Patriarchy and fertility

We observe high fertility in those nations and cultures where patriarchy is legally and socially enforced, in particular Muslim Afghanistan and Christian Timor Leste. Affordability of family formation has little effect. Clearly males in patriarchal societies are highly motivated to have children. They will do whatever it takes so that they can afford a family.

Thus, if pro social behavior in a patriarchal society is rewarded by a wife and the ability to support a family, you get highly motivated workers and soldiers.

Some people have argued that this observation is psychologically unreasonable “The guys I know don’t want children”

Henry Dampier explains why males in our society don’t want children in his 2015 article “Why no one wants to be a patriarch”

If you want men to join the legions, you make it so that the clearest path to power for a typical man will be to join up with the legions, serve his time, and then marry and be fruitful on his plot of land. If you want men to form households, you given them rights over those households and the families that issue from them. …

… Men lost the right to use legal force against their wives and children in stages. …

… the disciplining doesn’t really go away from society. The switch is just passed on from the father to the policeman and the schoolmaster. The state’s hirelings retain the right to discipline children, although wives tend to be permitted to run wild, especially nowadays, restrained only by their desires and sense of self-interest.

The disciplining also changes from spanking to drugging, often heavy drugging of untested chemicals onto children. …

The reason why no one wants to be a patriarch today is that patriarchs have no more legal authority. They have no formal power over their wives or children. They only have influence. Influence is both fickle and distinct from power. When a child misbehaves in the modern world, there are only a few paths that a parent can take. They can verbally discipline the child (more likely to work in a higher-class household than a lower-class one), they can illegally or semi-legally beat them, they can take them to a psychiatric professional of some kind, or they can feed the kid to the justice system. Schools have their own corrections systems of varying levels of effectiveness.

Further, paternal heads of household can be deprived of their assets and children at any time at the arbitrary whim of their wives. The wife can commit adultery, and the man can still lose his property in the ensuing divorce. The children and the wife alike can be wildly disrespectful to the head of household, and the man has no recourse other than whining.

I was the boss of my family and I found being a patriarch and having children hugely rewarding. But then I am a grade A asshole, and I am not afraid to commit illegal acts, though I tend to consult lawyers on ways to weasel out or buy my way out if caught, before I commit them. It is hard to be a patriarch if you are a nice guy, or if you have respect for law and social pressure, because marriages on the Pauline model are illegal, being marital rape and psychological abuse. Marriage as it has been understood for thousands of years is illegal and criminal, so of course the population is collapsing. Workable families are similarly illegal. Indeed, these days any sexual interaction with women is illegal with the notable exception of hiring whores and escorts – whores, escorts, and porn stars being the only women who are likely to give you explicit verbal consent moment to moment.

Extrapolating my subjective experience, and the subjective experience depicted by Henry Dampier, fully explains observed fertility patterns, for example the very spectacular collapse of Japanese fertility.

People don’t want children as assets. Never have, never will. If you think we can modify fertility with the tax system read Luke 15:11-32 and 2 Samuel 15:2 – 19:6 to gain an understanding of human nature and the human condition.

The problem is that children can be taken away from a man and used as hostages against him. That is why men do not want children.

Marriage and family is outlawed, thus only outlaws have wives and families.

Tags:

66 Responses to “Patriarchy and fertility”

  1. Jack says:

    Both men and women shun reproduction because “muh hedonism”. They wanna have a constant rush of fun, and kids don’t seem to fit this category for most people. The only people reproducing these days are either irresponsible underclass scum or those not prone to regard worldly pleasure in high esteem.

    With men there’s also the issue of falling victims to the (((mass illusion))) of sexual abundance: even though most men masturbate, someone keeps spreading the meme of easy ubiquitous sex with non-prostitutes, someone keeps sexualizing culture despite it being very obvious that society is less sexual than ever in history, that is, actors on the tv screen have sex all the time, while in reality women fall asleep at 10 PM because “muh career” makes them tired, and men masturbate at least on a weekly basis even as they’re convinced that everyone else is having sex because that’s what the television says. The moment men realize that no one is having sex anymore, and that patriarchal monogamy — rather than (((PUA))) — is the solution, will be sown the seeds of restoration.

    With women there’s not much of a problem because they have relatively small brains and therefore do what they’re told without any logical thinking involved in the process, so when told by dykes and kikes to pursue meaningless careers at the expense of having 6 kids on average, that’s what they do; remove the aforementioned dykes and kikes, and tell them that God wants them to be mothers, and they’ll become mothers without objection.

    Women do whatever they are told, but the “men” in charge of society all tell them the wrong things.

    • jim says:

      the moment men realize that no one is having sex anymore,

      I am pretty sure that there are some men, quite a lot of men, a large minority of men, who have a frequently changing harem of half a dozen girls, who have sex with a two different girls a day, sometimes three, sometimes a threesome as in two girls in bed at the same time, several different girls a week, and that most fertile age women, a large majority of fertile age women, are having quite a lot of sex with this substantial minority of men.

      Most males massively under estimate the amount of fucking going on. There is a whole lot of fucking going on. The majority of fertile age women need sex at least every few days, and preferably every day, and are apt to explode if they do not get it. A large minority of fertile age women will go batshit insane if they don’t get it reasonably regularly.

      • Jack says:

        It’s actually closer to the other way around: there is a tiny subset of females I call “astronomical sluts” who have several different partners every week and even several different partners every day, with the vast majority of women not being astronomical sluts, rather, they are content having sex once or twice a week with their boyfriend, and many are willing to go months and even years without sex. I’d say at least 35% of women go months or years without sex, another 60% have sex every few days with a regular partner, and the other 5% having sex with random truck drivers because YOLO.

        With single men, 80% are sexless, 10% enjoy the occasional fuck with regular FWBs, and the “top” 10% have several partners a month. Those in relationships, about 30% are sexless or almost sexless because their woman is either frigid or cheating, the rest 70% fuck on a weekly basis, on average twice a week. So, it’s not that a bunch of alphas fuck the majority of women, as (((self-promoting PUAs))) assert, but that a bunch of sluts fuck whoever they want but most men don’t get to fuck them because there aren’t all that many sluts in circulation, although some men get to fuck them moreso than others.

        Perhaps it’s just entirely anecdotal, but I’ve never met a man who fucks several different new women every week, not to say every day. Meanwhile, I’ve known several women who fuck everything. I mean, where do you think pornstars and prostitutes come from? Astronomical sluthood is real, albeit as I postulated above, only about 5% of women are like that, and super-hyper astronomical sluts, the ones who fuck 3 new men every day, are maybe 0.001% of the female population, but because they always find willing partners everywhere, account for much of the (promiscuous) sex that goes on.

