COTW winner is artistoftheslightlyshadydeal, who writes about the devolution of marriage:
“some experts say boundary-challenging gay relationships represent an evolution in marriage — one that might point the way for the survival of the institution.”
To survive as only a plaything of the legal profession.
It will also encourage women to scheme of ways to rework the marriage contract when they feel like to get 50 shades of dick on the side and bail out of their responsibilities in the partnership.
“I married him, but I never agreed to the reverse cowgirl or to be monogamous”
“I married him but I never agreed to wash the stains out of his children’s underwear”
Marriage will evolve all right, into a dicey proposition at best unless you have money to pay for the right contract to protect yourself from evolution or change you do not want.
Pre-nuptial agreements almost become mandatory to record promises made at the beginning. But it’s a band aid on gaping wound. As soon as marriages have porous boundaries then you may as well each just retain lawyers and start a limited liability company.
“50 shades of dick” lol
I’ve used this analogy before, and I’ll use it again, because I think it’s pertinent: A wife getting fat is reneging on her end of the marital deal just as assuredly as a husband lounging on the sofa all the time doing nothing is reneging on his. Both of them have turned their backs on what the other spouse desires from them.
Gay marriage has cracked open the door to the legalistic flim-flam divorce sham machine that much wider. This commenter is correct. Enlarging the purview of marriage to include all sorts of “arrangements” and “agreements” and “evolutions” and “fluid expectations” will essentially turn the institution into a loveless business partnership, and all that requires. May as well jump to the next step and avoid the wait: Contractual, time-limited marriages that can be renewed every few years based on client satisfaction.
COTW runner-up is Ras al Ghul, who spells out the final solution for the institution of marriage.
The real social danger, is what they’re [ed: gay marriage advocates] pushing, acceptance of open marriage.
Getting the betas to accept their women sleeping around (because they’re beta they’re not going to have the opportunity the women have).
The problem, and its a very real on is that the only incentive left for beta men to get married is the illusion that they are locking the girl down.
You take that illusion away and what possible reason do they have to get married and work hard?
None. Your married, hard working married slave boys are your revenue generators for your tax base and economy, Dalrock has that delineated out clearly. Single men, single women and married women have a small percentage of individuals that make a high income.
Married men are more likely to make more, work more.
They’ve erode marriage so far, I’m sure they think this won’t matter, but in the places where gay marriage is legalized the marriage rate drops faster for this very reason.
There will always be men that think they’re special snowflakes and that they’re relationship will be different, but that number of fools is already getting smaller.
Social acceptance and legal codification of open marriage will be the killing shiv twist in the black heart of the West. There will be no turning back from that paradigm shift. Hello, Afrimerica.