Recently I bumped into a casual friend I hadn’t seen for a few years. We last saw each other at a fundraising auction for a local cause where I met her sophomore in college daughter and her daughter’s beau for the first time. (Her first boyfriend.)
At the time I remember thinking, “I bet they will get married,” and sure enough they are this June.
Her mom is exceptionally cute, always dressed stylishly, with her hair and nails done. She’s very fit and looks much younger than her years. The mom is incredibly sweet too, very devoted to her family.
Dad is a regular guy, not flashy, not someone one would look twice at. I am sure he’d be classified as a beta, and yet his wife loves him and fawns over him, has a gleam in her eye as he speaks. They look at each other with love. He’s a good provider and they seem to have a happy, stable marriage of many years.
The daughter’s fiancé reminded me a lot of her dad, and I predict the daughter will have a similar happy, stable, and non-drama marriage. Not because she’s lucky (while she is to have such good parents and a good example) but because she’ll make the small daily good choices that make it so.
It really isn’t rocket science, and yet it is so rare. It makes me happy when I do see people making wise choices and living happily as a result.
What do you think? Please share in the comments.
Notes From a Red Pill Girl 
‘It really isn’t rocket science, and yet it is so rare.’
No…when things like the less premarital sex you have the more stable your marriage will be and here’s the reasons aren’t just made up to make sluts feel bad. It’s how things are.
Things like being devoted to the family, putting in effort, and not being selfish are a big part too.
Very true Earl, I agree that the downsides of casual sex and having sex early are very much unaddressed. But are very real.My mom was constantly asking if I wanted to go on the pill, in fact put me on it before I was even sexually active. The underlying message was that it was inevitable. She did at least stress the connection between love, commitment, and sex and never advocated a casual sex lifestyle. I plan to tell my kids it’s best to wait, and to encourage them in that effort by having stricter than normal rules on dating and such. And to share stories of how that pays off, like with this girl.
This girl has also had a good example w her mom. Her mom ALWAYS mentioned her daughter, what she was up to, what she was doing in school, etc. I heard of her long before I ever met her. The mom clearly has her family front and center, even though she also takes care of herself and I believe she works at least part time now, not sure if she did when her kids were younger.
In a post at Spawney’s Ame mentions she’s not worked outside the home for 22 years. After spending those same years working and doing the career thing, being always spread thin, and all the rest I have to say I think she made the wiser choice! I could have had a much simpler, easier, and likely happier life if I hadn’t done the “career girl” thing. But from the time I was little that was pushed by my mom as the be all and end all. (Now she criticizes that I have “missed out” on too much of my girl’s lives! I reminded her of her advice to me.) I support my girls education but I don’t push the idea of career as the ultimate and all that on them. I would be perfectly happy if they grow up to be wonderful wives and moms!
ahhh, Bloom … hindsight is … distorted at best 😉
i love what you’re offering your daughters … a farm life, the inside view of what it takes to manage a farm and a home. my aspie-girl and i were talking about things like this today, and we both agree a farm life would have been ideal for her growing up; it’s something i think she’d like in her future. but i have not a clue how to do that, and my husband is done with anything farm related 🙂 .
every mom feels like she’s missed out even if she hasn’t. pray daily to be and become the mom each of your girls needs just for them, and then leave it with God. there’s only so much we can do, even as a sahm, and the rest we just have to release to a Higher Power who is much more capable than we are.
sometimes i do wish i had a passion outside of homemaking and mothering – it would be a lot easier in many ways. i get a bit anxious, sometimes, when i think of the (somewhat) near future when i’ll need to work again – i have no idea what i’ll do. it’s very scary for me.
it’s amazing how easy it is for a woman to get herself in situations where she’s ‘spread thin,’ regardless of whether she works outside the home or not. most of the time i could not control it b/c my aspie-girl needed so much from me 24-7 and i had no help (no family). i had one friend who could handle her and would watch my girls for a few hours at a time here and there, but, as it should have been, her husband and family always came first. the four years doing it all as a single mom took so much out of me that i doubt i’ll ever recover. i am extremely grateful my husband doesn’t demand what i cannot give and never feels resentment or anything negative for that. if you knew the real cost to those years, how much it took from me, you’d probably be shocked (but i don’t share that publicly 😉 ).
be encouraged, my friend. these years are ones where most moms feel spread thin. there’s only so much of us to give and only so many hours in a day. we pray that God would enable us to be what He needs us to be, and we have to let go of the rest. there’s always another mom out there who seems to be doing better, is more organized, has accomplished more, etc, than we have. it’s hard not to compare ourselves to our perceptions of other moms.
