A lot’s been written on the unfairness of feminist-lobbied laws designed to void the traditional marriage contract, transfer wealth from men to women, and generally “empower” the female half of the population to fulfill their instinctual desires with impunity and not have to worry about any negative consequences to their behavior.
Many who call these laws generally “anti-male” fail to make the distinction as to exactly which males are paying to keep the hypergamous carousel spinning. Understanding this is key to understanding why the men in positions of power who have the ability to stop or reverse this legal trend allow and even encourage it to continue.
You can look fondly back at the old days – the days of constitutional rights, equality before the law, liberty and justice for all… but you can only do this as a beta male. The working stiff, the dutiful husband, the loving father, the family man, the good guy – that’s who’s getting screwed here.
Being a philandering alpha male has never been easier. The man who controls a woman’s emotions is beyond the reach of the newly lengthened arm of the law. He doesn’t get falsely accused of rape. He doesn’t get divorced. He doesn’t get sued for child support. He gets what he asks for in the backseat of his pickup truck and then he gets to drive off to his other baby mama’s house where a home-cooked meal waits for him like it’s still the fifties. The women he’s left raising delinquent teens in the public housing projects where the welfare checks keep coming in courtesy of the clueless masses of working betas, the women whom he’s given the very short end of the stick, the women who could seek legal recourse and use the heavily skewed “justice” system against him… don’t. Because… they love him, and who knows… he still might come back. He doesn’t have to worry. The clueless masses of working betas will pay to raise his accidental kids and “liberated” society will stand idly by and watch him continue to make sport of its daughters. Life is good, and the “anti-male” laws work in this man’s favor.
The men who own this place, the men who make the real decisions behind the ballot box puppet show and have the power to override anything an actual elected representative manages to get written down in law – how many of those men do you think qualify as “working stiffs”, or have the slightest amount of sympathy for one? In comparison, how many of them are sociopathic egomaniacs with zero sense of caring or fairness, driven only by an all-consuming thirst for power, conquest, mistresses on a conveyor belt and a citizenry of suckers to clean up after them? Consider this before you label something “anti-male”.
It’s not quite right to speak of a conflict of interest between men and women, although it can often be tempting to reduce the conversation to those terms for the sake of simplicity. The conflict here is more accurately between two different modes of thinking – between the people who produce, provide and support, and the people who exploit their labors. The provider group in this case may be predominantly male and the exploiter group predominantly female, but if you think of this as a “men vs. women” thing, a crucially important fact gets lost in translation. Men cannot choose to become women no matter how much of a sucker’s bet being male becomes, so if you choose to see this as a “men vs. women” thing you will quickly reach a conclusion that doesn’t make sense: men are being exploited here, yet men hold all the cards. Men produce, men provide, men lead in politics and business, all the real sources of power lie with men – it seems a foregone conclusion that men should have no trouble at all subduing women and “winning”. If you look at it as a “gender war”, the fact that the “war” wasn’t concluded with a decisive male victory the same day it started is absolutely unexplainable.
The only way to explain a “war” where the more powerful side loses is to conclude that members of the superior force are, for some reason, choosing to defect to the other side in large enough numbers to shift the balance of power. It can’t be a “men vs. women” thing because men aren’t changing into women. It’s a producers vs. exploiters thing, and men are in control on both sides. As the exploiter side scores victory after legal victory, being a producer becomes more and more of a sucker’s bet, and more and more men decide that the only smart thing to do is to join the winning side. The population-base of producers built by what used to be, in many ways, a pretty healthy and constructive civilization is still the majority, but every day a fraction of it moves over to the other side, and the worse the producers’ prospects become the more this shift will accelerate.
The spirit of the times we live in is not simply “anti-male”. A man’s chances in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are greater than ever – if he’s an alpha.
