Something Feral

Digging up the flower-beds.


Tuesday, August 4, 2009

A Dance With The Devil

(Included article is somewhat risqué in content; open at your peril.)

Excluding their political mishaps, I have always admired the practical nature of the Russians:
In the new capitalist Russia, a country consumed with money and status, snagging a desirable man is a tough business. "Women want a husband who owns a private plane, a yacht, and an oil well. It's not impossible, but they need super-fantastic skills to succeed," says Varra, who has a riot of curly blonde hair and wears tight black jeans tucked into silver boots -- high-heeled, of course.
I like Varra already; she understands the reality of the market, the fallacy behind the "equality" paradigm, and has created a business based on not only preventing unnecessary divorce, but enabling others to attract and keep suitors of their own choosing.

The problem is not only one of demographic disparity, however; it is (and should be) completely unsurprising that the State is causing an unnatural distortion with regard to demand:
Holding on to a good man long-term is an equally high-stakes matter. Divorce in Russia is easy; a powerful man can divorce his wife "in an hour," according to one local insider. Under the country's anachronistic divorce laws, husbands are generally not obliged to give their wives a penny, and they are often awarded custody of the children. "Relationships are like roulette for modern Russian women," says the insider. "They have a lot to win and everything to lose, so they can never afford to get complacent."
Heh. "Anachronistic" when the bias is in one direction, "progressive" in the other; are relationships for men not "like roulette" for men in Western nations? Complacency is no less a mistake, but diligence will not guarantee safety in either case.

As always, Old Scratch hides himself in the details:
To the Western feminist mind, it might seem a bit retrograde, yet Varra insists that Russian women are the ultimate post-feminists. "We know all about equality and independence -- we've been there," she tells me. During the Soviet era, which ended in 1991, millions of men died in wars and labor camps. Women often ran their households alone, while also working in factories. The problem is that Russian men, says Varra, remain deeply patriarchal and still expect women to be subservient. "Rather than try to change men, which will take another 200 years," she says, "we might as well get whatever we can out of them now."
Startlingly similar to the "pump-'n-dump" philosophy of secular men in this post-modern age, isn't it? If one is not the empowered party in the divorce, it pays to invest in a strategy that emphasizes either placating the desires of the other party or minimizing the liability of exposure. The strategy isn't symmetric, but neither are the demands: endless jokes have been made over the impossibility of pleasing a woman, and the utter simplicity in pleasing a man. Varra is not a fool, and obviously the evaluation is proving accurate enough for her to run a successful business in instructing other women in the more "delicate" aspects of doing so. What is surprising is the amount of Western women that refuse to believe that the corollary is true, and that preponderance of bias in the family-courts encourages the adoption of such a strategy, or as is the case with those men with misgivings about freelance-sexuality, complete avoidance.

It should come as little surprise to anyone, then, that such interested parties eventually seek each other out in spite of regulatory barriers and social-pressure applied by those seeking to exercise power through the State against them; it is a comfort to know that despite their best efforts, the market always wins, and the howls of protest from the feminist ranks will die with them and any State that adopts their philosophy.

6 comments:

Doom said...

It would be interesting to see what would happen if girls were given these classes in school, instead of say, algebra. One class (or group of classes, really, being math, and sciences actually) they could really use, the other they barely remember except in bad dreams. My guess is, in time, society would creep back from the precipice. Well, that and going European with divorce courts, at least, Eastern European.

It really could happen. I think the revolution may have hit it's apex. Either that or prepare for a one world government.

As for women's unhappiness? They are always unhappy, same deal, new day, different forms of unhappiness. It's all good.

One hour divorces, without the kids or alimony? Hehehe. Then again, if a woman takes care of her man, divorce would become rare. Modern American women though, they would either change or be gone in heartbeats. From the bedroom to the couch to the frumpy looks and attitudes, not to mention a few other things.

MikeT said...

I think it is pretty shitty that a man can divorce his wife, without cause, take the kids and all of the assets. That is just the opposite of our current situation.

Something Feral said...

Doom, I think the argument could be made that they are receiving this education in grade-school instead of algebra et al. However, it's just technique, and it's not being used to find and keep a suitable man, but to feel "liberated".

