Today's letter to drake

Leucosticte

Well-known member
#1
I wrote this letter to a dude who's facing a 15-40 year sentence for child porn, and whose wife is divorcing him.
-----

So anyway, about this topic of female autonomy. I see several downsides to letting chicks just arbitrarily leave their husbands for whatever reasons they want. First of all, the kids don’t consent to losing their opportunity to be raised together by both their parents. Not only that, usually their decision or preference to be with, say, their dad rather than their mom isn’t respected till they get old enough that a judge finds they can make an intelligent decision. Plus the mom can usually frame the dad for abuse and get the judge to rule in her favor on that basis, giving her all the custody. So that’s an injustice.

(But what’s the alternative ? To require her to present some kind of proof before she can get a court to believe that you raped her and molested your kids ? You misogynistic monster, to question the veracity of a woman’s claim of abuse, and side with her alleged batterer, leaving her in a vulnerable situation.)

Another reason is, I don’t see a lot of evidence that most women are happier after leaving their husbands. Even if they say, « It’s much better now living without my first husband » (pay no mind to that punctuation, it’s just a French quotation mark), who’s to say that if she’d stayed with him another year or five years or however long, the relationship wouldn’t have gotten better.

A lot of times, women are the source of their own problems, so merely switching to a different guy isn’t going to solve those problems. So what’s the point of breaking up the family, just so she can go chew on some grass from the other side ? Also, a lot of times when chicks leave their husband, they become financially dependent on the state. Yeah, maybe with you as breadwinner, your family was going to need government assistance anyway, but if your wife leaves you, that’s now two households that need to be maintained at state expense, unless she gets with some other dude, which she might have trouble doing once she reaches a certain age. It’s more costs for the taxpayer, without an added benefit to anyone ; on the contrary, it probably causes suffering for the kids to be separated from their dad.

Also, who’s to say a chick is going to pick a better dude to be with, the next time around. A lot of chicks leave one abusive dude and get with another abusive dude. At any rate, they made their decision to get with the dude they got with, and have kids with him, so why shouldn’t they just live with the consequences of that. Women will marry guys they know are pedos, for instance, and then get upset when he does pedo stuff. Why should society rush to bail them out of a situation they knowingly got themselves into ?

Some might argue, it's bad for the kids to be around parents who are fighting all the time, so it's better if they just split up. Well, why doesn't he instead just punch her in the face, and then maybe she'll shut up instead of arguing? Or, if he wants to be gentler, then just spank her or take away her privileges or something. If she's gonna act like a petulant child, then she may as well be treated like one.

What I would propose, if we’re going to have prisons, is that the dad be given a suite, so he can move his family in there. So you’d have a bedroom for you and your wife to have some privacy, and your kids (and/or second, third, etc. wives) could sleep in the next room. And during the day, your family can follow you around as you go to chow hall, and eat with you ; and they can tag along to the rec yard and everywhere else ; or if you need to do something without them, you just lock them in your cell so they’ll be safe while you’re gone, and go your way. They can play cards or something while they wait for you to come back. Having some mom-kids bonding time like that maybe is healthier than the current situation, where they have to go to the babysitter or be home by themselves while she’s going out and getting banged by some new dude who wants to replace you.

You know, I was held captive throughout most of my youth ; I had to live in Culpeper, a crappy small town full of rednecks, with crummy schools, instead of Charlottesville, which was much nicer and had better people. I probably could’ve learned a lot more living there and made some good friends. But my dad got a job, essentially his dream job, in Warrenton, and it was expensive living in Charlottesville, so we moved.

Even though I had to live someplace I didn’t like, and even though my parents only halfway got along, I still would prefer that to any scenario of having a stepdad or a single mom, or a single dad. Keeping the family together is of paramount importance, because that’s the foundation for being able to do a lot of other stuff, since you get complementary instruction and whatnot from each of them. Women actually seem to HATE being single moms, since they have to handle all the discipline and whatnot themselves, which they’d prefer to have the dad do.

Looking at the situation from a racial perspective, it’s very important that whites keep their families together, because that’s one of the main advantages we have over other races. Do you want other races to gain supremacy ? Because that’s probably what they’re going to do if whites show weakness. They’re gonna kill us, take our territory, etc. like they’ve done in places like Haiti or South Africa.

One might argue, I’ve gone in a pretty fucked-up direction, even though I had both parents in my life, but it would’ve been even worse without my dad. He gave me at least some sort of compass, even if it was kind of a fucked-up compass by mainstream society’s standards. Your dad gives you a starting point, a foundation you can build upon, or discard if you decide you no longer need it. He also helps you understand your own identity and origins.

I don’t really think humans were meant to break up their families the way we do in this modern world. I think it causes a lot of emotional harm, without any compensating compelling benefit. The breakup of the family interferes with the transmission of familial culture from father to son, which is arguably the whole point of why the state wants to weaken the family by creating provisions for divorce. They want to be supreme, rather than letting patriarchs be supreme.

By the way, speaking of different options for how prisoners can continue living with family – what about cities of refuge ? Why not hole up in the Ecuadorean embassy like Assange, and have your family come hang out too, so you don’t have to be separated ? Except we could give Ecuador a whole city for their embassy (or consulate, as the case might be), so that you could have some more elbow room, and even work opportunities, as factories and so on were built there to provide employment to prisoners. Then, all the political and sexual dissidents can have sanctuary.

I guess if that were the case, though, one could simply go to Ecuador. True, but it’s more convenient to have these little enclaves everywhere. Why not turn Detroit into one of these cities of refuge, so that it’s within commuting distance to your friends, extended family, etc. ?

You know what they say, your family is already doing time with you. So, they may well do time with you in person, amirite. Otherwise, how are you going to fulfill your fantasies of father-daughter sexytime, unless, say, the government just happens to do something crazy like abolish laws against victimless crimes.
 
Last edited:
Top