Not related to the above videos, but one thing I am starting to see as common to the left, is their apparent disinterest in reproducing.  Two conversations I recently had with liberals reinforce this: The one is a 60 year old man with one son.  His son is in a years-long stable relationship with a live-in girlfriend, and when I asked his father if he had any plans to have children, the father was dismissive and indifferent to whether he did or not.  Whereas in generations past, a father would have some interest in seeing his line continue, this modern liberal could care less.

The other example is the company attorney, who is Very liberal. (He headed the local office of Obama's '08 campaign)  We were discussing various buildings near the courthouse, and one mentioned was the Family Court.  He told me that they were the ones to do paternity testing.  Fair enough, I mentioned that I would keep that in mind if I ever need a paternity test done... To which his dead-serious response was: "Just get a vasectomy, and you will never have to worry about it."  He has one daughter himself, who is a career woman, and may or may not ever get around to having a child.

In both cases, there is a complete lack of concern whether or not their only children ever reproduces.  Having only one child is okay...  For some it is the best choice, or maybe the only choice they have.  But if you are going to only have one, either they reproduce... or your line dies.  Liberals seem not to care.

Good. Maybe they will be bred out. My wife and I have 5 kids and would have had more if we hadn't waited 6 years until we were out of college. Had we started earlier we might have had 6 or 7 kids. No hippies in our clan either.

Good. Maybe they will be bred out. My wife and I have 5 kids and would have had more if we hadn't waited 6 years until we were out of college. Had we started earlier we might have had 6 or 7 kids. No hippies in our clan either.

Good for you.  Though didn't you say the one girl was edging toward the Dark Side? 

I didn't realise that you had so many! That's fantastic! 

I've read many articles saying that for some reason, whites have "bean pole" families.

I am in a bit of a pickle, as I want children really really badly, but I want the marriage laws to change. Dating and looking for Mrs. Right has become something of a life and death battle for men our age these days: you property, money, reputation, status, and your own children can all be taken from you or used against you in family courts.

I speak not from personal experience, but from the personal experience of men around me.

I get you, and I totally understand.
Thank Goodness I have a wife (Asian) who fully supports traditional western values and wants us to have many children.   She wants to contribute to out income, but see's child rearing as her primary calling.

It's totally cultural, and it just seem that the well has been poisoned  in the US.      I don't care about my children's skin tone, I care about their mindset.

That is because kids are inconvenient.  I see that in my sister, who is the only one of us to reproduce yet.  She want to do certain things with her life, but she willingly gave up a good, secure job to stay home with the kids. (third one shows next month)  Because motherhood is not just a calling, it is the highest calling for a woman.  It also makes her husband that much more valuable to her, because he is the sole breadwinner, the duty of a family man.  And I am not looking down to those who have a two income home - it's great.  But I think the separate-but-equal roles form a closer family bond, causing the ever-present possibility of a divorce to lessen.

And you just have to deal with the risk, or else not reproduce.  Your choice.  The family laws are not changing, if anything they will get worse.  MGTOWs do have some valid points... but all of their lines will die with them.

I don't think it is that cut and dry. On my individual level, right now, yes that is what I am stuck with. However, after combing the internet for all of my SJW stuff, there are a hell of a lot of MGTOW's out there (regarding what I have italics). Funny thing is, women need men to reproduce as well. I think that there may be results directly because of the MGTOW movement, although I do not say this with any happiness as it is still a reactionary movement that is just about as bad as feminism

Marriage defined is a legally binding piece of paper. The legally binding terms of which would be decided[/defined], possibly by a third party, only at the time of its dissolution. And then that decision is enforced at the point of a gun. - Karen Straughan

Morally, I am not sure I could sign that contract. When all the benefits go to women and all of the burden and responsibility go to the man, if things don't work out. Hell, the very reason for such a divorce could be something as fickle as one spouses perception of 'satisfaction' or 'happiness', something which no one has control over.

