Post: #1

I think it is fair to say that in the "redpill" community the anti-marriage voices are the loudest and probably the vast majority. There is a reason why anti-marriage sparkplug Mark Minter was the most popular commenter in the manosphere for a brief flash in the pan, before his embarrassing and highly public engagement to a manosphere groupie.

Famous PUA Paul Janka announced his engagement and gave a very interesting interview to Return of Kings.

He gave a few reasons for his decision to get married:

Quote:Regarding the manosphere, while I commend everyone for grappling with these big questions, a lot of men want offspring. Aside from the mini-relationship, there hasn’t really been a good alternative structure proposed.

Quote:Chasing girls is fun when you have a core group of guys and continuity in your life. When you’re looking at women as disposable sexual objects then there’s so much churn and no one follows your life with any interest.

Quote:If I take a wonderful trip with someone, I want to be able to reference that trip in five years with that same person. If you’re going to invest in someone, it has to be someone with long-term potential, not just some booty call. Finally, I met a girl whose character was in many ways superior to mine and I said wow, I want to hitch my horse to this cart.

Quote:And I think for a man to be successful at life he should recognise his youthful erotic nature, but as he ages he should transition into a more respectful relationship with a woman that perhaps resembles more what he has with his mother. Men who fail to do that might be cut off at the knees.

There was quite an outpouring in the comments. Commenters accused Janka of falling for the soulmate myth, having one-itis, not being actually good at pickup, and being afraid of being alone.

The purpose of this thread is to get an idea of where people stand on this issue and maybe start a debate about on a topic that is taken for granted in the manosphere.

I will start off with my position: I think that the redpill anti-marriage position is an understandable reaction to the modern notion that one should marry their soulmate and have romantic love forever. Like most redpillers, I think this is a flawed notion. I think the institution of marriage needs to return to its traditional role, which is to start a family and raise children the right way. Ideally, romantic love and platonic companionship spring forth from a marriage. For this reason, I have a goal to get married and have kids, because I think the benefits of a good marriage are worth the risk of marriage hell and divorce. I would never marry a woman with whom I didn't want to have kids, and I am looking for a traditional woman with a similar background as myself.

Post: #2

I thought this topic has been discussed 1000 times already on this forum, and the general consensus is that most of us would get married if the marriage laws weren't pure shit.

Most of us aren't players because we want to be, but because it's the only option in a society that destroys women as marriage partners and is hostile to men.

Post: #3

(11-12-2014 05:39 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I thought this topic has been discussed 1000 times already on this forum,

Fair enough.

Regardless, I am curious what the poll results will be.

Post: #4

Just read that interview with Paul, and this part jumped out at me:

Quote:I don’t think there’s a party line on marriage per se in the manosphere. I think actually a lot of guys would love the happy ending we were all brought up to believe possible, if the prospects with Western women didn’t appear so bleak. The issue is with hypergamy, divorce rate, alimony and child support and so on. And 70% of divorces are initiated by women.

Why would they voluntarily release themselves back into the sexual marketplace after their expiration date?

Is he serious??? He's assuming women will act rationally on marriage. Newsflash: Women aren't rational. Why do old 50 year old women initiate divorce all the time? Who the fuck knows, most of them couldn't explain it to themselves if they tried.

Let's see, what are the things divorced men have told us?

- Revenge on husband for some perceived slight
- Joining her other frivorced friends so she won't feel left out
- Wants her hubby's money for herself
- Wants to control her children more so she cuts her husband out
- Believes, irrationally, she can still get another quality man
- Comes up with the idea that only a solitary life can make her haaaaaapy


I think Paul may have damaged himself by focusing too much on women in his life. Since pretty much all he did was chase women, he never grounded himself as an independent man. As a result, he needs to have a woman, no matter what, and marriage is the only remaining option.

Although, having children in a stable household is an admirable goal, at least Janka could have said something along the lines, "I got married in a country where a marriage contract isn't just a license for women to abuse men."

Post: #5

(11-12-2014 06:02 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Just read that interview with Paul, and this part jumped out at me:

Quote:I don’t think there’s a party line on marriage per se in the manosphere. I think actually a lot of guys would love the happy ending we were all brought up to believe possible, if the prospects with Western women didn’t appear so bleak. The issue is with hypergamy, divorce rate, alimony and child support and so on. And 70% of divorces are initiated by women.

Why would they voluntarily release themselves back into the sexual marketplace after their expiration date?

Is he serious??? He's assuming women will act rationally on marriage. Newsflash: Women aren't rational. Why do old 50 year old women initiate divorce all the time? Who the fuck knows, most of them couldn't explain it to themselves if they tried.

