I received the following article request:
In your Open Thread 278 there were two comments you made.
1. “…you need to be aligned on life goals and hope that
neither your nor her goals change significantly in the long run.”
2. “…have a bunch of children. This will keep her busy
until she is in her mid to late 40s, and afterwards you can
enjoy a few decades as empty nesters together.”
Would you be able to expand on these issues, providing some
My response is split in two parts.
Relationships and Life Goals
In order to enter a relationship that has any chance of making it past a few months, you need clear alignment not just on life goals but also on how you intend to get there. There are several aspects to it. Let me highlight a few.
First, you need clarity about who is going to lead and who is going to follow in the relationship. Many modern women are unable to submit to a man, thinking they should not compromise at all and that the man should follow their lead instead. This only makes sense if they are willing to financially support a man who relegates his career ambitions to an afterthought. If both want to pursue their career, it will be only a matter of time until one of them gets a job offer that entails a move. This is either the eventual end of the relationship or the beginning of the woman accusing you, whenever it is convenient for her, of having sacrificed her booming career as there were all those great opportunities she could not take because of you. The only workable model of a relationship is to have the man take the role of the leader (and breadwinner). Women will not accept a man who earns less money than them, which is a consequence of female hypergamy. This is also the reason why all those supposedly successful women in their bullshit jobs cannot find a man. Not only are they too old to be successful on the dating market, they furthermore want a man who is more successful than them.
Second, both the man and woman need clarity on what they want to get out of life. For instance, do they want to maximize their work/life balance or does the man want to see how far he can get in his career, sacrificing time spent with his family if necessary? This is not so much a sacrifice but a trade-off as any man who chooses to prioritize time spent with his family necessarily sacrifices career ambitions to some extent. This is obviously a moot point if someone is stuck in a dead-end job that do not offer any advancement at all or in a role in which it is very difficult to impossible to get ahead. Your wife needs to be willing to accept that she will see a lot less of a man who is driven by the prospect of climbing the ladder.
Third, having children is arguably the biggest issue for a lot of couples. It used to be common that women told you that they do not want to have children if they could sense that you do not want to have any. Of course, they would invariably trick you into impregnating them, either not caring at all about your feelings or believing that you will change your mind. No matter what she says now, she will very likely want to have children at some point in the future because her biological clock will keep ticking louder and louder. In that regard, my advice is that if you do not want to have children you should not even seriously date any woman. In the best case, you are only wasting your time. In the worst case, you are entering hell on earth.
Fourth, there is the issue of stability. The biggest issue with thinking that you have found the perfect woman is that she will change. Most women are incredibly fickle, changing even deeply held convictions on a whim. All it takes is that some fad reaches critical mass. This is not always bad because it led to yoga pants becoming part of street fashion. Yet, today this means that she is likely vegan, hates Trump, loves communism, endorses BLM, got vaxxed and boosted because she fucking loves science, and supports the Ukraine even though she cannot find this country on a map (soon nobody else will). Whatever the media-industrial complex throws at her she will gobble up. You should also not underestimate the impact of all her best friends. These likely change year after year, and every such peer group does not tolerate dissenting opinion. If all her friends are pregnant and she has not had a child yet, she will ride your dick raw like there is no tomorrow. Similarly, if the husbands of her best friends drive big cars or have houses they cannot afford, she will make her dissatisfaction about the standard of living you provide known. Of course, once her best friends start to get divorced, she will get a divorce lawyer too.
Lastly, I think that a relationship with a normie woman is an absolutely soul-crushing experience. The utter bullshit and stupidity you would have to deal with on a daily basis will sap all life energy out of you. Your best bet is finding a woman who is comfortable with endorsing unpopular opinions. This does not mean that she has to regurgitate right-wing talking points on Twitch to get simp bucks. Instead, the bar is quite a lot lower as all it takes is being able to question the mainstream or, even better, not taking it seriously at all.
