“How dare useless men earn less than us!”


30 November 2006


Successful women begrudge husbands who earn less, study claims


In today’s modern workplace women are increasingly out-earning their male partners.

But it seems that becoming the main breadwinner does not necessarily make for a winner on the home front.

In fact, many women begrudge their partner’s lack of earning power.

Yes, we know; for all the bragging of their uber-business skills, most women still want a man to bankroll their way through life and, although they’re content to live off a man, the idea of it being the other way around infuriates them.

Strange how, when men provided for women, that was Patriarchal Oppression, yet for women to provide for men (which will be more common as women not only have hiring preferences but more men are sensibly deciding not to bother striving in the rat-race in an ungrateful society) it’s somehow horrible for poor women.

And while they might like the rewards of success in the workplace, many [women] dislike the financial responsibility they have strived for.

Feminist women’s motto: Love the rights, hate the responsibility.

“Responsibility. Nooooo!”

Experts say the tension is down to the fact that while attitudes to women in the workplace have changed dramatically over the years, attitudes in the home have failed to keep pace.

Us men are always being angrily told to adapt to modern women, accept new “gender roles” and all that shit, and in most cases we have, with the world of work bending over backwards to accommodate women.

Yet it is clearly women who have not bothered to adapt their mentality, in still thinking that a man should be there to provide for her.

Well fuck you ladies. You threw away an easy life back in the Patriarchy and stormed into the workplace, shoving a load of men out in the process, and demanded careers and financial independence. You got it!

Now get back to work and stop complaining about being a wage-slave forced to provide for yourselves and possibly a spouse and kids as well! Us men used to do it without moaning.

And you were dumb enough to envy us!

Well, now you’ve got your careers, we won’t envy you back. We’ll increasingly be taking it easy and trying to live off you. Hah!

Check out all the comments too; more and more men are waking up and reacting with disgust at feminism and modern women:

Another ‘study’ to state the bleeding obvious. It has been known for years that few women are prepared to marry down and, though it may be a bitter pill to swallow, it is therefore very clear that women care more about things than people – despite the shrieking protestations to the contrary. In short, actions speak louder than words.

Derek S, Dundee

The fact that women prefer things to people, that they do not love men but men’s possessions and money, is a sad fact to learn, but it’s a fact all men must learn sooner or later. Ideally sooner; like before they get married.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:08 PM

At 6:34 PM, Brazilian Bachelor said…

They are never satisfied anyway. Nevermind…

“The fact that women prefer things to people, that they do not love men but men’s possessions and money, is a sad fact to learn, but it’s a fact all men must learn sooner or later. Ideally sooner; like before they get married.”

I thank god EVERY DAY that I am only 21.

Thank you god! (again)


At 6:48 PM, Delta said…

Well, only a minority of the women felt bothered…but I will still agree with this:

Love the rights, hate the responsibility!


At 7:00 PM, Anonymous said…

“The fact that women prefer things to people, that they do not love men but men’s possessions and money, is a sad fact to learn, but it’s a fact all men must learn sooner or later. Ideally sooner; like before they get married.”

In the beginning when I started college I wanted to be able to provide for a family because after all that is what society tells us to do. (Now I am one semester away from graduating with a Business Degree) As it became more evident that American Women don’t like poor nice guys, I decided to look at the mail order bride option. I became obsessed with the Latin Euro website, especially with the photos of the Brazilian women.

Then I ended up discovering sites like www.nomarriage.com, www.americanwomensuck.com, and this blog and I realized that you can’t get married in the US to and American Woman (obviously) or to a Foreign Woman.

Then I read From Courtship to Courtroom: What divorce law is doing to marriage. Once I finished reading this book the conclusion was obvious getting married in the US is like having a loaded shotgun pointed at your head. The trigger will get pulled the moment a new emotion fickles through cupcake’s head.

Now the Brazilian Bachelor confirmed that Brazilian women are not wife material. The Brazilian Bachelor is right, after reading Sex Ploytation, it is the woman’s nature to sell herself to the highest bidder. (Pete Patriarch provided a great service by allowing us to download some very good books including sexploytation.)

