4 ms·

The article briefly touches on the links between the "tradwife" movement and the alt-right, but doesn't really press on, even though it also contains these poig

The article briefly touches on the links between the "tradwife" movement and the alt-right, but doesn't really press on, even though it also contains these poignant examples: ... Estee Williams, a quasi-Marilyn Monroe with white-blond waves and a cinched waist, advocate marital subservience. Others, like the Australian Jasmine Dinis, sell Biblical womanhood affirmations. One, the Canadian Gwen Swinarton, has pivoted from making porn videos for OnlyFans and A.S.M.R. content for YouTube to the trad-wife space. (In a recent TikTok testimony, she credited the transition to God.) Then there are more openly political, like Abby Roth, who splices mothering tips with anti-abortion content. Pettitt, the O.G., is a rare Brit and a purist [...] set out her Christian beliefs and principles of womanhood long before the new generation of trad wives began filming themselves saucily kneading sourdough. and there is more in the linked article from The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2020/jan/27/tradwives-new-trend-submissive-women-dark-heart-history https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2020/jan/27/tradwives-ne...) In my opinion anyone should be free to decide how they define their roles in their relationship/marriage. If both are happy in a "traditional" marriage with a breadwinner and a housewife, who am I to judge, but there is something very eerie about how radical some people can get about these things. To me tradwifes almost seem like the feminine counterparts to incels. May they be very happy together.

giraffe_lady 2y ago
Yeah this whole thing is somewhere between, or an intersection of, roleplay fetish and far-right propaganda. It cannot be effectively understood as a movement or "trend" without locating it as such. Cowardly journalism to even try.
ToucanLoucan 2y ago
> In my opinion anyone should be free to decide how they define their roles in their relationship/marriage. If both are happy in a "traditional" marriage with a breadwinner and a housewife, who am I to judge, but there is something very eerie about how radical some people can get about these things. Algorithms reward extremism. Every major social media algorithm takes what you're already consuming and tries to find more of it. Ergo, the more things your content is "more" than, the greater audience pull you'll get. This is basically what created the alt-right, or the intellectual dark web, or whatever you want to call it. Attention economies naturally produce more extreme views because people are monetarily incentivized to become more extreme. This isn't a new thing, we saw this much earlier in different ways with radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones, just as with most things, the Internet and social media cranked it up to 11. To what extent they "really believe it" is between them and their supposed god and I wouldn't speculate on it. I'm sure many do. I'm sure many also turn the camera off and say "thank fuck we're done for this week" then resume a relatively banal existence. Both however are corrosive to society.
- stantaylor 2y ago
  You basically made the comment that I was considering. The problem isn't whether some people want to live in specific types of relationships. The problem is how social media amplifies extremism, as you note. It makes a small minority of people doing a specific thing look like an actual trend when it isn't. Throw in monetization--people making money peddling specific beliefs as if they actually believe and live them when in fact they may not--and it's just a recipe for a mess.
8338550bff96 2y ago
I think the misstep is trying to articulate these kinds of inherently personal lifestyle decisions on the broader scale of societies. It just falls into the typical tribal traps. It would be nice if we could live in a society where you as an individual could decide on the lifestyle that you would like to live and have that personal decision not pigeonhole you into sectarian groups and ideologies that have nothing to do with your personal decision.
- micheljansen 2y ago
  Sure but then also don’t go on Instagram or TikTok promoting that lifestyle as the ideology of a sectarian group.
gadders 2y ago
Obviously as it's the left-leaning New Yorker they will choose the least sympathetic examples. I think the Trad Wife thing should be more about motherhood than what sort of a wife you are. People - women especially - should consciously weigh up the pros and cons of spending your life doing PowerPoints for some company that would replace you in a heartbeat if you dropped dead at your desk vs being more present in your children's life (or even having them in the first place).
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  They chose an actually extremely soft approach to this, almost completely skipping over the question of the role of these influencers in the ecosystem of right wing religious nationalist propaganda they are clearly a part of. > People - women especially - should consciously weigh up the pros and cons of spending your life doing PowerPoints for some company People - women especially - already do this! Talk to them about it! They mostly all have extremely fraught and internally conflicted experiences of and beliefs about their capitulation to economic & social pressure and the demands that places on their own desires & values & hopes for their families and their futures. The fact that some still do choose professional achievement for some part of their lives doesn't mean they haven't considered the consequences or alternatives. And also, I mean, it's not a novel observation to point out that these women all have serious professional jobs: influencer. The cumulative stresses & demands of the life in front of the camera are well attested and articulated at this point. The effects of this sort of blurring of spheres and public professionalization of caregiving on the children who grow up in it is just beginning to become apparent but I haven't noticed anyone thinking it looks good for them.
- micheljansen 2y ago
  That’s such a false dichotomy. There is a whole spectrum of existence between being a corporate PowerPoint drone and being a subservient housewife.
  - gadders 2y ago
    I agree, but I never mentioned subservience at all. Those are your words.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
snapplebobapple 2y ago
The difference you are missing between a tradwife and an incel is the tradwife is perpetuating a social circle/family focused lifestyle (and often perpetuating the species through having a reasonable number of children) usually surrounded by a significant social support network of friends and family and like minded individuals. One is very much prosocial behavior (possibly in a way you don't agree with) and the other is antisocial. You may or may not agree with what each of those groups espouse but they are very different.
- suoduandao3 2y ago
  Far from all Incels are antisocial. An incel is just a (typically young and male) nonbreeding human of breeding age. Most species have them. Human societies in the past got around the problem a little by discouraging polygamy and shifting enough risk of death onto men only that men were a minority and likely to breed by default if they made it into adulthood. Modern society doesn't like fifteen year olds dying in farming accidents or warfare, so there are a lot of men involuntarily celibate instead. But that category covers a huge range of situations and behaviors. It's just become associated with the antisocial subset because it's an effective insult - by definition, no one wants to be incel.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- stogot 2y ago
  That was my immediate reaction. They’re completely different and I imagine incels would rage against all groups including this one. But I do agree with the original commenter in one way — leave traditional marriages alone and let them be happy.

