New essay at The Rational Male
https://therationalmale.com/2017/10/20/the-war-on-paternity/
Excerpt:
Increasingly we are seeing a push on the part of the Feminine Imperative to delegitimize the innate need of men to ensure their paternity. It’s actually an aspect of a war that’s been going on since the Sexual Revolution to redefine masculinity and fatherhood. As I mentioned in Positive Masculinity the definition of what makes a father is becoming more and more ambiguous, while fathers become increasingly more superfluous. In order to complete this delegitimization of masculinity men must be convinced that their innate need to know paternity, and the importance they inherently place on it, is something to be ashamed of.
Every social mandate we see today puts the interests of the mother and child well above that of any father. This is why paternity is rarely ever a factor in issues of child support; even for children that a man didn’t father but is held legally liable for. Socially, even religiously, any importance of paternity for men is being systematically erased. From doctors being gagged from informing cuckolded fathers of genetic tests, to limiting their access to DNA tests themselves, to encouraging men to ‘man up’ and marry single mothers as a moral imperative, paternity for men is now some sort of shameful insecurity.
Why would the Feminine Imperative seek to root out what has been a fundamental, evolved, part of men’s mental firmware since the time of our hunter/gatherer beginnings? Because Hypergamy needs security. Hypergamy needs assurances to quell the doubt that a woman has optimized both the Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks aspects of her sexual strategy. I would argue that men’s psychological need for certainties in his paternity is on par with the need women have of certainties in their need for optimizing Hypergamy.
All this war on paternity amounts to is an ensuring that women’s unquestioned, unilateral control over Hypergamy is baked into men on a societal level. Convincing men to abandon any claims on certainty of paternity, and at the same time shaming men who put any importance on it, is an effort on the part of the Feminine Imperative to get men to surrender their sexual strategy by abandoning it wholesale, while praising them for playing a willing role in fulfilling women’s sexual (and life) strategy. Even when that sexual strategy is one where a man acknowledges his lesser sexual market value and seeks to put all his investment into one woman, the push to delegitimize men’s need for paternity circumvents this strategy.
Delegitimizing men’s need for paternity cancels any and every upside that long-term monogamy had for Beta men using this sexual strategy. Thus, a return to a scattershot, some would say ‘less civilized’ sexual strategy becomes the only obvious alternative for men who want parental certainty.
Erasing the importance of paternity for men is literally the last nail in the coffin that is now contemporary marriage. It reduces men to little more than draft animals and livestock for women’s breeding purposes by erasing any claim a man may have to know his children are his own. Most well-conditioned Blue Pill men adopt this archetype unquestioningly. There are no ‘Fathers’ anymore; all men are interchangeably either breeding stock or simply childcare workers in this new social framework. And boys and young men’s pre-acceptance of this state of men is part of their Blue Pill conditioning.
To fully effect Open Cuckoldry the goal of the Feminine Imperative is to have men define masculinity as accepting parental investment as separate and apart from evolved concerns of paternity.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
Ou-tis 6y ago
I think that most of women just want the benefit of motherood (attention,self worth,ecc ecc),so a baby exchange I don't think it's a big problem for them.
eightgaydiamonds 6y ago
It would be the most vapid skinny 22 year old woman's baby. Its not a random man's baby, it's Chad's
sadomasochrist 6y ago
You must be new here. Ever heard of self rationalization or hypoagency?
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
Timewasting14 6y ago
As they should it's a serious cock up.
cyan_pop 6y ago
At the hospital I used to work at they handed the mom the wrong baby
[deleted]
[deleted]
sailorJery 6y ago
had this discussion with my sister and she said because she was pregnant she's going to take her baby
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
sailorJery 6y ago
she feels like she deserves her baby because of the effort it takes to create it, vs the job of a man largely begins once the baby is alive. I didn't mention that the man taking care of her through her pregnancy might have a different opinion.
Original_Dankster 6y ago
Brilliant idea. I wholeheartedly support this initiative. After all, maternity is just a social construct, amiright?
SirKolbath 6y ago
Nono, gender is a social construct. So clearly motherhood cannot be unique to females.
[deleted] 6y ago
Good Lord, when you put it that way, it drives home how stupid it is that this even exists as a conversation topic.
Wilreadit 6y ago
I am an attack helo and I agree. Super_Six_Four out
sigma272 6y ago
hey bb i am a surface 2 air missile wanna get destroyed
Wilreadit 6y ago
Did you just assume my missile defeating capacity you Nazi radarist bigot?
Mithra9009 6y ago
I believe communists actually intend to enact such a practise. The government will assign what children you raise. Children from low-income families will be raised in high-income ones and vice-versa, for the sake of equality of course.
aesu 6y ago
This is nonsense. perhaps some politicians in some communsit country at some point advanced the notion. But it is in no way a principle of communism, or in any way related to the distribution of the means of production and elimination of state cooercion, which are the primary driving forces of communism.