– – –
My mom was constantly asking if I wanted to go on the pill, in fact put me on it before I was even sexually active. The underlying message was that it was inevitable.
gosh … i’d forgotten about this ‘craze,’ probably b/c i pulled my girls out in high school to homeschool and didn’t have to be exposed to it anymore. such a tragic way of thinking, imo. my parents didn’t do that, but they encouraged to the extreme my involvement with boys … it was as if me being attractive to boys was a positive reflection on them, so anytime they noticed it they pointed it out and overly flaunted it. the town i grew up in was overtly sexualized, too, and with the abuse from when i was little and up, i grew up with some very distorted ideas and views of sex and boys and dating and marriage. i had to work hard to discard the lies and find the truth. lots of mistakes and trial and error along the way.
one of the huge negatives of this philosophy of putting girls on the pill young is that it teaches them that getting pregnant is bad and terrible and worth harming oneself to avoid. once that settles in, and sex becomes seemingly ‘free,’ it’s like a downhill snowball of poison.
– – –
Merry Christmas to you and yours! hold your girls, delight in them, honor and respect your man, and give the rest to God. we can’t *not* miss things as they grow up, but we can appreciate and value and delight in what we do have 🙂 … and it truly is wonderful to raise children to honor what is right. i’m amazed everyday at my daughters and who they’ve become and are continuing to become.
and Merry Christmas to all out here. i greatly appreciate all of you, your stories and advice and thoughts and wisdom. i don’t get out here all the time as often as i’d like, and sometimes i only get to glance through all the comments, but i do appreciate what i get to read and what you share 🙂
shhhh! listen carefully! can you hear Santa and his reindeer?! 🙂
GBY RPG!
IDK if it is applicable in you situation, but one of the best decisions that I’ve made in the last year was to get my 2 youngest daughters involved in our local pregnancy care center. Amazing what they have learned, seen, and experienced so far. They love their volunteer work and they are able to see firsthand some of the difficulties associated with poor decisions.
I think that my wife’s past good times have a lot to do with our failed marriage. Her realization of her slutty ways in her 20’s caused her to seek out a good provider with which to settle down. I think that she felt that if she didn’t find a keeper soon that she would become just another whore. It was as much about keeping self respect as anything else. I think that she knew that she could barely contol herself, sexually. Bad, bad reason to marry.
‘My mom was constantly asking if I wanted to go on the pill, in fact put me on it before I was even sexually active.’
I’d outlaw hormonal contraception if I could. It’s the only pill a person takes to try and take out a normal healthy function…namely a woman’s fertility. There’s nothing good that comes from it.
‘I think that my wife’s past good times have a lot to do with our failed marriage. Her realization of her slutty ways in her 20’s caused her to seek out a good provider with which to settle down.’
It’s a harsh truth a lot of people don’t want to face…but the more premarital sex partners a person has they have a higher risk of divorce and a lower chance of having a stable marriage.
Truth you don’t want to face is vriganl brides go wrong all the time
‘Truth you don’t want to face is vriganl brides go wrong all the time’
Well that’s a broad statement. Care to clarify?
What a day to be speaking about virginal brides (Merry Christmas!!!) but I can see what both of you are saying. Everybody starts out a virgin, so that’s no guarantee things won’t go wrong from there, but I do think in today’s day and age it (can) show self control and the ability to have delayed gratification. But not always, so one should consider the overall character. And even then… divorce is just too easy today (but it’s NOT easy, that’s what they don’t tell anyone!) I’m not saying virginity = will be a perfect wife and mom, or non-virginity = won’t be, but it’s better not to be a tart than to be one. Obviously.
And so true Ame, there is no perfect path. But I have no doubt you will find your “thing.” Maybe helping other moms in some way?
‘But not always, so one should consider the overall character. And even then… divorce is just too easy today (but it’s NOT easy, that’s what they don’t tell anyone!)’
Yes character is the main point…however one of the biggest risks which studies have shown is that as the number of premarital sex partners increase, marital stability decreases and the divorce risk increases. And in the land of no-fault that’s a big thing to consider. I don’t doubt a virgin bride could divorce…but her odds are less than a non-virgin.
Obviously the bigger problem is that no-fault exists and the character of a lot of women, even virgins, is less than desirable. Those two things I’d argue are the main reason MGTOW even exists.
Why is he beta? Beta is not looks. If he assumes the leadership in the house and doesn’t bend over to her whims, he’s the rock she craves
Good point O Patriacia, and I don’t know them well enough to really observe their dynamic like that. He’s a very meek, shy guy. He seems the type to treat her like “my princess” and write poetry and be sensitive. He’s definetly not a zfg type guy. He’s a steady eddy, very loyal, provider kind of guy. But as you say there could be a side to him I don’t see. I think she may be one of those rare these days gals who values his beta qualities. Such men used to be considered “a good bet” and “the marrying kind.” IMHO beta guys are vastly under appreciated. They are the backbone guys, the guys who take direction from a leader and help execute the plan. But then again it varies a lot it seems what the terms Alpha and beta mean to different people. I don’t see beta as a derogatory term like many seem to. Or not necessarily so. Of course being “too” beta (a guy who petastalizes ALL women no matter how awful, etc.) is not good.
