The allure and perils of financial dependence: why careers empower

The internet is spreading hate against women at an unprecedented rate. A good example of this is misogynist Andrew Tate. He is an extremely misogynistic man who is quoted as saying the following: “Females are the ultimate status symbol. People think I’m running around with these hoes because I like sex. That’s nothing to do with the reason why I’m running around with these bitches. I got these bitches just so everyone knows who the don is.”

To make matters worse, a study found that “90% of young boys had heard of him, 30% looked up to him as a role model, and 36% said he was ‘relatable’.”

Many people excuse men, saying that boys and men simply need positive role models and the reason why they are turning towards toxic men like Andrew Tate is because there are no positive male role models. This is completely irrelevant to a woman who is being beaten and abused. If a stay-at-home mother financially dependent on a man is being raped and abused, you can imagine many people will simply blame the woman and excuse the man, saying things like, “This man is raping you because he didn’t have a positive role model. It is your fault your gender didn’t give him a positive role model, so now you have to suffer.”

It is not just these aggressive manosphereans who are a problem, there is also pornography, especially rough porn, which is all over the internet. To make matters worse, artificial intelligence is allowing many men to generate child abuse images. Of course, whenever I bring these issues up, everyone is quick to downplay it. Rather than wait for the world to get better (it never will), women need to protect themselves right now!

Finding a good man is the wrong solution

Many people put the blame back on women, saying that women simply need to vet the man properly rather than chasing bad boys. However, this solution doesn’t work. There are many who think that you can easily find a “good man” to marry, but the problem is that a man who seems “good” can easily hide his bad side or simply he can change into a bad person over time.

A man may be perfect, and a woman may marry him and have his children and be financially dependent, on him, but then if this man stumbles on aggressive porn online as well as manospherean misogynistic hate content, it can flame his anger and resentment towards women, and he will take it out on his stay-at-home wife simply because he has anger to release and because his wife is an available punching bag, a person upon which he can unleash his anger.

The real solution is financial independence and autonomy

Being single, childfree, and financially independent is the only solution that is guaranteed to work.

Many women aspire to financial dependence on a man, often fuelled by cultural portrayals of a glamorous housewife’s life. However, this path is extremely risky.

Society presents images of stay-at-home wives living a life of leisure, pampered by successful husbands. It is easy money for these women. These portrays however do not depict the downsides of financial dependence, which often includes abuse. A man who is funding a man’s housewife lifestyle is often resentful that she is living off his money, and men who have financial power over a woman will eventually exercise this power and see how much abuse he can get away with.

Domestic abuse is rife. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reports that 1 in 6 women and 1 in 18 men have experienced physical or sexual violence by a current or previous cohabiting partner since the age of 15. it is also important to note that these statistics are misleading as many cases go unreported.

Financial dependence leaves a woman trapped in abusive relationships. If a woman cannot support herself, she cannot leave a bad situation. Careers give women a path to autonomy and independence. Women who earn their own income can live a happy and glamorous life, and most importantly, they are developing skills that are in demand by many employers. However, if a woman works to please a man and have his babies, she is trapped.

Beware the advice of women heavily invested in men

Notice how many people who invest in bitcoin will loudly and aggressively defend their investments? The same applies to property investments. Those who took out huge mortgages to buy a house will always loudly and aggressively say that property is a great investment. This is because many people tend to advocate and have faith in what they are invested in. If someone has put all his net worth into bitcoin, to lose faith in his or her investment would be to admit that they are wrong.

The same applies to women who “invest” in men. A woman who falls in love with a man and has his children and becomes financially dependent on his has fully invested in him, and even if he is abusive, if she were to leave him, she would need to admit to herself and others that she made a bad decision. So many women will stick it out with an abusive man for this reason and even try to get other women to marry men so that her life choices can be validated.

Although I spoke negatively about the internet before because the internet spreads manospherean misogyny as well as rough porn, one of the good points about the internet as it relates to female empowerment is the fact that woman in abusive relationships with men are admitting their mistakes anonymously online and warning younger women about the dangers of financial dependence. A woman may be apprehensive to admit that she made the wrong decision in real life as it may be shameful. Furthermore, the man may abuse her even more if she were to try to talk badly about the relationship. However, online she can anonymously warn the women of tomorrow about the dangers of marriage and having kids.

Many women are also witnessing friends being mistreated in real life. This coupled with reading about intimate partner abuse online is leading to many women losing faith in the fairytale delusion that is marriage.

