Contraceptives are for losers

Here is a simple scenario to understand this under the lens of https://worldview.switchupcb.com/you-are-human/

Suppose there is a group of 10 men and 10 women
And the goal of the game is to have children which are well fed
And everyone is expected to orgasm

The man who has sex with all the women without a condom has an interest in having the other males orgasm in a way that doesnt result in children, like using a condom or abortion or whatever

Like he is making his opponents just waste their effort

And then its a bonus if he can also have the other men give him or his children money (resources) for sterilizing themselves in exchange for sex

It doesnt work the same way for the women
Because generally she wants to test the men
And contraceptives can help her with this goal

Except that in reality
Women do use contraceptives to have sex in exchange for resources without any risk
Then use those resources on their kids or relationships which will lead to kids

And other women shun these women because they cant take these risks,
but dont want men who are contributing resources to (the other women)
To give the women (having sex for resources)
"Their" (The othrr womans resources) Resources which from the man
To use on their children

...

And the reason the government doesnt like this exchange is not because of these women or men in alliance with these women but because

This exchange just leads to all women controlling resources
But women are not as violent as men
And the government uses violence to control
So why would an exchange system which puts your resources into a decrease in physical force capability
Result in a powerful government
It doesnt
So its "banned"
In strong governments

Not because of the reasoning above
But rather that
Strong (men) governments did not engage in it and banned or shunned it
They got higher physical force capabilities
Than governments who allowed it

Governments which have it allowed exist

The underlying feminine psycology is - regardless of whether your mate is selected - you must feed resources to your child. The resources are important.

The underlying male psycology is you need women to have sex for children, and then you are physically more capable to acquire resources than women.

So a masculine government is using physical force to acquire resources, and then its men also see women as a resource, which is required for these men to have children
As oppossed to another masculine government "taking the other governments resources" and having their children.

The feminine governments dont care about the women or invasions from masculine governments, but rather that they are getting resources.

So basically these masculine governments are battling for access to women
And then provisions for the resulting children

And the feminine governments are trying to manage the resources without force and dont care about their forces

Its a bit of an incoherent ramble at this point
But just think about what i am saying
And what government you would prefer to live in if you were a man
Vs a woman

...

Similarly
A society is not strong because it uses reason to ban contraceptives
Rather it is strong because it was already banned, then its citizens did not waste energy with fake sex and had more children for military, etc
Than a society which wastes all this time on fake sex and has no children

unless

So then of course there are strategies which are optimal for a man to use a condom, perhaps to influence certain women or simply deny her sexual energies from the other men

And then the other men also may use contraceptives initially and then attempt to reproduce by force within the above scenarios

Society publicizes these men as losers when they are successful in this operation but the truth is these men have a higher chance to reproduce themselves than "respectful men".

And in general there is an ideology on certain internet communities which shun acts which lead to reproduction (e.g., not using condoms) but the people in this ideology will just die out faster than the people who ignore them.

The ideology is not sustainable at best, and at worst is a manipulation tactic similar to a person with a child who advises other people not to have children "because it takes a lot of effort" Or "its rewarding but i wouldnt recommend it"
But then that same person advocates for everybody to put their resources into systems which benefit (the person's) child because "think of the children",
Which doesn't help those people reproduce.

Its like a person who is well fed and says "food isnt important" because food isnt important to a well fed person until that person is no longer well fed.

And the well fed person may not be making the statement out of manipulation but rather impulsiveness or simply living moment by moment.

todo update with further breakdown