Saturday, April 10, 2010

Marriage Strike (Boycott) Part 2

Modelautoman writes

Just when did the marriage strike first take conception?

Spocksdisciple responds to Modelautoman with this post

I am not sure that the marriage strike was planned and conceived, I think it was more of a stochastic semi random occurrence which was the logical outcome of the gender war. Many men came to the logical conclusion that women were not worth the effort and started to live their lives accordingly.

This all probably came about during the late 80s with a small but growing number of men following the MGTOW path, as the marriage situation and laws deteriorated the number of disillusioned men reached a critical point where our absence from the dating scene became noticeable I would say around 10 years ago.

A mathematician could probably pinpoint a year when this kind of mating(or not) strategy started to take hold and grow, you could probably pinpoint it based on marriage/divorce and single status census data.
Like all the best political/cultural movements in history this one started spontaneously and then became self sustaining.

I believe we are probably coming up to a point where MGTOW will sooner rather then later break into the mainstream conscientiousness.
When that happens we need to make sure that it's men holding the moral high ground because the fems and women in general will then try to portray us as a viable threat to society and attempt to isolate and stigmatize the MGTOW movement.
We as bachelors need to lead a positive life as an open example to these femnazis and manginas that we don't need nor want their approval/attention.

As I stated, if we lose the moral high ground and PR war I can see feminazis declaring male bachelorhood as being dangerous for society as a whole.
If you think staring at a child in Maine is a stupidly insane law(felony), wait till you see what the feminists may try to put on the docket.
How about "restricted" zones where single males are not allowed to venture?(they have the female equivalent in the Middle East) How about legislation controlling where bachelors can and cannot live? ie. high spec housing and apartments to be reserved for married couples, single mothers and single women, bachelors can live down by the railroad tracks where they belong.

If you think these are silly notions just drop by any radical feminist websites and have read on what they think about single men.
Calling us Peter Pans and trying to shame us back into line hasn't worked, so it's time for stronger medicine. What the feminists cannot and will not allow is for us men to "disengage" they absolutely need an enemy, and if they can't find one, they'll manufacture one instead. Bachelors are a high value and convenient target.
Only by living a proud and clean life by example without feeling any shame or remorse will we communicate the message that life without women is indeed possible, not only that but it can be sweet and men can be successful without women in their lives.

Irlandes writes

A reminder that in most states the prenup agreement is not worth the paper it is written on. State law in most states allows the judge to tear it up if the judge feels the result is injust. So, even in a short term marriage, assume Cupcake will get at least 1/3 of your assets if you have any no matter how many prenups she signs.

Superbad writes
we NEED a SEMEN strike. without babies women would panic. MEN do NOT dream of huge homes, picket fences, wedding bells, and babies. we dream about 1000 horsepower trucks, living in a cabin... with a nymphomaniac... and Chinese food.

Arcangel911 writes

Actually, i dream of a huge house, perched on a cliff over looking the beach, with the size and all the fixings of the playboy mansion... in Thailand. (Eastern European, South American and Asian women only though. Don't need an AW/WW screwing up my dream there, cause they already did it in this country.)

Spocksdisciple responds to Superbad with this post

A semen strike wouldn't work, those women who could not get it at home will get it outside of the country.
What women really hate about the marriage strike is the growing absence of suckers willing to marry them, they can have a kid anytime with some thug or player and they would won't mind having one but they need that extra income which the thug wouldn't provide. Hence they need suckers and the marriage strike is a drought they don't want to see happening.

My guess would be that they'll have babies regardless but they'll raise taxes for everyone else to support their deliberate choice of being a single mother.
Look no farther then octomom for a role model.

Cobalt writes

Superbad wrote: "MEN do NOT dream of huge homes, picket fences, wedding bells, and babies. we dream about 1000 horsepower trucks, living in a cabin... with a nymphomaniac... and Chinese food."

Amen brother. But here's my variation:

Got the log cabin (on a lake). No truck, but got a red convertible sports car (it has 2 seats, which means that it seats two - which is more than enough). Got the willing woman, but she doesn't live with me - even better - she lives 20 miles away. Which means that I get to do my thing, and then put the top down, drive home, and my thing. Got Chinese whenever I want it. And pizza. And KFC. And DVDs from the library (the price is right).

Life is good.