[deleted] 6y ago
I believe the goal of statists/communists is to substitute the parents altogether with state nurseries and nannies. This is exactly what happened in the Soviet Union, and a major downfall of industrialism is the transfer of women from the home to the factory, driving wages down in the market as well as having less time to raise children. Hence, the nuclear family has been severely weakened.
Nuevahombre123 6y ago
Socrates suggested the aristocracy of the perfect city state would do exactly in this in Plato's Republic. The top tier of the aristocracy would choose who would breed with whom, and confuse paternity/maternity by encouraging the 2nd tier to breed continuously and have no such thing as a nuclear family.
perplexedm 6y ago
Didn't they do similar things in Spain ?
[deleted] 6y ago
This sounds completely insane. Shit like this could never happen in America! Oh wait, here is a list of things that also would have sounded completely insane 30 years ago.
1) Being fat is not shameful. 2) Being a slut is not shameful. 3) Transexuals as a civil rights movement. 4) Raising a kid outside of wedlock is no big deal. 5) Police being called on you because you let your children play in the park unsupervised. 6) Only white people can be racist. 7) Toxic masculinity 8) Women should serve in the infantry
This is only a partial list. Feel free to add on.
Wilreadit 6y ago
Being black and whoring money off of the system by guilting innocent people is very glorious
mummersfarce_is_done 6y ago
Wait... what? Is america like this right now?
[deleted] 6y ago
There have been some news stories. I'm sure it's an exaggeration to say that the whole country is like this, but there is some chance that if you let your children wander unsupervised before someone thinks it is appropriate they will call child services on you.
Entropy-7 6y ago
40+ years ago when I was in grade school it was a 10 minute walk: BFD. Now the cultural climate seems to say that it is child abuse if you don't drive the little darlings from door to door.
The other thing is that back in the day, if you acted out your neighbour would give you a smack, and if you complained to your parents they would give you a smack as well. Now, if you lay a hand on some little fucker you are facing police or a lawsuit.
TheDevilsAdvokaat 6y ago
So many good points here.
Western society has decided that there are two important things: Women, and their children. Men are disposable, sources of income and labour.
Men who refused to partake in this crap are criticised by the matriarchy as "being childish" or having "the peter pan syndrome"
So not wanting to be part of a bad deal is a sign of immaturity?
Our entire society is increasingly seen through the eyes of women, and we have let this happen. In the name of fairness and quality we have allowed men to be less than equal in the eyes of the law. This is shameful.
There was a social movement for the equality of women, starting way back in the 1800's with the right to vote. I am all for female equality. What I am not for is female superiority. But like a moving pendulum, once a social movement has gathered momentum, it swings past the midpoint.
Right now we live in a society "of the women, by the women, and for the women".
The idea that paternity is a non-important issue is a terrible attack against men. Apart from the right to your own life, there is no right more basic than the right to reproduce. Any society that thinks men's paternity is not important is a society that thinks men are not important. An anti-male society.
billybobjoecarl 6y ago
If anyone ever is claiming a child is yours, paternity test that baby as fast as possible! It’s always an option in the first hearing for any child support case. Do not be shamed into not doing it. Take the paternity test
rporion 6y ago
They do not elevate the woman´s and her children´s needs above that of the father.
It is the woman´s interest alone.
Dalrock calls it hostage taking, the children´s needs are just a weapon to use so that she gets what she wants.
trees_away 6y ago
This. Precisely this. I have an assault charge against me for spanking my daughter, and was kept from seeing my kids without supervision for three months. I got completely railroaded by the court and CPS. My ex hides behinds "she was just doing what was best for the kids", while defending the guy she left me for who sexually molested his 9-year-olld daughter (and she was taking my girls over to his house to spend the night). Our court system is fucked.
BokehClasses 6y ago
Kill the bitch and the molester one night, take the next plane to South America.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
He should have spanked his ex.
Rollo-Tomassi 6y ago
Yes, but they do so under the social auspices of what is best for the child, which is always presumed to be with the mother.
rporion 6y ago
Yes, but we both know that when comparing the result of single fatherhood to single motherhood what the end result would look like.
I am not trying to nitpick too much, but the best interest of the children is not taken into account, it is used to rationalize gynocentrism .
In fact we do not disagree, it is "Mütter, Mütter, über Alles."
Nuevahombre123 6y ago
I don't know what the general outcome looks like between single fatherhood vs. single motherhood, but a friend and I were raised each way respectively and my friend is certainly more masculine and successful than me.
rporion 6y ago
Look it up.
Hint:
Being raised by a single mother, you have some work to do.
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
WelfareWarriorZ 6y ago
I'd rather have feminism die than be less competitive. Competitiveness creates growth. Growth creates value. Value is the end goal.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
segagaga 6y ago
And that basic attitude is why the west is declining, concerned only for yourself and not others of your kind.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
segagaga 6y ago
Fuck Ayn Rand though. Selfishness never saved a tribe from invasion or fed everyone during a harsh winter.
sailorJery 6y ago
you improve your society by being the best version of yourself, not by being some self sacrificing martyr
segagaga 6y ago
Except even the bestest best Alpha in the Whole Worldz still needs other men to achieve anything of significance for their people.
sailorJery 6y ago
what the fuck does that have to do with what I said?
segagaga 6y ago
Being solely selfish means your actions destroy the society that protects and provides for you. If other men do not mate, then you get rapid population decline (as we see in western countries with low birth rates) and thus imminent collapse of your kin and their replacement with immigration or military invasion.
sailorJery 6y ago
why do you think being the best version of yourself means being solely selfish. That doesn't follow logically at all from what I said.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
segagaga 6y ago
But it is patently obvious that not everybody wins in America.
Jyontaitaa 6y ago
There has been an effort by the government to block men from discovery. You won’t be given a blood test for blood type in many first world countries particularly to hide irregularities in blood type matches.
jackandjill22 6y ago
More incentive for us to remain vigilant in the culture wars. After gaming/swooping girls, remember: don't get married.
[deleted] 6y ago
Vigilant in the culture wars? The war is over my friend. We lost. The Russians have surrounded Berlin. Lee's army has surrendered at Appomattox. Communist tanks are rolling unopposed on Saigon as the ARVN melts away. Those who still resist gather on anonymous internet forums that the opposition will shut down as soon as soon any real threat becomes apparent. It's up to every man to find his own little bubble of sanity and happiness now, as there is none to be had in society at large. Enjoy the decline.
BokehClasses 6y ago
Anyone who thinks the west has hope isn't red pilled enough.
There is no hope now. Society is beyond fucked. The only silver lining is that maybe Rocketman can nuke us into extinction.
[deleted] 6y ago
Don't worry the Chinese or Russians will carry on the human race...
Raspberry_pi07 6y ago
Time for Bob Lee Swagger to step in, snipe out the worthless cunts and their manginas
sailorJery 6y ago
i'm just a peckerwood who lives in the woods with too many guns
Raspberry_pi07 6y ago
Huh, so you'll be in good company.
jackandjill22 6y ago
Analogy taken. What do you mean specifically though? Why do you feel that way?
[deleted] 6y ago
I just don't see any reasonable probability that things will get better or even stop getting worse. For what it's worth I tend to swing wildly back and forth between we have to fight and fuck it we lost.
jackandjill22 6y ago
That's your problem. Binary.you need to act in stoic acceptance, & cynical aggression.
segagaga 6y ago
Stoicism doesn't mean acceptance.
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
I don't know what that means. Seems that your sentence/punctuation got messed up.
jackandjill22 6y ago
No, the statements just Laconic.
WorkThrowAway125 6y ago
In France Paternity test are banned. French men that try to get test done can face a year in prison and a 15,000 Euro fine.
FwoGiZ 6y ago
Also, correct me if I am wrong but child custody is never forced on a guy against his will in France. The burden is always taken by the state aka men's taxed money aka redirecting funds from men to women. At least they never put the burden on just one guy!
Entropy-7 6y ago
In Canada - and I might have to double check this - if you take care of a kid for a year you can get tagged with child support if mom leaves you.
One more reason not to get serious with a single mother.
TheDevilsAdvokaat 6y ago
My god. I had no idea. Why the fuck aren't they revolting against this??
edit:
https://www.ibdna.com/paternity-testing-ban-upheld-in-france/
He's right.
[deleted]
Wilreadit 6y ago
Because the French love to surrender. To enemy forces, to Islamization, to toxic feminism.
[deleted] 6y ago
What's to stop them from coming to USA on vacation and taking a swab to be sent to a USA lab?
This might be way to boost tourism -paternity tourist.
cuggwy 6y ago
Or just over the border to Switzerland or the U.K. For a day trip
popthatpill 6y ago
Apparently a lot of the business at Swiss DNA paternity labs comes from France and Germany, where casual paternity testing is banned.
TheDevilsAdvokaat 6y ago
Yes, it might be.
But many men could not afford this.
Sad to think that any country could do that to their men - while insisting that men have a responsibility to pay for their children, also insisting they have no right to ensure the children are theirs.
Utterly bizarre, and shows how men are discriminated against.
[deleted]
Adam1394 6y ago
It's still illegal AND cannot be used as evidence.
[deleted] 6y ago
Not illegal in USA or apparently in other countries to take a DNA test or view the results. However it may not be admissible evidence in your country.
