Recently, Deti wrote a very engaging post. Here it is again, along with some of the significant replies.
The post you’re about to read is a bit of an expansion of and variation on a comment you’ve seen me leave here repeatedly.
I think it’s going to get bad for men. Really bad.
In my opinion, we’re at the very tail end of most men being able to get married, reproduce, and have some semblance of a family, which might or might not last. We’re at the very beginning of something very different. It will be a major lifestyle change for most men, which will also affect most women.
Don’t get me wrong. This isn’t a revenge fantasy in which I think dastardly women will get their comeuppance for all the mean things they’ve done to men or for carouseling it in their youth. This is just a natural consequence of women’s decisions, and a number of other events and trends all coinciding, to create something of a perfect storm. Sit tight, because this outlook is bleak.
For the foreseeable future, most men, most young men under 35 reading this, will not marry. They will not ever have children. If they do sire children, those men won’t see them or know them or have a hand in raising them. Most men will live their entire lives with sex lives resembling those of the average high school male: repeated failure and months- or years-long dry spells interspersed with several short term relationships, a few long term relationships, and a few one night stands. Most men will not share their lives with any woman, because they won’t be able to.
There are many, many reasons for this. There are two prime reasons. First is that the average man of today is not sexually attractive enough to get and keep the attention of a woman such as to expect her to commit to him for two or three decades, or more. The second is that the average woman of today has had sexual relationships with much, much more attractive men than the men who are willing to commit to her. The average modern woman will be completely unwilling to commit to the average men on offer, particularly since she has her own money and resources, or extracts them from the burgeoning, intrusive state.
MGTOW (by that I mean real MGTOW as originally conceived, circa early 2000s style) will explode in the years and decades to come. More and more men will simply eschew marriage and fatherhood, totally and completely. Those men will still have the occasional sexual relationship or coupling with women. But commitment will be absolutely out of the question. More common will be the incel/frustrated chump segment of MGTOW. These are the men who don’t want to try to get more attractive, don’t care, or tried and failed to get more attractive. These men will be the ones with the occasional relationship, but more often will subsist on hookers and porn.
Yes, men will still have sex with women. But they’ll do it only after having vasectomies (if they can still get them without a woman’s permission) and “taking control of the birth”. Men just won’t marry, and won’t father children.
Men will take this position on marriage and fatherhood because the risks long ago outweighed the benefits. Most men who do make the marriage mistake will see their marriages end, at enormous personal, financial and emotional cost. Most men who do make the fatherhood mistake will find themselves reduced to little more than monthly support checks in the lives of their offspring. More and more men are seeing this now, and concluding, rightly, that there’s no upside at all to marriage or fatherhood, and the downsides are horrifying both for themselves and any children their unions produce.
Marriage will increasingly become the province of the upper middle class on up. Within that social strata, marriage will be almost exclusively for acquiring, consolidating and preserving material wealth. Those marriages will stay together, but not for sexual attraction or “happiness”. The marriages will hang together for their one child, at most two children, and to pass on the wealth accumulated during the marriage. This minority will become the new “Old Money” and landed gentry in the US. They will retreat to gated communities and will increasingly isolate themselves within their own social groups. There will also be increasing overall degenerate behavior (adultery, addictions, alcoholism, porn consumption) among those groups, because mutual sexual attraction and affinity won’t be a reason for the formation or continuation of marriage.
There are a number of other reasons for what I think will be very bleak times ahead. More and more men are underperforming in schools, which causes them to underperform in higher education and job training, which causes them to underperform in employment and earning. They will earn just enough to support themselves, but not enough to support a wife or a family. And our society has been trending this way for years. Most men now don’t earn enough to support a family; two incomes have long been required. And more women are outearning men now, further contributing to men’s increasing inability to get and stay married. Women don’t want to marry men they have to support financially, and they sure as hell don’t want to pay alimony to ex husbands.
Women’s sexual strategies and method of forming and sustaining relationships with men have been revealed for what they are. More and more women don’t even try to sugarcoat or conceal their strategies any longer, and even if they wanted to they probably couldn’t. The concepts of “marriage is a bad deal for men” and “alpha fucks, beta bucks” have made it into mainstream blog discourse. Men and women who have never heard of the manosphere are openly discussing these concepts under different names and phrases. Most men are now much more aware of marriage pitfalls and failures than they were even 10 years ago.
A relatively new development in the past 10 years or so, since the Obama administration began, is the rapid proliferation of identity politics and the resulting societal fractures along race, class and gender fault lines. The Left has been practicing identity politics for at least 30 years now; with the rest of society catching up. We are increasingly distrustful and skeptical of one another. Every incident involving police or some aggrieved interest group is blasted across the internet.
Ethnic groups (mostly whites, and men) who have silently taken it on the chin for decades are saying “no more” and pushing back hard. The election of Donald Trump, a deeply personally flawed real estate developer, TV personality, self-aggrandizing egotist and political neophyte, represents a huge hoisted middle finger to politicos and ideologues on both sides of the aisle. Even those who voted for Trump don’t fully trust him, as clearly represented by his in-the-toilet approval ratings. The only entity less popular than Trump is the US Congress.
But they don’t care even if everything the left says about the president is true. The Cathedral has finally pushed them too far, and in response to their shouting is using Antifa thugs and goons to mount a tremendous offensive against them. The alt-left is actually advocating violence against anyone who supports “alt right” ideas – a development we all knew was coming despite the left’s prior support of free speech, no matter how hateful or offensive. Now that the left owns the apparatuses of Deep State government, culture, corporations and media, the US First Amendment no longer “protects” anyone with views opposing Antifa. They can demonstrate, but it’s open season on them as police retreat and let Antifa thugs launch violent physical attacks with impunity. Dissidents are being doxxed, outed, fired from their jobs, and ostracized from society.
Essentially, the left’s response to all this is “everyone who voted for Donald Trump, and everyone who associates with anyone who voted for Trump, is a racist Nazi who needs to starve to death or die in a fire. Anyone who defends anyone who voted for Trump deserves to be physically attacked and decried as a racist Nazi. Anyone who employs anyone who voted for Trump is a Nazi sympathizer who deserves to be boycotted into oblivion and their businesses destroyed.”
Trump is probably a one-termer. In 2020 he’ll likely be replaced with someone more Establishment. Expect the Dems to run Cory Booker for an attempt at Obama’s third term, or Liz Warren, or even Hillary again. He’ll be replaced with someone more willing to do the Cathedral’s bidding soon enough. But the damage is done. Identity politics reigns supreme now, and there’s no going back for the foreseeable future. There is so much distrust and discord among the factions that I don’t see how it can ever be repaired. The US really isn’t even a nation anymore, if it ever was. Race relations are the worst they’ve been in my conscious memory (about 40 years) and there’s no end in sight to their deterioration.
There is increasing radicalization across the board in all spectra: race, socioeconomic status, gender, ethnicity, political philosophy, nationality, you name it. There’s no common ground anymore, nor even efforts to find common ground. This can be sustained in the short term (<20 years) but not in the long term. The lid will eventually blow off the boiling pot.
Why would any sane man even try to form a family in these times?
It’s bad, and it’s going to get worse. A lot worse.
Discuss. What do you think? Am I wrong? Is there anything I’m missing? Is there anything that can be done to improve things?
Your vision of the future is indeed bleak. Towards the end, I was thinking that the only thing that men could do is expatriate. But, where to go? It is not like it is the early 1840s and Texas is welcoming. If men do leave, they will have to go where feminism is unpopular and men are in short supply. That does sound like most of the non-English speaking world.
Also, for this dystopia to work, women will have to have the income a husband can provide without the husband. I can see them getting raises to that point while men’s pay is ground to nothing.
I have heard stories out of Eastern Europe. To begin with, feminism is not all that popular and WWII is still part of the living memory. The former Soviet Union lost ten million soldiers and seventeen million civilians in the war. That had to make for one heck of shortage of men. Women there know what that means culturally. Currently, there are a lot of women who are divorced and the best that they can hope for is a few short affairs before they pack it in. For the men, at an 85/100 male/female ratio, they have little trouble finding companions. There is little misandry there. Black men get the short end here because of that, even though they have the 85/100 ratio in their favor.
Your model does not allow for changing technology. I think that introducing effective male contraception will be as powerful as introducing contraception to women in the seventies. No matter what, women are going to get “baby rabies” and sperm banks won’t pay child support. With widespread use, women are going to have to negotiate with men to get bred. Add to that, raising a child as a couple will still be the best situation for the child.
Then, there are the sexbots. I have to wonder if all that stuff in a woman’s nightstand is there to reduce sexual demand from women to men to enhance their advantage by reducing the supply and demand from women in the supply and demand graph. Sexbots could reduce demand from men. It is not so much the reality of it for my theory, as it is the perception of women to the marketplace.
I think the bottom of Deti’s dystopia is the conversion of men into slaves to serve a society that elevates women. Men don’t like being slaves. It sounds like it will all end in violence. A lot of violence.
I actually see a slightly different outcome.
A few points to consider.
1. Women will still have a biological urge to have children. Some men will want them as well. Does this mean that there is a promise for quality, long-term, marriages? No, but there may still be some.
2. Those women that really want to marry and have children will have the same options that they do now.
a. Quit their full-time job to be a SAHM.
b. Marry a potentially lesser-earning man who will be a SAHD.
c. Both work and put the kid(s) in daycare.
d. Survive off of government.
I don’t think that much will change. Regardless of women making the majority of college graduates, they still end up with junk degrees and have massive debts. The men that leave will still often outnumber in STEM, or some aspect of finance, because that’s where the money is. Men will still often make up the vast majority of higher-earning dangerous jobs that women don’t want; Construction, waste management, mining, etc. That will never change. All it requires is the necessity to work and learn a trade. Bear in mind that I’m not downplaying that sort of work. Just pointing out that nothing’s changed that education still isn’t all that important for every single person, and probably will be less so as the wool is no longer pulled over everyone’s eyes (See Stefan Molyneux’s recent video on why they want to shut down free speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDkWYtUnQnA ).
3. The vast majority of women will still be fat land whales of no value. They’ll take every man that they can get. So what if they get pumped and dumped by a man who’s had a vasectomy? It means that there will be less fat losers in the gene pool.
4. Conservative families will be trying extra-hard to isolate their children from the rest of society. How do I know this? I have an ultra-conservative family member that has a litter of children and they do not attend public school. They are RP’ing the hell out of their families.
5. The State will become so bankrupt that the Marxist laws that are currently in place will be unsustainable. Feminism will not ever go away, but it will be seen as unfashionable (and even destructive) by the next generation. That is not to say that it’s going to stop all of the crazy behaviors, but we will be reaching a breaking point where there will no longer be such a tolerance for some of the BS we are currently seeing. Make note of how big-name media is being usurped by grassroots media; Hence, Trump election. Regardless of whether or not it’s one term, it’s worked. The State would have to ban all free speech to stop it further. It would obviously be a violation of constitutional laws. It doesn’t stop liberal media from trying, but I think that they are starting to fail. In just a matter of two weeks, the general opinion on ANTIFA seems to be turning around (I believe).
6. There will be a backlash. There already is. As marriages decline, the State will attempt to further tax men in the form of alimony for having relationships without marriage. But if what you say is true, the lifelong teenage boys won’t have any money anyway, so they would be the alimony recipients of their highly educated live-in girlfriends (because the laws will be gender neutral). So the laws will either be repealed or simply won’t make it to most states after they are deemed a failure.
7. Finally, If what you say is true, the options that successful / educated women have to find men are going to be so poor. This simply means that some men just need to work a little harder to make the “top 20%”. Even if they have less education, it’s going to be pretty much open season out there for the young / middle-aged men because those that do succeed will be in high demand. The rest? At some point the welfare state is going to have to collapse. If those men are having children, they are going to be illegit. But if what you say is true, they’ll have had a vasectomy. I actually expect that we are going to see a population decline (like Japan and parts of Europe). Yes, this is going to suck since there won’t be enough working-class people to pay into the economy and social security, but we all knew that SS was crumbling and the birth rate will need a decline to become sustainable again.
