Women In Early Modern Europe, 1500-1800

women-early-modern-europeEditor’s Note: Consider this a companion guide to the latest podcast over at the Stormer. I’ve chosen the Early Modern Era to illustrate what life was still like for men and women closer to our own historical epoch.

In Early Modern Europe, women worked considerably more than 3 to 4 hours a day. Household labor went on from dawn until dusk:

“One historian calculated how women divided their time, using the information contained in diaries and other similar sources. It is, of course, only a rough indication given that women did not do exactly the same things, depending on whether they lived in the city or the countryside, whether they were rich or poor, whether they were unmarried, married or widows, and whether they were young or old. In spite of this, the results are interesting and give us a vivid picture of tireless women constantly at work. The study showed that in Great Britain the preparation of food required 3 or 4 hours a day, fetching water and firewood about an hour, and lighting the fire and feeding small children another hour, making a total of 6 or 7 hours. On top of that, there was the time employed in the kitchen garden (1 hour) and milking and looking after the animals (2-3 hours), making bread and beer (3 hours a week for each activity) and from time to time the making of preserves and similar foods. But these activities relating to the preparation of food were obviously not all women had to do. Childcare took 3 hours a day, cleaning the house 2 hours, making clothes 2 hours, other activities concerning clothing 2 hours and washing clothes 4 hours.”

Raffaella Sarti, Europe At Home: Family and Material Culture, 1500-1800, p.190

In England, most couples married after their parents were already dead, who outside the highest levels of the aristocracy were not arranging their marriages. The lowest classes had the most freedom in their marital choices which were already heavily influenced by sexual attraction and popular notions of romantic love:

“The fact that many young people married after having spent many years in service away from home also undermined parental authority. On the other hand, the fact that in England the majority of the population married late meant that they married when their parents were already dead. Whatever the case, it appears that after 1660 only parents from the very highest levels of the aristocracy did not systematically grant their sons and daughters at least the right to veto any potential partner they might suggest.”

Raffaella Sarti, Europe At Home: Family and Material Culture, 1500-1800, p.288

In northwestern Europe, the average man married around age 27-28 and the average woman married around age 24-25. Marriage was expensive and nearly a fourth of the population never married:

“The situation was similar north-western Europe and for the middle and lower order in cities pretty much everywhere. … To get married you had to scrape together enough money to set up home on your own, and to do that, you had to work hard and be patient. With a bit of luck, a man could hope to marry around age 27-28 and women around 24-25. But it was not unusual to have to wait longer, nor did everyone succeed in their intent. There were those who never managed to save the absolute minimum required and therefore remained unmarried all their lives. In north-western Europe, the percentage of those who never married was high, although it varied according to the social group, the area and the period. In England from the mid-sixteenth century to the mid-nineteenth century, the figure fluctuated between 4 and 24 percent.”

Raffaella Sarti, Europe At Home: Family and Material Culture, 1500-1800, p.48

All of this is fanciful talk anyway.

There will never be any return to an imaginary medieval Arcadia. Only a small fraction of the American and European population works in agriculture. What’s more, the household tasks that women were still performing up until the Industrial Revolution have been almost completely eliminated.

About Hunter Wallace 9532 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

46 Comments

  1. Have you ever read” Piers Plowman”? Written around 1390?
    Or “The Fairie Queene”? (Early Modern Era, published in 1590?)

    Some people really don’t know anything about the subjects on which they opine…

    They might drop dead if they read “Piers”

  2. Excellent and informative article Hunter. There are many other corresponding citations over these figures as well.

    The Roman Empire was another society that married much later. Funny that the medieval era folk married later than we do now here. Early Marriage was a luxury reserved for the nobility (which were mainly marriages of alliance or political reasons, so they constantly reneged on these early betrothels, King Henry VIII’s Princess and the French Kings dauphin for just one example of thousands) and even then there were strict rules on it and what and when they could consummate – 16 being typically the considered age that was mature enough to do so. (Dispensation could be given in certain cases) Ironically the same age as it is now in Alabama.

  3. It brought to mind the writings of the women of the women of the Scotch Irish and other settlers of the South (and certainly later the west) you did years ago I read. Here is a short bit:

    “Women got busy spinning breeches and shirts designed for the practicalities of their new lives. They shaped simple moccasins and coats made out of deer and bearskins. This rapid transformation in appearance quickly set them apart from the wigs and buckles and frilly shirts of New England. Almost immediately the frontier revitalized the hunter-warrior encoding in their bloodline.

