Wtf is with this submissive women trend recently?

[lousyanxiety]

I'm seeing this everywhere on social media atm. Young women talking about returning to the "natural feminine state" of being "submissive" to your partner. It seems to include leaving your job, becoming a stay at home wife (or even girlfriend), cooking and cleaning for your partner, tending to all his needs, and leaving him in control of all the finances and difficulty of life.

Basically, you need to tap into your "divine feminine" energy to bring out a mans "masculine" energy to make him provide for you, take care of you, and stay loyal to you. And a woman who has "masculine" energy (aka provides for herself and is independent) will never truly be happy 🤔
Apparently the idea that women could have it all - career, kids, happy marriage etc was a lie and it's easier to just rely on a partner...
Whats so crazy about this is its WOMEN saying this stuff.

I mean... I thought we'd got past this mentality a long effing time ago??? Surely this is only going to benefit the man in the long run.

Is this a movement thats stemming from these alpha male podcasts? What is happening?

Has anyone else seen the post where a woman openly admits(brags)about hitting her children for 4 hours so they would learn who the bosses were?!

I mean WTF,if those women choose that life for themselves then more fool them but to then openly talk about abusing they're children because they've chosen to be doormats themselves is bloody disgusting!

Maybe psychologically there's an element of some ppl being overwhelmed with our f*ed world and finding a sense of security in being looked after?

I mean, still wtaf but at least from this angle I can kind of understand it.

I was wondering this too actually.

Yes I said this. I completely understand it

Its the same as my fantasy of winning the lottery (that I dont even play so a bit of a logic fail there), in that I would have no need to work, I would be looked after, could buy myself a chef, cleaner, personal trainer, people to look after me basically. I would allow OH to have some of it too!!!

Maybe this is it for me.

If I compared living in a cabin in the woods where my "job" was to look after the actual physical needs of my husband and children + some added manual labour to help..

VS what we have now where almost every single part of living comes with a massive mental load (I don't even have to include the career and the fact the washing still needs to be done at the end of the day), then I would take the first option every day of the week so long as I had a good, hardworking husband.

I’m sure I read an article recently that said it tended to happen during times of austerity, recession, etc. But I’ve forgotten why. I’ll see if I can find the article again tomorrow…

@AprilHeather

I’m sure I read an article recently that said it tended to happen during times of austerity, recession, etc. But I’ve forgotten why. I’ll see if I can find the article again tomorrow…

Makes sense. When resources are scarce men want to try and corner them as much as possible. Economically independent women are in the way.

I remember the surrendered wife stuff. Sometimes, when I've had a shit week and I'm juggling everything and it's 10 o fucking clock and I'm still at it and one of the kids suddenly remembers hw and I haven't sorted a babysitter for the weekend yet and there are relatives I need to check on but I can't b'cos work is nuts, I think how nice it would be just to let it all be someone else's problem, or at least let someone else do the brain work and just tell me what to do.

But then... what if they did it wrong?

Well fuck that, from a single parent on a low income who gets UC. I'd rather be on the bones of my arse than cook and clean for a man and have him in charge of my finances. And I have been on the bones of my arse many a time in my 14 years as a single mum!

'I interpreted it as a backlash to the idea that women have to act like men to be successful. When often that can backfire just as much and lead to a loss of identity and connection. It’s enough to be a woman and take pride in it and removing the trivialisation of feminine interests. That the starting point shouldn’t be “you can do this almost as well as a man, just work twice as hard as them for half the recognition” it’s saying it’s ok if you want to be a mum and or have a job that isn’t a Career when capitalist patriarchy is encouraging you all your friends to prioritise overtime at the office and freeze their eggs to start motherhood at 39 and not value the idea of a family unit.'

I see what you're saying here. Women shouldn't have to act like men to be successful and success shouldn't be measured in one way. You're forgetting though, that many women genuinely love doing and are interested in tasks/activities that are stereotypically masculine. And these women aren't adopting these interests or doing these things because they feel it's the only way to get ahead. Examples: some women love bodybuilding, or working hard in a corporate job, and it's not because they feel like they have to. Some women are very strong willed and are natural leaders, and they aren't faking it to try be accepted by society. Im all for women making their own choices, and it's sad that some women feel they have to be stereotypically masculine to be successful. A lot of the women I've met don't feel that way, instead they feel pressure to be feminine when they aren't naturally very feminine.

A woman I was at school with went down this route, as did a friend's sister. I knew both quite well. Both had been quite academic but not had a great deal of common sense. There's probably a better way of putting that but I'm not sure what.
Both went into high paying, corporate roles after never having had any other sort of job. These were careers which really were just making your boss more money. They were not socially useful, except in the sense of providing tax revenue.

