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 â€œdefending 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 â€œdefenders of marriageâ€ are either intentionally or unintentionally pushing men into the feminist institution of marriage 2.0. Many of these â€œdefenders 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 â€œdestroy marriageâ€ (which typically means MRAs to them, even though MRAs arenâ€™t trying to â€œdestroy marriage,â€ but warn men of the dangers of marriage 2.0). How do we know whether these â€œdefenders 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 â€” 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)
Donâ€™t get married whether you expat or not
Anyone who claims to defend â€œtraditional 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 shouldnâ€™t matter to them where a traditional marriage happens as long as it happens. This objectively does more to preserve â€œtraditional marriageâ€ â€“ by any definition that the â€œdefenders of marriageâ€ would use â€“ than getting married in a marriage 2.0 country, which does nothing to preserve traditional marriage.
If you confront â€œdefenders 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 â€œdefender of marriageâ€ will fail the expat test, proving that their real goal has nothing to do with â€œtraditional 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 youâ€™re reading this, itâ€™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 â€œdefenders of marriageâ€ arenâ€™t actually defending marriage, but have other goals, none of which take menâ€™s interests into consideration.