In particular, it needs to be emphasized that the involvement of the State is the Great Despoiler in the dynamic. As you said, MikeT, it is no more just that a man should benefit from a "winner take all" judgment than if a woman should do the same. Unfortunately, both courses are heavily incentivized, with predictable results: the offenders are quick to action, and are increasingly unattractive as mates (figuratively and literally).

Naturally, the ideal pairing is a woman and a man that are both looking for a traditional marriage, the State has a carte blanche to abridge the civil liberties of those seeking to extricate themselves from such a situation by restricting outbound communication and offering fast-track citizenship through domestic divorce to foreign women. The concern for these women is a thin veneer: restricting the market encourages trafficking in the black market. (Vox on this here, here and here.)

When you dance with the Devil, you stay until the song's done, ladies.

Elusive Wapiti said...

Great find, Feral.

This is an excellent example of the post-Christian, feminist society. Really, the only difference between that society and ours is that the women in our society get most of the money, the kids, and a steady paycheck out of a divorce, whereas the men in Russian society just get to keep the marital property and the kids. Otherwise, the social symptoms are the same. The women in both societies hypergamously seek the best guys, and only the best guys have a chance at finding a mate.

Mike is right in that a system that permits men to divorce with impunity is just as stupid as ours, although (somewhat ironically as the US family law system uncannily resembles the Russian one circa post October Revolution) the Russian system lacks state-enforced slavery, a key difference.

""Anachronistic" when the bias is in one direction, "progressive" in the other; are relationships for men not "like roulette" for men in Western nations? "

Absolutely. As I've said, the only difference is the lack of a slavery component.

I wonder what the divorce experience is for non-powerful men. Or the divorce rate for that matter. I doubt it is fast, or if women are so disempowered as they are in moneyed divorces.

All that said, I do find it interesting how a woman is making money in Russia reminding Russian women how to make a man happy, and "bingo!" their marriages improve.

I also noted with some interest that Russian women have finally realized that working like a dog for their money really isn't that great of a gig, and that it's much easier to glom off a man instead.

Although it appears that the end result will be one powerful man with several wives/girlfriends/mistresses, with the betas not having much at all. Which is okay I guess because the betas will die a premature death anyway, so I guess it's okay.

Doom said...

Fair is, indeed fair. And, I will not saying I am advocating, truly, a reversal of fortunes. I was merely enjoying the notion. I will argue, however, that men are far less likely to divorce. Though too, Russia is dying faster than they can possibly change in time to end. Then again, Europe and then we are right behind them in the culture of death.

I would guess that poor men and women are not even a blip on the radar in Russia, at this point, so what happens regarding their marriages, divorces, and such is of little concern to the state. So, what occurs is whatever some local judge decides will occur. I have some doubts about law being applied, applied evenly, or any of that. Then again, we do not have it in family court either (justice anyway, if it is evenly unfair).

I still think the best plan would be for the state to get it's filthy hands out of marriage altogether and leave that to religion. The tax issues can be handled quite separately. And family court should stop being an administration branch thing and revert back to (if it ever was?) a judiciary branch thing. (I think they changed it to admin from judiciary so as to provide "protections" regarding confidentiality as I am remembering, so family court was judicial at one time).

Still, what if?

Something Feral said...

I'm all for the State leaving marriage to the Church, but the State is making money through incentivizing, taxing, and manufacturing court-ordered financial slavery, so that's unlikely to happen. The same rationale applies to the tax code, family law, private property usage, et cetera, ad naseum.

Unsurprisingly, I am for keeping the State out of just about everything, which has the added benefit of reducing the amount of tax that it needs to sustain itself. Unfortunately, legal changes will not do much good unless the values of our culture change for the better; we have an excellent set of Supreme Laws (supposedly), but we ignore them regularly, and suffer accordingly. Even a quick and dirty application of the Bill of Rights to every decision to exit the courts in the spirit of the times and with that interpretation would neuter a vast majority of these abuses. Perhaps we lack the will to do so, or perhaps the popular knowledge to do so, or perhaps our children do not cry loudly enough in hunger.

Regardless of the reason we do not, it will likely get much worse before it gets better, and the marriage situation is not likely to improve, being beset on all sides by its enemies. (I'm open to ideas, by the way; perhaps this will spawn a new post...)

I hear Chile is nice.