More evidence that women want to have their cake and to eat it too. Also, media pushing for men to be cucked

D

Deleted member 88

Guest
I can't wait for the Orwellian phone technology that makes cheating impossible. Like I dunno-fully integrated body cameras or search engines for public video.

Or heck, when genetic testing becomes cheap and widespread enough everyone will be able to afford it, and thus babies will be tested at the hospital, officially for genetic disorders and possible diseases or predispositions thereof. Which will also reveal paternity.

Women who cheat will need to either be discrete and go to great lengths to avoid getting caught, and they will need to make sure any children are not the lover's.

Hopefully alongside these technological developments-the law will become more pro husband in this regard. A cuckolded man owes nothing to a child that isn't his. Sure if he loves the kid in spite of the wife's infidelity that's his right, but if he doesn't he shouldn't owe a penny in child support.
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
I can't wait for the Orwellian phone technology that makes cheating impossible. Like I dunno-fully integrated body cameras or search engines for public video.

Or heck, when genetic testing becomes cheap and widespread enough everyone will be able to afford it, and thus babies will be tested at the hospital, officially for genetic disorders and possible diseases or predispositions thereof. Which will also reveal paternity.

Women who cheat will need to either be discrete and go to great lengths to avoid getting caught, and they will need to make sure any children are not the lover's.

Hopefully alongside these technological developments-the law will become more pro husband in this regard. A cuckolded man owes nothing to a child that isn't his. Sure if he loves the kid in spite of the wife's infidelity that's his right, but if he doesn't he shouldn't owe a penny in child support.
Decent chance they outlaw paternity testing in tye next decade. They've already done so in France I think. The tech means jack without a significant cultural shift.
 
D

Deleted member 88

Guest
Decent chance they outlaw paternity testing in tye next decade. They've already done so in France I think. The tech means jack without a significant cultural shift.

From what I read, its apparently intended to ensure more families don't shatter. French law claims to be pro children, but its clear this is designed to ensure women can cheat without much legal recourse for their husbands. The only time it is permissible is if a divorce case is already ongoing.

And you have to ask for a judge mandated one.

But yeah with our "women over men" court system, I can see them being banned or at least treated like lie detectors, unrecognized and inadmissible, even if they are perfectly reliable.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Decent chance they outlaw paternity testing in tye next decade. They've already done so in France I think. The tech means jack without a significant cultural shift.

What ever line you have feminists will cross it, remember they are a hate group and their true goal is to make men suffer all men. They will not stop until you stop them, my advice? Get rid of all federal and state grants to feminists and feminist organizations even at the height of the KKK black men were not forced to have their tax money go to the people who wanted to persecute them.
 

Shipmaster Sane

You have been weighed
Even then, I don't think that maybe enough, depending or not if the women are the sorts of sociopaths I think they maybe
I mean Amber Heard from what I know, abused Johnny Depp a guy who was way more successful than her
Hell, standing up for yourself may not even be considering by them as being "strong" enough either
The reality is you cannot be "alpha" without an element of physical power and the will to use it. If she hits him, and he doesnt hit back, he's physically submissive.
 
D

Deleted member 88

Guest
The Times had a similar article back in 2010, its behind a paywall and I can't find it now.



I don't like Jezebel but they quote portions of the article.

"The woman's prerogative of knowing who is a child's father was, when you think about it, the trump card of the sex. It accounted for the vice of jealousy in men; it made a mockery of the laws of inheritance; it made male claims to omnipotence absurd."

"The point is that paternity was ambiguous and it was effectively up to the mother to name her child’s father, or not. (That eminently sensible Jewish custom, whereby Jewishness is passed through the mother, was based on the fact that we only really knew who our mothers are.) Many men have, of course, ended up raising children who were not genetically their own, but really, does it matter?"