A career offers a reliable path to financial security, but dependence on a spouse carries risk such as divorce. Many manosphereans like to talk about “divorce rape” and how women somehow benefit from divorce by taking all the man’s money, but the reality is that women typically get very little from divorce, and if a woman has a child, she has an added financial burden. Divorce actually harms women more than men. This is especially the case in a traditional conservative relationship where the man is the breadwinner and the woman is the stay-at-home mother. This is because careers increase in value whereas childrearing is not worth much, so a woman who dedicates her life to being a mother ends up with less skills or work experience post-divorce, which makes it harder for her to find a job. On the other hand, the traditional breadwinner male has a career, which typically over time is more and more valuable as his experience and skills develop. Women should be like this. Women should focus more on career rather than caregiving.

True financial independence is the power to walk away from abuse

Financial independence is important and needs to be taught to women early to undo the social brainwashing given to young women that marriage and childrearing is glamorous. True financial independence is the ability to walk away from abuse whether that abuse is in a relationship or abuse at work. Women should focus on education, work, and investments, and aim to be in a position where they are able to live off their investments without working.

Do we need to be in relationships to be happy and healthy?

I have been reading the article Who Does Best at Being Single, which explores the question of who does well when they are single. The answer is that people who embrace their single status and see it as an opportunity for growth and self-discovery, rather than just a temporary state of waiting to find a partner, tend to fare the best. The article argues that society often sends the message that being single is a bad thing and that people who are single must be unhappy or deficient in some way. But research shows that this is not necessarily the case, and that many people are quite content and fulfilled when they are single.

The article also states that people who believe in traditional norms about gender and parenting have a harder time being single. The idea of traditional gender norms in relationships is that men should be the breadwinners and women should be the homemakers. This belief system places a heavy emphasis on the importance of being in a relationship, as it is seen as the ultimate goal for women. However, this way of thinking can actually hinder one’s ability to be happily single.

When people who hold traditional gender norms are single, they may feel like they are not fulfilling their role in society. They may believe that they are not “complete” until they are in a relationship, as they have been taught that their worth is based on their ability to be in a relationship. This can lead to a sense of desperation to be in a relationship, as they feel like they are failing in their duty to society.

This desperation can make it difficult for people to be happy while they are single. They may become obsessed with finding a partner, and they may even settle for someone who is not right for them, simply because they feel like they need to be in a relationship. This can lead to a host of problems, including feeling unfulfilled, trapped, or being unhappy in the relationship, as well as being the victim of domestic violence and rape within a relationship.

There is a common belief that having kids and a family will make you a happier person, but just browsing through r/regretfulparents shows that parenthood regret is very common and that many people who hate being parents suppress these thoughts because of the stigma associated with hating parenthood. There are many benefits to being childfree e.g. you have more money, more freedom, a cleaner home, peace and quiet etc.

There are many risks associated with being in a relationship with someone who may be abusive. Therefore, it’s a good idea to practice being content with being single so that you don’t feel desperate to be in a relationship, which can lead to settling with someone who is abusive. Being single can also give you time to work on yourself, build a strong support network, and figure out what you truly want. There is nothing wrong with being single for the rest of your life.

It is very risky for a woman to be traditional

Traditional gender roles can put women at risk of being taken advantage of by predatory men (e.g. those applying the DENNIS system). Traditional gender roles often encouraged women to rely on men for economic stability and protection. However, it is impossible for a woman to fully vet someone. Because of the spread of manosphereanism particularly among young men, it is very important for women (especially young women) to protect themselves.

It is important for women to be independent and self-sufficient so that they have the ability to leave a situation if they suspect manipulation or deception. Rather than focusing on traditional characteristics such as wealth when choosing a partner, women should prioritise their own education, career, and financial security. Ultimately, true safety and autonomy for women cannot be guaranteed by any man, and it is important for women to be in control of their own lives and well-being.

Some will argue that it is women’s fault if they end up with an abusive man. According to these people, women should properly vet men. Ending up with an abusive man is simply a consequence of poor vetting. However, there are no male characteristics that can be looked at to guarantee that a man will be reliable and trustworthy. Because it is impossible to guarantee the quality of a man, it is therefore better that women focus on themselves, their education, career, investing etc. Women should be well versed on the different contraceptive methods such as the birth control pill, IUD and even surgical sterilisation procedures such as tubal ligations and bisalps. This allows women to ensure they cannot be tied down with children. Having children can certainly impact a woman’s freedom and autonomy, as it can add responsibilities and demands on her time and energy.

Women should focus on independence and autonomy. A woman being independent means she doesn’t need a man. Even if a man they are with is untrustworthy, it doesn’t matter because she can just walk away. If she instead were traditional and became a housewife and mother, then if she falls victim to a toxic man, then she is trapped and cannot escape.

Being traditional can be extremely perilous for women. Sacrificing one’s career to stay at home can lead to being highly unemployable, especially when combined with the high costs of children. This can create a nightmare outcome of unemployment or low income. Additionally, if a woman is financially dependent on a man, she may have no choice but to submit and tolerate abusive behaviour. It is crucial for women to give themselves the ability to walk away from such situations.

To achieve this, women should focus on obtaining education, pursuing a career, building financial independence, and investing in assets that generate cash flow, such as real estate, stocks or ETFs. Avoiding the financial burden of children through contraception is also important. Women should recognise that their greatest power lies in their ability to walk away and should take the initiative to position themselves to exercise this power if necessary.

Marrying a man is dangerous

I think if I were married, the worst part would be not knowing how he’d treat me when I’m older and less physically attractive. Domestic violence is very common. There is no way to tell how a man can change as he grows older. There is no telling how he will react when you are no longer physically attractive. He may regret marrying you and take out his regret through violence. Most men don’t think about the future. They do what pleases them at the moment, and if they marry you while you are young and beautiful but then later down the road you are less physically attractive, what are the odds he will react negatively? Why do you think there is so much cheating and divorce?

Then there is the sunk cost. Many women put so much into their marriage. They sacrifice their careers to take care of the children. They look after the man. Then he abuses her. But the problem is that many women have already invested so much into a marriage that they are willing to be with an abuser than to throw it all away.

Furthermore, about forty percent of marriages end in divorce, so it’s not like marriage dysfunction is some sort of rare occurrence. It is the norm. Although forty percent of marriages end in divorce, it is likely that the remaining marriages will turn out to be dysfunctional marriages, and given men are usually physically larger, there is a good chance that if a couple is not divorced, the woman is suffering in silence.

Men are also hypocrites. They don’t like women who have had many partners. They think these women are loose, but they do not upholding other men to those same standards. They want to sow their wild oats but will despise a woman who dares to do the same. 

Being with a man is too much risk for too little reward. It is very unlikely you will find a man who will pull his own weight. What COVID-19 has showed is that when men and women are trapped at home together, domestic violence rates go through the roof.

For me the risks are not worth it, and so I will go WGTOW.

Is religion harmful for women?

Many Western secular democracies have strong feminist institutions. It is regrettable that these women’s institutions are threatened by the emergence of male-based hate groups on the internet. Far-right manospherians such as MGTOWs and “Red Pill” are radicalizing young minds.

Men are becoming extremists. There is a considerable amount of hate directed to women, which is why women must protect themselves using the teachings of WGTOW.

The biggest danger is when women become aware of male supremacist hate and choose to either deny the problem (be apologists for male hate) or they know about male hate and aggression but choose to appease men and be extra nice and loyal to them in the hope that they take pity on their weakness.

If this trend continues, sexist policies will destroy feminist institutions and women’s rights will be lost.

Religion plays a big role. The Bible and the Koran are filled with gender passages. Many women feel that they should be offered to men because the Bible or the Koran says so. However, religion is not the only problem. There is also a strong secular element. Most red pill PUA men are not religious. They seek to live a hedonistic lifestyle wherein they “pump and dump” women and manipulate them for sex.

PUA-TRP men use a technique called “dread game” i.e. putting fear on women in order to manipulate them so you can have sex with them.

These men are usually (but not always) atheists but they are sexists and misogynists. It does not really matter whether sexual prejudice comes from the Bible, the Koran or from hedonistic atheists. The bottom line is that it is male supremacist hate that is the problem and we women need to protect ourselves personally and vote for female-friendly policies before we lose our freedom.

We must break ourselves from marriage, which is a tool of enslavement. We must spread the word to other women (either blatantly or with nuance). Our freedom and safety are at stake.

Are women gatekeeping procreation more or less than men?

Someone made a post at the natalism subreddit claiming that even in an equal and free society, women have a natural advantage, a “monopoly over the womb.”

Even though the poster was a natalist himself who wanted children, the natalists there responded mostly negatively. The poster now seems to be banned and his account deleted.

The poster claimed that male natalists (men who want children) are at a disadvantage because of “women gatekeeping procreation.” According to this narrative, a woman who wants children can have kids at any time. She can easily get sperm (e.g. on the internet) and impregnate herself. However, a man who wants a child is at the mercy of the woman because of her “monopoly over the womb.” If a man wants a child, he needs to convince a woman to have a child. The womb is necessary for procreation and hence according to this hypothesis, women are the gatekeepers of procreation.

