There is much hostility toward the idea of matrimony within the manosphere, and understandably so. Most of those familiar with this part of the internet come from western nations and are therefore familiar with what the skyrocketing divorce rates, punitive alimony and biased custody laws associated with Western marriage have done to men.
In spite of this, I suspect that the idea of marriage has not entirely lost its luster for many of us. In fact, I’d posit that quite a few denizens of the manosphere would still be open to it under the right circumstances, at least in the long term. I know that I am one of them.
It is these circumstances that determine the wisdom of a male considering the idea of marriage in the modern age, separating the gullible saps from the wiser patriarchs. Teasing out these circumstances requires that a key distinction be made between two different forms of the marriage that exist in different cultures. This will determine the degree to which the male entering a marriage arrangement can be considered a fool.
Marriage 1.0
Marriage 1.0 is the older version of the institution. It features fewer incentives for dissolution of the union and offers significantly less room for the ideal fulfillment of the feminine imperative, while offering more incentive for the male involved. Keeping this arrangement going requires fewer games for the male to play and allows for a more equitable, mutually-beneficial partnership.
The most crucial key here is the elimination of easy outs for the female that could leave the male high and dry and with severe legal and financial obligations with little consequences to her. The legal risks for a man within a Marriage 1.0 contract are lower and quite a bit less one-sided.
Men have a bit more room to be men within the context of this arrangement because their investment in their family is more well protected and not as easy to invalidate as I will soon show it has become.
This deal is still available in many parts of the world where more traditional gender roles are still respected. Marriage isn’t a horrible deal for your average man operating within the confines of these cultures. In the West, where the culture is largely oriented to cater to the feminine imperative, Marriage 1.0 is largely a memory, with the era in which it last dominated surviving only in fiction.
In today’s western world, another option dominates…
Marriage 2.0
This is where lifetime alimony, stealth alimony, fem-centric child custody laws and a host of other factors combine to make marriage a general liability for men and a boon for women, who can essentially do no wrong barring a few extreme cases.
If a divorce is initiated after a male cheats on his spouse and fathers another secret family, the male is likely to lose custody of his children and be saddled with large financial obligations to his ex.
If a divorce is initiated after it is discovered that a female has cheated on her spouse and actually cuckolded him (paternity fraud), then the male is still likely to lose custody of his children (the ones that are his) and be saddled with large financial obligations to the child that isn’t his.
Marriage 2.0 is, in short, the story of male liability at all costs and in nearly all situations. It is the product of re-imagined divorce laws that, in effect, removed most of the protections men enjoyed under Marriage 1.0 and replaced them with a system that incentivizes the initiation of divorce by women, regardless of their actions.
So, Is Marriage Ever Worthwhile?
I have made a serious effort, but I’m failing to find many instances in which Marriage 2.0 could be considered worth the risk and effort. Marriage as a whole, though? That depends on the cultural context.
It is crucial not to overlook these cultural factors when it comes to the topic of marriage and whether or not a man should bother with it. The firmly anti-marriage view is pretty spot on if you’re dealing with your typical western women and Marriage 2.0 is your only option, but the dynamics shift when you start talking about other parts of the world where Marriage 2.0 is not a dominant force.
Women in many of these places are a bit more willing to do the things many in this corner of the internet hope their partner would do in an ideal world that a lot of western women will not.
Combine this with the decreased financial/legal risks and a marriage-minded man in the Marriage 1.0 context suddenly seems like less of a sap. Even a less relationship-oriented man might begin to reconsider things in the right society.
Were Marriage 1.0 a more viable option for western men, there would be significantly fewer voices standing in opposition to matrimony altogether. Sites like this would, in fact, probably suffer quite a bit due to decreased participation. Guys would have less to complain about in a society where Marriage 1.0 was more than an often ridiculed memory.
If you can get out of the matrix that is the west (especially North America), marriage is still largely viable.
If you’re marriage minded and you live in the West, your long term goal should be a more permanent expatriation to a society where Marriage 1.0 still persists (don’t bring a girl back and risk her assimilation).
Even those who are not very open to possible matrimony in the near or short-term should at least flirt with the idea of Marriage 1.0 if it is available and see if you can’t change your mind. At least avail yourself of all of your options before committing to eternal bachelorhood. Do not let your familiarity with the worst case scenario (Marriage 2.0) tarnish your view of matrimony entirely.
The institution of marriage is dead (or close to it) in the West, but that does not mean that all is lost.
Read Next: The Limits Of American Feminism
Marriage is still an option to the extent that she’s young, untouched, in awe of you, and has money.
1000 words down to 20 words. You’re welcome.
Whatever you do, don’t delude yourself into thinking that Eastern and Muslim societies all have strong marriages. In many of those countries the divorce rates are comparable to Western ones. The marriages are also a sham.
Jack, Saudi Arabia has the highest divorce rate – in the world.
While it might be not as bad as in the US, I can assure you that marriage in my country (Poland, which some on this blog consider pussy paradise ) is already 2.0 marriage rather than 1.0.
If a man desires marriage 1.0 it is still sort of possible in the West. First, of course, you have to find the right woman who has not drank the feminist kool-aid outright. This is possible, but exceedingly difficult especially in larger, more liberal cities. Second, you have to perfect your alpha-ness and internalize it to the point where you are a natural. The only long lasting marriages I know of today is where the father is a true natural alpha through and through. You can sense it the second when you enter a room they occupy it is that obvious. Third, you have to be upfront a blunt with your wife candidate about your expectations in marriage at least six months before you even think about getting engaged. This will involve several one-way conversations where you dictate the expectations and she shakes her head in agreement. You have to do this many times over the course of several months so that she will internalize these expectations. Fourth, you need to get a pre-nup. Now a pre-nup is not some type of magical shield that will provide you absolute protection in a divorce, but it does help shift incentives more toward marriage 1.0 instead of marriage 2.0. In most states a good lawyer can craft a pre-nup that will minimize alimony liability, maximize the chance to obtain the most favorable child custody and child support arrangements, and provide for the most equitable split of marital property for both parties. To what extents these are all possible varies greatly depending on state law, but in general, as long as the pre-nup is fair, has been reviewed by lawyers on both sides, and was not signed under “duress” (as in given to your soon to be spouse days before the wedding) most states will recognize it.
Given all this and the right age for the man and marriage is still a viable option. I usually only recommend it to men who are entering their mid to late 30’s. If you don’t have a good wife candidate 33-35 is a good time to start looking. If you do have one 35-38 is a good timeframe to think of marriage. If you are a man that desires a family beyond one or two children I suggest that you have a few years off these recommended ages. I know many men that have tried to father multiple children in their late 30’s and early 40’s and it has exhausted them half to death. Fathering of young children was meant to take place in your 20’s when you have the energy to keep up. Attempting it later in life can not only be a determent to your health but also your career and add unneeded stress to a marriage.
I’m married but to a woman from Asia. She was raised in the U.S. so has a bit of feminist baggage but in general is much more traditional than most American women.
Kids are the only reason for marriage IMO. But that is a big reason for me.
I still have affairs and travel a lot so that is a big help in keeping me happy.
Lots of things – not just feminism – make me think that emigration is the best long term option for civilized men in the U.S.
Eastern Europe and certain nations in Latin America offer a good life for non-feminized robots.
Why did you get married if you didn’t intend to have sex with only one woman? Honest question..
“Marriage is still an option to the extent that she’s young, untouched, in awe of you, and has money.
1000 words down to 20 words. You’re welcome.”
Try again. Marriage in Western societies is at best a horribly bad bet (as noted in his article). Marriage elsewhere – not so much.
There fixed your fix for ya.
Your summation overlooks the not so uncommon; untouched – in awe of you – I Married Too Young chick who partakes of one too many Girls Night Out only to discover she’s “missed out” all these years. I’ve got a buddy right now staring down the barrel of that gun. Western society with its pro-slut leanings and destructive marital incentives pumps out record numbers of empowered divorcees. Sure your odds may be marginally better with a young innocent or imported chick. Like maybe 2% better. So much for the Marry Them Young thesis, antidotes notwithstanding.
