A woman should try to keep her husband for her whole life!

A woman should try to keep her husband for her whole life! That's what she lives for! Why did a man become a prize to fight for? "What did you want? He left, which means she didn't keep him. A woman must keep a man. To hold is to cook, to be kind, patient, not to saw. And if he left, it's her fault. It means that she became a, or got old, or did not try hard enough." We heard this phrase from a neighbor, an aunt, a casual acquaintance on the bench. And even from his mother. This is what we are taught from childhood - a woman lives for the sake of the family, and if something goes wrong, then she is to blame.

From childhood, we are taught: you have to try. To be good, not to annoy, not to ask for much, to inspire, to smile. And if you're tired, no one cares. A woman must endure, be smooth, and save because she is a woman. And he just exists. At best, it works. And for this, he was given the Order of the Man of the Year—the story of a tired woman. We got married young. At 23 and 24 years old. First love, romance, night walks, kisses until dawn. Everything seemed real. Then a daughter appeared quickly. I was happy — I had always wanted a family after two years, a son. My husband worked, and I stayed home with the kids. I cooked, cleaned, ironed, rocked one child at night, then the other. He came home from work and said, 'What are you tired of? You’re at home.' I didn’t respond.

I thought: well, he works, after all. I should. I have to endure. Then I started taking on extra work. I spent hours typing texts at night while the kids slept. Then I got a job in an office — I left at 7 AM and returned at 6 PM. I cooked dinner, washed the floors, and checked homework. He came home at 8. Sat on the couch. And said, 'Where's dinner?' Then added, 'You've changed. You used to be different. Cheerful, light, and now it's just fatigue and complaints.' I nodded. Yes, I've changed. Because carrying everything on my shoulders and being cheerful — it’s impossible. Where does this idea even come from: a woman must hold everything together? Who invented that 'to have '?

 Is it a woman's task? And "to stay" is like a man's feat? This is an old idea, Soviet, peasant, rooted in patriarchal norms where a woman is a function, a servant, a mother, and a housekeeper. And only if she is convenient, beautiful, cooks deliciously, and never gets tired, will a man be "satisfied." But women are not bread and are not obliged to be fresh and soft 24/7. Why must a woman "hold on"? Because he might leave? Because he has a "midlife crisis"? Because someone younger looked at her with a sparkle in their eyes? And if she is tired, if she is panicking, if she is feeling bad, does she not have the right to leave? Does she not have the right to be imperfect? Does she not have the right to stop inspiring? When a woman is carrying the weight, while a man just lives. Many families survive solely on the efforts of the woman. She cooks, cleans, sees a psychologist, reads books on relationships, makes surprises, builds intimacy, worries about the children, and manages the budget. And he works. That’s it. Full stop. He doesn’t care about what his wife is going through. He doesn’t ask what worries her.

She is worried. He does not share his thoughts. He says, "I don't have time for this. I'm tired. You're back with your talking. What do you want from me?" And if she doesn't smile, he thinks she should be "punished with silence." If she doesn't jump into bed at his request, he says: "Then why do I need you?" But he doesn't cheat. Doesn't drink. Doesn't hit. So he is a good man.

The psychology of this scenario: where is the mistake? The mistake lies in the very setup. The essence of it is that a man is a prize. He must be earned and kept. At the same time, a woman is the one who tries. To the point of exhaustion, to the brink of psychosomatics. This is how the sacrificial role is formed, in which the woman does not live for herself but serves someone else's expectations. She loses herself. Her self-esteem drops. She feels like a "bad wife" if he is in a bad mood, and she feels responsible if he leaves. That she didn't try hard enough if he chose someone else. But he didn't go because you are bad. He left because he doesn't know how to be in a partnership. Because he wants a servant, not a wife.

Because I didn't grow up. And who should hold the family together? No one. Because families are not 'held,' they are built. Together. If one pulls and the other just breathes nearby, that is not a family. That's exploitation. And in the 21st century, fewer and fewer women agree to this. A woman is not obliged to be a washing machine, a psychologist, a cook, and a sex toy in one bottle. She is a person. With emotions, desires, and exhaustion. With the right to say 'I feel bad.' With the right to do nothing. With the right not to hold up an adult man. The heroine's story: how it all ended. He left. 'You've changed. You used to try. And now you just whine.' He went to a young girl.

Naive. She also tried, for the first six months. And then she stopped, too. Because she got tired, he came back. I wrote, called, and begged for forgiveness. Promised. Cried. I didn’t let him in. Because I'm no longer ready to hold anyone. I want to be with someone who holds onto me on their own. Voluntarily. Without coercion. Without claims. Specialist's conclusion: stop holding on. Start living. If you think about it every day, then...Holding on is not love. It's fear. If you live to be convenient, you disappear. If you try to earn care, you are not loved. You are used. Genuine relationships do not require holding on. They are based on reciprocity. A mutual 'I want to be with you,' with mutual care and respect. And if someone has left, let them go because they are no longer yours. And the sooner you understand this, the sooner you will start living for yourself, not for someone else.