Thursday 30 April 2015

Back To Basics: What Is Marriage For?

Eyes, balls, brains - all here. Hang on tight, it's time to go all the way back to basics and follow the question-chain through all all the way to the final conclusion.

Leftists, feminists, marxists, and women - walk away now. This will not make you feeeeeel good.

What is marriage for?

Possible answer: Because we love each other. No. We can love someone without marrying them. Without getting involved with them. Without anything formal being involved at all.

Possible answer: Because we're exclusive. No. We can be exclusive with someone without marrying them. That's just a "lets fuck exclusively" arrangement.

Accepted answer: To protect the family. Yes. Now let's expand that chain of thought.

What is a family?

Possible answer: A couple. No. A couple can be a couple (ie fuck exclusively) without being a family. Marriage is not required to be a couple.

Accepted answer: A Man, Woman, and Child(ren). Yes. Without children it is not a family. It is simply a pair of people hanging around together and fucking exclusively. Lets expand these two thoughts.

Why was marriage developed?

To formalize the expectations of all members of the family. Formal expectations of the Man, of the Woman, and of the Child(ren). What is considered to be the duties of all members of the family. What is required to keep that family together and strong. Most importantly, what is required to provide the best growing environment for children (the next generation).

Again: Why was marriage developed?

Because without formal expectations what was happening was not working very well. Without some form of enforcement, there was nothing to hold the family unit together (beyond nebulous feeeeelings). Feelings are notoriously changeable - for both Men and Women.

Yet again: Why was marriage developed?

It was developed to harness the power of Men and to yoke it to the development of civilization for the overall benefit of Men, Women, and Child(ren). When you give somebody skin in the game, then they will work hard at it. To give someone skin in the game, then there must be in their opinion something worthwhile in return.

The something worthwhile can include:
  1. Goods of use (clothing, food, housing, etc)
  2. Social respect
  3. Ease in older age (accumulated goods)
When there's nothing worthwhile in return, when there's no real skin in the game - "meh, what the hell" becomes the attitude.

"If civilization had been left in female hands we would still be living in grass huts." - Camille Paglia

With civilization and it's accumulated knowledge and development we have a longer lifespan and helluva lot better living conditions for all. Without it we live in effective squalor, with higher chances of disease or starvation or childbirth killing us off.

To summarize:
  • Marriage was designed to protect the family unit (Men, Women, Child(ren) all), to enforce certain rules upon the family unit, to effectively make that family unit a part of a growth towards better conditions for all Men, Women, and Children in a larger group.
  • Call that larger group "civilization" (and to a lesser extent, "society").
  • Without enforcing formal rules upon the family unit, the family unit will most likely break up.
  • The breaking up of the family unit generally ends up with a less-pleasant situation for the bringing up of children.
  • Civilization requires the best possible bringing up of children, the next generation, to overall improve the living conditions for all within that civilization.
Note: When an individual or group attacks, debases, or destroys the family unit, then civilization is similarly being attacked, debased, and destroyed.

Note: Throughout history there have been examples where civilizations have destroyed the family unit (Sparta, Rome). These civilizations have declined and been destroyed.

Note: LGBTQ-whatever is not a family unit. They cannot naturally have children (sans adoption). It has also been documented that child-abuse is higher in the homosexual community - not good for the children, the next generation, and therefore civilization as a whole.

Note: For 15,000+ years humanity has had civilizations of various forms. For over a million years there were no real known civilizations. It wasn't until something became worthwhile in the mind of the people involved that civilization developed.

Note: The deconstruction of the basic rule-of-thumb template of civilization that has held true for the past 15,000+ years, by the arbitrary ideas of leftist/feminist/marxist theorists of less than 150 years who think that they know better than a time-tested method, is hubris/pride to an incredible degree.

Which is overall why Marriage 2.0 (and civilization) is breaking down. There's basically nothing worthwhile in it for the one who works the hardest and produces the most to support the family unit: the Man.

Now lets go to the next logical set of conclusions, as regards MGTOW and older men in general and social expectations:

  • Men are expected to be in a relationship or married (a social expectation)
  • Without any intent to have children, there is no need for marriage
  • Without marriage, without family, relationships are simply casual or exclusive fucking arrangements

Which is basically society these days. Especially with no-strings-attached sex, pick-up, one-night-stands, etc. Without any stable family unit (all the above) then it's no wonder that civilization is declining in the West.

Which is why we are getting LGBTQ marriages, women marrying themselves, weird shit like that. (What's next? Marrying your cat? Your dog? Your horse? How about your dildo or vibrator?)