I should add pedastalizes all, not the kind who respects a women who is good to him and a good wife of many years. And maybe pedastalizes is not the right term…
And even then… divorce is just too easy today (but it’s NOT easy, that’s what they don’t tell anyone!)
this. very much … this. yes.
and when I have tried to tell people this, they don’t listen 😦
‘IMHO beta guys are vastly under appreciated. They are the backbone guys, the guys who take direction from a leader and help execute the plan.’
That’s fine if they are taking orders from a legit authority figure like God, a boss, their parents, or a superior.
In the realm of marriage though…their wife is not the head of it, they are.
Good point Earl, I have seen many women take the lead in their marriage only to end up very miserable. I don’t get the sense this gal bosses her husband. She seems happy to be part of his team!
Back during the j4g days there was 3-4 of us who marred vrignal church girls to our misery
You and others want to keep proclaiming game plans with failed track records despite no shortage of personal testimonies on how it’s crashed and burned
Ton…
Then elaborate how it crashed and burned.
Hope everyone had a great Christmas.
Earl, you said you would outlaw hormonal contraception if you could. Then who would pay for all those illegimate children born? Taxpayers? Outlawing something doesn’t improve behavior. It only opens more doors to illegal activities. Plus the system would be further abused.
I started watching a new series on Showtime called SMILF. After a few episodes, I got disgusted and couldn’t watch anymore. It starts out with a single mother seeing her doctor to know if her lady parts have been ‘blown up’ after giving birth. The doctor advises her to get out there and start having sex again (with protection) and doing kegal exercises. This girl is a sad state. She’s unkept, looks dirty, lives in a rundown apartment, no real job, and barely has money to eat or feed her child. Yet she’s concerned about her vagina. She then meets a man in person from a sketchy online site she signed up for… He offers her $300 just to say hello and another $300 to sit and talk to him in a cafe. She accepts both and they have a great conversation. Yet, when he goes in to grab her crotch, she is absolutely outraged and punches him. That’s where I had enough. You have promiscuous sex to confirm the size of your vagina. You sign up and meet a man from a seedy website. You accept money for your time (I.e. prostitution). Then you are offended at his sexual act???
I sincerely hope she’s not the new role model for young women.
‘Then who would pay for all those illegimate children born?’
Those who created the child. Perhaps it would at least make them think that pregnancy is something that can naturally occur after sex…since that’s been the case since the beginning of time.
What we have now is a society where the irresponsible are sheltered from their bad decision making by taking money from the responsble.
Besides with all that wonderful hormonal contraception out there stats show something in the neighborhood of 40-50% of children are being born out of wedlock…it never used to be that high and certainly wasn’t before hormonal contraception came on the market.
‘Outlawing something doesn’t improve behavior. It only opens more doors to illegal activities.’
Sex outside of marriage isn’t illegal though…it’s immoral and becomes irresponsble if people are bringing kids into an unstable family unit.
Why? I’ve done it before and I am not some woman who wats to dump her purse all over the floor some girl wants to dish
Well if you have then point me to it, otherwise you aren’t refuting anything I’m saying other than with cryptic phrases only you know about.
Ok sparky
There is a new post at Spawny’s
https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2017/12/27/red-pill-movie-review-hustle/
I mean if hormonal contraception is outlawed, this opens doors to selling the drug on the street or worse, back alley abortion clinics. The problem would become much worse.
The problem is the worst with the system we have in place. People keep thinking they can get around the natural consequence to sex…but with the out of wedlock birthrate as high as it is and number of abortions as high as they are with the current system in place, it’s obvious they can’t.
Ton, Earl:
You’re both correct.
Earl, you’re correct that the more premarital sex partners a woman has, the higher her chance of divorce and the more unstable her marriage is likely to be. It’s correlation, yes, but it does show risk of a woman’s divorce increases by 50% with even one premarital sex partner.
And Ton is correct that marrying a virgin is no guarantee of marital success, especially in today’s sexual marketplace, where the incentives to blow up a marriage have never been greater for women and the penalties for ending a marriage have never been harsher for men.
The problems arise because of all the variables involved. More often than not, a woman with a lot of premarital sex partners has a lot of emotional issues, mental issues, daddy issues, etc., that led to the high N. And the sexual partnerships just makes it worse – the constant breakups, the booze- and drug-fueled one nighters, the constant relationship/hookup failure, she develops a reputation as slutty or easy or unable to keep a man. She just makes herself into someone who isn’t relationship or wife material.
The premarital slut can still get married, and most of them do. But usually they have to marry downmarket and certainly cannot marry the hot men they are accustomed to having sex with. (Or, they decide that those hot men are fun for sex, but that they shouldn’t marry those men.) And they marry men they just aren’t all that sexually attracted to. They marry men because “time to get married” and “Need a husband and father for the babies I want” and “it’s just time” and “we’ve been dating long enough and it’s time for us to marry or I’m moving on” and “mom and dad expect me to get married” and “gotta cross marriage off the ol’ bucket list” and “I’m running out of time and need a husband NOW” etc.
