Marriage and the Power of Divorce
- Thread starter Grumpus
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Noodleface
A Mod Real Quick
- 38,275
- 15,106
I said that to my wife on our first ever meeting. It was tough, I cracked a few codes, but I did it
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,656
Oh some of it's true enough as far as it goes. Just easy to take it too far. In practice these sorts of things are self limiting.
The really good stuff is in the MIDDLE of the book. You'd think it's in the back, but that's how they getcha.
Redpill awareness actually worksbestin a marriage or LTR because those same behaviors (and again, not PUA) are needed to maintain attraction. Remember desire cannot be negotiated - it's not something to be discussed, communicated, or compromised upon, yet it must be there, constantly and continually.
The redpill reddit and all these blogs are full - literally thousands - of stories from men who believed the societal narrative of 'open communication', only to be there posting a horror story years later. Anyone who thinks this community is full of incel nerds hasn't been involved in it whatsoever.
Rollo's response to mr and mrs spreadsheet, excellent analysis:
Considering MRA and a return to 19th century Christian values: you have to understand, regardless of whether the beliefs in Christianity are illusory, that it was used sociopolitically to embed a social and moral organization upon society. These men (and what men today too often don't) knew the sexual nature of women, and this was their solution to maintain stability in society, right or wrong. The same as in Islam.
You also have to understand the concepts of 'romantic love', historically, were created by women in the 13th century French courts. Women were totally treated like property back then, and the way they gained power in interpersonal relationships was to create ideas of chivalry, courtly love, and romance. That's how the love that's conceptualized in your mind here today began: a power grab in response to being treated like property.
Fast foward to today, where laws and society do favor women in almost every respect. The answer isn't to return to the solution of the 19th century obviously, but it's, at the least, to tip the scale of power away from feminism and give some of it back to men.
The redpill reddit and all these blogs are full - literally thousands - of stories from men who believed the societal narrative of 'open communication', only to be there posting a horror story years later. Anyone who thinks this community is full of incel nerds hasn't been involved in it whatsoever.
Rollo's response to mr and mrs spreadsheet, excellent analysis:
Case Study - Lowered ExpectationsRollo_sl said:
Theydofulfill those stereotypes when it comes to human sexuality. Feminism isn't all bad: it's a good thing that women have the freedom of choice, to have a career if they choose. However, it also lies to them: youcannothave it all; you can't have both a prosperous career and an equally prosperous home life. It just doesn't work pragmatically or even mathematically (in terms of hours). When you hear the leaders of feminism, such as Sandberg who DO have it all, what that usually means is that they have a properly feminized husband and the wealth to hire armies of nannies to maintain that prosperous home life. Most women cannot even get close to this. That aspect of feminism is a total lie.
Considering MRA and a return to 19th century Christian values: you have to understand, regardless of whether the beliefs in Christianity are illusory, that it was used sociopolitically to embed a social and moral organization upon society. These men (and what men today too often don't) knew the sexual nature of women, and this was their solution to maintain stability in society, right or wrong. The same as in Islam.
You also have to understand the concepts of 'romantic love', historically, were created by women in the 13th century French courts. Women were totally treated like property back then, and the way they gained power in interpersonal relationships was to create ideas of chivalry, courtly love, and romance. That's how the love that's conceptualized in your mind here today began: a power grab in response to being treated like property.
Fast foward to today, where laws and society do favor women in almost every respect. The answer isn't to return to the solution of the 19th century obviously, but it's, at the least, to tip the scale of power away from feminism and give some of it back to men.
FTFY, and this is another part of the problem, multiplied by however many, probably over a million, kids born to single moms. The football player doesn't stick around, and the mom is therefore even more likely to raise a kid in poverty (& provided for by taxpayer money) who will probably grow up and do the same shit. Due to sexual nature being what it is, the circle of dysfunction just goes on and on in a freer society.
Of course redpill reddit is full of thousands of guys who got burned. So is the "womenareevil" and the "MyExIsSatanIncarnate" subreddits. It's self selection. Just like RR.com selects for gaming nerds. It's like arguing "dude, playing MMOs all your life to the detriment of your social and professional life is totally the way to live! Just look at the thousands of guys on RR!"
Chance of divorce over your lifetime is 40%. It is not self-selection. It is crowd-sourced truth.
sci.anthropology: Aug-96: Re: how many bastards are there, anyway?
