Can economic pressures force women back into their traditional role?

[SweetDaddyDom420Participant 391]

Well, my situation is a bit different. Years ago, I was smart enough to place everything I own in my daughters name. And before any of you start on that….. I trust her 1 million percent. She has been a great daughter, because I raised her to be. She would never screw me over in a billion years. I wanted her to have my assets when I am gone without having to go to court or fight anyone for them. But this has the added bonus of making my s~~~ untouchable to any females I might bang. I have a vasectomy. I ain’t getting married, so really, I am risking very little.
As for my income, I deal largely in cash, and I can make my business vanish like a fart in the wind on a moments notice. There simply is no income for a potential snowflakes to come after. So again, short of a false allegation, there is literally nothing a bitch can do to me, and I feel like I have my bases covered on that.
Consider this an experiment I guess. Will report the outcome as it unfolds.

[Anonymous 54]

SweetDaddyDom420 wrote:

I don’t understand some of the comments. I am a construction worker. Not a lawyer, doctor, or politician, but a construction worker. I can afford for a woman to stay at home, or work part time maybe, despite being divorced and having a few setbacks. I worked hard all my life to make sure that I could provide that, if I ever found one worth providing for. I came from poor KY hillbillies. I was given very little to start my life. I just worked hard and used my head. I have other friends in my trade who have stay at home wives, or wives that work part time. Maybe I am missing something here.

Intellecuals gotta overthink the s~~~ out of everything! Hahah

Yeah, they get hungry, theyll be good girls.

[sjt1975Participant 2536]

Not without massive cultural/legal/societal reform, to restore them to their previous pre-Feminist state. Never going to happen. Feminism has knackered the relationship between the sexes (for good, in my view-point). That is what happens when you give too much entitlement/power to a group of people who do not think before they act/speak; damage and implosion. Even if Women were willing to be Traditional again, Men know The Game and that The Game Is Up, so would not agree to have a relationship with a Traditional-Again Woman. In the current legal/societal systems and culture, a Man’s only hope for risk-free sex is with a Flesh Light or a Sex Doll (which is basically a plastic-type female body/face/legs with a plastic pussy); Escorts and Prostitutes are not risk-free and having sex with normal women is risk-infected nowadays. Feminism has screwed it up real good. Well done, women!
#ManOut

[BritGHOWParticipant 2566]

You may be able to force women back to traditional roles but like with so many other schemes forcing red pilled free men living the good life back to the them will be a lot harder.

Also not to put too fine a point on it but would you want to force them into anything? would you really want to share your life with someone who’s technically a slave? Only there because of a Hobson’s choice in which her other option is penury and misery.

[Anonymous 54]

Also, Traditional “roles” are just that.
A role played by an actor.
Its what women needed to do to survive.
Its not real.
Remove the need for survivel and they become their true selves.As we are witnessing now.

So yes. You can hire a starveing actress.

[NoMoreParticipant 1233]

Short answer is no.

Longer answer is that it wasn’t just economic forces that kept women in traditional roles. Yes, women had trouble attending college, gaining high paying jobs, or advancing in their careers. However, there was also the social pressure of staying home, caring for the children and family, tending the house, etc.

This social pressure has been dismantled. I think it was a fair effort to let anyone be able to make their own life decisions, but you will also be responsible for the consequences. Yes, there is still some gender discrimination in the social arena, but it exists in both directions. The problem is that one direction is decried, while the other is mostly ignored.

Economic pressure cannot force women back into traditional gender roles, nor should it. The pressure will reach a point where society will have to make a decision.

Down one path, they can blindly use the govt to force a solution. Coerce or penalize people into forming family units. Tax those dissolving a family unit to subsidize those choosing to remain together. Institute a regressive tax structure on single men. Single at 25 and making 40k, no big deal. Single at 50 and making 100k, it starts to sting a bit.

Down the second path, people recognize and address the inequities in the socio-legal system of marriage and divorce. Custody is joint legal and physical unless showing incontrovertible proof of need for a different custody. No more reliance on antiquated psychological theories of mom being the best parent. Punishing false and frivolous allegations of DV. Recognition of parental alienation as child abuse and punishing it as such. Recognize that a divorce will lead to a less desireable ideal lifestyle for both parents. One will have less disposable income and one will have less time with children. You cannot justify compensating one person for loss of disposable income and ignore the loss of contact with children by the other party. And many other issues that need to be addressed.

I have little faith society will chose the correct path. So no, we cannot force anyone to take up previous traditional roles. Society has changed irrevocably and the financial benefits of continuing the farce is too great. Remember, the lawyers create the laws and their brethren are the ones billing you when you stand in front of the judge. Conflict generates income. What incentive do they have to resolve it?

