Recently, I’ve seen a wave of girls on social media expressing their desire to get a “soft life”, free from a 9-5 job and the trappings of modern womanhood under capitalism. Understandable, even admirable, as someone who, personally, hates work with the passion of the grandpa from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory who chose to be bedridden for a decade so he wouldn’t have to get a job. But where this wave of “I do not dream of labour” girlies lose me is in their proposed solution: their version of a so called “soft life” (a term coopted from Black women and robbed of all it’s original meaning) is a return to the standard of stay at home wives and mothers.
“I hate working, maybe feminism was a mistake” they say with varying degrees of seriousness. I saw one girl say she wants to just relax and have “3 or 4 kids”, despite that being just about the least relaxing lifestyle I can imagine. But most of these people are young, and rich, and many don’t have children. When I see a video of a gorgeous 20 something detailing her life as a “Stay at Home Girlfriend” doing yoga and making matcha for the 8 hours her boyfriend works a 6 figure job I would be lying if I said I wasn’t cripplingly jealous. And for these girls, who all seem to be making money off of these accounts and likely come from rich families, I worry very little about this lifestyle going sour. I don’t agree with the promotion of this lifestyle as easy to attain, or to sustain. The majority of men do not make six figures. The majority of stay at home wives, mothers, or girlfriends will not have paychecks coming in from Sugar Bear Hair sponsorships. Women who do not work face higher rates of abuse than women outside the home, and have a harder time leaving. Much like influencers who present OnlyFans as a laid back part time career and ignore that for most the SW industry is not financially viable or even safe, these women promote a fantasy of a situation where the majority live in a very different reality. But these girls, while perhaps out of touch, aren’t necessarily recruiting. Rich girls being out of touch is nothing new, or even particularly dangerous—they’ve always lived like this, they just have camera phones to show it off now. No, the true signal of our swing back to conservatism in the dating world comes in the form of the high value, submissive women influencers.
In my research, I found several…enlightening, articles about how to be a good submissive wife. I also read the 1973 classic The Total Woman by Marabel Morgan, famous anti-feminist best known for her brilliant sex advice for married women, including a memorable tip involving wrapping yourself in cellophane. I found that the submissive, High Value Woman crowd hasn’t really managed to come up with any new tips since Marabel came onto the scene--she even gave coaching courses! But they do have podcasts now. Personally, I think by most metrics I’d be considered something of a low value woman, so I was eager to learn more. (Here are my test results from an online quiz to give you a sense of where I stand):
An article called “How to be a Submissive Wife” from Paired Life (not linking it because there is no point in you reading it, trust me) leads with the provocative statement, “Women are now more unhappy than men in the United States, as self-reported happiness has decreased in the past 35 years. Some people correlate the rise of the feminist movement with the divorce rate and rates of unhappiness among women”. This is a common sentiment among both Andrew Tate alpha males and Abby Shapiro trad wives, and you bet your bottom dollar our girl Marabel thought so too: feminism has made women unhappy. We had a good thing going, and then women’s lib came and made it harder for women to marry, and stay married, and as a result we’re all miserable crones gathering cobwebs in our cooters until a femininity coach comes to snap us out of it. Never mind that unmarried, childless women are the happiest demographic, which might indicate that marriage is the problem and not lack thereof. Never mind the fact that women’s lib came about precisely because women were unhappy. None of this matters to the High Value Woman, just as it doesn’t matter to her ideal mate, the High Value Man. And you want to land yourself one, you better make sure it doesn't matter to you either.
Let’s get started on our first lesson. Today, we’re gonna talk about sex. And, because sex for the High Value Submissive Woman is categorically, painfully, and inescapably heterosexual, that means we’re gonna talk about men.
“Women need to be loved; men need to be admired. We women would do well to remember this one important difference between us and the other half.” -Marabel Morgan, The Total Woman
Marabel informs us that according to “psychiatrists” (dubious), men need two things above all else: sex, and admiration. Marabel makes no mention at all of things like food and water, so we must assume she was married to the terminator, but let’s go with it. Dana Chanel, the Christian marriage influencer behind the most haunting tiktok I saw this week, had something similar to say: “Sex is such a huge part of a man’s identity. It’s the way he emotionally bonds with us. And it’s crazy because God wired his body this way.” She claims that men release oxytocin, the bonding hormone, “400% times more” than women do during sex. She states we should never use sex as a weapon but she also makes it clear that it must be used as a tool if we want our man to truly love us. As Marabel says, “It is only when a woman surrenders her life to her husband, reveres and worships him, and is willing to serve him, that she becomes really beautiful to him.” Again, sex is a tool. Not a weapon, and definitely not a reward, at least not for us.
The high value woman is an asset, something you achieve, something you earn. She’s a man’s greatest accessory. She is the consummate wife, mother, and lover. She may also work outside the home, like Dana does, and if so she needs to excel there as well. But she has to manage these responsibilities alone. Her man will foot the bill, he’ll buy her little presents, but in the end she isn’t there to make his life harder, she’s there to bring him peace. That means no nagging, no neediness, and never saying no. As Marabel says, The Total Woman “graciously chooses to adapt to her husband’s way, even though at times she desperately may not want to,” and sex is no exception.