        Truth is, women control the sexual market with such Absolutism that Stalin’s rule would be libertarian in comparison. Makes you think “rape” is in essence tactical guerrilla warfare against an oppressive militaristic vagina-supremacist regime, doesn’t it? One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter! No but seriously, it’s in the interest of married men to have single men become married men, otherwise their own marriage would be endangered. Hence, patriarchal monogamy for everyone.

        Women hear the message: “do and fuck whatever you want” from the Eskimo-dominated media, but let’s be honest, sluthood is still looked down upon in the current year (just wow, can’t even…) by most well-adjusted people, so really it’s a mixed signal they receive, thus, horny women find the socially-appropriate justifications to spin 5 fuckbuddies, while frigids find the excuses to have sex with a short-term bf every 10 months and remain sexless in between. If you have one-super-hyper-horny-but-nevertheless-non-cheating-gf then you’ve hit the jackpot (marry her!), otherwise it’s pixelated sideways Nip-Ginas on your screen every so often.

        (Note: if my estimates don’t make sense and don’t add up, it could be that reality itself doesn’t make sense and doesn’t add up anymore, because we’ve entered the Twilight Zone. But mostly it’s accurate)

        Contrast this state of affairs with one in which 100%, or as close to that as humanely possible, of both men and women have sex every day in monogamous marriage. Clearly, it follows that this is the most sexless epoch ever.

        • jim says:

          So, it’s not that a bunch of alphas fuck the majority of women, as (((self-promoting PUAs))) assert

          The number of women who claim they have a boyfriend substantially exceeds the number of men who claim they have a girlfriend. The only way this can add up is if a large proportion of those girls are in harems. Plus a whole lot of married women are fucking around whereas not many married men are fucking around.

          Truth is, women control the sexual market with such Absolutism that Stalin’s rule would be libertarian in comparison

          On the one hand, this is obviously true in the sense that sperm is cheap and eggs are dear. On the other hand, it is obviously false in the sense that girls really are getting brutally badly treated by all the males that they notice exist. (Apex fallacy.)

          they are content having sex once or twice a week with their boyfriend, and many are willing to go months and even years without sex. I’d say at least 35% of women go months or years without sex, another 60% have sex every few days with a regular partner

          Most fertile age women need sex every couple of days. Less than that, it is difficult for them.

          • Jack says:

            >The number of women who claim they have a boyfriend substantially exceeds the number of men who claim they have a girlfriend. The only way this can add up is if a large proportion of those girls are in harems.

            Lol, no. This is a basic male-female psychosexual difference: a woman would claim that every man she fucks is “a boyfriend”, nevermind that she met him yesterday in a dank club. A man, meanwhile, would describe the very same relationship as “friendship… with benefits, wink wink”, if not with a “who is she, again? I recall her name starts with a B…”. Women who are flings delude themselves just as often as men who are friendzoned about the true nature of their dynamics with the other sex.

            >Most fertile age women need sex every couple of days. Less than that, it is difficult for them.

            Yeah… if by “most” you mean approximately 60%. Not much more.

        • viking says:

          I would have to agree my numbers about 200 and i have gone long periods not bothering with girls while focusing on projects and have been in several LTR so Id say Im as naturally alpha as can be Im also in AA and the 12 step community so am very familiar with sex and love addiction and whats possible yeah there are a tiny tiny percentage of sex addict guys that will have sex with a pig they usually do things like carry pics of there 10″ cock to show girls so maybe theres a few guys with numbers close to a thousand over a lifetime but even movie stars and rockstars rarely can manage this its so all consuming. super sluts are a bit more common but again its so consuming.And despite tinder its not clear promiscuity is actually up above the 70s and early 80s when i came of age

        • Corvinus says:

          “I’d say at least 35% of women go months or years without sex, another 60% have sex every few days with a regular partner, and the other 5% having sex with random truck drivers because YOLO. With single men, 80% are sexless, 10% enjoy the occasional fuck with regular FWBs, and the “top” 10% have several partners a month. Those in relationships, about 30% are sexless or almost sexless because their woman is either frigid or cheating, the rest 70% fuck on a weekly basis, on average twice a week.”

          [Laughs] you have no fucking clue. You are simply pulling percentages out of thin air and stating these numbers are accurate.

    • jim says:

      Both men and women shun reproduction because “muh hedonism”.

      They shun reproduction because marriage is illegal, and reproduction without marriage is painful and unpleasant.

      • jay says:

        The case of cads getting the babes but not the babies.

        • peppermint says:

          Single moms are everywhere with a baby or ten by one or more cads, that’s the nature of reproduction in a matriarchial society like West Africa or the US.

          Sure, some of those men wanted to be married but were pushed away, and plenty of other men are currently stuck in a marriage to women who don’t respect them because they respect women. But how many of the men who reproduced with those single moms actually did want to stay married, and how many of them were the women choosing a man with her pussy and the man being willing to stick around for just long enough until it got boring?

          Every milennial knows from school that men are evil and walk away from wymyn after those wymyn have their babies. But some of us are capable of thinking critically about the situation that a significant portion of our generation was born into.

        • peppermint says:

          …once again I realize that I probably wasn’t clear enough.

          (1) women like cads
          (2) women get to choose
          (3) therefore cads are the ones who reproduce
          (4) the ridiculous imposture that men who would be dads are the ones who reproduce, they’re just oppressed out by the matriarchy, is reverse feminism and equally ignorant of human nature

      • viking says:

        There much truth to this at 56 i would like to start a third family but its too risky There is no way to protect what i have built and im too old to start again.
        That said i think the dignity and financial/ physical security white require for family formation would go a long way towards higher birthrates. Patriarchy is an element but not all guys are patriarchs some recognize it wise to give their wives the checkbook and sometimes the veto. Thats cool if it doesnt get formalized. This is a very complex topic.

        Do we really even want higher birthrates? US is holding steady a lot of worry on right is born of ability to fight off niggers not actual need for white purposes, white tech allows less labor participation and a USA with half the population would be more pleasurable if it was the nigger half gone. We might be able to level all the malls and sprawl and have quaint old towns and dynamic cities only and more wildreness This would naturally leed to patriarchy dignity and security

      • A.B. Prosper says:

        Or maybe many men shun marriage because they don’t really want the responsibility of being a patriarch.

        Its kind of a raw deal for men, essential trickle down power in exchange for a lifetime of slavery shackled to a diminishing good.

