Welcome to our new upgraded phpbb 3.2 forum! The upgrade is now complete. See announcement and new features here, or report any problems or issues here. Enjoy the new forum.

Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.

View Active Topics       View Your Posts       Latest 100 Topics       FAQ Topics

The Expat Test

Discuss and talk about any general topic.

Moderators: fschmidt, jamesbond

Post Reply
Freshman Poster
Posts: 241
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 1:57 am

The Expat Test

Post by OutsideoftheBox » June 9th, 2012, 1:34 pm

In this part of the internet there are many traditionalists and others who attack the idea of going ghost and try to promote marriage. They will repeatedly say that they are “defending marriageâ€￾. For those of us who know the score about marriage 2.0 and how marriage 1.0 is already dead in Western countries, these “defenders of marriageâ€￾ are either intentionally or unintentionally pushing men into the feminist institution of marriage 2.0. Many of these “defenders of marriageâ€￾ will claim that they are just trying to protect â€￾traditional marriageâ€￾ (i.e. marriage 1.0) from those who are trying to “destroy marriageâ€￾ (which typically means MRAs to them, even though MRAs aren’t trying to “destroy marriage,â€￾ but warn men of the dangers of marriage 2.0). How do we know whether these “defenders of marriageâ€￾ are legitimate in their defense of marriage, or are just trying to force men to submit to a conservative/traditional form of feminism? The answer is the expat test.

In these arguments for and against marriage, the debate is presented as getting married vs. not getting married. This is an inaccurate way to frame how men are dealing with the current situation regarding marriage. There are more than just those two answers — there are actually three options:

Get married in a marriage 2.0 (feminist) country
Get married in a marriage 1.0 country (which by definition involves expating, because bringing a woman to a marriage 2.0 country ends up being option 1)
Don’t get married whether you expat or not
Anyone who claims to defend “traditional marriageâ€￾ should love option 2. They should love the idea of a man making sure that he gets a traditional marriage by expating to a marriage 1.0 county. It shouldn’t matter to them where a traditional marriage happens as long as it happens. This objectively does more to preserve “traditional marriageâ€￾ – by any definition that the “defenders of marriageâ€￾ would use – than getting married in a marriage 2.0 country, which does nothing to preserve traditional marriage.

If you confront “defenders of marriageâ€￾ with the expat test, what will their response be? Typically, they will be against the idea of a man expating to another country to enjoy a traditional marriage. They will come up with all sorts of nonsense to argue against expating to contract a marriage 1.0 arrangement. The arguments range from culture to, in extreme cases, white nationalism/racial obligations. In other words, in nearly all cases, a “defender of marriageâ€￾ will fail the expat test, proving that their real goal has nothing to do with “traditional marriage;â€￾ instead, it is about placating the women in their churches and producing more babies. Their push for marriage is really about white knighting for women and/or their fear that their group or race is not having enough babies.

If you’re reading this, it’s likely none of this is is new to you. However, the expat test still has value because it can be used as a tool to prove objectively that nearly all “defenders of marriageâ€￾ aren’t actually defending marriage, but have other goals, none of which take men’s interests into consideration.

Link: http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/12/17/the-expat-test/

Veteran Poster
Posts: 2394
Joined: May 18th, 2008, 9:16 am
Location: El Paso, TX

Post by fschmidt » June 9th, 2012, 4:04 pm

This is typical Spearhead bullshit. First of all, there are virtually no traditional countries out there. There are liberal/feminist countries and there are anarchistic/chaotic countries. Maybe Saudi Arabia is an exception, but there aren't many. MGTOW is the process that converts a liberal/feminist country into an anarchistic/chaotic country. The anarchistic/chaotic countries are hardly the traditionalist ideal. They are dysfunctional and lack meaningful virtuous traditions. They are not particularly good places to start a business or to raise a family.

The ideal for a traditionalist is to marry in the sense of a couple making a commitment to form a family but to not get a government marriage license. Unfortunately this isn't practical because the only women worth marrying are abroad and one needs the marriage license to immigrate one's foreign wife. But this isn't actually such a tragedy because a traditionalist can overcome the liberal/feminist laws with traditional culture found in a traditional church. This has been demonstrated by the fact that Anabaptists and Hasidic Jews have an extremely low divorce rate in America. The Spearhead/MGTOW types have no appreciation for the power of culture and tradition.

Now I would like to propose an Expat Test for MGTOW. Anarchistic/chaotic countries are already fully practicing the ideals of MGTOW. Just across the border from where I live, in Juarez Mexico, men go their own way, women go their own way, and bullets go their own way. It sounds like a MGTOW utopia. So why don't MGTOW expat to anarchistic/chaotic countries instead of complaining all the time? I would like an answer for that.
Last edited by fschmidt on June 9th, 2012, 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Experienced Poster
Posts: 1421
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 7:53 pm

Post by MrPeabody » June 9th, 2012, 5:31 pm

My parents were married for over 50 years. This use to be the typical situation. Marriage isn't a big problem when the laws and culture are set up right. The solution is simple. We need to go back to the way it was in the 1950s. This was the golden period of the United States. During that period, Marxist liberal Jews were kept out of sensitive elite positions by discrimination so they couldn't damage the country. They won. Now the culture has been totally trashed. There is little hope of a stable marriage because the surrounding culture destroys stability. That's why people don't progress in third world countries because every time they get up they are slapped down again. If you are living in a bad culture, you will always be treading water. We already had the ideal society and there is no need to invent new rubbish. Everything has to be rolled back.

Freshman Poster
Posts: 241
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 1:57 am

Post by OutsideoftheBox » June 9th, 2012, 11:20 pm

The article is correct; the maginas commenting on the article above me are wrong.

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussions”