Welcome to my blog. Its purpose is to explore various topics regarding sex, marriage and family — an area with many problems today, as has been amply explored by the “red pill community.” They have done an excellent job of analysis and description. But, little has been said about solutions, and this persistent lack has been troubling me, so I will take it up. I tried doing a little bit via YouTube, the preferred medium these days it seems, but I am not suited to it. So, I will join with Dalrock, Rollo Tomassi and others in print. Like Dalrock, I am happily married, for seventeen years, and have a son. (Yes, it really is “happily,” perhaps because my wife is Japanese, and her English even now is bad enough that she is isolated from Western media and the society of Western women.) Perhaps I would like to have my son, when he is older, to have some kind of woman available besides wasted harlots.
In general, I am a Traditionalist. This is different than today’s TradCons, which Dalrock (among many) have rightly eviscerated. But one thing you can say about Traditional solutions is that they have actually worked, in real life, for a long period of time, and produced good results. You could invent some kind of new solution, but Utopian dreams sometimes don’t work out. I am not a Christian, although I find that they are my natural allies, so I am Christian-friendly. Ezra Pound once did a broad review of spiritual traditions, including many in the East. He eventually decided to become a Christian (specifically, an Anglican), not because he was not aware of the many failings of the Anglican Church in his day, but because he realized that, if he wanted to gain the advantages that come from cooperation with like-minded people, he would have to join some kind of existing community.
I say often that “you have to tell women what to do.” They seem to be incapable of organizing their actions without external leadership. This leadership may come in the form of individual vision, or it may come in the form of social norms, in-group behavior, and the artificially-created “social norms” and “in-group behavior” manufactured by the Cultural Marxists in music, television and movies. Women have a choice of which leadership they choose. But, they seem to lack the masculine capability of analysis and description, awareness of longer-term cause and effect, and also based on this, invention of definite solutions, independent of existing norms. Without someone else to do these things, who they can follow, they are rudderless. Some women are quite intelligent, but this ability is usually channeled entirely toward the Rationalization Hamster, and also lies, manipulation, and deceit. (This is basically the Rationalization Hamster applied to others.) But along with this, women are open to suggestion. If some men start telling women what to do, and it seems to them an attractive proposition, some women will follow.
And so, although you can lament the present condition of women in the U.S. and the West today, unless you tell them what to do, they will not change. It is not enough to say “I don’t like this and I don’t like that.” Eliminating options and identifying problems are important steps toward figuring out What To Do, but do not create a solution in themselves. Along with this, men have to clarify what they want. Today, we lament the fact that most women today are unfit to be wives and mothers, and are frankly dangerous and destructive in those roles. And yet, we seem to like having a large supply of sluts on ready call, so we have been perhaps a little hesitant to say: don’t be sluts. Obviously, we are going to have to make some decisions here. Are you ready for a world in which women are sexually unavailable until after your wedding day?
Unfortunately, by focusing on analysis and description of present conditions, men are, in a way, telling women what to do. Men say that “all women are like that.” Women hear this, and, following what they are being told by men, as is their nature, behave in the manner that such men say they behave. While it is true that women certainly have the potential to be “like that,” and today that potential is reality, it is also true that, in the past, they were not like that. Just as there is “women’s nature,” there is also “men’s nature.” For example, men have the potential for domination and plunder, that we see in every gang or group of bandits, and which anthropologists have recorded in primitive human societies around the world. And yet, most men today are not like that. The difference is part of what we call: civilization.
Thus, I want to focus on concrete, specific solutions. For example, there is near-universal agreement that today’s laws regarding divorce, sexual assault, domestic violence and other interactions between men and women are grossly anti-male and dysfunctional today. But, you rarely hear anyone say what, then, the laws should be. If you were to change it, what would you do? In the past (before 1970), for example, divorce required either mutual consent and terms acceptable to both parties, or, for a unilateral divorce, abridgement of certain conditions, notably adultery or serious domestic violence, with evidence that would hold up in jury trial. In another example from history, divorce among the ancient Romans would result in the man keeping the children. This served as a double preventative: most women would avoid divorce if it meant being separated from her children; and also, a man looking for a younger, sexier wife would probably be handicapped by having custody of his children. This would naturally require someone to handle childcare; and what better (or cheaper) person than the children’s natural mother? At the same time, a younger, sexier women would probably not be very interested in caring for another woman’s offspring.
