You haven't yet saved any bookmarks. To bookmark a post, just click .

In history, the defining trait of intergender relations was marriage. This was true for every single culture that is civilized. Leftists have to dig for savage amazon tribes or reference bonobos to somehow trick NPCs into believing that somehow marriage isn't a consequence of our biology and our nature.

Marriage isn't actually religious at all. It's not christian or Islamic. Not even Abrahamic. It existed in pagan culture, among Europeans and beyond. Even the Aztecs and other tribes that haven't been connected to us for thousands of years, have a concept of marriage.

It's primarily based on a man providing resources for a woman, who gives him exclusive reproductive rights, so he has the benefit of a secure lineage. Women always know that they are the mother of their children, but not the men. This relationship is basically a necessity for civilization, because otherwise men lose their stake in it.

What we see right now is basically the complete deconstruction of the role of the husband. The provider role and the partner role have been divided.

There are sugar daddies, beta providers, who provide resources, but they don't get exlusive sexual reproductive access. In fact it's only about sex. No children. That's another thing. Sex and Reproduction is severed because of technology.

But then you have providers, that aren't even in a sexual relationship. They are in a quasi-relationship. They get pornographic pictures or role-play a findom relationship or something like that. Likely only over the internet, not in person. That's another thing. Porn is a pacifier for single men to give them a quasi-sexual relationship. In nature these animals without a mate might have risen up already and went on a killing spree, because the system isn't working for them.

Now to the sexual side. There is the boyfriend, the lover. But that is still monogamous. Even that has now been split up. Now there are open relationship, where the provider role is fulfilled by a beta cuck and the sexual side is fulfilled by an additional boyfriend. The beta provider is usually married, while the sexual competitor is attached without any legal bounds.

Interestingly in a very animalistic sense we can see that the women even shares reproductive rights with both of them. First the beta provider gets 1 or 2 kids. And then he is denied any further reproduction, so the new boyfriend gets to have a kid too.

What I observed is that in these interviews and life stories of these people, you can kinda read out that this group of people is sure that the boyfriend is the father of the new kid, which implies that the woman is somehow making sure it's only him that gets to reproduce in that timeframe. There are many options. Maybe she's taking the pill. Using condoms only with the husband. Maybe she is only satisfying him with non-penetrative sex. They don't talk about that openly, but somehow they are making sure the boyfriend gets to reproduce.

Behind all the surface bullshit, you can read the basic animalistic nature of humans out of it. How the cuck brags about how he is even going to take care of the children of the boyfriend, because they are his wives children. This is literally bragging btw. He is living that beta provider lifestyle. He shows the ladies that he can provide.

This shows that it really does matter, who the children belong to and people aren't just like "we are all going to take care of whatever kid spawns out of that pussy". They want to know and if they don't they are deeply psychologically concerned about it.

by Letters To Republic Standard

Read more posts by this author.