Direct Link to Latest News

 

Men Love Women Who Empower Them

December 1, 2019

ginzburg-2.jpg
(Don't be fooled by the ugly exterior. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is ugly inside as well.) 

Heterosexuals now face an insidious attack on their gender identity as bad as anything experienced by homosexuals.

Satanist social engineers exemplified by Justice Ruth Bader Ginzburg (left) have tampered with the fundamental sexual alchemy of nature. Heterosexuality is based on the exchange of female (worldly) power for male power expressed as love. This is feminine. Men want power; women want love. Heterosexual union is based on this exchange. 
(When men trade power for love, they are feminized.) 

By empowering females and emasculating males ("gender equality"), Satanists (Communists) have sabotaged male-female complementarity and the lives of millions. 

The heterosexual male has a natural instinct to lead his wife lovingly. Heterosexual females want to be lovingly led by their husbands. A man loves a woman because she entrusts her power to him. He wants to possess her entirely, and she longs to be possessed. This is played out in the sex act. He always respects her individuality because he wants her to want to belong to him. 

A woman cannot respect or love any man she can control or dominate. Trusting a man is the way a woman shows she loves him. Men understand this instinctively. 

The Illuminati are Satanists who believe in corrupting what is natural and healthy. The fact that media and government are attacking heterosexuality is a sign of how far subversion has gone.

Disclaimer- I realize this is not the only template for a successful marriage. But it may help many men and women who are lost.


Below, Melanie describes a working model of marriage. A woman accepts her husband's leadership and he uses this power to make her happy. A man won't take responsibility for what is not his. Female submissiveness is an expression of female love. 


"I realize now that when I was in control, the image I reflected back to my husband was the image of someone not entirely necessary, not entirely competent, not worthy of my trust and confidence. And he lived like that person. Now we are both transformed."




Updated from Nov 15, 2016
The joy of the master-queen dynamic-king
 by Melanie 
(Abridged by henrymakow.com)


Since my husband became head of our home and our relationship, he just can't do enough to make me happy. I'm still trying to figure out exactly why this dynamic works the way it does. Before I became submissive, I was sure he didn't care about my feelings. He would create problems for me by leaving important things undone. It just didn't seem like he cared enough to make the effort. He didn't want to be reminded of his responsibilities or asked to do anything more. 

How could a man really care about me and yet care so little about making me happy? Yet I knew he loved me. I knew he wanted me to be happy. He often said so, and he often expressed his love very convincingly in words and lovemaking. So why not in particular, important actions? This was so puzzling and frustrating to me.

A piece of the puzzle fell into place when I realized how important self-determination is to him. He has to do things because he wants to. He has to take on responsibilities and obligations freely; once he's taken them on, he'll just about kill himself to meet them. 

But if he feels the responsibility or obligation foisted on him from without, he just won't accept it. He just won't do it, even if it's something "everyone does" or "a good husband does". 

If he hasn't chosen it, you can just forget it. I could beat my head against a wall until I went unconscious trying to get him to do things that I thought he should do because everyone else's husband does that, or because it's only fair, or whatever.

quote-a-truly-submissive-woman-is-to-be-treasured-cherished-and-protected-for-it-is-only-she-anne-desclos-82-2-0212.jpg
When he became the head of the household and of our relationship, there was a shift in the way he viewed himself, and me, and our home, and our life. He seems to have a heightened sense of ownership, a heightened sense of being the man of the house, and a sudden willingness to do things. Suddenly he wants to help me with the dishes and make the bed! He seems to feel that everything is more "his" than it was before: me, the house, the money. And it is indeed more his, in the sense that he has more control over all those things.

Ownership is basically having control over. Although we use the word "mine" to describe things that are merely connected with us, real possession implies control. I believe the sense of ownership ties us (his home and family) to his self-determination somehow. We are not so much things outside himself, demanding onerous duties; we are part of him, and doing things for us is more like doing things for himself. Furthermore, being in command means he makes decisions and carries them out. He does things because he decides they should be done, not because I told him about them or reminded him of them.

What does it mean to own another human being? Obviously, slavery springs to mind as an ugly institution that has fortunately been mostly stamped out. To own a person as if the person were an object, having total control over their destiny and no regard for their feelings, is obviously not good. But when a person desires to be possessed by another, this can be wonderful...

A man sees himself reflected in the eyes of his woman. She can make him look small, incompetent, and weak. Or she can make him look strong, heroic, larger than life, a good man and true. And seeing himself so, he can be all that. In this way, her submission and trust make him a hero. A hero who holds her happiness and well-being in his hands. He will cherish that happiness and well-being above everything--above his own, perhaps--because that hero in her eyes is worth more to him than money, status, or his own comfort. This is the dynamic of the master and his queen. He cannot do enough for her because of the way she sees him.

I didn't see myself as a controlling woman, but I suppose I was. It's not a bad thing to be; it all depends on the circumstances. Sometimes a woman's survival depends on it. But when a woman would be happier if she had less control and she still won't give it up, I think it's because she was wounded at some point. Perhaps she was orphaned in childhood, or abused, or abandoned by her parents. Perhaps she was hurt in adolescence by selfish, uncaring men. Whatever happened, something convinced her that she was on her own, that if she didn't take care of herself, no one would. She is, you might say, a woman warrior in a hostile world.

