Marriage is a horrible deal for women

[Anonymous]

Never married, single mom by choice. 2 masters degrees. I realized marriage was a bad deal for women when i was about 13 years old.

I do however enjoy dating in general. But I would never *depend* on a man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lol when people go on and on complaining about “radical feminists terminating their bloodline.” If you consider me a radical feminist, and I end up not having kids, wouldn’t that therefore be a good thing in your eyes? Since I’m not passing my evil ideology on after all.

That's not how ideologies reproduce. You are reproducing your ideology by advocating for it in this blog. But you're right that modern feminism is a death cult.

Correct. The idea reproduces by getting a hold of the impressionable minds of children and young people. Like older women going on and on about how heterosexual marriage is slavery** and how having freedom with cats and a passport is much better…like the 36 pages of this thread….

**What a completely batsh*t insane thing for, based on the site demographics, an almost certainly privileged affluent white/asian woman to say?!!?!

People with options in life (access to IUDs & other forms of BC, high quality education, geographic mobility) are going to avail themselves to those options. Shocking, isn’t it? And that usually means having one or no kids.

The 21 y/o home health aid woman who is a home health aide in rural Alabama doesn’t have the same options, obviously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lol when people go on and on complaining about “radical feminists terminating their bloodline.” If you consider me a radical feminist, and I end up not having kids, wouldn’t that therefore be a good thing in your eyes? Since I’m not passing my evil ideology on after all.

That's not how ideologies reproduce. You are reproducing your ideology by advocating for it in this blog. But you're right that modern feminism is a death cult.

Correct. The idea reproduces by getting a hold of the impressionable minds of children and young people. Like older women going on and on about how heterosexual marriage is slavery** and how having freedom with cats and a passport is much better…like the 36 pages of this thread….

**What a completely batsh*t insane thing for, based on the site demographics, an almost certainly privileged affluent white/asian woman to say?!!?!

I’m not advocating for cats and a passport for anyone (except someone who wants that) I advocate for extremely high quality donor sperm from highly attractive and accomplished men, and financial independence to raise a family over partnership with a mediocre man who you have to support, clean up after, and in a divorce lose your children 50% of the time to.

It doesn't matter how many resources you may bring to bear for child raising. Your child statistically will be worse off by being raised by a single mom than by a mother and father. But by all means keep encouraging anti-social behavior that hurts children.

Of course it does. A lot. A kid born to a wealthy single mother is going to do 1000% better in every way than a kid born to a drug addict mom & dad in Kentucky.

That wealthy kid born to a single mother won’t do better in any way than a kid born to a wealthy two-parent home though. But the number of children born to single wealthy mothers has to be infinitesimally small compared to wealthy married couples so there would be no way to accurately measure that. Because this is an insane fantasy and not rooted in reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lol when people go on and on complaining about “radical feminists terminating their bloodline.” If you consider me a radical feminist, and I end up not having kids, wouldn’t that therefore be a good thing in your eyes? Since I’m not passing my evil ideology on after all.

That's not how ideologies reproduce. You are reproducing your ideology by advocating for it in this blog. But you're right that modern feminism is a death cult.

Correct. The idea reproduces by getting a hold of the impressionable minds of children and young people. Like older women going on and on about how heterosexual marriage is slavery** and how having freedom with cats and a passport is much better…like the 36 pages of this thread….

**What a completely batsh*t insane thing for, based on the site demographics, an almost certainly privileged affluent white/asian woman to say?!!?!

I’m not advocating for cats and a passport for anyone (except someone who wants that) I advocate for extremely high quality donor sperm from highly attractive and accomplished men, and financial independence to raise a family over partnership with a mediocre man who you have to support, clean up after, and in a divorce lose your children 50% of the time to.

It doesn't matter how many resources you may bring to bear for child raising. Your child statistically will be worse off by being raised by a single mom than by a mother and father. But by all means keep encouraging anti-social behavior that hurts children.

Of course it does. A lot. A kid born to a wealthy single mother is going to do 1000% better in every way than a kid born to a drug addict mom & dad in Kentucky.

That wealthy kid born to a single mother won’t do better in any way than a kid born to a wealthy two-parent home though. But the number of children born to single wealthy mothers has to be infinitesimally small compared to wealthy married couples so there would be no way to accurately measure that. Because this is an insane fantasy and not rooted in reality.

Depends on the quality of the marriage. There’s no chance of divorce if a single mom adopts, has ONS or uses donor sperm.

[Anonymous]

If women had true freedom to control their reproductive health (abortion, IVF with donor sperm, tubal ligations etc) men would be rendered useless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lol when people go on and on complaining about “radical feminists terminating their bloodline.” If you consider me a radical feminist, and I end up not having kids, wouldn’t that therefore be a good thing in your eyes? Since I’m not passing my evil ideology on after all.

That's not how ideologies reproduce. You are reproducing your ideology by advocating for it in this blog. But you're right that modern feminism is a death cult.

Correct. The idea reproduces by getting a hold of the impressionable minds of children and young people. Like older women going on and on about how heterosexual marriage is slavery** and how having freedom with cats and a passport is much better…like the 36 pages of this thread….

**What a completely batsh*t insane thing for, based on the site demographics, an almost certainly privileged affluent white/asian woman to say?!!?!