Has. money.
Keeps. kids.
So where do you suggest we marry? Bermuda? Marriage 1.0 doesn’t exist anywhere anymore I fear. I bet even the Amish have issues in this day and age.
One thing that must be considered is non-legal marriage. A libertarian myself, I see no reason I Should have to confirm my marriage before a court. In this scenario you can structure, as best you can, a 1.0 marriage. Make sure the house or apartment you live and pay for is in your name. Make you’re wife pay for other things. The cultural incentives of a 1.0 marriage will not be their, but it will still be an improvement.
Can you explain this idea of a non-legal marriage further? I did a quick search on Google but was unable to find anything relevant.
Do you just mean simply acting like you are married without obtaining the license and completing the legal proceedings? If so, you may have to worry about common law marriage in some states. If you live together for an extended period and present yourselves to others as married (calling yourselves husband and wife, using the same last name, wearing wedding rings), then you may find yourself subject to the same biased divorce laws when the two of you break up.
As far as children go, you will face the same laws, but as far as the economics of it you can still keep everything you put in your own name.
After having seen many friends, male and female fail miserably at marriage I have come to one conclusion. Marriage is a terrible idea, unless you look at it as a business perspective. California law currently states no matter who’s fault it is for the divorce assets are split 50/50. That means if you live there and only have 30% of the income you have come out with a 20% profit.
The author of this article is literally telling you to move to a third world hell hole to get married, leaving behind all of the conveniences and social advances of the West.
No thanks. I like running water, the ability to say/do what I want, and my friends back home.
Furthermore, the Western model of the State taking over the marriage institution is proliferating across the globe. Perhaps the only place on the planet that will be spared feminism is the Middle East, and I cannot see why anybody would want to live there in the first place.
Furthermore, the idea that traditional marriage is somehow a deal for men is also pretty hilarious. So, basically, you work all day while your parasite wife stays home and turns knobs on washing machines and ovens. That’s not a fair exchange of labor. Marriage as an institution is finished. Women killed it the first chance they got and it’s never coming back.
Your best bet is to pay a woman to carry your child for 9 months in a sort of contractual agreement and then take care of it yourself if you’d like to procreate.
“Third world hellholes” are not the only nations in which Marriage 1.0 is attainable.
There are also nations with respectable standards of living that fit the bill and offer most of the conveniences of the west, especially for westerners who can take advantage of lower costs of living.
Running water and freedom of speech aren’t hard to find, especially for a well prepared westerner looking to expat. There are many advantages to living in the west, but you’re overestimating them.
If you’re this uninformed, however, it is perhaps best you stay put.
I already addressed this myth. It is unwise to extrapolate growth trends into perpetuity. Western feminism has serious limitations. The nightmare scenario in which you envision its global dominance is simply not viable. Most of the world will never see it as entrenched as it is in parts of the west (specifically the Anglosphere and Scandinavia). Even in western Europe there is variation in the degree to which each society has adopted anti-male tenets of feminism, which should tell you something.
That depends on how you view your relationships.
There are many nuances you overlook in this paragraph that I could take issue with (ex: the value of housework/childcare, what constitutes a “fair exchange of labor” and how much that idea should weigh in a relationship, etc), but I doubt I’ll change your mind and frankly I don’t need to do so. I’m not here to sell you on the idea of marriage. It is ok for a man not to want it, and if he feels that way he should stay away from it.
To each their own.
Surrogacy is much less feasible if you desire a large family, and that is to say nothing of the expense.
Again, this is an immutable difference in outlook that I will not seek to alter. If kids aren’t a big concern for you in the long term (I suspect they aren’t in your case), then don’t have them (or go for a single try). To each their own.
Please name some countries where I can practice traditional marriage while still maintaining a standard of living and the freedoms I have in the West.
Also note that feminism has spread to both China and India, the Asian monoliths, and wreaked more havoc there on the family in TEN YEARS than they did in 60 years over in the West since feminist legislation was passed through the halls of government. The same goes for South Korea and Japan.
It has gotten so bad in Japan that young people are simply not even marrying anymore and so-called “herbivore men” are foregoing relationships altogether in favor of porn and prostitution. I argue that the situation is even WORSE outside of the West.
Face it, dude: traditional marriage is a done deal. It’s through. The moment women had an alternative to the traditional model they collective jumped ship and hopped right onto the throbbing, multi-pronged phallus of the State. Your vision of marriage bliss will never materialize again.
I repeat: marriage is an outdated vestige of the past and is never returning. Women don’t want it to return, simple as that.
I want to also mention that you guys shouldn’t even try coming at me with this “be an alpha” bullshit, because we all have seen what happened to perennial alpha males Tiger Woods and Kobe Bryant in their respective divorce rapings. Either man could probably fuck any woman they wanted on the planet if they tried.
If you say so.
“we all have seen what happened to perennial alpha males Tiger Woods and Kobe Bryant”
Tiger Woods is not an alpha male, and never was. The same could be argued for Kobe.
Being good at sports =/= being confident or skilled with women.
Athlone, while you keep mentioning Scandinavia as a bastion for feminism I advise you to exercise caution when comparing it to the anglosphere with regard to marriage. In Swe for example divorced couples with children have shared custody in 97% of all cases (88% for partners with kids that never married).
@Vicious: Fair enough, will do.
Agreed on most, but not all points from Jason. Some countries in SA are actually not as bad as Jason generalizes. Uruguay, Chile and even Argentina with all of its problems still have running water and decent healthcare system. And families are still strong.
But as i also agree that there is no way to see just how the pandemic spread of feminism and shit female behaviors will spread. For example, as China’s economy grows, the divorce rate is rising at a very fast rate. This of course comes as no surprise.
And with the avent of social media, smart phones which all females across the world over gravitate to are just a few of the means a society westernizes.
But as far as saying what you want and doing what you want, Jason if you are based stateside you can bet that now we are heading towards a social dictatorship those days will be over, and for certian things such as discussing mens rights or speaking out against feminism, well we see that we already have less freedoms.
“No thanks. I like running water”
Really? You believe the bullshit that your teachers told you in 10th grade about how “third world” countries are dilapidated?
Marriage was and still is a great institution. Up until modern times it was mostly a religious thing…and compared to today that worked pretty well.
The government and judicial system killed it. I won’t trash on marriage…but I will bring my anger and fury upon Uncle Sam and corrupt judges.
“I’m married but to a woman from Asia.”
“I still have affairs and travel a lot so that is a big help in keeping me happy.”
You aren’t married, you are a joke. A man stands for something. You stand for nothing. Don’t make marriage more of a joke than it already is with this shite. And don’t embarrass your gender. Just don’t get married, and certainly don’t spawn if you stand for nothing.
Yes this man is single-handedly ruining marriage. Gay marriage, 50% divorce rate, no-fault divorce, etc play no part.
how does gay marriage ruin marriage?? straight marriage has been a joke for almost 50 years now—the gays have only been getting married for eight or nine years or so. and in like six states.
I totally agree Roosh, DON’T GET MARRIED. I have no problem with people fucking over other people’s vows. It’s fucking over yourself I have problem with. If you have no moral code, and you lie to yourself on a daily basis, aren’t you just as feral as the rest?
I’m not talking little white lies like “I need to pretend that I still like this girl before I never call her again”, but more a big lie like, “I’m going to kiss my wife that I don’t respect and take my child to school that I don’t respect”, because if you did respect your child you would be doing everything possible to make sure they had a real family. Otherwise don’t spawn, as mentioned.
Also, saying “my little depravity is no big deal in the face of these grand depravities of a, b, and c” , is a copout, and you speak eloquently on the topic of not being a copout. All you have is yourself. /Rant off sorry for spam.
@dragnet
Gay marriage is symptomatic and reinforcing. It is both a symptom of our declining seriousness regarding social, romantic, and sexual attachments; it then reinforces those trends.
“The author of this article is literally telling you to move to a third world hell hole to get married, leaving behind all of the conveniences and social advances of the West.
