 and the list keeps growing as her market value plummets. This is going to play out in a social level. This is going to affect our society. The other one is a woman who exercises her sexual freedoms in a manner, in a wanton way, who's able to ride the cock carousel in her 20s and early 30s who all of a sudden decides to get off and realize after paying 15 years of the phallus field that she's worn out, used up, and men don't find her available. Not only that, she actually has an unrealistic appraisal of her sexual market value. A woman who's young, beautiful, and very sexual can actually hit above her weight class. And by that I mean to be able to be sexually involved with a man who will exchange a relationship for commitment for sex on a temporary basis to get sex, to have access to her at a later time in which she won't be able to get because men won't put up with her behavior. In a way, the same guy is now moving on to younger women. She's been replaced. And again, you have her slipping into this new age Spincerdom syndrome. Ultimately, the last one I want to bring up very briefly is the fact that women have privileges because of the youth vibrance and the value of sexuality in our society. Men have it a different way. We age differently. Our status rises later. Do not think just because women have sexual privilege and act on it on marrying up and society values it and they can throw that out in the mainstream and be okay with it that you can do the same when you exercise male privilege. Your male privilege is to get the highest quality woman you can at the best possible time in your life and typically it's going to be when you're older. Do not think you won't be shamed when you act on it. Older men being sexually active with, marrying, and taking up sexual time with younger, vibrant women who are younger, fitter, hotter, and free of the social baggage of women his age. Do not think that's socially acceptable. If you doubt me, ask your mother. Alright, moving on from culture, we also fall into politics and this is where we get into the law of the land and this is when politics lives downstream of culture. Culture will guide our laws and if our culture was feminine based, awarded women special privileges and removed accountability from it. What do you think our laws are doing? By the way, this is where men truly get hurt. It's not just that you're going to take a financial hit. It's that your sense of a man as being able to provide is actually under attack. You've been found to be unsuitable. And because the marriage is truly only valuable in an economic sense, men are particularly hard hit by it. Both on a psychological, emotional level and a financial level. And because that we can see the astronomical increase in depression rates. We also see the astronomical rise in suicides. You don't see that correlating with women as emotionally distraught as they may be. And so one of the things that we can look at as far as culture and what our politics and the laws are telling us is not just that marriages are disposable, and they are. They're readily disposable. The running joke with lawyers is divorce is worth it because it's so valuable. It's worth paying for. It's not just that it's disposable, but men taking one step back looking at the legal context in which they're living are really utilizing that marriage isn't necessary. It is completely not required to be loved, appreciated, to have a relationship, a life-long relationship. It's not necessary to actually have children and raise healthy and productive adults. It's advisable for a number of reasons in their studies, but you're actually better off not getting married because you're better protected outside of the law than you actually are as men. And that's a scary thing. You know, we can look at the divorce statistics. The secondary case would be child custody. 80% of the time women get custody. Even though as men with higher EQ requirements, with a greater demand of your involvement in your child's life as a father, emotional development, you're expected to be there, our courts in the last 20 years have not changed in the percentage of awardees of child custody, nor visitation. Gender rights have not kept up with the times. We can also talk about alimony. If marriages are disposable at will and marable marriage spousal supports obligation and at marriage, what is the point of actually supplying additional financial incentives and also reserves as far as funding their lifestyles after marriage? What is the point of actually doing it? In some cases there are actually some genuine ones. But overall, it's not about keeping women afloat. It's not about the social contract and the construction which the laws were actually forming. They have not kept up with the time in which women are actually higher educated than men when women are actually making more money on per basis of job. They may have chose other careers that afforded them other lifestyle choices of comfort, of socialization, of a number of things. But that's a choice. Men typically sacrifice. So you have a causal effect that alimony is really wealth management, it's wealth redistribution. And we're not the only society that does this. Interesting enough, Scandinavia doesn't have that in many cases, which is actually kind of a unique way of looking at things. The last one, actually there will be two more. Another one is going to be looking at your sexual rights as far as reproduction goes. I talked about you actually have more rights to your intellectual property rights than you do your own DNA. Once you lose control of your DNA, it's over. A woman's body, a woman's choice. But a woman's choice can actually incur after it's no longer her body. Post-delivery of the child. She has the right to be able to sign away parental rights and financial support arrangements at will. Be able to give the child up for adoption. A man has no right to that. You are tied to her decision. At no point anywhere in the process are you allowed to sign off on your rights and obligations to that child. Now I'm not saying it's right, we don't have gender parity on this. Beyond that, a man who actually lays claim to child custody for a woman who's given rights up to a child cannot sue for child support payments in a way in which a woman can. Again, non-gender parity. And again, we're not even allowed to discuss these things, let alone come to conclusions. We're not simply allowed to discuss them. There's no justice in that. There's no equity in that. And we can move on. But the basics is that we have the cultural context and the political context are fueling incentives for men to stay out of relationships. And then we come into a doozy. And that is going to be the biological context has very much been unchanged. And there's going to be an elephant in the room. There's been an elephant in the room that we don't talk about, that society literally drapes a sheet over. And that is going to be a term called hypergamy. What we're faced with is a very real notion, biologically, is that men and women are actually the same creature. Men have a libido. We have a limbic system that drives us sexually, our choice selection, our desire of mates, so forth. Interestingly enough, behind that curtain, so do women. And it acts out. And there are three primary ways in which it acts out. By the way, ignore that. Ignore that elephant in the room and it will ruin your life. It will ruin your relationship.