Does every man deserve a woman/wife and children of his own?

This seems to be an assumption around here due to it being a norm in Patriarchal societies.Not trying to be particular divisive but I thought it would be good for me to get some thoughts out. Probs not going to change society any time so best not to take this too personally.

I do think Hypergamy is quite healthy. Why should a low-quality male desire to have as many children as a higher-quality one? If you care about the well-being of the group shouldnt you should be happy for a higher quality male to have more children than you.

In the past this system may have been beneficial for the march of civilization. But civilization is not marching anywhere now, we have arrived into abundance and all that is left now is for the gene pool to be improved by hypergamy and producing better quality offspring.

This expectation coming from Patriarchy is causing more and more problems in the modern world.

When sons are born there is an expectation he will go into the world and make money and become successful within the system. This should help him get a wife and have children. If he doesnt get a wife and children he might feel a failure, and more so the people around him will think him a failure. Parents want their son to marry and have a wife to maintain social status. Because men are indoctrinated in this type of individualism and idea of ownership of women and wealth, we see serious thirst and entitlement from the degenerate and broken men. It is a really bad thing when low-quality broken men feel the pressure to 'have' some wealth or women. Their lack of intelligence and morality means they often go too hard, fast and take too many risks to get that wealth or women.

Low-qualty men are having a negative impact on society, and they are no longer useful as farmhands or soldiers, so they will likely just get used and abused by the system. Ultimately, they are driven by ego, insecurity and selfishness, so I would be happy to see them weeded out, the sooner the better. I am not a Christian so I dont believe in salvation. In my opinion hungry, selfish, immoral men who dont care about the negative impact they have on others but only care about their own gratification have little value for the group. A good example is poster Rob Banks. This guy is not concerned at all about the effect he had on a women, no sense of responsibility, guilt or anything, just wanted to 'have' a woman, a virgin too, and now wants another one, people like that cause lots of problems in society.

Hypergamy is perfectly healthy. The top guys should have the most children, the middle guys an average number, and the lowest little or nothing. There is no higher goal for humanity than to improve the gene pool.

This idea that a man can 'own' a woman is now outdated. Men who understand love and relationships also understand that marriage and love are very different, and it can be quite miserable living with one woman in a nuclear family away from friends and loved ones. Even moreso for a woman to be stuck to a man for life, who she realizes is lacking in morality and masculinity, as the vast majority of men born of Patriarchy are.

Public 'ownership' of women by being a good, provider husband is problematic because now for sure many men will not get that. The public, permanent nature of real Patriarchal Monogamy means many men will feel like losers, many living alone in old age, without female company or children around them.

I know my parents and those of my peers would saying stuff like "X is married, so is Y, why arent you yet". Society puts pressure on men, which pushes men too hard, and when failure occurs, as it inevitably will nowadays, it is all the more painful.

I havent worked a serious job for 5 years when I worked in the tech department of a large Bank in London. I only started living when I stopped working. The last 5 years of my life have been great. For me to maintain my low-stress working life (I currently make a little money from temp work and doing some coding which I hope to monetize) I need reponsilbilities removed from me. I dont want to be responsible for a wife and a child financially. We live in abundance, they will have enough anyway, so why put myself in that place. Work a crap job hoping the woman and government will make it up to me, get stressed about financial stuff, and then just lose it all anyway. So many men are like "This is mine and thats yours". I put myself above this type of individualism, because I am the best. I am already the best guy so I have no need for competition to prove anything.

"I work so hard at my job, got into debt to try and impress people, get stressed with all the bills etc so this women better love me alot and make up for it". Nah bro, a woman is only going to love you when you have positive energy. Positive energy is returned with positive energy. You cant buy positive energy with money.

"I worked so hard, this woman is mine and this house is mine, it says so right their on the deeds, this belongs to me cos I slaved away for years for this achievement, I hope the house rises in value so I can feel richer." In the former it's just your turn, bro, and in the latter the house is yours as long as you pay the taxes on it, which will go to the single moms who dont work anyway. Sucks I knw.

