Thoughts on fence-sitters

https://babylonbee.com/news/famed-archaeology-professor-resigns-after-several-photos-surface-of-him-in-nazi-uniforms

I was thinking. Here’s a fusion of Bible and science. 3800 words. Skip to bold if lazy.

Having no protective instinct for your kin is a woeful excuse for cowardice. I keep seeing it in American men and I’ve no skin in that game so it’s objective. I’ve noticed it’s trendy for men to SIGNAL conservative (a virtue signal to K values) but also throw various in-group under the bus (e.g. white mothers = Karen), usually for existing.

With friends like that….

It’s getting really grim and they deserve their own suffering, as the Bible stipulates.
Who are we to intervene? If we could? (We cannot).

Deut 28:15…

“But it shall come about, if you do not obey the Lord your God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes with which I charge you today, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you: “Cursed shall you be in the city, and cursed shall you be in the country.”

Deut 31:17

Then My anger will be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them and hide My face from them, and they will be consumed, and many evils and troubles will come upon them

If you are unholy, you deserve to suffer. Suck it up. Man up.

From Prov 1, God is laughing at you

Because I called and you refused,
I stretched out my hand and no one paid attention;
And you neglected all my counsel
And did not want my reproof;
I will also laugh at your calamity;
I will mock when your dread comes

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reproof

You’re supposed to be criticized.

And men are supposed to police one another, women only chastise (from chaste, a virtue) when men have failed to be men.

1 Samuel 3:13

For I have told him that I am about to judge his house forever for the iniquity which he knew, because his sons brought a curse on themselves and he did not rebuke them.

But they claim to slag off actual Christians (some of which are evil whitey and evil woman*) using a book that expressly condemns them?

Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit” – Matthew 15

Leave them alone, God said. Let them suffer. Let them be dumb. Let them fail, it’s God’s will. Don’t go simping for the anti-social.

Matthew 25 “The foolish said to the prudent, ‘Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.’ But the prudent answered, ‘No, there will not be enough for us and you too; go instead to the dealers and buy some for yourselves.’”

They’re parasites.

Isaiah 65:12

I will destine you for the sword,
And all of you will bow down to the slaughter.
Because I called, but you did not answer;
I spoke, but you did not hear.
And you did evil in My sight
And chose that in which I did not delight.

You can’t appeal to the authority of the Bible if you read it? Did they read it?

Stop meddling in others’ morality and check yourself.

Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?” Rom 9:21

You are responsible for YOUR soul. Derailing to others’ is a weakness.

They’re even pushing Muslim rhetoric about *supposed The Woman Question. How stupid can you get? With no white women (whom they truly reference), the race is dead, numbnuts. That’s what the SJWs openly want, along with certain religions. If you don’t know any good white women, it sounds like you’re the problem? Why don’t they want to be around you? Note how the Muslims trolling on those ‘right wing’ pages, pretending to be white goys, are also pushing them into the very Marxism they claim to oppose e.g. largely cultural, an abortion and STD clinic on every corner. Like no, you’re not edgy, that’s all 100% mainstream, you cannot hate white women and girls more than the people literally rape slaving them under your noses and calling you effeminate cowards for letting it happen. Kin before ‘gender’. If you don’t care about your kin, you’re not conservative. These fake Ks want an excuse to be globalist, why? Just leave the West instead of whining every day for years, who will stop you? We won’t miss you, while you always, coincidentally, side with the oppressors, as true r-strategists. I’m losing patience with them, something might have to be done. They lack in basic literacy and common sense. What did Muslims do historically to men of lands they enslaved? Castrated them. Can’t say they wouldn’t deserve it, for allowing their kin to be raped, Bible is clear about “I will give you over to foreigners if you disobey” proclamations and “love her because she is a woman” rules.

It’s love thy neighbour as thyself, love your close kin, protect them, respect them, honour them, not throw them under the bus to foreigners with a different religion to signal how ‘independent, fish bicycle’ macho bravado man you are.

https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Peter%203%3A7

They just want an excuse to be cowards, cucks and traitors. Damn the fence-sitters.

Who’d be dumb enough to believe gib promises from people who come from countries with retarded IQs that can barely feed themselves?

And if it’s “men r so special” – not really, most infant deaths are male because the genome is weaker, Natural Selection culls men (earlier mortality, more accidents from low IQ etc). How are women meant to alter your IQ exactly? I’m all ears.

https://www.medindia.net/news/infant-mortality-rates-higher-among-boys-than-girls-study-34597-1.htm

An analysis of infant mortality in 15 developed countries found that baby boys are 24 percent more likely to die than baby girls.

This is down from a peak of 31 percent in 1970, but double the rate in the days before the development of vaccines and public health measures like improved sanitation dramatically improved infant mortality rates.

Men are the mutants of the species. If women were – no species, we’d go extinct. I get a vibe of hard cope from a sizeable segment of low IQ multicultural r-guys who thought they’d be Brad Pitt one day, a little like our version of India’s angry single men.

“As infant mortality falls to very low levels, infant deaths become increasingly concentrated among those who are born with some weakness.”

Genetically, men are the weaker sex.

The male disadvantage begins in utero…..

it continues

When poor sanitation and nutrition weakened all babies and mothers the male disadvantage was less noticeable: from 1751 until 1870 the gender mortality gap was about 10 to 15 percent.

Medicine has allowed weak men to survive

we all knew already, soyboys were saved by medicine

The gender gap rose steadily as infant mortality rates plummeted and only began to reverse with the increased use caesarean sections and improvements in neonatal care.

by God’s design, they should’ve been dead

“Changes in obstetrical practice and neonatal medicine that saved all but the weakest babies have benefited boys more than girls because boys were more vulnerable across the entire range of birth weights,” the authors concluded.

“In addition to changes in delivery practices, improvements in neonatal intensive care also may have benefited males more than females.”

we owe them nothing

A third times more likely to die from infant syphilis, for instance

60 v. 93 per 100k (f/m)

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/infant-death-rates-by-cause-by-sex?country=~Syphilis

so where do they get the idea of being God’s favourite?