Let's see, what are the things divorced men have told us?

- Revenge on husband for some perceived slight
- Joining her other frivorced friends so she won't feel left out
- Wants her hubby's money for herself
- Wants to control her children more so she cuts her husband out
- Believes, irrationally, she can still get another quality man
- Comes up with the idea that only a solitary life can make her haaaaaapy


I think Paul may have damaged himself by focusing too much on women in his life. Since pretty much all he did was chase women, he never grounded himself as an independent man. As a result, he needs to have a woman, no matter what, and marriage is the only remaining option.

Although, having children in a stable household is an admirable goal, at least Janka could have said something along the lines, "I got married in a country where a marriage contract isn't just a license for women to abuse men."

I agree...and the way you wrote this was hilarious, in a good way....

Post: #6

(11-12-2014 05:36 PM)TheRookie Wrote:  I think it is fair to say that in the "redpill" community the anti-marriage voices are the loudest and probably the vast majority.
There was quite an outpouring in the comments.

Commenters accused Janka of falling for the soulmate myth, having one-itis, not being actually good at pickup, and being afraid of being alone.

Glib snippets like "one-itis" were invented ( that one by Mystery I believe) to describe particular situations at a particular time.

Their use then gets broadened, sometimes to the absurd degree where any attachment to any girl is viewed as some kind of pathology.

Essentially saying someone has "one-itis" has to be relevantly linked to the situation and the person or it has as much meaning as saying someone has "cooties."

Also, I myself am terrified of marriage in the USA.

But he is taking into account kids-- which is probably the strongest innate biological drive after survival, if you believe in evolution. It's true some men don't want to have kids, I don't argue with their decision.

However Janka's basic assertion remains unanswered:

How do you take decent care of kids without an enduring, harmonious relationship with a woman?

I haven't heard an answer.

And without an answer, marriage, or some kind of long-term cohabitation emerges as the reasonable default for most.


What the alternative to marriage or something like it when the evidence leans highly towards a two parent home being best for the kid?

I'm trying to find a woman here in the Philippines which does' have male-punishment oriented family law.

Also, in Italy for instance, it takes about seven years to get divorced, so it isn't a "go-girl" afternoon endeavor.

Accusations of "not being good at pickup" have an unstated assumption that continuous recruitment is a positive ideal which I disagree with for myself.

An accusation that someone is "afraid of being alone" seems to disregard that humans have almost always been tribal animals. It's simply our nature or most of us. Making solitude an ideal for most people is simply unrealistic.We fundamentally designed to spend more time with others socially than FacebookMatrixSkynet want us to.

Post: #7

I think getting married in my current place of residence is simply out of question. There is positively no optimistic outcome for a man choosing to raise a family other than to provide and serve as a useless drone to the state which has no authority within his home, outside his home, or pretty much anywhere else. How many women will voluntarily opt out to be a traditional wife, with nothing to enforce such behavior ? Very very tiny number, so tiny that even searching for them is pretty meaningless task unless you really want kids, for the sake of kids only.

Islam will prevail

Post: #8

Marriage has always been a retirement plan for women. Doesn't matter how you slice it or what part/type of marriage you are talking about (marriage 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 etc).

It has always been retirement for women. It might have made sense when women were legally considered chattel way back when but today?

NOPE!

If you want kids then just find a decent one and knock her up and game her to stay with you, obviously while having a mistress or two on the side, and worst case scenario you end up getting along for the kids sake, paying CS and hopefully raising your sons to be red pill aware and scorch earth players at a young age.

MARRIAGE IS RETIREMENT FOR WOMEN!

Post: #9

My game is as good as the next man's, but I seriously don't know how to "keep hand" with a chick until the day I die. All of my boys, some of them stone cold players that got married eventually broke. And i'd say it's about half and half in terms of divorces and haven't divorced yet.

In the LTR situation, once a chick gets her hooks in to you, it's becomes logistically and practically difficult to run game...unless you're heartless.

And that's the rub. If you're heartless, you don't want what marriage or parenthood brings.

Even in favorable jurisdictions, women have long evolved ways to manipulate and control you and your happiness. Best believe that obedient Thai wife can put the screws to you in other ways.

Arab sheikhs,,,, where chicks can't drive, vote, or go anywhere if not accompanied by family...even those dudes with harems and 4 wives got to please the main bitch if he wants peace in his palace.

You putting food on the table, the finest of Niqabs on her back, and that broad still got to complain about something.

