A lot of people hate on Hollywood, and in truth, there’s plenty to hate. Even so, the people doing most of the hating tend to be scumbag Christian priests, who equate the virgin Mary with skank-ho single moms, and who hold up fat divorcées as the pinnacle of womanhood — describing them as “beautiful, beautiful, beautiful.” With this in mind, we are called to dispense with the lies of the Christians, and take a look at the bright side of secular pop culture, and we start with the music industry. For all its faults, it showcases a number of men who did their best to warn their brothers about the pitfalls of feminism.

The late Tupac Shakur is an example of a confused young boy who was forced into the playa lifestyle after being used and tossed into the gutter by one wimminz after the next. Most of the young brothers don’t even know this man, and that’s a shame, because he had plenty of wisdom to impart.

A bit of background: Tupac’s mother was a drug abusing radical feminist, and he never knew his father. While he loved his mother dearly, the two had a complicated relationship, with years of separation, largely her fault. The following video is a good example of the range of emotions that came out as a result, both in his art and in his life…

https://youtu.be/4AHH0bdNKyM

At the end of his days, he truly had his head on straight.

Another brother who was taken from the world far too soon was Curt Cobain. Cobain became famous trying to redpill your father and uncles, way back in the day.

I don’t know much about Sledge, but a quick internet search suggests he was run through the divorce courts at least once, and the bitch took all his money.

Are any of us surprised at these lyrics? Ironically, his last marriage was consummated in 1980, and his (last) wife appeared to be a cool female, who stuck with him until his passing in 2015. He didn’t offer much advice on picking a woman from among the wimminz, and I’m forced to conclude he just managed to get lucky after a very rough start. Good for him.

And now, of course, we come to the king of pop. It’s sorta before my time, but just as relevant to my generation as it was to the one Michael wrote it for. If you’ve never paid attention to the lyrics, this song is about that skank-ho who tried to pass Chad’s baby off as yours.

For forty days and for forty nights / The law was on her side / But who can stand when she’s in demand / Her schemes and plans / ‘Cause we danced on the floor in the round / So take my strong advice, just remember to always think twice / (Do think twice)

For the moronic shitlib woman who is currently blowing up your FuckBook feed…

For the record, I’m not the guy who is trolling Tinder skanks. Someone sent this to me, and it is truly hilarious.

This sort of shit is always fun…

I went to a middlebrow Catholic school for my undergraduate degrees. Part of earning a degree in mathematics was taking math-like disciplines. You had to take a computer science course. I got a B in that. You had to do the 100-level calculus-based physics series. I got A grades in that, but only because I kissed the professors asses. I put off the statistics classes until I was just about ready to graduate. Those are the only C grades on my transcripts. I earned C grades, partly because I hated statistics, and partly because I was already accepted to graduate programs, and just didn’t give a shit in my last semester of the bachelor’s program.

Around this same time, I read Herrnstein and Murray’s book, The Bell Curve. The book, as I remember it, is huge, containing at least a dozen chapters. The section on racial difference is only a part of a single chapter of the book. I know almost nothing about statistics; but my dismal grasp of that topic, along with the authors’ explanation, suggests something quite different from the reviews of the book by all the hateful SJW faggots who are still jerking themselves off in outrage over the content.

If you take huge populations of people, there are bound to be differences. Those differences in character and attitude are notable only in aggregate.

If I take the whole group of African bushmen, and the whole group of European-descended anglophone Americans, I’ll note a difference in the average intelligence between these two groups. Suppose I, as an anglophone Mormon, descended entirely from New England WASP types, meets one African bushman in the wild. What do the statistics tell me? The answer is, not a god damned thing. The best I can surmise is that I have a slight probability of being a little smarter than that fucker, but that is in no wise guaranteed. If I happen to meet him in Africa, then it’s in my interest to kiss his black behind in the hopes that he can teach me how to keep from becoming a lion’s dinner.

I’m the whitest motherfucker you have ever seen. As a group, White people are supposed to be near the top of the cognitive ability distribution. The minute I set foot into the aforementioned graduate program, I met a whole bunch of people who were far smarter than I was, and none of them were as White as I am. Included in the group of people who are at least one standard-deviation more intelligent than I am are…

• One blue-black African-American woman,
• One male halfbreed, with a Mestizo mother and Iranian father,
• One light-skinned Mestizo woman,
• One Jewish man, with the stereotypical big nose and kinky hair.