No thanks. I like running water, the ability to say/do what I want,”
Spoken like the true 85% of America that doesn’t own a passport. You should probably get back to watching Dancing With The Stars.
I hate to keep pumping my essays “A Man Wants a Wife, Not a Co-Worker” and “ForeignBride Product Review : Finding a Model That’s Right For You”, but some of these young men need to have their eyes opened. And I’m not making money at it, so the shameless self-promotion is ok.
Uncle Elmer, you’re articles are much appreciated. My eyes have been opened wide for some time now. This is definitely the route I’m going. Thanks again!
I take it you’ve never objectively analyzed the intellectual and cultural wastelands that are the third world nations. There’s a reason why their countries are underdeveloped and feature near-constant levels of internecine–they’re philosophically bankrupt and despotically-managed.
The idea that you’d want to go to these places and live among poor people that you would have no chance of relating to on any personal level is hilarious. Even more hilarious that you think you’d be marrying one of the women there for any reason OTHER than the fact that you’re a walking ATM machine that can provide more pesos to her than the alcoholic third-world slobs that are flip-flopping around her local slum.
You seem to think American women have loftier goals, and standards. Enjoy your frivorce.
You stay put, then.
Well, for the record, my wife was successful in her business before we met, and she is only here to be with me. I enjoy her friends and family and her culture is a real pleasure to live in. Their appreciation of good food reaches art in everyday life. Take a look at the photos in “A Man Wants a Wife, Not a Co-Worker”. I eat like this every single day, and she says her sister is a better cook! The women in her country are stunningly beautiful and abundant, yet modest and polite with an innate cheerfulness. Other countries are similar. You owe it to yourself to travel abroad. Returning to the US can be a big letdown after extended travel there.
Off-topic but in Saigon there is this massive natural park near the river devoted solely to providing lovely backdrops for wedding photos. You can go there and stay in a little cabana and order outrageous exotic foods and beer while watching the photographers work their magic on the happy couples and their huge families.
This post by Athlone is a bit beta.
I completely agree with you that marriage should be avoided at all costs in the West, but I disagree with you that marriage, even outside the West, should be the goal of a player.
I think Roosh has said he is not in a hurry to marry and doesn’t consider it a high priority. The goal of an international playboy should be goal should be to sample as many women as possible without settling down. Roissy has stated that all the benefits of marriage can be had within LTRs, which unlike marriage have no downsides. Add to this that fact that Western culture is spreading though out the globe like wildfire, and the case for marriage becomes even weaker.
Marriage is an outdated institution.
I could write a whole post on the absurdity of this critique and its total preclusion of important nuances, but I’ll leave that for another time.
Suffice it to say that too many in this corner of the internet lean on a rigid alpha-beta dichotomy in their thinking and evaluation. This limits the quality of said evaluation/thinking.
For the record, I am probably best described as a “Greater Beta” on the Roissy Scale, with perhaps the potential to end up more of a “Lesser Alpha” in the future (I probably will not surpass 100 lifetime partners). I have no shame in admitting this, nor am I ashamed to say something “beta” once in awhile.
Beta =/= incorrect.
You don’t disagree with me in this regard because I did not make that statement.
I did not claim that “players”, generally, should make marriage a goal. Here is what I did say.
I suggested at the beginning of the article that there exist within the broad group of “players” (broadly defined here as those who frequent the manosphere) some men with an affinity to the idea of marriage. These are men who may want to settle down further down the line, and haven’t completely ruled out the idea of becoming a husband at some point in their lives.
Note that I did not claim that all “players” (manosphere readers/writers) are like this, which is what your disagreement implied. I merely claimed that there exist some for whom marriage holds some sort of appeal, even in a limited sense. It is something they haven’t totally written off yet and may consider down the line.
Roosh is, judging from his own writing, one of these guys.
I then suggested a way of thinking that could help these particular men reconcile their desire for matrimony in the long term (most of these guys, including myself, won’t be marrying young) with the shitshow the institution has become in our primary place of residence (the west).
Later on in the post, I broaden my claim to state that some players who lack the affinity for marriage/LTRs mentioned above may want to consider the idea in the long-term. I simply suggest that they learn of it so they can make an informed choice about the viability of matrimony should they decide one day to settle down.
This is not a suggestion that players make marriage a goal. It is a suggestion that they do some due diligence and consider all aspects of the discussion in determining their long-term future. Many guys won’t even wish to consider Marriage 1.0 at all in the long term, and that’s fine-not every “player” needs to make marriage of any kind a goal.
As I already mentioned, Roosh is the kind of guy (someone who may want to settle down in the long term) to whom I would address this post.
Not everybody is interested in building a massive notch count simply for the sake of doing so. More importantly, not everybody needs to possess that interest in order to avoid becoming a manipulated chump.
There is a middle ground here that too often gets lost in these discussion of what is “alpha” and “beta”, and amidst all the “playboy” talk. I consider this consistent oversight to be rather unfortunate.
I have never heard Roosh mention that he is considering marriage (in the long term or otherwise). In fact, he never really addresses the issue other than to warn men against dating Western women. What little can be gleaned from his posts on his blog and forum is that he intends to be an international player well into his old age, so I wouldn’t be so quick to say that your message about marriage even resonates with him.
“I have never heard Roosh mention that he is considering marriage (long term or otherwise)”
I’m confident I have.
Jason:”The author of this article is literally telling you to move to a third world hell hole to get married, leaving behind all of the conveniences and social advances of the West.
No thanks. I like running water, the ability to say/do what I want, and my friends back home.
Furthermore, the Western model of the State taking over the marriage institution is proliferating across the globe. Perhaps the only place on the planet that will be spared feminism is the Middle East, and I cannot see why anybody would want to live there in the first place.”
Agreed on most points. some countries is SA are actually not as bad as Jason generalizes. Uruguay, Chile and even Argentina with all of its problems still have running water and decent healthcare system. And families are still strong.
But as i also agree that there is no way to see just how the pandemic spread of feminism and shit female behaviors will spread. For example, as China’s economy grows, the divorce rate is rising at a very fast rate. This of course comes as no surprise.
And with the avent of social media, smart phones which all females across the world over gravitate to are just a few of the means a society westernizes.
But as far as saying what you want and doing what you want, Jason if you are based stateside you can bet that now we are heading towards a social dictatorship those days will be over, and for certian things such as discussing mens rights or speaking out against feminism, well we see that we already have less freedoms.
After seeing the divorce rape my father took, I’d have to be a complete and utter fucking moron to get married. It has roughly 50% chance of occurring with a 70% chance initiated by your wife. Most people are simply blinded. If I told you that you had a 50% chance of getting into a fatal car wreck with a 70% chance of it being someone else fault on a certain road, I guarantee no one in their right mind would drive down it. All of a sudden everything would be clear.
Good point.
I also recommend that people watch “Blue Valentine.” I watched it after it was recommended by Chateau Heartiste, and it is a very good movie that (probably unintentionally) exposes how fucked up the current version of marriage is in the USA.
The link to the review is below:
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2011/01/18/beta-valentine/
What about love and romance? Isn’t marriage about sharing your life intimately with the one person who means the most to you? Maybe marriage has such a bad rap because of the women men are choosing to marry (and the men women are choosing to marry) and not the institution itself. Several studies indicate the financial value of a homemaker/housewife to be upwards of $90k/yr in value added to the home. Why such hostility towards having a homemaker/housewife if all of you preach that you want a feminine woman? It seems you hate women for either choice ~ a career woman is a ‘feminist bitch, etc’ and a woman who is a homemaker/housewife is a ‘lazy feminist bitch’ just waiting for alimony. You can’t have it both ways. In every relationship the man brings 50% and the woman brings 50%. The blame for marital downfall, therefore, is equal in that respect.
