As we’ve seen again and again on this blog, misogynists love to talk about how much better men are than women when it comes to things like math, logic, and scientific thinking generally. Unfortunately, their posts and comments online – filled with breathtaking failures of logic, absurd unsourced assertions and magical thinking — do not seem to bear out this hypothesis. I would compare the scientific thinking of most manosphere misogynists with that of the creationists, but frankly that would be insulting to creationists.
A case in point: a graph – provenance unknown – posted in a recent MGTOWforums discussion of marriage. The standard line amongst the lady haters is that marriage is on the way out , because men are “waking up” to the evils of marriage in an allegedly feminist state and deciding to, well, go their own way. The reality: while the marriage rate has been falling fairly steadily for the last quarter-century or so, for a variety of reasons, most people do marry at some point in their lives; it would be silly to assume that a trend over the course of several decades heralds the death of a social institution that has lasted (and has had many previous ups and downs) for millennia.
Of course, that’s not the way the MGTOWers in question see it. Their proof that marriage is doomed – doomed, I say – lies in this little graph which charts with mathematical precision the exact date range within which marriage will vanish forever from this good earth:
Now, there are many problems with this little graph. For one thing, what happens AFTER the projected marriage rate goes to zero? Does the marriage rate bounce like a rubber ball back into the positive realm? Or does it go below zero, with unmarried couples divorcing one another – just in case?
Second, this chart is based on a tiny number of data points – a mere 25 year sliver of the millennia-long history of divorce. If you go back a mere century and a half – see the chart below, taken from a paper you can find here — you’ll see that the marriage rate doesn’t conform to any neat mathematical formula; it jumps up and down, affected not only by slow-moving cultural changes but by events in the real world – look at the gigantic spike in marriage after World War II.
But the main issue here is that there is simply no way you can come up with a neat equation to predict the future of marriage because THE WORLD DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY. History isn’t math. It cannot be predicted in advance, and any attempt to do so — especially one based on a tiny sliver of data — is doomed to failure. (Well, certain aspects of reality can be predicted — like when Halley’s comet will next return (assuming it’s not eaten by a giant space monster we haven’t discovered yet). Orbits can be calculated with mathematical precision; social trends cannot.)
To illustrate the dangers of extrapolation, let’s consider the little chart below, prepared by a helpful assistant (who happens to have access to a scanner). The chart provides some interesting data on the age of a hypothetical cat named “Fluffy” and her projected life expectancy. As you can see, Fluffy was hypothetically born in 2001, making her ten years old today, with her age increasing by one every year. (Just pretend that the numbers line up properly; my assistant, despite her many other charms, is not big on precision, and may have been drunk when she prepared this chart.) Based on this data (which show Fluffy’s age increasing by one every year), we could project that by the time the next century rolls around our dear little cat will be 99 years old.
If projecting the future were as easy as drawing little lines on graphs, the world would be a much simpler, and much less interesting, place to live. Most of us realize this. MRAs and MGTOWers, not so much.
I hope this isn’t derailing but I wanted to throw this idea out here…sorry if its TLDR
#23922 of MRA hypocrisy:
MRAs and MGTOWs especially flounce around declaring how marriage is bad for men, they aren’t getting married so us bitches better watch out (OOOoOOOoooh whatever will I DO? a misogynist wont marry me?! *faints daintily*)
MRAs and MGTOWs also like to complain that feminism destroyed marriage and its goal is to abolish it completely.
Shouldn’t MRAs and MGTOWs be happy then? they think marriage is a death trap so they should be thankful for these supposed feminists trying to abolish marriage.
Oh but I forgot one teeny think. Marriage seems to be okay for them so long as wifey keeps her pretty little mouth shut, doesn’t gain 1lb of weight, and stays barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen popping out babbys.
No thank you.
In my personal opinion, and this is just what it is, opinion. I think marriage is outdated and useless in this day and age. Marriage was done in the past because women barely had rights. She couldn’t work, own land, vote, get higher education (or any education) and discouraged from entering the public. She needed a man to care for her.
Nowadays, at least in North America and most 1st world coutries, she does not. That’s why marriage is largely useless (though there are benifits too but I personally dont think they are worth it) That’s one of the few issues I very very SLIGHTLY agree with the MRAs. *feels so dirty for saying that* Society needs to come up with a different social structure that fits our current situation.
