The Warden’s Tale: Why Expatriation from the Anglosphere is now the sole remaining hope for Anglosphere Men - Part II

  

Is Anglosphere Feminism uniquely Misandrist?

A poster called Lawrence has written a brilliant defence of the Anglobitch Thesis. As an American expatriate and former prison worker, Lawrence has unique insight into the terrible state of modern gender relations across the Anglosphere. His piece was over 10 000 words  in length, and placed as multiple comments on a previous post by Legal Eagle. Here is Part II:

Like I said, every man in the Anglosphere is a target of this machine, but wealthy American and Canadian men are the hardest hit, because the US legal system gives family court judges wide latitude, which really can’t be appealed, to place arbitrarily high demands on the incomes of men who have been wealthy at any point. This is why Robin Williams committed suicide. At one point he was a very wealthy Hollywood A-lister. But after his two divorces, he was no longer pulling in that kind of money. The family courts didn’t care. They said he once made big money, and in the fantasy unicorn filled land of US family courts, that meant he could just click his feet together and make the same money again. So they made Robin pay out the nose for alimony. By this time he was sick with Parkinson’s Disease he couldn’t make anywhere close to that amount of money, and his lawyer was warning him that prison time was likely coming. So he committed suicide. Here’s another famous case, a guy in New York with same sort of situation, once made a lot of money on Wall Street and became upper class, told to pay alimony every year after that at insane high levels, lost his job in recession== then off to prison when it became impossible.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-08-26/jail-becomes-home-for-husband-stuck-with-lifetime-alimony Brendan Fraser has been hit with a similar judgement, tens of millions of dollars in alimony.

Wealthy men across the US, Canada, UK and the Anglosphere generally are hit hard like this. And yes, a lot of them wind up in prison. The incarceration rate in Canada and the UK isn’t quite as bad, but this happens there too because the misandrist structure of the laws and family courts is as bad as in the USA, and the legal systems share the same insane practice of imprisonment after court-ordered impoverishing of a man. I found this out ironically after I expatriated and was working as a Web and database planner, when my previous experience led prison systems in many countries to contract me to help with their intake software and legal briefing documents. This imprisonment of men for marriage or kids (or in these #metoo days, just for “harassment” that in reality is “any interaction with women”) really is an Anglo phenomenon uniquely. Whatever stupid idiosyncrasies the rest of the West has with feminism, they don’t throw men in prison for this.

The very worst case I saw as a prison guard was a surgeon, yes an American surgeon who was one of the most respectable guys I ever met, hard working, worked until 2 a.m. 6 days a week to save people’s lives. With all the work hours, his wife got “lonely” and started sleeping around, eventually having 2 kids that weren’t even his as he found out later. And then she filed for divorce so she could take the surgeon’s money, blow it on cocaine and stupid luxuries for herself without doing any work herself (that’s the real destination where the “child support” money goes) and sleep around with her favorite Chad of the week, all on her hard working surgeon ex-husband’s money. She won an insanely high judgment in a US family court, millions of dollars in child support and “alimony” that the poor surgeon would have to pay. Since by the court’s judgment, “she should be entitled to maintain the same standard of living after the divorce”, even though this greedy gold-digging Anglobitch is the one who filed for the divorce to steal from her hard-working husband who was actually saving people’s lives.

After a few years of doing this, and losing his house and his nice car, the poor surgeon threw out his back while helping a patient onto an operating table. He had to cut down his hours as a surgeon, and went to the divorce court asking for a reduction in the support demands, and ask that his lazy, spoiled brat bitch ex-wife get a damn job herself. But the court refused using the same delusion filled imputation bullshit they pull on other ex-husbands, claiming he could somehow make millions of extra dollars using his surgical wizard skills somehow. Which he couldn’t do in reality with his injured back, something the family court judge couldn’t or wouldn’t even try to understand. So then now the alimony and child support were demanding 120% of his income. You see, the family court system will never let you off the treadmill once they target you, especially if you earn a lot of money. Eventually he drained his savings and retirement, couldn’t make the payments at all—and he wound up in the prison where I was a corrections officer.

The corrupt American family court-media-feminist-academia cultural Marxist-big business-prison industrial complex had worked perfectly to ruin this poor man, and what a prize they had. A dedicated, hard working US surgeon, saving lives every day, drained of his money and reduced to poverty by a gold-digging, spoiled greedy bimbo who divorced him due to his very dedication, had kids with other men to force him to pay bullshit “child support” in addition to never-stopping alimony, his assets taken by his gold-digging ex wife and the state to grease their own corruption, the “child support” in actuality supporting the ex wife’s corrupt, hedonistic lifestyle after divorce. And then the poor surgeon himself made a literal slave in a US prison, stripped of his license and made a perpetual debtor, worked to the bone but never allowed to profit from his own efforts or hard work. That really is how it works in the US family court and prison system. That poor surgeon was the worst case we ever saw, made us so mad we were talking about how we were going to “free the Bastille” and start a revolution ourselves to stop all the corruption, Robespierre style. And free all the innocent men, and even some women, who were imprisoned this way, to feed more slaves to the machine.

Because if you’re an American man, particularly a rich, well to do, middle class or upper class man with skills, saved money, assets, wealth and a good job, that’s what you really are. Fresh meat for the Anglosphere family court meat grinder machine. Like Legal Eagle said, you are literally a slave with marriage or child-bearing in the US or the greater Anglosphere, from that day on, the state and officials have full purview over all your assets and unlimited ability to seize them. Legal Eagle saw this from the legal debate and court side, I saw the horrible result from the prison side, where men were sent after all their assets had been stolen by the family courts and their only further “value” was as slaves to the prison-industrial complex. This shit’s real, guys.

And now, in the ugly aftermath of #metto, #timesup and #nameandshamehim, you don’t even have to get married or have a kid in the Anglosphere to become a slave. Any interaction with a women, even something as casual as a glance or an innocent conversation, opens you up to charges of harassment and sexual misconduct. And given that as much as half of young white women in America find even innocent male female interactions to be harassment, you’re in great danger at any moment. Many harassment and misconduct changes now are being assembled by our corrupt legal-prison-industrial complex system to become prosecutable offenses. But even short of that, the witch-burning in social media means that any vague accusation, whether recent or months or years ago, will make you unemployable and a social pariah. You’ll lose your health insurance and ability to earn a living, and then the state will have all kinds of additional ways to brand you a criminal and toss you in jail.

Now on to one more thing Legal Eagle talked about, which is precisely why the Anglosphere poses such a unique and lethal risk to men in general, and husbands and fathers specifically, while other countries including others in the West and Europe do not, despite the poisonous fumes of Anglosphere and especially American culture. I’m not an expert in legal history or common and civil law like Legal Eagle is with his attorney experience, but as a LEO (we corrections officers are classified as this just like police officers are) we do need to understand at least the essence of the law. Our job is to enforce it after all. I’ll do like Legal Eagle and spell right out, best I can, just why the Anglosphere legal and culture tradition has turned into a monstrous machine so deadly for men, and for normal women who want to start a family, and why expatriation now is the only option.