90k for unskilled labor, eh? Women do not cease to amaze with their economic illiteracy. I can hire someone for 20k a year to cook, clean and do everything else. If you come back with the ” emotional support” argument you ought to subtract the equal support received by the wife making it a zero sum game…
That $90k figure is probably something people came up with to justify raking men over the coals in divorce court. Do you know who came up with that? Most of the things a wive used to provide can be had far cheaper than $90k, and you don’t have to pay for the services after you have terminated the contract, as your employee or contractor is not entitled to the same standard of living he/she had while in your employ. Additionally, it would make no economic sense for a woman to marry a man earning less than ~$180k.
And then there is love. A simple emotion doesn’t trump complex reasoning or risk vs. reward calculations. People fall in love with lunatics, murderers, (substance) abusers and the like. Your love for someone doesn’t change the person you love, it changes you. Your love also doesn’t change the way the state is going to dispossess and enslave you to your “beloved wive”. And know, most love is conditional. Being in love also makes men stupid according to some research. Having to suffer in perpetuity while possibly living with a broken heart, separated from your children is the least romantic thing ever. Chaining a couple together by a legal contract doesn’t sound that romantic either, why impose penalty on the man when supposedly love is all you need?
How you can first suggest love and romance as a valid reason to marry, then say people get married to the wrong people for the wrong reasons? It is a weird form of amnesia if you contradict yourself two sentences into the first paragraph.
One thing I agree on, to assume you’ll find a woman with a 1950 attitude who is also self-sufficient like the 2012 “career gal” is just like all those stupid cunts blabbering about “having it all”.
@Tess Let’s test your argument for honesty.
Let’s say that having a child is about “about sharing your life intimately with the one person who means the most to you.”
But, if you lived in a world in which there was a 50% chance the child, whom you love dearly, could, for no reason or for any reason, file divorce papers with a court which would:
a) Kick you out of your home and hand the home over to the child, and
b) Separate you permanently from the rest of your family, and
c) Seize half of your current and future income plus half of your assets including retirement accounts, and
d) Compel you to breastfeed another woman’s child in 10% to 15% of cases (*maternity fraud)
would you be more inclined or less inclined to want a child; a “person who means the most to you?”
We all love children but why would any sane person want to have a child under those circumstances?
Even if 50% of children in such a world were loving, trustworthy, and wonderful human beings why would anyone take the risk of losing everything on the whim of another person?
What would happen to the number of childbirths over time? Would potential parents become angry at the injustice of such a system?
*Regarding the maternity fraud reference above, paternity fraud is rampant and victims of the fraud are usually compelled by the anti-family courts to pay child support for the non-biological child until the child turns 18. If you think it’s no big deal, consider breastfeeding another (hated) woman’s child for a few months or years. The National Organization for Women opposes mandatory paternity testing at birth, a practice which would eliminate paternity fraud. Another reason we hate feminists.
If you don’t see the parallels, there’s no hope for you because you lack a logical mind and you are incapable of empathy (the ability to place yourself in another person’s shoes).
To take off a bit from what you’re saying, I wonder about this in the manosphere; why do men who want sweet, loving, feminine women piss on what that kind of woman wants in her life? I’m not saying that in a men-have-to-conform-to-my-ideals-or-else kind of way, but it does surprise me.
Sure, sluts and brainwashed idiot females still get married, but the women these guys claim to want really want marriage. A good woman isn’t going to consent to being some man’s fuck-toy in the name of her own “sex-positive attitudes”; she wants commitment and love and connection. A good woman isn’t going to screw her husband by divorcing him behind his back and stealing his kids. A good woman wants to be there with her man. A good woman – a feminine, sweet, low-maintenance, loving woman – isn’t going to want to be with a man who fundamentally doesn’t trust her.
Completely missed the point.
Thanks to feminists, and the misandrist laws they fostered, marriage is very dangerous for men. If we choose the wrong “feminine, sweet, low-maintenance, loving woman,” we lose everything we value.
Lose everything. 50% of the time. For random, ridiculous reasons like: “She loves him but is no longer in love with him.”
How do you like them odds?
American women are not worth the risk.
PS. Debating women is a huge waste of time because most are incapable of placing themselves in a man’s shoes.
Yes, it’s unfortunate that the manosphere ignores the 95% good women(tm) and focuses on the infractions of the 5% nasty, skanky, frivolously divorcing, cuckolding, manhating, sluts.
That’s why I’m proud to be a feminist, because every man is more privileged than any given woman, every woman deserves special treatment and I hate men generalizing about women.
LOL!
Tess, please don’t fool yourself and certainly don’t try to fool any of us. I manage at a restaurant and that type work would get minimum wage. The best scenario a dime or two more an hour if those dishes are spotless and everything is done quick.
Because Athlone McGinnis has made it impossible for me to reply to his post to my previous response to him, I want to point out a few things:
1. He never named a single country where you can obtain a traditional marriage while still enjoying a Western lifestyle
2. Woods and Bryant aren’t just good at sports. They are filthy rich, famous, and probably UNIVERSALLY desired by women. Please, save yourself the embarrassment and don’t try to throw your pitiful game “theory” at me as a justification for why these men got divorce-raped. These men are alpha males in every sense of the word. They could walk into a bar and instantly have their pick of any female in there without even opening their mouths. The fact that you try to downplay this shows just how deluded you are.
3. No mention of the fact that feminism has proliferated RAPIDLY throughout every developed corner of the globe and is more rapidly weathering away at the edifice of the institution of marriage and the family unit than it ever did in the West.
I’m screenshotting this article in case Athlone McGinnis decides to delete it in the future out of embarrassment.
Athlone didn’t write the blog software. You can’t reply beyond the second level reply, so maybe dial down the paranoia a bit.
Agree. I cringe when I hear a man proclaim his Alphaness will save him in marriage. Your wife may play along but she knows the State is just a phone call away in case she needs. This is now true in almost all countries of the world.
There’s NO ONE more Alpha than the State, not even the President. Even Clinton had to apologize like a Beta on TV.
You come up with good points.
Athlone seems to have a romantic vision of marriage. He didn’t provide any concrete examples of countries because he hasn’t really thought enough about this subject (or traveled enough) to give advice, and he dismisses rich athletes getting raked over the coals in divorce court and the spread of feminism around the globe since those facts don’t fix neatly into his worldview.
Marriage worked in the past because there was no alternative. There was no divorce, no welfare, no alimony, no safety net, etc. An unmarried woman in the past was considered a burden and a shame. As for married women, divorce was generally out of the question (both legally and socially), even in cases of serious spousal abuse. Until those old values and ways come back into being, marriage will continue to be a terrible choice for any man.
Nah.
A caribbean example came to mind immediately (drawn from my own experience), but I know Jason will not acknowledge that one can enjoy reasonable living standards there.
There’s no point in arguing with those who cannot be convinced. Like I said several comments ago, to each their own.
I’m not here to sell marriage to anyone who doesn’t want anything to do with it. That wasn’t the point of the post.
I don’t see why I’d need to dismiss that. What impact does it have on my argument?
My post stated that Marriage 2.0 is untenable. How does a wealthy athlete (ex: Bryant, Woods) getting raped in a marriage 2.0 divorce court clash with what I said about Marriage 2.0 being too risky for men?
You claim I have ignored this, which is daft because I addressed it head on just a few comments ago.
I’ve also made two blog posts about the spread of feminism around the world and the myth that it is possible for western style feminism to become uniformly dominant elsewhere. Search the archives-the limits of the ideology are very, very clear.
You previous posts about the limits of the spread of feminist ideology is hardly proof. Your theory is nothing more than speculation. Only time will tell how feminism will spread globally. So far, things don’t look good.
“You previous posts about the limits of the spread of feminist ideology is hardly proof.”
They aren’t meant to be, and in the context of this particular discussion they certainly do not need to be.
You claimed that I’d ignored these issues for my convenience. This is not true, as I have in fact addressed them head on multiple times. You were incorrect.
“Your theory is nothing more than speculation.”
Yes, it is an educated guess. It wasn’t intended to be more. Nobody here claimed the ability to predict the future.
1. I didn’t create the software that prevented your reply, as Hugh mentioned. The site doesn’t allow multiple levels of replies.
2. Good at sports/famous/rich =/= alpha. There are plenty of simps and betas in pro sports.
3. Western feminism has not proliferated in the way you claim. I addressed that in a previous comment, and have also made two blog posts about the limits of western feminism.
4. I’ve had racists come in here and throw much more serious insults at me than you have. I left their comments alone, and even responded.
What makes you think you’ll be any different?
You’re not embarrassing anyone, bro. Its just the internet. Calm down.
Still waiting on you to post a country where I can “enjoy” traditional marriage while still having access to the freedoms of the West.
As to your claims:
1. “In 2009, one in five Chinese marriages ended in divorce, according to a report by the Ministry of Civil Affairs. The report said 1.71 million Chinese couples broke up last year — 160,000 couples, or 10.3 percent, more than the previous year.
The figures follow an upward trajectory. Last year the divorce rate — the number of divorces per 1,000 people — stood at about 1.85 per thousand. In 1985, the figure was only 0.4 per thousand.
The trend is significant because Chinese culture has long leaned heavily against divorce. An ancient proverb admonishes newlyweds to “be married until your hair turns white.” In the old feudal culture, it was shameful for women to marry more than once. Divorced women were considered disgraceful failures and were called “po xie (old shoe).” But for men, divorce has been traditionally easy.”
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-06-18/world/china.divorces_1_divorce-rate-marriage-law-couples?_s=PM:WORLD
Meanwhile, in India:
“Metros have always earned a bad reputation for playing havoc with the institution of marriage, thanks to mind-boggling stress factor thrust on the couples. But, hold you breath, when it comes to marital turbulence, aaplya Nagpur is not lagging behind! In the past decade, the divorce rate has increased here by more than 100 per cent.”
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-10-03/man-woman/34218858_1_divorce-rate-divorce-cases-young-couples
Get fucked.
2. I don’t know if it’s sheer idiocy, delusion, or trolling, but the fact that you think that physical power, obscene levels of fame, and the extreme wealth possessed by both Kobe and Tiger don’t amount to credence with women is indicative that you’ve got some sort of mental disorder.
I want you to take a look at the wives that both of these men possess and have impregnated. Both are thirty times hotter than any girl you’ve probably even talked to for more than fifteen minutes. Not to mention the hundreds of women these two dudes have plowed between them, if not more.
What you’re telling me is that if you were in a room with Kobe Bryant and Tiger Woods, you would “outgame” them for the women in the room because of the fact that you know this amorphous procedure of social interaction called “Game.” Please just kill yourself now because I don’t see your life getting any better.
3. Who’s throwing racist insults at you, dipshit?
Jason: You have many good points, however you fail on couple of things…first I don’t know about Kobe Bryan but Tiger Woods IN NO WAY is alpha, he is beta to the core and moreover stupid. Why do I say this? First he married a woman ostensibly equivalent or even worse in some aspects than any American feminazi (a Norwegian) since she has been “bathed” in feminism almost since birth, to a high degree. Two, even though his fortune and fame would guarantee that 99% of women in any given bar would accept an offer to go with him to the bed, if what I have seen of him (body language) points to the truth, they would only let themselves be fucked by him , for all the wrong reasons, considering that they would do it ONLY after he spent a few hundreds if not thousands of dollars before . So speaking of Tiger Woods as an alpha is almost as lame as saying that Zuckerberg is a natural conquistador thanks to the billions he has in his bank. Let alone the fact that he even let himself be beaten with a golf club by her, without even trying to denounce it speak volumes about how his state of mind. ON the other hand is very true that being an Alpha WILL NOT PROTECT YOU from insane laws and the State hellbent in making the marriage institution as inconvenient and unfeasible as possible, if it weren’t for conspiracy maniacs I would bet that for some reason there is a push to make viable reproduction as unfeasible as possible worldwide but that´s another story.
Moreover contrary to what you think, there are many countries that have running water and utilities, have a decent level of freedom in which Common law marriages ARE NOT RECOGNIZED as marriages, hence you can, for all practical purposes, escape the insane laws, for now and live as best as you can with minimum or no state intrusion at all (This is specially true in those countries whose government is not known for its efficiency). Ditto they don´t have large malls, refrigerator peopl. errgh I mean overweight people and don´t have cameras all over the place watching you but have decent areas and expanding economies unlike the stagnating economy of the US and most of Europe.
Let’s break down Tiger Woods for all the socially inept morons on here who think that what they read on Roissy’s blog is the end-all-be-all of male-female interaction:
1. Arguably the greatest golfer ever, having outcompeted thousands of skilled men to get where he is and, at one time, dominated his profession.
2. Net worth approached a BILLION dollars prior to his divorce
3. Has fucked more women than probably everybody posting in this thread combined.
4. Would literally outcompete any of us in any given social setting for access to vagina.
5. Would outcompete 99.999999% of all men currently alive for access to vagina.
BETA MALE
@Jason
You almost debate like a woman and didn´t refute any of my points, Congratulations. Second what kind a pussy let himself be
@Jason
You almost debate like a woman and didn´t refute any of my points, almost like a feminist troll. Congratulations.
By the way no one denied the prowess in golf of Mr. Woods. Just his intelligence and social smarts, something which is obvious even for a kid. Want to see famous alpha males? Sean Connery, Arnold Schwarznegger, George Clooney amongst others. Alpha males fucked? Silvio Berlusconi.
By the way get ready to descend to the 3rd world life standards since, unless someone turns around the course of your country, that’s where its headed in the very near future (at least for non-elite citizens, a privileged class and its lackeys will have a VERY comfortable lifestyle).
Enjoy your declining life expectancy (http://www.salon.com/2010/10/11/empire_5/) your GMO laden foods moron your unicorn like expectations from women.
“He never named a single country where you can obtain a traditional marriage while still enjoying a Western lifestyle”
I will : Vietnam. But you’ll ditch the exalted “western lifestyle” pretty quick.
My wife owned a new apartment in Phu My Hung, which is predominantly Korean and westerners. Excellent restaurants everywhere. There was a little park nearby and at night hordes of teenagers would circle around the park like butterflies on their bicycles. Sometimes 2-3 on a bike. Many of the girls wearing the lovely traditional Ao Di. It’s like another planet.
What are the amenities that the west offers you that you think you cannot live without?
So you are recommending that readers ditch the West to go live under the boot of a COMMUNIST DICTATORSHIP with a GDP per capita of $3,400 a year?
You retards are incredible, really. Your desperation to get laid is so extreme that you’re willing to extricate yourselves from the relative safety and prosperity of your home countries to leverage your American dollars in the impoverished regions of the world.
And then you think that the people there somehow appreciate you because they’re “nicer,” in poor countries. Get the fuck out of here: you’re nothing but a john paying for a prostitute wife who would have nothing to do with you were it not for the fact that you can live like a king in Vietnam on an American minimum wage salary.
… and yet somehow Asian women are still capable of raping a man thoroughly in the divorce process, and ruining his life just as completely as a Western one. I still maintain that all women have the same capacity for that kind of behavior, and marrying from outside one’s culture actually carries a higher risk of not being able to recognize the danger signs.
I’m sure your Vietnamese wife is a lovely woman. But not all of them are.
Implying a man can read the mind of a woman to find out what she is really like inside. If I only had a dime for every time a man thought he found one of the 1% only to get disappointed later in life.
Women are masters of deception. Men can’t even come close to understanding the level at which they operate. Especially when the little head takes over.
The women you consider “traditional” are orders of magnitude better at manipulation than “overt gold-diggers” that you are so afraid of.
Marriage is a prison. Some countries and cultures may have better prisons and some worse, but they are all prisons.
The only honest relationship is an open relationship where either party can walk away without penalty.
Women are as simple as men. It’s just that men don’t want to admit that hypergamy exists or that it effects them. This inability to be honest with female nature and the political realities in which they live is precisely why they’re never going to work towards any appreciable progress other than the few lucky nights in their lifetimes when they manage to drag home some slag who isn’t thirty lbs heavier than they are.
When you finally admit to yourself that the State has fucked over the majority of men in today’s society by subsidizing and thus grossly inflating the price of pussy, then you’ll be able to work within the framework to get what you want out of it at a consistent rate.