        In that regard though not that language the 1st generation Feminists were correct, their movement would also liberate men in different way. Of course social continuity wasn’t in their plan, ah well.

        Its a dumb idea on its face but its not irrational, the core being “new era” “new roles” , of course people don’t work that way

        In modern society with technology would be men 50-60 hours work, woman 10-20 — its a raw deal.

        Many people also don’t especially like children either so that isn’t very motivating.

        Last, there still is an economic angle. Automation increased a lot during the baby bust and even the boom years were a product of basically the world being smashed in WW2

        Its going to be harder to have a family with unstable income. Granted people did in the past but that was pre birth control, pre well everything we take for granted

        I’ll grant pushing women from the work force after mass deportation and with trade controls would increase wages some but it would also speed up automation.

        For a great example, watch some old manufacturing footage than follow it up with How its Made or one of those shows. Modern factories are sparsely peopled.

        Pretty much every industry is like this now, it can be done on-line even when it can’t be done by a machine directly.

        One clerk for 8 self check out machines.

        This creates huge problems

        Now in the past, people just ate it but its not the past. They aren’t doing that and its the right thing to do.

        This situation bottlenecks your middle, you highly skilled and connected will do fine , your poor won’t care. The rest get screwed

        So we either find some way to make sure people have work status and income or just accept we are reaching the limits of our social carrying capacity

        Going back to the 1600’s ideology might work but its going to require far too heavy a hand of the state and more cooperation than is out there.

        • jim says:

          Or maybe many men shun marriage because they don’t really want the responsibility of being a patriarch.

          When men are allowed to be patriarchs, they will do whatever it takes to be a patriarch. We know this by observing times and places where patriarchy is or was legal.

          The criminalization of patriarchy was the criminalization of the deepest and most powerful need of men.

          Its going to be harder to have a family with unstable income. Granted people did in the past but that was pre birth control, pre well everything we take for granted

          The three high fertility non black countries are all extremely poor and provide absolutely no financial assistance to women with children. Men will do whatever it takes – and if the country is poor enough that this gives men leverage over women, that is a big advantage. The more children cost, relative to income, the more women must submit to men, and the more women must submit to men, the more children men have.

          • A.B. Prosper says:

            Are they White countries? Comparisons of other sorts don’t make much sense since European folks are products of very significantly different selection pressures,

            In any case, it will take a complete collapse to get a hard patriarchy. Thats decades at best off,.

            • jim says:

              Behavior of males in Muslim Afghanistan and Christian Timore Leste closely parallels behavior of males in 18th century England. If a man can have a real family, the kind of family that is now illegal, he will do whatever it takes.

              • A.B. Prosper says:

                The Timorese and Afghans come from basically illiterate societies and have produced nothing of lasting worth not even music, art drama, science. Anything.

                Literacy is either country is is around 50% , its 30% for females in Afghanistan

                Both are staggeringly poor and quite backwards, 4th world basically and about as poor as Africa .

                Both are very violent places, lawless, corrupt with staggering poverty, malnutrition and birth defects galore.

                Is that what you want?

                You cannot have a modern wealthy orderly society with pre modern ideology. You can have a healthier ideology than the Cathedral is currently promulgating but tech drives ideology and that tech is going nowhere.

                • peppermint says:

                  — tech drives ideology

                  Typical commie nonsense. It’s not even wrong m8, look at Russia ad China and Japan, they have the same tech we do. We will have nationalism and it will be modern. Heil Hitler.

                • jim says:

                  The Timorese and Afghans come from basically illiterate societies and have produced nothing of lasting worth not even music, art drama, science. Anything.

                  True, but what they do to have a high total fertility is the same as what eighteenth century England did, and eighteenth century England produced science, the Industrial Revolution, and empire. The qualities of their societies that I say we should imitate, are among the qualities of eighteenth century England that I say we should restore.

                  My model is not Afghanistan or Timor. It is eighteenth century England. I point to Timor Leste to prove that if men have the opportunity to be patriarchs, they will not let poverty stop them. They will do whatever it takes.

                  So we set up society so that prosocial behavior, reasonable competence, upholding order, and a bit of hard work pretty much guarantees a man will become a patriarch, and lo and behold, we will get prosocial behavior, order, hard work, and lots of well brought up children.

                  If, however you deny men the opportunity to become patriarchs, they hang out in their mother’s basements and watch cartoon porn, regardless of whether their society is rich or poor.

                  Poor places with emancipated women have the same fertility as rich places with emancipated women.

        • peppermint says:

          » Or maybe many men shun marriage because they don’t really want the responsibility of being a patriarch.

          » Its kind of a raw deal for men, essential trickle down power in exchange for a lifetime of slavery shackled to a diminishing good.

          what the fuck are you talking about faggot? Go beat off into a sock if you don’t like being a man.

          » In modern society with technology would be men 50-60 hours work, woman 10-20 — its a raw deal.

          boo hoo little bitch try to get a uterus transplant then maybe you can raise a man’s children if you don’t want to be a man

          » Its going to be harder to have a family with unstable income. Granted people did in the past but that was pre birth control, pre well everything we take for granted

          legalize discrimination and watch how quickly full employment results

          » One clerk for 8 self check out machines.

          oh no the robots are taking all the jobs! that means

          » So we either find some way to make sure people have work status and income or just accept we are reaching the limits of our social carrying capacity

          fucking commie faggot, you get work status and income from having a job, no one is going to pay you just to exist you little shit why the hell would you even ask for such a retarded faggot thing are you feeling the bern you socialist?

          you create value for other people and then you can capture some of that value and trade it for other goods and services. that’s the way the economy works. being paid to do nothing means you can tell other people to do things and other people can’t tell you to do things, meaning you’re some kind of king. you may want that, but you will never have it faggot bitch.

          niggers provide services for the ((federal government)) in exchange for their welfare money.

          you’re a fucking faggot commie transwoman with a prolapsed pozhole and should kill yourself.

          • A.B. Prosper says:

            Stop acting like a Emotional Leftist Woman and THINK

            In any case, I’m not asking for anything, I’m just telling you actions have consequences and that if you take certain actions, deny people of wages and work they aren’t going to knuckle down and give your ideology kids

            If you want to go all Bible verse read and consider Timothy 5:18 and Luke 10:17 Corinthians 9:9 and Deuteronomy 25:4

            Some people will as they always have but you may find too few people to participate. Evangelical retention is low and LDS fertility outside of Utah isn’t that high. Despite massive recruiting, they aren’t growing

            Also do you know what a diminishing good even is? If I were to marry a woman and support her for decades, she had better be worth it for decades. I don’t love for society or some religious meme . I live for my kin and where lacking myself

            If I decide not to have a wife and kids, I’m not negligent on some manly duty or to my kin who don’t care . I have no such duties to anyone and if I decide that I’d rather bu y say the Witcher 3 than take a women out I’m making a rational self interested choice . 500 hours of fun vs. say 5 hours of maybe fun

            Or for the cost of a few dates i can use a legal hooker where I am at. Or just use Tinder. Why pay dearly for the cow when i can buy milk cheap?

