0 sats \ 6 replies \ @k00b 15 Aug \ parent \ on: Vote With Your Feet, A Short Story BooksAndArticles
What maddens me about this dilemma is how relatively inflexible men are. Caveman Grok is a man for a reason. Grok says, "Grok protect and provide, Grok do no nothing else." Even if men were still generically desirable while not protecting and providing, I'm not sure enough men would be able to switch biological purposes very well. We can be derelict in duty easily but changing duty requires a relatively unique and powerful man.
I always think of a government saying "we're here to protect you".
Protection is creating a land where citizens are free to pursue their dreams and happiness, of their own volition, that THEY choose themselves.
The second the government says "we're here to protect you, you'll have to serve us the way we tell you to though"... you've gone into tyranny, not protection. And tyranny is dangerous af.
Women do not want tyranny and the danger that comes with that, masquerading as 'protection'. I think that's what it comes down to. We see the falsity of these claims.
Protection is fine. But is it really protection? If I cannot pursue my dreams, happiness, and choices?
Thing is.... a LOT of people do still get married. Happily. Even couples that are more modern. It's a very real thing. I also suspect there will be many upcoming trad divorces. Give it 3-10 more years. I think if I'm right... it's a tragedy.
reply
A lot of people do still get married. That's for sure.
Our World in Data has some cool stats on how that's going.
reply
Out of curiosity, is their definition of marriage purely with a government issued marriage certificate?
I wonder if perhaps people are trending toward a more organic marriage, but the term marriage was co-opted by governments, and so there is not currently a term for a man and woman living together, being exclusive, and raising a family and pooling resources.
reply
hmm
"In recent decades there has been a decline in global marriage rates, and at the same time, there has been an increase in cohabitation. What’s the combined effect if we consider marriage and cohabitation together?
The chart below plots estimates and projections, from the UN Population Division, for the percentage of women of reproductive age (15 to 49 years) who are either married or living with an unmarried partner.
Overall, the trend shows a global decline – but only a relatively small one, from 69% in 1970 to 64% projected for 2020. At any given point in the last five decades, around two-thirds of all women were married or cohabitated."
Odd paragraph, I'm intrigued by this one I didn't expect;
"For older people the trend is reversed – the share of older women who never got married is declining. In the 1971 census, the share of women 60-64 who had ever been married was lower than it is for women in that age bracket in the decades since."
reply