Children Will Keep your Wife Busy (and you on the Treadmill)
The one tried-and-true method for keeping your wife busy consist of her taking care of the household and a bunch of children. With two or three kids, she will be busy for 15 to 25 years, depending on how involved she wants to be, albeit there are outliers, meaning that there are women who don’t really give a shit about their kids. They put them in front of the TV while they are looking for Chad dick on Tinder.
From a relationship perspective, children serve as glue as they are the clearest sign of maternal and paternal investment, of course assuming that she did not cuck you with Chad or Tyrone. Having kids also makes you more employable because managers like it when their underlings do not have the power to just walk away from a job. The flip-side is that men also feel that they need to better provide for the family, which may make them want to go the extra mile at work. Thus, Chad the family man may even embrace his exploitation, and the carrot his manager dangles in front of him may never have looked bigger and juicier.
Taking care of children takes a lot out of a woman, in particular if she breastfeeds. Not even the biggest club slut will have the energy to entertain the thought of lusting after other Chads. Besides, she views children as an extension of herself and this will be all her thoughts revolve around. Of course, this is clearly a very positive outcome. Just like Chad fathers find it easier to get up in the morning and head to their cubicle farms, so do (some) mothers with children develop a hitherto unknown ability to resist the lures of social media and dating apps. I should add that there are also women who show very little maternal investment. They have the kid, don’t breastfeed at all, and within six months they are back on their knees, gobbling down Tyrone’s dick. You will surely recognize such a woman if you bump into her.
For the best outcome, you should move your wife to a small town or, if possible, a remote village. Then she can fully focus on the house and the kids. If you saddle yourself with a big mortgage, you will furthermore be able to tap into a once unknown energy reserves, much to the delight of your manager. By having children, both the man and the woman make big sacrifices. However, they likely do not view them as such. This is not a perspective a single man or woman will find easy to assume, however.
30 thoughts on “Alignment in Relationships”
As far as embellishing details go, I particularly liked the quips about yoga pants, her stupid female friends.
And the stance on men not even seriously dating women if they didn’t want children is absolutely spot on. (An aspect quite many a man apparently has difficulties to grasp.)
„ With two or three kids, she will be busy for 15 to 25 years, depending on how involved she wants to be“.
I think kids are very time intensive the first years. however, when kids start going to school taking care of the kids (plus house) is not a full time job anymore and a lot of house wives end up bored. Boredom in turn can be very dangerous Therefore you need a plan for what the wife can do when the kids start going to school – e.g. part time job.
Assuming that your wife will not have triplets, three kids should keep her busy for at least 15 years. If she is involved in the life of the children, and in particular if she wants to provide support in some school subjects, she will be busy for many years longer. Afterwards, she may have grandchildren to take care of.
True when you have 3 kids with their birth being spaced then that works.
You have 1 kid. Then the second kid 3 years afterwards, and then third kid 3 years afterwards. The last kid has to be really taking care until they are maximum 8. so 6+8= 14
I think the normal thing is to have two kids with 2 years in between. Which would be 2+8=10 years.
I don’t see the support in school subjects btw. If you and your wife are intelligent, which I assume must of us are, then your kids will inherit that intelligence and School is going to be really easy. I didn’t need any support.
The problem is not that school will be easy but that you cannot expect school to properly educate children anymore. At the very least, you will have to set up a proper mathematics curriculum for them. More realistically, you will have to take care of Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, and Biology. It furthermore surely does not hurt to teach your kids how to code, which you can already do during the primary school years.
Of course when you have 3 kids and a stay at home wife you need to think how you can stem it financially.
I think there are only three options:
1) live as you said in „a small town or, if possible, a remote village“ and have a remote job
2) work for a global successful company that has its HQ in „a small town“. The company will also probably send you as an expat with your family abroad
3) already climbed the corporate ladder and saved lots of money. You will probably be in your late 30s or 40s. Note though that your wife should be younger than 25 if you want 3 kids spaced over 9 years.