            It get worse when you factor in the cost of children or worse of supporting a a wife . early everything is a better way to use for that limited money

            assuming a decent income, having one child instead of three allows a person to pay off a house in a few years and actually have a shot at retirement

            Modernity. technology , the Internet, T.V. computers , books for that matter (I can buy a book for the price of a date) are not going anywhere and counting on old emotional leverage to work, may not,.

            It hasn’t done shit in Japan and we have no idea how its done anywhere else, Not one developed nation inhabited by civilized races has above replacement fertility and even Muslims are starting to decline

            Marriage is a disaster now in modernity , its a raw deal in modern patriarchy since my support costs stay the same and hers go down.

            I’m well over twenty so lets assume my wife and I stayed married for 45 years, each year after 30 or so her looks decline, her sexual value declines after 40 and her attitude will get mostly worse, They had shitty wives way back in Ye Olden Days.

            Technology, that thing you apparently can’ts see having any impact on reality diminishes the value of household labor as things that would take many hours in a day

            Thus female labor is deprecated, Its not that fucking hard for any bachelor to keep a house clean and anyone who can’t cook (which is also a man’s job) can eat a wide range of healthy food out for less than it would cost to support a wife.

            In any case it may come to the point in which I can have a Fallout style domestic robot and an exo-womb within a generation or so. They already exist and goats have been tested since 1996 (yes 20 years)

            we can also create artificial sperm and eggs and three parent children

            At that point unless a crave female company a woman has zero value for anything except sex or maybe genetic material , assuming I wanted to

            This might mean larger families but it may also mean a family of two humans and a bot and patriarchy goes away.

            As fr you discrimination idea, might work. Its defacto legal against Whites though and all it takes is one cuck to allow in one nonwhite and no White will ever have a job again

            Caste systems are no solution either, too many low IQ or poorly skilled Whites

            that said in a few centuries or less if society collapses the value of a wife and help meet soars, patriarchy is pretty good in lower tech . You have to fall to “before electricity or running water” to get there but in that case the population will plummet and infant mortality will soar . More babies yes, fewer survivors and you still might get no population growth depending on the nature of the collapse

            Also re: status and desire for it. I don’t have much of that so I’m not typical. I’m boringly straight but simply know my limits far too well to care.

            Healthy men Vox’s “Delta” males tend to prefer equilibrium and that’s most men are

            The high echelon guys already have outlets

            Also its way easy to sublimate the drive for status and victory now . They don’t need to lord over a family to do this, video games and other outlets abound and scratch the itch nicely for most. Our lower T levels also diminish this desire a bit

            Its not as essential as it once was.

            Of course dreaming of a serious reaction is fine, I can’t complain about it. I know what this blog is about and I’m fine with that

            Its just a pipe dream though unless collapse happens and even that (c.f Russian collapse )might end up with less children anyway.

            • jim says:

              Reality is that wherever and whenever men have the option that I propose that men should have, and that you propose the state and the state religion should continue to deny to men, the option to be a patriarch, the overwhelming majority of men gladly make whatever sacrifice necessary to attain that role, even if extremely poor.

              And the bible verses you quote have absolutely no relevance to this question. You seem to have chosen them by throwing darts at the bible on the theory that Jesus is a progressive, so whatever comes up will confirm progressive doctrine.

              Or for the cost of a few dates i can use a legal hooker where I am at.

              So can I, at about the cost of two dates, if that, and it is not an adequate substitute. Hookers are only a marginal improvement over masturbation. What progressives offer men is just not what most men want, as revealed by men’s actions.

              Yes, a harem is better than just one wife, but a changing rotation of whores is not a harem. The point of having more than one woman is having more than one woman. If I sleep with several women that is really great. If one of them sleeps with another man that is really bad and I will certainly dump her, probably beat her, and might well kill her. I will be very angry and sad for a very long time.

              Look at the typical male polyamorist. He is psychologically scarred and mentally crippled for life. Having a bunch of whores rather than owning a woman, or better, owning two women, just really sucks brutally. Those guys are traumatized for life.

              It unmans men, as if every day a bully beat them up, and they could do nothing about the daily humiliation but suck it up. Just look at what it does to men. It would be kinder to cut their balls off, which is pretty much what progressives are planning to do to us.

              The typical male polyamorist looks as if a fat blue haired feminist has been beating him up every day – indeed, he would probably love it if a fat blue haired feminist beat him up every day.

              Whores are a marginal improvement on beating off to anime. When men are reduced to such desperate straights, it totally crashes their testosterone and they buy an anime cuddle pillow and weep bitter tears upon it.

              • A.B. Prosper says:

                I’m not a progressive. I admire the Cathedrals effectiveness however. They kick Conservative ass time and time again. They’ve won every significant fight

                What the Bible verse says , repeats is pretty much what every injunction in the Bible says “Stop doing stupid things, it will have bad consequences ” in that case stinting on wages for a short term profit

                Jobs equal babies and a man without work makes a poor father in the same way an ill fed ox makes a poor plow animal

                . Its pretty clear to me that jobs play a big part in the fertility decline . ts a lot harder to get the Homo Economicus modern man to act entirely against his self interest and breed for faith and state

                Unlike you I think this is good. A society that won’t adapt and learn to pay its way, deserve what it gets.

                Now as for the state religion and state restricting things I propose nothing of the sort . I am observing the very low probability of your desired events in relation to the world we live in.

                If you can pull it off or light the fires for the future more power to you .

                Also an interesting note, even Islam is not a solution, Chechnya which is White, Muslim, low status for women , in war recovery and almost entirely rural and not well educated has a very high TFR at around 2.9

                It has every trait a society need for population growth.

                This seems great however it has high infant mortality and neatly half of children, 40% have birth defects if the stories are true , The gives you a healthy TFR on par with everyone else.

                • peppermint says:

                  » I’m not a progressive.