When a woman like this submits to a man and gives him control of her life, is this not a truly awesome gift? She is telling him that he inspires enough trust to overcome all her doubts. Is this not a much greater gift than the submission of an untroubled girl who has been cherished all her life?

I realize now that when I was in control, the image I reflected back to my husband was the image of someone not entirely necessary, not entirely competent, not worthy of my trust and confidence. And he lived like that person. Now we are both transformed.

-----------------------
rectangle2.jpg



First Comment from Ken Adachi

The quote attributed to Ruth Ginsberg in the photo  is typical of the falsified  pretense (or false dichotomy) upon which her 'revolutionary' dictum is based. Those who wish to manipulate historical perception to their liking, often use this ploy to inculcate the Unthinking.

We don't know the context of the quote, so we can only judge her words, but her words say enough. She implies that the "tradition" of civil law marriage (the state, the courts and their blacked-robed appointees) has supplanted the  previous "tradition" of common law marriage. But the tradition of marriage has never been a 'common law' tradition. That's absurd. Marriage has always been - down through the ages - a solemn ritual, officiated by a priest of some sort, where vows are exchanged and promises are made that are binding upon both before God.

Of course, you're expected to view this 'tradition' movement as a forward projection, from the barbaric (common law), to the more 'civilized', modern tradition where the state and their blacked-robed representatives have bequeathed to themselves the power to decree who is married and who is not, rather than the Church and God, where the authority rightfully - and traditionally - has resided.

Feminists, like Ginsburg, are responsible for the wholesale destruction of the sanctity of marriage in America as a solemn binding between a man, a woman and God with the  imposition of 'no fault divorce' in the United States in 1975.  This vile 'law' permits anyone to simply throw away their spouse, like so much garbage, if they are dissatisfied with him or her, for any reason whatsoever. People like Ginsburg are a pox on humanity and the very architects of societal destruction and familial dissolution.


Jennifer wrote-

"She can make him look small, incompetent, and weak. Or she can make him look strong, heroic, larger than life, a good man and true. And seeing himself so, he can be all that. In this way, her submission and trust make him a hero."

I disagree with Melanie's magical ideas that a woman's play-acting and envisioning can make her man into a hero.  Suzanne's comments hit the truth.  A man's sense of who he is, his responsibilities are very weak and pathetic, if they are based on a woman's opinion of him and not on a higher spiritual source from God. No matter how much a woman treats her man like a "hero" if he has a double life as a Mason, homosexual, womanizer, pedophile --nothing she can do or say will make this loser into a hero and it will only be a matter of time before their lies come to the surface --but sadly for many traditional wives-it can be years before they realize their life was robbed by these rotten men. 



Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for "Men Love Women Who Empower Them "

Tony B said (December 3, 2019):

The FACT of civilization is that women have been designed as helpmates - followers; encouragers; backers - not as leaders, for which they simply are not equipped. A satanic attempt to make over women into imitation men has already sickened both sexes throughout the whole world. Ask any truly mature woman if she would rather have a man or a woman in control of her life. Yet many "modern" women will automatically vote for a woman president, never believing for a second that her vote is being manipulated.


Ken Adachi said (December 3, 2019):

The quote attributed to Ruth Ginsberg in the photo is typical of the falsified pretense (or false dichotomy) upon which her 'revolutionary' dictum is based. Those who wish to manipulate historical perception to their liking, often use this ploy to inculcate the Unthinking.

We don't know the context of the quote, so we can only judge her words, but her words say enough. She implies that the "tradition" of civil law marriage (the state, the courts, and their blacked-robed appointees) has supplanted the previous "tradition" of common law marriage. But the tradition of marriage has never been a 'common law' tradition. That's absurd. Marriage has always been - down through the ages - a solemn ritual, officiated by a priest of some sort, where vows are exchanged and promises are made that are binding upon both before God.

Of course, you're expected to view this 'tradition' movement as a forward projection, from the barbaric (common law) to the more 'civilized', modern tradition where the state and their blacked-robed representatives have bequeathed to themselves the power to decree who is married and who is not, rather than the Church and God, where the authority rightfully - and traditionally - has resided.

Feminists, like Ginsburg, are responsible for the wholesale destruction of the sanctity of marriage in America as a solemn binding between a man, a woman and God with the imposition of 'no-fault divorce' in the United States in 1975. This vile 'law' permits anyone to simply throw away their spouse, like so much garbage, if they are dissatisfied with him or her, for any reason whatsoever. People like Ginsburg are a pox on humanity and the very architects of societal destruction and familial dissolution.


Robert K said (December 2, 2019):

This discussion should be including the effects of the pressure put on people by the Money Power, which is usually assumed to be conservative but is, in fact, revolutionary, to adapt to financial realities--i.e., the constant pilfering of the benefits of technological progress so that the latter actually augments personal financial precariousness. The community could overcome this racket if it took seriously the admonition (by Him who said He came that we might have life abundantly) to "love your neighbor as yourself", but we are too busy competing against each other for largely useless jobs.


