I just heard about a growing and controversial movement called “tradwife” (“traditional wife”) in which women reject modern feminism and choose to be homemakers, while their husbands are the breadwinners. According to critics, not only must tradwives ditch their careers, but they must also serve their husbands. OK.

I don’t follow trends, so I was unaware of this movement until last week. I thought it was worth a little more investigation.

The tradwife movement embraces the nostalgia of the 1950s, complete with suburban home and white picket fence, when life seemed simpler and families seemed happier, when children were raised with love and stability, when society in general and schools in particular reinforced family values rather than undermined them. Some claim the tradwife movement would be a cure-all for many of America’s social ills if universally adopted.

Clearly stay-at-home moms (SAHMs) have been around forever, so why is the “tradwife” movement suddenly in the news? The phenomenon is being denigrated as associated with religious conservatives, but for heaven’s sake, when did stay-at-home moms become shocking and controversial?

According to the New York Post, “The TikTok hashtag #TradWife has garnered 110.6 million views, as younger women post in support or in jest at the seemingly antiquated, fringe lifestyle.”

Fringe lifestyle. Interestingly, while modern feminism has never expressed a great love for SAHMs, neither have I noticed it being especially hostile to the demographic (kids must be raised by someone, after all). So why all the vitriol directed at tradwives?

The key, perhaps, can be found in an article by the Political Research Associates, a social justice research group. They write, “In some circles, being a tradwife – short for ‘traditional wife’ – also means being a fundamentalist Christian, and accepting that women shouldn’t work, shouldn’t have the right to vote, and should fully submit to their husbands and their faith to live a happy life of homemaking.”

Some tradwives interviewed admitted as much about marriage, though they said nothing about the right to vote. Said one woman, “Tradwives also believe that they should submit to their husbands and serve their husbands and family, and that triggers people because the words ‘submit’ and ‘serve’ – it makes women think that we’re saying we’re less than a man. That’s not what we’re saying.”

From sociopolitical commentary to romance writing! Patrice Lewis branches into the world of Amish inspirational fiction. These clean romances are wholesome enough for Grandma to read. Check out Patrice’s available titles.

Tradwives also embrace the shocking concept that men are not toxic. This completely countermands what is currently being taught in endless institutes of higher education, where the hostility to the cisnormative patriarchy (or whatever it’s called these days) has reached hysterical levels of indoctrination.

A division of labor is often the most efficient way to run anything from a corporation to a household, which is why women who stay home to raise children while their husband works is “traditional.” I gather “tradwives” have gone one step further and adopted hair and clothing styles from the 1950s, playing “dress-up” like those who attends a Renaissance festival or sci-fi convention enjoy doing.

According to Catherine Rottenberg, an associate professor at the University of Nottingham, what sets tradwives apart from their predecessors is the visibility of their social media platforms. Apparently, women who embrace a traditional role and blog about it are spreading dangerous misinformation

But, since tradwives are presumably not forcing their lifestyle choice on anyone else, what’s the harm?

The problem, apparently, is the movement delves into the sinister world of white supremacy. However, since everything from astrophysics to bouncing on a trampoline is associated with white supremacy, that just sounds like random mud-slinging. The hostility, I suspect, stems from a more sinister reason.

In the 1958 book “The Naked Communist,” by W. Cleon Skousen, the 45 goals of communism are clearly laid out, a frightening number of which have already come to pass. Among them:

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

Karl Marx said much the same thing in his “Communist Manifesto” of 1848 in which he called for the abolition of the family. He considered the family an “obstacle” to his goals, which included having children educated by the state and not by their parents.

This explains, in part, why the left has been at war with families for generations. Never underestimate the hostility of the left toward anything traditional and time-tested.

It’s been thoroughly documented that children raised in intact, two-parent households fare far better at resisting peer pressure and a radical agenda. The left recognizes the power of intact families in creating happy secure children who are less likely to be swayed by glib and empty promises. Therefore – to refer to the goals of communism – it’s important to destroy the family, with some even pointing out how a family can actually be a threat to children (we’re not talking abusive families, but merely families that reject the radical left agenda).

Viewed in this light, the hostility toward the tradwife movement makes more sense. Anything and everything must be done to discredit it, up to and including calling adherents “white supremacists” and other unflattering sobriquets.

That’s why so many public schools are actively engaged in separating and dividing children from their parents, and why so many teachers and administrators are openly hostile to traditional values.

I must assume (though I don’t know for sure) many of these tradwives don’t put their kids into classrooms, knowing full well they can’t send their children into the belly of the beast and then be surprised when their kids embrace the beast’s agenda. I suspect many tradwives homeschool their children.

I like to think the “rise of the tradwives” is because both men and women alike are recognizing what previous generations have always known: Children thrive best in an intact, two-parent home, no matter how twisted and “white supremacist” and “abusive” the left tries to paint it.

For those who are more familiar with tradwives, perhaps some of you can enlighten me about the pros and cons of the movement. What are your thoughts? Is it a fringe movement or the wave of the future?

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

Related Posts