Category Archives: QUEEN VICTORIA

VIDEO: Happy wife, happy life

You don’t need to speak German to figure out what this fun music video is saying, and it’s really about emotional generosity.

I like this concept: Happy wife, happy life.

Social science (for whatever that’s worth) supports it:

When a woman is happily married, her husband’s overall life satisfaction gets a boost, regardless of how he feels about their union, according to a new Rutgers University study, published in the October issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family.

The researchers analyzed the marital quality and general well-being of 394 couples who’d been married, on average, for 39 years. (To be included, both spouses had to be at least 50 years old, and one at least 60.) Although overall life satisfaction didn’t significantly differ by gender, the men did tend to report slightly higher marital happiness than their wives did.

And an unhappy wife spelled serious trouble: When the women didn’t report wedded bliss, their husbands’ overall life contentment tended to take a hit.

To me, the conclusion makes perfect sense. Women tend to be the homemakers, so their mood will dominate the one place in which you’re supposed to be safe from the trials and tribulations of the rest of the world. This is even truer when there are children. An unhappy woman robs everyone of their sanctuary.

Having said that, as a husband, you are not obligated to become a milquetoast slave constantly yielding to an angry, irrational, demanding woman. As I understand it, a marriage based on emotional generosity, one in which the partners willingly give of themselves to each other (no one-way streets here), makes for the happiest home.

And in the spirit of that idea, here’s a very cute video on the subject. You don’t need to speak German to understand it, but after the video, I’ve included Google’s translation of the original lyrics:

You can see us in front of the altar
I want to try it until my seventh year
You want the villa in the Schlossallée
I think my 100 hectares are the s***.

I’m bargain hunting for Chanel
You prefer to drive fast in the Audi
I like my old Buffalos
You feel good in your lederhosen

All the opposites are nothing to frustrate me
because I got it early

Happy wife, happy wife – happy life, happy life
Do you have a happy wife?
Do you have a happy life?

Happy wife, happy wife – happy life, happy life
Do you have a happy wife?
Do you have a happy life?

You want to take a dance class with me
You’d rather see Ronaldo
Where my workshop used to be
Is now a closet – accessible

You love your designer bags
You’d rather stick with the beer bottle
And if you look at suburban women again
Do you think,”Unfortunately, no naked women”

Happy wife, happy wife – happy life, happy life
Do you have a happy wife?
Do you have a happy life?

Happy wife, happy wife – happy life, happy life
Do you have a happy wife?
Do you have a happy life?

Hey baby, if you’re fine, I’ll be fine too
And if I’m fine, then you are fine too
I have a dream – this country needs more “happy wifes”
Because then there are also more “happy lifes”

Happy wife, happy wife – happy life, happy life
Do you have a happy wife?
Do you have a happy life?

Happy wife, happy wife – happy life, happy life
Do you have a happy wife?
Do you have a happy life?

Image: The image is a painting by George Hayter (public domain) celebrating the 1840 wedding of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. She was an extraordinarily happy wife, adoring everything about her husband. It’s an open question whether he was happy, or whether this stodgy, duty-bound German, who never felt at home in England, was capable of happiness.

Reclaiming our language from transgender activists

The speech demands that transgender activists and other Leftists make on us exceed the bounds of good manners and enter the realm of pure totalitarianism.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” — United States Constitution, First Amendment (which, through the 14th Amendment, applies to all governments in America, not just Congress).

“The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meaning and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meaning whatever.” — George Orwell, 1984.

“Monsieur l’abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.” — Voltaire, letter to M. le Riche, February 6, 1770 (summarized in 1906 by S.G. Tallentyre as “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”). [UPDATE: But see the Babylon Bee’s take on the modern version of Voltaire. It’s satire . . . or is it?]

At this blog, I have written at some length about the lack of science behind the whole transgender movement. My two main posts on the subject are here and here. You can find most of my other posts about the transgender movement here. My point, over and over, is that the claim that someone is “transgender” has no basis in science, but that we are nevertheless being forced to change our language and even our thinking to accommodate a minute percentage of Americans who have severe body dysmorphia.

Speaking in a PragerU video, Abigail Shrier spells out in clear terms the way in which Leftists, through transgender activism, are upending the First Amendment and trying to implement IngSoc in America (AmSoc?).

I would sum up the video by saying that, without losing compassion for transgender people, who I believe suffer either from mental illness or imbalanced hormones (which should by treated by balancing those hormones), we must resist this totalitarian movement. Sympathy should not equal surrender.

Even before I was aware of the video, I added my mite to the debate only this morning when I put up the following tweet (which still lives there because my following is too small for Twitter to care about my challenges to the Leftists’ AmSoc):


It’s also worth pointing out that, until a few years ago, only Queen Victoria (the probably apocryphal “We are not amused”) and those whom people castigated as a-holes referred to themselves in the plural. Moreover, even Queen Victoria and the a-holes, while referring to themselves as “we,” did not insist that others refer to them as “they” or “them.”

In other words, that demand on us pluralizes the a-hole quality of those who insist on being referred to in the plural. The problem for them, of course, is that they can’t acknowledge that the English language has a very specific pronoun for a person or animal that is neither male nor female: “It.”

The post Reclaiming our language from transgender activists appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.