Past a certain age, a man without a family, can be a bad thing

>Past a certain age, a man without a family, can be a bad thing
is he right?

considering it's just about impossible to not have family at any age, it's a pretty meaningless statement.

so please stop

Yes.

Men work on order and hierarchy. We're just built that way. Once we leave home, we eventually need to settle down and have a family. You see threads on other boards about women past 30/35 losing their shit and people claim it's because they never had kids, and for a large proportion it's true.

Men have a very base desire to carry on their bloodline. It's hard wired. After I'd say about 30-40 (depending on the guy) bachelors start to lose their shit and get weird, like women do when they start to be able to procreate easily enough.

Would he have a problem with me being a 30 year old virgin?

While Marty's statement makes him somewhat hypocritical for his own glaring faults as a 'family man', it's accurate that men with knowledge to share go batty without someone to share it with.

That being said, the idea that a straight man in the west can only realize himself through a blood-related nuclear family is hogwash. Legacies come in all shapes.

Yes, he is right, that's what Taxi Driver is about. Men going through unwanted solitude and alienation get fucked up bad, you don't even need to be predisposed to mental illness.

30 year old awkward virgins wouldn't last a day in that testosterone filled kind of police department, see how they all shit on each other for laughs?
It'd get under your skin and they would know, and then it would be the end of you.

It's how the military weeds out the weaks.

Fuck off, Trudeau.

While adoption is admirable and a great thing, it should be for those that cannot conceive naturally. People will always love their biological kids more than adopted offspring, it's just a fact of nature. The greatest thing a man can do is have a family, raise them right and do everything he can to change the world for them. It's truly the greatest legacy a man can give, is his offspring.

Is this the daily Sup Forums kissless virgin thread?

>implying that's not every thread

no.

True Detective was first and foremost a show about masculinity and what it entails, at least in my opinion.
Rust was kind of a "warrior monk" on a holy mission(ironic since his convictions), or at least he tried to convince himself he was, while Marty was the foil to him, trying to appear like a good ol' family man but hypocrite as fuck since he cheated on his wife with younger girls, one even a girl he rescued from prostitution.

It's meant to add depth to these characters, his phrase is something that can be both taken at front value (yes, most men who didn't build a family after 35-40 are fucked up) or in the context of Rust being a complete nutjob from the outside because having no family and no attachement meant he could go full weaponized autism on his "crusade".

There's also the society part, society is "better" with men that are easy to control, a man with no family is a man without nothing to lose which is another theme in True Detective.

Just stab the biggest guy there on your first day

>It's truly the greatest legacy a man can give, is his offspring.
Huh, I thought inventing electricity, cars or interplanetary space travel is great, but seems like Mutombo putting his dick in his wife and producing the eight child they can't feed is something even more admirable, who would've thought

You must have mixed it with prison life user.

You're such a faggot honestly

>this fucking faggot thinks I'm talking about adopting
Actually my point was you should work hard and make a decent living for yourself, you fucking MORON.

Only a retard can think this.

Imagine being THIS insecure

Can someone tell me why I've seen this thread 15 times? Is it bait? What's the aim?

Past a certain age, a man without a shitpost, can be a bad thing

newfriend

>Past a certain age, a man without lawn to mow, can be a bad thing to shoot at
What did he mean by this

>Past a certain age, a man's entire life is objectively considered a failure if he hasn't preserved the purity of the white race by breeding at least three times with a white woman who he's married
Is Sup Forums right?

No, not at all

Society claims reproduction and family is important but it is a rouse


A man can have a family at any age, women can not. Try to realize that a man who is successful can have kids, have a wife and live a good life at any age

a man without a family after the age of 35 can be a bad thing.

This captures the essence of what he meant, but I'd like to elaborate a little bit more on it. The vast majority of men settle down and have families. It's the safe bet. A family provides a man with consistent responsibilities, a sense of purpose. It's the secure way to ensure some sort of legacy. It's stability.

An old man without a family has to look elsewhere for purpose. He has to take risks if he wants to leave a mark on the world. There are a few success stories (like Isaac Newton) and many more failures, men who died alone and unremembered. However, not having a family, not having that stability, gave Rust the freedom to take those risks that were necessary to solve the case. He was given a second chance at a normal, stable life, but he threw it away because of his obsession. Ultimately, this masculine alienation and obsession is the reason for many of humanity's greatest achievements. Not goodness, but greatness. There's a reason that so little great literature has come from women and it's because they just don't spend much time alone with nothing but their own thoughts. The obsessive drive simply isn't there.

>Errol Childress had a family, mowed lawns and got shot by Rust + Marty

really makes you think

Who was in the wrong here?

I accept your defeat.

...