It has no data, they die younger and have lower average IQs, so is it the Bible?

but… God doesn’t actually like men. Genesis:

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. The Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.”

So if we’re arguing God hates either sex, it’d be the one who was 100% in charge during all the evil, wouldn’t it?

He literally wants to kill those guys.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=proverbs+1%3A27-32&version=NIV

when calamity overtakes you like a storm,
    when disaster sweeps over you like a whirlwind,
    when distress and trouble overwhelm you.

Then they will call to me but I will not answer;
they will look for me but will not find me,
since they hated knowledge
and did not choose to fear the Lord.
Since they would not accept my advice
and spurned my rebuke,
they will eat the fruit of their ways
and be filled with the fruit of their schemes.
For the waywardness of the simple will kill them,
and the complacency of fools will destroy them;

You deserved this. It’s right there. You wanna be a reprobate, this is what happens. What have your fellow mortals, men or women both, got to do with divine justice? Are we supposed to pray for you?

“As for you, do not pray for this people, and do not lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you” Jer 7:16

God does reject people, after they reject Him.

Jeremiah 6:30
They call them rejected silver,
Because the Lord has rejected them.

If society sucks, the Bible is abundantly clear that men are responsible. You lost moral authority and God is punishing you, not women. We find it funny Americans say they oppose the Sexual Revolution while encouraging strip clubs and their own daughters to join ‘legal’ brothels. Is that a Christian nation, really?

Women are meant to fear GOD. Not you guys. You’re mortal. You’re not Jesus. Most of you can’t put the porn down for a week. Remove the offending ‘limb’, Jesus said. Respect is earned. What do you do, that makes fellow men and women respect you? Usually crickets ensue after asking.

I get the feeling we’ve been flooded with Cluster B men recently, complete with “splitting” and delusions of revenge fantasy, it feels very Elliot Rodger, dunnit?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology)

There’s literally something mentally wrong with them. They’re spiteful mutants who implode any group dumb enough to accept them. They did it with atheistkult. Do we not have standards? Basic moral standards? Not being a literal raging hypocrite? All Cluster B men do is derail with pity parties about how much of a loser they are and Someone Else must fix it or be “punished”. Very just world fallacy crap, male brand hypoagency. I think a fair standard is not blaming others for your own inability to grow up. I expected such entryism (fake Ks). We should reject these guys, they’re worthless to any First World civilization, actively anti-social, they’re just picking on women as the weaker sex for now so the men are weakened (family ties, borderlines love to split them up, attacking women first as the weaker sex).

Splitting is a relatively common defense mechanism for people with borderline personality disorder.[7] One of the DSM IV-TR criteria for this disorder is a description of splitting: “a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation“.[10][11] In psychoanalytic theory, people with borderline personality disorder are not able to integrate the good and bad images of both self and others, resulting in a bad representation which dominates the good representation.[12]

Those people shouldn’t breed! Nobody is entitled to pass on their genes, yet only r-types feel that way. Sexual Selection is supposed to deny the genetics of entitled borderlines, histrionic personalities etc. Many of the undiagnosed cluster Bs are male, statistically. 

Borderline Personality Disorder in Men: A Common Co-Occurring Disorder

Characterized by pervasive mood instability, difficulty with interpersonal relationships, negative self-image and harmful behavior, borderline personality disorder in men (BPD) is a serious mental illness.

We’re not your shrink, we’re not here for any one guy subjectively but they keep treating discussions of societal issues like a personal therapy session, classic cluster B characteristic. Like STFU so the grown-ups can talk?

Borderline personality disorder is characterized by:

  • Intense bouts of anger, depression or anxiety that last hours to days long
  • Episodes of impulsive aggression, self-injury or drug or alcohol abuse
  • Distorted thoughts and negative sense of self
  • Frequent and impulsive changes in life-altering decisions
  • Highly unstable patterns of social relationships
  • High sensitivity to rejection
  • Impulsive behaviors like excessive spending, risky sex and binge eating

It is common to see borderline personality disorder occur with other psychiatric problems, particularly bipolar disorder, depression, anxiety disorders, substance abuse and other personality disorders.

I see no way they could ever impair our optics. /s We shouldn’t pick up defects. We’re not SJWs, we don’t need it. They drag every group down, we’re just the latest.

There’s also a huge persecution and victim complex, with paradoxical claims e.g. women are stupid vs. women are ruling over us – pick ONE, moron.

Another is “women don’t have enough kids” vs. “I don’t need to have kids”. It takes two. You not having kids means roughly one woman in your group cannot, so it’s an actual loss of TWO or more (just at replacement rate). Maths is hard, huh?

See if this seems familiar.

A series of intense but stormy relationships is often the first thing people notice about a man with BPD. He will fall in love quickly and can fall out of love just as fast.

They don’t feel love, then. In-lust isn’t love.

Similarly, in a friendship or family relationship, when he has been offended, he immediately stops all contact with that person and cuts them out of his life in anger. He is notorious for holding grudges.

Yep.

Part of joining forum cults is avoiding outrage in the echo chamber. They’re dysfunctional.

A man with BPD may harm people and bring excessive emotion and drama to relationships, but deep down he usually doesn’t want to hurt people; he just wants to be loved and is desperate for it. Men with BPD appear needy and manipulative, but they are desperately seeking to feel love they’ve never felt before.

Depends if co-occurs with HPD, NPD, ASPD, etc. And being abusive isn’t excusable, everyone wants love. Borderlines want a secured victim to love them “unconditionally” (even when being abused). That isn’t love. They don’t know what love is. They think abusing someone = love, they SHOULD die alone.

When symptomatic, a man with BPD is walking around in a living hell and perceived as universally hostile. He walks around with incredible inner pain, depression and free-floating anxiety.

“universally hostile” a hell of the reprobate’s own making

Dependent, dramatic and highly manipulative, BPD sufferers have learned to cope in these dysfunctional ways due to the overwhelming fear and emotional pain they endure. The emotional instability coupled with impulsivity places these individuals at risk of drug or alcohol abuse.