Besides not telling women what to do, men today are bizarrely, pathologically politically inactive. Men need to join together and get things done to change the laws, just as men have always done to produce any change. Look around you: who is going to do it, if not men? At the very least, men should support existing men’s rights organizations. It is true that they have been woefully ineffective. But, more money would probably help fix that. Any man who is unwilling to give $25 to an existing MRA organization deserves everything he gets. This is evidence of extreme learned helplessness. Think of it like doing political pushups. If you can’t do even one pushup, you are in bad shape my friend. Get over your learned helplessness. Give another $25 to the YouTube Redpill personality of your choice. Divorce law is State law, so eventually there will have to be an MRA organization for each state, which lobbies and informs State legislators: the Ohio Society for Men’s Rights. If all concerned men were giving $100 a year in total to the cause, there would be enough money around that other men would have the funding to establish such organizations. Unfortunately, most men cannot risk too much opprobrium, as it jeopardizes their livelihoods. Thus, we need specialists, whose livelihood is itself based on objecting to the status quo, and who can serve as professional lightning rods.
Men are the builders of civilization, not only in steel and concrete, but also in laws and principles. Women nurture the creations of the men of their choice. So: start building.
Duties of a Wife
Here we will list the basic duties of a Wife.
A woman can take upon herself more projects and responsibilities than this. But, these are the basic items for any stay at home Wife. If a woman is working, then you can have a somewhat different arrangement of responsibilities.
I recommend the Stay At Home Wife as a general goal for all men. But, sometimes there can be specific exceptions.
I think you can just print this out and see what she says.
Cooking: Many of the things that a housewife did in the past are not so necessary today. Women don’t have to weave cloth, make clothes, milk cows, churn butter, or split firewood. But, we still have to eat; and outsourcing this in various ways (take out food, prepared foods from supermarkets) don’t work very well. It will be expensive, and you will have long-term health problems. Plus, having a family dinner together has many advantages besides simple nutrition. I would emphasize not having prepared foods (snacks, frozen pizza, drinks) at all, beyond perhaps something like simple bread. Meals should be made from Single Ingredients. I would even make bread at home, which is not that hard, especially when you have all day to do it like a stay-at-home Wife.
Dishes: A woman should be responsible also for all kitchen cleanup including dishes. Maybe children or a husband can help from time to time, but she should recognize this has her duty alone.
Housekeeping: All kinds of housekeeping tasks, including cleaning bathrooms, vacuuming floors, mopping where appropriate, dusting (it’s a real thing), occasionally wiping windows. It may include some outside tasks, especially if there are flowers or other gardening elements. Kitchens should be cleaned daily, with floors vacuumed, counters wiped, etc.
Laundry: All laundry. Ironing if necessary.
Childcare: Mothers are primarily responsible for childcare. Fathers may participate in various ways as they wish, and usually will, but are not required or expected to do much of anything.
Plus, we have various responsibilities that are not quite jobs.
Sex: A wife should be enthusiastic about regular sex — at least once a week. Husbands should make it easy for a wife to be enthusiastic.
Frugality: A woman should be frugal; that is, to live within the means available. She can ask for something more, and if she asks nicely, will usually get it.
Stay In Shape: A wife should keep in good shape. This means good diet (see Cooking above), and regular exercise.
Beautification: Wives can engage in beautification in various ways, including interior decorating, clothing, housewares etc.
Don’t Make Problems: Many women today exult in making problems from nothing. This must be rejected. If there are no real problems, just enjoy your good fortune in a cheery mood. A home should be a welcoming and comfortable place for a man, where basic duties are already taken care of.
Your Money Is His Money: If a woman works, she hands her salary over to her husband to administrate. He then uses it for various household expenses, such as mortgages, car payments, utilities, etc. He may then give some of it back, in the form of a monthly allowance or budget, or perhaps contributions to a woman’s own retirement funds, etc.
These are things that all women can do. Not all men are taller than six feet; not all women are in the Top 20% for beauty, or intelligence. But all women can do these things.
Wives Not Pets
Among the various interesting conversations a man should have, to aim for the Top 30% of Wifey girls, is this one. Make a list of expectations of a stay-at-home Wife. See what she says.
If you find yourself in one of these kinds of marriages, or almost-marriages (cohabitating?), I would not start with withdrawing. I would make a concrete list of expectations, specifically duties to perform. Go over it with her so that she understands every one, and can’t run away and hide under the bed. Then, if she chooses to do otherwise, it won’t be because it wasn’t explained to her. Then it’s not your fault, it’s her fault.
Recently on X:
I didn’t go to college until I was 30. This gave me a chance to see it with the perspective of an adult.
One lecture in Industrial Psychology, in particular, I will never forget.
The professor spoke about how an effective job description focused on concretely measurable tasks, not vague instructions, or characteristics.
For example, “maintain an 85% or greater average on customer feedback surveys”, instead of “be cheerful and upbeat”, or even “interact positively with customers”.
This means that goals are clear, and performance is measurable. A job is to do something, not be something.
Once some of the students had wrapped their minds around this concept, the professor decided to do a class exercise.
He asked the female students to come up with a job description for “husband”. At first, this went fine. The girls noodled around a bit with things they wanted their husbands to be (tall, etc), but he was able to gradually steer them towards describing what they wanted in terms of actions.
But then he asked the male students to define a wife in the same way.
And all the girls became upset. Some of them had full-on meltdowns.
Every single thing that a male student wanted, or expected, from his hypothetical future wife was sexist, oppressive, old-fashioned, misogynistic, patriarchal, etc.
They were literally screaming. Some of them in tears.
And I realized something pretty quickly. It wasn’t the actual, concrete responsibilities of the female role that they objected to.
It was the idea of there being a female role at all, with any attached responsibilities.
These women didn’t want to be wives. They wanted to be pets.
What’s a pet? Well a pet is not a wife, or a friend. A pet is a creature of instinct, which you bring into your home because you like how it naturally behaves.
You get a cat because you want to behave like a cat, and do things a cat naturally does, like play with string, and purr when you pet him. If he’s smart, he’ll adapt to you somewhat, but he doesn’t have responsibilities other than “be a cat”.
If you get a wife, you get a wife so she will do things for you, specific things that are the responsibilities of wife, like care for your home, bear and raise your children, cook nutritious meals so you don’t have to eat processed slop, look after your emotional well-being, and so on.
These girls didn’t want to be held responsible for those things. As married women, they might have anticipated doing some of them, but only some of the time. Only when they felt like it.
The cat chases the string if and when it wants to, not because chasing the string is its job.
These young millennial women didn’t realize it, but they wanted to be pets. And that’s what they were in their college relationships. They hung out with guys when they wanted to, had sex with them when they wanted to, broke up with them for someone new when they wanted to.
Their relationships had no element of reciprocal responsibilities. They were perfectly at home with the idea of men having responsibilities to them, but they would repay those men if they chose, and how they chose, not how the men actually wanted.
And as I’ve said twice already, someone you have responsibilities to, but who has none to you, is a pet, or a child.
Since our ancestors, in a moment of foolishness and weakness, allowed women to vote, it is no longer legal to dole out the corrective spankings a great many of them both need and read pornographic novels about.
Therefore, the corrective measure, for any man who finds himself with a pet instead of a wife, is to withdraw from any husbandly duties and start actively searching for alternatives.
This can either result in a correction of the behavior, or the end of a relationship that offers no value. Either is acceptable.
This may strike some of you as dishonorable, but there is no honor in keeping a broken pact, or in serving those who despise you.
Men must have the pride and self-worth to say “I will be honored and respected, or I will depart to a place where I can be, even if I must be alone there.”
Men must honor and respect themselves.
How To Get Not-Married
So, it turns out that you can just ask ChatGPT how to get married without getting married.
It depends on the State law.
Here is New York State:
If a couple deliberately conducts a ceremony that does not constitute solemnization under New York law—for example, a blessing, betrothal, commitment ceremony, or some other religious rite not intended or structured as marriage—they may not have created a civil marriage.
Then there is technically nothing for a New York divorce court to dissolve.