"At a stroke, the one thing that women had going for them has been taken away, the one respect in which they had the last laugh over their husbands and lovers. DNA tests are an anti-feminist appliance of science, a change in the balance of power between the sexes that we’ve hardly come to terms with. And that holds true even though many women have the economic potential to provide for their children"

"DNA tests are an anti-feminist appliance of science, a change in the balance of power between the sexes that we’ve hardly come to terms with. And that holds true even though many women have the economic potential to provide for their children themselves…Uncertainty allows mothers to select for their children the father who would be best for them. The point is that paternity was ambiguous and it was effectively up to the mother to name her child’s father, or not… Many men have, of course, ended up raising children who were not genetically their own, but really, does it matter…in making paternity conditional on a test rather than the say-so of the mother, it has removed from women a powerful instrument of choice."

"For the entire course of human history, men have nursed profound, troubling doubts about the fundamental question of whether or not they were fathers to their own children; women, by contrast, usually enjoyed a reasonable level of certainty about the matter. Now, a cotton-wool swab with a bit of saliva, plus a small fee, less than £200, can settle the matter. At a stroke, the one thing that women had going for them has been taken away,"



This opinion piece was written 2010 by a Miss Melanie McDonagh.

In essence it seems to be saying, "women have the right to dupe men", or "choose who the best father will be". And that cuckoldry was some expression of female power and subverting the patriarchy.

Basically DNA testing is anti feminist and misogynistic because it gives men the ability to determine whether or not their wives are unfaithful conclusively. And not be duped into child support. Thus it robs women of this feminine power of deception and uncertainty.

*Bolded parts for telling and emphasis.
Now I haven't seen many feminists outright agree with this, but given it was over ten years ago more probably do now.

The reality is you cannot be "alpha" without an element of physical power and the will to use it. If she hits him, and he doesnt hit back, he's physically submissive.
The reason why that happens is the law is on the woman's side. He hits back and he goes to prison. She doesn't.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
The reality is you cannot be "alpha" without an element of physical power and the will to use it. If she hits him, and he doesnt hit back, he's physically submissive.

Even when odds are, in other situations he maybe willing to fight back to defend his life or someone else's

There's a thing in-regards to turning the other cheek, as a show of morals or in order to stop escalation in violence

Other people however can take that as a "weakness" and thus opportunity to keep on hitting
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
In a 'normal' relative-size physical relationship, when a woman strikes a man, it's a rebuke. She has no real ability to harm him, and it's an expression of anger, nothing more.

When the man strikes the woman, it's at minimum a threat. Because even if that blow does not physically harm her, he very much could completely wipe her out, and in terms of raw physicality, there is little to nothing she can do about it.

This is what has shaped and established cultural norms for a long time. When the man doesn't hit her in return, he is showing restraint, and that he will not respond to provocation, with escalation. Because even if she struck him, him striking her in turn is still an escalation.

Still, in the end if she started trying to really beat him, instead of just slap him, he would be justified in using some real force in return.

Modern feminism has completely screwed up this paradigm. The 'Duluth model' where the woman is always assumed to be the victim, biased courts, the 'Violence Against Women Act,' all kinds of nonsense that has increasingly turned the law into a tool for women to wield against men, rather than an arbiter of justice.

Some men respond to this by caving. Some respond by becoming MRAs. Some respond by going MGTOW. And some respond by turning into the misogynists feminsts have claimed they are fighting.

It's a messed up situation we live in now.
 

prinCZess

Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
It’s not uncommon for women to let their straight partners play in a “monogamy gray zone,” to give guys access to tensional outlets that allow them to cheat without really cheating. “Happy ending” massages, oral sex at bachelor parties, lap dances, escorts at conferences … influenced by ubiquitous pop-cultural cues, many people believe that men need these opportunities for recreational “sorta sex” because “it’s how men are.
No?
Pretty sure that happy endings, oral sex, and the like are going to be classified as cheating quite quickly, and this 'monogamy gray zone' sounds like hooey in those regards--lap dances and 'escorts' perhaps getting some leeway in some cases from wives/girlfriends who are more permissive or comfortable in a relationship (and the 'escort' probably more in the 'Oh cool, you were out with a mutual friend to a thing I couldn't make it to' if it does pop up).

