) http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=3768
Seeking a Libertarian opinion.
Seeking a Libertarian opinion.
I would be interested in hearing comments on the following article from people who regard themselves as Libertarians. The article is about Women and Sex. (That ought to generate some interest. )
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=3768
) http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=3768
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
Personally I think the author has the basic diagnosis but has provided the wrong prescription.
The prescription should be to make marriage between a man and a woman desirable to the men. Gays seem to REALLY want it. But hetero men are staying away in droves. That seems to be because the legal ramifications of man/woman marriage are frequently a disaster for men.
Make marriage an equal opportunity institution and the trend may reverse.
The prescription should be to make marriage between a man and a woman desirable to the men. Gays seem to REALLY want it. But hetero men are staying away in droves. That seems to be because the legal ramifications of man/woman marriage are frequently a disaster for men.
Make marriage an equal opportunity institution and the trend may reverse.
I don't see how you uninvent reality. The modern world is what it is. Social relations haven't caught up.
My guess is that this sort of thing is more of what is causing the breakdown of marriage:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php ... -necessary
And what is referred to as the "White Knights" on the Right (protect women at all costs) are not helping.
This article discusses the "White Knights":
http://www.singularity2050.com/2011/01/ ... rived.html
Let me add that Jewish culture has for a long time been promiscuous premaritally. That hasn't seemed to deter marriage. Maybe some one should study why it works.
======
There is also another dynamic at work. About 80% of women prefer 20% of men and women these days are not willing to "settle". So they "play" with the unsuitable while waiting for a chance (or working for it) at the 20%.
It is the women and their enablers who are messing things up.
Before birth control, shotgun weddings gave lower "valued" men and women a chance. Now with birth control and paternity tests that route is greatly diminished.
My guess is that this sort of thing is more of what is causing the breakdown of marriage:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php ... -necessary
And what is referred to as the "White Knights" on the Right (protect women at all costs) are not helping.
This article discusses the "White Knights":
http://www.singularity2050.com/2011/01/ ... rived.html
Let me add that Jewish culture has for a long time been promiscuous premaritally. That hasn't seemed to deter marriage. Maybe some one should study why it works.
======
There is also another dynamic at work. About 80% of women prefer 20% of men and women these days are not willing to "settle". So they "play" with the unsuitable while waiting for a chance (or working for it) at the 20%.
It is the women and their enablers who are messing things up.
Before birth control, shotgun weddings gave lower "valued" men and women a chance. Now with birth control and paternity tests that route is greatly diminished.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Kiteman and I are on the same wavelength. It took me longer to post because I was looking for links.
Here is another one:
http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/ ... ubble.html
Here is another one:
http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/ ... ubble.html
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I've come to the opinion that feminism is being used as a perfect class warfare weapon. The men that end up being incarcerated for non-support are usually the poor, and its women in their same socio-economic group duped into keeping both sexes down in it.
Then women hit the glass ceiling in business where the upper-class men are immune to the effects of social change. They complain they make less than men, but take away the top percentiles, and they actually make more.
Subconscious class warfare is very much alive, the upper class want to kill off the lower class by stopping them from breeding, hence feminist laws.
Then women hit the glass ceiling in business where the upper-class men are immune to the effects of social change. They complain they make less than men, but take away the top percentiles, and they actually make more.
Subconscious class warfare is very much alive, the upper class want to kill off the lower class by stopping them from breeding, hence feminist laws.
CHoff
The really sad part (as in so many cases) is that the Republicans in the name of "personal responsibility" are complicit. i.e. it is the job of government to make sure you are personally responsible even if you have done nothing wrong (in the sense of destroying a marriage or intentionally harming another).choff wrote:I've come to the opinion that feminism is being used as a perfect class warfare weapon. The men that end up being incarcerated for non-support are usually the poor, and its women in their same socio-economic group duped into keeping both sexes down in it.
Then women hit the glass ceiling in business where the upper-class men are immune to the effects of social change. They complain they make less than men, but take away the top percentiles, and they actually make more.
Subconscious class warfare is very much alive, the upper class want to kill off the lower class by stopping them from breeding, hence feminist laws.
No fault divorce as it currently works is very pernicious. The rule should be that the one who asks for divorce gets nothing. Unless malice is proved. Or the state takes your children for smoking at home. Pot? Heavens no - every one knows that is evil and kids with pot smoker parents deserve new parents. I'm talking legal tobacco. Using laws to prevent social ills has created greater social ills.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
His argument is basically this: Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free?KitemanSA wrote:Personally I think the author has the basic diagnosis but has provided the wrong prescription.
