Post: #101

(06-03-2016 09:55 AM)Pride male Wrote:  I cant think of reasons to have kids.

I can understand why someone doesn't want to get married, but what you said is against the natural instinct of a man. May be try supplementing with N-A-C

Post: #102

(06-02-2016 10:37 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  The post above is excellent, although we have all drifted from the OP.

Reasons to get married:

Because you want to start a stable family and raise children in a traditional environment that will give them the best start in life,
and/or
you want a foreign woman for same,
or
you want a foreign woman as an indentured servant
or
you're desperately lonely.

As stated above, in many countries including mine you become financially bound by law if you have lived with a woman for a certain period of time and/or sire children by them. In my country it's called a de-facto relationship, and even gay men have successfully claimed half of their former partner's assets under such laws. In the case I'm thinking of the relationship lasted only five years, but de-facto status can be imprinted on you by the state in as little as two. This is part of the welfare initiatives that (as suggested above) seek to turn earners into welfare providers AFTER their tax has been deducted.

The bottom line is this. If you don't want to get married then obviously it's a very bad idea. I don't want to get poked in the eye with a fork, so no matter how many positive replies I get on a thread titled "reasons to poke myself in the eye with a fork" I'm not going to poke myself in the eye with a fork.

If you want to get married then there's no sense asking for good reasons to do so. The better question is "how do I start a good marriage and keep it so."

Perhaps I over-react because when there's a hundred posts about the decline of Western society and a hundred posts about how "marriage is a raw deal and I'm never going to have kids" I don't take the time to determine whether each individual member holds a hypocritical view on the two matters.

There seems to be a sense that marriage as an institution went backwards from '65. I wouldn't argue against that. The seeds of its demise were sown back with FDR's "New Deal" when the state began to become a viable alternative to a husband. From there it was only the slowing momentum of social values that reinforced the need for marriage.

On paper kids and marriage seems like a bum deal, but when you have a good family you wouldn't trade them for anything, and when things get ugly (a process well underway) then tribe is all you're going to have. It's worthwhile to remember that being a successful bachelor for life is luxury of our decreasingly prosperous civilisation, just like being a spinster.

Some valid points being made about being the right kind of guy and all that, but a couple of things need to be recognized:

Women, in the realm of dating/romance, have ALOT of power and control. It's a bit of putting the cart before the horse to say that men being bachelors and living that type of lifestyle are the cause for the decay in things pertaining to marriage and relationships. Sure they expedite the process, but more and more men gravitate towards that when they realize the traditional marriage route has benefits that are increasingly diminishing. If women wanted the traditional set up en masse, it would still be available. That structure didn't need to be created, it was already there for them if they wanted it. They could also argue for fairness in a marriage contract if they themselves truly wanted to incentivize men to get married. The western world has an "have your cake and eat it too" arrangement currently for a lot of women. Can't say I blame them, as it is to their benefit. I think the frustrating thing to many men about videos such as the one posted and all the "man up" articles popping up these days is that the gender being held the most responsible (men) is not the one with the most power to change things (women).

The thing about "traditional marriage" is that it wasn't just about the guy being a certain way and the woman being a certain way, by the societal framework around them was also a certain way. Men were pressured to financially contribute by their peers, women were pressured to not sleep with the milk man. A marriage between two people was never meant to be a freestanding structure, it was to be supported and enforced by the tribe so to speak. So simply being the "right kind of guy" isn't really enough. People aren't perfect, so if a good marriage is contingent solely upon the man being the model husband, then it's a fragile arrangement.

Post: #103

(06-03-2016 12:18 PM)nek Wrote:  A marriage between two people was never meant to be a freestanding structure, it was to be supported and enforced by the tribe

This is what is most poignant about the whole debate to me.

Post: #104

(06-03-2016 10:55 AM)fighter Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 09:55 AM)Pride male Wrote:  I cant think of reasons to have kids.

I can understand why someone doesn't want to get married, but what you said is against the natural instinct of a man. May be try supplementing with N-A-C

I think it would be foolish to say that no one should have kids; unless one believes the entire human race ceasing to exist is a good thing.

On the flip side I'm not of the opinion that everyone should "be fruitful and multiply".

Just from an economic POV there are times when members of a nation having more kids than the nation can support would be a bad thing, so in this current era of national debt and unchecked degeneracy, it would probably be better if we all used a lot more caution rather than treating it as a primary impulse.

The idea that making a baby is the only way to "leave a legacy" or "have purpose in life" is a myth IMO, man isn't just another animal and there are many ways he can leave a positive legacy, such as in his professional or friend relations or his accomplishments for the "tribe".

Post: #105

I married for very practical, immediate reasons. My wife was my first girlfriend and we were both virgins at marriage.
- girlfriend and I had different work schedules meaning that we could only spend time together after 8 PM.
- girlfriend lived in a shared apartment with multiple other women and I wasn't allowed in.
- I lived in a similar setup, only with guys. Nor would she be interested in visiting. It was far away as well.
- both conservative, so no cohabitation until marriage (this is a great rule IMO).
- workplace started cracking down on couples seeing each other at work.
- the weather became colder and it was inconvenient to spend time together in parks and in the streets for this reason.
- she can cook well.

Honestly I don't get the obsession with bedding different women. I look at other, hotter girls all the time, but I imagine the mechanical act of sexual gratification to be the same no matter the girl's looks, and personality-wise my wife is pleasant plus she is attractive enough (not fat, nice features) so why bother with anything other than appreciating the superficial beauty of others?

In the longer run, marriage is essentially to creating a family. And since state-mandated social security programs are either disappointing or inefficient, having kids and raising them well is the only sensible option.

Post: #106

^you were virgin till marriage, this is so wrong. Sorry but what you said about hotter girls is just your hamster in your head

Post: #107

(06-03-2016 05:22 PM)fighter Wrote:  ^you were virgin till marriage, this is so wrong. Sorry but what you said about hotter girls is just your hamster in your head

I know, but the illusion is important. If I knew how other girls felt, it might be cause to question my long-term fidelity. Which is not good for either me or society.

Post: #108

Quote:I imagine the mechanical act of sexual gratification to be the same no matter the girl's looks

It's not.

Post: #109

(06-03-2016 04:40 PM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  I married for very practical, immediate reasons. My wife was my first girlfriend and we were both virgins at marriage.
- girlfriend and I had different work schedules meaning that we could only spend time together after 8 PM.
- girlfriend lived in a shared apartment with multiple other women and I wasn't allowed in.
- I lived in a similar setup, only with guys. Nor would she be interested in visiting. It was far away as well.
- both conservative, so no cohabitation until marriage (this is a great rule IMO).
- workplace started cracking down on couples seeing each other at work.
- the weather became colder and it was inconvenient to spend time together in parks and in the streets for this reason.
- she can cook well.

Honestly I don't get the obsession with bedding different women. I look at other, hotter girls all the time, but I imagine the mechanical act of sexual gratification to be the same no matter the girl's looks, and personality-wise my wife is pleasant plus she is attractive enough (not fat, nice features) so why bother with anything other than appreciating the superficial beauty of others?

In the longer run, marriage is essentially to creating a family. And since state-mandated social security programs are either disappointing or inefficient, having kids and raising them well is the only sensible option.

I agree with you, I'll tell you why.

I have double standard with the girls. When I meet a new girl, I try to quickly find out if she's a virgin (by asking "how long are you single for"). This puts the girls in 2 categories:

- Virgins, for marriage / LTR potential
- Non virgins, for mini-relationship / fun potential

I will not marry a girl who is not a virgin, so I know right at the start that I have to refrain from developing something serious with non-virgins. On the other hand, I don't monger / lie to virgins, as it will burn another man's wife.

If every girl waits until marriage (or maybe before, but only with the right man) to have sex, we will have a generation of non-slutty girls who are marriage material. There will still be girls to fuck and dump; those are the girls who take the wrong path and become whores.

The world sure evolves, but not in the right way. I believe in the traditional nuclear family with a married mother and father, with each gender recognizing and playing their respective roles. This worked for thousands of years and made good, legit children born inside marriage. We didn't need feminism, because we had something that worked and made everyone happy.

Today, we can say we have an "evolved" society, but look at the stats: marriages lower than ever, almost half of kids are born outside wedlock, we see single mothers with rings, and fuck knows that kids born outside marriage and living in a broken household perform poorly on pretty much every scale.

A kid needs a mother and a father. Not a single mom + her cuck, not a father + his girlfriend. And this can be achieved by marrying girls who are virgins, as evidenced by the stats. Virgin brides are almost twice as likely as their second-hand counterparts to not file for divorce.