..and not at all because thanks to feminism, marriage has become a financially and emotionally unviable proposition for modern men.
The article is here ..
There are similar ones here , here and here ..
And here is a response , and another..
So, who does own the marriage strike, now that one half of the population of the western world is finally admitting that it exists – and why does it seem so remarkable to them?
Isn’t it also remarkable that feminists consistently attempt to reframe the Marriage Strike as a minority decision now that more people than ever are opting to live separately ?
Exposing Feminism 
19 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 4, 2008 at 4:52 pm
bachelor tom
Well, if we assume the Times is striving for clarity and balance then they’ve struck out.
If we assume the Times is catering to their shareholders, advertisers and customers then they’ve hit a home run.
The primary responsibility of any business (including media) is to survive. Follow the money.
February 4, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Khankrumthebulgar
Never Let a Fish use your Bicycle. Wow another Man Shaming rant. I never saw that one coming. Go to National Review and read Kathryn Jean Lopez’s article on Arrested Development. It actually mentions why Feminists are some of the cause of the Marriage Strike. But does not go far enough.
Talking to a Rabid Feminist is like trying to teach a Pig to Sing. You annoy the Pig and it never will sing for you. So why bother? I post primarily to try to reach Men. As most Women are beyond reaching Mentally.
February 5, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Renegade Evolution
Question, gents:
It seems to me there are a lot of unhappy not married people in the 30 range, men and women, and many of both are burned by previous bad relationships/partners. I’m in the US, and it does seem to be somewhat different here, but the theme is prevelant here too. I know guys who would like to settle down, women who would too, but all of them seem to be coming at the idea of it with a lot of baggage, and no, man/woman shaming doesn’t seem to the be the answer…the all men are/ all women are statements make me ill. So, really, what is a solution for these people? I mean, it could be an interesting thing to explore.
February 6, 2008 at 7:27 pm
bachelor tom
quote:
So, really, what is a solution for these people? I mean, it could be an interesting thing to explore.
For starters, the “me first” attitude has to be toned down. Any relationship involves compromise, and maybe sacrifice.
If you believe as I do that N Americans are too materialistic, then unplugging from the consumerist matrix will help people to re-focus on “real” values, whether spiritual or communal.
As a self-confessed misanthrope (?) you will probably agree that human perfectibility is a dodgy proposition. Reducing childish complaints and whining will at least help us think more clearly (yes the right wing whines too).
February 7, 2008 at 5:06 am
fidelbogen
Annihilate, root and branch, the entire system of feminist-inspired anti-male laws and public policies which have been set in place over the past few decades. That all by itself would cure most of the malignancy. Of course, I realize that I am being long on diagnosis and short on detail in saying this, but. . . one thing at a time. It is best to start with an overview.
As for the delicate matter of gender- bashing (from both sides of the fence) – that would be less of a problem (a LOT less) if we stopped making a big hairy fat-assed political issue out of it. (Which was originally the doing of the feminists — they’re the ones who insist on politicizing everything.)
To be perfectly honest, men and women have ALWAYS been snapping and sniping and snarking at each other. It’s called the human condition, and yes, it is fucked up.
And what ought be done about it? Not a blessed thing! Hurrah for gender-bashing; bring it on! But see that the field is level and both sides are licensed to have an equal slug at it. (Which was more or less the state of life prior to the recent advent of feminist social engineering.)
Those who are spiritually able to float above all o’ that (above-referenced) rot, will naturally do so. (Cream rises to the top.) ‘Twas ever thus. . .
And the the kiddy-o’s will mosh around in the mud pit as they have always done. And why shouldn’t they…? Leave them to their puerile devices and (in theory) leave the politics to the grownups. For truly, the personal and the political are a match made in hell.
Maxim: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. If it IS broke, don’t break it worse – or you will be held accountable.”
————
“…unplugging from the consumerist matrix will help people to re-focus on “real” values, whether spiritual or communal.”
Word!
February 8, 2008 at 3:09 am
fidelbogen
EF – that certainly was a snide, patronizing, muddle-headed shit-stain of an article you linked to. 😉 And yet, like so very many things, it was richly informative if you study it NOT for what it purports to say, but for what it unintentionally reveals. Some authors…you know…. craft their treatises better than they know!
However, what most delighted me was the long string of reader comments which followed: I would say 3-to-1 were male-positive and damnatory toward the author. It was a HIGHLY revealing core sample of the current zeitgeist, and although it depressed me, it also gave me hope. (Yes, a paradox. I know. Go figure!)
