Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Men Now Need More Than Just Money To Be Marriageable

  1. #21
    Senior Member Idis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 07:00 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Dutch, Low German & French
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Age
    30
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    Free & Libertarian
    Religion
    Cultural Christian
    Posts
    124
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    75
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    105
    Thanked in
    43 Posts
    I don't think that the education issue is that much of a problem. A woman can get a degree while she has children at the same time. Especially nowadays, when you can study long-distance or online. On the other hand, you cannot force a woman to choose motherhood if she doesn't want it, not even if you take away her education. At the same time, if a woman wants to become successful at something, banning her from getting a higher education in institutions won't stop her.

    As far as men are concerned, I believe education is important, because it opens far more doors. Also given that today many women are educated, they expect their partner to also be educated.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Idis For This Useful Post:


  3. #22
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    oreiar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    9 Minutes Ago @ 07:01 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Ancestry
    East Norwegian + distant Finnish
    Subrace
    Nordid + reduced CM
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Occupation
    Traditional Craftsman
    Politics
    Family, Nation & Nature
    Religion
    Heathen Worldview
    Posts
    2,145
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,990
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,161
    Thanked in
    556 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    Under patriarchy, Western people fought constantly amongst themselves and those that went on to rule the world did so by conquering other patriarchies.

    So the societal model in itself didn’t bring success.
    Then what did? And how can we qualitatively assess what was lost to Western civilization with the dismantling of the traditional patriarchy? To me, it all seems a bit like a game of "tower blocks". Pull one piece out from the bottom, and the tower may still stand, until you pull enough pieces so the entire thing smashes to the ground. Which single piece which was the most crucial to the integrity of the structure, may never be known for sure. But we can be fairly certain that it would still be standing if none of the pieces were reassembled.

    So my question is: What great societal improvements or developments has come about in the West, which can reasonably be attributed to the rise of feminism and the crumbling of the patriarchy the last 60 years? Do these improvements outweigh the downsides, and justify the reassembling which occurred?

    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    There were winners and losers with the main beneficiaries probably being a clique of rich (male!) Jewish bankers.
    You are just zooming in on one aspect of past Western patriarchal societies. Another aspect being above-replacement level birth rates and a society not being taken over by immigrants. So I'd say there were more beneficiaries than simply bankers.

    I know you're not all that much concerned about birth-rates and a shrinking, aging population, but can you name me one single country which can be characterized as equally un-patriarchal as the modern West, where the women actually make enough children to replace the one's dying off?
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to oreiar For This Useful Post:


  5. #23
    Senior Member SaxonPagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 06:01 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English, Anglo-Saxon
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South Coast
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Self Employed
    Politics
    Free Speech / Anti-EU
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    5,004
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,548
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,531
    Thanked in
    1,361 Posts
    Then what did?
    Superior technology was primarily what enabled us to colonise other parts of the less-developed world.

    This can be demonstrably proven, whereas claiming it was due to ‘the patriarchy’ is not only debateable but (to the extent that we conquered other patriarchies) highly illogical.

    Sure, we achieved many great things under ‘the patriarchy’ but since this means everything that happened pre-1960 it’s hardly surprising. There were also a lot of disasters, however, that the patriarchists are less keen to highlight

    What great societal improvements or developments has come about in the West, which can reasonably be attributed to the rise of feminism and the crumbling of the patriarchy the last 60 years?
    Well, firstly, I am not a feminist or anything resembling one. I’ve never claimed that feminism is the way forward nor praised what it’s accomplished so far. Were I inclined to do so, it would be as difficult a task as you would have in finding any positives that could be attributed directly to the patriarchy.

    Were there any great improvements over the 60 years preceding feminism though? I mean, if we’re comparing like with like then I’m not sure I’d prefer 1900-1960 to the 1960-2020 period by any means. In fact, on balance, I think I'd probably take the latter!

    I know you're not all that much concerned about birth-rates and a shrinking, aging population, but can you name me one single country which can be characterized as equally un-patriarchal as the modern West, where the women actually make enough children to replace the one's dying off?
    Hold on, I always hear this mantra from the proponents of female baby machines but where does this ‘shrinking population’ neurosis come from? Have you actually checked the demographics of European countries from the end of WW2 until now?

    If so, then can you name me ONE country whose population has declined during this period?

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SaxonPagan For This Useful Post:


  7. #24
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Sl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Northern European
    Gender
    Posts
    280
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    67
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    76
    Thanked in
    32 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    Women can and want to marry within their own socio-economic class or even a higher class. There are more and more women in the higher strata of society as opposed to less and less men nowadays.
    And? It's not negative to want to better yourself. More women being educated doesn't mean that men can't do the same. Do you really expect for women to lower their standards just so that uneducated men can have a partner? Plus not everyone wants to get married or have children. Like Idis says, you can't force them. Those who do will do it regardless of their education. And those who don't won't, even if you take their education away.

