Gender Roles, the Woman’s Father and the Afterparty

by Featured Guest on February 25, 2013

by Spanier

I. Gender Roles

Biologically, women are the critical link to the next generation. Animal breeders all know this, as does anyone who stops to think for a minute: one man can impregnate 10 women, but 10 men cannot get one woman any more pregnant than one can. So, for reproduction and perpetuation of the human race, women are essential, while men are expendable.

When it comes to civilization, on the other hand, men are essential, while women are expendable. If every male truck driver suddenly decided to stop working, kick back, and relax, the economy would collapse within hours. If every female truck driver did the same, the overall effect would be insignificant.

So, assuming we want both the human race and civilization to continue, men and women must both be encouraged to play their parts– or at least not _dis_couraged from doing so. Women need to have babies, and men need to build trades, professions, and careers to work and provide for them. Both these roles involve considerable challenges and take considerable effort.

Let’s look at these roles one at a time. If a woman wants children, from a purely medical standpoint, at what age should she try to get pregnant if she wishes to minimize the risk of infertility, complications of pregnancy, miscarriage, and birth defects? 17? 18? Let’s just say 21. At this age, she is in her physical prime, and best able to cope with the complex and demanding task of bearing and nurturing a small child.

Why, then, does our society teach a young woman that the route to happiness lies in postponing childbearing until her 30′s or beyond? Why do we tell her to waste her prime years for her most essential function in life on completely irrelevant pursuits? Suppose you were talking to a 12-year-old boy who expressed an ambition to be a professional baseball player. Would you advise him to go to college, study law or accounting, build a corporate career, and then take up baseball when in his 30′s? Of course not. If he is serious about sports, his prime age for this activity will be in his late teens and early 20′s, and it would make no sense to pursue a different career at such a point in his life. It would be far more reasonable to play baseball when in his 20′s, retire at 30, and then take up something else. And so it should be with women and childbearing.

By pointing out these obvious facts, I am not claiming that the only thing women are good for is having babies. But it is their only _essential_ function. They certainly can and do help humanity in other ways, and there may be some women whose contributions in other fields are impressive enough that they outweigh their failure to reproduce. But a society suffused with Special Snowflake Syndrome, which teaches that women in general are so talented that they should chase lofty ambitions at the expense of fulfilling their basic roles in life, is a society that is headed towards demographic and cultural demise.

Having babies, of course, is only part of the picture. Children have to be fed, clothed, protected, cared for and educated during their long periods of immaturity, and to fill these needs, the role of fathers is all-important. As the Elusive Wapiti has brilliantly pointed out, the one thing that men desire most deeply, and the ultimate motivation for them to work and produce wealth, is a durable bond with their own biological offspring. A man may never completely leave the “wild oats” stage, but family interests will generally grow and come to the fore as he moves into his late 20′s and early 30′s. At this point, hopefully, he has a fair amount of experience both in the ways of women and in the business world, and has acquired enough resources to support a wife and children.

Combining these ideas allows us to rediscover a paradigm that was well established in classical Greece: Men should generally marry at around age 30, women at around age 20.

II. The Woman’s Father

To introduce couples and promote fertile relationships, third parties and extended families, particularly women’s fathers, need to take a much more active role. While PUA types go on about how, deep down, a woman wants to be dominated and ravished, I submit that, deep down, a young girl wants to be protected and guided by her father into a successful marriage. The current model of sending her unsupervised to high school and college, leaving her to her own sexual devices, and hoping for the best, is a form of abandonment bordering on the criminal. And a man who consents to his unmarried daughter patronizing bars and clubs in search of hookups, or having sex with men unknown to him, is guilty of a gross dereliction of duty towards both his family and his civilization.

On the contrary, is it a father’s responsibility to solicit and cultivate the best suitors for his daughter, and this effort should begin many years in advance of her reaching a marriageable age. Like the boy who wants to play baseball, a girl needs to start no later than age 12 in planning for marriage and children, and she needs considerable help from her family in doing so.