Those reader comments included the following item which in my opinion is transcendentally intelligent; how could I not share a thing so luminous?
All boldfacings are my own:
“ Men and women are only compatible in a pre-industrial age world. Marriage was a survival contract as much as anything. Love & happiness took a back seat. Now women get married for emotional gratification and men marry to get laid steady, at least young men and women. As a man, I can state that until I was 45 I was completely incapable of being responsible for a womans emotional gratification. I was however completely capable, from a young age, to be a provider in a pre-industrial world and my woman would have loved me for that back then. I would have loved my woman for her role in the family.
“Today marriage doesn’t work, it simply can’t work. The proof is all around you. No gender is to blame. The good news is that as a man I do Single better than a woman who is always more comfortable in a relationship. Men generally want freedom. This shows in politics. A woman will trade her Liberty for security (from the state) in a heartbeat. A man craves liberty.”
The hard lesson we must learn, is that we are hardwired.
(But good luck instilling that lesson upon an old-school feminist! The folk wisdom about teaching new tricks to an old dog certainly pertains in this case.)
February 18, 2008 at 12:20 am
tim
Exposing Feminism, take a deep breath before I post this one and make sure you don’t have any food or drink in your mouth because you may spit it on your computer screen. Here goes:
“the marriage strike is a Neocon plot”
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2008/2/10/19234/9426
“The Neocon, “Dr.” Helen, has used the City Journal article on her blog and at Pajamas Media to whip up men into another frenzy of hate against women and promote the marriage strike once again. (Even digg and fark have gotten onto this bandwagon.) You would think that with this “Dr.” Helen being a woman she would stand up for women rather than selling out to the Neocons. Regardless, all you have to do is read the comments from her blog or Pajamas Media to see how much American males hate women. The Neocons have brainwashed most American men (particularly those under 35) into thinking women are out to get them. The comments prove this since they are all about how women are going to steal your money, steal your kids, dupe you into being a father for kids than aren’t “yours”, etc. In other words, it’s all complete bullshit. It’s really similar to how the Neocons use “terrorism” to keep their hold of power over the people.
Let’s take a look at the City Journal article. It’s about how males aren’t maturing into men. The article is correct. I see this at my university. Nearly all of the males have the maturity of a 5 year old. To them, it’s all “ME, ME, ME, ME, ME, ME.” (The only males who actually act like adults are myself and others involved in progressive leftist politics and causes.)
The marriage strike is a temper tantrum from a 5 year old. Women rightfully stand up for their rights, and American males go, “Wah, wah, wah, I’m not going to play anymore until you submit yourself to a patriarchal marriage.” What is needed is for these American males’ moms or kindergarten teachers to put them into the corner until they learn how to play fair and respect women. After all, if American males want to act like 5 year olds, they should be treated that way.
It’s gets more interesting when we look at who the author is. She is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a Neocon think tank. In other words the Neocons wrote this article filled with facts about the state of American males, just to have other Neocons like “Dr.” Helen rip it apart and reinforce the American male hatred of women. This direct link between the Neocons and the marriage strike proves that the marriage strike is a Neocon plot. “
February 21, 2008 at 8:41 pm
bachelor tom
Okay I’ll ask the obvious question: how does a marriage strike benefit Neocons, and what is the evidence that they are behind this ‘conspiracy’?
March 3, 2008 at 1:22 pm
The14thOpossum
Who really wants to get married anyways? Male or female?
July 4, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Mr. Smalls
Regarding small penis sex positions, they have been around for quite a while. Even the Kama Sutra mentions them. Small penis sex positions are basically deep penetration positions.
They are helpful for men not so endowed.
February 21, 2009 at 2:32 am
Mikko
Ask an American woman what she thinks a small dick is and surprise-surprise: it is a Johnston below 7 for some and below 6 for others. Together that is 80% of dudes having an underpowered tool, according to most women. Ask them again and they will tell you that most men are plain bad in bed. So, why in the hell they want to marry small dicked men who are just awful in bed? This is simple: women need a nester type who will help her build a nest so she can rear kids. If you aint an Alpha dream male sex god and that is a very small minority, you are just a nester that the female of the species uses.
Following that logic, most men should avoid marriage because it is an institution that presses them in the service of women needs and desires while dynamiting the needs, desires, dignity and finances of men . Prostitution should be allowed so that the ordinary man can have release. Kids will be fathered by the alpha males, but it is women who have to solely rear and provide for them without the help of lesser males.
