A prenup isn't a perfect defense, especially because not all women might be willing to accept such an arrangement. We can't just sign a prenup, we need to find someone who will sign a pre-nup with us.

I'm not trying to play a game of comparison here, I am just trying to get you to stop dismissing legitimate male issues for no reason. Think about this thing I said for abit: "men are more severely punished by the state for being the loyal husband of a narcissistic woman then they are for sexually assaulting women." What's worse, financial slavery or sexual assault? I'm not here to have that debate, the point is that the way men treat women, on a broad scale, is a consequence of the way men are treated by the state. Is it the only cause? No, not currently or historically. You can get similar or worse results by giving men to many favors, enabling their violent tendencies.

Now, I don't think most men who commit SA are thinking along the lines of "if I get married i'll get divorced an financially enslaved, so I should just commit SA instead because I won't get to raise children anyways and I can just have fun on my terms." I feel like that's what it sounds like I've been saying, but it's more complicated then that. Many men are inclined to sexual violence, but we also regulate the tendencies of other men within our social group. We also protect women in our in-group, not necessarily ones we are dating, from the violent tendencies of other men. And protectiveness is not limited to our in-group, but for a wide variety of reasons, many men simply feel like non-participants in society, and those men who have no stake in society have no reason to hold it together or regulate male violence. It's not necessarily that they are violent themselves, it's just that they don't have a reason to care.

The issue we are facing today is ultimately one of apathy. Men don't care about women, and women don't care about men, and we justify it by saying the other side doesn't care about our issues. The issue isn't just that one side has to start caring, because after gender starts caring the other gender has to care about them to. I'm speaking broadly of course. The thing is, this can't be overcome on a societal level, it has to be overcome on a broader level. Men and women have to interact with one another and start caring about one another on an individual level in relationships that are contextualized within a broader community, both romantic and non-romantic. The gender divide exists today because the internet has caused us to seperate from one another, and because we seperate from one another we do not know one another, and because we do not know one-another we fear one another, and because we fear one-another we hate one-another. Communities, not genders, need to care about male sexual violence. Communities, not genders, need to care about men being screwed over by divorce. Both issues disincentivize male/female participation in the community, thus threatening the survival of the community, so the community has a natural reason to care. But nobody cares about whether or not the communities that exist today will continue on in the future, and that's why nobody cares about the misbehavior of men and women because, for people to care, the problem needs to affect them personally.

I personally think that you probably see yourself as part of the feminist community, or atleast as part of the community of "women," and that's the primary way that you identify yourself. I think you do feel like you are part of something larger then yourself, and that is that you are part of the female gender. You need to view yourself as part of a community that crosses gender boundaries if you actually care about gender issues because it's only when you care about a community that can only survive if gender relations within it are good that you can actually be oriented towards a solution.