So, if I’m being honest, I don’t think that it can possibly get any worse than the shit-show that we currently have. If anything, it’s going to be better in some respects. Some communities are going to isolate and live with conservative values. The majority of families are going to live as they do now. Or else everything is going to crash down hard and we’re going to be in for a massive recession that’s going to put everything back at post WWII (probably a third World War).
I honestly feel that we live in a period that parallels the 1920’s in many respects. High divorce rates, sexually liberated women who could now vote, but STILL a massive number of women who stayed at home while their husbands worked. Stats say that the SAHM is on the rise.
Stats are saying that working women are unhappy with their liberated roles. Things are bad for the current generation, but I expect that things might improve for the next. Furthermore, the next generation of men have to collective knowledge and experience of those before them. They will have greater tools to succeed once they truly come to understand the world that they are up against.
I have read that the divorce attorneys are applying “common law” marriage to obtain divorce between cohabitants because marriage rates are falling through the floor.
A lot of what everyone is discussing is already here.
The future is very difficult to predict. Where are the flying cars? When they were predicted, the skill level required of a pilot was overlooked.
As for he rich, they will continue to act independent of the culture. Theri money gives them more options. Still, isolating themselves in gated communities is not going to make them part of the community.
Fuzzie – You are right, but if fewer men are bread winners and then it becomes a “women’s issue” because the wealthier feminist women will deem alimony “unfair” (and they already do) when their husbands want “cash and prizes” for her frivorce, so men have already won. I see the end of most alimony in 20 years, because it’s now the State’s goal to grow that female workforce to keep the machine moving, and women will be making more money than ever. You see very few men making alimony claims, but that’s going to change as a lot of guys out there get left out in the cold.
I can personally attest that some things are changing for the better; At least with regard to father’s rights. My situation is better than that of most men and I even get to see my child more than his mother does (Probably close to 60/40). So while divorce is easier, so is it to have access to your children. But there will always still be a disparity simply because it’s a woman who carries the child, so men will still often have to fight to some degree.
Given that far too many young boys were raised almost completely by single mothers in the ’80s / ’90s, there are going to be far fewer in the future as the young men and women will have more influence from their fathers, and will be less likely to be indoctrinated into feminism by their (typically) useless Marxist single mothers who are the biggest collectors in state assistance (see video link above). There is going to be a massive backlash by those men who have discovered that they have been lied to. It’s pretty much how they all find their way to the manosphere. I don’t care if RP becomes common knowledge because it exposes people to the truth.
Common law obligations are ultimately going to hurt women as much as they would hurt men. Best thing that RP men can do is never fight it, and give them what they want, so that they can find out in the end how much it all hurts when everything is equalized. How is anyone in their right mind going to be able to make “PATRIATCHY!” claims if women will have all of the jobs? The whole thing is going to backfire.
There really are a lot more women becoming aware… not enough maybe, but more than gen x with all their hangups. I’ve personally seen a very big change in how women my age and younger think, and it’s encouraging. IRL, there have been several women, even gen X’ers, that have remarked to me that reading my posts on the marriage topics and being around my husband and I have changed how they act with their own husbands. Change is possible, especially when you have a generation of angry young adults that don’t want “their parents’ marriage.” There’s actually a book with that title! I mean… more people are becoming aware and then making necessary changes… but maybe not very many people overall I’m not sure.
I think that many will once they begin to clearly see the problems. Inevitably, older women become more conservative later in life. Even my own mother was RP before I was, and she knows nothing of the manosphere.
What happens when you have an aging population and few children to replace them? Fewer young liberals will be running around. More established conservatives will dictate cultural norms. I think that the best thing that we can hope for is that the people who benefit the most from government assistance can somehow weed themselves out, or will be isolated from the rest of society who can actually contribute to the cause. We’ve got an influx of very lost, young individuals. As they age, perhaps they will guide the new children on a better path. We’ve got to set a better example though, now that we are seeing the repercussions of past actions.
The Glorious Patriarch:
Because women operate more on feelings than actual justice they are open to bullshit like for millenia women had it worse. They hear it, don’t worry about whether it’s even true* and then use it to justify men suffering more now. In reality. Demonstrably.
Putting feelings aside and demonstrating justice is part of what men bring to bringing up kids, I reckon.
*yes they were stuck running the house. The man, was he living the high life? Or was he working his guts out in the fields?
Back In The Saddle:
I think Deti’s post is spot on. Things will continue to get worse … and more and more men will check out. Virtual Reality is where things begin. And then sex robots. Male contraception. And most of men will check out and stop dealing with women. Why would they continue to engage females … when all of society is against them. Population growth goes to zero. A man really doesn’t need much to live … once he does’t have to support a wife and/or children. And so there will be an economic collapse. And then things will be reset. The biggest wildcard … is when things start to go bad … do the politicians/elites start WW-3 to try to distract the populace from the fact that their policies have destroyed civilisation.
Much respect for Deti. He is one of the main man o sphere commentors that kept me around in my early days of man o sphere reading and he was one of the 4 horsemen of j4g ‘s which will always be one of the better man o sphere discussion spots. Long may the j4g glory last
While I mostly agree with what Deti dropped on us, I continue to think ecconmic factors driving MGTOW is under stated here in the man o sphere. There just aren’t enough jobs that pay well for most men to actively engage with women, dating and society in general. 3 factors are driving that. #1 & the factor we can do the lest about is…… young men today are unhealthy in body, mind and soul. I am amazed at the number of physically unhealthy young men I run into these days. I ain’t talking about fat ass couch potato who doesn’t do anything but eat and jerk off but 20 year old men with breathing problems, seizures and what not. Mentally unhealthy is easy to pin down because they live in a sick society.
#2. Immigration has devalued labour across the board but especially hard hitting for young men is they can’t get the entry level jobs that puts them on a good path because taco benders have those jobs locked down. Trump is addressing that issue but for how long? 8 years at the max so no long term fix there
#3 is industrial automation makes it so employers don’t need anywhere near as many employees as they did in 1950 and there is no real solution to that problem. I mean there are things that could be done but those things won’t be done.
