The Best Man’s Divorce SpeechFullmoon Ancestry
One of the best memories I have is giving the best man’s speech at my best friend’s wedding. I gave that speech 14 years ago and my friend has been married ever since with three great kids. Unfortunately, I have also known men who have lost their property, money, and custody of their children from devastating divorces. With high divorce rates and biased laws, some men are opting out of marriage due to the financial and social risks of divorce. In order to reclaim our communities and our culture, we as white advocates need to address the realities and challenges that men face with divorce.
As much as we might think that divorce is a symptom of modernity, divorce has played a substantial role in European history. After the fall of the Roman Empire, marriage was regulated more by religious authority than by any power of the state. The early Orthodox Church had more lenient views on divorce, granting some divorces on evidence of adultery or abandonment. The Catholic Church viewed marriage as a sacrament instituted by Jesus Christ, and therefore, indissoluble by human action.
While divorce was prohibited in most Catholic areas after the 10th century, annulments were sometimes granted to members of the nobility and ruling classes. Henry the VIII of England is best remembered for his numerous marriages and his ability to get his marriages annulled. His efforts to have his first marriage to Catherine of Aragon annulled in 1533 was a catalyst for the Church of England to break away from the authority of the Pope and the Catholic Church. Between 1643 and 1645 John Milton wrote four pamphlets emphasizing the importance of making divorce a private matter instead of a religious matter. These pamphlets foreshadowed Milton’s views on politics and religion and would tie into the depiction of Adam and Eve in his epic poem Paradise Lost.
The English Reformation’s view on divorce would also impact the broader Enlightenment movement throughout Europe. King Frederick II of Prussia enacted a new divorce law in 1752 which declared marriage to be a private concern. Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II also implemented a similar law throughout his domain to all his non-Catholic subjects. Divorce was also legalized in France after the French Revolution under the Napoleonic Code of 1804. Napoleon would announce his divorce from his first wife Josephine in 1809 and officially divorced her on January 10th, 1810.
Up until the 19th century, English wives were still under the economic and legal control of their husbands. During this time, any divorce had to be granted by Parliament and required a large financial sum. The Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857 made divorce a civil affair of the courts instead of the Church of England. It was still expensive to file for divorce, but this law made it more affordable to the average commoner. Further amendments were made in 1878 where local judges and civil servants could approve separations. By the 1960s, most western societies had some form of legal separation or divorce, apart from Vatican City.
In 1969, Governor Ronald Reagan of California signed the first no-fault divorce bill in the US. This law removed the need for married couples to identify the wrongdoing or actions caused by their spouse to justify a divorce. This law would inadvertently allow a spouse to dissolve a marriage for any reason or no reason at all. By the 1990s, almost every state in the US had some type of no-fault divorce law.
For various reasons, it is always difficult to calculate the actual divorce rate of a country. The most recent US census results from 2018 recorded the marriage and divorce rates from the number of women (age 15 and older) who were married or divorced within the last year per 1000 people. In 2018, there were 16.6 new marriages and 7.7 divorces per 1000 people with a divorce-to-marriage ratio of 0.46 (46 percent). In 2008, there were 17.9 new marriages and 10.5 divorces per 1000 people with a divorce-to-marriage ratio of 0.58 (58 percent). From this information, the divorce rate in the US may have lowered in the last ten years, but so has the marriage rate. To give some European comparisons: Denmark and Finland have a divorce rate of around 55 percent, France and Belgium have a divorce rate of around 54 percent, and Hungary and Slovenia have a divorce rate of around 37 percent.
There are fundamental differences in how divorce impacts men and women. Over 70 percent of divorces are filed and initiated by women. Roughly 75 percent of child custody cases during a divorce give sole custody of the children to the mother. Around 45 percent of the divorces In the US require men to forfeit property. While the average duration of a new marriage in the US is eight years, various states require men to pay lifelong alimony to their ex-wives should they end up getting divorced after ten years.
In a perfect world, every white man would find a compatible white woman to marry and have white children. Unfortunately, we do not live in a perfect world. White people are marrying less and having fewer children. When white people do end up marrying and having children, a large percentage of these families are broken up through divorce. Sadly, most divorce courts in the US favor women over men in regard to finances, property, and child custody. Younger children may have a greater need for their mothers, but pre-teens and teenagers have a greater need for the guidance and leadership of their fathers. Numerous studies have shown that white children in single-mother homes are less likely to succeed in school, careers, and even the chances of getting married in the future.
My parents were married several years before having me. They planned on having children and waited for the right time in their lives and careers to have me. I am who I am because of my parents. I have been told that I take after the characteristics and mannerisms of my father. However, I also think that I inherited many of my hobbies and interests from my mother such as reading, writing, language learning, and music.