Like...To boil it down, this articles is exceptionally, fantastically long on assertion and very short on any substantive backing of it. The idea of women being just as (or more) sexual than men isn't new somehow, and pretty much just a reversion to where perception was pre-Victorians and there's frankly not anywhere close to the message of exclusivity and monogamy as they seem to think, at least not societally (personal standards, of course, are subjective and there's as many of those as there are women who have them...Maybe even more, actually, because turns out emotions and sex and relationships aren't exactly firmly logical areas of thought and behavior, regardless of one's sex).

'Gray-zone hall pass' is a silly 'solution' to propose and I don't agree it's a prevalent thing even for men as the article frames it at all ('cheating' is still the name that behavior gets in majority I will contend--and since there's no objective indication that's incorrect, I think I'm justified until such is provided). Relationships are hard, the sex won't always be great for either party, it's a mutual responsibility to settle these affairs to mutual satisfaction.
I doubt in anything but a minority of cases is 'gray-zone hall pass' mutually satisfying or actually an effective 'solution'. But, that's me.

Daddy issues always effect realationsships with other men. Most of this crap flows from the removal of male authority in the home.
Eh, that's a pop-psychology phenomenon that undoubtedly exists but also more than likely gets overplayed, overgeneralized, and over-attributed for things. It also, by implication, somewhat maligns the importance of a mother in establishing this stuff, and the whole basic gist of someone seeing a functional, healthy family from a young age. 'Daddy issues' very commonly applies in cases where 'Your whole family and/or parenting situation was a shitshow' equally or even more appropriately applies.
*shrug* Bit of a pet-peevish tangential item, but my .02 cents on the matter anyhow.
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
The reality is you cannot be "alpha" without an element of physical power and the will to use it. If she hits him, and he doesnt hit back, he's physically submissive.
Personally I prefer throwing them over my shoulder.
No?
Pretty sure that happy endings, oral sex, and the like are going to be classified as cheating quite quickly, and this 'monogamy gray zone' sounds like hooey in those regards--lap dances and 'escorts' perhaps getting some leeway in some cases from wives/girlfriends who are more permissive or comfortable in a relationship (and the 'escort' probably more in the 'Oh cool, you were out with a mutual friend to a thing I couldn't make it to' if it does pop up).

Like...To boil it down, this articles is exceptionally, fantastically long on assertion and very short on any substantive backing of it. The idea of women being just as (or more) sexual than men isn't new somehow, and pretty much just a reversion to where perception was pre-Victorians and there's frankly not anywhere close to the message of exclusivity and monogamy as they seem to think, at least not societally (personal standards, of course, are subjective and there's as many of those as there are women who have them...Maybe even more, actually, because turns out emotions and sex and relationships aren't exactly firmly logical areas of thought and behavior, regardless of one's sex).

'Gray-zone hall pass' is a silly 'solution' to propose and I don't agree it's a prevalent thing even for men as the article frames it at all ('cheating' is still the name that behavior gets in majority I will contend--and since there's no objective indication that's incorrect, I think I'm justified until such is provided). Relationships are hard, the sex won't always be great for either party, it's a mutual responsibility to settle these affairs to mutual satisfaction.
I doubt in anything but a minority of cases is 'gray-zone hall pass' mutually satisfying or actually an effective 'solution'. But, that's me.


Eh, that's a pop-psychology phenomenon that undoubtedly exists but also more than likely gets overplayed, overgeneralized, and over-attributed for things. It also, by implication, somewhat maligns the importance of a mother in establishing this stuff, and the whole basic gist of someone seeing a functional, healthy family from a young age. 'Daddy issues' very commonly applies in cases where 'Your whole family and/or parenting situation was a shitshow' equally or even more appropriately applies.
*shrug* Bit of a pet-peevish tangential item, but my .02 cents on the matter anyhow.
Sure I'm sure that's a thing. If the dad is terrible it's likely the whole family is terrible seems intuitive.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
Eh, that's a pop-psychology phenomenon that undoubtedly exists but also more than likely gets overplayed, overgeneralized, and over-attributed for things. It also, by implication, somewhat maligns the importance of a mother in establishing this stuff, and the whole basic gist of someone seeing a functional, healthy family from a young age. 'Daddy issues' very commonly applies in cases where 'Your whole family and/or parenting situation was a shitshow' equally or even more appropriately applies.
*shrug* Bit of a pet-peevish tangential item, but my .02 cents on the matter anyhow.

I also believe in a possible rise in sociopathy, people taking advantage of other people's kindness or self-restraint and taking sadistic joy out of it

Root cause may involve society telling them how okay or great their actions are
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
I also believe in a possible rise in sociopathy, people taking advantage of other people's kindness or self-restraint and taking sadistic joy out of it

Root cause may involve society telling them how okay or great their actions are
Yeah society shouldn't incentivze bad behavior. Even if it doesn't directly outlaw said behavior.
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
Ever read Robert A. Heinlein’s Starship Troopers?

One thing I think he had a point on, was that you needed to teach kids that there are consequences to their actions from an early age, lest they grow up and they become more predatory
Indeed specifically for this topic. Women who do these things could certainly be seen as predator's. Gaining sexual satisfaction from thiermates pain.
 
D

Deleted member 88

Guest
Personally I think it’s just best not to marry. Or only marry a woman who is so virtuous that angels would envy her near divine sinless purity. As such women don’t exist or are about as unlikely as the atoms in the universe just randomly arranging a giant mansion for me on their own, the former advice applies.

If you don’t want to be taken advantage of, don’t marry and don’t date.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
If you don’t want to be taken advantage of, don’t marry and don’t date.

You know, I once had a conversation about the problem of having companion bots or sexbots or gynoids

I reasoned that simply put, it is NOT true love because they are programmed to love you specifically, it's NOT of their choice

I think men will still want to feel that sort of companionship, maybe women as well, but as said before they'd only get the fantasy

Not so different from some dating sim
 
D

Deleted member 88

Guest
Personally I’m not some sort of MRA. Life and achievement should be more then sex. Or relationships for that matter. Men shouldn’t feel anxiety or feel less worthy because they aren’t studs.

I find this whole situation symptomatic of broader spiritual problems. Namely the glorification of sex and sexual achievement as the height of one’s worth and measure.
of
The very concept of Incel is due to the fact that people want to be sexually active but aren’t.

My advice to any man or boy is to devote your life and energies to work, religion, political work, improving your talents as a writer/painters/builder or any other artistic pursuit of your choosing. Channel your sex drive into something non sexual. Discipline yourself.

If you must date, be cautious and exercise good judgment. Look for a woman with whom you wish to spend your life with and who you can be reasonably sure wants the same.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
Personally I’m not some sort of MRA. Life and achievement should be more then sex. Or relationships for that matter. Men shouldn’t feel anxiety or feel less worthy because they aren’t studs.

I find this whole situation symptomatic of broader spiritual problems. Namely the glorification of sex and sexual achievement as the height of one’s worth and measure.
of
The very concept of Incel is due to the fact that people want to be sexually active but aren’t.

My advice to any man or boy is to devote your life and energies to work, religion, political work, improving your talents as a writer/painters/builder or any other artistic pursuit of your choosing. Channel your sex drive into something non sexual. Discipline yourself.

If you must date, be cautious and exercise good judgment. Look for a woman with whom you wish to spend your life with and who you can be reasonably sure wants the same.

I wonder what it would be like if men ignored women en masse and focused on hobbies and/or also getting really skilled and achieving things like going up a mountain

Or having genuine friendships

MGTOW sounds pretty gay to me
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top