Men run the world. Women run the home. These roles are not interchangeable. Men are wired to attain, to make conquests, to take dominion. Women are wired to support, help, nurture. These tendencies obviously incline the genders toward their respective spheres (world and home). When these roles are uncontested, a society functions as it should.
If women, contrary to their original nature, left the home to run the world, who would run the home? The answer cannot be men; they will not give up their societal position (nor should they abdicate simply because women have); their own natures would prohibit it. So when some women leave the home, there are, consequently, less women to take care of the remaining children, who are thus raised by someone other than their parents, crippling society along the way.
How to stop this? Women must once again embrace their gender restrictions. And men need to stop letting women boss them around. The sexes have been endowed with these gender-specific traits and no amount of gender propaganda can change it completely. Unfortunately though, feminist propaganda has been largely successful. Feminism has managed to convince women that they would be happier by opposing their natures and competing in the world of men. Women now believe that because they have been restricted to their own sphere, they have been oppressed. This is not the case, however, since men are also restricted to their own spheres.
For example, if a woman becomes a dominant player in the workforce; while, at the same time, her husband is staying home with their children, the husband is seen as belittled (or whipped, or cucked) in both men’s and women’s eyes. With feminism, women can do as they please and receive support from the majority. For men, it’s a lose-lose situation. If they stay home, they’re effeminate; if they are in the workforce, they are part of the oppression of women.
This is what happens when women are permitted to redefine society. When women take charge, men suffer. Further, what the feminists will never admit is that women also suffer when women are in charge.
In the evangelical Christian world in particular, and in the world in general, there is a female bemoaning of the loss of serious, committed men. They complain that there are no longer any men willing to take the ultimate plunge into matrimony. What they don’t own up to, though, is that this is a direct result of the feminization of the church and culture.
Roy Baumeister argues in his book, Is There Anything Good About Men?, that it is men who create culture. Women are valuable to preserve and sustain relationships, families, and possibly even already-existing culture, but they do not create it. Cultural creation demands a nature willing to aggressively confront opposition and struggle even at great personal risk, which is a nature belonging in large part to men.
Once men took the risk in creating culture and ensured a comfortable and safe society, the women demanded entrance. With the risk factor removed (or no longer an inevitability), the man’s world outside of the home became appealing to women. Simultaneously, the world of the home came to be viewed as stifling in comparison to a man’s life of supposed freedom. What the women failed to comprehend, however, was because men are the creators of society, society functions according to the social rules of males. As a result, when women entered this world, they were appalled by the treatment they received and began whining about oppression, patriarchy, male conspiracies, abuse, etc. In reality, though, the women were being treated no differently from how all of the men were treated. The women did not recognize that men and women are treated differently by men. Men do not behave toward men in the same way they behave toward women.
Women inserted themselves into the man’s world. This very insertion, an aggressive and masculine act, was taken as an indication that women wanted to and could be treated like men. Thus, men treated them accordingly and were then left to scratch their heads as the women railed against them as misogynistic, sexist, and patriarchal.
What we must see, is that it is the women who are to blame, not the men. It is the women who over-stepped their social bounds and placed themselves into a world in which they did not belong. Men are not to blame for being too patriarchal, they are to blame for not being patriarchal enough. Had they asserted their rights as men and kept women in their own domain (to which they are naturally suited), our society may have avoided many of the ills it now endures.