As reminder I’m in France now, have been for years, and as a Web designer who’s often called on to help with the software used for prison intakes and legal briefings for law enforcement personnel, I also get a lot of international contract experience. I don’t want to claim the non-Anglo world is a paradise, yes we do have dumb, shrill and annoying feminists here too. But there really is a huge difference away from the Anglosphere because the feminists have nowhere the level of the power or cultural approval they do in the Anglosphere, and in France and throughout Europe, are shunned and ridiculed by even the mainstream media and society. The misandry is combatted in a lot of surprising ways, the safety nets are open to men as well as women here, the “sock it to him” attitude of the USA is throttled, people are cooler with nudity and sexuality so harassment isn’t an issue. But it’s really the legal structure that matters most in making things so lethal for Anglosphere men compared to the protections of the non-Anglo world ruled by civil law. Even if I don’t know the fine legal points of common law against civil law like Legal Eagle, I can tell you pretty specifically how they’re so different in practice, and why the civil law countries are a far better choice for Anglo men and sensible women, above all for professional and wealthy men, to expatriate to, settle down and have families.

a. Practically speaking, “common law” means Anglosphere law, while “civil law” which comes from Roman law, is continental law, used in Europe, in South America which is continental-based, eastern Europe, and apparently in a lot of Asia, which for some reason has copied a lot of civil law practices. (I’m a lot less familiar with Asia so I’ll trust Legal Eagle’s word on that). In the USA, Canada, UK and Anglosphere generally, common law in practice means judges have much more latitude to impose harsh and arbitrary penalties, which they’ll often feel free to do if they’re riding political currents and punishing a group that isn’t “politically correct”. This also creates a toxic legal atmosphere in the Anglosphere which attracts the most militantly feminist female lawyers to become family court judges in a sort of selection process. Like I said I don’t know the fine points of common law like Legal Eagle, but I did see how it played out in practice in US family courts when we were briefed on the court proceedings for inmates who had been confined for nonpayment of child support or alimony.

And it was very clear from the transcripts that the PC memes of feminist “you go girl” culture and the spewings of cultural Marxist academic journals had found their way into the American family court judges’ rulings, where the man was automatically assumed to be a deadbeat and loser deserving punishment. Yes, even lifesaving surgeons with back injuries were thrown into this pile, and while misandrist feminist judges were the usual culprits, there were plenty of stupid male white knight family judges doing the same bullshit. I’ve heard some people claim that Jewish family court judges male and female were particularly inclined to go the misandrist route, but tbh I’m not sure I really saw this, I think they were maybe overrepresented in general among the lawyers and judges, but plenty among both the stupid white knights and the hate-filled feminist judges ready to incarcerate some poor ex-husband for child support or alimony arrears, were old fashioned Anglo Protestants. Especially up in New England where I worked early in my career as a corrections officer. It’s clearly something in Anglo culture that combines with Anglo common law to fuel this insanity in the judges, possibly the strange combination of cuck-like chivalry by some men and zero-sum radical feminist hatred, unique to the Anglosphere, that maybe one of the other commenters made a note of.

The lesson to draw here is that it’s the “playing with fire” basis of Anglo common law that makes this possible in the Anglosphere, as I’ll explain, civil law countries reign in judges and don’t let them do this. The essence of common law in practical sense, is that the law is based not just on prior court precedent but also—and this is the main point—on “broad political currents” in society that the court supposedly interprets. Despite the US Constitution, which is essentially statutory law, the common law, which predates the Constitution itself, means family court judges in the US and general Anglosphere can “go with the PC cultural flow” which family courts in France, Germany, Norway, Brazil, Chile and the non-Anglosphere in general cannot do. And when rampant misandry and “sock it to ‘em”—even against a lifesaving surgeon whose gold-digging wife had 2 kids with other men—is the cultural current, US and Anglosphere judges have latitude to “go with it” and formalize the misandry in their decisions.

The common law, I suspect, is also why the Anglosphere, and I guess Israel from what Legal Eagle is saying (haven’t been there so can’t say personally), is unique in the way judges and the state have full purview to review and seize all of a man’s assets. The civil law of the continent in Europe makes that a no-go because judges are handcuffed legally, while the common law gives Anglosphere judges a lot more power over men’s finances. Combine that with the selection for feminazi lawyers to become family court judges, steeped in the latest misandrist bile from the media and women’s studies journals from academia, and boom, you have a formula for turning “sock it to him” into formal rulings by judges to seize all a man’s assets. Especially a wealthy man, who’s a juicy and favorite target for the unholy alliance of radical feminist Anglosphere family courts with the profiteering lawyers and prison-industrial complex, particularly in the United States.

This is the “laymen’s term” explanation for what Legal Eagle was saying: Anglo common law means that practically, a family court judge in the US and Anglosphere is a little dictator with uncontrolled and unappealable power to make state pronouncements that a man must ‘pay up” unrealistic amounts that add up to more than 100% of his assets and salary. And make him a pauper. There is no restriction on the delusional imputation that a family court judge can do with spousal support and child maintenance expectations for a man.

The judge in the Anglosphere can cite, as precedent, both previous decisions but even “flavor of the moment” social movements like #metoo and whatever misandrist junk is being spilled out in US university academic feminist journals, since an Anglosphere judge has so much latitude.

Not so in the non-Anglo world, especially in Europe and South America which is continent-influenced and where civil law rather than common law prevails. This is really where continental civil law from Europe shows its virtues—it’s in its essence more rational than Anglo common law, and by its very nature it imposes strict limits on what a judge can do, and how much of a man’s assets a judge, and thus the state, can review and effectively take control of. Again guys like Legal Eagle will know about this more than I would, but after being in France for a while and trying to master my French, I read a French language book that talked about how the Romans came up with law. They were almost scientific about it, a lot of philosophy and long term thinking, and that’s the heart of civil law that dominates almost every country outside the Anglosphere. Above all the Romans were realistic about how human passions of the moment could corrupt the law courts, and they were very frank about how women in particular, would too often get caught up in what we now know as misandrist hate campaigns like #metoo and the “sock it to him” hatemongering of divorce courts. That’s why civil law in effect protects men from harm and makes marriage and family formation possible outside the Anglosphere, and that’s true even in countries that, like in Scandinavia, have opened themselves up too much to many of the stupidities of Anglo-American culture. Despite this, the civil law tradition even in Scandinavia shields men in actual practice, something they don’t have in common law-dominated Anglo clountries.

In the practical terms of family courts themselves, family court judges in civil law countries are kept on a much tighter leash than common law Anglo countries, so the PC feminist “flavor of the moment” is irrelevant—the statutes are what matter, not vague prior “precedents” or media-driven memes like in the Anglosphere. That’s why, like Legal Eagle said, child support in the non-Anglo world is strictly capped, why alimony is almost nonexistent. The non-Anglo world is much safer for men in general, especially for upper-class and wealthy men, because the caps are kept deliberately low by the civil law legislative process. This stupid Anglo standard, that after divorce “a woman should be entitled to maintain the same lifestyle as during marriage”? The non-Anglo countries call bullshit on that. By civil law codes, if a woman files for divorce, she then has to get off her ass and earn her money herself. And they HATE gold-diggers in Europe, which the civil law formalizes. It doesn’t matter if the man has been a millionaire surgeon, like the poor unfortunate inmate I worked with, or a billionaire industrialist—a divorcing spouse is not entitled to his fortune, whether he made it before or during the marriage. She’ll get only enough to provide basic support for herself and her kids given cost of living, and beyond that she has to work. A wealthy husband will customarily contribute more to help her get job prep at the start, and a husband who’s having tough times or just lost his job will be given a break to get on his own feet.

