The Future of Relationships

Forecasting the Dystopia Further.

I think the best way to do this somewhat quickly is in the form of a logical argument. For background, this previous post of mine stated that women were in for a very bad time indeed, and in essence only had one of four positions to select from:

1. Shrieking lesbian/cat-lady (often obese) - These are the unfuckables. Too ugly, embittered and driven hysterical from lack of male attention. borderline unemployable, living on benefits mostly (while those still last), likely to become homeless or live in a commune when financial crisis hits. Mostly childless, thank almighty God, as any offspring of these harridans would be suffering a Hellish fate. They are irrelevant as human beings, not even qualifying as NPCs. They are more like kobolds. Pointless speed-bumps on the highway of life.

2. Victims - unfortunately this is an increasing number of women and girls. Those rapefugees gotta rape and kill, don’t ya know? And without masses of native men willing to overthrow the pedovores in charge in every government in the West, and then return all those illegals to either their own lands or a shallow grave, this isn’t going to change.

3. Modern Chattel - some women, rather than be constant prey to a revolving retinue of rapefugees may select ONE (hopefully) with whom to pair up. Convert to their culture/religion, and become a fully submissive trophy-wife/concubine/side-piece of an imported invader.

4. Become proper wives - pleasant, obedient, loyal, and sexually and sensually available to their husbands for whom they will happily produce multiple children, and keep a pleasant and well-organised home. Now, to the feminists still in brainwashed mode this “feels” like 3. above, but it absolutely is not. I explain why below.

As a counterpoint, (not directly because of my post, we were unaware of each other’s blogs I think) this lady wrote her own take on men, which boils down to her title:

Outside of dick and stress, what can a man provide? I am curious

Why women would rather be alone than partnered badly

And though it meanders a lot and is somewhat receptive, her basic argument is that since women can earn their own money, etc. etc. the only incentive to being in a marriage or nominally permanent relationship, is physical, mental and emotional compatibility.

It is a valid point, and as for being badly “partnered” I think we all agree that solitude is better than the torture of being with someone that makes your life hell.

HOWEVER… and there are some howevers, but in order to save time, let’s put them as baseline axioms to our logical argument:

1. Most women are solipsistic, say one thing and do and behave in an opposite manner, refuse to take responsibility for the absolutely shitty decisions they make, lack the capacity to organise themselves, lack good intent towards the man in their life, lack of respect, can be gold-digging whores, unreliable, and dishonest throughout.

2. Most men are lazy, unambitious, don’t take care of themselves, are no longer decent providers or protectors, shirk positions of authority because they don’t want the added responsibility, and are in essence also selfish and avoidant.

That’s a fair baseline, also more quickly summarised as: Humans suck.

Which they overwhelmingly do. The primary flaw being stupidity, the secondary flaw being extreme ego-driven, selfish concerns, and the third flaw being their weakness which leads to absolutely petty ways of thinking, living, and “considering” others.

Given that is the baseline, we can also conclude most of the relationships going forward will be an absolute clusterfuck, and lead to some of the most chaotic social upheavals ever seen (we are already living through this, but it can certainly get a lot worse, and almost certainly will).

Now… given as most readers here are NOT part of the zombie horde, what will the relationships that DO become not just healthy, but survive the storm, and quite possibly become the golden standard for success in the future, look like?

Well, here is where the premises come in, and as per my previous post, the learning curve is and will continue to be much steeper and harder for women than it is for men.

Partly due to biology and partly due to the complete chaos of the last 20-25 years of propaganda everyone has marinated in for the last 70 years (but really skyrocketed since about 2000 AD or so).

The PRIMARY thing that needs to change is for WOMEN to learn to be logical and objective; which is to a large extent a real biological hurdle that will not be easily overcome. Millions of years of survival pressure, their bodies, their hormones, their very ability to create babies and give birth to them, NECESSARILY means their own minds have to be far more flexible and “incoherent” from a male perspective than a man can reasonably appreciate. And these are not things that are flaws. They are how they are because it was the way to ensure the survival of the species.

But things have changed VERY rapidly. And women are now seriously behind. The last 70 years of feminist propaganda has “weakened” most men, it’s true, with the concomitant negatives listed above, but it also has allowed men to perhaps contemplate certain asides. From simple examples to large philosophical ones. I think it’s fair to say that the average man today is more aware (almost invariably too much so) of his need for a certain level of emotional nuance when dealing with women. On the other hand, women, seem to have gone more “feral” in the same period, turning life into a semi-permanent state of Sodom and Gomorrah for us all, while (as usual per their biology) avoiding taking ANY responsibility for any negative consequences of their own choices.

Therefore, the only relationships that will survive, reproduce, and create large families and therefore functional, well-integrated societies, will be one of the following:

1. The “new” men (sensitive but still mostly killers, just smart, dangerous and intelligent ones that also have a personal code of ethics that is unbreakable) and “new” women (objective, capable of constructive self-criticism, as well as adapting to factual reality, with a view to being “reconcilers” up to a point) get together, realise they are compatible, form permanent bonds and form stable families. Without a foundation in some form of religious belief such couples will still tend to devolve back to chaos over the period of various decades, however, the religious aspect may be of various kinds.

2. The usual “traditional” enforced by force, women as chattel, and men essentially “owning” them, but not in a caring, loving way, but literally more as a breeding mare for the continuity of his male progeny. Islam essentially works this way, and, to a certain extent, so does traditional Judaism.

3. (Possible but unlikely) some other form of “arrangement” be it throuples, voluntary harems, polyamorous villages, and so on. These will inevitably fail as widely accepted social “tribes”. While possible exceptions MAY work, or even last a lifetime, these would be the exceptions to the rule. The reality is that human beings are too messy as a general rule to even keep ONE relationship going, keeping multiple ones going at once never really ends well, certainly not on a societal level.

I would say that regardless of if you are a man or a woman, option 1. is the best life and outcome. Those who fall into category 2 are unlikely to be happy in general terms, and it can be downright Hellish, and option 3 essentially is Mouse Utopia, which leads to societal collapse and no sustainable model of a functional society survives that sort of widespread set-up.

One last corollary:

The VAST majority of the world is composed of people who can’t even read and digest the concepts of this post. They will almost inevitably fall into some version of option 2 or be modified by “modernity” towards option 3. Almost all of Africa, large parts of Asia and South American all fall into the 2/3 category, with 1 being the sought after exception.

The Caucasian West is a minority globally, but their technological advancements have kept them around longer than any other minority generally would have lasted. And while our overall numbers continue to drop, the fact is that if at least 10-20% of us DO enter into type 1 style relationships, and also BUILD for the future, we have a decent chance of not just continuing to exist, but also of replacing and then getting rid of the Talmudic Pedovores that currently run things on this planet.

So… dear men: Get off your ass, and DO.

And dear women: Get out of your head and take responsibility as well as a good, long, honest, look in the mirror.

Then go forth and multiply!