PATREON EXCLUSIVE: What Legislative Changes Could Be Made To Reduce Male Anger?

All I can say, agree with you.

Domald

Looking for ideas here on a next move. Paternity test at birth of child. Some years ago, thought paternity test at birth for all children would be something of use. Will not list way I came to this thinking. In the state where I live when parents are not married. Father has a paternity test before his name is place on child’s birth certificate. Have writing to my representatives in our state capital. One replied thinking me for my thoughts. The other responded with questions and we corresponded. He was asking his staff to look into it. Shortly after this he stopped responding to my emails on this. Have writing letters to the editor for two newspapers I get in my state. About Paternity test at birth of child. Have seen nothing, has been months. This video has prompted this post. How can I get this question out in public for people to talk about? Some think it’s a good idea man, some think it’s a bad idea, mostly women. Any ideas on how to get this in public conversation.

Domald

You know i'm really sorry for sweden. You guys got ravaged by the leftist narrative in pretty much every way, Good luck dude

So My parents got divorced when I was 3. My dad was quite successful with his business and didn't have alot of time to spend with the family. So my mom called a divorce. It was even split custody for 3 years then my mom decided to move 3 hours away which was heartbreaking for my dad. This means he could only see us once every second weekend and we would have to do alot of driving to meet eachother. How my dad ended winning in my opinion was for 12+ years he always followed through to make sure my brother and I had the best weekend ever when we got to see him. He also took us on cool trips to Europe and disneyland that my mom couldn't keep up with. He just wanted to make sure that he got to spend the most quality time with his kids that he could and it did work out in his favor. My mom also had to go through alot of resentment and anger from my older brother and it wasn't til recently that he started giving her some appreciation. She is a great mother, just played her cards right through divorce and it backfired

Here in Sweden, the term "men's violence against women" is an umbrella for all kinds of domestic violence in a couple: men on women, women on men, men on men, women on women. Then think about what such stats (numbers for men's violence against women) will do to the discussion in the society and the narrative of who beats whom, etc.

Luge Fisker

I agree with UltraSive, women should have more control over the baby’s birth since pregnancy is such an arduous task.

Jeffery Tang

I’m not quite sure I agree with one of your points on if a women wants to abort a pregnancy but the father wants his child. I believe that there is a very significant weight on the mother for carrying it out if she doesn’t want to that can adversely affect her for the rest of her life and she had the chance of dying whilst giving birth.

Any man who puts his own selfish desires to have a baby, over the physical and mental health of the living breathing mother, who would be carrying his child for him- is not a good man in my opinion. Hire a surrogate- or find a woman who wants to have a baby with you, or adopt, or become a foster parent, or invest in artificial womb technology. Do literally anything except legislate that woman needs to carry a baby full term, if the father of that baby says so lol. This is something I am seriously passionate about. Only because in America, the laws around these issues are absolutely whack, and health insurance isn't guaranteed for everyone.

If you've never experienced a high risk pregnancy or ever had to miss work or ruin your body or or deal with stress and hormones and over all sacrifice that it is to carry and give birth to a child- then you don't get a say. I will die on this hill. ----- that being said, I don't think I'd ever go through with a pregnancy, if I did not plan it with a man, and if we both did not want to raise the child together as a team. Both. I would not willingly go through a pregnancy for a baby I don't even want to keep. I hated being pregnant. I was high risk, and needed an emergency c section with my first child. I'm not sure I ever want to go through that again, period.

Abortion is not legal or socially acceptable a lot of places. You absolutely CANNOT force a woman to go through with a pregnancy she doesn't want to go through with 💯💯💯

50/50 split 100% when it comes to custody. That is so important to me! I only saw my dad every other weekend growing up, and that really hurt me.

I think automatic DNA tests would eliminate much of the need to criminalize paternity fraud lol

Automatic DNA tests would be so great!

The problem is some people's religious beliefs don't allow them to get an abortion. And some places abortion is absolutely illegal. In Alabama a woman can even be charged for having a miscarriage. We need to fix the religion problem across the world, and convince enough people that sanctity of life, is not inherent and make abortion safe and legal and socially acceptable EVERYWHERE, before this idea of yours can even be exercised.

That is really complicated because autism spectrum disorder is huge and affects people in different ways xxx

Alisha

I have a question idea, How does a relationship work when one or both persons are on the autism spectrum?

The abortion thing can only work this way: 1) If both the man and the woman agree to become or not to become parents, than the choice is straght forward 2) If the woman does not want to go on with the pregnancy, she has the choice to go on with the abortion regardless on the opinion of the man: a pregnancy has a massive impact on her body and no man willing to become father can force her to such a thing; if he really really wants to have a child, he should go with an other woman which agrees to go pregnant and become a mother. 3) if the woman wants to have the baby and the man does not, here is more tricky: ideally the woman should have the abortion and (the same as before) if she really really wants to have a baby, she should find an other man who would become father instead, because having to rise a children is a life-changing (possibly life ruining) experience which no man should be forced doing, if he is not willing to, or if he is not ready. The problem is that the woman could simply break this rule and force him to maintain the baby when he/she is born. So here's the solution: first, the woman has to tell (within a certain time) the man that she is pregnant, in order to give him the possibility to state if he is willing to having that child; if she doesn't, the man is not forced to raise the child. After being informed, the man himself should have a certain ammount of time to tell the woman if he is willing to become a father, and if he doesn't, he is forced to raise the child. After the woman knows the will of the man, she can decide if going on with the pregnancy or not, knowing that if the child is born, she has to raise him/her by herself. This whole reasoning is based on these two moral principles: 1) since today we have control of births, a person should take responsability of a child only if he or she is willing to become a parent, otherwise, an indesired pregnancy is not to be considered someone's responsability, but an accident. 2) a child does have the right to have a family, but a family is not necessarily formed by his/her mother and his/her father, but by some adults that love him/her and help him/her in their life; in facts, the idea that a family is composed by one man and one woman is far too simplistic, there are many people which grow as healty functional adults being raised by two women, or two men, or only one woman or only one man or some other number of both men and women, and while i can see that someone could say that on average, you may expect that one man and one woman should be the best case scenario, that is by no mean an implication, but only some statistical clue: you could make easily the case that being raised by a single man is far far better that being raised by one man and one woman which are neo-nazis or pedophiles and maybe you could even say that one single rich parent is better than being raised by two parents in extreme poverty who cannot let him have an education.

Mario Veca

The child loses all sense of normalcy in a 50/50 custody. Forget friends and sports, no, you HAVE to go see the other parent because courts.

eventhough im still average guy, ive always make sure i pull out and cum inside condom and make sure she doesnt steal my used condom with sperms inside, call me paranoid. Getting a female pregnant is one of the worst decisions and a man could make.

Have you and both your sons had a shit time of it with women then? I am sorry to hear that! What is your story then? Do you have anything that you think could help men (legislation wise) that could prevent them from being viewed as disposable? For instance I see many red pill people debating welfare... some are against it because they argue women "don't need men anymore" and that men are highly taxed to pay for it. But if there was welfare then wouldn't women use men for basic needs (I know that there would still be women wanting richer men). Just wanting to know your thoughts? xxx

Alisha

Mandatory paternity test! Absolutely!!! How this isn't a thing in modern society is insane!

I agree with most of the legal changes that need to occur in order for men to have fair outcomes in regards to male-female relations. Women aren't angels. They can no longer be treated legally with such deference. Regarding general male anger, not involving men being legally wronged, Jordan Peterson actually has amazing insight into this topic. He studied the Mass shooters of Columbine High School. He studied the worst human beings in history. He understands male anger and suffering acutely. As I understand his lectures and books it comes down to this: Life is painful. It can cause suffering. Males who are suffering and angry know this acutely. They then have a choice. Decide to adopt responsibility, first for their own problems and ways of life, then later for others. Start to tell the truth of why you are angry and don't lie. Perhaps the truth is their relationship is terrible, or they haven't even had a relationship. Ok. Take responsibility for that. Start to change. Nothing good will come of a victim mentality. Take control of your own life and all your problems. Perhaps in this way, they can become, in time, a high-quality male like Alexander Grace talks about. There are horrific things women can do and will do to men. Get away from those women however you can. Live a life of truth and responsibility. Live an honorable life. Seek out women who do the same.

Ooh, just brainstorming here about the abortion thing... what about this: Woman: I'm pregnant and I'm getting an abortion. Man: no you're not, I want the baby.   Woman: ok, you pay for a surrogate and we'll have the fertilized egg transplanted to her womb and it'll be yours and you'll never hear or see from me again. This would allow the woman to not be pregnant or give birth against her will, and divest herself of all financial and child rearing obligations, the man gets to be a single dad with sole custody, and the surrogate gets paid.  Is that a win-win-win? Or would it result in some warped version of the handmaid's tale?