Money can be replaced, but other things that are at stake such as professional licenses and the children being used as political weapons is unbearable.

I've seen/heard it with other men, but one of my really close friends had a repeat of the age old story of divorce: She cheated, she drained the mutual bank account which had 30k in it and immediately filed for divorce, and then she took the kid in the court battle when he didn't have a damn cent to fight her with thanks to her talking all of the money.

I have spent and continue to spend my time around women and I wish to continue to do so. In my opinion they make fantastic coworkers, friends, and they're even ok for family members ( ); but one has to tread carefully when the decision for matrimony comes knocking. Not every woman will eviscerate you in the courts, but every woman has the ability to. And the court system will not only cheer her on, but help her do it with the full backing of the law behind her. I liken it to urinating on an electric fence. The fence might be "on" or "off", it might not shock you or it might. But every one has the ability to shock you. So the real question is why would you go around trying your luck by urinating on electric fences in the first place? 

There was a family lawyer of ours who said that "love is love, and business is business". The relationship is the love part and your money and belongings are the business part. There is no reason for your business/assets/belongings to leave you, just because your sweetie decides to.

The easiest way to explain it, is to say that if you already had a child of your own...  You would never be able to ask that question.

As for the rest, a pre-nup and separate bank accounts would head off most everything.  Or at least remove most of the leverage that she might try to use.

If I don't get to raise my own, then it may be even worse than never having had one in the first place.

Apparently prenups can get thrown out  .

If defeatism is your attitude, then the 3GFs have already beaten you.

Maybe so  .

It's just a lot to mull over.

I've read many articles saying that for some reason, whites have "bean pole" families.

1- Zero population growth, aka ZeePeeGee, was taught/preached during civics classes in public schools for many years.  The reason given was that we didn't want to increase our population and overtax our resources.*

2-r/K-selection.   We tend to see children as requiring a greater investment of resources, so we limit the number to what we believe when can provide for properly.







*So instead we let the rest of the world do it, and leave us with overtaxed resources AND outnumbered. 

Good for you.  Though didn't you say the one girl was edging toward the Dark Side? 

Once she was but Julie and I finally got through to her although she still thinks I'm a racist misogynist hellbent on destroying Mother Earth LOL

1- Zero population growth, aka ZeePeeGee, was taught/preached during civics classes in public schools for many years.  The reason given was that we didn't want to increase our population and overtax our resources.*

2-r/K-selection.   We tend to see children as requiring a greater investment of resources, so we limit the number to what we believe when can provide for properly.







*So instead we let the rest of the world do it, and leave us with overtaxed resources AND outnumbered. 

I only have one son, which it turns out we're lucky to have at all. Otherwise we'd probably have 3 or 4 at least. Just wasn't God's will. I can only suppose it's for the best, as multiple variants of my DNA would've spawned a race of supermen.

And marriage is fantastic. Just find the right woman. I had to go all the way to Texas for mine. Sharing the same core Christian values is huge (and not in a weird fundie way).



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Medically... This just pisses me off. It's disingenuous, it's clown shoes, and it's radicalised political correctness. We are doing a horrible disservice to the trans community, they need help as patients, not to have people reinforcing their delusions.

Wouldn't it be just fantastic if a huge number of biologic male athletes decided to identify as female and enter all the women's sports competitions?   
After all, if "if gender is a social construct, and fluid" then the athletes could identify as female just for a few days around the competition dates, then "decide" to identify as male again afterwards.      See how long the whole charade of gender not being biologically determined holds up with the SJW crowd when CIS female athletes keep getting their collective asses handed to them.   

Trolling IRL? I love it! 

Of course trolling IRL.
You're talking with the guy who made sure to fry bacon everyday with the windows open during Ramadan in a country where fasting for Muslims is enforced by law.

Of course trolling IRL.
You're talking with the guy who made sure to fry bacon everyday with the windows open during Ramadan in a country where fasting for Muslims is enforced by law.

One of these days I'm going to have to buy you a beer.