Mainstream deeming men with limited earning prospects "ineligible for marriage" or "unmarriageable" demonstrates that women seek to cast aside their own traditional gender roles while continuing to impose them on men. "Unilateral imprisonment".

Prologue: (1) I earn plenty so this is not a personal vendetta, and (2) sure, it's feminism, so the tell that they would focus on women is right there in the name

Nevertheless, to all the men out there who buy into their sacrifices being made in pursuit of some kind of objective equality, are you even paying attention?

Men are still walking wallets. If you don't earn enough, you're "unmarriageable" or "ineligible for marriage"

Women can't even claim they're doing it for resources for the kids, because they're not even breeding at a replacement level anymore! (Well, poor women still are lmao, see the irony?)

What are neurotic box checking wagie Karens offering in return for demanding traditional norms from men while eschewing traditional norms themselves? (they continue to expect a higher earner while they complain about cooking, complain about cleaning, complain about child rearing, and they surely aren't virgins lmao, but just like women of the past, marrying still involves waking upto the same aging, boring face day in and day out).

What kind of idiot men are letting themselves have this inflicted on them? Women be like "iF yOu DonT lIkE iT dOnT gEt One" because they want to silence discussion of how fucking dumb this shit is to sign up for, because it accrues to their benefit

This is not "sell me on marriage". You couldn't if you tried. Rather, this is "I don't understand why dumbfucks are giving up the game without anything in return"

"MaRrIeD mEn ArE HaPpIer"

Umm correlation isn't causation. Given that only men of means are "marriageable", no shit people with money tend to be happier. They would potentially be even happier if they didn't imprison themselves in this manner.

But money doesn't always mean intelligence it would appear since some of them keep getting themselves into this idiotic choice.

Of course, men of the highest means simply work out the traditional role from their women. The rest seem to be settling for some kind of cheap, mediocre simularcum, perhaps thinking it's better than not having it at all.

Wtf?

Sex no longer requires marriage, monogamous commitment, or even giving a first name! Even having children doesn't require any of those (40% of births are to single mothers, and over half of millennial births are to single mothers)

"Statistics about divided homes"

Well first of all, a plurality of marriages end in divorce anyway...why not cut out the middle man? Second of all, a man can choose to be involved in their kids life, invest resources, etc., and those are important factors in how the kid turns out.

Women have been liberated. So have men, but they're not availing of it--what are men waiting for?