Friday, February 20, 2015

Halfway to the Misandry Bubble

I cited The Misandry Bubble, a 2010 Futurist essay about what might happen by 2020. We are now halfway there.

If you want a contrary view, this feminist fact-check complains about a statement that women married at age 20, not too long ago. The feminist says that the median age was 20.3 in the 1960s and has not been below 20 since 1845.

Tell her that 20.3 rounds off to 20.

She also claims that no-fault divorce laws have not contributed to the divorce rate. I think that the point is that the states made divorce easy before going all the way with a no-fault law. Or maybe social acceptance of no-fault divorce preceded legal acceptance. I am too lazy to figure it out. Regardless, today it is socially and legally acceptable for anyone to unilaterally walk out of a marriage for any reason, and that was not true in the 1950s.
So, to review, the differences between Marriage 1.0 and Marriage 2.0 are:

a) No fault asset division and alimony, where the abandoned spouse has to pay if he earns more, even if he did not want a divorce, and even if he is a victim of abuse, cuckolding, or adultery. There are rare instances of high-earning women getting caught in this trap as well.
b) Women marrying after having 5 or more sexual partners, compared to just 0-1 previously. This makes it harder for the woman to form a pair bond with her husband.
c) Women marrying at an age when very few years of their peak beauty are remaining, compared to a decade or more remaining under Marriage 1.0.
d) Child custody is almost never granted to the man, so he loses his children on a 'no fault' basis. ...

A complex sexual past works against women even if the same works in favor of men, due to the natural sexual attraction triggers of each gender. A wise man once said, "A key that can open many locks is a valuable key, but a lock that can be opened by many keys is a useless lock." ...

For this reason, after lunatic 'feminists', these pedestalizing White Knights are the next most responsible party for the misandry in Western society today. ...

Instead, all that exists are Men's Rights Authors (MRAs) that run a few websites and exchange information on their blogs. ... Hence, there will be no real Men's Rights Movement in the near future. ...

The destruction of the two-parent family by incentivizing immoral behavior in women is at least as much of a threat to American safety and prosperity as anything that ever could have come out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, or Saudi Arabia. ...

A single man does not require much in order to survive. Most single men could eke out a comfortable existence by working for two months out of the year. ...

'feminists' are leading average women into the abyss.
He calls it a bubble, so presumably this aspect of our society will become unsustainable and crash.

Feminists often complain of the "double standard" where women are held to higher moral standards than men. That analogy to keys and locks is particularly effective.

Five years ago, I might have disagreed with him about the prospect for a men's rights movement, and about his blame for White Knights. Now I think he is right.

Separately, Matt Forney writes 20 Signs That We’re Not Living In A Patriarchy.


Take The Red Pill said...

"Feminists often complain of the "double standard" where women are held to higher moral standards than men."

Yet these same feminists (and their White Knight supplicant supporters) have no objections whatsoever to women enjoying the benefits of being pedestalized as having higher moral standards and being more moral than men -- just because of their gender. Just like their typical hypocrisy of wanting rights without responsibilities and authority without accountability, they want moral authority without possessing greater morality.

Anonymous said...

Marriage for men has always been slavery. Society shamed men into providing for and protecting women and her children. In days past, a man that didn't have a wife had difficulty finding employment and one that didn't provide for a woman's children was deemed defective. Men were also sent to war to fight and die for their rights - rights that were given to women without any cost. Men that didn't go to war were branded cowards - by both men and women. These things are still somewhat true today, but more and more, men are standing up to this misandry and male disposability. Marriage, for all intensive purposes, has always been about the exchange of sex by women for provision and protection by men. To a large extent, society still enforces these roles.

In the past 40+ years, tens upon tens of millions of men have been destroyed through marriage. As a result, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of those men have committed suicide. This is the real reason for the decline in marriage.

Feminism inadvertently freed men from their traditional male roles. Now, men aren't forced to provide for and protect women. As more and more women enter the military - fewer and fewer men's lives will have to be sacrificed for women's rights. Women cast off their traditional roles and now men have done the same.

Because of the above, we are moving toward a more equal society in which one gender isn't forced to sacrifice themselves for the other. To continue this trend, white knights and chivalrous men must be removed from the male ranks. These are the men that will gladly throw other men under the bus to gain favor with the gynocracy. These men are relics of dark days past (for men) and need to be called out and removed from any gender equalized society.

George said...

You make some good points. This argument has persuaded me that white knights are not to be admired.

Anonymous said...

"You make some good points. This argument has persuaded me that white knights are not to be admired."


I have the utmost respect for you. I've been commenting on your site for a couple of years now. We both have great minds - which means we think very much alike.

Once again, thank you for all of your work. You're a blessing to all men. I look forward to your blog every single day. You're a gift.

If you keep posting, I'll keep commenting.

George said...

Thanks. I don't mean that your comments persuaded me by themselves, but rather the combination of similar arguments from different places, such as this article on the Misandry Bubble.

I may not keep posting. I've said what I have to say.

Anonymous said...

"I may not keep posting. I've said what I have to say."

If that's true, then you'll be missed. Each of us has to put the keyboard down at some point. If this is your point, then it's our loss.

Anonymous said...

As soon these white knights loose their Management Job they would Beg a MGTOW to show them or to pump and dump