PART ONE AVAILABLE HERE
PART TWO AVAILABLE HERE
PART THREE AVAILABLE HERE
PART FOUR AVAILABLE HERE
Numerous legislative avenues could be pursued to ensure the equitable distribution of Western society’s sexual resources. Here are a number of suggestions that could be used to solve the present crisis, dependent on the amount of political will available.
The government could impose a “spinsterhood tax” on prime age women who refuse to marry and have children. This would become more onerous the longer they remain single. There could be additional civil or even criminal penalties, such as the forfeiture of assets, heavy fines and imprisonment.
Since mass immigration generally increases the ratio of men to women, the government could bar all male foreigners from entering the country, but allow prime age females, who would only be allowed to immigrate as long as they were willing to become the spouse of any of the country’s eligible bachelors; failure to do so on the female’s part could result in revocation of citizenship and immediate deportation.
The government could provide rewards and incentives to families to have more females than males, using sex-selective IVF, abortion etc.; a larger percentage of females relative to males would significantly reduce incidence of rape, increase women’s safety and go a long way towards alleviating male suffering.
There could be "national recognition" that sex and female companionship are vital to a man’s physical and psychological health. Instead of prostitutes, who pose a risk to public health and do not satisfy a man’s need for emotional and physical intimacy, the government could subsidize sex and relationship therapists who would provide long-term female companionship for unwanted bachelors.
The government could do away with the welfare state, which has encouraged the rise of single motherhood, by embracing the free market policies of classical liberalism. If women can no longer rely on welfare to subsidize their breeding habits, they would be forced to marry the many beta and omega males ignored by women for shallow reasons like poor cranio-facial structure or lack of a six figure salary.
In the education system, it would be advisable to abandon feminist propaganda. In its place, housewifery and motherhood should be presented as legitimate full-time careers. The state could incentivize women to become stay-at-home wives and mothers by allowing them to make purchases without having to pay local or state taxes. There could also be college and university courses on home economics and how to be a good housewife.
Technological and scientific solutions to declining marriage rates in Western countries may supplement or even inform legal enforcement of monogamy. Negative eugenics could be used to equalize outcomes. Because women are predominantly attracted to a man’s facial features, dispersing good genes more widely throughout the population gene pool would mean that more men would have the facial features to attract sexually desirable females of childbearing age.
If implementation of negative eugenic policies is found to be impractical, then state subsidized reconstructive plastic surgery for inferior males is another possibility.
Corporations could invest money in developing realistic androids or virtual reality simulations, powered by artificial intelligence; these would serve as the "wives" and "intimate companions" of unwanted men. Female sexuality could also be genetically engineered to be more inclusive, so as to give unwanted men the opportunity to experience the joys of marital bliss; this may be accomplished by increasing female androgen levels to strengthen the woman’s libido without masculinizing her physical appearance.
Alternatively, women could be cloned in laboratories to make up for the shortage of marriageable females in the general population.
Declining marriage and fertility rates are not difficult to solve. In fact, this list of possible solutions could be expanded considerably. If the liberal totalitarian governments of the former Western democracies wanted to raise fertility rates and reduce the incidence of unmarried men to 0%, they could do so almost overnight. The liberals have been dumping hundreds of thousands of unwanted foreigners into Western countries for decades; if they can do that, then surely they can solve the bachelorhood crisis.
To the liberal totalitarian, it must be asked why Darwinian sexual selection is somehow more acceptable than Darwinian racial selection.
Indeed, it is hard to see what benefits there are to racial equality; the human races are, at least until recently, isolated geographical populations with widely divergent behavioral and intellectual traits. This universal tendency towards differentiation – and not the homogenization as predicted by multicultural theory – indicates that each human subspecies evolved to live within their own separate societies and physical environments.
On the other hand, sexual equality, unlike racial equality, serves a vital biological function: it ensures the survival of each human subspecies by reining in the female instinct towards hypergamy and hyperselectivity, allowing the subspecies to adequately replenish their numbers by giving each man the opportunity to continue his genetic lineage. Furthermore, it contributes to general social and political stability, the necessary precondition for high civilization, such as that achieved by whites, by eliminating the need for sexual competition between males.
Ensuring that all men are married is the very least any responsible government should do. Sexual attraction and lifelong pair bonding are unconscious biological instincts that have been shaped within an ancestral evolutionary environment; no one’s freedom is infringed upon when these urges are properly channeled and redirected toward utilitarian aims through legal enforcement of monogamy. In fact, freedom is enhanced when men and women no longer have to worry about satisfaction of their primitive drives.
Is not the purpose of civilization to overcome our primitive instincts, such as the female drive to seek out alpha males for breeding or pseudo-breeding purposes?
Is it not foolhardy for the government to abandon monogamy and allow sexual behaviors to return to the way they were during the Stone Age and the Neolithic?
This would merely exacerbate the inequitable distribution of sex as a female resource and further concentrate it within the hands of top tier alpha males. The reason why the liberal totalitarians would rather let the bachelorhood crisis spiral out of control, rather then fix it, is because they are gripped by an irrational obsession with the Other.
Multiculturalism, social welfare liberalism, and feminism are best understood, not as political ideologies, but as religious manias. The liberal totalitarian cannot be reasoned with, since his beliefs are beyond rational argument. In the liberal mind, feminism must continue until women become so hyperselective and the sex ratio so unbalanced that less than 1% of males are deemed suitable for breeding purposes, just as mass Third World immigration must continue until less than 1% of the remaining population is indigenous white.
We have witnessed the explosive growth of a marriage-deprived male underclass. It is not at all certain how long these men will continue to peacefully endure a life of forced solitude and, in many cases, forced chastity.
This has been inflicted on them by a liberal totalitarian government that refuses to hold itself accountable to the electorate. But one thing is certain: if the population of unattached males is allowed to continue its explosive growth, societal stability will be threatened and there will be civil war.
Feminists and their liberal totalitarian allies play with fire when they substitute a priori reasoning for actual experimental knowledge of human behavior in politics. Of course, the long-term purpose of feminism and women’s sexual liberation was always the destruction of Western society anyway, so to them, it doesn’t matter if fewer and fewer males are able to satisfy their most fundamental biological drives. The men who denied access to monogamy in the past were weak, inferior beta and omega males. As long as the bachelorhood crisis only affected such men it could continue, but the evidence is that it is now impacting a wider group.
The ancient Greeks and Romans were so much wiser than modern Western man; they knew that a class of unmarried males would lead to widespread civil unrest and social upheaval. They institutionalized monogamy to pacify non-alpha males. If there were surplus males, the slave trade would provide them with the needed sexual release and female companionship.
Unfortunately for us, feminists and their allies in the liberal totalitarian governments of the West are weak-minded fools in the grips of a deep-seated religious mania. Democratic reform is impossible. Only rebellion against the leftist tyrants or inevitable collapse of a decaying social order will return us to a more wholesome living arrangement, one that finally gives all men a stake in the society they are forced to wage-slave in and contribute to until retirement.
In the meantime, why would any rational man wish to contribute to a society that does not provide him with the minimum conditions in which to satisfy his most fundamental biological drives?
Connected Content:
The Death of Sex
Become a Patron!
PART TWO AVAILABLE HERE
PART THREE AVAILABLE HERE
PART FOUR AVAILABLE HERE
Numerous legislative avenues could be pursued to ensure the equitable distribution of Western society’s sexual resources. Here are a number of suggestions that could be used to solve the present crisis, dependent on the amount of political will available.
The government could impose a “spinsterhood tax” on prime age women who refuse to marry and have children. This would become more onerous the longer they remain single. There could be additional civil or even criminal penalties, such as the forfeiture of assets, heavy fines and imprisonment.
Since mass immigration generally increases the ratio of men to women, the government could bar all male foreigners from entering the country, but allow prime age females, who would only be allowed to immigrate as long as they were willing to become the spouse of any of the country’s eligible bachelors; failure to do so on the female’s part could result in revocation of citizenship and immediate deportation.
The government could provide rewards and incentives to families to have more females than males, using sex-selective IVF, abortion etc.; a larger percentage of females relative to males would significantly reduce incidence of rape, increase women’s safety and go a long way towards alleviating male suffering.
There could be "national recognition" that sex and female companionship are vital to a man’s physical and psychological health. Instead of prostitutes, who pose a risk to public health and do not satisfy a man’s need for emotional and physical intimacy, the government could subsidize sex and relationship therapists who would provide long-term female companionship for unwanted bachelors.
In the education system, it would be advisable to abandon feminist propaganda. In its place, housewifery and motherhood should be presented as legitimate full-time careers. The state could incentivize women to become stay-at-home wives and mothers by allowing them to make purchases without having to pay local or state taxes. There could also be college and university courses on home economics and how to be a good housewife.
Technological and scientific solutions to declining marriage rates in Western countries may supplement or even inform legal enforcement of monogamy. Negative eugenics could be used to equalize outcomes. Because women are predominantly attracted to a man’s facial features, dispersing good genes more widely throughout the population gene pool would mean that more men would have the facial features to attract sexually desirable females of childbearing age.
 |
| Surgery, an alternative to eugenics. |
Corporations could invest money in developing realistic androids or virtual reality simulations, powered by artificial intelligence; these would serve as the "wives" and "intimate companions" of unwanted men. Female sexuality could also be genetically engineered to be more inclusive, so as to give unwanted men the opportunity to experience the joys of marital bliss; this may be accomplished by increasing female androgen levels to strengthen the woman’s libido without masculinizing her physical appearance.
Alternatively, women could be cloned in laboratories to make up for the shortage of marriageable females in the general population.
Declining marriage and fertility rates are not difficult to solve. In fact, this list of possible solutions could be expanded considerably. If the liberal totalitarian governments of the former Western democracies wanted to raise fertility rates and reduce the incidence of unmarried men to 0%, they could do so almost overnight. The liberals have been dumping hundreds of thousands of unwanted foreigners into Western countries for decades; if they can do that, then surely they can solve the bachelorhood crisis.
To the liberal totalitarian, it must be asked why Darwinian sexual selection is somehow more acceptable than Darwinian racial selection.
Indeed, it is hard to see what benefits there are to racial equality; the human races are, at least until recently, isolated geographical populations with widely divergent behavioral and intellectual traits. This universal tendency towards differentiation – and not the homogenization as predicted by multicultural theory – indicates that each human subspecies evolved to live within their own separate societies and physical environments.
 |
| The sexually disenfranchised have nothing to lose. |
Ensuring that all men are married is the very least any responsible government should do. Sexual attraction and lifelong pair bonding are unconscious biological instincts that have been shaped within an ancestral evolutionary environment; no one’s freedom is infringed upon when these urges are properly channeled and redirected toward utilitarian aims through legal enforcement of monogamy. In fact, freedom is enhanced when men and women no longer have to worry about satisfaction of their primitive drives.
Is not the purpose of civilization to overcome our primitive instincts, such as the female drive to seek out alpha males for breeding or pseudo-breeding purposes?
Is it not foolhardy for the government to abandon monogamy and allow sexual behaviors to return to the way they were during the Stone Age and the Neolithic?
This would merely exacerbate the inequitable distribution of sex as a female resource and further concentrate it within the hands of top tier alpha males. The reason why the liberal totalitarians would rather let the bachelorhood crisis spiral out of control, rather then fix it, is because they are gripped by an irrational obsession with the Other.
We have witnessed the explosive growth of a marriage-deprived male underclass. It is not at all certain how long these men will continue to peacefully endure a life of forced solitude and, in many cases, forced chastity.
 |
| Monogamy, the final solution to the incel problem. |
Feminists and their liberal totalitarian allies play with fire when they substitute a priori reasoning for actual experimental knowledge of human behavior in politics. Of course, the long-term purpose of feminism and women’s sexual liberation was always the destruction of Western society anyway, so to them, it doesn’t matter if fewer and fewer males are able to satisfy their most fundamental biological drives. The men who denied access to monogamy in the past were weak, inferior beta and omega males. As long as the bachelorhood crisis only affected such men it could continue, but the evidence is that it is now impacting a wider group.
The ancient Greeks and Romans were so much wiser than modern Western man; they knew that a class of unmarried males would lead to widespread civil unrest and social upheaval. They institutionalized monogamy to pacify non-alpha males. If there were surplus males, the slave trade would provide them with the needed sexual release and female companionship.
Unfortunately for us, feminists and their allies in the liberal totalitarian governments of the West are weak-minded fools in the grips of a deep-seated religious mania. Democratic reform is impossible. Only rebellion against the leftist tyrants or inevitable collapse of a decaying social order will return us to a more wholesome living arrangement, one that finally gives all men a stake in the society they are forced to wage-slave in and contribute to until retirement.
In the meantime, why would any rational man wish to contribute to a society that does not provide him with the minimum conditions in which to satisfy his most fundamental biological drives?
Connected Content:
The Death of Sex
Become a Patron!