The only viable solution seems to be 100% selfishness, to be heartless.

or you could hold out for "The One"

*guffaws*

WIA

Post: #10

(11-12-2014 06:17 PM)Troll King Wrote:  Marriage has always been a retirement plan for women. Doesn't matter how you slice it or what part/type of marriage you are talking about (marriage 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 etc).

It has always been retirement for women. It might have made sense when women were legally considered chattel way back when but today?

NOPE!

If you want kids then just find a decent one and knock her up and game her to stay with you,

Is this "gamed" state a good psychological position for a woman to be a mother for your kids?

"Keep her on her toes! Never quite sure of her status with you ! "

I find this a little dehumanizing. It's needed _at points_, but it starts to lead to the question of whether you actually think of women as human beings.

That being said, it's true that there are aberrant political situations now like in the USA where the family courts are completely unfair. But that doesn't change what a healthy relationship is-- it just makes it more difficult to achieve here.

Post: #11

The poll should have age ranges as well.

I feel like I dont want to get married but most likely would around 40 if I can cash in with a young 20 something.

Post: #12

I am married, with kids and would not advise the younger dudes to have a legal marriage. Have a wedding ceremony if you are religions, never register it with the state, don't live in a community property state, never file a joint tax return and just walk away if it blows up.

Kids? only if you can afford it. As in, save up $100k cash in a "kid raising trust" that is administered by a family member like your dad or brother, use the trust to pay for the kids expenses in with your non-registered marriage wife and hire an illegal mexican lady or hot au pair to help raise the kid.

There is just too much risk otherwise and too many temptations for a woman to be a faithful wife and mother to make it worth it.

That is what I would do if I were to do it over again.

Post: #13

You can't game marriage, period.

Post: #14

I'll only get married and have kids, knowing fully well it will be in a society that not only allows, but in addition, encourages it.

I did say before I grew up in a broken home and I refuse to have a family in the USA, much less get married here, knowing fully well the tilted repercussions.

Post: #15

My mother was best friends with a woman who got married five times. Don't know how she managed to run marriage game so well but she did.

On her third husband, here's what she told my mother:

"You know what I just realized about Richard? He has a really big forehead."

Then she divorced him.

Post: #16

(11-12-2014 06:18 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  My game is as good as the next man's, but I seriously don't know how to "keep hand" with a chick until the day I die. All of my boys, some of them stone cold players that got married eventually broke. And i'd say it's about half and half in terms of divorces and haven't divorced yet.

In the LTR situation, once a chick gets her hooks in to you, it's becomes logistically and practically difficult to run game...unless you're heartless.

And that's the rub. If you're heartless, you don't want what marriage or parenthood brings.

Even in favorable jurisdictions, women have long evolved ways to manipulate and control you and your happiness. Best believe that obedient Thai wife can put the screws to you in other ways.

Arab sheikhs,,,, where chicks can't drive, vote, or go anywhere if not accompanied by family...even those dudes with harems and 4 wives got to please the main bitch if he wants peace in his palace.

You putting food on the table, the finest of Niqabs on her back, and that broad still got to complain about something.

The only viable solution seems to be 100% selfishness, to be heartless.

or you could hold out for "The One"

*guffaws*

WIA

I've been in love with a great girl for many years, I game her still, it's fun for both of us, and I never feel heartless. I know what's best for her and I give it to her, including healthy doses of drama. I plan to take care of her for the rest of my days (and having great times with many side pieces along the way). One of the reasons our relationship has endured is that she has never had the state sponsored ability to rape me and everything I own. You can't complain about slavery when you put the slave band on your finger yourself.

The hardest part for people to grasp about modern marriage is that for the first time in history, it actively works to destabilize families (through a series of perverse incentives) instead of stabilize them. You don't get married BECAUSE you love her. Instead, I enjoy all the benefits a marriage is SUPPOSED to have (but rarely does).

Post: #17

So far the best decision I've made all my life has been to resist the social pressure from family and relatives to get married for the past 10 or so years. And it's not looking to change anytime soon.

IF and that is a BIG if, I do get married, it will sure as hell:
a) won't be with a western girl
B) won't be in Canada or NA or anywhere in the Anglosphere.

It sure as hell would be:
a) with a traditional, feminine, caring, loving, sweet girly girl. One who takes very serious care of her health and appearance and is always dressed to the 9s when going out. Even for just a walk. One who embraces her femininity entirely and wholly. One who is an excellent cook
b) In a country where traditions and values such as family, respect as well as chastity of the females and loyalty are considered vital virtues. A country where there is a very healthy relationship between men and women where men are men and women are women and each fully and wholly embraces their roles based on the eternal laws of Mother Nature.
c) would keep her there in her country. Sure she can come vacation in Canada, US but not to live.

