I don't know if I'd call myself a hard TRPer or not, but... well shit, if anything your advice is solid and I really, really, really appreciate that there's a movement out there that celebrates and encourages men being men. I dig the self-improvement aspects, I dig the game theory, and I dig the analytical approach. It's outstanding work, and god bless you all and the internet for putting this all out here.

I remain skeptical about some concepts put forth (and it's entirely possible I don't fully understand them), but I think TRP gets a bad rap unfairly. In any case, I digress.

I was looking for some of the studies I've seen in the past to debunk a certain notion over at our favorite subreddit, TwoXChromosomes, that "Reminder: You can break up with someone for any reason, or for no reason at all. You don't have to have a "good reason" to end a relationship."

I found this Washington Post article "debunking" the notion that marriage confers great socioeconomic benefits to the children that spring from it -- apparently some boffins at the Brookings Institution (a moderately left of center think tank, and one of the most cited in policy) controlled for factors like income and time for the parents in marital partnerships, and found that -- by golly, when you eliminate those, they're no better than single parents raising kids!

Who would've known, right? /s

Anyways. I don't think much of modern social science work beyond a cursory glance -- the field is dominated by far too many ideologues who are absolutely utilizing their position of authority to force a certain point of view down society's throats, and they are openly dismissive of competing perspectives. The final paragraph was a darling gem, though, which I just felt like I had to share with everyone here juuuuust in case there were any doubts as to where you, men, stand in the views of our enlightened leaders:

Making single parents get married, in other words, won't fundamentally change the other characteristics about them that really drive their children's success.

Except, you know, increase the income of the unit as a whole and increase the time each parent has to parent. But, you know, you excluded those from your study... because reasons ("conservatives").

And then, there's the money shot:

The good news in this is that family income and parenting skills are more realistically addressed through public policy than marriage anyway.

Oh? That's "good news," is it? I appreciate you assigning a value statement to undoubtedly shitty social "science" data, WaPo, but actually I think that's pretty terrible, considering I'm a male and can read between the lines when you say "public policy."