Skip navigation

Tag Archives: indian free-thinkers

Dear feminist nuisances,
If human males are so bad all over the world with patriarchy, lets go back to the way things are in nature.
No Dog or ape male provides resources,food,security,enmotional support or anything for the female.
Infact they just forcibly try to have sex with the female in many cases (look at dogs or squirrels or anything else you may observe) and the females have to defend themselves if they are not interested. In fact, in snakes the male kills a female if it senses that it is carriying the eggs of another male. Even if we go back to that state now, Human females will be at an advantage compared to females of other species.
How? – coz u kave the brain capacity to know that all it takes is one targeted blow to the males crotch and he is going to be permanently damaged for life.
If you had not let yourselves become weaker, you could have ruled us males. But as we got more intelligent since neolithic times, you shitty females tried
to use preganancy as a leverage to take advantage of males but ended up becoming weaker urself.
Even in nature it was the role of females to take care of the offsprings in most cases. But men have agreed to this concpet of marriage where they take up a lot more
responsibility and suppress their natural instincts. A female can have only 1 preganacy in 10 months, but a male can be a part of several pregnancies in that time.
Thats the natural design and the instinct is for males to seek out mates more than females. But we have suppressed that instinct while we agreed for marriage,
and so even if you are earning equal to us and you think you dont need a man to provide security, you owe us for agreeing to enter into the contract of marriage on which occasion you spend 5 lacs for flowers and claim that during divorce settlement.
And finally yet, we dont complain but you do.You know why? coz you know you are inferior physically and intellectually and cannot be as impactful as males
on a level playing field. Hence you bitch and moan and complain and blame like every other inferior groups do. So thats who you are.

Now a little analysis for MGTOW

Being married vs unmarried

Lets say 0 points is when u have nothing
100 points – the maximum fun you can

pleasure/companionship in a happy marriage/relationship (without kids)provides on average 40
The pain of marriage in a happy marriage (without kids)= – 25
this is attributed to when ur romance reduces a bit and ur want to be with others increases and you think u do not have enough free time or space and when women make all sorts of demand.

Total = + 15

with being unmarried/no relationship
Because of freedom i can get quite a bit of fun.pleasure in most societies which amounts to = 20 points
Boredom n feeling of loneliness = -20 .

Total = 0

But if you are a philosophically sound person and feel like u are better than others – like ur a leader, a big shot , a popular guy or ur a proud intellectual – you can have a lot more positive moments and therefore you can have more positive moments than the average guy with a hot wife in a good marriage. So for people wondering whether to get married or not – the above may provide some perspective. You just think about whether you can find that extra bit of fun/positive moments when u are single by some means. I would say the average married guy with a companion holds a 15 point lead over the average unmarried guy. So you gotta make up for it somehow.

Having kids is another story. Many people have to have kids. Its their procreation which brings so much joy despite having to be burdened by it. Now bringing and raising another person into this world is a big impact/accomplishment. But since they have the ability to procreate – people assume that your impact is gonna go on for an extended period of time. My father keeps using the word my Vamsam(lineage) so go on and so you must have kids. So trying to figure out if your lineage lasts for 1000 years should you claim credit for all thousand years??- Now children/people are not just Genetic material, most of their potential is not in having a strong or beatutiful physical body, but in their brains. Of course, genes influence brains a bit but people’s intellect is influenced majorly by ideas they come across on TV, internet – from society and not just from their father. If it was a competition between which is more impactful – a man whose genes have survived for a 1000 years with an average of 3 person per generation( around 150 people), versus a man whose ideas/deeds have influenced a few thousand people in what they do for even just 10 years – the impact of the later man is more. So if you dont have kids, its not the end of purpose of your existence. Ultimatley logic leads to nihilism and nothing matters. But even in a level below nihilism, its not the end of ur usefulness if you dont have kids. – Just whatever you can. Contribute AI research and that will create machines which are gonna conquer space and time a million times over. Anyway – im running a matrimonial site, non-marital contractual childbearing site and the money from these 2 im putting it into AI research – those things you can find in some of the other blogs here.  I will also be opening up a cafe the profits from which will be contributed towards creating AI.

