Thread: Personal opinion on nuclear family and marriage.

One of the previous topics here had comment like this "If marriage was so stable then why does it so quickly fall apart?"

In old times, family and marriage was set for mainly this reason:
Create safe environment for women to take care of children.

Husband's responsibility was to provide protection and money to house so that the kid would grow up safe.
Wife's responsibility was to feed and take care of the house,as she was not capable of the world outside .We are talking about pre-19th century where war was a common place. Rape,kidnapping,rampant diseases etc.. Even in modern world women in Soviet saw the repercussions of low population of male after WW2 as they had to fill quotas for physical work. It was not designed for women.

Marriage is NOT designed for men. Reason is that with marriage, man cannot reproduce with more women if he is married. You have to take care of children and women.
Also women had to have some sort of protection from other men so she had to marry,get his last name and get rights (money,protection and etc..)

But there was a good rule in the system before modern world. Women were in men's control. Being unloyal,uncaring for children had HARD punishments for children..Before marriage,only man she served was his father.And after, only her husband. NO OTHER MEN. She could NOT act like a modern women,doing whatever she wanted. She had responsibilities,duties.. If she didn't, she was ousted from her family too. She was labeled as whore,bitch and let aside .Sometimes worse,killed.

Today's world is very different. The whole system is designed FOR women. Divorce laws,alimony,child support,unemployment benefits etc.. Police forces are around all the time protecting them. She can fuck 100's of men and have NO repercussions. A beta cuck will marry her and take care of her financials and her kids from the alpha. Even if a beta won't come up, government can. She will be employed in an office job where she can take all the benefits for herself.She doesn't need a man,really. We pay to her with taxes even if we do not know her.

For years we thought why women acted so irresponsible,why the backstabbings,#metoo etc ... but the whole system showed us how useless it is for men in the first place.

So people here saying if we could go back in time where we would have loyal and lovely wives . Think about it again. It was designed for women and children, NOT FOR YOU. Its been like that for centuries.

Note: I am open to any criticism

The only thing that'll work for me?

If you could buy, sell, and trade them!

Anything else is unacceptable!

The problem with women is that, due to their nature, there are no guarantees. Marriage sets a man up to fail and lose everything he has ever acquired.

Don’t get me wrong. Sometimes I think back to how husband/wife dynamics were in the olden times. I won’t lie. There’s a piece of me that wishes that women were trustworthy and loyal. It would be nice to have the stability of someone to care for the household and be a nice, reliable piece of ass for me in the evening after dinner. A quick slap upside my head reminds me that these are mere fantasies. The harsh reality, especially in today’s society, is that men are perceived as disposable drones. When a woman is no longer getting what she feels she is entitled to from a man she has no problem catching the next money train and leaving the old one behind.

It’s fucked up out there. That’s okay though. The whole marriage thing is backfiring and society is circling the drain a little more every day. I’m going to enjoy watching everything collapse.

The big difference of course, is they don't need us anymore. The gov will provide. But there's more to it than that.

The fifties in America wasn't horses and pack mules, but it was a lot harder for your average Joe to get around. Since you couldn't move as easily, you better be at least civil to the people around you or your life was going to suck. It's true that my parents moved all over with no money and made it work, but the point is, travel was harder for most people. You couldn't just bug every time you didn't like something.

If you did stay home, you wouldn't like what passed for communication with the outside world then. There was radio, TV (four channels), regional and local newspapers, magazines and snail mail. I followed F-1 by magazine, with the two month lag, I didn't know who won the championship till the eve of the next season.

The phone is what really shows the difference between now and then. While you could probably get a private line, no one could afford it. Everybody was on what they called party lines. One line, four house's, four different rings. If you needed to call someone, or someone wanted you while your neighbor gabbed for hours, well that was just too bad. The same gabby neighbor could and would pick up their receiver after you answered a call, and quietly listen to everything you said. You had to filter anything you didn't want the whole town to know on your own stinking phone. My parents never stooped so low, but a lot of people did. Long distance was expensive and rarely used.

Anyway, it's sometimes easier to burn bridges and get away with it than it used to be.

Originally Posted by Societysucksmyass

The problem with women is that, due to their nature, there are no guarantees. Marriage sets a man up to fail and lose everything he has ever acquired.

Don’t get me wrong. Sometimes I think back to how husband/wife dynamics were in the olden times. I won’t lie. There’s a piece of me that wishes that women were trustworthy and loyal. It would be nice to have the stability of someone to care for the household and be a nice, reliable piece of ass for me in the evening after dinner. A quick slap upside my head reminds me that these are mere fantasies. The harsh reality, especially in today’s society, is that men are perceived as disposable drones. When a woman is no longer getting what she feels she is entitled to from a man

she has no problem catching the next money train and leaving the old one behind

.