October 27, 2009 at 8:35 pm
The marriage strike: it’s still the fault of men « Exposing Feminism
[…] may also wish to read The Marriage Strike – It’s Because You Have A Small Penis on this blog, which was posted back in February 4th 2008 where I originally commented.. ..Thanks […]
February 12, 2010 at 5:27 pm
Freedom35
What underlies these women’s arguments is that they are not criticizing all men over 35 who haven’t been in a committed relationship. They are criticizing only the men in this catagory THAT THEY ARE ATTRACTED TO! It doesn’t bother them when an ugly guy is alone, but only one’s that have sex women.
March 5, 2010 at 2:47 am
Wellard Manning
Mikko, the funny thing is I can name a few guys with SMALL Johnsons, we’re talking 4-5 here who have laid an awful lot of women. The difference is only two things:
1) They cared about what they wanted more than they cared what the woman wanted. Doesn’t mean they didn’t care about what the woman wanted, just they cared what they wanted more.
2) They don’t really care about their penis being small. And why should they? It works, it feels good, what’s the problem?
So if you have a small pecker, don’t worry about it. There’s nothing wrong with it. Some girl states she prefers a big one, who cares? I’d prefer Angelina Jolie but I’d still love to play with that pretty blonde receptionist who works at the library. I’d prefer a perfect 10, but I’d still love to play with that dirty size 16 who does that thing with the lolly pop.You get what I’m saying?
April 8, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Anonymous
As a woman, i believe the marriage institution was never a good idea to begin with….for neither gender
May 15, 2010 at 6:59 pm
duck
I have been told since I was a small child how awful the male of the species was. I heard it on the radio. I saw it on television. I overheard it in female’s conversations. It is amazing that any male would commit their lives to any female at all.
Yet, I am married. My wife doesn’t try to remake me into some ideological servant worshiping at her alter of the ideal male, nor do I towards her. I support what she strives for and she supports me. We do not try to take over each other’s life. When there is problems, we work together to solve them. We have been married for 40 plus years now and I can only think of two times where heated arguments occurred and we ended up laughing about them afterwords. They were really silly when analyzed but the letting off of steam was beneficial.
Usually, most arguments over something small is a reaction to something else going on and it may not be anything pertaining to one’s spouse. A bad run of days at work can trigger things or false preconceptions of what another person should be like……
My sister in law has had numerous males. She picks up the un-confident, whining, insecure geeks, dweebs, and losers. She remolds them to fit her fantasies then drops them like a hot potato when they begin to think on their own. When these re-constituted males are on their own, they usually don’t want to have any serious relationship because, in their minds, my sister in law is what females are all about….
March 16, 2011 at 10:50 pm
Ash
I always go by the 1+1=1 equation. That is, the relationship becomes the main focus (1) and supersedes the of the focus of either partner (1 or 1). That concept is impossible for those who are self-centered and selfish.
April 19, 2012 at 7:21 pm
lawlyet_w
Hi, I’m a brazilian masculinist, owner of the site Homens Realistas (realistic men), the biggest and most famous MRM site in brazil. Most of our members are strikers, but I personally think that MS is not good for masculinism. The point here is that feminism was created by the comunism and their main goal is to destroy family, patriarchy and moral values. If we keep going with MS we are playing feminism game and giving them what they want. The end of family and patriarchy. Also, the more men joining MS, more the number of manginas paying single women to take them to bed. At the end this will not only lead to the end of family and patriarchy, but also to more sluts free to live a single life focusing on carreer without worries while men give them everything expecting casual sex, including promotions and better jobs taking the place of other men. Also we will se more laws protecting single mothers which will grow and also use this as an excuse to totally legalize abortion and also we’ll see more children in streets or growing up without a father to teach them values and masculinity. This will lead to a broken, immoral and feminized world and we will fall faster than Sweden.
October 14, 2012 at 5:09 am
Jennie
Wow-I feel sorry for heterosexual women who married some loser with a small smelly cock! I am bisexual and do as I please by the way. Stop blaming feminism for marriage failures. Millions of women do not want to spend their entire lives being told by some scumbag controlling guy that “this is MY house bitch!” Women are tired of raising ungrateful children (mainly boys-but that’s another story..). We are tired of not seeking out education-spirituality-a happy balanced social life and pursuing the things that WE have dreamed of to be some “housewife” that has to look forward to a guy like Al Bundy coming home-drinking beer-farting-wanting sex all of the time-and he may even beat the kids as well as his “wife.” Some don’t come home at all. What is the sense of all of this? Women have been held back for SO long by the patriarchy that now it’s our turn to do as we please. Getting married-being single-dating is a choice not a requirement for being female anymore…