The prescription should be to make marriage between a man and a woman desirable to the men. Gays seem to REALLY want it. But hetero men are staying away in droves. That seems to be because the legal ramifications of man/woman marriage are frequently a disaster for men.
Make marriage an equal opportunity institution and the trend may reverse.
As long as the milk is "free" fewer and fewer men will buy cows.
Why is the milk free? It started with Kinsey producing research that claimed everyone was having sex out side of marriage. This tainted the social pool of "norms" with false data. Next came the Pill, taking away one major fear of sex without commitment. Finally, Uncle Sugar came along and paid for unmarried females to live in their own homes if they were foolish enough to get pregnant outside of marriage.
We can't do anything about the pill or the false data effects, but we can demand our government not mollify women who expect everyone else to pay the bills for their foolishness. I don't say let them starve, but I do say make them work.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
From one of the commenters in the original article posted at the top of this thread.
This has always been my argument as to what the government does which promotes the current breakdown of society in this regard.
Ben Says:
September 26th, 2011 at 6:02 pm
Franke is correct. Women can bid “fatherhood”.
The real miss in your analysis is this: If women are freed by the sexual revolution to have sex without consequence, why are they not doing so? Why are so many of them getting pregnant by jerks who leave them?
There is something else at play. That something is the welfare state. Women are getting pregnant outside of a stable relationship because they and their children are insulated from the consequences. Even men who are not completely callous are fathering children and abandoning them because they know they aren’t going to starve, so the guilt just isn’t there. Meanwhile fathers and stable families are taxed to pay for the deadbeats.
The welfare state has devalued the bargaining position of all men. If he is keeping your kids from starving, almost any man can be an alpha, or close enough.
It wasn’t the pill that did it.
This has always been my argument as to what the government does which promotes the current breakdown of society in this regard.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
If that is indeed his arguement then I suppost I DON'T agree with his diagnosis. No sane man goes into marriage to get "milk". By this rather silly simily, he wants the companionship of the cow. Gays want the companionship of the bull.Diogenes wrote: His argument is basically this: Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free?
As long as the milk is "free" fewer and fewer men will buy cows.
But in this day and age, the conpanionship need not be formed by marriage. I have been in a monogamous hetero relationship for about 15 years without it. Why should I subject myself to all those legal, anti-man biased, issues if I don't need to.
You are married in fact if not in law. From what you told me, there was a time when the law would have regarded you as married anyway.KitemanSA wrote:If that is indeed his arguement then I suppost I DON'T agree with his diagnosis. No sane man goes into marriage to get "milk". By this rather silly simily, he wants the companionship of the cow. Gays want the companionship of the bull.Diogenes wrote: His argument is basically this: Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free?
As long as the milk is "free" fewer and fewer men will buy cows.
But in this day and age, the conpanionship need not be formed by marriage. I have been in a monogamous hetero relationship for about 15 years without it. Why should I subject myself to all those legal, anti-man biased, issues if I don't need to.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
-
palladin9479
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:22 am
This basically.KitemanSA wrote:If that is indeed his arguement then I suppost I DON'T agree with his diagnosis. No sane man goes into marriage to get "milk". By this rather silly simily, he wants the companionship of the cow. Gays want the companionship of the bull.Diogenes wrote: His argument is basically this: Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free?
As long as the milk is "free" fewer and fewer men will buy cows.
But in this day and age, the conpanionship need not be formed by marriage. I have been in a monogamous hetero relationship for about 15 years without it. Why should I subject myself to all those legal, anti-man biased, issues if I don't need to.
As a young (29 now) successful upwardly mobile male I'm scared sh!tless to get married. I've met many women who would be compatible but ultimately I can't predict whats going to happen in 10 years with any degree of certainty. Too many of my coworkers / friends / family have been divorced and it's a disaster. If your lucky you just lose half of your life, if the women is a b1tch and your in a state with pro-women divorce laws then you could end up giving her everything AND paying for her to live with her doctor / lawyer boyfriend. Women are innately selfish creatures, they will do what's best for them first and foremost, you can and will get left high and dry. "I'm sorry but its not working out, I need to discover who I really am, ohh and give me your money cause I need funds to do this self discovering".
I've pretty much decided that if I do marry, it'll be to a women from east / south-east Asia, or east-Europe. Having lived / worked in SK for many years now I have seen the amount of social pressure the women's family puts on her to NOT get divorced. It still happens, mostly in young couples without kids, but once you get a kid the parents and society as a whole deeply frown on separating the family unit. The advice is usually something like "deal with your bast@rd of a husband because I don't want my grand kids growing up without both parents.".
My son, 26, tells me the same.palladin9479 wrote:
This basically.
