@adam-l

Back in the day I thought we should have a Mrs Archwinger appreciation day.

Which one? The original frigid, bitchy dike he ended up divorcing? Or his current good one?

As the alchemists showed, unsolvable problems contributed majorly to the advance of human knowledge.

Ah. lol. I think you mean the original Mrs. Archwinger. She was definitely an unsolvable problem!

Men need love but can't find it, because women are incapable of it

They're capable of love, but it's not the idealistic love we feel for them. Theirs is far more conditional. Though to be fair, all love is conditional, except maybe from parents to kids.

Now, capitalism has found that it can squeeze more surplus out of the family

Capitalism itself isn't a conscious entity. But the powers-that-be certainly have done that, and they've also done it in socialist countries. It's not just employers, but also governments. More income earners = more tax revenue.

Typo, you've read Esther Vilar's second book, The polygamous sex, right?

No, but I'll certainly add it to the list of books I need to read eventually.

I wonder if it's on Audible? I have unused credits, and I can listen to books while I do essential tasks far easier and far more frequently than I can actually sit still and read.

The sad fact is that a relationship that is not supposed to last "till death do us part" necessarily turns into an antagonism of who can extract the most out of it.

That's our animalistic nature. As humans, we're capable of overcoming that. Christianity used to be an excellent guide for that, and it still can be if you stay away from any of the institutional churches, as they're all compromised and serve the idol of the Unholy Vagina instead of God.

And women, having a more integrated psychopathic mode, are more equipped for that.

True.

@Typo-MAGAshiv

Back in the day I thought we should have a Mrs Archwinger appreciation day.

As the alchemists showed, unsolvable problems contributed majorly to the advance of human knowledge.

I like how @Kloi sums up the current state of affairs.

What's left out, though, is men's need for love. (Men need love but can't find it, because women are incapable of it, while women find love but can't feel content because they are gluttonous by nature).

Until 100 years ago, a man was supposed to enter marriage with a woman after he made her submitt. The taming of the shrew was a prerequisite.

Now, capitalism has found that it can squeeze more surplus out of the family if it constantly excites the shrew. There's no reprieve for the man. (Typo, you've read Esther Vilar's second book, The polygamous sex, right? It's a bit dated, no evopsych back then, but it's impressive how she is able to grasp the gist of the difference in male/female love using 70s sociological notions and a humanitarian perspective).

The sad fact is that a relationship that is not supposed to last "till death do us part" necessarily turns into an antagonism of who can extract the most out of it. And women, having a more integrated psychopathic mode, are more equipped for that.