Monday, September 17, 2007

Marriage = the Non-Commital Commitment


Here's another example of the proliferation of feminist attitudes held in common by Western Women that is destroying marriage as an institution.

From The Starter Husband, from Marie Claire Magazine.

The Starter Husband You’d never buy a car without test-driving it first, right? So why settle into a lifelong marriage before trying one on for size?

"I’m just really not ready to be committed like this.” That’s what Andi said to Tucker, her husband of 11 months, after she came home from a crazy day at work two years ago with an overwhelming urge to quit her marriage. Today. Right now. “This just isn’t for me.”

She spoke stoically — no tears, no histrionics. She had been imagining this moment since she moved out of their condo a few months earlier, but she wanted to ease him into the inevitable — to somehow tiptoe her way through the minefield of Tucker’s emotions. But now, having scored a direct hit with those crushing words, she watched Tucker crumple against the dining-room table. “I don’t understand,” he said, over and over. “We’re married.”

“Look, we can do this now, or we can do this five years from now when it’s a lot messier,” Andi said, softening her voice but not her position. “I want a divorce.” The guy didn’t really do anything to deserve this, she thought, looking at Tucker’s ashen face. He must think I’m a monster. Watching her husband shuffle to the door of her temporary apartment, Andi felt awful. But mostly, she felt unbelievably relieved.


This is the perfect example of how feminists have indoctrinated modern women to be self-centered and entitled...and how their agenda of no-fault divorce have absolutely gutted the institution of marriage by pandering to women's base desires.

This selfish women is the perfect example of why more and more Western Men are choosing to forgo marriage altogether and either go their own way or become non-committal pick up artists sport fucking as many sluts as possible.


Within months of promising to love and honor and cherish Tucker forever, she knew she had made a huge mistake. The problem? He was boring.

Isn't that just perfect?

This is EXACTLY why marriage as the building block of society, is crumbling at it's very foundation.

The proliferation of feminist attitudes and norms have now led us to a state where women look at marriage as no big commitment, something to easily get out of...in fact it is something that benefits the woman, until she gets "bored," at which point she gets to cash out, gutting her poor, unsuspecting husband, cleaning out his house, bank account and heart.

"He must think I'm a monster."

That's because, my dear, you are.

Prior to "No-Fault Divorce" women knew that getting married was a lifelong commitment...and it was one that they weighed much more seriously before saying "I do." And even when they did "take the plunge," it took a lot more than just being "bored" before she even THOUGHT about destroying her husband's (and children's) lives to "feel relieved."

The seriousness of the marriage commitment has been abrogated by our laws...laws passed by the feminists. It appears that the prevailing attitude of Western women today is that commitment to marriage is not serious, because marriage has become the non-commital commitment.

8 comments:

MikeeUSA said...

Start making a list.
She needs to die when the revolution come (which will be about whenever the next huge economic downturn occurs: with no family-life to fall back on there will only be violence and murder to serve as an escape).

--MikeeUSA--

Blademonkey said...

Yeah, and women wonder why men won't commit, there's no guarantee. In the times when a man's word is his honor and bond, commitment to one's vow is to be expected. Now, not so much. The marriage vows sounds as empty as ever when a women can easily break the union with ease. I guess "'til death do you part" must be amended with "unless you deem him to be boring, or flawed in some ways, or to be human".

I walk my own path.

Uncharted Thoughts said...

Most women today lead dull, pointless, depressing, soul crushing lives.
Dating is there only escape from there horrible lives.
Marriage ends this distraction, so they are back to being miserable.
They do not want to face reality. They divorce so they can resume being distracted.

Women can never be pleased, only distracted.

Anonymous said...

pinpoint analysis by uncharted thoughts

Kim said...

"I’m just really not ready to be committed like this.”

Something that should have been decided long before she got married. These women enter into marriage, what should be a sacred union, with no concept of it being a lifelong commitment. Ofcourse, the starter husbands aren't the only casualties...what about the starter kids? Just more victims in the wife's journey to empowerment and 'finding herself'.

Women can never be pleased, only distracted.

I don't entirely agree. Women who have denied their femininity and true natures in pursuit of being what feminism has told them they should be, can never be pleased. I find myself being very pleased and contented with my life and marriage.

Anonymous said...

As a feminist, I believe that the law should permit no fault divorce. Otherwise, victims of abuse (male or female) may find themselves trapped with their abusers with no way out. It can be very difficult to prove abuse and victims are often disbelieved. As an MRA, you should recognize that this is particularly true of male abuse victims. Do you really want the male abuse victim to have his assets all tied up in his abuser's control contingent on him being able to convince a court that he is a victim? I believe that it is extremely difficult for victims of both sexes to establish marital abuse and that is why I support unilateral no-fault divorce.

In addition, I believe that a married couple's misery can be worse for their children than a separation. (I know because I was the child of parents who should have divorced but didn't. I am emotionally scarred by their marriage far more than I would have been by divorce. I prayed for divorce every day when I was little.)

However, feminists have not consistently supported no fault divorce. The New York chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) opposes unilateral no-fault divorce, on the ground that it fails to protect homemakers who can be unilaterally dumped and thus placed in a lower economic category by their more economically powerful husbands. I think that people who care about both sexes equally (as I do) can make meritorious arguments both ways, but ultimately I am just uncomfortable with forcing victims to prove marital abuse in order to escape.

That having been said, I believe that it is morally wrong to unilaterally terminate a marriage after having taken vows, unless there is abuse. I personally would never divorce my husband unless we mutually agreed that we both want divorce, or unless he abused me. But if the State were to deny me the fail-safe of unilateral no-fault divorce, I probably wouldn't want to get married in the first place.


Pendragon 3

Anonymous said...

I also disagree that divorce destroys lives. I know plenty of well-adjusted children of divorce, and I know plenty of people who have gotten back in the saddle after a divorce.

Sure, I would be emotionally distraught for a long time if my husband left me. But I am sure that I would ultimately recover.

Anonymous said...

That last comment was from Pendragon 3. I don't have a google handle.