Generally the civil law that Legal Eagle talks about, means that men in the non-Anglo world can marry, have kids, divorce if it comes to that, without putting their assets at risk. Because not only is there no alimony, but child support is kept low and works differently, as the woman filing for divorce is expected to work and do the supporting herself. Again this shows the rationality of the civil law which is developed by community leaders with long term thinking, as opposed to divorce law and family court judges with a feminist chip on their shoulder, swayed by the PC whims of the moment. The “playboy rule” that I and I think Legal Eagle are describing above, is done this way for a reason. It discourages divorce for one thing, so non-Anglo Europe and South America have much less of it than the Anglosphere. It also encourages shared custody, since a woman gets no advantage from profiteering through the child support bullshit which usually just supports a custodial parent’s excessive lifestyle. It means men don’t go to prison, since child support is low, it doesn’t “rack up” and there’s no alimony. It also means that lawyers, judges, states and the prisons don’t get to be gluttonous greedy pigs like in the US, UK and Canada, since you can’t profit from the divorce process, like I saw time and time again with all the poor ex-husbands sent to the prisons I was assigned to.

This in laymen’s terms is what Legal Eagle was saying in his first point, the civil law of Europe, South America, east Europe, everywhere outside the Anglosphere is a far better protection of a man’s assets, wealth and freedom than any prenup, because it totally changes the math and economics of divorce, takes away the incentive for it, prevents profiteering and makes custody shared. That’s why, even if feminists and dumb Anglo culture get into non-Anglo countries, they’re tightly shackled in what they can actually do. It really is true, I have seen this. Feminism and dumb Anglo-PCism are laughed at in France, Austria, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Holland, Belgium and east Europe, and whiny feminists especially here in France are vocally mocked and marginalized, but they do have some currency in Germany and Scandinavia, which makes them a little too vulnerable to stupid PC fads and feminist farts from the Anglosphere. (Although as I’ll get to below, Nordic and German feminism really is a breed apart from misandrist Anglo feminism).
Yet despite this, the actual process of marrying and divorce in Germany and the Nordic countries has the same legal structure, with the same statutory protections as men enjoy in France and the Mediterranean, and it’s because those countries also follow the civil law instead of the common law of the English-speaking countries. If the feminist harpies from the Anglosphere came to Germany or the Nordic countries, they could bleat all they want, but they have no power to ruin a man in a divorce as is routine in the Anglosphere. And so men in Germany and Scandinavia, especially upper class and wealthy men, have their assets walled off and protected from the state the same as we do in France. If a woman files for divorce in northern Europe as much as France or southern Europe, she doesn’t get to do any gold-digging, and if she has a rich husband, she isn’t entitled to his wealth. The statutory limit is deliberately kept low to discourage divorce and encourage custody sharing, and if she still goes ahead and files, she is responsible for getting off her ass and getting a job. No freebies on a husband’s dime, whether he’s rich or not so rich.

b. The different feminisms of the Anglosphere as opposed to the non-Anglosphere. I know Rookh was bringing this up as a main topic, and when it comes to things like sociology and cultural history I’m really not too familiar, so I can’t really comment with the depth a lot of you guys have here. But I can say this from direct observation, the feminism of Scandinavia and Germany really is a world apart from the hate-filled, virulent misandrist madness of the Anglosphere, and ironically it further serves to help northern European men and protect them from divorce or #metoo-like harassment witch hunts. This isn’t so easy to explain to people in the Anglosphere because the cultural framing of reference in Europe is so different, but I guess here’s the essence of it.

Consider for a moment a European country infamous for its loud, obnoxious feminists, say Norway, Sweden or Finland. For the poor guys stuck in the Anglosphere, as I was until I expatriated, when we hear “feminists” even overseas, we instantly think of the vitriol-filled, openly misandirst American, Canadian or British harpies like Emily Lindin at Teen Vogue. For those who don’t know, she was the disgusting bitch in the middle of the #metoo witch-hunting who wrote on Twitter a few months ago, ““if some innocent men's reputations have to take a hit in the process of undoing the patriarchy, that is a price I am absolutely willing to pay.” This is the character of Anglosphere feminism: it’s shrill, resentful, spiteful, malicious and clearly full of hatred, less concerned with helping women than with doing damage to Anglo men in any way possible. (If these crazy feminists really wanted to help women, they’d campaign against the oppression in Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia).

So what about the feminists in Norway, Sweden, Germany, Denmark and Finland which had feminist traditions even before North America? It really is a totally different form of feminism. The feminists up there in Nordic-land and Germany can be shrill and loopy in their own way, yes. But up there, the feminism isn’t misandrist, and they aren’t obsessed with this “evil oppressive patriarchy” the way Anglosphere feminists are. For the Nordic feminists, it’s more about true independence, sexual freedom and yes, actual egalitarianism. They hate the #metoo thing up there because they think it makes women look weak. They hate alimony for the same reason, in fact of all ironies, it was Nordic and German feminists who led the push decades ago to abolish alimony and restrict child support. And even to help institute paternity leave as well as maternity leave to encourage fathers to be with their young kids. It sounds crazy to us in the Anglosphere because “feminism” here is something so much nastier and misandrist by definition, but the feminists up in Nordic-land in Germany in general aren’t misandrist and in fact do a lot of things that are very husband and father-friendly. Yes, they can irritate sometimes with their own “you go girl” talk and be a little standoff-ish at times, but to a surprising extent, most of them are actually reasonable, and mainly focused on making sure that girls and women have opportunities to explore and be creative—without doing this at the expense of boys and men.

And you’ll be relieved to know that despite the cultural excrement floating in from the Anglosphere, Anglo-style feminism really isn’t catching on there. That’s in part due to the fact that German and Nordic universities are structured so differently, they focus on gaining real skills and frown on Anglosphere bullshit like gender and women’s studies programs that for the most part are just high tuition welfare for PC feminists and administrators. But it’s also because the northern European feminists just plain don’t like the Anglo style of feminism. (And like I said, the French, Austrians, southern and eastern Europeans just don’t like feminism at all).

As to why this is, I have my own theory. I know a lot of you guys have talked about how the crazy Puritan tradition in the Anglosphere, or maybe the Victorian era, is responsible for making the Anglo version of feminism so toxic by making sex itself an item of scarcity that women gain power by making rare, and that pushes the societies to harmfully separate the genders from an early age so they don’t understand each other. Now, I’ll say I think there’s something to this. Repressing male-female sexual interaction in the Victorian or Puritanical tradition does lead to a lot of societal perversions directly and indirectly. Directly, I feel like we saw this in the Victorian period, and today in Afghanistan with the sexually repressed Pashtun tribes that make young women unavailable for sex before marriage, resulting in men’s schools and clubs plagued by homosexual weirdness. More importantly, I feel like this does contribute to the “men are evil” misandry of family courts and #metoo extremists since it paints any sexual association as evil, and since men in general are more associated with sexual interest towards women, it means that Anglo feminists frame their misandry with a lot of Puritanical shaming and disgust at sex itself.

And the different, more freewheeling attitudes of Europe towards sex and sexuality are truly a lot different, which probably steers the culture sharply away from Anglo-style feminism, even among the feminists there. Before my fiancée joined me in France—and I’ll admit it here, even after we got married—one of the places I loved to go was up In NE Germany. Tbh German, Polish, Czech, Swedish and Finnish girls are sexy as hell in general, something about that Baltic area, and these gorgeous ladies never have hang-ups about being sexy, attracting men, even being nude or out in thongs in public. When you talk to them, many will say they’re feminists, but their coziness and lack of frigidness around being sexual totally changes what feminism means to them. FWIW I see the same kind of thing down in South America when I’ve been there, particularly down in Brazil, which is the one country I would have chosen if I didn’t wind up in Europe. Crazily hot women, independent, often say they’re feminists but it all means something a world away from Anglo feminism. (In Brazil, when a girl says she’s feminist what she really means is she likes to be the one in control in bed). So from that observation I think you guys are right, the way that Anglo feminists have been conditioned to view sex itself as dirty and nasty, a hang-up from our Puritan tradition, may contribute a lot to the nastiness and misandry of US and Anglo feminism.

