Why Men Still Defend Marriage

[E Irizarry R&B Singer]

What the fuvk is wrong with these noobs, man??

E Irizarry R&B Singer, I have read a few of your past posts. Yes you are single but...are you really enjoying your lifestyle and the kind of ladies you can find? You don't sound like you had too much fun in Latin America and even in Africa. Are you even open to the possibility of showing some commitment to a woman, if she is worth it? If not, you will have to be a pretty hot stud to get a good looking girl to have s*x with you as a reward for just turning up.

What I am trying to say here is: with the ladies like with everything else in life it's garbage in, garbage out. Very, very few of us can get some of the finest things in life without putting some effort to earn them. We often need to put 10 to get 5, but very rarely we can put 5 and get 6.

Errrrr it's called globalisation of feminism, social justice, among other Western nuances...idiotsyncrasies as I like to call them. 20 years ago if I were in Africa, I wouldn't have come back because I would have been living with women for free. However, due to corruption and inflation too, there are a lot of w.hores in Africa. Literally millions of them. They all want money no matter how hot or ugly a man/foreigner man is.

Settling down is not going to help, genius. How fcking stupid can you be to render your power over to the State and gynocentrism???

I like to add that I gotten laid for free in Rwanda and Uganda...it's just not as easy due to the aforementioned. Squirting is awesome. Woot, woot.

[Shemp]

...you will have to be a pretty hot stud to get a good looking girl to have s*x with you as a reward for just turning up....

Errrrr it's called globalisation of feminism, social justice, among other Western nuances...idiotsyncrasies as I like to call them. 20 years ago if I were in Africa, I wouldn't have come back because I would have been living with women for free. However, due to corruption and inflation too, there are a lot of w.hores in Africa. Literally millions of them. They all want money no matter how hot or ugly a man/foreigner man is.....

Sex for free is the hallmark of a degenerate society, one that has been contaminated by feminism, not one that is free of feminism. In traditional societies, the man always has to pay. Either he pays by marrying the woman (which almost always involves transfer of resources from man to wife and children) or he explicitly pays whores (nowadays called escorts, sugar babies, etc).

Free sex implies something is radically wrong with society, in that women no longer need men's resources to help them raise children. Either the state is directly supporting women and children, or women outearn men (implying state intervention, which is indirect support for women and children) or women no longer want children and so can manage on their own.

Free sex is always a short term phenomenon. Initially, some women are exhilarated by being given special privileges by the state and/or being relieved of the burden of children. Intelligent disciplined women, in particular, respond quickly to the new system of incentives. They stop having children, while collecting indirect state support in the form of affirmative action jobs, and enjoy a sterile "Sex and the City" lifestyle modelled on the lifestyle of homosexuals. Next generation is thus composed of the children of stupid and undisciplined women, plus immigrants. State eventually goes bankrupt from this perverted system. Giveaways to women are cut back and women who were acting like whores with a zero price tag now raise their price to something higher, while continuing to act like whores. That's where we are in the developed world, hence the rise of sugar babying on the last decade and the difficulties of wannabe PUAs like E I R&B in the USA.

In Africa, Philippines and other so-called "p***y paradises" of PUAs, state never gave women huge support, so the only reason western men did well was because stupid women thought these PUAs were wife-hunting versus notch-hunting, so they gave out free samples, hoping to hook a husband. Once these women figured the PUAs were never going to marry, party ended. It's too late to go back to "no sex before marriage" for these women, but they are now demanding payment for test drives, versus giving out free samples, or else renting themselves out as sugar babies versus looking for permanent buyer husbands.

[Cornfed]

Sex for free is the hallmark of a degenerate society, one that has been contaminated by feminism, not one that is free of feminism. In traditional societies, the man always has to pay. Either he pays by marrying the woman (which almost always involves transfer of resources from man to wife and children) or he explicitly pays whores (nowadays called escorts, sugar babies, etc).

Free sex implies something is radically wrong with society, in that women no longer need men's resources to help them raise children. Either the state is directly supporting women and children, or women outearn men (implying state intervention, which is indirect support for women and children) or women no longer want children and so can manage on their own.

