Direct Link to Latest News


Real Men Want Real Women

June 24, 2016


Ronald Samartino, 71, the father of
three daughters thinks Mark's description
women. He has distorted Mark's message
but we are not about imposing one view.
We leave that to feminists. Ronald's take 
is resonant of real life.

 "Mark wants some uneducated, dingbat, whose only passions are housecleaning and cooking and gardening and saying "Yes, dear."--Wow, he sounds to me like someone who is threatened by women, who feels a bizarre need to hold them down and needs constant ego boosts from the female in order to feel manly. It's a very distorted and unenlightened perception of life, of the value of human lives, and of the universe."

by Ronald Samartino

I would've been embarrassed to tell my wife that her entire precious existence on this earth--was meant only to serve me. I never regarded my wife in that way which seems pretty disrespectful. I saw her as an individual with hopes, dreams, desires, aims, just like me, not some slave. If you need a woman to clean up after you to feel manly, you got a problem.

I feel like these articles are written by men who don't have daughters. My wife and I had three girls, and NEVER did I say, now here's a fine slave for some man. 

No, sorry. Real men want real women. I didn't even question it--and I grew up in a pre-feminist era. I'm 71 years old, but it never crossed my mind to raise subservient, uneducated, ignorant humans, whose lives revolve around another human male without any interests or goals or aims. 

Are you kidding? My wife and I raised intellectual, kind, caring young women who knew how to take care of themselves, make their own money, not--NEVER to depend on a man, but to also take care of their future families in a loving, caring atmosphere. 

They saw me their father helping their mother with everything around the house. Again, I was raised pre-feminist era, now widowed after 43 years of marriage--and I NEVER had to be told to help out around the house. To me it was NOT, you're the female you do these jobs and I do this and you cater to me so I can feel like a "REAL" man.

My wife and I were a TEAM. We were in it TOGETHER, raising and taking care of OUR family, OUR home. When money was tight, my wife worked, and she and I were both happy that she did. And when money wasn't tight, she worked, because she wanted to and she was her own person--you know, someone with their OWN, INDIVIDUAL thoughts and desires. 

My wife worked right alongside me when we decided to build one of the homes we lived in over the years. She was amazing--that's a REAL woman, a loving mother, who will work for her family, who's independent and regarded as an EQUAL. 

I didn't have to be asked to help around the house---I WANTED to help, if dinner wasn't ready I cooked it, I enjoy cooking. I helped clean and do laundry, I changed diapers, we did all the work EQUALLY, because we loved each other and our family, and we strove together to make our home nice for our children. We were EQUAL partners. That's being a REAL man, not this phoney divisiveness that is just as extreme and wrong as the militant feminism is.

And any REAL man who has daughters sure as hell doesn't--does NOT, want them to be mere slaves to another man, even if he's the greatest, nicest man in the world. It's a sickening thought as a father. 


I watched as my daughters grew and they spoke of their passions and interests and the jobs they wanted--and I'm bewildered how any man could possibly want to smother his daughter's ambitions, or prevent them from having an education, inhibit their own individual human wonder and enlightenment. You really have to have something wrong with you--honestly, to subvert a human being like that.

By the way, I was raised Catholic, came from a nuclear family. My mother worked a full-time job as did my father. My wife was catholic--not a feminist, same age as me; we both grew up in the pre-feminist era, high school sweethearts. But never did I even EVER think of using the bible written in archaic unenlightened times as my guide on how to treat a woman--I didn't and still don't believe my wife belonged to me, we chose each other and I valued her as a person, as someone who deserved as much respect as me--and vice versa. 

And for any men who are reading these Makow articles and are unmarried, hoping to find a nice woman, I would disregard all of it as purest bull$hit, because that's what it is. If you really love someone, you want them to be a true equal, not something like chattel that you feel you can boss around so you can delude yourself with some false sense of power as "head of the house". 

If you need that, if you need a slave to care for your clothes and clean your house and revolve you to feel manly, then you're missing the big picture. A REAL man, can handle a NON-SLAVE woman, and loves the fact that she is an equal. 

Makow comment- It's a shame that Ronald needs to distort our position in order to make his point. Mark and I do not regard women as inferior or slaves. On the contrary, in a traditional marriage there is an exchange of female worldly power for male love. The woman and man become one. The husband consults and cherishes his wife as part of him and wants to see her happy and thrive in every respect. That's what love is. Love does not succeed when husband and wife compete as neutered "equals." 

Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for "Real Men Want Real Women"

RE said (June 26, 2016):

Just a quick response to your article by Ronald. I got a few years on him and also raised children.

However, Ronald would have made a good 'poster boy' for the feminist movement. With a catholic

background in liberal theology, I can see why he does not want to follow God's instruction manual.

We all have to give an account to our Creator when the time comes. I wonder what his excuse will be?

Take care and God bess,

GT said (June 25, 2016):

This is just a progressive indulging in virtue-signalling. Aside from distorting Mark's article, he has no idea whatsoever about what women really desire in a man. What he advocates is the same old egalitarian unisex nonsense that has screwed up marriage for the past half a century or so. Moreover, the fact that he so grossly misrepresents Mark's and your position raises questions about the veracity of his entire article.

Mark H said (June 25, 2016):

I would stand for Marks position because I see there harmony.
I'm so tired to fight outside of my house and if I need do it inside of my house too ... it will choking me to death.
It's not rocket science to live in harmony , all starts from altar ...
Mark and you have decrypted that so many times.