giraffe_lady 2y ago

Yeah this whole thing is somewhere between, or an intersection of, roleplay fetish and far-right propaganda. It cannot be effectively understood as a movement or "trend" without locating it as such. Cowardly journalism to even try.

ToucanLoucan 2y ago

> In my opinion anyone should be free to decide how they define their roles in their relationship/marriage. If both are happy in a "traditional" marriage with a breadwinner and a housewife, who am I to judge, but there is something very eerie about how radical some people can get about these things. Algorithms reward extremism. Every major social media algorithm takes what you're already consuming and tries to find more of it. Ergo, the more things your content is "more" than, the greater audience pull you'll get. This is basically what created the alt-right, or the intellectual dark web, or whatever you want to call it. Attention economies naturally produce more extreme views because people are monetarily incentivized to become more extreme. This isn't a new thing, we saw this much earlier in different ways with radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones, just as with most things, the Internet and social media cranked it up to 11. To what extent they "really believe it" is between them and their supposed god and I wouldn't speculate on it. I'm sure many do. I'm sure many also turn the camera off and say "thank fuck we're done for this week" then resume a relatively banal existence. Both however are corrosive to society.

stantaylor 2y ago
You basically made the comment that I was considering. The problem isn't whether some people want to live in specific types of relationships. The problem is how social media amplifies extremism, as you note. It makes a small minority of people doing a specific thing look like an actual trend when it isn't. Throw in monetization--people making money peddling specific beliefs as if they actually believe and live them when in fact they may not--and it's just a recipe for a mess.

8338550bff96 2y ago

I think the misstep is trying to articulate these kinds of inherently personal lifestyle decisions on the broader scale of societies. It just falls into the typical tribal traps. It would be nice if we could live in a society where you as an individual could decide on the lifestyle that you would like to live and have that personal decision not pigeonhole you into sectarian groups and ideologies that have nothing to do with your personal decision.

micheljansen 2y ago
Sure but then also don’t go on Instagram or TikTok promoting that lifestyle as the ideology of a sectarian group.

gadders 2y ago

Obviously as it's the left-leaning New Yorker they will choose the least sympathetic examples. I think the Trad Wife thing should be more about motherhood than what sort of a wife you are. People - women especially - should consciously weigh up the pros and cons of spending your life doing PowerPoints for some company that would replace you in a heartbeat if you dropped dead at your desk vs being more present in your children's life (or even having them in the first place).

giraffe_lady 2y ago
They chose an actually extremely soft approach to this, almost completely skipping over the question of the role of these influencers in the ecosystem of right wing religious nationalist propaganda they are clearly a part of. > People - women especially - should consciously weigh up the pros and cons of spending your life doing PowerPoints for some company People - women especially - already do this! Talk to them about it! They mostly all have extremely fraught and internally conflicted experiences of and beliefs about their capitulation to economic & social pressure and the demands that places on their own desires & values & hopes for their families and their futures. The fact that some still do choose professional achievement for some part of their lives doesn't mean they haven't considered the consequences or alternatives. And also, I mean, it's not a novel observation to point out that these women all have serious professional jobs: influencer. The cumulative stresses & demands of the life in front of the camera are well attested and articulated at this point. The effects of this sort of blurring of spheres and public professionalization of caregiving on the children who grow up in it is just beginning to become apparent but I haven't noticed anyone thinking it looks good for them.
micheljansen 2y ago
That’s such a false dichotomy. There is a whole spectrum of existence between being a corporate PowerPoint drone and being a subservient housewife.
- gadders 2y ago
  I agree, but I never mentioned subservience at all. Those are your words.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

snapplebobapple 2y ago

The difference you are missing between a tradwife and an incel is the tradwife is perpetuating a social circle/family focused lifestyle (and often perpetuating the species through having a reasonable number of children) usually surrounded by a significant social support network of friends and family and like minded individuals. One is very much prosocial behavior (possibly in a way you don't agree with) and the other is antisocial. You may or may not agree with what each of those groups espouse but they are very different.

suoduandao3 2y ago
Far from all Incels are antisocial. An incel is just a (typically young and male) nonbreeding human of breeding age. Most species have them. Human societies in the past got around the problem a little by discouraging polygamy and shifting enough risk of death onto men only that men were a minority and likely to breed by default if they made it into adulthood. Modern society doesn't like fifteen year olds dying in farming accidents or warfare, so there are a lot of men involuntarily celibate instead. But that category covers a huge range of situations and behaviors. It's just become associated with the antisocial subset because it's an effective insult - by definition, no one wants to be incel.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
stogot 2y ago
That was my immediate reaction. They’re completely different and I imagine incels would rage against all groups including this one. But I do agree with the original commenter in one way — leave traditional marriages alone and let them be happy.