On the one hand, what can possibly possess a woman to accept airplane tickets and trips to friends’ weddings two months after meeting a dude? It kind of seems that she saw him that one time in Nevada and then immediately became a rent-a-date for a wedding visit.
The dude, though, is also quite a gift. It’s clear why he has to rent women he dislikes to attend weddings with him. No normal woman would be caught dead around him.
The absolute prize in the situation, though, is the mom. Instead of gently explaining to the daughter the concept of “a desperate girl” and how off-putting it is to be one, the mother pushes her to act in an even more undignified manner.
Clarissa's Blog 
LikeLiked by 3 people
Boundary crossing.
I recommend both Gavin DeBecker’s The Gift of Fear and, for those who missed it Saying Goodbye to Crazy.
Another useful tool for those with a moderately strong sense of self are the hoe_math videos.
For parents: Spend more time, or, if you are a ++!striver and part of the AINO nomenklatura*, any time helping your child prepare to find and acquire a suitable husband or wife as you would to secure him access to a top college/career.
God bless you. I pray for you and your children in general. If you would like me to pray for you in particular drop me a line. **
*Would you have time to hear the Gospel message? People like you, who embraced it, built American civilization. Be the change you hope to see.)
*Though God (in person) told us the prayer of the righteous is ++! And as you perceive I am not that. So YMMV. Widely. Offer is still open.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This. Gal can’t figure out *why* this upsets her, because her mum obviously never talked to her about personal boundaries and people who test them… but it upsets her, and she needs to *listen* to that still small voice and not go be in a faraway place, away from all her friends family and contacts, with this person. yeesh.
LikeLike
People say that young women have no interest in marriage any more. But look at the level of desperation here. This girl would crawl after any dude who’d look at her semi-kindly in hopes of a relationship.
The problem is that it’s no longer OK openly to say (even to yourself) that you want marriage. So there’s no criterion to help figure out how to act. No longer any way to make judgment as to what you should do because you can’t admit what you are actually trying to achieve. No longer a support group of older women who can give suggestions as to how to achieve your goal.
And it’s not just this girl. Matt Walsh recently did a segment on a famous female influencer who went to Europe to live with some dude she barely knew. The sex was horrible, everything was almost traumatic, yet she didn’t know how to refuse or leave.
Sexual revolution, yay! Women now run after men to have sex they find terrible and traumatic. What a victory for progress.
LikeLike
I am seeing it everywhere. Religious people seem to be the only ones left who have any cultural scaffolding for finding a suitable partner, getting married, and having a family.
For everyone else: it’s so hard to watch! So many women AND MEN out there who just want to get married and settle down, but… there’s no longer any template for that. Every individual person has to some how figure it out from scratch, and for the younger ones particularly, it seems sort of shameful to even *want* it.
Sure, there’s a certain percentage of people who are probably just born restless, and who don’t actually want that. But there’s also a a significant chunk who do, who prefer security and stability, who don’t want to “shop around” forever and… it’s almost as though the restless, and the culture at large, have conspired to make it as difficult as possible for them to find each other and execute the historically-standard template.
Given the interesting demographic trends I see at church lately… I am waiting for young single women who want to be married, to finally catch on, that large numbers of single young men who aren’t aspiring PUAs, have steady jobs, and would probably like to be married… can be found at certain churches.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I remember how 20 years ago I was shocked to observe how Latin American female friends would openly discuss their strategies of landing a husband while such a conversation would be considered heresy among their Canadian-born peers. Nobody was supposed to say they wanted to get married. As a result, women did the most outlandish things to find potential husbands but they kept failing because there was no coherent system of rules and expectations behind it.
Most of people absolutely want and need to settle down with one person. But somehow we have convinced ourselves that saying this out loud is impermissible. It really messes with young people’s heads. And it’s such a shame.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Also I want to mention that there’s a wedding at my church today. And it’s the second this Fall so far. We are a tiny parish, so it’s extraordinary to see that weddings are suddenly booming.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s wonderful!