So the takeaway is that you can still have a more positive,happier life despite not being married or in a relationship and not even having kids.  If you are willing find me and contribute to my businesses 😉 and if not me to other people who are making strides in doing impactful things.


Now lets examine some of the apsects of marriage & divorce

marriage is essentially a match. So at the thime of the match they are both deemed equal
in terms of what they bring to the table & what they commit to offer each other and no one else for the rest of the life. So yes its a life long contract.

Now if the husband or the wife cannot satisfy each other emotionally of actually in most cases sexually, it is a valid ground for divorce.
But what if someone wants to get a divorce on the grounds that after 15 years of being satisfied sexually, they want a divorce citing lack of sexual satisfaction anymore?
Okay, let them have it. But does the guy have to lose half his wealth for this?
or even within a short life span if this demand is made, should the guy lose half his wealth?, people will use loop -holes claim torture,abuse,lack of sexual satisfaction and claim money from wealthy people.

So ideally yes in a marriage both spouses are supposed to be equal and wealth sharing makes sense, on a practical level it is very very difficult.

Either we need houses with cameras all the time which can be provided in a court of law when needed.
We should learn to live without the institution of marriage.

AN arrangement between a man and a woman to have kids where the man might provide some monetary compensation.
For emotional companionship, they can just have what is currently Bf/gf /dating thing that people do today, and can move in, or move out whenever.

For providing destitute women with security we can just have large cooperative society housing & business/community districts for destitute women and government will pay for that. This is unfortunately the case as women are currently the weaker sex.

————–older points—————————————–

what is marriage anymore?


A simpler understanding is that two people are committed to each other
for sex, having kids, raising a family and companionship. What is prohibited now is spending time energy n emotional and material resources elsewhere that reduces what your spouse alone is entitled to. In many cases, the spouse does not even want actual stuff(energy,time n resources) from their partners, they just want to know – whatever their partner has, they prove it 100 % to them. In some cases, the people are happy with what their  spouses r offering them that they come to accept a lil action of their partner in the side if they find out to it.

But forget about extra-marital affairs for now, in a faithful marriage – what if there is no compatibility?
When people take marriage vows, is it a commitment that they will fulfill each other’s needs in the above aspects?
what if initially they thought they could fulfill it but after living together for a bit more time – they find out there is no proper compatibility – personality based and thence sexual
what if there is difficulty in kids arriving? at this point what is the foundation of this marriage? – no kids, no sex, no compatibility and no companionship.
Maybe one person may still find the other to be enjoyable to be with but what if this is not mutual?
So initally the understanding was to make a commitment in the above aspects, later on one realises that the commitment cannot be made because of what they realise about the other.

Who is at fault? and what can be done?

Well no one can 100% judge someone from the start – to add to it is the difficulty in finding potential mates these days esp with the arranged marriage thing in India.
The person who realises he/she cant fulfil the commitment anymore – they dont mean any harm at the beginning, its just that they come to the realisation that
its gonna be hard.
If they are running away coz they are impressed by others – thats something bad coz thats breaking the inital commitment and should gladly accept any penalties for breaking the relationship. But, if they think they’d prefer to be single rather than live with the other person?
Are they at fault entirely? and should they be punished if they wanna divorce?
Although the problem is with both parties – because no one means harm initially, but if one person has a shitty personality, the other cant keep on giving in,
and will not be able to find true companionship and sexual compatibility. So this person can either become more aggressive to try and change the one
with a shitty personality/or give them a taste of their own medicine. Or go for a divorce –
But has to pay the penalty either way for a misjudgement earlier on while making a commitment.
But, they cannot be blamed for not fulfilling their commitment, if their partner has a shitty personality.

Men have it really, really hard these days and our society needs to change in a lot of aspects for things to get better. First thing is Dads – please dont let your daughters become the entitled cunts that most women are today. Maybe if the dads dont keep em pampering too much, most girls wont be so dumb after all. Teach them to think about what is it that they bring to a marriage rather than just keep expecting things from the guys and in the name of norms and privileges in today’s society.

