Speaker A
A single woman is rock bottom. Don't get involved with a single woman. Okay, it's not just rock bottom, it's complete and utter crap. That's it, don't get involved with a single woman.
A critical analysis of single motherhood and divorce, focusing on societal impacts and family dynamics from a controversial male perspective.
Key Takeaways
- Single motherhood is portrayed as detrimental to men, children, and society.
- Divorce reasons cited by women are often exaggerated or fabricated.
- Alimony demands conflict with claims of female independence.
- Children’s welfare is compromised by unstable family and partner dynamics.
- Legal and social reforms are needed to prioritize fathers and protect children.
What the video covers
- The video argues that single women post-divorce represent a low social status and warns men against involvement with them.
- It critiques the legitimacy of divorce reasons often cited by women, portraying them as fabricated to justify negative behaviors.
- The speaker discusses the negative transformation of men during marriage and the paradox of women divorcing good men for poor ones.
- Alimony is portrayed as a contradictory issue where supposedly strong single mothers still demand financial support.
- The video highlights the problematic introduction of new male partners into children’s lives and the impact on family dynamics.
- It condemns the use of children as tools or extensions of single mothers’ desires, ignoring their individuality.
- The speaker praises single fathers and argues children should primarily live with their fathers for better stability.
- There is a strong critique of societal and legal systems that favor single mothers and marginalize fathers.
- The video suggests that single motherhood contributes to societal decay by producing 'weak men' and destabilizing family units.
- It calls for a restructuring of family law, advocating for fathers’ rights and limiting women’s claims on property and support.
Chapters
- 00:00Introduction: Single Women and Social Status
- 01:53Divorce Reasons and Their Legitimacy
- 03:29Alimony and Financial Contradictions
- 05:05Impact of New Partners on Children
- 06:28Motherhood and Conceit
- 08:08Children’s Rights and Custody Issues
- 11:18Single Fatherhood and Societal Implications
- 12:21Call for Legal and Social Reform
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
Don't get involved with a single woman. Something like that. A single woman is rock bottom, and anyone who gets involved with her isn't just some low-ranking devil. They're complete losers. You shouldn't even sit at the same table with them, let alone shake hands with
Speaker A
them. Let me explain to you right now why a single woman is rock bottom. Well, first and foremost, she got divorced for trumped-up reasons. That is, she's trying to deceive society, she's trying to legitimize her condition, her
Speaker A
permanent state of whoredom, debauchery, debauchery, and all sorts of perverse deviations, while destroying the man's status in the process. Now think about it. They always marry good men, but for some reason, they divorce the most complete jerks. Have you ever
Speaker A
considered what they do to men over the course of 5-7 years, maybe more or less, of marriage? How a wonderful man turns into a living horror? And they're trying so hard to legitimize this far-fetched pretext in society. And the
Speaker A
most interesting thing is, as a blogger, I've been in this field for almost 5 years now, I've seen dozens, hundreds of lawsuits. And, you know, they're all the same: drank, beat, didn't love, didn't develop, didn't earn money. He
Speaker A
even showered his mother with a golden shower somewhere, and that's it. He backed his neighbor, the neighbor the children resembled, and sometimes punched him in the face. Basically, the pretext is completely far-fetched, but they think we should all believe it.
Speaker A
And you know, the most interesting concept for them is "normal." Morality, in principle, doesn't exist. Look, I'll give you two examples. She married a normal man. In the marriage, he started drinking, beating, cheating, not earning money, sitting on the couch,
Speaker A
not developing. Poor woman. Poor woman, when a man gets married, forgive me, although many do, when a man gets married, he sort of watches himself, well, what he marries, who he marries.
Speaker A
And if suddenly she cheats on him, has children not from him, goes to the neighbor or some homeless guy on the heating main, to stand on all fours somewhere in the bushes, then it's his own fault. His own fault. He should
Speaker A
have looked at who he was actually dragging to the Legislative Assembly. It's not her fault. She didn't have to look at who she was dragging to the Legislative Assembly with. Paradox. And the bottom isn't even for alimony, which always seems small to them, which
Speaker A
they never have enough for, which they run after like beggars, all the while claiming to be strong and independent.
Speaker A
Let's use logic again. She's strong, she's independent, she has everything, she can do it all herself, but she vitally needs those 8,000 or 10,000 elements, because without them, she'll probably perish. There's nothing. Or the lover she drags to the kids has
Speaker A
nothing to drink, I don't know what he's called, fufiriks, boyarka, the cheapest of the 1.5-liter bottles, that Sanin beer that sells for 70 rubles on sale at some supermarket. Think about it, what a double bottom. Such alternative logic. That is, she's
Speaker A
strong, but give her alimony. Strong people usually don't ask or demand or run after alimony like beggars. And what's most interesting is that there's no control over this alimony at all.
Speaker A
It's rock bottom not even because she's worried about this loser she drags to the kids; we'll talk about that later.
Speaker A
Who's she dragging to the kids? But it's not because she'll walk all over him and kick him out somewhere to live on a doormat next to cockroaches. No, she's doing it right here. I approve of it here. I mean, when she brings him in
Speaker A
and starts to take him for granted, he takes a second, third, eighth job, and gives all the money to the family, because, well, he's real. I mean, she told him her husband was a piece of shit, and that kind of spurred him on.
Speaker A
This bottle of female approval, which he wants to fall right on. Yes. Fall so hard that it gets all the way to his guts, all the way to his kidneys, I don't know, maybe even to the KDK. And
Speaker A
the most important thing is, well, they're doing the right thing here, but what they're doing around the kids is rock bottom. Total rock bottom. Here, we have absolutely no right to stage such, how can I say, insinuations, performances, or social games in
Speaker A
apartments where underage girls and boys live. Another positive aspect of single parenting. Logically, it should be a very good and positive aspect. Now I'm going to praise single parenting.
Speaker A
You know, there are many cases where some jerk finds a woman with children and says, "It doesn't matter what happened before me, the important thing is who will come after me?" Well, it's logical to raise his children. So, he
Speaker A
finds this woman and lives with her. Naturally, this woman gets tired of him much faster than the first one before him. She dumps him. He doesn't want to dump her because he's already invested a lot there—maybe he paid off her
Speaker A
mortgage, maybe he even married her and adopted the children. And it's like, at that moment, when she needs to dump him, to continue her idle lifestyle, this dance on the bones of the institution of the modern family—that is, well,
Speaker A
standing on all fours in a club—and when she needs to dump him, she suddenly, or rather, not she, but her children, suddenly remembers that this guy was playing doctor with them. And he's going to prison under Article 130,
Speaker A
to trample the prison system. And they're like, oh, they'll give him a good reception there. Oh, they'll explain to him why the hell there are holes in bread and what this shit is.
Speaker A
In short, they're doing absolutely the right thing here, too. That is, everyone who comes to live in the KRSP should leave it exactly like that.
Speaker A
They're doing absolutely the right thing here, it's like. I agree with you on that. But the very bottom, the hardest bottom, is conceit, firstly, and the fact that they constantly try to hide behind the womb, well, that is,
Speaker A
to hide behind motherhood. They're always poor, they're always destitute, always, um, orphaned, wretched, treated badly by life, humiliated by society, downtrodden by men. And they need help, they need money, like you can't ask anything of them, even when they're
Speaker A
just being downright annoying. Well, for example, they sell meetings with children, meetings between a father and his children. That's true, that does happen. But there's another issue here, conceit. Let's talk about this. I mean, imagine this situation. You're sitting
Speaker A
at home, and some neighbor, or maybe even a neighbor woman, comes over and starts spouting this bullshit. He says, "That's it, you're quitting tomorrow. I don't like that you work where you work. I want you to work where I want you
Speaker A
to work." And it's not even discussed, it's not even questioned. Well, it's natural for any normal, sane person, upon hearing such nonsense, to say, "Fuck you," and stop communicating. Now imagine you're a child. Imagine you're 6-8 years old, whatever. You can't
Speaker A
defend yourself yet. You're not responsible for yourself. And, basically, no one will even listen to you in court if you want something. But, according to single mothers, children want the same things they want. This is also a certain interesting mental game.
Speaker A
They don't perceive their children as individuals, not as people. They perceive them as, you know, an appendix that's come loose and is running around somewhere nearby, sometimes making some noise. In other words, her desires are his desires, and they extrapolate their
Speaker A
desires to their children. That is, when a drunken brat is screwing some idiot, a douchebag, a drug addict next door—at best, the child listens to all this and is simply terrified—she thinks the child isn't terrified. She thinks he's just as happy as she is,
Speaker A
because they're inextricably linked. But that's not the point. Now imagine you'
Speaker A
out (it's good that, well, if he doesn't have open tuberculosis)—says, "Now he'll be living with us." And it's like now you have to call your dad " daddy," and you love your daddy, you call him daddy, you want to live with
Speaker A
your daddy, but you can't live with your daddy. You need to live with that jerk your mother dragged in. I mean, a wonderful man. That's what they're trying to say. Look again at their logic, how they simply ruin men. She
Speaker A
says everyone's wonderful, she marries a gorgeous, perfect man, but she always ends up with a piece of crap in the end . I mean, well, well, that's not how it works. But it's not like all men are crap. So, either you have to do
Speaker A
something about your pants, or you have to decide on the cross somehow. Because it's completely beyond any rational or unsound logic, even the most rudimentary kind of logic. Why do I say : nonsense, a jerk, a lowlife, in short
Speaker A
, a drug addict, a long-term addict, some kind of marginal, some kind of alcoholic, a homeless guy with a heating main, who once, like, turned on a man there, left his woman, like, an apartment, so she could take men there
Speaker A
normally, when he himself left there, he drank, I don’t know, shot up, with the homeless people there, and then found a new one who promised something, she believed him, I don’t know, for some reason. So look, imagine this
Speaker A
situation. There’s a normal man, an ordinary one, like, 30, 35 years old, yeah. He has money, he has a job, a car , he has a hobby, no bad habits, he has , like, a financial cushion, he even
Speaker A
invests something somewhere, he has some interests, he has the opportunity to travel. And basically, he's not sitting still, he's actively living, developing well, he's doing great, he has hobbies, he's got everything, in short, he's having a blast. It's pure
Speaker A
feng shui. And she, this divorced woman who's already ruined one marriage, thinks that this is the kind of man she should have. And they're actually looking for men without children. I mean, men with no relationship experience, no experience of
Speaker A
relationships where children are born, no experience of living together that projects onto children and everyday life. You see, the point? So, ah, and a man like the one I described, he'll find himself a normal woman. He'll find himself a normal woman, even if he's
Speaker A
out of a marriage, even if he has alimony and the kids have been taken away from him, they don't let him see them, he'll find himself a normal woman there. What does he need a dog for, what I just described? These mothers,
Speaker A
grandmothers, girlfriends, this constant devaluation, these children who are impossible to raise, you don't even want to be with them. And you risk leaving with 130 happy. Why would a normal man need this? A normal man doesn't really need it. Do you
Speaker A
understand the point? I'm just saying that even if he has children, it shouldn't bother anyone. A man has a basic right to a virgin if he wants to marry. If she's not a virgin, remember that joke from the internet, supposedly
Speaker A
Orthodox, like a peasant. A virgin, I sing in a church choir, three children from different husbands. A virgin, okay . A man has an absolute right to a virgin. If she's not a virgin, then goodbye. It's his basic right, a
Speaker A
natural right. And those low-class, low-ranking, socially marginalized, lowlifes, the scum, they're supposed to do whatever they want there. As for those single mothers, well, there are children there, and the children didn't choose whether their mothers would get divorced or not. You see, that's the
Speaker A
point? That's the problem. So, who goes to those single mothers 'houses to live ? Normal people definitely won't go there. Those who go there are the one-eyed, the sepsis-ridden, the tuberculosis-ridden, the strange venereal diseases, those convicts from the zone, the alcoholics, the
Speaker A
marginalized, those criminals who've been in prison for a while. Well, not criminals, there's no trace of crime there. Someone stole a basin from a neighbor's bathhouse and went off to live in the zone, as it were. And all
Speaker A
that scum who can't find a place to settle down in life go to the single mothers' houses. Simply because the single woman has a broken compass. That is, she doesn't notice normal men, whether high-ranking or highly pretentious. Well, especially after the
Speaker A
divorce, she doesn't notice them. She only notices these deviant, marginalized types who spit over her or at her, or put out their cigarettes on her. Simply because she grew up in this rather marginal environment, where she was, uh, deflowered in the entryway
Speaker A
behind the trash can, basically, behind the garages. She was taken by all sorts of people when she was a teenager. Then she found some idiot, said she only had one, got married, then her wet nurse dragged her off on another adventure,
Speaker A
and that's it. And the problem is that when this social filth, these completely abnormal men, these unshakable men in decent society, come after these women. The problem is that there are children involved. That's why I really believe that children should
Speaker A
be left with their fathers after the court hearing. Absolutely after the divorce. Mothers get child support, and let them do what they want, with whomever they want, however they want.
Speaker A
But our situation is a little different . We have a matriarchy, you see? Here, a woman has more rights than any other woman, if that woman is old. So, the women's pit is an untouchable pit.
Speaker A
Children are boiling in this pit. That's the problem. That's the main problem. You see? That's the main complaint: they deliberately push, drag , simply draw children into this situation, supposedly to legitimize it.
Speaker A
And if legitimization doesn't work— well, if she really is a complete alcoholic, a street slut, you know, then she needs a child to cover up her motherhood. That is, children, in principle, are not considered individuals. I already explained, they
Speaker A
are preserves for old age. Moreover, if it's a boy, he will be a broken boy, prolactin-ridden, who can go somewhere to do something, earn money, bring it to her later when she gets old, or simply...Well, but again about money,
Speaker A
right? Child support is a completely different matter. It can't be controlled in any way, although there are opportunities. But no one controls the elements. And since, well, they spend it, they drink it away, they spend it on alcoholics, on these
Speaker A
marginalized people, they spend it on some kind of incomprehensible get-togethers, junk food, they spend it on drugs. And since we have the presumption of innocence, yes, let them prove to me with documents and receipts that they don't spend it on all this
Speaker A
crap. Let them prove to me that they don't sell meetings between fathers and children. So they don't manipulate children to expand their pennies for a strong, independent woman who already has everything. So let them prove it, no problem. I'm ready to take my words
Speaker A
back, as they say. But if they prove it , ladies, you have every opportunity to prove it. And like, well, come on, come on, prove it, prove to Mdshnik that he's completely wrong. And no mother, no granny, no aunt, no Klavka
Speaker A
Pomidorikha from the next building has the right to decide for a child who they'll live with, how they'll live there, who won't be there, how some piss-stained devil will show up. A child should live with their father.
Speaker A
That's 100%. Only with their father. And if the father allows it, if the father decides that the mother won't transmit syphilis to the child through everyday contact, then he can let them interact. Otherwise, there's no other option. No options. She has to pass the
Speaker A
test. She has to take the test every time. A quick test for all the venereal crap, for drugs, for alcohol, so she can talk to the kids, because we see what's going on. We see what's happening in Russia. We'll just open it
Speaker A
up right now, I'm not joking. Any search engine, any search engine you like, open it up and type in one word: "stepfather." And you guys will be shocked by what you read there. Just " stepfather." But if you add any words,
Speaker A
something like "cut out" or "raped," that is, "seduced" somewhere, it will be complete trash. And it's really the stepfather who does this. And how does the stepfather appear next to the child ? The child probably finds him himself
Speaker A
in kindergarten, right? He brings him to his mother and says, "Mom, look at this guy, he'll be a good dad for me." No, sorry, that's not quite how it works. So, what's she doing when she decides that some random stranger, not
Speaker A
the father, will live with the child? She's harming the child. I mean, statistically speaking, we have single motherhood, the main danger that can only exist for a child under seven, before they go to school, is single motherhood. Open any publication by any
Speaker A
psychologist. Open anything you want, everyone's writing about it, but it's like a matriarchy. It's not just in our world; in our country, things aren't as dire as they are in Norway or Spain.
Speaker A
It's still possible to live here, you see? We don't yet have mandatory lifelong payments for the support of a woman, for the support of her new ones, so that at least...Because look, here's the thing. It's 26 now, there's a
Speaker A
crisis everywhere, inflation, and gasoline, all this crap, it all just piled up at once, you know? And money has gotten worse, and there's less money, and everything's just getting sadder. And now the Russian-speaking community needs to be motivated. Not
Speaker A
just motivated by the state, but also motivated by money. If before they had to somehow motivate those prisoners, those one-eyed ex-cons, those half-assed ones—they had to be motivated: buy them beer, register them in that apartment you're still paying
Speaker A
the mortgage on—then now they especially need to motivate them, because, firstly, there aren't many of them left, yes, they've all been snatched up, dragged off somewhere, and those who remain aren't fools anymore.
Speaker A
That is, and for all of this, the ex-husband pays for everything. You've thought about this too and understand.
Speaker A
That is, to drag a deer into a woman's pit, you need more resources. But where can you get these resources if the woman's pit itself doesn't produce resources? Well, there you go, the ex-husband will pay for everything. The
Speaker A
children's father, if he really is the father—yes, unless he's a Turk, an entertainer, or a neighbor—that is, if it's the man listed on the children's birth certificates, he'll pay for everything, because, well, a fool pays twice, a stingy man pays
Speaker A
thrice, and always a loser. And the average man, a normal guy, who doesn't drink, doesn't smoke, and doesn't have any bad habits, and doesn't beat up his neighbors or his wife—well, the state pimp has labeled him a loser. Well,
Speaker A
congratulations, you'll get your money's worth. Basically, a single mother sets a negative example for her children, and that's terrible. It's terrible that she sets a broken example of family from the start. I condemn it, bad as hell. And I condemn it not only
Speaker A
as a man, as an estranged father. I condemn it as a citizen, because family is the foundation of the state. And when you're going through this whole mess, dragging some PDF file, some alcoholic, some drug addict to the
Speaker A
child—it's the destruction of the state at its core—think about it. Children should be left only with the fathers, and alimony for the women. Let them do whatever they want. No apartments, no jointly acquired property, nothing. In general, the
Speaker A
divorce procedure shouldn't be complicated, let alone made more complicated. It should be designed so that it's not just disadvantageous for women to get divorced, that's also an infringement of their rights. Divorce should be conducted in a way that's
Speaker A
fair. And fair in our world is like a woman doing nothing, and a man working three jobs. So, you have to give her half and then, I mean, pay alimony for 30 years on top of that. And then you
Speaker A
have to pay extra for visits with the children. I've been through all this, guys. We've all been through this, I'm not the only one. We all know this.
Speaker A
Great. It all works. In short, if we don't do something now, if we don't start blaming single mothers (SMPs) with renewed vigor—with tripled energy, with maximum enthusiasm—not as individual women, but as individual women within this social imbalance, this socially destructive phenomenon,
Speaker A
then in 15 years, we're at risk. And what are we risking? We, men, essentially, aren't at risk. We can easily move somewhere, if the need arises, if we really need to. And not because things will get bad somewhere
Speaker A
or we'll need to hide from some government pimp—no, everything will be much simpler. Migrants will come and literally start clearing out the territory, because, well, single mothers (SMPs) breed weak men, men whom they, who were once strong, break down
Speaker A
so that it will be easier to extract resources from them. To sum it up, the single mother is an enemy, not a state, but an enemy of humanity, an enemy of our future, because we will stop reproducing this way. These broken
Speaker A
people, these broken children, will never create normal working families. Do you understand? And the family is the foundation of the state first and foremost, and then of society. That is, we won't even turn into some kind of, you know, multi-race, like the
Speaker A
globalists want to create here, not black, not white, but brown-eyed. We won't even turn into that, because those kids who take our place, yes, they will come into a comfort zone. And the comfort zone, which the single mother is pretty much shitting on, will
Speaker A
do the same to them. Well, if not today , then tomorrow, if not tomorrow, then in a generation. That's it. If we don't stop this trend now, humanity will die out. Like, comment, subscribe to the channel. We're doing really important
Speaker A
things, we're doing really necessary things, especially now. But really, I'll let you in on a secret: now is a great time. Right now, thanks to the current situation, we, men, leaders of this life, patriots of our country, and
Speaker A
humanity as a whole, have a wonderful window of opportunity opening up in front of us, in which we can truly talk this society into starting to live properly. Well, at least if they don't want to live like normal people, then
Speaker A
at least live like the Bible says. And if they don't want to live like the Bible says, then at least live like some, I don't know, secular humanism textbook. Basically, it's time to stop drinking, hanging out, and screwing
Speaker A
everyone. And we need to start thinking about our children's future, because it's not like it's coming tomorrow. It already happened yesterday, and, unfortunately, we've wasted three waves of feminism. To support me, like, comment, and subscribe. And for those
Speaker A
who really want to participate, there's a link on boost. Subscribe. A regular subscription helps us produce content faster, more, and better, oddly enough.
Speaker A
Let's change the situation together and at least cleanse our great, wonderful, beloved country of this femotriarchal crap. It's only going to get worse.
Speaker A
Well, more interesting, that is.
Topics:single motherhooddivorcealimonyfamily lawfather's rightschild custodysocial critiquemen's rightsfamily dynamicsparenting
