“Unintended Chaos”

3 min read

1 hour ago

A woman wrote online asking whether she should quit her job to stay home with her three children. She felt pressured, overwhelmed, and torn between being a present mother and maintaining financial stability.

My reply was simple, logical, and fair:

“You have already sacrificed your body three times to bring three human beings into this world. You have paid your dues. If someone must pause their career, suggest that your husband should stay home this time while you work to support the family.”

That was all I said.

I did not insult men.
I did not bash marriage.
I did not dismantle patriarchy with a megaphone 📣📣📣📣📣

I simply pointed to an obvious truth:

Women shouldn’t automatically be the default sacrificers.

And then… the reactions came.

Within 24 hours, my single, measured comment triggered a storm of more than 80 replies — and counting. What made it even more fascinating was this:

Only two of the responses came from men.
The rest came from women.

Women defending male privilege.
Women reinforcing their own undervaluation.
Women arguing passionately that motherhood equals automatic self-erasure.
Women insisting that asking a husband to sacrifice anything is equivalent to starting World War III.

It became a social experiment in real time — one I couldn’t have designed better if I tried.

The Fastest Way to Trigger Society: Suggest Balanced Responsibility

What shocked me wasn’t disagreement. Disagreement is healthy.

What shocked me was how radical it sounded to simply ask for equity.

Not dominance.
Not rebellion.
Not misandry.

Just balanced responsibility.

The mere idea that a man could ever be the parent who pauses his career was treated as an attack on the natural order. The tone of several replies hinted at shock, fear, guilt, derision and outright scorn.

And that told me something important:

Women have been conditioned to normalize struggle… even when it harms them.

Many had internalized the belief that:

A “good woman” absorbs the sacrifice.

Marriage is a system where a woman must shrink first.

Motherhood automatically cancels professional ambition.

Suggesting that men should share the load is “wicked.”

Yes — wicked.

Which leads me to one of the most unexpected gifts this debate gave me:
Someone called me “wicked” for leading Girls SECEED.

And honestly?

I’ll take that title gracefully.

If “wicked” means telling women not to sabotage their future…

Then yes — I accept.

If “wicked” means encouraging women to:

Preserve their earning power,

2. Maintain their relevance,

3. Stay employable,

4. Avoid financial vulnerability in old age, and

5. Value themselves beyond domestic sacrifice…

Then call me wicked a hundred times.

Because the truth is simple:

A woman’s body, time, and future are not community property.

This Was Never About One Comment

This was a window into a much bigger pattern — one that Girls SECEED was created to confront. And trust me, we’re going to mine this topic deeply. The replies are a goldmine of cultural data, identity conflict, subconscious conditioning, and societal expectation.

This single conversation is going to give birth to at least 10 pieces of content across Instagram, Medium, and the SECEED platforms.

But , for now, here’s the main takeaway:

The moment a woman stops centering sacrifice as her identity, society calls her wicked.

And that is exactly why Girls SECEED is needed:

To teach girls and young women to depend on their intrinsic value,
develop economic power, and
plan for their old age with clarity — not romantic optimism.

Because nobody should have to gamble their entire life on someone else’s willingness to do the right thing.

This is just Part 1.
We’re about to dive deeper, sharper, and more unapologetically into the mindset that fuels these reactions.

Stay with me — the social experiment has only just begun.