It’s fucked up out there. That’s okay though. The whole marriage thing is backfiring and society is circling the drain a little more every day. I’m going to enjoy watching everything collapse.

Men that adopt broken women from broken marriages are funding the whole charade!

MGTOW are a stand of trees without limbs in a monkey-branch forest.

I disagree on 2 points, OP. First being marriage. I think marriage is as much a male "institute" as it is a female one. The female part you've explained already. The male part, IMO, is a sociological solution to human nature. In nature we're social primates with hierarchy. It comes back in nearly all civilizations. One "alpha male" with his "vice president." The only difference is we are thinking primates. And the "alpha" has figured out he can never defeat the the whole pack of beta's when they cooperate. TFM analyzed this perfectly I think. The beta's need their pussy fix as well, so the alpha must share the females. Furthermore, only the mother knows for sure it's her child coming out of her. The father doesn't. Marriage lowers the chances the kid being not yours. Combined with social shaming surrounding marriage in the past.

The second being your claim feminism is "aiding women" while suppressing men. Though there is a truth in that, I think the main goal of feminists is to disrupt the fabric of society. By stimulating female basic instincts a.k.a. the cock carousel. so increasing chances females will get barred by the numerous of STD's. Furthermore diverting them from their fertility windows (study, career and again: the CC. "you can have it all girl!"). Removing the marriage institute will have females chase after the top 5% of men, getting kicked to the curbs over and over ("where have all the good men gone?"). Thus pushing the majority of men in the dark (the only fans). Those CC riders who get impregnated are raising their sons alone. Thus creating a weak group of men who can be very dangerous because they didn't have a father figure to teach them to restrain their anger. Throw in the divorce rape system into the mix and the circle is complete. Is feminism meant to "up" females to a "higher level?" I don't think so. Yes it seems that way and partially it is. But I think it's main goal is disruption. In the end women rely on men. One way or the other. And once females hit the wall, they are usually the ones kicked to the curbs. I must give feminists one thing: their MO is IMO genius. It's so indoctrinated into every aspect of society it must be very powerful people behind that.

So why are feminists doing this? Depopulation is the only viable motive I could think of. Wars, killing off, starve out don't help in the long term. Populations recover within 2 generations. So sabotaging the root of reproduction, take it slowly and push it slowly into the minds of people, like it's all their own choice is a very effective way to lower birthrates. IIRC there is no western civilization on replacement level.

My main questions I still have are these: who or what is benefiting from this disruption? I've heard big corporations but I don't agree. Why would a successful business sabotage itself by hiring under performing, nagging and always sick females? Governments? Enslaving men from the divorce terror will only cover so much to their expenses. I for one don't understand why men in the US who got divorce raped let themselves imprison en masse. Then they'll hit the system back quadruple: the state will have to shelter, guard and feed those men, the system will remove tax payers, it will have to take care of the females and their offspring and how will such a gvt run a country full of useless eaters?
Another question is I don't understand why God/ the cosmos/ evolution or the flying spaghetti monster has invested in the neocortex with women. It seems to me females are so profoundly stupid they let themselves enslaved under the "you can have it all girl" lies. They actively defend their own prison with tooth and nail. I get it: female instinct. But again: females are supposed to be member of H Sapiens as well. If men can figure out "wait a minute. I know humanity need females for it's survival. Women need men for their survival. But I need neither of them for mine." Why are females behave like apes on a hill, being able to wield a smart phone?
Third and last question I have; what is the exit strategy of the feminists? If the populations have dwindled enough. What is their way out? Because as I see it, the "overlords" behind this still need us, plebs, to do the dirty work for them. With overlords I mean I strongly suspect we are being ruled by a very small group of people who are really calling the shots. Governments, institutions, corporations a.s.o. are IMO just puppets to them. Yes, higher on the "food chain" than me or you. But still puppets. Think of it. If the true leaders were actually a demented geriatric patient, a megalomaniac invading countries, or Karl Marx LXVII I think we'd be in a nuclear winter for a long time by now.

I can express myself better through a picture.

Dear RedPillSimp,
About your first point, I have never heard of such thing ,not in eastern world (I live in Turkey). You touch another man's woman, you were practically dead.Its been like that for centuries. What you say makes no sense, like if alpha tries to share the female with beta in my lands means he is not an alpha at all.Thats out of debate where i live.

About your second point, I didn't mean feminism . I meant the world in general. Women do not depend on marriage like before times anymore. They have options of earning money and having more protection (guns,police force etc..) compared to old times..

Loyalty is a male trait. Loyalty is not a female trait. This is part of human nature forged over millions of years, this has never changed and never will. Her "loyalty" is only as good as she views his value. She always looks for the bigger, better deal. Social shaming kept this in check or kept his mouth shut in times of old.

Female nature has not changed with feminism, female nature has always been there. Women have always looked for the bigger, better deal, "Hypergamy" is not something new. Briffault's Law is not new, women have always treated men for what he can supply to her.... In times of old maybe she became a widow when her husband became useless to her...

Prostitution is the oldest profession. Not all women in the past picked a husband.

There has always been, mistresses, and spinsters since the development of the family.

The male female dynamic has changed many times in the development of humans, the family unit is more of a modern idea.

Seems long ago religion was a more important part of people’s lives and they also wanted to maintain a good reputation in the community. Now women can do whatever they want and find large numbers of people online that will support their choices. I see local girls in their 20s (most with small children) on social media that go on and on and on daily with memes about every raunchy detail they like sexually…body on display at their most “flattering” angle daily. They get likes though and have plenty of people basically saying “work it girl”. Maybe there was a time when a single woman with a child would do her best to show how wholesome she could be…and how good of a wife she could be in hopes of having a family and stability….not recruiting every man in town to see her vagina online.

But yeah, I’d say a decline in morality, religion becoming less fundamental to how we live and things like the internet unleashing all of our narcissistic ways have all turned the human race into crap. Could it be that things were generally the way they were for thousands of years for a reason? Maybe we are in some ways deluded by our technology into thinking people of the past were stupid. Perhaps human civilization has long ago peaked and we just can’t grasp how far in decline we are just yet…can anyone imagine civilization as currently constructed in 50 years? In a way I almost feel bad for every kid born into this world.

Originally Posted by Edwardhaskell

I’d say a decline in morality, religion becoming less fundamental to how we live and things like the internet unleashing all of our narcissistic ways have all turned the human race into crap. Could it be that things were generally the way they were for thousands of years for a reason? Maybe we are in some ways deluded by our technology into thinking people of the past were stupid. Perhaps human civilization has long ago peaked and we just can’t grasp how far in decline we are just yet…can anyone imagine civilization as currently constructed in 50 years? In a way I almost feel bad for every kid born into this world.

Well said, my man. Well said. Wow.

Originally Posted by user97972

Dear RedPillSimp,
About your first point, I have never heard of such thing ,not in eastern world (I live in Turkey). You touch another man's woman, you were practically dead.Its been like that for centuries. What you say makes no sense, like if alpha tries to share the female with beta in my lands means he is not an alpha at all.Thats out of debate where i live.

About your second point, I didn't mean feminism . I meant the world in general. Women do not depend on marriage like before times anymore. They have options of earning money and having more protection (guns,police force etc..) compared to old times..

First point: in fact you state exactly what I meant with marriage as an institute. Giving the B's the idea they are alfa. By indoctrinating the mindset "I'll kill someone who is touching my wife." Don't you see how insane that is? How does that other guy even know she is "your" wife in the first place? (Your meant as pars pro toto). If she doesn't tell him she's married and he thinks he's only getting his dick wet. Why blame him? Furthermore don't think the Turkish women (we call them "headscarfs" here in the west) are so virtuous. When I did my internship gynecology there was a steady flow of headscarfs who came for "hymen reconstruction." So the one consensus we have right here is AWALT.


Second: that's also what I meant. Only with the nuance said "freedom" women "enjoy" are a mere prison for them. Why am I seeing droves of fertile women in my work with serious mental issues? The one theme they have in common is they are docile plantation slaves, having fallen for the "you can have it all girl" narrative. While I think their problem is they actually want to fulfill their role: bare kids and take care of the house. And said women come from every corner of the planet, including Turkey. And don't start: I know there is a small minority of them who actually made a conscious choice in life to pursue career over their nature. But strangely enough those women don't have mental issues very often.

"Marriage is an institution necessary to the maintenance of society but contrary to the laws of nature". Honore de Balzac

The social rules that held marriages together have fell apart never to return in my lifetime.

Originally Posted by stanmsl

"Marriage is an institution necessary to the maintenance of society but contrary to the laws of nature". Honore de Balzac

The social rules that held marriages together have fell apart never to return in my lifetime.

Yeah, I don’t see any way to put the genie back in the bottle…no smooth landing. I imagine at some point there will be a huge reset of the world but that may be after a huge world war or something in which some more “barbaric” society conquers the world.

As I’ve heard others say, at this point perhaps the best long term strategic approach isn’t an outright war on the west…just give us 100 or so years to extinguish ourselves via internal divisions, mental problems, drug use, obesity, open borders, low birth rates, suicide, narcissism, imploding morals/nuclear family unit, etc.

Wouldn’t it be kinda interesting if the fall of humans isn’t some grand event but just a slow smothering. Could it be possible that on a macro scale intelligence or whatever the word can only allow “beings” to get so far. What if in the grand scheme of things everything we know is like a grain of sand.

“This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.”

> ...But yeah, I’d say a decline in morality, religion becoming less fundamental ... have all turned the human race into crap.