A co-worker recently told me, "If you want to see who someone really is, divorce them." I have found out how true this is. When your wife drops the façade of being the caring partner, you will witness all of the greed, hate, and spite that she has masked. It is truly breathtaking!

[Truthseeker82Participant 6406]

Women are biologically programmed to desire Chads c~~~ and Sugar Dads wallet. As long as those two entities exist nothing changes. The only left for men is to plot their own course based on what we can control – ourselves.

[Bloody HeartlandParticipant 693]

The only system I’d ever think to go back to would be caveman era. Even then, hunting with sticks and stones doesn’t sound too fun.

"I have the fury of my own momentum." "With this ring I thee wed. Fire walk with me."

[iMickey503Participant 12465]

Have ALL OF YOU LOST YOUR MINDS? WTF people! Are you MAD?

What the hell are you actually asking to go back to?

To a person that if you were ever sick would snuff you while you sleep? Or more than likely, have someone else do it like they are doing today?

And this s~~~ about incentivising women to take these roles as a manner of not only survival but a job? ARE YOU HIGH?

Call women children all you want. But they are nothing that innocent nor are they worthy of a man’s protection. Let alone Cohabitation.

If marriage with a woman or even cohabitation is only choice a woman has then what makes that woman worth 5 cents? These are the same bitches that will kill their own children just to have more time to play video games on Facebook!

The Dirty f~~~ing secret of the MRA fanboys is to go “BACK TO THE KITCHEN” so you can get some pussy on a buffet arrangement. The very thing that got all of us here in the first place!

In all of this, all of you forgot that the reason why this all worked was based on the fact that the person in our homes and around us was giving us the notion that the meatsack had some odd thing of loveing us unconditionally.

You want to go back to where women go F~~~ around on you and at any moment of weakness is able to take you and everything you ever had and f~~~ you over and then CONTINUE the system we have in PLACE and EXTENDING THE SYSTEM WE HAVE IN PLACE?

Its time you understand something. THIS is the future

If you show women they are f~~~ing worthless to a man, then and ONLY then are you going to get women to get the point that they not only see the faults in themselves, but see that the only value they have is not their utility or their bodies, or beauty.

Again, the whole idea of Families is to have a LOVING MOTHER. THAT is the ONE THING you can not regulate. Can not make a law and you can’t make happen to a woman.

So unless you are willing to jeopardize your children, and your own ass, then you are barking up the wrong tree.

WOMEN TODAY are LOST on the majority. And until there is a MAJOR shift. And that would require some pretty serious changes to out modern way of life and that includes an overhaul of the legal system that consequently already uses A.I. in order to produce sentencing, there is going to be no reason for the system or women to change.

Yes, some of you may have great daughters Sure. But even my own sister had to go find her own way before she got the fact what she had was worth something.

Like it or not. Women are no going to settle down, change or be better people until they see that there is no option out there. And if that the ONLY reason they change. THat’ even MORE F~~~ED UP.

We can’t even stop 4 year old from being BEATEN TO DEATH and Scolded with hot water.
We got men that had to LEAVE THE F~~~ING COUNTRY and Assume other identities.

If you’re lonely, GET A SEX doll and a dog. Or move to some very poor 3rd world s~~~ hole, and hide your wealth. And as you need medical care, move back to the state when both of you are old as s~~~ and she has no options or application to Hypergamy up.

But to think that women are WORTH barging with? Have you not heard about the Koran proverbs? THEY STRIKE WHEN YOU ARE AT YOUR WEAKEST.

Just cuz you know a FEW good women does not mean s~~~. The proof that facebook’s database and others prove that almost EVERY woman out there is only a minute bit of attention away from the drama she craves to go f~~~ around with another man should tell you that she would be best off employed to have your children. And that is not currently legal in west. Hell even in CHINA.

Get the thought out of your head and get back to reality.

You are all alone. If you have been falsely accused of RAPE, DV, PLEASE let all men know about the people who did this. http://register-her.net/web/guest/home

[iMickey503Participant 12465]

NoMore wrote:

Short answer is no.

Longer answer is that it wasn’t just economic forces that kept women in traditional roles. Yes, women had trouble attending college, gaining high paying jobs, or advancing in their careers. However, there was also the social pressure of staying home, caring for the children and family, tending the house, etc.

This social pressure has been dismantled. I think it was a fair effort to let anyone be able to make their own life decisions, but you will also be responsible for the consequences. Yes, there is still some gender discrimination in the social arena, but it exists in both directions. The problem is that one direction is decried, while the other is mostly ignored.

Economic pressure cannot force women back into traditional gender roles, nor should it. The pressure will reach a point where society will have to make a decision.

Down one path, they can blindly use the govt to force a solution. Coerce or penalize people into forming family units. Tax those dissolving a family unit to subsidize those choosing to remain together. Institute a regressive tax structure on single men. Single at 25 and making 40k, no big deal. Single at 50 and making 100k, it starts to sting a bit.

Down the second path, people recognize and address the inequities in the socio-legal system of marriage and divorce. Custody is joint legal and physical unless showing incontrovertible proof of need for a different custody. No more reliance on antiquated psychological theories of mom being the best parent. Punishing false and frivolous allegations of DV. Recognition of parental alienation as child abuse and punishing it as such. Recognize that a divorce will lead to a less desireable ideal lifestyle for both parents. One will have less disposable income and one will have less time with children. You cannot justify compensating one person for loss of disposable income and ignore the loss of contact with children by the other party. And many other issues that need to be addressed.

I have little faith society will chose the correct path. So no, we cannot force anyone to take up previous traditional roles. Society has changed irrevocably and the financial benefits of continuing the farce is too great. Remember, the lawyers create the laws and their brethren are the ones billing you when you stand in front of the judge. Conflict generates income. What incentive do they have to resolve it?

THIS GUY GETS IT.

You are all alone. If you have been falsely accused of RAPE, DV, PLEASE let all men know about the people who did this. http://register-her.net/web/guest/home

[JustAnotherGuyParticipant]

The 50s sucked for men, by the way. Stop romanticizing the recent past. If you avoid women, there is no better time than the present. Women walking out on their responsibilities has enabled men to do the same.

Walk away from that social contract. It was always a trap.

Cupcakes are Cold. MGTOW is Absolute Zero.
“Let us wait a little; when your enemy is executing a false movement, never interrupt him” –Napoleon Bonaparte, 1805

[iMickey503Participant 12465]

Anonymous wrote:

Also, Traditional “roles” are just that.
A role played by an actor.
Its what women needed to do to survive.
Its not real.
Remove the need for survivel and they become their true selves.As we are witnessing now.

So yes. You can hire a starving actress.

And there you have the Spark Zaruthrusta of the question.

WOMEN ARE JUST ACTING. And the only thing that keeps them in this position is that the circle of freinds they keep around keep them in these roles.

Again, if it was not for the pressure of other women that not only get that their own acting spoils are on the line, it would be even more of a problem.

And its time men come to the same conclusion. There is some other man that wants what you have. And it’s not just pussy. He’s doing just so that can fill his need for domination since he could not do it on his own.

Lawyers, the CHad, the Drug Dealing crowd, the Single life peeps, whatever.

THe truth is, marriage is a death sentence for women who want drama in their lives and all the TV shows out there can’t give them enough of it.

You want to change things? Start with the making money from womens bad choices and be marketing consultants for you own life.

When they get to the table of a relationship and their family history is their credit score of getting into a relationship comes into play. THEN AND ONLY THEN are women going to VOLUNTEER to be good people.

And no offense, you know where all these people live that make this system possible Yet all of you still think its the woman giving them this power.

Face facts. WE ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN TO US. And we use these new laws to justify it. Well last time I heard, TYRANNY is to be fought at all cost.

And unless you want to end up like me? Its not a good idea to fight it. Same reason why the SFM is not really Growing as expected.

You are all alone. If you have been falsely accused of RAPE, DV, PLEASE let all men know about the people who did this. http://register-her.net/web/guest/home

[iMickey503Participant 12465]

JustAnotherGuy wrote:

The 50s sucked for men, by the way. Stop romanticizing the recent past. If you avoid women, there is no better time than the present. Women walking out on their responsibilities has enabled men to do the same.

Walk away from that social contract. It was always a trap.

So many people don’t get this. The people that enjoyed their lives were in the roaring 20’s at least in the larger cities if you were well off.

And the 50s was an artificial push by the governments to start the social engineering process for population expansion.

Were the men more secure? NO. Did men have more options? Not really. And if you were single, you did the best overall. AS ALWAYS.

Remember WOMEN only were behaved when they had well structured family units or dynasties.
As soon as that broke up, s~~~ hit the fan.

There is a saying that the Grandfather kept things together and s~~~ fell apart when these men died after that. Same goes today.

We are ALL ALONE in this and there is NO WAY you are going to be able to BATTLE the STATE that not only pushes this, but GIVE WOMEN EVERY INCENTIVE TO DO THIS.

