Wednesday, 9 December 2009

Prostitution, Post-Marriage Relations and Obama’s Unlikely Election

Obama: Elected on the back of soft polygamy, Welfare and the Marriage Strike?

Prostitution is a topic that sharply divides MRAs. On the one hand, some consider prostitution a largely benign institution that cheapens the power of sex, thus knocking Anglobitches off their pedestals of entitlement. Other MRAs point out that many feminists view prostitution as a ‘reappropriation’ of female sexual independence – making it something to be obviously opposed by MRAs. (However, yet other feminists strongly oppose prostitution, concocting bogus figures about levels of trafficking and coercion, further muddying the waters).

In short, prostitution is a baffling topic, on which there is no clear consensus among either MRAs or feminists. What is our own view?

The Anglobitch Thesis broadly considers prostitution in the Anglosphere to be quite distinct from that which occurs in other cultures. This relates to the Disneyfied, puritanical repression that undercuts sexual relations in the Anglosphere. Elsewhere, sex is viewed as a physical function, like eating, not some quasi-mystical sacrament bestowed by women on men. Hence, in the Anglosphere it is broadly in women’s interests to keep this high ‘exchange value’ attached to sex, for any decline in its value means a loss of that ‘princess’ status uniformly granted to women in the Anglosphere. That is why, broadly speaking, prostitution is opposed by Anglo-Saxon feminists like Harriett Harman, and all blame for it laid at the door of (largely imaginary) ‘traffickers’, pimps and most of all, men.

Prostitution attracts the utmost controversy among Anglo-American MRAs

However, many women also oppose prostitution for entirely personal reasons. If men can obtain a cheap, steady supply of sex, more women will end up without a mate, a mortifying fate for most females. After all, most men marry to assuage sexual needs and an endless supply of cheap young female bodies is infinitely preferable to spending half one’s life with an ageing, turkey-necked scold. Of course, the ‘Brazilification’ (socio-economic inequality) that has recently emerged in the Anglosphere also means that fewer men can can now attract a wife, anyway. In short, many women are also on Marriage Strike, in that too few Anglo-American men can now afford to keep one. Many evolutionary psychologists argue that prostitution is very prevalent in Third World countries because there, it is more cost-effective for women to prostitute themselves than marry an impoverished husband. In western countries only 1% of women are prostitutes; in African countries the proportion of prostitution-women is as high as 25%. Indeed, the ‘soft polygamy’ that is arising in the Anglosphere probably represents an expansion of prostitution in response to ‘Brazilification’ – that is, we are rapidly returning to a pre-modern, pre-patriarchal socio-sexual compact closer to the Stone Age than advanced industrial society.

So now we begin to explain the differences of opinion among gender activists of both sexes on this crucial topic. Young, attractive, lower-class women will of course favour prostitution, since they can use it to exploit male sexual needs and earn far more than they ever could in conventional employment. However, old or unattractive women will automatically oppose prostitution, for the same reason they oppose male homosexuality – it will likely leave them childless and mateless in old age, as men opt for quality sex over marital commitment. Indeed, old elite women (a la Harman) are invariably most opposed to prostitution for this very reason.

The same distinction can probably be found among MRAs. The Anglo-American MRA movement is broadly divided into conservatives and progressives. Conservatives, represented by sites like American Women Suck, tend to hold Christian beliefs and strongly oppose prostitution. Progressives, as represented by MGTOW, tend to be agnostic materialists and broadly accepting of prostitution and homosexuality. Both positions hav their problems, however.

‘Anglo-American’ conservatism is somewhat of an oxymoron, in that America is a nation forged in revolt. Moreover, Protestantism is a faith of revolt, and Christianity (sans the Judeo) is a revolutionary hotpotch of idealist eschatology, pacifism, paganism and Marxism (turn the other cheek, accept the pagan Trinity, give away all your possessions). Besides, ‘traditional’ Anglo-Saxon puritanical culture inherently promotes matriarchal values, so adhering to it is hardly likely to challenge feminism. By contrast, the progressive strand of men’s activism acknowledges some of the problems inherent in Anglo culture, even if its solutions may still be invalid.

In sum, the issue of prostitution is complex, and opinions on it are formed by personal circumstances, politics and culture. That the West is changing, moving away from Marriage towards ‘soft polygamy’ (another form of prostitution, after all) is impossible to doubt. This is shaping new cultural trends – increased rates of singleness, the Marriage Strike, more use of hired sexual services and a rapid expansion of alternative sexual lifestyles. What has not been noted before is that these trends are starting to influence mainstream political events in the Anglosphere, as can be seen in the election of President Obama.

The great unstated truth about Obama is that young, single women made him President. There is something about being a young, single woman that makes someone strongly enamored of generous Welfare programmes. The fact that most young, single women earn little, tend to study non-renumerative subjects at college and have a pronounced sense of entitlement in Anglo-Saxon societies all disposed them to vote for Obama in droves. Of course, the crucial factor in their situation is singleness- specifically, singleness occasioned by the Marriage Strike. Simply put, in the ‘Post-Marriage’ era, an elaborate Welfare State is essential for such women. Since men still earn more, yet no longer trust them enough to marry them, young single women must necessarily look to the State for survival provision. Of course, the Welfare State inherently favours women, anyway – just look at Britain, where men pay most taxes but get little Welfare help - which further explains these women’s electoral choice.

Theirs was a vote for misandrist matriarchy, and long will American men rue their present political administration.


  1. Ultimately, a prostitute (or stripper) EXPLOITS and DEGRADES a man's sexuality.

    The man pays, the woman gets the money - the woman (prostitute) is the exploiter, the man is the exploited.

    It degrades the man's sexuality, because (in my opinion), it turns a HUMAN act into a bartering act. I.E. how would you look on somebody that sold a starving person food - eventhough they had food aplenty...

    Given the choice, I'd take a prostitute.

    No, its not good - but, at least the prostitute is straightforward about the type of person she is.

    The typical anglobitch is a prostitute - she does not have the ethical decency to admit that all she wants from her man is money.

    The typical anglobitch is a prostitute, just more deceptive about it.

  2. Give men a choice when it comes to sex. Make prostitution legal in the US. Let's see how the feminist would react to that!

  3. From your website sccrow:

    "ABOUT FEMINISTS: Do not be fooled by what you find on the internet. There are quite a few web-sites and books that separate feminists into 3, 5, 7, 12, or 197 different categories. These are apologists. That is, they are trying to excuse the evils of feminism by re-packaging it and making new addendum labels for it."

    Very good stuff indeed.

    The "repackaging charade" is one we can expect feminists themselves to engage in, yet it is unfortunate to see MRAs promote it.

    Fortunately, this illusion of "197 different categories of feminism" is not a difficult one to debunk.

  4. Eh - that was some frustrated sarcasm on my part - the 197 categories...

    overall, they basically try to imply that there are good feminists, and bad feminists.

    I would say that the feminist concept, is flawed.

    Because, as this site points out, it had a hidden misandrist agenda.