The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Automation Is Coming for Prostitutes, Too
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The replacements are primarily visual and audible in nature now, but tactile stimulation is just around the corner. In fact, it has already moved passed the seminal (heh) stage. The percentages of men who have ever paid for (or have ever been paid for) sex is on the decline:

Orthogonally, I suspect it unlikely anyone will find this particularly surprising:

The parenthetical “been paid for” is obviously more relevant among gays than among straights, though I wonder what percentage of gay men who have ever been paid for sex have themselves never actually paid for it. I suspect that figure is small, but that’s not based on anything more than my own cis-intuition.

GSS variables used: SEXORNT, YEAR, EVPAIDSX, SEX(1)

 
• Tags: GSS, Prostitution, Sexuality 
Hide 198 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. iffen says:

    You just can’t stop, can you?

  2. Michael S says:

    I usually trust the GSS, but this is one case where I think we could easily be seeing a decline in honest answers, rather than a decline in the actual activity. Particularly when you consider the rise in inceldom, it makes no sense that johning would be on the decline.

  3. Without even looking at the numbers,

    that’s a very humorous title.

  4. “The Service Economy” degenerates into B&D S&M with the owners of capital generally preferring to Sadistically Bind and Discipline those without capital. Being aware of this in Silicon Valley during the DotCon era, it did occur to me that a company’s health depended on short-circuiting the ordinary dominance hierarchy of psychopaths above the glass ceiling abusing corporate concubines who, in turn, berate their Incel underlings for being males. If the psychopaths could somehow get their sexual perversions satisfied in a more direct manner, they might not need to hire a bunch of unqualified female middle management. This, in turn, would lessen the stress on the Incel underlings who had to actually make the whole thing work. So the obvious place to turn was just over the Sierras: Nevada. There was a _huge_ amount of loose change rolling into Silicon Valley in the late1990s and it wouldn’t have taken much to relocate the pros from the next state over and set them to work providing the “perks” in a manner that, while it would cost stockholders some value, could be accounted as a cost of doing business. Give the psychopaths their perks but do so in a relatively-honest (hence transparent to the accounting department) free market manner and keep it from growing a company-killing middle management filled with females on the edge of hitting The Wall, hence going berserk on the limbic systems of Incels trying to do neocortical work upon which the companies ultimately depended.

    As it turned out, the survivors of the DotCon era were network effect monopolies, like Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Uber, AirBnb, etc. Their network effect customer lock-in provides enough monopoly rents to not only grow the internal “service economy” to galactic proportions, but they can spill over their sexual perversions into the wider social ecology through B&D S&M “terms of service” turning the rest of the world into their Bitches.

    One can only hope the AI providers of the new “Service Economy” are so exquisitely expert that the whole thing can implode into its own black hole of VR.

  5. “Everybody’s bloggin’ at me.
    I don’t hear a word their sayin’,
    only the echoes of my mind ….”

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  6. @Achmed E. Newman

    “… they’re sayin” Sorry!

    I hope nobody reading this is a Homo …

    [MORE]

    … nym Nazi.

    • LOL: Talha
  7. Talha says:
    3292208

    Guys will line up for that.

    What’s that statement about buying a cow when you can get the milk for free…?

    If enough women put out at this rate, it certainly takes away a big incentive for marriage. Man, how does a society get out of this downward spiral? This is nuts.

    I read an article a while back about Tinder and these kinds of apps. All the guys seemed stoked by it and all the women were either miserable or ambivalent. They were basically doing it because everyone else was and they didn’t know how else to go about getting male attention and not lose out on opportunities.

    Peace.

  8. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    all the women were either miserable or ambivalent. They were basically doing it because everyone else was and they didn’t know how else to go about getting male attention and not lose out on opportunities.

    You sound like Rosie. 😉

    • Replies: @Talha
  9. Twinkie says:

    The percentages of men who have ever paid for (or have ever been paid for) sex is on the decline

    Some obvious possibilities:

    1. Men are more dishonest in answering that question now than in the past.

    2. Men find sexual gratification more through pornography than through actually visiting prostitutes than they once did.

    3. Men now seek sexual gratification at lower rates than they did in the past.

    I wonder how this correlates with married men and their adultery rates. It’s just a speculative guess, but I feel like married men have fewer mistresses/affairs than they did in the past. That could be totally wrong, but I am curious to see if such data are available at all and, if so, how they have trended over the years.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  10. Talha says:
    @Twinkie

    To be honest with you, I really do feel bad for them. In the past era a guy would have had to commit to them for the long run to get into their pants. Now they’re hooked into a system that is rapidly replacing other methods of meeting with and forming a relationship with a man. They don’t know another way because all their peers are doing it and the guys seem to be the only ones that are loving the new paradigm.

    As a father, I empathize with these young women who are also someone’s daughters after all.

    I mean, I don’t know how to go about solving it and I know no one is putting a gun to their heads, but I still feel bad for them having wasted so many years of their youth being passed around by men and hoping on the edge of despair some guy will stick around.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @L Woods
  11. MattinLA says:

    Bullshit. Sex robots aren’t even close to being acceptable, let alone perfected.
    1. They can’t move. Hydraulics/electric motor technology isn’t near close to making a robot move like a human without jerking/loud engine noise.
    2. Artificial skin/ muscle has not been created. What we have is rubbery/slimy plastic that smells terrible. And is cold and clammy to boot.
    3. Everything else. We have no technology capable of realistic respiration. Or able to make realistic human sounds. Or human secretions.
    Bottom line: all we have now are crappy looking, feeling and sounding rubber mannequins. Totally unusable for any sort of simulated sexual activity.
    It would take Apollo-level investment to create a realistic sex robot. Clearly, that isn’t happening.
    Sorry, fellows, you’ll get your sex robot same time you get your jet pack. I.e., never.

  12. Twinkie says:
    @MattinLA

    Wow, you have given a lot of thoughts to this.

    I know nothing about the respective technologies involved, but wouldn’t virtual reality be closer to reality than android sex slaves?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  13. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    I mean, I don’t know how to go about solving it

    If mainstream behavior is destructive (and self-destructive), the solution is obvious. You have to check out from it. “Everyone else is doing it” is a poor excuse for third graders, let alone putative adults.

    The fundamental problem of the day seems to be that too many people want something for nothing. Goodies (in this case affection, bonding, and love) without self-discipline or sacrifice.

    the guys seem to be the only ones that are loving the new paradigm.

    I don’t know that young men are happy with this arrangement either, judging from the grumbling from the younger cohorts here (unless the younger “dissident” males as such are particularly bad at attracting women).

    I see the degraded morality as a lose-lose situation for men and women. Even the few men who are sleeping around a lot are not, in end, helped by the situation, which degrades them also both spiritually and otherwise.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Wency
  14. Talha says:
    @Twinkie

    The guys that seemed to be happy with the arrangement were those interviewed in the article as opposed to the women who were interviewed and were (all of them) not happy.

    How does that correlate with society at large? I’m not so sure.

    You made very sound points.

    Peace.

  15. anon[255] • Disclaimer says:
    @MattinLA

    Sex robots, not literally.

    But the female vibrator is mechanical automation of part of a sex act.

    They are popular and ubiquitous. Nobody sees it as a robot or equivalent to legacy sex.

    There is no analogue for men. Yet. But there is progress being made. I’m embarrassed to elaborate, but there will be roughly equivalent technology for males soon.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  16. Mark G. says:

    In addition to the decline in men visiting prostitutes, there has been a decline in the number of men visiting strip clubs. I would consider the decline to be related. Women are more promiscuous now but that really only benefits men of above average physical attractiveness. Average and below average men aren’t switching from prostitutes due to increased availability of sex from other women. I think part of the decline in various forms of commercial sex is due to the declining income of the average male. Unemployment statistics don’t capture true levels of unemployment because they only count people looking for work. There are larger numbers of nonworking men now. For men who do work, incomes have either stagnated or decreased for the bottom eighty percent of them. The increased availability of pornography provides a cheap substitute and various other forms of cheap entertainment like watching tv or playing video games provides inexpensive nonsexual substitutes.

    • Agree: Duke84
    • Replies: @Corvinus
  17. L Woods says:
    @Talha

    The bottom 90% of men can’t get anything worth having for “free” (or at any price) with any reliability. And that old saw about buying the cow is obsolete. You can’t “buy” the cow now — only pledge 50%+ of your lifetime earnings to it in exchange for nothing.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Corvinus
  18. L Woods says:
    @Michael S

    The state and society make it one of their foremost priorities to combat inexpensive pussy (excuse me, “sex trafficking”), so it doesn’t surprise me at all. The gynarchy will broke no challengers to its cartel.

  19. L Woods says:
    @Talha

    Oh please. They have men lined up around the block to commit to them — they just don’t count because they’re not Chad.

    • Replies: @Talha
  20. L Woods says:

    The state will spare no expense to persecute the users of these services should they ever gain prominence. It will be the designated morality play act of our times, to ensure the that every fat 3/10 on tinder has 50 thirsty dudes sucking up to her in perpetuity.

  21. Talha says:
    @L Woods

    Really l, men lined up to marry non-Stacey’s?

    Peace.

  22. Talha says:
    @L Woods

    in exchange for nothing.

    Marriage and kids isn’t exactly nothing.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @neutral
    , @L Woods
  23. neutral says:
    @Talha

    how does a society get out of this downward spiral?

    It’s not the how, but the who. As long as the people that are behind this malaise are not correctly identified, then this will never end.

  24. neutral says:
    @Talha

    I think what he was trying to get at was that there is a certain percentage that will not be able to marry or have a family no matter what, this is hard iron door that shuts them out. I don’ think that the number is 90%, but it is certainly much higher than it used be in the past ages.

    • Replies: @Talha
  25. L Woods says:
    @Talha

    Marriage itself imposes zero obligations on the woman.

    • Replies: @Talha
  26. Talha says:
    @L Woods

    Are we talking in a legal sense or not; I’d think bearing and raising kids should be considered an obligation from her side.

    Why would men want to impose financial obligations on them?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @L Woods
  27. Mark G. says:
    @Talha

    Men wanted to have sex with women as much in the past as they do now. Men didn’t pressure women to put out as much for sex in the past because they knew the pressure wouldn’t work. There were very strong reasons for women not to give in because abortion was illegal and if they had a baby the amounts of welfare available were very low. The welfare state and the legalization of abortion loosened female sexual morality. Once some women started putting out that then put pressure on other women who didn’t want to put out to do so anyway to be able to compete for men.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Rosie
  28. Talha says:
    @neutral

    Well, if this is true and it is this bad – then society is screwed.

    Peace.

  29. Talha says:
    @Mark G.

    This sounds about right. It is the sexual marketplace after all; it will conform to supply/demand pressures.

    Peace.

  30. Anonymous[217] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    Pregnancy and childbirth are the two things that men have historically underrated since time started.

