On The Distribution of Spouses

[Vassenor]

What you're talking about though isn't an arranged marriage, it's a random marriage.

A system of arranged marriages would be preferable to the current system, but is still open to abuse and easily (and often) disenfranchises the poor.

What is the deficiency of the current system?

[JxLand]

Ugh, no! The wrong woman is much worse than no woman!

[Cranborne]

Is this peak socialism?
Has it got to the point where we redistribute other people?

I don’t want a wife let alone a government mandated wife.

Hahaha, oh no no no no. I am far from a socialist, being of wealthy means myself it would be counter productive. However, I am a friend of the poor and this would tremendously help them.

[Saiwania]

Yeah, no. Natalist policies are fucking stupid, though nowhere near as stupid as this proposal. A stable population is the only option that's viable, and we'll hit that quite naturally.

Natalist policies are actually the best, it is good. Women of the world, please- give me sons with which to send into the meat grinder or ahem; the next war I'm interested in sending them into, and more daughters with which to produce more sons!? I think perhaps, it'd be pretty ideal if there is massive overpopulation every year, but instead of trying to support them for the long term: just use them for more war.

I want to conquer an empire spanning as much of the world as possible, a new Mongol empire! If I'm in the mood, there isn't a single land battle or war I don't like. It is only possible however, with massive numbers of troops and equipment, and whatever spoils get captured in the process.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

What you're talking about though isn't an arranged marriage, it's a random marriage.

A system of arranged marriages would be preferable to the current system, but is still open to abuse and easily (and often) disenfranchises the poor.

Arranged marriages in which way? Would both people have to consent?

[Cranborne]

A system of arranged marriages would be preferable to the current system, but is still open to abuse and easily (and often) disenfranchises the poor.

What is the deficiency of the current system?

Primarily it results in women going after a smaller pool of men with status whilst lower status men are left out in the cold. Nowhere near as terrible as during the days of polygamy but it still occurs. This leads to more violence. Women calm the worst tendencies of man. Just as it is man's duty to utilize these tendencies to defend woman, so to is it woman's duty to calm man. In this, peace and harmony are achieved. Economically it would be quite good as well, due to the decrease in crime and improved happiness of society.

[Cranborne]

A system of arranged marriages would be preferable to the current system, but is still open to abuse and easily (and often) disenfranchises the poor.

Arranged marriages in which way? Would both people have to consent?

Well the parents (or whomever the legal guardians are) consent. Neither myself or my wife were asked, but we did our duty and what was expected of us and it has served us well.

[Vassenor]

What is the deficiency of the current system?

Primarily it results in women going after a smaller pool of men with status whilst lower status men are left out in the cold. Nowhere near as terrible as during the days of polygamy but it still occurs. This leads to more violence. Women calm the worst tendencies of man. Just as it is man's duty to utilize these tendencies to defend woman, so to is it woman's duty to calm man. In this, peace and harmony are achieved. Economically it would be quite good as well, due to the decrease in crime and improved happiness of society.

So basically because we've had a couple of high-profile mass killings because a man got turned down by a woman we need to start forcing marriage?

[Liriena]

OP is making me agree with Costa Fierro (I despise the MGTOW thing, but incels are definitely worse).

That's a paddlin'.

Also... No. Nope. Absolutely not. Good gawd, no. This would only make sense to someone who didn't have any respect for the most fundamental notions of individual autonomy, and that ain't me. I may be a communitarian person, but I definitely draw the line at stuff blatantly dehumanizing like "distributing" spouses, specially under the guise of "calming" men. It's reactionary nonsense in desperate need for critical thinking to be applied to it. If there's a problem of male violence, the definitive solution is not forcing women to marry us to "contain" our violence. Best case scenario, you'll just redirect the violence towards our "spouses" (i.e. slaves) rather than the general public.

[Cranborne]

As for those wondering:
On homosexuals: They would be free to form their own unions, as they do not carry on life - thus if some remain lacking in companionship for life that, while tragic, is not as destabilizing to society not to mention their already lower numbers.

The infertile: They should be helped as much as possible and not mocked or demeaned in any manner. Curing infertility should be among our highest priorities.

Those who do not wish to have children: Should suffer damnatio memoriae upon their passing. Whilst not forced to have children, should heavily be encouraged to do so and suffer the necessary societal consequences with persistent refusal.

[Cranborne]

Primarily it results in women going after a smaller pool of men with status whilst lower status men are left out in the cold. Nowhere near as terrible as during the days of polygamy but it still occurs. This leads to more violence. Women calm the worst tendencies of man. Just as it is man's duty to utilize these tendencies to defend woman, so to is it woman's duty to calm man. In this, peace and harmony are achieved. Economically it would be quite good as well, due to the decrease in crime and improved happiness of society.

So basically because we've had a couple of high-profile mass killings because a man got turned down by a woman we need to start forcing marriage?

No, I developed these ideas before such cases. I have long been a friend of the poor.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

Arranged marriages in which way? Would both people have to consent?

Well the parents (or whomever the legal guardians are) consent. Neither myself or my wife were asked, but we did our duty and what was expected of us and it has served us well.