If you follow the mental diarrhea that’s being spewed by Athlone McGinnis and his ilk, then you’re going to find yourself on a one-way track to Rape City.
It’s just that men don’t want to admit that hypergamy exists or that it effects them.
Pride and ego.
Pussy is cheaper than ever, it’s having a family/children that’s expensive and risky. That’s why it’s mostly the domain of the feckless. It’s also another way the wealthy and powerful are holding the door shut behind them. Most of the rich liberals might preach different values than the conservatives, but their living arrangements are eerily similar. They don’t divorce much so the wealth stays in the family, social networks and family influence grows etc.. Like the aristocrats of old.
But of course denying the plebs the rope they need to hang themselves would be immoral.
“Get the fuck out of here: you’re nothing but a john paying for a prostitute wife who would have nothing to do with you were it not for the fact that you can live like a king in Vietnam on an American minimum wage salary.”
I expected you to come back with a point or question on making a living over there but you stooped to ignorant, nasty insults. My wife was a successful businesswoman who started a shoe manufacturing business from nothing and her family now owns the factory she started which employs 30 people.
She was a virgin on our wedding night.
You cannot live in Vietnam on a minimum wage salary; it can actually be very expensive to live there or purchase property.
Get out of your bubble before spewing chickenshit insults about topics which you have no knowledge of.
The problem with marriage 1.0 is, the government can easily upgrade it to marriage 2.0. That’s why I wouldn’t purposely invite the government into my private life, they meddle enough as it is.
I ask, O’ Hugh G. Rection, if pussy is so cheap, then why does this site and others like it exist?
Why is it that, throughout history, the so-called “beta male,” a typification which describes the majority of men, never needed assistance on how to court and attract females in the sexual market?
Why is it that, you have to expose yourself to some 30-40 odd rejections by women before you find one who’s agreeing to wobble home with you to the bar on a Thursday night?
Pussy hasn’t gotten cheaper: it has gotten more accessible to a certain cohort of men because hypergamy instincts are no longer being penalized due to ample safety nets provided by the STATE. If the State opened vagina farms where men could venture forth and fuck orifices belonging to lithe, shapely, young women to their heart’s content with zero repercussion, you’d have the equivalent of what females have today.
Well compare that to the old days. Approaching 30-40 women doesn’t cost me anything. I don’t have to take them out on dates, buy them drinks and if I get fortunate enough to bang one I don’t have to marry her afterwards, lest she sue me for breach of promise or her father shoot me in the face. A rejection compared to that is like missing the bus, it’s unfortunate but it’s not going to impact me in any meaningful way because surely as the sun goes up there’ll be another bus and another woman in short time.
Why don’t we take away women’s right to vote, own property, earn income, etc. that way she is 100% dependent on a man and can never take “his” kids or any of “his” money in a divorce. Or better yet, let’s just make it legal for men to kill their wives when their tits start to sag. It’s not like women are people or anything.
That’s not the point, you vapid clown. It’s that your pussy is subsidized by the state via alimony, child support, useless government jobs, welfare, and affirmative action in universities. Guess who pays for all of those privileges? Working men in the private sector.
If you were placed on a level playing field against men without the interference of the state, you’d get dominated just like you did in the million years of human existence prior to feminism and organized state power.
My pussy hasn’t been subsidized by a god damned thing. And I’m sorry I’m not being properly dominated in your opinion. I guess more women living in perpetual servitude and slavery would make your life a lot easier. It must suck to be you.
I’m sorry HotChick doesn’t have the faintest idea of when men are thinking and feeling, let alone the maturity to understand their point of view.
But on the flipside, I just want to say it’s sad that men on this site have completely given up on American women and the notion of marriage.. but if most are like HotChick, then I understand why. I used to be more defensive and independent-minded until I hit 24. I think many women are upset that they can’t find “decent” men but they’ve been duped by feminism and don’t even know where to start. Many women DO need to be shown the way. I’m just thankful that I started looking for REAL answers before I was too old. And especially thankful that I found an amazing alpha who wants to marry me and have his babies and who teaches me everyday how to be a better woman.
@Vapid Chick
You have interesting ideas. Present them to your sisters and get back to us. We’ll wait.
I don’t have any sisters.
Why don’t we just have an entire conversation hyperbole? Why don’t we just say shit that makes no fucking sense at all instead of going shopping or complaining to our friends about how women are so fucking equal at everything s long as men keep laying down or them?
Get thinner, dress hotter, keep quieter.
I like how you resort to the most outrageous shit to make it seem like you’re getting a legitimate point across. But I can expect nothing less from the poster child for alimony bitches.
@Flo
“90k for unskilled labor, eh? Women do not cease to amaze with their economic illiteracy. I can hire someone for 20k a year to cook, clean and do everything else. If you come back with the ” emotional support” argument you ought to subtract the equal support received by the wife making it a zero sum game…”
So to you everything a wife does is unskilled labor? And it’s not a monetary $90k, but the addition of value to a home. I am curious to know where you can, for example, hire ‘someone’ to have your children, cook, clean, party plan (for business networking & deal making), and take care of all the details of life so you can focus on the priority of providing (reasonably) for yourself and your family (a family created when this someone gave birth to your kids) for ‘$20k/yr’ (in the 1st world, for lack of a better term). I’m not sure why ’emotional support’ makes it a ‘zero sum game’ (i.e. somebody wins, somebody loses). Emotional support benefits both, of course, but that mutual benefit doesn’t lessen its worth/value.
Unskilled since it takes no or little specialized education to perform said tasks. Every female with an iq of 80 can do those chores after a few weeks of training. In the US housekeeping and “party planning” are minimum wage jobs. Getting someone for $10 per hour to do them is easily accomplished. This adds up to $400 a week, roughly 20k a year. Of course, most housewives spend less than 40 hours a week actually working. Check tv viewership of daytime talk shows…
By zero sum game I mean that your husband gives you equal levels of comfort, “homeliness” and emotional support so that cancels itself out of your “bill”. The same goes for “having someone’s children”. He provides you with the 50% of the ingredients that you do not have just as much as you provide him with your 50%. Most couples I know feature a wife as the driving force behind kids, a lot of men could do without so whose benefit is it really?
@Hugh
“That $90k figure is probably something people came up with to justify raking men over the coals in divorce court.”
The figure was a basic generalization of teasonable costs for many of the tasks housewives are responsible for, i.e cooking, cleaning, childcare, assistant, party planner, animal caretaker, driver, etc. its a rough guage, for sure, but one could argue that in good marriages the wide has a quantifiable effect on the money her husband makes (not tge gold digger, but a wife improving the lide of her husband and family). i think its interesting you reference a wife as an employee, which seems crude but almost fair. I would say in your wxample alimony, for good or bad, is a severence package foe tge success tgat employee has beougt to that company. of course some severance/alimony is not fair/due, but its often there for a woman who has sacrificed working outside of yhe home (other topic alrogether) and needs to provide for herself ansd kids. sure wonen are taking advantage of the system but it would be weong yo assume men are not
“Additionally, it would make no economic sense for a woman to marry a man earning less than ~$180k.” Interesting. Why?
“Chaining a couple together by a legal contract doesn’t sound that romantic either, why impose penalty on the man when supposedly love is all you need?” IMO the contract allows the woman to be vulnerable enough for child birth/rearing and gives a man the ideal environment of support for his career and the building of his family.
“How you can first suggest love and romance as a valid reason to marry, then say people get married to the wrong people for the wrong reasons? It is a weird form of amnesia if you contradict yourself two sentences into the first paragraph.” I definitely believe (and hope) love and romance are valid reasons to marry. I was trying to point out that there are hundreds (thousands?) of different reasons people get married/choose their partners. Often they choose for the wrong reasons i.e. the woman who loves a ‘bad boy’ and is trying to change him into a bookworm or a man who loves a party girl and is trying to change her into a housewife. Both have chosen to love the wrong person…the woman should look for the bookworm (if that’s her real preference) and the man should look for a cute feminine woman (if that’s his real preference). Interesting point, Hugh.