Theres nothing inherently noble about work, certainly in modern society. Capitalism is degenerate, how many ways can a spiritual man make money in the west and keep his morality in tact. Work for a financial institution and you are just propagating usury. Work for consumer products company and you are just trying to get people to buy shit they dont need. All the people who contact me trying to sell me stuff, how many are actually adding value to my life, even the net affect of marketing and advertising is negative even when you learn about some good product. So some guy works a job just trying to get other people to buy more stuff they dont need. What's so noble about that, why should he deserve to 'own' a woman. More importantly, even women can do those jobs, so is this even a man, if he spends most of his waking time doing the same things as women, surrounded by them.

I like the idea of a non-Patriarchal society. If we want women to have more children earlier we need to make it easier for them. Ultimately, it may become socially acceptable, even ideal, to have children out of wedlock.

Father son relationships are always strained and intense. Maybe men can raise the children of their sisters as their own, a relationship a bit more distant and relaxed than a typical father-son one. Therefore, every man might have the company of children at home and be part of a family. Higher quality men will also have children of their own, and can negotiate time with them, by maintaining a positive relationship with the mother. I think this was the setup in the video I posted about the chinese Matriarchy.

More importanly, relationships should be private. There is no need to tell the world you have a gf/bf or husband/wife. Public displays of affection are weird, modern and not normal. Often times is causes jealousy and other negative emotions in people. Many men also want to show-off to other men about what they have, and often exaggerate, fuelling the sense of insecurity, unhappiness, and urgency in other men. This just creates a society of harsh, meaningless and constant low-level competition and superficial one-upmanship at the bottom level.

Low quality men should not feel that are losers, and higher quality men with greater access to women shouldnt rub their faces in it. But in a modern, competitive, patriarchal society this is exactly what will happen. Add Polygamy to it and it will be awful for those low-status guys.

Patriarchy rewarded obedient working men who could follow directions but may not have had an internal moral compass. Inner Game is important now to attract women, and Inner Game is related to Internal Morality. Men who dont have that compass, who are poor at creating an emotional connection with women will and should lose in the reproduction game. Internal Morality is the most masculine thing and should be respected by men, not outward wealth or political power within a false or broken system.

As I high-quality male, I see nothing worse in the world than the great number of low-morality, entitled, high-energy ADHD type guys who cant chill out and often cause problems.

TLDR: Patriarchy resulted in a society with unnaturally low quality men (and women) and now it may be better to move into a more eugenic set up which is also less stressful and competitive.
Jokes aside what he says will happen with cybernetic cloning etc. The Orgy of the Will guy has been analyzing this for years.


Gold Member
Is this the same autistic Pakistani that posted all that cringe garbage about the bracelet in the 'new anti-blasphemy rules' thread? I thought he got banned.
I have heard that before the industrial revolution that only around 20% of humans had children. Granted a large number that didn't have kids were due to childhood diseases and other concerns that have been solved by technological advancements.

And if technology is causing society to collapse to an uncivilized state, maybe this is all just a large natural cycle of life.

Hard times create strong men
Strong men create good times
Good times create weak men
Weak men create hard times

Hopefully there is a better/more peaceful solution that to let the entire thing collapse and start over.


Gold Member
No Logos in OP.

I have heard that before the industrial revolution that only around 20% of humans had children
The only societies where this happened were slave societies. Descendants of slaves today do have children, but without fathers, kind of along the same lines the OP is advocating, with male fornicator-hustlers and welfare baby momas.

Society has decayed to a point where you have guys like OP who have become completely morally rudderless.
The thing is, if I personally didnt have a wife and children of my own, but lived in a 'happy' society where most women had 2-3 children with good men, and there were not too many pressures on me, and I could enjoy leisure time, and I had family and community around me, then I think I would be happier there than in modern society.

I'm only talking from my own personal journey so I can understand most men here may not agree.

Number one bummer

Gold Member
One man and one women creates a vested interest in maintaining a civil society. Is it a form of collectivism? Maybe. A more realistic take is its a formation of a micro-state. Having a family has always had a transcendent truth behind it. Marriage was required to move to agrarian societal models from smaller tribal ones, it assured that life was structured, labor could be specialized and that responsibility was divided.