Jennifer Coopman

I agreed with some of this and had problems with some, too. And some things I just had questions. Mandatory paternity testing - it's a great idea, but who's going to pay for it? The mother, that's who.   Hospitals will pass that cost on to the patient and who knows if insurance will pay for it.  It's basically making the woman pay a fee to prove she's not a liar. And what about gay couples or sperm donors? If a woman uses a sperm bank or a friend as a donor, and she's required to pay for a paternity test, does that mean the sperm donor is now on the hook for child support?  Even when the mother has a wife?  False contraception - so if she's on the pill and it fails, then she is charged with a crime? What about if a man has a vasectomy but it reverses itself and she gets pregnant, will he be guilty of a crime?  Same with tubal ligation. Sometimes birth control fails. Nobody should go to jail for that.  How could anyone even prove she was lying? Criminalize false accusations - good idea, but I strongly disagree with Alexander here that this won't affect true rape cases. Actual rape cases, where she reports and police find a suspect, but there's not enough evidence to convict him, will pose a problem. The rape victim can then be charged with a crime, or at least sued in civil court by the suspect for defamation.  Alexander said 'obvious' cases will ensure justice for those having actually been raped. But a suspected rapist who gets off for lack of evidence will now have a way to put the victim in jail for identifying him.  So yes, it will absolutely make women afraid to report. Even if she didn't identify him, if she didn't see his face, but police identify a suspect, and he ends up not guilty, is it still a false accusation on behalf of the police? Or only if a woman does it?  Mandatory investigating of domestic violence calls - another great idea, but I'm not sure how this could be realistically implemented.  In many communities in the U.S. cops are ordered to make snap decisions on who is most physically vulnerable at the moment they arrive at the scene. Women are usually physically smaller/weaker than men, so naturally the cop is going to assume she is in more physical danger from him than he is of her. I'm not saying it's right, but what else can the cops do when it's left up to them to decide on the spot? That's not a rhetorical question; is there anything else cops can use in an acute situation to determine who is really the aggressor and who is really in danger? Divorce - the no fault issue.  Alexander said if someone did something bad, they shouldn't get half the assets for obviously tanking the marriage. But  what's 'obvious?' What's heinous enough? Not keeping house good enough? Being a bad cook? Getting fat? Who decides that measuring stick?  Divorce - the suggestion to do more psych evals for custody determination really triggered me. There goes all the progress western society has made trying to destigmatize mental illness.  It absolutely terrifies me as a mother, especially one who had post partum depression.  If I had divorced my husband back then, or even years later, I would've lost custody if a law like this was in effect.  Remember when a woman was considered having a mental illness just for being emotional? This could leave room for that to come back.  And ever notice how so much of the manosphere these days assumes that women by default have borderline personality disorder, just by being female?  If you get a black-pilled shrink, he will diagnose moms as crazy as a matter of course. And what if both spouses have issues, is the shrink deciding who's worse? Like, is it the dad who's a schizophrenic or is it the mom with OCD? Abortion - if the woman doesn't want it, but the man does: It's not that pro-choice women don't think a man should have a say about his baby. I think it's that pro-choice women don't think it's a baby in the first place.  If she takes Plan B the next day, without even doing a pregnancy test, will she need the permission of last night's one night stand, who she doesn't even know his name or contact info, before she can take it? Most women won't even tell a man that she is taking it. So maybe that part of question is more about the definition of a viable fetus rather than men's having a say. Like, Is a 1-day old fertilized egg a baby? And if she decides ok I don't want it but if you do I'll give birth, but she miscarries, then is she charged with a crime?  The other women mentioned rape victims, so I won't expound on it here, just to say I agree with them.

Jennifer Coopman

Funny, I thought the video was going to be about men's anger in relationship dynamics. I think you really did hit on every one of the main Men's Rights legal issues that are prevalent in the U.S. and, as far as I can tell, took the side of Men's Rights in actually every case. You'd make for a good activist. As a divorced man with two adult sons, I have to tell you, I basically advise never getting married, never living with a woman, possibly even never dating. It's very, very difficult to advocate for the reverse position because the risks are SO massive. There are a million ways to lose - some of which, as discussed in this video, are life-scale and even life-ending - that those who actually find happiness really are one in a million. Do you really think you're going to be the one to win the lottery? dodge the bullets? avoid the landmines? Believe me when I say: that's what all the rest of us thought too. Male anger involves a whole lot more than marriage and custody laws. It's about dehumanization when you get right down to it. It's about never being valued as a person, but only as a contributor/servant. It's about the realization that your life doesn't actually matter, that the only way you will ever be seen as valuable is as an exploitable resource. And in the end, it's about poor self-esteem. But, how would you ever legislate that someone must value someone else? Even if you were able to establish every one of the Men's Rights initiatives mentioned in the video - even if you gave completely preferential treatment to men under the law in terms of marriage, money and custody - you still wouldn't solve the problem of male anger, because, in the end, we still wouldn't be appreciated and valued by women. I must conclude that there is no legislation possible to address male anger. We are in situation where we have to solve it on our own or be doomed to remain angry (and abused). We have to take charge of our own circumstances and make our own freedom real. No else else will, and in the end, no one else can.