Still, I think there’s something else at work in the Anglosphere which has to do with Anglosphere history. Most countries in the Anglosphere were settled by invading British colonists who pushed out the natives and took slaves. That’s the history of North America in essence. But this all changed in a nasty and bloody way for the Anglosphere that was very different from Latin America, where there wasn’t the history of open and hateful group conflict like there was in America’s civil war in later history. It just seems like the lines are more blurred in Latin American countries. So North America, in particular, has had this nasty history of rival ethnic and racial groups, displacing the natives and fighting bloody wars against each other, and never came to an understanding about it. And then cultural Marxism came, whipping up and playing on these conflicts as a wedge against the West, and it found its most fertile ground in the Anglosphere. The malicious Anglo feminists of US divorce courts and #metoo seem to borrow a lot of that group warfare language, and maybe that combined with the Puritanism has made the Anglo strain very ugly and hostile.

c. This one’s simpler—the media culture of the Anglosphere is a world away from what we have in Europe, especially in France. That’s part of why #metoo never caught on in France, Italy or the rest of Europe outside the UK. We just don’t have that kind of voyeuristic “gotcha” culture that plagues the Anglosphere. Some anonymous commenter was whining that Catherine Deneuve, Laetitia Casta, Brigitte Bardot and the other French women luminaries were harshly criticized in the media after they came out against #metoo. This guy obviously hasn’t been to France and doesn’t speak French, because he’s totally wrong on this. Deneuve, Casta and Bardot all speak for the overwhelming majority opinion of both the French masses and the French elites, who find the #metoo stupidity and the misandry of US and Anglo family courts to be a laughing stock at the very least, and a threat to society that should be shunned. This view is shared by 96% of the French people, and the French media openly mock the few French feminists who try to imitate the Anglo feminists, and whose own attempt at #metoo here fell totally flat. Caroline de Haas in particular is roundly ridiculed by French women even more than men as being totally out of step with French culture and reality in general, and she wound up being a punchline humiliated by comedians all over the country after her lame response to Deneuve.

Notice for example the tears of the misandrist mainstream American and other Anglo media about how #metoo has failed completely in France. They know the media and culture of Europe spit on the Anglo delusions of cultural relevance in areas like this, and it burns them up inside.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/01/france-me-too/550124/
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-did-catherine-deneuve-and-other-prominent-frenchwomen-denounce-metoo
https://www.thewrap.com/catherine-deneuve-joins-100-frenchwomen-bashing-puritanical-metoo-witch-hunt/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/world/europe/italy-sexual-harassment.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/26/opinion/italian-feminism-asia-argento-weinstein.html

In fact it’s gotten so hostile and humiliating for these Anglo feminist imitators that they’re now set to leave France, setting up in, where else, the UK and Anglo provinces of Canada. In all their whining and butthurt, they say that the Anglo countries are more receptive to their shrill misandrist feminism, which itself is telling.

d. Hinting at this before, but something else that makes the Anglo brand of feminism such a wrecker for men and society, is the Anglo obsession with money and profits over people, and the stupid worshipping of big business and corporations. This may sound money coming from me because I’m a business owner, a hard-core capitalist and was considered right of center when I was in the US. But these ideology driven lines in the sand confuse more than they reveal because they’re too damn broad. Yes, I am a capitalist and fully support free markets for most things in society. But the problem is, too much of what the US and Anglosphere calls “free market capitalism” isn’t really capitalism at all, it’s more like lazy cronyist style fake capitalism. This in reality is more like socialism for the oligarchs and super rich buddies of people in power, like the third world corruption that rules shitholes like Mexico (yes, I said it) where a few families hold 90% of the wealth and brutally oppress the masses, extracting their wealth for themselves.

This is what the US is becoming as it embraces this fake oligarch capitalism rather than true free market capitalism, and it’s exactly what I saw working as a corrections officer with the prison-industrial complex in the United States. Like I said above it’s a big part of why we have the world’s highest rate of incarcerating in the US, the prisons here are in essence slave labor camps and plantations that constantly need fresh bodies and more slaves, and it’s a big part of why the divorce court insanity is so awful in the US and Anglosphere. For the Anglosphere, every part of the miserable divorce process, and now the #metoo screaming, is a chance to profit.

Family courts provide a lot of profit for the lawyers, judges and the states too like Warburton was showing. Gold-digging ex-wives get huge profits from alimony and child support just like the states. And then when the Anglo man’s assets are drained dry, especially a wealthy Anglo man who’s such a rich target, he’s sent as a slave to the prison-industrial complex to extract his slave labor and further profit, both private and public prisons do this. Another reason the Anglosphere is so deadly for a man who wants to hold on to his wealth and start a family. It’s just like healthcare and college in the Anglosphere, the marriage and divorce court system, and now the “harassment industry” after #metoo, is another place for the most corrupt oligarchs in the US to make big profits.

There’s a term for what the Anglosphere has now that economists use, it’s something like “rentist seeking”. I’m not sure exactly and economics overall is one of my weak points from college. But whatever the term is, it has something to do with asshole oligarchs, profiteers and parasites in essence skimming off the wealth that real producers in society produce, like manufacturers or that surgeon who got sent to my prison after impossible child support and alimony demands. It’s yet another reason to expatriate out of the Anglosphere, the culture no longer values real capitalism, it’s more about profiteering and extracting money from people who do real work. Which is exactly what American family courts, and Anglosphere family courts generally are set up to do.

This is maybe another less noticed reason why the non-Anglosphere is much safer and more welcoming of men, and of women who want to start families, than the Anglosphere. Business and free market entrepreneurs are greatly valued in France and Europe, but they care about real capitalism here, not the cronyism that’s become the big thing for the Anglosphere. This is another reason why the non-Anglo European and South American countries, and yes this includes Germany and Nordic-land, so strongly oppose the insanity of US divorce courts, discourage divorce and prohibit alimony. They just see this as part of the crazy profiteering and cronyism that’s consuming the Anglosphere economies from the inside, parasitically. They hate the idea of divorce lawyers and ex-wives, let alone courts and prisons making profits off something so terrible as divorce. And they realize there are lots of things in society, like divorce and health care, where profiteering is a terrible thing. So they forbid it, and it’s another reason divorce rates are so much lower in Europe, while divorces in general cause minimal damage to those involved in it.

On this topic I know Legal Eagle said Switzerland was a little different, and yes I have heard of the Swiss being unusual in the nasty, sometimes US-style divorces they have there. But as I understand it, that’s because Switzerland is a bit of an oddball, the last country in Europe to given women voting rights while still having paternalistic “protections” for women that haven’t caught up to the reality that women work these days. It’s more of a legislation lag than anything else, and as Switzerland is a civil law country too, that’s correcting itself. The Swiss absolutely do not profiteer from divorce the way Americans and other Anglosphere countries do, the Swiss are sharp eyed capitalists in the traditional sense.