Even in USA only certain types of paternity testing can be used to establish paternity. I don't recall all the details, but a disinterest third party may be needed to collect the sample and/or verify the sample source/integrity. These court admissible test cost more than non-admissible (for information purposes only).
Entropy-7 6y ago
Under ancient Roman law it was simple: birth out of wedlock = woman's responsibility
Birth while married = husband's responsibility.
I_Need_More_Space_ 6y ago
France has always been a country of pussies.
[deleted]
Patriarchysaurus 6y ago
The Napoleonic French Empire would like a word with you.
Wilreadit 6y ago
Tell them to put down their weapons.
[deleted]
I_Need_More_Space_ 6y ago
Pardon me. Since my birth, France has always been a country of pussies. It was confirmed when I visited a few years ago too.
[deleted] 6y ago
That's not really true. Up until 1940 they were considered to have one of the best armies in Europe.
Wilreadit 6y ago
Considered by arm chair generals. They were the bitches of the Prussian army, the British Imperial army and even the Swiss. Best army for beating up Algerians of course
I_Need_More_Space_ 6y ago
Pardon me. Since my birth, France has always been a country of pussies. It was confirmed when I visited a few years ago too.
segagaga 6y ago
Until they managed to lose their entire country virtually overnight with barely a shot fired.
Hillarysdilddo_2016 6y ago
So, they thought they had the best army.... But then reality showed that they didn't have jack shit?
TheReformist94 6y ago
I think he's harking back to Napoleon. But ww1,ww2 and Indochina they got their arses handed back to them hard
Entropy-7 6y ago
And if they weren't fucking with England through the late 18th century Americans would be. . . Canadian! haha
rporion 6y ago
They had a rather good army, they had good officers too, alas, their generals did not heed the warning how and why they could be taken out in one swoop.
Hillarysdilddo_2016 6y ago
So, I repeat myself...
What they thought, and what they actually had are two completely different things.
A superior army is one that is victorious. Period.
Wilreadit 6y ago
In war, victory is everything. Victors are not the ones who are right but those who are left
rporion 6y ago
They had incompetent leadership, a French officer demonstrated that they could be beheaded by an attack through the Ardennes just a few weeks prior.
Either the British or the Americans refused to believe that battleships could be sunk by bombers.
It was just the usual, the brass refusing that times had changed.
You also do not take into account that with Rommel, Guderian, von Mannstein and others, Germany had fully understood that times indeed had changed and they made full use of it.
The French were just preparing for the last battle, as armies tend to do.
Entropy-7 6y ago
AFAIK, they couldn't get Belgium on board so there was a gap in the Maginot Line that the Germans went up and around. . .twice in the same century.
As a side point, while it comes off as a bit creepy (see Verhoven's Starship Troopers) the Nazis - more objectively speaking - had the snazziest uniforms. I hated my Canadian tans and greens. (When I applied for JAG they asked me which service. I said navy. They asked why not army? I told them, the the whites and blacks - summer/winter dress - look better. That got a chuckle out of them.)
Wilreadit 6y ago
So a good group of fighting men with a rotten General equals a 'good army'?
rporion 6y ago
Look, I wholeheartedly agree that an army of sheep lead by lions is probably going to do better than an army of lions lead by sheep.
However, this is the normal course of events, in times of peace driftwood seems to accumulate in the officers ranks and the first part of a war is mostly about locating and firing the hopelessly incompetent.
This is true for all armies, it was true for the French, the US, Italy. you name it, with the possible exception of Germany and the UK.
By the way, the British were taken by surprise too.
Dunkirk and all.
Wilreadit 6y ago
You become a good army by fighting wars. Not by surrendering. Did you know when Japan surrendered after being nuked, some of the groups in the army continued fighting. It is that ingrained culture. Some races are good at it. Like Gorkhas. Some races are bad at it. Like blacks. Some countries are good at it like Germans or Murica or Britain. Some countries are bad at it. Like France. You will only be feared if you consider dying better than surrendering. The Frenchies love their women and cheese and women's cheese too much to die.
Entropy-7 6y ago
I'm a Canadian and I was in the reserves. We have (had?) a reputation of being, man-for-man, some of the best soldiers on the planet but never known for the quality of our leadership. It's the Brits and Germans who have that distinction.
At one point there was a standing order from NDHQ (national defence headquarters) that the officers had to rotate, day to day, as to who would be in uniform and who would be in civies: we had too many fucking generals running about the place.
As an aside, the best officers I ever served with were those that spent at least a year or two as a non-com.
Wilreadit 6y ago
The Brit regiments to this day have the reputation of being hard, rough and really badass soldiers.
JamesSkepp 6y ago
That's not true.
What you need is either the other parent to agree to the paternity test or an order from the court to make one.
The fine you're describing is for men that break that 2 rules, not the ones that make any paternity test at all.
K_J_K 6y ago
Those two rules shouldn't exist in the first place.
rporion 6y ago
Yeah?
