Post: #26

(05-30-2017 10:46 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Show me a guy who chooses a wife carefully under red pilled basic guidelines, keeps in shape and fucks her regularly, maintains frame and dominance and still ends up divorce raped.

Out of the guys that do all that, he would be a statistical anomaly.

The "marriage is unfair" waaaaambulance crowd should really try to sound less feminine and less butthurt. Horrendous divorce statistics exist not just for feminine cultural reasons but because the average beta bux simp is in fact a beta bux simp, and he can't exactly blame his wife for treating him like a beta bux simp if he acts like a beta bux simp.

Most guys aren't red pill by nature and though they may walk the walk for a little while the blue pill indoctrination machine eventually reclaims them. If you were actually red pill you wouldn't even think about getting married because you would know that it's a contract, it's not the relationship. It's a contract that here in the USA is not in a man's best interest but every day men enter into it believing that they won't have to deal with that part of the contract, that it won't happen to them. They often marry women that only bring pussy and fleeting looks to the table. Men more often than not select women that can't kill a roach, a mouse or hand them the correct wrench when he needs it. These women never think of the man outside of the "relationship" meaning they never think of him as a stand alone person only as part of the "relationship".

If you marry someone that's not on the same financial footing as you, meaning that broke ass 8,9,10 you gloat and dream about, when it ends you lose. If you don't care about that, cool, sign on the dotted line, personally I think it's stupid and I'm speaking from experience. The fog of love will do this to you think of it as a con because that's exactly what it is.

Marriage is a contract that favors women, it isn't a relationship.

Post: #27

So you're saying Trump is blue-pilled?

Same old nonsense. Obsess over the guys getting fucked and utterly ignore all the guys that are happy with their wife and their kids, yea unto old age.

I'm coining the term Marriage Derangement Syndrome. A mental disorder whereby a severe paranoia of everything related to marriage causes the sufferer to abandon reason and logic in favour of all encompassing doomsday prophesies that ignore contrary statistical data.

MDS.

Post: #28

(06-01-2017 09:00 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  So you're saying Trump is blue-pilled?

Trump is part of the moneyed elite, I'm sure he has a contract that works out in his favor. If he doesn't, it's still dumb.

Post: #29

(06-01-2017 09:00 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  So you're saying Trump is blue-pilled?

Same old nonsense. Obsess over the guys getting fucked and utterly ignore all the guys that are happy with their wife and their kids, yea unto old age.

I'm coining the term Marriage Derangement Syndrome. A mental disorder whereby a severe paranoia of everything related to marriage causes the sufferer to abandon reason and logic in favour of all encompassing doomsday prophesies that ignore contrary statistical data.

MDS.

Like I said before Marriage <> Relationship and the contract favors women not men. This is about awareness, the more you know the better off you are.

Post: #30

There's an argument to be made, but as soon as kids are in the picture then it disappears. At best you get to keep your stuff but you're still on the hook for child support.

And in a lot of nations now if you've cohabited for a couple of years you're liable to be considered de-facto partners.

Frankly I just don't know that any of the anti-marriage brigade have ever had a serious long term relationship.

What kind of moronic woman would have a man's kids without his signed commitment to her. She'd have to be so dumb you wouldn't want your kids carrying half of her genes regardless.

Post: #31

What if we take the feelings out of it and look at it this way: Would you sign a business contract with the same terms as a marriage contract?

Any time your business partner decides he's "not happy" with the way things are going, he can renege and take half the company assets, your kids, your house and you're required to send him monthly checks for the next 18-24 years to maintain the lifestyle he became accustomed to while the company was operating. And you're on the hook for any liabilities accrued.

Post: #32

(06-01-2017 09:54 AM)Renzy Wrote:  What if we take the feelings out of it and look at it this way: Would you sign a business contract with the same terms as a marriage contract?

Any time your business partner decides he's "not happy" with the way things are going, he can renege and take half the company assets, your kids, your house and you're required to send him monthly checks for the next 18-24 years to maintain the lifestyle he became accustomed to while the company was operating. And you're on the hook for any liabilities accrued.

Of course I would. It is my duty as a red pilled alpha male.

