Seeking a Libertarian opinion.

[Betruger]

Women are innately selfish creatures, they will do what's best for them first and foremost, you can and will get left high and dry. "I'm sorry but its not working out, I need to discover who I really am, ohh and give me your money cause I need funds to do this self discovering".

The problem is cluelessness, if this somehow turns up after marriage "out of the blue".

Both men and women are selfish.

I've pretty much decided that if I do marry, it'll be to a women from east / south-east Asia, or east-Europe.

Character trumps culture. Traditions only stifle the real one-of-a-kind animal under all that conformism.

[KitemanSA]

The absolute last thing I need is my significant other picking up on the bad habits of the "independent, empowered western female". I guess its a good thing I have no intention of returning to the USA anytime in the next decade.

There is nothing wrong with the "independent, empowered western female"; it is the medieval marriage laws that are the problem.

If divorce was as simple and clean as marriage, there would not be the problems there are now.

[ladajo]

Women are innately selfish creatures, they will do what's best for them first and foremost, you can and will get left high and dry. "I'm sorry but its not working out, I need to discover who I really am, ohh and give me your money cause I need funds to do this self discovering".

The problem is cluelessness, if this somehow turns up after marriage "out of the blue".

Both men and women are selfish.

I've pretty much decided that if I do marry, it'll be to a women from east / south-east Asia, or east-Europe.

Character trumps culture. Traditions only stifle the real one-of-a-kind animal under all that conformism.

Fundamentally it is between the two people. Backgrounds are secondary.
I was born and raised in New Zealand, came of age in the US, and have been married to a Turkish woman, who I met while working there, for 16 years. We have lived in the states and europe since, and travelled all over the world. We do this, because we both accept each other and choose to. It is between the two, all the rest is external noise.

[palladin9479]

The absolute last thing I need is my significant other picking up on the bad habits of the "independent, empowered western female". I guess its a good thing I have no intention of returning to the USA anytime in the next decade.

There is nothing wrong with the "independent, empowered western female"; it is the medieval marriage laws that are the problem.

If divorce was as simple and clean as marriage, there would not be the problems there are now.

On paper there is absolutely nothing wrong with feminism, in practice it can and will result in an extreme version of hyper-gamy.

The whole idea of marriage is to not require a divorce in the first place. After being married for 10 years and having a couple kids, no women should ever do the "I'm sorry but I need to discover myself" routine and bail. Yet feminism teaches women to do exactly that. That they ~should~ desire to do whatever they want and not be "enslaved" by their reproductive organs. Yet when it comes to child rearing someone must take care of the kids and do the home making. Male or Female doesn't matter who, but someone needs to stay home with the kids. "Splitting" doesn't work because one of you is away for eight to twelve hours at a time and needs to focus on career development and bread winning capabilities.

Anyhow the root of this part of the problem is how western women see marriage. Their taught it's some sort of fantasy land where they'll be happy and connected in some meaningful level. That they'll have their dreams fulfilled and spend their time eating unicorn rainbows. They run around with the idea that their future husband needs to be "Mr Perfect" and have this insane laundry list of requirements that no man could ever meet. Then they eventually settle as they get older and harry this chip on their shoulder on why their "inadequate" husband couldn't be "Mr Perfect".

East Asia / East Europe cultures tend to treat marriage as a business relationship rather then some mysterious romantic "The One" nonsense. Females look for males who have the appropriate character traits to be good bread winners and good fathers. Men look for females who have the required traits to be good mothers and home makers. Both have intense pressure from their parents, especially if their the oldest male child, to find mates that are compatible with their family. The family unit is more important than any single member, mothers don't go wondering off to "discover who they are" while leaving their husband with the kids. A women doing that would become a pariah amongst her family members.

For that same reason a husband who didn't have a job would be severely reprimanded by his parents as being a failure. He goes too long without employment then his wife is considered justified in leaving him and taking the kids. They usually don't, but it's still a pretty big psychological burden on him. The wife also is responsible for the children's education and they take this extremely seriously. A husband gets yelled at for trying to make education or financial decisions. And in more "traditional" couples the husband gets yelled at for stepping into the meal preparation area (aka kitchen). The women ends up with more power / control then the male in the marriage.