That can have major financial consequences. A partner generally would not receive marital-property rights merely because the couple lived together for decades. New York does not create a common-law marriage merely from cohabitation.
There could still be separate issues involving:
- jointly titled property;
- contracts between the partners;
- trusts or estates;
- child custody;
- child support;
- jointly incurred debts.
But those are not the same thing as equitable distribution of property in a divorce.
Describe how one can have a possibly non-religious marriage-like ceremony, without being legally recognized as married.
Yes. In New York, the safest way to have a marriage-like ceremony without becoming legally marriedis to make sure it is clearly a commitment ceremony, not a legal “solemnization” of marriage.
That distinction matters because New York law is unusual: even though the state requires a marriage license before a marriage ceremony, failure to get the license does not necessarily invalidate a marriage between adults if the marriage was otherwise legally solemnized.
A nonreligious commitment ceremony can look very much like a wedding. You can have guests, rings, vows, formal clothing, music, a reception, and someone leading the ceremony. But to reduce the risk that it could later be treated as an actual marriage, the ceremony should avoid the elements New York uses to solemnize marriage.
Under Domestic Relations Law §12, an ordinary marriage ceremony requires the parties, in the presence of an authorized officiant and at least one witness, to solemnly declare that they take each other as spouses.
So, for example, instead of saying:
“I take you as my lawful spouse.”
the participants could say something like:
“I choose you as my life partner, and I promise to share my life with you.”
And the person leading the ceremony could expressly state that:
“This is a personal commitment ceremony and is not intended to create a legal marriage under New York law.”
Other precautions would include:
- Do not obtain a marriage license.
- Do not use an authorized officiant in the capacity of a marriage officiant. If a minister, judge, or other authorized person participates, make it explicit that they are merely serving as master of ceremonies and are not solemnizing a marriage.
- Avoid language such as “I now pronounce you husband and wife,” “spouses,” or “lawfully married.”
- Call the event a commitment ceremony, partnership ceremony, or celebration rather than a wedding, especially in written programs and invitations.
- Do not have anyone complete or file a marriage certificate.
- Consider having both partners sign a short written statement beforehand saying that the ceremony is ceremonial only and that neither intends to enter a civil marriage.
The last point is particularly useful because the real danger is a later factual dispute. Suppose the couple separates after fifteen years and one partner argues that the ceremony actually constituted a marriage. With no marriage certificate, a court could have to reconstruct what happened: who conducted the ceremony, exactly what the couple said, whether that person was legally authorized to solemnize marriages, and what everyone understood the event to be.
New York’s rule that an unlicensed solemnized marriage can still be valid makes “we just won’t get a license” insufficient by itself.
There is also a reason to avoid having an authorized officiant knowingly conduct something that purports to be an actual marriage without a license. New York law makes it an offense for an authorized officiant to solemnize a marriage without having been presented with the required license.
So a relatively clean arrangement would be:
Commitment ceremony + no marriage license + no declaration that the parties take each other as spouses + explicit statement that no civil marriage is intended.
The couple could nevertheless privately arrange many marriage-like financial matters—joint ownership, wills, beneficiary designations, health-care proxies, powers of attorney, contracts governing property, etc.—without acquiring the entire legal status of marriage.
One important caveat is that calling something a “commitment ceremony” is not dispositive. Courts generally look at what actually happened rather than just the label. That is why the vows and the role of the person conducting the ceremony matter.
If the purpose is specifically to have all the social and ceremonial features of a traditional wedding while making the non-marital legal status as unambiguous as possible, I can lay out a sample New York ceremony and accompanying one-page acknowledgment designed around that distinction.
Cosplay
When women are allowed to take Men’s roles, such as voting, they think that they are basically being allowed to cosplay, and that they won’t be allowed to do anything dangerous. They don’t think they are actually a pirate. They think they are on the Pirates of the Caribbean ride at Disneyland. So, when there are consequences, they blame Men, and actually; they are right.
This is also why you see “female rage.” These are women who more-or-less did as they were told, or at least, followed the herd. They thought that if they did as they were told, there would be benefits. If there aren’t, it’s because Men screwed up.
And, they’re right. They have been betrayed, at the very least, by their Fathers, if they have a Father.