I got to know my best friend Adam in high school over music. While my mom took me to my first concerts as a kid, I went to a lot of concerts as a teenager with Adam. He drove us to a Slayer concert and I recognized a group of girls from our high school. I was attracted to one of them, so I asked Adam to come over with me to talk to them. The girl I liked had another friend with her that Adam started talking to. That girl would later become Adam’s wife. 14 years ago, I was asked to be the best man at their wedding and to give a short speech on how I introduced my best friend to his future wife.
I wish I could give a speech to all the white men who have been impacted negatively by divorce or who may never get married due to the risks of divorce. I would tell them that they are not alone. I would tell them that they have every right to be bitter from a devastating divorce or skeptical of ever getting married. Our current culture and societies do not want white people to form families and have white children. There is a good chance that your future wife might leave you, take your property, and take your children, all while making you pay for the legal fees.
I would tell them that I do not have the answers and that things will not change overnight. But what I would tell them is that we as ethnic nationalists and white advocates care about them. We want them to be the best they can be and live the best life imaginable. Marriage and children may not be for everyone and many men in history were unable to reproduce. Nevertheless, our ancestors were able to defy the challenges of their time to form families and have children. Without the sacrifice of our ancestors, we would not be here today. We have a duty. We have a biological imperative. I would remind our brothers that we must do whatever we can to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children. Regardless of the risks. Regardless of the challenges. If my parents did not have me, I might not have introduced Adam to his future wife. Without Adam and his wife getting married, their family and their children might not be here today.
I would end my speech by telling our men that I myself am not perfect. I myself have never been married and I do not have any kids. I too am cautious about marriage and children. Nevertheless, I am happy with my life now and remain positive about the future. I have my own goals, I have a dog, and I have made some great male friends in the Dissident Right that are helping white people reclaim their communities and culture. Many of these friends have also started forming families and having children of their own. Who knows? These friends might introduce me to my future wife just as I did for Adam.
I just hope they give a better speech at my wedding.
If you want to support our work, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every Friday.
Forgotten Roots of the Left: Fichte’s Moral & Political Philosophy, Part III
Happy Valentine’s Day from Counter-Currents!
Religion & Eugenics
The Populist Moment, Chapter 10, Part 1: The Ambiguity of “Communitarianism”
A Woman’s Guide to Identifying Psychopaths, Part 4 Demographics
A Woman’s Guide to Identifying Psychopaths, Part 2 Relationships
The Odinic versus The Freyic: Pagan Morality & Moral Ambiguity in The Northman
“Are You So Severe upon Your Own Sex?” Femininity According to Jane Austen
If one wants to reproduce but do not want to give a woman great power over them, then the possibility of using a surrogacy does exist. It’s expensive but it can be done. One can choose an egg from very attractive white women from all over the world.
A single father using a surrogate egg from some random White woman he’s never met, then having a zygote made in a lab, and then implanting the zygote into another woman (likely non-White, from a third world country) to carry to term is the most cringe thing I’ve ever heard of.
Not to mention, breast feeding is super important for infants, and men can’t breast feed… well, at least not without taking female hormones. So, you’d need to hire a wet nurse (look it up on Wikipedia, it was apparently a thing in the old days if you were rich), to feed the baby.
At that point, you’re up to three different women to create one child.
Not to mention, when the kid eventually learns about the circumstances surrounding his conception, there’s a high degree it’ll psychologically mess him up, and he’ll get made fun of in school.
The whole “muh surrogate child creation” / “artificial womb technology” is literally a giant meme created by Andrew Anglin, a character known for his hyperbole and sarcasm. Nobody should actually be taking his articles totally seriously.
I’m only pointing this out because, I’m the Internet, it’s impossible to differentiate serious people who propose seriously bad / cringe ideas from those who are merely trolling for teh lulz
Well I think it clearly beats not having any children at all.
I would disagree with that. You get at least the potential for a normal child if you can satisfy these things: normal sex; normal birth; normal feeding and care of the baby. With advanced technology, something is missing. No, it’s better to help others raise their properly produced children (if you are inclined to do so) than to break so many laws of nature in this most important matter.
With the normalization of technological reproduction, we will end up with a world of cyborgs. Sex-change operations & procedures, which were rare at one time – who’d ever have thought they would be both legalized and encouraged, even among teenagers and children? Artificial reproduction is next. Soon enough, ordinary conception will be banned. Didn’t they make a film about this?
Enjoy the Kali Yuga.
One of the most traditional ways to meet a partner is through dance. For hundreds of years dancing was a mandatory part of a gentleman’s education, but that declined after WWII.
Today dance classes often have a shortage of men. So taking such classes can be a great opportunity to meet women, learn to dance and some social skills.
For most traditionalists ballroom dance would be the natural choice. But also folk dances and more modern dances can work as well.
The more people who speak out in their own voice on these issues the better.
The herd wakes up one at a time unfortunately. At least until a critical mass is reached.