In Austria I can send in whatever I want, no questions asked.
In related news, the Green party is no longer in parliament since the latest election.
What you call freedom, I call serfdom.
Though, come to think of it, 15000?
Kind of cheap, given the alternatives.
0signal0 6y ago
I'd like to add: erasing the importance of paternity for men is literally one of the last nails in the coffin that is Western society.
Those who have done their research know that the increase of single-parent households correlates with increased crime, higher rates of drug abuse and mental illness amongst the children growing under those conditions, promiscuity and more. In other words, a lot of the issues society faces result from the lack of importance given to fatherhood.
TheReformist94 6y ago
Cuckoldry is the act of a woman raping a man. My aunt is a midwife and she said the father is not the father in about 40% of cases. The war on paternity is the legalising and institutionalising the rape of men by women.
[deleted]
BokehClasses 6y ago
What the fuck. Rocketman please nuke us into extinction.
SirKolbath 6y ago
I don't know if we are allowed to link to his channel here, but Sargon of Akkad commented on that a couple weeks ago. (Seems that a few years ago there was a ban in place on his videos. I don't know if it still exists and I'd rather not try the patience of the moderation team.)
rporion 6y ago
If they ban Sargon of Akkad I am out.
Sorry, but he tries his very best to tell it like he sees it and if he is "verboten" because he does not always toe the line, well, let is say I would not fundamentally agree with the values expressed by this site.
SirKolbath 6y ago
I may be misremembering. It was some time ago. But you're right about Sargon.
[deleted] 6y ago
Also why the black community has been stagnant.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
Wilreadit 6y ago
Free money abd free sex. While the men shoot up innocent and play 'kangzz' and shiyat
[deleted] 6y ago
it's not so much single parent households... it's single mother households. dual parent households have the best outcomes by far, but single father households are only slightly behind. single mother households are crime and poverty factories.
and people shit on blacks for having extremely high poverty/crime rates (3% of the population commits 50% of all crime), but it's not racial... it's familial. single mother households regardless of race are crime factories. it just happens that blacks have a disproportionately high percentage of single mother households.
single mothers absolutely deserve to shamed hard.
FlatEarthShill6969 6y ago
Its definitely racial to a degree. Blacks have an average IQ of 85 and about 30% more testosterone than whites. This is what leads to higher rates of single motherhood as well as crime even when single motherhood isnt a factor.
In modern society your genes shape your environment. The egg (genes) came first, not the chicken, environment followed.
Entropy-7 6y ago
If you read something like The Bell Curve the IQ difference is maybe half-and-half. Do you have a cite or link about the T difference? I recall reading about the "Tanner Scale" and black girls tend to physically mature faster than whites who in turn mature faster than Asians.
But look at a football team: mostly black quys for power or speed but the QBs - the brains of the outfit - are mostly white.
[deleted] 6y ago
the stats i saw said otherwise... that regardless of race, dual parent households win, single father households come in second, and single mother households can't even really be described as coming in third... they just lose horribly. this happens irrespective of race. white single mothers are just as big crime factories as black and hispanic single mothers. and blacks already had their family unit destroyed... hispanics and whites are going through that now.
FlatEarthShill6969 6y ago
Of course the dual parent household wins. There are pretty large differences in dual parent households though. In transracial adoption situations blacks do much worse than whites. Even more telling, wealthy blacks dont do as well academically or criminally as poor whites and neither do as well as east asians in just about any situation.
Entropy-7 6y ago
I think Ann Coulter wrote a whole book on this, eh?
The US homicide rate is 3 times that of Canada, mostly because of all the inner city black kids shooting each other.
It seems like too many black guys want to get off and then get gone (there was a news article about one guy who sired 43 kids and had child support orders against him that would be 5 times his income under normal circumstances). It also seems that black chicks want to be "Strong Independent Women"^TM and so they don't expect the guy to stick around.
I don't think that blacks "just happen" to do anything but rather it is something in their culture that shifted somewhere between the post-war 40s and the 60s. Thomas Sowell - a black man and perhaps the leading conservative intellectual - laments about this in many of his books.
[deleted] 6y ago
yes, coulter literally wrote a book on this.
blacks historically have had high rates of single motherhood, and over the last 20 years or so, hispanics and whites have shot up and are on the way to joining blacks in having an excessive amount of completely failed families.
Entropy-7 6y ago
"Historically", as Sowell points out means basically from the dawn of the welfare state. We didn't really have this issue in the 1920s and 30s.
mummersfarce_is_done 6y ago
Why do blacks have such a high percentage of single mother households?
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
culturally, blacks never cleaned up the single motherhood problem. hispanics fell into it eventually, and now whites are falling in too. race really is irrelevant... the problem is single motherhood.
BewareTheOldMan 6y ago
Why do blacks have such a high percentage of single mother households?
The short answer is entity known as the Welfare State.
Unmarried/Unwed mothers receive money from the government. The catch or requirement is they CANNOT be married nor have a male/husband as head of household. This encourages Black women to produce children out of wedlock at a rate of 73%. For perspective, in 1965 the OOW Birth-Rate for Blacks was 25%....which was considered high for the time period.
Single Mothers were shamed and considered pariahs/family embarrassments. More importantly, children suffered in poverty and experienced much hardship in ghetto life. Despite this, the OOW continued to rise over the decades.
The rise of 1960’s feminism further aggravated the situation by encouraging the "Strong and Independent Woman" archetype who "doesn’t need a man." It’s frustrating, sad, embarrassing, and contributes immensely to the many social ills plaguing Blacks in the United States; crime, high school dropouts, low unemployment, high incarceration rates, lack of family units, etc.
The bad news is that EVERY ethnic group is following the same pattern. Single Mothers receive praise rather than shame and vilification. It’s practically a badge of honor among today’s young women. The overall OOW birth rate for the United States is averaging 40% for ALL groups (Black =73%, Latinos = 53%, Whites = 30%, Asians = 17%, *Native Americans = 66%; counted separately due to representing less than 1% of the US population).
More importantly, when anyone shames Single Mothers, the situation is reversed and said person is vilified for daring to criticize this group with the expectation for Good Men to volunteer to be caretaker to another man’s offspring.
There’s a saying: To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are NOT allowed to criticize.
As usual...enjoy the decline.
mummersfarce_is_done 6y ago
That's fine, but why do blacks have so many of single mother households compared to other races.
[deleted] 6y ago
Hypergamy not only favors strong men, but favors strong resource providing institutions over men. Hypergamy drove poor women away from poor men and into the steady (but meager) welfare, WIC, sub/free housing offered to single moms. What was intended to be a safety net to bounce back up from is now a economic niche that is used to make a living. Also get $ from the man that is made into a federal wage slave and also use him as an excuse for her failures and issues (they always blame the men... solipsisim). Internalized racism and the war-bride syndrome (hypergamey) also comes into play. The stronger tribe (big daddy white government) is believed to oppress and dominate them, so taking big daddy government $ is a combination of internalized racism manifesting itself as hypergameous race sell outs to big daddy white government. Black women could fix this if they wanted to or if govn't subsidies decline be forced to.
[deleted]
[deleted]
NobleFarore 6y ago
Very concerning trends we're seeing marching towards the collapse of patriarchal society in favor of the parasitic and communistic feminist ideology.
This is just another avenue in a multi-pronged approach the powers-that-be are taking towards making society more dependent on a centralized governing body. It's a slow erosion of our rights as free men and targeted demoralization of our collective will.
The best thing we can do as individuals is to never let ourselves fall victim to the game. Keep developing yourself as a man and as the female imperative comes closer to realization, most men will be shells of their former selves, leaving the self-actualized to reap the harvest of plentiful pussy. Remember that while this is fucked on a civilization-wide scale, you can still personally benefit from the decline, since there's not much we can individually do.
TheSelfGoverned 6y ago
I've noticed that a traditional patriarchy is ideally about honor and merit, whereas a matriarchy seems to mimic a parasitic popularity contest.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
Oscar_Cc 6y ago
A "bonus", lol.
The delusion is real.
BewareTheOldMan 6y ago
She [a Single Mother] believed that if "I really loved her" her children wouldn't be baggage but a happy "bonus".
Just terrible...as it relates to cognitive dissonance and a Single Mother's false perception of reality; as if fully committing to taking care of another man's kids is no problem to the non-biological father. Single Mothers fail to consider the effort, dedication, energy, time, finances, and overall commitment in support of this "bonus."
It highlights the selfishness and general lack of consideration or appreciation a Single Mother has for any man to expect him to accept that level of commitment.
It's the VERY reason so many Single Mothers are visibly upset and "triggered" when men say: "I don't date nor will I EVER marry a Single Mother. They can't even fathom a reasonable man would not be interested in this situation. The only perspective and compassion a Single Mother can consider is her own myopic viewpoint.
The insult is that even when they find a "Beta Male Chump" to accept the stepfather role/duties - they will likely not appreciate nor respect any man who accepts such a one-sided situation. They NEVER wanted him in the first place, but have to settle because the biological deadbeat/absent father is a "no-show."
If they weren't so serious about their dissonance, it would ALMOST be funny.
Nintendobandit 6y ago
Except you were dating her, not them. If she wanted a father for them why wasn’t their actual father good enough?! Facepalm.
[deleted] 6y ago
Is there any research which proves that infanticide happened among Homo Sapiens?
I have bookmarked one very interesting comment from July on this subject.
