Real Men Want Real Women
June 24, 2016
Direct Link to Latest News
June 24, 2016
GT said (June 25, 2016):
This is just a progressive indulging in virtue-signalling. Aside from distorting Mark's article, he has no idea whatsoever about what women really desire in a man. What he advocates is the same old egalitarian unisex nonsense that has screwed up marriage for the past half a century or so. Moreover, the fact that he so grossly misrepresents Mark's and your position raises questions about the veracity of his entire article.
Mark H said (June 25, 2016):
I would stand for Marks position because I see there harmony.
I'm so tired to fight outside of my house and if I need do it inside of my house too ... it will choking me to death.
It's not rocket science to live in harmony , all starts from altar ...
Mark and you have decrypted that so many times.
PV said (June 24, 2016):
Samartino, is right when he says men/husband and women/wife deserve to achieve the same level of quality of life. I agree with him when he says that is wrong to think that women/wife must a inferior status than men/husband.
But also Makow and the usual readers of the blog are right when they state that men/husband are not equal, don't have the same personality, goals in life of women/wife.
I think the real problem is the meaning of word «equal». Both sexes must have same level of achievement in life but shouldn't have the same choices, preferences paths in life. By the way, I think Makow and the readers agree with me.
Barbara W said (June 24, 2016):
I liked Mark's simple paean to his wife, but I did not like Ronald's article at all. It could easily have been written by his feminist wife or daughters, who have evidently led him a merry dance all these years.
It is HE who seems the brainwashed domestic slave, to these four women in his life!
I have seen this before in relationships of feminist acquaintances; for example:
- husband works, wife stays at home, refuses to have children, makes him do the housework as well
- husband & wife both work to support their children, wife makes husband & kids do all the cooking & housework, while wife relaxes
- husband works, wife stays at home raising children, if husband disagrees with wife in any way, he comes home to find his dinner thrown into the bin as passive-aggressive "revenge"
- husband works, wife works part-time, if husband & children dare to complain of hunger pangs because wife didn't bother to cook dinner, next day all their dinners get thrown into the bin, as "revenge"
- husband works, wife stays home, but still demands his pay packet, control of all his money, total control of every aspect of interior furnishings, and makes him spend his leisure time doing household repair jobs, or else nagging him about it
- husband comes home tired but cheerful, wife greets him in a rage over something he said 5 weeks ago
It is WE, ladies, who need to change. As Mark Thomas said in his book, "Not Guilty: In Defence of Modern Man", domestic violence has two forms: physical and psychological, and women's psychological abuse and domination of men also counts as "domestic violence".
MM said (June 24, 2016):
Looks to me like Ronald has completely misinterpreted Mark's post of yesterday. "Uneducated"? "Dingbat"? "Threatened by women"? I didn't get any of that from Mark's post. I thought Mark's post was just what it said it was: a loving tribute to a wonderful wife. As for Ronald, the lady doth protest too much.
Tony B said (June 24, 2016):
This guy may have been a Catholic in name but his thinking is entirely pagan. In fact he disparages the principles, both written and traditional, which Catholics live by. His belief system may accurately be labeled "pagan Americanism" or "American paganism," comes out the same.
Dan said (June 24, 2016):
I'm perplexed by Ronald's reaction to Mark's marriage. I can only surmise that he misunderstood. I just read Mark' article again and I just don't get the image of a "dingbat, who's only passions are housecleaning and cooking and gardening and saying "Yes, dear."
Roland's created a straw man and named it 'Mark'. It's uncharitable to put words in other people's mouths. Not an persuasive argument strategy either.
Dan
Al Thompson said (June 24, 2016):
I'm not impressed with this article. The idea of a woman being equal with a man is ludicrous. That's like saying that the Sun and the Moon are the same thing. In the natural order, it doesn't work that way and it is the feminism that is destroying families.
Men are physically and mentally stronger than women. If a man can't be stronger than a woman it is probably because he has been emasculated by feminism. Feminism has turned upside down the natural order that should exist between a man and a woman. I don't expect a woman to change the oil on my car. I don't expect to see a woman on a football field. Woman should be at home raising the children taking care of the household.
Ronald criticizes Mark by saying that he wants an "uneducated" dingbat. Most of the dingbats are in colleges and universities and these libtard teachers have nothing to teach anyone. It isn't a matter of ego, it is a matter of the natural order which God made man and woman. And this kind of thinking is what is destroying society. Any woman who has graduated from college or university will have a twisted view of life because they were taught by libtards. Hardly a recipe for a happy family life. I'll take the "dingbat."
Men and women should compliment each other with the man as the head of the relationship. Granted, immature men cannot handle this responsibility because they have learned to be unproductive douche bags raised in a feminist environment. If they had fathers, they would learn to be productive. The children will always come out better when they are raised in a family that lives within the natural order. Feminism turns all of that upside down. A man is one thing and a woman is another.
A woman's commitment to her husband is not a form of slavery, but it is her intelligence knowing her proper place in supporting her husband. I'll tell you, a man will try to move heaven and earth for a great woman. That's not slavery but true love.
Dan H said (June 24, 2016):
Ronald says his wife is his equal... well, here's how 'equal' works with women.
The family does what you think is right if she agrees with you...
And does what she thinks if she disagrees with you.
Ronald is confused about a REAL man's motivations. They aren't about domination... they are centered on the husband's responsibility. Even the secular State recognizes that responsibility and makes the husband responsible for his wife's actions. Don't think so? Try getting divorced from a woman who has run up a lot of debt against your wishes and you'll find that the husband is jointly and severally liable for ALL of it. It is this RESPONSIBILITY that drives the husband's need to have the final word, not any desire to dominate someone. Until the secular state makes women fully responsible for their own debt, there is no 'equal' in marriage. Even that 'archaic, unenlightened' book recognized the fact that women make rash decisions that are detrimental to the family and husbands need the authority to block that to protect their family from the feminine propensity for believing deceptive lies are good for them. (Numbers 30)
Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at
RE said (June 26, 2016):
Just a quick response to your article by Ronald. I got a few years on him and also raised children.
However, Ronald would have made a good 'poster boy' for the feminist movement. With a catholic
background in liberal theology, I can see why he does not want to follow God's instruction manual.
We all have to give an account to our Creator when the time comes. I wonder what his excuse will be?
Take care and God bess,