Why feminism may be right

Men’s Rights bloggers are right in saying that feminism has made marriage a losing proposition for today’s men. Whether women enter the marriage contract in bad faith, or frivolously break the marriage contract to seek a better deal elsewhere, men are left paying for their free ride. Sometimes men pay for life. On top of that as an extra slap in the face men are often deprived of any meaningful rights to the children they’ve fathered.

Feminism hasn’t just broken marriage. It’s made all relationships between the sexes completely dysfunctional. It has unleashed high status alphas, game bloggers, and others to feast at today’s sexually liberated commitment-free all-you-can-eat pussy buffet. At the same time it turns sex into a game of Russian roulette for all men. The ones who lose like U.K. footballer Ched Evans will discover the buffet wasn’t completely free. All along they’ve been playing with fire.

Men’s risk is that the current legal definition of sexual consent puts all responsibility for the consequences of women’s slutty behavior solely on men. At the same time women’s consent has become ambiguous. More men who love easy sex are recognizing that the safest way to avoid a life destroying “false rape” charge is to prevent morning after remorse by being subserviently nice to the slut who offered that easy sex up. Instead of letting a disgraced slut wake up naked and alone in the morning as Ched Evans did, alpha men are now obliged to pedestalize her. In the feminist desire to remove all consequences of slutty behavior we as a society are literally criminalizing the scorn and disdain we used to have for these sluts. High status men in particular can no longer get away with banging them so carelessly.

Once done with sex he may be dying to leave or to get rid of her by calling her a cab. Having a good understanding of the law surrounding consent almost forces him to spoon the slutty women affectionately all night, to listen to them patiently and earnestly, to look into their eyes lovingly, and to make sure to call. At least until he’s out of the ever widening danger zone of a rape accusation.

By waging this war of false accusation terror feminism has successfully reengineered society to remove any restrictions on women profiting from use of their natural sexual assets. Sluts can now freely exchange sex as currency for personal gratification, to obtain gifts or favors, for coercion, for self-promotion, or even for marriage. Western men are losing or may already have lost any input on the market value of chastity.

One way men have responded is by rejecting the marriage noose in droves. More men are even opting out of dating, finding that investing in a woman rarely makes sense. Having come to terms with it these men are happier than ever to stay at home satisfying themselves with porn “10”s instead of spending money taking an over entitled “6” on a date. The remaining men who go out looking for easy sex brave the odds of being called a “creep” for just saying hello. More aggressive and angry at being “victimized” than ever before, where women used to decline advances politely now they use the word “creep” so carelessly. A man is right to fear the label. To feminists it puts him one step away from having to hire a lawyer.

How could any of this be good? Bizarrely it could be exactly what the planet needs. Every first world economy in the world relies on the assumption of growth into the infinite future for it’s very survival. Growth means more consumers buying more cars, watches, and IPods, then paying more taxes and allowing businesses to create more jobs. A world wide and permanent end to growth will be a catastrophic change. We don’t yet know to survive it and we don’t even know if we can. But the planet has never had unlimited resources and unlimited space for population growth. That catastrophic change may be an inevitable part of our future. It might even be necessary. At some point world economies may have no choice but to find an equilibrium based on zero growth. Feminism is taking us there.

The traditional marriage was good at producing well adjusted children capable of filling the positions growing economies were able to provide. This marriage contract is unsuitable if we’re preparing for a world that can no longer accommodate population growth or economic growth. The feminist marriage contract however will cure population growth by killing any incentive for an increasing number of men to enter the reproductive game at all. It might even help select for positive traits in our populations in that it allows women to mate more selectively with fewer high status men since they have little fear of being left un-provided for regardless of how many women those men already have.

History has shown it’s a fundamental principle of all current western democracies that in such democracies entitlements steadily accrue to those who demonstrate “victimhood” rather than those who demonstrate merit. History has also shown men will accept ever greater social burdens without resistance. Given our lack of male resistance and that our very system of government can only do a one way flow of entitlements to women, feminism may be the natural solution to healing the earth. The caveat is that the new feminist economy will replace an assumption of growth with another assumption that also might not be true forever. Feminism will create growing legions of disenfranchised men. To succeed feminism must be right in assuming these men will forever continue to accept their defeat, and that they won’t one day rise to tear down the feminist system that’s literally imprisoning them.

 

Recommended Content

Skip to toolbar