And another reason why the Europeans and South Americans hate Anglo profiteering creeping into very inappropriate places, like divorce and family courts—when people aren’t valued, eventually the society changes out the people and the demographics change. This is a big reason why the US is already a majority non-white country in its school-age population, with the rest of the Anglosphere following suit. Corporations in the US don’t want to train or support American workers, they want bigger profits fast, and the best way to do that is to import surplus labor through mass immigration to depress wages. Short term profit, long term disaster and civil conflict. France has a totally different perspective. I know the US media likes to go nuts over all the trouble French Muslims supposedly cause, but in reality they’re only around 3 percent of the population and actually dropping as Muslims and Africans leave what’s becoming a very culturally strict society now, which I think someone else mentioned. The same goes for the Swedes, Dutch, Germans, Italians all of which are much tougher on immigration than Trump could ever dream to be. By refusing mass immigration this means they have to invest more in their own people and not profiteer off them. Which means none of this parasitic bullshit the US loves to pull in things like family courts and healthcare.

e. The last point, and sort of a follow-up on the previous one about what makes the non-Anglosphere more suited for men and families than the Anglosphere, it’s the safety-net traditions here. Now, again I know Americans get confused about this because they’re so used to calling this “socialism” and looking at French social programs in just left leaning or right leaning terms. But the French social assistance programs are more properly seen as ways of making sure society stays harmonious, and this extends to things like family courts and divorce courts.

Part of why US family law is so stressful, and divorce court judgments are so harsh and devastating for men, is that there just aren’t good safety nets in the US and Anglosphere, so Americans are always at each other’s throats trying to extract money anyway they can. It’s like a state of constant downward mobility and anxiety, and this contributes both to the tendency for Americans to divorce, and the grasping and nastiness of divorce itself there. In Europe, people in general are just less stressed and happier because people aren’t constantly stressing about going broke from hospital bills or college costs the way Americans are. This also reduces the divorce rate and stops the ugly side that Americans show when divorce hits.

One thing I haven’t mentioned yet, is that my wife is actually American herself, and she moved to France with me. There have been a number of expat conferences in the US recently drawing American expats in, across the world, to spread their wisdom to other Americans thinking about expatriating. (A lot of people at my conference are aware of Rookh’s site, so I’d say there are at least thousands of men lurking specifically to find about expatriating from the misandrist mess the US and Canada have become). Anyway, one of the guys I talked to in the US conference talked about how he and his wife in Washington State nearly divorced after the costs of their first child, who needed specialized care, nearly made them insolvent.

This kind of ridiculous economic stress from healthcare, daycare, college tuition is a lot of what pressures so many couples to actually go ahead with divorce in the Anglosphere, and it’s something we’re freed of in Europe. My wife and I also had a complicated birth here in France for our first child, and yet it cost us nothing. That’s right, $0 other than the parking and lunch. So something that would have stressed us out like crazy in the United States or another Anglosphere country, here in France was just a minor little annoyance, and we’re just happier and more secure here than we could ever be in the US. There’s an irony for you, I married an Anglo girl from America when I went to France, but by being in France, she avoided becoming an Anglobitch—she and I are 100% French now. So if you want to marry your sweetheart in the US, make sure you both settle down somewhere else!

As bonus, we don’t even pay more taxes here in Europe even though Americans assume that. Our healthcare costs so much less, and for that matter our family courts are much quieter and less expensive, plus with far fewer inmates there’s much less need for what I did in the US as a corrections officer. So things just cost less in Europe than the Anglosphere and less taxes are needed. I actually pay less in taxes in France than what I paid while working Rhode Island in the US! It really is not just worth it, but essential to expatriate out here or to other countries outside the Anglosphere. You can have a real family and real quality of life here. With normal relations between men and women actually loving each other and enjoying each other’s company.

 

The Warden’s Tale: Why Expatriation from the Anglosphere is now the sole remaining hope for Anglo-American Men - Part 1

Isn't she lovely?

A poster called Lawrence has written a brilliant defence of the Anglobitch Thesis. As an American expatriate and former prison worker, Lawrence has unique insight into the terrible state of modern gender relations across the Anglosphere. His piece was over 10 000 words  in length, and placed as multiple comments on the previous post by Legal Eagle. Therefore I will repost it here in several parts, to be appreciated in its full glory:

Applause for Legal Eagle’s intelligent and historically informed perspective here. A US-based old buddy of mine got wind of this Blog and suggested I contrib my own frightening observations as a prison guard to add to what Legal Eagle said, ‘cuz I’ve seen the neo-slavery impositions of the Anglosphere and specifically American “family law” system on American men, up close and personal, in their full brutality. Legal Eagle is dead right, the Anglosphere really is a uniquely dangerous death trap, in every way, for any man who dares to even attempt a relationship with women, and especially for those poor souls who become husbands or fathers particularly in the US. Expatriation, as he said, really is the only option now. 

And I’ll underline something else he said because everyone here needs to be well aware of this for your own protection, as someone who’s seen too many wealthy and upstanding American men literally enslaved in US prisons after divorce: the greatest danger for men in the Anglosphere is actually for wealthy men and professional men (and oddly enough, for a growing share of non-feminist non-crazy women), above all those with fiscal discipline, lots of savings, investments, assets and earning potential. For most potential hazards, your wealth and assets protect you, but it’s the opposite in the upside down world of Anglosphere family law. For wealthy and well-paid American men and their peers in the Anglosphere, marriage, having a kid and yes, now in #metoo world even striking up a conversation or hooking up with women paint a huge, ugly red bullseye on your back for the lunatic family court system in North America to come after you and profit at your expense. Not just to take your assets and impoverish you, which they absolutely do and which family law gives them full power to do, but also to toss you into prison. Yes, rich, upper-class and professional men not only robbed of their assets under full cover of law, but also thrown in jail, a tyrannical practice unique to the Anglosphere. 

I know because I’ve seen this with my own eyes year after year with horrible repetition, and often for kids that weren’t even from the imprisoned “father”. Forgive the wall-of-text I’ll be putting up here, but I feel like men in the Anglosphere, above all the USA don’t understand the very real threat to their very livelihoods and even status of free citizens they’re facing if they marry, have a kid or in today’s #metoo inflamed world, even associate with women who can later hit them with harassment charges. I doubt that even Legal Eagle, despite his wisdom from practicing family law, could really see this at a gut level. The MGTOW’s are correct in the corruption they’ve identified in the divorce court system, but even most of them don’t see the horrible path this corrupt system eventually leads to. However, it is something you see as a prison guard with your jail cells filled with men who committed no crime, confined there because US, Canadian and British family courts have imposed impossible financial demands on them, literally making them slaves for the prison-industrial complex to profit off of. This is one of the ugliest sides of the society wide disaster that the Anglobitch culture has given rise to, and Rookh was well ahead of his time in putting many of the threads together. In my former line of work, I saw the horrible, kafka-esque end result of Anglo misandry and feminazi feminism: total impoverishing, a jail cell, literal slavery, even for wealthy and highly skilled men. In fact, ESPECIALLY for wealthy and highly skilled Anglo men, who are this corrupt machine’s favorite targets in America and the Anglosphere.

Here’s some background. Before I myself went the expat route a few years ago, I had a job for about 10 years as a corrections officer, building up some savings and then later as a flexible shift job while taking correspondence courses in computer graphic and Web design and finishing a Master’s in database management. I really wasn’t a traditional fit personality wise for a corrections officer, I’ve always been bookish and nerdy and not really into rapping knuckles. But my family has been in law enforcement for a few generations and prison guarding can be a decently paid gig. So I used the job not only to make money but also observe the US justice system up close, which I would later be able to generalize to much of the Anglosphere. 

And here I have to warn you, if there is any job that will redpill you from your 1st month on the job into becoming an MGTOW, it’s being a prison guard. Because you see the effects of the legal Weapon of Mass Destruction that is US divorce courts and family courts generally right up close. That’s because the large, large majority of the prisoners we watch over in our jobs aren’t violent, aren’t dangerous, aren’t even really criminal. They’re either tossed in the slammer for the “crime” of minor drug possession (not dealing, just personal possession) or more and more, for contempt of court due to failure to make alimony or child support payments. And yes, this is a uniquely Anglosphere practice, mainly US, Canada and Britain. The rate of such imprisonments in France where I now live and work, and every other country in Europe? Or South America which follows French and Roman legal tradition? 0%. They simply don’t do that to men here. 