Post: #33

(06-01-2017 09:28 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  What kind of moronic woman would have a man's kids without his signed commitment to her. She'd have to be so dumb you wouldn't want your kids carrying half of her genes regardless.

Why can't the man just say, "Look babe, I love you so much, I would never want to leave you. That's why today I'm willing to take the step of triple-dog pinkie-swearing, in front of all our Facebook friends, that I'll stay with you forever and raise our kids together with you. Why do you need it in writing? What, don't you trust me??!! What kind of foundation does this relationship have, if you think I might betray you?"

That's the way women react when men say, "Hon, can you sign this prenuptial agreement?" They pout and say, "Why do we need that, when this marriage is till death do us part?"

Kind of ridiculous that marriage (a contract that says, "If you betray me, or if I betray you, I get to financially rape you") is considered more romantic than prenuptial agreements (a contract that says, "If you betray me, you don't get to financially rape me"). It's all just propaganda.

Most kids these days are born out of wedlock, so I guess there's a lot of really dumb women out there, huh? They're deciding that as empowered feminist womyn, they don't need a man to provide financial security. In reality, the only system that has ever worked well is to let marriage be a contract between the husband and the father of the bride, so that her future doesn't depend on her wisdom at age 18, or whenever she gets married. Her father then also helps keep the marriage together by telling her, "Hell no, you can't leave him for some frivolous reason. Go back to him."

Women say, "Look, it's an equal contract! Just like I can dump you if you get abusive, you can dump me if I get fat." Well then, it's not much of a contract, is it? What's the point, if either of them can withdraw from it for any reason, or no reason? It's just an empty ritual. That wouldn't be a problem, except that beta men think that piece of paper is going to restrain her from leaving. Their conditioning sets them up for disappointment, and I think cartoons like the one in the OP can be helpful in deconditioning them.

I'm wondering, too -- what about the masses of men who only halfway have their shit together (e.g. in terms of employment, etc.), and are only halfway alpha? Do they just need to hold off on marriage till they improve themselves and their situation, so they don't get dumped? It used to be that you didn't have to be some super-mega-alpha to keep your wife around. There was also some leeway for your situation to have ups and downs (all that "for richer, for poorer" and "in sickness and in health," etc. stuff) without your getting dumped. Nowadays, there's just not much margin for error before women start thinking, "Can I do better? Maybe I should leave."

In contrast, we're supposed to stick with them through the inevitable decline of their looks, fertility, etc. Not to mention, after the wedding, they tend to change up their behavior pretty quickly, but we're supposed to let that slide and stay with them anyway. It's an unequal contract, because they get to dump us if we slip up in any way, but we don't get to dump them if they misbehave.

But the people who do stay together for a long time, are not necessarily all that happy. Maybe they both consider themselves to lack options. Maybe they're staying together for the good of the kids. There can be a lot of quiet desperation that goes on behind the scenes. From what I've seen, the typical married man in his 30s who does have his shit together enough that his wife stays around, is usually dying to get some 18-year-old pussy.

Post: #34

Just so I don't bother wasting my time with people who are the equivalent of a lactose intolerant person bitching about the price of milk, how about the guys interested in kids and a "life partner" sound off.

Because the hell if I'm going to waste my time trying to sell the benefits of milk to the lactose intolerant crowd.

And the guys who want kids and a "life partner" while having to make zero sacrifices in their life can go hang out with the lactose intolerant crowd. That way the thread can be debated between realistic adults with skin in the game.

Post: #35

(06-01-2017 10:56 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Just so I don't bother wasting my time with people who are the equivalent of a lactose intolerant person bitching about the price of milk, how about the guys interested in kids and a "life partner" sound off.

Because the hell if I'm going to waste my time trying to sell the benefits of milk to the lactose intolerant crowd.

And the guys who want kids and a "life partner" while having to make zero sacrifices in their life can go hang out with the lactose intolerant crowd. That way the thread can be debated between realistic adults with skin in the game.

I've always thought that the general chart of happiness went something like this:

Happy Marriage > Mediocre Marriage > Good Singledom > Mediocre Singledom > Bad Marriage > Bad Singledom > Good Divorce > Bad Divorce.