    “The bosom of their dress,” said one visitor, “served as a wallet to hold a chunk of break, cakes, jerk, dow for wiping the barrel of the rifle.”

    In a belt around their waist, they wore the most essential accoutrements; a tomahawk and a scalping knife for hunting and self-defense. No one could go about without muskets and knives in case of an Indian raid or bear attack. Skill with a rifle and knife was essential to survival, and a good marksman had great status in his community.

    “The inhabitants of this country, in common with all backwoods people,” wrote one backwoods traveler, “are wonderfully expert in the use of it, thinking it a bad shot if they miss the very head of a squirrel.

    Hunting and tracking – skills necessary for survival – became competitive pastimes.

    Soon out-shooting, out-bragging, and showing off became integral to frontier culture and a wholly noble pasttime.” …

    There is a reason why the Scots-Irish (And all southerners – my own addition here) are so uniquely attached to their guns.

  4. The thing is – if you lived into your Thirties and beyond, you were of good genetic stock, and were lucky, you were not really wizened in your Thirties. Lots of trading and sea-faring went on, and the tip of the boot of Italy is very close to Africa. 30 miles, at one point, or something.

    It would be about the diseases, killing you off. Not early aging.

    I probably would have joined the Church, as I love reading and studying.

  5. Crimson – women always worked along side their husbands, in almost every era, save the Aristocracy – where women exerted enormous influence.

    Rome rose to civilization and power from the founding, in a very short 100 years. The brilliant Emperor Augustus Caesar had to pass laws that forced MEN as well as women to marry, and start families, as every-one generally had a wonderful time during his reign – and didn’t want to be bothered with the duties and drudgery of family life. Augustus fretted constantly over these developments. He was one of THE BEST Patriarchs of all time – but his daughter have him immense trouble….

  6. Denise thank you for your thoughtful response, although I take a different stance on Augustus 🙂

    Another subject for another day, although he did a very good job in many aspects. We can always have a discussion elsewhere regarding this as this part of history is one of my fortés and favorite to research.

  7. And yes just ask any Southern person whose family was likely sharecroppers at some point and they will tell you the backbreaking reality that women and men and children all worked under. I think the equivalent for the yanks was the women and children in horrible factory conditions.

    Not working is reserved for the wealthy, although having a strictly stay at home house wife was possible throughout the 40s-modern times here if you can make the financial sacrifices. Not diminishing stay at home moms, which I think is the ideal situation, but when it’s denigrated and seen as ‘not contributing, then who would want to be in that position?

    It’s really a catch 22 as of course most women want to be at home with their children but the media has convinced many white men (and women) up that this is a non contribution to the family. Very sad.

  8. That’s true.

    Renee’s mother remembers sharecropping in Southeast Missouri. In the Jim Crow era, lots of Southern women also worked in textile plants and lived in company towns.

  9. I dont feel the need of debating here, but who knows, maybe some will come out of this, so here it goes:

    The touching quote about the amazons of the Scotch-Irish came from Karen McCarthy (I somewhat remotely suspect that Karen is female name hahaha) and this book from Raffaella (a female form of a man’s name, poor Raffella seemingly didnt come out from mommy as they expected) Sarti doesn’t adress any of Andre’s contentions.

    The delay of the marriage age came with the individualization which in turn came from the Prot emphasis on hard labour as something essential to eternal salvation. It is very sick dogma indeed, but nevertheless, this was the cause.

    This article is just a slimy roundabout way of attack without even adressing anything what Andre said. So characteristic of Braddy ‘The Slime’ Griffin.

    http://www.dailystormer.com/male-rehabilitation-saga-the-prequel/comment-page-1/#comment-2041466

    Here I adressed and totally destroyed the main contention brought up in the previous article in the commnets by one named “palmetto patriot”.

    You guys realize that Andre is correct in everything he says, right? Deep down, you feel in in you guts.

    The only thing you can conjure up is portraying everybody with common sense as a half-chink mongrel serial killer. “You are like Eliott Roger”. That is how pathetic you are.

    • 1.) I shouldn’t have to point out here the logical fallacy in asserting that something is untrue because a woman wrote it.

      2.) I’ve attacked people in the past. This isn’t an attack. It is a disagreement about history. There isn’t going to be any return to the Early Modern Era, much less the Middle Ages, because only a fraction a population now works in agriculture, and the tasks that women were performing back then and all the way down to the Industrial Revolution have been superceded by technology.