Virgins of course get married for all kinds of reasons too, and many of the same reasons. And many of them get FOMO/YOLO disease. I’ve seen it happen, especially to young virginal women who get married before age 22 and then they start working. If they aren’t really sexually attracted to their husbands and if they don’t have a solid grounding in what marriage is and what is expected of them, they’re going to have a very hard time of it.
Those young women get all sorts of frank and candid sexual interest from men, including very attractive men, including men who push all their buttons, and including men who are miles and miles more attractive than their husbands. And they find it very, very hard to resist those men, even when married. What’s more, our entire society and culture tell these women they have a right to do whatever they want, when and wherever they want, with whomever, they want, married or not. And if they can’t, then they can just get divorced. Or cheat, in the open or on the downlow. It’s very easy for a married woman to cheat. She can cheat with married men or single men. The men they cheat with have no reason to divulge their secrets. And if a husband says “no you can’t do that”, she replies with “you’re cramping my style” and “you’re mean” and “yes I can do what I want” etc.
This kind of sexual deregulation and encouragement of women to divorce is unprecedented in modern history. Women acting overtly sexual in public with all sorts of men has no precedent in the past 300 years in the west. And that’s what is causing all sorts of marital problems today.
For a lot of women, there is literally no immediate personal downside to ending a marriage, even a good one. The downsides are to any children born of the marriage, of course. They are the ones who bear the brunt of the marital problems first, foremost, and the hardest for the longest.
There are long term downsides to divorce for women and they are quite personal. Divorce is very hard, and it tends to hollow out a woman’s soul. Then sending her back out into the dating world she discovers how difficult it is to find someone sexually attractive and marriage/relationship minded.
Tough all around for women after a divorce.
Thedeti, I agree with you entirely. In my opinion, I’ve thought married women in the US can do just about anything. I think a lot of their husbands are soft and allow them to get away with almost everything. These women have no fear. I don’t mean fear of being beaten by their husband. I mean no fear of that man leaving them. One married woman once told me she knew her husband would never divorce her, so she cheated often. She had lost respect for her husband because he failed to create rules and boundaries as well as repercussions to breaking those rules. I understand divorce in the US is mostly on the woman’s side. But what about men becoming smarter and creating pre-nups and protecting themselves rather than going in blindly? Also, if the woman makes more money than the man, then she must pay alimony.
‘This kind of sexual deregulation and encouragement of women to divorce is unprecedented in modern history. Women acting overtly sexual in public with all sorts of men has no precedent in the past 300 years in the west. And that’s what is causing all sorts of marital problems today.’
That’s why I think when it comes to the biggest problems with marrying a woman it goes
1) Women are always told they good no matter what actions they do, and are told men are always evil no matter what actions they do
2) There’s always the No fault threat
3) Promiscuity
If it wasn’t for such a widespread acceptance of #1…perhaps things like 2 and 3 would lessen.
Love – I don’t think that access to hormonal contraception is really doing anything to stop unwanted pregnancy. If anything it’s giving a lot of men a false sense of security when women “promise” that they won’t get pregnant out of marriage, yet they seem to do it. Children of unmarried parents, women who lie about the father, women who actually deliberately try to become single mothers, etc. It’s becoming a major problem. Hormonal contraception encourages a lot of sex outside of marriage because it artificially removes any “consequences”. However, research continues to show that it is inherently flawed in the way that it damages long-term fertility, libido, ability to bond with a partner, etc. The list goes on and on.
The real reason that women want access to it for free is because it gives them unlimited access to sex and ultimate control over reproductive rights of men (who have none). If it really was an effective solution the out of wedlock birth rate wouldn’t be nearly 50% now and the divorce rate wouldn’t be so high. I don’t think that most women realize just how much damage that the pill has really done to them in the long-run.
Functional male birth control would help to put a stop to these things but I don’t think that it’s going to be a reality any time soon.
‘The real reason that women want access to it for free is because it gives them unlimited access to sex and ultimate control over reproductive rights of men (who have none)’
Bingo.
And as you can see their ‘fear’ is that if it is taken away women will still have the mindset they can have unlimited access to sex and more unwanted pregnancies will happen. I doubt this would happen though. For one both partners won’t have that false sense of security anymore and perhaps would realize again that pregnancy can happen after sex.
I know virtually no women who avoid hormonal birth control who have unwanted pregnancies. Only wanted pregnancies. They do tend to have larger families but clearly are happier.
The old method of birth control was called accountability. If two people had sex, and then she got pregnant, it was a social standard that they would be forced to marry. Now there is no accountability and no social standards, especially for women (who have zero accountability today).
Men, on the other hand. Never off the hook. Get a woman pregnant and she can choose the baby whether or not you want it, and she will have access to your resources for 20+ years.
Laws need to be changed to give men equal reproductive rights. It’s unreasonable that women have such access to power with no repercussions. Even with birth control, women still manage to get pregnant with zero accountability and men are still forced to pay for it via tax money or child support. It’s a wonder that more men haven’t become MGTOW yet.
I’m with Deti on the N-count relative to psychological damage. It’s a chicken / egg scenario.
Most women who are extremely promiscuous at a young age and up to the point of marriage are likely that way as a result of deeper psychological trauma. I can’t quite imagine that any woman in her right mind would just give up sex so easily unless there is something deeply wrong with her. I get that such a comment is an easy target for much hate, because it’s almost unanimously assumed these days that women should be liberated through their sexuality, but that is just flawed messages through the guise of feminism, which does nothing to truly keep women safe or happy in the real world. I know no women who are highly promiscuous who are actually truly happy.
Women who are extremely promiscuous are almost always dealing with something else that makes them incredibly unfit for marriage. Yet, men still seem to marry these women, and they end up devastated through higher than average risk of divorce.
It’s hard to tell if the inability to bond with a partner was always there from the trauma or was a reaction to the “alpha widow” phenomenon. I’s say that it’s a bit of both. More to do with the trauma and disgust such a woman begins to feel at some point from her inability to function in a sexually healthy way. I think that most women can overcome it but it takes a lot of years of therapy and self actualization to “reprogram” that part of their brain, because it’s far more deeply ingrained within a woman’s psyche than a man’s out of the biology. We just don’t really understand the full impact yet.
On the flip side, a woman with a zero n-count (like Ton’s ex-wife) might be just as adversely impacted in a similar way. Rather than acting out sexually, she is unable to properly function sexually at all. Much of this stems from teaching young women that “sex is dirty and something that only terrible sinners do” from a young age, rather than teaching them that “sex is beautiful and your most prized asset that you should share with a person that you are married to”. See the difference?
Men do not seem to be impacted in the same way. It seems that men are normally biologically geared to have as much sex with as many women as possible. The only guys who feel shame for it are those who were deeply blue-pilled from early childhood on. A common theme now is to teach men that their sexuality is toxic but for women it’s great and empowering. We’re basically twisting things around for some BS initiative. More ways yet to rob men of reproductive rights through manipulation and coercion, in addition to the legal ramifications and lack of birth control options.
A woman who cannot function correctly, sexually, is inevitably going to blame her partner (and media does this as well), but the problems were there before she even met / married him. I’ve seen countless articles from women who were unhappy with their husbands, divorced them, explored their sexuality (if they hadn’t already cheated beforehand), and blamed him because they magically “enjoyed sex again” because they needed some external motivator to overcome their built-in stigma due to broken “programming” in their brains.
A lot of this goes far beyond the AFBB thing, because even a guy who is a bit more of an “alpha” can marry a woman who can’t function sexually in a healthy way, and it basically will destroy him because he’s stuck with someone for the rest of his life until there are no other options beyond cheating or divorce.
RPG – Your casual friend (OP in the thread) is interesting. Care to share what it is that makes you think that their situation is different?
I noticed this:
“Her mom is exceptionally cute, always dressed stylishly, with her hair and nails done. She’s very fit and looks much younger than her years. The mom is incredibly sweet too, very devoted to her family.”
I might have trouble determining the real meaning of this without knowing her. A lot of women who have access to money (or want to give the impression that they have it) dress stylishly and look good. On the other hand, some women just love to look good. Some women also love to be at their best for their husbands, but it’s rare.
I would not personally want to be married to a slob, but some people turn into that when they get to be either complacent or disinterested. I suppose that looking presentable may be a proper middle-ground.
A Dad:
Laying down the truth, friend. Well said.
I think for most promiscuous women, they become promiscuous because of some emotional/mental/psychological issue/trauma/event/disorder. The promiscuity is intended to cover the underlying issue. Women often turn to sexual promiscuity because that’s an area where women have a lot of power. A woman can have sex pretty much whenever she wants and can deny sex to whomever she wants. Women have immense sexual power. Having sex when you want and denying sex to those who want it from you and can’t have it, gives women a sense of enormous power and “strength”. And many women learn early on how powerful they are sexually. And when women suffer from some emotional problem or personality disorder, usually brought on from maladaptation or parental issues, they often use sex to take control over areas of their lives where they had little to no control previously.
I think there are a few women who become promiscuous and that causes mental disorders. But for most, the mental/emotional/psychological issues predate the promiscuity, and cause it or contribute heavily to it.
A Dad, if a man is having sex with a woman out of wedlock and they’re not in a committed long-term relationship, doesn’t he also have a responsibility to protect himself? Use condoms. That gives him at least some protection. Yes, women lie about when and how they used hormonal contraception. Yet, a man can at least do his part and insist on condoms rather than completely relying on her word.
“A Dad, if a man is having sex with a woman out of wedlock and they’re not in a committed long-term relationship, doesn’t he also have a responsibility to protect himself? Use condoms. That gives him at least some protection. Yes, women lie about when and how they used hormonal contraception. Yet, a man can at least do his part and insist on condoms rather than completely relying on her word.”