I almost fully agree with your position. For 2) the caveat is that your stints abroad will likely be in big, expensive, and degenerate cities. Your expenses will be covered, but you will not be able to protect your children from the degeneracy you will face. I have a great anecdote about this: A few years ago, I visited a friend of mine in Beijing. He lives in one of the most expensive parts of the city. Close to his apartment there was a shopping area and at night you saw groups of white, foreign youth lingering, playing loud music and drinking alcohol, which was tolerated by the authorities. Those were the children of diplomats and business executives. Their parents did not have much time for them, so they took their cues from Western garbage media.
True Aaron. I knew a lot of children of diplomats. They were all very degenerate taking drugs and drinking at an early age. Not only were they living in big cities, their parents also neglected them or they had friends whose parents neglected them. On top sons of diplomats are actually above the law. With their diplomatic passport and cars with diplomatic number plates they can do anything… so they started behaving recklessly
You are also right when it comes to education being bad. So yes if the mother does some extra home schooling then it is a full job. If not then I do not think so.
I wonder now though whether the mother must do home schooling – or could you instruct your kid to do learn more via extra online or in person class?
I imagine a division of labor where the wife takes care of languages and the husband of STEM subjects. Of course, you don’t have to write your own textbooks. There are some very good materials out there you can use. In fact, often it is enough to just get old textbooks from the 1950s or 1960s. I recently came across an old primarily school textbook on arithmetic and it is shocking how much better the materials was compared to today. Back then you got brief explanations, illustrative examples, and a lot of exercises. Today, you get examples that connect to climate change and social justice, proper explanations are often missing, and exercises are few and far between.
I suppose I will be in the minority who wouldn’t be afflicted by boredom (at least I say now that I don’t think I’ll be) because there is always more you could do for the household if you so wish. For example, making your own non-toxic cleaning products, ferments, baking your own bread, cleaning the house more often, etc. When the children are young, they are so much work that there’s a lot you cannot pursue. Even trying a new recipe that’s a bit more complicated sometimes feels too much if you don’t have the help of extended family to provide free childcare.
In any case, when the children are older and engage in hobbies or extracurriculars, I also see the mother’s role to be to learn enough about that pursuit to at least be a bit ahead of them, in order to guide them. If I want my children to paint well, I need to show them it’s an activity I appreciate and enjoy myself; not just throw some paintbrushes at them and expect them to get somewhere decent. If I want to guide them better in their chosen sport or instrument, I’ll have to look up relevant resources. Maybe this is way too much involvement and investment for most, but it’s the expectation that I’m setting for myself. So how I see it is that there’ll always be work to do, just of a different sort.
I should add that my wife is a very curious person. At the least, she always has a stack of books she wants to read. In contrast, if you wife up an IQ100 NPC, she will find that she has nothing to do because nothing interests her, besides shopping and yapping with her friends.
>If I want my children to paint well, I need to show them it’s an activity I appreciate and enjoy myself; not just throw some paintbrushes at them and expect them to get somewhere decent.
As the saying goes; Lead by Example.
There are few faster ways to lose a child’s respect than to invoke a “Do as I say,not as I do” policy. Don’t expect a child to be into fitness when you yourself refuse to. (Unless you have a truly valid reason like being crippled from a background of physical activity. even then,unless its really extreme,you can at least have some light playtime with them.)
You definitely seem to be starting off with a great head on your shoulders right there! Which is sadly more than what I can say for way too many “aspiring parents” out there.
“Gracie Games” I would say is a great example of introducing little children to physical play time at home:
I hated mainstream team sports as a kid,but I probably would have loved this had my parents known about it and made time.
>If I want to guide them better in their chosen sport or instrument, I’ll have to look up relevant resources. Maybe this is way too much involvement and investment for most, but it’s the expectation that I’m setting for myself.
This is not a bad thing by any means. As long as you’re not smothering them with your presence (always feeling the need to be around during their extra curricular time,unless of course they tell you they want you to constantly be there) or thinking you know better than the activity instructor/coach (If you chose them,that should have been because you trust them) and shouting instructions that probably just get in the way as opposed to letting the coach do their job.
I say this as someone who,unfortunately,has a mom (not that my dad is perfect either!) that is lacking a bit on the self-reflection department. Always thinks she has to be in charge and the leader,even on subjects she knows absolute zilch about. We often got into intense arguments over the fact that she would try to mess up my diet schedule (Thinking she has to reduce the food even more!) even though I’ve already produced results (Lost significantly more weight than i ever did in my life with previous attempts) and I’m already losing weight at the absolute best realistic rate we can hope for! (attempting to reduce it even further will only introduce a mountain of problems. AlekNovy has done an excellent job documenting them over the years with his comments in this blog)
Sorry for that mini-rant up there,but please do not be that kind of parent. Acknowledge that you do not know everything and defer leadership to the expert on the subject matter that you trust. Micromanagement kills both productivity and relationships,this article puts it best:
Anyway,getting past that…Interestingly enough,I have recently found this subreddit:
If you haven’t already done some reading on “Evidence-based Parenting”,it might be worth a look for you.
I think the more children you have,the less likely you will be able to truly give your full attention to their needs.
1 kid given full guidance and attention is better than 3+ kids who are given divided and incomplete attention. (even worse if favoritism becomes a factor,and I feel parents underestimate the likelihood of this happening)
I think if you have your first child,and you are lucky enough that they turn out FANTASTIC (i.e. High achiever,very intelligent and ambitious,etc.),I sincerely feel the best course of action is to be thankful for your luck and stop there. I’ve read horror stories of parents who had a great first child have everything go downhill when they had their next and the 2nd child turned out to be the exact opposite. (whether that’s because they were born with inadequate ability or is born with psychopathic/sociopathic traits,etc.)
That’s what I would personally do if kids were part of my lifeplan. If I had an awesome son/daughter,I feel I would owe it to them to not risk their road getting potentially derailed this way.
Getting past that,I feel we should also consider the importance of having great mentors in your children’s lives. Probably most likely found in social activities with a competitive element. Its a thought experiment fans love to entertain,but maybe Mike Tyson would actually have gone down as the GOAT of Boxing had Cus d’Amato had not bitten the dust AND may have been able to guide him away from the people who just wanted to use him.
I disagree with you there. I think two kids is better than one kid.
First, I think you have more then enough time to give fully attention to two kids. So if you are unable to give full attention and guidance to two kids, you are unlikely to give it to one kid either.
Second, siblings often help each other with their development and support each other. I often see two siblings have developed better than a single child.
Third, you said that you have „read horror stories of parents who had a great first child have everything go downhill when they had their next“. Well you can also read horror stories how the first kid was great and then you have a tragic accident and you wish you had a second one. Finally, by when do you know that your kid is „awesome“? Let’s say it takes 12 years. If your wife gets the first kid with 28… waiting till 40 to decide to have a second one is very risk.
I do agree with you though that having 1 kid is better than 4+. I just think 2 is better than 1. I don’t know whether 3 is equal, better or worse than 1.
>by when do you know that your kid is „awesome“?
Assuming you’re providing the proper avenue,you should know very soon if your child has great potential. Going back to the Mike Tyson example,when Cus d’Amato picked him off the street and had him try out Boxing,he witnessed right then and there,that awesome potential hidden within young iron Mike.
The proper avenue can be something like a well-designed Daycare center system. I’ve mentioned Finland multiple times here as a great example of a country that runs an actually good education system. They also serve as a great example of a country that has an actually productive Daycare system. Allow me to copy-paste a comment from one I spoke to:
Currently in selected municipalities around Finland, the state is evaluating two-year preschool (ages 5 to 6) which is free of charge for 20hr/week. Preschool is mandatory, though homeschooling is an option for that as well.
Generally majority of kids start daycare before they turn three. They do cooking, sports, arts etc. on daycare, adapted to the age of the child of course and everything is presented more or less in the form of play. Of course learning to act in group, expressing yourself and your feelings and overall learning good manners and considering for others, whilst building up self confidence and independence are important guiding factors in both daycare and preschool.
In practice, daycare and preschool are generally arranged in same or nearby facilities, as many kids continue the rest of the day in daycare after 4hrs preschool ends.
There are quite many groups/clubs arranging activity for small kids with stay-at-home parents, Mannerheimin Lastensuojeluliitto probably the biggest having local associations in practice on every municipality.
Public daycare it self has cap-price per child defined in law, currently 288€/month for 1st child and -60% for the rest. Household income matters, so you might get discount if household income goes below certain thresholds.
Daycare is a statuatory right to every child, municipality has to provide it to everyone in need. So with these in mind, homeschooling or staying at home (i.e. not having any job) is financially a big burden as parental leave payments end usually when the child is around 1,5yo. and “kotihoidon tuki”, national allowance for stay-at-home parents end when the youngest child turns three years old.
Note these are my own experiences having kids 3 and 5 yo. We are extremely happy with the quality of daycare at our municipality.
If you enroll your kid in this kind of high quality Daycare system (and you SHOULD if you have such an opportunity),and you see them making great developments in 2 or more playtime areas,chances are those are the signs right there.
>Well you can also read horror stories how the first kid was great and then you have a tragic accident and you wish you had a second one.
You are more likely to have a 2nd child that ends up as a drag down (they don’t even have to end up terrible. a mediocre sibling will probably already harbor feelings of intense jealousy over the sibling that does better,especially if you cannot avoid ending up with favoritism in your children,and that can already screw up the family dynamic) than a great first child to end up dying in an accident. that is,assuming you’re not a negligent parent.
>Second, siblings often help each other with their development and support each other.
You can get that from making friends in social circles of the child’s choice. In fact,many best friend relationships are actually much deeper and closer than family bloodlines.
But do you want to know the real major advantage of this? if your child does not end up getting along well with the social circle and/or school,you can just pull them out of them. If your children don’t fundamentally get along with each other,you don’t have that kind of easy solution.
Overall,I simply come at this from the perspective of *Don’t Fix what isn’t Broken*. If you’re already doing great with your first child,I wouldn’t want to risk screwing that up by bringing in a new sibling who I have no idea if they’ll be anywhere near as good as the first child. If you are INCREDIBLY lucky to have 2 great children who have synergy and get along,don’t push your luck by having a third.
I see it similar to gambling. You win big at first prize,don’t risk losing by staying at the table. walk away with the win.
I think that your children are most likely going to be more or less like you/your wife. And if this is the outcome my children have then I will be super happy. Moreover, I think the main reason why my children could turn out „worse“ than me is because of bad social influence between the age 12 and 24.
So let’s say you have a child who is 3 and „awesome“. The risk that the second child will be „not awesome“ is very low. The child will be very likely be like me/my wife and my other child.
Moreover, there is a risk if I only have one child. I use the word tragic here very broadly. It could be death, serious injury or illness. But it also could be that the child will turn out bad because of bad social influence between the age of 12 and 24. therefore, I think it’s more risky to not have a second child.
Finally, when I say a sibling helps with support and development I do not mean that they become good friends (which is very likely though). I mean that a child becomes for example better at sports or better socially.
Society has a negative stereotype of single children. My personal observations are consistent with that stereotype. My personal observations of siblings are also consistent with what I wrote before. First, they are very similar. Second, they seem pretty well developed (good at sports, competitive). Finally, they also often have a very strong friendship.
One thing I forgot to bring up earlier on and I consider this a very important step regardless of our agreement on the 1 vs 2 kids thing..
