When did western women take the dominant position in the relationship

>>1431654
>when did women take the dominant role in relationships
It was a gradual process, started by their entry into the workforce. Once they began to find jobs outside of shirt factories and reception desks the power shifted even further.
Modern feminism ensures that it continues to shift whilst simultaneously making relationships less common. My guess is that it will come full circle since less men want relationships i.e. children, due to the toxicity of female dominance, then womens value in the social aspect of society decays aswell

>>1431654
Women for centuries have always held a relationship in a couple that is not equal but fair with the husband. As well as being care givers and watching the children the mother has often controlled finances in the family dating back all the way to Sparta.

>>1431707
Some cultures give women more power but let's not pretend like women have had much power. Look at Africa and the Middle East where you can mutiliate women and face no repercussions

>>1431730
>face no repercussions

>>1431654
lol culture war threads
sage

File: acid-attack.jpg (43KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 800x534px

>>1431779
More like "no face repercussions"

File: hi_five_meh.png (20KB, 493x402px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 493x402px

>>1431933
pic related, but you're terrible!

>>1431654
Women generally don't have the dominant position in Western families. Just because you're a cuck doesn't mean everyone is.

>>1431730
But this is in regards to western women. Women in the west have always held some degree of liberties such as not fighting in wars.

>>1431654
ayy niggas letting some pussy dictate they lives n shieeet baka desu

It was the war. Men fucked off to war, women went to work and they never left, stealing jobs from men to this day.

>>1432413
Yeah they had the power to be raped by the victorious army. Great !

>>1432432
If anything being more rapeable works to women's advantage. The victors are less likely to do stuff like pull out finger nails and blinding since they can fuck the females. Sure a woman has a high possibility of being raped in war but they won't be subjected to torture as severely as their male counterparts.

>>1432499
>The victors are less likely to do stuff like pull out finger nails and blinding
What would they gain from doing that sort of thing? Torture really only makes sense if someone has valuable information.

>>1431654
Mens power in relationships is derived from physical power and money. Womens power is derived from sex. Societal norms have shifted so that it is now unacceptable for men to use force on women and women our now fully able to be bread winners, severely reducing both primary sources of male power while not damaging the main source of female power

sounds like you've done a lot of intense research in the subject

>>1432413
>>1432499

Don't bother. Feminists on /his/ think men enjoyed fighting in wars and it was actually a positive thing to be conscripted because it was fun and jolly all the way through.

>>1432570
t. strawman

>>1431654
Since a certain desert tribe came to dominate Western affairs and poisoned the food and water making men more effeminate.

50 years ago, men were expected to hold the door open for women, and today a man is still expected to defend a woman's honor, it's just taken a different flavor.

Now you're supposed to say you're a feminist and that you support everything from letting your wife fuck your postman, to letting her rule the household finances, else you're a misogynist pig.

This was also true before, the context was just different. Men who beat their wives and left their families were considered shit, and were ostracized too.

So literally nothing has changed other than the wrapping, it's still the same shit.

>>1432536
What if you don't care about sex - you just do it once for reproduction - what then, what's the point of marriage? I would consider it for the sake of the child and to develop in a healthy environment to assure his optimal success - but then if the women desires sex like some animal - and I refuse to provide it to her - she will most likely cheat me - in that case I would trash her out the moment I find about that.

>>1433490
Marriage is an obsolete institution imo, but that doesn't mean monogamy is.

>>1433483
Back to your containment board with your deranged fetishes. Seems the only reasonable answer to OP is >>1432536

>>1433504
What deranged fetishes?

I am commenting on the current culture where if you exert any kind of influence over a woman as a man, you are criticized as a misogynist.

The examples I pointed to were a reductio ad absurdum, but the point still stands.

>>1431654
Wtf are you talking about? Women always had the power in the relationship. My mother once told me the secret. She told me that the key is to let the man think he has the power. When in reality it does not.

>>1433698
> When in reality it does not.
This is how women think what men are

Fuck off leftist

>>1433522
your entire argument rests on reductio ad absurdum, because if you've ever stepped out of the shitty internet echo chambers you dwell in and into the real world you'd realize that the current culture isnt anything like that.

>>1434191
You mean right, right?

>>1434175
>This is how women think what men are
What did he mean by this?

>>1434388
He said ''when in reality it does not''. Referring to men as 'it'.

>>1432432
This post makes less than no sense. You can't use an example of them having no power as a "power". Besides, the victorious army does what it wants to the men and women. So at worst that puts the women in the losing side on equal footing to the men.

>>1434542
>You can't use an example of them having no power as a "power".
What is sarcasm?

>>1433490
Marriage is meant as a support structure for the child bearing relationship. The woman essentially promises to only have children with one man and he agrees to the same and to support her and those children. The institution of marriage puts some of those promises into law so that if one cheats the other has greater claim to the children, it also makes questions of inheritance easier. There are a few other perks in modern law but that's the basis of it.

>>1434546
But it doesn't even make sense as sarcasm because the vanquished men are also treated horribly. The point seems to be to draw some kind of distinction between men and women but they chose a scenario with almost no distinction in it.