So basically Orangutan and Gorilla females fuck every male in the group in order to bring confusion about paternity, but that happens when they're least fertile.
Was something like that happening in primitive Homo Sapiens tribes?
We already know that women fuck Chads when they're the most fertile, and seek Beta Bucks when they're the least fertile.
Rollo-Tomassi 6y ago
Good read from a Red Pill perspective.
https://www.amazon.com/Naked-Bonobo-Lynn-Saxon/dp/1523945516
berryfarmer 6y ago
This is why some of us have blue eyes, and we males are more attracted to those with blue eyes if we have them. Paternity testing becomes a little more accurate, visually
mummersfarce_is_done 6y ago
And here I thought I can not learn anything more from this forum. Truly I was wrong.
JamesSkepp 6y ago
A large part of that being so prevalent is b/c men have much stronger "moral" values, be it self-sacrifice for the greater good, or just plain everyday "morality" ("don't do bad stuff, do good stuff"). And that is regardless of whether these "moral" values came to be b/c we evolved that way or b/c out culture deems them to be good and we simply follow that rule.
I would go even a step further and say that the self-sacrifice for the greater good is something that makes us susceptible to BP ideologies that are in large part based on "moral choice" (regardless whether it's "morally" right or not, what matters is that people believe it's right).
Are there any non-manosphere resources that explain what is the rationale of people behind making that rules and who these people are?
What you're saying here means that people who push for that kind of things (and I'm pretty sure it's overwhelmingly men that make this happen, b/c who else) understand the nature of hypergamy and actively work to ensure it's "security". That assumes these men understand m-f dynamics like TRP does (how likely is that?) and b/c of that understanding it would also mean they knowingly work against their self-interest (which is plain stupid).
There is another explanation - that ties to my first paragraph - men who make this happen do it b/c they deem it "morally" good or perhaps even willingly sacrifice cucked men in the name of said "moral" need of the child by being aware that it's not how it should be, but it's the lesser of two evils (at least in their mind).
I'm not saying that this or that explanation is right, I'm just making theories on the fly b/c while I understand feminine-imperative permeating the BP society, I can't really pin in on specific people, group or category.
It also removes any choice they could have. Up until a few decades ago you could be a cuck and don't know about it, now you can be a cuck (you can even choose to be one, oh the irony) and can't do anything about it.
The "some that would say - less civilized - sexual strategy" people need to remember that sexual strategy has nothing to do with morality, culture, civilization etc. It's primary goal is to spread the genes and that means any form of "morality" is an obstacle not an advantage.
Dmva100 6y ago
There are only two options:
Vasectomy if you don't want kids.
Be a single father if you want kids.
There is no other way in which you will have control.
stompie5 6y ago
If you want children, the ideal environment for child development requires a father and mother raising it.
I_Need_More_Space_ 6y ago
Just have kids in S. America while never renouncing U.S. citizenship. Easy.
NarcKammerjaeger 6y ago
Reminds me of Eric Cartman's paranoia last season about woman ruling Mars and misusing men for their sperm. Basically enslaving them in a mine and milking them. Also all men had to confirm that women are strong and funny!
Whitified 6y ago
Women need men for more than just sperm.
Protection and security, food, clean water, contruction, sewage and other cleaning of human waste, disposal of any other kind of waste, distribution of food and consumables, energy, innovation, mathematics and science, engineering.... the list goes on
In contrast, the day humanity invents sex robots and cloning/reproduction of human beings, is technically the day women are "obsolete".
0xdada 6y ago
Most animals have a pheromone or other identifier that prevents them from inbreeding with their siblings and children. People have it as well.
It's intuition, but I would be willing to bet $100 that greater than %50 of cases of incest and molestation would co-occur with a negative paternity or sibling test result. It's a fucked up crime committed by fucked up people, but the perpetrators may be fucked up in different ways.
MattyAnon Admin 6y ago
The man himself may be superfluous, but his financial support is taken from him by force. As a father, access to your children is entirely dependent on the mother never saying "I feel scared". The second she decides that your presence is no longer required (due to you being too beta or too alpha or caring too much or not enouhg or her mood changes).... the very second she decides this, you're out. No proof required. Just a simple court case that you'll be paying for.
It's a sick and twisted lesson to learn, but as a man in the West you do not have legal rights to see your children. Everyone pretends you do, but it's trivial for the woman to decide otherwise. A few false allegations and you're out, entirely on her whim and without proof.
I could almost be ok with this if it was ever the interests of the child. But it's not. There is the pretence that it's about the child, but it's really about the mother. Eg "Child support". Paid to the mother, and never audited. She gets a new iPhone, child gets crappy clothes and rubbish food. Consequences for her? None other than using her brand new iPhone to pull Chad on Tinder.