Linking to a weird site because it quotes an actual book which has cited studies in it. Awkward, but best I can do on short notice. Also:
"[7] Betzig L, 'Where are the bastard's daddies?', Behavioural and Brain Sciences 285, 16, 1993. See also: Robin Baker 1996 "Sperm Wars: The science of sex" Basic Books, NY / Fourth Estate, London: "On average, about 10 percent of children are not sired by their supposed fathers. Some men, however, have a higher chance of being deceived in this way than others -- and it is those of low wealth and status who fare worst. Actual figures range from 1 percent in high-status areas of the United States and Switzerland, to 5 to 6 percent for moderate-status males in the United States and Great Britain, to 10 to 30 percent for lower-status males in the United States, Great Britain and France. Moreover, the men most likely to sexually hoodwink the lower-status males are men of higher status." (pp. 124--5)"
Food for thought.
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,392
- 98,597
Marrying later, having more wealth, not engaging in destructive behaviors (e.g. withdrawing from discussions, calling names), not reciprocating destructive behaviors, and many other things all predict non divorce. I should have typed it to not be a double negative, but fuckyouI'monaphone.
Divorce is not a random unpredictable event.
I'll have to dig it up, but the CDC discovered something odd with their divorce numbers while they were tracking STDs (which also involved tracking sexual history). Women who had only had one partner were very unlikely to get divorced. For each additional partner your odds jumped by like 10%, till a brief plateau between 4-7, then continued to increase by 4-6% per partner up to 12, where it leveled off. So, yeah, the average for divorce across the population? Well known. The odds of you personally getting a divorce? Well, you can pretty easily stack the odds in your favor through good selection.
Not true. Both you and your partner being college educated alters that figure immensely.
Well, another part of that fact is women first marrying in their 30's, which is a bum deal for men. Of course those divorce stats will be less - because they're past their prime and established career-wise, and they've won the smv game by marrying (a hypothetically) handsome, successful man, but this man got a raw deal in this narrative.
Yes.
We have to look at these statistics accurately for our purposes. College-educated may make a difference, butwhenall these college-educated women are getting married may matter more than the fact they're college-educated in the first place. That is, the college doesn't matter save that it pushes marriage to later in life, after establishing a career. That's likely what matters, not the college education itself.
Redpill is most certainly a strategy to keep passion and maintain some attraction in a marriage, and the divorce is usually seen as this eat-pray-love ideal for women to toss their beta provider husband aside and jump back on the c--- carousel once more before it's too late, with some divorce court prizes as a bonus. However, this wouldn't really apply if a womanfirstgot married in her early or mid 30's, for example: she's been on the carousel much longer than some woman marrying at 25, and she's never jumped off. She's most definitely spewing theI'm ready to settle down and find a life-partnertrope from every corner of her cum-stained mouth by then.
Idealism and its mental constructs of 'love' never trump biomechanics, as much as we want, hope, or wish it to. Rationality cannot compete with nature and its evolutionary work, despite how much we try to wedge it into relationships. That's the bottom, and real point, of the redpill rabbit hole.
We have to look at these statistics accurately for our purposes. College-educated may make a difference, butwhenall these college-educated women are getting married may matter more than the fact they're college-educated in the first place. That is, the college doesn't matter save that it pushes marriage to later in life, after establishing a career. That's likely what matters, not the college education itself.
Redpill is most certainly a strategy to keep passion and maintain some attraction in a marriage, and the divorce is usually seen as this eat-pray-love ideal for women to toss their beta provider husband aside and jump back on the c--- carousel once more before it's too late, with some divorce court prizes as a bonus. However, this wouldn't really apply if a womanfirstgot married in her early or mid 30's, for example: she's been on the carousel much longer than some woman marrying at 25, and she's never jumped off. She's most definitely spewing theI'm ready to settle down and find a life-partnertrope from every corner of her cum-stained mouth by then.
Idealism and its mental constructs of 'love' never trump biomechanics, as much as we want, hope, or wish it to. Rationality cannot compete with nature and its evolutionary work, despite how much we try to wedge it into relationships. That's the bottom, and real point, of the redpill rabbit hole.
Actually the education statistic is pretty steady across all age groups, but age isn't nearly as strong a determination as education level so maybe you should just stop talking out if your ass.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,404
- 80,895
Dumar I appreciate that you're trying to give out advice, but you, an unmarried man who isn't willing to even demonstrate some level of sexual prowess, have no credibility. Your arguments for redpill ideology are also generally flimsy and full of verbose platitudes or opinionated statements presented as fact. You've also made some very critical logical errors and are making broad and unfounded assumptions about a lifestyle you've never experienced.