Identity politics has always been will always be. From the beginning of time, world without end, Amen. Obama just made it overt enough for more mainstream White men to pick up on it. More Whites need to come to grips with the biological reality of life and that is we are tribal creatures, us vs them and your skin is your uniform. Yes individuals “can rise above it all” but not whole nations/ tribes/ the world. This also applies to men vs women. Women understand at an instinctual level for them to achieve what they want, open and legally enforced hypergammy, men must loose.
Cill hits on something that is not given enough attention. Or maybe it is but nothing can be done
I married early because that’s what we did back then. Now folks don’t marry at all, or marry very late so that getting married and having kids etc tradition has been broken for 2 generations maybe more. That’s going to be a mother fucker to repair. Steph ain’t wrong about the younger generation of girls but it ain’t many from what I can tell.
The lack of male role models to teach them useful life skills.
No Dads, coaches (cause no one in sports), no shop teachers.
Most twenty somethings cou!dn’t unplug a sink to save their lives.
Oh there is an app for that. No there isn’t unless you can afford a handyman on retainer.
And growing from adversity? “Oh my poor baby, someone is going to pay” instead of “walk it off, it aint broke.” How many kids have scars and the stories to go with it?
At some point life is going to get hard, real hard.
We’ll see how they make out.
You can only grow through adversity when there are a series of possible victories to shore up and rebuild what tough times tear down. Right now, things are tough for them in ways that don’t really allow for recovery and growth. For younger men, those type of reforging victories are not allowed and are labeled “toxic masculinity”
The Glorious Patriarch:
I’m optimistic, perhaps overly so, that young men will rise to the challenges when all this diversity bullshit comes down. We know who gets shit done when the conditions are fair. The people that built the modern world do.
The technology issue is a bigger one, I reckon. I do not see how that works out well for anyone except the currently mega-rich. It would be nice not to be flooding civilised countries with people that cannot, or do not, contribute now let alone as machines decimate the jobs suitable for most people.
Wimminz thinking that their paper pushing jobs will be immune to this are barking mad. Many such jobs already only exist so that huge corporations can meet bullshit laws designed (by them) to remove competition from smaller companies. Huge corporations view their hiring of such gormless minions as a cost of excluding smaller companies – they prefer to live with these ‘ticks’ rather than real male-driven competition.
“it’s less about women wanting alpha men but that so many betas have become simps” (Ton)
Yes. Too many boys brought up without dads, too few role models, too much anti-male crap brought down on boys.
A way to improve it is teach young blokes some physical, manual know-how, from which they can get self respect and independence – especially from women. I’ve dealt with enough of these young blokes to know that if I can’t teach them to realize they can be independent from women, I’m pissing in the wind.
Something overlooked that may affect Deti’s projection is that automation hasn’t really hit the office yet. When it does, a lot of jobs for women will be eliminated. Just guessing, automation may be more of a threat to women than men.
It occurs to me that the young men dropping out of the sexual marketplace are doing just that. While they may have experienced trouble, what is getting them out is the fear that they may succeed and go from the frying pan into the fire. As women have taken advantage of the system, they have managed to turn AWALT into a curse. These guys aren’t involuntarily celibate, they have chosen to live in conflict with their biological imperative. What brought them to this? What women do.
This will be a problem for women going forward. There will be no boyfriends or husbands to bail them out financially.
Fuzzy, there’s still the type of women’s employment that’s generated by ideology. This can only be reduced by reducing the grip of the ideology. Marxism / feminism (post-modernism, whatever) want everyone to be indoctrinated, which will require indoctrinators in all areas of employment or occupation. There’s still a long way to go before they fully achieve that goal, but they are getting there fast. Meanwhile the furtherance of their goals creates more and more employment for themselves.
Fuzzie – Regarding office automation. It already has happened. Brick / mortar stores are replaced by shipping depots, or stores that serve as little more than a place to pick up an order (see Internet grocery shopping at Walmart or Whole Foods). Most services have been replaced by online shopping. I hardly even go into a store anymore when I can just buy groceries online in 15 minutes and pick them up later in the day, or tomorrow and get out in 5 minutes at Walmart. When is the last time that you stepped into the DMV other than to get a new picture taken? What about a bank other than those rare occasions that you have a paper check and you can’t simply deposit it at an ATM? I personally work in a business that has like 5 female employees out of about 50-75 (in one office location). Only one of them has a reasonable technical role. The rest are admin assistants. Everyone else (men) either sells or produces a product. There was one woman in sales but she lasted all of like 3 months before she disappeared. Had a picture of her dog on her desk (cracks me up every time I think about it).
There will always be service-based jobs that will be needed; Auto / appliance repair / construction / installation / etc. Most of those are dominated by skilled laborers and will always be unless manufacturers make completely perfect product or completely disposable products. But when is the last time that you threw away a 5 year old vehicle that ran you $20-$50k? Probably not going to happen unless everyone starts leasing, which is downright idiotic for most cases.
It just occurred to me that I seldom deal with women in my line of work, mainly because it’s rather technical and women seldom occupy these jobs. The only time they show up is when a bullshit “committee” is somehow involved. Not that I’m hating on women. Just stating an observation. I seem to only encounter women when I am meeting them at some front desk, checking out at the grocery when I actually need to pick something up in a store, or I reluctantly go into a government office or public school. One wonders how they survive on those menial jobs, but I have plenty of ideas.
Bit late to this.
I’m a little more positive about the future than Deti.
I think Deti’s view a bit too linear – he see’s what *has* happened over the last 50 years and is projecting it into the future. I believe the dynamic in play is, like most things in nature and human affairs, cyclical.
If we take the 10,000 foot view, just about everything humans do, or have ever done, has been done in service to the female imperative. Which, put most crudely, is to find the best quality sperm and the best quality provisioning. And this is as it should be – in pursuing this imperative we (usually) end up with the types of offspring best suited to whatever environment prevails at the time.
In traditional societies, this is recognised and regulated, setting up structures to force women to look for both the sperm and the provisioning in one man. This involves placing restrictions on women’s freedoms and behaviors whilst placing obligations on men. Patriarchy ‘turbo-charges’ the dynamic, tying men’s access to sex to his work, in the process creating wealth.