                  » They kick Conservative ass time and time again. They’ve won every significant fight

                  what you are is a coward faggot little bitch transwoman commie, and the synthetic estrogen and testosterone blockers are affecting your thinking

                  » Its pretty clear to me that jobs play a big part in the fertility decline

                  is that so? it’s pretty clear to me from observing my 3d gf and my friends and family that women don’t respect men and thus don’t have their babies, and the reason for that is men are trained and forced to act like faggots

                  the most disgusting thing I have ever seen was the moment when me and my gf had to stand aside to let a huge nigger walk past us in the grocery store, and my gf turned her ass towards it slightly and leaned into the wall.

                  in that moment I realized that all niggers must hang.

                  it doesn’t matter that I pay for things from working and niggers are all on ebt, section ape, and in affirmative action. they can make us stand aside for them, avert our gaze, and hope not to be noticed thinking anything bad about them. that’s what women look at.

                  lefties win because cultures with more stuff can get more advanced faggotry before they burn everything. stopping the process is possible and has been done several times in the past, most notably Restoration England, and the various fascisms.

                  three of these men were successful at stopping lefties: http://imgur.com/esexhxX.jpg

                  it can happen again, and if we lose, we lose everything, so it’s time to stop wetting your pants and get in the game

                • jim says:

                  Jobs equal babies and a man without work makes a poor father in the same way an ill fed ox makes a poor plow animal

                  Looking at high fertility and low fertility countries, it is simply obvious that this is untrue – the Philippines being the most jobless country in the world, yet has reasonably high fertility.

                  One of the things that gives the Philippines their high fertility is that what few jobs for women there are pay even less, and there is no child support.

                  If you look at high fertility and low fertility times and places, the factor that massively outweighs absolutely everything else by far, is whether or not a man and a woman can make a deal to form one household and have babies and expect their partner to be forced to stick to it. Patriarchy is necessary for this, since one household must have one captain, but patriarchy is in itself insufficient – the woman also needs protection that her children will neither be torn away from her, nor will she and they be abandoned by their father. The deal has to guarantee both the authority of the husband over his wife and children and the economic and emotional security of the wife and children, has to guarantee the father and husband obedience and respect, and the wife and children that they will be protected and looked after.

                • theshadowedknight says:

                  If patriarchy is the law of the land and I have a legal path to be a patriarch but no job, I can find a job, or create one, or scrape up a living somehow. If patriarchy is outlawed and I am legally prohibited from being a patriarch, I will be receptive to the life of the outlaw. Jobs are not the problem. The lack of a reason to get a job is the problem.

                  The Shadowed Knight

                • A.B. Prosper says:

                  Can you name a significant victory that Conservatives have won anywhere outside the 3rd and 4th world?

                  I actually agree with the respect and race issue though. No argument here, How you are going to get the state to back patriarchy is an interesting challenge?

                  My guess here is to exercise patience . Never interrupt your enemy when is making a mistake.

                  As far as you guys, at l;east two of them were Leftists. Mussolini was humiliated and hanged and Hitler committed suicide.. They were wiped out by the Cathedral and all their works undone.

                  Ass most thoroughly kicked and Germany is now supine and Italy is chaos

                  I don’t recognize the others on sight. Who are they?

                • A.B. Prosper says:

                  re: the Philippines. A lot of them end up as migrant labor and as slaves in the Middle East Creating jobs like that is a civic failure.,

                  Its also in a fertility decline. It dropped 10% in a few years and its current leader Duerte Harry is not pro natal

                  The drop has has just started but within a generation or two I suspect they will get to 2 and change , replacement or maybe lower.

                  This will improve the economy considerably and the well being of those people Duerte favors a three child policy BtW which is sort of moot as the nation is already there, .

                  In any case fertility is not the be-all end all. That nation whose people I quite like really isn’t fully developed.

                  More =/= better, anyway.

                  what matters in continuity of culture and eugenic births.

                  The current system hurts both and has to change.

                  It does not however have to encourage to poor and low IQ to breed

                  This however is a species wide problem, how do you define it?

                  Honesty we don’t need cheap labor, lower IQ’s at all. We need decently smart, healthy and fertile people, 120 for men and whatever amount for women to prevent regression to the mean

                  That is however 10% of the population for Whites , maybe a bit lower if you factor out Ashkenazim

                  I’m not sure with current tech we even need average IQ people very much

                  That is a problem, in any case truing teh US into a 4th word

                • A.B. Prosper says:

                  Sorry, most post was cut off

                  In any case turning European lands into an undeveloped pest hole like Timor Leste or Afghanistan to get more bio mass for breeding is stupid

                  It fails the social continuity test and is apparently dysgenic

                  If we are really concerned about the future, we need to concentrate on border control and making sure the smart and preservation , i.e actually conservative people have children

                  Eventually we should be able to figure out how to boost IQ at the genetic level . A reactionary state could do this which is something the Cathedral won’t allow

                  In time with gene engineering and especially fetal selection this gets you to Gatttaca meets Lake Wobegon but that was a pretty good social model

                  And note too fetal selection works, it along with medicine mostly eliminated dwarfism and eugenics, abortion has eliminated much Down’s Syndrome

                  Do the same for stupidity and civilization will be far better off

                  And yes it is possible that HI IQ has opportunity costs that lower reproduction, 2.2 surviving guarantees growth . Its doable,

                • jim says:

                  Eventually we should be able to figure out how to boost IQ at the genetic level .

                  Science is dying and technology is stagnating. Our civilization is decadent, and within a few years they are likely to import four hundred million black male military age muslims screaming for infidel blood and white pussy to live on crime, welfare, and voting democrat. Brazil is not going to figure out how to boost IQ at the genetic level.

                • peppermint says:

                  tl;dr you’re a whiny little faggot commie cuckold and wish there was a man who would give you chicken tendies and cuddle you to sleep while telling you how things are inevitably going to work in the glorious worker’s paradise of the future

                • A.B. Prosper says:

                  Peppermint, you overly emotional dimwit . You still haven’t answered my question

                  Name a significant victory the Right and reversal has won outside the 3rd and 4th world?

                  The two closest examples, 2nd world if generous here The Philippines has an anti-natal President and Russia isn’t above replacement fertility East Timor is as poor as Africa, violent, corrupt, backwards . Chechnya is like this too.

                  Also “Commie” really? No.

                  Observing that high unemployment and improvement in automation will probably end up with a population collapse and or more socialism is common sense reality based thinking. since its already happening

                  It happened in 1930 during late patriarchy and we simply didn’t recover outside of a single holiness spiral called the baby boom.

                  The population decline among the more urbanized population is natural;, expected and unavoidable .

                  wanting a more patriarchal culture is fine but unless you have a model that can work with modernity and in the future or you have a collapse you’ll almost certainly fail and fail hard.

                  Here is something else to chew on. Be glad that the Left is afraid of facts, science and especially genetic determinism.

                  With CRISPR and gene drive technologies its becoming every day far more possible to simply change peoples off spring how you want them

                  Someone with real wealth, say a social media billionaire could find a way to change via mosquito bit and contagious disease the genetic makeup of billions . One bite and you are pozzed and your future offspring are liberals at the biological level

                  You have no choice, you won’t even get to pass in your DNA or you get Georgia Guidestoned out of existence

                  An ignorant nation concentrating ion Maor babees is meat for anyone willing be this nuts,

                  That is the world we are building and longing for an imaginary 18th century is frankly bullshit

                  be here now and find a way to improve fertility in the world you inhabit not the imaginary past

                • jim says:

                  Name a significant victory the Right and reversal has won outside the 3rd and 4th world?

                  Survivorship bias. Each variant of leftism overreaches and perishes in chaos, ruin, poverty, mass murder, terror, and unspeakable horror. Progressivism is simply the longest surviving variant. Its time rapidly approaches. The only question is: will some of us survive its inevitable fall?

                  Sample victories of the right and reversal: The English Restoration. The fall of Napoleon. The fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of Putin.

                  Japan and Turkey may well be engaged in a restoration of the divine emperor and the Turkish Caliphate respectively. We shall see what happens. As the US army is forced to wear high heels, some of the subject states of the American empire, in particular Japan, grow restive. Are the Japanese really secular or are they quietly worshiping an emperor who has temporarily forbidden them to worship him? Do America’s nukes still work? If they don’t work, can we still build nukes that do work? If we cannot build plutonium batteries for pacemakers and spacecraft any more, can we still build nukes?

                  As people have started to doubt that we can still build nukes, Japanese emperor worship has come out of the shadows.

                • jim says:

                  Observing that high unemployment and improvement in automation will probably end up with a population collapse and or more socialism is common sense reality based thinking. since its already happening

                  The population collapse is nothing to do with automation etc, since emancipated women in poverty stricken third world countries reproduce even less.

                  It simply a matter of whether or not men and women can enforceably contract with each other to durably form patriarchal families. If they can, total fertility per woman is around six or seven. If they cannot, total fertility per woman substantially less than replacement. If something in between (as for example the fifties where marriage was illegal but socially enforced) then the fertility rate is something in between. The economy makes scarcely any difference, short of outright famine and hard Malthusian limits.

                • A.B. Prosper says:

                  Science in general is stagnate however genetics is improving scary fast.

                  The Us won’t be bringing in 400 million Muslims though. It won’t lats that long without a war and the elite while short sighted know they can’t protect themselves from such numbers,

                  I have no idea of the Republic will collapse, if it does it will get more patriarchal though it may end up taking Russia’s route and have even lower fertility after the ethnic warfare is over anyway.

                  And while I greatly agree with you on the “restive subjects” issue, that doesn’t mean that the modern secular society is in danger of being replaced.

                  I strongly suspect no emperor worship is going i in any case. Japan has rarely been seriously religious and doesn’t have the T levels to make babies . They are far worse off than we are

                  The West has low fertility but parts are basically near replacement. It would take little or nothing to push Sweden to growth . I’ve heard rumors of a Scandinavian baby boom as well , covered up since its all nationalism driven

                  The same bump wouldn’t be replacement in Japan

                  Also none of the victories have lasted and even Putin who physically incarcerated and/or expelled Cathedral operatives hasn’t gotten fertility to Swedish levels much less replacement

                  Amusingly as noted the highly Cathedral Scandinavian nations have pretty high fertility, quite near replacement among Whites . Kick a few kebab out and it could go even higher

                  They are mostly atheist feminist and socialist as well with very sketchy marriage arrangements

                  Actually re: enforceable contract for family formation, I concur. It is important

                  caveat though, you kind of reiterated my point : the economic component .

                  The drop in fertility correlates near exactly to economic uncertainty and decline. Fertility dropped repeatedly well before easy divorce and custody rape , before spousal rape and back when levels of domestic discipline that would be felonies now were quite acceptable

                  Some of this economic decline is caused by women entering the workforce however given the needs of the economy, you’d need a dictatorship to change the rules to keep them out.

                  Almost no business will hire a White man if he can get an easier to control female or a cheaper foreigner.

                  To achieve your goal you’d have to convince men authoritarian patriarchy is better for them , overthrow the current system, fight a race war and be willing to set up a lot of new rules on how business is to be conducted.

                  Possible I guess but not easy.

                  also as long as I rambling, I am still not sure that many as men wanted patriarchy as you might think. Some men do as was noted by y’all they’d do near anything for it but guys gave it up pretty readily, Maybe it is a raw deal for them in some ways.

                  I can’t tell however we’ve had too many generations since proper patriarchy to be sure.,

                  In any case, more people of average IQ solves nothing .we don’t have work, don’t need them really. We need a mostly homogeneous society where the smart people to have three, the median two and the slower, one or none

                  That would be harder to get than patriarchy though a hijacked Cathedral could pull it off I think.

                • jim says:

                  The West has low fertility but parts are basically near replacement. It would take little or nothing to push Sweden to growth

                  Swedish growth is white women having brown bastards to unknown fathers. The number of whites in Sweden continues to collapse precipitously. Sweden is the most extreme case of unmanly whites being cucked by manly woman beating Muslims, and correspondingly the most extreme case of white population collapse.

                  White Swedish males stay in mother’s basement, watch cartoon porn, and weep bitter tears onto their anime character pillows while white Swedish women enthusiastically cruise the streets half drunk looking for beatings and fuckings from darkies, and the more brutal the beating, the more fun the fucking.

    • Corvinus says:

      “Both men and women shun reproduction because “muh hedonism”. They wanna have a constant rush of fun, and kids don’t seem to fit this category for most people.”

      That is a consequence of liberty and technology.

      “The only people reproducing these days are either irresponsible underclass scum or those not prone to regard worldly pleasure in high esteem.”

      Rather bleak. It’s more like people who have the finances or do lack the finances.

      “With men there’s also the issue of falling victims to the (((mass illusion))) of sexual abundance:”

      There is no mass illusion. People have sex. Some more than others.

      “even though most men masturbate”

      Yes. And they also have sex.

      “while in reality women fall asleep at 10 PM because “muh career” makes them tired”

      And how would YOU know of this fact? Please offer citations.

      “and men masturbate at least on a weekly basis even as they’re convinced that everyone else is having sex because that’s what the television says.”

      Or what their relatives or friends say.

      “The moment men realize that no one is having sex anymore…”

      Men are having sex. That is the reality.

      “and that patriarchal monogamy — rather than (((PUA))) — is the solution, will be sown the seeds of restoration.”

      That is one of several suggested courses of action.

      “With women there’s not much of a problem because they have relatively small brains and therefore do what they’re told without any logical thinking involved in the process, so when told by dykes and kikes to pursue meaningless careers at the expense of having 6 kids on average, that’s what they do;”

      How many children do YOU have?

      “remove the aforementioned dykes and kikes, and tell them that God wants them to be mothers, and they’ll become mothers without objection.”

      Men and women are able to make their own reproductive decisions. That don’t need you to badger them into submission.

      • peppermint says:

        my family is fully convinced that the shooting of Tamir Rice was unjustified and unjustified shootings of niggers happen all the time.

        People are not having sex as much as people think. Every man brags about having more sex than he actually has and every woman talks like she has more men in her life who are interested in her than she actually does.

        And, of course, condomistic sex isn’t actually sex. At best it’s a promise to have sex later.

        It may be hard for you to understand, but people lie to each other, and people write fiction and then people tune into the most salacious fiction. The media has a huge role is signaling what sexual activity is normal and is controlled by Jews who see undermining the sexual mores of the Aryan race as revenge and the way to prevent anuda shoah.

        • jim says:

          Tamir Rice video shows a smartass kid shooting it out with police with a pellet gun. Cops did not know it was a pellet gun, and if I got shot with a pellet gun, would probably kill the twelve year old who did it before I realized it was only a pellet.

          Every man brags about having more sex than he actually has and every woman talks like she has more men in her life who are interested in her than she actually does.

          There is nothing stopping fertile age women from getting as much sex as they want from men that are as alpha as they want. Unless society does something mighty forceful and quite drastic to stop them, they will get what they want.

          Which is a whole lot of sex from high sociosexual status males.

      • jim says:

        Men and women are able to make their own reproductive decisions. That don’t need you to badger them into submission.

        Well, actually, they are not able to make their own reproductive decisions, because a man and a woman have to agree, and then stick to that agreement, and have to have reason to believe that the other party will stick to that agreement.

        So, without such agreements being enforceable, very hard to reproduce.

        So. Marriage must be impossible to get out of except for great and grave fault. Each party must be legally and socially compelled to provide the other with sexual comfort according to the desire of the other. If marriage is to be durable, there can be no such thing as marital rape. Indeed it must be the absence of marital rape, marital debt, that is illegal, ridiculous, anti social and despised. Further, each must be legally and socially compelled not only to provide sexual comfort according to the desire of the other, but reproductive sex according to the desire of the other.

        Further, since they must form one household, one flesh, and one household must have one master, the wife must agree to honor and obey her husband. The husband must have the right to physically discipline his wife, his dependent sons, and his unmarried daughters until they become engaged, become married, or reach menopause. And since the wife must agree to honor her husband, he must be entitled to discipline her for insolence and disrespect.

        If a husband fails to sexually gratify his wife, incurs undue marital debt, he should suffer social opprobrium, and a possible fine. If a wife fails to sexually gratify her husband, she should suffer social opprobrium, and be beaten.

        Then, people can make their own reproductive decisions.

        • Corvinus says:

          “Well, actually, they are not able to make their own reproductive decisions, because a man and a woman have to agree, and then stick to that agreement, and have to have reason to believe that the other party will stick to that agreement. So, without such agreements being enforceable, very hard to reproduce.”

          It’s not really amazing that posters here challenge you on even the most idiotic of statements, in particular this one. You act as if YOU know EVERY time what people OUGHT to do. It must truly frustrated you when your wife made her own choices.

          Men and women today are agreeing to get married and have children, with discussion on how to raise and care for their offspring. Their arrangement is for THEM to decide, not YOU.

          “Each party must be legally and socially compelled to provide the other with sexual comfort according to the desire of the other.”

          Which is observably the case today.

          “If marriage is to be durable, there can be no such thing as marital rape.”

          Not for you to decide, but for those living in our society.

          “Indeed it must be the absence of marital rape, marital debt, that is illegal, ridiculous, anti social and despised.”

          Illegal according to him? Please offer specifics.

          Anti-social by whom? Please offer links.

          Despised by whom? Please show me who else shares your sentiments and has written EXACTLY about this issue.

          You think there are a shit ton of people who believe as EXACTLY as you do, yet time after time you fail to offer the required evidence.

          “Further, each must be legally and socially compelled not only to provide sexual comfort according to the desire of the other, but reproductive sex according to the desire of the other.”

          That’s for society to decide, not YOU.

          “The husband must have the right to physically discipline his wife, his dependent sons, and his unmarried daughters until they become engaged, become married, or reach menopause. And since the wife must agree to honor her husband, he must be entitled to discipline her for insolence and disrespect.”

          You live in a fantasy world.

  2. Alan J. Perrick says:

    Marriage can’t be outlawed, but in the public and secular sphere can basically be abolished. Ultra-competive individuals aren’t able to have children and be free from risk regarding those children, so complaints are voiced. However, religious communities that are considerably less worldly don’t have abysmal fertilily because they spend a lot more time doing things that don’t pay as much, an inconceivable hindrence to those who want to have their cake and to eat it, too.

    In a society that allows too much religious tolerance, to the point where prayer in schools has been outlawed by the Supreme Court in obedience to the Heckler’s Veto, marriage is going to be a hard prospect for those who go with the flow. The question is whether things have become too Latitudinarian, as was the worry during the outset of the democratic “American Experiment”, and they probably have, since an established aristocracy re-inforces an actual established church and vice versa.

    A.J.P.

    • jim says:

      Marriage can’t be outlawed,

      In order to reproduce, you need a deal in which both parties agree to stick it out whether they are feeling like it or not.

      That deal is now marital rape, psychological abuse, domestic partner abuse, etc. The deal is outlawed. It is illegal and immoral to even think about it – you get ads on television that equate thinking such thoughts to violence against women.

      • In order to reproduce, you need a deal in which both parties agree to stick it out whether they are feeling like it or not.

        Given the high divorce rate, that is obv. not the case

      • Garr says:

        “in which both parties agree to stick it out whether they are feeling like it or not” — I noticed you saying something like this in a post a couple of months ago; it’s surprisingly egalitarian. The thing is, if a man doesn’t “feel like it” it’s going to be hard for him to “stick it out”; he’s the one who has to do all the work, and if he’s exhausted and depressed he won’t be motivated to get himself into an aggressive state of mind, while if the woman’s exhausted and depressed it doesn’t matter so much; she can just lie there on her back and the man can even lube her if she’s dry.

      • Alan J. Perrick says:

        “Marriage is outlawed, marriage is outlawed, marriage is outlawed”

        In your opinion. In my opinion, the ultra-competitive careerists are getting what they deserve. Thirty pieces of silver.

        A.J.P.

        • peppermint says:

          really?

          First you were pushing the retarded “White women sex strike against White genocide” line, now you’re pushing this “thirty pieces of silver” line, it’s like you can’t stop respecting women.

          Here, this is women: http://www.dailystormer.com/we-can-get-women-involved-in-nationalism-using-this-one-weird-trick/

          The way to get women involved in nationalism is to get Black men involved as PR, just like feminism and internationalism.

          • Jack says:

            Who cares about single women? If you’re married to an obedient wife, it’ll take you about a week to bring her into the fold of hardcore Nazism, and if you have children, you can just raise them into the ideology. Women, actual feminine women who aren’t Feminist harridans, are very easily persuaded… by their husbands. No need to trick anyone using niggers.

            As for single women, again, who cares? You can only appeal to them if they are viscerally, allergically opposed to the Poz, in which case, they won’t remain single for long anyway. If they aren’t viscerally, allergically opposed to the Poz, yeah, pull out a big black nigger cock to attract them, but that seems like an exercise in pointlessness (yes, I know he doesn’t sincerely advocate for that) – because attracting them is pointless. Single women, unlike married women keen on reproduction, have nothing to contribute to WN.

            Anglin: “there is a Woman Problem because women are herd-animals and the Jewish media told them to suck nigger dick.”

            Jack: “there is no Woman Problem because their “involvement” shouldn’t manifest in their oh-so-important opinions being written on blogs and forums but rather in their willingness to raise families for Nazi husbands.”

            You choose which position makes more sense.

            • pdimov says:

              “Single women, unlike married women keen on reproduction, have nothing to contribute to WN.”

              Single women have nothing to contribute to anything, but their value for a popular movement is not in their supposed contribution, but as bait for single men.

              • Jack says:

                Is it, though? What popular movement, that is, successful popular movement which had a real influence on society, other than the “dude, weed” hippies of the 60s, used single women to attract men into it?

                • pdimov says:

                  A popular movement’s ability to attract single women could well be a symptom and not a cause of that movement’s popularity, but either way the inability to attract single women would indicate a problem.

                  But my point is more that people who claim that their movement has a woman problem supposedly because it’s missing women’s valuable contributions actually mean that their participation in the movement doesn’t make them more attractive to women. Contributions are irrelevant.

                • Jack says:

                  I see.

                  The thing is, rightism is considered low-status and leftism is considered high-status, hence 16 year old Tumblrinas and their gay lackeys are almost invariably shitlibs.

                  If it were in reverse, and once the pendulum swings back away from the leftist singularity it is bound to be reversed, being a shitlib will be considered low-status and having testosterone will be considered high-status.

                  To reach that point, the value-system of the (((priestly class))) has to be altered 180 degrees, or as Jim suggests, the priestly class has to come under the boot of the warrior class rather than vice versa, or better yet, both those things shall occur; it is then that this “woman problem” will evanesce. Meanwhile, complaining about the dearth of the single-female-cohort within the movement is actually counter-productive; i.e, it’s better to post pictures of Hitler surrounded by adoring women, which indeed Nazis occasionally do, than to complain about how women will only join hardcore Nazism if hardcore Nazism is lead by niggers, which Anglin recently did.

                  Expecting women to enlist en masse to the Nazi movement is putting the cart before the horse. Besides, I’m not sure that the kind of woman who’ll spontaneously initiate an oration about gassing the kikes would make the best wife-material. If you think politics is supposed to give you high-status in the eyes of a normie, decent woman, you think about it all wrong. Wasn’t Eva Braun pretty normie and apolitical? If it’s good enough for the Fuhrer…

                  This whole “dispute” within the movement is a tempest in a beer cup IMO.

                • pdimov says:

                  Anglin is just mocking the “we have a woman problem” crowd. He understands all that.

              • Corvinus says:

                “Single women have nothing to contribute to anything, but their value for a popular movement is not in their supposed contribution, but as bait for single men.”

                Single women contribute mightily by getting married and having offspring. You’re not that bright.

            • Alan J. Perrick says:

              Silly comment, “Jack.”

              • Jack says:

                Thorough refutation right here, AJP. You’re like a Jew, in that you complain about those who aren’t even in disagreement with you.

                Chaim Shekelberg: “Moshe, thank you for inviting me to this Oriental restaurant, I heard great rumors about it, and to paraphrase the ching-chongs, I judge my food not with the tongue, but with the ear.”

                Moshe Goyvexer: “You are indeed a great epicure, Chaim.”

                *10 minutes later*

                Chaim: “Mmmm, yum yum. This fetus is just terrible – and such small cockroaches. Will definitely visit again.”

                Moshe: “Oy gevalt! Anti-Semitism has struck yet again!”

                Chaim: “It always inevitably does, doesn’t it? I wonder why. Anyway, what happened now, Moshe?”

                Moshe: “They entirely misunderstood my order, those Gooks. I asked for a “miso soup”, but instead they gave me a “mice soup” – and I can see those mice moving around on my plate. It’s another holocaust.”

                Chaim: “Well then, I guess slanty here is going home with no tip this time.”

                Moshe: “Implying we ever leave any tip, khe khe khe. Good one, Chaim. We don’t even leave the tips on the penises of our boys.”

                I guess my point, AJP, is that you shouldn’t complain when it’s unwarranted. That’s a Jewish trait.

        • peppermint says:

          since you probably don’t understand my point, let me spell it out for you: saying White women deserve anything for what they do outside of the home implies that they are responsible for their actions

      • Alan J. Perrick says:

        I’d advise anyone to not get involved in “Peppermint Papist”‘s comments in this thread. He’s not a serious person – very silly, but did you come here to get silly?

  3. Pseudo-chrysostom says:

    There is no such thing as marriage when a thing such as no fault divorce exists.

    Also, marriages should be arranged by the patriarchs of both families.

  4. Ramona says:

    What about Iran? Very patriarchal but fertility has tanked

    • jim says:

      Due to affirmative action two thirds of Iranian university students and graduates are female, and generally come out of university covered head to toe with semen.

      Not patriarchy.

  5. […] A. Donald: Patriarchy and fertility. Patriarchy causes fertility and marginal increases in male economic productivity. It is tantamount […]

Leave a Reply