Anyhow the whole point of this is to outline that any successful union requires separate and defined roles for each member. These should be established prior to the union and both should go in knowing that it's a life long commitment to each other. Marriage isn't for love, it's to create a stable environment to raise children. It's focus should be building and maintaining the family unit.

And before anyone makes snide comments, you can reverse male / female roles with everything I stated above. I simply used the traditional role assignments, there is nothing wrong with switching things around due to different bread winning skills. And to underscore this I'll use my own experience.

My father is a disabled Vietnam vet, he is unable to maintain a job and receives government disability money. Because of this he stayed home and raised me and my six brothers / sisters (I'm #5 of 7) while my mother who was an LPN worked all sorts of crazy hours to bring home a meager pay check. Eventually she become a RN and things became a bit better, but she was still gone most of the time. It was dad who cooked meals and did the child raising, but it was mom who did the financial management, bill paying and food shopping (dad wasn't too good in crowded areas).

So I would find no problem with my significant other being some corporate executive, engineer, doctor or other high paying (higher then myself) profession. I would gladly stay home and do all the house stuff while their off bringing me back money. It's not sexist its just being rational and responsible.

[palladin9479]

Hmm I think my "Women are selfish" wasn't clearly stated.

Selfish as they now expect to be able to have a career, travel the world, have active social lives and still raise a family. Without serious financial assistance this isn't possible.

Raising children in and of itself rules out many other options due to the time commitments involved. Also having two adults with full fledged careers is going to be ridiculously difficult. Career advancement often hings on being able to quickly move from one location to another for job opportunities. This is somewhat possible for a family when it's one working member, but both working 40~60 hours a week and being required to move around is going to be a train-wreck of stress and resentment for the adults, and a nightmare for the children. One of the two needs to give up their career aspirations for family stability, and if its the women she's gonna end up blaming the man for it.

I know this isn't all women, but it's a frightening enough percentage to scare eligible young bachelors away from western women. Why on earth would I marry someone, invest both financial and emotional capitol into the relationship, have kids, devote my life to educating and raising those kids, only to have the women split whenever she's tired of being a "mom". Don't pretend this doesn't happen, I personally know a long line of people this personally happened too. Starting with my dads first wife (first four children) and ending with my youngest sister (she split with her husband because he didn't want her drinking and partying when they had a kid).

[KitemanSA]

The absolute last thing I need is my significant other picking up on the bad habits of the "independent, empowered western female". I guess its a good thing I have no intention of returning to the USA anytime in the next decade.

There is nothing wrong with the "independent, empowered western female"; it is the medieval marriage laws that are the problem.

If divorce was as simple and clean as marriage, there would not be the problems there are now.

It strikes me that the CONVERSE is true also.
If you couldn't get married without all the legal document reading and contract signing, people would not get married on the spur of the moment, but the marriage disolution should be cleaner and more equitable.

Well, I can dream, no?

[Diogenes]

Only problem with that line of reasoning is that you can't take em back to the states, at least not until you've been together awhile and had a few kids.

The absolute last thing I need is my significant other picking up on the bad habits of the "independent, empowered western female". I guess its a good thing I have no intention of returning to the USA anytime in the next decade.

I know countless men who married foreign wives and their major lament is that their wives were wonderful until they got back to America and the women became "Americanized" and now they aren't worth a sh*t.

In one case, I have a friend that was an air force C-130 pilot stationed in the Philippines. (Loves Filipino girls!) He has repeatedly told me "I've traveled all over the world, and out there it is generally believed that American men make the best husbands in the world, while American Women are thought to make the worst wives. " (He ended up marrying a Russian woman, and now he too laments she has become "Americanized." )

[palladin9479]

Only problem with that line of reasoning is that you can't take em back to the states, at least not until you've been together awhile and had a few kids.

The absolute last thing I need is my significant other picking up on the bad habits of the "independent, empowered western female". I guess its a good thing I have no intention of returning to the USA anytime in the next decade.

I know countless men who married foreign wives and their major lament is that their wives were wonderful until they got back to America and the women became "Americanized" and now they aren't worth a sh*t.