Gabriel said (December 2, 2019):

I'm very old style, I had a good example with my parents, who were together forever until my father died a few years ago. My father always working hard and my mom always at home. Nowadays it's a little different due to a harder economic situation. Now the woman, for the most part, needs to contribute so people can make it.

My wife is super accomplished, very smart. But she also had a great example, her parents have been married for almost 45 years. So we work really good together, we pulled together in every way. Always with a touch of dominance and submission. I think the parent's example is key; and their guidance and education. Unfortunately, in today"s clown world, these examples are quickly disappearing. The freaks of today, created by the powers that be, are just lost. The old stylers are becoming a thing of the past."


JJ said (December 2, 2019):

I put the blame of this deception almost solely on women.

Years ago the world was an agricultural world. Even in the cities work was hard. Animals, especially the big ones need a masculine hand and carrying buckets of water and feed to them as well as cleaning up after them was way too much for any woman to handle. Farms are like electric shocks of reality to even the most hardened lesbian dyke who will sooner or later have to flirt her way through a harvesting or a milking session to get men to finish the job.

Modern society is really no different even with socialism. It's this simple. Equal work deserves equal pay but if women can do only half the work they should get half the pay! If it takes two women to lift something one man can lift (and we're talking about a longer period of time than an hour), be honest and go to the man and demand half the pay! End of argument!

Men are not perfect but believe me, I've worked with hundreds of men in the industry and if women knew what men actually think of them and their utter stupidity they would shrink back in great horror. Women, of course, should be submissive in marriages. It shouldn't matter what the man does. What matters is truth and reality. Women, have integrity!


Suzanne said (November 16, 2016):

Usually I really love your work. However, in this instance because of my own personal experience, I must add my thoughts.

I was married for 25 years. I was a stay at home mother and wife, who often told my husband how wonderful he was, how lucky I was to have him, what a great provider he was, etc., etc., etc. I kept a good figure, a clean home and have raised three great, responsible kids. When he came home, he was waited on hand and foot - he didn’t even have to take his plate off the table after dinner! None of this stopped him from being a porn addict or cheating on me. He decided that “life was too short” and left home, bought a motorbike and started yoga.

So a Male Dominant Marriage (as I had) will only work if your husband is honourable to start with.
--
Suzanne

The heterosexual contract is power for love. As soon as you saw he was breaking the contract, it ended.

h



Connie said (November 16, 2016):

It is important not to judge... These days, most women marrying past the age of 18 have de facto become 'wounded women warriors in a hostile world.' Following the trend of countless daughters raised to be “independent”, the transition from single to married life is quite the challenge.

What we need is to take a giant step backward in time, with a stealth campaign to keep young women living at home and marrying young. Who is the single best person to get past our current cultural programming with a sales pitch for this? None other than a girl's own father. This is exciting because I think the culture is ready for it. After all, they have elected an alpha-male named Donald Trump.


Brian said (November 15, 2016):

Good work Mr. Makow. You are a voice of logic in a world of fools. Our family took a very different approach to this disease that has rotted out our most precious institution called marriage. We threw out our TV. I know sounds pretty dumb but it worked. We just went back to our roots based on love respect and honor. As a man I refuse to run from my responsibilities and my wife stands firmly behind me. Our relationship has given us freedom and a moral compass to base our lives on. I protect and provide She encourages and provides love and support. In the end we are just plain happy.

These people who do not have the privilege of being in a responsible relationship are poor regardless of their material worth. I truly feel sorry for them. Hopefully they will someday accept the natural order and find happiness. Meanwhile we will enjoy raising our children and going about our lives. Life is choices I feel strongly we have made the right ones.


Al Thompson said (November 15, 2016):

My experience has been that when the woman tries to take the place of men of leadership in a marriage she is going outside of the natural order. Now, I can't explain why this is but the facts show that a submissive wife and a strong and mature husband is the ideal set-up for a marriage. Everything works better as each person has their job to do but it is the husband that should be dominant. I liken it to the sun and the moon. The moon is one thing and the sun is another. Both are part of the creation and it is the moon that is subservient to the sun. That is simply the natural order of life.

The communists and Satanists want to turn all of that upside down. Libtards like Ginsberg and the Rock-A-F**kers do everything they can to destroy the natural order of life and put in its place a twisted version of their own perverted thoughts. This ends up being a disaster for the establishment of happy families.

No one should ever listen to libtard ideas. They have nothing constructive to say about anything and all of their ideas are stupid; not just some idea but all are stupid.

Any couple who stays within the natural boundaries of a dominant husband and a submissive wife will have happier and long lasting marriages. I've seen this over and over again.
http://verydumbgovernment.blogspot.com/2012/10/to-find-good-woman.html


Gary Kinghorn said (November 15, 2016):

I follow this woman MD/counselor who is an advocate of natural remedies for depression. She writes to help women of all ages. But this article on the false destructive feminism exhibited by HRC and women today, and what feminism should be (and may become) is amazing. She puts the whole reality of the election and the possibilities now for women in perfect context.

http://kellybroganmd.com/feminism-and-the-election/


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