  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sl For This Useful Post:


  9. #25
    Sound methods Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    11 Hours Ago @ 07:12 AM
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Politics
    Vlkisch traditionalist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,127
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,428
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,470
    Thanked in
    1,071 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Sl View Post
    More women being educated doesn't mean that men can't do the same.
    So you can be unemployed together? Women aren't interested in that.

    What's the point in competing with women (and other men) over a handful of jobs - with quota already ensuring women jobs - and having to spend years first in the most unpleasant hard left environment in society? Lots of women only find out later that their degree is worthless too. And yet they still want a guy with a background similar to theirs. And regardless of how much debt they now have.

    There's no need for so many people in uni and college (yet far more in trade school) - you can't seriously expect men to do the same - the end result won't be more women and men in relationships as women's standard still won't be met.

    One can't place more importance on being 'educated' as opposed to what comes after that, like finding meaningful employment or perhaps finding some husband. Having gone to some college for a few years does not entitle women to millionaires or otherwise successful men, men who have made use of their diploma. And when it's some bullshit degree like women's studies it's even more absurd.

    Successful men, if they don't lower their standards, aren't waiting around for women to finish their studies. They're probably going for someone younger, more feminine and less delusional. Probably much less of an SJW or leftist too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol
    Do you really expect for women to lower their standards just so that uneducated men can have a partner?
    It's an insane standard, quite artificial too. And yes, I do: it would be a good thing if women lowered their standards they now got because of voodoo higher education - it's a status symbol essentially - women do lower their standards when it comes to obtaining a job. But better yet would be simply less women taking this path to begin with, then they won't cultivate impossible and silly standards.

    And especially because this is such a huge thing for women currently - having some college degree seems to be one of the biggest factors preventing women from entering relationships.

    You can't have it both ways. If you find it normal that 50-60% of women go to college and uni, then they will pretty much have to lower their standard if they're ever going to find a long term partner, yes. It's simple math. It's a question of supply and demand. And it will be harder for women to do so if they studied until they're 30.

    Also: "Educated" ... "Lower their standard" ... don't forget schools aren't brilliant these days, standards are lower than ever there. In a great many cases having these big ideas is fully unwarranted and in practice they become the biggest stumbling block to partnering up with anything more than a cat. Somehow this is much less of an issue for working class women.

    In the end you're not offering an alternative or a solution, Sol. You'd make the problem worse I fear.

    Quote Originally Posted by Idis
    On the other hand, you cannot force a woman to choose motherhood if she doesn't want it, not even if you take away her education.
    Apparently you can force women to choose education/career over motherhood just by repeating a feminist message over and over again as soon as they're in kindergarten, so I suppose you can also tell them it's okay to have children instead. Then they're going to want that. It's good that women have the option to study, but it's wrong to push as many as possible into college/uni - which is purely a feminist driven ideological crusade. It's not a path leading to happiness never mind a family.

    Quote Originally Posted by Idis
    I don't think that the education issue is that much of a problem. A woman can get a degree while she has children at the same time.
    Theoretically yes, but that's not the way most women organise their lives, least of all when they're 21. And Europe may just be a little worse in that regard than the States.

    Quote Originally Posted by Idis
    As far as men are concerned, I believe education is important, because it opens far more doors.
    Men have less and less incentives to study or a realistic chance at having a bit of what was once considered a normal life by doing so - hence they don't. And to just take care of ourselves we don't need to study.
    Remember that all worlds draw to an end and that noble death is a treasure which no-one is too poor to buy. - C. S. Lewis, The Last Battle

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Chlodovech For This Useful Post:


  11. #26
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    oreiar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    9 Minutes Ago @ 07:01 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Ancestry
    East Norwegian + distant Finnish
    Subrace
    Nordid + reduced CM
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Occupation
    Traditional Craftsman
    Politics
    Family, Nation & Nature
    Religion
    Heathen Worldview
    Posts
    2,145
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,990
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,161
    Thanked in
    556 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    Superior technology was primarily what enabled us to colonise other parts of the less-developed world.

    This can be demonstrably proven, whereas claiming it was due to ‘the patriarchy’ is not only debateable but (to the extent that we conquered other patriarchies) highly illogical.
    Well, every single civilization in the World was grossly patriarchal at the time, so it didn't leave much room for error. Superior technology and organization was the means, while traditional patriarchy was the motivation. In comparison, what does our modern-day feminized societies motivate us to use our superior technology and organization on? Feeding, clothing and baby-sitting brown people. Abortions... AIDS research... Sex reassignment surgery... You can be very well assured that none of those things would have come about under traditional patriarchy.

    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    Sure, we achieved many great things under ‘the patriarchy’ but since this means everything that happened pre-1960 it’s hardly surprising. There were also a lot of disasters, however, that the patriarchists are less keen to highlight
    Okay, let's narrow it down. Was there ever a time under patriarchy in the West where the People just decided to do away with themselves, and let foreigners take over their own homelands without even putting up a proper fight? To me, and most Nationalists, that is paramount to pretty much any disaster or injustice that may have went down during our thousands of years of history.