Everything that's happening now is designed to get unconditional support and money for women. In other words, getting female privilege enshrined in law. If she can get her beta bucks paid for by your tax dollars, she's free to fuck Chad. Children are held to ransom by women seeking freedom from any performance or obligation to men. "You can't lock me up or punish me or let my child starve, now hand over the money, regardless of paternity".
As a democratic society we are not going to let children starve, so we allow and enable women to do as they please.
In parallel with this, the same is now true for sexual access without paternity. Investing in one woman has poor returns for a man compared to investing in himself and never committing too deeply.
While this is definitely happening, there is a ray of hope: there is modern awareness of it among many men. Men are shamed by each other (and rightfully so) as being "cucked". If men do not accept fatherhood, DNA proof is required as a condition of his support (exceptions: if you're married to her or if you don't question it soon enough after birth, varies by country).
What's less well known is the extent to which our tax dollars are subsidising women and other men's children. Beta bucks by the back door.
adam-l Endorsed Contributor 6y ago
Although I largely agree on your conclusions, i.e. beta strategy losing all credibility etc, I have a contrary opinion on how paternity influenced the balance of power between the sexes. I wrote this article a year ago, it summarizes my position, check it out.
Adam
[deleted] 6y ago
While reading "Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control" by E. Michael Jones (an excellent read, but not for the light-hearted: it's very detailed and 600+ pages long) I have concluded that those who attempt to engineer human nature or significantly fuck with cultural values produce chaos, which must be then controlled with tyranny. The book goes very deep into the progression of sexual liberation movements since about the 1700s.
But I really don't think this will last long. Look at the fall of any major civilization in history or any tyrannical government and a key feature is declining masculinity, excess promiscuity, and/or unhealthy families.
[deleted] 6y ago
Doesn't the no-questions-asked legal paternity of whomever the mom writes on the birth certificate only apply if she writes the name of her husband and he did not challenge it within a certain period of time? Basically it has an automatic signature by the husband that kicks in after a certain short period of time if not challenged. Without marriage the legality of the certificate must be established in court and resolved by genetics. This does gave a number of failure modes if the father doesn't know about the pregnancy.
Edit: apparently a few states haven't updated their laws yet to accept the reality of DNA testing and allow the husband a window to challenge the presumption. Can't seem to figure out which though without requesting legal consultation. I'll just assume it's a safe bet the bible belt is dragging their feet. Where I live the laws are said to be updated. Know your state's laws.
red_matrix 6y ago
If you're not married I don't think you can be on the hook for child support without a paternity test. If you're married I think you're totally fucked though - can anyone confirm the legality here?
bourbonhipster 6y ago
This is wrong in a number of states. The presumption of acting as a fatherly figure can put a man under equal burden to continue supporting that child as if they were the paternal father.
Solon64 6y ago
The question then: if the biological father is still around and has claimed paternity through a dna test, would the "acting" father be legally liable?
In other words, is it possible to have two men on the hook simultaneously? If it isn't, I'd be surprised
bourbonhipster 6y ago
Once a paternal father challenges that role with genetic proof, he would essentially be laying claim to sole responsibility of that child. While the acting father may do what he can to defend his parental right, that would be a hard case to fight. But usually I'm that instance if paternity was challenged the acting parent wouldn't likely be liable for, let's say, continued financial support. The challenging paternal father assumes that burden as a major responsibility under his paternal claim.
[deleted] 6y ago
If you're not married to the mother, who's forcing you to act as a fatherly figure without a DNA test?
red_matrix 6y ago
That's my question - it was kind of implied in the article. Just wanted to know what rights we have. Lawyers can be slimey.
[deleted] 6y ago
Well, it seems like there's some remnants of that common law bullshit that hasn't been purged in some corners of the US. And it may be things like ongoing transitions where some of the population may be grandfathered so that it's more situationally dependent. In common law things tend to derive from tradition and examining behavior rather than state permission. I do find it odd that there seems to be a perception that common law is spreading rather than receding.
Edit: Not a lawyer, just my gestalt about it.
coco5440 6y ago
What world are you living in? Paternity almost always needs to be established before a child support case can proceed. Sometimes paternity is established by a DNA test -- other times its established by the fathers stipulation. If the stipulation becomes problematic years later the father is often stuck. But so what. If you claim a child as your own guess what he or she is yours.
Almost all family code sections are written in gender neutral language. Guys can use the law to their advantage just as easily was women can. Guys don't bitch after the fact -- hire a good family lawyer as soon as you can.
Rollo-Tomassi 6y ago
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/magazine/22Paternity-t.html
Rollo-Tomassi 6y ago
https://rationalmale.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/paternity.jpg
coco5440 6y ago
There are rules to this game of life (AKA laws). If you want to play the game successfully you damn well better learn the rules -- even if you don't agree with them. It's hardly Red Pill to cry about the unfairness of life if you're too lazy to learn the rules before you play.