~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
[deleted]
[–]5 Endorsed ContributorStayinghereforreal13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
The real agenda is this:
She offers a three-step replacement for the current child support system. First, Thornhill writes that "when informed of a partner’s pregnancy, a man should get a single, time-sensitive opportunity to choose fatherhood.” Second, by accepting, a man would assume all the responsibilities of fatherhood, but by declining he would legally be no different than a sperm donor. Finally, she suggests that for low-income families, state-funded child support should exist.
Translation: Let's use the state's coercive power to get beta bucks. That way we know the checks are coming, and we can avoid having to deal with men who don't excite us.
Alphas nod and smirk in agreement.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'd be for that, if it were so minimal it was near impossible to raise a child on it. Basically, that would make a woman who is pregnant and unable to get the father to agree to father-rights abort the baby over having to live on the meager state-run child support, unless she truly, absolutely thought abortion was murder.
[–]Endorsed ContributorrebuildingMyself0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Then there's still adoption and legal abandonment. Any irresponsibility projected onto men are legal privileges women enjoy today.
[–]Endorsed ContributorrebuildingMyself2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If that happens, MGTOW will collapse it within a generation. It would be glorious.
[–]puaSenator5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
God, the breakdown of the family unit is just getting worse. Women are given less and less incentive to try and make relationships with their children's fathers work. And more incentive to just have kids out of wedlock with shitbags because the state will support them.
I'm not even conservative, but even I have to draw a line. For instance, today on the frontpage there was an article about how a single mother of 4 children from 3 different guys got a chunk of her foodstamps cut. Yeah, it does suck for the children, but mom needs to stop relying on the state to get by. When you take on the ultimate responsibility of bringing a child into the world, you can't take it lightly and need to be prepared for the consequences. She shouldn't have been jumping around from man to man carelessly reproducing thinking that her actions have little consequences because the state will pick up. Instead she should be focusing on getting back with one of the dads I'm sure she's burned but is willing to take back.
[–]1whatsazipper-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It's no wonder the schools have been turned into prisons. Preparation for these children.
[–]jacobman0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Let's use the state's coercive power to get beta bucks. That way we know the checks are coming, and we can avoid having to deal with men who don't excite us.
It really depends on what is considered low income. If it goes by the poverty line then you're kind of blowing this out of proportion. In 2012 the poverty line for a family of four was $23,050. I don't see it as system crushing to throw some bucks that way. Most women wouldn't be so lucky.
[–]angryadult0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I actually don't have much of a problem with that, and it goes back even deeper than traditional American values.
It's pretty well accepted amongst most early societies that the women got pregnant, and all the women and the whole village raised the kids. The monogamous pairing of one man and one woman wasn't necessarily the way things have always been done.
If that plan was put into place, it would mean several things:
I actually see that as living out the RP fantasy. It's the BP guys who will be fucked in this system.
[–]5 Endorsed ContributorStayinghereforreal2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Those systems of communal parenting you say would give every kid a shot out of making it out of poverty are found in cultures like pre-Columbus America, certain contemporary poverty-ridden Africa areas, and stone-age cultures in South American jungles.
Notice any common theme among those cultures: culture-wide poverty, lack of technology and science, and short lives.
Strip away fatherhood, and you assume we will all still have iPads and running water to provide kids. Why? A correlation to the contrary exists, based on what we see in the past 1,000 years. Might there be causation involved as well? Do societies with traditions of involved paternal parenting coupled with representative democracy create more wealth?
Sure sounds plausible. Maybe you are right. We end fatherhood as a culturally enshrined role, and this will all continue on, with men contributing and working much like the are now. I doubt it, however. Take away the role and anxieties of father, and guys will not shoulder the burden of keeping the lights on for everyone else.
And I am damn sure women cannot do it without men.
[–]angryadult-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Guns, Germs, and Steel is a great read on this topic.
To be sure, though, there are some communal parenting communities in the developed world. Not just the mormon polygamists, but there are self-selecting communes where people live in a large family structure, not just monogamous hermits.
[–]kudosxv0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The thing is the man is still paying its just in increased taxes now. Fucking stupid. It should just end at "no" and now you're on your own.
[–]PostGradWarrior6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Women would be paying these taxes too... But we pay enough taxes already.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I'd rather have a viable non-intrusive contraception personally.
