Most British women would pick being a housewife over having a career

Why does this not come as a surprise? And why is the government torturing society in denial of this reality?


About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Most British women would pick being a housewife over having a career

  1. mamaziller says:

    Exactly, women want the choice not to work; not the choice to work more. Yet all we hear is not enough women in STEM or politics. What about the women who do not want to be there. Affirmative action and funding of women’s education more than men is unfair. It just makes it easier for women; who are not a disenfranchised class as they exist on every level of society in all classes in a the same ratios as men. It just pushes women into a position where they have no choice, because there are not enough well educated men to support them and they are the one’s with education and training. Women should have the choice to prioritize having children, breastfeeding and caring for children. It is not that men should not have this choice as well, but if we leave both sexes alone, my guess is that in the majority of cases it would make more sense for the woman to make this choice. And it is not a bad life, caring for kids. It is actually quite joyful, if feminism and society would stop making it sound like slave labor for a second then maybe more people would discover that it is not so bad. And housewives/husbands can work and bring in money, not as much as if they had a steady job; but being a housewife/husband does not mean not making money.

  2. Of course they would. That is natural. But what is unatural is exactly WHY the central state has encouraged women to work and the detrimental effects it has had on family and, indeed all of society.

    All these gender equality laws were introduced in the 70s just after the gold standard was abolished, this allowed governments to create money out of thin air but this money creation required a massive jump in the amount of debt. Having 2 for the price of 1 workers could inflate house price debt, raise more taxes (well a little). The establishment elite encouraged feminism, indeed the notable early American feminists were former members of the CIA, notably Gloria Steinem.

    In the 80s, the Reagan and Thatcher years, the state allowed the parasitic finance sector to take over the state finances, with almost no regulation, in UK it was called the Big Bang. The debts then became vast and unpayable, out of control and resulted in the economic collapse in 2008, when the banksters started to lose money bailed out “socialised” by the taxpayer.

    Can we ever return to the 50s and 60s family? For red pill men, our eyes have been opened, female parasitic behaviour must be stopped if the status quo remains. The traditionalist females are the biggest objectors to male rights, they don’t want their easy life curtailed by trifles such as work.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: 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