    99.999% of men have no idea the extent of physical pain and mental trauma pregnancy and childbirth brings on a woman.

    I will never ever shame a woman for choosing to be childless, just like I would never shame a man for not wanting t0 get drafted into an army.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @L Woods
  31. LondonBob says:

    That percentage seems way too low for men. I have only known two dedicated brothel visitors but I would say the majority I have known have paid for it a handful of times.

    • Replies: @SafeNow
  32. The start year is 1991. Maybe the film Pretty Woman (1990) humanized prostitutes and made it icky for more men to use them?

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  33. L Woods says:
    @Talha

    Women can (and do) marry and shortly thereafter quit putting out, get fat and/or cheat at whim, with zero consequences (except getting her husband’s money).

    • Replies: @Talha
  34. anon[416] • Disclaimer says:
    @MattinLA

    The Anthropogenic Climax Crisis.

    My understanding that Bernie Sanders is getting behind this and will make it his issue. Expect a “JFK Moon Shot” speech from him sometime this summer.

  35. Are you sure there is not some error, somewhere, in either the data, surveys, or the responses?

    Because with the explosion of such pay-for-play sites as Seeking Arrangement, What’s Your Price, and Sugar Daddy Meet, it seems to me more men are paying. They’re just not doing it the old-fashioned way, where you hire an escort.

    Let me put it another way: Regardless of what the men say about paying, more women are GETTING PAID for sex, so it stands to reason more men are paying. How do I know? Because I know the women. They’re college students or local girls who are on these sites. And while anecdotal evidence does not = statistical fact, Seeking Arrangement is a big enough site to make me think that what women are doing locally is also going on nationally, which means there are major changes afoot regarding pay-for-play.

    Before these sites existed, this kind of “soft prostitution” could not have happened as much. These sites created an environment where it could flourish.

    What do I mean by that? To use an actual real-life example, in the old days you could not just go up to the cute 21-year-old girl check-out girl at Food Lion and ask, “Can I have sex with you for money?” But when these girls got on Seeking Arrangement, you could in fact do just that. And many men do.

    Since two of the three checkout girls I actually knew at Food Lion are on Seeking Arrangement accepting offers from multiple men, I think that’s the time to say that something seems off kilter with this survey.

    • Replies: @Svigor
    , @Audacious Epigone
  36. anon[264] • Disclaimer says:

    “The state will spare no expense to persecute the users of these services should they ever gain prominence.”

    I suspect not. Look at how many more gay men identify in this survey. As a result, I suspect the Left will find some way to excuse users of these services. I’m already seeing a nascent “sex work is real work” movement on social media.

  37. Rosie says:

    . You can’t “buy” the cow now

    Horrors! When is somebody going to do something about the fact that women can’t be bought and sold like cattle?

    • Replies: @Anonymousse
  38. Rosie says:
    @Mark G.

    Men wanted to have sex with women as much in the past as they do now. Men didn’t pressure women to put out as much for sex in the past because they knew the pressure wouldn’t work. There were very strong reasons for women not to give in because abortion was illegal and if they had a baby the amounts of welfare available were very low. The welfare state and the legalization of abortion loosened female sexual morality. Once some women started putting out that then put pressure on other women who didn’t want to put out to do so anyway to be able to compete for men.

    Um, no. Men didn’t pressure women for sex as much because they knew they would be forced to marry a girl if they got her pregnant, so they had incentive to be much choosier.

    It is absolutely inevitable that you are going to get enough girls to put out such that everyone else is forced to do the same. Girls will not be perfectly disciplined in this regard until parents become perfect, i.e. NEVER!

  39. Mark G. says:
    @Rosie

    What do you mean by men were “forced” to marry women? Are you saying shotgun weddings? The amount of sex and resulting out of wedlock pregnancies increased starting in the nineteen sixties. The amount of welfare was increased and restrictions on it were decreased starting in the nineteen sixties. This was documented by Charles Murray in “Losing Ground” and he said the first was caused by the second. Do you have any evidence that shotgun weddings were common before the nineteen sixties and the number sharply decreased during that period?

  40. The little spikes on 2008 and then 2014 kind of indicate tech advancements; in 2008 we had FB, thus the first FB sugar babies, then recession-driven decline; and by the middle of this decade again a spike with tinder, twitter, snap, and the late-Obama-age boom in support for “sex workers”. Pretty Woman in the 90s was the first propagandistic salvo.

    Agree completely that this does not mean that normie men and women are having more babies or even more sex. And it also seems like dating has become increasingly expensive, to the point of nearly having a sugar baby instead of a girlfriend. It depends, I have noticed the most spoiled of white women, and their doorstep fatty/brown/sjw friends, have pretty much set unrealistic standards upon millennial women. They are all Elaine from Seinfeld. Maybe, just maybe, the need for community around nation and creed (with large genetic commonality, but not exclusively so) is important for personality development?

    I actually think robots will be too expensive and still remain impersonal enough for a while. VR is quite better at the moment; maybe the money will not be in robot hookers, but in VR motel rooms. True, human sex workers will always try and push for legality, and their flesh-product will obviously always have willing customers. Problem is, they won’t stay cheap, as the whole female-led zeitgeist fails to appreciate the guys that pay the bills and promotes globalist dysgenics from all sides. Economically the traditional male unions and fraternal societies are gutted, cutting down wages and benefits for men, who already do not make the majority of purchase decisions; while socially the culture hates having to point out positive aspects of masculinity.

    Ergo, if and when prostitutes are legalized, prices for a “half and half” would not be universally 15 bucks from the best pornstars on down. Perhaps this will just happen in the ghetto and trailer park areas, while perhaps whiter bohemian and touristy sectors will have their fancy red light district that legalization proponents insist will happen everywhere (not). In such hip sectors, the sex worker guilds will become vip professional cartels like other unions. And of top of that, a cadre of independent even pricier pros will arise. Why? Because most American/Western men, including a lot in relationships or marriage, have been increasingly indoctrinated to think that if a woman takes a lot of money to conquer, she is worth the effort, and will pay their “respectable, understanding sex workers” just a little less than their real gfs (who all have degrees and jobs and credit cards, and want a man with more of those than them), or worst case scenario will rather sit in the VR motel room by themselves. It is the liberal wasp model of wealth and individualism, taken to its logical conclusion in the typical consumerist fashion in sexual matters (free trade uber alles), thanks also to Marxoid sjws who insist on not only base physiological relief as a consumer product, but that the women who would provide it are sex goddesses to be worshipped and paid tithes to.

    Going back to the Pretty Woman example, the lesson they wanted to implant was not that women should not turn tricks, or that men shouldn’t do frequent them too much. (Relatedly, the other extreme, a majority of repulsive men that frequents the whorehouses all the time instead of feeding their family and/or creating wealth, is also bad – and that situation is coming from down south). Heck, the movie did not even teach that hookers can convert a-la-Magdalene – rather, the movie instilled that wealthy types can turn any woman into a slave, and that if you are not wealthy then your wife will not cease to be ugly, your hooker will not cease to be a transaction, and single girls will not look at you. Considering that it was mostly single women and couples that watched this movie, you can see the pernicious effect through the decades, until now.

    Seeing this exploitation of the human cash cow, aka males, I fail to see how the US is not headed for hyperinflation any sooner, unless credit has turned the populace into indentured servants and it no longer matters unless Beijing cares. Even then, I think the Chinese will get their own sjws, which in an atheist country might be even more fatal. Unless, the Crispr race takes over before that crash.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  41. @Mark G.

    Her logic is similar to that of women crying in soap operas because they were marrying a guy they did not want to marry – but did marry him anyway because they liked him enough to let him make her baby. So she surmised that and other similar gossip and called it “shotgun weddings”.

    Here is my argument, not just gossip or untethered numbers: Back then usually a guy who had sex with a girl was not afraid of getting married to her. Even if he wanted to have fun and play the field and the child was unwanted, he did not mind marrying and (worst case scenario) cheating around while raising a family with the wife. Not to mention, women wanted to marry and did not mind the division of labor. Better economics for males also helped, will give that; it is clear though that many women depressed wages in several fields by entering the market (and those who do get paid well, are usually unmarriagable). And well, some races are more afraid of marriage than others…but that just means that whoever follows interracialism and miscegenation as proposed by the media (diversity is supposed to be neutral at best) will have their plans backfire in that and other ways…

    Furthermore, in those bad old days adoption also existed, mental institutions too; there were more old and/or non-married people with vocation to care for unwanted children (yes, even those children beget from incest and rape, they were cared for), and parents told boys not to impregnate and girls not to put out. Was this so “oppressive”?

    The capitalization of “NEVER!” when saying that parents are not perfect, that shows something. These SJWs deep down want the state to replace their parents. That said, I pity her, because men should be teaching her and other women better; and even more so, their sons need learning. Daddy issues affect everyone and young men do have “the weight on their shoulders” (Ian Curtis), they need more guidance than whatever is on blogs and youtube.

  42. Mark G. says:
    @Rosie

    Parents pressured their daughters to get married because if they didn’t the parents would often be financially responsible for taking care of the daughter and her child. The reason for this were low levels of welfare payments which weren’t enough to support the girl and her child and this forced girls to rely more on family members. Once welfare payments increased, parents didn’t have to financially assist their daughters as much and this gave them less reason to pressure their daughters to get married. So I would still say increases in welfare are involved.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  43. @Michael S

    Johns are mostly working-class guys with strong sex drives who don’t pedestalize women but need an actual vagina for relief in droughts. Tinder has meant fewer droughts for them. Incels are mostly NEETS or in non-manual employment who can’t get laid in the hypergamous era because they pedestalize women. Pedestalize them, in fact, far too much to ever go to a hooker. If only they could it would do them a world of good. Porn takes care of their needs, at the cost of the odd spree killing.

    • Replies: @216
  44. @Rosie

    Bring back shotgun weddings and make divorce hard again. I’m not being facetious either. Guys who knock up girls should stick around and raise the children and women shouldn’t be able to so easily kick dad out of the house and collect 20%.No opt out for men, no abortion for women, you have sex and you should be ready for the consequences. You want to get off without any risks, buy a fleshlight.

    And get rid of welfare for couples that aren’t in the same house vs our current dysgenic system rewarding the woman with tax credits if dad is at a different address. If a woman makes 30k with 2 kids and dad doesn’t live with her she gets an extra 2.5k of Earned income credit vs $0 if they live together and are married assuming dad also pulls down 30k.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  45. @Toronto Russian

    Not even close. The “hooker with a heart of gold” archetype has been around since biblical times. (funny, that)

    But more recently movies like Some Came Running and books like Crime and Punishment were humanizing prostitutes long before Ghoulia Roberts hit the scene.

  46. Wency says:
    @Twinkie

    I wouldn’t take the grumblers to be too representative of reality. Most are locked into highly negative thought patterns.

