On The Distribution of Spouses

[Frostnia]

No, I was genuinely asking. Looking at it now I could see how it could be interpreted that way.

Iirc men kill more in general, so that's probably the same here. But I don't know the reason for them killing more in general.

Males are generally more aggressive than females, so it would follow that they would be more likely to do something like this

[Chernoslavia]

Is this guy for real?

[Galloism]

Always as a (remote) possibility with a stranger. But maybe not something for the man to worry about rather than the woman. Considering the gender breakdown of offenders committing intimate partner homicides is 75% men to 23% women.

I wonder why that is.

When it comes to Australia, part of that is statistical methodology compared with perpetrator methodology IIRC. So a man that kills his wife is an intimate partner homicide, while if a woman and her boyfriend kill her husband, it’s a multi-perpetrator homicide or something along those lines (can’t remember the details and I’m on a cell phone).

[Costa Fierro]

MGTOW's avoid marriage.

i don't understand how that is bad?

I don't either, but apparently feminists and traditional conservatives think men avoiding women is somehow a horrible thing destined to bring down civil society as we know it.

[Costa Fierro]

Referring to MGTOW since they are not remotely Incel's at all, and quite frankly to suggest so its either malicious or accidental.

It's malicious. There has to be a narrative to be maintained. And that MGTOW is a threat to society. Because without men earning money and investing it in relationships and marriages, all of this pretty much disappears. Married and cohabiting couples are massively underrated drivers of economic growth. Less people getting married means less spending. Less spending means growth slows.

[New Emeline]

I wonder why that is.

When it comes to Australia, part of that is statistical methodology compared with perpetrator methodology IIRC. So a man that kills his wife is an intimate partner homicide, while if a woman and her boyfriend kill her husband, it’s a multi-perpetrator homicide or something along those lines (can’t remember the details and I’m on a cell phone).

Huh.
Do women "collaborate" with murder more frequently than men?

[Costa Fierro]

Always as a (remote) possibility with a stranger. But maybe not something for the man to worry about rather than the woman. Considering the gender breakdown of offenders committing intimate partner homicides is 75% men to 23% women.

Using statistics from Australia. Not really applicable to other parts of the world.

[The Grim Reaper]

Always as a (remote) possibility with a stranger. But maybe not something for the man to worry about rather than the woman. Considering the gender breakdown of offenders committing intimate partner homicides is 75% men to 23% women.

Using statistics from Australia. Not really applicable to other parts of the world.

But...Bakery Hill /is/ Australian. And you're from New Zealand?

It's not like he's cherry-picking, he's using the statistics that are most relevant to him, and the statistics that are, besides New Zealand itself, probably most comparable to your own in the absence of a more rigorous comparative criteria.

Like, what was he supposed to cite? Quebecoise state-level statistics?

I mean, his article was posted in refutation to your list of nine news stories. Which makes it several magnitudes more generalizable than your argument there was.

[New Emeline]

Always as a (remote) possibility with a stranger. But maybe not something for the man to worry about rather than the woman. Considering the gender breakdown of offenders committing intimate partner homicides is 75% men to 23% women.

Using statistics from Australia. Not really applicable to other parts of the world.

Neither would any other country.

[Galloism]

When it comes to Australia, part of that is statistical methodology compared with perpetrator methodology IIRC. So a man that kills his wife is an intimate partner homicide, while if a woman and her boyfriend kill her husband, it’s a multi-perpetrator homicide or something along those lines (can’t remember the details and I’m on a cell phone).

Huh.
Do women "collaborate" with murder more frequently than men?

Probably. Size and strength disparity at play, along with statistically lower risk tolerance, and historically women have often acted through men instead of directly (which may relate to the risk tolerance issue).

Hard to prove without tearing through a boatload or data - which is hard for me to do on a phone.

[Costa Fierro]

Like, what was he supposed to cite?

Nothing. If it's not applicable, it's not applicable.

[New Emeline]

Huh.
Do women "collaborate" with murder more frequently than men?

Probably. Size and strength disparity at play, along with statistically lower risk tolerance, and historically women have often acted through men instead of directly (which may relate to the risk tolerance issue).

Hard to prove without tearing through a boatload or data - which is hard for me to do on a phone.

I understand. Phones are difficult.

[New Emeline]

Like, what was he supposed to cite?

Nothing. If it's not applicable, it's not applicable.

You cited nine news stories.

[The first Galactic Republic]

If this was the 70’s then this would probably be considered some quality cult sci-fi.

[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.

I am not sure how you can despise people going full Greybeard...unless you are secretly an agent of the Aldmeri Dominion.

Skyrim belongs to the Khajiit!

[Costa Fierro]

Nothing. If it's not applicable, it's not applicable.

You cited nine news stories.

Which proved my point.

[New Emeline]

You cited nine news stories.

Which proved my point.

And their source did not?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Bad idea. Even suggesting something like this is off. You're pretty much wanting to force people into a life long commitment they have no say over. Only for spawning? No one has a right to a relationship or to be defined by one. Be you a man or a woman. Moreover, human beings should not be treated as objects, assigned to someone just for spawning, as if they were commodities.

[Bakery Hill]

tfw u can't tell if it's black supremacism or white supremacism

Turks and Arabs consider themselves white in their own countries but pretend they aren't when they visit the West.