PV said (June 24, 2016):

Samartino, is right when he says men/husband and women/wife deserve to achieve the same level of quality of life. I agree with him when he says that is wrong to think that women/wife must a inferior status than men/husband.

But also Makow and the usual readers of the blog are right when they state that men/husband are not equal, don't have the same personality, goals in life of women/wife.

I think the real problem is the meaning of word «equal». Both sexes must have same level of achievement in life but shouldn't have the same choices, preferences paths in life. By the way, I think Makow and the readers agree with me.

Barbara W said (June 24, 2016):

I liked Mark's simple paean to his wife, but I did not like Ronald's article at all. It could easily have been written by his feminist wife or daughters, who have evidently led him a merry dance all these years.
It is HE who seems the brainwashed domestic slave, to these four women in his life!
I have seen this before in relationships of feminist acquaintances; for example:

- husband works, wife stays at home, refuses to have children, makes him do the housework as well
- husband & wife both work to support their children, wife makes husband & kids do all the cooking & housework, while wife relaxes
- husband works, wife stays at home raising children, if husband disagrees with wife in any way, he comes home to find his dinner thrown into the bin as passive-aggressive "revenge"
- husband works, wife works part-time, if husband & children dare to complain of hunger pangs because wife didn't bother to cook dinner, next day all their dinners get thrown into the bin, as "revenge"
- husband works, wife stays home, but still demands his pay packet, control of all his money, total control of every aspect of interior furnishings, and makes him spend his leisure time doing household repair jobs, or else nagging him about it
- husband comes home tired but cheerful, wife greets him in a rage over something he said 5 weeks ago

It is WE, ladies, who need to change. As Mark Thomas said in his book, "Not Guilty: In Defence of Modern Man", domestic violence has two forms: physical and psychological, and women's psychological abuse and domination of men also counts as "domestic violence".

MM said (June 24, 2016):

Looks to me like Ronald has completely misinterpreted Mark's post of yesterday. "Uneducated"? "Dingbat"? "Threatened by women"? I didn't get any of that from Mark's post. I thought Mark's post was just what it said it was: a loving tribute to a wonderful wife. As for Ronald, the lady doth protest too much.

Tony B said (June 24, 2016):

This guy may have been a Catholic in name but his thinking is entirely pagan. In fact he disparages the principles, both written and traditional, which Catholics live by. His belief system may accurately be labeled "pagan Americanism" or "American paganism," comes out the same.

Dan said (June 24, 2016):

I'm perplexed by Ronald's reaction to Mark's marriage. I can only surmise that he misunderstood. I just read Mark' article again and I just don't get the image of a "dingbat, who's only passions are housecleaning and cooking and gardening and saying "Yes, dear."

Roland's created a straw man and named it 'Mark'. It's uncharitable to put words in other people's mouths. Not an persuasive argument strategy either.


Al Thompson said (June 24, 2016):

I'm not impressed with this article. The idea of a woman being equal with a man is ludicrous. That's like saying that the Sun and the Moon are the same thing. In the natural order, it doesn't work that way and it is the feminism that is destroying families.

Men are physically and mentally stronger than women. If a man can't be stronger than a woman it is probably because he has been emasculated by feminism. Feminism has turned upside down the natural order that should exist between a man and a woman. I don't expect a woman to change the oil on my car. I don't expect to see a woman on a football field. Woman should be at home raising the children taking care of the household.

Ronald criticizes Mark by saying that he wants an "uneducated" dingbat. Most of the dingbats are in colleges and universities and these libtard teachers have nothing to teach anyone. It isn't a matter of ego, it is a matter of the natural order which God made man and woman. And this kind of thinking is what is destroying society. Any woman who has graduated from college or university will have a twisted view of life because they were taught by libtards. Hardly a recipe for a happy family life. I'll take the "dingbat."

Men and women should compliment each other with the man as the head of the relationship. Granted, immature men cannot handle this responsibility because they have learned to be unproductive douche bags raised in a feminist environment. If they had fathers, they would learn to be productive. The children will always come out better when they are raised in a family that lives within the natural order. Feminism turns all of that upside down. A man is one thing and a woman is another.

A woman's commitment to her husband is not a form of slavery, but it is her intelligence knowing her proper place in supporting her husband. I'll tell you, a man will try to move heaven and earth for a great woman. That's not slavery but true love.

Dan H said (June 24, 2016):

Ronald says his wife is his equal... well, here's how 'equal' works with women.

The family does what you think is right if she agrees with you...
And does what she thinks if she disagrees with you.

Ronald is confused about a REAL man's motivations. They aren't about domination... they are centered on the husband's responsibility. Even the secular State recognizes that responsibility and makes the husband responsible for his wife's actions. Don't think so? Try getting divorced from a woman who has run up a lot of debt against your wishes and you'll find that the husband is jointly and severally liable for ALL of it. It is this RESPONSIBILITY that drives the husband's need to have the final word, not any desire to dominate someone. Until the secular state makes women fully responsible for their own debt, there is no 'equal' in marriage. Even that 'archaic, unenlightened' book recognized the fact that women make rash decisions that are detrimental to the family and husbands need the authority to block that to protect their family from the feminine propensity for believing deceptive lies are good for them. (Numbers 30)

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at