—
Of course he does. But it’s wrong to assume that it’s society’s obligation to provide birth control for women just as it’s also wrong to assume that it’s society’s obligation to provide for her accidental children. People need consequences to keep them in check.
See my point above where there used to be accountability and repercussions for both men and women. Now it’s completely one-sided.
Free access to birth control and free access to tax dollars for raising a single mother’s babies are nothing more than a vehicle for a growing welfare state. Of course many women like it, because they are the greatest beneficiaries of such a system so their vote really counts. There is a very good reason why women tend to be predominantly socialist because statistically men are the only ones that actually pay taxes and women as a group will fiscally have a negative lifetime impact (even while more women work and have free access to education).
I was asking myself why there are more divorced and/or single mothers in the US vs other countries. In other cultures, a woman is much more hesitant to divorce because of the negative stigma of being a divorcee. Their families and community blame them for failing. Also, they know that there is less opportunity for a divorced woman to remarry within their culture.
However, when I was in the Caribbean I noticed that rule did not apply at all. I witnessed single women having many children from various fathers. In my opinion, that’s a very heavy burden to carry all alone. Especially when many of the men did not give them any financial support. The child support laws on the islands are not as punitive as in the US. However, someone explained to me that the more children they have with various men, the more they increase their odds of getting a bit of money from some of the fathers. I guess their playing the numbers game to generate income.
By saying that women should have free hormonal birth control to prevent them from having children, it’s basically saying that they are incapable of being responsible for their sexuality and are relieved of any consequence.
Please not that I’m not trying to pick on you. I just think that we need to start forcing more women to behave like responsible adults, even if many of them actually seem to be incapable of that. If we continue to lower the bar for certain people, we are ultimately lowering the bar for everyone.
Love:
The woman makes the decision whether to have the child or not. Therefore, it is HER responsibility to support that child.
It used to be, 100 years ago, that if a child were born out of wedlock and the mother decided to have and keep the child, the “father”/sperm donor had no rights or duties. He had no duty to support the child; but had no rights to see the child, visit the child, live with the child, have custody of the child, give the child his name, or call the child his own.
The child became the financial responsibility of the mother, and ultimately, the mother’s parents. The child took the mother’s name. The child was always known as a bastard – born out of wedlock.
The way a man got rights over the child was to marry the mother. So if he knocked her up, he married her, and then had all the duties of a father, but all the rights too. It was his child. The duties of supporting that child fell solely to him. He can see the child, live with the child, the child is given his name. In the event of divorce, the child stayed with him.
The old way of doing things forced women to be more responsible about what they did before they got married, and who they did it with. It forced women to avoid premarital sex if they thought the guy(s) they were having sex with might not stick around and “do the right thing” if she got knocked up. It forced women to really stop and think about who they chose to associate with, and when, and under what circumstances.
Why? because there were consequences to her conduct – the chief one being that if she got pregnant out of wedlock and the guy didn’t marry her, it was all but over for her. She was NEVER going to get married to an attractive guy or high status guy. Her marriage market value plummeted to near zero. Even if she miscarried, everyone would know she was a slut who had sex with a shitbag. Even if she “went away” and gave the kid up for adoption, everyone knew why she disappeared for months without explanation. It was just understood why some girl “went away” and “disappeared”, suddenly coming home several months later a bit chubbier and yet hidden away for a few weeks (to let her milk flow and then stop and to let her recuperate from either the birth or the C-section). If she was lucky enough to get married at all, it would be to a drunk, an ugly guy, an old guy, a fat guy, a bald guy, or a shiftless layabout. No man of even middling status would so much as look at her.
Candidly I think we should go back to that system. Shitbag men who knocked up women and wouldn’t or couldn’t provide through marriage were viewed as shitbags with no honor or virtue, were not allowed rights to their spawn, and were pushed to the margins of society unless and until they turned their shit around. Sluts who got knocked up were viewed as rebellious women prone to poor decisionmaking, were saddled with the responsibility and shame of single motherhood, and worst of all, were relegated to the male dregs – the losers, the addicts, the drunks, the idiots, and the poor men with no prospects.
“I was asking myself why there are more divorced and/or single mothers in the US vs other countries. In other cultures, a woman is much more hesitant to divorce because of the negative stigma of being a divorcee. Their families and community blame them for failing. Also, they know that there is less opportunity for a divorced woman to remarry within their culture.
However, when I was in the Caribbean I noticed that rule did not apply at all. I witnessed single women having many children from various fathers. In my opinion, that’s a very heavy burden to carry all alone. Especially when many of the men did not give them any financial support. The child support laws on the islands are not as punitive as in the US. However, someone explained to me that the more children they have with various men, the more they increase their odds of getting a bit of money from some of the fathers. I guess their playing the numbers game to generate income.”