Chris Rock does a great bit on O.J and alimony…If you have 20million and your wife wants 10million it sucks, but you’re not starving. But if you have $30k and your wife wants 15k, pretty much all bets are off.
Ugh, needed to spellcheck, got restless…
Marriage does have to be predicated on more than just love. Basing marriages on love is one of the reasons the divorce rate is so high – when the romance breaks down, somebody gets bored and legal papers get filed. Marriage has to be based on mutual respect, admiration, teamwork, and compromise. It’s when people don’t understand this that the trouble starts.
Looks like my original post disappeared. I very disappoint.
Of course if you assume professional level salaries for all of those things you might get that figure. But I think you can probably shave off more than half, depending on where you live. More if you speak Spanish 😉 And the husband also supposedly does some work around the house, you’d have to subtract professional salaries for all the handywork, car repair, gardening, computer troubleshooting etc.. And if he’s taking out the trash you’d be surprised how much unionized garbagemen make.
The thing is, in divorce nobody looks at her contribution. She could have spent her day on the couch eating bon bons, watching TV and shagging the neighbor, she’d still be entitled to the same things she’d be if she sacrificed for her husband. Tiger Woods’ wife probably did almost nothing around the house, and she got an obscene amount of money.
I’m not referencing her as an employee, I’m just comparing her to an employee. You suggested a wife’s services should generally be valued at $90k, which makes it fair to compare her services to actual free market rates for unskilled labor.
No divorce court looks at it that way. She’s entitled to the same lifestyle, no questions asked. If my company fires me I might get a severance package, but I’m not entitled to the lifestyle I had when still in their employ minus actually working for them. If I intentionally or through negligence damage or destroy my company I might actually have to pay.
My point is that you can’t choose who you love. If that were the case we wouldn’t have that many divorces. And a woman who changes her bad boy into a bookworm will later resent him for that, that’s the whole problem. She’s eliminating the qualities that attracted her to him in the first place. The man isn’t attracted to the party girl because she parties a lot, it’s because she’s beautiful and she has sex with him. Also not a good basis to risk losing all you have.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNqVC4cRxeQ this is a good explanation 😉
Well a lot of professional athletes are broke soon after their career ends and often the reason is divorce and child support – it would appear it’s far more challenging to raise the children of a NBA player than those of a plumber, because child support is often in the 5 figures. Most celebrities still get off easy with a one time lump sum payment compared to the regular guy.
It’s not that the regular guy has $30k in the bank, loses $15k and he’s done. You have to calculate the present day value of the future income stream and retirement account. Say I’m getting divorced at 40 and am ordered to pay $2k in alimony. I’ll have to pay $24k for every year until I die, assuming I die around 77, that’s over $800k. I don’t think I’ll have $1.6m when I’m 40.
Also, I want to add that my latest response to Athlone McGinnis is “awaiting moderation.” Let’s see if it ever gets published here (doubt it).
Don’t worry bro, I’ll post it for you.
“Still waiting on you to post a country where I can “enjoy” traditional marriage while still having access to the freedoms of the West.
As to your claims:
1. “In 2009, one in five Chinese marriages ended in divorce, according to a report by the Ministry of Civil Affairs. The report said 1.71 million Chinese couples broke up last year — 160,000 couples, or 10.3 percent, more than the previous year.
The figures follow an upward trajectory. Last year the divorce rate — the number of divorces per 1,000 people — stood at about 1.85 per thousand. In 1985, the figure was only 0.4 per thousand.
The trend is significant because Chinese culture has long leaned heavily against divorce. An ancient proverb admonishes newlyweds to “be married until your hair turns white.” In the old feudal culture, it was shameful for women to marry more than once. Divorced women were considered disgraceful failures and were called “po xie (old shoe).” But for men, divorce has been traditionally easy.”
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-06-18/world/china.divorces_1_divorce-rate-marriage-law-couples?_s=PM:WORLD
Meanwhile, in India:
“Metros have always earned a bad reputation for playing havoc with the institution of marriage, thanks to mind-boggling stress factor thrust on the couples. But, hold you breath, when it comes to marital turbulence, aaplya Nagpur is not lagging behind! In the past decade, the divorce rate has increased here by more than 100 per cent.”
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-10-03/man-woman/34218858_1_divorce-rate-divorce-cases-young-couples
Get fucked.
2. I don’t know if it’s sheer idiocy, delusion, or trolling, but the fact that you think that physical power, obscene levels of fame, and the extreme wealth possessed by both Kobe and Tiger don’t amount to credence with women is indicative that you’ve got some sort of mental disorder.
I want you to take a look at the wives that both of these men possess and have impregnated. Both are thirty times hotter than any girl you’ve probably even talked to for more than fifteen minutes. Not to mention the hundreds of women these two dudes have plowed between them, if not more.
What you’re telling me is that if you were in a room with Kobe Bryant and Tiger Woods, you would “outgame” them for the women in the room because of the fact that you know this amorphous procedure of social interaction called “Game.” Please just kill yourself now because I don’t see your life getting any better.
3. Who’s throwing racist insults at you, dipshit?”
My response:
http://i.imgur.com/SzhOH.gif
Have a good night, bro!
You really need to go away. Get some sleep and go troll somewhere else.
I’m thrilled to see that a main contributor to this site has dropped all his pretense for a factual, logical debate. The first nail in the coffin.
http://i.imgur.com/yxZZb.jpg
@”Hot” Chick
Are you denying that the following institutions exist:
1. Alimony
2. Child support
3. Affirmative Action
4. Government welfare
5. Government employment programs
Just a yes or no answer will suffice.
I have no idea why Roosh and the staff here continue to let this joker “Jason” post. He’s been vomiting his BS on ROK literally since it began and I can sum up every comment he’s ever made in one line:
“Game is a lie, women only care about money.”
Even though Athlone and just about everyone here has repeatedly shredded him, he keeps leaving his whiny, trollish comments on every post, contributing nothing of value to the discussions. Not surprised that he’s pulling out the MRA/MGTOW “woe is me IMMA BE DIVORCE RAPED” card now, seeing as every comment he makes reeks of failure and hopelessness. It’s clear that he’s never traveled outside the country, or even left his mom’s basement in the past ten years.
Roosh can run the site however he likes, I suppose, but I have no idea why he tolerates letting someone who is diametrically opposed to everything ROK stands for constantly derail comment threads with his blubbering.
So rather than argue my points, you’re calling for my wholesale removal from the site?
Then again, I don’t know why I’m feigning surprise–not like I expected anything more from you intellectually bankrupt morons who are doing nothing more than trying to cash in on male sexual frustration.
If we’re “intellectually bankrupt morons,” Jason, why are you wasting your time with us? Surely an ubermensch like yourself can find more productive uses of your time, like selling oil futures for MEGAPROFIT!, buying a new high-rise Manhattan penthouse, or snorting blow off of the ass of a Colombian hooker.
Don’t answer that, BTW. If you truly believed what you spew here, if you were anything more than a dejected troll stuck masturbating to YouPorn, you wouldn’t be shitting up ROK with the same arguments day after day; you’d be out making money like a boss. Winners don’t get into prolonged arguments on websites that they don’t like; losers do.
You’re a loser, Jason. Go back to playing with your action figures in the corner; the grown-ups are doing grown-up stuff.
First you demand your points be argued, then you declare yourself the loser in the debate by name calling in accusations. Make up your mind.
So, rather than discuss my points, you called my wife a prostitute.
+1
QUOTE MATT FORNEY: I have no idea why Roosh and the staff here continue to let this joker “Jason” post. He’s been vomiting his BS on ROK literally since it began and I can sum up every comment he’s ever made in one line:
“Game is a lie, women only care about money.””
I’m not sure if game is a lie, but certainly money is more important.
Even Esther Vilar said this in Manipulated Man back in 1971.
I was sleeping!
I gotta leave. Your site is addictive. I like the focus on personal development. I promised the Spearhead a number of essays such as “You Just Got Canned” and “Learn 3D Modeling”, among others, but I have a day job and a ForeignBride. Need to leechblock you.
