Rallye Mondain

Often, marriages are mostly arranged. The young man and woman might get a veto, if it wasn’t too important. (Princesses did not get a veto.)

But, even if young people are allowed to find a partner more organically, it was usually among a selected set of partners, with strong parental involvement.

One reason for this was simply to get young people married (especially young women), before they got into any trouble.

https://blog.exitgroup.us/p/57-peg-on-the-french-aristocracys

Changing the Laws

We don’t really need any more YouTube Channels. What we need, is some organization, even a single person, that takes the steps necessary to change the laws.

Mostly, this is State Law. So, you will be dealing with State Congress representatives. This is good, since they are much more accessible than Federal representatives.

There are certain steps involved.

  1. Identify the problem. Collect statistics, provide descriptions.
  2. Propose a solution. This will take some effort. I would get into discussions with divorce lawyers. Talk to at least ten divorce lawyers. Ask them what they are seeing. Ask them how they would solve it. Look into the old laws. What did the laws look like in 1960? 1900?

After a while, you will get some lawyers to draft some legislation, or at least the outlines of legislation. Then take this to State Representatives. Have a presentation of the problem, with statistics. Have a presentation of the solution, which describes its contents and why you think it would work.

The Representatives need something they can put through the legislative process. This is something that is mostly done, although maybe it can be tweaked a bit. Then, build a majority. You need enough Representatives on board to get something done.

One person can do this, in one State. Then, with that success, go on to the next State. Most of this is monkey-see-monkey-do.

Ask for money. Just have a place where people can donate. Public policy organization are generally not tax-exempt, which is good because then you don’t even have to worry about that.

Support such people. Donate $25, or $100.

Eventually, you want to have someone who is hardworking and effective. Someone who is getting something done even on a budget of $50,000 or so. Then, a wealthier person (perhaps burned in divorce …) can support that person. Give them $10 million.

Stay At Home Moms Vs. Gold Diggers

There are a ton of what are basically gold diggers these days, who, typically around Age 28, decide that they want to get married so that some doofus can pay for all their stuff, “treat them like a princess,” and they don’t have to work. There are gold diggers at the middle-class level too. In the past, this was known as a “meal ticket.” Sprinkle sprinkle!

A young man should avoid all these women, at least for marriage. Don’t take them seriously. And yet, we also should seek out women who want to be Stay At Home Moms, a single-income family, where the husband basically pays for everything. These seem similar. How can we tell these two types of women apart?

I decided that a decisive factor was the appreciation, by an aspiring Stay At Home Mother, that having a family, and living on one income, would mean more work and less money, than living alone. There is not much expectation of ease and luxury. Having children, cooking and keeping house would keep any woman busy, with little time for luxuries or making use of fancy handbags, particularly if there are three or four small children, which there should be. And, you would have to live on one income, which might not be very much if your husband is perhaps about 27, as might be the case in the beginning.

If you read Laine’s Letters, or Annelise, you can get the character of this sort of woman, which is very different than the “meal ticket” sort.

Keep Your Daughters At Home; Marry Them Young

A lot depends on there actually being some supply of marriageable young virgin maidens somewhere, that the best sort of men can marry; and these maidens have to actually get married (around Age 18-22) and prosper, in some fashion that is obviously better than becoming an indebted career girl.

I think a lot of young women are actually quite happy with this. There is a large supply of “I thought I would be married and have children by Age 23” women on YouTube or TikTok, wondering what went wrong. But, it is hard to see how it would happen if they begin college. In the 1950s, women really did go to college to find a husband, and really did it, and then dropped out of college, after getting married. But today, there would be a lot of pressure to continue with the college education, in the process also excluding anything in a marriage direction. Already by Age 17 they are fluffing up their college applications, committing themselves in that direction.

Having daughters at home is good for parents, at the most basic level because having a young woman live at home doesn’t cost much. For lower-income families, she can even work at a job and help with expenses. She can certainly educate herself at home, and in the past this was common, with private tutors among the wealthy classes. Just avoiding Leftist indoctrination at colleges would be a big plus. Whatever positive education occurred at home — reading good books — would be much better than anything that happened at a university.

But, young women are not supposed to Live At Home with their Fathers. They are supposed to Get Married Young, around Age 18-20, or up to Age 25 for stragglers. Don’t keep them at home. In the past, many marriages were sort-of-arranged by parents. One of the chief duties of Matrons was to find husbands for their daughters — before Age 25.

In the past, 23yo women were not virgins. They did not live at home. They were getting more sex than even the sluttiest girls today. This was known as “starting a family.”

https://twitter.com/Couragemylads/status/1777790184211333255

New TradMom Drops

Here’s “Annelise,”

Ummmm ….

Still, it is nice to have some good role models.

Recently, the Twitterverse has been abuzz at how many TradWives have been revealed as Trad Feminists.

https://twitter.com/search?q=pearl%20davis%20trad%20feminists&src=typed_query

Condoms > Hormonal Birth Control

Evie Magazine is leading the charge to get women off hormonal birth control pills.

I think this is great.

While I appreciate some Christians’ disdain for all forms of birth control, nevertheless, some people aren’t ready for that yet. Among the alternatives, around here we promote the use of condoms.

Japan did not have hormonal birth control until 1999. It was paired with the approval of Viagra for men. Condoms were the most common form of contraception. I think that, among other things, the “feminine” character of Japanese women in the past, and perhaps their tendency toward girl-bossiness today, was related to this.

This worked quite well. Out-of-wedlock births were very low, around 3%. This was paired with a permissive abortion regime, although abortions per capita were about half of the US. “Morning after” pills were approved in 2011.

Besides keeping hormones intact, condoms have a number of other advantages. We avoid IUDs and other disturbing alternatives. Women remain literally fertile. A condom is essentially a means of “men’s restraint” not “women’s infertility.” Also, it prevents the spread of diseases. I think that condoms also reduce the degree to which women are exposed to men’s DNA, with interesting implications.