It is interesting to note that I am still friends with all of these people, except for the light-skinned Mestizo woman, who turned out to be one of the most treacherous bitches I have ever encountered. She ended up divorcing a good Mestizo man, who had bussed tables to pay rent so that her dumb ass could get her Ph.D.. Almost immediately after she graduated, she dumped him to marry an East Indian dothead, and has subsequently divorced his chump ass too. Between the two of these simps, I imagine she got most of her school loans paid off.

The blue-black African-American woman is the most brilliant statistician I know, and whenever I have a tough linear algebra problem, she is my go-to for a quick answer. She was married to a White guy when we were in our program, and has since divorced him too. I’m sure she got a nice payout for breaking all her most important promises.

Part of what I want to illustrate, with all this, is the absolute non-correlation between cognitive ability and wimminz’ well-established proclivity for whimsical self-destruction. One should appreciate that having an advanced degree is usually not a ticket to a trouble-free life. The Mestizo waiter and the White bank manager, who were married to the two wimminz noted above, have the capacity to make much more money than any of us. The Bindi who was Mestizo-wimminz’ second husband was a stockbroker, and his father was a millionaire. He made more in the year I knew him than all four of us make today. He got tossed into the gutter like so much garbage, by a wife who never appreciated him.

The rest of the illustration has to do with the general non-correlation between aggregated data and individual cases. This is the source of a lot of confusion in the manosphere, where I read claptrap like…

This has clearly be discussed beforehand. A NAWALT is the perfect women who isn’t affected by modern feminism, remains loyal through the good and bad times, never nags, never throws tantrums, remained a full virgin before marriage…

Full stop, nigga. Hold it right there.

I understand the source of this misconception. It originates in the Teachman study, which, not unlike Herrnstein and Murray’s brief digression into race, examines statistical differences based upon the sexual history of various populations of wimminz. My man Marcus D. has pointed to this study and popularized it as some sort of guidepost for young brothers.

So, to all my readers, let’s review. Suppose that you have two populations. One is wimminz who are strippers, escorts, and professional prostitutes. The other is made up exclusively of virginal wimminz. What do we know? We know that marrying a random individual from one population carries a slightly higher risk of eventual divorce, compared to marrying a random individual from the other.

Suppose you have two wimminz, one who is a virgin, and the other who is a reformed skank-ho single mom.

Question: What do you know about these two, just taking this background into account?

Answer: Not a damned thing.

Meet Jenny Erickson, at top left. Mizz Erickson is a public figure, CONservative republican, and “mommy blogger,” who uses her own personal biography to make a living (when she’s not sponging off her ex-husband).

The un-named children in this photo are sired by at least two different men. The eldest girls are the legal (if not biological) offspring of a man who had the misfortune of being married to Jenny. The youngest girl is a bastard, father unknown.

In 2013, Jenny took to whining on the internet, about being excommunicated from her Christian church, which is how I became acquainted with her. Her crime was filing for divorce from her husband, something which Christianity explicitly forbids, except under the most serious of circumstances.

I have no source (and I did look for one) that illustrates Jenny’s virginity at the time of her first marriage. Even so, I remember seeing her boast about “giving” her husband “the gift” of her virginal holes on the honeymoon.

I’m always skeptical, but let’s suppose she actually was a virgin. Does it matter now? I would argue that it doesn’t, since she has treacherously run her husband through the divorce courts, made his kids bastards, and subsequently given them an additional sibling through her own immorality.

Let’s meet Naghmeh Abedini. Naghmeh is the skank-ho ex-wife of our brother Saeed Abedini, who we met yesterday. Naghmeh married Saeed in Tehran, Iran, in 2004. Was Naghmeh a virgin? I’d say she might have been. She certainly claimed to be, as in that society, you get your ass kicked if you are known to skank around.

Naghmeh spent years holding herself out as a dutiful wife and mother, and this schtick was very profitable, while her husband was incarcerated in an Iranian prison. Due to her pressure, Barack Obama moved heaven and earth to get her husband released. Before he even hit American soil, Naghmeh pulled a 180, and was down at the divorce courts, accusing her husband of abuse. Amazingly (or perhaps not), her accusations were taken seriously, despite the fact that her husband was in an Iranian prison during the time he was supposedly abusing her.

Here are two innocent, virginal wives who turned on their men, the second it was advantageous to do so. With this in mind, can we honestly say that marrying a so-called virgin is a better idea than marrying a skank-ho prostitute?

Fetishizing virginity is merely a holdover from an earlier age. Five hundred years ago, it actually was advantageous to marry a virgin. The husband would have his friend (the “best man”) carry out evidence of his wife’s virginity from the wedding chamber. The doors would then be locked up, and the couple would fuck with abandon for a few weeks. The expected pregnancy would result in at least one potential heir, that could inherit the husband’s wealth. The second and third children, well, it’s anyone’s guess who their fathers were, but the first one was statistically (there’s that concept, again) more likely to be a blood relative of the putative father.

Suppose a young brother marries a virgin today. What would I advise him to do?

Get a DNA test for any child that is born in your house.

Suppose another young brother marries a prostitute. I’d advise him the exact same thing.

Suppose a virginal bride begins causing trouble at home. What should the authorities tell her?

Get your ass back home and obey your husband.

Now, this isn’t what the authorities tell wimminz in our society. In our feminist state, they are coddled, and encouraged to slut it up. Even so, in a normal society, troublemaking wouldn’t be tolerated.

Suppose a former prostitute marries, and does the same thing? The proper response, in any normal society, would be precisely similar.

If two wimminz, one a virgin, and the other a prostitute, make a promise, is one expected to keep it, and the other given a pass for breaking it?

In conclusion, I’ll anticipate the usual scoffing by my critics, who will talk about me being a male skank-ho slut, and having written this after spending too many weekends down at the STD clinic with various Tinder skanks. They’ll dismiss my article as the result of a slanted worldview after a life of immorality.

The reality is that 100% of the wimminz I know, including my mother, grandmother, sister, and female cousins, have all proven to be exactly the same in kind and character, as the most hardened prostitutes. All are wimminz. The fact that a few of my relatives (and by no means all) have been effectively controlled by Mormon mores and the fear of shaming, does not change this in any way. If my sister finds it advantageous, she’ll divorce her husband tomorrow, and make her kids bastards. I know this as surely as I know the sun will come up tomorrow.

Yes, there are variations in populations. No, it doesn’t mean you should marry a wimminz, even if that wimminz is a virginal young cupcake of 18, who has never laid eyes on a cad. You do this at your peril.

Happy Father’s Day to all you fathers out there, and Eid Mubarak to all my Muslim brothers.

Last week we examined the Muslim woman in detail, and illustrated the propaganda and hype surrounding the so-called “submissive” and “helpful” Muslim wife. Admittedly, we looked at an extreme example; but, the possibility that the woman you marry might cave in your child’s skull, while living in the house that you’ve been evicted from (but are still forced to pay for — of course) is a real possibility.

It might be argued that Saeed Abedini is also a victim of the bait-and-switch of the Muslim woman.

For those who haven’t heard this sad story, here’s the news: Saeed’s wife, Naghmeh, promised to love, honor and obey him, during a traditional Muslim wedding, in 2004. If we believe the Islamophilic propaganda, we would expect that young Naghmeh was a virgin on her wedding night. Of course, I’m always skeptical; but, ultimately, it doesn’t matter. A professional prostitute has the same obligation as a virginal young religious girl, when she makes a promise. Everyone who says their wedding vows is expected to keep them, from that day forward, until death…

So, did Naghmeh live up to the hype of the Muslim princess? Did she spend the rest of her life being a modest, obedient, helpful wife to her beloved husband? What a laugh! Naghmeh was at best a secular Muslim, and she was already an American citizen when she married Saeed. How she obtained U.S. Citizenship is a murky matter, but it suggests that she was already skankified.

Saeed and Naghmeh began exploring Christianity shortly after they emigrated to the United States in 2005, and Saeed obtained naturalized American citizenship through his marriage to Naghmeh. He subsequently studied for the Christian priesthood, and became ordained around 2009.

