daily is in on the Grand Feminist Conspiracy, too?
Feminist marriages have like a 95% failure rate, what stat did you just pull out of your ass.
Not a trace of irony. None.
That’s pretty much the crux of the matter right there…when the wife-to-be vows to “obey” her husband-to-be, she’s not vowing to be his partner, she’s vowing to be his child. But hey, women shouldn’t take that perpetual denial of adulthood as being demeaning at all, hell no, they should understand how demeaning…nay, emasculating….it is to men for women to not agree to be their child.
What Mish Mash said – if people are happily living together in common law marriages, domestic partnerships, polyamorous nests or forbidden-to-marry gay & lesbian partnerships, or even happily Going Their Own Way… why does it matter? You seem to have a disparaging view of marriage to begin with, shouldn’t you be happy that fewer people are signing up for it?
90% illegitimate birthrate in the black community.
Actually it’s 72%. We’ve been over this material before. Please try to keep up with the rest of the class.
@NWO read the article. Where’d that 95% rate come from? Because I’m pretty sure it’s your fevered imagination. And the rest of your ad hominem doesn’t mean anything because, unlike those examples, feminism has a direct effect on relationships. Good job there.
NWO, you specifically said earlier that “Divorce rates haven’t gone down.” I was pointing out that, looking over the past 30 years, they have gone down.
And yes, marriage rates are also down.
Unlike you, I don’t jump to a lot of conclusions based on that one data point. People tend to live together outside of marriage more than they used to, and get married later. (They also tend to live longer.) Most people get married at some point in their life.
I think NWOslave is pulling facts out of his nether regions and projecting it onto Nobby.
*hands Nobby some soap* yes, it is bacon scented.
@Captain Bathrobe…Well darn only 72%, I’ll take your word that. Hmm, pre feminism 10% post feminism 72% and rising. Well the future so bright I gotta wear shades.
I don’t even require my boy to say please! Usually he’ll phrase it “do you have time to stop by the store and get milk on the way home?” and I’ll say “sure”, assuming I do have the time. Gosh, so obedient am I! *eyeroll*
@Elizabeth Why thank you. Ah, bacon, is there anything it can’t do?
Elizabeth, I bet you live in the woods in a house made entirely of bacon, which you use to entrap unsuspecting passers-by.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that. 🙂
Cure NWOslave’s utter lack of humour or sense or wits.
Hows that “it takes a village to raise a child” feminist motto lookin in the old Ghetto. I usually pick out some inner city as my vacation spot. Any reccomendation.
I think if we go back a little further in time we’ll find that ALL black babies were “illegitimate” because most black people were slaves and slaves were forbidden from marrying. Was feminism to blame for that too?!
If I did, I would be married already CB. 🙂
@PfkaElizabeth Aw, that’s sad. Oh well, bacon can also cure my sadness 🙂