[xyzone]

Originally Posted by Nyororin

I don`t recall even once saying marriage was necessary,

Well to a reasonable observer you might at least be inferring so by defending it and by arguing against saying it's not necessary.

You have basically said that, even if it`s not your intention. You have stated that it is natural for women to want jerks, to make that choice for a mate...

I'm saying it translates that way in the context of modern society. To put it another way, I'm saying that what females find attractive is no more based on thought than what males find attractive, and I'm pointing towards the general area. That's one of the main things I wanted to get through.

And that women like this are those who will screw men over if given the chance. It adds up to all women (minus exceptions) ready to screw men over if the opportunity is given to them.

Sure, in the same sense that 'people steal stuff' but not all people are thieves. That's why we lock our doors and our stuff despite not everyone being a thief.

In the case of Latin America - marriage is much more religious, with a large majority of people having very strong beliefs about the consequences not just in this life but in the next. I don`t think that the differences in the legal end of the procedure have that much of an effect.

At any rate, I can assure you that overall the legal system in divorce laws or enforcement of such doesn't particularly cater to women in those lands.

You have presented the divorce rate as evidence. This doesn`t necessarily add up to what you are saying. It doesn`t say that women are screwing over men any chance they get. It doesn`t say how many marriages ended in a huge ball of flames. It also doesn`t tell how many marriages were "messed up at a chapel in Vegas" either. (Nevada doesn`t have the highest divorce rate in the US for nothing...)
Getting married has become easier, as has getting divorced. The attitudes toward both have changed drastically. Unless those attitudes change, I don`t think much would even if "marriage" was abolished.

Even assuming this is 100% accurate, which I don't think it is, that still leaves marriage without a strong list of tangible advantages while having deep, tangible risks.

You are completely welcome to choose not to get married and to advise others against it based on your figures and experience. I don`t think that anyone is going to tell you that you shouldn`t. But people DO take offense at being told they were stupid for agreeing to a marriage. People do take offense at others expressing disgust at their life choices - particularly if those choices are working for them and making them happy.

Well, no matter what you say, somebody somewhere will take offense to it.

And this is different in what way from a woman leading a man on if the end result is one side getting screwed over?

It's different because it's the man doing it.

I very much doubt there are women out there (healthy ones with a normal mental state) who want to have a man screw them over. The result we should be aiming for is a solid relationship founded on trust and love, not one side in control of the other through deception.

Look, I'm not presuming to be the love guru. I'm just stating some general philosophies I consider accurate towards the guys it would make sense. The psychological strategy you're advocating is just an arbitrary choice, same as mine.

Let me put it another way. You're not going to debate or preach idealism against human nature and win. You can try, and you can even arbitrarily select some point of evidence as support for the superiority of your strategy. My strategy is to work with human nature, not against it. I can assure you most guys want to get laid and not be made a fool of in "love". And many of them would live more successfully through the notion that some things don't just matter because somebody says they do, such as the notion that what women want is something that particularly matters. Actions speak louder than words. (And their own love lives are their own love lives)