Traditional Values and Wives
If you have read any of my prior submissions you know I am no font of information on the mongering scene. I have spoken mostly about avoiding long term relationships, or, having rejected the best advice, where to look for long term relationships (see Adverse Selection by yours truly), and how to live in a long term relationship. These are things I think I may know something about, and where I can contribute. Some times I wish I were a Dana, madly exploring the outer fringes of sexuality, but alas, I am very conventional.
So, you have decided to ignore the advice of millions (billions?) of married men, and have decided to look for a wife. I hope you have been reading here and have at least decided to look for a wife in cultures that retain traditional values. The conventional wisdom in the US is rapidly becoming, “Don’t look for a good wife among the single women of the US; such a thing does not exist.” Of course the conventional wisdom is also that any man marrying in the west is an idiot. As a several times married man I have to agree, but I just can’t help myself. I am the product of my early conditioning. If you are also a victim of cultural programming, and feel it necessary to have a wife and family to have a full life, then at least go where you have a better chance of survival. Remember that, in the casino, you may have better odds at the Black Jack table than at the Roulette table, but the house always has a percentage. In the long run we all lose. However, in the memorable words of John Maynard Keynes, “In the long run we are all dead.” On that cheery note I will go on.
I will start by assuming you have found this traditional values woman, and are contemplating marriage. For those practicing pump and dump (one night stands), or catch and release (short relationships only), this may not strictly apply to your current situation, but the caveats may still be useful at some future date. Reading on is, of course, up to you (those three little words all men love to hear).
First you must understand what traditional values mean in a woman. The most important of these values is that family is the most important thing in her life. This is a vast improvement over what you will find in American/Western women. For them the most, and typically only, important thing in their lives is themselves. Yes, to them “it is all about ME.” I have seen many American girls and women wearing t-shirts that proudly proclaim this; and I detect no hint of irony. Responsibility and care for the family the two of you are creating is what you want in a wife. It is what is likely to make a long term commitment on her part possible. But, it also means that she will have the same concern for her birth family. There are some women from traditional cultures that will care only about their birth families. You must select carefully to avoid these women. You can not separate these two values. (What? You want what ever is in your best interest in everything, and leave the downside to be suffered by someone else? You demand to have two mutually exclusive things at the same time? What are you; a Feminist?)
You must negotiate limits which you can live with on what support you will give her birth family prior to marriage. Let me emphasize, prior to marriage. Once married you must strictly enforce these limits from the start. Don’t be a typical western man wimp. A traditional values woman will walk all over you, just like any other woman, if you let her. She will not respect you if you do not enforce what you said you would. Part of traditional values is that she wants you to demand her respect, and for you to lead the family. You must also provide support within the agreed limits without complaint. They are part of the deal you made; live with it gracefully. Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time. If you do not do all of the above you are looking at years of strife with your not so submissive traditional values wife.
Let me refute right here and now the myth that in woman traditional values equals submissive. This is frequently stated by Feminists trying to shame western men for looking outside the Anglo-sphere for partners. The fact that it is said by Feminists is sufficient proof that it is a dastardly lie. Remember that Lorena Bobbitt was from the traditional values culture of Ecuador. In the same light, the traditional culture of Thailand leads the world in per capita penis reattachments. Based on my Filipina wife, the Philippines can not be far behind.
I have a friend of about my age that was married once for less than a year, has no kids, is an only child, and has never had contact with any relatives on either side of his family other than his aged, and long time divorced, parents. He finds it inconceivable that any man would agree to any support of a woman’s family. He has trouble accepting that a man would support his wife. He is an island. I come from a large, extensive, and traditional Irish Catholic family. My attitudes are closer to the traditional values women we are discussing than to this friend who nominally shares my culture. Family supports family. Family is who you can count on to see you through tough times. And there will be a lot more tough times in the home countries of these traditional values women than there are in ours. When you “lend” money to a relative you should consider it gone for good. If any is ever repaid you should consider it found money, and not waste it on anything useful or practical. Her family will now be your family, whether you like it or not. You should get to know her family very well before you marry. Let me emphasize again, before you marry. If you can not accept them as your family, then let the girl go on her way.
The second principle component of traditional values in a woman is that she wants to be a good wife. This is all to the good. It is why you sought out a wife in a traditional values culture, rather than in your own. I have been married four times. (Forgive me father for I have sinned; mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.) The first two were American women. I prefer not to remember the first. It once took me several days after being asked before I could remember her name; I had called her nothing but THE BITCH for over 20 years. The second was a darling woman, and if she had not died very young, I would be married to her still. The third was a very Americanized Latina who had lived in the US for 25 years and was a US citizen prior to our marriage. My final wife is a lovely Filipina. My second wife frequently told me how happy I made her, and that I made her life better. (It is much nicer living with a happy woman. American/Western women these days are much too angry to be happy.) My current Filipina wife frequently asks, is she a good wife and is she is making me happy? This is a critical difference. Even my very good second American wife never wondered if she was making me happy. To American / Western women being a good wife and making their husbands happy is a non-issue. It is so far out of their world view that if they tried to think of it, it would cause so much cognitive dissonance that their minds would crash like a Microsoft operating system. To American / Western women, marriage is all about making the woman happy. A good marriage is one where the wife is happy, and bad marriage is one where the wife is not happy; the happiness or lack of happiness of the husband is never a consideration.
The third principle component of traditional values in a woman is that she wants to be a good mother. This is the one that we older guys really find hard to deal with. Say you are a gentleman in the evening of your life, are financially secure enough to take on a dependent, and have met a beautiful young woman from a traditional values culture that wishes to share the rest of your life. This combination is often irresistible. Now consider that she will want children. No matter what she says now; she will want children. Let me say that one more time; she will want children. You must ask yourself, “Do I want a (another) child at this point in my life?” If your answer is, “No way in Hell!” then perhaps you should let this little hottie go on her way. Marriage is not all about you. (Once again, what are you; a Feminist?) If you get married, this is part of the deal. Expect it. Live with it.
In an earlier thesis of mine I said, based on my circle of friends with Filipina wives, there were only two issues for which a Filipina will divorce her husband; no sex and no children. If you embarrass your Filipina wife in public you will spend time in tampo (silent treatment), but she will not divorce you. If you hit her you may find wake up to find an appendage missing, but she will not divorce you. If you are unfaithful, she will give you hell for quite a while, but she will not divorce you. A friend got in an argument with his wife while visiting her family in Angeles City, RPI. She stormed off to her mother’s. He got drunk and brought a BG back to the hotel room he was sharing with his wife (he admits this was incredibly stupid). He found his wife in bed ready to make up. He suggested a three way (also incredibly stupid.) She gave him hell for quite a while, but they are still together and everything seems back to normal now. However, if you refuse to cooperate in producing a child with your traditional values wife you will be history. Don’t get married just to get divorced.
This last scenario brings to mind an issue that has recently been discussed in several submittals. Some, mostly from Australia and New Zealand, have argued the case to leave Thailand, so their children, born in Thailand of a Thai mother, can enjoy the fruits of western civilization. They seem to have a low opinion of the educational system in the kingdom, and are somewhat negative about the cultural values they believe the child will pick up in school. Things must be much better in Australia and New Zealand than they are in the US. <I would suggest that "things" are VASTLY better in NZ and Australia than they are in the US! – Stick>
In my local community of American men married to young women from traditional cultures (Asian or Latin American) there are several men like me (of mature years) that are in the same situation. The men have either just fathered a child, have just put a bun in the oven, are working hard to put a bun in the oven, or have a future child on the near term future plan. I am in the working hard at it stage. Fertility drops in a man after about 40, but I am willing to soldier on for as long as it takes. In separate discussions with these guys I have found a common thread. We all plan on raising our children outside the US. One, whose wife is two months pregnant, is planning on retiring next year and moving to the Philippines. He is lucky to be able to retire early since he is a government employee who had prior military time that counted towards retirement. Another has worked at the same company since he was 18, in a union job. He can get full retirement benefits, with medical coverage, in his early 50s. He is planning to get his wife pregnant next year, retire after it is born, live with his folks for 6 months so they can get to know their grandchild, and then move to the Philippines. Those of us with a slightly longer retirement horizon are all planning to leave the country about the time our future or recent children reach school age.
Why did we all reach this decision to leave the US? We are all concerned with what values would be taught to our children in the US education system. The entire system, Kindergarten through 12th grade, and especially the higher educational institutions, shove an anti-male pro-feminist and homosexual agenda down children’s throats, whether the parents agree or not. I have no problem with homosexuality. I believe it is an inborn characteristic and not a choice, so there is no fault to assign (except maybe to god). However, this does not mean I agree with my children being taught that all heterosexual men are abusers, violent, rapist, and child molesters, and that lesbianism is a highly acceptable alternative. Boys in grade school are taught to sit down, shut up, and behave like girls, or be punished or drugged into compliance. They are required to write endless essays about their feelings, and the only literature on offer is chick lit that disparages men for the crime of being male. No wonder they are lagging behind.
Males are an endangered species on US campuses. Yet they are hunted down with unsubstantiated charges of sexual assault, sexual harassment, or rape. Society as a whole cares nothing for the impact on our future when the majority of those getting college degrees are women (about 2/3 currently and trending higher). If current trend continue, by 2030 only women will be getting college degrees in the US. The only concern voiced in the mainstream media is the lack of males on campus is limiting the women’s dating options. You could not make up a more gynocentric response. I will cite a recent example in higher education to demonstrate the anti male bias that is pervasive in US higher education:
From the April 4, 2011, directive on sexual violence sent by the U.S. Department of Education's assistant secretary for civil rights, Russlynn H. Ali, to college officials across the country. In an effort to make campuses safe and equitable for women,
Ali, with the full support of her department, advocates procedures that are unjust to men.
She begins by describing the "deeply troubling" state of the American campus, where "one in five women are victims of completed or attempted sexual assault." <This statistic is outright BS that is widely accepted Feminist propaganda. OFB> The Title IX equity statute, she says, guarantees students a right to an education free of discrimination on the basis of sex. Sexual assault and harassment violate this right; therefore, colleges that fail to pursue offenders aggressively can be found in violation of Title IX and lose federal government funds. No matter what the local police choose to do, says Ali, colleges are obligated to carry out their own investigation of all complaints.
"We will use all of the tools at our disposal including … withholding federal funds … to ensure that women are free from sexual violence," Ali told NPR last year. One such tool is the standard of proof that college disciplinary committees use when determining guilt. Many colleges employ a "beyond a reasonable doubt" or a "clear and convincing" standard. (Roughly speaking, "beyond a reasonable doubt" requires a 98 percent certainty of guilt; clear and convincing, an 80 percent certainty.) Ali, however, orders all colleges to adopt the far less demanding standard of "preponderance of the evidence." Using that standard, a defendant can be found guilty if members of a disciplinary committee believe there is slightly more than a 50/50 chance that he committed the crime. That standard will make it far easier for disciplinary committees to try, convict, and punish an accused student (almost always a male).
Marching under the banner of Title IX and freed of high standards of proof, campus disciplinary committees, once relatively weak and feckless, will be transformed into powerful instruments of gender justice. At least, that is the fantasy. But here is the reality: Campus disciplinary committees—often a casual mix of professors, students, and an assistant dean or two—are well suited to resolving cases involving purported plagiarism and cheating, and violations of college rules on drugs and alcohol. But no one considers them prepared to adjudicate murder, arson, or kidnapping cases, or criminal assault. They lack the training and the resources to investigate and adjudicate felonies. So why are they expected to determine guilt or innocence in cases of rape? As with murder and arson, serious charges of sexual assault should be left to the police and the courts. The Department of Education should not pressure universities to enact a system whereby a student can be found guilty of a major crime by a mere preponderance of evidence.
Deans at institutions including Yale, Stanford, and Brandeis Universities and the Universities of Georgia and of Oklahoma are already rushing to change their disciplinary procedures to meet the Education Department's decree. Now, on campuses throughout the country, we face the prospect of academic committees—armed with vague definitions of sexual assault, low standards of proof, and official sanction for the notion that sex under the influence is, ipso facto assault or rape—deciding the fate of students accused of a serious crime.
Most of we older guys starting a second family have seen the results of this culture on our older children, both male and female. We have no desire to see it repeated on the next group of children.
Recently, I was chatting with my 19 year old son and his 18 year old girlfriend. The subject of my wife and I deciding to have a baby came up. She was a little shocked. I pointed out that my son, her boyfriend, had a very close friend that was the child of an older guy and a much younger (American) woman. The guy retired about the time his son was in second grade. The father was very involved in all his son’s activities. The mother went on working without the need for daycare. It worked well for them. Their son was a Boy Scout, graduated high school with excellent grades, played with my son in the school orchestra, and is now doing well in college. The father is still around and in reasonable health. The next issue raised was, where and when I would retire; that is, where we would raise the child. We replied, “In the Philippines.” After pointing out several pros and cons, it all came down to one thing. I told her that every parent really only wants one thing for their child; that it would be happy. I then asked her if she thought any child, boy or girl, raised in the current environment of the US was likely to end up happy. She thought for quite a while, then, shaking her head slowly, said, “No.”
I'll just comment on one of the points in your submission. I really think it would be nice to hear from those with Thai / farang kids, or even just plain farang kids, who think it better to raise them in Thailand. Having taught in a (very good and prestigious) Thai school, I maintain that an education in the West is the way to go. Who can forget the quote of the week I included in a recent weekly column – "Only send your kids to school in Thailand if you hate them!"