Regarding having kids, if I were to have kids, it would just like the above, be with a traditional woman in a traditional country. I'd raise the boys to be very masculine and into sports and the girls, very feminine and girly. I would ensure my kids are polyglot just like me and make sure they speak the following languages fluently: French, English, Spanish, Farsi and Chinese. Along the mothers' language.

So far, looks like an Asian girl from Asia or a Latina from Latin America or an Eastern European from EE appear to be the best candidates in terms of meeting the above criteria. Both in terms of the women's desirable attributes as well as the healthy social dynamics in those countries which have been historically, traditional and masculine.

This is a summarized version of my MO when it comes to my stance on marriage in this day and age. I'd venture and say that in light of the current environment in the West and specifically, in the Anglosphere, the above MO would be the wisest one for a man wanting to have a family while drastically reducing the high risks involved with such a venture in the West.

Post: #18

(11-12-2014 06:02 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I think Paul may have damaged himself by focusing too much on women in his life. Since pretty much all he did was chase women, he never grounded himself as an independent man. As a result, he needs to have a woman, no matter what, and marriage is the only remaining option.

I know some of my friends from when I was growing up who were too focused on women all the time (it's very bad if it starts when you're really young). Believe me, most of those guys aren't exactly in a position any of us would envy.

I also think he let out something very telling here...

Quote:Chasing girls is fun when you have a core group of guys and continuity in your life. When you’re looking at women as disposable sexual objects then there’s so much churn and no one follows your life with any interest.

Sounds like he was doing it to show off to other dudes rather than because he needed his balls drained, and now that no one is watching he needs a new hobby. Goes to show most people just want a fucking clubhouse to belong to rather than doing something for its own sake.

Post: #19

I would get married if I dated a girl for an extended period of time who didn't exhibit a ton of red flags. As it happens, all the girls I've had relationships with for extended periods of time would display some serious red flags within the first 2 to 3 months. This made me terrified to consider them as long term prospects and I would start looking for a way out, though one girl I ended up staying with for over two years even though I knew she was too crazy and dramatic to marry. It seems to me that a girl can't keep the red flags in a bottle for more than 3 months without letting them slip.

For people who have been with someone for 10 or 15 years and suddenly the person leaves, I would imagine there were signs in that person's personality early on that would show they were capable of such things, and the signs just weren't scrutinized closely enough.

Post: #20

(11-12-2014 11:44 PM)Vitriol Wrote:  I also think he let out something very telling here...

Quote:Chasing girls is fun when you have a core group of guys and continuity in your life. When you’re looking at women as disposable sexual objects then there’s so much churn and no one follows your life with any interest.

Sounds like he was doing it to show off to other dudes rather than because he needed his balls drained, and now that no one is watching he needs a new hobby. Goes to show most people just want a fucking clubhouse to belong to rather than doing something for its own sake.

Yeah, this comment is key. It goes beyond just showing off your girls to your guy friends though. As a man you need to keep a clubhouse going. This doesn't have to be a bunch of single guys chasing women and talking about it (but it can be). It can be the guys you get together with and go play cards, golf, bowling, church, etc. At least,this is how many men maintained sanity so many years.

Post: #21

I voted 'marriage', on the proviso that the legal structure thereof was safe. There is a lot of variability in what constitutes a 'marriage' nowadays.

Post: #22

If I get a perfect / young / docile girl, then why not. But to lock me in a relationship where I won't have "side girlfriends", she's better be good.

Post: #23

It would be good if we could get some more 50 + guys to tune in and tell us how there feelings towards the subject have changed over the years; I know now in my late 30s, I think a hell of alot different to when i was 20 about it all (obviously) The main thing I can see now that I did not realize would be the case at this age is that I have so many choices. But I am really not interested in the choices on offer from western women; eventually I may form a LTR with a Latina, SEA, or EE women.

Post: #24

I'd love to be married and have kids someday. Western women are out of the question though, and unless it's absolutely necessary due to my location independent income not being large enough, I will do my best to keep my wife out of the West and to select one who is resistant to its "charms".

Otherwise, hell no.

Post: #25

(11-13-2014 02:49 AM)alex3948 Wrote:  If I get a perfect / young / docile girl, then why not.

That fantasy will last for about 6 months after you get married. I hope all of the guys who clicked yes are planning on waiting until you are at least 35.