The rules of Marriage, the rules designed to strengthen and enforce the duties of the family unit, have been kicked out of shape and fucked with to the point of being unrecognizable and unworkable and not worth dealing with from the Man's point of view.

Which is also why laws have been passed regarding "Common Law Marriage" or "de facto relationships". Just the same as Marriage, automatically slapped on a couple after a few years of being together, forcing people into an arrangement which has no real worth from the point of view of the Man.

Forced child-support for one-night-stands and single mommies who no-way want the Man in their lives, yet are quite happy to stick their hand into his wallet on an ongoing basis to support her parasitic lifestyle.

Garbage rammed down everyone's throat about how Marriage is special - women having lavish weddings - all that crap. All for the woman's validation. Nothing of worth for the Man.

Brought to you by Crap Colored Glasses™, only $1k the pair and cheap at 10x the price. Tonight I will have a sip of Grand Marnier while I reflect, in front of my winter fire, sitting on my chair, in my warm house, about the decline that is so obvious - and muse about why so many people are living in denial as it happens around them.


  1. It's a simple deal and easily comprehended: the man gives the fruit of his labour to her, and she the fruit of her labour to him. That's why childbirth is called "labour": in the context of marriage/family/society, it is the woman's work. It's all she needs to do to justify her place in the world. And this is why children take the father's name. Under the terms of the ancient bargain, they become his.

    And now the reason for the marriage strike becomes plain. There's only one reason a man will give a woman a lifetime of work and financial support, one thing that makes it all worthwhile. And in any case, sisters are doing it for themselves, these days. Either way, the deal is no longer in effect.

    1. Exactly. Sadly, it does not seem to easily comprehended by the intelligentsia - who have effectively been brainwashed by those with an overweening pride and hubris (academia) who initiated this social programme.

      There's some truth to the old saying: "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach." Theory is fine, the practice is chewing our civilization to bits, and they are too bull-headed stubborn (or blinded by pride) to admit that they just might have made a fuckup somewhere along the line.

  2. I understand the biblical passage about 'becoming one flesh' as having children together. Well, nothing stops me from making my own interpretation, as I lost my faith at the age of 16, 23 years ago.

  3. Female hypergamy is definitely a big reason never to get married.

    1. It can be controlled. It used to be.

      Hell of an uphill battle now, though.

  4. I hav'nt commented in a while.

    When I saw your trigger warning I thought this had to be good.

    You didn't disappoint.

  5. ....and our culture and civilization has been betrayed by women.

    And men have a deep revulsion for traitors.

    That's the great truth I got from my divorce. She betrayed my family. She betrayed me. It won't be until women deal with the traitors in their midst (yeah right) that men will MGTOW.

    1. Excellently put. It is, in a gut sense, the deepest betrayal possible: everybody in the world promises the husband will gain everything possible that is of great social worth, then she can take it all away at a whim with every woman in the world's approval.

      I will think further about this. Thank you.

  6. Thinking about it, what I should have also had in the post was this:

    Note: Civilizations and social structures which emphasize the family unit have spread through the world. Civilizations and social structures which do not emphasize the family unit have not proven to be as strong, stable, cohesive, etc. So the former are evident everywhere in various forms while the latter are almost non-existent (and practically irrelevant on a global scale).

  7. I do like how in the game of thrones, the dwarf says "screw the king, fight for your families"

    That's the bottom line of why they fought, riches and better life for their children.

    The crusades were made up of 2nd sons for that reason (and I'm a 2nd son).

    Now, they cannot say that. They have sold out men's greatest motivation. Hence they (feminists, females, cultural marxists) have betrayed us, especially themselves.

    This is why all the articles about wanting men to come back are about.

    They are also to stupid to realize they shot themselves in the foot.

    Today a man can only fight for his own honor. MGTOW is the new paradigm for men.

    1. A Man needs also to define what honor is to him. Otherwise he might be finding himself by default following a system of "honor" which benefits others over himself. I am beginning to think that this is much of what becoming MGTOW is about.

  8. Boys/men are still being raised to believe it is the 1950s, that they are to support and defend women. At the same time girls/women are being raised to compete with men, give them nothing, and - if the opportunity arises - take 'em for everything they've got. It is critical for modern society to keep men and boys in the dark because society needs them to produce at maximum capacity. By the time the men figure out they've been had - if they ever do - they're already deep in debt and responsibilities.

    As more and more young men start catching on despite all attempts to keep them in the dark, I wonder what measures the slave masters will resort to? Now they rely on lies and misdirection. Will they get more overtly forceful?

    1. It is an interesting question. Will more overtly forceful measures actually work?

      At what point does a lickspittle who gets little in the way of return suddenly decide that enough is enough - and break free?