Tbh Jen I am in 100% agreement with you and I really do hope that male contraception comes leaps and bounds but I researched it for part of my dissertation and there is lots of papers that are basically saying that they don't want to fund Male contraception because it would affect the profits of female contraception (or so they assume). I think that if a man could make it so the woman would have to carry even if she didn't want to then it would be a really fucked up world. But I also think men should have the right to almost have a financial abortion too xxx

Alisha

It’s all about the spin. Maybe legislation would be more likely to be passed if they spun it as standard DNA testing for future health reasons - and paternity would be just one element of that. It would still scare away shitty women who would seek to defraud men and not seem accusatory to women who just wanted to make babies with their husbands. 🤔

I agree with all of that with some hesitancy around the abortion part. I am conflicted. On the one hand, the Dave Chappell comment made perfect sense to me when I heard him say it the first time - If, by law, women have the only, and complete, say over whether they bring a baby into this world… It seems only fair that there should NOT be any law that requires men to pay to support those children (unless there is some agreement made for him to be involved in the child’s life). On the other hand - a man having legal recourse that could force a woman to continue a pregnancy she does not want - my mind goes to some pretty horrific scenarios and rebels against the thought. Unfortunately, I don’t know what the best middle ground is. Given all of these complexities - I hope that some scientist figures out a type of birth control for men (not condoms but a pill or shot or something) that temporarily (or for however long they want) prevents pregnancy. Something like that might help to mitigate some of this mess while legal inequity is worked out.

The hostility towards even suggesting paternity testing at birth, is really amazing. And given the rate of false claims of paternity, and the stunning results of past and ongoing examples of paternity testing on a large scale, the shock to our culture if this were to come about, would be incredible. During the 1950's, an era when it was supposed that high moral standards were commonly adhered to, a large scale effort was made to track genetic history of married American couples, to gain an understanding of transmission of genetically based disease/conditions. They were somewhat upper class, and the testing was quietly shut down, and is seldom heard of at all. It seemed that just short of 10% of the children assumed to be produced by the married couples..... were not the product of the husband in the marriage. Given the size of the average family at that point in time, 2 and often 3, sometimes more children per couple.... a considerable number of the 'wives', 20% plus or minus, were pregnant by another man, but the husband was going to carry the financial and emotional burden, of another man's child. And current testing to trace genetic history, is turning up similar figures. Small wonder that so many women are shocked by even the suggestion.... We are a very strange species.

Hey Alexander, loved the video. I totally agree with everything you said apart from some of the abortion stuff (although I feel empathy for men who lose children I don't ever think that a woman should have to carry a child to term because a man wants the child and the woman doesn't, plus how would that even be proven? She could turn round and say he isn't the father or something, but other than that it is a moral thing for me). The mandatory paternity testing has been something I have written about before and suggested to family members but once again they had the same attitude you expected such as "women shouldn't be treated with suspicion, that is ridiculous". I think not only is it beneficial to fathers but the child too, so many children don't know who their dads are and I feel it is a vital part of yourself to know. Not to mention inheritable diseases such as Huntingtons which if a parent develops it (and it can develop later in life) then the child should know they have a 50/50 chance of that. There are other diseases too that could be managed with treatment. Maybe a politician could take that route instead? xxx

Alisha

GREAT video Alex! You covered a lot of super important topics and provided good reasoning. Paternity fraud and mandatory paternity testing aren't topics I've studied much, but I've previously heard a couple people make impassioned, reasonable cases for mandatory testing. I'm convinced. Regarding penalties for false accusations, I agree that we need to somehow disincentivize that behavior more.

Blair

Hey, sorry to hear about your divorce and the fact you were robbed. Hope you are doing better! (I'm the person who asked this question) That is very interesting you mention about the de facto laws as I forgot about it entirely, I didn't realise it would count if you lived with 4 people. I totally agree with the pre-marriage finance thing, I always thought about an opt-out prenup that holds legal weight similar to the opt-out paternity testing Alexander mentions which I have also thought about myself and even mention in my dissertation 😅 Thank you for your comment! xxx

Alisha

DNA tests should be the de facto standard for all live births. It should just be a dial tone. This would reign in a lot of female misbehavior overnight.

Kent C Johnson

Just been through a divorce. After a 2 years of marriage, that ended after my wife insisted on having an ‘open marriage’ (an ultimatum that I refused), my wife extorted me out of half of an inheritance worth $600k, and forced me to pay $60k in legal fees (note, our case didn’t even go to court. Those are the costs of a mediated dispute. I would’ve been looking at another $100k minimum and 2 years to go through the court system). Despite being a 2 year marriage it was considered 5 years due to de facto laws (we were living in a share house together with 4 others when we started dating but it still counts). This is an area of the law you didn’t cover in your video Alex. De facto laws need to be eradicated. Also, no man should get married in this day and age without a signed binding financial agreement, made at least 6 months before moving in together, with independent legal advice on both sides. Modern marriage is an instrument of oppression and theft. My wife faced no legal or social consequences for her action (apart from being massively rewarded financially). We live in a society that valorizes women both for getting married and for getting divorced. Once you realize that, any desire for marriage on the mans part should go away…