But want to have fun when they do have kids without having ten kids.

The point is, it encourages behaviors that reduce marriages, marriage happiness/success, birth rates, male and female happiness. All of these things on the decline since "sexual liberation". If you think "fun" is worth sacrificing all those things for, that's your call.

Thing is, you don't need to be married to have a successful family.

And you don't need a housewife to take care of the kids.

Both parents should help, that's laziness unless one of the parents work away.

Children do better with both parents in the home, it's not even close. Not marriage per se, but these things are highly corelated. You are correct that a woman could work and kids still do alright, that's not really what I meant. It was just a figure of speech. The economy is such that I understand why women must work now, another reason for a drop in female happiness. Career women of today are less happy than housewives of yesteryear. Also worth noting, women tend not to want to marry men who make less than them and women are overrepresented at university, so this decreases marriage as well.

You are right, there is a drop in happiness, but is every life perfect?

Life is hard in 2018.

Everything's more expensive.

In 1950, the woman could stay at home because the man could get enough money comfortably.

Now, that's not the case.

It was also that some women don't wanna be bored, that's how the feminism movement started in the 60s.

Then women entered the workforce and supply/demand took over, decreasing wages for men. Then the establishment on both sides supported importing cheap labor at the expense of the American worker. Women were lied to and told they would find happiness and meaning in work when that really isn't generally what they find. The truth is it's rat race that serves to make others rich while you eke out an existence. There is nothing more meaningful than raising children IMHO and the drop in female happiness seems to support that. There are exceptional women who might not fit the norm, but that is irrelevant. One shouldn't consider the exception while ignoring the rule. Lot's of things converge to make society as broken as it is today and it's just not better than it was and it's getting worse.

If one puts the individual above the society and ignores the fact the even individual women are less happy under this system, it is a good system.

Tbh I don't think that is what made society as broken as it is today.

I think what really divided society, especially American society recently is the mass feminazism.

Yes, but what I pointed out about women was also the result of feminist lies.

Unfortunately.

It's funny how people only focus on the women's oppression in middle-eastern countries.

When in countries like Saudi Arabia, men are just as oppressed or more, because if they do something wrong, it goes on their whole family and their cousins. If a woman does it, it's only her that suffers.

The thing is, employers love it, of curse. In a time when mass immigration would not have been allowed, it allowed them to drive down wages. that's another reason it happened, these things happened in tandem.

Oh, I didn't know that about saudi.

So the whole family pays for the mistakes of a man?

No

But everyone knows about it, because men are in the hypermasculine environment.

But when women get charged with something, yeah everyone knows but its not that bad because women aren't in that environment.

So both sexes are equal there.

Both have dress codes

Both are kind of equal tbh when it comes to laws.

I see

It's quite equal, which I like. I would never be able to go there because I'd be thrown in prison immediately but it's a good society tbh.

Right, the plight of men is generally ignored by society. This is historically true as well.

Yeah there are some issues, but they have an okay system.

Men have suffered for societies to exist, men have largely built all the societies we know of and do the dangerous jobs, as they should. Men die and get injured at much higher rates, none of that is to be considered. Anyway, in my view, the typical western point of view is rotten at it's core and most ills we face emanate from that fundamental problem.

It's sad

Yeah, it is. I don't mean to be a downer but I think system has to crash before any meaningful fundamental change can occur. Until then, politicians will do the bidding of those wo want to use our countries purely as economic markets to be exploited while giving lip service to side issues, while ignoring our fundamental and difficult problems.

To be honest, it's understandable that they don't tackle the core issues, it would take more than politicians to fix and I don't think the populace is up for it yet.

It's unfortunate that a book written by some guy has affected society in such a way.

Especially western society.

What book is that?

Speaking of book, have you read Tucker's book? I plan to pick it up.