    I’m not very attractive and I pretty much had my pick of marriage-minded Christian women once I decided I was ready to get married not too terribly long ago. There is a much larger supply of these women than there are marriage-minded Christian men with their lives halfway together.

    • Replies: @L Woods
  47. eah says:

    Back in the day, the average prostitute was pretty skanky (not talking about escorts here); no idea about today — so I’m actually rather surprised that 11% of hetero men claim to have paid for sex — the idea never really crossed my mind.

  48. L Woods says:
    @Wency

    You’re in a religious subculture (and willing to offer your balls on a platter in marriage) — that itself is hardly indicative of the “reality” experienced by the general, atomized populace. Looking back to the evangelical culture I left behind, I do indeed see a seemingly hopeful number of 1950s style young looksmatches — however, these frequently end in the woman cheating and/or divorce (if you marrying a “Christian” woman is any protection, you may be in for an unpleasant shock).

  49. Rosie says:
    @Mark G.

    Parents pressured their daughters to get married

    Here you are assuming the girls needed to be pressured to get married. I don’t know why you would assume that.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Anonymous
    , @Mark G.
  50. @Rosie

    Marriage is based on reciprocal obligations. The current legal (and accompanying cultural) system doesn’t acknowledge any obligation on the woman’s part.

    As soon as “marital rape” became anything other than a punch line, secular marriage as a civic institution (rather than a risky tax avoidance strategy) was done for.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  51. iffen says:
    @Rosie

    assuming the girls needed to be pressured to get married

    There is more than one pressure on girls to get married.

  52. Talha says:
    @L Woods

    Well, not all women. Men also cheat.

    But I agree, the way divorce (especially no-fault) does not seem to be fair to the man. It is definitely a risk he is taking by entering into the marriage. But any big commitment like that comes with risks.

    Peace.

  53. Rosie says:
    @Anonymousse

    The current legal (and accompanying cultural) system doesn’t acknowledge any obligation on the woman’s part.

    Women have exactly the same obligations in marriage as men.

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/more-women-are-paying-alimonythat-includes-supporting-their-exs-porn-habit-2018-05-23

    As soon as “marital rape” became anything other than a punch line,

    This is a new one. Are you suggesting women shouldn’t have the right to refuse sex in marriage?

  54. @Rosie

    Well that’s entirely orthodox christianity (see 1 Cor 7) and until the 1970’s every state in America excepted spouses from the definition of rape. So yeah, spouses have an explicit sexual obligation to one another and your grandparents would have thought you were crazy if you said otherwise.

    If you’ve been stewed for a couple decades in the recently ascendant norms of jewish feminism of course that sounds immediately objectionable.

    Do you really think “gay marriage” was the first and only attempt at redefinition?

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Toronto Russian
  55. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    Pregnancy and childbirth are the two things that men have historically underrated since time started.

    100% agree – having seen my own wife bear and deliver four. But if she marries, then the assumption is that she will bear her husband’s children. If she does not want to sign up for that, then don’t get married or be clear in the pre-nuptial agreement or whatever.

    Shame has nothing to do with this – it is about legal and social obligations of choosing to be married.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  56. Rosie says:
    @everybodyhatesscott

    And get rid of welfare for couples that aren’t in the same house vs our current dysgenic system rewarding the woman with tax credits if dad is at a different address.

    The welfare system actually punishes women for having a relationship with the father, so he becomes a liability if he can’t earn more than what welfare would provide. Given the state of the economy, this is increasingly likely. It’s a very perverse situation.

    Universal basic income would be much more sensible.

    • Agree: iffen
  57. Rosie says:
    @Anonymousse

    So yeah, spouses have an explicit sexual obligation to one another and your grandparents would have thought you were crazy if you said otherwise.

    Yes, spouses have sexual obligations to each other. If you habitually deny your husband, he doesn’t have a right to force himself on you, but he he has a right to divorce you for cause.

    • Replies: @Anonymousse
  58. @Michael S

    Why wouldn’t it make sense? If they’re able to pay their way out of celibacy, they’re not incels, after all!

  59. @Talha

    The most obvious way for society to get out of this mess is for selection for procreation (as opposed to just fornication) to win out.

    • Agree: Talha
  60. @Twinkie

    According to the GSS, the percentage of men who’ve cheated on their spouses has been remarkably consistent over the last thirty years, with 20% saying they have done so

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  61. @Twinkie

    Or the combination of the two.

    Make sure that one is included in the Decline and Fall series, btw!

  62. @anon

    “There is no analogue for men.”

    • LOL: Mr. Rational
  63. @Rosie

    “He has a right to divorce you for cause” aka “he has a right to give you his kids and half his money plus an annual stipend”

    Sounds pretty fair. No wonder men are so anxious to marry now in the west.

    A lot of women have been conditioned to consider their nominal husband a dangerous brute and also to feel only their real husband – the state – can be trusted to look out for them and police the relationship to their satisfaction.

    The trustworthy state meanwhile has remedied the terrible danger of rude grabby husbands and replaced it with their imported literal (actual) rape gangs.

    How great has that trade worked out for women? For men? For kids? For anyone?

    • Replies: @Rosie
  64. Rosie says:
    @Anonymousse

    “he has a right to give you his kids and half his money plus an annual stipend”

    Here we go again.

    1. If it is marital property, it’s not “his money.”
    2. If you’re at fault for marital failure, you don’t get alimony.

    Now, if there are really men who are paying alimony to wives who weren’t having sex with them for no good reason, which I highly doubt, then that’s outrageous. But that is a problem with no-fault divorce, not marital rape liability.

    • Replies: @Svigor
    , @EldnahYm
  65. Twinkie says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    Thank you. That’s surprising. I was under the impression that affairs/mistresses were much more common in the past.

    20% seems very high. That’s depressing. What is it for wives?

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Audacious Epigone
  66. 216 says:
    @Jack Highlands

    The Incel operate on the belief that prostitutes “don’t count” because the alpha male gets free access, and on the female part there is no desire.

    For perhaps the same reason, the condemn “Beta bucks” as a reproductive strategy which only ends in cuckoldry.

    Short of their desired communism, there is not much that can be done to satisfy them. Expect state repression to increase.

    • Replies: @L Woods
  67. 216 says:
    3294278

    It’s a man’s wet dream to have thousands of woman just one swipe away. A woman doesn’t necessarily dream of having thousands of thirsty men slobbering over her pictures. Although increasingly they seem to be programmed to enjoy that.

    The phenomenon of “beta orbiters” precedes the internet era, perhaps being recorded as far back as the palace eunuchs of antiquity.

    Women really enjoy the ego-validation of interaction, even on a text-base forum like this one, the self-identified female poasters get more attention.

    Same thing with abortion. Even though it’s sold as an “empowered female” issue, it’s really men who push their girlfriends to get one, not the women who actually want to have one.

    Stop white knighting. Abortion is part and parcel of giving women power over reproduction and limiting men to influence at best.

  68. SafeNow says:
    @LondonBob

    I agree with the with the “handful” analysis, at least in CA, where AMPs abound.

  69. SafeNow says:

    “women really enjoy the ego validation, even on a text-based forum”

    So do men. Updike, in “Rabbit,” posited the idea that the most important thing a woman can give a man is to tell him he’s terrific — even though we men suspect we are not actually so terrific. Flawed characters, true, but Updike had a point there. Prostitution, if performed proficiently, confers this “terrific!” validation. If indeed prostitution is less prevalent, maybe that’s because social media confer the “terrific!” And, perhaps prostitutes are less skilled in conferring the “terrific!” —- after all, as we move closer to “Idiotocracy,” almost everyone is less skilled at their jobs.

    • Replies: @Toronto Russian
  70. Anonymous[375] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    Because younger people tend to be less responsible, and because youth is wasted on the young. Young people tend to think that they’ll be young forever. They don’t realize that they’ll lose their youth and looks relatively quickly.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  71. Anonymous[375] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    The title to the article you linked: “More women are paying alimony (as more wives become breadwinners)”.

    In other words, more wives are breadwinners and more women are paying alimony just as marriage rates are falling and hitting record lows, just as Anonymousse wrote above, “secular marriage as a civic institution” is in decline.

    You’ve done this several times in recent threads now. You will cite some recent statistic about marriage that suggests greater equality in marriages now in terms of status or income or responsibility, in order to support the argument that such trends have no impact on the institution of marriage, without noting that marriage rates have dropped to record lows. If you were unaware of the drop in marriage rates, that’s understandable, but you should be aware of it by now.

  72. Svigor says:
    @Days of Broken Arrows

    Because with the explosion of such pay-for-play sites as Seeking Arrangement, What’s Your Price, and Sugar Daddy Meet, it seems to me more men are paying. They’re just not doing it the old-fashioned way, where you hire an escort.

    I always assumed the explosion was one of scam websites designed to extract monthly fees from desperate men. I never got the impression that sex was involved at any point.

  73. Svigor says:
    @Rosie

    1. If it is marital property, it’s not “his money.”

    Seems like legalistic bullshit to me. Prenups are, AFAICT, not worth the paper they’re printed on, and marriage is, legally speaking, a scam to make his property into “marital property,” i.e., to transfer wealth from him to her.

    Obviously this isn’t how marriage was intended, but how marriage was intended has fuck-all to do with the legal system.

    Now, if there are really men who are paying alimony to wives who weren’t having sex with them for no good reason, which I highly doubt, then that’s outrageous. But that is a problem with no-fault divorce, not marital rape liability.

    LOL, there is no meaningful distinction between marriage and no-fault divorce in this context.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  74. Svigor says:

    Pregnancy and childbirth are the two things that men have historically underrated since time started.

    Never seen an overabundance of gratitude from women to men for doing all the protecting, fighting, dying, dangerous work, dirty work, etc., etc., etc. The number of tasks that women just assume are men’s work is fucking breathtaking. The amount of entitlement and privilege women breathe in and out every day is breathtaking, if you’ll forgive the pun. Any man who has ever worked anywhere that is 1. substantially coed and 2. involves at least a modicum of dirty or unpleasant work knows exactly what I’m talking about.

    Women are basically grown children.

    Feminism seems to be women’s way of catching up to men in underrating pregnancy and childbirth.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  75. Svigor says:

    Sorry, I misspoke – I’ve never seen any gratitude from women to men for doing all the protecting, fighting, dying, dangerous work, dirty work, etc., etc., etc.

    • Replies: @Clifford Brown
  76. EldnahYm says:
    @Rosie

    But that is a problem with no-fault divorce, not marital rape liability.

    It’s a problem with alimony actually. The practice of alimony should be eliminated. People who wish to divorce should live with the consequences.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  77. iffen says:
    @Twinkie

    OT

    a bit too fancy for my tastes

    Hey! Wait a minute. I thought that you were a fancy Asian. Have you been misrepresenting yourself?

    You haven’t read the meritocracy article.