Obviously you can quibble with parts of that, and it certainly doesn't apply to every situation. But it looks something similar to that. If I thought I was guaranteed even a mediocre marriage, however you'd define such a thing, I'd be on it in a heartbeat.

Post: #36

This is Leonard's fighting off 30 white knights at the club.

Post: #37

Lactose intolerant SOBs, go home!

Post: #38

Just like nothing comes free in life (remember you had to be the one egg that didn't get discarded and the one spermatozoid that made it, and even then manage to survive development in the womb!) I am guessing a good healthy marriage is no different from things such as maintaining a healthy physique or a craft.
You gotta select the material, put in the work, learn the subtleties and keep a discipline.
As for the possibility of getting burned, if you work with fire you have to consider it and prepare accordingly, ask a blacksmith if not!

Post: #39

(06-01-2017 09:28 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  There's an argument to be made, but as soon as kids are in the picture then it disappears. At best you get to keep your stuff but you're still on the hook for child support.

And in a lot of nations now if you've cohabited for a couple of years you're liable to be considered de-facto partners.

Frankly I just don't know that any of the anti-marriage brigade have ever had a serious long term relationship.

What kind of moronic woman would have a man's kids without his signed commitment to her. She'd have to be so dumb you wouldn't want your kids carrying half of her genes regardless.

tl;dr - I don't want/enjoy like the extended company of a woman, but would be willing to commit to pay (in one way or another) for one to be the mother of my children.

Leonard - I hear you on your argument. A respectable woman needs a commitment to willingly grow my kid in her stomach. However, do you think there any alternative forms of commitment aside from a romantic relationship, maybe financial or otherwise, that can allow me to be a loving father without committing emotionally?

I'm 30 and in the process closing on my first home. I've been in the game now for almost 6 years following a pretty miserable breakup in my mid-20s, and still have very little interest in settling down. At the end of the day, all I truly want from a woman is children and an amicable, positive parenting situation.

I like being generous and kind to the women I date, it's in my nature. I like treating them to a nice meal or fun day trip, banging them out, and then sending them on their way with a smile. I know myself well enough to admit I have a deeply ingrained provider instinct combined with low self-esteem that makes me extremely susceptible to manipulation once I "let a girl in." My mind associates love with doing anything and everything to make my woman happy, even when I know its not warranted or I don't even want to. I feel horribly guilty about saying no, or even taking my fair share. Needless to say, I receive very little benefit committing to a relationship and become resentful very quickly. I've learned to keep my emotions out of the equation, keep things casual, and this works for me.

I've worked hard to break this habit for years by reading psych books and going to therapy, but I'm nowhere near where I need to be mentally to maintain a serious relationship (not that I even really want one). I know it will end badly for me - still, I don't want this to prevent me from being a father.

I've thought about volunteering with youth sports in the short-term and maybe even adopting on my own in a few years, although I'd love if the kid/kids was/were from my DNA. Maybe these emotional issues make me unfit to be a father at all?

Would love to hear some opinions.

Post: #40

All the tradcucks who say "man up" really have no idea how shitty it is for a man to get married, or theyre just geezers from a relatively better era.

Egalitarianism has essentially killed men's roles as bread winners. Women can now turn to the government for a job and a seat in college instead of depending on a man to take care of her, this makes the government the new Man of the house in women's eyes. The only way to change this is to reverse about a hundred years of feminism, which even a lot of conservatives would disagree with, especially the Alt Light.

Consent laws, revenge porn laws, and common law marriage are now slowly being passed nation wide, basically making hookups or LTRs now a death trap. I don't care how much you posture yourself as a Ward Cleaver archetype, the state won't give a shit about you as long as the law dictates that the woman's word means more if she "feels" threatened or raped.

Finally the marriage laws. Thanks to the "conservative" king himself Ronny Reagan, we have a little thing called no fault divorce, which basically means a woman can rage quit a marriage whenever she wants. Most of the judges in marriage/family court are marxists, and of course they are wholly gynocentric which leads to more men losing all their assets and having to pay alimony and child support. Women also win most of the custody battles, so if you think you at least get a kid out of a shitty marriage, think again, now your wife along with the marxist education system can now re educate your children.