I still recommend men taking vacations to other countries if they want no strings attach action from beautiful women. Because in countries like Brazil you will be seen as the highest bidder and could attract many women in their prime years. Remember they are not attracted to you because you are good looking or because you have a great sense of humor. They are attracted to you because they believe you are at least 3 times as wealthy as men living in their own home country.

The Feminazis managed to screw up a good deal. Rather than Western Women selling their prime years to the highest bidder, they bought the lies that they can squander their prime years to exciting bad boys and thugs and once there looks are going down they can still sell themselves to the highest bidder.

Let me tell you Duncan the last thing a man wants to do is to make a bid on a woman past her prime years after being used and chucked like currency during her prime years, especially with the prospect of marrying into the feminazi court system.

Women don’t give a fuck about poor hard working nice guys, so why should I give a fuck about women past their prime after being used and chucked like currency by thugs and exciting bad boys once I get wealthy?


At 7:12 PM, VoodooJock said…

Well, we wouldn’t want the princesses to hold me in ill-regard, so I guess we just won’t have to marry them.


At 7:26 PM, ditchthebitch said…

I read the article & wanted to post a comment, but I remembered that comments for that paper are highly screened and from the looks of the ‘cutesy-cutesy’ comments by the women on there, it looks like it would just be a waste of my time. But still, even as watered down as this article is, it’s good to have in mainstream press. The best part of the article is that it does state quite clearly that traditional couples fair better. The ‘one in six’ ratio of women earning more than their mates isn’t exactly that impressive either. What I mean is compared to the overwheming impression we get in the media one would think that women have completely taken over the totality of business world- just not at YOUR company (it’s always somewhere else, of course) it’s something of a relief that it is only one in six women turning the business community into a joke. And when I say joke, what I mean is that all the women that have come to work at my firm simply did not show up half the time (still drawing a full check) and when they were at work they didn’t do anything of any substance then all ended up quitting within a year. Everybody knows that the day to day reality of women in the workplace is like this. I encourage everyone I talk to zero in on these women instead of looking the other way, ask them, “What do you actually do here, not your title, but a breakdown of what you do in the course of a day” “Why are you never here?” “What’s wrong with you exactly?” “Why do you get a check while everyone else (men) does your work for you?” “Why are you always ‘sick’?” Play time is officially over, ladies, and so is the free ride. We’ve gotten rid of all the bitches at the firm I work for except for one older woman who actually works, which seems like the only situation that works. It’s time to get the bitches out of the workplace for ALOT of reasons- this would go a long ways to solving a lot of problems.


At 7:34 PM, Jerkmenistan said…

If women don’t want to earn more than their husbands, and thereby become the primary breadwinner in the family, then they should be more selective of their mates. The alternative is to forgo a high-paying career if they want to marry a man who doesn’t have a large income potential.


At 9:25 PM, Anonymous said…

Check out all the comments too; more and more men are waking up and reacting with disgust at feminism and modern women

Duncan, what are you talking about? Basically all I see there is women explaining why that is so and why it shouldn’t be something else and why husbands don’t do any ironing, washing etc.


At 9:53 PM, Bryce said…

We can only expect this situation to get worse before it gets better because of:

  1. The offshoring of male-dominated and well-paying manufacturing, engineering, and programming jobs.
  2. The onslaught of affirmative action that mandates certain percentages and set-asides for women.
  3. The overemphasis of “soft skills” in the workplace and the rise of white-collar and service jobs.
  4. The increase in supply in the labor market by women’s entry concurrent with the decrease in its demand, which lowers wages.
  5. An increase in the cost of living ironically fueled by #4.
  6. Taxes that skim off up to 40% of a breadwinner’s income; where one spouse ends up working to support the government.
  7. The feminization of all public spheres where feminine qualities like routine, compliance, and safety trump masculine qualities like initiative, innovation, and risk-taking.
  8. Fewer men are motivated to excel professionally and academically because there is no incentive in terms of preparing oneself to support a family, because a) women eschew decent men for jerks and b) the fruits of their labor can be taken from them at the point of a family court judge’s gavel.


