Thread by @cirnosad

Debunking modern marriage. A short thread. /🧵

What we regard as marriage today, isn't what marriage used to mean. Today we associate a marriage with a wedding, registration, a semi-official ritual and all kinds of nonsense.

This all represents the death of love, not its birth.

Let's start, right off the bat, with the most formal part of it in our soyciety: The marriage registration, which results in a certificate.
What does "register" mean? It's in the name, "regis" meaning the authority of the nation. Or the REGIme!

It means handing it to the regime.

This isn't just a play on words but a VERY real phenomenon. In the old days, a man would get married to a woman, and their families would be joined quite literally. That means the authority of both families would reign over them, their children and so on.
These bonds were strong.

The concept of a man "departing" from a marriage was never really a thing, the family would intervene, and the man would be ejected out of society.
Same deal for the woman who would disobey the husband, cause trouble and generally go crazy as women do today (very regularly).

As the man held the responsibility to protect his wife, and provide for her and their children, he also was granted authority over her.
This will undoubtedly make modern women shriek. "Ew, a random man [and I *despise* all men], has authority over ME?"

Indeed, that's how it was.

Why?

What incentive is there for a man to be given responsibilities and burdens, if they aren't given authority to shape their own destiny? That includes what their wife does.
How can you lock them into this over a long time without giving them something in return?

Clear? No?

Well, let's look at what happens with marriage registration today and you'll see it. Perhaps.

When a marriage is registered today, the woman is given away, by the person who wanted to marry her, to the regime. She is registered as the property of the regime.

Now, to a modern woman this sounds LESS offensive. "Well the regime is bigger and better than any man".

Like anything registered as property of a regime, that property can return to the regime -- through no-fault divorce.

The woman is incentivised to divorce her "husband" (not really her husband as you can see), and in trade for destroying his life, they are rewarded handsomely.

These women have every reason to divorce their man. Think about it.

He has no authority over them.
He just provides.
It's through the goodness of these women's hearts that they pretend he's their husband for the duration, it's through their mercy this right is not exercised.

I'm sure this sounds horrible but think about it logically.

Imagine you had a knife to someone's back, even someone you liked, and had to go on a 20 year road trip with them.
Imagine if there is an inevitable difference between you and there's no consequence for plunging it in.

See, these women are human, albeit fallen humans most of the time. This mercy cannot last forever.
At some point, there will be trouble.

With no bonds to family and no society to fall back on, the only husband they had all along, the regime, is all they can turn to. And they do.

Men aren't stupid. The majority of us see this for what it is. So there are two solutions.

The most popular one was to just not commit and bounce around all the women. Why sign this stupid contract when you can rent out fake relationships to satisfy your lust? Hookup culture.

Eventually women caught on, so they kicked off #MeToo but it ultimately created a disincentive of being with women all together.

So men started to go into another mode: Complete avoidance of women. This phase has been going on for about 9 years. Women have noticed...

So their solution? To try and shame men back into the marriage trap. 😂
It won't work, men are familiar with basic game theory from their observations. The game is skewed on one end and has nothing to do with spirituality.
Men would only accept a real marriage without the regime.

But the regime already thought of this. Today, you're automatically married by "cohabitating" (a term invented by feminists). This means you could invite someone over to your house for some duration and then they'll suddenly own half of it. And you'll become their slave later.

Furthermore, men who try to use the legal system to exercise authority, via a prenuptial agreement, are also f**ked over by judges who throw it away.

Leaving no way back to the way things were.

There's ultimately no solution here, so what is the lesson?

Ultimately, women are the root of civilization as they create families. But without men, these roots are not fed nutrients, will shrivel up and die.
Marriage kept these going and is gone.

Restoring real marriage won't fix everything. But it would be one important step.

/End

P.S. I was going to write about the problem with modern weddings, but I'll save that for another time.