Comments by "CaptainVanisher" (@captainvanisher988) on "Would Taking Away Women’s Right to Own Property Solve the Fertility Crisis? (Hypergamy???)" video.

So we take away the handouts. I agree.
10
And even Simone as an exception is subjected to this female behavior btw. If she were to be the provider for a prolonged period of time, then their marriage would be over and that's undeniable.
6
All societies collapse. The question is what will collapse them. They all enter a decadence period which in modern societies we've already entered and promptly collapse after that period has ended. It's either through population collapse, mass disease/starvation, infighting or getting conquered by outside forces. Nevertheless it always happens.
5
Loyalty is innately tied with chastity. If she were loyal, she'd also be loyal prior meeting me. She'd value the fact that she will only give it up to the man she will forever be loyal. That's true loyalty. As for other traits, I'd say virtousness. A non-virtuous woman will never be a good wife in the long term. Last but not least, understanding the preferred family dynamic that is prescribed in the Bible. Meaning the wife submits to the husband. The same way men understand it aka the man loves their wife like Christ did to us, meaning that we ought to be ready to sacrifice everything for our wife and kids even our life. I agree with cuteness. I don't care as much for conventional attractiveness, I prefer cute and shy girls which you might've meant by autistic tomboyish.
4
Important note is that women could almost always own property. BUT they couldn't own property after they were married. The man was the owner of the property and the money in the family. At least that's how it worked in the Us and most of Europe. Which is the funny part about the bank account. Married women couldn't have a bank account, non-married ones could. As for women working back then and now. It's very different. When women worked at the same level as they work now, they only did so for the family. Meaning that their husband was their employer or at least worked with the husband. The same went for children. It's was more of "helping around" than the modern definition of working. When women had children, they almost always worked with their children around to take care of them. Meaning that they worked from the home. Women NEVER chased a career over a husband which is the important take away from this. So yes, if we eliminate the ideology implanted in young women's heads of chasing a career and replace it with chasing a husband, then fertility rates will almost certainly rise. I am more on the libertarian side so I don't necessarily support barring women from education, work, property etc. However, freedom of association is mandated. If I am a businessman I HAVE to have the right to decide if I want to hire women or not. It was one of the most destructive part of our societies when we allowed the government to take away freedom of association. The vote is also an issue. Democracy is obviously not working that well, especially the democracy of "everyone has an equal vote". It's a ridiculous concept. Especially considering that we gave bums, young people and women the same power to the men that built society and are biologically capable of being the decision makers.
2
It's completely the opposite. Men nowadays have extremely low standards. I have far more standards than most men out there and I still don't expect half of what you described. I just want an attractive woman (30-40% of women instantly qualify for me), that has been waiting till marriage, is young enough so we can have many children (24 and below) and is a devout Christian that abides by Christian doctrine and family structure, or at least be ready to be taught about it. If she refuses to abide by the Christian doctrine of "Wives submit to your husbands like the church submits to Christ and husbands love your wives like Christ loved us" then nothing can be done about it. I don't care if she likes what I like, although usually feminine women that are into a guy adopt some of his habits and hobbies and it would certainly be optimal, it's not even close to be a demand. If she can't abide by the most basic standards my grandma abided by, then why would I even pursue a marriage with said woman? If she can't be a virgin, young, Christian woman that is moderately attractive then there is no point on pursuing sh*t. Even the Christian part can be worked on as long as she is "coachable" or otherwise ready to be taught. The other 3 are not even difficult requirements yet modern women have a hard time with them. As for girly stuff she might like. It always depends. There are many modern stuff marketed towards women that are extremely harmful to a healthy relationship like reality shows or sex and the city esque shows, social media validation etc. But there are also certainly neutral or at least harmless girly hobbies that women should be able to enjoy. So I get your point on that one.
1
@fluffyribbit1881 Women never really had as much power as they do now which is why fertility rates have dropped so low. It's an unforeseen event in human history for countries to have less than 1.5 fertility rates. Usually what you'd see in periods of decadence was a fall in fertility rates, fall in marriage rates, rampant degeneracy, complacency, stagnancy in innovation and economy, high depression/suicide.
1