But this creates tensions in women as it works against their hypergamous impulses. Being forced to choose just one man, their their hypergamous hind-brain can never be sure they have managed to get either the best sperm or provisioning, so there is always the tendency to rail against patriarchal structures.
Occasionally a set of circumstances presents itself that allows that hypergamy to break free. The sixties and seventies were such a time; a confluence of the pill, mechanisation, a weakening of masculinity as the result of the culling of masculine men in of two world wars, and fantastic post war wealth allowed women to agitate for fundamental social changes – and they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.
This is just hypergamy in action – and indeed it makes a lot of sense that women would do this. Under the old order their access to the best men and best provisioning was limited; feminism allowed them access to more of both. Nature was finding a way to ‘speed up’ hypergamous friendly results.
But now, after 50 years circumstances have changed. Feminism has destroyed the large pool of men who are both able, and more importantly, willing, to provide for a women in the same way as men did 50 years ago. The flood of women in the workforce destroyed wage growth for men and is now doing so for women, so the option of providing for themselves has now become an obligation for women where it used to be a choice, and despite (or more likely because of) the massive affirmative action programs and explosion of government and corporate ‘make-work’ jobs for women, they remain predominantly lower paid than men as they stubbornly refuse the higher paid roles with more risk, danger and responsibility. For more and more women, living at, or even below the poverty line is becoming the new reality.
At the same time, more and more men are coming to realize that the deck is stacked against them. Either willingly or unwillingly men are disengaging – from women, from education, from careers, from society itself, the vast majority unconsciously. For nature provides men with the ‘nuclear option’ for periods when women get out of control. Men always have an option women don’t.
Men’s ability to live very well and very little is ALWAYS the feature that kills every attempt at female empowerment.
For when when men dis-engage, they take with them the productivity that provided the wealth that allowed the attempt at female empowerment in the first place. And women are utterly incapable making up for the lost male productivity. I did some analysis a couple of years ago – the second generation of ’empowered’ women are about to retire and STILL, women are taking about three quarters of the gov benefits whilst providing about 25% of the tax base. If this is the best they can manager after 60 years of being given every possible advantage over men then it should be clear that they are never going to match male productivity.
And we are seeing the result of this everywhere – huge amounts of personal, corporate and sovereign debt; desperately trying to make up for the declining male productivity in the here and now by borrowing first from our children and now from our grandchildren. The problem is that huge numbers of our sons are no longer allowed or inclined to achieve the productivity that it is assumed they would – thanks to feminism’s attempts to dis-enfranchisement. And most of our grandchildren won’t even be born – thanks to feminism’s success in diverting women away from motherhood.
This is all subject to an immutable rule of nature; what can’t continue, won’t.
Men are tapped out financially and Big Daddy Government is broke. The two sources of funding the feminism has utterly relied on to disguise women’s appalling record of wealth creation and preservation are almost exhausted. At the same time the elevation of female status to utterly absurd levels whilst tearing down men’s status has, for millions of women, rendered just about ALL men unable to meet their hypergamous standards. These women live in world where, romantically at least, there literally are ‘no men’.
In short, feminism first provided women access to a richer pool of high quality men and provisioning. But now it has destroyed both.
Women sense this. They are (mostly) unable to articulate it in these terms, but it’s there, as always, not in the things they say, but in what they do – especially among gen Z. Those born since the middle of the 90s are testing as the most traditionally minded since the 1940s. My daughter (mid teens) falls in this cohort. Many of her friends are rejecting the feminist drum beat of ‘uni, career, empowerment’. This is the generation who have seen first hand the result of the feminist lifestyle, and for most the difference in life outcomes (the outcomes that MATTER – especially to women – family, children, community) between those those who follow the feminist line and those that tread a more traditional path are now so obvious that even children can see which way is better.
Ultimately, feminism no longer provides the best access to quality men or provisioning. And feminism is just as subject to hypergamy as the lowliest man, and will (is in fact) being discarded just as quickly. For increasing numbers of women the path to the best quality men & provisioning now lies, as it always does in the end, down a traditional route. And women always steer society down the path that best gives them access to these things.
Men will re-leash female hypergamy again. But make no mistake, it will be women who lay the leash at men’s feet and ask to be tethered.
Back In The Saddle:
Funny comment by Cadders … he rightly and correctly explained the entire situation and then came to entirely the wrong conclusion. See … if it were men doing this damage to society … they would eventually realize what they were doing was destructive and change course.
The problem is women don’t think rationally like men do. They do what gives them tingles. And an under-employed man or an unattractive man does not give them the tingles. A man would choose an ugly woman (or fat) rather than have no woman at all. But women don’t. They want a top notch man or no man at all. They’ve been doing it for decades … look at all the single mom’s. They once had a decent man, ejected him, have unreasonable expectations of what kind of man they can attract and live in denial without a man … for years, decades … most times ruining their own lives and those of their children. They’d rather have random sex with strangers than accept a man they don’t think is good enough. And they won’t change.
They won’t change because they can’t change. Its like asking a woman to stop having a period. They won’t change because they can’t change.
If men don’t reclaim society by force … then its not happening. And men have been striped of most of their economic, social, and legal power … at this point in time … the tide has turned and men have lost. The West is going down … its just a matter of time.
Sure they may be small pockets that go back to traditional values … but society as a whole, nope. Its not going back … its going down.
Cadders did brilliant analysis to buttress Deti. That is exactly what is going on.
Back in the saddle rightly points out women alone can’t change it both capability and their inability to observe and react logically.
They will indeed lay down the leash as Cadders said. Like any time a woman realizes she can’t fix the plumbing leak that is slowly flooding her house. (Bats eyes) Oh please big strong man, save me.
Unfortunately as everyone points out the current man is incapable of rising to the challenge. He lacks skills and any experience with adversity. The drive to tske charge has been disincentivized and culturally beaten out of him. Hostile masculinity!!
The few capable men will just look at the poor distressed woman facing a life of work til retirement, no kids, and no family and simply say “No!” These men will keep a small harem or family, keep to their own, keep them safe. They will be both revered and jealously hated by the incapable masses of both sexes.
