0
0

[–] NamelessCrewmember ago 

Then block it. I block all sorts of things I don't like. I cannot see your anti freedom angle, people may choose their lives, some choose based off historical data, some choose the expiramental group.

0
0

[–] 9580947? ago 

Sexism: irrational judgement based on biological sex.

Nothing irrational about noticing that our current model of "everybody is exactly the same" family structure - or lack thereof - isn't working.

0
0

[–] brucethemoose ago  (edited ago)

They preach about good values over there. Alot of couples could use more of that.

But yeah, there are some implied/unspoken icky aspects too, especially the whole submissiveness and "traditional roles" thing :/

Reminds me of Christianity. The values they preach also fall along the lines of "don't be an asshole", which is fantastic, hence churches often function as community/charity centers. But they run into the same problem of holding onto certain traditions that should really be left behind in the century they came from...

1
3

[–] HungryCrow 1 point 3 points (+4|-1) ago  (edited ago)

So don't subscribe. There's no action you need to take besides inaction. You've also missed the point, they're not anti-freedom, they're pro-happiness. Traditional families are happy families.

1
1

[–] OKythen 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

I think they're anti-freedom

Oh OK.

You have the right to that opinion because you know freedom...

As far as I understand they are not hatin' on you like everyone else is.

They are happy in their own little (dream) world.

Sexist?

Oh you must be new here (from reddit)

There are quite a few pretty rough areas of vote and you are picking a fight with /v/TraditionalWives

3
0

[–] Misanthropia 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago 

It's a bunch of fat permavirgins fantasizing about women being submissive to them.

0
1

[–] draegspir 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Um..I'm pretty sure they anything but fat and virgins. The idea behind being a traditional wife is to be feminine and desirable so as to play a complementary role to their spouse.

2
2

[–] WedgeSerif 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

Did they teach you that in your Gender Studies course?

1
1

[–] Misanthropia 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

0
4

[–] Kleyno 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

They can be anti-freedom if they want, so long as it is self-imposed.

The instant they start dictating to others outside of their group, how they should live their lives, and advocate punishing those that ignore or disagree with them, then we have something to worry about.

Until then, let them do their thing in peace.

1
-1

[–] varialus 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Minor point but I'd say that "should" should be "must" in the way you phrased your comment. I think it's fine, although sometimes a bit abrasive, for people to tell other people how they should live their lives, but not how they must live their lives. Of course you did say "dictate" so it still sorta came across that way, which is why I said it's a minor point.