Its hard enough for man to control his covetous nature when it comes to material items in a capitalist setting, when a man is forced to covet a simple natural right, he either turns to violence to meet his end or he ends up as an islamo-fascists or some other degenerate faith. Nothing good has ever come from societies where large amounts of eligible men have been excluded from forming families.

The failure of the patriarchy and subsequent secularization is why you are asking such questions. Its why I support limiting voting to nuclear families, where either the husband or the wife casts a vote. It removes the gender warfare behind politics and serves the real interest of society.

Days of Broken Arrows

Gold Member
This post reads like a parody of manosphere tropes. All the buzzwords and concepts are put to use -- but in a way that's just a bit too dark and menacing.

In the real world, it doesn't work out that the high-value males advance the race. It's often flawed or eccentric rejects with great ideas who do that.

Only in Manosphere Fantasyland do we have a world where ultra-high-value men spend their time breeding obsessively with Nordic women -- when they're not being captains of industry, weight lifters, and classical pianists all at the same time.

This post reads like it was actually written by a Tiger Mom who thinks she can fool us into thinking she's a guy. Maybe you can fool some of the people some of the time, but I'm onto you. Yoko.
The problem with people trying to analyze the future is that they neglect to include science and technology in their calculations. This might have worked a couple thousand years ago when advances took centuries, but now they take mere years if not months, so all projections that neglect scientific and technological advances will be false.

And this is where cloning etc. come in. PUAs always have a blind spot here because they think the goal is women, whereas women are merely a means to procreation. Same with sex. It’s merely a tool, and once a more efficient tool has been created, women will go the way of the dodo so fast it’ll make your head spin. After that people will date for the same reason some people hunt now: for recreation, and most will choose androids because they’ll be superior to biological females in every way.

And sure, some people will still be praying that God destroy civilization. But personally I think God will side with the civilized, because they prefer creation to destruction, amen.


Biological sex aside, I pose a divergent yet relevant question: is procreation a right or a privilege? Should everyone be able/allowed to procreate?

I’m genuinely interested in the forum readership’s perspective on this. You have to take a class, pass a test and obtain a license to operate a vehicle but anyone with functioning genitals can pop out a kid with no forethought and with moderne welfare/social safety nets, little to no consequence.


Gold Member
'No Man is an Island'

No man is an island entire of itself;
every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main;
if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less,
as well as if a promontory were, as well as any manner of thy friends or of thine own were;

any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
it tolls for thee.

-John Donne


OP’s post reads like it was written by a woman.

I shouldn’t respond, but the response is easy.

Restrictions on sex for both men and women exist to ensure peace.

Without them, humans would live like Chimpanzees (or other mammals) with 60+% of men waging continuous war on society (and encouraged and rewarded to do so by women).

Mairrage is nice, but there have been other arrangements in history, such as arranged marriage or slavery.

A society that offers nothing to weak men is a weak decaying society, and almost always such societies are conquered by societies that do offer something to weak men.

Rob Banks

mr_ks said:
...A good example is poster Rob Banks. This guy is not concerned at all about the effect he had on a women, no sense of responsibility, guilt or anything, just wanted to 'have' a woman, a virgin too, and now wants another one...
This is complete crap. If OP had actually read my thread, he would know this. Every single post I made in that thread was based on the sense of responsibility I feel for having hurt this woman. Also, I specifically said many times that I DON'T want another woman. Clearly, he did not read my posts or he is trying to twist my words in order to fit his bullshit eugenics agenda.


Society has become Sodom and Gomorrah. I personally believe that the end times are near, and soon the antichrist will reveal himself. Then all hell will break lose. But that
thought has not stopped me from finding a wife and having children. I want my genes to continue. High class or not every man should find a wife and have children.
The fact that men don't own anything anymore is the biggest problem in Western civilization today. Men don't own women, don't own their children, even their homes. At best men are seen as transient custodians until they are seen as unfit by the government. Men can't even own the culture around them since that is not even considered property. With men not owning anything they don't have skin in the game and opt out of the system, just like OP claims to have done by becoming a part-timer. OP claims to have no kids, no wife, does some work for living expenses. He sounds like a happy slave that is complicit with not being able to own anything. In the past I would have said most men would beg to differ but men are increasingly becoming demoralized with how bad it is getting out there.