Thank for the article. Some good information there.
Just a comment:
“King Frederick II of Prussia enacted a new divorce law in 1752 which declared marriage to be a private concern.”
Which is partially wrong, of course.
Marriage ending in a divorce is not a private issue. It never was. The cost for the rest of the society is very high. Anything from more poverty (needing government support) and more people liable to commit crime makes it a burden for the rest of us.
In my opinion marriage should give you a high status (like being the only group allowed to vote), it should require a rigorous regime before you are allowed to enter it, and a divorce should take all the status/rights away.
Marriage is registration of one particular type of contract with the government. Dissolution of the contract must therefore be a government matter as well. Yes, marriage is supposed to be “personal and private” but the reality is that there is a public, legal angle. I guess that is because of the matter of children and property.
I sometimes wonder if things would be improved or much deteriorated if marriage was purely personal and private. Why, even shacking up more than a certain number of years = marriage. LOL. You can’t escape government interference.
‘numerous studies have shown that white children in single-mother homes are less likely to succeed in school, careers, and even the chances of getting married in the future’
This is correlation, not causation. You have to account for behavioural genetic confounds. The traditionalist orientation of the right makes it almost as oblivious to this as the left.
All behavioural traits are partly genetically heritable. The influence of shared environment (including parenting) on adult outcomes is real but relatively small. IQ, for example, is 80% genetically heritable. The rest is mostly non-shared environment (including in utero events, random chance etc)
The group ‘single mothers’ contains a higher proportion of people with high impulsivity, low IQ, high risk-taking, alcoholism, drug addictions, low conscientiousness, aggression etc. The fathers of the group ‘children of single mothers’ contains a higher proportion of men with the exact same problems. Because recidivist criminal men don’t tend to partner up with highly conservative, hard-working religious women and vice versa.
What this means is that the children of that group are more likely than ‘children of still-married parents’ to also turn out to have those traits. And this would be the case even if they had been adopted at birth. Those traits are causal in school failure, lower incomes, likelihood of incarceration, inability to hold down a job, failure to sustain healthy relationships etc. Lower average IQ alone predicts most of those.
In other words, genetics are most of the cause of these well-known associations. Parenting, including the absence of a father, probably plays a role, but firstly, it’s a smaller role than genetics and secondly, we don’t know how large it is yet because leftist social scientists refuse to account for genetic confounding and conservatives are ideologically committed to the importance of the traditional family and parenting style.
numerous studies have shown that white children in single-mother homes are less likely to succeed in school, careers, and even the chances of getting married in the future’
Indeed. In my experience, women are most likely to file for divorce when they have daughters. They may be willing to put up with being treated like garbage, but they are not willing to put up with being treated like garbage in front of their daughters, who they know will get the impression that degrading treatment of women is normal and acceptable.
This article is pointless fearmongering. The correlates of divorce are well-known, and it is easy to marry in a way that is very low risk.
Marry a college-educated woman in her mid-twenties who has never been married and you are overwhelmingly likely to remain married for the long haul.
Inb4 anyone says that hardly any college-educated women are interested in marriage, sorry but no. Educated women are also more likely to get married in the first place.
So what is a working-class man supposed to do?
He can start by not assuming that college-educated women aren’t interested in him. More and more women are marrying men who have less education than they do, and it works out just fine.
It would also be helpful to refrain from such marriage-busting behaviors as gambling, substance abuse, and adultery. Not marrying a teenager and being nice to your wife would also be advisable.
Beyond that, I would have to know more about the causes of divorce in order to answer. Of this I am certain: “female hypergamy” has nothing to do with it. If anything, women are loathe to admit they have made a mistake and move on due to the sunk costs fallacy. It’s human nature.
Much of the concern about divorce (she gets half “his” property) assumes that the man is not working class, but well-off. Dissident right men make unreasonable demands for certainty in an uncertain world, while insisting that women learn to live with no security in their relationship. Indeed, I’m not really sure that they think marriage should be binding at all on men, for if there are no consequences for breach, there is no contract.
Moreover, they want a traditional marriage without the responsibility that goes along with that. If you marry a “career woman,” you’re less likely to wind up paying alimony. On the other hand, you don’t get the dependent spouse and the more relaxed, single-income lifestyle you claim to want.
Manosphere marriage-bashers act like spoiled, petulant children throwing a temper tantrum if they don’t get everything, and I ean everything, just their way.
Most importantly, just like any other issues in our societies , it happens with propaganda .
Every other white couple in movies I watch always , always have some kind of issues .
Breakup,death,fighting, adultery, cheating,lesbianism ,e.t.c is what is always portrayed
Sex between a white couple is always portrayed in a negative way compared to lesbian relationships and interracial relationships .
The Jew – Media/Porn/Social Media is entirely responsible for this crisis
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Edit your comment