The further liberalisation of divorce laws will only discourage men from marrying.

This obviously will lead to women wondering where the “good men have gone” and why they themselves are not married. The answer is of course that men have consciously or unconsciously avoided marriage

In the long run marriage was an institution that benefits women more than did men – women gained protection and provisioning from the arrangement and this was usually at the expense of the liberty and freedom of men. Men took on the additional workload that a family required, and worked tirelessly to that end.

In an effort to incentivise marriage and to balance out the asymmetry of benefits marriage was always traditionally incentivized for men by offering men the headship of the household, higher social status, and in some societies- a dowry

In the modern era these incentives for men to marry have nearly entirely been removed and instead replaced with an increased risk of divorce, cuckoldry and financial pain. These changes have been entirely at the expense of men and to the benefit of women who now can enter or leave the contract of marriage at will, often making off with prizes and cash in the deal. This new version of marriage (marriage 2.0) is catered entirely to the happiness and designs of women, who are usually harmed less than their menfolk in divorce proceeding – regardless of who initiated or warranted the divorce.

So it is unsurprising therefore that men have been showing an indifference to the contract of marriage as currently offered. The real losers of this of course in the long-run are women because although at the moment they can extract provisioning and protection from the state and not from their non existent husband, this too can’t last

The large welfare and security state so beloved of women, is maintained by tax money and the best and most reliable source of tax money has always been the working family man. There seems to be little more reliable way of extracting excess labour from a man then by giving him the stability and concern of a family. A man with a family with overproduce for wife and children as well as the taxman, maximising his output over the course of a productive lifetime to the benefit of all, often at the expense of self. And the traditional contract of marriage was the means by which this contract was codified, protected and insured to last against the vagaries or moods of either party

The removal of the option of family and secure marriage from men will result in them under producing relative to what they would have produced had they been married. Give a man a family and he will produce huge amounts of wealth for society at large. Give him a single man’s life of video games and travel, and expect him to produce only for himself and his low consumption lifestyle.

This of course starves the state of taxation and must necessarily collapse and atrophy the welfare and security state that women have used as a surrogate for husbands.

The feminist, anti family , anti marriage divorce industrial complex contains within itself the seeds of its own destruction by disincentivising the very wealth creation processes that allowed such policies to existing in the first place.

It is fair to say that the advocates of the recent divorce bill are somewhat motivated by decreasing the friction involved in the divorce process that this bill brings. This is possibly to be lauded, for those of a red or honk pilled mindset as it will accelerate both the decline of the welfare state and the modern marriage – the swing back from this collapse will return to a more traditional version of the contract. The ensuing fallout of single men creates fertile ground for right wing politics to sprout, for men without a family have less to lose than a man with. Any further liberalisation of divorce will be the final death knell of the parasitism of the liberal class upon old Ireland – the host will finally die, and the parasites with it. Those of us left standing will rebuild free from their convergence


Inspired by: https://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

Jimmy Rustle

When sorrows come, they come not single spies, but in battalions

Irishman with notions.

View all posts

6 comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Quite apart from, “an increased risk of divorce, cuckoldry and financial pain” the sight of a man carrying a baby in one of those reverse back-pack yokes is enough to put anyone off.

  • Wow that was some read. I would be genuinely worried about the safety of any woman with you around after reading that.
    If your marriage failed I’m sure it was your fault.

  • Marriage is a God given blessing to both men and women to bring forth children. Men and women benefit from good morally solid marriages and their children thrive. Don’t fall into the twisted pit of saying women benefit more from marriage than men. Marriage is to protect families and Christ died to give us a moral compass. I come from a family of five brothers, I am the only female child. We don’t throw blame at men or women in the sorry plight of those who divorce. Marriages fail because either the male or female or both do not understand the true meaning of marriage. Which is based firstly on mutual respect and love which we all know is not the world’s idea of love.
    Respect to your work just a reminder that Almighty God created man and woman to work together not one superior than the other.

  • Spot on GT. Hit the nail on the head. We met in Limerick at the Irexit conference. I wish they would join up with the NP and Gemma. If we unite we could give these treacherous bastards some headache. I’m sending you on a few euros towards the petrol. Watched your live stream this morning on the sex attack in wexford. God bless you Ronan.

Content by Date

July 2019
M T W T F S S
« Jun   Aug »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031