I agree with the realization - but not with the precondition.

The human race didn't "turn into crap" because of the decline of morality, religiousness, etc.

it is, always has been, and always will be crap.

"Who watches the watchmen" (https://www.goingyourownway.com/mgto...91/#post191791) was uttered two thousand years ago, cautioning that it's impossible to enforce moral behavior on women. This was a truth universally acknowledged by adult men, back before feminism and onlyfans and simps.

You prefer more commonly-held-in-acceptance sources? Fine, use the "Holy" book: Jesus' disciples (Matthew 19, 8-10) are crystal clear about the subject:

"[Jesus] you can't divorce a woman unless she is unfaithful to you"
"[disciples] Really? Then men shouldn't marry"

St Paul: "I prefer men not to marry - and stay as I am" (1 Corinthians 7:7)

Sooner or later, men realize the mistake of worshiping the Holy Vagina (the most fake of all gods). Most are so hopelessly trapped in societal and emotional constructs that they won't ever dare admit it - but deep inside, they know they are pitiful slaves. Moreover, an ever increasing percentage gets to experience the joy of divorce - and then the cold, hard truth hits them on the face like a bucket of ice. Others realize the insanity using their reason - and see the world for what it is: the "education" from childhood into simp-ing and white-knighting, orchestrated by organized religion, the Disney fairy tales of princesses, etc.

But, sadly - as can be seen many times in our forum - most men don't dare take the next step, and trace the fault to the reality we find ourselves in.

All of us - men and women - evolved in a hideous, unfair, faceless, ruthless, cold, unfeeling universe. We men evolved into the horny dogs we are, getting aroused in a few seconds and fucking almost every woman that says "yes", because that's the best way for our genes to survive - by spreading our seed as much as we can. And similarly, female DNA didn't just evolve into what it is because of an accident - or because "Lucifer whispered to Eve's ear". Women evolved hypergamy for a reason. They evolved into relentless, exploitative sluts millenia ago, because that's the most optimal way for their DNA to propagate and survive. They don't give a shit about their husbands, because once he impregnates them, his evolutionary purpose is complete - he now just has to feed her and her spawn.

Whether females are "kept in check" via fear of gods or societal shaming, is irrelevant. Any married man lives next to a creature that will betray him in the blink of an eye - as soon as it is profitable for her to do so. And that makes sense to her genes, no matter whether it makes sense societally/religiously or not. She literally does what comes natural to her.

The sooner we realize this, as MGTOWs, the sooner we can come to peace with our going-away choice, and with our inner selves.

I'll say it out loud, Edward, even though it marks me as a fringe MGTOW-er - and potentially makes many MGTOWs hate me for saying it:

I don't just feel sadness for the newborns in this universe.
I feel proud for not bringing innocent lives into this hellscape.

end of days — what you say makes perfect sense. We could never really change the inherent nature of women but I guess for those wanting to live in that deluded framework — for thousands of years humans did their best to tame the beast which may have made things the best they could really be given the intentions and situation. We live in a different reality now though and a man would have to very intentionally want to stay ignorant to not see things for what they are. Marriage or impregnating nowadays is far too risky to take a chance and hope for the best. Let’s say 150+ years ago…knock yourself out.

Originally Posted by end_of_days

They don't give a shit about their husbands, because once he impregnates them, his evolutionary purpose is complete - he now just has to feed her and her spawn.

EoD's That was a great comment!!!

Just one point I think does not apply very often.... The word "Husband" in the above quote... Single mothers tote the kids into new relationships, so new husband did not impregnate... If she's not a single mum, often the husband is not the father because of an affair/fling or ONS with a "Bad Boy", work supervisor, beach bum on holidays, or some other man that gave her tingles when husband was not there to stop her spreading her legs.... DNA tests should be mandatory before a name is listed as father on the birth certificate.

Briffault's Law, she will only associate with a male if she can benefit. Seed or resources and may not be the same male for both.

Good point, Rusty.

Can you imagine it, if all couples and their offspring were to undergo mandatory DNA testing...
And then the fathers would actually learn whether they enslaved themselves for someone else's kid or not?

That would be "fun" :-)

Originally Posted by Edwardhaskell

after a huge world war or something in which some more “barbaric” society conquers the world. As I’ve heard others say, at this point perhaps the best long term strategic approach isn’t an outright war on the west…just give us 100 or so years to extinguish ourselves via internal divisions, mental problems, drug use, obesity, open borders, low birth rates, suicide, narcissism, imploding morals/nuclear family unit, etc.

I have often wondered if our society will eventually be conquered by a more traditional / faster reproducing one. I'm now thinking the opposite will happen, western ideas like feminism spreading to more traditional parts of the world. The recent protests in Iran by women would probably not happened in the pre internet age. I don't buy the "internet is cut off" in Iran line for one minute.