Women lack accountability because they are not supposed to have accountability.
Men today are still asking: “Why don’t women act like men?” If it hasn’t happened yet, after 50 years of Feminism, it isn’t going to happen. Instead, women should be treated like grown-up children — or, actually, as women.
Worthy Girls
The notion that most women today are unfit for marriage is becoming more common. This is particularly true in our legal environment, where a woman can cause all kinds of damage, if she chooses to. There are some defenses here, but the main one is that a woman chooses not to. This requires even more virtue.
We are going to have to take a stand somewhere, so I have said that we should take a stand with the Best 30%. Mostly this is young women, under Age 25, preferably virgins, and who have a definite interest in home and family rather than careerism and whoring, from an early age (age 15 for example).
Most young women today say they don’t want children. So, obviously stick with the ones that do.
Special recognition for virgin women who get married at Age 19.
“I want a man” = Friends With Benefits
Sometimes you get these women — typically career girls Age 28+, and definitely 35+ — who have some kind of “I don’t need a man, but I want someone to talk to, to do fun things with, to hang out with, and of course to have sex with.” And what’s wrong with that?
The natural outcome of this line of reasoning is: Friends With Benefits. I also want someone to talk to, to do fun things with, and to hang out with. This is what Men do with their other Men friends. We are Friends. With a Woman, you can also be Friends With Benefits. There is no expectation of monogamy, and certainly no living together. Actually, Men friends often live together, because they don’t have sex together. But, when a man and a woman live together and have sex together, then things become complicated.
Marriage, and monogamy, are primarily frameworks for raising children. If you don’t want to have children, or you can’t, then there isn’t much reason for it. It might work well, but the risks and restrictions are too great, when you can just be Friends With Benefits. Women have a natural tendency toward monogamy, because they want a Man who will protect, provide, and be a Father for her children. The only women who passed on their genes are those that did this; so there is a natural urge to do this. An exclusive “relationship” is really a kind of marriage-lite, or preparation for marriage. It is a degenerate form, that doesn’t exist where Courtship is the normal path to Marriage.
Women today, of the careerist 28+-ish type, naturally feel a conflict between having children and working full time; or having children and their present age, plus working full-time; or maybe just spending the rest of their lives, or at least 20 years, with some guy that she likes, but not that much. This leads to the aversion to children.
All of this leads to a conclusion that if a woman wants to have children and a family, she should get married; otherwise, maybe not. If a woman wants to have children, she should arrange to do so, rather than ending up with a full-time job and student loan debt. She might have a job, but she should expect to quit her job upon giving birth, or a little earlier; and this requires a husband. You might as well just do that first, and leave the rest for later.
Men Will Have To Fix It
Unfortunately, I think we are still under the delusion that if women can understand the consequences of their actions, then they will change their behavior. I think this will be wrong. They will just continue to do stupid and self-destructive things, until they are brought under the guidance of men — men who understand the consequences of women’s actions.
For example, women are the only reason the Democratic Party exists. If women didn’t vote, the Party would disappear in the next election. In our two-party system, any individual is normally dissatisfied with many of the activities of their politicians. Hardly any Republicans support all the things Republican politicians or Presidents are doing. Likewise, just because someone votes Democrat does not mean that they think boys should be encouraged to cut their dicks off and start calling themselves girls. It doesn’t mean that they support mass illegal immigration, or vote fraud. But, there must be something they support, or they wouldn’t vote Democrat. For most women, it is apparently abortion, which is perhaps another example of why women shouldn’t vote. Now we have “post birth abortion,” including way-post-birth, such as the children of the infamous Lindsay Clancy, whose oldest child was five years old. Not all women support this, but it appears that about 20%-30% share the opinions of the demented members of the jury (including all the men but one), which is 20%-30% too many. Men understand this; women do not, and probably never will.
In other words, we witness women supporting Leftist parties in the US and elsewhere, which openly support mass illegal immigration, and then complain about the immediate effects of this immigration, which is a bunch of people you definitely don’t want in your neighborhood, in your neighborhood. But, somehow, women can’t add 1+1 and get 2. Men sit by and wonder when women will begin to understand the consequences of their actions, but I suspect they will be sitting by a long time because it will never happen, at least not at the general population level. Individual women might get it (and you might find that this is often with the guidance of a man), but as a whole women will not, or at least I suspect they will not.