In one case, I have a friend that was an air force C-130 pilot stationed in the Philippines. (Loves Filipino girls!) He has repeatedly told me "I've traveled all over the world, and out there it is generally believed that American men make the best husbands in the world, while American Women are thought to make the worst wives. " (He ended up marrying a Russian woman, and now he too laments she has become "Americanized." )

It's scary, truly scary. The moment they start hanging around other "American" wives who tell them that it's "ok" to treat their husbands like sh!t because their husbands deserve to be treated that way. Also their respect goes down when they see that while compared to their home country their American husband is wealthy, but compared to the USA their husband is just average.

$2000 a month will buy you a upper class life style in PI, you'll live large. $2000 a month is barely above poverty line in the USA. In PI their happy just to have enough food to eat for the month and not to have to go outside to use the restroom. In the USA their not happy unless they have all the newest toys and get to go shopping every month for that new purse. It's all about perspective.

Traveling around East / South East Asia has taught me a new way to look at things, and from what I can see people in the USA are spoiled, greedy and absolute idiots.

[CaptainBeowulf]

Just a comment on this part of the original article:

Before 1960, the price of sex was held fairly high by fear of pregnancy and social stigmatization. Then came the Pill; fear of pregnancy receded and social stigmatization of unwed birth effectively collapsed with it. But in the absence of these restraints, we found out something interesting; women, as a group, want nookie now more than is good for their marriage prospects. That is, the operation of female desire is poorly matched to their most effective reproductive strategy – they’re too easily pulled into casual sex and behaviors they can fool themselves aren’t pure hedonism.

This is confusing biological reproductive strategy with social reproductive strategy. From a biological perspective, it's very easy to argue it both ways:

1. A female should attract a strong mate for the long term who is effective at fighting off wild beasts and competitors, getting food, and protecting the offspring.

2. A female maximizes the genetic diversity of her offspring by having them all fathered by different males. This increased diversity increases the likelihood that some of her descendant lineages will survive.

The conflict between these two biological imperatives also creates a certain motive for cuckolding. However, in the end it all depends on the person - humans do not have to be slaves to their biological instincts if they choose not to be.

My most basic feeling, as a borderline libertarian, is that people - male and female - allow social conventions and peer pressure to dictate their sexual behaviour far too often. The "dating game" today is as ridiculous and silly as any of the ceremonies from 50 or 100 years ago. People should just be themselves and to f*ck with whatever the current conventions are.

Don't want to f*ck on the first date? Don't. Want to? Then do it.

[CaptainBeowulf]

I have a bit more to add:

From one point of view, we hear all about how women held various sorts of power in the past. They were able to hold out on sex. Male mortality was higher because men went out to dangerous jobs. Women ran the household and in some cases had a de facto, though not legal, predominant say about how the money a husband earned was spent.

We also hear about how now women are frustrated, because they want a man who makes more money/is a bit brighter/is a bit older etc. than they are.

Basically, this is trying to have it both ways. People who look at it logically, male or female, realize that all along both sexes wanted an equal and respected role in marriage, even if the duties of marriage have been split up between the sexes in different ways over time.

People don't look at it logically because, again, they allow themselves to be slaves to social convention. Young people are told that they are supposed to want certain attributes in the opposite sex, and they buy it. Realistically, every couple should be able to come to their own consensus on how to divide up the requirements of their marriage.

[palladin9479]

Mostly agree with one difference.

We also hear about how now women are frustrated, because they want a man who makes more money/is a bit brighter/is a bit older etc. than they are.

This can be distilled down to something easier. All women want a mate who they believe is worth more then they are. The "worth" isn't necessarily a monetary value but a subjective judgement by the women. During their young and early adolescent years girls are taught the value of these traits, usually from their family.

If a girl is taught that brown haired, blue eyed men with athletic build are more valuable then blond haired, green eyed men with slim build then they will choose the former over the later. If their taught men with a stable life style and a predictable earning potential are worth more then men with a wild lifestyle and an unpredictable earning potential then they'll chose the former over the later. Things like logic and reason do not factor into the female mate selection process. This is something people always screw up, they think logic and reason are being used when it's a purely instinctual process. Most of the time the women are themselves completely unaware of this process and just go on their "intuition" and "how they feel", which are just representations of this instinctual process.

There is absolutely no such that as "be yourself". Its just code words for "don't care whats going on and hope your lucky enough that a female's instincts find you desirable".

Now that all being said, humans are thinking creatures and we are capable of putting our emotions and instincts aside. Men and women can and will often do things that their instincts disagree with, usually through social obligations and expectations. This is why conservative countries tend to have more stable marriages, the members have been coerced to maintain the relationship by their social obligations. More liberal countries experience the exact opposite, without social obligations / expectations to keep the union together your left with relying on the instincts of the male and female to maintain their current mates. Unfortunately human instincts don't work that way, the union only stays together long enough to ween the children off dependency on the parents before both parents have instinctual desires to seek new partners for maximum genetic diversity.[/quote]

[Diogenes]

It's scary, truly scary. The moment they start hanging around other "American" wives who tell them that it's "ok" to treat their husbands like sh!t because their husbands deserve to be treated that way. Also their respect goes down when they see that while compared to their home country their American husband is wealthy, but compared to the USA their husband is just average.

$2000 a month will buy you a upper class life style in PI, you'll live large. $2000 a month is barely above poverty line in the USA. In PI their happy just to have enough food to eat for the month and not to have to go outside to use the restroom. In the USA their not happy unless they have all the newest toys and get to go shopping every month for that new purse. It's all about perspective.

Traveling around East / South East Asia has taught me a new way to look at things, and from what I can see people in the USA are spoiled, greedy and absolute idiots.

Amen! Preach it Brother! I personally think Liberalism is a side effect of prosperity.

[Diogenes]

Just a comment on this part of the original article:

Before 1960, the price of sex was held fairly high by fear of pregnancy and social stigmatization. Then came the Pill; fear of pregnancy receded and social stigmatization of unwed birth effectively collapsed with it. But in the absence of these restraints, we found out something interesting; women, as a group, want nookie now more than is good for their marriage prospects. That is, the operation of female desire is poorly matched to their most effective reproductive strategy – they’re too easily pulled into casual sex and behaviors they can fool themselves aren’t pure hedonism.

This is confusing biological reproductive strategy with social reproductive strategy. From a biological perspective, it's very easy to argue it both ways:

1. A female should attract a strong mate for the long term who is effective at fighting off wild beasts and competitors, getting food, and protecting the offspring.

2. A female maximizes the genetic diversity of her offspring by having them all fathered by different males. This increased diversity increases the likelihood that some of her descendant lineages will survive.

The conflict between these two biological imperatives also creates a certain motive for cuckolding. However, in the end it all depends on the person - humans do not have to be slaves to their biological instincts if they choose not to be.

My most basic feeling, as a borderline libertarian, is that people - male and female - allow social conventions and peer pressure to dictate their sexual behaviour far too often. The "dating game" today is as ridiculous and silly as any of the ceremonies from 50 or 100 years ago. People should just be themselves and to f*ck with whatever the current conventions are.

Don't want to f*ck on the first date? Don't. Want to? Then do it.

I don't think you accurately assess the sociological/evolutionary purpose for all of those social conventions. I'm not going to go into why they exist because that would take too long, but I am going to ask if you have ever heard of Chesterton's fence?

[Diogenes]

Why Are Women More Promiscuous Than Ever?

This shift is being blamed on several factors. For one, gender equality comes into play. With the balance between men and women evening out in the workplace and financially, women are behaving in ways that were once stereotypically male. There's also the invention of the Pill that has given women freedom and control over their bodies that didn't exist in the past. Blame is also being placed on Internet porn that is "desensitizing" us to what was once regarded as sacred between a husband and wife.

http://www.yourtango.com/2011102326/why ... cuous-ever

[MSimon]

When the M/F ratio goes above 1.05 or below .95 relations between the sexes change. Birth control and porn operate only at the margins of the larger biological systems. Too many women - girls gone wild. Too many men - pedestalizing of women. Colleges these days with ratios running from .9 to .5 are the happy hunting ground for men. Also any city where the numbers are skewed. Wash., DC fer instance.

What changed? Birth mortality mostly.