“The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.”

So spake Robert Briffault in 1927, in his book The Mothers: A Study of the Origins of Sentiments and Institutions. Twerps now use this almost 90-year old Law as a mantra whenever a woman leaves them.

All I want to ask is – who associates with people who provide no benefit?

You desire a partner because you desire fulfilment of your needs – be they emotional, sexual, a need for companionship, a desire for children, etc etc.

If your partner doesn’t provide any of those benefits, then what is the point? If you find yourself unhappy because your partner stopped being a positive influence in your life, then you leave – and that goes for either gender.

Why is this directed at women, and women only? Why is it treated as though this is ‘female programming’, when really it is common sense which applies to any relationship?

Oh, so it’s easy to blame failings on those nasty female brains. “She left me? Oh it must be because I got sick once. It must be because I cried at one point. AWALT.” It cuts out the need for reflection on why you’re a terrible person who doesn’t care for your partner’s needs.

A lovely example of the redpill hamster spinning at top speed.