I would rather be owned by my husband than owned by the state.

SunShineMary knocks it out of the park. Especially pay attention to the economic aspects. My crowd has been talking about work and creating value independent of the financial/corporate system for a while now. I’ve discussed local economic co-operation for years.

Of course, the traditional place where a lot of unpaid (unpaid in the sense of $0 fiat dollars) work was done, thus promoting a high level of economic co-operation: the family.

11 thoughts on “I would rather be owned by my husband than owned by the state.

  1. From a feminist troll:

    If serving your husband is enaugh for you, then why are you bothering the anonymous internet with your hateful (unbecoming of the Christian you claim to be) rants instead of making sandwiches and ironing and cooking and polishing the floor and washing dishes and whatever a good Christian wife should do?

    It really shows the mentality of these feminists that to them, “stay at home mom” is all about … housework. Doing the dishes. Polishing the floors.

    Educating and raising children? They tend to ignore that part. To them, “stay at home mom” is all about ironing clothes. “Mom” = “Maid” to these people.

    Their CLASS perspective is pretty clear: close enough to the middle class that they could afford to live on one income, but NOT to hire help, like a maid of cleaning service.

    Forget housework – would any of these feminists make good mothers? Much less grandmothers? Or aunts? Forget how they look, forget how attractive they are – just consider their personalities.

    Also, you prefer being owned by a faulty, erratic being like your husband (I don’t want to insult him, I don’t even know him, but as a human being he is prone to error) than an institution?

    So instead of one human being prone to error, you have an institution made up of numerous human beings prone to error, the difference being? SSM’s husband knows her and loves her. He’s not some faceless official with a set of rules voted on by committee.

    Hey Lila, if you like being in a “poly” relationship with an “institution” – all I can say is, “kinky!”

    What if your husband decides to leave you for a younger, more attractive woman who can provide him with more babies? As he has cheated on you 30 times already, that is not an entirely unrealistic notion. What if you, are suddenly alone? You havent’t worked for years. So you are forced to either strip your ex-husband of his money and thus destroy his new family, or you and your children will be dependant of the state all the more. As you are already in your fourties you won’t find another “Alpha male” you seem so fond of to provide for you.

    A legitimate consideration. This is what extended families are for. An isolated nuclear family living in a suburban tract house surrounded by strangers isn’t nearly as stable as an extended family that lives with you, or nearby. This is also what churches are for, if they actually enforce the no-divorce rule (which most don’t seem to anymore.)

    Plus, what happens if your corporation decides to lay you off? What happens if the institution decides you broke the rules and kicks you out? Is an institution really much more stable?

    Hey feminists: your kink is ok. I don’t want to own you. I don’t want to marry you. I don’t want to fuck you. I don’t want to have my taxes to pay for your birth control and your bastard children either. Irreconcilable differences. Let’s make it a no-fault divorce.

    Like

  2. So many great comments on that thread. From zykos:

    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/i-would-rather-be-owned-by-my-husband-than-owned-by-the-state/#comment-31517

    If you actually deconstruct it to its basics and go back in time, money is really just a social representation of value. It was created so that, once you extend the exchange to several people, you can keep track of the value of someone’s work. This hints that it’s simply impossible to “valorise unwaged activities” at the group level. So either she’s really advocating for a return to traditional patriarchy without realizing it, or she’s talking about a communist utopia (unsurprising coming from a feminist) which we have ample evidence does not work at national scales, or she simply does not have any clue what she’s talking about, and hides behind big words.

    Like

  3. http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/i-would-rather-be-owned-by-my-husband-than-owned-by-the-state/#comment-31553

    FuzzyWuzzie asks:

    In the last thread, someone said that early communism wanted marriage destroyed and then, women to be a pooled resource. I had heard that a little of this was tried in Russia post 1917 and discarded.

    Wilheim Reich has written extensively about such things and the results of various experiments that were tried in the early USSR. Similar things were tried in the early years of the Zionist entity. This should surprise no one, as both regimes were run by the same tribe.

    Like

  4. http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/i-would-rather-be-owned-by-my-husband-than-owned-by-the-state/#comment-31557

    Gerry T. Neal

    Of course, sensible and sane people have always been able to see that the reasons why a housewife is not paid a salary or a wage are completely different from the reasons why a slave is not paid a salary or a wage. Think of the difference that would be made to the status of each if they were to be given a salary or a wage. It would elevate the status of the slave, from that of chattel property to that of paid employee. It would lower the status of the housewife, on the other hand, because it would redefine her standing in the family, from that of wife and mother to that of paid employee.

    Like

  5. Your takedown of a middle-aged WN woman a few threads back was well done. This is not a comment on the female party involved, as I do not know the specifics and backgrounds. But in general principle, well done.

    “Babies or GTFO” indeed.

    LOL at royal names – though alas you deleted your comment.

    Like

    1. @PA

      oogenhand, in his spergy way, gets all of this on a visceral level – which is exactly why certain posters hate him, and are always calling for him to be banned.

      Sex leads to race. Sex is the primary fight here, not race. Men have a certain sexual strategy, women have another. Monogamy was a compromise. That compromise has been destroyed, and there is plenty of blame to go around. We can argue over the cause, or we can figure out the solution.

      Well, guess what. The women’s solution is very different than the men’s solution.

      There’s another dynamic going on here that I probably pick up on a lot more than most. It’s a dominance and submission thing. I am often good at picking up the personalities.

      At my most charitable, the best white knighting I can do: these older women have no idea how slutty their daughters are, and how actively, aggressively sexual their daughters are. But how can I really believe they don’t know? You’re telling me they weren’t like that when they were their daughter’s age? Even if society or religion restrained them, do they really expect me believe they did not have the same desires themselves, and that without social and religious restraint they would not have acted the same way?

      I have not met a virgin woman since I was 16. Just read the Christian blogs – chock full of decent Christian men, who stayed virgins by choice, and they can’t find virgin wives.

      Now – why is that? I remember all the complaints about Hugh Hefners. As I said at the time, for there to be one Hugh Hefner, there have to be multiple Playboy Bunnies. Do the math. I can understand exactly why lots of people are very scared to do the math, and I understand exactly why I lost most commenters when I started telling the sex stories.

      White Princess has been very, very naughty. And she hasn’t gotten very far doing her part of fulfilling the 14 Words, either. White women = below replacement level fertility.

      Is there a shortage of white men’s sperm? I think not.

      So, if we’re serious about the white race and a white nation …

      That, right there, is the beginning and end of any question of sexual morality as far as WN goes. And that’s the only significant thing white women can contribute. Anything else is just chatting.

      Like

  6. There’s so much good stuff in this SSM thread I’m copying certain comments here for my own reference. This is where the real battle lies as far as the MW version of WN goes. Mantra is the primary public relations/talking points strategy. All of MW’s stuff about economic localization and fertility: this is where the actual battle lies.

    It is NO coincidence that this battle is being fought most effectively by married subbie women. It’s no surprise that their most bitter opponents are both feminists and “anti-feminists.” Dalrock calls them “churchian feminists.” It’s a slick form of double talk that women are naturally good at. What is essentially, emotional manipulation. They across as just plain old traditionalists but then use the same tactics feminists use for the same purpose: to make men submit them, follow their advice, and give them attention.

    Instead of saying, “what can we do for you” they say “you should do this for us.”

    Sorry, I’m not in the market for a Domme. And I already have a mother. She’s married to my father.

    Michelle responds to the troll:

    https://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/i-would-rather-be-owned-by-my-husband-than-owned-by-the-state/#comment-31656

    I thank God for submissive wives that are willing to be vocal. I grew up in the SF Bay area. I’m not sure if you know what that means, but I had liberal morals and kinks imposed on me from the time was in kindergarten. My parents stopped taking me to church when I was 13, and I had NO voice of reason to tell me that I wasn’t weird for wanting marriage and family more than a career.

    Feminist doctrine is preached on every street corner, in every school, and by our government. Why is it that you object so much to people on the anonymous internet disagreeing?

    Like

  7. I’m not even religious, but this is why SSM’s blog is my second favorite on the entire internet. It’s the quality of the women.

    Sarah responds to the troll:

    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/i-would-rather-be-owned-by-my-husband-than-owned-by-the-state/#comment-31660

    Why Lila, I do believe you have a crush on our beloved SSM.

    Considering all that you know of her she has made privy to you, you come across as a bit of a…stalker. It’s a bit creepy, Lila. While I’m sure SSM appreciates that you’ve been a long time reader, filing in your mind every tidbit you can about her personal life, I must question why you use words like “impose” – you do know you (and all women) have control over which blogs you read…don’t you? My internet contract certainly didn’t come with the clause that I must read Sunshine Mary and the Dragon. Did yours?

    Like

  8. songtwoeleven:

    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/i-would-rather-be-owned-by-my-husband-than-owned-by-the-state/#comment-31666

    Personally, I am all about Mister seizing my stuff. Daily would not be excessive, actually. I mean, we do have six children so far. Sometimes he seizes his hairbrush, too. Oh, no! Abuse! Abuse! I’m a kept woman; my entire being seized by (gasp!) … my husband…a M-A-N.

    Bring it.

    Those man-hating she-beasts can keep their independence.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s