your first point is projection based on nothing. back then, there were options because family relationships were strong and so were religious institutions. she could stay with her mother or seek relocation through the church.  your second point is another fantasy. the daughter has options as much as anybody, and agency through social circles.  the third point is an utter falsehood. everyone in the household benefits through the presence of a loving family, opportunities for fun and enrichment. the father's work is easy and profitable. additionally, the son's expectation is not to maintain that household, but to establish his own. he is uplifted by the community around him. your final point is also a weird projection. he doesn't rule - he enjoys the pressure of having to provide or his family that loves him will suffer unduly. luckily, he is a part of a functioning society that provides for him in exchange for his physical labor. he is not a ruler. he is forcing nobody. he is providing. you are incapable of picturing white people happy, because you have declared them evil unduly. if such was the case, it would not have been able to collapse as the control you assert was exerted would have been absolute. he provided his family agency enough to leave, just like our god who loves us enough to afford us our mistakes. the reason for both is the same: our loved ones are always free to return.
United States