At 9:58 PM, Field Marshall Watkins said…

ditchthebitch I agree. Seems like women have taken that ‘I’m a princess I can swan through life, and if anyone gives me grief, I’ll wear a low cut top and flicker my lashes, and if they still want me to do work, I’ll just sue them for sexual discrimination.’

They think the company is their personal theme park where they can gossip and bitch and get paid, while guys pick up their slack. F*ck that.


At 10:16 PM, Javier said…

The one thing that has always enlightened me was the fact that women – by and large – always take the easy jobs, too. I remember getting into a “discussion” with a woman years back in which she tried to make it sound like women do so much more for society’s sake. At one point she used the fact that women usually do the shopping, take the kids here & there, etc., etc. I looked her in the eye and said “Just who the hell do you think built the highway you use without thinking to transport yourself and the kids, and who the hell do you think designed and built the vehicle you use on the highways built overwhelmingly by men, and who the hell do you think built the supermarkets, the department stores you go to spend “your” money – not to mention all the other structures you may visit over the course of your lifetime.”

She instantly got internally pissed and walked away ina huff.

BTW, hope all of you caught this article about further discrimination of genders (in favor of women, of course):

Boys will be boys
Court rules boy can’t compete on girls’ squad


At 10:19 PM, unpleasant bitter git said…

Funny, but this piece written by a woman seems to back up the extremely controversial article Michael Noer wrote in Forbes “Don’t Marry Career Women” a while back.

When a woman writes this stuff no one bats an eyelid. When a man says nearly the same thing it’s considered “blood boilingy misogynistic” and “shockingly irresponsible”.


At 10:50 PM, Mark said…

It is more than a little ironic that these high earning women, who so frequently find themselves reaching the end of their fertile years childless, are being forced, by the very same bloated government that women voted for far more than did men, to hand over vast amounts of their pay to subsidise the feral offspring of their feckless and parasitic single-mother ‘sisters’. Yet another ‘victory’ for feminism.


At 11:32 PM, Playboy said…

The reality is that very few women are actually “Career Women” and those who claim to be are usually secretaries or legal assistants. Women tend to use that term to distinguish themselves from waitresses and such (as in, “I work in an office”).

The vast majority of women, even those with college degrees (often in ‘art’ or ‘social work’) are simply biding their time, working a job, paying a few bills, maybe living with a roommate… until the ‘right guy’ (i.e., has money) comes along and she can live off of him.

That’s the reality.


At 12:08 AM, Panzer said…

Well, if they’re looking for a man that earns more than them,I say fine go look for him.
But, when your 40 and still single, dont come crying to me.



At 12:56 AM, HAWKEYE said…

they wont marry down,
this speaks volumes about the internal nature of a female.

treat career girls with the respect they deserve.


At 3:05 AM, Cornholio Mangus said…

An aside from that article, and a link from it:

Women live six years longer than men, but spend eight years of their life shopping.

I say that means that men win.


At 7:36 AM, Anonymous said…

bitter git:

My thoughts exactly.

Women will always bitch about everything, and frankly, I do not think it has anything to do with American Women or feminization, I think all the feminization did was allow themselves to show their true colors. When a person gets drunk and then shouts racial slurs, it’s not that they “didn’t mean it,” they just weren’t inhibited, that’s what they really did mean. That’s what feminism has done in western cultures, it simply removed the inhibitions. We’ll probably destroy Iraq too this way, and India sounds like it is already doomed.

There is a reason why religion was created. I don’t mean to offend anyone that believes in religion, because you can say God had the intention of this and he created it himself: it was designed to control society, specifically, to keep women in check. By forcing accountability in the form of morals into women, the largely destructive behaviors women engage in were prevented. Unchecked, women are simply much more powerful than men are. Physically a man is much stronger, however, rarely can a man use his physical force, because a woman can control other men to prevent any force coming to her.