Now watch MRAs shriek at me for wanting to get rid of marriage. Let me remind them though that ITS WHAT YOU WANT ANYWAY. You want to be free of us bitches and I’m all for it.
But again, to really make this work out is that pay gap issue needs to be resolved 100% possibly by raising the wages and status of female oriented professions on equal par to mens. That or being more open to including women into all sorts of jobs from construction work to freaking president. Women will be able to support themselves even more, and more men might pursue those once female oriented jobs too. (Assuming this will happen anyway)
So yea, just my 0.02. I doubt this will happen anytime soon, nor do I wish to force it on anyone. I dont look down on those that are married, and I agree that marriage just works for some people. Others not so much. I dont even know if it would work, and there are many factors into play that I’ve probably left out. It’s just a thought and I’ll just plan my life as I see fit, and that probably means choosing not to get married. I just dont see a point in it. Have a feeling though that the older I get, the more I’ll questioned by others about it too.
*sorry, that should say (or any education in SOME cases)
I agree Quakers
Unless you have some sort of religious reason or are doing it to appease the in-laws I have no idea why anyone would wish to go through with an outdated ceremony except if you can make more money then you spend via gifts.
My wife and I got married alone overseas because as second marriages our parents were not taking us as serious life partners. Our children’s partners are part of our family without ceremony.
Kave, we got married for immigration reasons. I never imagined myself married and even after 15 years, I’m not real sure I like it. I’d have been just as happy without the (extremely sad & pathetic) civil ceremony.
Re: Quackers “#23922 of MRA hypocrisy”
Isn’t that a bit like saying “these environmentalists over here oppose nuclear power, and those ones over there support nuclear power, therefore all environmentalists are hypocrites” ?
You would never the suggestion to should do away with marriage from the traditionalists and you would never get the garden variety misogynists to endorse marriage. About the only thing they agree on with regards to this issue is some level of blaming feminism. But you will notice that it’s usually not the same people who have both viewpoints.
Getting way, way back to page 1, because this is still baffling me…
Hellkell called it a “partnership.” We’ll call a man partner “A” and a woman partner “B” and a child asset “C” Well at anytime partner “B” can disolve the parnership and take asset “C” plus at least half of the holdings. Partner “B” can also demand payment from partner “A” for asset “C” while denying access to asset “C” backed by the guns of the State.
Pretty much anyone can see being partner “A” is a really bad deal.
Wait, so A and B both have the right to dissolve the marriage, and if they leave they each get half of “the holdings.” How is this “a really bad deal” for A and not B? They’re getting the same thing!
Okay, okay, in your scenario B also gets custody of their child. I guess that could be seen as a bonus if you like raising kids. But if A’s going around referring to his kid as a “child asset,” I definitely wouldn’t trust him with custody.
Also, in another episode of NWOslave is Wrong on the Internet; divorce, custody, child support and alimony don’t work the way he thinks they do.
Something like 70% of divorces are initiated by the woman filing, and women tend to end up with primary custody. This, to a brain like Slavey’s, indicates a conspiracy – because in Slavey’s world, everything is a conspiracy.
I’m not sure why women tend to file for divorce more often than men, maybe because women are less willing to live in an unsatisfying or only partly satisfying marriage? Maybe more women are leaving abusive partners? I have no idea. As to custody, though, women still assume the primary caregiver role while married, and most judges see no reason to interrupt that during a divorce. If you compare the stats of men who are stay-at-home-dads or primary caregivers with the stats of men who are awarded primary custody, they’re roughly even.
This is just another example of misogyny in action, though – if she files for divorce, she’s a golddigging harpy only out for alimony and child support; if he files for divorce, he’s glad to be rid of a golddigging harpy.
Kave-
*facepalms* totally forgot about religion. Yep. Disolvement of marriage is not happening for a looooong time. But yea, even with that I agree that there are reasons for why its still relevant. It also sucks that some people feel pressured into it. One should only marry if they truly want to and are ready for it. Maybe that’s why there are so many divorces…because men and women just feel like its something you HAVE to do. It’s one of the things that defines adulthood, therefore you go along with it without really examining the reasons why you actually want it.