We have tons of very nice single young men who’d *like* to get married, but a dire shortage of single young ladies. I keep hoping they’ll find us, but it feels like it’s taking *forever*. The mother-hen part of me thinks we should start trying to recruit them!
LikeLiked by 1 person
We also have some great single young men. I think there are six right now. Again, a tiny parish. The elders say this is a very new development. Young boys just come. And stay. Incredible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, this has been 100% a thing that happened in the last three years, at our parish as well. Weddings haven’t started here yet, but I am hopeful. We can’t send them *all* off to monasteries… but we did just send one off to seminary. The older people who founded the parish, remark often on how extraordinary it is. It’s not like we did anything different!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Incredible indeed, does anybody really imagine that society can suddenly just remove three generations of feminasti destruction of marriage? Don’t want to crush you with red pill, but young men are essentially looking for young women that are: feminine, non tattooed, preferably virginal (or at least with a very low N), and no debt…essentially unicorns ;-D
LikeLike
People have an almost non-existent capacity to be aware of who they are really looking for. The guy in our church who’s getting married today ended up with a fiancee who is six feet tall, and with a tattoo that goes from shoulder to ankle. 🙂
I anticipate great marital happiness for them.
LikeLike
In my experience, people who are outwardly very expressive (having tattoos, green hair, piercings, etc.) and those who find outlet for their dark side through art (e.g., horror writers) tend to be the nicest, kindest, most welcoming people you’ve ever met. I bet that 6-ft tall tattooed woman from Clarissa’s church will be the most devoted wife and mom you can imagine, and will have a great relationship with her adult kids.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely, she will. She’s wonderful. And yes, this is a brilliant observation about needing to get the dark side out instead of repressing it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will never understand men’s obsession with finding a grown woman with no sexual experience. Unless the woman is very religious, her having no experience is more likely to mean she doesn’t care very much about sex and will end up being a low-libido wife so there is a dead bedroom in the couple’s future, than it is to mean that she will somehow be “a lady in the streets but a freak in the sheets” who has eyes for no one but her husband. If a secular person wants to have a good sex life in the marriage, they should find a spouse who enjoys sex, and such person would not have stayed a virgin deep into adulthood.
LikeLiked by 1 person
that’s my daughter. Hope she finds a good man.
LikeLike
“Young boys just come. And stay. Incredible”
Men want a mission and nowhere else is offering them one….
LikeLiked by 3 people
“People have an almost non-existent capacity to be aware of who they are really looking for.”
True enough, particularly when the people are women, afterall my wife married me ;-D
But an anecdote does not constitute data. And while it may be utilized to help establish a range, a method to establish the central tendency is probably a better descriptor of the population. We will just have to agree to disagree, but I too hope the pair all the best.
LikeLike
“I will never understand men’s obsession with finding a grown woman with no sexual experience.”
It is a question of successful pair bonding, are you familiar with the term “alpha widow” 😀
LikeLike
Sadly, I do know all about that stuff; the web is bursting with it and it’s impossible to escape it. What I’m saying is that it’s extremely regressive misogynistic BS couched in the language of lupine hierarchy which is supposed to make these concepts seem like they’re part of the natural order. In reality, people of both genders are able to form multiple deeply meaningful connections throughout their lives, and wanting a virgin smells suspiciously like being too insecure in the bedroom to withstand comparison with any previous partner.
LikeLiked by 1 person
…and then there are just ASD types who have a pretty extreme need to *trust* someone before they get all touchy-feely with them. It’s not a sign of low libido: it’s the trust part that’s tricky. We would absolutely *break* mentally if we had to go through that process multiple times before settling down. For some of us, the unwillingness to jump into the sheets with people we don’t know extremely well and basically trust with our lives, and have spent so much time around that we don’t startle anymore, is actually an indicator for high tactile responsiveness. No I will not fill you in on the details.
