I'm not too familiar with BAP and his ilk, so I may have this wrong, but I think they have a "Genghis Khan" view of relationships. Every man is supposed to be a psycho, knocking up as many beautiful women as possible. Women are stupid baby machines anyway, so who cares what they want or think.

The takeaway seems to be that real men are supposed to act like Blacks, which now that I think about it, explains why he and the Tates are so loved by conservative media right now...

I also don't get their obsession with "age of consent". Why does this issue keep coming up? They like to go on about how "men use to marry younger women", without understanding why they did so. Yes, it wasn't uncommon for men to marry younger women at ages that would be illegal or scandalous by today's standards (though the age discrepancy wasn't always as ridiculous as people image, the median age for both sexes even back that was often in the early to mid 20's, like today). There are three main reasons for it that they all seem to conveniently ignore.

The first one is obvious, fertility and infant/child mortality. The chances of a baby surviving to adulthood was low. To accommodate, people would have large family with lots of kids. In order to have lots of kids, women needed to marry younger so that there was enough time to have all of those kids.

The second one is less obvious, it cuts down on inbreeding. Age staggered mating strategies, especially for small tightly knit populations, is very common among animals. Famously, orchid mantis males (which do not have wings and so do not stray from the place of their birth) mature twice as fast as females, which prevents populations from the same ootheca from interbreeding. Humans obviously don't mature at significantly different rates, but I suspect that it still may play a role. I also think it's the reason why people find foreign accents attractive.

The last and biggest reason has to do with finical responsibility. In the past, men were expect to be able to provide for a family financially by himself, and it was seen as irresponsible to do otherwise. Similarly, women were hypergamous, they were expected to "marry up". Men at this time were also expected to take a leading role in caring for their kids. If he were to get divorced (which was obviously very rare and taboo), there was an expectation that he would retain custody of the kids as they were his responsibility to provide for them. This was overturned by the wide adoption of the 'tender years' doctrine.

The result of all three of these factors is that men would be getting married in their mid 20's to early 30's, and women would be married at much younger ages, sub to mid 20s.

Maybe there's something to be said about some of this. Society held men up to a standard, it viewed men as responsible for providing for his family. That was the role of men, to be providers and protectors. Now it views men under a much more hostile lens.

These BAP followers are not serious. I don't think they actually explore history and sociology, to see and understand why people did the things they did, and try to learn from it and implement it in their own lives, or see that some of these issues don't really exist anymore. Instead it's like the think all of life's problems can be solved by acting like Conan the Barbarian.

RT: https://bae.st/objects/2de9e0c0-0c14-4eb8-a33a-12730e54756c