GET GENETIC TESTING!!! (I believe this is what it is called)
Be sure to have the womb checked early on for abnormalities. I won’t pretend to be an expert on the subject,but I think nowadays we have ways to find out if a fetus has a high chance of ending up with downs (If you end up with one like this,you won’t just have 15-20 years to look forward to,but you can kiss your freedom goodbye for the rest of your life) or some other nasty disability. You can abort early on in this case,then you can try again (if you insist) next time. You don’t want to end up with a seriously disabled child. as I’ve mentioned in that parenthesis,that can be like volunteering for a prison sentence. Allow me to share a notable horror story:
The problem with those tests is that they are not perfectly reliable, so you get false positives. I have also read that they may damage the embryo. My position is that given those issues, such a test should only be performed if there are any risk factors such as high maternal age.
BTW,this is actually one of those examples I speak of,where a bad next child,ended up screwing everything up.
But still,this also applies on first kid. Be damn sure to get womb Genetic Testing early on.
Aaron and the rest of the community. By what age do you think it’s necessary to move out of a big, degenerate city for your children?
I feel like if they are below the age of 12 it is ok to not live in a small village or countryside. However, after the age of 12 I will avoid the city at all costs.
I will reply to this question in a separate article, but it will take me a while.
Another problem is that the degeneracy is online. All the kids I know have internet access. All their friends are watching youtube and tiktok, playing roblox etc. If you keep your children away from that crap they will be “the weird kid” who can’t play together in roblox or join discussions on the latest tiktok trends. This problem is ubiquitous even in small towns.
You can of course limit online access of your children. In fact, this is what you should do. Also, I see less of an issue in terms of being the “weird kid” in a European context as our schools tend to be a lot smaller than their US counterparts. Furthermore, school ends early, oftentimes it does not even include lunch.
1. “Women will not accept a man who earns less money than them, which is a consequence of female hypergamy”.
What about a Chad who make less than them?
2. “You should also not underestimate the impact of all her best friends”.
Does this mean that a wife should only surround herself and spend time with other women who are also virtuous who faithfully walk with lord, so she won’t succumb to external influences from ordinary women who are impulsive, aren’t virtuous, and aren’t faithfully walking with the lord?
3. “…all it takes is being able to question the mainstream.”
It’s definitely hard to find a woman who is able to question the mainstream media.
4. “The one tried-and-true method for keeping your wife busy consist of her taking care of the household and a bunch of children”.
I don’t want to sound like a progressive, but what if she wants to have some fun like travel or do something without the kids. I know parents can get tired being around their kids, and want to get away from them. Would there be any kind of regret from women for having missed out in their past because they have spent all their time, focus, and energy raising their kids? Or would only ordinary regular women feel like this compared to a woman who is more virtuous?
1) If Chad makes less money than the woman, she will prefer an arrangement where she exploits some beta for his money while getting Chad dick on the side. This is the typical cuckolding scenario, in the original meaning of the word.
2) The ideal scenario is indeed that there are no bad influences around her. However, any woman worthy of being wifed up will not have friends with loose morals to begin with.
3) This is extremely difficult.
4) The question is how much “fun” she wants to have. If she wants to travel with her girlfriends you should spot the bright red flag she is waving. Raising kids should be its own reward but there are women who are so incredibly selfish that they think their kids prevent them from having the life they want.
Related to number 4, how should a guy respond when his wife and/or girlfriend starts accusing him of being insecure, controlling and possessive because she wants to have a girls night out. In this situation, would this call for the termination of the relationship or work things out?
Yes, exactly. If a woman wants to justify her desire of slutting by making accusations, you need to cut your losses. Clearly, she would not be fine with him flying to Thailand for two weeks to bang two dozen hookers, so why should he tolerate her going out, getting drunk, and taking numerous dicks? Just imagine the reverse: the guy telling his wife that he will fly to Thailand with his bros and if she’s bitching about it, he tells her that she is insecure, controlling, and possessive. She would totally lose it.