A Tribute TO: www.the-spearhead.com

I want to recommend an outstanding site to my readers!




This site has some of the most truly exemplary and intelligent thinkers and writers in the Men's Rights Movement!

http://www.the-spearhead.com/


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outstanding Article: http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/01/14/john-bagot-glubb/


Lieutenant-General Sir John Bagot Glubb KCB, CMG, DSO, OBE, MC better known as Glubb Pasha (born 16 April 1897, Preston, Lancashire – died 17 March 1986, Mayfield, Sussex), was a British soldier best known for leading and training Transjordan's Arab Legion 1939-1956 as its commanding general. During World War I, he served in France.

A soldier for much of his life, John Glubb was also a historian who wrote a number of books on Middle East and Arab history, including The Life and Times of Muhammad. But it is his prescient book “The Fate of Empires,” that is quite interesting, excerpt below...



“An increase in the influence of women in public life has often been associated with national decline. The later Romans complained that, although Rome ruled the world, women ruled Rome. In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab empire, the women demanding admission to the professions hitherto monopolized by men. “What,” wrote the contemporary historian, Ibn Bessam, “have the professions of clerk, tax collector or preacher to do with women? These occupations have always been limited to men alone.” Many women practiced law, while others obtained positions as university professors. There was an agitation for the appointment of female judges, which, however, does not appear to have succeeded. Soon after this period, government and public order collapsed, and foreign invaders overran the country. The resulting increase in confusion and violence made it unsafe for women to move unescorted in the streets, with the result that this feminist movement collapsed. The disorders following the military take-over in 861, and the loss of the empire, had played havoc with the economy. At such a moment, it might have been expected that everyone would redouble their efforts to save the country from bankruptcy, but nothing of the kind occurred. Instead at this moment of declining trade and financial stringency, the people of Baghdad introduced a five day week.” -Sir John Bagot Glubb

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here gentlemen in correlation with an unrelated source is a glimpse into the decline of Rome you may find relevant to our time!!!

Upon the dissolution of the Roman family, falling birth rates, female sexuality moving from private and monogamous to public and promiscuous the Roman general, statesman, and censor Quintus Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus states in 131 B.C....

"If we could survive without a wife, citizens of Rome, all of us would do without that nuisance.” So proclaimed the Roman general, statesman, and censor.

Still, he went on to plead, falling birthrates required that Roman men fulfill their duty to reproduce, no matter how irritating Roman women might have become.

"Since nature has so decreed that we cannot manage comfortably with them, nor live in any way without them, we must plan for our lasting preservation rather than for our temporary pleasure."




Wow, our birth rate in the U.S. is barely sustaining replacement levels.

So Quintus said the above in 131 B.C... It seems The Roman family really declined in the final century of the Republic--that is, the period from 146 BCE to 49 BCE when Julius Caesar was proclaimed sole dictator.

During the last century of the Roman Republic, no-fault divorce was introduced.

Following the complete end of Manus Marriage in the 1st century BC (100-1 B.C) and the emergence of Free Marriage Divorce, divorced ceased needing any reason, (No Fault Divorce). Reasons for any divorce became irrelevant.

Hmmmm well I know with the decline of the family comes the decline of a civilization and empires. Looking more into no-fault divorce: "No-fault divorce was pioneered by the Bolsheviks following the Russian Revolution of 1917" Hmmm so no fault divorce was introduced during the major transition to Communism... Interesting that both were implemented during the last days of the Roman Republic and during the Communist Revolution. I think it is time we make divorce equitable for both the husband and the wife!

Currently, in my country The United States it is the wife that maintains sole power in marriage. Marriage is the lawful commitment from a man to a woman. Children are the property of the woman and the husband is subject to forced labor under penalty of prison to support her financial needs and that of his estranged children in the event of divorce. The wife maintains the sole option of "choice" to work or stay home and the man the sole obligation to support her both in and out of marriage. We are the first civilization that I know of to revoke all male rights within the marriage contract and thus the contract and obligations in divorce.

If history is any lesson my country will continue to make "change" we won't want to believe in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-fault_divorce

There has been a substantial movement in favor of the revival of fault in the context of divorce in the United States.[15]

Members of the fathers' rights movement state that laws establishing no-fault divorce did not stop at removing the requirement that grounds be cited for a divorce, so as to allow for divorce by "mutual consent"; they also allow either spouse to end the marriage without any agreement or fault by the other.[16] They state that no-fault divorce should be referred to as unilateral divorce.[17]

Members of the fathers' rights movement state that laws establishing no-fault divorce can be seen as one of the boldest social experiments in modern history that have effectively ended marriage as a legal contract.[13] They also state that it is not possible to form a binding agreement to create a family, adding that government officials can, at the request of one spouse, end a marriage over the objection of the other.[13]

They add that no-fault divorce has left fathers with no protection against what they describe as the confiscation of their children.[18]

Members of the fathers' rights movement propose "reasonable limits" on no-fault divorce where children are involved.[19] Other commentators on no-fault divorce propose an amendent to no-fault divorce laws to create a (rebuttable) presumption of custody of any minor children for the respondent [who is innocent or does not wish to divorce] regardless of gender.

Tim O'Brien, a proponent of the proposed amendment and a Libertarian, predicts that the proposed amendment would result in a plummeting divorce rate, and would reduce the negative consequences of divorce for children.[20]

Columnist Melanie Phillips wrote that "the divorce laws...were reformed by unrepresentative groups with very particular agendas of their own and which were not in step with public opinion."[13]

Hmmmm, I DON'T LIKE THIS PART.."Members of the fathers' rights movement state that laws establishing no-fault divorce can be seen as one of the boldest social experiments in modern history" The truth is that No fault divorce has been implemented before in history and we should look at the results......



NOVASEEKER HAS SOME GREAT POINTS! EXCERPT BELOW:
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/12/21/patriarchy-works-ii/

"Indeed, Jack. There is no historical precedent for a non-patriarchal society thriving in the long-term.

However, this does appear to be a cycle in the course of human history. Oxford anthropologist J.D. Unwin penned a book at the beginning of the 20th century titled “Sex and Culture” which explains this dynamic fairly well. Following a rather exhaustive survey of human cultures around the world, Unwin concluded that societies which restrain female sexuality tend to thrive, but eventually, as a result of their prosperity and success, tend to erode these restraints, due to women demanding this and men acquiescing. In other words, the societies thrive, and this gives rise to demands from women to participate in the success and prosperity, and men generally acquiesce (at least the powerful ones do) at some stage — and that acquiescence pretty much always takes the form of relaxing the strictures of marriage and allowing women to exist “independently” from men — sexually and otherwise. The history here is revealing and, in the broader world, largely unknown. For example, very few people are aware that ancient Babylon, prior to its collapse, instituted civil reforms to family law such as no-fault divorce and child support. Or that Sparta, which is widely known for its military tradition, had liberated women to such a degree that they ran the Spartan economy, and as a result had below replacement rate birth rates, leading to a collapse, eventually, to surrounding patriarchal states. Or that marriage in late Rome had declined so precipitously that the Empire tried to encourage men to marry by instituting a bachelor tax (to no avail, mind you, because men did not *need* to marry due to the relatively freely available sex after women were “liberated”)."