And yes it gets worse for anyone in the Anglosphere, like Legal Eagle said a terribly big fraction of the men in US or UK prisons for child or spousal support payments? They’re wealthy and upper-class men, because their assets give the family kangaroo courts wide authority to impose outrageous and impossible payment demands on them. This is due to a family judge practice called “imputation”, which essentially means the judge, completely ignorant of real economics of actual job and earning potential for a man hit with a divorce suit, can pull a random number out of her ass and tell the man, “this is what you should be earning”. And this makes upper class and especially rich men particularly vulnerable to an enslavement by the family courts. While there are some idiot white knight male family court judges who do this, it’s mainly naïve feminist female family court judges who see a man who’s wealthy or has been at some point, and automatically assume the guy can grow money on trees. They’re not only feminist idiots, they’re ignorant about business, real hard work or what it actually takes to earn a lot of money, and how risky and uncertain, famine to feast a high-earning position or job is. So ironically it’s the wealthier men who are hit the hardest by family court judgments since the judge can impute any ridiculous fantasy of what he “should” earn out of her ass, regardless of reality, and she’ll always pick an outrageously high demand. Then with any dip in the man’s fortunes or the broader economy, he of course can’t make the impossible imputed payments, and then boom, it’s off to jail for the “deadbeat” man even if he’s been a model citizen. I saw this there in the prisons I worked at, day in, day out. And no, it’s not a bug. It’s a feature of the insane Anglosphere system. Why you ask?

Chew on this stat for a moment, the United States of America has by a long shot the highest incarceration rate in the world, about 4 percent of the world population but getting close to 30 percent of its prisoners, with about 1% of our population in prison in any given year and, depending on the study, up to a fifth or even a fourth—that’s 20 to 25 percent—of the US population being jailed for one reason or another at some point as either an adult or a juvenile, in most cases for charges that turn out to be trumped up or (as with child support) involve the hazy concept of “contempt”. (And crazy enough, sometimes the Americans in jail are the “lucky ones”, the USA also has the highest rate of citizens being shot by our own cops for complete misunderstandings or trivialities, and whites face just as much danger as minorities for that these days). And the US imprisonment rate is still rising. In fact, the United States with 320 million people has more prison inmates than China and India put together, even though these 2 countries have 2.5 billion people between them! The reason is obvious: Money. There really is a prison-industrial complex in the USA, I know because I was a part of it. And it really does make big money for a lot of people in control of it. It’s the modern day update of the old plantation slave labor system. 

The catch of it is, to make money from a slave economy, you need lots and lots of slaves, and you don’t want them to be too violent or dangerous either. But then how do you get normal, law-abiding men (and also many women) into the heavily profitable US prison slave system, when jail is only supposed to be for criminals or bad guys? The answer, you simply fill up the prisons with people, mainly men and preferably white men, who aren’t actually criminals, but who can be tossed into jail for victimless “crimes” like drug possession. And for simply doing the thing that humans are biologically programmed for—having relationships with women and fathering children. So how to drive these decent law-abiding men into the slave plantations of US prisons? Simple. Create a vicious, misandrist culture in the USA, and the Anglosphere more generally where men and particularly white men are vilified, demonized and turned into objects of hatred and scorn, encourage women at every opportunity to divorce men and “sock it to ‘em” in divorce court, and now with #metoo, encourage women all over the workplace, bars, gyms, wherever to start a massive witch hunt against men for simple flirtation or even looking at them, while lobbying to make the vaguely defined “sexual misconduct” charge (that is, it’s whatever a feminazi decides it is) into a punishable offense. And there you have it, millions of American men and other Anglosphere men ripe for confinement in the lucrative slave complexes of the Anglosphere, which we call penitentiaries. 

Because that’s what the insane, bloodthirsty family court madness of the US Anglosphere is—an unholy alliance of profiteering interests that unites radical feminists and cultural Marxists, with government bureaucrats, with corporations and big business who want to make huge profits off slave labor, and with the mainstream media and social media that has created a politically incorrect object of hatred that’s ripe for targeting and enslavement—the men of the Anglosphere, especially white men. (Notice how quick Mark Zuckerberg was to bow to radical feminist pressure in censoring “fake news” on Facebook—he wants to align social media as much as possible with the same misandrist hatred that rules the MSM and academia).

And above all, this Anglosphere and above US alliance of dirty interests targets wealthy white men and a few uppity Asian-American men for “diversity” (I’ve seen this too in the prisons), after all you guys have far more wealth and assets for the state and the gold-digging woman in family court to plunder, much more to drain you dry of before they toss you into prison where you can make a bunch of fat cats even more profit as a slave. Doesn’t matter whether it’s a public prison or a private prison, the US and Anglosphere war on husbands, fathers and men on general is all about the money, ultimately, and they need slaves to make the big money.

This is why you truly cannot risk marriage or child-rearing in the US or the English language nations just like Legal Eagle was warning. Above all if you’re wealthy and have a lot to lose. Like Legal Eagle also said, prenuptial agreements don’t really help because they’re not designed to, the Anglosphere needs you as a slave that the vultures in power can get rich pickings off of. And the numbers back it up. In many of the American prisons I got assigned to, outside of the drug offenders-- another nonviolent noncriminal group wrongly incarcerated at outrageous rates—MORE THAN HALF of our inmates were men incarcerated for falling behind on child support or alimony, or hit with questionable domestic abuse or sexual misconduct allegations. (And to make this figure even more terrifying, as it should be if you’re even considering marriage or child-rearing in the US, all this was BEFORE the #metoo craze which is going to send those numbers up even higher). The US really is a banana republic particularly in its prison-industrial complex, but without the nice weather, beaches, good food and sweet pretty ladies of the countries usually labeled banana republics.

I know I’m sounding grim with all this, but I’m trying to be honest about all this and give you all warnings of the real horrors you’re exposing yourself to with marriage or child-bearing in the English-speaking world, and nowadays even with male-female associations, because courts in the Anglosphere from then on, into the indefinite future, have real power to take away your assets and literally enslave you as a prison inmate. To put this another way, what Legal Eagle was saying in his post, about how men in the Anglosphere become slaves as soon as they get married or have a kid—I’m not sure how much even he realized that this isn’t just a metaphor. It literally is true, and once you’ve been cleaned out financially, you’re ripe for the slave market of a US family court that will assign you to your slave plantation—an American prison.

At one point in my corrections officer job, the incarceration of men for child support and alimony arrears got so bad that a group of us prison guards came to the warden, complaining that we were being unethically ordered to guard men who really weren’t a threat and who should have never been sent to jail. Once imprisoned, they usually lost their professional licenses, their driver’s licenses, became unemployable so they just wound up back there again. The warden just shook his head, he knew how corrupt the system is, how the US family courts, media, politicians, universities, feminists and the prison execs all work hand in glove to profit off the US slave economy fueled by all the husbands and fathers tossed into prison. How it creates sick incentives that encourage divorce and profiteering. (This is another reason the US divorce rate is by far the highest all over the world, so much money is made from it). But the warden knew he was powerless to reform it. Just like we were as guards. The vultures of the Anglosphere want their prison slaves, and husbands and fathers are an easy target.

I will be posting Part II of this brilliant and insightful article soon.

 

Head to Head: Is Anglosphere Feminism really that different from non-Anglosphere Western Feminism?

 

Recently this blog has been engulfed by a riveting debate on a crucial topic: is Anglosphere feminism really distinct from the feminism in non-Anglosphere Western nations? And by extension, is leaving the Anglosphere really the optimal choice for Anglo-American men who still want relationships with women?

Anonymous strongly believes that the countries of non-Anglosphere Western Europe, South America and Asia are at least as bad as those of the Anglosphere:

The Ripper tells us that: "Give me France any day"

Well, I already wrote about France, but, man, I tell you, Mrs Casta is facing a bad backlash for her words. She was hated 20 years agou because she was too much sexy being so young, beautiful and big tits; now they have a political reason to hate her more.

The same faith for based mommy Catherine Deneuve. You don't have idea when the feminist machine catch on you with all its force. The fact that a few real women tell the truth, doesn't mean that the mayority agrees.

Go east, man. (note: the soviet version of feminism was not hatred on men...).

You would think that it's over, that the sitaution couldn't get worse, right? No, we have the Expat Phil that starts on digging shit.

Europe mainland? srsly?

France is described up.

Sweden is the feminists' hornets' nest, they were the first to cimininalize the customer of whores and right now the govt is making casual sex a crime unless you sign a contract with the girl/woman. The cuck governor of sweden is proud of such a new law.

Norway? Ask Eivind Berge.

Italian courts believe to every possible shit the females say, so the last one is that a pair of cops have been accused of rape by 2 american (!!!) girls even if the messages on phones state differently; they will lose the uniform and risk jail (not that I have any simpathy for the pigs...). If they catch you cheating on your wife, the court will make you lose everything.

In Greece there is the witch hunt against men who buy sex from refugees females. German women balme the misconduct of muslim men against white men patriarchy. Reseved train wagons, reserved swimming pools, free sexual harassment compliants to the cops in the case you don't meet the girl's standards, and so on... Many of them treat you like a sexual object, it happened me with a girl, for whom I was just her fetish; and some turned muslim (like that very same girl I dealt with, and) like the 16 yo girl named Malvina who appeared in KIKA, dating a muslim guy (alt rightists made up a shitstorm because the guy looks "too old for her"... just to keep up with the AOC theme and the cultural imperialism of the USA and UK).

Do you really like to be surrounded by bikini girls whose ass and tits will never been yours? Are you a masochist? That's why I support a forced modest dress code, even more in feminist countries of the west.

Should I go further?

LatinoAmerica? again, srsly? Have you ever considered the helluva bunch of feminist new laws passed everywhere? From Venezuela to Colombia? (so you can't balme communism). And right now that we have the worst pope ever? The black pope bergoglio? a men hater feminist scumbag like never before. Today he advocated for even stricter feminist laws for fight what they call "femicide".

So, if you are a fit, good looking anglo male cunt, don't teach us about how wonderful european women are, because if you can interest to a german or a french girl, you can interest to a texan girl from a conservative rural area too.

Also, pay attention on writing to take care of yourself, because I got the interest of that german girl for something that is the opposite of being fit. It's all about her own standards, brothers. Fat or fit, tall or short, etc... and if she changes her mind, just start on preying your gods, because it will be rape, even years later.

I only agree with you Phil, about the Israel and the Jewish conspirancy. Israeli men are in deep shit like the rest of us, and I don't give a shit if the israeli women at the end want to settle and have kids to fuck up arabs in the numbers because it's a patriotic duty (and that's true, so you have many ppl messing about the jewish conspiracy). They are over 30 years old creeps in the last 3 days of fertility, looking nasty.

James Bond, the best MGTOW is Expat MGTOW (that indeed is not real MGTOW if you still date or are interested in girls, that is something natural and normal), but only in countries where feminism is still not strong, or your assets are enough to make you to have a safe life (examples: philippines and surroundings). Check out the videos of MGTOW Expat, Kris Cantu and friends. But Europe is not an option (at least western europe and places like poland or latvia).

Finally, remember, you all angloamerican patriotic male cunts: this situation it's all your and your own fault only. It started after the 9/11 with the collusion between feminism and imperialism against muslims. If you ever served into an armed force of USA, UK and NATO, you are the source of the problem. Why in most part of muslim countries men didn't commit suicide before the imposition of feminism by the west via the bombs?

Allah Hafiz, brothers.

However, Legal Eagle has much personal experience of these issues from his work as an an international lawyer. I am very interested in the law, since it is now the primary feminist weapon in the Anglosphere. More women than men now graduate from Anglosphere law schools, and law is the cultural template via which feminists rewrite Anglo-American society in their own image. 

Legal Eagle also considers the distinctive Anglo-Saxon Common Law to be uniquely dangerous to men, marriage and fathers: 

Just wanted to tl-dr the informed points above to sum up in simple terms just WHY the Anglosphere is so measurably different and DANGEROUS for men compared to the non-Anglosphere (West and East) when it comes to marriage, divorce, simple dating, harassment and overall lifestyle and interpersonal relations. I'm an attorney specializing in family law, now working overseas myself with a basis to make the comparison, and this is really all you need to know about the real-life decisions you'll have to make in the Anglosphere versus outside of it:

--- Marriage and having kids are now fundamentally non-viable options in the Anglosphere because of one specific quirk above all in the way the Anglosphere handles divorce: You literally become a slave to the state upon marriage or having a kid in the Anglosphere because at that point, the state has the power to extract your assets without limit in the event of divorce, separation or abuse allegations. Again; ALL of your assets, your savings, earnings, even your work potential, before or after marriage, can be seized from you after you marry or have a child in the Anglosphere, because the US court and civil system gives women and family courts absolute discretion over all your assets and even future earning potential, WITHOUT LIMIT. Now with #metoo, a variant of the same unchecked power has also been placed into the hands of the state (courts), institutions and women with a chip on their shoulder, to bring about complete ruination and financial damage to a man even outside of marriage, due to any hazy allegation of "harassment". All of this is reinforced by the powerful Anglosphere cultural meme of "man = deadbeat".

--- Outside the Anglosphere, especially in old Orthodox and Catholic countries (Mediterranean, France, Latin America, central and East Europe) and most of Asia but yes, also in non-Anglo Protestant lands (Germany, the Benelux region, Scandinavia), the state has no such power over a man after marriage and having a child. Instead he retains full control over his assets, savings and future earnings, and all forms of support payments are strictly capped. By the same token fatherhood is also explicitly supported (hence sharing of custody, paternal support, mediation), and the #metoo hysterics are dampened both by cultural disapproval and by explicit laws and policies that forbid a woman from ruining man's career and reputation through simple allegations. (The defamation laws are also much tougher in the non-Anglosphere, and women making such accusations are harshly punished.)

That's it, the one reason above all why, as this Blog correctly makes clear, the Anglosphere is fundamentally more dangerous than the non-Anglosphere to basic rights especially for men, families and rational women. The state and a wife or ex-wife in the Anglosphere, or even a meddling busybody bureaucrat, has enormous and essentially unlimited power to drain and enslave a man financially. This is why you have to ditch the Anglosphere and set up elsewhere, and this is one area where the MGTOW's are exactly right Simply dating, associating with women and marrying in the Anglosphere literally and tangibly-- not in some abstract way-- expose even a highly skilled, wealthy, upper class men to real risk of improverishment, public humiliation and severe downward mobility in Anglosphere countries.