Spend a fraction of the state funding this would gobble up on RISUG trials and we just might get somewhere.
vasagel is doing well in trials. i'm still gonna be a silver fox when that finally comes out, so there's always that.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm a few days short of 28. So if it takes another 5 years to hit the US, it'll probably be around 10 before its available in the UK.
Long enough that i'll be too old to really get much out of it i suspect.
But nonetheless, its a game changer. Perhaps too much of a game changer. Cant see the female imperative allowing us control over our fertility after they've had unilateral power over it for so long.
[–]angryadult0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Luckily, if it's approved anywhere that's GRAS, men of status will go get it. I'd happily take a trip to India or Mexico to take control of my own reproductive power.
The feminist imperative will fight it here in America, but that might be a good thing. It'll really highlight the damage of feminists and the inequality in paternal rights, in a very public way. Given that somewhere around 50% of people are men, we might make even more traction after the initial backlash, than we would have without it.
[–]realniggasstandup2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
This is never going to happen and here's why:
1) Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, it is one of their fundamental tenets. The welfare state is alpha fucks beta fucks applied on the grand scale. By allowing a man to abdicate all responsibilities to his child, society is going to be burdened with the cost of raising that child.
2) Leftoids, even though they're the paragons of shifting responsibilities away from the individual and onto society, will never allow this either. Many leftoid voters would be okay with the idea, since they already believe in the whole village raising the child and shit, but they will lose independents and moderates simply because the idea of alpha fucks beta bucks in repulsive; they won't suffer a political blow-back from their own base, but they will lose those in the middle. Not only that, but they are in the pockets of man-hating feminists. These bitches will not allow a man the same rights a woman has in abdicating responsibility to a child, even though doing so would be consistent with their pro-abortion logic. Why? Because they want to punish men for leaving them; women can really get spiteful. Go to /askwomen /women wherever the fuck bitches are on this site and ask them to debate the merits of financial abortions and they'll be doing mental gymnastics that your typical hamster couldn't do.
So essentially, when you have two sides agreeing on this one thing, the reality of financial abortions becomes a pipe dream.
The other alternative is having both parents take responsibility for their child -- outlaw abortion and mandate child support. One side is for it, so there's actually a very good possibility of this happening. If you want true equality in reproduction without shitting on everyone else, vote to outlaw abortions.
[–]someotherdudeagain0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Pater Familias. I like.
[–]_whistler-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
A remarkable article. Much of the argument is sound. But it makes me uneasy, because the basic problem of the system remains unchanged. Regulation of symptoms doesn't cure the underlying disease.
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm telling you, legalize a 3 month period of father initiated post birth abortion, do you know how many problems that would solve?
[–]Opioidus-2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Or better yet, take away the choice for women to opt out of motherhood, abolish no fault divorce, and cut off alimony/child support. Stop encouraging women to study in worthless fields and waste their most fertile years riding the carousel, bring back fat shaming, slut shaming and divorcee shaming so women start to become more attractive to marry for men, and stop normalizing the abnormal.
I despise everything traditional and I love to live in a land where MRA values are in place and true equality between men and women exists, but that's recipe for disaster not a sustainable cultural model for maintaining civilization. Some of us are damaged beyond repair, and even if all things mentioned above were to be put in effect by the powers that be tomorrow morning I still would be continuing my hedonistic, almost parasitic existence till the day I die, but the vast majority of people aren't beyond hope yet. There's still time to go back to a model that got us every good thing we have.
Or we could just continue preaching for a lost cause. Western civilization is suffering from a massive demographic winter and this will worsen the problem and hasten the downfall. Maybe it's better for this whole charade to be done sooner rather than later, so we could all welcome our new Muslim overlords and become Abdul's slave boy, at least then we'll have purpose in life..
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]5 Endorsed ContributorStayinghereforreal13 points14 points15 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed ContributorrebuildingMyself0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed ContributorrebuildingMyself2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]puaSenator5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]1whatsazipper-1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]jacobman0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]angryadult0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]5 Endorsed ContributorStayinghereforreal2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]angryadult-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kudosxv0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]PostGradWarrior6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]angryadult0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]angryadult0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]realniggasstandup2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]someotherdudeagain0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]_whistler-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Opioidus-2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link