And she’s back up with an army of lawyers for the free money that the government’s throw at these people, and organizations and other men that fund this s~~~ on behalf of women.

If you thought Planned Parenthood was about ABORTION You f~~~s got it all wrong. It was WAY more deeper then that.

You are all alone. If you have been falsely accused of RAPE, DV, PLEASE let all men know about the people who did this. http://register-her.net/web/guest/home

[bigboy83Participant 11312]

Lol, and none of them cook, clean, laundry, or even want to mother their kids.

Shit Tested, Cunt Approved.

[Y_Participant 4591]

That is still a bulls~~~ as far as men are concerned.

Instead of making men’s lives hell outside they make it hell inside.

Fact: Japanese men are scared to go home early in case their wives get mad at them for missing a possible promotion. See how they care for you?

Men should b asking themselves this question – and only this question – right now : “How can we replace all f~~~ing females with 21st century innovation?”

Sex bots – check.
Robotic Housekeeper and IOT – check
Artificial wombs – check
Male only cities – check

Then what good are females?

Errr – you got me. Anyone?

[Solo MAN’S WisdomParticipant]

SweetDaddyDom420 wrote:

Can economic pressures force women back into their traditional role?

Why do you want to force women in to ANY role??

Leave them alone.

When women lead, destruction is the destination. -- Me.

[Anonymous 0]

SweetDaddyDom420 wrote:

Will any of them be willing to re-assume the role of mother, wife, sandwich maker, and blowjob giver?

Answer:
No.
Unless she was born in the fifties she will have no idea what you are talking about. And if she was, who the hell wants her now?

[JustAnotherGuyParticipant]

iMickey503 wrote:

So many people don’t get this. The people that enjoyed their lives were in the roaring 20’s at least in the larger cities if you were well off.

The 20s were great if you lived in the cities, but everyone was on credit. Most of the country was agrarian.

The 50s sucked specifically because women had appliances to do their chores (and thus lots of free time), while the men would commute 1-2 hours by train to their job in a city. The men would probably then spend the week away from their “loving family” because it was too expensive, financially and time-wise, to commute in and out all week. You’d come home to a list of demands from a bored wife who had nothing but time on her hands to obsess over things she felt she needed because she was bored.

The man worked all damn week without access to that coveted family that people are all romantic about. And then for a day or two a week, he’d come home, have a decent meal, see his kids for a few hours, and maybe get to f~~~ his wife. If she was in the mood.

The 1950s sucked to be an adult.

Cupcakes are Cold. MGTOW is Absolute Zero.
“Let us wait a little; when your enemy is executing a false movement, never interrupt him” –Napoleon Bonaparte, 1805

[OldBillParticipant]

SweetDaddyDom420 wrote:

So I wonder, will any of them realize what a great deal they had in the 50s?

This is what is known in my business as a gross conceptual error. Your “question” is faulty because it fails to understand the actual reality of the situation. It’s as if you asked what kind of bones are in ice cream.

When you supposed that economic bad times may cause women to change their behavior, you completely failed to account for the many legal advantages women enjoy. Those legal advantages allow women to take money from men regardless of the economic situation. If anything, a bad economy will cause more women to marry and then divorce men. We already see similar behavior with women in their 30s marrying in the hopes of being rescued financially.

It isn’t the behavior of women which has changed. It’s the law which has changed and those changes give license to the worst of female behavior.

Your belief that you’re somehow protected from all of this because you’ve placed everything in your daughter’s name is equally faulty. While there may not be a house, a pension, a car, or a bank account that a wife or girlfriend can take from you, a woman can still take away your freedom.

One phone call is all it takes. The police will take you away and, one restraining order later, she’s living in your house no matter whose name is on the paperwork.

This site is replete with documented accounts of men losing the freedom, their apartments, and their homes to wives and girlfriends. You need to read those threads and you need to believe them before you become the next victim.

Good luck.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[JustAnotherGuyParticipant]

OldBill wrote:

Your belief that you’re somehow protected from all of this because you’ve placed everything in your daughter’s name is equally faulty. While there may not be a house, a pension, a car, or a bank account that a wife or girlfriend can take from you, a woman can still take away your freedom.

Also, just because women haven’t yet figured out how to raid a trust a Jon has set up for kids he had with another woman, doesn’t mean that they won’t. If they can’t have the money, they will settle for making sure you don’t have it either.

If you think you’ve protected your assets, you’re probably wrong. The only protection is to not engage.

Cupcakes are Cold. MGTOW is Absolute Zero.
“Let us wait a little; when your enemy is executing a false movement, never interrupt him” –Napoleon Bonaparte, 1805

[Author]

Posts