If a woman wants a man who is the breadwinner, she should marry a man who can afford that. She should also not work, but instead stay at home because that entitles her to have a breadwinner. However, that too doesn’t mean that she doesn’t earn her keep. She absolutely earns her keep as she works very hard to maintain a home and to look after the children. She IS doing a job, and earning her keep. Muslim women must get rid of these entitlement, satanic teachings of the Ulama. You are not special because you’re a woman; you are also not entitled to anything because you’re a woman. The only people who are entitled to anything without having to earn it are children, the insane, and the old and infirm.
Women are juristically adults and therefore responsible for themselves. If they don’t want to be housewives, then they must maintain themselves financially. No one is responsible for a woman’s financial well-being if she has her own money. Why does she have money? Is it for candy? The Islamic scholars, by and large, would say, “Yes, that’s fine,” because they, in effect, do not understand basic economics.
Any person born into a family requires resources to survive. Those resources are procured; they are not free. In other words, no one exists on the planet for free. Everyone exists either through their own hard labour or the labour of others. No one on the planet is automatically entitled to the labour of others while they are able-bodied juristic adults- male or female. The basic value exchange where men were the breadwinners had women be the homemakers. Being the homemaker was a job she was being paid for through the labour of her husband, who took care of her in exchange for being taken care of.
When the economy worked on that basis, the labour market, being almost exclusively male, involved paying males enough to support their families because men would simply not accept anything less. Men did not, and by and large, do not work for themselves. When women joined the labour market, it devalued the price of labour. When there is a greater supply of labour than there is demand for it, the price of labour plummets. The price for female labour is the decrease in the value of male labour. That means men would no longer earn enough to support a family. They either accept the lesser wage or become unemployed. Since the market shift means that now the woman earns the other half of the salary the man would have earned by himself, it follows that she is now also a breadwinner. It is no longer her “right” to be maintained. It’s that simple. No amount of jurisprudence is going to fix an economic problem.
IT IS WHAT IT IS: Coach De Bruyns’ Philosophy in a Nutshell (eBook)
Discover more from Coach De Bruyns
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.