—–
There are more divorced / single mothers in the US because it’s easy for them and they are encouraged to do it. It is no longer a culture where it’s discouraged. It used to be that way, but that changed (coincidentally) with the sexual revolution and easy access to birth control.
Places where you see women with many children from various fathers are not married to men. They are married to the government. You will see that in highly socialist communities that child support laws are indeed lax or non-existent, because the state wants you to depend upon it instead. That, and the tax systems make it far less enforceable because income is much harder to track and certain cultures still operate with family businesses / working under the table, etc. That’s much harder to get away with in a country where a large number of people work for larger corporations at an office job.
I am with Deti on this. The old system worked better because it weeded out the dregs of society to let them rot. The current system just encourages their survival.
To add, male children were traditionally of great value as a labor pool for the family business. This is how society grew stronger and a family would build a small “empire” within their communities. This is why children were a man’s “property” in a divorce settlement. Alimony and the likes were exchanges for this transaction, and only in fault-based scenarios where divorce was actually granted. These were actually protections in place to help women, even though you will be told that women had zero rights. They had incredible unique rights, that still exist today even though the old system no longer exists. Now, women have alimony, and child support, and men have nothing to gain in the marriage transaction when the risk of no-fault divorce is extremely high. Marriage was once a necessity for survival. Now it’s just a day that a woman can pretend to be a princess for 24 hours before she goes back to being a shrew.
As a result, people have kids just to have kids for the feelz of it. There is nothing wrong with this. I really enjoy being a father (note the name). But children now are more of a financial burden in today’s society. They don’t bring any revenue back to the family and most people in “first world” western society die penniless and alone anyway, because they work and live by a system where they are endlessly indebted to banks and work meaningless jobs and have no quality family life. That’s why a lot of guys are getting out of this shitty system. Having kids basically just guarantees that they are going to grow to be someone else’s wage slave in 20 years unless you have the means to give them a better life.
You will see that the most successful men are the ones that didn’t get a woman pregnant early in life, and didn’t just work some dead-end job to get by. They are the guys that built something for themselves and got to retire early by checking out from the start.
You should understand that the current system is so appealing to many women because they only need to open their legs to any men to get something out of it. But the price is higher than what they have been told, because they are selling the souls of their children to the system to bring about a new generation of countless unskilled / low-wage workers. They simply know no other life though, so can’t imagine how they’ve done so much damage by bringing children into that system. They grew up that way, and their children will, and their grandchildren will, etc.
Men: Build your small empire and reject the bullshit “American Dream”. You are going to be far better off competing in the current system if you don’t participate in it.
I never said free hormonal birth control. I said we should not outlaw it completely. I, like you, do not want my tax dollars to pay for someone else’s irresponsibility.
Love – Point taken, but even having it available at all doesn’t seem to stop accidental pregnancies.
Let’s revise Earl’s statement with an idea of my own.
Any woman who gets pregnant is responsible for the child on her own if she is not married. She is responsible for complying in proving who the father is through mandatory third-party DNA testing. By that token, she gives the father the first right of custody only if she has nothing to gain financially in having a child.
Hormonal birth control could be provided for “free” though the current insurance system (and it actually is) but women would be encouraged to use it responsibly or risk social and financial ruin, instead of having it to cheat a system. If it can’t be banned outright, there need to be real legal repercussions for lying about contraception. Just as now it’s considered a type of “rape” for a man to lie about using a condom and remove it without consent (or even to not use one at all without permission), it should be considered a form of rape to allow women to lie about the use of hormonal contraceptives.
Problem solved.
Note that the Affordable Care Act made birth control essentially mandatory to be provided to all women who want it. So it is, in a sense, “free” because men are paying for it. Women just aren’t using it. And even before Obamacare, women almost always had access to it for free or for next to nothing through some form of government funding; e.g. Planned Parenthood, etc. I’ve known plenty of women who didn’t have insurance early on and weren’t even technically “poverty level” who could get free or nearly free birth control. It’s been this way for like 30 years or more.
Or, better yet. Government should just stay entirely out of everyone’s sex lives and marriage.
Even better problem solved.
‘Or, better yet. Government should just stay entirely out of everyone’s sex lives and marriage.
Even better problem solved.’
Agreed.
But that’s how men think…women love the fact the government is in sex and marriage because it gives them an ‘out’ for their bad behavior. If it was only men voting…we’d see something closer to that legislation.
And I stand by my outlawing hormonal contraception proposal. We didn’t see nearly as much single mothers and children born out of wedlock before it came on the market….because
1) in practice it’s around 80% effective (the 95-99% effective is only a theory)
2) A woman has all the reproductive power
I dont think the numbers support birth control limiting the number of illegitimate kids. I imagine the high number of kids out of wedlock are a direct result of welfare. You get more of whatever you subsides and we subsides the shit out of feral female behaviour
‘You get more of whatever you subsides and we subsides the shit out of feral female behaviour’
That’s true. There’s a lot of different factors that go into that and it isn’t one specific thing.