It will be a downwards spiral. Neither sex giving anything of value to each other. As men are easily self sustaining and with a generation of grievances to “I told you so”, we will see culture split even more than the current identity politics.
A tipping point will come. Largely driven by the lack of resources\productivity being produced. A broke economy and failing hard structures. Make work and an app for that churns existing wealth. Real wealth is only made by pulling or growing something out of the earth and building something out of it. Multiple sales of a century farmhouse just moves the value between parties, shuffles the deck. The actual wealth was made a 100 years ago when the stone and wood was shaped.
This lack of new wealth and the civil\military conflict that goes with it will be the reset.
It will be ugly. Men will be forced to be true men or fall to stronger men. And THEN women will find the men they will be willing to be leashed to.
Unfortunately much will be destroyed in the fall.
@Deti – I always find your comments interesting, good to see you authoring a piece again. The ‘old friend’ comment (Hi yourself btw) made me realize how many years we must have been at this. I don’t comment so much anymore but I’m always up for a debate about the course we are on and where we are heading.
@Ton – ‘traditional’ is really shorthand for patriarchal. Wherever we are going it will end up as some sort of patriarchal order, I think. I doubt many of the existing formally recognized traditions will survive in the form we see them today, but there is a reason that just about every culture, in every time period, in every geography has eventually evolved a patriarchal society structure of some sort; it works. To paraphrase Churchill – it’s the worst way to organize society, except for every other way we have tried. The way things are currently unraveling shows, I think, our current attempt is faring no better than attempts at female empowerment in previous times. I do agree though, that an unavoidable feature of this unraveling is likely to be violence of some sort.
@BackInTheSaddle – I think there is a tendency in the manosphere to endow hypergamy with some kind of mythical, unassailable power. It is indeed true that ultimately it drives everything women do to some degree – but – it is not omnipotent. It is almost always trumped by fear.
You are of course correct when you mention that ‘the problem is women don’t think rationally like men do’ and go on to mention some of the horrible behaviors women have been allowed to get away with as a result. But this more emotionally driven way of engaging with the world (compared to men) is a double edged sword. In times of plenty and safety, it can result in women pushing for feminist mores as they have little to fear, for there are wealth and structures in place to protect them from the consequences of their emotionally driven decisions. But, when times turn leaner, as they are now doing everywhere in the West, women themselves increasingly have to bear consequences of their actions – which for an ever increasing number of women means living a life where they cannot secure commitment from a worthy man, never become a mother, are trapped in jobs they can never leave, often living a life of poverty or near poverty as a result of debts racked up to obtain useless degrees or to buy pointless trinkets and baubles to try to fill the hole where a family should be. In past times they had a good chance of finding a man able and willing to commit to them and ‘fix’ all of this – this is no longer the case.
Plan B for women for the last 50 years has been Big Daddy Government, but many countries have now implemented austerity measures and the benefits reduced. Women have always been the biggest recipients of these benefits so the cuts are having a disproportionate effect on them. Here in the UK for instance, legal aid to pay for divorces is no longer available, child benefit payments capped and frozen, the total amount of benefits any one person receives has been capped and the amount you can earn before benefits are removed has been considerably reduced. All these things push more and more people into poverty, but especially women. They are happening in plain sight but under the radar.
Life for most women is getting worse.
I travel to offices all over the country and I see the same thing again and again. Women of a certain age, 30 something, 40 something or older, childless, single, or in a relationship going nowhere. When I talk to them, none of them planned for their lives to turn out this way, they just did as they were told, obeyed the nonsense of the feminist narrative. These are the female cannon fodder of feminism. And they are paying the price for the ‘glory’ of feminism, in money, misery and motherhood denied. The cost of feminism, first born by men, and then children, is now being passed on to women. Fear – the great antidote to hypergamy – is starting to stalk the world of women.
And women notice these things. Women’s social antennae are twitching and they are starting to change their behaviors – the number of SAHMs is increasing and the female labour force participation rate is starting to decline (for the first time ever iirc). Once again, women are signalling a change of social direction. This is the way of women – they will rarely if ever overtly state what they want or actually do anything to enact it, because, as you say, ‘they can’t’. Indeed I suspect they don’t even understand their impulses enough too overtly articulate it. They are simply doing what women always do – reward the behaviors in men that they want to see more of. When feminism was young, they rewarded men who towed the feminist line, now we are seeing them start to reward men who tow a more traditionalist path.
This is why I differ from you in the insistence that men need to re-take society ‘by force’. Force is not necessary. For what women are looking for is the same thing they have always sought – dominant masculinity. In the post feminist world women could indulge the fantasy that the bad boys and the thugs fitted this description, that tingles equaled love. In the newly austere West that fantasy can no longer be maintained – it’s days are passing. In a world where huge numbers of women rely on pools of wealth and power that no longer exist or are almost gone, the future belongs to confident, self reliant men and the women who have proved themselves worthy of them.
Agreed. “the future belongs to confident, self reliant men and the women who have proved themselves worthy of them.”
But for the first time you have mgtow. True j4g mgtow. Off adventuring, learning, cooking in a wee cottage full of books and outdoor gear mgtow.
Historically there has always been a division of labour. Men needed the services of women to help take care of them and theirs. With modern life men truly do not need women except for sex and child rearing. How does the effect of many self reliant men not WANTING women play into things???
I see it as a huge factor to slow the correction.
The collapse of feminism, the bankrupt social government, the call for male productivity.
But I see many top tier men putting down their books on the deck of the cabin they built saying, respectfully, truthfully and politely “No thanks, I’m good” and quietlt going back to their peaceful lives.
What will be the incentive to return to the plantation.
And dont say sex cause such men will have controlled or found outlets for their sex drives.
And many men want to be fathers but few say oh my god I have to have kids.
I see the fall as described. I just dont see the reconstruction appearing.
You ask a good question – which can be summerised as (I think); why *will* men come back to the reservation?
I don’t see it shaking out like that. Men won’t be coming ‘back’ at all.
