article: Blame the Sexual Revolution, Not Men

[MatureDJ]

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/281490/blame-sexual-revolution-br-not-men-mona-charen

This is in response to the Atlantic article (that was presented here by yours truly) by the spinster complaining about there not being men who want marriage.

But economic analysis can take you only so far. Men’s capacity to insist upon promiscuity rests completely on female cooperation. And women have been foolishly compliant for decades.

They’ve conspired in their own disempowerment not because they love their sexual freedom (though a few may), but because people like Gloria Steinem and Ms. Bolick’s mother convinced them that the old sexual mores, along with marriage and children, were oppressive to women.

The resulting decline of marriage has been a disaster for children, a deep disappointment to reluctantly single women, and unhealthy for single men, who are less happy, shorter-lived, and less wealthy than married men. The sexual revolution has left a trail of destruction in its wake, even when its victims don’t recognize the perpetrator.

 

[zekko]

The resulting decline of marriage has been a disaster for children, a deep disappointment to reluctantly single women, and unhealthy for single men, who are less happy, shorter-lived, and less wealthy than married men

Don't most of the guys here mainly want an endless supply of random sex partners? Who is the poster on here who is always saying feminism is a good thing, because of this very thing? Is it Zarky?

 

[Knight's Cross]

I've seen this on Roissy, Roosh, and a bunch of places. Only a matter of time before it goes mainstream. Guys today are getting mad, mad at the system. Sure you can get laid easier, you've got a ton of women out there that want to ride the carousel. Do you want to marry one, so she can hyphenate your name to hers? Do you want to fight for the reigns of the household. Do you want to "clear it with her when you go fishing"?
Not me. So where does that leave us? Not in a great place, does it.....
KC

 

[Burroughs]

Unhappy people SPEND MORE and are EASILY INFLUENCED.

Unhappy people are good for business. And in America we are in the business of BUSINESS.

The best way to make people unhappy is to remove the family as a viable means of mental and physical support. Seems like that has been nicely accomplished. Women in the whole cannot be trusted to be reliable long term partners or raise families..can they even fvcking cook? ..the pump and dump is the only sane option. To fill the sadness in their lives women shop..they shop a LOT..its the one thing they are REALLY good at.

 

[Nutz]

I've seen this on Roissy, Roosh, and a bunch of places. Only a matter of time before it goes mainstream. Guys today are getting mad, mad at the system. Sure you can get laid easier, you've got a ton of women out there that want to ride the carousel. Do you want to marry one, so she can hyphenate your name to hers? Do you want to fight for the reigns of the household. Do you want to "clear it with her when you go fishing"?
Not me. So where does that leave us? Not in a great place, does it.....
KC

And the merging of Game and the Men's Rights Movement takes one more step towards accepting each other. Ironic since they're basically the same thing. Game is male empowerment, something all of the MRM should be behind IMO.

 

[Nutz]

Are they the same thing? MRM sounds political to me. Not that I'm knocking it - to each his own. Game seems more like active or reactive methods for seduction. I suppose you could argue that every action is political, but I don't want to join a rights movement.

Not the same per se, but Game is something of interest to men as it's very empowering. I see it two sides of the same coin in respect to relationships. MRAs talk about the risks of relationships and Game tells men how to have relationships on their terms so they don't fall victim to the stuff MRAs talk about. The Men's rights movement is awareness about the pitfalls of relationships and the sorry state of modern marriage and divorce laws, and Game is the how-to, at least for relationships, so not sticking your **** in crazy or get taken advantage of.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Is anyone really surprised that it's now women receiving public recognition for acknowledging psychological and sociological principles and dynamics that the manosphere has covered (via Game) for over a decade now?

I'm glad to see it getting the publicity, but ONLY a woman could write this without suffering fem-screech backlash accusations of misogyny. This is the environment we're in today.

 

[scrouds]

Right on rollo. If she had a penis, she'd be "bitter"