I’m sorry, but marriage is NOT an option for the man who values his financial well being.
I’ve lived marriage v1.0 successfully for over two decades, two kids, house, dog, cars, retirement, etc, etc.
I’ve been in some dicey financial situations from business and investments, but nothing has threatened my financial well being as much as a divorce. And, that’s after five decades of alimony reform, albeit not alimony revolution.
Young men, my advice to you is not to marry unless you have a solid prenup agreement. If such and agreement violates the principles of “unconditional love” (a female mythology), then expect your future wife to hold you by the financial balls if things aren’t going her way — and they usually don’t sometime in the marriage. If you’ve already tied the KNOT, understand that the know is a hangman’s noose around your neck. The ring is for show. The noose keeps you under control. Play nice in the feminist cesspool lest you strangle yourself in that noose and loose much of all you’ve worked for and towards, including your children.
I’m glad feminism has “enlightened” women to their role as “equals,” allowing men to unabashedly ask for equality in division of marital assets BEFORE signing their name to that marriage license. However, Jesus was right, it’s better never to marry than have to deal with the situation of divorce, which is a highly likely outcome of even the best marriage.
I declare marriage v3.0 to be a lose, non legally binding coupling of two souls for the purposes of mutual edification and support based upon a binding agreement, currently know a pre nuptial. The two shall remain together as long as the agreement is honored — provided there is no pro creation. As soon as agreements are irreparably breached then the two shall go their separate ways according to the provisions of the pre nuptial. I go on to say that in the future there shall be no marriage licenses issued until there is a prenuptial in place prior to application for said license. Also, no court of the land shall set aside any provisions agreed to in the pre nuptial, as women are no longer hapless victims due to lack of education or empowerment.
Now, if you want to roll the dice with foreign women, betting that they don’t want nor will demand what American women do, take your chances. But keep in mind you’ll have other issues to contend with. If you think an Amercian divorce is messy, just trying dealing with custody and support issues across international border. YIkes!
LOL, even as I type this, there is comic on TV reciting a study about the decline in marriage.
Pre-nups also get laughed out of court these days, so its not worth the bother, nor is marriage, period.
Which countries do you think would be the best for the matrimony 1.0 minded?
I currently do not wish to marry and find friends who share the same sentiment from as far as Germany.
However, I do want to have 4 kids with a woman of my choice and I think marriage 1.0 was not bad for that. I want what the grandparents of our generation had (my grandparents were not a shining example, though).
Hey Jason, I think your really cool for standing up to these guys, you’re really brave.You remind me of this one guy I know who spends all his time on the internet calling people names. I thought he was so cool for it man. The way he would come up with the dopest comebacks to anything. Sometimes he would spend all day thinking of a good comeback, I admired him for it. But then one day his ex-wife killed him and took all his shit.
haha boom!
Bit extreme. Those of us who live in multicultural cities are very different. If you’re not bothered by race (I don’t care) you can still easily find a girl of Asian,African or (Christian) middle eastern descent who is either a virgin or who has only had serious boyfriends, who will look after you, your children and your parents.
Best of all they are born in the west and will also push education on your kids.
Most marriage-minded middle class white men in the UK in multiracial areas marry Indian or East Asian women, these marriages seem to work very well are rarely end in divorce.
If you only like white women, wow that would be hard. You still find attractive, feminine girls in churches though, that would be a good bet.
If you’re a Jew, you’re doomed if you want to marry a non-religous Ashkenazi, secular Jewish girls are generally worse than even than Anglo women.
Jason has been banned.
I almost feel the need to apologize to Athlone… my feminist post has drawn a semi-illiterate crowd to this thread.
Sometimes I slightly cringe, at posts like Roosh’s recent piece on ugly feminists. Unnecessary and juvenile, I think.
And then I observe the emergence of all the mindless, passive-aggressive church ladies, and I just wish there were some way to punch them harder and more directly.
http://i.imgur.com/Lr2BH.gif
I said I was leaving but I’m back. Check out this website my wife just showed me :
http://www.everydayviet.com
Damn, this post blew the fuck up!
110 comments and counting.
Needless to say, the topic of marriage is always going to be a controversial subject within the manosphere.
This is very true. Coming back from a month abroad in a Marriage 1.0 environment, I was honestly shocked to see how different the marriage culture was. This isn’t to say that it was perfect, but from what I saw it was generally a lot safer than the options given in the west, espeically to people who game (given their palette).
The girls are more familial, know their place and understand how roles in a family work. It still comes down to the girl though, but often times as long as she’s attractive, has a good family and upbringing, the marriage is successful. I’ve seen this work in the west too, marriage minded individuals marry girls from certain ethnic backgrounds (not white), and the women know how to handle themselves properly. Whether this comes from a cultural or religious background, I’m not sure, but I’m glad for it as it doesn’t completely rule out marriage.
There is only one setting where a man has any shot at a successful marriage, and it has nothing to do with external culture. I am loath to explain it here, but I’m surprised I don’t see it mentioned, really.
Going Amish? I hope you are not suggesting religous women.
FUCK this marriage talk. Any of you characters start thinking about getting married, go hang out at a decent bar, talk to some of the “Girls Night Out” cougars, and listen to the way these twats bitch about the husbands who are more than likely funding the evening. Now imagine these conversations are about you. Because they sure as shit will be. I say fuck all that. Wanna have a kid? Have one, women are “empowered” now, they’ll go for it. But for crissakes, don’t put the loaded gun of marriage up to the only head you’ve got and let some moody, self-centered, bleeds-for-a-week cunt put her finger on the trigger .
…or maybe just find someone you really hate and buy them a house.
“Marriage 1.0 is the older version of the institution. It features fewer incentives for dissolution of the union and offers significantly less room for the ideal fulfillment of the feminine imperative, while offering more incentive for the male involved. Keeping this arrangement going requires fewer games for the male to play and allows for a more equitable, mutually-beneficial partnership.
The most crucial key here is the elimination of easy outs for the female that could leave the male high and dry and with severe legal and financial obligations with little consequences to her. The legal risks for a man within a Marriage 1.0 contract are lower and quite a bit less one-sided.
Men have a bit more room to be men within the context of this arrangement because their investment in their family is more well protected and not as easy to invalidate as I will soon show it has become.”
What sort of room do men have to “be men” in the context of a traditional marriage? Weren’t the largest alimony settlements meted out in the 50s and 60s?
Nowadays no fault divorce is a boon because there essentially is no alimony, both parties just contribute to child support.
I think the best bet for American women and men is just to live together and forego legal and religious marriage. That trend has been gradually increasing over the last 30 years and I’m willing to bet legal and religious marriage will be down to probably only 10-15% of the population within another 30.
My daughter desires marriage, but does not desire to be a wife. My son has learned through living with a very nice gal, that even a break up that is very amicable has inborn costs. Every young man I work with who has been divorced has had his backside handed to him. So marriage is almost a 100% loss for men. Move to France or Quebec, the Napoleonic Civil Code places women where they should be, equal, but not more equal than others. On a personal note, I and one other man in Canada are the only two guys in the last 15 years who won their divorces outright, I happen to know the other guy, he is happily remarried to a much wealthier woman, I stayed single with all of the fun that comes along with that.
Most of the great international playboys were married.
Sadly North American “values” are being exported. A women I worked with for a year was from Brazil and university educated down there. She was every bit the feminist that a Canadian woman would be. Makes me think that those options are going to dwindle over the coming years.
Or find a girl with a brain who grew up reading Heinlein. His work singlehandedly taught me in my youth that a woman should be dignified, intelligent, loving, compassionate, competent, and never treat marriage lightly. His women can be and are everything a woman should be. I wish more women emulated them or saw them as role models!
Let’s face it- eternal bachelorship is lonely and meaningless.
At least have kids.
Studies have shown that having children increases lifespan
http://ergo-log.com/child-needs-lengthens-life-expectancy.html
it is our nature to start a family. Too bad if you are in a M 2.0 hell