    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    Well, firstly, I am not a feminist or anything resembling one. I’ve never claimed that feminism is the way forward nor praised what it’s accomplished so far. Were I inclined to do so, it would be as difficult a task as you would have in finding any positives that could be attributed directly to the patriarchy.
    No, that's simple: Patriarchy contributes to traditional gender roles being upheld as the norm, and contributes to women choosing to have a family and children over career and hedonism, which in turn ensures the existence of our People and a future for White children. Not acknowledging the connection between the rise of feminism and "female empowerment", and the current loss of our Nations, is like leftists refusing to acknowledge the connection between Third World immigration and crime. It's right there, in front of our eyes, and is both statistically consistent and simultaneously occurring. Yet ideological dogmas prohibits people from seeing reality. Are we supposed to just stick our heads in the sand, and come back up in twenty-thirty years time and see where it led us?

    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    Were there any great improvements over the 60 years preceding feminism though? I mean, if we’re comparing like with like then I’m not sure I’d prefer 1900-1960 to the 1960-2020 period by any means. In fact, on balance, I think I'd probably take the latter!
    I hope you're speaking strictly in regards to material standard of living? Do you think there were any Rotherham scandals in England previous to 1960, for instance? That alone, would be a good enough reason to turn back to our previous ways, in my opinion. And then there are of course the heaps of other bad (and worse) merits.

    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    Hold on, I always hear this mantra from the proponents of female baby machines but where does this ‘shrinking population’ neurosis come from? Have you actually checked the demographics of European countries from the end of WW2 until now?

    If so, then can you name me ONE country whose population has declined during this period?
    I'm sorry, but ... LOL. Am I supposed to be satisfied and content with our Nations being flooded and taken over by Third Worlders? You do know Western fertility rates haven't been above replacement level since the 70s? Sure, it took a decade or so for the "female empowerment" to screw it up completely. But ever since, it has consistently stayed below replacement level and continually been on the decline. The only reason our native populations haven't shrunk the last four or five decades, is due to increased life expectancy. But that too is starting to level out. From there on, our numbers will take a nose dive, all the while our populations will continue to get older and older, sharing the same living space with a growing and much younger immigrant population, belonging to a culture which is highly patriarchal. A recipe for disaster, one would imagine? Time to take this shit serious.
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

  12. #27
    Senior Member SaxonPagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 06:01 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English, Anglo-Saxon
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South Coast
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Self Employed
    Politics
    Free Speech / Anti-EU
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    5,004
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,548
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,531
    Thanked in
    1,361 Posts
    oreiar, were I to answer all of the above point-by-point it would take us even further away from the OP than we are already, and probably round in an endless circle.

    However, immigration appears to be the central theme so I'll just deal with this bit …

    Am I supposed to be satisfied and content with our Nations being flooded and taken over by Third Worlders?
    No, of course not. Neither am I but this is a separate issue.

    My ways of solving the immigrant problem could not be printed on here because they’d contravene a lot of laws, but entering into a reproduction contest with Somalis is not one of them. You see everything in terms of raw numbers but Britain once governed the whole of India with just a few hundred thousand civil servants - we didn't try and out-breed the natives, it was only necessary to control the key institutions!

    That’s something to ponder but if you recall, the OP was about why there are fewer marriages today and the growing number of single mums.

  13. #28
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    oreiar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    9 Minutes Ago @ 07:01 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Ancestry
    East Norwegian + distant Finnish
    Subrace
    Nordid + reduced CM
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Occupation
    Traditional Craftsman
    Politics
    Family, Nation & Nature
    Religion
    Heathen Worldview
    Posts
    2,145
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,990
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,161
    Thanked in
    556 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    oreiar, were I to answer all of the above point-by-point it would take us even further away from the OP than we are already, and probably round in an endless circle.
    Good point, I tend to forget where it all started If only some fascist mod with a predilection for Ordnung would come along and split the discussion off to a more suitable thread ...

    Quote Originally Posted by SaxonPagan View Post
    My ways of solving the immigrant problem could not be printed on here because theyd contravene a lot of laws, but entering into a reproduction contest with Somalis is not one of them. You see everything in terms of raw numbers but Britain once governed the whole of India with just a few hundred thousand civil servants - we didn't try and out-breed the natives, it was only necessary to control the key institutions!
    I get that, and I don't think numbers are everything, as history has shown time and time again. But at some point, lack of numbers does make it an excruciatingly difficult task. And combined with an ever aging population, there's not much potential to turn bring about much change. India wasn't conquered by men resembling the characters of 'Dad's Army'. And 50 and 60 year olds don't have a habit of starting revolutions.

    All the while, the immigrants are in majority and have taken political power, with the strength of the State backing them up. That's not some far-off, farfetched scenario. That's where most of Western European countries are headed within the next 30-40 years, if current trends continue.

    The Somalis are already here, and they're not being shuttled off to passenger ships leading them back to Africa anytime soon. So we have to adjust accordingly.
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Do Men Want Children, Too? / Are Modern Men Afraid of Commitment?
    By Adalheid in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: Friday, July 5th, 2019, 02:30 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 8th, 2018, 08:06 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Saturday, July 8th, 2017, 11:04 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •