I enjoyed reading this so much (my poor husband just got bombarded with fun facts on the sofa next to me)! Particularly interesting to see how the sentiment score preceeding the word 'wife' jumped up in the 17th century, absolutely fascinating stuff (ps. I would have greatly enjoyed that wedding speech).
There are so many directions and generalizations in this post that it is difficult to comment. Therefore, I’ll focus on the false notion that stigmatizing divorce prevents women from fleeing abuse in absolute terms. Stigmatizing divorce is not a south Asian phenomena, and has been part of cultural practice at various points in human history throughout the world. In Europe for example, many countries began legalizing no fault divorce around the 1970s. While no fault divorce and divorce as a result of abuse are separate categories, nevertheless, it is clear that divorce was and still is stigmatized throughout the world. The claim that divorce is a necessary means in exiting abuse should be disputed. The term “separation” has been entirely absent from the discussion and has a clear distinction from divorce. For societies with stigmatized divorce, separation is a mechanism in which a spouse may escape abuse to another house whether family, friend, or private residence followed by rehabilitating the abusive spouse and reconciling the marriage, if possible, should rehabilitation be successful. Even in cases of abuse, separation provides an alternative to divorce for a spouse to flee abuse while maintaining a marriage. We know through research that individuals who view divorce as morally wrong have higher marital stability and increased happiness. We also know that a majority of unhappy couples that avoid divorce end up happily married five years later. In an era of glamorizing divorce as a means of liberation, the quiet mechanism of separation is ignored as the better alternative to handling troubled marriages. As I’ve said, there’s too many topics in a short post to dive deep into the errors. The wheel does not need to be reinvented. Get married, have kids, put down your hedonistic desires, and flee the vices of fornication, divorce, abortion, pornography, homosexuality, and every other product of the sexual revolution. Do as your ancestors did who had no trouble marrying and having kids as evident in the fact that 90% of Americans were married by age 30 in 1960. As if you hate 1960 American culture, there are countless cultures and time periods to chose where men and women had no issues getting married and having kids. Men and women aren’t dogs where desired behavior is achieved with a reward system. Promote traditional religious practice, discipline, virtue, and self sacrifice over any ideology that pits the sexes against each other and assumes the worst in people.
The distinction between courtship requiring emotional labour versus just providing resources is fascinating. Makes me wonder how much of contemporary gender dynamics still hinges on that same tension.
Great article. I'd be curious as to your take on how monogamy has been good for women historically, which you seem to imply, and maybe at present. Somehow it feels kind of uncool right now to make a liberal/progressive/feminist argument for monogamy when conservatives make such rigid ones. But at the same time it seems like maybe an explicit liberal or feminist monogamy argument is really needed in the culture. I can see that committing to one another sexually puts pressure on both parties in a marriage to treat each other well ... except when it doesn't? It's a really interesting cultural debate around monogamy right now with morays kind of up for grabs.
Pretty happy that state capacity declines and mass migration mean this gay culture & its attempted assimilation abroad is dead. Hail the clannish European!
Many things contributed to the discipline of men. For example, the individualization of violence in the growing European cities of the modern era. There were no clans or extended families that would come after you for revenge. You were simply killed, and that was it. Boxing, which grew out of English fist fighting, is also about trust. It means that none of the participants will pull out a knife. The founding fathers gave people freedom, and Colt equalized their chances (a culture of honor is extremely detrimental to survival).
Idea that people prefer AI to the attention of the opposite sex is completely ridiculous. They simply cant secure it. And they will not stop "dumping the market" if you take away their porn. Lonely people are already sufferr. At least leave them AI pornography.
Seems to go along well with studies showing the men women find most attractive are not the purest egalitarians, but those demonstrating benevolent sexism? Or no, that's a contradiction?
(Clap for the simp's role in building civilization!)
Thank you for this important work. Feels like it could not be more relevant at the moment.
Can we think of courtship as a kind of coordination "technology"? Then AI substitutes are threatening not just incentives, but the social infrastructure that sustains social life in general.
I've been thinking more and more of social life in terms of a "synchronization tax" that we pay for relationships with one another. Keeping it symmetric and low is hard work.
I enjoyed reading this so much (my poor husband just got bombarded with fun facts on the sofa next to me)! Particularly interesting to see how the sentiment score preceeding the word 'wife' jumped up in the 17th century, absolutely fascinating stuff (ps. I would have greatly enjoyed that wedding speech).
Thank you so much Jasmine! Yes, that graph is fascinating!
There are so many directions and generalizations in this post that it is difficult to comment. Therefore, I’ll focus on the false notion that stigmatizing divorce prevents women from fleeing abuse in absolute terms. Stigmatizing divorce is not a south Asian phenomena, and has been part of cultural practice at various points in human history throughout the world. In Europe for example, many countries began legalizing no fault divorce around the 1970s. While no fault divorce and divorce as a result of abuse are separate categories, nevertheless, it is clear that divorce was and still is stigmatized throughout the world. The claim that divorce is a necessary means in exiting abuse should be disputed. The term “separation” has been entirely absent from the discussion and has a clear distinction from divorce. For societies with stigmatized divorce, separation is a mechanism in which a spouse may escape abuse to another house whether family, friend, or private residence followed by rehabilitating the abusive spouse and reconciling the marriage, if possible, should rehabilitation be successful. Even in cases of abuse, separation provides an alternative to divorce for a spouse to flee abuse while maintaining a marriage. We know through research that individuals who view divorce as morally wrong have higher marital stability and increased happiness. We also know that a majority of unhappy couples that avoid divorce end up happily married five years later. In an era of glamorizing divorce as a means of liberation, the quiet mechanism of separation is ignored as the better alternative to handling troubled marriages. As I’ve said, there’s too many topics in a short post to dive deep into the errors. The wheel does not need to be reinvented. Get married, have kids, put down your hedonistic desires, and flee the vices of fornication, divorce, abortion, pornography, homosexuality, and every other product of the sexual revolution. Do as your ancestors did who had no trouble marrying and having kids as evident in the fact that 90% of Americans were married by age 30 in 1960. As if you hate 1960 American culture, there are countless cultures and time periods to chose where men and women had no issues getting married and having kids. Men and women aren’t dogs where desired behavior is achieved with a reward system. Promote traditional religious practice, discipline, virtue, and self sacrifice over any ideology that pits the sexes against each other and assumes the worst in people.
The distinction between courtship requiring emotional labour versus just providing resources is fascinating. Makes me wonder how much of contemporary gender dynamics still hinges on that same tension.
Great article. I'd be curious as to your take on how monogamy has been good for women historically, which you seem to imply, and maybe at present. Somehow it feels kind of uncool right now to make a liberal/progressive/feminist argument for monogamy when conservatives make such rigid ones. But at the same time it seems like maybe an explicit liberal or feminist monogamy argument is really needed in the culture. I can see that committing to one another sexually puts pressure on both parties in a marriage to treat each other well ... except when it doesn't? It's a really interesting cultural debate around monogamy right now with morays kind of up for grabs.
Pretty happy that state capacity declines and mass migration mean this gay culture & its attempted assimilation abroad is dead. Hail the clannish European!
Many things contributed to the discipline of men. For example, the individualization of violence in the growing European cities of the modern era. There were no clans or extended families that would come after you for revenge. You were simply killed, and that was it. Boxing, which grew out of English fist fighting, is also about trust. It means that none of the participants will pull out a knife. The founding fathers gave people freedom, and Colt equalized their chances (a culture of honor is extremely detrimental to survival).
Idea that people prefer AI to the attention of the opposite sex is completely ridiculous. They simply cant secure it. And they will not stop "dumping the market" if you take away their porn. Lonely people are already sufferr. At least leave them AI pornography.
P.S. Do you really consider men to be cattle?
Loved this!
You might like this related piece I wrote a while back: https://www.kvetch.au/p/wife-economics-and-the-domestication-e8f
Seems to go along well with studies showing the men women find most attractive are not the purest egalitarians, but those demonstrating benevolent sexism? Or no, that's a contradiction?
(Clap for the simp's role in building civilization!)
Your pdf witchcraft links are broken. They go to a page saying the session token has timed out.
Thank you for this important work. Feels like it could not be more relevant at the moment.
Can we think of courtship as a kind of coordination "technology"? Then AI substitutes are threatening not just incentives, but the social infrastructure that sustains social life in general.
I've been thinking more and more of social life in terms of a "synchronization tax" that we pay for relationships with one another. Keeping it symmetric and low is hard work.
https://www.symmetrybroken.com/the-synchronization-tax/
You should lift weights.