Think about it, I mean if Donald Trump himself can't even pass immigration laws past these judges, or celebrities like Robbin Williams are pushed to suicide by gynocentric divorce laws, then what makes you think your cock grabbing attitude is going to fix anything?

It takes a societal effort to maintain a healthy patriarch where marriage is rewarded, and the right lost that badly while the left wisely invested their time by embedding themselves into politics and media. The future is getting more bleak, and the only way to man up is to learn how to measure risks and rewards, and marriage is anything but rewarding now, even in terms of something more abstract like sentimentality.

If you still wanna smash pussy, the best thing to do is go to a conservative part of the west, or save up for some sex tourist trip to places like Japan or Latin America. Relationships and marriage in the west have officially jumped the shark.

Post: #41

I tend to agree with Leonard here.

No doubts that cultural Marxism and liberalism of the last 50 years had fucked up females pretty badly and has unleashed their slutiness as no other time in history, but men have became whores also, lets not forget this.

When those bitches crave for attention and want to feel some adventure are the men who give that to them.

On the other hand, weak and beta men, not keeping in shape, not being enough sexually active, masculine enough, keep the right dominance have made the females go out of their way and seek for guys who can satisfy them, alo because they do not fear males anymore.


Lets not forget that is the man who created the civilization and all the system and is the male who has to maintain it.

The female has no morals or consciousnesses, she just goes with the wind.

The men creates or allows the creation of the wind the female goes by.

Post: #42

(05-30-2017 10:46 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Show me a guy who chooses a wife carefully under red pilled basic guidelines, keeps in shape and fucks her regularly, maintains frame and dominance and still ends up divorce raped.

LOL. I can show you a stadium full of them. Talk to any divorce lawyer. Being successful, in-shape, having game, etc doesn't cure crazy. Doesn't cure hypergamy.

See Adam Sacks' facebook page (he's a divorce attorney). See Fathers for Justice, representing millions of good dads whose ex-wives find one excuse after another to keep their kids from. All members of the waaaaaaambulance?

Men frequently lament the unfairness in divorce court, child support guidelines, etc. Many ask "How did it get to be this way??", and instinctively blame women. But it's actually mens fault. Women stick together - if a woman hears a story about a woman who got screwed in a broken marriage, she thinks "that poor woman! That bad man!". But when a man hears about a man who was raped by the family courts, he thinks "Ha! He probably deserved it! It's his OWN FAULT! If he had been a good/cool/sexy husband LIKE ME, he'd be fine!! Can't happen to meeeeeee". LOLZ.

Post: #43

(06-01-2017 09:28 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Frankly I just don't know that any of the anti-marriage brigade have ever had a serious long term relationship.

Does this square with the fact that many of them seem to be divorced, or more typically, frivorced?

I see the opposite: Never married guys who think that, when they are finally ready to give up chasing tail, THEIR marriage will be traditional. Because that's how they imagine it should be.

The guys in the anti-marriage brigade, the most fervent ones, anyway... It's the ones who thought that...and got married... and saw it was hard work but said "marriages are work; men and women are different, its normal, i don't mind putting in the work for the sake of my family"... and then find out their wives filed for divorce last week :/

Post: #44

And I've seen a lot of people who just make stupid decisions regarding marriage.

It can work but you need MUCH more of an asshole mindset than 90% of "redpill" seekers can have. The inner simp is very deep and it absolutely will come out because very few guys have actually fixed their issues.

Why asshole? Because there is absolutely no room for charity when picking out a mother for your children. Some things can be worked on like needing more education to be able to teach or getting her a few pounds thinner. However character can not be fixed and you should not consider it your job to fix their character. There should be zero tolerance of any kind of craziness, hypergamy, or undermining.

It's a lot easier said than done if you're still in the mindset of trying to pedestalize the one. Marriage may have love in it, it may be with your best friend and all that, but it is first and foremost a contract entered into for the purpose of procreation. Men would do well to remember that and adjust their priorities accordingly.


And of the group that DOES keep that in mind?

Quote:Show me a guy who chooses a wife carefully under red pilled basic guidelines, keeps in shape and fucks her regularly, maintains frame and dominance and still ends up divorce raped.

I'll do you one better. Note one item that very few people think of: Catholic couples who attend mass every week, were married in the church, did not sleep together before marriage, and do not use contraception have a divorce rate in the area of 1%.


THAT should be your screen. By far the best screening tool I've found for marriage material girls is if they reject the use of contraceptives. I don't really understand why but once you start looking for it the correlation is hard to ignore.

Post: #45

Found another study. This one doesn't show the same results, but also note that this one only accounts for the use of NFP ( advanced rythmn method) to control birth frequency. Frequent church attendance lowers the odds as does pre-marital abstinence.



https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4536625/

Quote:The most dramatic findings from this study of ever married, reproductive age women in the US indicate that the ever use of the most frequent methods of family planning, i.e., the hormonal pill, sterilization, condom use, and abortion were the most significant factors that increased the likelihood of divorce compared with ever married, reproductive age women who never have used those means of family planning. From almost two times greater likelihood with abortion, the pill, and sterilization to over two times likelihood with ever use of condoms. Furthermore, ever married reproductive age women who have low levels of religiosity (as expressed by less frequent church attendance) have a greater likelihood of being divorced or separated. The use of abortion, sterilization, and low levels of religiosity might reflect a marital relationship that is already at risk for disruption.

Frequent church attendance was the only religious variable that provided a protective influence from divorce. This findings parallel the results that religiosity and, in particular, church attendance have on sexual activity outside of marriage, early sexual debut among adolescents, and multiple sex partners—i.e., less likely with ever use and higher levels of religiosity (Haglund and Fehring 2010; Haglund, Edwards, Fehring, and Pruzynski 2011). The results also reflect the less likelihood of having an abortion with ever use of NFP (Rodriguez and Fehring 2012). Ever use of NFP or rhythm failed to provide a significant protective effect from abortion except when mixed with the religious variables.

Some of those old religious teachings are less prison bars than they are guardrails.

Post: #46

(06-12-2017 10:49 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  Catholic couples who attend mass every week, were married in the church, did not sleep together before marriage, and do not use contraception have a divorce rate in the area of 1%.

Both those couples are still married, eh?

Post: #47

(06-12-2017 11:21 PM)The Father Wrote:  

(06-12-2017 10:49 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  Catholic couples who attend mass every week, were married in the church, did not sleep together before marriage, and do not use contraception have a divorce rate in the area of 1%.

Both those couples are still married, eh?

There's a lot more of them out there than you would think. The Catholic church takes a fairly hardline stance on contraception (and I'm talking about Romans, let alone Orthodox...) and require completion of NFP classes prior to allowing a marriage ceremony.

Li

Post: #48

I wouldn't marry in a country where marriage is under the regime of community property without a prenuptial agreement that fixes it back to a separation of property.
I wouldn't accept to have a common bank account either.
On the other hand her sexual needs are my duty and I can't allow myself to fail her on that.

Post: #49

(06-13-2017 10:12 AM)Easy_C Wrote:  

(06-12-2017 11:21 PM)The Father Wrote:  

(06-12-2017 10:49 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  Catholic couples who attend mass every week, were married in the church, did not sleep together before marriage, and do not use contraception have a divorce rate in the area of 1%.

Both those couples are still married, eh?

There's a lot more of them out there than you would think. The Catholic church takes a fairly hardline stance on contraception (and I'm talking about Romans, let alone Orthodox...) and require completion of NFP classes prior to allowing a marriage ceremony.

Li

I'm sure that a woman who would refuse premarital sex and contraception on religious grounds would also be disinclined towards divorce.

As for the classes, however...i seem to recall taking those classes with the ex...about 15 couples in the class...most are divorced now :/

Post: #50

People who cry about divorce rape as an argument against marriage fail because they are approaching the problem from a male point of view and not applying the principles of game to understand things the way the wife sees it. Most women aren't calculating monsters waiting for the opportune moment to divorce their men and suck them dry of their money and deprive them of their children. What women are is guided by emotion and intuition. All the laws can favor her, but if she feels the guy she's with is a real man--that is, in charge and competent, she will follow him to the end.