Supply and demand – don't be a number on a blue pill farm

[ChristopherParticipant 2478]

Stories like the recent ‘ignore rape’ thread based on a new york times story would seem to be yet another tactic by the system and its msm to control men and shame men into staying with todays ‘f~~~ed in the head by feminism’ women. Such stories also seem to indicate that the supply to demand ratio must be changing. Supply of men willing to marry must be noticeably decreasing AND demand/number of women seeking a marriage partner is therefore likely increasing.

In the current flawed global banking/economic system – when private banks ‘socalled’ crashed in 2008 – the citizens of various countries were unjustly forced by their socalled ‘govern-MENT(AL)s to pay for private bank bailouts to balance the government books and keep the flawed global private banking system going.

Similarly here its a numbers game – to try and balance the supply/demand for marriage CON-tracts men are being pushed by any means the ‘system’ can get away with to treat men like animals/bulls kept on a farm. It seems surreal writing this yet the reality is the ‘nonsense’ of ignore rape was pushed in the new york times a vassal of the MSM – if it is ever socalled legalised men would be penalised for choosing not to be with/stay with a women they dont want to be with. In effect pushed by unjust law (forced) to continue association, relationships thus more likely leading to impregnate and marriage CONtracts.

Treated like cattle/bulls that are pushed into the cowshed to impregnate the cows (women) – or to be like animals/workhorses to keep providing resources for lazy bitches, keep generating more tax dollars and new tax slaves for the ‘system’ of government control, and keep the whole flawed show on the road. If you marry her than they can divorce rape you – whether you are cohabitating, married or divorced you can be ‘used’ by the ‘system’ and have little control in a marriage CONtract in which the state is the senior partner. The only solution is to walk away – to be MGTOW.

There was a time in the past when men and women played their correct gender roles and family and marriage was a ‘real thing’ – that time is past in mainstream society – feminism has destroyed that. Be FREE be MGTOW.

Feminism was funded by bankers/politicians to create more taxpayers. MGTOW IS FREEDOM https://archive.org/details/mgtowisfreedomblurayready

[ConstantineParticipant 4420]

Christopher wrote:

Supply of men willing to marry must be noticeably decreasing AND demand/number of women seeking a marriage partner is therefore likely increasing.

One can only hope. In 2015, The Daily Mail reported that marriage in Britain was at its lowest level since 1895. Men in some parts of the world are getting wise, but this “ignore rape” garbage just goes to show that wisdom can’t keep you safe anymore either.

Christopher wrote:

It seems surreal writing this yet the reality is the ‘nonsense’ of ignore rape was pushed in the new york times a vassal of the MSM – if it is ever socalled legalised men would be penalised for choosing not to be with/stay with a women they dont want to be with.

Yeah, they’re not above enforcing the stupidest tactics if it keeps their hooks stabbed into us. Isn’t that why “co-habiting alimony” was created in Canada? Because men weren’t willing to marry, they managed to rig it another way; a girlfriend can still receive pay-outs just for sharing your house.

To see what is in front of one's nose requires a constant struggle. -Orwell

[BoarParticipant]

Demand only occurs where something is desirable or necessary. Men are realizing that whimyn are neither.

The sheer irony of this situation is that for decades whimyn have been demanded to NOT be treated as sex objects. Now they are winning, so why aren’t they happy? /sarc

Untamed wrote: Quit complaining and Go Your Own Way in whatever manner suits you best.

[AwakenedParticipant 35216]

For MOST Men, NOTHING GOOD, especially in the long-run, will come from ANY form dating, relationships, cohabitation, marriage, and Fatherhood.

Men are BEGINNING to Watch, Listen, and LEARN.

In a World of Justin Beibers Be a Johnny Cash

[StealthParticipant 5391]

Never heard of this ignore rape. Links?

"Once you’ve taken care of the basics, there’s very little in this world for which your life is worth deferring." -David Hansson. "It’s not when women are mean or nasty that anything is out of the ordinary. It’s when they are NICE to you that you have to be on high alert..." -Jackinov.

[SwimcatParticipant 3600]

When MGTOW becomes a real factor in society, like it has become in Japan, the femileft will react and force men to provide sperm and support to single women. It wouldn’t surprise me to see the government assign an established single man, like myself, several single mothers to directly support. God help you if you fight back and refuse.

[narwhalParticipant]

Supply and demand works a little differently when it comes to relations like this since perspective determines what is supply and what’s demand. Then you have to factor in the quality of the product for sale. From my perspective, I’d say that demand (of women by men) is still pretty high. What changes is that men expect more from women while the quality of supply has good down. This change has mostly occurred due to the high volume of divorce. Men are more aware of the dangers of marriage. At the same time, women are very much aware that there is no need to make a husband happy once he’s locked into marriage.

From a woman’s perspective, I’d say supply of available men is still pretty high. It’s been stated often that women can walk into a bar and get laid anytime they want. Most certainly when they are still in their prime, so to speak. What’s changed on this equation is that women have much higher expectations of men when it comes to marriage. When they do marry, they criteria for divorce is getting lower and lower. Feminism has taught women that they need to expect more from men.

Ok. Then do it.

[Secret Agent MGTOWParticipant 22565]

Constantine wrote:

Christopher wrote:

Supply of men willing to marry must be noticeably decreasing AND demand/number of women seeking a marriage partner is therefore likely increasing.

One can only hope. In 2015, The Daily Mail reported that marriage in Britain was at its lowest level since 1895. Men in some parts of the world are getting wise, but this “ignore rape” garbage just goes to show that wisdom can’t keep you safe anymore either.

Christopher wrote:

It seems surreal writing this yet the reality is the ‘nonsense’ of ignore rape was pushed in the new york times a vassal of the MSM – if it is ever socalled legalised men would be penalised for choosing not to be with/stay with a women they dont want to be with.

Yeah, they’re not above enforcing the stupidest tactics if it keeps their hooks stabbed into us. Isn’t that why “co-habiting alimony” was created in Canada? Because men weren’t willing to marry, they managed to rig it another way; a girlfriend can still receive pay-outs just for sharing your house.

They are trying to push it even farther with dating alimony-type precedents.

Women want everything, but want responsibility and accountability for nothing.

[black_knightParticipant 2602]

Secret Agent MGTOW wrote:

Constantine wrote:

Christopher wrote:

Supply of men willing to marry must be noticeably decreasing AND demand/number of women seeking a marriage partner is therefore likely increasing.

One can only hope. In 2015, The Daily Mail reported that marriage in Britain was at its lowest level since 1895. Men in some parts of the world are getting wise, but this “ignore rape” garbage just goes to show that wisdom can’t keep you safe anymore either.

Christopher wrote:

It seems surreal writing this yet the reality is the ‘nonsense’ of ignore rape was pushed in the new york times a vassal of the MSM – if it is ever socalled legalised men would be penalised for choosing not to be with/stay with a women they dont want to be with.

Yeah, they’re not above enforcing the stupidest tactics if it keeps their hooks stabbed into us. Isn’t that why “co-habiting alimony” was created in Canada? Because men weren’t willing to marry, they managed to rig it another way; a girlfriend can still receive pay-outs just for sharing your house.

They are trying to push it even farther with dating alimony-type precedents.

Wait… what? So you go on a few dates with a woman and see her regularly for say, 2 months, then cool things off because you’re not feeling it anymore, and there’s a chance in the not too distant future that legally she could be entitled to alimony payments?

Fffuuuuuuuuuu……..ck, now that IS insane.

[Author]

Posts