The high value woman may enjoy sex, but she won’t admit that, that’s not the point here. If the high value woman admits she enjoys the sex too, it stops being a selfless act, an act of submission. It stops being something you promote. Dana says she had to learn to stop viewing sex as a chore or another responsibility. She says she was never taught anything different, and I believe her. Instead of viewing it as a chore, she’s learned to embrace and enjoy her husband ‘feeling respected and honored and wanted.” Yes, the Total Woman tells us, sex isn’t a chore, but it is a duty.
Mommi Nation (again, not linking, it’s for your own good) tells us that in order to be an empowered submissive woman our husband’s sexual needs need to be prioritized. Unless you’re “severely ill” (in which case you must explain apologetically so that he doesn’t feel rejected), you should be doing it as often as you can. Mommi Nation is careful to add in these little qualifiers: “as often as you can”, “if you can”, presumably so they can’t be accused of outright telling women to have sex they don’t want to have. However, given the only valid excuse they list for being unable to partake is a severe illness the implication seems clear. Dana tells us to put ourselves in the man’s shoes: “Imagine if one day our husband came home and said ‘I don’t feel like having sex with you.’ We would be massively offended and hurt.” Marabel tells us that if a woman says no too often, “Her husband misinterprets that attitude and thinks she doesn’t care about him anymore. Forlorn in this situation, he longs for romance. This is a dangerous state. A married man shouldn’t be wandering around with an unfulfilled libido. A Total Woman knows that sex is vital to her marriage.” Saying no, however harmless your intention, will inevitably be taken as a personal offense. And who knows what he’ll do if he’s offended! The husband won't pressure her into sex, that would be wrong of course. But she knows the possible ramifications of saying no. An unhappy husband, an emasculated husband, that’s the husband who’ll stray, who’ll leave, who’ll be quick to anger. The Total Woman, the submissive woman, the perfect wife is first and foremost his peace. And so she doesn’t say no.
On every list of what to look for in a High Value Woman, a low body count is mandatory. No man wants something any man can have, and because the High Value Man views his woman as something to own, something to earn, something for him, this means a woman who has slept around was just too ripe for the taking, too easily won for it to be a meaningful victory. Never mind that some women have sex because they want sex. Some women have sex not because they were won, but because they wanted to. This does not fit into the High Value paradigm. A world in which women have sex because they want to is a world in which a man can’t consider any woman he lays a conquest. If sex is good for the woman, sex becomes a partnership instead of a gift. Then the man would have to question if she’s having sex with him because she loves and admires him as a man, or because she wants to get laid just as much as he does. Even if he knows she enjoys it, she shouldn’t advertise the fact. The High Value woman can compliment her man, sing his praises on her podcast, but she can never admit to liking sex, only sex with him.
The comments section on Dana’s video is full of men who love her message. 17.6k comments, most of them a variation of men saying she’s not like the other girls, wishing they could find a woman like her. “Your husband won, we losing it out here” “Any chance someone can send this to the missus” “IS IT TOO HARD TO ASK FOR”. One fine gentlemen proves Marabel right with his comment, “Showed this to my wife. She got mad. This is why I have a girlfriend too.” We get a lot of criticisms of women without Dana’s good submissive values: “The audacity to say ‘I’m too tired’ when 99% of the time the just lay there anyway” “The amount of times I tried to explain this but it only fell on deaf ears” “Please start a class/podcast teaching young women how to treat men”. But the genre of comment I found most telling the one that crystalized for me why these women do what they do, was the recurring phrase: “PROTECT HER”.
“Most women, holding on for dear life, do not dare abandon blind faith. From father’s house to husband’s house to a grave that still might not be her own, a woman acquiesces to male authority in order to gain some protection from male violence. She conforms, in order to be as safe as she can be […] She will save herself by proving that she is loyal, obedient, useful, even fanatic in the service of the men around her. She is the happy hooker, the happy homemaker, the exemplary Christian, the pure academic, the perfect comrade, the terrorist par excellence. Whatever the values, she will embody them with a perfect fidelity. The males rarely keep their part of the bargain as she understands it: protection from male violence against her person. But the militant conformist has given so much of herself—her labor, heart, soul, often her body, often children—that this betrayal is akin to nailing the coffin shut; the corpse is beyond caring.” —Andrea Dworkin, Right Wing Women
The Manosphere defines high value man as "high earning". Yet they want their women to cook and clean. All the rich families I know hire domestic help for both the indoor "woman chores" and the outdoor "man chores". So what does that mean? These guys are mostly poor, broke, or at the very most middle class. Completely cut off from the high value lifestyle. Yet they throw around this term "high value man" and when they read or hear things about "high value men" they take it as talking about them.