Free sex is always a short term phenomenon. Initially, some women are exhilarated by being given special privileges by the state and/or being relieved of the burden of children. Intelligent disciplined women, in particular, respond quickly to the new system of incentives. They stop having children, while collecting indirect state support in the form of affirmative action jobs, and enjoy a sterile "Sex and the City" lifestyle modelled on the lifestyle of homosexuals. Next generation is thus composed of the children of stupid and undisciplined women, plus immigrants. State eventually goes bankrupt from this perverted system. Giveaways to women are cut back and women who were acting like whores with a zero price tag now raise their price to something higher, while continuing to act like whores. That's where we are in the developed world, hence the rise of sugar babying on the last decade and the difficulties of wannabe PUAs like E I R&B in the USA.

In Africa, Philippines and other so-called "p***y paradises" of PUAs, state never gave women huge support, so the only reason western men did well was because stupid women thought these PUAs were wife-hunting versus notch-hunting, so they gave out free samples, hoping to hook a husband. Once these women figured the PUAs were never going to marry, party ended. It's too late to go back to "no sex before marriage" for these women, but they are now demanding payment for test drives, versus giving out free samples, or else renting themselves out as sugar babies versus looking for permanent buyer husbands.

Brilliant.

[hypermak]

I personally don't see anything wrong with "free sex". If a woman is attracted to a man and wants to have sex with him, she will (very) probably have sex with him multiple times without asking for anything in return. This is because they perceive their sexual value lower on a par with the guy they want to f*ck. This happens to engaged and married women, as most of you know. Nothing new, nothing incredible about that.

Fortunately I am still at this stage in my life where I am reasonably young and decent looking. I never had problem getting "sex for free". Two of the girls I met here were introduced to me by common friends and made their intentions very clear. One of them literally pushed me into my bedroom and gave me one of the best deep throats I ever had right against the door. It was wild. We cannot meet more than a couple of times a week because she is a consultant and moves around. Believe me, the topic of any sort of material or monetary reward has been as far from our minds as it gets.

Perhaps you should think that, if sex must always be a transaction, sometimes physical pleasure is the only "currency" needed.

I call BS on the idea that free sex is enabled or sponsored by the State because women are now more independent and can do many jobs men do. Women are not pets or bed animals. The State is offering the same opportunities to both men and women. Last time I checked at my school, women pay as much as men. Women study, train and if they are considered as qualified to do a specific job and get the job, good for them! Are some men so insecure about themselves that they can only imagine being with a woman who is unable to provide for herself and totally dependent/subervient to them?

I agree, though, that free sex is a temporary situation only. All women, and some men, will eventually want to settle. When that happen, sex as a reward for itself won't cut it anymore. That's where commitment, money and other forms of material reward come in.

I feel like I am stating the bleeding obvious as some sort of obscure truth. What's so special about what I am saying?

[hypermak]

In Africa, Philippines and other so-called "p***y paradises" of PUAs, state never gave women huge support, so the only reason western men did well was because stupid women thought these PUAs were wife-hunting versus notch-hunting, so they gave out free samples, hoping to hook a husband. Once these women figured the PUAs were never going to marry, party ended. It's too late to go back to "no sex before marriage" for these women, but they are now demanding payment for test drives, versus giving out free samples, or else renting themselves out as sugar babies versus looking for permanent buyer husbands.

I have no idea what happens in Africa but, at least here in the Philippines, women are often the ones who support the family. They often have children to support and absentee boyfriends/husbands and they have to work, even for a few thousand pesos (tens of dollars) a month, to buy the essentials.

Of course there will always be girls who prefer to latch on to foreigners, especially the older ones, in the hope to be chosen as life companions and change their lives, perhaps radically if they are lucky enough to get married and move abroad. I don't know what crossed their minds as they give themselves away for "free sex" but, as you say, they probably believe that those "free samples" are a price worth paying for the lottery ticket of being chosen.

As far as I have seen, this conduct hasn't stopped yet. Maybe some of the prettier girls have smartened up and started to ask for more commitment upfront or cash, but I still see armies of women having sex with foreigners just like they have always have.

[E Irizarry R&B Singer]

...you will have to be a pretty hot stud to get a good looking girl to have s*x with you as a reward for just turning up....

Errrrr it's called globalisation of feminism, social justice, among other Western nuances...idiotsyncrasies as I like to call them. 20 years ago if I were in Africa, I wouldn't have come back because I would have been living with women for free. However, due to corruption and inflation too, there are a lot of w.hores in Africa. Literally millions of them. They all want money no matter how hot or ugly a man/foreigner man is.....