Are females more loving and more good than men?

So when they say women are more loving – what exactly does it mean?
Will they give more of their possessions to the guy than the other way in a relationship?
is it more of their time? emotions? thoughts?more dreams? more passion? – The above comes down to how much time each one has for their own thoughts.
Is it that they move on less sooner after a break up because they love more? – Dont think this is the case
Less likely to break the commitment when something better turns up? – Its not the men vs women here, its the good people vs idiots thing here.
Is it that women would go hungry to feed their kids while men wont?
or will they empathise more of their kids’ suffering than fathers?
Is it that they dwell on or give more importance to someone’s feelings
more than logical things? – Maybe that part but hey its just logic vs emotions and it doensnt mean the father loves his kids less

In those days there were no courts with a constitution that would divide the wealth equally between sons and daughters. The way the wealth was divided was to give it in the form of gold and women oriented things to the daughter when she got married and to give the land to the sons who can manage it…guess what this was called?.  The bargaining/expectation bit was to ensure that the sharing was appropriate so that the parents wudnt keep most of their wealth for their sons and that they wud give sufficient amount to the daughters atleast for fear of shame. It is also superficial to prentend that life is easy for everyone and it is not manly for the guy do expect a little head start from the girls’s side.

For over thousands of years the men have looked to prevent this from happening to women

If you hadnt wached the above video fully it and get some perspective on things.Competition,Conflict and struggle for gathering resources was the responsibility of men. In return for protecting from hardships, the fathers prevented their daughters from going out and face the wrath of greedy aggressive people outside. It is simply unrealistic even today and even more so back in the days to ask a number men stand guard for the protection of a females that feel the need to to go out in the night.

Females who go out in unsafe places  in untime are bound to be attacked the same way a weak male is bound to be attacked/ robbed.

( I bet no white worshipping coconuts saw the above as an issue)

India being a not so rich country has limited resources for law enforcement. But the UN statistics in which India was ranked 131 in HDI revealed the number of rapes per 100000 in India as 1.9 while it was 90 in US and around 75 to 80 in countries like Australia, UK even wil an 85% of the cases unreported in these countries. If you were a women and were born in ancient greece/rome(the most civilised part of ancient west)there was a good chance you became a prostitute or a maid. Not a lot of emphasis on marriage or family there compared to the east.

Only in certain parts in India we have Matriarchy and the smritis begin with the premise that Women are to be protected and treated with respect and hence having to follow a number of norms.Those werent perfect, sometimes went over board in bein restrictive and they certainly donk make sense these days, but originally it was intended for the good and not a patriarchal plot to dominate women. Also, polyandry(women having many husbands ) was prevalent only in india whereas polygamy in middle east and in europe meant only males can have multiple wives.

Yet today we all know how bad and immoral Indian men are and how mightly and righteous the westerners are.

Women drool over guys like brad pitt and ryan gosling…the aggressive natured european type who had been war-mongerers and who raped and pillaged a lot of native population of the  world at a cancerous rate.

Generally speaking males can procreate more times than females (because unfortunately only the female has to bear the child), and the instituion of marriage is slightly not so favourable for the male nature. yet indian men have respected the institution of marriage more and longer than western civilisations. Indian culture is inherently feminine and it can be observed from the non-aggressive nature  of indian men. But in the name of feminism, free-thinking etc a lot amongst indians like to bash indians ness and indian culture. There are two kinds of people in these groups…one white worshipping coconuts who look upto all things white, evaluate India through the western lens, and try to gain popularity, and feel important by putting down everything indian/native and trying to imitate the west. And then theres the other kind who despite not having any bad intentions, are drawn towards these politically correct righteous concepts since they are not really that intelligent and lack critical thinking. Dowry, slavery, feudalism existed throughout the world and atleast in india literal slavery didnt exist for a long time and caste system was just a way of avoiding the concentration of power,wealth within one group. However these so called thinkers always attribute the evils to indian culture/way of thinking. Either way these people are short-sighted and are a huge burden to India as a whole.