Indeed, a straightforward application of red-pill wisdom shows that young women are simply not capable of making wise sexual choices on their own, and it is utterly unreasonable to expect them to do so. Again as understood by the ancient Greeks, women have a strong anti-civilizational bent. They will, if left on their own, reward the destroyers, rather than the creators, of civilization with their sexual favors, and in the process ruin themselves for better men and destroy their own prospects for a happy life.

To use a simple analogy: A patch of dirt, if left alone, will not continue to be bare ground– unattractive weeds will grow there. If I want it to look nice, I have to take an active role in planting and cultivating desirable plants, such as grass, thereby crowding out potential weeds. And so it is with women– they will inevitably have sex with someone, but their fathers need to make sure that that someone is a man who can and will provide for her and the resulting children.

III.The Afterparty

Women also have “wild oats” urges, but for a woman, any indulgence of these desires must happen after, not before, she has children. She may then, hopefully after an amicable negotiation with the children’s father, join a different category of individual, but at the risk of devaluing her sexual brand.

We may call them, euphemistically, “free agents” — those women who neither have, nor have in prospect, a long term relationship with a man, but who engage in short term liaisons of various types. Much maligned in the manosphere, these “free agents” actually serve a vital purpose, by allowing younger men to gain sexual experience before marriage, and by serving as safety valves for men of all ages. The problem arises when the free agents try to transition to long term relationships or marriage– to “hop off the carousel” in Dalrock’s phrasing. In that case, especially when there is misrepresentation or concealment involved, a man can be misled into investing far more in the relationship than it is worth. As always in human relations, economics plays a central role.

{ 29 comments… read them below or add one }

anoncoward February 25, 2013 at 15:31

Ill repost:

Unlimited Eggs:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/scientists-rewrite-rules-of-human-reproduction-7624708.html

Sperm isnt needed:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/opinion/men-who-needs-them.html?_r=1&#comments

Artificial Womb Tech isnt that far off either:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWGVZ6Gl7pQ
—————————————————————————

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
patriarch February 25, 2013 at 15:42

Excellent commentary. I think you are very right about their being a never ending list of negative ramifications resultant of the fact that today’s girls and young women girls either receive no advice from their fathers or respect no advice from their fathers when it comes to their sexual habits and their choice of men. And “Special Snowflake Syndrome”? That is one of the best ones I’ve heard because it describes about ninety percent of the female population under about eighty. How can men satisfy women who are so “SPECIAL”? They can’t and misery for all is the result.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Jensen February 25, 2013 at 15:44

Clear. Concise. Brilliant. Thank you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Georice81 February 25, 2013 at 16:05

I generally agree but there are a few points which with I differ from.

Our primal insincts are based on “ME”. Society, through various means including religion, tames us and teaches us to go beyond our childishness towards maturity. This involves looking at the bigger picture and learning to deny ourselves some of the primal urges. An advanced civilization produces citizens that are sacrificial in their outlook for the benefit of the whole. Children are taught at an early age morals and proper behaviour including courage and abstinence.

Most women, when properly taught at an early age, will be just as moral as properly raised men. What we are seeing in today’s world is rampant immorality stemming from what is being taught in schools, churches and even families. I agree that this is where the father has to step in and make sure that the daughters and sons stand fast concerning morality. This is the way it was done 50 years ago. But Benjamin Spock came and wrote a book and kids’ proper teaching went to hell.

What we are seeing nowdays in terms of the behaviour of young women is symptomatic of bad up-bringing and is not necessarily due to that one gender being naturally more immoral than the other. It is in all moral aspects, not just sex, that we are now seeing a big problem which may end up dooming our society.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Anonymous Reader February 25, 2013 at 16:06

While PUA types go on about how, deep down, a woman wants to be dominated and ravished, I submit that, deep down, a young girl wants to be protected and guided by her father into a successful marriage.

Both statements are accurate. Do not assume that women are inherently moral, or inherently monogamous. Neither is true.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader February 25, 2013 at 16:11

Plus, it is no accident that no-fault divorce – actually “men’s fault” divorce – enables women to eject fathers from the household, thus eliminating their influence over daughters, while continuing to claim resources from fathers. This is feminism at work.

The cock carousel riders are engaging in the preferred form of promiscuity – serial polygamy vs. parallel. This is also feminism at work.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
crella February 25, 2013 at 16:16

I submit that, deep down, a young girl wants to be protected and guided by her father into a successful marriage……….And a man who consents to his unmarried daughter patronizing bars and clubs in search of hookups, or having sex with men unknown to him, is guilty of a gross dereliction of duty towards both his family and his civilization.

This places the responsibility squarely on the man. I agree with you 100% that fathers can influence their daughters, and that a woman with a present and involved father makes a better choice when choosing a mate than a woman without one. I wouldn’t marry anyone with less character than my father, someone without his honesty and integrity, and ethics. With that as a yardstick the bad boys are distinctly unappealing and shallow.

However, the crux of the matter to me would seem to be the need of the father to do something about the negative influences of mothers . A man can do his best with his daughters, but in many cases, it is not the man’s lack of caring or action that causes the daughters to run wild, but mothers subverting the fathers behind their backs, letting daughters date weirdos, dress like Slut Walk participants, get birth control, and then conspire to keep it all from poor Dad. Even worse is the mother who belittles the father and renders him ineffective.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
El Bastardo February 25, 2013 at 16:38

Free Agents, but not prostitutes?

Hahahahahaha, you may have discovered the anarchist, and the brigand’s, favored mode of genetic transportation? Legally bonded loose women, who fulfilled their societal duty not once; but one big time, followed by many successive “training episodes?”

Honestly, women left idle is terrible; but they have left males idle as well. What made them think that sociological experiments would not come and replace their own?

Eventually, I suspect we will get back to marriage; but not until sociologists have cataloged the “New Romans” of our time. We have the buffets for gluttons, spas and bath houses, we declare war to let out pressure from within, porn (like internet temple prostitutes), and now we will “cultivate our cougars” into free agents? Thereby guaranteeing they have no legal access to our funds, but all and sundry may get access to their “fund?” Hahahahaha, brilliant; but will never happen.

Hehehehe, I love it; I don’t want to actually implement it. I merely see it as men rattling their sabre in the gender war. We all know that unrestrained women will only get us back to where we started; here, and now yet in the future.

We need more MEN, we need to train our beta males to naturally be less beta; and any “alphas” that play the field to get publicly humiliated if we are to go back. I just don’t see it happening. We did what no other generation in the history of the world has done: Gave women the right to Vote! Then followed it up a couple decades later with allowing them to stay idle while we worked. Bad moves for sure.

Now we are paying for it.

An medieval black smith’s wife would have had to help him in certain endeavors until a son was available; but even then, when he took his things to market you think she was able to just stay idle at home?

Hell no, she was pushing that cart to market with her brood and blacksmith husband. Life back in those days was nothing like the fifties; and these idiot feminists just got rid of their golden ticket; and will soon be faced with new sociology spewing this, the antecedent to their foolishness.

Again, I LOVE IT!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
geographybeefinalisthimself February 25, 2013 at 16:50

“When it comes to civilization, on the other hand, men are essential, while women are expendable. If every male truck driver suddenly decided to stop working, kick back, and relax, the economy would collapse within hours. If every female truck driver did the same, the overall effect would be insignificant.”

Yet Hanna Rosin still writes a book called, “The End of Men” (and has a pathetic husband who won’t satisfy her androcidal fantasy by killing himself). I’d like to see her drive an eighteen-wheeler.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Jean Valjean February 25, 2013 at 17:09

Why don’t women have kids at 21 instead of 31 or 41? Indeed it is far more logical for women to have kids earlier. Not just for the reasons you cite but also because by delaying a career for 10 years she can see her children to a point where they are semi-autonomous.