I have seen many definitions of MGTOW – it frequently seems to excite a ‘passionate’ response amongst it’s critics. And this feature is, I think, and indication that people sense a power in the concept, even as they sometimes try to deny or fight it.
They are not wrong. I just think the nature of that power is misunderstood.
I mentioned earlier about the women I see in offices around the country. I didn’t mention the men, but among them I see the male response to a feminized world. Few are leading or looking for any kind of traditional lifestyle. Younger men working just enough to take care of themselves, few interested in career progression, occasional sex when the planets align, no kids, even increasing numbers of them not even able to drive (this last came as a surprise to me). Among older men there are obviously more who are family men, but even here the trajectory is similar to the younger cohort. The single older men are often divorced, not interested in any kind of committed relationship, they are coasting in their careers and some tell me they would rather spend time on their hobbies than have sex with the women that are on offer. These men are living their lives on ‘easy mode’.
The mainstream media would of course cast these men as ‘losers’. But they support themselves, are not imposing themselves on others, and don’t seem especially unhappy – in fact many seem to live full and peaceful lives. I don’t think this is purely anecdotal either – in ‘The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness’ – a report based on the longitudinal study of happiness which (iirc) has been running for over 60 years, it was documented that for the first time ever, men are now reporting as being happier with their lives than women.
So when I look around the office at these men, what do I really see? Well, to my eyes I see hoards of MGTOWs. It’s just that most have never heard of the term, and few would consider themselves as such. But functionally – and that’s what really matters – that’s what they are.
Feminists are fond of saying that women are all feminists now. The irony is that at the same time, they have made, or rather are making, all men MGTOWs – at least functionally.
Such men form an increasing proportion of the general male population. These are the men the women get to choose from. It really is no surprise many women can’t get commitment from them. The men are happy to have sex or FWB arrangements (of course) and many are interested in something longer term…..but…..so many times I have seen fledgling relationships fail as the men start to step up to shouldering ‘traditional’ responsibilities – seeking better jobs, more pay, a bigger flat etc….and then give up. They seem to get to a point where they think – meh – the relationship is not worth the effort, and switch back to easy mode. In all honesty I can’t say I blame them.
All of which is to support your contention. This is the dysfunctional state of today’s mating market.
But my point is there is no ‘reservation’ to get men to come back to. Just an increasing mess of broken people leading empty, atomized lives. Both men and women desire something better, but it can’t be found in the current system – feminism destroyed or corrupted all the social mores, traditions and institutions that worked to give both men and women meaningful and fulfilling lives and a family.
As you mention, men now only need women for sex and child rearing. And feminists would have us believe that women don’t need a man for *anything*.
Well kinda – women don’t need men for anything because the state provides to women most of what men traditionally provided. Or at least it used to. Without the state intervening women not needing men for *anything* quickly becomes women needing men for *everything*. And this is what is happening. It’s not obvious because women are suffering the ‘death of 1000 cuts.’ I described earlier the austerity cut backs that are predominantly affecting women – as ever the politicians are being clever – they are not (or rarely) actually stopping or cutting benefits, just making it much harder to qualify for them. They are introducing multi-year freezes on them and letting inflation erode the true value of them. Women are increasingly finding that Big Daddy Government no longer cares for them like it used to. They want something better. Hypergamy in action.
So are women stepping up to the new challenges they face to better their lot? Hardly – the UK National Health Service has just issued a directive that young women aged 16 to 24 be considered an ‘at-risk’ group for mental health issues. Rather than creating a generation of ‘strong independent women’, feminism has instead, it seems to me, created a cohort of frightened little girls.
And no wonder. Feminism has left women increasingly in a world of half-interested men and an impoverished state. Women as a group clearly aren’t stepping up, coming off the government teat and providing for themselves to anything like the same extent their male peers are. They traded the sex card in years ago. So what do women have left?
The one thing men are still desperate for.
Just as women are crying out for authentic dominant masculinity, so men are craving authentic submissive femininity. And this is what I am starting to see popping up here and there. Women being sweet, submissive body language, showing affection, being playful. Not playing games or being a bitch.
And they are creaming it. One that stands out for me can only be described as, well, quite ugly. But she captivates most men in her orbit as she has dialed up her femininity to 11. That’s how desperate men are for femininity. Believe me, other women notice as well. The message is starting to spread through the herd; ‘there is a better way’.
This, I believe, is the nexus of the change that is happening. Feminism has pushed the pendulum so far against men’s interests that it is now also working against women to the point that some of them are waking up. And it will swing back to just such an extreme extent in the opposite direction; women will have to become feminine again in order to command men’s commitment as they once did. And to be feminine is to reject EVERYTHING that feminism stands for. I am sure it will not go down without a fight.
But here’s the thing. Femininity is a very fragile thing – in a feminist environment most women are now too scared to appear feminine. It can only flourish when protected by a strong masculinity. The challenge for men is to develop sufficient masculinity to give women the strength to express their femininity. A few men will (are in fact). And this is enough. Because when all those guys on easy mode see the prize that can be won, this will be enough to make them step up and be a contender. Because at last women are offering something ‘worth the effort’.
The future will belong to such men and women. Back they won’t be going ‘back’ to anything. They will be creating the new culture, and as ever, where men lead, the women will follow.
Well, to my eyes I see hoards of MGTOWs. It’s just that most have never heard of the term, and few would consider themselves as such. But functionally – and that’s what really matters – that’s what they are
Been saying that for years. I reckon the number of mgtow I personally know pushes 50% or so
Cadders, that is so interesting about femininity and men craving it. It DOES seem like feminine beauty **inspires** men to do what they normally wouldn’t probably do.
Adam was given Eve as a gift. Women are supposed to be gifts to their men in every way… their very essence **should** technically be femininity that explodes with giving men inspiration to become the heroes they’re meant to be.
Since I have too much time to nurse our baby, just wrote a post on a woman’s sensual beauty being a God-given gift. Beauty inspires… it reflects God’s ultimate beauty.
Masculinity inspires and desires the feminine
The feminine inspires and desires the masculine
Or does in a healthy society
Again brilliance. Ton I agree, 50%+ if not 70%.
