![Cuck-A-Doodle-Do [1125x1170 - 125KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/jN74Qi.jpg){kind=link}
>Allow girls to gain the maturity that comes with a few extra years of experience before they make an informed choice to live with a man and his family.
Let's think about a world like this. In this world, women can get as many degrees, ride as many cocks, and post as many nudes to Onlyfans as they want before being "ready" to settle down and have kids. Likewise, in this world men would be able to play video games, watch hours of porn every day, and fuck whores until he is "ready" to settle down. This model does not infringe on either party's consent to marriage, nor does it bring parents or grandparents into the conversation. True liberation.
Now I ask: how is this different from the collapsing society we have now? You are arguing for the present situation and set of circumstances that have led to most children being born out of wedlock, 70% of men 20-34 being unmarried, and most marriages ending in divorce. Is the liberty worth it?
>You just described to me a hypergamy scenario
Fathers choosing a husband have far different criteria, like strength and leadership, compared to women making the decision. The quality of rat race bugman job and sportscar and weed aren't traditional White values, but they're hypergamous, and you're lying to yourself if you think that young women don't select mates primarily based on these today. Not controlling this hypergamy is why we have the problems in my second paragraph. Only motherhood and patriarchy can fix women. Nothing else can.
> women don’t have to take your deal either if they dont like it
> Women won’t take your deal and they have other options. You are going to have to make a better offer. Consider me a representative for femalekind. I am not going to recommend this deal to my client.
Hence the problems in my second paragraph. The problem goes both ways. Men, on the one hand, see the Nintendo Switch and Pornhub endorphin rush, and, on the other hand, see many of their friends in unhappy marriages or divorced and paying hefty child support without access to the kids. Both sides are actively opting out. But hey, maybe you're right, and all they need to do is "find themselves" before marriage, to reach apotheosis through the endorphin rushes. Or, maybe I'm right and the only solution is a return to our roots with multigenerational households and arranged marriage (with courtship). We're on course for your plan, so time will tell.
> If males can advance their wealth by trading their young daughters to wealthy men, they will. And it will become ingrained in the culture and genetics.
If the man can swim the English Channel, recite his family's unique and timeless history, and support a man's daughter, he is very able to be a father and husband. The greasy sickly geezers cannot. This is courtship. This is patriarchy. Men proving themselves as strong leaders (as judged by fathers, not female hypergamy) to earn the best wife he can. Women proving themselves as good prospective mothers and wives to earn the best husband she can. Whites have used this method for millennia. After a few centuries of your method, we have modern men and modern woman. Only motherhood, fatherhood, and patriarchy can fix this. But as I said, time will tell. We're on course for your plan.
blah blah, they’ll ride the cock .....Now I ask: how is this different from the collapsing society we have now?
How is postponing marriage till early and mid twenties different from the cited data, going back as far as the 1600s, confirming that in northwest europeans and early anglo americans did not get married until 22 or 23 for F and 26 to 28 for M. But no onlyfans!
Did women from the Diocese of Canturbury in the early 1600s have onlyfan accounts? And ride the cock mobile while finding themselves? DID THEY?
STRAWMAN.
Nowhere do I encourage sexual odysseys or endorphin chasing or finding oneself.
I have established that NW europeans’ typical age of marriage has been early to mid twenties for a LONG time and there for later marriage is neither necessary nor (in particular) sufficient for Onlyfan whores and fapping incels.
Furthermore I have established that aristocratic NW Europeans who were the most likely to arrange marriages for their daughters were also the most likely to marry off their daughter at early ages like 13, AND they were the matches most likely to be hypergamous whereas middle and lower class women were relatively free to make love matches.
Have you ever read Jane Austen? All those books were about women being forced to marry hypergamously by their decent white christian FAMILIES. For CASH.
I say Elizabeth, the man has 20,000£ a year, how can you refuse? Think of th family?
And trying to sort out the scumbags and liars from the Mr Darcy’s. Many of the matches were very unhappy because middle and upper class english girls were forced to marry for money and not love.
By. Their. Families.
You seem to admit that hypergamy is the norm, but that the VALUES that women have, the TRAITS they are selecting for are what you object to. Easy jewish cash, which is jumping in bed with the enemy that is redistributing the WEALTH that white men create. I get it. But you aren’t going to solve the problem by putting fathers (males) solely in charge of matchmaking. Fathers are just as corruptible by cold hard cash as their daughters.
Maybe moreso. Women will actually be more invested in seeking out pleasing character traits and physical health because they have to fuck the guy. Men set their 13 year old daughters up with wealthy 30 year men or even 50 year old men because they dont have to live with the guy. They arent the ones getting fucked.
You just keep repeating over and over patriarchy and arranged marriage and extended families, like these things are just magic and that white males will just act virtuously in spite of evolutionary pressures. Its babyish. Muzzies have all those things. Teen marriage, arranged marriage, extended families. And yet they are corrupt and violent and not particularly intelligent, they treat their women like children or property. They treat their daughters like bargaining chips. They are totally cool with fucking 9year olds. It is a corrupt patriarchy. A low trust society. Did I mention corrupt.
Patriarchy is not magic. Men are not immune to making selfish decisions. Women are 50% of the white race. They have a 50% stake in its success whether they realize it or not.
Extreme patriarchies are corrupt. Monogamist like europeans have the most egalitarian status between men and women. European women have MORE power than women do elswhere because of monogamy. Women choose their own mates later in life and live a quality over quantity reproductive strategy. This is essentially european and K strategy.
This is a power sharing agreement that has been undermined in both directions.
Jews offered sexual license to MEN in the way of porn, pre marital sex and divorce— essential an appeal to males’ desire for a more R strategy polygamous system. R strategy makes more sense for males that females. Quantity over quality is a doable male strategy because of investment per fuck.
Then they offered a matrilineal strategy to wahmens in which paternity is not established and the female is supported by her own family (uncle sam). This is more hunter gatherer.
Only some females are making polygamous matches with wealthy men, all of mel gibsons wives, all of donald trump’s wives. These are men that abandon monogamy, as many elites have always done, because they can.
Women are not the only bad actors here. The faroese men were essentially going with a muzzie strategy, buy cheap submissive females. Very brown strategy.
It seems as though you've failed to communicate what kind of society you want at all. Has your proposed system ever been tried? If so, what society are you seeking to emulate? Is it extant? If not, why?
>NW europeans’ typical age of marriage has been early to mid twenties for a LONG time and there for later marriage is neither necessary nor (in particular) sufficient for Onlyfan whores and fapping incels
We already agree on that age being fine for most. My amendum was that some reach maturity earlier than others and can get married earlier on a case-by-case basis.
> women being forced to marry hypergamously by their decent white christian FAMILIES. For CASH
How is that different from rich old jews buying them as sex slaves now just without the marriage? In America alone, 400,000 children go missing every year. Every system has those who fall through the cracks. My system would be far better than that 400,000 in love marriage America alone.
>middle and lower class women were relatively free to make love matches
You better bet their families began the arranged marriage process when the daughters got over the age figure you reported. As it turns out, there is an abundance of good men and women in a world with multigenerational family unit values. The pairing is almost automatic and the fathers just nod to an arangement that is as good as any, but they do check for important things like preserving unique and timeless ethnicity, which was easy seeing how travel was restricted before Western modernity. Childhood friends made/make great spouses. You overestimate how "forced" arranged marriage is in a society with values.
>Then they offered a matrilineal strategy to wahmens in which paternity is not established and the female is supported by her own family (uncle sam). This is more hunter gatherer.
How is it hunter gatherer? Vast industries enable the surplus for their welfare.
>Only some females are making polygamous matches with wealthy men, all of mel gibsons wives, all of donald trump’s wives. These are men that abandon monogamy, as many elites have always done, because they can.
I agree. Divorce and (proven) adultery should be punishable by free helicopter rides.
>The faroese men were essentially going with a muzzie strategy, buy cheap submissive females. Very brown strategy
Like it or not, it's a classic Western strategy. Since the Rape of the Sabine Women, the West has had a contingency for replacing their own women who are not there for whatever reason. It is a shame that they are not White.
I dont know that I ever meant to communicate my vision of a better family model to you. I just know that guys around here squawk all the time about hypergamy and then say “hey, ladies should not work, they should stay home and raise kids.” Which is a recipe for financial or economic hypergamy. Which isn’t necessarily bad, but obviously there are other traits besides money that should be taken into account.
As I said, giving males too much power in a society will lead to polygamy. There is a smaller disparity of power among white men and women and I think that is the natural result of forced monogamy. I also think that the fact that white fathers are a little less likely to sell their teenage daughters to 50 year old men for cash than some other groups is also a result of thousands of years of natural selection for traits compatible with monogamy.
But given a different set of cultural constraints, white guys will not be the same for long. Evolution changes people over time. You do not want to make decisions now that will cause white men to evolve in to polygamous pediphiles over time. It could happen.
Like it or not, it's a classic Western strategy. Since the Rape of the Sabine Women, the West has had a contingency
True but its been awhile since that sort of thing has happened.
Given the amount of R1b y chromosomes that are around europe, one supposed that the aryan invaders were taking multiple wives from the people they conquered. I havent researched it but I assume. But their white hybrid descendents have been enforcing monogamy for 2000 years at least.
You better bet their families began the arranged marriage process when the daughters got over the age figure you reported.
You are overlooking the fact that many incels just joined the nunnery/monastary.
You know, we lost a lot when we lost the church. We need a replacement institution. Obviously the values that you are most concerned about have been eroding because the church is largely gone from our lives. It was a natural place for men and women to be trained in what was expected from them and also a natural place to find prospective spouses.
Im just obviously very against fathers being the only people with a say in who their daughters marry. That seems like lunacy to me. I think that like a lot of guys here, you assume the antidote to extreme feminism is extreme misogyny or extreme patriarchy and I would point out that that will have a lot of unintended consequences you haven’t considered.
(post is archived)