On Valentine’s Day this year, I heard a man calling in to a radio program to ask how to show his wife love.  You see, the man’s wife is a career woman in the medical industry, and focuses all her energies on her job as a heart doctor.  She’s away from the home for long periods, and the husband struggles to find time to spend with her.

Idiocracy: Still not quite ready for a Family

The man stated that while their friends are buying houses and starting families, they aren’t even considering a family, because his wife states she can barely take care of herself, much less raise children.

Been there, done that

She’s too busy to even enjoy the monthly massage package he purchased her, and she is currently several months behind.  This poor cucked man, who obviously isn’t getting to touch, much less make love to, his own wife, is married to a career woman who isn’t even interested in the indirect pleasure he offers through the transitive purchase of another massaging her body.  The husband is relegated to occasionally cooking her a home cooked meal, hoping she has time to enjoy it.  What a sad, miserable, lonely life.

Hypergamous Narcissism

I later found the program online: The economy of single women (cucked caller at 41 minute mark). It begins with a Jewish female journalist from Columbia University lamenting that jewelry purchases have traditionally been romantic gifts one partner gives to the other, but now jewelry store Tiffany is also marketing to the “self-purchasing woman.”

As the journalist states, women are tired of waiting around for a man to buy her something because she deserves it (earning it) and instead are making these “just because” purchases.  In other words, putting forth the effort to attract a man for more than a couple of weeks, or showing him affection and care and devotion, is too difficult for her, so she decides to reward herself with what society has always deemed an outward sign that a woman is successfully pleasing a man—jewelry.

Why so many bags? Just ’cause.

This is primarily made possible by women’s entry into the workforce, and declining marriage rates.  The feminist journalists erroneously state that single career women have greater economic power than they did before, so they are able to better afford things like jewelry.  In actuality, a single woman, needing her own house or apartment, car, stove, microwave, furniture, etc. spends far more than a married couple does on these expensive items, and the single working girl’s disposable income is far lower.

Female Math

The primary difference is that a man as head of household is going to prioritize household expenses and severely limit the amount of purchases on luxuries like jewelry, where the single woman will spend freely on such low value, high cost items, as long as she has the money in her pocketbook, or more likely, available on credit, “just because.”

Ironically, this removes most of the underlying value of the jewelry itself.  Apart from being semi-rare, the main value in jewelry is not in its underlying mineral content, but in the romantic sentiments that go along with said gift.  There is both a financial and emotional value attached above and beyond the base value of the metal or stone.

Indirect Social Proof: An obvious gift from a man she’s pleasing

Diamond engagement rings have a far higher markup than other precious stones, because of their emotional connotation to a marriage or engagement.  I don’t really care about the silly trinkets women want or use, but the point is, they do, and they are destroying their intrinsic value.

Becoming More Materialistic While Losing All Shame

As the story points out, women 50 years ago would lie if they had bought jewelry for themselves, because they knew it was a meaningless display of vacant emotion and crass commerce, but today women have no such shame.  A diamond is moving away from a display of a partner’s love to selfish materialism (which is fine by me).

I’m confused.. is this empowering and brave, or am I a social creature that craves interaction?

More feminists joined, including one who operates the blog Alone In Atlanta, an ironic title considering Atlanta has one of the best demographics for young singles to meet and form relationships in America.  They continued with the usual brainwashing that women don’t need a partner, and that women can now do everything that they formerly needed a husband for, including economic needs, sex, and having children.  This is certainly true, as I have discussed before, but the main question remains: Why is society pushing this destructive narrative?

Why Are Women Being Educated?

I’ve been considering this question over the past week after Roosh posed the question Why Are Women Being Educated? after encountering a young female in her fertile prime squandering the huge resources society devotes to give her a career in place of a man.

This article reminds me of another controversial idea I read years ago—the chapter on marriage in Harry Browne’s book How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World.

Browne advocated shunning legal marriage, making personal agreements directly with your partner instead of entering into the dangerous three-way marriage contract with the government, and also arguing that lifetime romantic love is unnatural.  Much like many readers may feel with ROK, I agreed with almost everything else presented in the book, but this one chapter seemed too different and unconventional.  Fast forward a decade, and the idea seems like common sense.

Perhaps you rarely question things that are taken for granted in our culture, but spend some time over the next few weeks pondering why we educate women so highly, and what are the results.

We All Cannot Casually Fornicate Or MGTOW

What happens to a society where men and women no longer want to raise families together?  It dies.  If it’s not an obvious death, then it evolves into something that resembles the former society in name only.  Many would say this has already happened in America.  If not, give us a few generations where productive people do not form families, and we are reliant on other cultures to provide children and sustainability to the economy and eventually the original society is gone.

Yale: How much are they really contributing?

Why is career elevated above family?  I find myself on a similar path as many here, who after enjoying some short term fun with women, question what I really want from life.  While an endless single life of meeting new women, traveling and exploring the world, and using clown game on myself to provide endless fun and enjoyment, can be appealing on an individual level, it is a recipe for cultural extinction.

The life of a promiscuous nomad should be like that of a career girl:  an option that is always available, but not one that society pushes and glamorizes.

Propaganda Used to Have Positive Goals

The truth is women in America were always free to have a career if that’s what they truly wanted.  Most of them just didn’t want it.  Or changed their mind when they saw how difficult it was.  Even today, women are doing this.  A 2012 study in the peer reviewed Journal of Human Capital revealed that most women physicians do not work sufficient hours to break even on the financial investment in medical school.

They choose to work shorter hours, or drop out of the profession after entering it and finding it too demanding.  The costs of medical school represent huge societal investments.  Besides the financial loss, for every woman that finishes medical school, a man is not educated with the skills to be a physician, depriving society of the benefits of a needed service, and driving up the cost of health care.  The study concludes:

The majority of women physicians do not appear to work enough hours earning the physician-wage premium to amortize that profession’s higher upfront investments.

So why are we educating them to be physicians?  Can anyone provide a rational answer?

Women Aren’t Happy Being Men

The irony is that female doctors are the ones choosing to work part time, because they do not value their career highly.  And this is a laudable thing!

While the young propagandized feminist may start out thinking her career will be a source of happiness, she soon finds out that she has other priorities in life, and chooses to work fewer hours in order to give more time to family, hobbies, or other non-career goals.  Which is consistent with women’s nature.  Women are not happiest being career drones.  Women are not happiest being highly educated.  Women are not happiest being men.

Western women are, and have been for all my life, free to choose whatever life they want for themselves.  But we should stop actively encouraging them to make anti-family choices that will make them unhappy, and will destroy our identity and culture.  If anything, we should encourage them to nurture their feminine side, to foster beauty and embrace fertility, to recognize they are happiest when they are pleasing and caring for a man who is happy to be with her.  This is family.  This is future.  This is culture.

Read More: Is Genocide On The Elite Agenda?