Natalists naturally want to increase fertility rate (in contrast with antinatalists who want to reduce fertility rate). The poster is claiming that because women are the gatekeepers of procreation then the decline in fertility rate is the fault of women.

However, there are arguments that can be made against this poster’s narrative. Firstly, given that there are about eight billion people in the world today, there is no urgency to have children. Some claim that procreation is necessary in order to avoid the negative outcomes of the ageing population and also to create more people to work. However, this completely ignores the advances made in AI and automation, which will likely see more and more unemployment. Given the advances made in technology, it is highly likely that in the future there will not be enough jobs for your kids, so why make them suffer by bringing them into existence?

Even if we ignore automation and overpopulation and the environmental impact of having kids, we need to realise that it takes two to have kids. A woman may want a child but if the man doesn’t want a child, there will be no child. Women are not going to simply go on the internet and get sperm from anyone. Raising a child requires more than sperm. It requires a man’s support and commitment. So once a woman is able to find and vet a man who she is confident can provide support and commitment, she then needs his sperm, but he could easily refuse.

In fact, there is significant anecdotal evidence of this happening. Very often you hear of women wanting children but men tend to drag their feet. Usually the woman needs to plead and negotiate with her partner before he relents and agrees to have children, and men who have kids tend to do it as a compromise. They do it not because they necessarily want to but because they do it for their partner. It is a sacrifice.

Furthermore, if we look at the antinatalist subreddit, we find that most antinatalists are men. According to a 2019 antinatalist survey, about 62% of antinatalists are men. If a woman falls in love with a man, vets him and finds that he is able to provide support and commitment to raise a family, but then finds out later on that he is an antinatalist, then she may be the one who compromises and agrees to live childfree.

Attracting men involves so much conformity

I am watching this YouTube video below made by a man about the five things women should do to make themselves more attractive to men.

When watching this video, the main theme is that if a woman wants to attract a man she needs to pretty much put her own wants and values and individuality aside and just do what society wants. She has to be a slave to society.

There are so many things a woman must do to attract a “good man” e.g. she must be thin, she must act like a virgin in public but in private she must be a slut.

This is the level of conformity that is required. There is no being yourself or doing what you please.

Relationships and marriage are all about conformity and being obsessive with doing what others want for you.

Forget marriage. Do what you want, go your own way, and stuff society.

If you watch the video above, you will notice that the man states that in order for a woman to be attractive to men, she cannot be a “social justice warrior.”

In my opinion, this is terrible. Given that I believe that women should vote for their rights and vote to make their lives better, that makes me a social justice warrior because I want social justice. I want women to have justice in society. I want society to be better.

However, if I need to let go of that just to attract a man, I’d rather lose the man. That I am told to not care about society in order to attract men makes me want to abandon men. I’d rather do what I want than appease and conform.

Furthermore, I question the motivation behind people who recommending I don’t try to seek social justice. If a person tells others not to seek social justice, aren’t they themselves seeking their own form of social justice? Seems hypocritical to me.

Having kids will make you a slave to men

I will never have children. The reasons for my childfree lifestyle choice are so simple that it can be explained to a child.

Children are expensive. One child costs $1.1 million according to a study by Time Magazine. Not only that, but someone needs to take care of the child, which means it is not only money you need but time and effort.

I also think it is unlikely you will find a man who will put in time and effort into raising a child properly. Men want to feel masculine so they don’t want to do girly things like raising children, so they will make you do it, which may seem fine in theory except it ignores the golden rule, which is that he who holds the gold makes the rules. If a woman is financially dependent on a man, she is completely vulnerable to his abuse. Just about all men feast on pornography and as their porn consumption increases, they need to feast on more and more extreme porn just to get a high, which leads them to barely-legal porn, rape porn, gag porn, schoolgirl porn, etc, and these men will want an outlet for their escalating desires, so why not use and abuse the wife?

If a woman is financially dependent on a man due because she has a child, she will be the victim of his rape fantasies.

Porn always has very young and attractive women, so the man will have a strong desire to seek out younger women, which means they are likely to cheat, and if they do then you become a single mother. Being a single mother means you are disrespected by men and everyone looks down on you and spits on you. Have a look at this MGTOW thread where they make fun of a single mother.

Humans are quite disgusting. Oppression is innate in humanity. More humans in the world will only result in more oppression. Due to overpopulation we have considerable damage to the environment, to people, to the animals, and to the planet. A child seems like such an innocent creature, but in reality such an innocent creature is the cause of all the death and corruption of innocents in the world. More children means more humans, and more humans means more corruption, depravity, and destruction of the world.

By never having children, you don’t just increase your net worth by about $1 million and give yourself a life of freedom and autonomy, but you also save the planet, save the world, and save humanity. Never having kids is not just selfish but extremely selfless.

Stop having kids. Go your own way. Be completely independent. If you must have children, adopt instead.

Who will look after you in your old age if you are unmarried and childfree?

If a woman decides she doesn’t want to have children i.e. if she decides to be childfree, then it is highly likely that she will be labelled as selfish by others. However, one of the reasons many choose to have kids is because they expect their kids to look after them in their old age, which in my opinion is extremely selfish.

I will never get married nor will I ever have any kids, but my hope that the money I save by not having kids will help me afford good carers.

From what I’ve seen, most people don’t end up looking after their parents anyway because they have mortgages and kids of their own, and many parents go into old age having very little money to afford carers because they have spent everything on their kids.

Certainly it depends on the culture, but even among many people who belong to a culture where you are expected to look after your elders, the pressures of modern capitalism restrict how much help you can provide your parents. For example, in China it is a cultural expectation that people look after their elders, but many of them are simply abandoned. Looking after elders holds you back from working, finding job opportunities in other areas, etc. Especially if you have kids, the high cost of kids will put so much pressure on you to work that you will not have time to look after your parents. You will need to be very rich in order to look after both your kids and your parents as well. I think this is one of the reasons why Asians in particular have extremely low fertility rates. For an Asian, if they are burdened with looking after their elders, they’re not going to be able to have kids, and if they have kids, then that steals resources away from their elders.

The solution is to just not have any kids and give only the minimum to your parents e.g. a roof over their head and rice and beans.

Is murder or rape natural behaviour?

It makes sense that murder and rape are natural and a product of natural selection. Those who have been subject to a genetic mutation that makes them have more aggression are more likely to use that aggression to exploit others e.g. enslave other people. This makes them more wealthy and have more resources and power which means they have more ability to spread their genes, which means over many generations aggression is selected for. This is why throughout history there is so much rape and murder and slavery. We evolved this way. The main cause of suffering is DNA replication. To reduce suffering, we must all contribute to ceasing DNA replication by not procreating. In my opinion, the solution to eradicating suffering lies in antinatalism and efilism.

Didn’t we evolve to cooperate as well?

Looking at evolution, there are advantages that come from cooperation. For example, allying yourself with a group can increase the probability of survival and increase your power and so over time evolution selects for cooperative behaviour. Rape then is an example of non-cooperative behaviour.

My view is that both these instinct evolved at the same time. Rape increases the ability to pass on your genes but so does conforming to the norms of a tribe, and this would explain the behaviour of many. If they were to rape, it is something they keep hidden. One observation is the popularity of abuse porn. It is consumed by very many people yet at the same time in the public sphere it is condemned.

Another explanation is that rape becomes normalised and society cooperates to effectively force women to be pregnant. In many societies, women do not have much autonomy nor do they have any reproductive freedom, so this is an example of how the instinct to oppress and rape works together with the instinct to conform to society.

The appeal to nature fallacy

Regardless of natural instinct, I think it is problematic when using nature as a basis for civilisation and that is what my main point was when I was saying murder and rape are natural. Throughout history we as a species (as did other species) have engaged in murder, rape and oppression. Usually when people use the “appeal to nature” argument it is to rationalise an oppressive behaviour they currently engage in. For example, if someone eats meat and a r/vegan asks him to stop, he may claim that eating meat is natural and that humans have been eating meat for many years, but that person is unlikely to want use that as a justification for murder or rape because chances are he doesn’t engage in such behaviour. In other words, due to cognitive dissonance, people are likely to want to believe that they should oppress animals because they grew up in a carnist culture. If e.g. someone grew up in the seventeenth or eighteenth century when slavery was legal and an accepted part of social norms, if an abolitionist tried to pursuade a slave owner to not own slaves, a common argument slave owners used was that slavery is natural, it is the natural order. This application of nature of groups of human is Social Darwinism. It is an “appeal to nature” that attempts to rationalise slavery. Analogously, many meat eaters use the “appeal to nature” argument to rationalise the oppression of animals rather than slaves.

In my opinion, if we are concerned about reducing suffering then we should try to reduce the amount of harm we inflict on others in our own lives. We should also not have children (i.e. antinatalism) because existence is a catalyst for suffering. If a living being exists, it can both experience suffering and cause suffering. By preventing a living being from existing, you eliminate the possibility that that life can suffer or cause suffering thereby reducing suffering.

I think there are three things that need to be done: reduce the amount of harm we cause others in our own lives, stop having children, and educate others on the truth and logic of r/antinatalism and r/efilism. This is the best we can all do to contribute to reduction in suffering.