Sex for free is the hallmark of a degenerate society, one that has been contaminated by feminism, not one that is free of feminism. In traditional societies, the man always has to pay. Either he pays by marrying the woman (which almost always involves transfer of resources from man to wife and children) or he explicitly pays whores (nowadays called escorts, sugar babies, etc).

Free sex implies something is radically wrong with society, in that women no longer need men's resources to help them raise children. Either the state is directly supporting women and children, or women outearn men (implying state intervention, which is indirect support for women and children) or women no longer want children and so can manage on their own.

Free sex is always a short term phenomenon. Initially, some women are exhilarated by being given special privileges by the state and/or being relieved of the burden of children. Intelligent disciplined women, in particular, respond quickly to the new system of incentives. They stop having children, while collecting indirect state support in the form of affirmative action jobs, and enjoy a sterile "Sex and the City" lifestyle modelled on the lifestyle of homosexuals. Next generation is thus composed of the children of stupid and undisciplined women, plus immigrants. State eventually goes bankrupt from this perverted system. Giveaways to women are cut back and women who were acting like whores with a zero price tag now raise their price to something higher, while continuing to act like whores. That's where we are in the developed world, hence the rise of sugar babying on the last decade and the difficulties of wannabe PUAs like E I R&B in the USA.

In Africa, Philippines and other so-called "p***y paradises" of PUAs, state never gave women huge support, so the only reason western men did well was because stupid women thought these PUAs were wife-hunting versus notch-hunting, so they gave out free samples, hoping to hook a husband. Once these women figured the PUAs were never going to marry, party ended. It's too late to go back to "no sex before marriage" for these women, but they are now demanding payment for test drives, versus giving out free samples, or else renting themselves out as sugar babies versus looking for permanent buyer husbands.

I'm a wanna-be PUA? Ummm actually I have 600+ women under my belt since '93, guy. That's not a PUA, that's upper echelon macking...and to be fair....480-490 of them were not outright pro's. I am spoiled and want the best of the best so I b.itch and complain. Don't ever call me a wanna-be PUA again. I defended your posts before. Other than that, it was a good post.

[hypermak]

Errrrr it's called globalisation of feminism, social justice, among other Western nuances...idiotsyncrasies as I like to call them. 20 years ago if I were in Africa, I wouldn't have come back because I would have been living with women for free. However, due to corruption and inflation too, there are a lot of w.hores in Africa. Literally millions of them. They all want money no matter how hot or ugly a man/foreigner man is.

So find a place where "globalisation of feminism" is not that rampant and you can find women who will be happy to f*ck you for free. I have never had to pay for sex, not in Italy, not the UK, not in Malta, not here. If I can do it, so can you.

Settling down is not going to help, genius. How fcking stupid can you be to render your power over to the State and gynocentrism???

I like to add that I gotten laid for free in Rwanda and Uganda...it's just not as easy due to the aforementioned. Squirting is awesome. Woot, woot.

Who is talking about settling down. And when I do, if anything, I'll be "rendering my power" to the chosen lady, not to some obscure power that be or social phenomenon.

Paranoia runs wild in this forum...WTF...

[Shemp]

I feel like I am stating the bleeding obvious as some sort of obscure truth. What's so special about what I am saying?

Your problem is you didn't read and carefully think about what I wrote.

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.

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.)

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.)

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.

[flowerthief00]

Paranoia runs wild in this forum...WTF...

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.

[Cornfed]

Paranoia runs wild in this forum...WTF...

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.

Contraception is something wrong with society. For starters it is dysgenic in that it causes stupid people to outbreed intelligent people.

[sugarcube]

...you will have to be a pretty hot stud to get a good looking girl to have s*x with you as a reward for just turning up....

Errrrr it's called globalisation of feminism, social justice, among other Western nuances...idiotsyncrasies as I like to call them. 20 years ago if I were in Africa, I wouldn't have come back because I would have been living with women for free. However, due to corruption and inflation too, there are a lot of w.hores in Africa. Literally millions of them. They all want money no matter how hot or ugly a man/foreigner man is.....

Sex for free is the hallmark of a degenerate society, one that has been contaminated by feminism, not one that is free of feminism. In traditional societies, the man always has to pay. Either he pays by marrying the woman (which almost always involves transfer of resources from man to wife and children) or he explicitly pays whores (nowadays called escorts, sugar babies, etc).

Free sex implies something is radically wrong with society, in that women no longer need men's resources to help them raise children. Either the state is directly supporting women and children, or women outearn men (implying state intervention, which is indirect support for women and children) or women no longer want children and so can manage on their own.

Free sex is always a short term phenomenon. Initially, some women are exhilarated by being given special privileges by the state and/or being relieved of the burden of children. Intelligent disciplined women, in particular, respond quickly to the new system of incentives. They stop having children, while collecting indirect state support in the form of affirmative action jobs, and enjoy a sterile "Sex and the City" lifestyle modelled on the lifestyle of homosexuals. Next generation is thus composed of the children of stupid and undisciplined women, plus immigrants. State eventually goes bankrupt from this perverted system. Giveaways to women are cut back and women who were acting like whores with a zero price tag now raise their price to something higher, while continuing to act like whores. That's where we are in the developed world, hence the rise of sugar babying on the last decade and the difficulties of wannabe PUAs like E I R&B in the USA.

In Africa, Philippines and other so-called "p***y paradises" of PUAs, state never gave women huge support, so the only reason western men did well was because stupid women thought these PUAs were wife-hunting versus notch-hunting, so they gave out free samples, hoping to hook a husband. Once these women figured the PUAs were never going to marry, party ended. It's too late to go back to "no sex before marriage" for these women, but they are now demanding payment for test drives, versus giving out free samples, or else renting themselves out as sugar babies versus looking for permanent buyer husbands.

This is pure historical ignorance. Sex has always offered pleasure. Humans have basically been the same anatomically for about 100,000 years—so what is safe to say is that if we enjoy it now, then so did our cave-dwelling ancestors and everyone else since. Just as our bodies tell us what we might like to eat, or when we should go to sleep, they lay down for us our pattern of lust. Indeed, cultural restraints—rather than anything anatomical—have had the biggest effect on recent sexual history. And what if we weren't bound by such social limitations? Bonobos have sex most of the time ... a fairly quick, perfunctory, and relaxed activity that functions as a social cement, But for cultural constraints, we would all behave more like bonobos. In physical terms, there is actually nothing that bonobos do that some humans do not sometimes do. Women only need about two years to recover from having a child and that's how long men are programmed to stick around. If you go far back enough in human evolution, mothers raised their young alone and didn't feed or care for them past weaning (which happened around 5 or 6 years of age!). Humans THEN transitioned into family and community patterns of child rearing. The earliest cooperative groups were formed by a mother and many of her children, with older ones helping rear younger siblings; after this was established, other adults were incorporated, probably when bands of mothers with their offspring teamed up.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 8415000196

The low priority attached to sexual pleasure by people who lived in distant times is inexplicable unless one considers the hindrances that existed in those days, You had 1,000 years of misery and disease—often accompanied by some very un-sexy smells and itching—that led up to the Industrial Revolution. After the mid-nineteenth century, these hindrances start to be removed, and the great surge towards pleasure begins. The liberalization of sexuality kicked into high gear by the 1960s with the advent of the birth control pill, letting women get in on the fun and act on the basis of desire as men always had. The 1960s vastly accelerated this unhesitant willingness to grab sex for the sheer sake of physical pleasure, openly seeking out sex just because it feels good, rather than for procreation alone, has continued on unabated into the new millennium.

[flowerthief00]

^ Not to descend into appeal to popularity fallacy, but you most know you are in a very tiny minority to think that. Contraception is widely viewed as a way to lower risk of women falling into perpetual poverty caused from unwanted pregnancy.

[Shemp]

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.

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.

[Cornfed]

^ Not to descend into appeal to popularity fallacy, but you most know you are in a very tiny minority to think that. Contraception is widely viewed as a way to lower risk of women falling into perpetual poverty caused from unwanted pregnancy.

It is widely accepted that contraception is dysgenic. It is just that people seem to think it is the highest value in the universe that women should be able to do anything they want, such as being irresponsible sluts. In sane society females are generally wives or whores. If a woman wants to be a wife should maintain her virginity until marriage, have as many children as their husband wants and then have her tubes tied. If she wants to be a whore she should have her tubes tied prior to commencing whoring. But they might not want to do that, you say. Well boo hoo, they should just be made to. A society based on the mindless sluttish whims of females will not stand.

[Cornfed]

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.

Yeah, pretty sure that was always the intention.