    No, I haven’t. I keep meaning to try again sometime. I have trouble reading something when the author is: 1) astounded every other week by well know facts, 2) didn’t know about a subject until recently, but launched an extensive study and can now provide us with the “real” story, 3) has some sort of decoder ring that tells him which Jew York Times reporter is reliable and which is not, 4) frequently begins articles with, “I don’t know if this is true or not, but …”

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  78. L Woods says:
    @216

    “Short of the situation that still exists in most of the world and existed here within living memory, nothing can be done to satisfy them.” Your moral preening is weak.

  79. @Rosie

    “Men didn’t pressure women for sex as much”

    I can assure you they did, given the opportunity. Of course middle class young ladies in Georgian and Victorian times were supposed to be prevented from ever getting into the situation where such a thing was possible. But sometimes that didn’t happen.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarissa

    Just like hypergamy doesn’t care, young men’s hormones don’t care. In “elder days before the (1960s) fall“, entire best-selling novels were based round the quest to get a “nice girl” into bed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take_a_Girl_Like_You

    “because they knew they would be forced to marry a girl if they got her pregnant”

    I doubt the vision of having your beloved/lust object in your bed every night was wholly unpalatable to all young men.

    If there was a wide class gulf it would be a problem though.

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Western_Circuit

    • Replies: @Rosie
  80. @Rosie

    ” Are you suggesting women shouldn’t have the right to refuse sex in marriage?”

    For both parties it should be a just reason for divorce with fault. Of course you need to restore the concept of fault to divorce first.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Rosie
  81. Corvinus says:
    @Mark G.

    “I think part of the decline in various forms of commercial sex is due to the declining income of the average male.”

    Actually, the reason for the decline in men having sex with prostitutes is that they employing to perfection the gaming advice offered by Roosh and Roissy. They may have to pay for a drink or two, but that’s par for the course. Men in the field are absolutely killing it these days, and we have those two entrepreneurs to thank.

  82. Corvinus says:
    @L Woods

    “The bottom 90% of men can’t get anything worth having for “free” (or at any price) with any reliability.”

    “Women can (and do) marry and shortly thereafter quit putting out, get fat and/or cheat at whim, with zero consequences ”

    You seem to enjoy making up statistics as you go along. Are there any sources that actually offer that exact percentage/number?

  83. 3294278

    “It’s a man’s wet dream to have thousands of woman just one swipe away.”

    But I doubt it’s his dream to have thousands of women reject him, unless he has testes of brass and iron and is playing a numbers game. Remember that 80% of men on OLD are considered “below average”.

    He’s got that anyway in porn.

    “A woman doesn’t necessarily dream of having thousands of thirsty men slobbering over her pictures.”

    I’m told that the ‘likes’ on FB and Instagram are for some a big ego-boost, even if the ‘likers’ are guys she wouldn’t touch with mint surgical tweezers. But I have no stats on this.

    Back on topic, this could be one reason ‘official’ prostitution is (apparently) declining.

    https://www.seeking.com/sugar-baby-university

    “Over four million students worldwide are registered on SeekingArrangement. A Sugar Baby in a successful arrangement can expect to receive monthly allowances, professional and social opportunities, and gifts from a Sugar Daddy or Sugar Mommy.”

    https://www.seeking.com/how-it-works

    A girl I knew was offered a similar arrangement by the landlord of her student house – her own flat and a weekly allowance in exchange for keeping one night a week free for the landlord. This was mid/late 70s!

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  84. 3294278

    Same thing with abortion. Even though it’s sold as an “empowered female” issue, it’s really men who push their girlfriends to get one, not the women who actually want to have one.

    Yep. What Roe vs. Wade really did was to take away a woman’s right to insist on marriage should she become pregnant. Not more, and no less.

    Then welfare took away the monetary need to get married immediately should pregnancy ensue. Double whammy on marriage. Triple if you want to count the changes in divorce laws.

    The Democratic clown show last night (2019/06/26) was a clown show because the POC and fanatic outgroups were the only people listening to it. It sounded insane and foreign because its viewers were insane and foreign.

    This isn’t going down well, now that people are just starting to see outcomes.
    To paraphrase Zelazny:
    “You have lied and punished and killed that I might forget my past and lose my future, but here and now I renounce that and I say to your face that your days are numbered.”

    Counerinsurgency

  85. iffen says:

    Women have a conciliatory trait. Many of them don’t have a clue as to what to do to make things “better.” But they can personally participate in a possible solution by creating a beige race. Think Sabine women.

    They identify the winners and then submit to those winners. They get to live on. The male losers, in contrast, do not.

    I think that the motivation of betting on the winning horse is different from the motivation to mate with the “other” in order to bring the two sides together via mixed children. Although, either way we end up with a lot cute brown babies.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  86. @MattinLA

    I think you are way behind on modern technology, Matt. I’m talking not just the extremely fast microprocessing, the almost-free memory, modern micro-electro-mechanical sensors, and even new materials.

    One of pundit Fred Reed’s more fun/interesting columns (he writes a lot of crap nowadays) was about these sex-bots, and the fear that they are causing in feminists – Peak Stupidity’s take.

    1) Engine noise ??! Sure for hydraulics, but not pneumatic, and electric stepper motors (linear or rotational) can do amazing things when computer controlled and make little noise.

    2) Who says the material smells terrible? Perhaps robot-perfume will make them smell just like your girlfriend.

    3) ?? Sounds? Seriously? Look at what kind of sound comes out of the smart phones with their tiny speaker. To me, it’s amazing, but a 5 foot-odd tall robot doesn’t need to be so compact inside – after all, she doesn’t need a liver, lungs, intestines (a BIG PLUS, sometimes!). The smart phones that ring with the old desk-top land-line sound fool me lots. Come on, what kind of secretions do you want, Matt?

    It would NOT take Apollo-program level spending. Engineering of sex bots is right in the wheelhouse of modern technology. The energy requirements may have been the biggest problem in the past, but with the amazing battery storage I’ve seen lately, I don’t even think so anymore. Sure, she may not be allowed to travel in 1st class with you to Rio, due to her Lithium Ion batteries, and don’t leave her alone at home without a good sprinkler system.

    All the ramifications, about which comments I have not had the pleasure of reading through yet (I skimmed though, very interesting, but I think I’ll opt out.) aside, I am surprised that your view of technology is way, way, out of date.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  87. Mark G. says:
    @Rosie

    The parents were pressuring their daughters and the boys who impregnated their daughters and the parents of the boys. I assumed you would know that without me telling you.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  88. @iffen

    cute brown babies.

    Oxymoron alert.

    • Replies: @L Woods
  89. @Anonymousse

    Well that’s entirely orthodox christianity (see 1 Cor 7) and until the 1970’s every state in America excepted spouses from the definition of rape.

    Does someone really think the Apostle meant forceful penetration of a kicking and screaming, or knocked out woman by “Defraud ye not one the other?” In Ephesians 5 he wrote that a husband should love his wife as Christ loves the Church and as his own body. Since no man wants his body to be violated by a gay rapist (for full analogy imagine a vulnerable kid molested by a family member he loves and trusts), I think the Christian canon is clear on what is moral and what is not to do with wives.

    That secular law didn’t have “marital rape” and than had it – only means that secular laws evolve along with the development of society. They once included the crime of “witchcraft” and now don’t, they didn’t have “animal cruelty” and now do. By the way, the English criminalized animal cruelty much earlier than child cruelty and had their last witch trial in the 1940s – just examples of how weird human laws (even in “rational” developed countries) can be.

  90. Rosie says:
    3294402

    Go make lunches for your kids.

    Lord knows, there are about a million other things I’d like to spend my time doing, but you all need a babysitter. If some man would like to take the lead in reining this crap in, I’ll be happy to get back to my traditional duties.

  91. Rosie says:
    @EldnahYm

    It’s a problem with alimony actually. The practice of alimony should be eliminated. People who wish to divorce should live with the consequences.

    Self-contradictory nonsense alert.

    • Replies: @EldnahYm
  92. Rosie says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    For both parties it should be a just reason for divorce with fault. Of course you need to restore the concept of fault to divorce first.

    My concern is about brutish men who spend all night blowing their check at some dive bar, and then, failing to get lucky, come home and force themselves on their angry (and naturally unwilling) wives. Obviously, if a woman has a perfectly good husband whom she refuses for no reason, or even just for petty reasons, she is in the wrong and her husband should have no further obligations to her.

    One thing that must be considered is that it would be exceedingly foolish to force a woman to divorce her husband in order to regain her right to refuse sex. Suppose you’ve been married for many years, mostly happy, but your husband is going through a sort of midlife crisis. You have prayed extensively about it and determined that you are called to wait it out, sincerely believing that this is a temporary rough patch and your husband’s conduct will improve. You ought to be able, IMO, to remain in that marriage with your right of refusal intact.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  93. Rosie says:
    @Mark G.

    The parents were pressuring their daughters and the boys who impregnated their daughters and the parents of the boys. I assumed you would know that without me telling you.

    But what information do you have to the effect that women needed to be pressured to marry?

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  94. Rosie says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    I doubt the vision of having your beloved/lust object in your bed every night was wholly unpalatable to all young men

    Nor to women! Customary shotgun marriage in case of pregnancy seems reasonably fair to all concerned.

  95. Mark G. says:
    @Rosie

    Whether the girl needed to be pressured or not the men would often need to be. Many men would enjoy the sex resulting in the girl getting pregnant but may not have wanted to get married. If the girl’s parents had to support the girl and her child they would be more likely to pressure the girl, the boy and his parents than if the girl could just go down and sign up for welfare. If the girl was eager to get married, then they would just have to pressure the boy and his parents. Increased welfare limited the need for shotgun marriages.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  96. L Woods says:
    @Mr. Rational

    Cuck alert more like.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  97. Anonymous[217] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    Now imagine you switch bodies with your wife temporarily.

    Imagine you being the person who has to endure erratic mood swings, a 10% chance of post-partum depression, a 50-80% chance of genital tears. If the doctor says you need a C-section, imagine having to have your abdomen cut up: the skin, your abdominal muscles, your abdominal cavity, and your inner organs displaced, just so you can get the child out of your body safely. Imagine having to recover from major abdominal surgery.

    A lot of men think that family life is easy for wives, whom they accuse of “doing nothing”. They don’t see it from the wife’s perspective. A lot of women work full time jobs before they marry and have kids. Every family woman I know has said that even the toughest paid jobs are easy compared to the physical trauma of pregnancy and childbirth.

    When it comes to family life, biology has dictated that the woman gets the short stick. A child has a father just as much as it has a mother, but only the mother had to endure a year of constant physical discomfort (with extreme pain at times) for the child.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @Talha
  98. EldnahYm says:
    @Rosie

    People who want to end a marriage contract should be able to take care of themselves, otherwise they should stay married.

    You naturally advocate marriage as a profiteering scheme.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  99. Rosie says:
    @Mark G.

    Increased welfare limited the need for shotgun marriages.

