There is much hostility toward the idea of matrimony within the manosphere, and understandably so. Most of those familiar with this part of the internet come from western nations and are therefore familiar with what the skyrocketing divorce rates, punitive alimony and biased custody laws associated with Western marriage have done to men.
In spite of this, I suspect that the idea of marriage has not entirely lost its luster for many of us. In fact, I’d posit that quite a few denizens of the manosphere would still be open to it under the right circumstances, at least in the long term. I know that I am one of them.
It is these circumstances that determine the wisdom of a male considering the idea of marriage in the modern age, separating the gullible saps from the wiser patriarchs. Teasing out these circumstances requires that a key distinction be made between two different forms of the marriage that exist in different cultures. This will determine the degree to which the male entering a marriage arrangement can be considered a fool.
Marriage 1.0 is the older version of the institution. It features fewer incentives for dissolution of the union and offers significantly less room for the ideal fulfillment of the feminine imperative, while offering more incentive for the male involved. Keeping this arrangement going requires fewer games for the male to play and allows for a more equitable, mutually-beneficial partnership.
The most crucial key here is the elimination of easy outs for the female that could leave the male high and dry and with severe legal and financial obligations with little consequences to her. The legal risks for a man within a Marriage 1.0 contract are lower and quite a bit less one-sided.
Men have a bit more room to be men within the context of this arrangement because their investment in their family is more well protected and not as easy to invalidate as I will soon show it has become.
This deal is still available in many parts of the world where more traditional gender roles are still respected. Marriage isn’t a horrible deal for your average man operating within the confines of these cultures. In the West, where the culture is largely oriented to cater to the feminine imperative, Marriage 1.0 is largely a memory, with the era in which it last dominated surviving only in fiction.
In today’s western world, another option dominates…
This is where lifetime alimony, stealth alimony, fem-centric child custody laws and a host of other factors combine to make marriage a general liability for men and a boon for women, who can essentially do no wrong barring a few extreme cases.
If a divorce is initiated after a male cheats on his spouse and fathers another secret family, the male is likely to lose custody of his children and be saddled with large financial obligations to his ex.
If a divorce is initiated after it is discovered that a female has cheated on her spouse and actually cuckolded him (paternity fraud), then the male is still likely to lose custody of his children (the ones that are his) and be saddled with large financial obligations to the child that isn’t his.
Marriage 2.0 is, in short, the story of male liability at all costs and in nearly all situations. It is the product of re-imagined divorce laws that, in effect, removed most of the protections men enjoyed under Marriage 1.0 and replaced them with a system that incentivizes the initiation of divorce by women, regardless of their actions.
So, Is Marriage Ever Worthwhile?
I have made a serious effort, but I’m failing to find many instances in which Marriage 2.0 could be considered worth the risk and effort. Marriage as a whole, though? That depends on the cultural context.
It is crucial not to overlook these cultural factors when it comes to the topic of marriage and whether or not a man should bother with it. The firmly anti-marriage view is pretty spot on if you’re dealing with your typical western women and Marriage 2.0 is your only option, but the dynamics shift when you start talking about other parts of the world where Marriage 2.0 is not a dominant force.
Women in many of these places are a bit more willing to do the things many in this corner of the internet hope their partner would do in an ideal world that a lot of western women will not.
Combine this with the decreased financial/legal risks and a marriage-minded man in the Marriage 1.0 context suddenly seems like less of a sap. Even a less relationship-oriented man might begin to reconsider things in the right society.
Were Marriage 1.0 a more viable option for western men, there would be significantly fewer voices standing in opposition to matrimony altogether. Sites like this would, in fact, probably suffer quite a bit due to decreased participation. Guys would have less to complain about in a society where Marriage 1.0 was more than an often ridiculed memory.
If you can get out of the matrix that is the west (especially North America), marriage is still largely viable.
If you’re marriage minded and you live in the West, your long term goal should be a more permanent expatriation to a society where Marriage 1.0 still persists (don’t bring a girl back and risk her assimilation).
Even those who are not very open to possible matrimony in the near or short-term should at least flirt with the idea of Marriage 1.0 if it is available and see if you can’t change your mind. At least avail yourself of all of your options before committing to eternal bachelorhood. Do not let your familiarity with the worst case scenario (Marriage 2.0) tarnish your view of matrimony entirely.
The institution of marriage is dead (or close to it) in the West, but that does not mean that all is lost.
Read Next: The Limits Of American Feminism