      3.) Outside of Slavic and the Arab-influenced Mediterranean fringes of Europe, marriage was delayed because it was very expensive and because life expectancy rose. What’s more, most couples married after their parents were dead.

      4.) Andrew’s view of women is mostly based on his own experiences with them.

      5.) “Boing” sees himself as being “at war” with women. He sees women as “the enemy” … just like Elliot Rodger.

  10. Hunter, my mother and grandparents were from the Kennet area of south east Missouri too, and she remembers the same thing. My Pawpa, {grandfather, to all you non southerners} rented his family out to chop cotton and corn. Tried share cropping once, but quit it, he didn’t make any money from it. My mother remembers driving a tractor between fields in the boothill delta. Enjoy your site a lot. Cute little boy you got there too!

  11. HW,

    There is no need to be concerned about what Andre Anglin thinks about women. He is a 30 year old n’er-do-well who’s never had a job other than piddling around with underage girls in the Philippines on his father’s tab. Not to mention half the time I suspect he’s high when he writes his articles. Sometimes he’s “out there” if you catch my meaning. He also harbors pedophilic tendencies. He wrote that any woman over 25 is really just an used up hag and he described one of the girls in his video uploads as “my jail-bait girlfriend.” He also wrote on DS that he has never “been with a girl for more than two weeks.” He’s part of the Millennial MGTOW movement. He has a real hang-up about keeping this hidden because every time his former friend uploads these videos of him and his “jail-bait GF” he gets them pulled from YouTube. He knows that 99% of his “followers” are a gaggle of clowns who will bolt the second any trouble hits.

  12. Crimson – I’d love to hear your “take” on Augustus Caesar. I think he was an extremely effective Manager. He had some real blind spots in his personal life though… ; }.

    Edward Longshanks is still my ideal of a truly worthy King. The Best of Kings. A man for his time.

  13. HW- as a married man, a cleric, a father, and someone who (as you know) has read a great deal, as well as lived for quite a long time, I believe the myopia engendered against Mr. Anglin by both the feminazis, as well as the merely delusional estrogen crowd, who think they are a Man’s equal, is CULTURALLY derived, as well as SINFULLY derived.

    The modern era has adopted Jewish memes and Freudian worldviews, all geared in opposition to the biblical roles of female submission and male federal headship. Whether your more ‘secular’ readers care to believe that or not, such is the case.

    This capitulation to non-White, non-Western, and non-Biblical mindsets affects every element of the Western, apostate Church, from Franky the Last [antichrist], on down to the multiracial nabobs with their prosperity gospels and mega-churches.

    And, personal slander and slurs against Mr. Anglin serve no useful purprose. Why not investigate the clear Lesbian/against-nature connections with all those ‘women’ who were the first Abolitionists, instead? Let alone the Jewish connection with the early 1960’s, via all the Hebesses who hated Christendom, White Leisure, and the beauty of their ‘sisters’ which the Deicide’s women never would possess?

    Because, to the egalitarian heretic and soul-dead feminazis of the post-miodern era, that is no longer a sin, a crime, or something to be viewed with utter disgust. Just as recent actions by those who still see sodomy as an abomination, are treated to mass slander and name-calling by such types of manginas, and other liberal unregenerates, so, too, the ‘WN/SN’ sites have begun the process of pruning the dead wood: as one commenter noted in AA’s site…”There is no way we are ever going to stop these kikes if we’re running around like a gaggle of limp-wristed queers trying to please a bunch of completely unhinged females”…

    And, whether you like it or not, that IS the fight that is engaged. Denise and others such as myself have told you time and again, the fight is not to the strong, but to the self-aware Whites, who KNOW that there is a difference between the Chosenites and the Chosen Whites. One that transcends merely race, but is ontological as well.
    Sadly, the lies of the Endarkenment need to be sloughed off, one at a time, even if they are painful So, Denise’s comment about ‘rights’ needs to be countered by this article, which pretty much sums up the Biblical POV:

    http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/rights-mans-sacrilegious-claim-to-divinity/

    Lastly, HW, you keep on saying that reversion back to a pre-electice day is an impossibility. Don’t you know any ‘preppers’ ? have you not read ONE article on what an EMP attack could do? Have you never read dystopian fiction? We are literally looking at WWIII with Russia, at the hands of American Jewish Neo-cons, which could either annihilate us, or restore us back to the Little House on the Woods timeframe.