In the summer of 2012, Saeed returned to Iran and was arrested after a complaint alleged that he had been proselytizing his Muslim neighbors in the town of Resht. He instantly became a celebrity among Christians in the United States. Christian priests used his name and image to bilk the gullible out of millions of dollars. Naghmeh, who had remained in the U.S.A., became a minor celebrity, and went on speaking tours to protest her husband’s treatment.

Barack Obama eventually paid some ransom money, and twisted some arms, and in 2016, President Obama finally got Saeed deported back to the U.S.A.. Almost immediately after his release, his wife Naghmeh, who had spent years making beaucoup dollaz off her husband’s imprisonment, turned the tables. She denounced her husband, filed for divorce, and swore out a criminal complaint against Saeed for “abuse.”

Naghmeh alleges that Saeed was “abusing” her, from around the world, while he was jailed in the notorious Ervin Prison. His children were naturally taken from him, by the faggots in the divorce courts.

Today, Saeed is still separated from his children. Let’s let him tell it…

It is hard for me to believe that the Iranians would sever the bond of a child with either parent, simply because of unfounded gossip by an attention seeking neurotic like Naghmeh. It might be argued that Saeed is being treated worse by the American divorce courts than he was by the Iranian religious censors. Thus the United States has no standing to criticize any other society for “human rights” violations.

I have sent Saeed a message, inviting him to comment here on his situation, and to correct any details I might have mistaken. I’m aware he is a busy man. If he isn’t inclined to participate, he should know that we’re all in sympathy with him, and that we salute his courage as he speaks out for the millions of fathers and husbands who have been abused and robbed by the divorce industry.

NSFW: Tom schools Dana about the calling and vocation she has chosen.

When I was a much younger man, I used to listen to Tom Leykis. This appears to be an old episode, but I had never heard it. It lasts for a half hour, and just gets better and better.

https://youtu.be/Z-nTwUN9v2U

This is the day where I tended to show up over on wimminz, to wish all the fathers there a happy day. The author had his own children stolen from him, by his whore of an ex-wife, in a custody dispute, so it was appropriate. AfOR’s story was somewhat similar to my own father’s sad tale; so, I expected his kids to contact him, once they got out from under the thumb of the family courts. I don’t think they ever did.

If you are separated from your child, or your father, then allow me to sub for either, and wish you a happy day today.

It’s current year, so we need moar brainwashing of children. Sex is a social construct, bigots!

Like many new dads, Sabastion Sparks knew parenting would come with serious challenges.

But most new dads didn’t give birth to their child. They didn’t breastfeed them. And they don’t endure glares from strangers when they go shopping with their wife and their toddler son.

Sabastion, 24, is a transgender man who lives with his wife Angel in suburban Atlanta. Assigned the female gender at birth, he began transitioning five years ago . It’s a process that felt more complete last month when he had surgery to remove his breasts.

Translation: Sebastion (Jesus, can’t these dykes spell?) is a wimminz. At first I assumed she had an anal marriage to another wimminz, named Angel; but, it gets funnier.

With Father’s Day approaching, Sabastion finds himself thinking about gender roles and what it means to be a dad. He wants Jaxen, their 20-month-old son, to have as normal a childhood as possible.

And for the first time, he now feels at ease inside his own body. He hopes Jaxen will see that difference.

We get it. CNN is trying to sully Father’s Day, by listing young Jaxen’s mom as his dad. What they later discuss is who Jaxen’s dad actually is.

They both knew they wanted to be parents. After they were married in 2016, they agreed that Sabastion would carry their child — a decision, Angel Sparks says, that wasn’t taken lightly.

Like many transgender men and women, they had been taking medication to increase the testosterone or estrogen in their bodies. So to make a baby, they briefly stopped taking their hormone pills.

The couple conceived their son the conventional way, even though their biological roles at the time were not compatible with how they saw themselves.
“Getting pregnant was fine,” Angel says. “Trying to stay pregnant was difficult.”

The first time they tried, Sabastion miscarried. When he got pregnant with Jaxen, they worried another miscarriage could happen.

So, Jaxen’s “dad” is actually his mother, and his “mom” is actually his father. Typical clownworld shit. Got it. Here’s a photograph of the man called mommy…

That’s a really convincing tranny.

Read More

CNN: Transgender Father’s Day

Александр Николаевич Волков: Pomegranate Tea House (1924)

Our Muslim brothers are, right now, celebrating the end of the Ramadan fast. I wish them well. While I have no antipathy toward Muslim men, and I don’t intend to consciously disrespect any man who reads here, this joyous event opens up the possibility of discussing a constellation of widespread misconceptions among North Americans.

Too often I see brothers idealizing Islam, as a way to fight feminism. Their delusion centers around Hollywood stereotypes of Muslim men as strong and in charge, and Muslim women as chaste, obedient, modest, sweet and helpful.

This bit of propaganda is more than just a factor in the widespread Islamophilia I see among men on the internet. It has the potential to be quite dangerous. Young men pass around the meme that one needs only to immigrate to some Muslim country and marry a Muslim chick, or to import a mail-order Muslim wimminz to the U.S.A., and he will have the makings of a trouble-free family.

This is naïve at best.

I have known many Muslim women, and fucked a few, and my experience suggests that Muslimahs are possessed of all the evil qualities of American whores. The only difference I was able to ferret out is an added propensity for being excellent liars. Where the American bitch will take pride in her calling as harlot, the Muslim woman is an excellent pretender in public. When the doors shut behind her, she’s as dirty as any Las Vegas barfly.

Of course, I don’t expect a young brother to take my word for any of this. In honor of the holiday, we’ll dispense with my useless anecdotes, and examine a real-world incident, that illustrate the actual homemaking and mothering skills of Muslim wimminz.

Let’s meet young Ayesha Ali.

Scratch that. We’ll never get the chance to meet Ayesha, because she’s dead as dirt. Tragically, no one knows the exact day she died. She was found in her North London bedroom, with her head caved in, on 29 August, 2013. First responders report that she “had been dead for some time.” Blood trails suggest that she had been locked in her room days before, to desperately crawl around and beg for help, as she slowly bled out on the floor. They estimate that the poor kid died two or three days before her discovery.

Who could do something so monstrous? It must have been her father, right? That’s what the feminist media is always telling us.

Afsar Ali: Forced to fund the murder of his child

Afsar Ali, young Ayesha’s dad, couldn’t have done the deed. Months before, Ayesha’s mom found an accomplice in a faggot judge down in the divorce courts. We don’t know exactly what happened, because in the U.K., divorce court proceedings are sealed. What we do know is that immediately after she walked into the divorce court, skank-ho wimminz Polly Chowdhury was granted sole legal and physical custody of young Ayesha, and her ex-husband was threatened with a long prison sentence if he attempted to make contact with his own little girl.

Of course, Mr. Ali was expected to keep paying all the bills. Princess must continue in the style to which she has grown accustomed, and all that…

Polly Chowdhury: Child murderer

Once free of the patriarchal oppression of her Muslim marriage, skank-ho Polly moved her lesbo girlfriend, one Kiki Muddar, into the home that her ex-husband was paying for. Evidence suggests that the two hateful bulldykes immediately commenced to torturing young Ayesha for their own sadistic amusement.

Kiki Muddar: Child murderer

When rescuers found Ayesha’s lifeless corpse, they made a hideous discovery. Months of brutality were recorded in her flesh. She was covered in bruises, scrapes and bite-marks. Authorities also found a diary which Ayesha kept hidden in her room. It became clear that Ayesha had been subjected to considerable psychological stress, and the two dykes appear to have “brainwashed” her into believing that she deserved the abuse they randomly dished out.

When they weren’t torturing young Ayesha, the two dykes amused themselves by taunting her father in text messages, saying things like:

“Your daughter will soon be dead”

and

“You have no right to ever love your evil daughter”

One would think that these two empowered feminist wimminz, who had treated a little girl so badly, would be given some prison sentence commensurate with their crimes. A sentence of life in prison would not be unreasonable. It was not to be. They were lavished with sympathy in the British press, and the courts have so far treated them as “victims” in the whole affair. Skank-ho mommy got 13 years, and her dyke girlfriend got 18 years, and both are due to be released long before their sentences run out, so that they can go do it again to some other kid. In the meantime, Ayesha won’t be celebrating any more holidays, and her father has been effectively destroyed.

Ayesha Ali, dead at eight-years old. RIP

Read More

BBC: Bizarre Relationship Led To Killing

ITV News: Mother Who Tortured Daughter Jailed

One of the greatest parts of being a man is the drive to learn, simply for learning’s sake. The manosphere has been an interesting place for me to burn spare time, simply because there are so many talented people in residence who know all sorts of shit I don’t. Here I can talk to attorneys, plumbers, physicians, carpenters, social scientists, diesel mechanics, and engineers. Ya boy Boxer knows nothing about these sorts of things, and he appreciates all of you for expanding his horizons.

Like everyone else, Boxer has his own areas of competence. Arcane arguments in linguistics and philosophy of language are one. Epistemology is another. Aside from its primary focus, as a survival guide for younger guys, this blog functions as a way for me to give back some free knowledge to the community that has been so generous with me.

Down below, Gunner takes issue with Pascal’s work. In doing so, he’s joined some truly great minds (like Descartes). He also makes some problematic generalizations. We should parse one in detail.

Pascal’s wager fails on two counts with respect to Christianity. (1) Works don’t achieve salvation, belief does. Keeping the various rules isn’t sufficient.

For the sake of argument, let’s grant that the New Testament is a series of true propositions. With this as background, Gunner is correct that good works alone is not a sufficient condition for salvation. Gunner is incorrect in arguing that belief as a sufficient condition for salvation. From the New Testament:

One must note that the word ‘belief’ does not appear as a part of the argument. Moreover, Gunner’s exegesis seems to deprecate the importance of works. Works are described here as the outward manifestation of faith.

Now, it might be that Gunner is apostatizing from Christianity, and attempting to re-write the text, and start his own religious movement. I don’t believe this to be the case, but I want to cover the possibility. A charitable reading of his argument suggests a more likely scenario. Gunner is conflating the notion of ‘belief’ with that of ‘faith’. This is not at all uncommon, because ‘faith’ is one of those English words with a tremendous lexical range, and people commonly use it to describe a variety of dissimilar states-of-affairs. Let’s go through a few examples…

• Faith as a feeling of surety or confidence,
• Faith as an adherence to certain precepts,
• Faith as trust in some modal claim, and,
• Faith as a practical commitment to some set of ontological or ethical claims, with no evidence of their material existence.

None of these things rise to the epistemological level of ‘belief’ per se. Moreover, most people who use the word ‘faith’ to describe their own internal psychology will not posit the whole range of definitions.

Example: Suppose Person X describes his own faith as a commitment to follow the rules laid down by St. Paul in the New Testament. He’s probably not going to also posit that he trusts the possibility that those rules exist someplace in the universe. ‘Faith’ in Person X’ parlance, in this context, is ‘faith in’ the utility of an abstract system, rather than ‘faith in’ the existence of God. It’s entirely possible for Person X to have both types of faith, but given that they take different types of subjects, the meaning of the word is different in each claim.

What St. Paul is promoting in James, above, seems to correspond to our second example. If you have faith, in this context, you will follow the positive duties, and those will manifest in a distinctly material fashion. The bible talks about charity, and your faith will entail donations, or works of service, or at least going out of your way to be kind to people. The works are not faith, and neither the works, nor the faith, are beliefs, but the works follow from faith, when we read it in this context.

Belief is qualitatively different from faith, in that if I believe some proposition p, then p features in a network of associated beliefs which form the backdrop of my existence.

Example: I believe that the most expedient route to my car is out my window. This belief is justified by my proficiency in mathematics; but, I don’t need to consciously re-write Pythagoras to justify it. The “straight line” proposition just features in my epistemology. I also believe that I can’t take the most expedient route to my car, because that would entail a) breaking the window, and b), jumping three stories to the pavement. I don’t need a primer on employee rules, nor do I need to dredge up Newton and discuss gravitational acceleration, to come to this belief. The details are less important than my belief. I’ll be able to keep making money and stay out of the hospital if I take a less direct route, and so I do.

There are certain things that, by definition, we can not believe. For example, we can’t claim to believe in a proposition if it has never occurred to us. There are almost certainly new subatomic particles that we haven’t yet investigated. There are probably novel astronomical objects that we haven’t yet discovered. If nobody has ever posited such stuff, then it stands to reason that nobody can ‘believe’ in these things, whether or not they exist.

God, for better and for worse, has some similarities with these examples. It may be plausible to posit that “something created me,” but describing this something becomes very difficult. The best that most people are able to do is to posit a “first cause” or an Anselmian sort of “greatest” being.

So, faith and belief are different words for a reason. They describe different things. St. Paul was careful not to require his adherents to believe in too much. For the most part, Christians are called to have faith, and observers are cautioned to test the faith of the adherents by the material manifestations of the same.

Read More

Robert Audi: Faith, Belief and Rationality

Daniel Howard-Snyder: Does Faith Entail Belief?

Visit: Gunner Q’s Blog

As an amateur sociologist, with absolutely no formal training in that discipline, I enjoy articles like these. Apparently it’s “universally acknowledged” that “a single man with a good fortune needs a wife.” Are we surprised that the hack who wrote this, both for the content and the grammar mistakes, is a wimminz named “Aimee”?

One thing Mizz Picchi isn’t wrong about: The marriage rates in North America continue to decline. While we can (and should) laugh at articles like these, we should also wonder why marriage has such a bleak future. Dalrock is a pretty good place to begin researching social trends, but a huge lacuna in that blog is looking at factors other than divorce. I get the feeling Dalrock is in his 40s or 50s, when I read him, and as such, he probably doesn’t have much day-to-day interaction with kids of prime marriage age.

The most dysfunctional community in North America is the African-American working class. Their dysfunction is directly tied to the historical dishonor of being the first to abandon marriage en masse, and embrace the skank-ho single mom lifestyle. Why did they do this? Their behavior was driven purely by economics. Until the latter half of the twentieth century, Black families in the U.S. were more stable than the norm. Black women, in the late 1960s, realized that they could get more money via a life of harlotry, than they could by being decent wives and mothers, and it has been downhill ever since.

Never wanting to be outdone, the white Protestant working-class in the U.S. has embraced single-mom harlotry and welfare, and now races to the bottom with its nappy-headed rival, for most disgusting ethnic group on offer. They have a way to go yet, but whitey is doing his damnedest to catch up in this race, and countless stringy-haired white skanks on PoF are available (with white bastards in tow), which are perfectly comparable, in every bad aspect, to the stereotypical black welfare queen.

Marriage is not merely declining because of an increase in divorce, and marriage is not declining because of an absence of faith or values. Marriage is declining because it does not make financial sense for marriagable couples to get married. Let’s consider John and Jane, a monogamous couple who live in Seattle, and who attend community college, as an example.

As a single brother, John gets:

• Washington State Need Grant (like the dole for students)
• Apple Health (Free medical and dental insurance)
• QWEST (Food stamps and a small amount of cash assistance, loaded into a debit card)
• At risk youth scholarship

As a single woman, Jane gets all the same shit John does. They hold themselves out as “roommates who live separate lives” when they go down to the welfare and student aid offices, so they have completely separate accounts. For better and for worse, the minute these two lovebirds get married, everything but the Food stamps disappear (and the food stamps that they get will suddenly be cut by something like 50%).

Now, let’s suppose John and Jane want to have a kid. They are suddenly faced with a new choice. They can get married, and get private insurance, or they can get married, and somehow pay 20,000 USD in cash at the hospital, or they can remain as they are, holding Jane out as a skank-ho single mom, and let Uncle Sugar pay the tab.

Not only will John and Jane have a free kid, their combined welfare bonus will suddenly go way up, along with being enrolled in other programs, like WIC nutrition. They won’t even go after John for child support, if they play their cards right. Jane is a single-mom, and she puts “unknown” on the birth certificate. Never mind John, who is here kissing the baby, and holding Jane’s hand.

“He’s just my roommate. He’s just here for support, and sheeeit.”

If you think this doesn’t happen, you’re crazy. I used to teach at just such a community college, in Washington, and I saw it happen constantly. I couldn’t fault any of the kids who did it, either. There’s no downside to being shack-up parents in this society, and grievous financial penalties for being married.

Sites like Dalrock constantly review the drawbacks men face when getting married, but they also often ignore the very real incentives that appeal to both men and women, in staying single. Moreover, much of the manosphere is pointed at men age 35+, which has almost no relevance to the lives of 20-something kids. Should Jane get a divorce from John after a couple of years, what do you think her payout will be? The answer, of course, is nothing. By this we know that the incentives for staying single factor at least as much into the decision not to marry, as the fear of eventual divorce.