~ archived since 2018 ~

Women just seeing men as ATMs; expectation of men to be providers needs to end

TC1827 · 2019-09-06T02:21:32+00:00

Crosspost "Sexism at it's fucking finest" from /r/MGTOW:Posted by jimmyscrackncorn | 5 September 2019 |...

TC1827

September 6, 2019

30 upvotes

/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Women just seeing men as ATMs; expectation of men to be providers needs to end
Author	TC1827
Upvotes	30
Comments	40
Date	September 6, 2019 2:21 AM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/d0aikp/women_just_seeing_men_as_atms_expectation_of_men/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/women-just-seeing-men-as-atms-expectation-of-men.1064518 https://theredarchive.com/post/1064518

Comments

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 14 points15 points16 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThePigmanAgain 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LeJacquelope 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]TC1827[S] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]TC1827[S] 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

How are you going to enforce monogamy?

I think your reframing tradcon values as sexual socialism/communism is somewhat clever and a cute thought experiment, but it raises some questions.

Should we apply "redistribution to achieve equality" (a classically left-wing to economic problems) to all other areas of life? Does this even make sense? Socialized healthcare and wealth redistribution make sense as these are preconditions to put all people on a level playing field where the basics of life are concerned (everyone needs food, shelter, access to affordable healthcare, access to at least a basic level of education etc.) so that they can pursue what they want. But not everyone wants to marry, have kids, etc.

I myself lean more towards the New Left of the 1960s, which combined classical left-wing ideals on economic issues with civil libertarianism on social issues. Freedom of speech and of expression, sexual freedom, artistic freedom, the right to euthanasia, abortion, privacy, drug use. "Your body, your choice". If anything, I see the current left regressing on some of these issues, particularly freedom of speech.

I do think there needs to be more sympathy for those who are "left behind" when it comes to romance, dating and sex, and more effort into finding constructive solutions. Some alternatives are:

Sexbots, VR girlfriends/boyfriends; arguably legalization or decriminalization of sex work, etc. this is a band-aid that certainly doesn't fix all problems, but at least it helps as a coping mechanism alongside more productive activities.
programs to help men (and women) improve their social skills.
promotion of shared social activities. One areas where the collapse of religious hegemony has somewhat backfired is the loss of churches, not as a place of indoctrination or worse, abuse (in that case, it's good riddance as far as I'm concerned) but as a place where whole communities gathered to socialize regularly. Lots of couples met while at church.

As far as kids growing up in broken homes, well, even kids from middle class families with two parents nowadays often grow up barely seeing their parents, who both need to work to make ends meet. They are practically raised by their Colombian nanny.

I think the root of the problem here are the economic circumstances that lead to such a scenario. The deadbeat dad is such a trope in poverty-stricken cultures and areas because poor socio-economic circumstances often are the ideal breeding ground for what progressives nowadays call "toxic masculinity" - we've had some discussions on that previously (search the sidebar for "violence", "violent", "testosterone"). Lower-status men engaging in destructive behaviors (such as engaging in criminal activities, gang violence or fucking around) in an attempt to climb the status ladder because these environments are so shitty that the only resource they have is their bodies. What's worse, women in such environments will tend to go for violent men in order to protect themselves and their children from other violent men.

Addressing the poverty and precarity that leads to such situations in the first place is, methinks, more important than addressing "promiscuity" or "degeneracy" or whatever you think the problem is. Ensuring that parents don't have to bust their asses to barely make ends meet and can actually spend some quality time with their kids.

[–]insane_gravy 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TC1827[S] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]insane_gravy 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]serpentineeyelash[M] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]banmale 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]insane_gravy 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]webernicke 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]insane_gravy 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]webernicke 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]insane_gravy 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]webernicke 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll admit that this is difficult to find. The closest examples I could quickly come up with were examples in Ming China where same-sex couples had an elaborate wedding (complete with fidelity vows) and would be together for 20 years or so before separating to procreate. Which highlights the problem with trying to argue this from a historical standpoint.

Marriages historically served a major purpose for producing and raising children. If an important part of people's duty to society in premodern cultures was to produce offspring, it would make sense to legally bind the family together to most efficiently raise the children (because DNA testing isn't a thing yet and Dad is the weakest link in the whole equation.) After that, non-hetero/non-monogamous behavior may be tolerated but not sanctioned on the same level as unions producing offspring. Or non-hetero/non-monogamous behavior is outright banned in favor of baby-making couples getting hitched. After all, if you need to produce offspring, forcing same-sex relationships to practice monogamy would rob society of potential children. Historically, without the ability to produce offspring, there is literally no logical reason why a society would enforce monogamy for same-sex couples as a rule.

The difference is that in the modern era, we are overpopulated and don't need to produce children as much, to the greatest degree ever in history. As a result, marriages and relationships are less strictly about procreation and more about the personal fulfillment and happiness of the adult partners. In this case, the other advantage of monogamy (preventing very attractive people from hoarding all the sexual and romantic opportunities) makes just as much sense for hetero and LGBT situations.

For that matter, just because heteronormativity and monogamy may have dovetailed in the past doesn't mean it's impossible for us to do something different now. Nothing about monogamy automatically implies heteronormativity.

EDIT: A link

[–]TC1827[S] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

Not gonna happen.

We already have some socially enforced monogamy. But in the past it used to be brutal. Judging others for their collapse in relationship is shitty behaviour because you don't know have the full scoop and why it didn't work out. In the past it didn't matter whether people left due to violence and abuse, youd still be shamed for being divorced.

If someone is in a bad relationship they're gonna want out and society isn't going to revert back to the 1950s social morals and shame them.

The left will never get behind conservative shaming of other people's relationship or lack of relationships. Plus, people already do pressure couples to stay together for their kids, but if it doesn't work out then it doesn't work out.

Shared custody arrangements have been shown to be fine for the kids. Whereas living in a home where you parents fight all the time isn't. What you consider "better for kids" isn't proven to work in their best interests.

Socially enforced monogamy like it used to be was not better for children or for parents. Tradcon values are not leftist.

The bottom 70% of men in looks being unloved in their 20s, leading to sky-high depression, etc.

Also this is false. 70% of men are not unloved. Yes, the most attractive 30% of men find it easier to date, but that doesn't mean the bottom 70% are unloved. Most still find some success in dating and relationships even in their 20s.

A lack of "enforced social monogamy" also isn't leading to "sky high depression". The depression is due to a myriad of things, most of which stemming from alienation under capitalism

[–]TC1827[S] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TC1827[S] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]heimdahl81 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TC1827[S] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LeJacquelope -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LeJacquelope 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TC1827[S] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]heimdahl81 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Melthengylf 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]turbulance4left-wing male advocate 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]turbulance4left-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]lol1969 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]turbulance4left-wing male advocate 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link