    Either way, assuming that women’s rights have ANY legitimacy is the grossest willful blindness I have ever heard from you. I expect better from such a youth….

    “To the law and the testimony…”

  14. I’m saying there isn’t going to be any return to the Middle Ages or the Early Modern Era … unless, say, Mars attacks, and we are all blasted back to the Stone Age and have to rebuild civilization all over again.

    It’s just not going to happen. It is fanciful to daydream about women spending all their time fetching water and firewood, making clothes, milking cows, and so on. What percentage of men even work on farms these days?

    I see it as just another example of how the internet has untethered lots of people from reality. What are you even proposing here? Are you saying that women shouldn’t be taught to read or something?

    Am I the only one here who doesn’t see anything “Medieval” about a bunch of men who can’t get a girlfriend casting themselves as an identity/grievance group and crying about it on the internet?

  15. HW, first off, is this the ‘modernity’ you want?

    http://www.dailystormer.com/anti-hate-sign-in-indiana-reads-sodomize-intolerance/comment-page-1/#comment-2049737

    Secondly, when did I ever say this? “Women should not be taught to read?”
    All Christians have the command to ‘study to show thyself approved,’ but, by doing so, are we obligated to send either our sons (like your precious little boy) or daughters (like ours) to the Moloch State School?

    You’re jumping to conclusions- which is, a rather ‘feminine’ way of dealing with logic.
    Which AA talks about in his most recent post, a FAQ on the topic.
    Just sayin’….

  16. 1.) Umm, obviously no.

    2.) It was just a question. Where are you going with this?

    3.) I’m sorry, but every man who has been rejected by a woman isn’t a victim of society. ALL women are not the enemy just because some men have had bad experiences with women.

    4.) Finally, if this becomes an Elliot Rodger-style griping and self pity fest, a male version of feminism, the vast majority of White men won’t have anything to do with and it, and neither will most men who are nationalists.

    There’s a legitimate issue here which should be addressed, but a lot of it is just unsuccessful men who can’t get laid getting butthurt and feeling sorry for themselves on the internet.

  17. Braddy, my comments werent primarily directed towards you, but glad you took the mantle of the mangina.

    2) disagreeing with history has zero to do anything with the core of the female issue.

    Andre said that the Medieval relationship between man and woman is the closest to ideal. Citing a History book about how it wasnt the case 200-300 years later, is totally irrelevant to the case. It is just bullshitting and derailing into pointless details, something you are good at.

    And of course you dont know anything about how life was harder after the Medieval Ages for all of Europa, and particularly for the Northwestern and Northen part, because you know absolutely nothing about the Little Ice Age that made agriculture much harder than before.

    3) a) See above, b) unproven assumption “most couples married after their parents were dead” ther are no stats proving this c) The period of 1500-1800 is irrelevant to the Middle Ages. Citing “facts” from this era proves nothing about the period before. Are you this stupid?

    4) Argumentum ad hominem

    5) Cherry-picking

    BTW, Andre said 10 things, and you try to disprove only one. It makes no sense at all, unless you are a History-jerk. In which you fail miserably anyways, so there is no point.

    “I’m saying there isn’t going to be any return to the Middle Ages or the Early Modern Era”

    You are implicating in your usual slimey way that Andre or anyone wants to go back living in mud huts or something… you are insane.

    And you dont have to work women 15 hours a day in households in order to get respect for men. If you are implying that, you are actually more backward-thinking than you are accusing Andre with.

    Checkmate, you failed again.

  18. I wonder how many of your readers know what a “summer kitchen” was, or a “spring house”?

  19. 1.) Believe it or not, but not every man has been unsuccessful in life in their relationships with women, or resents ALL women like Elliot Rodger.

    2.) This post was only about European history. I took lots of graduate level courses on Medieval and Early Modern Europe while in college. I’m sure some of the stuff that was said on the podcast was as bewildering to others as it was to me.

    3.) In the Early Modern Era, life expectancy was higher and science and technology was more advanced, but women were still performing many of the same tasks that they were in the Middle Ages. My point was to show that even 300 years later women were still performing arduous household labor.

    4.) Life expectancy was lower in the Middle Ages, most people were poorer than in the Early Modern Era, and their parent died off at even an earlier age.

    5.) Andrew said in his Valentine’s Day post that his view of women was based on his own personal experiences with them.

    6.) “Boing,” who is a male version of a feminist who is opposed to nationalism, is an illustration of where all this is trending.

    7.) I agree with Andrew on lots of things, but I haven’t gotten around to outlining where I agree and disagree.

    8.) Can’t go back to the Middle Ages or even Early Modern Europe. Neither men or women have lives today that are remotely similar.

    9.) If that’s the case, then why even bring up the Middle Ages?

  20. 1) “Resents all women like elliott rodger”
    strawman argument

    2) What you refenrenced has nothing to do with what Andre said about the crux of the issue, Braddy. And you failed even wiht that.

    3) irrelevant

    4) irrelevant

    5) I want an exact quote.

    6) its cherry-picking, for the sake of illustrating your distorted view on anti-feminists

    7) That is definitely true, bc you dont have convictions that would make apparent, where you agree and where you differ

    8) strawman argument

    9) As an example, when things were normal relationship-wise.

  21. 1.) As I see this, there is a legitimate issue here, which is the damage to our culture that the Sexual Revolution has unleashed since the 1960s, and which is not synonymous with male grievances. Women, too, have their own list of grievances about male infidelity.

    At the same time, there’s a group of an incredibly angry and alienated men who are sexually frustrated who are using the internet to anonymously band together as a victimized grievance group. Some of these men are angry virgins like Elliot Rodger who start to resent ALL women and who start seeing their gender as their identity group in the exact same way that feminists and homosexuals do.

    I’m seeing elements of both over at the Stormer. Is every man who has ever been rejected by a woman a victim of society? Are we going to run out women who agree with us for the sake of a bunch of embittered and emasculated losers? What sort influence should those people have over the WN movement or at least the e-movement version thereof?

    2.) I’m going to deal with that separately.

    3.) and 4.) This post was about historical accuracy and is hardly irrelevant to what was said over there.

    5.) It’s in the Valentine’s Day post where he wonders if he is too jaded or whether his own negative experiences have left him biased.

    6.) See above.

    “Boing” reflects the group that I have a problem with.

    7.) Nope, it has more to do with the fact that I am married and have a child now, and so I don’t have the time to pump out 2,000 word essays.

    8.) Andrew brought up the Middle Ages to illustrate his ideal, but we couldn’t go back to the Early Modern Era, even if we wanted to. Technology has changed the world.

    9.) Arranged marriages with adolescents hasn’t been the historical norm for my ancestors. Maybe in Sicily or Bulgaria though.

  22. 1) “incredibly angry”, “victimized grievance” “Some of these men”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_words

    Throwing around bullshit, Braddy. By the way, you cherry-pick certain individuals (assuming your judgement is correct about them, I have my doubts) and you equate them with the whole group.

    3-4 historical accuracy about a different age. If I talk about the Medieval ages for example , how is the Renaissance relevant to that ? If the talk is about the Medieval ages, then talk about the bloody Medieval ages.

    5) I want an exact quote.

    6) Exact quote, quit the BS

    Boing reflects Boing, I fail to see a group there. Maybe ther are 2-3 other people. Equating a movement with its radical fringe (if we assume you are right regarding Boing, which I seriously doubt) is very dishonest, Braddy. And patently false.

    Lets say that every anti-feminist is an elliott roger, as you falsely claim. If elliott roger says that 2+2=4 for example, how is “you are an eternal virgin serial killer” the answer to that? Could you tell me?

    Argumentum ad hominem, Braddy. That is what you are. Smearing with shit thrown at people.

    7) The anti-femmie manifesto on DS is very simple, if you lok at the key issues. Nobody wants 2000 word essays, not from you anyways haha

    8) Technology has changed the world, but human nature remained the same. The challenge is: how to preserve humanity in the changing world? It is definitely helpful if wee se things when they were in order. Nobody wants to go back to the middle ages, that is only your hallucination. You keep parroting this lie over and over again, seemingly believing that if you say it enough times, that will make it true. It fucking wont.

    9) Who knows. Do you know about every single one of your ancestors, paternal, maternal line? Woud it make a difference if there were such mariages? Does it matter? You would have an identity crisis or what? lol

  23. 1.) No, I made a point to distinguish between the legitimate issue, which is the chaos caused by the Sexual Revolution, and the socially awkward, sexually frustrated dorks who are bitter because they either can’t get laid or can’t attract the women they want.

    Virtually every normal White person who I know in real life will look at the latter and blithely conclude that life has never been “fair.” It is not a world tragedy that some angry, extremely alienated men have too many issues to attract a mate.

    3.) and 4.) As I said above, life was shorter, technology was less advanced and women worked even harder in the Middle Ages. It is impossible to return to the Early Modern Era, much less the Middle Ages or Roman Antiquity, and insofar as this is discussed on the internet it is just romanticized fantasist talk that has become unmoored from reality.

    5.) I’m on my mobile phone. Anyone who wants to read the essay can easily Google it.

    6.) The tone of the commentators there shows plenty of bitterness and loathing of women. Andrew is not as extreme as many of those in the crowd he has attracted.

    7.) Just don’t have the time to write 7 page essays anymore like the one Andrew posted this afternoon.

    8.) There’s no way men and women could organize their time in accordance with Medieval norms in the modern era. The Medieval economy and social structure has been utterly shattered. Same with the Early Modern Era.

    There’s no going back to anything resembling that system and proposing that we do so at a time when the family farm is dead as a doornail can’t but sound utterly ridiculous to anyone familiar with that time period.

    9.) I don’t have any ancestors from Andalusia, Sicily, southern Italy, the Balkans or eastern Europe.

  24. FR John -I said that no sane person would willingly give up legal rights. Women have all kinds of legal rights – and are not going to surrender those rights.

    As Hunter keeps noting ,again and again – we will not return to a Medieval, or any other past era. Talking about surrendering rights makes us sound like nutbags.

    Sorry – but this is simple PR.

    White Advocacy is utterly retarded when it comes to things like simply PR – whether you or Andrew or any-one else likes it or not.

    Yikes – there are so may other things to deal with – why does this shooting-ourselves-in-the-foot subject keep recurring?

    Pick yer battles.

  25. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_European_marriage_pattern

    The Western European marriage pattern is a family and demographic pattern that is marked by comparatively late marriage (in the middle twenties), especially for women, with a generally small age difference between the spouses, a significant proportion of women who remain unmarried, and the establishment of a neolocal household after the couple has married. In 1965, John Hajnal discovered that Europe is divided into two areas characterized by a different patterns of nuptiality. To the west of the line, marriage rates and thus fertility were comparatively low and a significant minority of women married late or remained single and most families were nuclear; to the east of the line and in the Mediterranean and select pockets of Northwestern Europe, early marriage and extended family homes were the norm and high fertility was countered by high mortality.

  26. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

    The region’s late marriage pattern has received considerable scholarly attention in part because it appears to be unique; it has not been found in any other part of the world prior to the Twentieth Century (except for parts of Southeast Asia). The origins of the late marriage system are a matter of conjecture prior to the 16th Century when the demographic evidence from family reconstitution studies makes the prevalence of the pattern clear; while evidence is scanty, most English couples seemed to marry for the first time in their early twenties before the Black Death and afterward, when economic conditions were better, often married in their late teens.[28]

  27. 1) cherry-picking, guilt by association

    “Virtually every normal White person who I know in real life will look at the latter and blithely conclude that life has never been “fair.” It is not a world tragedy that some angry, extremely alienated men have too many issues to attract a mate.”

    world tragedy -weasel word, also, Freudian psychoanalysis how “sexual frustrations” are the cause of everything.

    3-4) Those are non-sequiturs. One can make this claim that the Little Ice Age or Protestant individualisation influenced societies as such etc.

    5) The burden of proof rests on the person who makes the claim, slimey!

    6) It is a subjective observation, worthy of a mangina white knight. It does not show anything like that.

    7) Let me reassure, nobody wants you to write 7 page essays.

    8) It was mentioned as an example. Look up what an “example” means.

    If someone says that Edward Longshanks was a great example of a king, the answer is NOT “wake up buddy, ther is no going back to the Middle Ages”, that is just stupid.

    Trying to disprove one single element of what Andre said doesnt make sense. It is the refuge of mediocre bureaucrat nobodies. That is what you are.

    9) You dont know for sure, that Western Euros never ever practiced such a thing. Child marriage and Bangladesh: guilt by association.

    @Denise:

    Denise, is your name really Denise? In that case, your parents wanted a male child, Dennis, instead came you. You have a feminime form of a man’s name, it probably compels you to behave forcefully, like a man. But there are other issues as well.

  28. Vigilant Guardian – every attempt of refutation you make is evidence of derangement. What’s your real name? Harvey Milk? Andrew is obviously frighteningly ignorant of actual world history, and HATES women. Like the rest of his claque of Twinks.