This is the difficult and painful message that my old law firm, when we were speaking honestly, would convey to clients looking for a "solution" to their concerns about asset exposure to marriage in the US and Canada. If you marry and or have a kid in the English-speaking world, from that point on you have a sword of damocles over your head. It's as simple as that, and again, the MGTOW's are right on here. In fact perversely it's even worse if you're a rich or upper-class man, all your assets, including anything you've inherited can be extracted from you under Anglosphere law. On contrary, this is what someone referred to by the "playboy principle" in the non-Anglosphere-- even very wealthy husbands can never be asked to pay beyond a statutory and low limit as support, which does indeed discourage gold-digging since the "lifestyle standard before divorce" is not a factor.

Just focus on this point and avoid all the distracting issues, because whatever other cultural factors you're considering, these are the ones that affect you directly as an individual, and put you at infinitely greater danger of destitution and disaster in the Anglosphere versus outside it.

And just to throw cold water on any assumptions that "there still must be a way to safely date and marry in the Anglosphere", I'm sorry, but there isn't. Like I said above, domestic and international family law is my legal specialty, what I've done every workday for the past couple decades. I've worked in dozens of US states, several Canadian provinces and then several law and legal translation offices overseas in Europe as well as (in 2016) in Cordoba, Argentina. My law partners and I have seen literally thousands of men in the US and Canada show up in our office, nervously asking about ways to protect their assets in the event of divorce, wondering about "the perfect prenup" or if marrying a religious girl in a religious ceremony, or a foreign girl protects them. (Short answer-- it doesn't, not if you're still living in North America or anywhere in the Anglosphere.) I'm sorry, but if you want to establish a meaningful relationship with a woman, have kids, start a family-- the things fundamental to any society for centuries-- there is now no alternative to becoming an expat outside the Anglo world. None.

The family law policies in the Anglosphere really have become THAT dangerous and perverse, and now with the #metoo hysterics and media push, it's only going to get even worse for men, families and reasonable women in the Anglosphere. I think other posts here have covered why, but if they haven't, here's the tl-dr: it's due to the particularities of Anglo common law (which is we learn from Day One in law school, is a whole different animal from civil statutory law), stare decisis and political/administrative inertia in Anglo legal tradition (feminists claiming female independence while clinging to "helpless wife" assumptions used to justify long term alimony), the oppositional essence of US law, media and culture. And don't think the political system, elections or either US political party will give you relief. For ex., guess who shot down two major attempts at alimony reform in Florida and Alabama, both of which have esp. harsh alimony statutes that hit ex-husbands hard? The foolish pro-alimony white knights were none other than two "conservative" Republicans, Rick Scott and Roy Moore. (The real reason Roy Moore lost the Alabama Senate election is that he imposed permanent alimony payments on a major Alabama publisher who was understandably embittered-- the things you learn working in family law.)

If it wasn't clear already, pre-nups offer very limited protection that's all but useless amidst the full discretion of divorce court judges, esp. after kids are born but even before-- even my own ex-law firm partners virtually laugh when husbands request them now, they simply don't help. Not "marrying a good girl" or "marrying a Christian or religious girl". Here's a nasty stat for you: the biggest jump in divorce, esp. nasty expensive divorces, in past decade has been among Christian and esp. Mormon women (!). Not marrying a foreign woman in the US-- once under US law, she'll have the same power to ruin you as an American woman, and fall under the same poisonous "deadbeat man" Anglosphere cultural influences that push other "nice women of good character" to divorce in Anglo countries.

Since I guess concrete paths to expatriation are becoming a topic here, f.y.i. my ticket overseas was to do legal translation. This is not only one of the easiest but also most lucrative paths to expatriation and you can do it even before getting fluent in another language, since there's such heavy demand for translation of documents and policy reports from the US and UK into the major languages of other (esp. European) countries. And yes, I got started in Sweden before focusing more on Continental law and translation now. And yes, it is true. Although Scandinavia, Benelux and Germany do have more traits in common with the Anglosphere, they are indeed worlds better because they reject the fundamental principles that make marriage and divorce (and now, even dating and harassment) so dangerous to men in the Anglosphere. The only other non-Anglosphere countries that come close are actually Switzerland (which does have some nasty divorces of its own, but still nowhere near the same damage, level or frequency as the Anglosphere) and Israel (which is the only country as bad as the Anglosphere).

I grew up in a traditional religious family myself, my father and mother are among the fairly few American couples who not only stayed married but actually happily so. And even for me and my brothers, my parents have urged us to never get married in the US. They've soon too many friends and neighbors get ruined. Expatriation is the only option. Save your earnings, sell your assets while you can (esp. now that the equity and property markets are at such high) and use your savings to head out of the Anglosphere, A.S.A.P. People here have been giving some good options-- France, Mediterranean or other Catholic/Orthodox countries in southern/central/east Europe or Latin America, Russia/former USSR, non-Anglo Protestant (Germany/Benelux/Scandinavia), most of Asia. But anywhere else will spare you from the literal slavery and vulnerability to asset destitution that greets you upon marriage or childbearing in Anglosphere countries. Don't listen to any idiots who whine stupidly about how "France, Germany, the non-Anglosphere has feminists and #metoo too". Yes, and they also have no power to ruin you in marriage and divorce let alone dating overseas, because the structure of the laws is fundamentally different, the oppositional cutlural nature of the Anglosphere is absent, and the overall culture even in very modern non-Anglo countries like Japan, Korea, Scandinavia, Germany and France still emphasizes traditional feminine responsibilities while honoring the importance of fatherhood. The whiny feminists overseas are powerless there, drowned out by institutions and the 99% of people who value fairness and reason.

Warburton weighs in with unstinting support for Legal Eagle's brilliant monograph, adding a few important insights of his own:

A great deal of wisdom here LE, thank you for sharing. A couple add-ons to your great points, not only do crazy feminists, technocrats, and judges have the legal power to reduce men, families and rational women to destitution in the Anglosphere, they actually do. In terrifying numbers. The risk of financial calamity from marriage and divorce in the English-speaking world, and as you say now from just dating or workplace association, isn't just theoretical. It's real, and very frequent. More than three-fifths of American marriages collapse in divorce, and its' very ugly and expensive there and in Anglo-world in general. We're talking tens or millions of men and families, across the Anglosphere, brought to ruin and financial collapse by divorce or a miserable marriage even it stays together.

You covered most of these bases. I'd also add that divorce is a huge profit center, not just for the divorce lawyers, the courts, judges, even states make big money from divorce settlements. O worked as a paralegal for several years myself while taking night classes,and saw another ugly truth about why child support and spousal support demands in North America are out of control and, unlike outside-the-Anglosphere, have no limit: courts and states get a nice little cut of alimony and child support as "processing costs", at least in many states. So when states don't raise taxes explicitly to meet all their deficits, they go after husbands and fathers with a brutal "secret tax" in family courts to make up the difference.

Plus, a point to add to your great expat advice: Another way for Americans, to get to Europe at least, is to find someone in their family-trees who came from the Old Country. If you have a Greek, Swedish or Italian ancestor somewhere, you're golden, and this is the fastest way to get there. I'm off to Italy later this year myself, hired as a statistician. But my cousin is using her traced roots to get there right along with me next year,and with full citizenship. Use every advantage you can.

Amidst such brilliant debate, I can only add that sexual freedom in the non-Anglosphere West is certainly under threat from the Anglosphere nations (especially the imperialistic United States). The case of Cuba Dave Strecker proves that, in spades. Yet the fact remains that misandrist, puritanical feminism is very much an Anglosphere meme (as I have always argued); and while the struggle for sexual freedom in the Anglosphere is probably lost, the struggle for the non-Anglosphere West is still fluid and contested.