Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Vent your rants and raves here about whatever makes you mad, angry or frustrated.
User avatar
flowerthief00
Junior Poster
Posts: 866
Joined: January 10th, 2017, 8:14 pm

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by flowerthief00 »

Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 3:47 pm
Normal for Chads. For ordinary boys, there is no girl, because she is content to wait on the sidelines until Chad has a spot open on his calendar. In the past, the girl would have been hoping for marriage WHICH IS PAID SEX and so she would have lowered her standards to accept ordinary boys. Furthermore, she would have avoided Chads (unless she was Stacy, meaning Chad's equal) because she wouldn't have wanted to lower her value on the marriage market by getting a reputation as a slut. In more traditional societies, she would have preserved her virginity until marriage, so as to keep her marriage market value high.

MARRIAGE IS PAID SEX (or it was traditionally when men worked outside the house and women raised children). Free sex implies the devaluation of monogamy in favor of uncontrolled hypergamy and polygamy. Right now it's free sex polygamy, with Chad getting all the girls for free. But this system eventually leads to hypergamy with a ruling class of rich men getting all the women. Widespread free sex is a temporary aberration.
Well I agree with much of that, but ironically not the part that you sought to emphasize with all-caps.

Come on, marriage was much more than paid sex. Marriage, sex, companionship, children (which could be put to work at early age), family, security in old age (back when it was expected for children to take care of parents when they got older). All of those things were a package deal. Both men and women wanted, or were supposed to want that package. If you were to refer to marriage as paid sex back in that day...well, I wasn't around to say for sure, but I would be very surprised if folks saw it that way.

Going to see the village whore was paid sex. Marriage was something different.

When a man wed a wife he was taking on an investment expected to provide various benefits down the line. An investment he had ownership and authority over, so it was worth sinking time, money, and care into. As for the wife, she couldn't just take her "payment" and leave because now she belonged to him.

To fancy marriage as paid sex is to already be thinking in a modern liberal and egalitarian (dare I say feminist?) way in which men and women are sovereign equals simply exchanging services.
User avatar
flowerthief00
Junior Poster
Posts: 866
Joined: January 10th, 2017, 8:14 pm

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by flowerthief00 »

Cornfed wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 4:22 pm
It is widely accepted that contraception is dysgenic.
It is?
User avatar
Contrarian Expatriate
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 5415
Joined: December 2nd, 2009, 9:57 pm

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by Contrarian Expatriate »

Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 12:59 pm
4) Paying for sex is a privilege for the man, because it implies society has arranged did that men can easily have more wealth than women. Free sex implies equality of incomes and wealth among men and women. All you can think is "great, I don't have to pay!" More perceptive observers, like me, note that you don't have much money and that's why you are so happy about not paying. Not having much money, and especially not having enough to impress the women he is dating, has traditionally been a degrading position for a man, unless he is very young and has good prospects, so his poverty is only temporary.
And what is not mentioned is if you physically compared the “free sex” girls to the ones who demand or require resources, it is like night and day in terms of beauty.
User avatar
Shemp
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1643
Joined: November 22nd, 2014, 7:45 pm

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by Shemp »

flowerthief00 wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 4:50 pm
..If you were to refer to marriage as paid sex back in that day...well, I wasn't around to say for sure, but I would be very surprised if folks saw it that way.
Back in the 1950's, when the liberalization first started, grandmothers were warning the younger women: "why should he buy a cow if he can get milk for free?"

Yes there was (and is) much more to marriage than just sex, but sex was the major motive for young men in the past because they had no other sexual outlet, other than masturbation using imagination only, since no pornography back then. And to get married, young men needed money to support a wife and family. And that is still how things work in traditional societies. Quality Filipinas, for example, normally were virgins at marriage until very recently and maybe they still are virgins at marriage (some debate on that topic in another active thread), and such women only marry men who can support a family. So in that sense, marriage with such women is paid sex.

I'm not trying to twist things around with misleading labels. On the contrary I'm trying to clarify things by using an all-encompassing model. Maybe it would help if you focus on how men could sex without either marriage pr explicit payment back before 1950, let's say. It wasn't common and mostly it wa confined to the fringes of society.

You mentioned contraception. That is merely one of a series of technological changes that is playing havoc with a species that evolved under hunter gatherer conditions. Indeed, everything since the start of the industrial revolution may well turn out to have been a mistake, if worst predictions about global warming or estrogens in the food supply turn out to be true. Contraception, no fault divorce, out of control alimony and child support, welfare for single mothers, pensions for childless old people, social media, etc, etc. All these phenomena have unforeseen consequences. We really don't know where we are heading in so many respects: technology, demographics, environmental issues.
User avatar
hypermak
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1276
Joined: October 20th, 2019, 12:17 am

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by hypermak »

Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 12:59 pm
1) Women in developed countries who give out free sex are living in degenerate societies, and the free sex is a manifestation of that. That wasn't the ways things were in the past in those countries, except among the degenerate elite (aristocrats, artists, etc). Things cannot go on forever with intelligent men and women living a sterile "Sex and the City" homosexual lifestyle. Think through the ramifications, grasshopper.
I get your point, but I wouldn't be as dramatic as that. Free sex is the manifestation of the fact that women no longer need to give sex to a man in order to get his exclusive protection and support. Without existential, material and financial gains, the only thing left is the exchange of physical pleasure. Which is very natural and biological and I find nothing wrong with it. A girl is horny, she finds a man she fancies and who is (obviously) happy to oblige, and they do the deed.

Now, I did say that, in a sane society, this cannot be a means to an end. I agree with you, it must be temporary. No intelligent woman and no self-respecting man will "go on forever". Yet, I think it's wrong to stigmatize sex as a means to get purely sexual gains as degenerate. It's a good way to explore one's own sexuality, learn about the opposite sex and what one wants, get some pleasure in the process.
Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 12:59 pm
2) Women in developed counties who do the same work as men and thus get paid fairly are only able to do that because they are not having children, as I pointed out and you didn't read. This widespread lack of desire by women for children is another manifestation of a degenerate society. (My own lack of desire for children is also very peculiar. My father literally dragged himself back from the dead, namely begging for help from the hopeless pile of triaged bodies after a battle in Korea until the doctors finally relented and moved him to the "might survive" pile and then further struggles after that, so as to produce children. Meanwhile, with every advantage in the world including perfect health, good looks and rich by the time I was 35, I have no desire for children. Nor am I alone, since lots on men like me nowadays. Something is clearly deeply wrong with our society that we can't even muster up the desire to reproduce.)
That's not entirely true. Sure, a woman who wants to be a fighter jet pilot is obliged to give up her femininity (stop her menstruations, cut her hair short, etc.) but those are fringe professions. Most women I know in Italy, UK, even Malta, have kids and are not housewives. My mom is a retired primary school teacher, she used to teach in the morning while I was at school and take care of us in the afternoon when we were all back home.

As you yourself point out, the lack of desire for children is maybe something that involves both men and women. I want to have fun with Filipinas for now but I am not writing off the idea of settling with a woman, even marrying her if she is worth it, and having a kid or two. Or maybe not, I just don't know yet. I think yes, there is a social trend towards individualism and materialism, that is instilled by the consumerism machine driven by social media, one-click e-commerce and the likes. A person who is an individualist, be them a boy or a girl, will obviously be less happy to give up much of their comforts to raise a couple of kids.

Kudos to your strong-willed Dad and good for you if you're financially stable, but it is a fact that raising a child is more and more expensive and the latest generations have at least a sub-conscious feeling that their life won't be nearly as stable as that of ther Boomer parents, or even the Gen-X-ers.
Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 12:59 pm
3) Filipinas are the stupidest women on earth and that is why they continue to give out free sex to foreigners and to support deadbeat boyfriends. At some point, the Philippines will be so overpopulated that a true starvation event will occur and there will be a great culling of the herd. Idiot Filipinas who don't have a male provider will die, along with their children. Subsequent generations will not be so stupid. In general, tropical countries are stupider than those at higher latitudes, because winter was historically an annual culling event of the stupid. (Though of course that no longer happens, which is why IQ levels are dropping in developed counties now.)
Sadly true. Filipinas are some of the most uneducated women on earth. And by that I mean not just schooling and academic education but also sex-ed, emotional education, and even cause-effect common-sense kind of education. Most Filipinas grow poor and grow with the dream of living their desperate, hard and uneventful lives. Most of them don't have the brains and the resolve to pull themselves out of those kinds of lives, e.g. studying hard, going to public university on a scholarship and becoming successful against all odds.

So all they can think of, as a Plan B, is to latch on anyone who is perceived to be better off than them. They naively think that every white man who booked a 3-star hotel and wears a flowery shirt is rich enough to support them for life and, most important of all, is willing to do so with them. Giving away sex "for free" to them a few times, until they inevitably realise he's a no go, is a price worth paying. It's like buying a lottery ticket. Winning is not guaranteed but the ticket itself isn't free, it costs a few sessions of "free sex" :-)

Apart from that, and I can say it by personal experience, Filipino society is nowhere near as conservative as it used to be. Single girls have sex with hot men because they like it, no strings attached. Married women do that, discreetly. I just discovered a website full of Filipino swinging couples, couples in open relationships, single girls willing to be promiscous. I might check it out soon ;-)

I am not sure about the apocalyptic scenario you make. The Philippines are a very bountiful country. There will always be enough mangoes and bananas hanging from trees for the population to be fed. It's much more likely for people to die because of one of the many typhoons, earthquakes and other climate events that hit the islands.
Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 12:59 pm
4) Paying for sex is a privilege for the man, because it implies society has arranged did that men can easily have more wealth than women. Free sex implies equality of incomes and wealth among men and women. All you can think is "great, I don't have to pay!" More perceptive observers, like me, note that you don't have much money and that's why you are so happy about not paying. Not having much money, and especially not having enough to impress the women he is dating, has traditionally been a degrading position for a man, unless he is very young and has good prospects, so his poverty is only temporary.
Yes, I agree. Free sex is a product of a mature society where primary needs are largely catered for, if not via abundant jobs, via welfare and social services. I don't quite understand your "perception", though. Of course free sex means you don't have to pay for it, so your hard-earned money. But the two things are not related. You can be a wealthy man who is also handsome, fit and good with the ladies...unless you're specifically targeting gold diggers and high-maintenance women, you might find a lot of the girls who want to have sex with you have no reason to ask you anything material in exchange.

Also consider the typical age where the most free sex happens: teenage years, college years, the years where both the boy and the girl are at their financially weakest, most unstable. That should tell you that money is not an issue, to enjoy some sex.
Last edited by hypermak on December 24th, 2019, 9:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
hypermak
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1276
Joined: October 20th, 2019, 12:17 am

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by hypermak »

flowerthief00 wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 2:59 pm
Truer words have never been spoken. Welcome to HA.

Nah, free sex isn't a sign of something wrong with society. It's largely a result of the proliferation of effective birth control which only became widely available in the 20th century. Which in turn helped pave the way for feminism.

I sometimes see guys in the manosphere say stupid things like "Money is what women get out of marriage. Sex is what men get out of marriage." Only in the modern age could they have this narrow perspective. Before effective birth control became widely available, sex AND marriage AND children was a package deal. One implied the others. Sure whorehouses have always been around, but under most circumstances a man didn't pursue a woman without expecting marriage, sex, and children, usually in that order.

Today a boyfriend and girlfriend can engage in sexual activity with relatively low risk of unwanted pregnancy. Not 0 risk, it should be noted and imo both men and women still ought to be much more cautious about it than they often are, but the fact that sex has been decoupled from marriage and children thanks to the wide availability of birth control does afford us more freedom than past generations had, which is considered progress by most people. (although there is a negative side to this progress for sure)

A normal scenario today: Boy meets girl at a college party. They go on a first date. They go on a second date. At some point they become physical. At some point perhaps they become exclusive. At some point they may marry but they do not have to.
If instead the girl had said to the boy "Wanna do me for $200 tax waived?" on their very first time meeting that would be abnormal and unnecessary, not to mention arguably not conducive to a healthy relationship. Boys and girls will naturally want to get sexual without formal exchange of dollars.

Whores, escorts, sugar babies... there's where the degeneracy is, if anywhere.
I am not against it existing, tho; it too is an exercise of freedom. And one that itself has benefited from birth control. So it would be an odd thing to criticize the same birth control which has naturally, inevitably, almost predictably led to the explosion of free sex without marriage in the modern day.
Very well articulated. I mean, even whores have an important social function, they provide a last-resort outlet for men who want sex right there and then and have some disposable cash.

Of course the free sex situation doesn't tend to be a lifelong thing. Most young men and women do it when they know they can have it consequence-free (because of birth control, sure, but also because society no longer has a taboo about sex before marriage), while they are young and attractive, and the juices can keep flowing.
User avatar
Contrarian Expatriate
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 5415
Joined: December 2nd, 2009, 9:57 pm

Woman, 26, arrested for trying to cash $1M check from husband of just 4 months

Post by Contrarian Expatriate »

Women and wealth don't mix! And this is why you never marry (unless of course you're broke or retarded or both.) Had he just remained a lover, or a sugar daddy, he could have prevented this.
BUT, cucks are always gonna cuck. I kind of wish she would have gotten away with it just to punish him for being so stupid for marrying.

Image

https://www.fox5ny.com/news/woman-26-ar ... i-24rUTysc
User avatar
Shemp
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1643
Joined: November 22nd, 2014, 7:45 pm

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by Shemp »

More in-depth article here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/ ... 08623.html

Definitely should have gone pay-as-you-go: money on the table when she arrives, neatly spread out so she can count by eye, no touching until after services rendered. And make it understood, politely but clearly, that she can and will be quickly replaced in event of misbehavior. All criminologists agree, it is certainty and swiftness of punishment that deters wrongdoing, not severity of punishment. No need for men to resort to gorilla pimp threats of grievous bodily injury, in other words. Just be prepared, at all times, to walk out on the woman at the first sign of disrespect.

"Victim" looks old but not diseased and disgusting old. Assuming he bathes properly, is respectful and doesn't have perverted desires, plenty of girls willing to overlook wrinkles, liver spots and semisoft erection in exchange for $1000 per visit. At two visits per week, which is all a man his age needs, that adds up to a mere $100K/year, which obviously he has, given that the perp was trying to cash a check for a million. Poor old man unable to think clearly, but then lots of young men just as foolish, as this thread amply demonstrates.

And before some idiot starts howling about $100k/year, that's only for very rich men like in the story, for whom $100k/year is small change. With a little effort, not difficult to get girls as pretty looking as the perp (who is no beauty, IMHO) for much less than $100k/year, even in the USA (much, much less in Ukraine, Philippines, Colombia, etc).
User avatar
Contrarian Expatriate
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 5415
Joined: December 2nd, 2009, 9:57 pm

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by Contrarian Expatriate »

Shemp wrote:
December 26th, 2019, 1:32 pm
More in-depth article here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/ ... 08623.html
Best comment from the article, “If it flies, floats, or fvcks, you are always better off just renting.” Every SMART rich man already knows this!
User avatar
flowerthief00
Junior Poster
Posts: 866
Joined: January 10th, 2017, 8:14 pm

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by flowerthief00 »

Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 5:40 pm
Back in the 1950's, when the liberalization first started, grandmothers were warning the younger women: "why should he buy a cow if he can get milk for free?"
I think some of that can be explained by the game women love to try to play of squeezing their assets (to expand on the analogy) for all the bargaining power they can possibly get and then some, because they never had much else to offer.
Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 5:40 pm
Yes there was (and is) much more to marriage than just sex, but sex was the major motive for young men in the past because they had no other sexual outlet, other than masturbation using imagination only, since no pornography back then.
Change "the" to an "a" and I would be in agreement. Sex was a major motive. Sex in and of itself was not the major motive. If it were, why would any of those men have gotten married at all? Why not put all of their money into whores when supporting a wife and family was a tremendous deal more difficult and involved?

Our society today is hyper-obsessed with sex, a sign that life has become very easy. Life used to be nasty, brutish and short such that there was little time to spare for any pursuit that did not contribute to one's survival. Sex in itself does not contribute to one's survival.

Furthermore, if you lived in a time and place where you had a choice of who you could marry you were lucky. Even absent arranged marriage, choices were limited. If there was one single girl of marriageable age in the town and one man who had managed to accumulate enough resources to begin building a family, then these two individuals got married to each other. Didn't matter whether they found each other attractive. Didn't matter if he was going to enjoy that sex or not.
Shemp wrote:
December 24th, 2019, 5:40 pm
You mentioned contraception. That is merely one of a series of technological changes that is playing havoc with a species that evolved under hunter gatherer conditions. Indeed, everything since the start of the industrial revolution may well turn out to have been a mistake, if worst predictions about global warming or estrogens in the food supply turn out to be true. Contraception, no fault divorce, out of control alimony and child support, welfare for single mothers, pensions for childless old people, social media, etc, etc. All these phenomena have unforeseen consequences. We really don't know where we are heading in so many respects: technology, demographics, environmental issues.
This is true. We are getting benefits from technological changes--lots of them--but we don't know at what cost.
User avatar
jamesbond
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 11251
Joined: August 25th, 2007, 10:45 am
Location: USA

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by jamesbond »

Contrarian Expatriate wrote:
December 26th, 2019, 1:55 pm
Best comment from the article, “If it flies, floats, or fvcks, you are always better off just renting.” Every SMART rich man already knows this!

I have heard Tom Leykis use that phrase numerous times and it makes a lot of sense. :lol:
"When I think about the idea of getting involved with an American woman, I don't know if I should laugh .............. or vomit!"

"Trying to meet women in America is like trying to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphics."
User avatar
Contrarian Expatriate
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 5415
Joined: December 2nd, 2009, 9:57 pm

Re: Why Men Still Defend Marriage

Post by Contrarian Expatriate »

Wow, I am speechless......
Image
:lol:

#SigmaLifestyle
Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Rants and Raves”