    So what? When you attack welfare, you are implying that it is fine to leave women and children starving in the streets. The burden is on you to show that such is strictly necessary, not merely possibly helpful.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  100. Rosie says:
    @EldnahYm

    People who want to end a marriage contract should be able to take care of themselves, otherwise they should stay married.

    I can think of a surer way to discourage women from embracing marriage and motherhood than this. Every would-be homemaker’s worst nightmare is to be stuck in an abusive marriage with no way out.

    You naturally advocate marriage as a profiteering scheme.

    Since you appear to be out of your depth, allow me to explain to you the nature of the traditional marriage contract. A young man with nothing says to a young lady with nothing:

    “I have nothing, but I promise to work hard to ensure your needs are met, and I promise to share with you whatever I shall have in the future. I promise to love, honor, and cherish you.”

    Now, by the nature of things, marriage will be profitable for some and unprofitable for others (“for better or worse”), but in any case, it remains a leally as well as morally binding Covenant between husband and wife.

    • Replies: @EldnahYm
  101. @SafeNow

    Updike, in “Rabbit,” posited the idea that the most important thing a woman can give a man is to tell him he’s terrific — even though we men suspect we are not actually so terrific.

    That’s what the geisha trade is about – attention to and admiration of clients combined with artistic skills and cultural sophistication (I guess it’s less flattering to be admired by a pretty but empty-headed girl.) The most famous Japanese culture scholar in the USSR wrote:

    Following the motto “to all its own place”, the Japanese are used from time immemorial to dividing women into three categories: for the hearth, for reproduction – the wife; for the soul – the geisha with her education; and finally, for the flesh – the oiran…

    Actually, in her wig and makeup, a geisha is perceived as more of a doll that came alive than a living human. A tourist who imagines he will see something risqué in geisha dances is deeply misguided. Their pattern is very stern and almost devoid of femininity, for those dances trace their lineage to the ancient Noh theater.

    Sometimes the geishas sing along with the guests, sometimes they play innocent parlour games. All the while they don’t forget to pour the men sake, joke with them and, most importantly, laugh at their jokes. Any contact doesn’t go beyond that.

    V. Ovchinnikov – The Sakura Bough

  102. @Days of Broken Arrows

    Self-report surveys, especially on sensitive topics, are always potentially confounded. That said, with the erosion of religion and the increasing advocacy in favor of “sex work”, I see no obvious reason people would understate more now than in the past.

  103. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman

    It would NOT take Apollo-program level spending. Engineering of sex bots is right in the wheelhouse of modern technology

    It’s not really a matter of having to design sexbots that are “just as good” in a strictly mechanistic sense. Plenty of women make do with vibrators and plenty of men make do with porn. As far as simply getting off is concerned people are prepared to accept a good deal less than “just as good” as the real thing.

    The real breakthrough will be robots with which you can have an emotional relationship. I read a book some years ago which pointed out that given that people generally have no problems forming emotional relationships with pets there is no reason why they won’t be able to form emotional relationships with robots. You don’t need a robot with anywhere near human levels of intelligence. If you can build a robot with roughly the intelligence of a dog and with roughly the same capability for emotional response as a dog then people will form emotional bonds with such robots. They will fall in love with such robots.

    The robots don’t need to be incredibly human-like. Dogs are not incredibly human-like and they can’t talk but millions of people love their dogs. A robot that is better than a dog at communication with humans should be well and truly achievable.

    Such robots would be not mere sexbots. They would be, in a crude sense, lovebots.

    Now please don’t jump to the conclusion that I’m advocating any of this. I simply think that it’s quite likely to happen.

    • Replies: @14wordstofreedom
  104. @Disordered (with a bad memory)

    Indentured servants living well above their means? This isn’t going to continue forever. If China gets SJWs, it will end even sooner as they start demanding the stuff being sent to the US be consumed at home instead. North America is on its way to be as globally influential as South America was last century.

  105. EldnahYm says:
    @Rosie

    I can think of a surer way to discourage women from embracing marriage and motherhood than this. Every would-be homemaker’s worst nightmare is to be stuck in an abusive marriage with no way out.

    False premise. Most women “stuck” in abusive relationships are in that situation because they do not want to exit them. They make excuses for the man, they are embarrassed to be in the situation so they try to hide it from society, or they don’t want to get the criminal justice system involved. Alimony does nothing to prevent any of this.

    Also, we already have many forms of welfare and child support so the premise that women will be destitute if they leave their relationship is false.

    People who exit marriages should have no right to maintain their past standard of living, which is what alimony is actually about. Abusive men and their women probably should not have children by the way, so I would consider discouraging their unions to be a plus.

    Since you appear to be out of your depth, allow me to explain to you the nature of the traditional marriage contract. A young man with nothing says to a young lady with nothing:

    “I have nothing, but I promise to work hard to ensure your needs are met, and I promise to share with you whatever I shall have in the future. I promise to love, honor, and cherish you.”

    Now, by the nature of things, marriage will be profitable for some and unprofitable for others (“for better or worse”), but in any case, it remains a leally as well as morally binding Covenant between husband and wife.

    Maybe you have failed to notice, but “traditional marriage” is dead and has been for decades. Those words you quoted are utterly meaningless under current societal arrangements where women are no longer dependent upon their husbands. The idea that we should promote policy based on how we wish things were rather than how they actually are is irrational.

    Today’s system, like it or not, is based upon the premise that marriage itself is not binding, but that a former spouse’s right to their ex-spouse’s income is. You are defending this perverse system because the idea of women having to sacrifice something in a divorce rather than gaining something is terrifying.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  106. @Twinkie

    Half that, 10%, and also remarkably steady over the few decades it’s been asked about.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  107. Twinkie says:
    @iffen

    when the author is

    Ad hominem. It’s been cited even in the mainstream press. Give it a whirl if you want to know what the relevant arguments and data are.

    • Replies: @iffen
  108. Twinkie says:
    @Anonymous

    A child has a father just as much as it has a mother, but only the mother had to endure a year of constant physical discomfort (with extreme pain at times) for the child.

    There are women who love their pregnancies. My wife was one of them, as were several friends of hers.

  109. Twinkie says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    Half that, 10%, and also remarkably steady over the few decades it’s been asked about.

    Thank you. Do you recall what the demographic distributions were like offhand? Sex, age, race/ethnicity, income, education attainment, etc.?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  110. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    I fully agree with you, mothers sacrifice more than the father and thus the child has a greater obligation to the mother beyond the father.

    In the collection of an-Nasa’i; a man came to the Prophet (pbuh) asking permission to go on jihad. The Prophet asked him, “Do you have a mother?” He said, “yes.” The Prophet said, “Stay with her, for Paradise is beneath her feet.”

    There was also this advice:
    A man asked the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), “Who is most deserving of my good company?”
    The Prophet said, “Your mother.”
    The man asked, “Then who?”
    The Prophet said “Your mother.”
    The man asked again, “Then who?”
    The Prophet said, “Your mother.”
    The man asked again, “Then who?”
    The Prophet said, “Your father.”
    – reported in Bukhari and Muslim

    Only God can repay mothers for their sacrifices. May every tear that has ever fallen from the weary eyes of our mothers be gifted to them as a waterfall in Paradise.

    Peace.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Audacious Epigone
  111. L Woods says:
    @Anonymous

    Grossly overrated in the age of modern medicine and low birth rates. Indeed, to some extent, always — iirc the pain of child birth is far less than ie kidney stones or a swift kick to the gonads insofar as pain can be objectively measured.

    • LOL: Rosie
  112. Rosie says:
    @EldnahYm

    People who exit marriages should have no right to maintain their past standard of living, which is what alimony is actually about.

    Nonsense. The point of alimony is to enforce the marital contract. Husbands are required to:

    1. Love, honor, and cherish their wives,
    2. Share their income with their wives.

    Imagine for a moment the law was as you suggest. If a middle-aged man got tired of his aging wife, he could just disrespect and humiliate her until she leaves. Then, he could spend his resources on some new woman, who wasn’t there when he was poor and has nothing.

    I’m sorry, but you have an exceedingly juvenile and simplistic understanding of this matter.

    Today’s system, like it or not, is based upon the premise that marriage itself is not binding, but that a former spouse’s right to their ex-spouse’s income is.

    Yet, the only reforms you are interested in are those that degrade women and turn them into at-will concubines in their own homes. Funny that.

    • Replies: @EldnahYm
  113. Rosie says:
    @Talha

    I fully agree with you, mothers sacrifice more than the father and thus the child has a greater obligation to the mother beyond the father.

    A woman can do no better than a homeschooled boy. They love and respect their mothers so much. They see us as a source of enrichment and wisdom, not merely physical sustenance, though of course that is also a huge, important, and joyful part of motherhood as well.

    • Replies: @Talha
  114. Rosie says:
    @Svigor

    Women are basically grown children.

    Hmmm. Go figure. And here my husband trusts me with his car, his credit cards, is house, and his children. Go figure.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  115. Rosie says:
    @Svigor

    Seems like legalistic bullshit to me.

    That’s because you are ignorant of the nature and purpose of marriage. Or maybe you just hate it.

    AFAICT, not worth the paper they’re printed on,

    And rightly so. Courts commonly refuse to enforce contracts that are against public policy.

  116. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    My wife was blessed to be able to homeschool all of our children (save the littlest guy) for some part of their education so I know what you mean. They always want to go wherever she is going whereas I have to bribe them to come along. LOL!

    That’s Ok, I hope they never lose that attachment and love for her companionship; even though it’s not fun often feeling like I’m warming the bench.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  117. Rosie says:
    @Talha

    even though it’s not fun often feeling like I’m warming the bench.

    Yes, Dad jealousy is a thing with homeschooling, as with nursing. We moms need to be sensitive to that and make it a point to include to make sure dads don’t feel left out, as I’m sure your wife does.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Twinkie
  118. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    I don’t feel jealous to be honest. I know she has a special place in their hearts more than me and the hadith I cited put that in perspective (at least for me). But it is getting better with time, and as my boys grow up, they need me more as a guide for things as they become young men. Kind of a nice consolation prize. 🙂

    Peace.

  119. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    Hmmm. Go figure. And here my husband trusts me with his car, his credit cards, is house, and his children. Go figure.

    I trust my eldest child with my car, credit cards, house, and my other children. 😉

    • Replies: @Rosie
  120. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    Dad jealousy is a thing with homeschooling, as with nursing.

    Nothing stops dads from participating in homeschooling and giving babies a bottle of stored mom’s milk.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  121. iffen says:
    @Twinkie

    when the author is

    Ad hominem.

    I haven’t read Mein Kampf either.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  122. Twinkie says:
    @iffen

    I haven’t read Mein Kampf either.

    You should, along with the likes of Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto.

    And I hope you are not equating Ron Unz with Hitler. And if you are, why are you here?

    • Replies: @iffen
  123. Rosie says:
    @Twinkie

    Nothing stops dads from participating in homeschooling

    Except their work schedules. My solution is to let Dad do the very most fun cocurricular activities, the field trips, the science experiments, etc. As his time is limited, he should get the opportunity to do the most fun and memorable stuff.

    and giving babies a bottle of stored mom’s milk.

    The trouble with that is that nipple preference is a real thing. After struggling with it, I insisted on a strict no-bottle policy with subsequent babies. Mr. Rosie was always very supportive and I will always be very grateful for that. I never even would have noticed the struggles with jealousy but for his light-hearted but very sincere disclosures of same.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  124. Rosie says:
    @Twinkie

    I trust my eldest child with my car, credit cards, house, and my other children.

    Then to that extent, he or she is not a “child.” Eldest children are God’s gift to parents.

    The notion that women are children is a disgracefully antiempirical notion, both sociologically and neurologically. But then almost every dissident right platitude about women is disgracefully antiempirical.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  125. Mark G. says:
    @Rosie

    So the article you linked to is not correct. Instead of the decrease in shotgun marriages leading to increased out of wedlock births, increased welfare led to decreased pressure to marry which then led to more out of wedlock births. So the increase in welfare is the originating cause. You appeared in the past to think that the decrease in shotgun marriages was a bad thing. If you think the decrease in shotgun marriages was a bad thing and the decrease in shotgun marriages was caused by an increase in welfare then wouldn’t the increase in welfare be a bad thing too?

    • Replies: @Rosie
  126. Anonymous[217] • Disclaimer says:

    The problem is not knowing how it will turn out.

    There are women who can have 3 or 4 kids, and each pregnancy goes fine: no complications, no morning sickness, 8 hours or less of labor, no tearing, no post-partum depression.

    And then there are women like my friend, who had a horrible pregnancy and birth. She was on bedrest for most of the pregnancy, couldn’t even leave the house to go to the grocery store. She had to have an emergency c-section at 7 months, because of some complication in the womb.

    I had a coworker who was on bedrest for most of her pregnancy too.

    I also know a local woman who had a botched c-section: everything went so wrong that her uterus ruptured, and they had to remove it entirely. She can have no more children. And she had to get a gigantic blood transfusion.

    When my friend’s brother was born, their mother only had 37 minutes of labor. He came out too fast, which damaged her genitals. Even years after his birth she had to get surgery to correct long term sustained damage.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  127. iffen says:
    @Twinkie

    You should, along with the likes of Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto.

    I still have my paperback copy of TCM.

    And I hope you are not equating Ron Unz with Hitler.

    No, Twinkie, I was not. I hope you are not equating Marx with Hitler. You said that I was using ad hominem and I wasn’t. I was not trying to use that to defeat any premises or arguments in his writing. I was listing some of my cues used to evaluate whether I wanted to read something by the author. He may well be the world’s supreme authority on meritocracy for all I know. I can’t read everything so I screen. I don’t read Nancy Nurse books anymore; I already read one. I don’t read Bodice Rippers anymore; I already read one. I don’t read F. Reed’s articles anymore, I already read the 3-4 that he has. I don’t read War for Blair Mountain’s comments; I already read it.

    I don’t listen to insurance salesmen everyday, but I do have some insurance and I don’t pay very much attention to what car salesmen say, but I have vehicles.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  128. Rosie says:
    @Mark G.

    If you think the decrease in shotgun marriages was a bad thing and the decrease in shotgun marriages was caused by an increase in welfare then wouldn’t the increase in welfare be a bad thing too?

    What did I ever do to deserve this? Seriously?

    I’m going to assume FSA that welfare decreased shotgun marriages. (I don’t believe that BTW. I agree with the article that it was abortion, which men here routinely claim absolves then from any moral responsibility to their children, though they never say that about welfare.)

    Anyway, this is seriously juvenile, pathetic reasoning. Suppose I have cancer. I get chemotherapy and my hair falls out. My hair falling out is bad. Therefore, chemo is bad and I shouldn’t get anymore chemo, even though it’s preventing me from dying of cancer.

    Look. I come here precisely to avoid this kind of stupidity. Perhaps some sort of introduction to logic might help you keep up.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  129. Mark G. says:
    @Rosie

    Your comparison isn’t accurate. Suppose you say cancer is a bad thing. I point out that smoking causes cancer so therefore isn’t smoking a bad thing too? You then reply that cancer is bad but that doesn’t mean we should encourage anyone to quit smoking if it is something they enjoy. That’s a more accurate comparison.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  130. Rosie says:
    @Mark G.

    Your comparison isn’t accurate.

    The point is that you must look at all the effects of a thing, not just one. Suppose that in addition to causing cancer, cigarettes prevented heart disease, stroke, and alzheimer’s.

    In the case at hand, even if you were correct that welfare eroded the shotgun marriage norm, you still have to take account of the fact that it prevents women and children from starving in the streets and/or being forced into prostitution. So, yes, my comparison is accurate.

    https://attackingthedevil.co.uk/pmg/tribute/mt1.php

    Now, please stop dragging down the discourse here with patently fallacious reasoning.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  131. Mark G. says:
    @Rosie

    But if welfare hadn’t been increased then you would have continued to have shotgun marriages. With shotgun marriages continuing, women and children wouldn’t have been starving in the streets because there would have been more pressure on men to marry them when they got pregnant. So increases in welfare caused the decline in shotgun marriages which then caused increases in out of wedlock children. Then the increases in out of wedlock children required even more spending on additional welfare. If the increases in out of wedlock children and resulting increases in welfare spending continue eventually the system will run out of money. The taxes needed to pay for it will be so high that it will discourage people from working and it will become impossible to collect enough tax revenue. When the system runs out of money then you will have women and children starving at that point. I’m trying to think long term here and think of what might sustainable in the long run.

    • Replies: @Toronto Russian
  132. Rosie says:

    The taxes needed to pay for it will be so high that it will discourage people from working and it will become impossible to collect enough tax revenue.

    If this were my blog, I would kick you off for dishonesty. White people are perfectly capable of sustaining a welfare state. Post-scarcity is upon us, and our problem is not too few people to fill jobs, but rather too few jobs for the people who want one.

    With shotgun marriages continuing, women and children wouldn’t have been starving in the streets because there would have been more pressure on men to marry them when they got pregnant.

    Everything was working just fine in “the good old days.” Welfare was some sort of elite plot to humiliate men, or something.

    What you fail to understand is that there is no reason whatsoever to destroy the social safety net in order to insist that men marry girls they knock up. None whatsoever.

    Once again, you make the mistake of assuming that:

    If A caused B, then you must eliminate A in order to eliminate B.

    Let’s go back to my chemotherapy example. Chemotherapy makes people nauseous, and that’s bad. Not doing chemotherapy is not the best option, because it is an effective cancer treatment.

    So what to do?

    https://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatments-and-side-effects/physical-side-effects/nausea-and-vomiting/nausea-and-vomiting-drugs.html

    This is precisely the fallacy at the heart of all reactionary thinking. You only know how to criticize, to demand regression. In the nature of things, the solution to one problem may cause another, and another, and another. The reactionary demands that problem-solving be rejected wholesale in favor of stasis, rejecting out of hand the possibility of progress. Fortunately, most people rightly reject such fatalism, else we’d still be living in caves.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    , @Twinkie
  133. Mark G. says:
    @Rosie

    The fallacy of all socialist thinking is that people will continue to work hard even if you take the fruits of their labor and give it to someone else. When people did live in caves it was because there was no secure private property. Primitive hunter/gatherers lived in a communistic society with no private property and lived an average of 35 years. It wasn’t really until the eighteenth century that the idea that people had a right to keep the fruits of their labor became widespread. As Locke put it, everyone has a right to life, liberty and property. Jefferson echoed this in the Declaration of Independence, replacing “property” with “the pursuit of happiness”. The capitalist system that developed during the Enlightenment led to average life expectancies doubling from 39 to 78 or more in whatever countries adopted capitalism. Now, when you say white people are capable of sustaining a welfare state and I say they aren’t, I would point out that neither one of us has a crystal ball and can see in the future. So we will just have to wait and see. I think the collapse of the welfare state will be soon. We are adding a trillion dollars every year to the national debt and it is up to 23 trillion. When all the Baby Boomers retire, they will stop paying taxes and start collecting Social Security and Medicare and I think that will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

    • Replies: @L Woods
    , @Rosie
  134. @Mark G.

    If the increases in out of wedlock children and resulting increases in welfare spending continue eventually the system will run out of money.

    They have been declining for over 10 years in the US.

    The birth rate for unmarried women was 41.0 births per 1,000 unmarried women aged 15–44 in 2017, down 3% from 2016 (42.4) (Tables 9 and 10). The 2017 nonmarital birth rate was 21% lower than the peak of 51.8 in 2007 and 2008 (10). …

    The birth rate for married women also declined in 2017, to 87.4 per 1,000 married women aged 15–44 from 89.6 in 2016. The marital birth rate declined 4% over the period 2005–2010 but rose 6% from 2010 through 2016 (11).

    The percentage of all births to unmarried women was 39.8% in 2017, unchanged from 2016 and the lowest level since 2007 (10). The percentage of all births to unmarried women peaked in 2009 at 41.0% (11).

    In 2017, the percentage of nonmarital births decreased from 2016 for the four largest race and Hispanic-origin groups: non-Hispanic white (28.4% in 2017), non-Hispanic black (69.4%), non-Hispanic Asian (11.8%), and Hispanic (52.1%) women (Table 9). The percentage of nonmarital births increased for non-Hispanic AIAN women between 2016 and 2017 (69.2% in 2017) and was unchanged for non-Hispanic NHOPI women (48.5%).

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_08-508.pdf

    For comparison, the nonmarital birth percentage in Russia peaked at 30% in 2005 and was 23.8% in 2014. In 2007 started the demographic policy that increased welfare big time, most notably the maternal capital everyone (including single parents) receives after the second child. So either the influence was opposite, or there was no influence and the decrease in out of wedlock births was caused by other factors (like falling alcoholism rate or general life stabilization after the chaotic ’90s), we don’t really know.

  135. @YetAnotherAnon

    Wasn’t there some swingers site where the registrants turned out to be 90%+ men? Not surprisingly, of course, but since “sugar mommy” is sold, maybe they’re largely men who sign up.

  136. Twinkie says:
    @iffen

    Agree or disagree, Mr. Unz’s arguments and data on affirmative action at elite universities are compelling if you are at all interested in the topic.

    I hope you are not equating Marx with Hitler.

    I am, to the extent that their ideas and followers have killed millions in the 20th century. And it’s useful to read the ideas of those men directly.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @iffen
  137. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    If this were my blog, I would kick you off for dishonesty.

    If.

    And you wouldn’t need to, because very few people would bother to read or comment on it. As another commenter once opined, your views are straight out of the Democratic part platform except “hate whitey” stuff. That’s why you get into food fight with just about everyone.

  138. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    Except their work schedules.

    Your husband doesn’t work 24/7. I know lots of dads who work demanding jobs and still participate in homeschooling. It’s a matter of priorities.

    The trouble with that is that nipple preference is a real thing. After struggling with it, I insisted on a strict no-bottle policy with subsequent babies.

    Children differ individually even within the same family. I think it’s not the most optimal parenting to apply preferences of one child on the rest.

    All but one of my children didn’t mind the bottle (they are all good, non-picky eaters). Even the one who refused the bottle initially relented after a few days of sustained effort. Most babies have a survival instinct like that. 😉

    Mr. Rosie was always very supportive

    That’s good. All husbands should be. But this is a different portrayal than what you painted before – you stated that you had to “negotiate” everything with him and dropped other hints about a husband who won’t help out.

  139. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    The notion that women are children is a disgracefully antiempirical notion, both sociologically and neurologically. But then almost every dissident right platitude about women is disgracefully antiempirical.

    I don’t believe grownup women are children, but because men and women differ, they may seem childlike to men. Women tend to be more pragmatic and less abstract than men, fo example. That can lead to women – child-like – focusing on immediate needs over larger issues. They also vocalize complaints more, which gives the impression of being whiney like children. They are also more likely to display fear in stressful situations, und so weiter.

    Empirical? That’s interesting, because male-female differences are far more empirically measurable than racial differences, a fact that you seem resistant to accept.

  140. L Woods says:
    @Mark G.

    The fallacy of all socialist thinking is that people will continue to work hard even if you take the fruits of their labor and give it to someone else

    Lol, as though that doesn’t happen under capitalism. Your typical scientist or engineer is given pennies on the dollar of the value he creates for the managerial and investment classes (not to mention the NAM lumpen proletariat and women).

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @dfordoom
  141. iffen says:
    @Twinkie

    I am

    130-10=120

    Compelling data, you don’t see it everyday.

    • Replies: @Talha
  142. Talha says:
    @iffen

    Stalin and Hitler…?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Twinkie
  143. iffen says:
    @Talha

    Stalin and Hitler…?

    • Agree: Talha
  144. Rosie says:
    @Mark G.

    The fallacy of all socialist thinking is that people will continue to work hard even if you take the fruits of their labor and give it to someone else.

    Hey Mark, is that you cracking jokes about 10-year-old prostitutes at 5:25?

  145. Can it really be true that there was a golden age of prostitution that peaked before the advent of the internet and of freely available information about affordable sex tourism destinations?

  146. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    Stalin and Hitler

    As warlords, yes. Marx and Hitler in terms of writing that formulated social and politico-economic policies with profound impact on early and mid-20th century.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  147. Twinkie says:
    @L Woods

    Your typical scientist or engineer is given pennies on the dollar of the value he creates

    That was also the case with medieval guilds and, frankly, communist countries in the real world.* At least under a capitalist system, that scientist can choose to quit, start his own business, and have a chance at deriving maximum benefit for himself. In other systems that was virtually impossible.

    *Mikhail Kalashnikov, the inventor of the AK series of rifles, would often grumble that he had virtually nothing while Eugene Stoner, the creator of the AR-15/M16 rifles, had his own airplane.

    I’m not saying capitalism is perfect. It tends to reward those who dare and it is a very much “winner takes all” type of a system. But historically it has shown a far greater tendency to enlarge the pie and make most people richer (even if some become far richer still) than other systems have.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @L Woods
  148. iffen says:

    Marx and Hitler in terms of writing that formulated social and politico-economic policies

    120-5=115

  149. L Woods says:
    @Twinkie

    I don’t contest capitalism’s unrivaled capacity for rapid absolute growth, but in that dimension we’ve long passed the point of diminishing marginal returns. To paraphrase a certain authoritarian figure: capitalism is a trolley to be taken to your desired destination, then disembarked. We missed our stop some time in the 70s, I think. Current social problems simply cannot be solved by growing the overall pie, without regard to distributional issues.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  150. L Woods says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    I wouldn’t doubt it. Brings to mind one of the endings of the great work of digital media, Deus Ex, in which you essentially destroy global telecommunications. It doesn’t usher in utopia, but it does keep dystopia at bay for some time.

  151. Twinkie says:
    @L Woods

    Current social problems simply cannot be solved by growing the overall pie, without regard to distributional issues.

    I don’t disagree, but don’t throw away the baby with the bath water.

  152. @Twinkie

    From way back when, with occupational listings to boot.

    Teachers are great bets. Very few cheating opportunities as they’re mostly surrounded by kids and other women.

    Real estate agents, lawyers, and waitresses, on the other hand–tons of comprised situations, and a lot of those women can’t resist.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @L Woods
    , @Twinkie
  153. @Talha

    I protect, I provide, and I try to nurture the best I’m able to. But I’m hopelessly outmatched when it comes to the latter.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Anonymous
  154. @Anonymous

    That’s a tremendous amount of bad luck in your social circle. Very sorry to hear it. It is unusually tragic, though.

    All of our children have come without complication, but even if one had been particularly tough, I assure you my wife would not have regretted whatever suffering she had to experience to get our child(ren) here.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  155. @Jonathan Mason

    Surveys consistently show people have less sexual in general today than in the past. Prostitution isn’t immune. Social cocooning and too many substitutes, I guess.

  156. Rosie says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    Real estate agents, lawyers, and waitresses, on the other hand–tons of comprised situations, and a lot of those women can’t resist.

    Do we know how many women versus men cheat on faithful partners? Apparently, retaliatory cheating is a thing, and it’s more common among women.

    https://www.insider.com/revenge-cheat-reason-for-affairs-2018-12

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    , @iffen
  157. Talha says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    In some things men outmatch women in and in some things it’s the reverse. No shame in this if both sides recognize what each brings to the table and honors and respects that.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @L Woods
    , @Anonymous
  158. “It ain’t no prostitute, it’s a SUBSTITUTE!”

  159. dfordoom says: • Website
    @L Woods

    The fallacy of all socialist thinking is that people will continue to work hard even if you take the fruits of their labor and give it to someone else

    Lol, as though that doesn’t happen under capitalism.

    But the free market is magical. Because in theory the free market really is perfect. Therefore in practice it will work perfectly as well.

    • LOL: Rosie
    • Replies: @L Woods
  160. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Twinkie

    Stalin and Hitler

    As warlords, yes.

    Except that Hitler was an abject failure as a warlord, whereas Stalin was pretty successful.

    The really successful warlords were Stalin and Roosevelt. The dismal failures as warlords were Hitler and Churchill.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Twinkie
  161. Talha says:
    @dfordoom

    Hitler was an abject failure as a warlord

    I think we can all agree that if your career of warlordism eventually ends up with your capital city wasted and your women raped in the streets, then it may not be your thing and you need to rethink your career options…or blow out your brains.

    Peace.

  162. Twinkie says:
    @dfordoom

    Stalin was pretty successful.

    1941 seems to argue against it.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  163. iffen says:

    James Madison and George “Dubya” Bush both served as President. AFAIK, no one tries to equate them.

  164. @Rosie

    Not from the GSS, no, unfortunately.

  165. L Woods says:
    @dfordoom

    You must be an economist.

  166. L Woods says:
    @Talha

    Ah yes, the “equal but different” fallacy conservatives are so fond of. Ranks right next to the “moral equivalency” fallacy between the “extremists” on the right and left (however they’re defined this year) that the moderates/Good People are so enamored with. Never gets stale, no sir.

    • Replies: @Talha
  167. L Woods says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    I can hardly imagine where military would rank on there — probably around 50%.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  168. iffen says:
    @Rosie

    Anecdotally, I have seen men over the years who wanted to end their marriage and cheated in order to provide a point of rupture.

  169. Talha says:
    @L Woods

    You are talking to a Muslim; I never stated that I think women should have the same exact legal rights as men.

    But men and women compliment each other in the formation of a family due what each brings to the table.

    Peace

  170. @L Woods

    Ha, the sample size was probably too small to even bother with, but I suspect you’re right.

  171. Anonymous[217] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    The problem is that the most important thing the average man does better than the average woman is quickly getting automated out of existence.

    In the old days X% of women died from pregnancy or birthing complications. And X% of men died in war, or from workplace accidents.

    The fact is, the average man is larger and stronger than the average woman. The inconvenient fact is, the dollar value of physical strength gets closer and closer to zero with each passing year.

    What happens in the far future when drones fight all of our wars, when all manual labor jobs are automated, and men no longer have to risk their lives to mine coal, or to build houses, or to wash skyscraper windows, to support their families?

    Men will have risk-free lives, but women will still be burdened by the physical toil of pregnancy and birth.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Audacious Epigone
  172. Anonymous[217] • Disclaimer says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    But that’s just you as an individual man and your individual wife.

    Maybe your wife has a more nurturing personality than most other women. Maybe you have a less nurturing personality than the average man.

    My father was almost as nurturing as my mother. He did everything she was able to do, with the exception of gestation and parturition.

  173. Anonymous[217] • Disclaimer says:
    3294278

    Does it occur to you that most women who get an abortion don’t do it to receive anything, but to avoid horrible consequences for themselves?

    80%+ are only doing it because their boyfriend skipped town to avoid being a father. Or to avoid getting beaten by their parents. Or to avoid having to drop out of high school. Or to avoid the shame of being a welfare single parent.

    I hate taxes and welfare, so I commend them if they are doing it to avoid being a financial leech on society.

  174. Anonymous[217] • Disclaimer says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    YOU are the one who has an unusually lucky wife.

    Over a third of children in America are born from C-section. 50%-80% of women have vaginal tears from giving birth.

    Maybe you should look up the statistics for pregnancy and childbirth complications.

    It almost seems as if there are more pregnancies and births with complications than without.

    I understand that your wife wouldn’t regret having kids, even if they came with complications that would permanently disable her in some way, but many women would.

    A lot of women’s vaginal injuries are so severe that they have painful sex with their husbands, even years after the birth.

    Most men simultaneously want children and want their lives to always be able to have sex with them, and look exactly the same as before pregnancy. This is an impossible standard.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  175. EldnahYm says:
    @Rosie

    Nonsense. The point of alimony is to enforce the marital contract. Husbands are required to:

    1. Love, honor, and cherish their wives,
    2. Share their income with their wives.

    You simply double down. #1 is already falsified by the existence of divorce, but you carry on acting like this does not falsify the logic of your claim. Logically, once marriage ends, #2 should end as well.

    Imagine for a moment the law was as you suggest. If a middle-aged man got tired of his aging wife, he could just disrespect and humiliate her until she leaves. Then, he could spend his resources on some new woman, who wasn’t there when he was poor and has nothing.

    I’m not interested in trading back and forth stories about imaginary scenarios where one spouse is screwed over by the other. There are an infinite number of them, and no government will be able to safeguard against all of them. What were your words: “marriage will be profitable for some and unprofitable for others.”

    Yet, the only reforms you are interested in are those that degrade women and turn them into at-will concubines in their own homes. Funny that.

    I am interested in reforms that could actually happen. You are a larper whose dream is to have the legal system force people into marriages and society make numerous accommodations so low quality women never have to be inconvenienced for their own bad decisions. You are for maximum state intervention in marriage. If what you wanted were to actually come to pass, what you would have is a society where men are utter weaklings and where trust has no part at all in marriage.

  176. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Twinkie

    Stalin was pretty successful.

    1941 seems to argue against it.

    It doesn’t matter if you lose a few matches early in the season. Even a few big defeats early in the season don’t matter. What matters is how you go when you get to the finals. Stalin did outstandingly well in the finals.

    You have to win the matches that matter.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @Twinkie
  177. Twinkie says:
    @dfordoom

    He was lucky to have Hitler as an opponent. But, as Chuck Yeager once said, “I’d rather be lucky than good.”

    • Replies: @Oleaginous Outrager
  178. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    And in my metaphysical framework they will continue to get rewarded by God for their normal efforts while the rewards of men will be diminished in correlation with the decreasing lack of sacrifice and responsibility.

    You have to realize, I have never expected this world to be fair – it is the abode of trials. All of these discrepancies get made up in the afterlife.

    As far as hyper-automation, I’m down for Butlerian Jihad if everyone else is.

    And if there is simply no option for us to put the brakes on it, then we have already become the technopoly that Neil Postman warned about:

    Peace.

  179. @Twinkie

    No, he was lucky to have millions more lives to spend than Hitler. That’s the extent of Stalin’s achievements as a “warlord”.

    • Agree: Twinkie
  180. I know I’m a day late and a dollar short to this party, but I just bumped across some article about this DeepNude thing. (It’s taken offline, but long term it sounds pretty inevitable.) I guess its net effect would be negative, at least when thinking about how the pictures of my wife or daughter could be put through it.

    But, as a guy, I always keep wondering about how women of my acquaintance would look naked. (I guess I’m not the only guy like that.) So I’d guess the temptation would be very difficult to resist. (Even if these pics in their first iteration would probably be poor quality, and perhaps wouldn’t really look like the women really look.) Out of curiosity, even with women who I don’t find particularly attractive.

    It’s like mixed-sex naked sauna in German-speaking countries. You are not supposed to look at the women, but how could you resist? All you can do is force your gaze away from them for most of the time. Even if they are not particularly attractive or young. At least that’s my experience.

    • Replies: @Talha
  181. Talha says:
    @reiner Tor

    It’s like mixed-sex naked sauna in German-speaking countries.

    Ah…progress!!!


    Artist:
    Laurits Regner Tuxen (Danish, 1853–1927)

    Title:
    Læssøepige (A young girl from the Danish island of Læsø) , 1874

    http://www.artnet.com/artists/laurits-regner-tuxen/læssøepige-a-young-girl-from-the-danish-island-of-VB_RRcg8g7aIXNqkBD7iZA2

  182. @dfordoom

    After reading your post, it makes me wonder if the first sex robot won’t be a canine one designed for women.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  183. dfordoom says: • Website
    @14wordstofreedom

    After reading your post, it makes me wonder if the first sex robot won’t be a canine one designed for women.

    It’s not impossible!

    Women are likely to be a huge market for sexbots (or at least robots that combine the functions of sexbot and companion robot). Realistically there are immense numbers of middle-aged women who are going to be facing lives of total emptiness and loneliness. Robots that offer something more in the way of sexual satisfaction than a vibrator and something more in the way of companionship than a dog are going to look pretty attractive to many of those women.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  184. @Anonymous

    A risk-free life is very risky for men.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  185. @Anonymous

    The increase in c-sections over time is at least in part due to people being more overweight than ever before, having children later than ever before, and CYA by hospital staff. Childbirth is hard, of course, but it’s been hard forever. It’s much less difficult than it was in the past, and women don’t have to go through it as much as they did in the past.

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  186. @Audacious Epigone

    C-sections are also getting structurally built into the hospital procedure for childbirth. For example they declare that a child has to be born within 24 hours of arriving in the hospital (or sometimes they count it from earlier, like when the waters break). That’s an arbitrary limit (midwifes traditionally said something like 48 hours). They automatically give the woman oxytocin, which may or may not increase the chance of a natural childbirth within 24 hours. But it certainly increases the pain (so the woman will ask for painkillers, which makes natural childbirth difficult if not impossible) and results in the orifice opening faster than normal. Then they turn around and say that with the orifice open, there’s a danger of infection (had they done nothing, we could wait longer), so they need to do a C-section. Giving oxytocin is done (at least in the few countries in Europe where I know the practice) pretty much unthinkingly to everyone, though the “benefits” are probably not any more proven than those of a low carb diet.

    One problem with a C-section is that it pretty much precludes having truly large families. A woman cannot have ten C-sections in a lifetime.

    Giving away control over childbirth to the medical establishment probably considerably depressed birth rates in itself.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Twinkie
  187. @dfordoom

    Besides vibrators and dildos, women have the Sybian. It’s basically a pretty realistic simulation of a riding position intercourse. Probably not any worse than a sexbot for guys.

  188. Twinkie says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    Did not see a breakdown by race, income, etc.

  189. Meta:  The comment-counting here is VERY buggy.

    I came to this post, and there was 1 obviously-new comment (in blue) but no new comments listed at the top.

    Sometimes I come to a post and it lists 2+ new comments, but there’s only one when I click through the list.

    Other times, there’s (say) a count of 4 new comments, but I have to click through 6 or more before I get to the end.

    Ron has some seriously buggy code here, and he needs to fix it.  I’ll give him the page source and cookie values if he tells me what to look for.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  190. Anonymous[217] • Disclaimer says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    Men’s lives have gotten much better since the Industrial Revolution.

    Most men work sedentary jobs. If you want a manual labor job, that is your choice. I don’t know any men in my social circle who work a blue collar labor job. My father and all of his friends worked white collar sedentary jobs.

    A man who works a white collar office job is no more at risk of workplace injury than his female colleague.

    In first world countries, the draft is often banned. I would like to see it banned worldwide. The conscript armies have historically been the biggest human rights injustice against men. No individual man should give up his life and his physical safety to satisfy the desires of corporate overlords and rich politicians.

    Paternity uncertainty has historically been a problem for men, but it is not a problem in countries where paternity tests are available. Every country should provide its citizens with mandatory, government paid paternity tests. This will reward the large majority of men who are good, and punish the small minority of men who are evil.

    Men now have paternity uncertainty, physical safety (in most first world countries), yet their wives don’t have artificial wombs. If men have access to paternity tests then women deserve to have artificial wombs.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  191. @Mr. Rational

    Passed it along to Mr. Unz, thanks.

  192. @Anonymous

    Except for psychologically, I think. What were suicide and depression rates prior to the industrial revolution?

    • Replies: @Toronto Russian
  193. Twinkie says:
    @reiner Tor

    One problem with a C-section is that it pretty much precludes having truly large families. A woman cannot have ten C-sections in a lifetime.

    True, but VBACs – Vaginal births after Caesarean – are on the rise.

    Giving away control over childbirth to the medical establishment probably considerably depressed birth rates in itself.

    More like the legal establishment, given that the prominence of C-sections and induced labors is largely a product of the “defensive medicine” mentality brought on by the legal industry. As far as doctoring goes, obstetrics is a pretty cruddy specialty with poor hours, high liability costs, and low income.

    My wife preferred midwives delivering at a major hospital with the ob/gyn physician backup (and having all the latest technology at the midwifery for checkups). She felt that was the best of both worlds, the touchy-feely-ness of the midwives combined with all the lifesaving technologies and skills of the physicians. And as it turned out, we needed that backup – otherwise I might be writing as a widower today.

  194. @Audacious Epigone

    Low in most nations (except the tribes which sanctioned suicide of old people to spare the rest of starvation, e.g. the Eskimo):

    https://evolutionistx.wordpress.com/2016/01/22/kabloona-friday-3/

    But you can’t really compare the cultural context. Maybe pre-industrial Europeans avoided it not because they were in a more sunny mood (melancholia was a known disease which would possibly be called depression today), but because there was more to be afraid of – not only damnation of your soul, but public humiliation and impoverishment of your family.

    Each of the toughening measures imposed by the church against suicides was immediately accompanied by even stricter acts of secular power.

    In the “Canons” of the English King Edward (XI century), suicides are equated with thieves and robbers. For nearly a thousand years, until 1823, there was a barbaric custom in Britain to bury suicides at a crossroads, first dragging a corpse through the streets and piercing its heart with an aspen stake. A heavy stone was placed on the face of the “criminal”.

    In medieval Zurich, those who were drowned were buried in the sand near water; those who stabbed themselves were exposed to mocking, with the suicide weapon stuck into the wooden block. In Metz, the body of the sinner was thrust into the barrel and let flow with the Moselle, away from the desecrated hometown. In Denmark, it was forbidden to take a suicide out of the house through a door – only through a window, but the body was not interred, and thrown into the fire, the symbol of the flames of hell to which the sinner’s soul had already gone. In Bordeaux, the corpse was hung by the legs. In Abbeville, it was dragged on a sackcloth through the streets. In Lille, the men were hung on the pitchfork, and the women were burned. Madness did not alleviate the guilt – after all, everyone knew that the devil settled in the souls of madmen.

    The zealousness of the authorities had not only religious but financial background: even in the laws of St. Louis (XIII century), the suicide was ordered not only to be subjected to a post-mortem court, but also to be deprived of property that was transferred to the baron. With the centralization of power, the crown became the successor to the suicides. If the criminal was a nobleman, his coat of arms was broken, castles were destroyed, forests were cut down, and all other wealth was given to the treasury. The criminal code of Louis XIV, along with the emotional punishments consecrated by tradition (read a sentence above the suicide, drag the corpse on the sackcloth face down, then hang it on the gallows or send it to a slaughterhouse), sees to the obligatory confiscation of property, bypassing the direct heirs.

    Given such severity, suicide occurred rarely and caused a mystical horror among medieval Europeans. Suicides along with heretics and hardened criminals were considered the source of personnel for vampires, ghosts, and other night ghouls (hence the stake in the heart as a precautionary measure).
     
    Grigory Chkhartishvili: The Writer and Suicide

  195. @Svigor

    Apologies, Svig,

    I’ve said it before, but it warrants saying again, a thousand times over.

    Thank you, Svig, and White Men in general, for ALL that you do that makes our White women’s lives easier and safer: protecting, fighting, dying, dangerous and dirty work such as pumping the oil out of the ground, changing the oil in the car, keeping the power on in snowstorms, fishing for crab legs and an untold number of other tasks and chores, without which my babies and I would have been uncomfortable or, at worst, died.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS