Happier Abroad Forum Community

I've read a lot of material from The Red Pill, MGTOW, incels, and other anti-feminist groups. But the weird thing that I don't ever see people suggesting as a way to defeat feminism is reviving the tradition of arranged marriage. I think anybody who believes in a progressive solution to feminism is delusional and that the easiest solution is to look to the pre-feminist past and see what worked. So in Europe, arranged marriage was the norm up until the 18th century. From 1700-1730, arranged marriage became the hot button "progressive" topic of that time period. By 1730, hardly any marriages were arranged anymore...

The result? The average age of marriage skyrocketed. By the late 18th century, women in Europe were getting married at 26 years of age on marriage while men weren't marrying until they were 28-30 years old. As a point of comparison, the average age of marriage for women in the US did not get this old until 2010. For those of you who dated during the 2000s, you actually were in a more friendly dating market then 18th century Europe was. This is all in spite of the significantly lower life expectancy of 18th century Europe. A lot of men would've died before they got married back then.

If you really want to know what the origin of all liberalism is, the 18th century is it. This is when arranged marriage died, sexual libertinism became popular, the enlightenment attacked religion and monarchy which had held Europe together for hundreds of years. This is also the century when the bankers started taking control of the financial system. The century that the Rothschilds rose to power and created wars in Europe so they could trap the European monarchs in a debt crisis. The French Revolution was basically the first socialist movement. The Bolsheviks were directly inspired by the Jacobins of the French Revolution and directly cited their tactics many times. This is why Bolshevik leaders openly advocated for a "terror" to be unleashed on their political opponents.

The 19th century, however, was a bit of a reactionary century. People became more "liberal" on racial issues like slavery but more conservative in terms of behavior. The average age of marriage started becoming younger again. This trend continued into the 20th century until conservatism peaked in the 1950s. This was short lived, however, because the stories of German atrocities had left a permanent stain on right-wing opinions fueling decades of increasing liberalism/progressivism.

One thing is clear though, all liberalism originates with the end of arranged marriage. Before the end of arranged marriage, 95% of women in Renaissance Europe were married by the time they were 25 years old. Most of the women who weren't married were prostitutes. The average age of marriage for women was 21 in England, 20 in France, and 18 in Italy. Given that Renaissance Europe was strictly monogamous, we can assume that a very similar percentage of men married as women did, although at an older age of course.

Meanwhile, in India, 80% or so of marriages are still arranged and this practice is very popular among young people in India, with 75% of them still in support of it. To be clear, arranged marriage is not the same as a forced marriage. Arranged marriage just means that parents introduce their son/daughter to a suitable marriage partner and they may either court one another, get married, or ask their parents to find somebody else. In India, most marriages are arranged, in Afghanistan, most are forced.

Either way, the solution that all anti-feminist movements ought to be advocating for is a return to arranged marriage alongside monogamy. This would make it difficult for bad boys to thrive and easier for good men to find wives, it would ensure that any guy as long as he is a good man and contributes to society can find a wife, it would ensure that women remain traditional and sweet as they wouldn't be having their egos blown up by hundreds of men approaching them all the time. It would eliminate the game of seduction, where men compete amongst one another for validation in the form of sex from women. Instead, marriage and sex will be all about the simple joy of being with another person. Long term instead of short term satisfaction would be emphasized leading to more stable marriages and lower divorce rates. Arranged marriages actually better then typical marriage with regards to long term love. Why is no group, ideology, or movement advocating for this? Even on radical right-wing forums I look at, this is still a minority opinion.

A lot of the world still has arranged marriages - it still exists somewhat in China, India and Pakistan, the Middle East, a lot of Africa, South-East Asia - a lot of the world there are arranged marriages.

I lived in Saudi Arabia where men were able to have more than one wife but the law there was you HAD TO PROVE you could keep more than one wife, you couldn't have two riyals to scratch your arse with and go 'oh well, I fancy a second wife' because you weren't allowed to do that and I gather that is how it is all around the world - Krademelder - a South African poster on here would talk about 'lobola' where in black South African culture - the girl you wanted to had a price on the amount of cattle that was arranged by the family members of the bride and groom.

For someone who hasn't got their act together, lives with mum and dad, smokes weed all day in their bedroom playing video games - arranged marriages aren't going to give you any more choice than what you have now because
the men who benefit from these arrangements are the men with money, with prospects and like I said, in Saudi Arabia - you have to prove it or else you don't get married at all.

In India, it is full of single men who will never get married because even though arranged marriages are prevalent there - many men are just frozen out of the process, they don't earn enough money, they have little in the way of prospects - they have little going for them where they can command a bride from a family and these men will die without getting married even though that is what they might want.

@MarcosZeitola

Sent you a PM.

yick wrote: ↑

June 28th, 2021, 5:19 am

A lot of the world still has arranged marriages - it still exists somewhat in China, India and Pakistan, the Middle East, a lot of Africa, South-East Asia - a lot of the world there are arranged marriages.

I lived in Saudi Arabia where men were able to have more than one wife but the law there was you HAD TO PROVE you could keep more than one wife, you couldn't have two riyals to scratch your arse with and go 'oh well, I fancy a second wife' because you weren't allowed to do that and I gather that is how it is all around the world - Krademelder - a South African poster on here would talk about 'lobola' where in black South African culture - the girl you wanted to had a price on the amount of cattle that was arranged by the family members of the bride and groom.

For someone who hasn't got their act together, lives with mum and dad, smokes weed all day in their bedroom playing video games - arranged marriages aren't going to give you any more choice than what you have now because
the men who benefit from these arrangements are the men with money, with prospects and like I said, in Saudi Arabia - you have to prove it or else you don't get married at all.

In India, it is full of single men who will never get married because even though arranged marriages are prevalent there - many men are just frozen out of the process, they don't earn enough money, they have little in the way of prospects - they have little going for them where they can command a bride from a family and these men will die without getting married even though that is what they might want.

Actually in India, the main issue is that they've had too much preferential sex selection resulting in a large excess of men in the country. Its a similar situation to China's, they have like 37 million more men there than women. But that's not indicative of arranged marriage, rather its indicative of why we can't make policies, whether legal ones or social ones, that might result in higher numbers of one sex being born then the other. I can't think of anything that can be done that would alleviate the plight of men in this type of situation. Countries just need to take note and make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen again.

I don't think somebody who is unemployed and isn't doing anything should be married yet either but I think that an institution like this would motivate more men to not live lifestyles as you describe. I think more men are doing that because they don't feel there's enough of a reward for being successful so they become lazy instead. I think material gain is not quite enough to motivate a lot of guys but knowing career success would get you a beautiful wife definitely would motivate a lot of guys.