I’m not advocating for cats and a passport for anyone (except someone who wants that) I advocate for extremely high quality donor sperm from highly attractive and accomplished men, and financial independence to raise a family over partnership with a mediocre man who you have to support, clean up after, and in a divorce lose your children 50% of the time to.

It doesn't matter how many resources you may bring to bear for child raising. Your child statistically will be worse off by being raised by a single mom than by a mother and father. But by all means keep encouraging anti-social behavior that hurts children.

Of course it does. A lot. A kid born to a wealthy single mother is going to do 1000% better in every way than a kid born to a drug addict mom & dad in Kentucky.

That wealthy kid born to a single mother won’t do better in any way than a kid born to a wealthy two-parent home though. But the number of children born to single wealthy mothers has to be infinitesimally small compared to wealthy married couples so there would be no way to accurately measure that. Because this is an insane fantasy and not rooted in reality.

Depends on the quality of the marriage. There’s no chance of divorce if a single mom adopts, has ONS or uses donor sperm.

Here we go with the “wealthy woman having a one night stand to impregnate herself” thing again. You are completely and utterly delusional and there is no reasoning with you!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lol when people go on and on complaining about “radical feminists terminating their bloodline.” If you consider me a radical feminist, and I end up not having kids, wouldn’t that therefore be a good thing in your eyes? Since I’m not passing my evil ideology on after all.

That's not how ideologies reproduce. You are reproducing your ideology by advocating for it in this blog. But you're right that modern feminism is a death cult.

Correct. The idea reproduces by getting a hold of the impressionable minds of children and young people. Like older women going on and on about how heterosexual marriage is slavery** and how having freedom with cats and a passport is much better…like the 36 pages of this thread….

**What a completely batsh*t insane thing for, based on the site demographics, an almost certainly privileged affluent white/asian woman to say?!!?!

I’m not advocating for cats and a passport for anyone (except someone who wants that) I advocate for extremely high quality donor sperm from highly attractive and accomplished men, and financial independence to raise a family over partnership with a mediocre man who you have to support, clean up after, and in a divorce lose your children 50% of the time to.

It doesn't matter how many resources you may bring to bear for child raising. Your child statistically will be worse off by being raised by a single mom than by a mother and father. But by all means keep encouraging anti-social behavior that hurts children.

Of course it does. A lot. A kid born to a wealthy single mother is going to do 1000% better in every way than a kid born to a drug addict mom & dad in Kentucky.

That wealthy kid born to a single mother won’t do better in any way than a kid born to a wealthy two-parent home though. But the number of children born to single wealthy mothers has to be infinitesimally small compared to wealthy married couples so there would be no way to accurately measure that. Because this is an insane fantasy and not rooted in reality.

That is not true— the child born to a wealthy single mother by choice has no chance of their home being broken up by divorce, losing their inheritance to unexpected half-siblings, or any of the many traumas that being born to a married couple can entail.

The optimal situation is marriage between two excellent people, but raising a child with a mediocre man is irresponsible since you’re setting bad examples for relationships and taking the risk of additional trauma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless the husband is rich.

Women do most of the unpaid and unnoticed domestic labor in the home. They use their body to create babies and then do most of the childcare.

If the husband isn’t rich, what does he bring to the table?

DCUM is a horrible source of malarkey for women --and men.

Exhibit A right here

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If women had true freedom to control their reproductive health (abortion, IVF with donor sperm, tubal ligations etc) men would be rendered useless.

I believe WOKE women have already accomplished this, rendering men useless, at least in their WOKE world. And then they whine when they can't find a mate in their thirties. lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If women had true freedom to control their reproductive health (abortion, IVF with donor sperm, tubal ligations etc) men would be rendered useless.

Extremely desirable men (genetically speaking) would still be in demand as sperm donors. I expect some could even command costs approaching egg-donation.

[Anonymous]

If women had true freedom to control their reproductive health (abortion, IVF with donor sperm, tubal ligations etc) men would be rendered useless.

The women I date find lots of ways I am useful to them. You must not attract the right type of man.

What would you do with the male babies after men (in general) were rendered useless? I pray you do not have sons now or in the future.

[Anonymous]

“ The optimal situation is marriage between two excellent people, but raising a child with a mediocre man or woman is irresponsible since you’re setting bad examples for relationships and taking the risk of additional trauma.”

Fixed it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“ The optimal situation is marriage between two excellent people, but raising a child with a mediocre man or woman is irresponsible since you’re setting bad examples for relationships and taking the risk of additional trauma.”

Fixed it

Happy with that addition, but men typically do not pursue single parenthood by choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless the husband is rich.

Women do most of the unpaid and unnoticed domestic labor in the home. They use their body to create babies and then do most of the childcare.

If the husband isn’t rich, what does he bring to the table?

Someone please explain to me what's a woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If women had true freedom to control their reproductive health (abortion, IVF with donor sperm, tubal ligations etc) men would be rendered useless.

The women I date find lots of ways I am useful to them. You must not attract the right type of man.

What would you do with the male babies after men (in general) were rendered useless? I pray you do not have sons now or in the future.

Not the poster you’re quoting but, raise them to be excellent partners who expect to make equal or greater contributions to their partner in all areas of their lives, and to understand and respect the fact that pregnancy/childbirth/nursing should not be treated like a free service that comes with a female spouse.