But it is a catch 22. Women need security to be feminine. Men need a reason to come out of easy mode to provide it. As you said, many begin and say nah its not worth it.
Also the jadedness of most men. We can forgive much but once the line is crossed it is indelibly permanent. My first reaction to a feminine woman under 50? Whats her angle? Why the act. It would take many, many, many interactions for me to actually believe it. Even if I did, she would have to entet my family, my circle of friends to be deemed worthy of my protection.
“Would you die for them Riddick?”
‘Not for them.”
I see a lot of false starts. Lurches. A whole generation raised by feminists who saw the worst of females in their formitive years. They will not easily be accepting of even genuine feminity.
The default will be the ejection switch. Hair trigger. The first sign of bitchiness, selfishness and they will eject. And the woman must start over, remaining feminine to work it again without falling back to bitterness, gurl power and sluthood which is their easy mode.
And for their part, even with good intentions, can women keep it up???
Can they, not us, they constrain their baser instincts. And keep it up long enough. To both convince us and to make the change permanent in themselves.
Men have always been the social control for women. We ruled in ways overt and subtle. But we ruled them. Now for the first time we have withdrawn. Left them to their own control and outcomes. We dont care enough to rule them. Like an orphan abandoned who must rear themselves. Yes absolutely with mens’ guidance it can come back. But can it without it?
This time it is up to the women.
A d we have seen what happens when women are left to themselves.
It is what got us here.
P.s. it hugely saddens me that the default, the easy mode is no longer maculinity.
My Scots grandfather, a walk the beat cop, oozed masculinity and protectiveness. A gentle giant at 6-6 the thugs were terrified of but who the school children adored.
My grandmother who I never saw in other than a dress taking the greatest pride in carrying groceries up to a third floor walkup to make “a proper Scots supper” for her husband.
Back In The Saddle:
I’m currently reading SJW’s always lie by Vox Day. In it he makes a point about how the SJW’s rigged the voting for Hugo and Nebula awards on books. And how the SJW’s have take over SF publishing houses. Since they have hijacked the agenda and are promoting female authors and books which push their narrative … SF books sales are down 50%. THEY DO NOT CARE.
In addition, there was a battle kinda like GamerGate to try and take back the Awards and make them fair. So a group used the rules in place to get some non leftist books considered for awards. And the SJWs reacted like they always do … like Feminists do. They would rather burn the place down than have fair elections. They changed the rules and since they were no longer rigged in their favor … they didn’t win … and neither did anyone else. Nobody won. And the whole awards process was rendered useless. And they did not care, they’d rather destroy everything rather than let a non leftist agenda succeed.
That is what people need to realize. Feminism, like SJW’s, is a mental disease. These people do not think rationally and will not change. Essentially they are brainwashed and will never change or accept reality or take a different course. Its either their way or they will burn it down. And that is why, things are not going to get better.
And seriously … can anyone seriously say that women will give up the notion of No Fault Divorce. A woman wants the ability to dump her man for someone better … at any time. They will never giver that up. Alimony. Child Support … yeah … really … once men have 90% of the jobs taken from them and women early 30% more than men on average … you think any woman is going to agree that they get to support their kids and not men ? Really ?
There will be no compromise. There will be no changes … offering equality to men. There will be no changes that give men an incentive to marry again or become fathers again. Women would rather burn it all down than give in. Because they are brainwashed and controlled by their biology and by group-think. They will always have an in-gender bias favoring other women. Its baked in genetically … and that’s not changing. Like SJWs, women have stolen the narrative and rigged the game in their favor … they are not giving that up now. And would rather see it destroyed than change.
If you want to see the behavior in action … lets take the typical divorce rape situation. Like mine … so, yeah, its persona … but since its literally happened millions of times over the last few years … I’m not unique; not by a long shot. So, lets say a woman looses respect for her man after having a couple of kids and they get older. Refuses to have sex with her man and makes him beg for it. After years of begging … and seriously … given the situation … he can beg, or he can raped in divorce or he can force his wife to have sex with him and go to prison and be labeled a sex offender for the next 8,000 years. In other words … he begs. Till he eventually gives up or he cheats. If he cheats … she nukes the marriage … adopts the “I’ve been wronged and am totally justified in destroying the man who I once claimed to love and would do so forever”. Victim card. If he doesn’t cheat and lives in misery for years, decades …eventually she loses respect for him and dumps him anyway. And here is where it gets interesting because most men show up in court and defend themselves and ask for access to the children and these women turn into the biggest man hating cunts on the planet. Steal the children and brainwash them to hate their own father. Fuck up the kids bad. Most never recover. Act like the biggest cunt in the universe and in many cases lie and accuse the man of something … spousal abuse, domestic abuse, child abuse, substance abuse … so unfounded accusation to ruin his life and given the legal system in the US is likely to end up with him fired from his job, in jail, and unemployable for life. It would be more gentle to get get a gun and blow his brains out … instead she sentences him to years and years of abuse. And that’s assuming he ONLY has alimony and child support payments for years. In other words … the once loving wife has morphed into a ruthless monster set out to destroy his life. And … and this is the point that Cadders doesn’t recognize. She does not care. DOES NOT FUCKING CARE. She’d destroy his life. Destroy her life. Destroy her own children’s life. SHE DOES NOT FUCKING CARE. She’d destroy the entire fucking universe if she had to . Most of these women are mentally ill, not rational, and do not care about anything but themselves. Evil takes over and they will destroy anything to preserve their narrative … they did nothing wrong and they are the victim.
Anyone expecting women to wake up one day and realize that what they are doing isn’t working and will therefore voluntarily agree en-mass that Men can have control of society again is just as delusional as these women are. Sorry Cadders but it ain’t a happening.
Horseman post points to how thoroughly the left has destroyed the social capital of the West. When the progressive train crashes against the reality of debt and human nature….. well if we are lucky we’ll have our own lost decade or two. If we ain’t lucky expect a lot of pain and suffering. I see no reason to think we’ll be lucky like the Russians mostly because when I have been around failed nation states ethnic clashes are the norm and we already have a shit ton of ethnic clashes already.
If the leftist train stays in motion we will become South America with more violence