Basically it’s trying to insulate them from the consequences of their bad behavior.
This is the reason why I think hormonal contraceptives should not be banned. Even though this was very controversial bill, I believe it would be beneficial for low income single mothers.
https://rewire.news/legislative-tracker/law/arkansas-contraception-incentive-for-medicaid-beneficiaries-hb-1868/
@a dad I am not totally sure why the wife/mom in the OP is so stylish but she certainly makes the most of her raw material, probably upping her looks by at least 2 points on a 10 point scale than she’d be otherwise. Her best friend is a natural looker (more than she) and also sytylish so maybe it’s a little keeping up appearances? She doesn’t come across as vain.
‘This is the reason why I think hormonal contraceptives should not be banned. ‘
Just like A Dad and I were saying…women want the government to come rescue them from their own bad decision making.
I think the only reason you are scared of my proposal is that you wouldn’t have that false sense of security in the land of lots of sex anymore. Men don’t have that already.
Earl, you’re making this personal. I do not fear banning it for myself. I care about my mental, physical, and emotional health and take great care of myself. My biggest issue is tax payers paying for irresponsible people. It is much cheaper to pay $1000 once than hundreds of thousands of dollars for 1 child.
I’m still scratching my head over how any of these things have ever worked. Giving people handouts simply just enables them to stay in a bad position for their entire lives. The only way to really help people is to force them to take ownership of their own lives.
A Dad, I live in a city where the homeless population is rampant. Healthy able-bodied young people beg for money on the street. Some even bring their children to squeeze more money out of people. It is a sad case. No amount of forcing can change bad behavior. In my opinion, it would only increase the poverty rate and homeless. And if you don’t want them on the streets, they’ll be pushed out to camp in your backyard. It is not the government who is paying – it is us. A third of my income goes back into the system. I would like to know I’m helping to control the problem not making it worse.
Love – I think that it’s always been this way. I, too, see it a lot where I live. I see the very same people every day, on the same corners.
Bear in mind that I’m not saying that every single bit of the welfare system can be dismantled. Lots of people who need help with mental illness. A lot of the problems with homelessness is in part by government intervention. Maybe a quarter of homeless are said to be veterans.
My problem is the growth of the welfare state. Completely abandoning it entirely (for instance, the unemployment services) would lead to a total collapse. There are people that really need help, and there are people that take advantage of the system. When it comes to these things, reproductive issues should not be a priority. I don’t think that we can keep supporting low quality people that keep breeding. There is no simple answer to it, other than make the incentives so small that it pays to work instead. It’s been said that the typical welfare recipients clear an excess of benefits of around $40k USD per year. It might mean that it would take at least a $60k per year income to actually encourage them to work. It’s fairly disconcerting where there are people who do work for far less than this and struggle to survive.
No amount of optional hormonal birth control is keeping low quality women from popping out babies. If anything, the option is giving them a reason to make more. Can you sterilize a woman who is just a burden on society? “Here is your money but you’re forbidden from having more children.” How well would that fly with feminist / rights activists that want free handouts?
Recognize that those people are all instrumental in building a dependent class that builds government larger. Supporting the problem only creates a larger problem in growing an unsustainable welfare state where a few ruling class control the government and the rest of the people need government to survive. It’s not like this is new. This has happened throughout human history.
“Can you sterilize a woman who is a burden to society?”
I think the Arkansas bill I mentioned above was trying to do that by incenting them with money. But you’re absolutely right. It didn’t pass because of activists.
I meant to check that link out but got wrapped up in some other things. Thanks for pointing that out.
‘ My biggest issue is tax payers paying for irresponsible people. It is much cheaper to pay $1000 once than hundreds of thousands of dollars for 1 child.’
Yes the taxpayers shouldn’t be shouldering the burden of irresponsible people having sex.
Perhaps the irresponsible people should be educated that in fact pregnancy can happen after sex…even while using contraceptives. That’s why marriage is important (or used to be) So if you are having sex with a man…is he the type of man who can provide for you and your child? How would you know if he hasn’t committed to you? If not the government isn’t going to help you…you either have your parents or you have to do it yourself.
The government isn’t going to solve the irresponsible problem with forced sterlizations. There’s even been situations where a woman gets pregnant with IUDs because those things won’t stay in place. It could even lead to ectopic pregnancies and kill her and the kid.
I do find it interesting though how the minute contraceptives are forced upon irresponsible women suddenly it’s a big deal.
That is a good point how women both demand free/easy access to birth control and then also oppose any mandates that irresponsible people use it.
And the really hard thing is the ones who bear the brunt of irresponsible parents are their children. i think the programs are more aimed at helping ensure the children have a minimum, despite inadequate parents. Not that it always trickles down, nor create other problems (like multi generational patterns.)
If people did the right thing, well things would work easier and better. But from the beginning of time people seem to choose otherwise, it’s certainly not a new problem. And then….????
Pingback: Hamsters On The Carousel | Spawny's Space