Where this goes is that men will have to fix all the dating and marriage stuff. There will be no “negotiation” — the premise of shows like Whatever or Fresh and Fit. Unfortunately, men today are very bad at this. This especially includes Fathers, for those girls who actually have Fathers. It includes fixing all the Marriage laws, and related abominations such as Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence, and so forth. Women won’t fix it. Young women can’t be held responsible for the legal abominations that were introduced before they were born. But, they should be at least able to understand some of the consequences of these legal abominations, especially after Men have been explaining it to them for twenty years; but they cannot, or at least don’t want to.
Most Common Years For Divorce
Useful statistics:
We Never Dated
GenX was, for the most part, pretty slutty. However, “going on dates” was not something that people did. I managed to get married, and cohabited with a couple other women before then, but I can’t remember “going on a date.” I’m not the only one:
If you don’t know who Valerie Bertinelli is, here she is getting married to Rock Guitar God Eddie Van Halen. Never went on a date though.
Robin Wright, an actress, said that she was never asked on a date.
Melissa Leo won an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress, but told the Washington Post in 2010 that she was never asked on a date.
What Is The Value of High-IQ Women?
Sigma Frame asks: What Is The Value of High-IQ Women?
First, let’s separate “midwit” high IQ (around 120 IQ, or Top 10%), with seriously high IQ, 130+ and maybe 150+.
In the past, I have known two high-IQ women, 130+ and 150+ (my estimate). I could have married either of them. Although the sample size is small, I find that very high IQ women are not that feminist. Both probably would have been happy to be stay-at-home Moms with 3+ children. They are smart enough to know that working all day is … a lot of work … and where do children fit in? They don’t. They are smart enough to figure this out.
However, the economic market value of high-IQ women is high, so they are theoretically giving up more by being a stay-at-home Mom than more average women. (One went to Harvard, the other to Tokyo University, which is sort of like Harvard if all the students were Asian, and it was free.) They tend to be channeled into careers, unless there is some sort of marriage offramp, and there usually isn’t. Usually, they can’t marry anyone who has an IQ within 20 points, because such men are rare, they have other options, they would rather have a stay-at-home Mom than a career girl, and the women are simply too busy with their careers to ever meet such a man.
The 150+ girl actually did become a stay-at-home Mom, without any career, because she was smart enough to do that. To give you an idea, IQ 150 or higher occurs in about 1:2330 White Men in the US; and due to differences in gender dispersion among women, there are about 3.08 Men with IQ 150 or more for every woman. So, about 1:7000. At 160, you find about one in 120,000 women. (Just to give you an idea, of all the high school girls in the country, how many can admit to getting into Tokyo University “without studying very much”?)
The greatest value of a High IQ woman, in my opinion, is good genes. The second is that they will raise their children to be like them. The third is that they are great fun to talk to, if you also have a high IQ, and probably not that much fun if you don’t, since they will always look at you like you are stupid, even if they are nice about it.
The downside is that they are typically 5/10 with little interest in clothing or fashion, but also smart enough to eat good food and get some exercise. For most men, they are both invisible and somewhat troublesome to talk to, not because they are in fact causing any trouble, but their simple existence reveals a pretty big IQ gap with every word. For me, I like women who get into Tokyo University “without studying very much,” (since I got into Dartmouth as a high school junior, early acceptance, without studying very much, and there are not very many of us), but most men don’t like that.
Actually, I know one other woman who graduated from Tokyo University, who married my friend and also became a Stay-At-Home Mom. She was more like 8/10, and liked to dress well, so let’s just say my friend is very fortunate.
Whatever work they do in the world is not that important, with a few exceptions like Margaret Thatcher (no tested IQ known; estimated at 154). Margaret Thatcher was a strong anti-feminist, by the way, because she was smart enough to figure that out.
High IQ women can have a career if they want, after the children are out of the house. Phyllis Schlafly (Masters in Government from Harvard; JD from Washington University, mother of five) is the model in this regard.
We will talk about the midwit woman, much more common, soon.