Once her kids reach 10 she can see them off to school in the morning and spend the day going to college or trade school. By the time the kids reach high school and need the least oversight the mother can begin her career and any employer can be assured that she will be more dedicated than if she had no children or had young children.

But feminists don’t want this. As Simone do Beauvoire wrote in “The Second Sex,” women cannot be given this choice because they will choose it.

Most women intuit the lie of feminism: that being a stay at home mom is “oppression” the moment they have a child and want to stay home. For the lucky few they are afforded the luxury of doing just that because of a willing and able husband. For most women, their choices are greatly limited thanks to feminism. Many men simply cannot support a household on their own income. Women, competing against men and employing hypergamy not only results in lower status men but also lower status women.

For instance, if we have a community of 1000 workers and there are 100 good jobs paying around 100k a year, and only men are allowed to work those jobs then that means that 100 families will have an income of 100k a year. But when women compete against men and say 40 of those jobs go to women and those women employ hypergamy then only 60 families have an income of 100k, and 40 have an income of 200k.

This means that 40 women will have to marry men who make less than 100k. This contributes to the widening gap between the rich and poor that many financial pundits fail or refuse to recognize.

This same dynamic applies to those families with two 50k incomes. The actual pain of these lower incomes is really felt by the mother most because she has to work to keep the family at the middle class level whereas 40 years ago she could choose to stay home.

But the real pain is felt at the lower incomes. Even two 20k incomes aren’t enough to allow a family of 4 to enter the middle class. And these lower incomes are the most common (and so is divorce among this class).

As always, feminism has always benefited the rich white women the most because the same dynamic that propels the sons of the rich into high paying occupations also does the same for the daughters.

The problem is that hypergamy (and high divorce not discussed above) are creating more lower income women than before. Feminism is harming women only women are too indoctrinated and selfish to realize it.

(Feminism harms men more but we already know that)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Zorro February 25, 2013 at 17:16

While PUA types go on about how, deep down, a woman wants to be dominated and ravished, I submit that, deep down, a young girl wants to be protected and guided by her father into a successful marriage.

Wow. Did they just de-thaw you from cryogenic freeze?

The current model of sending her unsupervised to high school and college, leaving her to her own sexual devices, and hoping for the best, is a form of abandonment bordering on the criminal.

Absolutely agree. Frankly, this mentality doesn’t “border” on the criminal, it epitomizes it!

And a man who consents to his unmarried daughter patronizing bars and clubs in search of hookups, or having sex with men unknown to him, is guilty of a gross dereliction of duty towards both his family and his civilization.

Again, we live in the 21st Century. It was difficult to prevent this 30 years ago. Today you just might get sent to jail for being what, in 40 years, your little girl would have remembered as the bestest Dad in the world. I think Obama guaranteed that all girls can claim their right to become Sex-and-the-City Slutasaurus Rexes. More’s the pity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Attila February 25, 2013 at 19:00

Age differences of 10 or even 20 years aren’t anything unusual in some parts of Latin America and the Middle East.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
joeb February 25, 2013 at 19:27

The artificial womb will end all this nonsense . Men donate to the artificial womb .
Second Womb , by rent .
Third . baby momma contract .
Forth Her death . (This is extremism ) but really she would do you is a heart beat .
No other options . besides mass rape .
Do not engage in a civil union .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
DirkJohanson February 25, 2013 at 19:30

“one man can impregnate 10 women, but 10 men cannot get one woman any more pregnant than one can. So, for reproduction and perpetuation of the human race, women are essential, while men are expendable.”

There are plenty enough people already. The human race is in no danger of not perpetuating. In fact, insufficient resources and spoilage of the environment due to overpopulation seem are far bigger threats to the human race in the foreseeable future than a shortage of chicks, unless the shortage of chicks in China causes China to go to war.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
qx11984 February 25, 2013 at 19:55

I’m sorry guys but I think it’s too little to late.

Anyone attempting to raise a moral child (especially a moral female child) will have to ultimately have the backing of society.

It’ s inevitable that as a child ages the parent’s control and influence over that child begins to wane.

Any message given by aforementioned parent will have to be reinforced by the society that we live in and in this case the child will discover that dad is a kook, loser, or simply out of touch and old fashioned.

Aleister Crowley once said: “Do what thou wilt, that shall be the whole of the law.”

In these modern times we currently have very little in the way of truly good communities to raise a child in this country or any other western country that I’m aware of for that matter.

I suppose the trick would be to somehow inoculate one’s offspring but I for one have no idea how something like that could be accomplished when songs, popular media, and the realm of education are squarely on the side of a spiritually impoverished and demented outlook on life.

I’m only 28 years old and I have absolutely no idea how I’d raise a child in this day and age.

If anyone has any ideas I’m all ears.

Sorry it took so long to say that I’m fucking clueless guys.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Eric26 February 25, 2013 at 21:25

If all men stopped working society would collapse. If all women stopped working society would collapse. If fifty percent of the work force stopped working society would collapse. It’s a very simple concept.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6
Matt Strictland February 25, 2013 at 21:32

anoncoward, those thing may come, they may not.

They can if they work outside the lab and are cheap enough maybe can , handle reproduction. They cannot handle civilization, cannot raise children and no amount of fem-clones if such things ever come about will be able to maintain the complex society we have today. They cannot convince any red pill guy to put up with an burned out old carousel rider and she while she might have a kid later she cannot have a career, raise a child and have a personal life. A society of femclones jacked up on sleep reducing meds and anti depressants is not going to miraculously work better

Heck were are getting to the point (in the US at least) where 1st world infrastructure and antibiotics are difficult to maintain. I can’t see how changing the reproductive window will even matter

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Shepherd of Miorita February 25, 2013 at 23:08

This article and comments made me laugh:
http://news.yahoo.com/husbands-micromanagement-wears-thin-wife-home-050021281.html
Sounds like dream country for men, which one could be that?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Jaego February 25, 2013 at 23:15

We need a female initiation rite to combat Special Snowflake Syndrome. Perhaps all young women could write a memoir entitled “Me” and then be forced to read from it on a regular basis to an all male audience – and recieve mockery, cat calls, and gales of laughter. An older Woman could orchestrate the ritual and determine when snowflake had had enough.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
BC Dad February 26, 2013 at 01:42

“I submit that, deep down, a young girl wants to be protected and guided by her father into a successful marriage. ”

It takes a brave person to make that statement in this day and age.

Your point about sewing their wild oats after having children, not before, is interesting because it seems to match the time of life when women are the most sexually agressive – cougars anyone?

In China there’s a saying that men in their 30′s are wolves, but women in their 40′s are tigers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
geographybeefinalisthimself February 26, 2013 at 05:00

@ anoncoward

Greg Hampikian needs to go kill himself and the Idaho Innocence Project needs to hire someone else to do its work.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Tam the Bam February 26, 2013 at 06:39

geog.b: ” I’d like to see her drive an eighteen-wheeler.”
Yaaargle! Thanks. I’m going to have nightmares now, about being stuck commuting on a two-lane road filled with Dunning-Kruger socialites piloting forty-ton artics at 60 mph. In both directions …

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Tam the Bam February 26, 2013 at 07:04

Jean: “By the time the kids reach high school and need the least oversight the mother can begin her career and any employer can be assured that she will be more dedicated than if she had no children or had young children.
But feminists don’t want this. As Simone de Beauvoir wrote in “The Second Sex,” women cannot be given this choice because they will choose it.”

Because it’s not about having an actual job, and never has been. A job? you’re kidding me, right? You mean like, manual labor?! Oh, the horror!

If they’ve had kids, then they’ve shot their bolt and are “committed” to those kids (obviously the man, less so). SMV relegated to junk bond status as far as high-rank males are concerned, and they know it. Worth the odd punt if he is bored, and is relaxed about spunking a little bit of capital up the wall for fun.

So they might as well put their feet up and attempt to divest themselves of any irksome obligations acquired during the struggle to get their feet under the table. First, that nasty little man. Who does he think he is, even daring to look at a Princess like what I are??

All that college and “career” malarkey is simply a stratagem for (i) enhancing one’s own social status and (ii) getting tight with higher-value men than they could have ever hoped to circulate among, had they stopped at home or gone to sit at the tills in the mall straight from highschool. Even the richest-daddied girls aren’t eyeing their cohort of male peers at uni. Those .. those.. creeps

Their gaze is always directed upwards, older, stronger, richer, badder, famous. Of course, they lie about it and deny it by reflex, mainly to protect themseves from the wrath of their herd-rivals.
Never listen to what they say.
Watch the hands, not the mouth. By their deeds …

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Tam the Bam February 26, 2013 at 07:14

Attila: “Age differences of 10 or even 20 years aren’t anything unusual in some parts of Latin America and the Middle East.”

And I’ll bet no man goes past the ancient Greeks’ injunction to marry at thirty, either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
keyster February 26, 2013 at 09:59

Plus, it is no accident that no-fault divorce – actually “men’s fault” divorce – enables women to eject fathers from the household, thus eliminating their influence over daughters, while continuing to claim resources from fathers. This is feminism at work.

The alternative to no-fault divorce was to pay lawyers to prove to a judge who was more at fault than the other. Guess who typically came out on top after all that expense and legal wrangling anyway?

Most states have no-fault, but if one party chooses to contest the divorce it leaves the no-fault process. Guess who wins, after the lawyers that is? In the few non no-fault states one spouse can refuse divorce terms and refuse to leave the house (or joint property), thus making the children miserable. No-fault saves thousands in legal fees and get’s the misery overwith. Collaborative divorce is even better.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Dale March 1, 2013 at 00:22

Re: III.The Afterparty

Well, you had me on the first two points; I think your ideas had significant wisdom. This third part however is perhaps your attempt to deal with the evil reality, but of course I think that abandoning the marriage would be destructive, not only to the marriage, but to the now-grown children’s view of and desire for marriage, thus harming the chances that the children’s marriages will last long enough for the grandchildren to have intact homes until maturity.
Plus, I think we have drastically more than adequate evidence to see that when a wife abandons her marriage, she does drastic and long-lasting damage to the ex-husband’s wealth and emotional health.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Stephanie Tohill March 3, 2013 at 04:54

“Men should generally marry at around age 30, women at around age 20.”

Oh not this again…

So men get to experience the ways of business and women while women should be happy to be nothing more than brood mares straight after college?

There are those of us women who actively choose to delay motherhood to our late 20s / early 30s for the sames reasons men do. To reach a level of maturity, work, experience life before undertaking the huge responsibility of family.

Plus you forget – most young women are also looking for young men…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Richard March 3, 2013 at 07:08

The sports analogy is brilliant – obvious but only after it has been pointed out.

The basic denial of human physiology in the “science-loving” left is truly something to behold (as evidenced by Stefanie Trollhill above).

Knocking one out of the park and getting knocked up are best done before 30.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
lee September 15, 2013 at 18:30

Women should not get pregnant til well into twenties. Teens have narrower underdeveloped hips. I know a teen girl who had serious difficult labor and serious internal injuries. Male testicles age just like ovaries. The younger the balls the healthier the sperm. Only young handsome men deserve young beautiful women. You deserve your equal in looks, wealth, age. That’s a bitter pill for most men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: