Against Feminism/MRA · Thoughts

Let’s Get This Straight: That Stepford Gal & Political Labels


I’ve been thinking.

When I first started this blog, I didn’t have as clear an idea of my values as I do now. I hadn’t figured myself out politically either, though I was quite…passionate about it.

I remember mentioning then that I wanted to be a housewife, I wanted to be at home more, I gradually began to realise how much I missed teaching and now I’m starting to see how strongly I believe in being at home while balancing that with part-time work and my study.

I also realised that the fiscal side of the Conservative movement doesn’t quite apply to me. Back then, I was eager to be Conservative and yes, socially I am. Yet, due to my experiences as an immigrant and my belief in finding contentment in a simple life, this seemed to be in direct contradiction to economical Conservatism. I saw how so many Conservatives didn’t actually believe in the domesticity of women and just saw their staying at home as a temporary fix to child care expenses.

That is not the real purpose of being a Domestic Woman.

There are some Conservatives out there, the strict, fundamentalist kind that does take the Bible’s words literally to heart and believe women should truly be at home. Those, I can get along with, despite not sharing the religion with them.

With those changes over the last two years, I have come to a clearer realisation of my ‘labels’, so to say.

Bear in mind, labels can change in meaning and who knows, I may become even more established and fervent in newer ways in the future. For now, what are my labels?

Socially Conservative
I believe that the traditional ways of living from the past, honouring family as a unit, with a homemaking mother and breadwinning father is working to their strengths and bringing money and time to the family. For a young person, this means living with their parents to save for the future. This means having shared values that are reinforced by each other, resulting in less influence by the materialistic modern society and marketing. This also means more company and support against loneliness and isolation. When it comes to variety, I acknowledge there are exemptions, such as when some women feel better as breadwinners and men as homemakers, or for same-sex couples who also embody this model. I am speaking as a general rule.

Fiscally Liberal
Due to my childhood spent in a third-world country, I feel very strongly when it comes to living simply in the West and being content with that lifestyle, allowing for more time for home and family. I just don’t see the two-income standard as a ‘must’, along with the typical big house and two cars and private schools, etc. I’ve lived with much less, lived in a whole country where people found happiness and got by with even lesser than that. I see this as a Western people-thing, they grew up with financial comfort and aren’t willing to settle for less or even consider that it is possible. I believe the government should offer support to honest Australian families, to a certain extent only and should not be supporting horrible habits and unsafe immigration practices.

Men have different strengths to women. The patriarchy is not about inequality, it is about men using their strengths to provide and protect women while women care for and support them. Both parties benefit equally. Men may appear to have more power in a patriarchal setting, yet they have heavier responsibilities and risks that offset that. Women may appear weaker in a patriarchal setting yet they are more protected and looked out for. Men, in general (with some exceptions and certain areas) are better leaders than women, most (not all) of the industrial developments and inventions that advanced the world are credited to men. BUT: A big but, I think credit should always be given where it’s due. If a woman succeeds, it should be presented how it is- she succeeded. If a man does- then he succeeded. I believe in always acknowledging exceptions since they always will exist, even if they are not the majority.

Pro-Traditional Women’s Rights
Due to feminism being pushed onto mainstream society and women throughout the 70s, the disdain and discrimination against homemaking women began. Women were forced out of their homes, convinced by bitter harpies and greedy governments that ‘outside work’ will set them free. That being at home earning time for their family made them ‘parasites’. I saw how many problems this started to cause, problems that are still having horribly negative effects in today’s society, less quality time and family cohesion, more divorce, materialism and misguided children.

These are the ‘labels’ I truly believe in. Mainly it’s just about how I see the roles of men and women and how they can work together and benefit each other, all my labels are connected to that idea.

Sometimes I feel these labels don’t quite fit me into an exact group and that can be a bit isolating. However, that is the price I am willing to play to stay true to what I believe, even if it doesn’t fit neatly anywhere. I don’t want to betray myself and what I value just to feel like I belong somewhere. Trust me, I’ve been tempted to do that before and it is not worth it.

It is more worth it to be true to yourself.

2 thoughts on “Let’s Get This Straight: That Stepford Gal & Political Labels

  1. I like to call myself traditionalist, because most people do not. So that label does not have so much preconceived idea that “this person must be this and that”.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s