As a young (29 now) successful upwardly mobile male I'm scared sh!tless to get married. I've met many women who would be compatible but ultimately I can't predict whats going to happen in 10 years with any degree of certainty. Too many of my coworkers / friends / family have been divorced and it's a disaster. If your lucky you just lose half of your life, if the women is a b1tch and your in a state with pro-women divorce laws then you could end up giving her everything AND paying for her to live with her doctor / lawyer boyfriend. Women are innately selfish creatures, they will do what's best for them first and foremost, you can and will get left high and dry. "I'm sorry but its not working out, I need to discover who I really am, ohh and give me your money cause I need funds to do this self discovering".
I've pretty much decided that if I do marry, it'll be to a women from east / south-east Asia, or east-Europe. Having lived / worked in SK for many years now I have seen the amount of social pressure the women's family puts on her to NOT get divorced. It still happens, mostly in young couples without kids, but once you get a kid the parents and society as a whole deeply frown on separating the family unit. The advice is usually something like "deal with your bast@rd of a husband because I don't want my grand kids growing up without both parents.".
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
-
palladin9479
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:22 am
Only problem with that line of reasoning is that you can't take em back to the states, at least not until you've been together awhile and had a few kids.
The absolute last thing I need is my significant other picking up on the bad habits of the "independent, empowered western female". I guess its a good thing I have no intention of returning to the USA anytime in the next decade.
The absolute last thing I need is my significant other picking up on the bad habits of the "independent, empowered western female". I guess its a good thing I have no intention of returning to the USA anytime in the next decade.
-
palladin9479
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:22 am
To the OP.
As a libertarian I feel there should be zero government involvement with this. Population control and breeding sounds too close to eugenics for my tastes. No free government (as in non-dictatorship / monarchy) can do anything past 70%, some not past 50%, why would we want to trust our relationships and child rearing to such a government.
Short solution, make divorce law irrespective of genders involved, no more preference for the women. No more alimony period, gone are the days when women couldn't provide for their own welfare. If it's in your name it's yours, none of her getting the house, car, bank accounts and part of your 401K, while you get stuck paying her CC bills for shopping.
Anyhow, I attribute the decline of the "family / marriage unit" to the state of society and not so much the welfare state or birth control. Young women have their heads full of complete BS from watching too many drama's. They highly over value themselves and price themselves out of the market. Their all looking for what amounts to the upper 1~5% of the eligible male population and are only willing to seriously consider the upper 20%. This leaves the lower 80% of eligible males as dating material only, which with the availability of birth control and abortion is seen as an acceptable long short term solution (date the acceptable guy until you find the Mr Perfect guy). Remove the birth control from the equation and you just get a women who's more cautious with who she sleeps with, she's still going to try to wait for the 1~5% because the TV shows say that is what she's supposed to do.
As for the welfare state argument, the poor have ALWAYS had kids out of marriage. A few hundred years ago we referred to them as "whores" and "bastards", now their just called "welfare queens". Couple centuries ago disease and harsh life would kill off many of these bastards before they were teens, now the state takes care of them. Remove the welfare and they'll just start dieing again, whether that's a good or a bad thing is up in the air (pragmatism vs moral obligation).
As a libertarian I feel there should be zero government involvement with this. Population control and breeding sounds too close to eugenics for my tastes. No free government (as in non-dictatorship / monarchy) can do anything past 70%, some not past 50%, why would we want to trust our relationships and child rearing to such a government.
Short solution, make divorce law irrespective of genders involved, no more preference for the women. No more alimony period, gone are the days when women couldn't provide for their own welfare. If it's in your name it's yours, none of her getting the house, car, bank accounts and part of your 401K, while you get stuck paying her CC bills for shopping.
Anyhow, I attribute the decline of the "family / marriage unit" to the state of society and not so much the welfare state or birth control. Young women have their heads full of complete BS from watching too many drama's. They highly over value themselves and price themselves out of the market. Their all looking for what amounts to the upper 1~5% of the eligible male population and are only willing to seriously consider the upper 20%. This leaves the lower 80% of eligible males as dating material only, which with the availability of birth control and abortion is seen as an acceptable long short term solution (date the acceptable guy until you find the Mr Perfect guy). Remove the birth control from the equation and you just get a women who's more cautious with who she sleeps with, she's still going to try to wait for the 1~5% because the TV shows say that is what she's supposed to do.
As for the welfare state argument, the poor have ALWAYS had kids out of marriage. A few hundred years ago we referred to them as "whores" and "bastards", now their just called "welfare queens". Couple centuries ago disease and harsh life would kill off many of these bastards before they were teens, now the state takes care of them. Remove the welfare and they'll just start dieing again, whether that's a good or a bad thing is up in the air (pragmatism vs moral obligation).