It’s not enough to avoid marriage and women in general. There is virtually no way you will be able to avoid them at work. Your life is going to be a miserable hell in almost any job you do. Sometimes I think those men that never even bothered to finish high school are the smartest of us all. By keeping their expenses down (no educational expenses, no woman to provide for) and by starting a job that doesn’t have women (since they will only work jobs that are really easy, and generally without an education you can only get difficult manual labor) these men can save up enough money to retire quicker, and probably keep most of their sanity. Sure physically their bodies will break down quicker and they will look older, but they’ve saved themselves so much mental and emotional trauma that they’ve clearly come out ahead.


At 11:05 AM, Anonymous said…

I think it is inevitable that a market obsessed culture sees relationships as contracts rather than based on companionship.

I have observed how amazingly compliant many women are with the society. They love television, shopping, brands, the whole thing. I think in this culture, women seeing men as walking cash machines and sperm-banks is inevitable. (And the Nagging Entitlement Princess is the Strong Independent Wymyn.)

I am experienced the phenomena of women treating me like a freak because I don’t really care much about cars, nor do I spend my whole brain-time thinking about money and my next line of “exciting” purchases to build up my brand image on the personality market.


At 5:12 PM, Yank_With_Question said…

I am an American who reads this blog on a daily basis (Keep up the good work, Duncan). I see in American women the same attitude described in the article.

I read the article and the comments appended to the article, and I have a question of an etymological nature. One of the commenters (female) mentioned “Chrimbob pressies”. Am I correct in assuming that “Chrimbob pressies” are what we refer to as “Chrismas presents”?

Normally when I run up against English slang (as often happens reading contemporary English fiction) I go to one of several online dictionaries of English slang. But “Chrimbob pressies” has me stumped.

Off topic, I know. but I thought I’d ask anyway.


At 6:42 PM, Duncan Idaho said…

It must have been a mispelling in the article, it should be “Chrimbo”. Anyway, you’re right, it does mean “Christmas”. Mostly women seem to abbreviate it to Chrimbo, I’m not sure why. Probably just laziness.


At 8:17 PM, unpleasant bitter git said…

I think “Chrimbo” is Australian slang. Obviously crept into British use by all the female viewers of the Aussie soaps on daytime telly these days.

Speaking of Aussie telly, has anyone seen the comedy Kath and Kim? I’ve haven’t seen a whole episode all the way through but it does seem to be the most accurate depiction of suburban skanks ever.


At 9:45 PM, Mark said…

@ Ditchthebitch
Actually I have found my comments to be accepted almost every time I have posted on the Daily Mail AS LONG AS it’s submitted not-too-late on the day the article first appears. Ditto for The Times. It is a completely different matter on the BBC however. There, I noticed that none of my posts ever made it so I tried a little experiment: I posted a range of comments for a number of different ‘Have Your Say’s. To try to catch censorship of just one side, I specifically wrote the comments such that they would come from opposing sides of the debates. Further, between making each comment, I deleted all cookies and I did it all via dial-up with a new IP address each time so they could not possibly know it was the same person posting. I tried on new articles that did not have many comments, ones that were averagely-commented and also on heavily commented ones and I never ever, not one single time, got a comment listed. I repeated the experiment on a smaller scale for both the Daily Mail and Times Times, but as I said, as long as I posted early-ish on the day of original publication, my comments almost always appeared.

So. In summary, no matter which side of the argument I posted, the right-of-centre outlets published almost every comment and the left-of-centre BBC published not a single one. I am not sure what more needs to be said other than this:

Censorship is a tool of those whose position cannot stand up in open debate.


At 6:00 PM, Anonymous said…

Modern feminism is definitely making me miserable. I can’t turn the TV on to see any normal programs anymore. This really is the pits.


At 12:47 AM, Anonymous said…

I know the reason why these women aren’t happy because i personally knew alot 50 something women who treated like nothing more than a shit . higher debts because of their husbands.more likely to have a violent relationship.


%d bloggers like this: