Marriage is a horrible deal for women

[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.

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.

You make it sound like all single mothers deliver top quality parenting. A single mother can also be a mediocre parent that saddles her child with all kinds of trauma. She can get ill. She can die early. She can decide parenting isn't all that. She can resent the limitations parenting places on her. Women aren't saints; they are equally affected by human vices.

[Anonymous]

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.

S let me get this straight, you’re divorcing someone bc they won’t do 50% of the childcare but then complaining when they legally receive 50% of the childcare?

[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.

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.

They can lose their inheritance to another (half) sibling if mom decides to single-mother procreate again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

As long as you understand that what you're advocating for is a very unattractive option to most of womenfolk.

[Anonymous]

These articles are so flawed.

For example, most divorces occur when people are relatively younger. At that point the woman may outearn the man. But with time and children, most men outearn most women, by a lot. So if they divorced in their 60s you’d see a very different picture about where the net worth came from.

Another absurdity is saying that someone losing a percentage of joint assets is worse off than if they had never had those assets in the first place.

[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?!!?!

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.

S let me get this straight, you’re divorcing someone bc they won’t do 50% of the childcare but then complaining when they legally receive 50% of the childcare?

I’m not divorcing anyone because, as I’ve said, I applied rigorously high standards to my choice of a spouse despite the DCUM logic that women should be happy with anyone.

You don’t have to divorce anyone if you choose a spouse who expects to contribute OR you forgo a spouse entirely and thereby don’t lose any custody to your kids.

[Anonymous]

despite the DCUM logic that women should be happy with anyone.

Liar. No one claimed such a thing.

[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?

If the wife doesn’t have perky tits and a mouth like a Hoover, what does she bring to the table?

Same exact concept.

It’s disgusting.

[Anonymous]

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.

Why would any highly attractive and accomplished man donate sperm to you or any other complete stranger? Seriously how many highly attractive and accomplished men do you even know and why do you think they would want you? They are most likely married and do not want some average Jane having their kid.

Sperm donors are usually just some guy off the street who has to fill out an application and background info. There is no background check or independent verification of donor. Also sperm donors have been sued and force to pay child support.

[Anonymous]

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.

This is absolutely dystopian. I’m assuming you consider yourself liberal. I hope that you embrace the mantle of destroying the family unit, disassembling society to its component parts, and radically remaking the world, when (what I used to think were) wild eyed conservatives accuse you of it.

I’m starting to understand the existential threat posed by liberalism as much as I understand the threat from nihilist populist authoritarians.

[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?!!?!

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.

This is absolutely dystopian. I’m assuming you consider yourself liberal. I hope that you embrace the mantle of destroying the family unit, disassembling society to its component parts, and radically remaking the world, when (what I used to think were) wild eyed conservatives accuse you of it.

I’m starting to understand the existential threat posed by liberalism as much as I understand the threat from nihilist populist authoritarians.

I would take a mediocre husband over being a rich single parent anytime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

You make it sound like all single mothers deliver top quality parenting. A single mother can also be a mediocre parent that saddles her child with all kinds of trauma. She can get ill. She can die early. She can decide parenting isn't all that. She can resent the limitations parenting places on her. Women aren't saints; they are equally affected by human vices.

So are men.

[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?!!?!

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.

This is absolutely dystopian. I’m assuming you consider yourself liberal. I hope that you embrace the mantle of destroying the family unit, disassembling society to its component parts, and radically remaking the world, when (what I used to think were) wild eyed conservatives accuse you of it.

I’m starting to understand the existential threat posed by liberalism as much as I understand the threat from nihilist populist authoritarians.

I do.

[Anonymous]

Just saying that the highest-IQ, most highly-educated countries (particularly educated women) on Earth have the highest % of childlessness & singlehood.

[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?!!?!

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.

This is absolutely dystopian. I’m assuming you consider yourself liberal. I hope that you embrace the mantle of destroying the family unit, disassembling society to its component parts, and radically remaking the world, when (what I used to think were) wild eyed conservatives accuse you of it.

I’m starting to understand the existential threat posed by liberalism as much as I understand the threat from nihilist populist authoritarians.

I’m not obligated to make babies & “continue the human race.” I would never give birth no matter what. I hope you realize that.