    Run along back to DS. Women are not wanted. I’ve left, and won’t be back. So you’re safe. Hurry along. Boing misses you.

  29. 1.) As I have said several times now, there is a systemic problem caused by the Sexual Revolution and the resulting disintegration of traditional Christian mores, and then there is the age old problem of embittered omega males who are unable to attract a mate. Not every male has successfully reproduced throughout history.

    3.) and 4.) Definitively addressed above by multiple sources.

    5.) For the last time, anyone can Google the V-Day essay and read it for themselves.

    6.) It looks to me like you are white knighting … Andrew.

    7.) People who aren’t frustrated on that front typically don’t.

    8.) The example was used to show that people worked 3 to 4 hours a day and that young adolescent women, 12 to 15 years old, were being partnered off in arranged marriages.

    9.) Western Europe, even in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Era, was unlike the rest of the world in its demographic pattern.

  30. I am really getting tired of seeing respectable men who have wives and children getting referred to as “manginas” . Usually these same “manginas” are also the ones in our cause who are showing their faces publicly and actually attending events and fighting on the front lines. Hunter isn’t saying that women shouldn’t respect men or that we shouldn’t denounce feminism. He is only rightfully suggesting that this MGTOW movement is equally despicable. A lot of Western women are messed up today but then so are a lot of men. Real men in any civilization will examine the root of the problem and at least give men part of the blame instead of only blaming women. Hunter keeps getting accused of strawman arguments when they are obviously mostly coming from the other side here.

  31. Hunter said,”…Am I the only one here who doesn’t see anything “Medieval” about a bunch of men who can’t get a girlfriend casting themselves as an identity/grievance group and crying about it on the internet?…”

    Hunter did say there are some grievances. My take is that rights for Women are WAY out of line in comparison for Men. All things being equal in divorce Men would get the kids 50% of the time. If you’re going to say things are equal. Today Men get married, have 2.2 kids and A LOT of their wives divorce them and they get the responsibility but not the kids. So they don’t have a wife anymore. They have all the responsibilities with none of the benefits of being married. Many have their children’s respect for them poisoned by their former wives. This happens a lot. It’s not like this is some struck by lightening odd event. The numbers are extremely high.

    True some of the Men rights groups go too far but it’s just the flip side of the coin of Women’s rights groups and isn’t true of most Men. Marriage is a much bigger liability for Men than it is for Women. As Denise says,”…Women have all kinds of legal rights – and are not going to surrender those rights…”. Sure they’re not. The benefits are mostly on their side. My belief is that’s something has got to give and Men will give no more. If Women are equal they must pull their own weight. Men are bitter about the legal situation they are in with respect to Women. Also they are a bit ill about some of the affirmative action that Women get. It not unreasonable to see things that way if you’re told constantly that Women are equal to Men in all ways yet they’re just a little more equal. If you didn’t understand that last line read “Animal Farm”.

    To say this is not to hate Women. It’s just a fact. Women as general want traditional deferments given to Women at the same time they want complete independence and in some cases affirmative action for being Women. This causes conflict and just because you notice this doesn’t make you a beta, omega or and other type lower creature.

    It’s bit much to call people omega’s, betas and failures when they just decided that rationally marriage isn’t for them. Doesn’t mean they hate Women just that they seriously doubt that they can find stable, reliable and compatible relationships with the present culture that shapes Women’s attitudes. With the legal hit that Men are libel for when they get married in combination with the cultural expectations of Women it’s difficult to see a strong plus side to marriage. Not that there’s none just that the liabilities have shifted to being on the risky side.

    I predict that marriage will drop drastically. The same thing happened in Rome when no fault divorce started and many of the things happening now are just all a winding of the clock back to the past.

  32. 1) irrelevant to the issue, genetic fallacy

    3-4) appeal to authority

    5)as I suspected, you dont have anything, you are just bullshitting with fake info, like the fucking liar you are.

    6) you are just throwing shit around, that is all you amount to.

    7)Nobody, braddy.

    8) “There’s no way men and women could organize their time in accordance with Medieval norms in the modern era.”

    Nobody advocated that, you bullshit straw man.

    9) Maybe so, but in the American colonies, Whites produced many many children, totally inconsistent with your Western European pattern.

    @Denise: I go wherever I want to, and I do what ever I wish.

    @Sam J: Good points, I agree.

Comments are closed.