They ritually complained about this but made no move to change it despite being financially comfortable with a lot of family support. After all, they were very well paid and weren't emotionally or physically demanding jobs. Their biggest problem was that they were dull and unfulfilling. Which could have been predicted, to be honest.

They've married rich men with big egos, gotten pregnant and found an emotional fulfilment in their babies that they didn't find in their jobs, and blamed feminism for all their past woes. Feminism has made them now down to the corporate, capitalist machine (which they seem to appreciate as consumers) and repress their natural femininity (?!).

They aren't religious or especially political. There's nothing hugely more complex here than women who chased top dollar without a huge amount of critical thought and couldn't be arsed to change anything about it themselves so waited for someone else to subsidise them. And then blamed feminism.

I dont think its led by men is it? Nothing to do with how they view women, its because the feelings of life being scary, hard work, overwhelming come to the fore more.

And as someone set out above, culturally its much easier for women to say they will be the stay at home housewife/homemaker than it is for men.

The equivalent for men I think is that they drift further into conspiracy beliefs, prepper type outlooks.

The 'masculine' energy thing bugs me. My MIL was talking about it ages ago. And how exhausting it is having to project it if you work in a male dominated industry. And how I should really read this book on how to be feminine and successful in the workplace because when she worked in a male dominated sector she found it so draining.

It never occurred to her for one second that times may have changed and that perhaps my 'masculine' energy is just my personality. But then she also mentioned how her exH (my FIL) never changed a single nappy so... Yeah...

Surrendered wife was big in about 2006. Meh.

Yes, I think you’re right!

"don't argue with your husband!!!"

😂😂😂😂

I suppose it's the oil prices, and cost of living, that makes staying at home and being 'looked after' seem attractive.

See how far that goes when the natural male state is revealed to be having several partners at once , like the lion with its pride, and the natural feminine state is defined as accepting this man's needs. Can't see this trend lasting.

Also think that men like the fact that the partner is prepared to help with the earning.

Oh that makes sense.
I remember surrendered wives and looking back I'm sure it was in a time of austerity.

I watched half a programme on a surrendered wife and honestly I dont know how she lived like that. She was completely beholden to him. I remember thinking , if he just fucks off to be with another woman, the wife is completely screwed, depending on his generosity. I could see he loved it, he made her wear a blindfold when he drove the family, so she couldn't say anything about how he drove. Ffs.

This sounds like more of the same. I'm all for women doing whatever makes them happy, I just want them to cover themselves if it all goes wrong and keep themselves employable by whatever means.

Yes! If I had a pound for every time I'd heard "You're trying to act like a man!" or similar inanities, I'd be able to support a couple of trad wives of my own.

I don’t know about this whole trend thing but I agree that ‘we can have it all’ is a lie… women rushing back to work largely benefits men in the grand scheme of things. Most of the profits made in the world are for companies owned by men. Also paying for childcare - again a chance for profit to be made! I’m not saying being ‘submissive’ as you name in your post is good - of course it isn’t! But I think young women these days are awake for the fact they can’t have it all really. I saw my mum struggle with ‘having it all’ and in reality what none of us had was any time with her. There’s definitely a middle ground to be found! x

Which is all well and good when the kids are young, but once they hit late teens and the husband leaves you're up a financial shit creek without a paddle.

I used to volunteer for an organisation that helped people sort out their financial problems. I got the fright of my life dealing with loads of single mothers who had no work history and who’s benefits stopped once the kids got to 16/18. Putting yourself in this situation by choice is utter madness and I say that as someone who had no choice but be a sahm because I had a child with a disability.

I think most men these days prefer the woman out earning as well especially with the cost of living. I see many threads on here where the woman is a SAHM and the husband wants her to go back to work and doesn’t want responsibility of being the main breadwinner. Maybe it was a thing in previous generations but I wouldn’t say it is now.

In your eagerness to be anti men you've overlooked that women not working is more beneficial for men.

Apparently the idea that women could have it all - career, kids, happy marriage etc was a lie and it's easier to just rely on a partner...

Well that is kind of true isn't it? Except it is easier to rely on that partner if they are good at breadwinning and are decent at home too, but I think this theory falls short when the man isn't bringing in much money or is hoarding most of it for himself, is pretty much absent as a father and is a repulsive, abusive shit. Most of the men that go for this idea are unfortunately like that.

WhatI want to know is how this theory works when one income barely covers your gas bill or mortgage? How does it work with only one person working at a time like this?

No of course not any more than advertising of any kind tells you you smell, you are fat, ugly or in any way deficient. It simply tells you your life will be better with their products, subtly undermines your confidence in yourself and your decisions and plants the seed. It works.

You ask why it comes around in cycles - because we live in a patriarchy which will never give up trying to push women into our "place". The costume may change, the medium may evolve but the objective remains the same.