Which is to say: the whole chastity thing works extremely well for some of us, thankyouverymuch. You don’t have to understand it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
…but it would be nice if you didn’t kneejerk-denigrate it, just because it doesn’t happen to be your experience.
LikeLike
This wasn’t anything against you, @methylethyl. And I’ve tried to qualify above that there are people, for example those who are religious, for whom chastity makes sense personally and spiritually. I have no problem with people making choices for themselves, as long as they don’t go around slut-shaming a whole gender on the net.
The person I was responding to above is telling women that they’re irretrievably broken if they’ve had sex before marriage because they will be unable to pair bond. That is nonsense, yet unfortunately ubiquitous in the “Red Pill” manosphere.
In reality, there is actually psychological research that shows that, in modern society, sexual experience highly correlates with sex positivity and general sex enjoyment.
Here are some posts from a psychologist who specializes in couples’ counseling:
https://www.drpsychmom.com/if-you-enjoy-sex-dont-marry-someone-never-prioritizes/
https://www.drpsychmom.com/are-you-really-not-that-into-sex-or-do-you-just-have-limited-experience/
LikeLike
…and again, dealing with averages and correlations.
There are enough of us out there that we actually pop up in the “sexpert” literature if you read enough of it. The Kinsey types get cranky about how the really, exquisitely *responsive* women are so boringly attached to monogomy and don’t want to come to their swinger parties. They are affronted by this, as though they had some kind of right to screw *everybody*.
Those things (high responsiveness, preference for monogamy) are related, but underreported, because, well… try it in public sometime, eh? Breathe a whiff of it on the internet, and you get mobbed by gross internet creeps. IRL everyone gives you the stink-eye because eww TMI, or “oh, you prude” or “why are you slut-shaming?”– it is completely normal, in this day and age, to be conditioned into silence. What that means is that, if you’re fine with playing the field, trying out a bunch of partners, etc, then *you’re allowed to talk about it* and likely willing to.
But if you’re the other sort, your experience is effectively banned from public discourse. You are *actively discouraged* from talking about it. Might as well not exist. And that is how we get to “the only healthy type of sexual expression for people who aren’t (extremely conservative religion here) is XYZ which was reported in a bunch of studies done with subjects who were comfortable talking to complete strangers about their sexual experiences.
The also-very-real experience of non-trivial numbers of people who are *not* comfortable talking about that with total strangers… well, that’s so insignificant it doesn’t matter, right?
Do you see the problem?
And fwiw, I was not particularly religious, or part of any church, when I met my husband. I had a religious upbringing that gave me *permission* to enforce the personal boundaries that my personality and brain wiring *needed* anyway. I do not even like *shaking hands* with strangers– am on the far end of *not* touchy-feely, because that’s too intimate for people I just met. Squicky. Some people have a bad energy that rubs off– I’d rather not have “let’s touch each other” as a default polite gesture at all.
I’m not going to judge your approach, because you are obviously a different sort of person– not wired up the same. That seems to be functional for you, and I’m willing to take your word on it. But if I were going to be obnoxious about it and judge everybody from personal experience alone (or from the studies, if all the studies were done on my sort but by default excluded your sort), I’d say: people who have a lot of sex with multiple partners couldn’t *possibly* be having a truly good time, because you’d have to be essentially *numb* to physical contact to even tolerate that, given the long period of acclimation required to be truly comfortable and relaxed with someone. It would be like a deaf person rambling on about his deep appreciation for music. How could you even begin to explain?
Why should you have to be religious, to be permitted to have strong sexual boundaries?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Look, I never attacked anything you said, and I refuse to have a fight with you here in Clarissa’s comments. I am not invalidating your experiences and I don’t know how large of a chunk of
demographic shares similar experiences.
I was responding to the guy who claimed (ending with the annoying winky smilies, as if that that doesn’t make what he says even more condescending) that women with sexual experience are unable to pair bond, and thus broken and worthless for long-term commitment. That’s plain misogyny.
FWIW, I was never particularly promiscuous; I’ve always had serious boyfriends and I’ve now been married of 25 years. Still, I will always be against slut-shaming of women on principle because it’s hateful and misogynistic. The whole oxytocin! pair-bonding! alpha-widow! manosphere rhetoric makes my blood boil.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed, let’s not fight.
But… do try to broaden your horizons a bit eh?
Yours is a fairly standard modern attitude, and it makes things unnecessarily difficult for people like us, in the dating market. I am keeping an eye out for my younger clones.
It’s OK to have heavy-duty boundaries if you need them. Even if you’re not religious. It doesn’t mean you’re a eunuch.
I don’t have a problem with men who prefer sexually inexperienced women, so long as they hold themselves to equal standards of virtue. “Let’s figure this out together” is a not a bad beginning, you know.
Manosphere is best left to its own devices.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I don’t have a problem with men who prefer sexually inexperienced women, so long as they hold themselves to equal standards of virtue.”
I completely agree with this. It’s the hypocrisy that kills me. Like a dude can sleep with 100 women and somehow he’s a “high-value man” (shudder) but a similar woman is garbage. Fuck that.
Regarding boundaries, everyone has boundaries. Not wanting sex is obviously a boundary. But people who do have sex also have boundaries, they’re just different; it’s not free for all.
Anyway, I will also say that I agree with what Clarissa has mentioned several times in the last few days. The modern attitude is that you have to put out or you’re a prude, and that puts pressure on the people for whom that doesn’t feel natural and who are for whatever reason more reserved. It’s also considered uncool to want or ask for commitment or monogamy. I do agree these trends probably hurt a lot of young people. If someone is a young person who wants kids and marriage and doesn’t want to play the field, I would imagine it would be pretty hard to find someone like minded outside of religious groups. I don’t know what the solution is given the Zeitgeist is what it is. Maybe it’s possible to filter according to these requirements on certain dating apps? I’m not sure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. The model you have outlined may work fine for some people, but a lot of folks are just more reserved. Sometimes that goes hand in hand with religion, and sometimes it doesn’t, but in practically all cases, such people are under tremendous pressure to conform to *your* standards out in the dating market, even when doing so makes them deeply unhappy. It’s not one-size-fits-all. And yet. We live in a world where the chaste are practically the only group of people in the dating market that it’s OK to shun, mock, and insult. Furries? Gotta respect people’s preferences. Virgins? Oh, what a loser, get with the program. What are you, a nun? You must just be low-libido.
The biggest problem with dating apps is that every time someone sets one up, to try and serve a specialized market– whether that’s lesbian hiking enthusiasts or Christian singles looking to marry– as soon as that app/site gets enough circulation to be actually useful, it becomes the singular goal of mobs of professionally-offended creeps to demolish the thing, either by sabotage or lawfare, because “I feel excluded!”
I did not suggest that y’all don’t have boundaries. Only that not everybody has the *same* boundaries: and that’s OK.
LikeLike
xykademiqz
“The person I was responding to above is telling women that they’re irretrievably broken if they’ve had sex before marriage because they will be unable to pair bond.”
Traditionally, men wanted a virgin to help ensure paternity. What I actually was suggesting was that men were also concerned with successful pair bonding; there are studies indicating lower divorce rates for brides with zero and one lover prior to marriage.
However, correlation does not necessarily mean causation. We don’t know why: maybe those brides had strongly held religious beliefs against divorce; or perhaps the other brides are indeed irretrievably broken loose women; or maybe, just maybe those successfully bonding are those receiving sufficient oxcytocin and dopamine for the first time. But then, I don’t know it all ;-D
LikeLiked by 2 people
“or maybe, just maybe those successfully bonding are those receiving sufficient oxcytocin and dopamine for the first time”
I can get dopamine from scrolling Instagram, and oxytocin from exercise or listening to music.
Look up the percentage of divorce among highly educated women; it’s very low, far lower than average for the population. Those are all women marrying later in life and likely not virgins, yet somehow able to successfully pair bond despite their misspent slutty youths. It’s almost as if mature women using their brains to pick partners they are compatible with bodes well for relationship longevity, and financial stability doesn’t hurt either.
LikeLike
methylethyl
Nobody understands love, I called it Fortuna, my wife claimed it was Grace ;-D
LikeLiked by 1 person
ykxademiqz
Hmmm, well, it is good to hear that you know it all ;-D
LikeLike
methylethyl
I agreed with your discussion on standards and boundaries, my wife was quietly, but deeply religious. When we met she was not only a virgin but virginal, her knowledge limited. And what little she did know was largely incorrect, because girls can be cruel to those in out groups. So I understood what you were saying.
However, you also said that “the manosphere is best left to its own devices.” That group largely consists of the male walking wounded of the current war between the sexes, simply ignoring their concerns cannot heal our society. Most of our extended family and friends are or were divorced, my wife and I struggled to help, she was much better at it than me. Since her passing, I have researched trying to understand of the forces creating the divisions. Sites such as Jezebel and the likes were of limited value, but two members of the HoneyBadgers, specifically Karen Straughan and Dr. Janice Fiamengo, are gold mines of the history of our current problems.
LikeLike
I do get it. I’ve been on the supportive-older-family-member side of a couple of nasty divorces, for men who have been through hell. They both ended up with sole custody of their kids– if you’ve had any experience with the US family court system, that tells you everything you need to know.
It’s good of you to offer your support. It’s rough out there, and I’ve seen it up close. I’ve never had reason to dive into the whole manosphere– I mostly just comb through legal documents and make notes on them, and listen to people on the phone, as the designated sympathetic not-emotionally-involved person.
I occasionally encounter “manosphere” content in passing, and… it mostly seems like an un-self-aware emotional black hole, populated by men who are in genuine pain, mostly because they were promised consequence-free hedonism, that turned out to be a lie, and they can’t seem to escape the eternal “BUT THAT’S NOT FAIR” cycle.
I know there’s more to it than that, unfair court systems, etc. But my personal experience, weirdly, has been that a man who is diligent, careful, patient, and persistent, can actually get the courts to do the right thing when it comes to child custody. We could definitely do better on the part where the non-custodial parent can repeatedly file stupid legal stuff against the custodial parent, and basically bleed them dry in legal fees. There needs to be a legal remedy for that.
I’m biased by my own contact with it. All the carnage I’ve seen up close could have been prevented by three simple heuristics that absolutely nobody involved wants to hear from me:
-Don’t do drugs
-Don’t drink in mixed company
-Stay away from women who do drugs and/or drink in mixed company
Yeah, there’s a lot of injustice out there. But you can’t help people who can’t see their own role in their current misery. I will take it on faith that this is an incomplete picture… but it’s the impression I get from glancing encounters with the manosphere scene, and it makes me want to stay far far away from it.
*before anybody squeals offense: I am not suggesting here that every woman who tries weed or likes to go out drinking now and then, is a bad person. However. If you’re a dude, it’s an efficient strategic filter that doesn’t require a lot of thought: the rates of substance abuse in the mentally ill are *extremely* high. If you’re willing to unfairly eliminate a few OK people from your dating pool, this will eliminate the vast majority of mentally ill people as well. Because it’s a lot quicker and easier to see if a woman does drugs or gets drunk in public, than to find out if she’s bipolar, BPD, psychotic, OCD, got an eating disorder, cuts herself, etc. Most of them self-medicate. If you avoid the self-medicating behaviors, you can avoid most of the crazies without having to be a shrink and diagnose them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, I was there when the pill arrived and while it certainly altered the behavior of both sexes, I don’t remember any “consequence-free hedonism,” mind you by then we were already engaged. But that was followed several years later by no fault divorce, and society seemed to break down. Prior to that divorce was rare, not only very difficult to achieve, but considered a personal failure.
My own mother filed, my newly married wife watched me like a hawk. Female social workers publicly insisted that children would avoid family disputes and be better off. What I saw were kids in shock, some approaching PTSD. Over the following 10-15 years we took a series of divorced kids over the holidays. Most are sort of okay, but you can tell that both sexes missed a father figure, and divorces definitely run through generations.
I was not suggesting that you dive into the manosphere, there is truly little happiness there. But over the years the two HoneyBadgers suggested have researched the origins of feminism in the USA, Canada, and Britain. Both are Canadians, possibly because we unwisely publicly subsidized the activism more than other nations. Both tend to have the same dry humour as my own ;-D
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, those developments back in the 70s were unquestionably bad, and basically wher the rot started. That was before my time. Things are such a cesspool now, that I wonder if the only way out for the younger generation is to abandon the whole scene and become religious. I’m curious if we’ll see boomerism come full circle in our time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
methylethyl
The 50’s boom was produced in both our countries largely because of the industrial output increased while producing materiel for the war. Combined, of course, by the pent up reduced consumerism during the war. Life wasn’t perfect but was generally good, most particularly for kids. Today both of our countries, as in most of the West, have mortgaged the future. Fortunately, both of our countries have large amounts of most natural resources including fossil fuels. Both Trump and Poilievre seem to believe that we can grow ourselves out of the economic problem. Let us hope that they get the chance to prove to be correct
Will agree that the rot emerged in the 70’s, but it’s origin is much older. The jealousy or envy and opposition to marriage was obvious in Wollstonecraft at least as far back as the Frencg Revolution in the 1790’s, and by Marx and Engels in 1840’s, and by Stanton in the USA in the same era. Curing it short of absolute collapse will be difficult. Religion won’t hurt and Peterson’s talks with young people, particularly young men, will also help.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am confident that we will return to more traditional family/sexual norms in the fairly near future. Not because people will want to, but because we are headed for a pretty massive economic decline, and pretty much all of the modern laxity on that is downstream of prosperity. Luxury beliefs and all.
The real question is, which tradition? I see no particular reason it should be a western married monogamous nuclear family. That’s a pretty new innovation in human terms. Probably a tossup between extended-family living arrangements with monogamous pairs, matriarchal extended families where marriage is irrelevant, or some form of polygyny.
LikeLike
methylethyl
Yeah, I am also not certain that we can grow out of the economic problem, nor am I certain that millions of illegal aliens can be removed without violence. But the USA cannot afford to continue to support them.
We lived in monogamous pairs within extended families to some extent within my lifetime, with nuclear family homes becaming the norm in the prosperous mid 50’s. And we are already in a matriarchy with at least some degree of polygyny today, which is largely why we are facing the current problems. Young males with few options and no hope, basically resembling the future facing much of the Middle East, is a time bomb that must somehow be defused.
LikeLike
And the fish may need a bicycle ;-D
LikeLike
Here’s my contribution to this discussion:
https://www.businessinsider.com/my-partner-is-monogamous-but-im-not-2024-10
Is there anybody on the planet who doesn’t read this and want Seth to find a nice, normal woman and ditch this bizarro freak?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Clarissa
Well, I agree he needs a better one but she is not a “bizarro freak” but rather the consequences of generations absent or with limited father guidance. Even those that are not raised in those conditions are influenced with friends that do. The boys are buggered up to, mo normal male would tolerate such foolishmess.
I have a niece, a high school teacher and guidance counselor, that just filed for divorce the fourth time, proud of being “strong and independent.” I also have a nephew that announces that, “If I want another woman, I will just rent one.” Me, I am sick and tired of the irresponsible breach of once sacred vows, the hopeless discussions and failed interventions. McBroom seems to be wrong, acfually “…love is only for the lucky and the strong” ;-D
LikeLike
The problem is, the current popular iteration of polygyny doesn’t require the men to support any of the women or children. It’s not workable in an environment where the government no longer subsidizes the children. Traditional matriarchies have maternal uncles supporting everyone. It’s at least functional.
Within my religious circle, as well as outside it among lower income people who still get married, I do see movement toward extended-family arrangements, where the family with young kids is perhaps pooling resources with a widowed parent to buy a house (they have zero chance of doing it otherwise), or the one I’m more used to: the younger family, instead of trying to stick it out on their own, moves into a trailer on parents’ property. It’s only half-jokingly we refer to this as the “family compound”.
I am not sure our overlords, in the rush to hoover up all the affordable homes, realized they were initiating the return of tribe and clan 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
methylethyl
Hmmm, well, I live in an area of small acreages, many are being subdivided with small lots but oversized homes specifically to address those concerns. Most have several suites to, not only help the mortgage but, provide housing for family members. The problem of course is accomodating the traffic and parking of additional vehicles. The tax hungry municipality prevents building permanebt trailers but allows what are basically small apartment buildings.
But for the rest, Ecclesiastes states, “there is nothing new under the sun.” As for asking men to support women that are essentially sharing a man, damned few guys have any interest in supporting the current matriarchy, let alone polygyny. How about taxing feminists instead ;-D
LikeLike
Yeah, I don’t see how we could get from here to men supporting their sisters’ kids, tbh. Right now what that looks like is, low-class men eking out on their own in temporary jobs, often with other male roommates, moving frequently to avoid paying child support, sometimes shacking up temporarily with a new babymomma… and the women in the picture… getting by on some patchwork of disposable jobs, current boyfriends, and state assistance. That whole scene seems pretty desperate, and often involves drugs and low-level criminal activity. When the kids are lucky, they get foisted off on grandparents for most of the week.
In the more functional family units I’ve known, I’m seeing a lot more of the mother-in-law-suite type multigen thing going on, plus a few different configurations of “family compound”– A) 2 or 3 trailers on a large-ish rural lot, B) family buys an urban 3-family house (3 floors, a kitchen on each floor), rents out 2 floors while the kids are young and they are paying off the mortgage, then as the kids reach adulthood, and form families of their own, the rental units are reclaimed for their use, C) kid marries, new spouse is integrated into the family business, and the parents subdivide their property and help them build a second house on it, and D) Parents run a small farm, as their kids reach adulthood and marry, parents help the kids buy properties within easy walking distance, the family collaborates between multiple adults on childcare, homeschooling, and farm labor.
All of which arrangements have always been a thing among people who aren’t wealthy, but I’m watching it creep up the class/income ladder as real estate becomes more and more ridiculous.
An inevitable result of this, is… we have a growing segment of the population who are becoming rooted to place. Nobody in these units is going to be packing up and moving away, to take a job in a faraway city as part of a mobile, rootless, fungible workforce. It’s a mixed bag– family’s becoming more important, this probably benefits community and the kids growing up now, though it results from the amputated opportunities of the current adults.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Methylethyl
I was tired last night and should have explained why there is already too much matriarchy and polygyny. Western civilization is unlikely to survive either. You should know that single women giving birth are already asked to list the father so that the state can use the court to force him to pay child support or be jailed. There is at least one infamous case where the man was required to pay support despite having DNA evidence that he was not the father.
. ,
LikeLike
Yeah, have actually reviewed legal documents for a similar case. Nothing came of it, because proper protocols had been followed, but as soon as a mom applies for state assistance for herself and kids, the state will attempt to collect child support from any man who was anywhere near the woman when the kids was born. Agreed that if even the more-functional forms of matriarchy and polygyny become the dominant forms, western civ is over. Those forms are incompatible with it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bring back shotgun weddings and make no-fault divorce illegal.
LikeLiked by 1 person