Developers!-
True. If that’s the case then, I understand the traditionalist, pro-marriage MRAs blaming feminism for ruining marriage/family- which to them usually means husband is dominant, wife is submissive. However it still doesn’t make sense that the anti-marriage MRAs be outraged at feminists for supposedly destroying marriage. Shouldn’t they actually be supportive of them, or at least agree with what they’re doing? They’re after the same goal after all, albeit for very different reasons. With marriage completely gone women wont have the legal power to be mooching child support off of them anymore
Everything I’ve read on MRA sites though, overall is pretty anti-marriage. Or at least anti-marriage in western countries. Whether they hated it from the get-go or hate what it has become (thanks to those dang western women who just cant shut up and obey their husbands) either way they are against it, so why complain at its supposed fall? Its not relevant to them since they don’t believe it anyway and/or have opted out of it. Just one more BS excuse to blame stuff on feminism I guess.
Here, I’m sure that Nightstorm 2516 could explain it to you:
“I believe marriage is dropping because marriage 1.0 was eraticated.. where the man had control, the woman, little power at all.. where as overtime, feminists merged in new laws like a frog in a pot of water.. and slowly turned up the heat.
Before people knew it, we had marriage 2.0 and people who married in 1.0 automatically got a upgrade to 2.0.”
Yes, all the dynamics of human interaction can be easily explained not only in Greek alphabetic terms, but in terms of version numbers. Why necessarily a frog in a pot of water I’m not so sure about. But I digress…
Those particular MRAs aren’t necessarily “anti-marriage”, they are “anti-marriage 2.0” and are outraged at feminists for destroying “marriage 1.0” (the only true type of marriage, I’m sure).
However, yes, there are anti-marriage MRAs who are also against “marriage 1.0”, because the man having control and the woman little power at all was for the absolute benefit of the woman at the expense of the man. Either way you cut it, “marriage 1.0” or “marriage 2.0”, it’s the li’l woman who benefits completely, at the expense of the man. Now, why those particular anti-marriage MRAs would complain about the decline of marriage rates, I don’t know, but it might it might be summed up by your last sentence, “Just one more BS excuse to blame stuff on feminism I guess.”
Blimey,
What a dozey lot you are…
NWOS asked us to imagine a world with no government – Mars, Venus, Mercury all seem to fit the bill quite nicely 😉 .
Now, I know I’m late to this portion of the comments, but…..
It wasn’t a State indoctrination and certainly wan’t something that the State “taught”. It was a policy implemented (and not ALL families were affected by this policy) to curb overpopulation, particularly in urban areas.
If you want to consider the morality issues of the one-child policy, then consider what happened when that one child was female.
Slavey, last night you said “tell me I’m wrong.”
Ok, you’re wrong. Completely, totally, and utterly wrong. Feel better now?
Anyway, on to other things. I personally really like being married. I like it so much, I want to extend the right to all consenting adults who want to get hitched. We should stop putting pressure on people to get married. It isn’t for everyone, and there isn’t anything wrong with the people who are disinterested in it. If we do that, we may well see a drop in the divorce rate eventually. I frankly don’t give a rat’s ass about the divorce rate, except that I want people to be happy in their lives. but it sure as hell isn’t tearing society apart.
I looked at the thread over on the MGTOW forum, and indeed it seems that the OP and most commenters actually approve of the dropping marriage rate, so painting them as being against it is a bit of a straw man.
Also, Child Asset C is my real name. True story.
By “interrobang”, I meant the symbol (‽). I wish that was more popular. It’s much more elegant than (?!) or (!?).
I just have to say of all the frankly insane things our trolls have said for some reason this disturbs me the most.
No Idiot. Most Chinese living in China live within the law. They don’t accept it, they live with it. I’m a little angry today and you are an idiot.
@NWO, seriously does your internet not have the google? Deficit, defined http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deficit
Also, you do understand that courts don’t write statutes, right? I know the whole “three branches of government” thing is advanced civics for you, but legislatures legislate. The drug war is a social policy failure, not a courts failure. People being sent to jail for drugs crimes are not disproportionately falsely convicted-they generally actually had the drugs, they broke the law the legislature wrote. The courts did not make those laws, they just applied them. Shit, I even went as far as to point out that I thought common law criminal law was a really bad idea, which makes this objection extra silly (also, common law crimes are rare to nonexistant in the US). Also, the area where the courts enforcement of drug laws falls short is one that I specifically said the courts were less adept at eliminating-that of widespread systematic bias-which would encompas the issues of disproportionate results across race and class. I pointed out that the courts do a good job of controlling for intimate interpersonal grudges, which I think they do. You have not convinced me that judges target individuals for drugs charges based on personal grudges against those specific individuals. Do you really think it is a common problem that a judge goes “you know, I really just hate Steve, as a person, so I am going to send him and only him to jail for heroin possession”? But things like that are problems in small communal settings with less defined rules and enforcement systems.
(also, see point number 4 of my earlier post-the US’s asinine drug policy is unique to the US, not a feature of all governments)
I also think you are over anthropomorphizing the state and the government, NWO. It is not some sort of self contained organism, it is a collection of people and certain social fictions. While it could be the case that certain governments place disproportionate power in the hands of a specific group or class, the expansion of power would still be done in a way that serves the interests of that group or class, not expansion for expansion’s sake. Generally, people argue for governmental expansion because they want the government to fullfill certain functions and expansion is seen as necessary for that, not because they just randomly like having bigger governments.
Fun side note on the middle ages, state marriage, and gay marriage-there actually was a court ruling in Florence in the middle ages where the city of Florence refused to delegitimize the marriage of two men on the grounds that it was none of the city’s business to say who could and couldn’t get married (the men still had to pay their sodomy fines, however). Florence was notorious as a hotbed of sodomy in the middle ages, to the point where the phrase “getting Florenced” was a slang term for getting fucked in the ass. If you included history in your list of important subjects to know, NWO, you might find out that people got up to all kinds of sexual stuff with or without state marriages.
I have a need to vent today and write what I’m thinking in a space that no one knows who I am.
I lost a child to cancer many years ago. I have this amazing 25 year old daughter whose lived with radioactive iodine resistant thyroid cancer since she was 16. She’s had two operations to remove her thyroid and cancerous lymph nodes in her neck, yesterday we found out that it might be time for her to have a third. She’d been stable for 4 years but she’s not anymore.
My daughter has a livid scar in a c shape from ear to ear. When strangers ask her about her scars her favorite answer is “heck of a fight but you should see the other guy”.
She has always maintained a strict holistic diet except for in the past year, so she’s beating herself up for becoming complacent.
I need to say this. Fuck you MRAL with your petty problems. Fuck you NWO with your petty grievances. My daughter is our most brilliant child, I do believe if we lost her there would be a good chance of my wife taking her own life. My wife doesn’t cry but her eyes again are just vacant.
By “interrobang”, I meant the symbol (‽). I wish that was more popular. It’s much more elegant than (?!) or (!?).
Elitist. I maintain my admiration for the platonic interrobang, the expression of interrobang-ness, regardless of its form. 😉
And…now I look like an asshole, being so flip following that. I’m so sorry, Kave, for you and your family. My thoughts with you, and your wife and daughter.
Kave, so sorry to hear that. I wish the best for your daughter, your wife and you.
Kave, I’m so sorry. My prayers to you and your family.
When she was 8 her pet rat died. She cried but then she told us she wanted to know why, and asked if she could dissect him. I can’t remember her conclusions but they made sense. It wasn’t just her rat, give her a dead animal and she wanted to dissect.
We always thought she would be a surgeon, from her earliest years it was her calling. Cancer changed her mind and she’s now a dietician. It’s a eating right to avoid going under the knife thing.
Both my wife and kid refuse to even discuss it. It’s something to be dealt with but not thought of. When she was first diagnosed kid caught my wife crying. We are a humanist/atheist/capitalist family. My kid said “I’m the one with cancer if I don’t cry you have no right to”.
I’m sorry to make this thread about me but thank you for letting me get it out. I keep waiting for one of them to show some signs of grief but they don’t except in the eyes.
. Can a MRA show up now so I can take my frustrations out? I took the day off., wife didn’t she’s changing the world for the better as per usual.
Kave, I’m so sorry. Your daughter sounds awesome. I’ll keep you and your family in my thoughts.