Interesting. Zoroastrian and arranged marriages. Where are you from?

[Cranborne]

OP is making me agree with Costa Fierro (I despise the MGTOW thing, but incels are definitely worse).

Why do you hate women so much, if I may ask?

[Geneviev]

So basically because we've had a couple of high-profile mass killings because a man got turned down by a woman we need to start forcing marriage?

No, I developed these ideas before such cases. I have long been a friend of the poor.

How is arranged marriage by lottery good for the poor? Arranged marriage is one thing, lottery quite another.

[Cranborne]

Well the parents (or whomever the legal guardians are) consent. Neither myself or my wife were asked, but we did our duty and what was expected of us and it has served us well.

Interesting. Zoroastrian and arranged marriages. Where are you from?

America. Though I am of English and Scottish heritage.

[Cranborne]

No, I developed these ideas before such cases. I have long been a friend of the poor.

How is arranged marriage by lottery good for the poor? Arranged marriage is one thing, lottery quite another.

Because then every one benefits. Otherwise the poor will be left out due to being seen as unworthy spouses and therefore cast aside. Whilst the poor may be materially forsaken, that does not mean they should be punished but loved and cared for.

[Xmara]

As for those wondering:
On homosexuals: They would be free to form their own unions, as they do not carry on life - thus if some remain lacking in companionship for life that, while tragic, is not as destabilizing to society not to mention their already lower numbers.

The infertile: They should be helped as much as possible and not mocked or demeaned in any manner. Curing infertility should be among our highest priorities.

Those who do not wish to have children: Should suffer damnatio memoriae upon their passing. Whilst not forced to have children, should heavily be encouraged to do so and suffer the necessary societal consequences with persistent refusal.

So the whole purpose of marriage is children. Is that what you’re saying?

That is ridiculous.

[Liriena]

Primarily it results in women going after a smaller pool of men with status whilst lower status men are left out in the cold. Nowhere near as terrible as during the days of polygamy but it still occurs. This leads to more violence. Women calm the worst tendencies of man. Just as it is man's duty to utilize these tendencies to defend woman, so to is it woman's duty to calm man. In this, peace and harmony are achieved. Economically it would be quite good as well, due to the decrease in crime and improved happiness of society.

So basically because we've had a couple of high-profile mass killings because a man got turned down by a woman we need to start forcing marriage?

It really is a testament to the lack of imagination inherent to this sort of reactionary ideology that the only thing they can think of as a solution to mass violence committed by "spurned" men is a pathetic return to pre-modern oppression.

Anybody else would consider possibilities like looking into and tackling cultural and psychological problems at play with a genuinely critical eye. Marxists would probably bring economics into consideration.

Maybe the solution isn't tacitly validating the exact sentiments that drove these men to violence by saying "well, you definitely needed a wife all along". Maybe the solution is questioning, deconstructing this pervasive sentiment that men should not tolerate sexual and/or romantic rejection, and that they need sexual and/or romantic validation to be good people. Maybe even question and deconstruct the way our culture relates masculinity with violence.

[Cranborne]

As for those wondering:
On homosexuals: They would be free to form their own unions, as they do not carry on life - thus if some remain lacking in companionship for life that, while tragic, is not as destabilizing to society not to mention their already lower numbers.

The infertile: They should be helped as much as possible and not mocked or demeaned in any manner. Curing infertility should be among our highest priorities.

Those who do not wish to have children: Should suffer damnatio memoriae upon their passing. Whilst not forced to have children, should heavily be encouraged to do so and suffer the necessary societal consequences with persistent refusal.

So the whole purpose of marriage is children. Is that what you’re saying?

That is ridiculous.

It is among the reasons, yes.

Why is it ridiculous?

[Liriena]

OP is making me agree with Costa Fierro (I despise the MGTOW thing, but incels are definitely worse).

Why do you hate women so much, if I may ask?

Why do you think I "hate" women?

[Xmara]

How is arranged marriage by lottery good for the poor? Arranged marriage is one thing, lottery quite another.

Because then every one benefits.

Except for, you know, domestic violence victims.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

Interesting. Zoroastrian and arranged marriages. Where are you from?

America. Though I am of English and Scottish heritage.

Wait. What lol? Where the fuck are you from where forced marriages are common/legal? Forced marriage is a violation of basic human rights.

[Cranborne]

Why do you hate women so much, if I may ask?

Why do you think I "hate" women?

You agree with an MGTOW proponent and that community is well known for their misogyny. One must go with the most likely conclusion.

[Sahansahiye Iran]

Why do you think I "hate" women?

You agree with an MGTOW proponent and they are well known for their misogyny.

Liri literally just said that they despise MGTOW.

[Geneviev]

How is arranged marriage by lottery good for the poor? Arranged marriage is one thing, lottery quite another.

Because then every one benefits. Otherwise the poor will be left out due to being seen as unworthy spouses and therefore cast aside. Whilst the poor may be materially forsaken, that does not mean they should be punished but loved and cared for.

Yes, but arranged marriages should still not be by lottery. I absolutely agree with arranged marriage, and so the best solution here should be to encourage people to not reject someone based on how much money they have through education or something. Not lottery.