Eating Your Cake and Having It Via Feminism 😂
I know a funny story about girl and her boyfriend. She earns minimum wage, lives on her own, and goes to her boyfriend's house a lot. She spends days or weeks there sometimes, the duration is random. Her guy earns way more than her and he provides for her a lot. Almost completely, say 80%.
Then one day he came complaining to me that he has been having issues with this girl. He said he'll tell her to cook and she does sometimes but a lot of other times she would refuse. Sometimes the food is already made and he'll tell her to go fetch some for him and she'll say no.
Long story short, she agrees sometimes but a lot of other times she refuses to wash his clothes, clean the house, so the dishes, etc.
He told me these refusals usually lead to arguments and quarrels, and these are the issues.
I then went to talk to the girl about it all and she replied sharply that she is not a slave and would never be a slave. How can the guy be asking her to do chores and things for him like that as if she was his slave, the guy has no respect for her, she is a feminist and she wouldn't let him treat her like they aren't equals, etc etc.
And this is what makes the story very funny 🤣🤣. Do you see how funny it is or are you still waiting for me to explain further? Either way, let me spell it out.
Humanity has been making a lot of progress, but the fact still remains we live in a society that is largely patriarchal. Different countries/jurisdictions are patriarchal in varying degrees, though.
Due to the patriarchal setting, provision is a man's patriarchal role, while housekeeping is the woman's patriarchal role. This girl happily sits back and lets her boyfriend do his patriarchal role and when it is her turn to do hers she starts feeling like she is being used as a slave.
I asked her if she is a feminist and believes in equality, as he is giving her money and things why is she not also giving him money and things? As he's providing all the food they eat at home, why is she not telling him to hold up sometimes and let her provide?
I asked her how many of the things they use at home has she bought? Why has your feminism never kicked in while watching only one person do all the spending? 🤣🤣
Funny how she'll let him carry the burden of his patriarchal role, she sits down and enjoys it, while reciprocating sounds like slavery to her 🤣🤣.
At this point it seems like I'm going to point at feminism and say this is how crazy feminism is, and that this is how feminism is ruining society. But that's not the truth, feminism is NOT ruining society, but misunderstanding feminism is ruining society. Sadly, though, at least 80% of females who claim to be feminists misunderstand feminism.
Females because I've found that it is the male feminists that understand feminism more. The females can't really grasp it because a full grasp of it mostly means missing out on the things (provisions and protection) patriarchy affords them. They're mostly only good with the partial grasp, grasping only enough to be rid of the things patriarchy takes from them (housekeeping labours). 🤣🤣
A good understanding of feminism would have made this girl know that provision is this guy's patriarchal role and her letting him carry it out means she has to carry out hers or else it would not be fair.
If she doesn't like to carry out hers then he also doesn't have to carry out his. She has to also provide and still carry out chores, she has to aim for half of both (provision and housekeeping). And the guy is to do the same.
One of the main reasons patriarchal roles are misunderstood by many so called feminists is that a person providing doesn't make them look in a bad/derogatory way. Bringing out cash and spending it makes you look like a boss and there's nothing demeaning about that. But cleaning a house, doing the dishes, washing clothes, cooking, serving the food: these things make you look like a servant 🤣.
So no one ever really feels like it is oppressive to let someone else provide and spend money, but they feel it is oppressive to let someone be the one doing all the chores. Forgetting that they're just two compensating roles and if one person does one the other is to do the other. Except they want to share both roles and aim for balance.
[I created the photos used in this post via AI]
The End
Hi there, buy my novella Professor Otagburuagu. It promises to be thoroughly entertaining and intellectually stimulating. Written by myself and illustrated by Scandinavian artist @ katharsisdrill.
You can order the hard copy from anywhere in the world via this link:
https://katharsisdrill.art/the-katharsisdrill-shop/professor-otagburuagu/
Thank you!
Hmmmm - I am going to counter you here, which I have before and you haven't responded haha. THe problem is the idea that “provision is a man's patriarchal role, while housekeeping is the woman's patriarchal role.”
Um - yep. That's the patriachy. Feminism is about questioning the bargain where 'men provide, women do housework'.
If they've decided together he'll provide money and she'll do the domestics, fine - if it's freely agreed. Not 'I give her money and she doesn't 'fetch'. That's not equality - that's a a transaction based on gender roles.
You've forgot that money isn't the only contribution here - people can contribute in other ways. If they don't, that's a relationship issue, not a failure of feminism.
Feminism doesn't say women have to reject the benefits that come from a relatiaonship with a man, but have the freedom to negotiate it rather than 'what, dude, I give her all this stuff and she doesn't 'fetch'* - a massively patriachal attitude. If she doesn't want to do that, fine - that's something he then has the freedom himself to go 'well, that's not the kind of relationship I was after - I wanted a sex slave and a cook'.
If you're honestly going to use the language of equality, you can't ask 'what's the women's patriachal role that she MUST perform', but 'what agreement has this couple made that's fair to both of them'.
There's a million ways that two adults can organise a relationship and a household. Maybe for him it's 50/50 financially and domestically. Maybe she's entered the relationship for love, not to pick up his socks.
What is funny about this piece is you start with the argument that feminism is about equality then you go into definiting equality as “he performs his patriarchal role, therefore she must perform hers.” 😂
That's just patriarchy with an invoice attached. Lmao.
More information - Support - Reports - Discord
Support engagement with a delegation to topcomment:
50HP - 100HP - 250HP - 500HP - 750HP - 1000HP - 1500HP
Oooh, I'm really sorry if there was any counter I didn't reply, I actually love to be countered and to see someone else try to apply logic to my opinions. Gotta actually be logical, though 😃. I'll go and try to find any of such unreplied comment.
But then, in this comment of yours we agree on a lot of stuff.
You said feminism is about questioning the bargain. And I agree, I said so in the post you may have missed it. I said:
In the post I also said:
That is clearly a bargain, because I'm not only saying her response to him carrying out his patriarchal role is that she has to carry out hers, I'm saying she also has the option to aim for about half of provision and half of housekeeping and the guy is to also do same. That is, they both provide and they both do the chores.
You said:
"people can contribute in other ways. If they don't, that's a relationship issue, not a failure of feminism."
And I never blamed feminism in the entire post, I instead used the post as a chance to defend feminism. Look what I said:
Then you're making it about "what, dude, I give her all this stuff and she doesn't 'fetch" but I made it about she takes all these stuff and she doesn't want to give anything in return whether by way of fetching or if she doesn't like fetching renegotiating something that is more fair to both of them since she's supposed to be a feminist and feminism is about equality and fairness, not sitting back and letting one person carry a bigger burden than you do while saying nothing about fairness until it is your turn to contribute.
"he performs his patriarchal role, therefore she must perform hers" is just half the story. The full story is that she must perform hers or renegotiate something more balance. SHE MUST AIM FOR BALANCE.
Aiming for balance is a must if you are supposed to be someone interested in equality and fairness. You can't say you don't blame someone who is interested in equality and fairness for sitting back and watching their partner do most of the stuff. Her feminism is supposed to kick in immediately she notices it going on for a while like "hey, you're doing a lot while I do almost nothing, it is not fair I have to stop you right there".
Remember, he's not only performing his patriarchal role of his own accord, she's letting him perform it. If you're in a relationship with someone and they're doing something regularly and you say nothing about it but rather sit back and enjoy it then they're not just doing it, you're letting them do it. You're complicit.
If she's letting him perform it without stopping him or renegotiating then it means she has to perform hers. That's the only way it can be fair. If she's against patriarchy there's no way she should be comfortable letting a man perform his patriarchal role while she only speaks up when asked to perform hers and her speaking up is not in order to renegotiate or stop him from doing more but simply to stop herself from doing her part. That is just selfishness and hypocrisy. A complete lack of interest in the fairness that feminism is all about.
So, while reading the post, I think you just missed the extra stuff I added to
"he performs his patriarchal role, therefore she must perform hers"
Even if we try to prove some valid points, its a losing battle nowadays my friend. It sucks.
View more
Thanks for the reply!! I do think we agreed on many points!
But aha no, I don't think I missed your argument 😂
My point still stands - if she's
sitting around contributing absolutely nothing while he pays for everything, then yeah, she's being selfish - we agree there. I'm not defending that for sure - she's a shit girlfriend 😂
Where I disagree with you is this idea that because she's "letting him perform his patriarchal role" she's therefore entered into some bargain where she must perform hers unless she actively renegotiates it.
That's still an assumed deal though -
just because providing for her doesn't automatically mean she's agreed to cook, clean, wash his clothes and fetch his dinner in return.
If that's what he expects in exchange for providing for her, then that is something THEY need to agree on. You can't have an unspoken contract and then accuse the other person of breaking it.
Also I don't think "balance" necessarily means half the money and half the housework either - spreadsheeting a relationship is shitty. People contribute all kinds of things, and one person might earn five times what the other does anyway, so it's a bit hard to divide it up down the middle and unfair.
. The point is that the people IN the relationship decide what feels fair - and even us on the outside for sure think she shouldn't take advantage of him. We agree there 💯
But she accepts his provision, therefore she's letting him perform his patriarchal role and must either perform hers or opt out — I stand by my argument that you're making the patriarchal bargain the default until she explicitly rejects it.
I'm saying there shouldn't BE a default bargain based on gender in the first place.
Also 😂 you took one woman being a selfish girlfriend and somehow arrived at the craziest generalisation that "at least 80% of females who claim to be feminists misunderstand feminism" - lol - and women can't fully grasp feminism because they don't want to give up the benefits of patriarchy --- what a stat! Lmao.
Maybe she understands feminism perfectly well and she's just an arsehole.
I think we are general on the same page though 😁
View more