There’s also an element of Boomer-like denial of aging (I know not all Boomers). BPD is close to NPD so they have a fragile ego and self-worth, aging suggests they might be abandoned, BPD’s greatest fear.

The guys who claim they’ll get divorced before they even meet their future wife – it’s a BPD sign.

If you knew you were going to abuse your spouse, you’d know you were gonna get divorced before you met them.

Women are diagnosed with BPD at a ratio of 3-to-1 to men. However, in general, population studies, the occurrence rates are evenly distributed. While it is true that statistically more women than men are diagnosed with BPD, there are reasons for the statistics.

For one thing, men, in general, are more averse to seeking professional help for medical or mental problems. And when they do talk to a counselor or doctor, BDP is often misdiagnosed in men.

In fact, the vast majority of men with borderline personality disorder go undiagnosed.

Men are often undiagnosed or misdiagnosed because BPD manifests differently in men than women and is interpreted differently.

It isn’t our fault you have a mental problem. Get professional help.

Fixing the ‘West’ won’t make you happy.

Borderline personality disorder in men is often overlooked and brushed off with a recommendation for an anger management class. Men tend to externalize behaviors like aggression, violent patterns and antisocial traits, including heavier substance use than women.

they’re like the new hippies “it’s the West making me like this, man!”

Then…. move? Forever?

Obvious solution, they never do it. BPDs have abandonment issues. They cannot leave the West because they’d be forced to act alone. They’ll still sit around and complain for years, with total meltdowns and mantrums (like a toddler) because it’s their cry for help, BPD’s way of getting attention. They’ll make up stories of abuse. Nobody has ever suffered in human history like the solid 5 who can’t score a 10 wife, somebody fight this injustice! The Cluster B is an eternal damsel.

You can deal with it, but I won’t. They punish people for trying to help them.

Sometimes these externalized behaviors are misdiagnosed as antisocial personality disorder, anger management problems or something else. Ironically, people with BPD complain of feeling misunderstood and in reality, they are being misunderstood and misdiagnosed.

Maybe the problem really is you, though? Nope, BPD has external locus of control.

Like you’re still responsible for your own choices in life? [they deny this]

If you ask during a tirade on women, they also have more problems with men. The system is against them, all their bosses are Satan, I r so smart fuq IQ tests etc. You cannot help them, they need a shrink. They want you to soothe them but agreeing, saying okay you’re a loser – they’ll try to get revenge on you. Cannot win. I warned you all.

It’s a trap. Engaging with them is a trap.

Familiar?

Here are some ways BPD manifests in men:

  • Sensitive to criticism while responding with aggression
  • Controlling through criticism
  • Holding grudges
  • Fear of rejection played out in jealousy and using sex to alleviate his feelings of rejection
  • Rejecting relationships – when he’s been offended by someone, he hates them; he sees people in good or bad absolutes
  • Jealous or possessive insecurities, but emotionally detached from relationships
  • Using alcohol or drugs to relieve his constant free-floating anxiety

sexual promiscuity too, like the psychopath

I’ll stop quoting there but the rest is good. They never take responsibility for their own actions, beliefs or life either. Classic Cluster B.

Men who are dead inside, incapable of emotional intimacy and empathy. Sure, we need those guys on our side!

Would you want one marrying your sister? Only Q you need ask.

They don’t want a high trust society, they’re still failing in one of the easiest societies in history.

It isn’t our responsibility to fix them.

Generally now.

Why are nasty men more often than not the past-it ones? esp. the never-was-es. Is envy really so spiteful? Just because you’d never have a chance with a woman (entitlement thinking) is no excuse to be verbally abusive, that’ll just put off the women who might’ve been interested? I seldom see women be as ‘spitting-bullets’ as embittered, aged bachelor types. They waste days per year crusading online. Why wouldn’t you be happier, after your decision?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/women-happy-children-spouse-partner-relationship-unmarried-a8931816.html

The women are? Why wouldn’t bachelors live longer, if it’s so great? Makes no sense.

Boomer bachelors are literally most white suicides right now, they NEVER broach this.

It makes no practical sense so it must be poor emotional control. The one thing an old ugly guy could have on his side is a great personality and they can’t even do THAT right? Why are so many men abject failures on the decency front, must we bring back the military service? Like, what’s missing? The dysfunction would persist even if they lived on an all-male desert island.

We truly bemoan the absence of etiquette.

There seems to be an epidemic of them nagging all and sundry on social media.
You don’t have a time machine to prevent past you from ruining your life and it’s nobody else’s job to ‘fix it’ for you nor soothe you with a long list of ‘demands’ (usually of the Muh Dick variety).
Wastrels always existed historically, you cannot blame Postmodernism for this one.
It seems women are emotionally maturing and just getting on with life faster than men.
You didn’t see staunch Bernie sisters, did you? And now they’re simping for Yang and Biden. They go from one “bro” to another, expecting them to clean up their life’s mess like a Statist Mommy figure. Statist Sugar Babies?
They also seem all too happy to play Judas with no self-awareness while discussing tribal loyalties. Every time someone’s tried to report me for having an Un-PC opinion in public, it was some bitchy little gamma male. They’re huge snitches.

Bring back duelling.

They can larp online as ‘reasonable’ and ‘traditional’ when, if you ask, they engage in all sorts of degeneracy. Various things “don’t count” according to them, like race-cucking porn WMAF. But white women are “their women”. What? They’re amoral, like psychopaths. For thee, but not me. They are the shameless people the Bible warned us about. There’s no Them in there, it’s a bizarre moral hollowness.
I find it ironic they claim to support white people while being more anti-white than the BBC to the literal majority of the white population (women). Like, aren’t the rape gangs enough? At least the media isn’t advocating for your rape as penance for some historical ill.
They still think throwing all white women to the crocodile will appease it, so throw a huge dose of unwise into there too.

Beware, anyone pitying them, that’s the male BPD’s MO.

They’re treating you all like their stand-in girlfriend

They seem to be unable to regulate their own behavior and actions, yet willing to establish limits and boundaries on others.

they complain for attention

They seem to be thrilled by engaging in risky behaviors and often will do so in the presence of others for the sheer joy of creating a shock factor….  The reaction from others makes them feel alive with admiration.

they say anything shocking to get attention

they don’t mean it

Once established in a relationship, a man with BPD will often seek out opportunities to initiate an argument or fight. Often this is in response to their own beliefs that their partner is not interested in them anymore. They have a need to justify their own reaction to these imagined perceptions and initiating arguments becomes the means to an end.

from

16 Signs Of Borderline Personality Disorder in Men

Men with BPD lack emotional intelligence. They are unable to regulate or express their own emotions and can often misread the emotional feel of others.

Men with BPD often are very controlling, having a desire and need to maintain the upper hand in every situation.

Men with BPD can be possessive, taking their partners life into their hands and demanding to make the decisions for any and every possible option they may have. This can include what type of job they may take, the type of clothing they can wear and even the friends they are allowed to have.

cuckoo

better you than me

They can be overly critical of others, using their criticism as a means of control. However, they cannot accept any form of criticism themselves.

They are known for holding grudges and being hostile over minute arguments or disagreements.

I warned ya.

Actual Victorian advice to women

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/09/13/victorian-era-advices/
Self culture books were popular then, for women and men.
Women weren’t all encouraged to become housewives, nor men husbands, that’s a lie.

“it is further said that a woman’s love “will wane” or that “her admiration will sicken and die” if her man over time acts with effeminacy.”
True but he shouldn’t be a brute either.
“Sexual indulgences, are, under marriage association, kept down to a reasonable and harmless minimum.”
Quality over quantity, true.
People are pressured to have more sex than ever, yet they’re miserable.

No coincidence.

Sexual hygiene went out the window in the 20th century and we’ve lived to see the result. Over-indulgence was known to lead to ill-health including self abuse. Nowadays we know it strains the body especially all this modern adrenal malfunction.

“The Victorian-era corset has been found to have had lasting damaging effects on women’s skeletons.”
False, feminists lying. There were X-rays done of women in corsets, it was about the same effect as pregnancy pressure. Average waist was something like 24 inches? Tightlacing was RARE.
Smaller for men of course. Food portions were tiny, just look at 50s diner portions.
“men do not fall in love with a tiny waist, unless the owner happens to have several other points of beauty to carry it off.”
true
and men have naturally smaller waists than women (taller, fewer organs).
Trannies have a number of unfair advantages. Many have the gamine look (large head).

Non-white births down in America

The sky isn’t falling you fecking idjits.

https://ifstudies.org/blog/baby-bust-fertility-is-declining-the-most-among-minority-women

[Marriage is also a factor. Unmarried women don’t want a baby.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/no-ring-no-baby ]

I am shook. Women don’t wanna be lumbered with the baby of a man who doesn’t care enough to be a husband and father?* They aren’t attracted to feckless manchilds?

Those bitches!

“That’s because the decline in fertility has been far greater among minorities than among non-Hispanic whites”

FEATURE

NOT. A. BUG.

Chart for the lazy people:

Look at the actual data before whining.

That’s called a selection pressure, children.

Men won’t marry? Women won’t breed.

Who wins? [women, their relatives breed]

But the “white” fertility figure is a bit misleading, as it includes most Hispanics, who have historically had much higher birth rates than non-Hispanic whites. Looking at all Hispanics together, these women are missing nearly 19% of the babies that would have been born from 2008-2016, or about 2.2 million births, as their age-adjusted fertility rates have fallen from 2.85 births per woman to just 2.1, and continue to decline. Meanwhile, non-Hispanic fertility has only declined from 1.95 births per woman to 1.72, yielding about 2.3 million missing births. Solidly half of the missing kids over the last decade would have been born to Hispanic mothers, despite the fact that Hispanics only make up about a quarter of fertility-age women.

Thus, in racial or ethnic terms, America’s “Baby Bust” is kinda, sorta, a little bit racist”

Telling them to be breeding sows isn’t?

Hey, what exactly are they claiming these women should do?

Get back in the maternity ward? Pump out future Dem voters?

*If you really “care” (virtue signal) about Western birth rates, Chicken Littles of the internet, ask MGTOW why they’re complaining about the birth rate but not marrying. You don’t get to complain if you’re causing the ‘problem’.

https://www.rt.com/usa/us-white-births-census-613/

https://nypost.com/2017/09/02/cheap-sex-is-making-men-give-up-on-marriage/

A problem you cause is a CHOICE.

[GDP will go up in a generation with fewer lower IQ drains on its system.]

Other data article:

For the lazy:

“That is, most long-run change in fertility can be accounted for by changes in the marital composition of society.”

Marital status is a key determinant of whether or not women have as many kids as they want.”

HALF OR MORE.

Meanwhile, student loans must be written off if you care about IQ.

“It’s possible that debt may also reduce fertility, independently of marriage. Some studies do show that student debt has a strong effect on delaying fertility. The economic rationale is simple: having and raising children costs money, and student debt gobbles up a share of income right off the top of the budget. Crucially, even income-based repayment doesn’t fix this, as it resets with higher incomes: a debtor can’t earn their way out. As income rises, so do debt payments. At some high threshold, of course, the debtor can exceed the required payments and can advance the date of final repayment, but the point is that student loans, no matter how they are structured, divert money that might have gone towards planning for a child. It’s even possible that student loans delay marriage because they cause debtors to change their childbearing anticipations: maybe debtors realize they won’t be able to afford a child for a long time, and so they postpone marriage until they are (financially) ready for a child.”

Men can’t afford to marry, have kids unless loans are much lower.

Loan control would be a conservative policy, boosting high IQ fertility.

More babies being born are born to high IQ, educated parents.

Again, actual data.

“Finances, and student debt, specifically, aren’t the only reason for delayed marriage. Most unmarried people who want to get married say either that they are too young and unready for marriage, or else they haven’t found the right person. It may be that part of the problem is the decline in “marriageable men.” At the metro area level, the imbalance in sex ratios can sometimes be enormous.”

“The simple fact of the matter is that marital status is a key determinant of whether or not women have as many kids as they want.”

ACTUAL. DATA.

Women want to have kids, it’s the mens’ fault.

“Combined, it turns out that a combination of marital status, age, and fertility ideals is a pretty good predictor of individual-level fertility. In other words, marital status serves as a circuit-breaker on fertility aims: married people get close to achieving their aims, while never-married people generally don’t.”
“But one vital driver of birth rates is marriage. And as long as the average age of first marriage rises and the number of prime childbearing years the average woman spends married falls, we can expect to see fertility linger at low levels. Therefore, any policy supporting childbirth—however generous it may be—that does not also somehow impact marriage trends is unlikely to boost long-term fertility.”

It isn’t women’s fault they won’t man up.

The data is loud and clear.

White bachelor men are cucking themselves.

America’s stop hitting yourself

The logic seems to be: Women can’t oppress me, if I oppress them first. How is that going away? The lampreys on MGTOW have utterly ruined it. Who actually supports rapists and murderers without mental issues themselves?

The characteristic of revenge fantasies is that they never actually work.

Logically, if they did keep all 100% of women under male control, all women would be able to renounce all forms of legal responsibility to the man in charge of them. It used to be that way in some places that if women ran up massive credit debt, her husband would be automatically expected to pay. If a woman broke the law, her husband would be expected to provide her alibi or, sometimes, be blamed for forcing her to do it – and be punished in her place. You really want total responsibilities over all those idiotic messes? REALLY. Even SJWs don’t want to be held accountable for what men do. They also want women controlled for life but believe women have expiry dates… need I mention how impractical that is? You can’t drop a responsibility. This is like the people who take a commitment (e.g. marriage) then complain it’s limiting…. The men against marriage would be forcing themselves into a de facto marriage of statistically older (longer lifespan) women. They also wouldn’t be getting sex either, consent still exists. Plus they’d have a recession economy, since half the workforce is gone and never has to work again (sounds nice).

Many of their economic woes are caused by globalization.

They blame the West instead of the East. That is irrational. The propaganda is about the West because it isn’t the West, we were doing well until the rise of Asia stealing our production and student places (most women in top Western universities are Asian, in on forged transcripts, they never mention this).

Mostly, it’s immigration.

If you showed the happy 50s husband the MGTOW posts online they’d probably tell you it was a mental problem. It does share similarities with borderline personality (assuming all people hate you, insecurity, flashy purchases, assuming all people will take things from you and abandon you eventually, feeling out of place).

Hating women (okay, distrusting is visible) so much they deny their own gender role (and thus, power).

from their own files


Do they cut off their nose to spite their face, or their dick to spite SJWs?

You don’t want to pay income tax but want women to pay it?

You don’t want to pay child support but expect mothers to live off air?

You don’t want to fund schools if you don’t have children (that one is fair).

You don’t want men to protect women but refuse the death penalty for the worst criminals? How else do we get rid of them?

You want socialism (the Pill, abortions, STD shots) without the pricetag, seriously? Why not crawl back into your mother’s womb at this point? You don’t want to be an adult. If disabled people can be responsible and productive, what’s your excuse?

Apparently being our gender role oppressed them first. Somehow. Women oppressed them by needing to be provided for, due to the choice to be the baby-carrying and physically weaker sex. Because we choose those, we choose our sex apparently and fuck Darwin, “man up” is apparently hate speech.

Asking an adult male to act like a responsible man is now “sexism”, according to these guys.

(Why do you think a man cannot be a responsible adult without being married ? HMMM?)

Are your parents pushing you to get married? Diddums, you think that doesn’t happen to women?

Are your parents pushing you to have kids? That one REALLY happens more to women. By an order of magnitude.

Is nobody allowed to criticize baby, for fearing he feel SHAME?

Why can’t we shame men who deserve it? They shame women all the time. Shame is good. It makes people question immorality.

If you’re so immoral that shame works, that’s called a conscience and you should listen to it.

Because funding the mother of your children is evil but foisting them on an expensive nanny is good parenting. Studies be damned.

Can I point out the obvious?

If men don’t want to be men – that might explain why women don’t want them.

If we wanted girly men, we’d be lesbians?

A man is not his car or cologne, that would be sexist and dehumanizing. Replacing dignity and masculinity with material possessions and arrogant bragging just puts women off. The good women. Brands are telling you you need to buy stuff to impress women. Is money all they have to offer as a person? How did that work before credit cards?

Oh yeah, men gave the one thing women couldn’t provide for themselves. Men were manly.

If you want to be a metrosexual man, fine. You can’t change biology to make women get the hots for it. This is like fat acceptance but for pajama boys.

“Why can’t the woman pay me paternity leave?”

Because you didn’t give birth. If you gave birth, one day, we’d support you 100%. However, in reality, men cannot give birth, whatever the BBC says. Maternity leave happens after the birth to medically recover from the worst of it (really it takes about a year biologically).

“Why are women congratulated for conceiving?”

Because it’s a medical phenomena that happens inside their body. 

Are they really this dumb? [yes]

They continue to grow and support life itself, that’s impressive. They’ll also have to give birth, which you won’t.

Most of their complaints can be answered with: well, you don’t have to.

Women who choose not to have children still see pregnancy test adverts. They aren’t bitching about it.

Spinsters see marriage programmes on TV. Where is their forum bitching?

Society doesn’t stop because of Princess.

They sound transgender, with all this talk about the ‘evils’ of gender roles and being fluid in their societal duties.

You’re either a man or you’re not. This isn’t hard.

Don’t they get this? I think many of them just have such a low IQ they think the basics of adult living are a huge accomplishment. Women should scatter rose petals at their feet for… not having a criminal record and other things that are… normal.

They want to be spoiled but they aren’t even gay.

Men do the spoiling. Get a boyfriend, let him spoil you. Why do you think men get a sex change? They want a sugar daddy, they need to look female.

Women do provide for men but not the maternal succour they try to demand. Women are maternal to children, not adults and especially not sexual partners. It’s creepy. To be that needy as an adult, just go get it from your actual mother. You will never find a sexy mother replacement. It’s irreconcilable. Women respect (and are attracted to) adults.

(They also won’t find a new one every decade as they age. They think they don’t age.)

Yeah, demanding things from women they cannot biologically (are not evolved to) provide is a recipe for failure.

You can’t blame that on women, broflake.

I deserve this and this and this…” is bullshit in entitled women and men!

You deserve nothing and respect has to be earned. They don’t even respect themselves.

If I hated American men and wanted their legacy to die out, I’d convince them women are like the Jewish Lilith and never to marry or have kids (both of which extend male lifespan and joy).

Males commit more suicide because most of those suicides are bachelors.

Being single (bachelor) is the biggest suicide risk factor for men.
https://psychcentral.com/news/2013/06/11/mens-suicide-rate-is-3-times-that-of-women/55897.html
Almost like they evolved to have a spouse?

ding ding we have a winning study, they’ll never look into it

admitting their lifestyle is medically bad for them would require self-critique

(single women by contrast live longer, especially nuns or the celibate women)

asking happily married men how they did it would require change

Men are also at risk once they are hit by the reality of aging in the 50s. Men young enough to be their children outcompete them.
I’m sure that’s a coincidence. It can’t be regret, right players? There’s no such thing as player burnout, is there?

Men can have children any time they like, sperm doesn’t accumulate mutations year on year, does it? [does]

 

Don’t get me started on the narcissists who feel entitled to sex with women ….without the women part. Well, if you encounter any human socially, you’re bound to expect problems from that. The original MGTOW was quite brilliant in forsaking women and even dating them altogether. Fucking women causes 99% of women “problems”, you signed up for it. Nobody feels sorry for somebody that stupid.

Patriarchy hates bachelors

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/11/23/bachelor-tax/

Always has done, always will.
It was a wealth tax on those who inherited from their family but refused their family’s wishes to continue the line, spitting on generations of sacrifice.

“Single, footloose, and fancy-free, the bachelor life is often portrayed as an ideal existence.”
Only in the 60s. Look how they turned out.
Historically, they were objects of pity and vice.
“For 2,000 years, bachelor taxes have periodically appeared in societies across the world, targeting single, childless men who were thought to be a useful source of revenue.”
No, they owed their family children (the purpose for their own birth) and, not being able to press the matter of family lineage, it was a useful incentive for the useless pajama boys of their age alongside tying inheritance to making a ‘good match’ and delivering at least one heir. Would you object to that too? Or should we further encourage the aptly named trust fund babies?
A single man doesn’t need a husband and father’s income. They’re spoiled brats who, if they did marry, would ‘marry their mother.’ It’s a good thing the difficult genes are seldom passed on.
They don’t even have to risk death in giving birth unlike the woman, it’s like refusing the draft. (Which bachelors often did, childish).
“In 9 AD, the Roman Emperor Augustus levied the ‘Lex Papia Poppaea’, which imposed a tax on single men and married couples who did not have children.”
Husbands who ‘prevented’ their wife’s fertility, in the latter case.
What about the Spartans?
They were successful because bachelors were considered like children. No responsibility was expected because they were incapable, too soft for it. As such, they were disrespected but at least not slaves.
“The purpose of the tax was to encourage marriage and procreation and to prevent immoral behavior.” They owe society by virtue of being in it, neglecting their duties to the nation – they’re funding, among other things, the women who cannot provide children because they refuse to marry. That’s a direct loss of population to the state.
If they didn’t like it, they could have left.
It was unpatriotic to be single for selfish reasons.
That’s bloody why.
The old wisdom is also coming back on the subject but the West can afford to drop back to its normal pre-WW populations, as long as its resources and infrastructure are not strained by immigration and foreign ‘aid’. We aren’t responsible for the world.
Look at Italy, picture how much better off they’d be now if they imposed a bachelor tax in the 50s.
I heard an old wives’ tale (untrue) that anyone who doesn’t want children, whatsoever, in an earlier era of less medical intervention, would have been destined to die as one, and that was Nature’s way of addressing the fate neatly, just one generation down. Funny how these stories explain things in the fatalistic manner. The impulse to have a healthy, happy family is connected to survival instinct and does frequently diminish in the sickly or traumatized. You could say a lot of modern men are traumatized by the modern world of globalization that forces them to financially compete with the world – so they can never afford a housewife. At minimum, they’re stressed by global concerns. I’d like to see studies on paternal instinct but the bitter segment of bachelors (and they do exist) would cry about it.
“In 1695, when the English Crown was struggling to raise capital for yet another expensive war with France, a bachelor tax was imposed to generate income. This law, known as the Marriage Duty Act, placed a fixed tax on all single men over the age of 25.”
A luxury tax, since you’d have to be rich to afford it. Taxing playboys is a national right, they’re a bad influence. Look how they ruined London. There goes the neighborhood.
Basically it was a eugenic tax on the dead-ends.
It worked.
“Bachelor taxes could also be used to regulate population growth. In South Africa, in 1919, a tax was imposed on bachelors in order to encourage white families to have children, a policy rooted in pre-apartheid racial politics and born out of fears that the white population would soon be eclipsed by the black community.”
No comment.
“In other cases, however, the bachelor tax was more about imposing moral order on society in a time of heightened panic about the hedonistic behavior of young single men.”
They were right…? The degeneracy of today is fueled by vain male demand.
Shut down the porn industry and women might listen. You can’t complain women are showing more skin without complaining about the billboards of lingerie models viewed by toddlers, sex scenes in minors’ films and free porn viewed by five-year olds online because age restrictions and checks would be a mild inconvenience to adults. They know about the brain damage of various vices, they don’t care to ban it. Why would anyone take them seriously? You must also complain about the double standards, like men walking around topless at gyms. We don’t actually want to see that. Plus it’s homoerotic. Sets a bad example.
“Many men complained that such an initiative was an intolerable form of gender discrimination, questioning why men ought to be singled out for extra taxation and not women.”

Men were bitching about muh sexism for decades first.
Broflakes. Men were the ones to propose, duh. It was a one-sided choice.
Plus the men were splashing the cash in illegal avenues difficult to trace (mobs).
Unmarried men only caused trouble to civilized society.
They still do.
Everyone complains about the marriage rate but never gets on the case of men who could marry but refuse.
It reminds me of Leonardo DiCaprio and how he rails against pollution while flying a private jet.
The men bitching about low marriage and birth rates in a personal way can’t be hypocrites, either marry or shut up.
Why don’t they just…? Well, why don’t you?

It’s a valid question, you begged it.

~mic drop~

If you’re rejecting your own gender role, that’s one potential wife you deprive of hers.
They sound like old women, traditionally the ones trying to force marriages.
With such paternalism, and that’s what it is, they must get married or get over it.
The worst are the bad husbands you see online, avoiding their family to lecture others on why they’re single.
Well… people like that. People who shouldn’t have married but wanted the status to browbeat others.
“More successful initiatives appeared at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century. The arguments that prevailed during these debates often centered on the behavior of single men, and the perceived need to coax men into marriage.”
All they had to do was shut the gin shops and brothels.
Make the manwhores leave the country, where they can’t be a bad influence on the native and naive.
The old-fashioned attitude was lynching for seduction.
“Opponents of the bill, however, suggested that if the bachelor tax were to stand, then a similar tax needed to be imposed on all women of marriageable age who had refused marriage proposals.”
This is hilarious. That would be fine?

Single men really don’t understand women, do they?
No woman would refuse a proposal from a man she was seriously courting.
However, to make it fair, men should be taxed according to the number of women they proposed to (including false promises and ex-wives) without a successful match.
Just punish the r-types until they move abroad, it’s very simple.
“In addition to this, in 1934, the state of California proposed a $25 bachelor tax, primarily as a strategy to boost the state’s falling birth rate. However, the proposals were not taken forward and the bill was never actually implemented.”
And look how well they’re doing!


This is like the elusive search for an atheist society that didn’t die out.
Such taxes will come back in the age of impossible unfunded pension liabilities.
Not might, must.
Why should they be entitled to live off other people’s children?
Why do you think the Boomers felt safe to abort their children? Social Security!
Then there’s the contribution to moral decay.
It’s funny how the very men who complain loudly about “degeneracy” also drink, smoke, fornicate, gamble and attend “massage parlors”.

We are not fooled.

What about a broad Hypocrite Tax?
Nobody could object.
That’d bring back the honor culture you so desire.
If you wouldn’t want an establishment opening next to a school, why is it allowed in your society at all?
At least make all of it underground and difficult to access. Don’t glamorize it.

It would make more sense to give all bachelors free vasectomies and make them sign a document that they’ll never ask the public to fund their sexual healthcare.
They won’t take you up on it though, r-types enjoy the idea of reproductive abuse.
They are the creeps who remove condoms against consent and don’t think of themselves as rapists.
Actually why aren’t there more child support cases about that? Most women are not on the Pill. Deliberate STD infection is a crime too. One very chiseled actor was in a Canadian court about that. Sometimes misogyny is obvious.

Traditionally, it was known rapists wanted to steal fertility* without the male investment of marriage. Why isn’t it assumed that producing such a child was an act of rape? Especially if the mother expressly didn’t want it? I’m sure we’ll come back to that legal position again soon, by necessity.

*or else they’d favour non-reproductive sex

I guess we could tattoo their forehead with a B for bachelor.
So they can’t lie to women about their intentions.

Suicide and low IQ

http://anepigone.blogspot.co.uk/2008/01/suicide-and-iq-does-it-take-smarts-to.html

Bet you won’t hear the manosphere explain one of its pet victimhoods.

You can’t make a silk’s purse out of a sow’s ear.

The findings of a 2005 study out of Sweden contradict Lisa’s assertion:

In one of the largest studies on suicide ever conducted, researchers found that men with especially low scores on intelligence tests are two to three times more likely than others to kill themselves.

Duh?
Average IQ men aren’t overwhelmed.
Look at EI/EQ too. The emotionally disturbed ones suck on that but denies its existence.
As you’d expect.
The study was carried out in Sweden, which, along with other Scandinavian countries, has one of the highest suicide rates in the world.
good design
Epidemiologist Finn Rasmussen at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm and two colleagues monitored nearly 1 million Swedish men, measuring their IQ when they entered national service at 18 and following them until age 44.
They should also do a study of bachelors. (see end)
In that time, 2,811 men committed suicide, with the highest rate found among those who scored lowest on the logical component of the IQ test.
Suicidal people make bad decisions, really.
Men academically in over their heads–those with low IQs who had received at least some higher education–were the most likely to commit suicide.
The “women shouldn’t be allowed to attend Uni, even if they qualify” crew literally want to increase male suicides. Most of you aren’t smart enough to go! Same goes for women! We need less people attending overall!
End
Unemployed and divorced men had a consistently higher RR in each year analyzed.
A protective effect of marriage has been observed in a number of previous studies and this article updates figures up to 2005. The article shows that despite changes in marriage  patterns over the last 25 years, those who are married still have the lowest risk of suicide, and there has generally been no obvious decline in the difference in suicide rates between those who are married and those who are not.
Reminds me of the quote “A bachelor’s life is a fine breakfast, a flat lunch, and a miserable dinner.”

Ruin

“In our time all Greece was visited by a dearth of children and generally a decay of population, owing to which the cities were denuded of inhabitants, and a failure of productiveness resulted, though there were no long-continued wars or serious pestilences among us…. For this evil grew upon us rapidly, and without attracting attention, by our men becoming perverted to a passion for show and money and the pleasures of an idle life, and accordingly either not marrying at all, or, if they did marry, refusing to rear the children that were born, or at most one or two out of a great number, for the sake of leaving them well off or bringing them up in extravagant luxury.”
-Polybius, Greek Historian

Anime was punishment for Hiroshima. We killed their city, they killed our birth rates.

When the men become weak and decadent with their pleasures, society falls.
Patriarchy keeps the men in line, to be men.

Married men are happier and why immature men fear commitment

webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NNiSn2ChL3kJ:www.menshealth.com/health/why-married-men-are-happier
+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

“Think bachelors have it made? It turns out married men are actually happier after marriage than they would be if they stayed single, according to researchers at Michigan State University.”

“The results: “People, on average, aren’t happier following marriage than they were before marriage, but they are happier than they would have been if they stayed single,” says Stevie C. Y. Yap, a doctoral candidate in the Department of Psychology at MSU and one of the study authors.”

Do the red pill ‘men’ cover this? Nope, because they’re bitter bachelors. Health improvements too from the connection, but they’ll keep catastrophizing marriage as the death of everything good in the world, wedding ring as a guillotine. The finding is pretty straightforward, in an even choice, marriage is the superior option.
Tbh I also think there’s a slight confound for maturity here. Masculine, mature men are more likely to get married and be happy in their wise selection. Naturally, they have no problem finding a good woman, being a good man themselves. Or another angle, being married isn’t so great per se, but the type of person who is forever alone is a bad thing to be, by comparison.

Married men are also more successful, another myth busted.
http://www.boundless.org/blog/why-are-married-men-hard-on-bachelors/

Marriage gives you support and a purpose, it helps you mature even more. The nurturing of a wife encourages a man to be more masculine, it’s a paradox, as well as the dependence paradox (you’ll feel more independent).

Nothing wrong with never getting married, just don’t lie about it to prospective dates.

The modern man sees cohabitation as superior to marriage and any woman stupid enough to agree to it, naively and silently expecting it’s a stepping stone instead of the final destination, deserves to be played. They get everything they want out of the woman with none of the responsibilities and expense. Women have this sunk cost fallacy where they wait around for years on a man who never said Yes to long-term. If he gives any answer to the future question than an emphatic Yes, it’s a no. Vague half-answers are chickening out of serving the truth too raw in case you break up with him because he wants the sex. Also, sleeping with a man won’t make him more attracted to you, it’ll make him respect you less for long-term prospects. You know if someone is a long-term prospect after a month, probably less. You know if you want to marry someone after a year, stop kidding yourself.

lhj.com/relationships/marriage/challenges/afraid-to-commit-young-men-want-to-wait-on-marriage/?page=2
cracked.com/blog/the-5-reasons-marriage-scares-men-arent-what-you-think_p2/
Fear of intimacy and fear of making the wrong choice factor in too.
Some don’t even expect to be faithful themselves which is… progressive. Yet they want the wife to be, which is insane. Do they even listen to the vows?

On another note, a husband shouldn’t be honoured until he cherishes his wife. As always in marriage, the male leads the example.

psychologytoday.com/blog/fighting-fear/201304/why-some-people-cant-find-anyone-marry

“Most people regard marriage as liberating, although they may not stop to think of it in just that way…”
“But not everyone sees it that way. For some people, marriage seems as if it will be a constraint.”
Bad attachment style. Avoid. Avoided. They should never marry.
A lot of them get so accustomed to only thinking of Number 1, they resent cooperation. Consider that. They cannot share their life.
“If a man or woman thinks of marriage as unpleasant, it will not be possible to find anyone desirable to marry.”

applause clap clapping yes well done

The OCD fear of divorce is keeping Gen Y from taking the step.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111218150305.htm
Sure, live your life in fear, close yourself off to one of the best experiences in life, I’m sure the Reaper will understand. Never attend a job interview either, because your dream job may not be as great as you imagined.
If you actually wait too long, when you could‘ve married younger (as in, late 20s), then divorce risk goes up too.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150716141945.htm
People in their 30s+ can become selfish and entitled, and build up such ridiculous expectations of marriage, the spouse will always fail. “I deserve XYZ because I’m so special, I waited all this time for you, worship me or I’ll leave” as if it’s a bf/gf arrangement and leaving is a casual matter.
Educated women aren’t a divorce risk either.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140724092816.htm

People who confuse sleepovers with commitment.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110725190040.htm

When they fail at romance, romance is a terrible idea for anyone and they pose as cynical because apathy is sexy amirite, because the fault can’t possibly lie with them, can it? Not Secret King, surely?!

Naturally these findings will be dismissed by bitter men with confirmation bias sucking lemons that other men are happy. I wrote about this in the New to the Manosphere? thing.
Appeal to exception, anecdotal evidence, fantastical What Ifs…. and that’s why they’re single. Fault-finding and nitpicking like a shrew.
Those are not reasons, those are post-hoc rationalizations. These are not smart people.
Low quality men cannot pass the social tests to hit the status symbol of marriage and long-term rite of passage it is. They can hardly keep a girlfriend happy for more than a few months, let alone a wife. Social skills of a hog in a suit. They mistakenly believe one party is like a slave and they can take anything out on the other party, it’ll magically patch all their insecurities and heal them with the bathing glow of magical sex, I’m sure that fantasy will end without the cops being called…

Spoiler: If you bitch about an entire sex, you aren’t nice.

5 Reasons Why The ‘Nice Guy’ Is Actually An Assh*le

“So, when you accuse women of always going for the wrong guy, you’re implying that you know better than they do. You’re rejecting the possibility that they can make the right choice for themselves.”
Somewhere, the siren song of gaslighting plays.
Not only are these guys mind readers, but they happen to know what’s best for you, and it involves fucking them. This is a coincidence.

In bitching about how ‘stupid’ women are, they’re proving they aren’t nice.

You aren’t entitled to Miss Perfect. Nobody is entitled to another person.