Marriage: Financial Implications

[Anonymous No.52925050]

Marriage as an institution doesn't make sense anymore for men, financially speaking.

Traditionally, a marriageable woman was a virgin, came with a dowry, had housekeeping skills, and child rearing skills. A marriageable man was a capable provider who would care for the woman and future family at his expense, but with the start up aid of the dowry. This social contract no longer exists. So let's examine what marriage is today:

A modern marriageable woman on average has fucked multiple men and comes with no dowry or housekeeping/child rearing skills. A modern man is on average incapable of supporting an entire family on a single income, but it's still possible, perhaps with the motivation of a family to care for and some industriousness, but due to immigration, outsourcing, and female participation in the labor force, it is exponentially more difficult to achieve an income capable of supporting a family and maintaining a decent standard of living. So what about divorce?

Women are responsible for initiating divorce 70% of the time, and men face the brunt of financial losses in the form of asset division, alimony, and child support. The losses sustained to a man’s standard of living is generally between 10 and 40 percent on average. So from a financial game theory standpoint, does modern marriage make sense for the modern man?

If you are an eligible bachelor, the only reason to marry is if the counterparty fulfills the traditional roles of a bride (generous cap: <25 yrs old with 0-2 previous partners), or if the counterpary has assets or connections you want access to (aka: a Dowry). Otherwise you could just stay the path of the modern relationship and fuck eternally without legal commitment. This is the endgame of feminism and it's not bad if you don't care about family or legacy.

[Anonymous No.52925055]

>>52925050
I still believe that if you have kids, it is healthy to have a marriage for THEM, not for you, because marriage is at this point entirely a financial risk the man assumes, as the woman is legally and socially protected to your detriment. But if you have children, traditional values will benefit them if you and your counterparty can demonstrate them.

Modern times call for a modern approach to relationships. If you are considering marriage to a modern woman, and you aren't marrying for assets or connections (rich parents, inheritance, prominent family), then you are LOSING by default. The assets/inheritance/income the modern woman comes with offset the financial peril you assume when you sign that contract with her.

But if she's not traditional, and she doesn't have assets/connections; she's destined to be a single mom or cat lady, and she's made to FUCK, NOT TO MARRY. And you can get sex easily even if you have to fake being a potential beta provider.

As for those high income lady's, well, I don't want to marry my business partner but we can remain single together and pool income on certain purchases without being married; perhaps they should be more open to modern relationships instead of trying to force the oppressive institution of marriage down men's throats.

[Anonymous No.52925097]

>>52925050
I like men that marry. Their wives make them buy useless shit that pumps my Home Depot stock

[Anonymous No.52925100]

>>52925055
Stop blackpilling me