Month: April 2017

No Such Thing As “Divorce”

Most people define a divorce as the end of a marriage, but that’s not actually true, if you think about it.  Certain aspects of marriage end, but others continue, sometimes for years.

Civil marriage is a contract, forming a corporation between two people, of all of their financial and many other legal affairs.  Unlike other contracts, parts of it can be dissolved by one of the parties, for any reason or no reason at all — completely arbitrary.  The parts that are dissolved include: the man’s right to his children; fidelity and exclusivity; shared residence; and of course, sex and love.  Of the aforementioned, the part about children is really the only halfway enforceable one — all of the others are ceremonial, and not actual commitments at all.  The parts of the marriage that continue are the fiancial aspects, most of which are burdens that fall on the man and are predicated on “maintaining the lifestyle that she is accustomed to”.  Yeah, just try to get un-married from those legal obligations.

So many times, I have heard men say it at the time they get married: “Well, ya know, it’s for her.”  Oh, famous last words…  He thinks he’s talking about the wedding ceremony itself, which he couldn’t give a rat’s ass about, but she’s been dreaming about since she was a girl.  What he might stop to think about is the fact that the marriage itself is also for her.  Think about it — what protections and benefits are built into marriage for the man’s sake?  You’ll hear propagandists hock a buch of specious statistics about higher average salaries and healthy lifestyles, as if marriage is an easy substitute for personal motivation toward those things.  The bottom line is that the civil protections of marriage are pretty much all for the benefit of the woman, and what the man got out of the deal was sex and children.  Guess what: in the modern age, all bets are off when it comes to the woman’s “duties”, but like never before, the man’s legal ensarements are enforced with unreasonable callousness and enthusiastic gynocentricism, often by a female family court judge.

So this makes you wonder if the only reason marriage still exists today is because men just aren’t thinking about it, or are ignoring the facts, or if pressure of tradition is really that great — or all three.  If a man ever brings these obvious problems up, the typical retort will be something like, “Well, you have to make sure that you marry the right one, see…”  Do these people ever stop to think about this?  Essentially everyone who gets married thinks they’re marrying “the right one”, but at least half of them are wrong, so what makes any man think that he’s got a handle on vetting women any better than the next guy?  If anything, those who pressure young men into marriage (parents, aunts, etc.) only cause them to ignore inhibitions that might save him from disaster…ah, but then, it’s all for her, after all.

The Bandito and the Biker

Just think…  This piece of shit has a woman, and you don’t.

You can bet that she stayed with him after this.  Hate to break it to the biker, but she was probably impressed with her boyfriend’s behavior – it showed that he has good genes.

Women’s choice in men says everything you need to know about them, not just as individuals but about womankind generally.

 

Researchers Blame Millennials Yet Again For the State of Marriage

It’s starting to become a joke.

Another blaring headline, this time from Bloomberg, that reads Young Americans Are Killing Marriage heads up an article with “new” research showing how the marriage rates have declined for 25-30-year-olds since 1980, and draws the same predictable conclusion: that the blame rests squarely on these despicable “kiddults” who are failing to grow up.

Every time you see an article like this, there is never any shortage of voices bringing truth and clarity to the issue, usually found in the comments section.  There’s usually no way to know for sure the age of those commenting, but they almost all speak the truth – that the rise of feminism and no-fault divorce has killed marriage, while poor economics and worthless education delays it further.  It’s no mystery to regular people what has happened in the last 50 years or so.

You would think that the think tanks who come up with these socially conservative studies, like this National Center for Family and Marriage Research or perhaps the National Marriage Project at UVA, would have picked up on this stuff by now and would have pushed it to the forefront, right?  Yet, you never seem to see that.  Even if they give those ideas a token acknowledgement, the conclusions they draw always seems to whitewash that, and leans right into traditional Protestant/feminist/complementarian male-shaming.  The dishonesty of it is troubling enough, but do they think that their strategy of pressuring men to marry with these things is actually going to work?  Seriously, is whining about the status quo, and ignoring the reason that are obvious to everyone else, going to produce even one more marriage?

It’s never a good idea to assume that people are in a vacuum, but sometimes their rigid agenda really makes you wonder.