Archive | housework RSS feed for this section

Sex contracts? Sounds like so much fun. How do you enforce defaults?

13 Mar

Tracey Cox, who writes a sex advice column at the Daily Mail has some advice for couples who aren’t having the amount of sex they would like:  what you need to do is think about all the things your partner considers romantic or seductive and then set the stage so that you can deliver those things, whatever they are.  If flowers and candlelight are the things that make your partner’s heart beat faster, then pick some up on your way home and turn the lights off when you get there.


If your partner finds it hot that you sit beside him on the couch watching footie, wearing nothing but his favorite team jersey, well, put the kids to bed and find a game to watch.


The key thing is to put your partner’s pleasure above your own, and use his or her preferences to encourage a little more time spent pursuing one of life’s great pleasures.


No, silly, that’s not how you have more sex with your partner.  What you NEED to do is think about what YOU want, and then write a detailed contract specifying all the particulars and then you both need to SIGN THAT CONTRACT (blood is optional, apparently) because nothing says “I love you darling and want to have sex with you” quite like the concept of CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION.


So romantic.

Usually, contracts come with some penalty for defaulting.  That opens up a lot of possibilities, doesn’t it?


You know, I can’t quite figure out where the caricature of the modern career lady as a dour shrew sucking the joy out of everything comes from?


And it seems that you can use this technique of contractual obligations for more than one aspect of life and love, too.  Look!  Jezebel has instructions for How to Make a Dude Sweep the Kitchen Floor (Correctly), Without You Even Having to Tell Him.

Make him!





Wow. Life with these ladies sounds like so much fun.


Here is just SOME of Jezebel’s list of considerations:

Do I do half of the laundry and half of the dishes every day?

Do I buy half of the clothes and toys?

Do I take on half of the management of my care providers?

Do I write half of the lists and notes?

Do I wake up in the middle of the night to calm the baby half of the time?

Do I change half of the diapers?

Do I plan half of the travel?

Do I track half of the household budget?

Do I put the kids to bed half of the time?

Do I make half of the grocery, sports, and afterschool lesson runs?

Do I write half of the e-mails to my kids’ teachers?

Do I watch the kids for half of the weekend and for half of every weeknight?

Seems like they forgot something, no?




This just leaves me with my head shaking.  In what world does this make sense?

Women work fewer hours

At idiotic jobs (Hello, File Clerk! – Good job knowing your alphabet!  Yay!)

file clerk

That require little to no physical effort

Make less money

And still demand the right to define what gets done in a house and by whom.

Here’s an easy way to add more sex to your marriage:  stop being such an irrational witch and do the damn housework yourself!

You know what really confuses me?  Why do men marry these women?  How is it even possible that they HAVE husbands?  What do men get out of relationships with these women?  Contractual sex, a shit ton of housework, and the thankless task of bringing home more money and working more hours at more physically demanding jobs.


I think I’d rather be single.

Short post today – my kids are off school for the week and they are trashing the joint. I won’t be setting up any Excel spreadsheets to make sure I have correctly bitched out Mr. JB for not doing exactly half of all this additional work.

Oh, and I’ll probably get laid tonight, too.

Lots of love,


Babies? We don’t need no stinking babies! The genius of Amanda Marcotte. Again.

7 Feb


There are two kinds of dumb in this world:  bag of hammers dumb, and Amanda Marcotte.  She’s a blogger at Slate Magazine’s Double XX feature, and she has really outdone herself this time.


America Is Doomed Unless Women Start Having More Babies. How Convenient.

Hmm.  Really?  That’s interesting.  I know we can blame men for ALMOST EVERYTHING, but declining fertility, too? For fuck’s sake, men, would you please start having babies? What, you think women should do everything?  Sorry lads, we’re too busy working on oil rigs and flunking out of STEM courses to have babies.

Who needs babies, anyways?

Oh, just, you know, the ENTIRE WORLD.  I could be wrong, and correct me if you think so, but I believe babies actually grow into adults and without them, WE HAVE NO SOCIETY.

Let’s look at Amanda’s first sentence (her grammar improves, trust me).

Ever since it became less socially acceptable to argue openly that women—at least white, middle-class women—owe it to men to curtail our professional ambitions in favor of a life as our husbands’ support staff, conservatives started to panic about declining birth rates.

Ladies, you must not curtail your professional ambitions.  And what are those professional ambitions?  Oh yeah, to work as SUPPORT STAFF for someone who is NOT your husband.

Yay, ladies!  Don’t be support staff for the man you love!  Go and do it for someone else.


Ok, that’s just one job.  I hear you.  What are the other jobs?



Retail sales clerks

Home health care workers




Childcare workers

So, let’s see.  Women found being a housewife so terribly dull and dreary and oppressive that they flocked to the labor market to teach children their alphabet, tend to the sick, fold clothes, care for the elderly, cook food, fetch food, clean house and take care of small children. And that’s just all the ladies who couldn’t find a cushy job organizing a man’s professional life.

Organizing, tending, fetching, wiping noses and asses, cooking and cleaning.

Wow.  Those are some pretty big ambitions.  Kinda makes you wonder, doesn’t it?  If it’s not the actual JOB that women dislike, since they clearly don’t mind doing those things for OTHER people, what is it that women didn’t like?

We’ll get to that.  For now, let’s go back to our favorite little retard, Amanda.


And don’t give me any crap about using the word “retard”.  Retard DOES NOT mean someone with Down Syndrome any more than gay means “effervescently happy” or computer means “someone who does calculations”. Language evolves.  It’s called semantic change, and it’s WHAT language IS.

To save America, women, especially those aforementioned pesky middle-class, white women, are going to have to start having more babies at a younger age, the argument goes. That this demand means that women will end up curtailing their ambitions and moving into the support-staff role is simply a coincidence, of course. Nothing to see here.

Uhm, Amanda?  WOMEN HAVE NEVER LEFT THEIR SUPPORT STAFF ROLE.  That is what they do, by and large.  Women are not building airplanes or crafting bridges or curing cancer or designing new technologies or searching for the Higgs-Boson.  They are SUPPORT STAFF for the MEN who are building airplanes and crafting bridges and curing cancer and designing new technologies and searching for the Higgs-Boson (it’s not a done deal, yet folks!).


And those are the ambitious ones.  The rest of them are fetching and carrying food and sorting out shit on shelves or scanning things across a bar-code reader (designed by men!) or taking care of children, the sick or the elderly.

Your outliers don’t mean shit.  Look at the facts.  The doors have been thrown open to women for decades, and most of them are still housewives.

They’re just not at home.

If women don’t want to have more children, then instead of abandoning women’s equality as a goal, we should rework our economic system so it doesn’t rely on a steadily growing population to function.

WOMEN’S EQUALITY?  Equal to what? Because it sure as hell isn’t men.

Where is our Mozart?

Where is our Galileo?

Where is our Hawking?

Where is our Mersenne?


Oh, wait, I know.  She’s busy getting an order of wings ready.


Let’s rework our economic system, shall we?

First of all, ladies, stop going to college.  Seriously.  Just stop.  Most of what you study is complete and utter bullshit (film theory degree here).  You don’t need an exhaustive knowledge of the Sonnets of the Portuguese to be a secretary.  You need to know your alphabet, how to tell time and the days of the week.

Secondly, get out of the labor market during your reproductive years.  Stop taking care of other people’s children and parents and husbands and go take care of your own.  You can get to filing shit alphabetically AFTER you have made your contribution to society by raising stable, happy, healthy children and supporting a man who is probably out there doing something useful.


Those two things combined would have quite an impact.  First of all, the labor market would contract dramatically and wages for men would rise correspondingly, allowing them to support a wife and young family.  Funding that is currently being poured into Children’s Literature and Urban Anthropology would go instead to the STEM fields, where all the real innovation and work is done.  By men, of course.  Social spending by the government would decline as women contribute more to the care of children and the elderly.  Federal tax revenues would stay about the same, because the fact is that while there are MORE jobs in the current labor market, there is not more MONEY.  The money would shift to men, and they would pay tax as usual on that income.  If anything, reduced need for social spending would lower the government’s outlay, giving them MORE money to spend on defence and debt repayment and infrastructure.


So why don’t women want to do this?

Because it would make them dependent on a man during their reproductive years.  They would need to rely on a man for income, and if you are going to rely on a man, you will have to give him something in return for that.  His own children, first of all.  Oh my.  Well that will require fidelity, won’t it? #sorrysluts


If he is heading out into the labor market every day, earning a wage for all of you, you will have to accommodate the stresses and anxieties that entails.  How do you do that?


Be nice.  Cook.  Clean.  Take of the children. Teach them manners and how to read and how to count.  Take care of your parents.  His and yours.  Keep the house organized.  Fold clothes.  Book your appointments and needs around his schedule.  Watch your finances.  Don’t spend too much money.


In other words, do all the jobs that women do in the labor market.  Secretary, teacher, retail sales clerk, home care worker, nurse, waitress, cook and maid.

But don’t do it for money.  Do it for love.  Love for your husband, love for your children, love for your parents, love for your country.  The alternative is to do everything for yourself.  Your own goals (be a secretary!), your own ambitions (fetch people food!), your own fulfilment (fold clothes at the Gap!), your own actualization (I never see my children!).

There is plenty of time to get to being a secretary or a waitress or a teacher.  Children are only young for a short period of time.  The real problem with people like Amanda is that she has uncritically accepted a male timeline for achieving what she defines as “equality”. Go to college, repay horrendous loans, build a “career” (if you can call being a secretary a career) – all during a woman’s reproductive years.  The result is obvious:  no babies.


