Captain Capitalism explains all the reasons why men are not getting married any more, and what women can do to reverse the so-called “marriage strike”.
Excerpt from his massive bullet-point list:
- Did you hear of this “divorce fad” going around? Apparently men get to pay out the majority of the time be it alimony or child support.
- Did you hear about this “divorce fad” going around? Apparently 65% of the time it’s women who initiate divorce.
- Kids cost around $500,000 each to raise. given employment prospects we can’t afford that. Much rather buy a boat or frankly work all that much less.
- Hey, you hear about this federal budget deficit and debt? Apparently we elected this guy “Barack Obama” and a bunch of democrats into office who are now mortgaging the future. This means our expenses in the future will be higher. Well, of course us “foolish, immature, pooping, farting boys” were too “immature” to vote for him like you wise women, but then again we’re too busy flinging poo at each other to ponder the future macro-economic ramifications of a collapsing dollar.
- Hey, you hear about this social security medicare thing? Apparently enough “smart wise women” disproportionately kept voting for democrats to essentially have those immature 20 something men pay for the livelihood for these aging people. This added expense on our futures make’s it that much harder economically to commit to a wife and children.
- Hey, you hear about this “welfare state” “medicaid” thing? Apparently enough “smart wise women” disproportionately over the years voted in enough democrats to essentially replace the role of fathers with government programs making fathers not only unnecessary, but an increasingly risky and unrewarding proposition, not to mention, making it easier for women to just up and leave their husbands, because well, “they needed to find themselves” and the government will take care of the kids while they go pursue their EPL fantasy.
- Hey, did you hear about this “welfare state” thing? Apparently because we’ve now outsourced bringing up children to the government and have to create government jobs for all the “sociology majors” and “education majors”and “communications majors” our tax bill will go through the roof. Oh! Wait!!! No it doesn’t! I forgot! I’m a guy! I can live on very little, work a crappy job, work part time, live in a crappy apartment with my buds and STILL have enough disposable income to play video games and buy booze.
Remember that 77% of young, unmarried women voted for Obama (70% of unmarried women, but 77% of young unmarried women). And research shows that women consistently vote for bigger and bigger government, more wealth redistribution for the “poor”, and more intrusion into the family by the state. More government means higher taxes, and that makes it harder for men to have the authority in the home that comes from being the principle provider.
Not only that, but you have problems like no-fault divorce and biased domestic violence laws. Not to mention how feminism in the schools have left men earning fewer and fewer degrees, so that men lose the lion’s share of jobs during recessions. Women also lobbied Barack Obama to make sure that the stimulus was slanted towards preserving women’s jobs. I’ve merely touched on a few of the incentives against marriage. I could list even more factors, such as the easy availability of hook-up sex – why should men commit to the wife when they can get the sex for free?
What to make of all these facts? Well, men don’t like paying more in taxes and getting less liberty. It makes it harder for us to justify marriage rationally. We want to get married, but when we run the numbers, we see red, not black. Men can either afford marriage and family or government social programs, but we cannot afford both. We can either be husbands and fathers, or we can pay for welfare checks and social programs that replace men, for women who don’t want to have to deal with relating to a man.
I think the problem of men not wanting to marry is caused by women actually believing feminism – that men and women are identical. Once you believe that, there is no special role that men are supposed to play, and no way to distinguish a man who fills that role from one who doesn’t. According to feminism, which most young women believe, men aren’t meant to be providers, protectors or moral/spiritual leaders. Chastity is out. A boring, good-paying job is out. Morality is out. Sobriety is out. Apologetics and theology are out.
What’s in? Being good-looking, inoffensive, and entertaining. Women are not selecting responsible men because they think that the men can be changed to be responsible, through sex, or maybe through nagging, and eventually through the threat of losing all his money and custody of his children. Men aren’t stupid. They’ve noticed that responsibility and morality are out, and they’re acting like clowns because that’s what women prefer when getting drunk and hooking up, the Duke University student and her report on all the men she slept with – they were graded by physical attractiveness, sexual technique, popularity and athletic ability.
Many women today accept feminism, with its strong emphasis on selfishness and career advancement. Those women end up wasting their 20s on their careers and only pursue men who are attractive and entertaining. They aren’t looking to settle down with a protector/provider/moral leader/spiritual leader. They don’t want anyone to judge them or lead them. (Just try offering a woman a book on apologetics, and you’ll see what I mean). By the time they hit 35 and decide to get married, all the men are cautious. Men want to get married to women in their early 20s. What is the point of marrying a 35-year old woman who has lost her looks and her fertility? What is the value proposition for a man at that time? Plus, two decades of binge drinking, partying and hook-ups are not good preparations for creating a helpful, loving wife. Men are not stupid. We know the difference between a bitter, cynical harpy and chaste, loving princess.
Men do what women expect them to do in order to get sex. Just read the peer-reviewed studies on hooking up. If women don’t select men who can do specific things as husbands and fathers, then men won’t prepare themselves to do specific things. If they are already getting sex for playing the fool, then why should they do more than play the fool? If women obsessed over Paul Ryan and William Lane Craig, then that’s what men would aspire to. They don’t, and so men don’t. Mature men intimidate women with their strong opinions, moral judgments, and exclusive theological claims. Much better to have an immature man who is shallow and politically correct.
There is a way for women to get what they want from men, but they actually have to engage in conversations with men and find out what men want from women. And what men want from a marriage. What they want from children. What they want from government. What they want from schools. What they want from the workplace. What they want from the church. You can’t take away everything men need to marry and then expect them to marry. Nagging, belittling, withholding sex and controlling are not incentives for men to marry. Every time you break a man down, that is one less husband and father candidate. And eventually, the money flow dries up for the sperm-banks and social programs that substitute for men. What will women do then?
For myself, I am NOT on the same track as secular men (video games, alcohol, girlfriends and TV). I’m earning and saving to support Christian scholars and apologetics events in churches and universities. That’s my role right now until women destroy feminism with their own hands. Marriage is only good for me if it is good for God. And I need to be convinced that it will be good for God by whoever is applying for the job. I would like to see the reasons why I should marry in a woman’s moral decisions, her studying of difficult apologetic topics, and her political and economic conservatism. I would like to see that she understands men and marriage and understands how marriage and parenting can serve God, if done in an unselfish, moral and disciplined way. No pursuing happiness. No reducing moral obligations to “legalism”.
Making one woman feel happy with a diamond ring and an expensive wedding is not a good choice for me when I could spend a lot less money sponsoring a stack of debates over my lifetime on Christian topics, in front of hundreds of thousands of university students, or even in churches. There are ways that marriage could be a good deal for God, but I want to see the value proposition for marriage before I sign up. So far, most women seem to resent the idea that marriage should be have to be proven good for God. They resent being asked questions that test their authenticity and capabilities as Christians. But everything we do is for God, don’t I have a right to ask what is in it for him? I think a lot of Christian men are asking that question. What’s in it for God? In fact, Paul recommends the single life in 1 Cor 7 precisely because of the dampening effect that ineffective Christian women have on men. Most Christian women refuse to “woman up” and learn how to be a good wife and mother – so why should a man choose that?
Related posts
- In the UK welfare state, single motherhood is passed from mother to daughter
- Conservative woman blames liberal women for choosing bad men
- New study finds that women choose mates based on appearance
- New study finds that teens who lose their virginity are more likely to divorce
- New study finds that cohabitation damages children
- New peer-reviewed paper highlights the benefits of pre-marital chastity/abstinence
- Does being a virgin before marriage affect marital stability?
- How more compassion and less moral judgments increases teen pregnancy
- Can a person be a feminist and still believe in marriage?
- What happens when the government pays people to have babies out-of-wedlock?
- New survey finds women more sexually active than men in high school
- Research to help you understand the “hook-up” culture on campus
- Why do feminist academics think that feminism has empowered women?
- Who is really responsible for the abolition of marriage? Men or feminists?
- Who is to blame for the hook-up culture?
- How the feminist welfare state causes generations of fatherlessness
- Obama’s new proposals penalize married couples and stay-at-home parents
- How feminism’s war against men ends up hurting women
- Less than half of 7 to 21 year old women think marriage precedes child-bearing
- How socialism undermines the traditional family in Sweden
- What causes women to become single mothers, and how are children affected?
- Which family configuration is best for raising children?
- New Scientist article shows why fathers are necessary for children’s well-being
- New study finds that cohabitation damages children
- New peer-reviewed paper highlights the benefits of pre-marital chastity/abstinence
- Does being a virgin before marriage affect marital stability?
Filed under: News, Blame Men, Boy, Budget Deficit, Child-Man, Deficit, Divorce, Divorce Court, Education, Family, Feminism, Good Men, Immature, Immaturity, Man-Blaming, Man-Child, Marriage, Marriage Strike, Marry, Marrying, Men, Men's Rights, Misandry, National Debt, No-Fault Divorce, Social Justice, Social Programs, Social Worker, Socialism, Workplace
Good points. I can’t disagree. If a gal can’t take the Bible seriously, you’re going to be in a whole heap of trouble. I would sure love to hear about the gal you find, if/when that happens.
Once women gained access to higher education,and favored themselves through voting, the results became skewed. Now we have a 60/40 ratio of gals to guys at university. But that will end up meaning that, first, many of the guys won’t match a gal in education, and gals don’t like to marry down, and second, that the gals will make more, meaning that they can afford to look for more evolved traits, like those dark triad traits that seem so popular right now.
If the convent was meant to sequester women so they would take their minds off ‘worldly’ men, then the university sequesters women so that they can put off the roles of wife and mother for over a decade. Of course, after that, how many will be suitable to be wives and mothers?
Lots of sobering numbers. I definitely got my Biblical manhood straight just in time to catch one of the good ones. She’s not terribly fluent in apologetics (yet) but we’ve worked through The Truth Project with a small group and my knowledge will rub off. And we’re both dyed in the wool conservatives and can’t wait to raise our first strong godly offspring. If/when a worthy woman comes along, you’ll be prepared.
Keep up the good work.
I think that the Truth Project is excellent! If she is conservative, then that’s very marriage friendly.
But everything we do is for God, don’t I have a right to ask what is in it for him?
absolutely
you have a RESPONSIBILITY to ask what’s in it for HIm, because if nothing is (and it aint right now) then marriage is just a genuflection to woman and her state . . . and a way for weak men to advance their socio-economic position by conforming to societal (i.e. female) expectations and control
e.g., the Moody Church is not unusual in requiring its “pastors” to be married with numerous children — this “church” will not even consider single males to, ah, “teach their flocks”
gee that Jesus guy, wasnt he one of those Evil Single Males?
wouldnt measure up to U.S. churchianity tho — God aint good enought for the American Woman and her churches; women will choose their OWN pastors, thank you very much
why do the Moodies and others do this? to self-select national-radio “preachers” to fit the female imperative, while pretending to submit to God
but simply being married is NOT submission to God, and to marry under unholy conditions (civil marriage in the modern west) in fact is to oppose God, for one then is expected to conform to the World, and not to Christ