T. Arab nationalists saying Hitler was right except that it was the Arabs that were the pure master race and that the G*rmans were the degenerate ones and openly call black people slaves.

We were stuck playing 2D chess whilst they were playing 5D chess.

Western racists need to learn from the Grey Wolves. They've got next level racism.

[Bakery Hill]

I wonder why that is.

When it comes to Australia, part of that is statistical methodology compared with perpetrator methodology IIRC. So a man that kills his wife is an intimate partner homicide, while if a woman and her boyfriend kill her husband, it’s a multi-perpetrator homicide or something along those lines (can’t remember the details and I’m on a cell phone).

Ah so it's not that men kill more often, it's just that convicts can't do the methodology properly! The malign forces of international feminism have been defeated again. Or maybe not?

Most domestic/family homicide incidents involved a single victim and offender (n=960; 88%) (see Table 5). Although rare, when additional victims/offenders were involved, they tended to be family members as well. From 2002–03 through 2011–12, a small number of intimate partner homicides (n=54; 8%) involved multiple victims and/or offenders. Of the 27 intimate partner homicides that involved multiple victims (including incidents with multiple victims/offenders), 23 (85%)

The table below then shows that 4% of intimate partner homicides involve multiple offenders. I'm not sure that really changes the reality of what's going on.

[Bakery Hill]

When it comes to Australia, part of that is statistical methodology compared with perpetrator methodology IIRC. So a man that kills his wife is an intimate partner homicide, while if a woman and her boyfriend kill her husband, it’s a multi-perpetrator homicide or something along those lines (can’t remember the details and I’m on a cell phone).

Huh.
Do women "collaborate" with murder more frequently than men?

Considering the multiple offender category is not broken down via gender, in somewhere between 0-4% of Australian intimate partner homicides women are collaborating to kill their spouses. Of course both genders really are the same on this issue, which we have to believe for some reason.

[Bakery Hill]

Always as a (remote) possibility with a stranger. But maybe not something for the man to worry about rather than the woman. Considering the gender breakdown of offenders committing intimate partner homicides is 75% men to 23% women.

Using statistics from Australia. Not really applicable to other parts of the world.

I'm sure the women of New Zealand are natural born killers.

Like, what was he supposed to cite?

Nothing. If it's not applicable, it's not applicable.

I mean yes, ideally I should just shut up and let you continue to make women-hating rants as some sort of bizarre coping mechanism. And I do that most of the time to be fair.

You cited nine news stories.

Which proved my point.

This is somewhere between funny and depressing now.

[Costa Fierro]

I'm sure the women of New Zealand are natural born killers.

I wouldn't know. I don't associate with them.

I mean yes, ideally I should just shut up and let you continue to make women-hating rants as some sort of bizarre coping mechanism. And I do that most of the time to be fair.

Do please explain where I was going on a woman hating rant by suggesting that the women killing their husbands was one of the bad reasons by acquiring a wife via lottery. I don't have popcorn for this, but it should be entertaining nonetheless.

[Halazy]

Alright OP, let's do this.

Other people have pointed out how incredibly slavey your whole idea is, but I want to talk about two different things. First, the direct consequences of your system. If this dystopia of yours puts immense social pressure on people to have children (and you've said it does), then think of all the people unwilling or unready to become parents, and how they would raise their kids. Can you imagine growing up knowing you exist purely so Mommy and Daddy are still welcome at the neighborhood association? Would these parents love their children the way voluntary parents do (or are supposed to), or would they conceive their offspring for convenience's sake and then simply do what's necessary to keep them alive and adjusted? What if two destitute people are matched together and expected to raise a family they can't begin to afford? Finally, prove that women actually calm men's dark impulses (presumably through pheromones or telepathy). You can't base a society on a single sentence composed purely of oversimplified gender roles from the Bronze Age.

The other thing is your repeated "friend to the poor" claim. As someone who may not be able to afford to refill his gas tank, and who's lived on little more than lentils for weeks at a time out of necessity, I ask you to please, please, please not be a friend to the poor if this is your idea of helping. Help me pay for college, or teach me how you got to where you are, or just share some chips if you happen to have them. Do not, for any reason at all, tie me to someone I've never heard of and expect me to become a father just because you think it's neat how family lines work. I can't stress this enough. The poor do not need this, do not want this, and the fact that you think they do reveals your own disconnect from the rest of society. If you want to help those with less money than you, how about actually addressing long-running economic issues instead of randomly assigning everyone cake to eat?

[Bakery Hill]

I'm sure the women of New Zealand are natural born killers.

I wouldn't know. I don't associate with them.

This and this alone disqualifies you from being a misogynist. This is a net good for women.

Do please explain where I was going on a woman hating rant by suggesting that the women killing their husbands was one of the bad reasons by acquiring a wife via lottery. I don't have popcorn for this, but it should be entertaining nonetheless.

It's a little bit stupid to try and reinvent the narrative considering all our posts are visible here. This was my point. From there the wonderful denizens of this forum can go on and see your excuse for an response.

Just look at at these women taming men's darkest tendencies.

And the great thing about the lottery is that who knows if your lovely new wife might just decide to kill you!

Always as a (remote) possibility with a stranger. But maybe not something for the man to worry about rather than the woman. Considering the gender breakdown of offenders committing intimate partner homicides is 75% men to 23% women.