All to avoid being dependant on a man for a few years. Amanda is probably one of those feminists who would claim that she “loves men”.  And yet, she’s terrified of them.  She has bought, hook line and sinker, the idea that men are abusive power-mongers who will oppress and mistreat their dependent wives and children without remorse or hesitation.  And she is hell-bent on making sure other women believe that, too.

And we all pay for that.  Dearly. The consequences will be stark when we have failed to produce the next generation.  The most important thing we lose is love. Feminism has destroyed the family, destroyed the love between men and women and destroyed the love between parents and children.

How very sad.

True love, and true happiness comes from loving another person.  For most of us, the greatest love we will ever know will be for our children.


Who needs babies?  We all do.  Without them, we have nothing.

There is only one happiness in this life, to love and be loved.

George Sand

Lots of love,


Hey married dudes! Want to have more sex? With your wife, I mean. STOP DOING HOUSEWORK!

31 Jan

File this one under “no shit Sherlock”, but it turns out that married couples who adhere to a gendered division of household labor have more sex than those who don’t.


Yep, it turns out that playing out traditional masculine and feminine roles has an impact on sexual desire, and therefore on sexual frequency. Guys who take out the garbage, mow the lawn, pay the bills and take care of the vehicles are getting laid 20 more times a year than the kitchen-bitches slaving over a hot stove.

kitchen bitch

And obviously, the inverse is true, too. Ladies who cook, vacuum, fold the laundry and make the kid’s dentist appointments are getting love 20 more times, too.


Why should this be? I have a theory: I think it has to do with respect. Feminism has spent a long time trying to convince both men and women that gender is socially constructed. That in and of itself is not a bad thing, necessarily. Stupid, but not bad. Where feminism went really wrong was to define femininity as POSITIVE, all the while ignoring the not so pleasant qualities associated with the feminine, while simultaneously defining masculinity as NEGATIVE, all the while ignoring the wonderful things about masculinity.

Feminism is straight up a theory of female supremacy.

Ladies rock! Men suck!


Of course by ladies, we mean white ladies, so don’t get excited, all you ladies of color. You are here to do all the shit-work the white ladies don’t want to do anymore. So get your mops and get at it.

Once you accept the premise that the feminine is a priori superior to the masculine, the plan of attack becomes quite obvious: men must become feminine or be forever defined as inferior and unworthy. It’s a tongue in cheek aphorism that feminists hate men, but of course, that’s not true. They love men. As long as men act like women.


Of course, Jezebel responded to the research, conducted at the University of Washington using a sample size of 4500 (that’s a good sample) with reason and rationality. They took a careful look at the data and then tried to come up with some hypothesis that might explain why couples following traditional gender roles might have increased sexual desire for one another.


Yeah, right. Nope. What they did was mock and ridicule the data, and then set up some kind of bullshit sexytime dollars, which is pretty rich, considering the data indicates that SEX is exactly what they won’t be getting. Well, not as often as the couples in the study who rejected the idea that women’s work is man’s work and the two are interchangeable.

Look at how they titled the piece: Cleanliness is next to manliness, which chores will get a man laid?

There you have feminism in a nutshell. Sex is something WOMEN give to MEN as a reward for doing whatever SHE defines as necessary.

Good dog!


Sex as an act of bonding, an expression of the deepest love and care, a mutually satisfying and pleasurable experience does not even occur to these women. Nope. Sex is a tool, a weapon, something you can use to coerce men into doing whatever shit these women want.

And oh my! We have a word for coerced sex. We do! I know it! It’s on the tip of my tongue. Give me a second…

Oh yeah!


Now isn’t that fascinating? A long time ago, a gorgeous, svelte, luscious lady, the pure embodiment of femininity, said that “all heterosexual sex is rape”.


By which she means MEN are raping WOMEN.

Here’s a new one for you: all sex with a feminist is rape. Women raping men.

Dudes, if you are getting laid tonight in exchange for cooking dinner or sweeping the floor or folding the laundry, AND YOU WOULD NOT OTHERWISE HAVE DONE THOSE THINGS, you are getting raped. Hey, lots of men love to cook, and good for them. The best cooks in the world are men # sorryfeminists.


But when you have been ordered into the kitchen by a sulky bitch who figures “it’s your turn and if you don’t do it, I won’t have sex with you”, then you sir, are being coerced, and that is rape. Down with rape culture!


No, I won’t cook dinner

No, I won’t vacuum

No, I won’t pick up all those fucking Barbie shoes

No, I won’t fluff the throw cushions

No, no, no!

Give the rape a pass, dudes. Traditional gendered division of labor is how you put more sex into your relationship. Sex based on love and affection and respect and admiration and desire.

Take a page from Marilyn’s book:


Sex is a part of nature. I go along with nature.

Marilyn Monroe

Me, too!

Lots of love,


%d bloggers like this: