More grim news for carousellers hoping to jump at the last minute.

Ever since my post in June Never marrieds piling up I’ve been curious what the data would look like for 2012.  The US Census has the data posted, and I’ve updated the charts.  I’ve also added two new charts at the end which show the breakdown by race.  As I shared previously, the first two charts are time series for white women going back to the last year I have easy access to data for, 1999.  Here is the chart for ages 25 to 49:

I left the 20-24 age bracket off the chart above because the never married rate for that group has been fairly flat the last few years and it changes the scale of the chart.  However, I have created a version of the chart including that age group for your data analysis pleasure.

Here is a zoom looking just at the 30-49 age groups:

My basic analysis of the data hasn’t changed since my previous post, but the additional data reinforces that something very important is happening.

More and more women continue to postpone marriage past their late 20s, and those who do so are finding it harder to marry in their 30s.  The changes in the later age groups likely dramatically understate the eventual impact of the existing choices because there is a delay before the changes in each age bracket fully cascade into the next older bracket.  Note that the same situation exists between the early and late thirties brackets which we saw with last year’s data, only more pronounced.  The late thirties group has been increasing even though the corresponding values for the same group five years earlier were constant.  This indicates that marriage rates for women in their mid thirties have been declining over the last five years.

At the same time, we see that women in their early thirties now are starting off with significantly lower marriage rates than just a few years ago.  Putting this together, more women are ending up in their early thirties having not married, and fewer women are able to marry in their thirties.

Note that the women currently in the 35-39 bracket have a 15.4% never married rate.  When these same women were in the 30-34 age bracket 5 years ago they had a never married rate of 18.5%.   However, the women currently in the 30-34 age bracket have a much higher never married rate of 25.1%!  It seems unlikely that today’s early thirties women starting from this much higher number will be able to drop down to 15% in five years, especially since we know the rate of marriage for that group has dropped considerably.  They will probably be lucky to drop down to 20%.  However, the cascade doesn’t stop there.  Today’s early thirties women left their late 20s five years ago with higher marriage rates (39.3% never married) than today’s late 20s women (47.5% never married).

Where this will eventually come to rest depends on too many variables to try to predict, but at the very least we know that a significant amount of reduced marriage rates are already loaded into the system.  It would take a very strong increase in later marriage rates to merely cause the values for women in their 30s and 40s to level off.

As these changes become evident, it is very likely that we will see a power shift in the “marriage market” as the husband shortage for marriage delayers becomes obvious.  The psychology of markets tends to revolve around fear and greed.  For the last 40 years, the marriage market has been characterized by greed on the part of would be brides and fear on the part of would be grooms.  This is why women have felt so comfortable making marriage a last priority, behind education, career, and casual sex.  The recent history of the marriage market can accurately be summed up as 40 years of ultimatums by women, with men backing down in the face of each new ultimatum.  The nonchalance by women towards marriage has been misinterpreted by many as a lack of interest in marriage, but I believe that it is reflective of an assumption that marriage will be theirs for the taking, so what is the rush?  The statistics above tend to bear out the logic of this position.  Young women look at their late 30s and early 40s aunts and see that all but a handful managed to marry.  But the same stats which explain their current level of comfort show why that comfort will soon be coming to an end.  At some point as more and more thirty-something women find themselves unable to marry the mood of the marriage delayers will turn from greed to fear.  Instead of looking for reasons to reject men, they will focus more on holding on to the men they can get.  This will be a change on the margins, but it will be enough to be noticeable.  This will have the follow on impact of changing the prevailing mood of late 20s and thirty-something men from fear to greed, as they notice a sudden embarrassment in SMP options.

I was also interested in the breakdown of these figures by race.  I’ve focused on marriage rates for white women when looking at time series to simplify the analysis.  I don’t have the time to chart out the different races year by year, but I have pulled together some snapshots showing the same basic data by race.  Here is what it looked like in the year 2000 (source):

Here is what it looks like now (source):

Edit:  I’ve exported the spreadsheets I used to create these charts to excel format (originals in Libre Office).  Here is the file with the time series for White women.  Here is the file showing all races.  As always, please let me know if you spot any errors in my calculations.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Aging Feminists, Data, Finding a Spouse. Bookmark the permalink.

350 Responses to More grim news for carousellers hoping to jump at the last minute.

  1. Ras Al Ghul says:

    I’m not so sure it will lead to keeping the one you got, as it more likely will lead to even more virulent competition between women for the few attractive men. I expect more slutty behavior, more stalkerish behavior by women, more violence between women on a scale that will shock people.

    As for men turning to “greed,” the few that are desired will have a great time, they will probably people to spin even more plates or if the direction of legal marriage continues, be able to legally marry more than one wfe if they desire.

    And this doesn’t stop frivorce. A woman that “got hers” thinks she can upgrade. Ahort term thinking FTW.

  2. Farm Boy says:

    So the “marriage strike” is finally here

  3. Outcast Superstar says:

    Hi Dalrock,

    I have always enjoyed your analysis on this subject matter. I just did a couple blog entries earlier this week which indirectly deals with the consequences of Women delaying marriage into their 30’s as well.

    I think you and many of your readers would find them interesting.

    The first one is called ‘Dissecting Women’s Sexual Currency Value’
    http://outcastsuperstar.blogspot.com/2012/11/disecting-womens-sexual-currency-value.html

    The other one is called ‘Is the Manosphere Really Dead’
    http://outcastsuperstar.blogspot.com/2012/11/is-manoshphere-really-dead.html

    Any way keep up the good work, I always look forward to reading your posts when you take on a subject matter like this one!

    [D: Thanks!]

  4. @Dalrock

    This is type of analysis is sorely needed today. I hate to say it, but Obsidian actually got something right. The white community is slowly catching up with the black community. Instead of gangs though, they will instead be forming guilds on world of warcraft. It’s going to be hilarious when they finally do throw the white men in this country out of power and their tax base disintegrates over night. Where do they think the majority of that 80% of discretionary spending actually comes from?

    My guess, we will start to look like Eastern Europe in about 25 years. That and we will have Australian style feminist laws to keep us there.

  5. Farm Boy says:

    My guess, we will start to look like Eastern Europe in about 25 years. That and we will have Australian style feminist laws to keep us there.

    What say you, David Collard?

  6. Ceer says:

    As a man, I have a hard time believing women aren’t trying to wreck marriage intentionally. The truest measure of what a person believes is how he acts. True for men. True for women. From my perspective, any woman who rejected reasonable men while at the same time sleeping around with unmarriageable men sends a powerful unmistakeable message: “I’m not looking for a marriageable man”. When she comes back in her 30’s with an “oops, I chose wrong. Don’t judge me.” Why should someone whom she judged and rejected react with sympathy?

  7. Wudang says:

    I read in a comment by mark minter over at rollos place some claims about the gender balance in the future that I am curious about how will impact society. As far as I remember his claim was that because of a declining birth rate and womens desire for older men women will start to have far more options than before and men will become desperate. This is a reversal of what happened with the sexual revolution when the boomer women experienced a lack of options because they where so many compared to older men (this is David Buss`explanation for the sexual revoloution and feminism). Supposedly it is especially those born from 2007 onwards that will experience this most strongly and according to Minter maybe as much as half of the men in that generation will not find a female partner.

    As far as I understand there are more gay men than lesbian women. Allowing them out of the closet then will mean that the sex ratio for straight relationships will be permanently tilted in “mens favour” a little bit by reducing the number of eligible men compared to eligible women. Acording to what I have read even very small adjustments in sex ratios influence the sexual market a lot. I`ve never seen this addressed so thought I should just mention it.

  8. Dalrock says:

    No comments on the opening picture? Is it too subtle? Or perhaps too obvious to note?

    @Wudang

    I read in a comment by mark minter over at rollos place some claims about the gender balance in the future that I am curious about how will impact society. As far as I remember his claim was that because of a declining birth rate and womens desire for older men women will start to have far more options than before and men will become desperate. This is a reversal of what happened with the sexual revolution when the boomer women experienced a lack of options because they where so many compared to older men (this is David Buss`explanation for the sexual revoloution and feminism).

    I haven’t looked at the analysis you reference, but my guess is he is assuming an acceptance of a wider age gap than is common. If you look at the median age of marriage for men and women, the range of the gap has never left the 1.5 year to 3 year range as far back as 1950. Women in their 30s aren’t typically looking for husbands that much older than them. At the very least, this typically isn’t their preference. I’m not denying the fact that men’s options tend to increase relative to women’s as they age, but I think this can at times be wildly overstated. I certainly don’t see the mass of never married 30 something women flocking to marry boomer men. Women’s preference for somewhat older men and men’s preference for younger women puts the youngest women in the power position, but this position fades as they age.

  9. @Dalrock

    I think men’s options do increase as they age, but their sexual market value is in line with women’s. Most women are not 10’s and neither are most men, but a lot of the guys who have learned game and write about it in the manosphere are 10’s when they hit that older age bracket. Most men don’t reach that level. They stay around the 7 level as most women do in their lives. This may be where the overstating of a mans SMV is coming from.

  10. ybm says:

    With due respect Dalrock (and thank God you’ve finally gone back to what drew me to your blog in the first place: DATA) you attempt to paint a very “hopeful” image for marriage minded men in this paragraph:

    “his will have the follow on impact of changing the prevailing mood of late 20s and thirty-something men from fear to greed, as they notice a sudden embarrassment in SMP options.”

    But this type of change will take at LEAST 20 years from now to start. Placing the majority of your marriage-minded readership well into their forties and fifties when it STARTS. Combine that with a total lack of change in the divorce laws in the next 20 years (which is what even the majority of MRA I speak with seem to agree with). I don’t think the spiral can be broken. By the time 20-something white women are marriage minded again, they will outnumber their college cohort, out-earn their cohort men, and largely ignorant of any society that existed pre-no-fault divorce.

    The marriage decline has begun, we all expected the lag time to see this data to start showing as the millenials hit 30, which is in 2 years (taking 1985 as a rough starting date for millenials). It is now permanent, and irreversible in my opinion.

    I couldn’t be happier. Today is a very, very good day. I can finally attach an expiration date to the white upper middle class. 30 years.

  11. ybm says:

    Ras Al Ghul says:
    November 24, 2012 at 1:39 pm

    100% agreement on every single point.

    What this is going to result in is a complete collapse of birthrates among white upper middle class women, a cut in social programs (as white UMC won’t want to pay for peter-pan white men to sit in luxury along with the single mothers), and pseudo-legalised forced transfers of property and wealth from white UMC males to white UMC females.

    I expect polygamy will be largely “socially acceptable”.

  12. jlw says:

    I would *love* to see these charts parsed out by the Sexual Market Value (SMV) of the subjects, but I doubt that data will ever be compiled, partially because people are cowardly about calling ugly people ugly. I think that would explain the difference. More specifically, I think the change described by Dalrock manifests itself at the very bottom. Marriage is less necessary, meaning that the dregs of both genders, but mostly female dregs, don’t have to get married anymore. (More women working, welfare state, less religion, etc.) The 2s don’t have marry the other 2s. Since attractiveness is objective, 8s feel genuine attraction to the 8s they can pull. 2s do not feel the same attraction for the 2s they can, in turn, pull. They want the 8s, can’t get the 8s, and would rather stay unmarried than settle for the 2s. They can more easily do that in modern times. My theory is that the welfare state has crushed the marriage chances of omega males. Half Sigma listed some pretty compelling data for this a couple of years ago. JayMan, linked in my name, also covered this.

  13. Dalrock says:

    @YBM

    you attempt to paint a very “hopeful” image for marriage minded men in this paragraph:

    This will have the follow on impact of changing the prevailing mood of late 20s and thirty-something men from fear to greed, as they notice a sudden embarrassment in SMP options.”

    But this type of change will take at LEAST 20 years from now to start. Placing the majority of your marriage-minded readership well into their forties and fifties when it STARTS. Combine that with a total lack of change in the divorce laws in the next 20 years (which is what even the majority of MRA I speak with seem to agree with). I don’t think the spiral can be broken.

    I’m not suggesting that men should wait for a better time to marry. I’m also not predicting a sudden snap back to previous marriage rates. When men turn from fear to greed, this will tend make them (on average) less interested in marriage, or at least more willing to delay marriage even further.

    What I didn’t go into in the post is I think that this will eventually stabilize, but as you say this is probably quite some time out. Even if the push to delay marriage ended today, there is as I showed much reduction already baked in to the system. I might write a post on this, but my expectation is that marriage will be seen as a critical status marker for White and Asian women. In fact, it already is for these two groups, and I would say Hispanic women as well. Once marriage becomes relatively more scarce, the value of this status marker will only increase. We regularly talk about Team Woman (which is accurate), but what we generally overlook is how brutally competitive women are with each other regarding status. Those women with husbands (and with fathers for their children), will subtly needle the crap out of the women who failed in this regard, and no amount of feminist shaming or sloganeering can change this.

  14. admiralboom says:

    Veritas pulchra est.

  15. Orville says:

    While I don’t doubt the underlying premise for the carousel riders, it is interesting to me that the numbers spike up right about the time of the recession/depression 2008. Plus there are a lot of twenty somethings back home with mom and dad after blowing through $100K in college expenses with no job to show for it.

  16. Hf says:

    More and more women fading into spinsterhood. The irony here is that women tend to not be happy alone, but men are finding more and more that they are happier and happier when alone.

  17. ybm says:

    Hf says:
    November 24, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    The reason for my joy at these figures is twofold:
    1.) An unmarried man cannot be destroyed in a divorce
    2.) A never-married man has better health than both married men and divorced men. There was a study that said married men live longer, however that included divorced men with never marrieds. When those two groups are separated, never-married men were at the top.

    If the MRA does not accomplish its goals, the fact is that time is on the MRA side. Over the long term, the MRA goals will be accomplished one way or another. Marriage will either be reformed to benefit men, or it will die out, and men will be free of its chains.

  18. Cultural_Expat says:

    I would add to YBM’s commentary that responsible fathers–divorced like myself, or otherwise–are going to counsel our sons on the danger that women and their pimpmasters (gubmint, pop culture and media, and “acadamia” are. Its feminist jungle out there: gubmint sponsored False rape accusations, false domestic violence accusions, divorce-theft rulings, inequality in sentencing for equal crimes, etc. Meanwhile mis-portrayal of men in the media and academia. As my son matures i’ll protect him as best as i can by informing him that he has a target on his back and to be very, very wary of the modern American woman.

  19. IrishFarmer says:

    One other perspective you may want to take into account: Discovery magazine did a large study of the ratio of marriageable men and women throughout history and showed that where women outnumbered men, marriage historically takes a nose-dive. interestingly, there began to be more women than men right around the 70s in America.

    More recently, men have outnumbered women through the 90s (around the time the manosphere began to peep out of the soil), and as of today the ratio is starting to even out. I don’t know how this handles “momentum”, that is when things have gotten this bad, how much cant he pendulum swing back the other way?

    But, it’s entirely possible that what we’ll begin to see is a balance. At any rate, this study could be way off, since from the 80s to 90s, feminism continued unabated and arguably got worse, and supposedly this is when there were more men than women.

    Just food for thought, anyway.

  20. IrishFarmer says:

    Correction: Discovery reported on the study, but did not conduct it.

  21. ybm says:

    Fox news embraces MRA memes in editorial:

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/24/war-on-men/

    “women good/men bad”

    “But what if the dearth of good men, and ongoing battle of the sexes, is – hold on to your seats – women’s fault?”

    “The fact is, women need men’s linear career goals – they need men to pick up the slack at the office – in order to live the balanced life they seek.”

  22. Farm Boy says:

    “women good/men bad”

    And cats are happy

  23. Johnycomelately says:

    It seem to me the rates of marriage for women up until recently have been a function of female mating preferences, they have been the price makers.

    Up until very recently men have simply gone along with the script and played by the rules (creating a generation of INCELS, AFCs and men friend zoned). There were no institutions promoting men’s interests but the advent of the Internet and social media groups like PUAs, Manosphere, MGTOW and Ghosts (albeit still quit small) has changed that.

    Watershed posts like M3’s ( https://whoism3.wordpress.com/2012/11/17/confessions-of-a-reformed-incel/ ) shows that down the track men’s preferences themselves might start to have an impact on marriage rates and partially become drivers of the stats.

    Btw your stats angles on marriage rates is the best on the web bar none.

  24. an observer says:

    Another factor is womens motivation to seek resources. Cubicle slave men, the underemployed and the failed business owner men are examples of the 90% not attractive to women.

    What happened in 2007? Tomorrow arrived. The debt market hit peak housing.

    The average guy with an average job or a failed business is no source of resources for the would-be breed and leave bride. IOW, no future cash and prizes = no contemporary bride.

    If the economy continues as expected, and us living standards contine to fall along with the usd, it may foster a marriage market like our grandparents, where brides and grooms truly started with nothing.

    For a generation of princesses fed a staple of stratopheric expectations, this will be a difficult, if not impossible pill.

    Hence, i see no immediate change in the figures. More out of wedlock children, more repressive wealth transfer schemes, progressively less businesses to soak.

    As our downunder fabian socialist pm would approve of, no doubt.

  25. Sojourner says:

    Pssh, I ain’t happy alone. It runs about 70/30 for me (I was previously married and found the red pill after trying to figure out what the hell happened). 70% of the time I think being single sucks and than 30% of the time I end up breathing a sigh of relief. My issue is that the women I would like to date (in the 25 range, I’m 30) are absolutely idiots. Being in LA doesn’t exactly help one find decent women but I’m stuck here because of my business so it is what it is. Not sorry for myself (I am a man afterall) but I certainly pray for the Lord to help me understand the mess I’m in. Reading the Manosphere is always fun and an exercise in restraint because now I have all sorts of tools to sleep around if I so desired but than that would make me a substantial hypocrite wouldn’t it?

  26. freebird says:

    There are a number of limiting factors in they physical world that can be held up as a metaphor for social inertia.
    Take the inverse square rule of energy for instance.
    It takes 16 times the energy to go 4 times the distance.
    It takes 144 times the energy to go 12 times the distance.
    Given that men are waking up and refusing the beta orbiter energy into the feminine prerogative,a tiny percentage of betas refusing to do grunt work will result in a cascade,or avalanche effect.
    Since women are inherently incapable or unwilling to do these tasks,the onus is on the alpha males to take up the slack.
    There will not be enough resources left in the upper %20 of alpha males to carry polygamy past a certain number of women,less resources given time and money for the vast majority of the target demographic.
    The upper %1 can only distribute so much so fast w/o losing their base capital,so to speak.
    I think what we will be seeing is a reduction to third world status socially in the first world,whilst also losing ground on the Romanesque empire building.
    As one commenter said elsewhere,what is good for society is also bad for society,in that redistributionism can only go so far before it meets diminishing returns.
    The tell tale signs of the cascade are there: chivalrous behaviors are now considered odd and out of place,men are awakening to the predatory female and instead of beta orbiting,boycotting or demanding hard cash in repayment.
    The free ride on the carousel is slowing down with the threshold of the cascade/diminishing returns.
    There will be doubling down and more misandrist laws,but that is not going to be enough to swing the social inertia back to women’s favor.
    This is the expected and desired result of the social engineers,the population reduction,the altering of the racial/power demographic,the dumbing down of the populace,the lack of resistance to the corporate driven State.
    In short,there is no remedy within reach due to technological distraction over tight community.
    Hope that is halfway coherent,it is not exactly what I wanted to express,but should be good enough to give you an idea.
    The disenfranchised young men of today are not going to all of a sudden forget bad times and go a-running to spend personal capitol later in life given the bad “investment” that is today’s empowered deranged wymyn.
    If nothing else the beating down in the courts will prevent any recovery.
    Hope yall can make sense of that?

  27. Remnant says:

    Opening picture is hilarious. Subtlety was not a word that came to mind when I saw it…

    An observation based on the last chart where there is such a noticable gap between the never married rates of blacks and every other group: Failure to marry is only really an issue that sends a woman into an existential panic IF there is still an implicit or vestigial cultural more of stigma attached to out of wedlock birth and bastardy. Since there is not really any such stigma in the black community, the huge number of never-marrieds has nothing to do with panic over a closing of the child birth window.

    This leads to a corresponding conclusion that can be drawn about the data on white women: It is only a subset of the never marrieds who will truly be in a panic, namely the educated, professional women who cannot imagine having children out of wedlock. Among the lower, less educated class where many of the disfunctions of the black community have taken root, there is little to no stigma attached to single motherhood, welfare dependency, etc. [See Charles Murray's recent book Coming Apart.]

    So, we are really talking about a subset of the white never-marrieds whose behavior may be affected by the trends Dalrock describes.

  28. freebird says:

    “Reading the Manosphere is always fun and an exercise in restraint because now I have all sorts of tools to sleep around if I so desired but than that would make me a substantial hypocrite wouldn’t it?”

    That all depends on your inner core beliefs,those can be changed at will,and also sometimes by necessity.
    I don’t think anyone has the right to judge a guy for going to pumping and umping,it IS after all what the gals want.
    It’s sucks badly being among the dwindling demographic of old style morality.
    It is rapidly becoming unaffordable,via the cascade effect.
    Improvise,Adapt,Overcome!
    That is what men do,and all the matriarchal laws and schooling will never change that.

  29. an observer says:

    At age 30, i thought most women were culture-soaked, herd following idiots. Years later, my opinion is unchanged.

    Age is the best positive in your favour. Provided the ex didnt screw you over financially, the next fifteen years should see the smv swing strongly in your favour.

    Church women are very forgiving of men with pasts. The worse, the better. They tend to save hypocrisy as a label for the beta behaviour they dislike.

    Whilst game will get results, in a church context it may not cultivate a wife. A couple of commentators suggested the very conservative groups for raising traditionalist, submissive girls.

    Problem is keeping them that way in the feminist matrix.

  30. freebird says:

    @remnant-
    Well said,need only to add that the destruction of the middle and upper middle class economically is going to remove that stigma for those demographics,also part of the cascade,or ‘avalanche’ effect.
    I expect the data 10 years hence to be dramatically different,perhaps the futurist is dead-bang right about the misandry bubble.(TFH?)

  31. Anonymous age 70 says:

    Good job, Dalrock. Those numbers show what some of us have been trying to tell you, that there is indeed a marriage strike. With a knowledge of calculus, it was predictable in advance by engineers and others with calculus. Yes, it is going to get much worse.

  32. okrahead says:

    Dalrock, I hate to have to say this, but I think I have discovered a glaring flaw in your data… While there is a “marriage dearth” among young(ish) womyn, these same womyn are still popping out lots of little bastards. So many little bastards, in fact, that for the firs time since we started keeping records the majority of live births to womyn under age 30 are bastards. Now, ask yourself, who is providing for these little bastards? Who pays for their food, doctor visits, clothing, education, etc? Why the government does, of course! So, who is their father? And to whom do their whorish mothers turn for succor? To the government. Marriage? These womyn are married all right…. to B. Hussein Obama and his government cheese. And when the IRS tells the beta he better work hard and pay for these little bastards (even though he can’t get a whiff of poontang himself) what does little Billy Beta do? He goes to work and forks over his $ to his lord and master, who then re-distributes it to the soft harem that keeps voting for him. These womyn are married all right, they’ve married up to the biggest alpha of all, who takes what he wants from whomever he wants.

  33. “No comments on the opening picture? Is it too subtle?”

    Is that animal, by any chance, a cock? If not, please forgive me.

  34. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock
    No comments on the opening picture? Is it too subtle? Or perhaps too obvious to note?

    Perhaps everyone’s too chicken to say anything?

  35. Ras Al Ghul says:

    Cultural_Expat says:

    “I would add to YBM’s commentary that responsible fathers–divorced like myself, or otherwise–are going to counsel our sons on the danger that women and their pimpmasters (gubmint, pop culture and media, and “acadamia” are. Its feminist jungle out there: gubmint sponsored False rape accusations, false domestic violence accusions, divorce-theft rulings, inequality in sentencing for equal crimes, etc. Meanwhile mis-portrayal of men in the media and academia. As my son matures i’ll protect him as best as i can by informing him that he has a target on his back and to be very, very wary of the modern American woman.”

    I think this is going to have more of an impact than people realize. This is the first time in a long time that the truth is finally out and men know, have discussed it and are passing it down to their sons.

    Just about every man here can remember the awakening when the feminine mystique was broken, and I can’t emphasize enough how big that is. Women’s behavior has been broken down, their motivations and actions, and double speak understood. They all think they’re a precisous little snowflake, but snow is snow, the individual differences are microscopic.

    No mystique equals a vast drop in female power.

    You are absolutely right, Dalrock, that being married will be a status marker, it is right now, and will be more of one in the future, but it won’t stop the direction of this.

    If Obsidian predicted that whites are going to continue to withdraw into WoW like the elves of Tolkein, he is mistaken.

  36. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock
    If you look at the median age of marriage for men and women, the range of the gap has never left the 1.5 year to 3 year range as far back as 1950. Women in their 30s aren’t typically looking for husbands that much older than them.

    A woman in her 30’s who was willing to marry a 40+ year old man (let alone a 50+ year old man) would probably have to put up with a fair amount of gossip/tittering of various sorts. Children might be an issue, unless he was from a family that tended towards longevity. So I think that would be pretty rare.

  37. >> From my perspective, any woman who rejected reasonable men while at the same time sleeping around with unmarriageable men sends a powerful unmistakeable message: “I’m not looking for a marriageable man”. <<

    Amen to that. Women are getting what they ask for. And I have no sympathy for them, either.

  38. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock
    Once marriage becomes relatively more scarce, the value of this status marker will only increase. We regularly talk about Team Woman (which is accurate), but what we generally overlook is how brutally competitive women are with each other regarding status. Those women with husbands (and with fathers for their children), will subtly needle the crap out of the women who failed in this regard, and no amount of feminist shaming or sloganeering can change this.

    40.7% of children born in the US were born to single women this year. No stigma, in fact quite the opposite. Clearly men are regarded as disposable, unnecessary, etc. rather than valuable.

    So, I’ll believe this change is happening when I see it in the popular culture. So long as babymommas are “brave, single mothers” who can “bring home the bacon and fry it up”, then it isn’t true. When sitcoms and Oxygen / Lifetime network movies start showing babymommas as losers, then maybe I’ll believe. Until then, 40.7% of mothers contradict the hypothesis.

  39. ybm says:

    Let the indebted colleged-graduated professional grrrrls support the bastard spawn. Since UMC white women have made feminism a political pressure group to displace all men from the professions; doctors, pharmacists, accountants, lawyers, now engineers and others, they can cry into their pillows at night at having to work a 60 hour work week to prop up the peter-pan men and the single mothers while their eggs rot away inside them.

    I can think of no grater irony that the very women who pushed rape-culture, anti-patriarchy, on-demand abortion, and title IX so they could climb the hypergamous ladder, will find no men and a childless existence waiting for them at the top.

    You go girl.

  40. Dalrock says:

    @Anon Reader

    40.7% of children born in the US were born to single women this year. No stigma, in fact quite the opposite. Clearly men are regarded as disposable, unnecessary, etc. rather than valuable.

    So, I’ll believe this change is happening when I see it in the popular culture. So long as babymommas are “brave, single mothers” who can “bring home the bacon and fry it up”, then it isn’t true. When sitcoms and Oxygen / Lifetime network movies start showing babymommas as losers, then maybe I’ll believe. Until then, 40.7% of mothers contradict the hypothesis.

    No argument that the 40% figure is a disaster. But that is an overall number, and the internals vary widely by race. For white women the figure is around 28%, for Asians 17%. Even these lower numbers are a disaster. But the fact remains that marrying before childbirth is a strong class & status marker for women. Over time these things can slowly change, but in this case I think the relatively rapid change of marital expectations will solidify the class signal here. Even in cases where the culture started off not seeing marriage as a class/status marker, there is still the problem of reality. Outcomes get noticed over time, and I think you would agree that marriage and having a father in the home make a profound difference in real life outcomes. I’m not predicting a return to the good ol days. I’m predicting that marriage and intact families will become even more obvious markers of class and status than they are today in part because those things will become (and are becoming) relatively rare. Murphy Brown’s girlpower was fiction, but the trashy cousin whose life bears a discomforting resemblance to an episode of “Cops” is a hard warning to dismiss, especially when multiple examples are available.

  41. Alshia says:

    @Ras Al Ghul:

    “…be able to legally marry more than one wife if they desire.”

    Although it may incite more competition for the few desirable men, I highly doubt polygamy will come to pass, especially if they want to maintain the claim that ‘men and women are equal.’

    What is highly likely to happen is a situation where the desirable men have a larger harem of mistresses, all trying to supplant the their wives from the background.

    @ybm:

    “By the time 20-something white women are marriage minded again, they will outnumber their college cohort, out-earn their cohort men, and largely ignorant of any society that existed pre-no-fault divorce.”

    Still, because they outearn and (possibly) out-educate men, they will definitely experience a reduction in ‘appropriate’ marriage prospects. So, the conclusion of this post stands: older women will it harder and harder to marry.

    Though agreeably readers of this blog will probably be unable to take advantage of this.

    @an observer:

    “For a generation of princesses fed a staple of stratopheric expectations, this will be a difficult, if not impossible pill.

    Hence, i see no immediate change in the figures. More out of wedlock children, more repressive wealth transfer schemes, progressively less businesses to soak.”

    I agree. Men definitely need to create some kind of countermeasure for manipulative wealth transfer schemes, lest we become nothing more than slaves to the female imperative. Ideas, anyone?

    @Sojourner:

    “I have all sorts of tools to sleep around if I so desired but than that would make me a substantial hypocrite wouldn’t it?”

    That depends on what you mean by hypocrite. The reason men were conditioned not to sleep around is not a moral one. It’s a practical one.

    Also, get this: no, men and women are not equal. It should be obvious that we have different mating strategies. So telling women not to sleep around while you yourself sleep around is not hypocritical, because we are not dealing with the same things. Logically, when y=x is false, you cannot substitute y with x in any equation involving y and x.

    Besides, monogamy is really a contract. With contracts, there are conditions. If those conditions are not fulfilled, you have no obligation to fulfill your part of the contract. It would be an idiot who continues to pay loans he has already completed or to pay what he doesn’t owe.

    Not saying you’re an idiot, of course. No offense intended.

    —-

    It would be interesting if we plot regression lines for the 30-34 and 35-39 groups, then compare their values on a separate graph. We should get a linear and positive gradient curve, which would show, to some extent, the cascading effect.

  42. jg says:

    Just in time, to give even more credence to Dalrock’s excellent analysis as usual, LGR has this new blog post that y’all might find interesting. As Farmerboy and Anon70 say there must be a marriage strike going on, according this article…
    http://unmaskingfeminism.wordpress.com/2012/11/25/women-continue-to-want-marriage-but-men-are-saying-no/

  43. sunshinemary says:

    … we generally overlook is how brutally competitive women are with each other regarding status. Those women with husbands (and with fathers for their children), will subtly needle the crap out of the women who failed in this regard, and no amount of feminist shaming or sloganeering can change this.

    Now you are speaking my language. What many men might not be aware of is the absolutely delicious pleasure of husband-bragging. Oh, it just makes me smile to contemplate it. I should probably ask the Holy Spirit to help me enjoy it less. Anyway, a woman doesn’t often leave the house without that wedding ring flashing on her finger, not only because it’s so pretty that she can’t bear to be without it but also because it sends a message. And that message is: “I got one. You?” There is a whole world of subtle inter-female communication and competition going on that men do not usually pick up on at all. Unmarried women know their social rank is lower; that’s one reason spinsters are so bitter. If you put a group of middle and upper-middle class white women in a room together, we’ll quickly have ourselves mentally sorted out into who is married and roughly how much money her husband earns. But if the guys look across the room at us, they just see a bunch of ladies chatting about recipes. If only you knew.

  44. UnicornHunter says:

    Undoubtedly this has been posted before, but it deserves an encore
    Bill Maher:

  45. ybm says:

    jg says:
    November 24, 2012 at 9:06 pm

    I think it will be very funny to watch this woman’s career in the next few months. My money is on her losing a lot of work prospects. Rupert Murdoch and his anti-male editorial boards have no desire to push men’s rights. They merely care about their bottom line, and need a productive group of males to produce and a female leisure class to consume.

    Which is exactly what this woman is pushing, while using our memes to do so. its just more ‘man-up’ hogwash.

  46. FuriousFerret says:

    Please replace header picture with the ‘cock carousel’ image.

  47. Farm Boy says:

    @SSM

    So what other secrets should guys know about?

  48. pb says:

    I’m imagining Palpatine in Return of the Jedi squealing “Good, good.”

  49. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock on the 40.7%:

    Outcomes get noticed over time, and I think you would agree that marriage and having a father in the home make a profound difference in real life outcomes.

    I don’t see anyone in public policy or infotainment agreeing with that. If anything, negative outcomes simply “prove” the need for even greater government assistance to brave, heroic single babymommas.

    I’m not predicting a return to the good ol days. I’m predicting that marriage and intact families will become even more obvious markers of class and status than they are today in part because those things will become (and are becoming) relatively rare.

    Perhaps, or perhaps children in traditional 2-parent families will be vilified as “privileged”, as having an unearned advantage over the “normal” child, whose heroic, brave, single babymomma just needs some more help to cope.

    Murphy Brown’s girlpower was fiction, but the trashy cousin whose life bears a discomforting resemblance to an episode of “Cops” is a hard warning to dismiss, especially when multiple examples are available.

    But with just more government spending, all those people on “Cops” could have their lives turned around, don’t you see? Just one more program…

    Let me know when Oxygen / LIfetime run programs slamming babymommas. Let me know when “The View” declares that single motherhood is bad for children. At this time, the culture trashes marriage and hold up the future “Cops” stars as great people who just need some more help to cope. And the result is 40.7% of children born this year are bastards. Next year, it will be higher. And the year after that, higher still.

    A majority of women under 30 are sending a clear message that they do not need marriage to bear children, and clearly they don’t want marriage badly enough to delay childbearing. It seems to me they are sending a clear message with their actions. I’m watching what they do, not what they say.

  50. BC says:

    What I got from the data:

    1- Things are getting worse* rather than better, and look to continue that way for some time.
    (*: Depends on one’s viewpoint)

    2- The correlation is imperfect, but non-marriage rates seemed to decline during the 2000-2003 and 2006-2009 periods, which correspond to times of economic difficulty. These declines are more pronounced for the older age groups. This can be interpreted a number of ways.

  51. 8oxer says:

    The stats on black females are simultaneously what I’d expect from personal experience, and absolutely staggering.

    I don’t want to knock them all in one swoop. There are several I’ve met who were slim, attractive, feminine and not an undue pain in the ass to hang out with. The ones I’m thinking of offhand are all recent immigrants from Africa itself. African immigrant women tend to be religious (either Christian or Muslim) and would likely make good wives in a patriarchal society.

    It’d be interesting to know the stats on whether African immigrant women stay attractive with long-term exposure to North American culture, and if not, how long it generally takes them to descend into the overweight, ballbusting, “strong black woman” type shrieker who is as attractive as a doorknob and as loud as a Metallica concert.

  52. TFH says:

    I expect the data 10 years hence to be dramatically different,perhaps the futurist is dead-bang right about the misandry bubble.(TFH?)

    Yep. 2020 is when the bubble pops. The trajectory of the lines in Dalrock’s chart point to this as well.

    My blog has a track record of accurate predictions going back 7 years. This one will be right as well. In fact, the pieces of the puzzle laid out in the Misandry Bubble are already falling into place (recall the Four Horsemen of Male Emancipation part).

  53. tbc says:

    An observation based on the last chart where there is such a noticable gap between the never married rates of blacks and every other group: Failure to marry is only really an issue that sends a woman into an existential panic IF there is still an implicit or vestigial cultural more of stigma attached to out of wedlock birth and bastardy. Since there is not really any such stigma in the black community, the huge number of never-marrieds has nothing to do with panic over a closing of the child birth window.

    On this issue, I think what is hidden (as others have noted) is that the never married rate among blacks is artificially inflated by gov’t intervention. The ‘market signals’ so to speak have always been distorted for Blacks in the US, first by slavery,then segregation and legalised racial discrimination, and more recently by the so-called War on Poverty (aka keep Black people voting Democrat Act). In all of these cases, in varying degrees, women and children have been separated from men — or perhaps better said, the relative market value of men has been depressed and the value of women inflated. In other words it has never paid very much to keep a man around in the Black community and in fact might become a liability. Despite this historical fact, marriage rates among Blacks used to be MUCH higher because there were still substantial costs (social & economic) to having children out of wedlock. The rise of the welfare state virtually eliminated the economic costs. The women’s lib movement and sexual revolution did the same to the social costs.

    For a long while these pressures were only evident in the Black community, allowing many Whites to distance themselves from what was coming. That plus greater social and economic resources has for a long time masked the decline in White communities, but people are people and the 50+ years of gov’t intervention in the marriage & sexual marketplace is having it’s effect on White communities as well.

    If history and the experience of Black communities are any guide (and they are), White folks should not expect behavioral change from women anytime soon. They can do as Black women have done: opt for children without the encumbrance of a man, and they will do so as long as the ‘market’ supports that choice. In other words,as long as White women are able to extract resources for the care of themselves and their children from men (via the gov’t) any marriage strike by men will not work.

  54. Michael says:

    Hello. Is there an introduction board for this website? My name is Michael. I’ve been reading this website for 3 days. I’m shocked to see everything I’ve experiencing written in such a perfectly stated way. Never before have I seen a blog/media outlet so perfectly written. The writer is surely a genius. I’m amazed and relived to see so many responses. It means I’m not alone.

    I’m 32 years old and have never been married. Unfortunately (or fortunately I’m not sure which anymore at this point) I have no kids. I am single and alone and not dating anyone. I live in Los Angeles. My income was $120,000.00 (net earnings after creative deductions and business taxes) in 2011. Income is projected to be $170,000.00 (net earnings after business taxes) in 2012. I’m exactly the kinds of “independent man” women claim they want. I drive a luxury car with an amazing apartment in Los Angeles directly on the beach. It’s quite a panty moistener and costs me $6,000.00 per month. I work from home because an office would cost at least another $2,000.00 month. I keep in great shape. Gym 3-4 a week + running + organic diet (I spend $700-$900.00 a month on organic foods and supplements) I was raised in a Christian “7th Heaven” (old TV show) type household. We always went to church. Strong hard working father figure was always present for me and my siblings. I went to private school, university, law school, and then started my own practice at 28 years old.

    My parents met and married in college. They have been married for 39 years. And it hurts me to the core to be 32 and unmarried. Alone. Without a loving wife. I feel pain from it every single day. It’s like a sharp invisible dagger constantly stabbing at me. But perhaps I’m part of the problem listed in the graphs above. Let me explain why:

    I went to the same college my parents met and married at. I was hoping to meet marry and settle down. Instead I was met with hundreds young college aged women who were NOT interested in marriage. They were interested in: 1) Partying 2) Having sex. College was 24/7 fuck fest. At first I was able to begrudgingly “socialize” in this element. What do I mean by “this element” within this context? College: Extreme social promiscuity, cheating, drama, drugs, and parties. I was an observer but NEVER a direct participant because my heart would not let me. This eventually caused me to stick out as a third wheel observer on campus. Someone who was always “not mixing” or “participating”. As a result I never enjoyed the benefits. I rarely dated. Instead I was sneered at. Cute girls flicked their fingers at me. I was used by women as a person to tell their problems to. I was passed over. I was seen as “weak “lame” and “boring”. I was ignored in the hallways, library, classes, by these women. And it didn’t help I was cash strapped broke working a minimum wage job and eating Raman noodles..

    The vast majority of these young hot girls vigorously pursued college life sex like you would not believe. They had sex with a large variety of guys. What I personally call “lily padding”. These girls did anything and anyone in the name of “fun” (fun=parties, fun= sex with new people, fun= drugs, fun= raves, fun = frat party etc.

    It hurt me to watch these girls go out of their way to pursue and spread their legs for complete losers. COMPLETE LOSERS. I’m talking: Hi I work in a carnival part time, I’m covered in tattoos, I have no job, I failed my minimum wage drug test and I’m in a band. These guys were losers. Some did not even go to the college! They would hop a bus stay with friends and get laid THAT NIGHT.

    Many nights I could not sleep because of the girls getting fucked hard… 1,2,3,4 dorms down. The dorms were old military barracks from the 1940’s with vents through the ceilings. It was very loud. All the time. I remember how much it hurt to be rejected by one girl in particular I had my open hopeless romantic heart set on… We had allot in common. I pursued her like a complete gentlemen – and was eventually turned down. That same weekend after getting turned down I got to hear her getting fucked hard and loud in the room next door. The guy who lived there was a super scraggly unattractive heavy drug user covered in tattoos majoring in “music studies”. This girl was young hot thin beautiful in her physical prime. I never said anything. But I felt so hurt she turned me down for casual sex with a guy like that.
    This guy was very open about his exploits with her and told me not to worry because practically every guy he knew fucked her. As the years passed the same thing happened again and again, and again and again, in various ways with all kinds of unrelated girls. What I mean is: I was looking for a LTR leading to marriage. I would meet trade numbers talk and “feel” a girl was a good person. Then she would do other guys. Or I would find out things like this. When this kind of thing happens to me over and over all through my life….it hurts me and makes me doubt senses. What is wrong with me that my heart is telling me she is a good person when she is clearly not?

    As time went on I was labeled “husband material” by the girls on my campus. This phrase continued to plague me into my late 20’s. This label resulted in ZERO DATES all through college. I wasn’t “down with it”. I wasn’t “participating” etc (sex, drugs, parties, etc.) My heart wasn’t into it. So I wasn’t entitled to any of the benefits (having sex with young attractive girls in their prime etc.). However party guys, flash in a pan athletes, loser guys in bands, wanna be DJ’s and self-professed “club promoters” – were ALWAYS getting these girls at their youngest hottest physical prime. Basically the more of a loser the guy was… the more these women would have sex with them. Hot sorority girls flocked to Football players like a butterfly’s on a beast. It didn’t even matter if the guy was black. College athletes did not even TRY to get laid.

    One night I had enough. I confronted a room of 8-10 gorgeous white girls. These girls were 18-24 years old. I asked them if they planned to get married. All seemed to say more or less – YES. I asked what their future husband would think about their behavior. I was immediately met with hostility. I was told the future husband would “never know” and “it’s none of his business”. The girls said they knew exactly what they were doing and were planning to “have their fun” (fun= partying, fun=sex, fun=going on spring break etc.) and would “settle down later”. I asked: when are you planning to settle down? They said: “It depends” and “probably around 27, 28” or “maybe sooner it depends”. I really put the girls on the spot. During our exchange they saw I was upset. They told me I should be happy because “nice guys finish first in the end”. I told them you cannot have your cake and eat it to. Then I was told by Kaylene (a young thin super sexy blonde with curves in all the right places (who BTW refused to date me even though we were friends and according to her roommate had sex with almost 30 guys in one semester ) she told me “Michael let me tell you something: not only am I going to have my cake eat it and eat it too. I’m going to have it with ice cream and sprinkles”. All of the girls laughed and smiled in agreement.

    I thought things would change after college. They didn’t.

    Now at 32 and successful these women are hitting me. In my mind these are the same women who rejected me. I’m not interested. The Bible says something to the effect of “don’t forsake the wife of your youth” or something like “remember your young wife”? Something like that. How am I supposed to remember something I never had? I have no history with these women. Ticking ovaries are scandalous. They will lie and say anything to get what they want. Which is: BABIES AND A LOVING HUSBAND TO PAY THEIR BILLS. Yet these women did not even give a few good years of their youth!

    As a man I am very visual. God made me this way. I cannot help finding a physically beautiful woman attractive. Why did these women not at least give me a few years of their youth so I would have time to fall in love with them and permanently burn their image in my mind’s eye? I need something to remember when we are 50 and married. Yet she spent her 20’s parceling herself out to guys who gave her nothing and offers nothing to the guy who gives her everything. I’m expected to commit hard earned resources to raising children with what is ultimately a suspect woman whose history I know nothing about. A 30+ unmarried women has very high chance of having a questionable past and baggage. I believe the more men a woman has been with the less likely she is to be emotionally committed each subsequent one. When you have handed out little pieces of your heart over years to dozens of different men what is left for the husband you proclaim to truly love? What value do the words “I love you” mean when she has stared into the eyes of 10-100+ different men and said the same thing?

    At 30+ women’s physical appearance has nowhere to go but DOWN. Is this what women mean by “saving the best for last”? Marrying at 30+? How can women spend trillions of dollars a year on beauty products yet at the same time claim a women’s age “shouldn’t be important” to a man? And what about children? Did they ever think their husbands might want to have children? What’s more likely to naturally produce a quicker pregnancy and healthy offspring? A fertile 24 year old in her physical prime… or a 35 year old aging womb? What if I want multiple children? At 30+ a women can easily before infertile after her first pregnancy.
    As a result of everything I’ve seen and experienced in my life I would like to make an announcement to all the desperate 30+ year old women out there: I would rather suffocate and die then spend my hard earned income, love, trust, and substance on you. Your entitled, ageing, feminist, jaded, baggage laden and brainwashed. And if I cannot marry a women in her 20’s I REFUSE TO EVER GET MARRIED. Given my high income this should not be a problem. However I’m concerned at some point I will have to start looking overseas (Ukraine, Russia, Eastern Europe etc.). I’m not going to marry one of these 30+ ageing entitled females who clearly have an agenda of their own. I intend to get married once. Marriage is meant to be forever. I will not be a starter husband for one of these used up women. I can’t tell you the number of men I’ve known who married late and were rewarded by losing everything they spent their lives building…

    The way I see it I’ve been given the following choices:

    1) Marry a 30+ women.
    2) Marry a women in her twenties
    3) Be single and enjoy my money.

  55. lavazza1891 says:

    AR: “Perhaps, or perhaps children in traditional 2-parent families will be vilified as “privileged”, as having an unearned advantage over the “normal” child, whose heroic, brave, single babymomma just needs some more help to cope.”

    Scarily enough not impossible. It all depends on what is good for TPTB. Obama really went for the slut vote, and with success. Will ever candidates dare not to?

  56. ybm says:

    Doubtful, once a feminist has marked her territory it cannot be undone. I read an article in the telegraph that questioned, in complete seriousness, whether it would be ‘regressive’ to EVER have a white male secretary of state, EVER AGAIN!

  57. christiankp says:

    It is interesting to note that the women who were in the agebracket 30-34 in 2003 managed to lower the percentage of never-married from 18,3 in 2003 to 11,7 in 2008 as they entered the 35-39 age-bracket. The cohort of women in the age-bracket 30-34 in 2007 only succeed to lower the percentage of never-married from 18,5 to 15,4 as they became 5 years older in 2012.

    That means that between 2003 and 2008 the chance that a woman aged 30-34 will get married in the following years has decreased by 54 % i five years. That is an amazin change.

  58. Michael says:

    In my high rise building there is a single attractive girl. 28 years old. She has less than 2 years of nectar in her late 20’s peach left before 30 hits. I’ve talked to her a few times. Her car is parked next to mine. In the interim I’ve seen her palling around with at least 11 different guys (in a suggestive consummating manner) since she moved in. She works during the day. And to the best of my general recollection, almost anytime I’ve been down on weekends her car is gone. Weeknights as well. I just went downstairs to get something out of the car. It’s 2:30am and her car is gone. I wonder where she could be? :)

    The Bible says something about a promiscuous women to the effect of “her feet never stay at home”. I can’t even count the numbers of single white females I’ve known, talked to, known of, heard about and personally observed whose feet “never stay at home”. I suppose the politically correct term today is having a “sex life”.

    One day (perhaps soon) this women and others like her might decide they want a husband. Why would any quality monogamously orientated man knowingly marry a women like this? Answer: They wouldn’t. That’s why women lie about their past. These women are garbage. They are pounded and creamed by all kinds of guys throughout their 20’s. Don’t kid yourself. It’s not just intercourse. All her holes are used by these men. In every possible way. After oral most women swallow. This means her stomach and digestive systems are used to digest and process the ejaculations from all these different guys.

    Then when the time is right, these women successfully present themselves as virtuous women (usually near or in their 30’s) rolling back their odometers; scamming and victimizing their trusting suitors and potential future husbands in the process. These are by and large innocent men, who believe they are marrying the discerning virtuous women of their dreams.

    A women’s past should be grounds for immediate divorce.

  59. I do not think this reversal will occur, on the margins or otherwise, based on the factors described. The government has their backs, until it doesn’t. That, and only that will create significant elevation of male value relationally.

  60. imnobody says:

    @ybm

    Interesting your comment about single men being healthier than married men, after years of having to hear: “You have to marry because married men are healthier and live longer lives”. Have you some link to this data. Thanks in advance.

  61. Opus says:

    The question is: Which sex is driving the marriage strike? – those Stats are jaw-dropping! (see Christiankp’s analysis at 04.30) – and I do not think that it can be explained away entirely by non-marital cohabitation – marriage matters to women.

    Is it women, who at the last minute (after the age of 39) having a last-minute change of heart, trap some hapless Beta into matrimony; or, is it Men who as they age, their testosterone decreasing and in any even finding that sex (without payment or commitment) is generally available, fail to see the point of it preferring their freedom?

    So many of my married friends (well two) say that they never intended to marry and it was only that ‘shotgun’ that prompted them to marry – another was on the receiving end of female violence – after which he got the message. The longer however women delay children the more likely it is that many if not ultimately most will find that they are left single and childless. It is thus odd to find that the most unintelligent females (the black females) have this in common with the brightest (the white educated middle-class females): Neither seem able or willing to enter into marriage.

    Which reminds me of that auto-cutie I was romantically linked to. She had edumacation and never ceased regaling all and sundry with non-stop facts gleaned from her time at Oxbridge. This woman easily failed the Turing Test as there was no way that one could determine whether there was a thinking human-being behind it all, or whether she was just a warm-blooded computer. Women always fall for heros and (like Lara Logan) one day found herself crushed by aggressive males, there being a fractious strike which her foolish employers had sent her to cover. She was knocked over, and concussed but a Cameraman came to her rescue, and – surely to the strains of Tchaikovsky’s fantasy overture Romeo and Julie – they fell in love and married – another success for Evolutionary Biology – andf for me too I suppose. After that she faded out of public life and her fifteen months or so of telly fame was over. Better looking in real life than on the telly, I suppose she must have been in her mid-thirtiesby then – so she was lucky, though I doubt she is happy, as marrying a cameraman is hardly hypergamous.

    Will Dalrock be awarding prizes for the best caption for the dialogue betweem that Alpha Cockrel and that rather feminine-looking pony?

  62. Anonymous says:

    And, wow, CNN (or at least its female commentator) has realized that funny feeling isn’t love, it’s just sex, and the “carousel” is a lousy way to find intimacy:
    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/24/my-take-searching-for-god-settling-for-sex/

    Gee, what took ‘em so long?

  63. Farm Boy says:

    once a feminist has marked her territory it cannot be undone

    Economics might say otherwise

  64. Ybm says:

    imnobody says:
    November 25, 2012 at 9:17 am

    Yup!

    This little lie was known as far back as 1996 to be nonsense. When the longevity study concluded, even as far back as the “good old days” single never married and married men who never divorced were at the top in longevity. But a trend emerged!

    http://phys.org/news/2011-03-keys-life-longevity-unearths.html

    Steadily married men – those who remained in long-term marriages – were likely to live to age 70 and beyond; fewer than one-third of divorced men were likely to live to 70; and men who never married outlived those who remarried and significantly outlived those who divorced – but they did not live as long as married men.

    But in 1996 another analysis of the longevity study came out, this one didn’t become a cultural meme like “marry or die” did.

    http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/abstracted.php?icid=587103

    “Furthermore, individuals who had not married by midlife were not at higher mortality risk compared with consistently married individuals. Part of the relationship between marital history and mortality risk may be explained by childhood psychosocial variables, which were associated with both future marital history and mortality risk.”

    So far: never married live as long as consistently marrieds when controlled for childhood psychosocial variables.

    New science:

    Never married men have the lowest heart disease mortality (heart disease is the #1 cause of death in income nations):
    http://www.healthdiseases.org/index.php/topic/view/id-80210

    Studies comparing different groups of men that separates the divorced from the never married are few and far between, simply because the never married cohort has never been statistically high enough to warrant major funding. Expect that to change, and so far the science is showing never married men are the healthiest hearts.

  65. Farm Boy says:

    What many men might not be aware of is the absolutely delicious pleasure of husband-bragging.

    The pain of being unclaimed falls mainly on the dame

  66. Robert in Arabia says:

    Michael,
    It is possible that Arab girls who have not spent time in the west are viable prospects. If they are Muslim, you will have to convert
    Most of the men I know who have converted have four or more children.
    Another thing to be aware of is that if you move to the Phillipines and marry a Filippina there is no divorce period. I even know Emiratis who have done this.

  67. whatever says:

    It’s called poverty.

    And if by “continue” you mean “get worse”, then yes it will.

  68. FuriousFerret says:

    @Michael

    If liked dalrock and it helped bring clarity to you, I suggest you read this blog next:

    Rollo Tomassi’s blog: The Rational Male

    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/

    Prepare yourself for staying up night reading it though.

  69. sunshinemary says:

    The more I look at the photo at the top of this post, the more it makes me laugh. Mr. Cocky Cockerel with the aloof facial expression is ignoring Ms. I’m-a-little-circus-pony-care-to-have-a-ride running along next to him with a desperate look on her face. Mr. Betaphant is waving his trunk around behind them with a what-about-me look, and Mr. Zeta Zebra is off in his own oblivious world. Art imitates life.

    Did you take this photo, Dalrock?

    [D: Yes. I believe I am the first in the sphere to capture a picture of the cock carousel.]

  70. Pingback: Fox News-The War on Men:Finally mainstream media is asking women the tough questions - Page 2

  71. pjay says:

    So beautiful. As a divorced man in his 40s, I am so thankful for the tingly cougars and desperate cougarettes out there. They all crave King Edward and he is happy to visit with them at his leisure.

  72. TFH says:

    I sent this to Instapundit.

    Let’s see if he bites.

    [D: Thanks. An instalanche is something to behold.]

  73. pb says:

    Welcome Michael. With God’s grace I hope you find some measure of peace in this life.

  74. jg says:

    I think it is wise for Micheal to marry the foreign woman of his choice and stay there in that country or move to a country that has not been tainted by feminism. If he brings that woman here,he is gonna get screwed by the divorce grinder once she decides to dump him after she gets her PR.

  75. JHJ says:

    @pjay:

    That is such an amazing one pic = thousand word illustration of the moden American womanhood. Kudos.

  76. imnobody says:

    @ybm

    Thank you very much for your links. It’s amazing how misleading can mass media be. Now, I know what to say every time I see somebody say this “marry or die” meme.

  77. Houston says:

    Sunshinemary writes: “Unmarried women know their social rank is lower; that’s one reason spinsters are so bitter. If you put a group of middle and upper-middle class white women in a room together, we’ll quickly have ourselves mentally sorted out into who is married and roughly how much money her husband earns. But if the guys look across the room at us, they just see a bunch of ladies chatting about recipes. If only you knew.”

    This reminds me of a conversation I overheard recently between two female coworkers, one wedded and the other shacking up. I could plainly hear the sheepishness/disappointment in the latter’s voice when she answered the question, “Are you and [boyfriend's name] married?”

  78. Hurting says:

    @Michael

    Sorry, no real concrete advice to offer except not to pursue #1. You have correctly perceived how women view you – as the stable provider who will fund the lifestyle they expect and support them in raising their (yes, I mean their as in not your) children.

    I married a woman seven years older than me (met when I was early twenties, she late twenties) who had ‘had her fun’. We married when I was 25 and immediately had kids due to her age. That was it for our relationship – she had what she wanted and disinvested completely in our relationship. We were ultimately married for 18 years before she pulled the plug. I was not a perfect husband, but neither I nor my sons deserved the fate we now face.

    I offer my own sad tale as a caution. I, too felt the contempt of my wife (while she never said it outright, her frigidity in marriage spoke volumes about how she viewed me vis-a-vis her other relationships). Like you I worked as many as three part-time jobs during college to pay my own way and have held a number of reaonsably well-compensated jobs that provided a very good life for my family. Yet none of it was enough for her to even ‘throw me a bone’ once in awhile. It wears on you in ways you can’t imagine.

    Do. Not. Settle. Do. Not. Marry. A. Slut. Ever.

  79. Anonymous Reader says:

    Ybm
    Never married men have the lowest heart disease mortality (heart disease is the #1 cause of death in income nations):
    http://www.healthdiseases.org/index.php/topic/view/id-80210

    I will speculate that this is due to fewer incidents of unresolved fight-or-flight triggers, and thus a healthier endothelium (artery lining, also the same tissue lines the inside of the heart). It is imperative that married men learn Game if for no other reason than to put a stop to having their fight-or-flight endocrine reaction triggered over and over again in the home.

    There was a study some years back in Japan that found working men in jobs where they had essentially no control over their working situation had the shortest lifespans, but I do not have a reference to hand. If my memory is correct (no guarantees there) then the “lack of control” would likely tie in to unresolved fight-or-flight. Just as with married, betaized men.

    Divorce kills men, and it shortens the lifespan of children. Only women, and their lawyers, and the family court system, and various state agencies, benefit from divorce. Men and their children suffer and lead shorter lives. Men need to know this, in order to protect themselves.

  80. Flybynight says:

    Agree never marry a women with a high number count(slut). They do not bond as well..they always compare you to the 5 minute Alpha’s they sexed up and you will always pay for some percieved grievance they have in their past.

  81. Dalrock says:

    Anon Reader,

    Picking up on our exchange the other day, SSM’s comment about husband bragging being delicious but done in ways men won’t notice reminded me of your description of team woman in the church going to bat for serial baby mamas. While I don’t disagree that what you saw was an example of team woman, I would suggest that there was almost certainly a degree of husband bragging and status signaling going on underneath the surface at the same time. “Oh, you must be kind to the poor woman, she has no husband!” As Vox described in a recent post, women’s aggression is generally cloaked in a web of deniability. While the women in the church were ultimately forcing acceptance of harlotry, they were also marking their own territory and signaling their own superior position in the local hierarchy. Some might argue that this kind of action is short sighted, and focuses on the status signaling woman’s immediate pleasure over the long term needs of the congregation. They would of course be right.

  82. ybm says:

    Anonymous Reader says:
    November 25, 2012 at 5:58 pm

    Likely true. A caged animals reacts with disturbing behaviours even at the best of times and conditions. Zoo animals rip their fur off. Caged cats and dogs tear their noses apart against the bars of a cage and eat their own vomit and feces. Although I do not subscribe to a great deal of evolutionary biology I do know that the nazi experiments pretty well put to rest the idea that man is capable of overcoming his fight or flight response.

    That is why it should be required reading among the MRA to read “Man’s Search for Meaning” to learn about the process of mental rationalization and the concept of levelling as defined by Schopenhauer. But its not easy to consume such dense material and reflect upon it, and the level of discourse in the manosphere is quite frankly, poor.

  83. ybm says:

    *evo psych

  84. ybm says:

    2 mistakes it should have been Kierkegaard

  85. Anonymous Reader says:

    Ybm, I have recommended “Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl multiple times on various androsphere sites. It is a slim volume of not that many pages, but packed with insight.

    However I am not aware of any connection between the Nordic Christian Kierkgaard and the Austrian Jewish Frankl. Could you explicate?

  86. ybm says:

    I wish I could find the paper I wrote in school on the topic, its in French (I went to a Jesuit High School in Quebec) but I’d translate it for you. Unfortunately it was written 15 years ago, pre internet days!

    Frankl talks a great deal about Logotherapy, which is very closely connected to Kierkegaard’s concept of will to meaning. My argument in the paper used the concepts of levelling, or as he spoke in his own words: “to be the self which one truly is.” Which is the essence of Frankl’s Logotherapy concept.

  87. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock
    …I would suggest that there was almost certainly a degree of husband bragging and status signaling going on underneath the surface at the same time. “Oh, you must be kind to the poor woman, she has no husband!” As Vox described in a recent post, women’s aggression is generally cloaked in a web of deniability.

    Many, possibly most, maybe all, questionable actions by women are done in a context that offers some degree of plausible deniability. Part of learning Game was having many recollections of past actions by women that had seemed utterly mysterious at the time that were suddenly quite, quite clear in hindsight when illuminated by Game precepts. In all cases, there was some degree of ambiguity that preserved an option of “Oh! I didn’t mean that“. So, AWALT.

    Having said that, there’s nothing ambiguous about demanding church support for a woman with 3 children by 3 different men, who was never married to any of those men. It’s pure “team woman” all the way, with married women demanding of their husbands “Man up, and support that slut. It sends a clear message: every single woman is deserving of material support by men, no matter what she has done, or with whom she has done it. Or to whom she’s done it, remember Mary Winkler?

    While the women in the church were ultimately forcing acceptance of harlotry, they were also marking their own territory and signaling their own superior position in the local hierarchy.

    Possibly. Or possibly they were signaling the dominant position that all women have in that church, engaging in a kind of cuckold-by-proxy: You men have to support this woman and her bastards, and continue to support your own wife and children in the style they deserve, and you don’t get a choice in the matter, either.

    Some might argue that this kind of action is short sighted, and focuses on the status signaling woman’s immediate pleasure over the long term needs of the congregation. They would of course be right.

    No argument from me that it is short sighted. I’m just not sure the average Churchian woman actually regards marriage as all that worth while that she’d use it as a status symbol. I’ll just point to the numbers “38%” and “60% to 65%” as my arguments. Humans generally don’t throw away things they value.

    Because I watch what women do and discount what they say. Actions speak louder than words.

  88. Dalrock says:

    Anon Reader,

    You have more information/context than I do on the church incident so I’m inclined to go with your reading there. I’ll simply leave it that it isn’t necessarily an either/or proposition.

    I’ll just point to the numbers “38%” and “60% to 65%” as my arguments. Humans generally don’t throw away things they value.

    Because I watch what women do and discount what they say. Actions speak louder than words.

    No argument that there are a multitude of mixed signals. I hope it is clear that I’m not trying to paper over anything here. We need to shine a bright spotlight on all of this, good, bad and ugly, and I try to make it a practice to do so. But there is another data point you might consider. Look at how close to 100% the figures get for women marrying, at least in the very recent past. Knowing what we do about hypergamy, women’s expectations, and the distribution of men, there is some deep, deep settling going on there. At some point all but the most hairy legged feminist and/or morbidly obese woman held her nose and suited up an omega for a trip down the aisle. Again, given the nature of the distribution of men, large numbers of these men had nothing to steal. This was a pure status move, and a very painful one given the low status men large numbers of these women ended up marrying.

    Women simply wouldn’t do this if marriage didn’t have an extremely high status meaning to them.

    Likewise, look at the very different rates of divorce between women who graduated college and those who didn’t. And also look at the impact of marital history on whether college educated women had children.

    I’m not arguing that women aren’t divorcing in obscene numbers, perversely driven by the incentive to steal the children. But I am arguing that there is a bigger picture, and it is most evident along class lines.

  89. ybm says:

    Michael says:
    November 25, 2012 at 2:54 am

    Whether you understand it or not, you have been saved.

    Hold your head high.

  90. James says:

    @ybm

    I couldn’t be happier. Today is a very, very good day. I can finally attach an expiration date to the white upper middle class. 30 years.

    I don’t think so. The decline is in marriage, not reproduction, and the UMC/UC have the financial resources to avoid the worst consequences of single parenthood.

    What about the other classes?

    The underclass will continue reproducing while you pick up their bills.

    The worst consequences of the decline of marriage will be felt by the working and middle classes. Upward mobility can be undone in a single generation, by frivorce or unchecked hypergamy.

    Combined with the loss of manufacturing jobs, the middle will not be squeezed, it will be crushed. When its final cohort retires, there will not be enough tax dollars to keep the feral underclass at bay, and that is when the UMC will expire.

    So I take your 30 years, and raise you to 50.

  91. FuriousFerret says:

    Looking at Michael’s story, I would like to point out one concept pertaining to Christian youth today.

    His mentioning of attractive women that he considers a 8+ is interesting. He specifically mentions these hot women and describes their slutty party girl behavior and how he played beta orbiter to them. He also mentions how he was an observer and didn’t want to join the party scene.

    Well you have to pay to play my man. What Christian youth don’t understand or want to comes to grips with is that both hot women and men are most likely going to go off into the fun life. They have the most temptation because of the all the pleasures that are offered at their feet. This is something that Christian men and women have to understand. You most likely will not get someone hot.

    The cognotive disconnect that Michael feels is understandable. When you read about him on paper he is quite the catch … in 1951. Law school, good grades …. who cares? Respectful towards females and putting them a pedestal, doesn’t mean shit when being male means shit in terms of natural status in 2000 +, in fact you are shooting yourself in the foot here.

    Truely attractive women and men leave the church when they realize what fun they can have. If you don’t want to enter the party life and learn/use Game, your chances to get a true 8 plus is very slim when they are young. How many true 8s are there in your church circle? They are as rare as the true (not contextual) alpha male. If there is an 8+, every single guy with any balls is trying to get her. The competition is fierce.

    The solution to this dilemma is Game. While the competition is fierce due to scarity for the true hot female who isn’t a slut, most men in there are either clueless about any type of romantic dynamics that work with women or refuse to use them because they think it’s evil. It’s still damn hard but the man with one eye in the land of blind is king.

    However, most men will have to settle with a 5 or 6 if they acutally want some type of 1930s style no sexual activity before marriage type of relationship and that’s if they are actually desirable and not a mangina who is utterly replusive.

  92. Uncle Silas says:

    Some of the commenters have been worried that a marriage strike is meaningless, as feminism will always extract, via the government, transfer payments from men to women. In a couple of years that will be mathematically impossible. Federal debt servicing alone will sink us, and, if one considers unfunded liabilities, close on $100 trillion, he will realize we’re far more likely to be living in a Mad Max society in two to five years than a world where the federal government continues to hum along, passing ever more confiscatory tax laws. A marriage strike in a world hovering near anarchy will be a disaster for women.

  93. FuriousFerret says:

    Just as added note:

    I personally would rather marry a hot slut than a 5/6 Christian ‘good girl’ who demands all sorts of shit with a princess attitude without even having the benefit of being actually attractive.

    In my experiences with the plain jane Christian ‘good girl’ I would rather hang out with the wild childs. Just because the ‘good girl’ abstains from sex she thinks she is some type of special snowflake. They have no sense of reality instead the mentality of a 12 year old.

  94. ybm says:

    James says:
    November 25, 2012 at 8:59 pm

    Well *I* won’t be paying anyone’s bills. Being a Fortunate Son and a soon-to-be former Canadian. But I absolutely understand, my concern is first and foremost the ‘life, liberty and pursuit of happiness’ of men.

    Let’s be honest. White UMC females are the reason feminism is what it is today. They are the ones who created ‘rape culture’ ‘no fault divorce’ ‘Title IX’ because upper class women have always had the capacity to attend university, pay for it, be independent, and live in total luxury under a patriarchy or a matriarchy. UMC women however, cannot. Feminism is, at its base, the political movement of the white UMC female.

    To see the decline and fall of the UMC female is to see the decline of their cultural memes, ‘modern women’ ‘rape culture’ ‘kyriarchy’ ’70 cents on the dollar’ ‘pink ribbon’ ‘walk a mile in her shoes’ ‘take back the night’.

    All of these are the spawn of the political movement of the white UMC anglo female.

    The true middle class (craftsmen, and skilled manufacturers) are already gone, they have been since the 1980s. Their unions have been crushed (but not the white UMC female unions of teachers, nurses and public employees, coincidence?) their jobs outsourced, their wealth extinguished. No greater evil has been unleashed by women than the destruction of a mans feeling of purpose, his MEANING.

    Now, white UMC females have turned their avaricious gaze upon the professions. Doctors, pharmacists, lawyers, engineers, accountants. They are using their political will to destroy another group of men’s feeling of purpose.

    Unfortunately for them, these professional men are the ones who in the past, provided the upward mobility their fathers used to bring their mothers into the UMC to begin with.

    So passes the professions, so passes the upward mobility, because white UMC women do not provide the required values an upper class man requires in a wife. Once the inheritances of the baby boomers is consumed by their daughters, there is no wealth left they will be able to grasp at. And a continental European class structure, the impenetrable floor at the bottom of the upper class, will be set.

  95. Farm Boy says:

    @Dalrock

    You should take Michael’s comment and make it part of a “best of” section.

  96. sunshinemary says:

    This was a pure status move, and a very painful one given the low status men large numbers of these women ended up marrying.

    Yes, along racial/class lines this makes total sense. Think about Susan Gregory Thomas, the divorced woman writer from the last post – she also writes a blog under the handle Broke @ss Grouch. Her first husband obviously had the cash, but she ditched him. Did she find a hunky millionaire handyman? No sir, she did not. She found an antiques restorer with no money, whom she refers to as Big Daddy on her blog, and whom she discusses in the most condescending terms. It’s clear what she thinks of him, but she married him anyhow. It wasn’t love, nor money, so what’s left? Status. I suppose women divorce because they think they are going to find a better man, not because they want to be unmarried forever. It is still higher status for middle and upper-middle class women to be married.

  97. Pingback: The Marriage Game Disappearing as Females Wait too Long. - WMASAW..

  98. ybm says:

    In case you haven’t been given the gift that is the band CCR, this is the source of my “Fortunate Son” quip:

  99. TFH says:

    Michael,

    There is a fourth option, which is pretty radical from a cultural standpoint, but quite efficient in other ways.

    Here is a Canadian man who hired a surrogate and became a single father :

    http://photogallery.thestar.com/1038282

    Other men have done this too. It is a big step, and very few men should attempt this.

    BUT, you should at least know that the option exists, and that others have done it. In fact, you should tell those single sluts that some men are doing this. While only a tiny number of men would do this, simply knowing that the choice exists can cause a major shift in male-female interaction dynamics.

    You have enough money to do this, so it is an option to consider.

    Also among your options is to expatriate and marry a foreign woman (staying in her home country). That would get you out of feminist brainwashing and anti-male divorce laws.

  100. FuriousFerret says:

    “Also among your options is to expatriate and marry a foreign woman (staying in her home country). That would get you out of feminist brainwashing and anti-male divorce laws.”

    Marry foreign women is not a ticket out of being a pussy beta.

    Once that woman gets to America and gets friends and sees her better options, you are on the road to divorce because you still offer very little value.

    Marrying foreign women is only good with alpha mentality and simply because American women make shitty wifes while foreign women will actually not get sick at the idea of even acting like a traditional wife.

    You still need Game with foreign women, you can’t simply be a beta and hope that everything works out.

  101. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock, I’m cogitating over a generalization, not a particular situation. I’m considering the idea that Team Woman and domination is very important to some number of modern women. I’m serious about the notion of support of babymommas a cuckolding-by-proxy. Because it explains and predicts. It explains why church going women would take actions that directly contradict some of the words they mouth. It predicts that the more support is given to one babymomma, the more support will be demanded by the married women for others. I believe this can be seen in many churches.

    Both you and SSM seem to me to be assuming that women have an innate desire for marriage. But if that were true, we would not see a bastardy rate of 40.7%. What women appear to have is a need for sperm to make babies, and a need for resources to raise them. These two things do not have to come from the same source. That is why cuckolding is a known reproductive strategy for women. Now that women can “marry” the state, we see the feminine imperative made very clear.

    So we are back to nature vs. nurture. It wasn’t that long ago that it was common to claim women are “naturally” monogamous – serial polyandry blows that up. Claiming women “naturally” want a man all their own appears to be in the same category. And Game predicts the truth in both cases: 5 minutes of Alpha carousel, Alpha sperm for babies / betas for support (but not babies), etc. The blue collar and lower middle class women are simply following their natural bent to obtain sperm for babies from one source, and support for those babies from another.

    Now, re-examine the situation when middle class, married church going women demand that the men of their church support in varied ways a single mother. What is the message, here? I suggest that it is nothing other than the feminine imperative, again. Maybe some are husband-bragging. Could well be. But there’s clearly female demand / men supply resources, i.e. female domination, going on as well. And I’m seriously going to think about the notion of cuckolding-by-proxy as well – here’s a woman pregnant by her 5-time-periods of Alpha, who needs Beta resources, and the wives are demanding….what? That’s right, they are demanding the bastard spawn be supported by their own Beta husbands.

    If that’s not cuckolding-by-proxy, or female domination / supremacy, what is it?

  102. TFH says:

    FuriousFerret,

    Your own quote excerpt of my comment states the following :

    (staying in her home country). That would get you out of feminist brainwashing and anti-male divorce laws.””

    You actually quoted the piece of my comment that makes your entire comment and video link unnecessary.

  103. FuriousFerret says:

    TFH,

    You are correct. I took your sentence out of context. I’m sorry.

    If you stay overseas then yeah it’s a better deal. But then you would have to give up your whole life just to get married.

  104. FuriousFerret says:

    Still a funny video though.

  105. TFH says:

    Yeah… and that video is from the 80s, long before things got quite so bad. Prophetic.

    It is amazing that women don’t understand cause and effect very well. They demand lopsided treatment in their favor, and they fail to figure out why men (after a delay) are deciding not to enter such a contract.

  106. FuriousFerret says:

    I find the fact that the most popular comedians are the ones that speak the truth but in humorous way to be very interesting.

    They truely are the modern day equivalent to the function that the court jester played in medieval England.

    If you listen to Joe Rogan, Eddie Muprhy, Chris Rock, Adam Corolla, all their jokes revolve around common sense observations about real life especially sex and women.

    If you said these things in public, you labled a bigot and shamed, however the comedians can get away with this because it doused in humor and it’s their jobs. The court jester likewise was the only one that could get away with criticizing the King’s flaws and giving a little bit of reality to a figure that couldn’t be opened ridculed by the courtiers.

    It’s like people understand these truths on a fundmentaly level and laugh at it but don’t take the full plunge to be open and act accordinly to these truths.

  107. whatever says:


    Combined with the loss of manufacturing jobs, the middle will not be squeezed, it will be crushed. When its final cohort retires, there will not be enough tax dollars to keep the feral underclass at bay, and that is when the UMC will expire.

    So I take your 30 years, and raise you to 50.

    I’d lower that estimate by 50 years.

  108. Pingback: The War On Men - VolNation

  109. Michael says:

    @ All -Thank you for your comments.

    @ FuriousFerret – Yes. I do feel I deserve an 7.5+. Why? My history, morals, hard work, ability, accomplishments, personality, physical fitness and income. I paid my dues. I would make a very good father. I’m not covered in tattoos playing guitar in a bar for $18k yr. I will be happy to settle for my equal. All I ask is she is white, in her 20’s, and has not been pounded and creamed by dozens of different men.

    I will not settle for a fabulous fat five or single mother at the Methodist church. What you say about church women (at least at my church) is interesting. There are very few attractive women. Even less who are single. I also look at Christian dating sites like “Big Church”. Let me tell you: they call it “big church” for reason. Haha. Physically attractive women as a general percentage feels significantly less than other dating sites reflective of the general female population (match.com etc).

    However there is one exception relative to my church experience: MORMONISM. I visited the Church of Latter Day Saints and was blown away by the single attractive women. At the time I was discussing my job to another guy my own age and noticed a few women were “orbiting” me. I attended a few sessions and was seriously considering converting.

    Interesting you mention game. I promise. I absolutely do have allot of game. In business. But that kind of game is actually hard work. I don’t want to “work” when I come home.

    I just want to come to my loving loyal monogamous wife. :(

  110. ar10308 says:

    @Michael,
    I’ve seriously considered Mormonism only for the fact that the Mormon women I’ve seen are very attractive and traditional. The group knows how to organize a culture.
    Now, if I could only get over their crazy belief that Joseph Smith wasn’t actually a con-artist…

  111. Michael says:

    Haha

    That comedy clip rings so true…

  112. Michael says:

    @ ar10308

    Haha. No comment. :)

  113. ar10308 says:

    @Michael,
    Clearly, you’ve been force-fed the Red Pill for decade or so. Now you have found a group of people who have had very similar experiences. What I can suggest is that you keep reading and listening. You will probably go through the grieving process in order to fully come to terms with the facts as they stand, but it sounds like you have already come to many of these realizations all by yourself.
    But realize that you do have options, including going internationally. However, you will need Game (dominant, masculine frame; IE you are the MAN in the relationship) to keep any wife worth having. Most won’t need a TON of game, unless they’ve ridden the Cock Carousel (in which case you’ve already screwed up by marrying the wrong woman), but just as you want a feminine, attractive wife, she wants a strong, confident, dominant man. So be her Alpha.

  114. FuriousFerret says:

    “Yes. I do feel I deserve an 7.5+. Why? My history, morals, hard work, ability, accomplishments, personality, physical fitness and income. ”

    Women don’t CARE about those things if you are a ‘Nice Guy (TM)”.

    – Morals: Morals aren’t fun, in fact they are the opposite of fun. This means nothing to a hot girl. It’s a neutral aspect at best, a buzzkill at worst.

    – Hard Work: Again who cares? Not women that are attractive. Money is a given. They have their own income and security. They are not looking for a provider when they are young and hot.

    – Ability, Accomplishments, Personality: What are your abilites? Is it the ability to social proofed at places she likes, like clubs? Is it the ability to make other women wanting you? Is your personality one of being extroverted and socially dominant? Do you allow others to have their way or do you demand your will be exercised?

    In terms of personality, hot women want a social dominant and outgoing guy. One that doesn’t supplicate to her. Who gets her emotions going and is fun. Who is experience with women.

    “I would make a very good father.”

    Women that under 26 could care less. They are having fun, fun, fun, fun. Are you providing the fun? If the answer is No, that’s the wrong one.

    “I will be happy to settle for my equal. All I ask is she is white, in her 20′s, and has not been pounded and creamed by dozens of different men. ”

    In 2012 your equal is a woman coming off the cock caroseul that wants to lock down a beta provider. In 1951, your equal is a hot 8 that has kids and tidys up the home. Also, she want a young white girl that is not a slut and is hot. Tall order my friend especially when you don’t offer value in terms of mentality and personality.

    “Interesting you mention game. I promise. I absolutely do have allot of game. In business. But that kind of game is actually hard work. I don’t want to “work” when I come home.”

    You have absolutely no Game. I can tell you right now you have no Game.

    Ok go here:

    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/

    Read that and then get back to us.

  115. Michael says:

    @ ar10308

    I’ve still getting used to the terms expressed on this website (red pill, blue pill, beta orbiter, etc) however I’m familiar with Alpha and Beta concept.

    I want to be a Beta in my off time. I don’t want to put out the effort to be an Alpha. That’s what I have to do at work.

  116. TFH says:

    The title :

    “More grim news for carousellers hoping to jump at the last minute.”

    What the charts tell me is that there was ONE generation of women who could afford to get away with riding the carousel and then marrying in the 30-35 period. That happened, and they got away with it.

    But only ONE generation of women would ever have gotten away with that. For the next wave, there are now a population of single ‘cougars’ older than then, that the first generation never had to compete with.

    Also, men adapt after the first generation too (and the aforementioned cougars enable that too).

    So after one generation of women got away with that, the second and third who assume they can do the same thing are in for a rude reality check.

  117. TFH says:

    All I ask is she is white, in her 20′s, and has not been pounded and creamed by dozens of different men.

    Why white? Go Asian – the partner count will be lower, and she might value your positive attributes a bit more.

  118. S says:

    @Dalrock

    “I might write a post on this, but my expectation is that marriage will be seen as a critical status marker for White and Asian women. In fact, it already is for these two groups, and I would say Hispanic women as well.”

    Do make a post on this, please. Do you think that there are any differences between the three groups of women in terms of their likely future family life trajectories? We all know that in the African community marriage and the nuclear family is pretty much extinct, but what about non-African American women?

  119. ybm says:

    Culture is the problem, not race TFH. Making a fetish of certain women because of perceived characteristics is the first step to ‘oneitis’ as you game guys say.

  120. @Michael,

    Your story is deeply memorable, particularly the fact that you confronted these women, and they, after trying to shame you, gloated about “having their cake with ice cream and sprinkles”, to your face. I actually posted a link to your comment on two reddit communities (/r/mensrights and /r/TwoXChromosomes) and saw similar reactions to theirs. Based on my own experiences on the matter and everything else I’ve read, I can safely say that contempt for men is well-rooted in female nature.

    Would you mind if I linked to your comment elsewhere? I think it’s required reading for every man out there.

  121. Johnycomelately says:

    Stay away from Eastern Europe, I have friends that have gone down that route and 90% have been disasters, Communism has done its damage, Russia after all has the worlds highest divorce rate.

  122. ybm says:

    shrineofvirtue says:
    November 26, 2012 at 12:53 am

    what could you possibly hope to accomplish by linking his post on redit? Maybe you can link it on Jezebel and the goodmanproject next! I’m not being critical of you, but really. Reddit is basically http://www.milquetoast.com

  123. james says:

    What scares me is what will happen when more men don’t want to marry any more. Up to now the suckers who married were the ones who got squeezed to finance the system. When men no longer marry, how will feminism finance itself? Through taxation, in other words by having unmarried men pay their share. So one the one hand when I’m in an MRA activist mood I want to convince fellow men not to marry. When I’m in a selfish mood I think they should be left to marry and get skinned.

  124. MackPUA says:

    & Ybm’s reign of trolling returns …

  125. freebird says:

    @Michael-
    “But that kind of game is actually hard work. I don’t want to “work” when I come home.

    I just want to come to my loving loyal monogamous wife.”

    That is a reasonable expectation and there is nothing wrong with that.
    Women used to follow that model with no problem when it benefited them most,it’s the changes in “the law” that has caused the change,not male behavior.
    It’s pure opportunism,nothing else.
    Given that legal climate it’s best not to marry in the Western world.
    If you’re not familiar with Briffault’s law and ladder theory look them up.
    The fact is you can never do enough to please a woman who can take all you have and also take from as many men as she pleases.
    The good looking woman you desire has the ability and will and no disincentives not to run hypergamy on as many men as possible,serially and in parallel.
    You have no recourse.
    In reality your options are:
    1.Marry and live outside the US or UK.
    2.Keep a mistress on the side in her own home and not co-mingling funds.
    3.Go it alone.
    I know which one is easier.
    A guy can delay taking a foreign wife until his late 40’s and play the field or not in the meantime.
    There is no compelling reason to sacrifice yourself or jump through hoops only to be rewarded with betrayal,anguish,and a multitude of various pains,financial and emotional.
    The fact is the modern woman does not bond for life,unless it costs a lot more not to do so.

  126. Alshia says:

    “So we are back to nature vs. nurture. It wasn’t that long ago that it was common to claim women are “naturally” monogamous – serial polyandry blows that up. Claiming women “naturally” want a man all their own appears to be in the same category. And Game predicts the truth in both cases: 5 minutes of Alpha carousel, Alpha sperm for babies / betas for support (but not babies), etc. The blue collar and lower middle class women are simply following their natural bent to obtain sperm for babies from one source, and support for those babies from another.”

    And love is just a contraption installed into female nature to motivate them to be persistent enough to pursue the Alpha until she gets his sperm, and Betas imitated ‘love’ in order to differentiate themselves from Alphas.

    Remorse, if felt by the female when Beta discovers he was cuckolded is not because she ‘loves’ him, but to motivate her to maintain her relationship with her wallet.

  127. Dalrock – brilliant picture, props to you, sir.

    @ Opus – “Will Dalrock be awarding prizes for the best caption for the dialogue betweem that Alpha Cockrel and that rather feminine-looking pony?”

    Princess Pony: “We played saddle-up all night, I put on my bridle so you could ‘break me in,’ wore the 6-inch horseshoes, and you even brushed my mane as you held me. Why won’t you return my calls or texts?”

    Alpha Cockrel (3 days later): “Gay.”

  128. ar10308 says:

    @Michael,
    “I want to be a Beta in my off time. I don’t want to put out the effort to be an Alpha. That’s what I have to do at work.”

    Sorry bro, but that really isn’t fair to either of you. You want a hot wife who will be sexually available to you, so in order to get that you need to be her Alpha. If you are her Alpha, then her sexuality will available to you whenever you want it because she’ll want it as much as you do. You can’t blame her for being more attracted to you when you act as an Alpha man than she can blame you for being more turned on by her hot, healthy body rather than being fat and slovenly.

    The best part about being the Alpha in the relationship is that it allows you to revel in your masculinity and it gets you what you want. The more Alpha you become, the better you’ll feel about yourself. For lessons on being Alpha, I suggest you turn to http://heartiste.wordpress.com/ and http://marriedmansexlife.com .

  129. James says:

    @TFH:

    “What the charts tell me is that there was ONE generation of women who could afford to get away with riding the carousel and then marrying in the 30-35 period. That happened, and they got away with it.”

    That is a good observation.

    40 years ago, when Richard Dawkins was a scientist and not a demagogue, he worked on problems such as the evolutionary biology of mating strategies. Some of his results are discussed here:

    http://www.heretical.com/ess/cyclical.html

    I don’t know whether the reality for our species is cyclical, but the more important message of Dawkins’ work is this: when one gender finds it advantageous to change its strategy, the benefit to that gender does not last very long. The reason is that the change gives the other gender the opportunity to benefit by changing its strategy too.

    For me, the really scary thing is that this war between the sexes not only predates civilisation, it predates the human race. It predates apes, even mammals. The games and strategies that dominate so much of our adult lives proceed from biologically anisogamous sexual reproduction, something that evolved hundreds of millions of years ago. We are doomed by our biology to want to follow scripts that are older than the dinosaurs.

    There are no arrangements that can be fair or ideal for both genders. There will always be the pain of discord with our biology.

  130. Paul says:

    AR, D,

    ” It predicts that the more support is given to one babymomma, the more support will be demanded by the married women for others. I believe this can be seen in many churches.”

    This concept is hardly new to politics. Many of the union contracts in the U.S. have salaries related to the minimum wage. Most of the fuss over raising the minimum wage, calling it a ‘living wage’, etc., is mere distraction. Increasing the minimum wage is almost always a case of Democrat politicians giving a stealth wage hike to their union supporters.

    This is the exact same economic principle playing out in your church example. Increasing the minimum wage actually hurts people at the bottom, as any competent economist (Sowell, Williams, Cappy Cap) will tell you. Just like increasing the number of babymommas does, with the people at the bottom in this case being the children. (Cue Maude Flanders: Oh please! Won’t someone think of the children!!) But then again all of these ‘good intentions’ are really nothing of the sort, they are actually quite blatantly malicious and selfish, with the better-off (i.e. union worker, married women) profiting at the expense of the most vulnerable (i.e. least-qualified workers, bastard children of babymommas).

    As the good Captain says, enjoy the decline!

  131. BSKillet says:

    A few thoughts:

    1) The chart for 30+ should be called the “can’t wife a ho” charts, since men are less willing to marry old, withered carousel riders with battered sluice boxes.

    2) “40 years of ultimatums” could also be called “40 years of shit tests,” with men failing each of the feminist shit tests over the last 40 years. Feminism is, as I have said, nothing but one huge society-wide fitness test that men are failing miserably.

    3) Not totally unrelated from Betty Woodruff at the National Review: Girls Not Coming of Age.

  132. What many men might not be aware of is the absolutely delicious pleasure of husband-bragging.

    This right here is probably the main reason marriage rates are still as high as they are, especially in the white middle class and higher. Think how many couples you see where the woman is obviously in charge, and the guy just kind of goes along. She doesn’t really have any respect for him, doesn’t really want to sleep with him anymore, and the current divorce and child support laws mean she doesn’t need to be married for his income. So why does she stay married? So she can brag about having a husband (not necessarily about anything worthwhile that her husband does, because that would mean she respects him), and because she fears being alone. Eventually, her contempt for him overrides those things, and she sees cougars on TV corralling hot, quality guys, so she decides to try to trade up.

    Michael,

    Thanks for telling your story. I could have written it at your age, with a couple differences, and I know other guys here could too. It’s important to keep getting it out there, though, so people will understand that Nice Guys like you aren’t outliers. You’re simply the logical result of being a genuinely nice guy who tried to follow the rules in a feminized society. You just didn’t know those rules weren’t designed to encourage marriage and virtue and family formation, the way the rules used to be. The new rules were designed to increase the sexual and social power of A) women, and B) ultra-wealthy, politically powerful men. In the process, they also increased sexual access for C) bad boys, like you mentioned, but hey, no system is perfect, after all. So who’s left to pick up the bill (both figuratively and literally)? Non-powerful, non-bad guys like yourself.

  133. b-166-er says:

    ybm,
    do you have a blog?

    I ask because you raise some interesting points but at the same time seem to get attacked or ignored for them?

    Is there another forum where you participate or a way to contact you for further discussion of the points you raise?

    Thank you.

  134. @Michael: Marry a woman who loves Jesus and lives it out. If you are to find such a woman she will be in a rural area or outside the USA entirely. Any woman you bring to LA will likely be ruined by it, so consider relocating as part of your strategy to marry. Furthermore, I can’t recommend that you marry any woman in the USA because of divorce laws. At any moment you can be robbed and ruined to the very depths of your soul.

    Seriously consider living cheap, stacking up crazy money, and then ex-patriating. Also, at your age, don’t be shy about seeking girls even as young as 19-21. Cast off any BS stigma you might feel about that. Hit me up if you want to talk more. There’s tons of ppl here to help you, and understanding the truth is a great start. Now we just need to work on you being able to love and not despise these poor depraved little creatures. There is a rare circumstance you may be able to arrange that would make a woman a wise investment for you emotionally and otherwise.

    As for the content of this blog:

    For seven women will take hold of one man in that day, saying, “We will eat our own bread and wear our own clothes, only let us be called by your name; take away our reproach!” Isaiah 4:1

    Grim news indeed.

  135. Pjay, what is the story behind that horrible picture? That looks to me like a serial killer keeping trophies of past prey.

    YBM, I think “Fortunate Son” is one of the best rock songs ever.

  136. “I want to be a Beta in my off time. I don’t want to put out the effort to be an Alpha. That’s what I have to do at work.”

    Ha! Well said, sir.

    You shouldn’t have to rebuild your entire personality from the ground up to get a date.

  137. b-166-er, try The Black Pill on for size:

    http://omegavirginrevolt.wordpress.com/

    YBM drops by there, too. Unfortunately some weirdo named “Peterman” posts there as well.

  138. FuriousFerret says:

    ‘You shouldn’t have to rebuild your entire personality from the ground up to get a date.’

    So you should just be yourself with strive for any self improvement?

    This is so B.S man. When you pedalize women and have a shitty femcentric personality and mentality you need to be set free of such thinking. A person doesn’t understand the feeling of freedom when they have lived their whole life in slavery. Yet that same person yearns for it. I understand that you don’t want to be a canned robotic alpha but you are missing the whole picture. It’s about reclaming postive masculinity and it comes in different flavors. While alpha comes in variety, I can tell you straight off the bat when a person is a ‘beta/effeminate/enslaved (take your pick of nouns here)”.

    You should see what Roosh V Forum thinks about this situation:
    A bluepill story from Reddit
    http://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-18097.html

  139. Ybm says:

    b-166-er says:
    November 26, 2012 at 11:02 am

    My blog is in italian and it is a finance and cycling blog where these types of topics are forbidden. I do triathlons and I use my real name and photos of myself so I will not link it here.

    This is the only place you will find me, as I don’t associate with the manosphere outside of this blog. You will have to discuss your issues here.

  140. MackPUA says:

    @FF thats Michaels post on rooshs forum …. lol

  141. FuriousFerret says:

    @Ybm

    “what could you possibly hope to accomplish by linking his post on redit? Maybe you can link it on Jezebel and the goodmanproject next! I’m not being critical of you, but really. Reddit is basically http://www.milquetoast.com

    Well I guess he accomplished it being posted on Roosh’s forum. Lol.

  142. ar10308 says:

    @The Real Peterman,
    You do realize that his effeminate Beta personality was encouraged and created by those who raised him. Changing his personality is part of taking the Red Pill because it is a full-rejection of the values and ideas about women he was raised with.

  143. Ybm says:

    Rather than trying to force a square peg into a circular hole (change who he is) Michael should be encouraged to find a square hole (change his priorities) instead. One is likely to result in a depression period and insecurities (the red pill) the other lead to a new sense of purpose and self esteem.

  144. MackPUA says:

    I did state Ybm was about to start his troll run … lol

    Thepeterman, b-166er, & ybm & the rest of the antigaming thread hijackers … you’ve been warned guys … lmao

  145. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    @Michael,
    “I want to be a Beta in my off time. I don’t want to put out the effort to be an Alpha. That’s what I have to do at work.”

    Unfortunately, this isn’t a realistic option. I’m like you, in that I don’t have a desire to be alpha. I’m more a zeta by nature; but I’m also married, and determined to do my level best to make the marriage a good one.

    I was raised on feminism, and it was pounded into me from pretty much all my information sources (pre-Internet) that being beta was the way to woo women and keep them happy. However, personal and observable experience kept refuting that.

    When I got married, my trained response was to go beta. It didn’t work, and so I switched to my natural zeta (essentially being roommates with my wife). That worked about as well as you’d expect. When I found the ideas of game and relationship/marriage advice that hadn’t been Oprafied, I tried acting alpha. I’ve started a few months ago, but the results are promising. I expect a sharp learning curve, though, because alpha doesn’t come naturally to me, and I’ve not had any training in it (unlike beta, which I’ve had plenty of training in).

    Part of going alpha for me has been grieving the loss of an ‘equal’ partner in marriage. All my life I was told that I could let my guard down, and share my feelings and vulnerabilities with my wife. This doesn’t work. For the marriage to work long term, you have to be predominantly alpha, with the other styles still there, but taking a back seat. Initially, this feels like I’m married to an opponent, rather than a friend. So far, though, it’s working better than anything else I’ve tried. And I think the feeling of my wife being an opponent is a reaction to having previously treated her like an equal. If enough time goes by, it won’t feel quite as pronounced, I suspect.

    I don’t like it, but so far it works better than anything else I’ve tried.

  146. Ybm says:

    MackPUA says:
    November 26, 2012 at 1:52 pm

    deformata reformare;
    reformata conformare;
    conformata confirmare;
    confirmata transformare;

  147. Pure says:

    “I want to be a Beta in my off time.”

    This is the male equivalent to

    “I am going to wear sweat pants and Uggs and you are going to find me sexy”

    No.

  148. TMG says:

    Suzanne Venker wrote a new article on why men are abandoning marriage. I think it’s a good article except that she fails to reference the anti-male laws involved in marriage and family.

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/24/war-on-men/

  149. I want to be a Beta in my off time. I don’t want to put out the effort to be an Alpha. That’s what I have to do at work.

    It’s not binary. One of the fallacies of the anti-game crowd is the idea that you have to put a massive effort into being uber-alpha at all times just to hold off the inevitable, and then you shed a tear at the end of Old Yeller, and she gets disgusted and moves out the next day.

    You can get most of the way to Alpha not by any particular effort, but just by not doing certain things. Defensive game, it’s sometimes called. Don’t ask for her permission. Don’t waffle; when you make a decision, stick to it, for good or ill (not if you decide you were truly wrong, of course; I’m talking here about things like where to eat). Don’t give her affection when she’s in a bad mood or not treating you well. (Follow the Dog Whisperer: save affection for when she’s in a calm, submissive state that you want to reinforce.) Don’t share all your worries and fears with her; a little vulnerability goes a long way. Don’t abdicate your responsibility as head of the family to her.

    If those things take effort, it’s only because you’ve been badly trained, and retraining yourself takes work. But you need to retrain yourself in those things anyway, because a real man doesn’t act that way, whether he wants to be married or not. So it’s a false choice to suggest that men have to do those things to keep a woman around. Men have to do those things to be men, and the fact that it attracts women is the natural bonus for it.

  150. koevoet says:

    Michael, Cautiously Pessimistic, I hear ya. I think one of the main things lacking in society is that men are constantly isolated from one another. I think that going beta is the natural thing to do when you are constantly expected to perform the dog and pony show for women. After the break up of my first relationship (and a rather long one at that) I threw myself into the dating game head on and suffered failure after failure. It was then that I started reading these sites. Eventually I got burned out dating and haven’t for a while. I have instead focused more on building and strengthening my relationship with friends. The more I do this the less I really care. I don’t think I’m going to straight up MGTOW on life but the more I look at things, the less I want to lose the good things that I have. I think that this is the proper path to alpha for the former beta, which I certainly was (God knows why, I was raised alpha but just turned beta after being force fed the BS in school and in the media). You need to be income independent. Otherwise, if you are just being alpha to impress the wimminz, you’re just doing the same old dog and pony show, just with a few more tricks. Maybe even a dancing bear if you get really good at it.

  151. Looking Glass says:

    One point, this mostly goes to frame: how you “start” the relationship will dictate much of how it proceeds. You don’t have to be the super-dominant Alpha for 95% of the time. Just enough when she tries to pull something that you push back and hold. That’s the main value of setting the relationship at the beginning, if you choose to be in one.

    There’s also a problem of terminology. Remember, even Roissy’s Alpha/Beta dynamic has gradients and exceptions. Athol Kay has a better hold on the relationship (rather than the pure attraction) aspects, so it’s a tad more complicated than being “Alpha at work; Beta at home”. What the real trick is to be “Alpha at work; don’t become an Omega at home”. That’s actually what most are talking about and what should be avoided.

    Actually, while most would suggest against legal marriage, I see the value of a Pre-Nup not so much in the legal aspects (which can get tossed out for a lot of reasons, though it seems to be pretty solid system for outlining premarital assets) but in setting the Frame for the relationship. It’s a much more solid place to start, assuming you’re going that way.

    It’s much like small children. Stern, enforced discipline early (pre-age 2) will replace any amount of discipline you can inflict later. If you don’t have control of them by age 3, then you really won’t. Same goes for relationships. You can’t build respect when you’ve been in the relationship a while and there is none without completely upending the situation. Which brings a high chance of it ending right then.

  152. newbie says:

    Hi Dalrock,
    I have found your blog recently and enjoy reading it tremendously. I wanted to share a brief piece of analysis with your readers.

    Consider women who in 2012 have reached the end of their reproductive years without ever marrying (the 40-44 cohort). They are 11.30% of all women, the same women were in the 35- 39 cohort in 2007. At the time the never married women in that cohort were 11.4% of all women. The same women were in the 30-34 cohort in 2002. At that time never married women were 19.30% of all women.

    So based on most recent data available for women who are never married at age 30-34 the chances of getting married while still able to have children are (19.30%-11.30%)/19.30%=41.45%. These are not great odds but not terrible.

    Again based on the most recent data available for women who are never married at age 35-39 the chances of getting married while still able to have children are (11.40%-11.30%)/11.40% = 0.88%. This is less than 1%! Something to think about…

    Age group Probability
    “30-34″ 19.30%
    “35-39″ 11.40%
    “40-44″ 11.30%
    Marriage Rate from 30-34 to 40-44 41.45%
    Marriage Rate from 35-39 to 40-44 0.88%

  153. Doc says:

    @Michael: “I want to be a Beta in my off time.”

    That is EXACTLY what every woman is thinking…

    I date women who are Doctors and Lawyers (or studying to be one) that just want to “concentrate on making the man I’m with happy”. That is the simple truth that many women won’t tell you, but they crave. I live life on my terms, and require that women devote themselves to making me happy when they are in my company. They seem to love it. No complaints – or no more than once since if they ever complain, they are out the door. Simple, easy, no fuss…

  154. infowarrior1 says:

    As I said before It is only a matter of time before this may happen if the women continue to behave poorly:

    Men Have Bred Dogs And Cattle
    Why Not Women Too?

    http://www.angryharry.com/esMenhavebreddogsandcattle.htm?note

  155. MaMu1977 says:

    Warning, might contain hilarity.

    In the old days, getting married was like getting a bike for Christmas.

    It was shiny and new
    http://www.socaltrailriders.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=135543&d=1325085485

    Or, at worst, had a couple of dings. But it was yours and no one else was allowed to ride it. And your Da taught you how to take care of your bike.

    Then one day, it was decided that bikes had the right (nay, responsibility!), to be ridden as much as they like, as hard as their increasingly frequent new riders liked, and that they would still carry the same price as a new bike.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4P3yp6mFfY

    And the bike suppliers (can’t say owners, because bikes are supposed to be free!), insisted that these bikes were as good as new, “Just wash it off and it rides like It’s fresh from the factory!”
    http://dirtbikeridingtips.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/adave_willet_jim_davies.jpg

    But, unfortunately for the bike suppliers, anyone with a working set of eyes can see that marrying…I mean *buying* a “new” bike in modern times will end up like this…

  156. deti says:

    It’s hard to miss the unmistakable upward trend in the never marrieds. Almost half of white women 20-24 YO are NMs. Fully one quarter of white women are NMs.

    This is not getting better, and it’s only going to continue upward.

    I am not sure that this is going to lead to a fundamental shift in the power position between men and women, though. There’s a chance (and only a chance) of that occurring only with men embracing and using Game en masse and I don’t see that happening.

    What’s more likely is what Ras al Ghul suggested: The women will flock to the attractive men, and an increase in soft harems (knowingly and unknowingly). The unattractive men still will not get women, because women simply don’t need a man and because they won’t stoop to dating or marrying a man they have no attraction for.

  157. Asafoetida says:

    You’re assuming that people want to get married as they get older — this is where you’re wrong. Lots of people are simply anti-social loners, more so than in previous times because so many lone children of lone mothers have been produced in the past 70 years, and they are just not socialised to be a normal family member, either as a spouse or sibling. There isn’t a blueprint for this type behaviour in their personal culture, and this is why most of those people do not get beyond the physical attraction stage in relationships and never will.

  158. an observer says:

    “I want to be a Beta in my off time. I don’t want to put out the effort to be an Alpha. That’s what I have to do at work.”

    Then you will live an increasingly disrespected, downtrodden life.

    Feminism is yet to peak. Failing EOTWAWKI, it will gradually ebb when the resources simply support it no longer. The misandry will endure for a long time to come.Isiah 4:1 indeed.

    A contemporary married womans respect will decline until she is terminally unhappy and pulls the eject shute. She will steal your children, alienate them from you, and blow your cash and assets on a series of asshole boyfriends.

    Your high gpa, morals and hard work will count for nought. Except by the child support calculations. Enjoy living in a single room hovel whilst the ex parades a series of men in front of children and shortens their lives by five years.

    I am happily married. I am an exception. If i had gone red pill before, i might have avoided women altogether. My wife is sweet, but does not understand.

    Fwiw: I cannot recommend in good conscience dating and marriage. The risk is too high. The return is unpredictable. Those who tell you to man up and take a risk downplay the effects of divorce rape.

  159. deti,

    You assume a static model when making these projections. While the assumptions may be correct, the assumptions may not be for the simple reason that people adapt. In this case we can already see that men are adapting, those that would have been the beta providers or at least the suckers that the system uses to pay for women behaving badly are checking out. These guys no longer have the drive to over produce and instead are living what can only be termed a subsistence existence. Thus the state can no longer take a good part of their over production and give it to the women in these soft harems. Without the patsy, the beta male, there is no soft harem as it can’t be supported economically.

    This whole social construct can’t continue and appears to me to be in a self re-enforcing spiral that will end with most of America looking like black america only worse as the welfare state ultimately isn’t self supporting (as Greece and Detroit have already found out the hard way). And once it’s hit bottom I don’t see it restarting as by that time most individuals will be hopelessly damaged by their up bringing in a single mother raised household.

  160. Herb says:

    @HF

    More and more women fading into spinsterhood. The irony here is that women tend to not be happy alone, but men are finding more and more that they are happier and happier when alone.

    “The only really happy folk are married women and single men.” – H. L. Mencken (a man decades ahead of his time on this one)

  161. Michael says:

    Dalrock said:
    No comments on the opening picture? Is it too subtle? Or perhaps too obvious to note?

    For what it’s worth, my first thought before even reading the article was that someone should take a picture like that and photoshop penises where the horses are.

  162. infowarrior1 says:

    @Michael

    If you don’t put in the effort then you ain’t ever going to to get the girl.

  163. Pingback: The Frustration of a Single Man « Free Northerner

  164. Dalrock says:

    @Deti

    I am not sure that this is going to lead to a fundamental shift in the power position between men and women, though. There’s a chance (and only a chance) of that occurring only with men embracing and using Game en masse and I don’t see that happening.

    One thing I would clarify is that young women will always be in the strongest position in the SMP. Likewise, young men won’t benefit much if at all from a power shift. The relative shift I anticipate is between men and women in their late 20s and in their 30s. The declining marriage rates for women in their 30s would seem to be proof that this is already happening.

    What’s more likely is what Ras al Ghul suggested: The women will flock to the attractive men, and an increase in soft harems (knowingly and unknowingly). The unattractive men still will not get women, because women simply don’t need a man and because they won’t stoop to dating or marrying a man they have no attraction for.

    This doesn’t fit with what we know about marriage rates for women who are already in their 40s. Over 90% of Asian women and 89% of White women in their early 40s have already married. For this to occur, large numbers of women married not just betas, but omegas. Hopping from man to man and even participating in an alpha’s soft harem are acceptable to young attractive women because it is generally assumed (unfortunately rightly so) that she could marry at any time she chooses. However, past a certain age (30? 35?) not having a steady man with a demonstrated investment in her (ideally marriage) is a big status hit for a woman, especially those who never married.

  165. Ybm says:

    Dalrock it’s possible, but the cultures of the cohort that is 40 right now and 20 (let alone the ones who are infants) is so drastically different that it’s pure speculation about whether ANYTHING we think we know about marriage will be predictive. For all we know anglobitches might start making American men suck blogs and expatriating to Angola.

  166. Outcast Superstar says:

    Gunner451Gunner451,

    In your response to deti let me add one more thing. Just because the would be no game beta male suckers weren’t able to get sexual experiences with 21-24 year olds when they were 21-24 years old doesn’t mean these guys are going to go all their life with out enjoying the sexual benefits of the 21-24 year olds.

    Once these would be no game beta male suckers get financially stable they can simply bail out of the dating and marriage scene all together, give the used up 30 plus year olds the finger while a couple hours later rent an attractive 21-24 year old Escort or Asian Massage Parlor babe for $200 an hour and get to enjoy all those sexual experiences that they missed out on years earlier.

    There is an old saying which goes like, “If it Flies, Floats, or Fucks, Your better off renting it”

    For those not bound by religious beliefs, I have amassed quite a good collection of links where you could learn more about what I’m talking about.

    http://outcastsuperstar.blogspot.com/2010/04/bachelor-links.html

    (The domestic sites are towards the bottom)

  167. dekcuf says:

    yeah, that story Michael gave really summarizes the heartache perfectly, but you have to move on. This web site is pure gold, christ!

  168. Elise says:

    I’m 34 and never married….

    And not because I didn’t make it a priority, or because no man was ever good enough for me, or because I wasted my life on career and casual sex. I’ve never had casual sex; I fundamentally don’t believe in it. Although I need to have a job in order to pay my bills, I’ve never been a driven career-woman. I’m not bossy, I don’t care about money or status or looks, and I’ve never turned down a man in hope of something better.

    I’m shy. I’m really, really, really, really shy. I’m socially stunted, and socially awkward. I don’t think I’m even particularly bad-looking, but I’m probably 20 pounds overweight. I’m shy. I was an outcast in high school, and an outcast in college and I’ve just been an outcast all my life, and here I am, an outcast in my thirties with men now gloating over my failed life.

    I really regret having been a hermit. If I had a time machine, I would go back in time and be less of a hermit. I’d force myself out there in front of men, no matter how much it scared me. I don’t know how to talk to people, I don’t know how to tackle dating, but I wish I’d learned to do it in my twenties.

    I hate the way you guys almost take delight in my predicament.

    I wish you wouldn’t assume that we’re single still because we were too picky, or too mean, or too stuck on ourselves, or whatever.

    If any man would just give me a chance to let me love him, I wouldn’t be anything like those women you say you hate. I’m a good, kind, loving, giving person and I know deep down that this is true, and if any man would only just give me the time of day, I could show him that. I don’t have youth on my side, but apart from that, I think I’m what men always say they want in a woman, but nobody wants a 34-year-old used-up hag. So…

    What is a woman in my situation to do? How do I explain to men I meet that my singleness is the result of years and years of intense and crippling social phobia? It’s not that “no man was ever good enough for me.” Will all men just assume that I’m single because I was an overly picky bitch who spent her twenties turning down men who threw themselves at her feet?

    No man has thrown himself at me, ever. No man has ever looked my way or asked me out. Even at 24, I was someone who was completely overlooked and ignored by all men. I wish I knew what it felt like to be desired by a man. Hell, I kind of envy women who’ve had opportunities to reject men — at least they’ve known what it’s like to feel wanted, at least they’re part of the world. I’ve just been a pariah all my life and I guess I always will be.

    I’ve got to be honest, I’ve been really thinking suicide lately. I’ve really fucked up my entire life. I spent my best years hiding out from the world, crippled by fear. Now, I’ve basically locked myself in to a lifetime alone. And then I read stuff like this, where men are apparently happy and gleeful over my deep grief. What do I do? What do I do? I can’t blame anyone for not wanting a 34-year-old, socially-phobic, overweight hag, but I don’t think I can face the future I’ve locked myself into.

    I wish I’d known at 21 how important it was to force myself to overcome these fears and find someone early in life.

  169. Igniss says:

    While I will also gladly warn the commenter wanting to be Beta in his off-time that it will destroy him, I will not criticize him for it. It is NOT an analogue to women wanting men to be sexually attracted to obesity.

    Yes, the basic mechanism of attraction is the same. But men have always wanted thin, healthy women, and have remained constant in their desires since the dawn of human race. Women, on the other hand, started needing the extreme alphaness (the so-called “high dominance threshold) only of late. Nowadays, women need Alpha even more than in the stone ages, because unlike that time, a woman’s survival and existence is no longer bound to anything and she can afford to do anything ‘safely’ (in her mind). With those natural constraints removed, we are now witnessing the explosion of Alpha criteria from women.

    It’s female desires that have grown unnatural and ballooned out of proportion. Adjust properly, but never forget that fact.

    It’s not your fault.

  170. BC says:

    Dalrock: “I might write a post on this, but my expectation is that marriage will be seen as a critical status marker for White and Asian women. In fact, it already is for these two groups, and I would say Hispanic women as well.”

    IMO any woman for whom marriage (and especially marriage to an outwardly successful man, i.e., a ‘catch’) is a ‘status marker’ is not a good woman to marry. This is not an in-love-till-death-do-us-part woman; her views of the man and the marriage will fluctuate with the man’s behavior and fortunes.

    Also,

    FF: “If you stay overseas then yeah it’s a better deal. But then you would have to give up your whole life just to get married.”

    lolwut? provincial much?

  171. Nancy Drew says:

    Hello Dalrock

    I think your analysis is spot on. I’m 36, my husband is 46. I’ve been telling him for years that something really weird is happening to women and he refuses to believe me. I look around at my peer group and many are (apparently) happily married but large numbers of them are single and childless. And yet these were the very same women who never went without a boyfriend, or a couple of dates, or a ONS for more than a couple of months at most (in stark contrast to my now-happily-married peers and I who seemed to be permanently alone year after year). Thanks to social media my husband and I can see what his former girlfriends are up to these days (they will keep checking him out on LinkedIn) – they invariably have fabulous careers in far-flung places but they’re all at least four or five years older than me and I can only assume from their frankly stalkerish behaviour that they’ve finally woken up and realised that the downside of rejecting men like my husband who wasn’t “handsome, ambitious, rich, tall” whatever enough was that they also rejected his reliability, faithfulness, wisdom, and willingness to provide for his wife and children. I’d call him a catch (or does that make me a bad wife?) but the girlfriends he had in his youth didn’t seem see him that way.

    [D: Welcome Nancy. Appreciating your husband doesn't make you a bad wife.]

  172. Opus says:

    Let me try a different tack: I think women as a sex are in serious trouble, very serious trouble – not men (who as always will merely shrug their shoulders).

    I maintain that women cannot cope with casual sex. Women always need some form of pay-off or reason to indulge in sexual activity over and beyond simple physical pleasure – there is no more free-sex than there is a free-lunch; men don’t have this problem, of course, which is why even in on-line dating, average women will get as many approaches as the good-looking: that is why Marriage suits women as does Prostitution. Outside of those two paradigms they cannot cope, for when it goes wrong as it will or not according to plan; where they become aware of their own degradation and slutiness they get upset, and naturally, being incapable of responsibility, blame men and often with a delusoriness otherwise only seen in the paranoid, and frequnetly with projection of their own irrational desires and impulses. Only this last weekend HMG are introducing two new laws against stalking. The Home Office is alleging now that 18% of women (claim to) have been stalked (this presumably is apart from all those who have been raped). It is, I am afraid, (and I have some personal and professional experience of stalkers) simply nonsense. Stalking is a psychotic state, – a substitute for a relationship, but malign in intent, and previously rare. Naturally, although stalkers are just as likely to be female as male (I can attest to that) HMG see it as entirely the fault of men. What I think is happening is that women, single women, are simply unable to cope with the freedom that comes from being single, aided by the pill, affirmative action and endless choice addiction and abortion and over periods of decades – that is to say through their twenties, thirties and into their forties. The menopause is the wall, after which no man (no matter how attractive they may still be) can want them (other than for pump and quick get-away dump). Even so, many women are so entitled they convince themselves they are too good for any man but at the same time, men who as they age lose their burning irrational desire for flesh, find the lure of Marriage (the only path previously to Pussy) considerably less than appealing, as they see their friends and acquaintances financially, emotionally and sometimes personally and professionally ruined by females. They think better of Marriage which is easy to do, as, if the women are like the females on Plenty of Fish and OK Cupid [see The Private Man's brilliant thread of choice-profiles thereon of desparate menopuasal or soon to be females] they – the women – are making it as hard as possible for any man less attractive than Brad Pitt, less charming than George Clooney and less affluent than George Soros to stand any chance. All that then happens is that these women will merely fall for Harley McBadBoy or Fuckbuddy Rockdrummer, thus lowering their MMV still further.

    Those lines on the graphs are spiralling upwards at an alarming rate, a rate which is probably previously unknown in any civilisation, and which takes us into uncharted territory with the SoCons calling for the Paddock-Gate to be bolted long after the Mare has cantered out across the field. Putting those mares out of their misery might well be the only truly humane action.

  173. Paul Murray says:

    A far more spectacular interpretation of that graph is this:
    in 2003, 18.3% of 30-35 were never married. In 2008, 11.7% of the 35-40 were. Thus, 36% of that 18.3% were able to find themselves a husband in their prime husband-hunting years.
    In 2007, 18.5% of the 30-35 were never married. In 2012, 11.7% of the 35-40 were. Thus, 17% of that 18.5% were able to find themselves a husband.

    LESS THAN HALF.

    The chances of a white woman with baby rabies (the 30-35 yo bracket) finding a husband before hitting The Wall dropped from ONE IN THREE (pretty bad odds) in 2003 to ONE IN SIX (really bad odds) in 2007.

    Lord only knows what the chances are for the 2012 cohort – we’ll find out in five years time.

  174. Paul Murray says:

    Oh – that kink in the graph for the 30-35 age bracket, it happens at 2009, which means women born 1974-1979. What a surprise. It’s generally interesting to arrange the data by cohort (year-age), which is what you are doing here.
    I’d like to see the graph for men.

  175. imnobody says:

    I don’t see women having problems with landing a beta. There are plenty of betas desperate enough to marry a former carousel rider . If women don’t marry them, it’s because they think they can do better. The women who don’t marry before The Wall are the ones who are extremely picky. This decrease of marriage rates is not driven by men rejecting older women but by women rejecting beta men.

    As I have said, I don’t live in the States but I lived there. Let me put an example of three women I know in America. These are not American women but they have completely been Americanized. These are a group of three friends.

    Girl number one is 27 y.o and pretty homely: chubby, small and kind of ugly. A 3 or 4, more or less. In my native country, she had a boyfriend with the same SMV as her. In America, she started banging a lot of guys who were handsome and with a good economic position. She has been banging an Indian guy for some years now. The Indian guy is a 9 physically (a stunningly handsome man), he is from a wealthy family in India and he has a good job. She is a elementary teacher. She is ruined for the normal guys who are willing to marry her. I tried to introduce some friends of mine to her, but she sees them below her.

    Girl number two is 38 y.o and it was pretty attractive: a 8 in her youth, a 7 now. She has been dating for 20 years now and she hasn’t found the guy (so imagine their standards). Unfortunately, she was diagnosed a problem in the womb so she is not going to be able to have children. She was devastated. But, as far as I know, she hasn’t decrease their standards so she is still single.

    Girl number three is 30-something. She was the quintessential American slutty princess. She rode the carousel hard and the other two girls criticized for this (mind you, it’s not that the other two girls were not slutty but this won the prize). She married a year ago with a beta with money who treats her like a princess. You see their pictures in pictures. She has aged badly: she seems an old woman now but she and her beta husband seem genuinely happy.

    So I don’t believe this thing about betas despising older women. For every former carousel rider, there is a beta willing to marry her. I believe in women being too picky to accept these betas.

  176. Lavazza says:

    Paul Murray: Yeah, it would be interesting to see what proportion of never married women born a certain year gets married during a year (2011 for example). I would guess it’s around 10-12 % two years before and after the median age of marriage (28 in the US?, so 26-30), dropping to 4-6 % during the thirties and to 1-2 % during the forties. You need to have a lot of unmarried female friends in their forties to get an invitation for a first wedding every year, or even every decade.

  177. Lavazza says:

    No, it must be higher during the peak years.

  178. Paul Murray says:

    (sorry about the multiple rplies, but oh well)

    Just plotted “chance, if never married, that you will get married in the next 5 years” for all your data. For the 25-29 age group, that figure hovers around 50%, and has dropped to 40%. For the 35-49 group, It hovers around 20%, although it’s more variable.

    Now, this figure is a pretty clear, unambiguous indication of SMV (actually, MMV – marriage market value), especially if we knock 5% off the figures for the lesbians and other women who will never marry because they genuinely are not looking to be married. (that is, instead of “percent never married”, it becomes “percent never married who probably want to be”)

    Here’s the thing – from 1999 to 2004 the line for 30-35 year olds is very much like the line for 25-29 year olds. Despite the whole 30-year-old thing, a 32-yo has as much chance as a 27-yo of getting married in 5 years. But from 2004 to 2007, it starts heading down and has not hit bottom yet.

    And that’s weird.

    Prior to 2004, a 30-something has the MMV of a late 20-something. Heading into the second decade of the new milennium, a 30-something has the MMV of a middle aged woman. This is the opposite of what feminism predicts. According to feminism, with all the empowerment and shit a woman can put off her marriage until later in life. We are seeing the opposite: the more we progress into the feminist new millennium, the more it becomes the case that if a woman doesn’t marry young, she never will.

  179. tbc says:

    “It’s female desires that have grown unnatural and ballooned out of proportion. Adjust properly, but never forget that fact.”

    Are you sure you meant to include the word ‘desires’ in that sentence? The sentence makes perfectly good sense without it.

  180. Hugh G. Rection says:

    Well the Fox article again specifies a good man as someone who is of utility to a woman and her children. I find this rather offensive.

  181. hurting says:

    an observer says:
    November 26, 2012 at 8:15 pm
    “I want to be a Beta in my off time. I don’t want to put out the effort to be an Alpha. That’s what I have to do at work.”

    Then you will live an increasingly disrespected, downtrodden life.

    Feminism is yet to peak. Failing EOTWAWKI, it will gradually ebb when the resources simply support it no longer. The misandry will endure for a long time to come.Isiah 4:1 indeed.

    A contemporary married womans respect will decline until she is terminally unhappy and pulls the eject shute. She will steal your children, alienate them from you, and blow your cash and assets on a series of asshole boyfriends.

    Your high gpa, morals and hard work will count for nought. Except by the child support calculations. Enjoy living in a single room hovel whilst the ex parades a series of men in front of children and shortens their lives by five years.

    I am happily married. I am an exception. If i had gone red pill before, i might have avoided women altogether. My wife is sweet, but does not understand.

    Fwiw: I cannot recommend in good conscience dating and marriage. The risk is too high. The return is unpredictable. Those who tell you to man up and take a risk downplay the effects of divorce rape.

    Some very, very good insight here, particularly regarding all of the hard work michael has put in to make himself a marriageable man. Don’t you see, it’s just expected – the price of admission, if you will. Women do not understand, even the few good ones, such as Opus’ wife.

    You simply can not imagine the effects of divorce rape. It’s more like a divorce gang bang where each step in the process is more painful and humiliating than the last.

  182. deti says:

    Dalrock:

    “Over 90% of Asian women and 89% of White women in their early 40s have already married. For this to occur, large numbers of women married not just betas, but omegas. Hopping from man to man and even participating in an alpha’s soft harem are acceptable to young attractive women because it is generally assumed (unfortunately rightly so) that she could marry at any time she chooses. However, past a certain age (30? 35?) not having a steady man with a demonstrated investment in her (ideally marriage) is a big status hit for a woman, especially those who never married.”

    OK, I can see this. My takeaway from this is: marriage is primarily a status marker for women currently. It is merely a demonstration that some man, somewhere, thought enough of her to ask for marriage and to actually go through with marriage. In decades past marriage was to provide safety and security, a safe place to raise children. Now it’s something else entirely.

    Another thing to consider: of those 90% of Asian women and 89% of White women who have married by their early 40s, a sizable percentage of those women either are already divorced or will divorce.

  183. Sandy says:

    2 Paul Murray

    Why do you have negative numbers on your graph?

  184. Dalrock says:

    @BC

    IMO any woman for whom marriage (and especially marriage to an outwardly successful man, i.e., a ‘catch’) is a ‘status marker’ is not a good woman to marry. This is not an in-love-till-death-do-us-part woman; her views of the man and the marriage will fluctuate with the man’s behavior and fortunes.

    You are conflating two entirely different things. A woman who values the status of marriage isn’t necessarily marrying a man she isn’t in love with. As I’ve said from the beginning, don’t marry if you aren’t both head over heels. What I’m trying to get at is women have impulses which work against lifetime marriage as well as impulses which work for lifetime marriage. Given the nature of the detonator/threatpoint, it is in your best interest to have something more than just the strength of your game weighing in the balance.

    There is absolutely no reason to object to women who are proud of keeping their marriages together, proud of their till-death-do-us-part commitment in a fickle world, and proud of providing an intact family (including the father) for their children.

  185. Dalrock says:

    @Deti

    OK, I can see this. My takeaway from this is: marriage is primarily a status marker for women currently. It is merely a demonstration that some man, somewhere, thought enough of her to ask for marriage and to actually go through with marriage. In decades past marriage was to provide safety and security, a safe place to raise children. Now it’s something else entirely.

    For large numbers of women status is likely all that holds their marriages together. However, anything which dulls the threatpoint offers the husband a fighting chance to keep his game intact. If he withstands the storm of irrational demands and comes out on the other side with her respect and attraction, the outcome is real. If his children grow up with him in the house, the outcome is real.

    Another thing to consider: of those 90% of Asian women and 89% of White women who have married by their early 40s, a sizable percentage of those women either are already divorced or will divorce.

    Yes, absolutely. The 2009 SIPP data backs this up. 90.2% of White Non Hispanic women in their 40s had ever married. 34.8% (of all women in that group, not just those who had married) had ever divorced. 17.5% (again of all) were currently divorced (the difference indicating remarriage, at least for the time being). Interestingly the ever divorced stat peaks for this demographic in their 50s at 39.4% and declines from there. For women in their 60s it is 36.4%, and for 70+ it is 20.9%. Since remarriage doesn’t change this number, the only way I could explain this is a combination of very low divorce rates for older women (which I’ve shown) and higher mortality rates for women who have ever divorced than those who stay married.

    My point however was that there is an almost knee jerk denial of the importance of marriage to women in the manosphere, yet the data shows they are willing to do some pretty surprising things from a red pill perspective to attain it. The current crop of carousellers are making a bet that marriage is a given, something to the effect of “only a loser can’t get married, I’ll do it later!”. They don’t yet know they are wrong. When they figure this out brace for some serous squealing, like we’ve never seen before. The current “man up” barrage is due to an extra 2% of women not marrying. Wait until this really develops. Also, look for those women who attained and held on to their status of wife to subtly dig those who didn’t.

    Just to clarify, what I’m not saying is that all of this will magically right itself. What I’m saying is there are counter-forces which will kick in along class lines, and we can already see this. Exactly where the demarcation line ends up between MC, UMC, and UC is something we could speculate on, but that this line will exist is in my opinion self evident. Marriage and having bio dad of the woman’s children in the home is and will continue to be a marker of status, of class. Those women who fail to attain this marker will be much more likely to watch their children and grandchildren devolve down to the lower classes than those who attain it, which will further reinforce this class marker.

  186. FuriousFerret says:

    @Elise

    I’m sorry about your situation. It’s not a good thing or fair that you had these problems growing up and now are very lonely in your mid thirties.

    You went through what we call ‘omega’ males go through. I presume your physical beauty was against the ideal and those physical attributes prevented men from seeing you as a sexual partner.

    First off, I want you to know that your crippling shyness probably didn’t hurt you as much as you think. Being outgoing and social is much more of a factor for men than women. That’s not to say it didn’t contribute but it was a secondary affliction. I do believe you when you said men didn’t go after you because due to the cruel nature of sexual selection your equals were the overweight, social outcast that had non existent social skills that utterly replused you even though he was the person that would likely date/marry you. This is a normal reaction. Just because you were an omega doesn’t mean that your biological attraction would be to another omega.

    What can you do about this though especially when you are nearly middle age? I know you have heard this before but weight is the biggest problem at play here and ignoring it will not make it go away. I know this is controversial and people are tired of hearing it but carbs are the biggest factor. To people that can’t handle the massive amount of sugar they will simply blow up eating the carbs. If you eat a diet of chicken, turkey, and veggies with no sugar drinks or wheat/carbs you will lose weight. Don’t even worry about exercise.

    I also presume you pretty plain even at a normal weight. Don’t worry about this at all. What you see as hideous when you compare yourself to other women, most men simply don’t see. They see your feminine qualities. It overrides what you think is ugly and totally unacceptable. It’s just by comparison that a healthy weighted woman believes that she can’t attract a man. It’s a B.S mental trick.

    After you lost the weight or even when you are still large, you still have to calibrate attraction cues massively. As hard as this is, you must make it a huge priority to see undesirable men and find good qualities about them. That fat lonely guy that has no social domaniance. Talk to him. It’s hard work but if you pound the pavement you will find a diamond in the rough. You will find a guy just like you that has been hurt by society’s standards and actually has a decent personality underneath it all. I think your extreme shyness was because you weren’t accepted by the mainstream even the normal beta. I doubt you will have crippling shyness to the lesser beta, quasi omegas.

    I really hope this helps you in some way.

  187. Dalrock says:

    FYI, seeing that Paul Murray is doing his own analysis of the data I exported the spreadsheets I used into Excel format and uploaded them (see note at bottom of OP). It looks like the conversion stomped the charts (at least when I open them in Libre Office), but the data tables are there which will make creating new charts in Excel easy.

  188. FuriousFerret says:

    Also,

    About the diet thing just do this:

    For the next four months, buy a over baked whole chicken every day and that’s your main meal for the entire day. For the side eat any veggies that are not corn or potatoes.

    You will lose massive amounts of weight and you will not be hungry. Exercise is ok if you want to do but is in no way necessary.

    It might be hard but not impossible. When are you mid 30s and an omega, you should give everything you got. Don’t look back and say I just didn’t try.

  189. tbc says:

    @Elise – I just saw your comment. You said:

    If any man would just give me a chance to let me love him, I wouldn’t be anything like those women you say you hate. I’m a good, kind, loving, giving person and I know deep down that this is true, and if any man would only just give me the time of day, I could show him that. I don’t have youth on my side, but apart from that, I think I’m what men always say they want in a woman, but nobody wants a 34-year-old used-up hag.

    You have my sympathies. I know that there are quite a lot of women like you around. My wife was one of them: she was very shy and slightly overweight. But she got married. I suspect that you need an indirect way to interact with people, and yeah losing a few pounds won’t hurt, but 20lbs over is not a game ender by any stretch. I suspect that there are men around that because of your own preoccupation with your shyness, you didn’t notice their probably too subtly indications of interest. Trust me, you have crossed paths with a guy or several who would have liked to have you. Some of them may have took your shyness for aloofness or arrogance and failed to approach you thinking that maybe you were stuck up. Don’t underestimate how intimidating it can be for a guy to approach a woman; your being shy probably made it harder for some guy who was very very Beta.

    As for looks, they are a bit overrated. Look around you and I’m sure you’ve seen some ladies that look like overturned turnip trucks who are happily married. Men are much more appreciative of femininity – which ups the attractiveness level by at least 1 point or 2. Work on losing a few pounds, but more importantly up your confidence level. Learn to walk well, wear makeup well, and dress in a conservative attractively feminine way. A woman who projects feminine confidence is an attractive woman = losing 10lbs. Cultivate other feminine qualities. Learn to cook, bake, sew, and let it be known that you enjoy it. Work on some indirect female game. There are ways a shy girl can show a guy she’s approachable or interested.

    I recommend online dating like Eharmony or something, BUT if you go on there, you CANNOT BE PICKY as far as responding goes. I met my wife online and part of my screening process was to ignore any woman who didn’t respond to my messages within 2-3 days. My wife today is my wife because she responded quickly to my initiative.

    My guess is you’ll meet a guy who is also introverted. Such guys (like me) struggle to take initiative and are awkward about showing their interest in a girl because they don’t want to be rejected.

    And 34 is not the end of the rainbow for you cookie. There are a lot of guys who would love to have a girl who isn’t a used up mattress at the age of 34!

  190. deti says:

    “For large numbers of women status is likely all that holds their marriages together. However, anything which dulls the threatpoint offers the husband a fighting chance to keep his game intact. If he withstands the storm of irrational demands and comes out on the other side with her respect and attraction, the outcome is real. If his children grow up with him in the house, the outcome is real.”

    Yeah, there are things men can do and say to dull the threatpoint.

    1. Remind her the odds are against her marrying again.
    2. Remind her that if she does marry again, remarriage will likely be to a lower status man.
    3. Her children will suffer financially, academically, and healthwise because of a divorce.
    4. “If we divorce, I’ll take a lower paying job and ask for reductions in child support.”
    5. Remind her that she will have to work if she divorces.
    6. “If you divorce me, I will tell our family, your family, our friends, your friends, my friends, and everyone we know why you are divorcing me (unhaaaappiness, your infidelity, your bitchiness, etc.)
    7. “If you divorce me, expect a war. We’ll fight over everything — custody, alimony, child support, property division, all the way down to who gets the Springsteen CDs and the downstairs bathroom trash can. I’ll do all I can to dissipate and waste the marital assets. I’ll force liquidation and equal division of whatever is left, and after the war you’ll have touched off, “whatever is left” will have to go to pay the lawyers. You won’t be able to keep the house because your only option to keep it is to buy me out and take over the payments yourself; and I know you can’t afford to do either. The only way you can afford this house is with my income.”

  191. FuriousFerret says:

    @tbc

    “yeah losing a few pounds won’t hurt, but 20lbs over is not a game ender by any stretch.”

    20 pounds overweight is obese in woman code.

    Lena Dunham has described herself as being normal weight while other women defend her weight as being ‘normal’ as well. Lena Dunham is extremely fat point blank.

    You have to read between the lines, she is most likely obese with plain looks. Losing the weight is the number one thing she can do as well with modifying her attraction cues to unattractive men that have low self esteem but have decent personalities between the social grime.

    Also I doubt she is an entitled femicunt with manly personality because she is crippled with social anxiety. You don’t neg down a broken ego with no self esteem.

  192. tbc says:

    @FF – oh.. did I neg her? I don’t think so.

  193. Ybm says:

    Elise says:
    November 27, 2012 at 2:10 am

    Ahh, the sex wars trample another life. Look upon the men of your quality, how they are treated by the likes of Amanda marcotte (creepy virgin rapists) how they are not to subtlety encouraged to commit suicide so their “failed genes” do not spread. Look upon the mocking and humiliation of skepchick towards a man of your equal who dared awkwardly ask a woman out, the nerve of his failed genes to look upon her with anything other than distant reverence! Look upon the darkest of feminists who encourage sex selective abotion to eliminate white males, forced lobotimzation and castration for the living ones.

    Look then upon the reaction to a man who dares say this is wrong, and how he is treated.

    Then look upon how little I give a fuck about you and your failed genes.

  194. ar10308 says:

    @Elise,
    “I hate the way you guys almost take delight in my predicament.
    I wish you wouldn’t assume that we’re single still because we were too picky, or too mean, or too stuck on ourselves, or whatever.”

    In your case (and women who share similar circumstances), we don’t. You have much more in common with most of us than you do with the Carousellers. You must make a conscious effort to remove yourself from the statements made above about these women. You are not one of them.

    As several others have said above, you need to work on your weight as the primary goal for personal improvement.

    Secondary to that, you have to become more sociable. That may actually be harder from what it sounds like. However, if you are losing weight and improving your looks, you will feel more confident and be able to summon the strength to get out and meet people.

    As others have said, you don’t have the option of being super picky with regards to men who do take interest. If a man finds interest in you, find something about him that you respect and are attracted to and give it your best Girl Game (http://marriedmansexlife.com/forum). At this point you have nothing to lose.

  195. FuriousFerret says:

    “Then look upon how little I give a fuck about you and your failed genes.”

    Hello my name is YBM. I am a badass.

    I LOL’ed, even though I felt bad about it due trying to help her.

  196. deti says:

    Elise:

    You have my sympathies too.

    I think you misunderstand this post and comments. The post is directed at the relatively recent (in the last 40 years or so) phenomenon in which a growing number of women deliberately postpone marriage, have sex with the most attractive men who will sex them, try to wring a relationship or three out of those attractive sexy men, complain when the sexy men won’t marry them, become sluts, and then complain louder when they hit 29 or 30 or 31 about “where are all the good men?!” these are women who have taken and are taking marriage for granted.

    Kate Bolick, a now 40 year old spinster, said it best:

    “We took for granted that we’d spend our 20s finding ourselves, whatever that meant, and save marriage for after we’d finished graduate school and launched our careers, which of course would happen at the magical age of 30. *** That we would marry, and that there would always be men we wanted to marry, we took on faith. How could we not?”

    You are not the type of woman we disdain. Shy, socially awkward women are not the ones to whom the manosphere directs itself.

  197. Ybm says:

    FuriousFerret says:
    November 27, 2012 at 12:31 pm

    There’s a reason visit blackpill with the regularity that I do. And it has nothing to do with being an “omega virgin” it’s because of how I treated guys like him growing up, at the behest of female approval. A lot of guys like to talk about how they are the bullied, the humiliated around, here, but I’m at the other end, the bully.

    Bullying is a raw thng for me, because I did it, and my younger siblings were the victims of me as much as the “omega virgins” at my school were.

    So forgive me if my emotions get the better of me. Call it penance if you like, but I couldn’t care less about a woman handed a silver spoon who chose to dig her grave with it. My focus is the men like her, the ones even now the manosphere mocks and humiliates. No more.

  198. deti says:

    Women like Elise point out something that inhabitants of the new SMP will have to accept.

    Women in general will simply have to bear more of the costs of dating, courtship and marriage. Women are going to have to grit their teeth, bite the bullets and put themselves out there more. They will have to risk more, they will have to pay more, and they will have to get rejected.

    Women will have to:

    1. Do more approaching and asking.
    2. Make the IOIs absolutely unmistakable. You give him your number. You touch him. You tell him you are interested.
    3. Reduce the financial outlays of dating by paying for more dates.
    4. Be willing to accept nonbinding LTRs.
    5. Be willing to accept covenant marriage, and not legal marriage.
    6. Be willing to sign prenups.

  199. FuriousFerret says:

    @Deti

    Approaching and asking from a woman is ‘super duper ultra creepy’. It’s just sad and feels off. I don’t suggest any woman does this. It signals ‘use me, i’m nothing’.

    The correct action is ‘Make IOIs absolutely unmistakeable’. Eye contact and playing with hair. If the dude has any interest,he’s talking to you. That is a female approach.

  200. FuriousFerret says:

    YBM, I definitely understand you on this.

    What you feel is empathy and digust of your fellow man.

    These men are not acting like what a natural man should be. They fill both men and women with repluse.

    The horrifying revelation that I have about these men is that most are doomed and I’m not going to try to save them. They simply suck you into their mentality and drag you to depths with them. They have to want to escape their bondage before it can happen. They must be the ones to seek out the truth and help, you can’t force it on them.

  201. koevoet says:

    Elise, you’ve gotten some good advice. The best I can give is to look online. When someone shows interest don’t push them away. I have tried dating a couple of shy girls in their 30’s. One rejected me (and is still single) and the other, I don’t know if she wasn’t interested but she come off so outputtingly that I just stopped talking to her. Smile now and then. It doesn’t hurt, even I do it sometimes. An awkward, shy smile is cute, so there is no excuse for frowning when I guy is trying to talk to you unless someone you really cared about died a horrible death in the recent past. Basically, men will come to you, even if you don’t believe it. Especially online. YOU need to make sure you aren’t rejecting them for the wrong reasons.

  202. Rock Throwing Peasant says:

    She’s not looking for advice. She’s looking for attention.

  203. MKP says:

    I join those who sympathize with Elise. But I’m not really sure what we can do about her predicament.

    Elise – even a cursory reading of this site would tell you that the regular readers and commentors are not pleased with the way things have gone over the past (say) 60 years. You certainly have to realize that the current state of relations between men and women is not something that we created, sought out, or desired. So why ask us “what should someone like me do?”

    Go ask the empowered, independent women who created this mess. That’s not a throw-away line to get rid of you. That’s a serious suggestion. Go ask the women who created this situation what you should do. Let us know what they say.

  204. UnicornHunter says:

    @FF 20 pounds overweight is obese in woman code.

    Lena Dunham has described herself as being normal weight while other women defend her weight as being ‘normal’ as well. Lena Dunham is extremely fat point blank.
    ================================================================
    I have a rule of thumb regarding appropriate weight for women. Max acceptable weight is twice your height in inches. Hot is going to be 85-90% of that value.

    5′ = 60″ = 120lbs max hot = 85% or 102lbs
    5’6″ = 66″ = 132lbs max hot = 90% or 119lbs
    5’10” = 70″ = 140lb max and you can see is starts to break down at the upper range because 140lbs is a reasonably attractive weight for a 5’10” woman, but again it’s a rule of thumb.

  205. koevoet says:

    Nine times out of ten you are right. Just in case she’s the one in ten or there are silent ones reading…

  206. Ybm says:

    Paul Murray says:
    November 27, 2012 at 6:13 am

    Did you notice that in 2007 a 35-39 year old never married was at 11.4% while in 2012 the 40-45 year old never married was 11.3%?

    Can you Interpret this figure for me, it seems to indicate something very drastic, but I’m not sure I’m looking at it properly.

  207. UnicornHunter says:

    @Ybm, I think the point is that the 11.4% of the women in the 35-39 age cohort in 2007 found their status unchanged five years later in 2012 when they are then the 40-45 age cohort and their rate of having never married changed by a whopping .1%.

    Or, I could be reading it wrong.

  208. Ybm says:

    Me too, but I didn’t want to ask a leading question by putting my own spin on it first.

    The strange part is that for the wome who were 40-45 in 2007, in 2012 they also have a 0.1% decrease.

    I couldn’t believe what my eyes were seeing! That since 2007, NONE of the so-called protected cohort of white women were able to marry after 35! so much for the believers that white culture is immune to the movement going on below it, and doubly so for the umc bubble types like the femosphere bloggers who think none of the marriage decline will matter to them.

  209. GeeBee says:

    @Michael

    I feel for you, man. I have a lot to learn abuot being alpha but the whole revulsion that you feel towards “Christian woman” that played the field is spot on. Don’t settle for someone who’ll break your heart with unfaithfulness.

  210. Bobby says:

    Dalrock noted in another post that feminism requires a “massive pumping operation.”

    Here’s the massive pumping operation in action… (anti-fatherhood) single mother subsidies:
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-27/when-work-punished-tragedy-americas-welfare-state
    “In Entitlement America, The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60,000 A Year”

  211. UnicornHunter says:

    @Ybm, two things came to mind about this data. Since it’s expressed as a percentage, it’s effected by the absolute size of the cohort. I’m not proposing that there is a vast difference in size between the 2007 35-39 cohort and the 2012 40-45 cohort, but it’s possible they start dying off.

    The other thing that comes to mind is that we probably need to reduce these figures by 3-4% to account for the lesbians. Then, an alternate reading of the leftover numbers could be that they represent the women who are straight up unmarriable, the morbidly obese, the crack addicts etc. I don’t know.

    I don’t know that we can assume the numbers represent MC and above women who are desirous of marrying.

    Just more random synaptic exercise in the afternoon.

  212. Bobby says:

    In the article linked to above: ‘… from Gary Alexander, Secretary of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (a state best known for its broke capital Harrisburg). As quantitied, and explained by Alexander, “the single mom is better off earnings gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.”‘

  213. an observer says:

    Maybe she should take up gaming.

  214. sunshinemary says:

    Hi Elise,
    I’m going to assume you’re for real and not trolling around. I actually knew a woman like you in real life. I met her through a women’s Bible study, and I have never met such a shy, awkward woman; it was hard for her even to talk to other women. She shook with fear just introducing herself. I felt really bad for her, and like you, she was in her 30s and unmarried. She wasn’t beautiful but she wasn’t ugly either, and she wasn’t overweight. Definitely lose the weight and tone up.

    Here is my question: do you have any friends? You only mention lack of success with men, but do you have a close girlfriend or two? I’m just wondering if maybe they could help you out by way of introduction to a male friend of a friend. You would probably have to accept someone rather low on the Sexual Market Place scale, but you could find someone to love and make a life with, even if he might be fat and socially awkward, too. It might be better than a life of loneliness. It definitely beats killing yourself, which is always a bad idea.

    One last question: are you a virgin? I assume you are. Many men find that to be quite a prize, as it is so rare. Try to think of your selling points so you can market yourself better. Some men would prefer a chubby, shy virgin for marriage over someone like Paula Broadwell, who has a hot body but is an evil slut. You seem not to know how to market yourself to men at all, but maybe you can learn if you put some effort into it.

  215. Ybm says:

    None is probably oversimplification on my part, more correctly: “a statistically insignificant number of white women have married after 35 since 2007″. If the lesbians/mentally/physically handicapped are in both figures; the only things that could “cheat” the numbers as you say, account for the entire group of women who married.

    Aka, for every white woman who is over 35 That has gotten married since 2007, one woman has either died, turned lesbian, or been maimed!

  216. ” Otherwise, if you are just being alpha to impress the wimminz, you’re just doing the same old dog and pony show, just with a few more tricks. ”

    Yup.

  217. “Then you will live an increasingly disrespected, downtrodden life.”

    Why, because the worst thing that can happen to a man is that women don’t approve of him? Who is pedestalizing now?

  218. “When they figure this out brace for some serous squealing, like we’ve never seen before. The current “man up” barrage is due to an extra 2% of women not marrying. Wait until this really develops.”

    That’s going to be hilarious. I can’t wait!

  219. Nancy Drew says:

    @Elise

    Exercise and everything else that everyone is suggesting is great, but please, please go get some medical help. Suicidal thoughts should NEVER be ignored. Depression is dreadfully blinkering and will convince you that you are unlovable. It’s wrong! I was depressed in my early twenties and looking back, there were some lovely guys who tried their level best to tell me they liked me, but I was just too ill to notice. You are probably the same.

    Please get medical help. You can sort out your love life when you’ve got some mental clarity.

    [D: Great point.]

  220. “Women in general will simply have to bear more of the costs of dating, courtship and marriage. Women are going to have to grit their teeth, bite the bullets and put themselves out there more. They will have to risk more, they will have to pay more, and they will have to get rejected. ”

    So true. I simply can’t muster any sympathy for a woman who just sits there, and complains that she doesn’t go on dates. If she asked enough men, she would find one who would take her. The same isn’t true for an unattractive man: he literally can’t ask enough women to find one interested in him. And I have no idea if Elise is unattractive or not. But if she does nothing to try and find companionship, and doesn’t have it, she’s no more deserving of sympathy than someone who doesn’t apply for any jobs yet complains of being unemployed.

    If Elise and other women in her situation don’t like that, they should blame the feminists for fighting tooth and nail to get more rights for women while denying, denying, denying that women should ever accept responsibilities. None of the men reading this blog deserves blame for where she finds herself.

  221. “Approaching and asking from a woman is ‘super duper ultra creepy’. ”

    Not to me or any other man I know.

    Anyway, a man creeped out by an approach from a woman probably would not approach Elise anyway, so what does she has to lose?

  222. Ybm says:

    I don’t get it either honestly, and it’s why I love going back to France in the summer. Nothing is quite like a woman shamelessly hitting on you in public. And no, I don’t mean drunk chicks giving you a shit test at the bar.

  223. Nancy Drew is right; seeking help from a professional is probably called for. If Elise, like the woman mentioned above, shakes with fear just introducing herself she likely has social anxiety disorder, and there are medications that can work wonders for this condition.

  224. Ybm says:

    The Real Peterman says:
    November 27, 2012 at 3:23 pm

    Too many discussions are made about what is biological about men’s mating nature, dominance, aggression etc. Not enough is spoken about female nature, passivity, low libido. Doing so asks questions that have ugly answers. But they are reasonable questions nonetheless.

  225. Dalrock says:

    @Ybm

    Did you notice that in 2007 a 35-39 year old never married was at 11.4% while in 2012 the 40-45 year old never married was 11.3%?

    Great catch. So few of the women in that cohort married in the five year interval that the percent never married only dropped by .1%. This is no doubt within the accuracy of the sampling they are using. Interestingly this puts a short term cap on the upward early 40s trend for the next two years until we start looking at the late thirties group observed at 13.3% in 2010 when they come out the other side in their early 40s in 2015.

    Edit: The same is true for the 2007 40-44 year old group which started out at 9.1% and came out the other side in the 45-19 group in 2012 at 9.0%.

  226. beta_plus says:

    But the question everyone wants answered is will this market switch cause American (and presumably other Anglosphere-NWEurosphere) women to stop being fat?

    j/k

    Great post as always. But still – do you think this will help fight the plague of fat chicks?

  227. 8oxer says:

    Dear Elise:

    Sunshine Mary gave you some good advice. Peterman and Nancy Drew nailed what you should do first, though. Go see a trained professional and fergawdsake don’t take medical advice from people on the internet. You may have a medically based illness, and once this is treated, the rest of your life will probably start looking up.

    I read a lot of men with stories like yours, and I don’t pretend to understand all the details of the incel types, but do my best to sympathize from afar.

    Bear in mind that I’m not an incel. Through luck or happenstance, I managed a few steady girlfriends through childhood. Learned the rudiments of game and blew through tons of women over the course of a year or two. I’m single by choice, have a nice (though not flashy) apartment and a few toys. I have a steady income and lots of hobbies. If you saw the world through my eyes, you’d consider yourself lucky in many ways. Society tells us that we should be paired up with someone, and that if we’re not, we’re somehow defective. If you look a bit deeper you’ll find that pairing people up is one way for this society to exploit people. I’ve made peace with the fact that I’m likely going to be single forever. I won’t lie and claim to be celibate, but if I have a dry spell it means nothing but more free time to do what I want, cultivate friendships with men, make extra money, or study.

    If you’re really eager to set yourself up in marriage, I’d suggest making some old lady friends and getting advice from them. In the old days (pre-1960 or so) women would find a “herb” type of guy, and use their wiles to make something great of him, riding to the top in the process. By this I don’t mean nagging, fighting, etc. Women have lots of leverage over men like this. Pick out a couple of prospects among your local accountants, and use old feminine wisdom to network behind the scenes on your collective behalf. I’m a dude, so won’t pretend to know all the details about how this works, but older women know all about it.

    The first step for anyone (male or female) is to be happy with oneself, quit worrying about things that are unchangeable, and accept one’s place in life. Once this is done, we are free to improve ourselves honestly, becoming better than we were before, in the ways that are changeable.

    Good luck, Boxer

  228. 8oxer says:

    @The Real Peterman
    “’Approaching and asking from a woman is ‘super duper ultra creepy’. ”Not to me or any other man I know.

    Not to me either.

    Of course you’re going to get a fair number of approaches from women you aren’t interested in, or who don’t do anything for you. Occasionally an overweight woman will sit way too close to you at the diner and make cow eyes at you all through your meal. Yes, this is annoying, but it’s part of life. Take it as a compliment, politely decline, and move on.

  229. ybm says:

    8oxer says:
    November 27, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    the funny thing about that boxer is that it is 100% reasonable that a man does that. Sit quietly, politely smile back, ignore, move on.

    However by the logic of Amanda Marcotte, Skepchick, and all the rest of the femosphere. You are a creepy virgin rapist and worse than hitler if you sit too close to a woman, make cow eyes at her, or even *gasp* FLIRT WITH HER!

  230. ala says:

    This message is for Elise, but I think it has some relevance to the general discussion – the problem of the unmarried women. I think that what we describe as shyness or social awkwardness is rather a disconnect that we feel from the people around us – in the case of particular toxic environments being shy is the best way to protect your sanity. I find the increase in anxiety/ depression/ neuroticism among younger women indicative of the larger contradictions and irrational thinking promoted by feminism.
    So Elise, I am not going to say “it’s society’s fault” (altough it might be! in other times there used to be some help for young women and men to find each other), but rather than feeling like a failure, try to understand what’s going on around you better. You might also find that actually many many many people feel the same discomfort as you do, but they learned how to hide it better…

  231. ybm says:

    Dalrock says:
    November 27, 2012 at 4:38 pm

    Yup, if you check out the graph Paul made and hosted you can see it shows the 5 year probably of marriage for a woman in 2007 who was ANY age older than 35 dropped to 0% in 2007.

    http://paulmurray.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/nevermarried.png

    [D: The negative zones earlier in the chart have to be due to sampling error, so I think that puts this in context. The Census isn't measuring with enough accuracy to spot the decline in never marrieds over five years for some of these recent groups. Still, that is brutal for marriage delayers. Past a certain age we can't tell if the supply of grooms has shut off entirely over the last five years or was merely a very slow drip.]

  232. 8oxer says:

    Dear YBM:

    However by the logic of Amanda Marcotte, Skepchick, and all the rest of the femosphere. You are a creepy virgin rapist and worse than hitler if you sit too close to a woman, make cow eyes at her, or even *gasp* FLIRT WITH HER!

    Well, if I wanted to lower myself to the level of Amanda Marcotte or that lunatic Skepchick (Rebecca Watson, yeah?) I suppose I could start whining about it on youtube; but, that’s really not my style. I suspect it’s not your style either.

    I’ve never been asked out in an elevator before by anyone, but if it happened I wouldn’t get all upset about it. There are far better things to do than to fly into histrionics over people’s bad communication skills.

  233. FuriousFerret says:

    You guys are missing the point.

    Female approaching is making eye contact, smiling, playing with your hair. They do in a non verbal context. Straight up asking them and running some type of weird game like a man is off putting.

    If you do the whole smiling dance and he doesn’t approach, he’s not that interested.

    Men should be the approaching and running game. When women do it it screams ‘use me, I’m desperate”. It leads to bad things for the girl.

  234. Opus says:

    One has sympathy for Elise. When I was a 1st year Law Student a very shy – and slim – girl-student seemed to want to be friends with me, and I was always polite and friendly, but somehow could not quite muster up the courage – and I say that even though in those days very few students were female, so even with hormones jumping I sensed that whatever happened I was bound to disappoint her. Something wasn’t quite right and men and women cannot be friends, can they. Attraction cannot – or at least shouldn’t – be faked.

    What I wanted to say however is that women approaching men (rather than men approaching women) is (for me) an absolute turn-off. It is after all the mark of the whore – to approach and proposition. A women must wait – she can use all the signalling she likes – for a man to summon up courage and risk rejection. That way the woman never has the humiliation of being rejected. Maybe I am old fashioned.

    That 0.1% ybm picked up above is just one woman married from that cohort out of 1000. That is statistically almost non-existant – even women aged between 45 and 54 produce two children out of every 1000 born and that figure is very low thus the ybm figure is half that. So is it the women not bothering or the men? Naturally men get the blame. Perhaps women do want to marry but (from Private Man’s OK Cupid/POF thread) the unreality of the applicants demands is such that no man can get near these aging women even if he wanted to. As I have done my (recent) share of rejecting aging females perhaps it really is men simply no longer sufficiently motivated by the older model for sale. I am devoid of sympathy.

  235. FuriousFerret says:

    I have had decently attractive women try to run verbal game on me before and it’s awkward. It makes me think she’s not right in the head because she is reversing gender roles. It’s a natural feeling. Often times when I had more contact with that person I was right.

    Guys approaching is never creepy because it’s natural.

  236. ybm says:

    FuriousFerret says:
    November 27, 2012 at 5:05 pm

    I can’t speak to this because it is an utterly cultural thing. Anglo women (and seemingly men) have a very bizzarre and unique view on ‘courting’ and the like which I don’t see anywhere except in anglo countries. Its especially bad in anglo countries with a colonial history like the US and Canada, since they have both the historical influences of English puritanism AND a woman shortage for the majority of their histories.

    If you ever get to experience it (which I do hope you do, because honestly the system you are most familiar with is not the natural one), you will barely believe it when YOU are the one who gets picked up in a cafe.

  237. FuriousFerret says:

    @YBM

    I would think that happens in countries where being a man isn’t seen as automatically low status until proven otherwise.

    So if that woman likes some certain aspect of that guy, she naturally doesn’t assume he’s a feminine beta male and talks to him. I can see how that would work.

  238. ybm says:

    True. I’m not saying a man simply has to stand on a corner like a woman in stilettos and wait for the proposals. Merely that interested women in the majority of the world will do far more to ‘help you out'; then just smile passively. Women are still ‘passive’ around the world.

    The difference I’m trying to describe, and I’m not doing a very good job of it. Is that it is only in anglo countries that you seemingly have to WORK for a woman to show you she likes you. Women make it easy everywhere else. You can say a stupid thing, fumble over your words, give her compliments, and not be attacked like you are in anglo countries.

    This is about the only thing I can honestly say a major manosphere commentator gets write in his writing: Beta might not be sexy outside the anglosphere, but it is more than enough to be successful.

  239. imnobody says:

    @ybm

    they have both the historical influences of English puritanism AND a woman shortage for the majority of their histories.

    Being a foreigner, I have always wondered why women have such a high status in the American society, that is, why they are so completely “pedestalized” (I am from Europe and I live in Latin America and I haven’t experienced this degree of female pedestalization in these continents so this caught me off-guard when I lived in the States).

    I knew the Puritan reason but I haven’t thought about a woman shortage because of being a colony. This explains a lot. Thank you for sharing.

  240. I hate the way you guys almost take delight in my predicament.

    Your solipsism is showing. We’re not talking about you. Yes, it sucks that other women have made riding the carousel “normal,” so a nice, shy girl who doesn’t show off her thong in the first 10 minutes can’t get a date. Just as it sucks that a nice, shy guy who just wants to buy a girl flowers and defend her against dragons can’t get a date. Life’s rough all over.

    Please don’t think I’m trying to be cruel, because as a shy guy, I sympathize. I too wish I could go back to my 20s and force myself to get out there and meet people, act stupid, and take more chances. In one of the Jesse Stone movies, Tom Selleck’s (hugely alpha) character says, “I’d rather regret the things I’ve done than the things I haven’t done.” I wish I could go back and make my 18-year-old self write that on the chalkboard a thousand times, because I have a long list of what-if’s and not nearly enough wish-I-hadn’ts.

    But back to reality: attractive women get approached all the time. And I mean all the time. I know reasonably attractive women, maybe 8 on the 10-point scale, who have received more marriage proposals than I’ve had girlfriends. They probably couldn’t even begin to tell me how many hundreds of guys have asked for their phone number or bought them a drink, because those things are just part of everyday life for them. I look both ways when I cross the road; they get handed a drink when they walk into a bar. Just normal.

    So when you say men never approached you, either you really were a total hermit, or you’re underestimating that 20 pounds pretty drastically. The shy, pretty girls may not get approached by the alphas, because they’re busy with the fun girls who flash some thong at them. But the shy, beta guys hunt for girls like you describe, hoping to a find a soulmate, and 20 pounds wouldn’t slow them down much.

    Again, I sympathize, and I hope you’re able to find someone. The good news is that you haven’t been riding the carousel like most of your sisters, so you should have an advantage with men who care about that, and they’re out there. If you can get past your shyness a little, you should be able to meet them; or if you can lose the 20 (or whatever) pounds, they’ll find you.

    In the meantime, try to understand that the glee you read here at the plight of the carousel rider who suddenly can’t find a beta to pay for her declining years isn’t about you. Try not to take it personally.

  241. This is about the only thing I can honestly say a major manosphere commentator gets write in his writing: Beta might not be sexy outside the anglosphere, but it is more than enough to be successful.
    ————————————————————————
    This is absolutely the truth. In fact I keep meaning to do so and doubt I ever will because its audacious, I’m meaning to look at the anglo differences in a more rigorous fashion than just the typical “hey dude best to expat” kind of way. There is something (my opinion here) about not any particularly identifiable demographic, not Latin, not Mediterranean, not Slavic or Germanic, not Asian or island, not 1st 2nd 3rd world……truly ANYTHING but anglo even those countries that are sold out to feminism to the absurd (Sweden). Sure the feminists there are freakishly feminist ideologically, but daily comporting with men is just not the stupid snake pit it is in the anglo word.
    I base this on anecdote to be sure, extensive and repeated visits to a plethora of places around the world, North South East West across 20 years and countless encounters (not meaning sexual encounters) I submit ybm is onto something I have yet to see adequately explained.

    ( Dalrock, you seem to have the time to crunch numbers, anything like what Im getting at that you’ve come across?)

  242. Johnycomelately says:

    Newbie great analysis.

    Elise, all is not lost, my 40 year old virgin friend (yes real virgin, confirmed by sister) met her husband in India and is having her first child at 41.

    Remember men respond to signals women project, if your not projecting those signals (no matter how attractive you are) we will not respond. You have to learn to feel good about yourself and express your feminity.

  243. Bill says:

    @Elise,

    I am sorry to read about your problems. I too had social phobia and it blighted my teens and twenties. I suggest you seek professional help, as I did. No one can make the phobia go away, but you can learn to control it, and stop it from running your life.

    Blogs like this one do over-simplify their message. Not all women who are single at 34 are ex-carousel-riders. Yet even by stating this, I can anticipate replies saying “Ha ha, you beta white knight, don’t tell us that NAWALT!”

    There are a hundred different reasons why a woman can remain single. I suppose “Manosphere” blogs tend to discuss women who are actively seeking a man, simply because they are the ones that men will meet, and for this reason alone they overlook the happily celibate, as well as those who have problems of one kind or another.

    You have a lot going for you. You are hardly a “used-up hag”, as you put it. You have a low partner count, something that is attractive to men and cannot be faked. 20 pounds overweight is nothing: many women need to lose 60 pounds or even more. Your problem is not your age or your weight but your social phobia, and if this is giving you suicidal thoughts I suggest that you tell your doctor and ask for appropriate help.

  244. deti says:

    Furious:

    “You guys are missing the point.

    Female approaching is making eye contact, smiling, playing with your hair. They do in a non verbal context. Straight up asking them and running some type of weird game like a man is off putting.”

    I was thinking about this because I wanted to respond to one of your other posts to me.

    This isn’t female approaching. That’s flirting. Female approaching is the woman going up to a guy she knows a little and saying “Hi, _____________. I was wondering, do you want to get a drink/get lunch/get a movie/get a cup of coffee?” Simple. Straightforward. Direct. It’s not running game or negging or trying to match wits with a guy. It sends a clear message that “I like you. I think you’re a great guy and I’m interested in you. I like you enough to go somewhere alone with you, just you and me, to do something and get to know each other better.”

    Women wanted equality. Women want boyfriends and husbands. Well, this is equality. This is it. I think an increasing number of women are going to have to do this in the future if they want any shot at all at getting BFs and husbands.

  245. Highwasp says:

    watch it there guys – you all are starting to sound like Fuckbuddy Rockbanddrummer, Harley McBadboy, Alpha McGorgeous and Frank Fratboy, all of whom have been experiencing the flirtations and sexual advances of women for decades now.

  246. Alex says:

    “A women must wait – she can use all the signalling she likes – for a man to summon up courage and risk rejection. That way the woman never has the humiliation of being rejected. Maybe I am old fashioned.”

    Really, Opus? We could never subject those sweet, innocent flowers to the humiliation of rejection. Har, har, har… Yeah, let’s save that good stuff like rejection & humiliation for men only, along with all the other goodies and benefits that go along with dating & marriage in the West.

  247. Random Angeleno says:

    @Elise,
    For your social anxiety issues in general, try thinking of things you are interested in (like gardening or hiking or …) and find out if meetup.com has anything going on near you. This can be an ice breaker of sorts, getting together with other people having similar interests. If you are Christian, you can look for Christian singles groups near you.

    For being around men in general, take a beginning social dance group class like ballroom or swing dancing. It is typical in group classes to rotate partners so you’ll get a moment to smile and say hi to each new partner and let him make conversation with you. It will be a process, the first time you go, you will likely be petrified at the thought of making small talk. Over time, hopefully you get past that and then can consider finding and dating marriage-minded men with similar SMV to yours.

  248. FuriousFerret says:

    “Fuckbuddy Rockbanddrummer, Harley McBadboy, Alpha McGorgeous and Frank Fratboy”

    All of these stereotypes have treated me way better than the mainstream betas that I interact with throughout my life.

    Also in my experience it’s the women that basically throw themselves at them. Why should they get scorn just because women sleep with them?

    The mainstream beta is the one that I have experience with fucking with me and trying to subvert me in my life. They are the gossiping little bitches and have no backbone and passive aggressively nibble at my being. All the guys you listed do not give a fuck about giving me shit unless they have reason to. They are way more secure and confident and don’t instantly look at me and try to figure out ways to bring me down a peg.

  249. 8oxer says:

    Dear Highwasp:

    I was thinking this was a function of age, but on second thought I know of a lot of incidents where an older “cougar” type woman (late 30s and up) followed some dude around not taking no for an answer. Perhaps geography plays a role. In any event, where I live it is not at all uncommon for women to approach men. A small but significant percentage of these are nutjobs who are bad news (google rapo for more on this) and naturally one has to watch out for these. Many are totally serious. Some are hoes, some are more “nice girl” types who are just more forward than average.

    The strange thing is, that before I learned game I often blindered myself to female approaches. They tend to be more subtle than male game, but much more obvious than simply twirling their hair. Looking back, I’m ashamed to say that I can remember at least a dozen different times in my youth when some woman clearly wanted to get with me, and either I was too shy to make it happen or just too stupid to notice the obvious. If you’re a fella and women aren’t approaching you, it may be that your perception is not correctly calibrated.

    Next time the hot chick laughs and starts a conversation in public, ask for her phone number. 8 times out of 10, if a woman makes small talk out of nowhere, she wants to see more of you. You won’t believe me until you try this.

  250. Highwasp says:

    Furious, yes, good question – why should they get scorn just because women sleep with them…? for example: “I have a special place in my heart for Fuckbuddy Rockbanddrummer. All the other three have sort of a natural genetic lottery type of thing going. They are born to just be better than others. Not so with Fuckbuddy. He’s usually bullied and beaten down in his youth for not fitting in and most of the time he’s not muscled and is kind on the skinny side. He’s an underdog man. He uses some ingeniuty to get laid. He puts in the work to at least sort of learn an instrument and then knows that chicks love artsy type and makes the most of it… Life gives him lemons, he makes lemonade. Is that so bad?”

    oh and – Thanks for the advice 8oxer

  251. ballista74 says:

    Hi Elise! From what I read, you have gotten some very good advice, but I just wanted to add a few things.

    First off, as others have said, when Dalrock (and others) use the term women, it means women as a general class, not specifically all women. All women are not the same, just as all men aren’t the same. But we can notice specific societal trends and these will be denoted in such ways. In a lot of ways, if you buck society, that’s a good thing, especially in this day and age. We are not gloating over you specifically (if all of what you write is true, I have a feeling it is and you aren’t trolling), but if there is anything it’s over those who have sowed the seeds to reap the consequences that we are talking about. If anything it’s not to gloat, it’s to function as a warning.

    There’s nothing wrong in being very shy. The others have mentioned that. I’ll say that coming from the same place. Let me just say that it’s very possible to see your life change if you are willing to seek out the things you need to do and the help you need (if need be). I know my past self would be absolutely shocked at what I’m doing now. I’m nowhere near the life of the party now and struggle with what to say in some social situations, but I’m a whole lot better than the past self I referenced. So you can get where you need to be. But I found this to be absolutely and definitely true of how others have perceived me in the past, and has shut people down the times I have tried to approach:

    Some of them may have took your shyness for aloofness or arrogance and failed to approach you thinking that maybe you were stuck up.

    As for your weight, it is indeed a factor. But don’t make it into an extremely big one. Different people have different thoughts on such matters. As long as you are not exceedingly morbidly obese (this is what is meant by those who use the unfortunate term “land whale”), you’ll be mostly fine. Personally, I’ve written many times that I’d rather have a 5-6 with a good attitude than a 9-10 who is a portrait of everything spoken of on this site.

    Something I will say that will probably be hard for you to hear, and does apply to you as well as a lot of other women is this: People tend to take their view of you from how you choose to present yourself. I mean, your self-perception, self-respect, and love that you have for yourself will come out and will influence others. This is another perception lesson that I’ve picked up in that same time frame, and I see hallmarks of this in your comment. This will be something you need to work on with or without help as much or more than your shyness in and of itself. If you do not see yourself as having any worthy qualities and do not see yourself as valuable (the women spoken of on this site and others see themselves TOO HIGHLY), people will perceive the same thing of you simply because you communicate these things. You will do better with time in this way, too, if you are willing to work on it and see good things in yourself and be confident about it.

    Lastly, please don’t lose hope. If you are a good person (and I believe on some level that you are), there has to be a number of good qualities in you, even at 34 for a man to want to look at you as a possibility. From what you write, you’re way ahead of the women who fit the typical discussion on this site. Don’t lose hope and work on being the best Elise you can be and it’ll happen for you. Not necessarily when you want it to happen, but when it is right to happen.

  252. an observer says:

    Context, Peterman.

    “Then you will live an increasingly disrespected, downtrodden life.”

    Why, because the worst thing that can happen to a man is that women don’t approve of him? Who is pedestalizing now?

    ——

    It refers to the man who plays alpha at work, but beta herb to his wife.

  253. Great post as always. But still – do you think this will help fight the plague of fat chicks?

    Not unless they start getting better advice about how to lose weight. This should be obvious, but: most fat chicks (and fat dudes) really don’t want to be fat. It’s miserable in all sorts of ways, but especially in the romance department. Most fat chicks have tried desperately hard to lose weight, but nothing seems to work for them. As long as they’re taught — and this belief permeates society just as completely as feminism — that the keys to weight loss are less animal fat, more grains and other carbs, starving yourself, and doing a lot of cardio, we’re going to continue to have a lot of fat, unhealthy people.

  254. Does anyone else realize how odd it looks when the commentariat goes off yelling “pick me” trying to give just one more piece of advice to some random gal who shows up?
    Ok, its just me then

  255. “This isn’t female approaching. That’s flirting. ”

    Exactly. The approach is go time, when the Rubicon is crossed and the big chance is taken. A woman who smiles and winks and plays with her hair isn’t taking any chances, not the least because she can always claim plausible deniability.

    *****
    “women approaching men is after all the mark of the whore – to approach and proposition”

    Really though? I have no personal experience, but it’s been my understanding that prostitutes sit around waiting for business propositions. A woman who goes around asking random men if they want to have sex for money isn’t a hooker–she’s a convict.

    Anyway, I have no problem with men who don’t like being approached by women. That’s an understandable personal preference. But the takeaway is 1) women like Elise aren’t getting dates by waiting to be approached, and 2) there are plenty of men out there who would be glad to be approached by a woman.

    *****
    Empathologicalism, I for one would be quite interested in that subject.

  256. Ybm says:

    empathologicalism says:
    November 27, 2012 at 6:31 pm

    I hope you have better luck than I have had trying to trace the roots of Anglo-pedestalization. I keep ending up running around the methodist movement, Francis Willard and Mary Wollstonecraft.

    I’ve tried to see what effect women rulers like Victoria and Elizabeth I had, but there is a total lack of culturally significant analysis outside of feminist writing, of what effect those two had on the mass polity and their views on women. It can’t just be the prescence of successful female rulers, because we would see a totally different culture in Russia from Catherine the great, and in Italy via Matilde di canossa, probably the single most important person to the history of Italy in the period between Alaric and Cavour.

    Hell, since I speak French I’ve even read early analysis as far back as the catharsis and the courtly love movement and the effect they had on the hugenots and thus the eventual influence on the English.

    It’s just a maddening process and I probably could apply to Cambridge for an honorary doctorate in history with all the time I’ve devoted to this.

  257. Ybm says:

    Catharsis = cathars

  258. Listerine says:

    Elise, if you are still reading this, you are NOT a hag. At 34 years old you have absolutely not fucked up your entire life. I noticed you wrote your comment at 2:10 am. I have no way of knowing what your reasons are for reading the manosphere blogs, but my time spent and compulsion to read these atrocities will be coming to an end soon.

    I have been with someone for 10 years now, but I can remember many, many lonely Christmases and Valentines Days – in my thirties.

    It is going to be OKAY.

    Angeleno’s suggestion about ballroom or square dancing seemed excellent.

    A suggestion I had was – are there any 12 Step programs for people with crippling shyness? If there are meetings that would seem like a logical place to meet new friends.

    God bless you, Elise.

  259. Kyo says:

    @Paul Murray

    “Oh – that kink in the graph for the 30-35 age bracket, it happens at 2009, which means women born 1974-1979. What a surprise.”

    I’m in this age cohort, and I think that the post-1974 births, extending on into the late ’80s, are the first generation of children born entirely steeped in feminism and divorce culture. Among my older pre-early-70s-born friends, there are lots of blue-pill guys who don’t see what is going on, whereas just about everyone born after 1974 or so has their eyes open. The women born in these years will never get married because their male peers know not to marry them.

  260. Anonymous age 70 says:

    Note to whoever: I am not saying Pick Me. Go pound sand, please.

    Note to Elise: In the USA, it is not over yet. Yeah, for the men on these boards, you are toast. But, there are plenty of blue pill men out there.

    The first thing, get a copy of a recent book by the Atkins Institute: THE NEW ATKINS FOR THE NEW YOU. I do not recommend the old Atkins books because they are actually dangerous. But, the new book has you eat Foundation Vegetables, and take 1/2 teaspoon of salt a day to eliminate problems. Get rid of that 20 pounds.

    Then, go where the men are. Not bars. Not meat markets. Not churches. Not online dating sites.

    And, don’t look for a man. Look for something to do. Something interesting and something useful. When you do, you will look interesting to a man.

    An example I can think of in one state is an old train club. Where people work on old locomotives. Man stuff. Find out how to volunteer. Get coveralls and cover your hair and climb down inside that thing and come out filthy dirty, like the men do.

    Or, in farm country, an old tractor club.

    Go places where you are going to actually work and get dirty, as men do.

    Don’t just do something where the men are. Do something you enjoy, because if you just do something to meet men, they can tell, instantly. Maybe there is nothing you will enjoy, it is up to you to find something if it exists.

    Avoid like the plague things like Save Namu and tree plantings. Those are for girlie men.

    Also, keep reading the manosphere to understand the bad things women do to men who love them. In other words, be a woman who has taken the red pill.

    Sunshine Mary is a good one to read. Also, Laura Grace Robbins. Red pill women. You are on a good blog right now. Learn. Especially practice smiling in front of a mirror.

    And, learn to understand Captain/First Officer concepts.

    Read until you find out what men want from a woman, not what you imagine they will want from a woman. Women with their own ideas are usually wrong.

    One thing to understand. Don’t even think of a man your own age. The rule of thumb for older women is take the man’s age, divide by 2, and add 7. The correct man for you will be as old as 54. 54 / 2 = 27 + 7 = 34, your age.

    And, he may also not be a pretty sight.

    Most women, even “old hags”, rate 80% of men as below average. The problem even “old hags” seem to want handsome men. You need, ahem, a male hag… If you want a man to accept you, you have to do the same thing. If you are a 2, don’t expect a man who is a 7.

    You do want an honest, non-violent man who can support himself. Are they out there? Yes, out doing man stuff, not hitting bars and chasing sluts.

    Do I think you can do this? Absolutely. Do I think you will? Absolutely not. But, the choice is yours.

    Last tip. eftuniverse.com It actually works for most folks, including veterans with PTSD. And, extreme shyness…

    Or, maybe this is first tip!

    I forgot. If you are depressed, a vigorous half hour walk three times a week is more effective then SSRI’s. Also, Buspar works for severe anxiety, so well one user called it a miracle drug. It does not induce high weight gains, nor dangerous withdrawal syndrome.

  261. Michael:
    “…I told them you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Then I was told by Kaylene (a young thin super sexy blonde with curves in all the right places (who BTW refused to date me even though we were friends and according to her roommate had sex with almost 30 guys in one semester ) she told me “Michael let me tell you something: not only am I going to have my cake eat it and eat it too. I’m going to have it with ice cream and sprinkles”. All of the girls laughed and smiled in agreement.”

    There is an old ‘curse’ that I read about years ago: “May you inherit a shipload of gold, and may it not be enough to pay your doctor bills!” If there is any Justice, those sluts and all sluts like them should have long lives — and slowly suffer all the while from painful, incurable STDs or have ovarian and uterine cancers (which should ruin their looks while also rendering them infertile).

    Besides HPV and Herpes (which are incurable, although treatable), there were brief reports this last June of new ‘Superbug’ strains of gonorrhea in Europe — which are feared to become virtually untreatable! Since then, the MSM hasn’t reported anything on it…sounds questionable, doesn’t it?
    Women LOVE to use sex as a weapon against men…it would be all-too-fitting if their favorite weapon backfired on THEM!
    It would be such poetic justice…

  262. I just read this bit in I Am Charlotte Simmons, where one college girl is talking to another, and realized it goes perfectly with that “have my cake and eat it too” quote:

    “I guess what I really mean is college is like this four-year period you have when you can try anything — and everything — and if it goes wrong, there’s no consequences? You know what I mean? Nobody’s keeping score? You can do things that if you tried them before you got to college, your family would be crying and pulling their hair out and giving you these now-see-what-you’ve-gone-and-done looks? …. College is the only time in your life, or your adult life anyway, when you can really experiment, and at a certain point, when you leave, when you graduate or whatever, everybody’s memory like evaporates. You tried this and this and this and this, and you learned a lot about how things are, but nobody’s gonna remember it? It’s like amnesia, totally, and there’s no record, and you leave college exactly the way you came in, pure as rainwater.”

    As far as I can tell, this isn’t fiction. Most women today actually think it works that way, except that it’s gotten worse — you don’t have to go off to some distant college to get this freedom anymore. You can have it wherever and for as long as you like, and as soon as you decide you’ve experienced enough, you can flip a switch and it’s all forgotten. No consequences, ever.

  263. 8oxer says:

    there were brief reports this last June of new ‘Superbug’ strains of gonorrhea in Europe — which are feared to become virtually untreatable!

    This is no joke. Nasty!

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/09/drug-resistant-gonorrhea-cefixime-ceftriaxone-treatment_n_1761091.html

    A monogamous relationship or celibacy, depending upon what you can handle, might be safer than the PUA route these days.

  264. Rock Throwing Peasant says:

    empath@ 11:13am
    Not just you. I had a similar reaction, though maybe a bit more “black pill” shaded.
    Constant distractions.
    I’m not “black pill” as I understand it, but I have little time for women dumping problems on the manosphere.
    I have two sons, eight nephews, three brothers, and a good friend that need my sharpest and most well-informed advice. They run the tisk of peril because one mom kicked the dad out to impress her friends and is batshit crazy (my ex), another mom is a self-absorbed drunk who calls herself a Christian who doesn’t need to read the Bible to know God, and another mom is a slut who completely abandoned her family.

    Some random pity-party chick on the internet? Pass.

  265. electricangel says:

    @YBM,

    For all we know anglobitches might start making American men suck blogs and expatriating to Angola.
    We can only hope!

  266. Anon says:

    Another factor that isn’t being touched upon here is the economic status of young men(which of course determines their marriageable status). In 2007 the economy took a nose dive, which impacted men worse then women thanks to daddy government, so things got worse for women marriagewise.

    The economy isn’t likely to improve any time soon, so things probably will continue to get worse in that respects.

  267. James says:

    @ybm, empathologicalism

    It’s just a maddening process and I probably could apply to Cambridge for an honorary doctorate in history with all the time I’ve devoted to this.

    It’s harder to find funding for the fees than it is to get accepted for a doctorate programme (assuming you have an appropriate first degree).

    It would certainly be worthwhile to get academics thinking about these things.

    I suspect there is a great deal of interesting material in academic journals, amidst the femino-nonsense. It’s hard for ordinary people to find it, because (a) it is often behind a pay barrier, (b) interesting findings are often couched in jargon, whose purpose sometimes seems to be to hide controversial findings from the public and from hostile academics.

    If the angle is political rather than historical, another approach is to write a book and enter it for the Orwell Prize.

  268. James says:

    @ybm – interesting that you mention Methodism. I once heard a fembot complaining about the supposed custom of a man destroying his pay slip to conceal his earnings, and handing his wife whatever money he thought she needed. She described this habit as “patriarchy”.

    In some Methodist areas, such as the coal-mining valleys of South Wales, the custom was rather different. The husband would hand his wife his pay packet, unopened; she would take out the money and pay slip, and check that they agreed; and then she would give her husband a small amount for his weekly pocket money, and keep the rest for herself. I couldn’t help wondering whether that fembot would have described this custom as “matriarchy”.

  269. Mark Minter says:

    I am a little late coming to the table with a comment.

    I generally tend to agree with your assessment of the motivations of women in regard to delaying or avoiding marriage. When I first came to your blog I had wanted to believe in the myth of Marriage Strike. But I am certain that it is women that are the cause of these numbers. I spend a ton of time on internet dating sites and I have read 10s of thousands of profiles. And the one, giant common theme is “NEVER SETTLE” or “LOOKING FOR MY SOULMATE” or “PRINCE CHARMING”. And I think this attitude is getting even stronger in the younger cohorts. Teen pregnancy fell and analysts are baffled why. They thought there was some constant and capriciousness of accident to the numbers. I think the reasons are two fold. There are fewer “accidentally on purpose” accidental pregnancies. And girls are taking greater precautions not to even ever ever possibly ever ever getting pregnant. Having a baby is the one thing puts a serious crimp in being “Classy and Fabulous”. Being a single girl for even an HB5 and up has serious upside. Serious. Even a plain Jane 18 year old can put a free profile on MillionaireMatch and open her age range she will accepts to 50 or 60 year old men and cash and prizes start rolling in. She takes the MySpace shot of her boobs puts another pick of her in a bikini if she has half a body and headline like “Want to touch?” or “I want to play”. “Looking for someone to spoil me”. And she gets letters. And it not just the plain ones. Even the attractive ones do it. It’s that 32-35 year old that narrows the age range and puts up those headlines that say “No games” “Only for serious” “Seeking a man who wants a family”. I am always amazed when I see a photo of a holding her baby. I always think of Dalrock and “man up and marry those sluts” But it must work. Or they wouldn’t do it.

    And as RooshV as pointed out, the nature of social media and constant instant communication is that it feeds the choice addiction of women. He commented that a plain looking HB5 woman can justify not getting approached in a public place by the sheer amount of admirers she gets on social media. There is always another email from PlentyOfFish or Friend request on Facebook, surely the hunky millionaire handyman is just around the corner.

    Now, despite what you see in your numbers of 35-50 never marrieds increasing, you are missing the fact that the impact of delaying marriage is only costing 2% of white women. Your data shows 9% for non-hispanic whites in 2000 and 11% today.

    The rise in the “All” category is predominately driven by Hispanic and, mostly, by black women. US Census data touts and celebrates the increase in degrees earned by women in both of those ethnic groups. Blacks constitute 9% of the population but only 6% of all degrees earned. Yet Black women constitute 12% of all degrees earned by women. Enrollment by black women is about 60/40 compared to black men but they are earning degrees at twice the rate. Given the reality of hypergamy, there are no men of appropriate social status for black women to marry and the dissatisfaction of Black Women with Black Men is almost institutionalized and named “Angry Black Woman” syndrome. And other ethnic groups rarely date black women much less marry them. You almost see a BF/WM couple anywhere.

    So while all the men might wish to be dancing on the sofa with glee over the increase in the “ALL”, the more sobering fact that in the largest and most socially impacting group, white women, there has been little change in a decade. I would attribute any increase for two reasons.

    One, the number of women that are highly educated and highly successful has grown a lot in the last ten years and marriage, while romantic, marriage is not necessary to those women, not even for child rearing. There was one majorly controversial article called “The Weaker Sex” or “Divorced Executive Woman’s Club” or something like that which celebrated the benefits of being divorced for the successful woman, that the women who were divorced had it better than the one sister in their little clique who still had idiot loser for a husband and was about to dump the loser because he wasn’t being the good little kitchen bitch his high paid wife demanded of him. And you have documented to Social Attitude machine is busy churning out Heroic Single Mother publicity every day. Some of these spinsters are voluntary and some are structural. There are fewer men available in that income bracket and those men don’t want those women. Rooshv has rating system for women, and degrees and professional jobs subtract points from the rating. He assumes they make shitty partners and are never satisfied. He multiplies looks by 5. Then factors in personality, sexuality, nurturing, femininity. A perfect score would be a 90 where an HB9 would get a 45 (There are not 10s). Better a dumb cute one with tits than an PhD or a Doctor. If a internet dating profile says “Cute doc”, I skip it. If it says “Hot Lawyer”, I hurriedly skip it. So I would attribute some of that 11% and certainly that extra 2% in the last 10 years to the increase in highly successful women. I saw a $10 million dollar house on Realtor.com in Hollywood Hills. The master bedroom was a giant closet with a large makeup area with couches and a large mirror out in the middle of the floor. It was designed for a woman. A single, woman with 10 million dollars for a house. The tub and shower were in the middle of the floor like there would be no need to close a door. Racks for clothes lined all the walls in the bedroom, right out in the open, maybe 30 linear feet of racks. That woman isn’t in any hurry to get married.

    And second, a lot of that 11% are scuzzy fugly women that could never find a man who would screw them much less marry one of them. There are an awful lot of truly obese women in my two supermarkets. One of those stores is a Walmart, and I constantly see woman there that are so obese they have to ride around in those electric shopping carts because they are too fat to walk the store. 36% of the population now is clinically obese, so that means 36% of the women. And that number has risen quite a lot in the past 10 years. There are lot more scuzzy women now than ever ever before. I can go into my supermarket and never see anything over a 5. Today I marveled that a 6 is now an 8. Women today are so unattractive that all women get 2 points added to their HB score just by grading on the curve,

    So I wouldn’t be celebrating these numbers as something that is going cause change. From the way I see it, any reasonably attractive woman and a lot of plain looking ones can get some man and slap the chains on him and drag him down the aisle to marriage. It may not be the Prince Charming Millionaire Hunky Handyman Alpha that she feels she deserves but as you have said, the women basically tell the betas, “We’re getting married now” and the men say “OK”.

    Even the most hardened Red Pill guy would cave if a really attractive woman put a full court press on him. You really have to have your circuitry fried (like I do) before you can resist that onslaught and mine wasn’t really finally burnt through and through until I was in my 50s.

    So despite what you may be thinking, your original assumptions still hold.

    It is the woman choosing to defer and they will continue to defer. And the attractive ones, and the white ones, and the sexy ones are getting what they want. Maybe some of geeky ones or the fat fugly ones might be loosing out. So those prom queens they could care less.

    All this data will do is acerbate what is going on. The lesser attractive ones will jump to get married sooner while there is still a chance for them and before the men realize that their SMV is increasing. My fat ugly niece, she’s married. My daughter that looks like a model doesn’t even have it on the horizon and neither do her attractive cousins. I do have one niece that is kind of in the middle and is paying the price. She has an MBA, she is newly 28 years old and just through the marriage zone. She is about a 5.5 with no tits and had lots of chasers when she was a girl and nothing viable today. She works in banking and it’s mostly women. She is southern and has conservative values about slutting. Her boyfriend is a MBA guy who definitely isn’t going to commit. But she can lower her sights and set her claws into some other man if she chose. But I am sure if she really set her mind to it, she could find a vulnerable beta, give him a whiff of Jif, and get him down the aisle. Heck, she could go get a boob job and she would have her man next week.

    So don’t go popping the champagne corks just yet. Ain’t nothing changed

  270. Michael says:

    Thank you for all the wonderful responses. I’m quite shocked I’m not alone. I’ve brought this up to other guys in the past and they laugh or look at me like I’ve got 3 heads. This site is amazing. I would like to thank the people who posted positive comments, and/or empathized with my situation even if they may have disagreed. Thank you for being objective, thoughful, and open minded to my situation. The postiive and open minded comments far outweighed the few (if any) negative comments most of which I took as a form of constructive criticism. Great responses. Thanks!

    P.S.: Has anyone created a simple single line chart (up, plateau, decline) showing a women’s age window of opportunity relative to her fertility/appearance? I wanted to email it to someone I know. Thanks!

  271. Michael says:

    Apologies for double posting. I’m just blown away by this websites articles and content with external links with comments from other (presumably) men who are essentially saying everything I’ve been silently thinking for years. Thank God I’m not alone…

  272. Pingback: A secret the KGB couldn’t have kept. | Dalrock

  273. anon says:

    I agree with you Mark Minter. The declining marriage rate is not the work of men, but of women. Many MRA types want to believe it is men rejecting marriage, but it is not.

  274. Opus says:

    The question as to who is fuelling the marriage strike, is an interesting one and not one with an easy answer. I am however far from convinced that it is just the women. If it were the women one would not be hearing of women complaining that men will not man-up, – there is a reason why pastors like Stanton berate men for not doing so i.e. they are playing to their unhappy female parishoners- and my local introduction agency (which caters to the middle aged – who they euphemistically define as ‘successful’ ie with money) would not be charging equal fees for men and women – it would be free for women, the men as usual bearing the entire expence of courtship. A young man, his hormones pumping and desparate for sex (and thus validation of himself as a man) will be easily persuaded to marry should a woman seek that as her compensation for access to pussy, but an older guy with some experience and thus validation of himself with access to sluts via OkCupid or POF and with a lowering testosteronal drive (and observing the misery of marriage and divorce around him) is going to think twice. A single man is not social pariah – at worst just ignored – but a woman who never married is always viewed as suspicious (and probably a husband-snatcher) by other women. As Dalrock has pointed out previously, there is a social benefit to women being married. At the very least the single white-corporate-spinster merely condemns her race to the same fate as the Shakers and thus deserves a Darwin award. Women are always vain and always assert that they are too good for any man or otherwise not interested – that is until they see the man they are berating is genuinely uninterested, at which point her true feelings (viz anger, insult, and self-inflicted humiliation) reveal themselves.

    Thyere should be a simple calculus, to determone a woman’s desire for marriage which I cannot define, but which should include fields for wealth (or lack of it) and SMV, and impediments (e.g. Ineradicable STDs; children;). For men the only real fields would be sexual desire and sentiment (i.e. protective instinct or one-itis).

  275. youngmanrp says:

    “The nonchalance by women towards marriage has been misinterpreted by many as a lack of interest in marriage, but I believe that it is reflective of an assumption that marriage will be theirs for the taking, so what is the rush?”

    @Dalrock. This is spot on. I’m a 26 year old guy, and I was just recently speaking with one of my best female friends about the best time to marry. I love this girl very much, probably one of the coolest girls I know, and quite attractive. Anyhow, she cited 35 as the age when she would want to get married/have kids, which nearly made me spit up my drink. I couldn’t bring myself to tell her ‘honey, you have to start looking now while you are still hot if you want to find a solid catch…’

  276. Pingback: Custody Demographics | Dalrock

  277. Pingback: In Search of the Peter Pan Manboy. | Dalrock

  278. anonymous says:

    Michael:

    Your story is painfully familiar; you did everything right and were not rewarded for it, indeed, quite the reverse. Many of us here can say exactly the same thing. I eventually married and had kids, but later than I hoped; I spent my 20s mostly alone and miserable.

    Some thoughts for you….l

    “Reformed” sluts are often sterile due to undiagnosed, symptomless STDs. Often such a girl caught chlamdyia or gonorrhea in college at 20, had no symptoms, possibly the infection even self-resolved (but only after doing its damage) and she never knew she had it. Then, 10 or 12 years later, as a married woman, she wonders why she can’t get pregnant, goes to the doctor…. and discovers that her reproductive tract is a devastated, ravaged, hopeless, lifeless wasteland.

    25% of all married couples have fertility problems, and STD damage is the MAJOR reason. Also, abortion scars can destroy fertility or prevent a woman from carrrying the baby to term.

    So…. Demand a virgin. Look for a homeschooled 20 year old. Any chick who has set foot in college — even a so called “Christian” college — cannot be trusted nowadays.

    Hear ya on the Mormon thing. Their theology is whacked but they live the Bible better than anyone else (and I HONOR them for that). So, look for an Evangelical Christian who lives like a Mormon… if you can find any.

    Russia, Ukraine, etc, are certainly options. Beware even there, though. There are Evangelical churches over there which are pretty solid, so that’s where I’d look if I were in your shoes.

  279. Robert in Arabia says:

    Wise words.

  280. Pingback: Not Glad Tidings for Post Marital Spinsters. | Dalrock

  281. An Observer says:

    Micheal – I read your story, and was going “yep, sounds a lot like me” (although I didn’t get the “with sprinkles on it” experience, thank God!).

    I’m a bit older than you, and had a similar experience of being frustrated by being the “nice guy” and getting repeatedly shot down for it until certain events conspired to shove the red pill down my throat and the light coming on that “being ‘nice’ doesn’t work!” I cannot describe how infuriated I was, and how long it took to get past the anger at being lied to for so long, and having wasted so much time and energy in a fruitless endeavor.

    Then I found out from blogs like this that “alpha” dominance is the desired position for a man, and that men _should_ be dominant in his relationships with the female sex. To me, that was a complete eye-opener. It also explained why, for me, being attentive, caring, and willing to subordinate my wants, needs, and desires to a woman’s actually felt completely dis-empowering – because that’s not how I as a man am wired to work! And, I must say, this new understanding has changed my interaction with women for the better. I’m working from a position of authenticity, and I’m getting better responses from the women I interact with as well, and that makes everyone a much happier camper now.

    This brings me to your comment on being “beta at home.” I’d suggest that trying to do this will sabotage your efforts to find a partner. First, because “beta” is not a man’s natural state, it’s the one feminism says it wants in a man, when in reality it’s not. “Alpha” dominance (I’m the man here, and I will be respected) with beta trimmings (and I will use that dominance to take care of you) is closer to what a man’s natural state should be. If you leave your alpha dominance at work in order to be “a beta at home”, what that means is you’re not giving your woman your best, with a net effect of effectively castrating yourself thus making you a supplicant to your partner. That, I submit, is a one-way ticket to being disrespected and a Relationship Fail.

  282. Pingback: Tips for Frivorce, why make it hard on yourself | Feminism is Empathological

  283. HanSolo says:

    Hi Dalrock. Good post. Do you have any guess as to what will happen with the never married 25-29 y/o’s over the next 10 years or so? Do you think it will keep rising? Level off or even decline?

    I think it will keep rising a bit but as some of the you-can’t-have-it-all narrative for women builds a bit more momentum I suspect that you’ll get a few less women thinking they can or should wait til their 30’s.

    So, my rough guess would be that it continues up at a slower rate to about 50-52% and then levels off.

  284. HanSolo says:

    Although if the lower and middle class white community follows in the footsteps of the black community then I guess we can expect that never married % to rise even further.

  285. Pingback: This won’t end well. | Dalrock

  286. Pingback: This won’t end well.Viva La Manosphere

  287. Pingback: Did the last decade prove that gay marriage isn’t really a problem? | Dalrock

  288. Pingback: Why aren’t men responding to economic signals? | Dalrock

  289. Pingback: Another crack in the narrative | Dalrock

  290. Feminist SWPLs have been sowing the wind for forty years.

  291. DavidVS says:

    Thank you for sharing your story, Michael.

    It could have been mind, but by God’s grace I found a wonderful woman during my graduate school years.

    I have no advice to give.

    In your shoes, I would follow the advice others have given about meeting young women in their early 20s in rural areas of the U.S., perhaps by vacationing in such places. It is not too late to find a wife who is willing to give you her best years in return for your best years.

    Divorce rates are very low for a woman who is young, chaste, intelligent, college-bound, enjoying your income level, no divorced parents, and who waits more than a year after marriage to have kids.

    Perhaps make a deal: wait a few years before kids to enjoy each other’s best years, then start a family, then finance her college education starting with part-time community college classes when the oldest kid enters kindergarten and concluding with a career to keep her hands from idleness when the youngest kid is also spending the day at school. I am sure rural U.S. is full of young women who would appreciate that offer.

    Also, “alpha at home” is not work. It is habits and perspectives that might take work to initiate but require no work to maintain. Basically being an energetic person who is willing to provide the momentum and confidence for the relationship and its activities/conversations. Other posts here, Athol, Rollo, etc. will explain it in detail.

  292. They Call Me Tom says:

    Mark Minter- I’d suggest that it isn’t just women postponing. Yes, it would be hard for a man to resist a full court press from someone who is attractive… for sex. For marriage though? In my early twenties, yes. Now that I have something to lose if I choose poorly, a woman being highly attractive and putting on the full court press wouldn’t be enough, other than for sex. A woman who has the makings of a good wife… yes she could put on the full court press and have almost anyone she chooses… but she’s going to make someone a good wife, she has no reason to opt out.

    Now I will acknowledge that some portion of women are burning themselves out in their twenties, and once they either decide they don’t want a family or get to believing that a family isn’t in the cards for them… then I can see them ‘opting out’. But isn’t that simply sour grapes in response to men ‘opting out’ on that subset of women who don’t have the makings of a good wife, no matter what full court press she tries to put on? Outside of that, I think women are only opting out of men they’re not interested in rather than opting out of men altogether. That is after all, the only thing that men are opting out of, women they’re not interested in rather than women altogether.

  293. Paul Murray says:

    @Sandy Meh – that’s just the way the calculations turned out. The data for that age bracket is noisy, for some reason. I decided to leave the graph as it turned out from raw data, rather than attempt to massage it into a shape that looks better.

  294. an observer says:

    Hey, someone used my tag but with capitals . . .

    Moving on….

    “The way I see it I’ve been given the following choices:

    1) Marry a 30+ women.
    Not recommended. Carries high risk. The woman likely has a high N count, significantly impaired pair bonding ability, an unwillingness to follow your leadership, and will be well established in her own routines and decision making.

    2) Marry a women in her twenties
    Better but prenup and family trust highly recommended. Late twenties means higher N count. Earlier twenties means she will encounter significant resistance against “getting serious” from her gal pals. If they sway her, she wasn’t worth it.

    3) Be single and enjoy my money.
    MGTOW aka Captain Capitalism. Always fun, but not good long term for civilisation, which feminism will probably ruin anyway, since women are net wealth consumers and vote for whomever promises the best and most generous largesse package.

    Dalrock is more optimistic than I am. Were I single again I would probably buy a motorcycle and be done with women. There are a few, possibly orthodox, girls out there.

    Caveat emptor, and all that.

  295. Pingback: Catastrophic Decline of Marriage | Monogamy Game

  296. eliza says:

    You are alone bc you are mean. You are also likely a liar (who goes to law school but cannot spell “a lot”?

  297. robinbreak says:

    Hi Darlock,
    I was reading Michael’s story, and I found so many similarities with my life I couldn’t believe.
    I come from the most Christian country in the world: Italy.
    But let me tell you, the degradation in this feminist world goes very far, and things are depleting very fast.

    My university years, lady-wise, were ridiculous.
    I was ready to give everything to a beautiful brunette girl: the good life, the children, the house in the countryside, the dogs, etc.
    Only to see her sleeping around with total losers and “Pump-and-Dump” style Alphas.
    I never even kissed her, even if I tried to kiss her several times, only to get crushed and rejected every single time.
    The story repeated again and again, always the same.

    Studying Engineering, I was a very Beta guy, because that is what my parents taught me.
    “Be a provider, work hard, have a solid job, and the good family will come.”
    Sadly, none of this apply to the western culture anymore, not even in the most conservative countries.

    I had the “luck” to know a 22yo incredibly beautiful Canadian girl in Italy, and she was virgin.
    We hit it off and tried to make the relationship work long distance for two years, then I moved to Canada to be with her.
    She started going to Law School, and step by step I could see her behavior clearly changing to the worst.
    Her college friends were encouraging her to “pursue her feelings towards other guys”, and “have fun”, because it was unreal to them that, at mid-20, she only had sex with one person.
    At some point she told me “I would like us to be a free couple”. I didn’t know how to take that, so I just said yes, thinking it was just a test and she would never act on it.
    Within 6 months I was in Canada, and few days after her “free couple” speech, I received the following phone call from her (and I quote): “Guess what happened yesterday night? I had sex with that other guy!” – like she was proud of the achievement!
    Of course the guy was a total loser, an addicted gambler that approached her with the words “I guess you’ve never been fucked really hard before”… and then he proceeded to fuck her in one of the casino rooms.

    I was devastated, but the Beta in me would have still married that girl.
    I didn’t even break up with her. I tried to make things works. Then of course I got dumped because she wasn’t happy with me and I was “oppressing her”.
    The environment of College/University destroys the capability of a woman to have a healthy relationship. She’ll never be the same. So much for the myth that nowadays College enriches life.

    So I kept going with my job, harder and harder.
    Then I discovered Game, and start to apply it, little by little.

    I scored a 30yo HB9. She has the most wonderful ass in the world. Perfect body everybody drools over. She is the type of girl I was able to hook up with only in my wildest fantasies.
    She is also the kind of girl that likes to “impose” herself in the relationship, only to get annoyed later on, because of that. The day we first kissed, she told me “I don’t usually date guys like you” (this is because I’m not 6’2”+ and super-muscular, but only 5’10” and average looking). But, you know, her biological clock is ticking, and she is starting to try to “settle down” with guys below her ideal Alpha Stud.
    We were together for four months, then I got dumped because “I’m not happy”, “It’s not working out”, “A relationship should come easily, I don’t have to work to maintain one”.
    Now she’s with a divorced dad of two, a guy that owns a wealthy company in the city.
    She’s giving me the “It’s like in the movies!” speech to describe her brand new relationship.
    I know for a fact she’s not going to put up with the “two kids and an ex wife” situation in the long run, she’s just not the type. And I pity the guy if she manages to tie the knot on him, he’ll be divorce-raped for the second time, guaranteed.
    She’s the kind of girl with unrealistic hypergamy dreams, she is not able to be happy for a long period of time, no matter what.

    So, 10 days ago I discovered the Menoshpere.
    And I understood what kind of huge mistake I would have made if I married one of those girls.

    I am still in Canada as we speak.
    I am 33 years old, I have a 6-figure salary job, a company car and I live in a company house.
    I own two Real Estate property – one worth $400k and the other $300k, both rented to perfect long term tenants.
    I have 100kg of silver and 1.5kg of gold in coins and bars, in a safe back in Italy.
    I have $100k worth of stock, and a 1/3 partnership in a $600k solar panel investment facility.
    I workout 3-4 times a week, I run one/two Marathons a year, and I’m trying to get in shape for the 2015 Ironman in Japan (4km swim + 180km bike + 42km run).
    I will shortly start my own Industrial Process Automation company, in partnership with my best friend that just moved in Canada.

    And, sorry ladies, I’m not interested in commitment anymore. You had your chance with me, when you were young and attractive, but I guess back then you were too busy sleeping around and swallowing copious amounts of loser’s cum.
    Now go fuck yourselves.

    I’m not even the classic “show off” guy. I don’t drive a luxury car. My house is modest. I don’t like to squander money around and display wealth.
    I have a hidden “million dollar jackpot” for the lucky girl that might marry me.

    Some friend of mine told me “Why don’t you just quit your job and enjoy your money?”. But, unlike them, I love my job.
    Anybody else in my situation would drive a BMW M3, a Mercedes SLK, or an AUDI S8.
    But I don’t want to squander $100k of my hard earned money to buy a car, for a show off in order to fuck sluts. If I will ever feel the need to have sex with someone I will call a professional escort.
    At least you pay for what you get, as simple as that.
    Or I’ll use the little Game I have to pump-and-dump average looking girls.

    Deep inside I am still an average Beta guy.
    Ok, I am in a good physical shape, and I have money (which I don’t like to throw around, so for a girl is almost a turn-off!), but sometimes I still find myself waiting for some girl’s text, hoping she will like me, sending that “too long” email, looking needy/desperate, putting her on a pedestal.
    Still working on that to become more confident, more Alpha-like, tightening my Game.

    My parents got married and stayed married for their whole life. They had their up and down, and I am sure most of the “down” would have been fertile ground for divorce for our generation. But they stuck together.
    The truth is I really wanted to get married too, and give them grandchildren and grand-grandchildren.

    But sadly, at this point I have EVERYTHING TO LOSE, and NOTHING TO GAIN if I get married, above all in Canada.
    The risk is way too high. Thank God I dodged the bullet.

    My plan is to keep going my own way. If by the time I am 36-40 I’ll feel the need to have kids, I will go for a 6 months sabbatical in Asia and get a wife. A hot 18/20yo fertile virgin wife, and I will make her happy, and I will take care of her and our children the very best I can.

    And I will speak with my lawyer, in regards of what to do in order to not get divorce-raped by her.
    That is absolutely NOT going to happen.
    NO. MATTER. WHAT.

    Thanks to everybody for contributing to this realization.

    The Red Pill has been swollen :-)

    [D: Welcome to the blog.]

  298. Pingback: Expectations vs outcomes. | Dalrock

  299. Pingback: Must a Traditional Man Accept Modern Marriage? | The Orthosphere

  300. Pingback: Desperate for your MRS degree? Don’t worry about it! say the women of Christianity Today. | Sunshine Mary

  301. Luke says:

    Listerine says:
    November 28, 2012 at 2:59 pm

    “Elise, if you are still reading this, you are NOT a hag. At 34 years old you have absolutely not fucked up your entire life”

    She already is at the point where she really shouldn’t use her own ova anymore to make babies. That’s set in stone. LIkewise, there’s very probably no Diamond wedding anniversary or living to see any great-grandchildren.

  302. Pingback: Feministas atuais - Expectativas vs. Resultados | Canal do Búfalo

  303. Pingback: She can play that game, but will she win or lose? | Sunshine Mary

  304. Pingback: Forfeiting The Patriarchal Dividend | Dalrock

  305. Pingback: He’s Just Not That Into You | kleyau

  306. Pingback: Marriage Rates Plummet–Projection of Never-Married Rates to 2017 | Just Four Guys

  307. Brian says:

    Wow, this is a special kind of insanity that they usually reserve for conspiracy theorists. This is everyone who agrees with this guy: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-your-online-dating-profile-isnt-working/. Fucking seriously, you people need to stop looking for women and wait for them to come to you.

  308. Pingback: Good stuff. | Dalrock

  309. Pingback: Eldersluts and Spinsters: the end result of the female fantasy of marrying “three days after turning 30″. | Sunshine Mary

  310. Pingback: Women’s morphing need for male investment. | Dalrock

  311. Pingback: Don’t blame women for creating feminism | Patriactionary

  312. Pingback: Do Women Pursue Sex With Alphas For Commitment Or For The Sex? | Just Four Guys

  313. Pingback: The sin of lacking moxie. | Dalrock

  314. Pingback: White Women’s Marriage Rates Dropping Much Faster Than Men’s | Just Four Guys

  315. Pingback: Cashing Out |

  316. Pingback: Why men are withdrawing from courtship. | Dalrock

  317. Pingback: How should women respond to men withdrawing from courtship? | Dalrock

  318. Pingback: 2013 Never-Married Rates Reach New Highs But Change Might Be Coming | Just Four Guys

  319. Adonis says:

    Subscribed

  320. Pingback: King of the red pill swallowers

  321. Flaming Man of Iron says:

    @Michael

    @Robinbreak

    (To both). I do had the “good guy” I won’t be a cad kind of attitude. Got me nowhere. Tried to be beta gentleman to court women. Failed. You truly aren’t alone. Lots of reading to do.

    I highly recommend Athol Kay’s Married Man Sex Life primer to both of you. It has a good explanation of the evolutionary biology that drives men & women… It also gives you a good “male action plan” on how to keep things going well in a marriage. Athol is very pro marriage (done right!).

    He also has a blog, marriedmansexlife.com – It is very well respected in this part of the red pill manosphere. Athol describes alpha and beta differently than many parts of the manosphere, to me in a way that is very health and not damaging to your psyche.

  322. coptic777 says:

    “Hot sorority girls flocked to Football players like a butterfly’s on a beast. It didn’t even matter if the guy was black.” being a self employed black male in his mid 30’s i had to laugh at you Michael & this comment. Immediately I knew someone had some insecurity & may be “coming up short” in one particular area. I say that not as a shaming tactic but as an observation that you had to bring that up since we are the bottom economically (don’t worry white folks you are coming along just fine in 20yrs) but as far who your girlfriends & wives secretly see as the “True Alpha male” w/ thugs being celebrated is us. So I know that is one of the fears you have Michael. Also I was raised similar to you 7th Day Adventist so I know what you are talking about as far as family upbringing etc. (by the way since Christ was born at the tip of Africa went to hide from Herod as a new born in Africa & since you are so Christian & take the Bible word for word I would suggest you read Revelation on Christ “return” & the physical description of him & I think you should change religions my friend also look up the Romans earliest descriptions of Christ on the wall paintings they clearly depicted him as black w/ a Afro before they hung him first then crucified him) & since my family is from the Caribbean it was easier since our family structure is still intact because whites are not able to tell our women they do not need us & buy them off w/ “gubment” programs (the plan to experiment & break up the black family worked great congrats white folks now prepare for the same to happen to you with only the top white 1% will be immune as planned) so this has nothing to do w/ our culture & is actually a direct result of your culture interfering w/ ours. That is not “blame whitey” either thats a fact & a couple of you admit this in a round about way in your comments. Anyways Michael good luck to you in your $6,000 apt & I pray I never need a lawyer because I see how most of you feel about us in your comment & based on that I would NEVER assume that you would do a good as a job for me as for someone of another race despite my money being the same. Thanks for proving that point as well. This is why I tell black men (The original MGTOW) NOT to join white men in any kind of MRA movement & just go MGTOW. We have always been on our own & thanks to the “gubment” & white liberals our women are for the most part completely against us. MGTOW is the only sane way……

  323. Pingback: So You Want Me To Man-Up and Marry That Slut? | The Society of Phineas

  324. Grim says:

    You guys who write 98 page missives to any girl who comments are complete beta tools.

  325. Pingback: 29. Pump and Dump | Radish

  326. Pingback: Warren Buffett on Women | Patriactionary

  327. Craig says:

    Michael (from above), I would like to know why you think it should matter if the guy is “Black”. Are you that insecure, racist, clueless that you think it should?

  328. Katie says:

    Why don’t some of the nice people on here get together? :) There might be a good match.

  329. Casey says:

    @ Katie,

    Most of the people on here are men………women are few in number.

    That said, any sort of ‘love connection’ would likely be troubled by a 1000 mile commute.

  330. Katie says:

    If no one is willing to move, yes. And here we come back to the “picky.” One of my sisters married quickly primarily because she decided she would like to and was willing to move the distance of a 22-hour drive.

    If someone is willing to stay single permanently in order to not have to uproot herself, not have to try a nontraditional method of meeting someone, etc., then fine–but she may very well be left with the “single” option then.

  331. Katie says:

    Sorry; that was not to bash anyone on here. Just a commentary on society in general, especially my Christian circles. Women want to get married, but they want the guy to make the first move, if someone flirts she’s wrong (not trusting the Lord), they don’t want to go anywhere where they’re more likely to meet guys because God is supposed to do it, and heaven forbid they enlist matchmaking couples or online agencies.

    But honestly, some men on here really seem to hate women. It bothers me somewhat that without knowing a commenter, they immediately lambast her saying that what she means is that she will sleep with her ex anytime, that she’s “obese” at 130 (?) pounds, that a woman must only be ___ weight (which few are) (when I was dropping below 120 at about 5’5″, people were very concerned about me)…some of it sounds like it’s bashing anyone who dares to want to get married when she isn’t a supermodel, assuming the worst of her moral behavior.

    Am I misunderstanding?

    (And yes, I know I don’t have to visit the blog. I do find Dalrock’s content intriguing, however.)

  332. Casey says:

    @ Katie,

    Katie…..this website is the anti-thesis to feminism.

    Feminism has permeated every corner of our world, and has had many dire consequences. This website is relatively unfiltered, which is why you find Darock’s content intriguing.

    Here men can meet and talk openly about their views of the world as they see it. More importantly, we have many, many, many valid points.

    Watching or listening to mainstream media only underscores the feminist narrative, leaving men to feel there is something wrong with them. So while you seem to take issue with some of the weight comments, there is great truth to it.

    North Americans in general are fat, both men & women. However, I’d have to say women are leading the way. Take it a step further….WHY are North Americans fat?
    If meals were still being prepared by women from fresh, wholesome ingredients….I dare say the obesity epidemic in this country would be greatly reduced.

    Trusting corporations to nourish us is foolish, as their only regard is for profit. “A cheaper ingredient? Let’s use it! A combination of sugar, fat, & salt that will leave the consumer wanting more to eat? Let’s do it!”

    Women left to their natural devices take great pride in building and nourishing a family. Men also take great pride in building and providing for a family. Feminism has ruined all that, and pitted women against men in some sort of misguided crusade for ‘Competition’ instead of ‘Co-operation’ between the sexes.

    The men on this site know the score.

    Feminism narrative #1……”A man must accept me for who I am”. This is a favourite with women, because it allows them a ‘pass’ for all past, current, & future poor decision making.

    A man does NOT have to accept you for who you are. He may choose to ACCEPT or REJECT you for who you are.

    At 5′ 5″, then 130 to 140 pounds is probably the upper band of a healthy weight. As you comment, few are under 130 pounds……….TODAY. Just a generation or two ago, many women were under that weight range.

    Women carry around (unabashedly so) a list of traits for their ‘dream man’.
    Men have a list of their own for women, yet our list is to be attacked by feminists as ‘bad’.

    First and foremost on that list is physical attraction. A women who comes to the dating table 30 pounds overweight, and with a bad feminist attitude to boot is NOT attractive to men in the slightest.

    Men want to feel attraction, and part of that attraction is body weight. Men get no particular warm feeling in their loins for women who are 30 pounds overweight.

    If you are lamenting over the comments about weight here, maybe you should ask yourself “Why?”

    If you are looking to attract a decent man for matrimony, here are your pocket list of actions steps:

    1) Be as fit & attractive as you can be
    2) Be pleasant
    3) Be available
    4) Learn to cook, & enjoy cooking.
    5) Make eye contact with men in whom you are interested
    6) Look for a man to whom you can respect his role of family headship. If you don’t feel safe in following his lead, then do not marry him.

    For the record, I don’t hate you. I wish you great success.

    If you have found yourself @ Dalrock’s…..and you see merit in what he has to say, then success can be attained by you.

  333. Katie says:

    Thank you, Casey! That helps clarify. I actually am very happily married but am interested in the breakdown of marriage and courtship in our modern-day culture.

    I definitely see the unfairness in a woman *or* man expecting physical perfection in the other person while being unrealistic about their own attractiveness. I just hope that if a man finds a woman who will forgive a slightly-imperfect body, he will most often do the same for her.

    When I started dating I weighed under 130 pounds. Unfortunately, my late 20s did a number on me and it has become more difficult, but this renews my desire to keep trying.

    By the way, I despise major corporations, for the most part. I think wheat flour can be highly addictive; I have family/ friends who’ve had to go gluten-free. I also despise the pharmaceutical industry, vaccines, etc., and think that the more you believe they all have your best interest at heart, the more messed up your health will be. Sometimes when we return to simpler, more-organic living, I think some of these issues clear themselves up.

    I think that while someone is improving herself on multiple scores, a friendly, pleasant attitude, secure and non-resentful of those who may be younger, more attractive, richer, etc., goes a long way. On the flip side, if someone is larger than average AND has a mannish type of take-chrage attitude, she will be able to “get away with it” less than a tiny girl doing the same thing. It’s totally unfair, of course, but the petite girl acting “tough” when she really physically can’t pull it off is less threatening and will be perceived differently, I think.

    If people would just decide to get married and stay married, a lot of this would clear up. And clearly the problem is not with just men. My sympathies are absolutely with the good ones. And I am very thankful for myhusband.

  334. DeNihilist says:

    Katie, posted this at the Jenny thread that Dal has at the top, but thought it may be apropo to this discussion too. (Dal, if you have a no cross posting rule, sorry in advance and just delete). This is in regards to why just 100 years ago, families were more then likely to stay together as opposed to today.

    “Martel, big change is our structure. Most families were still rural. By the time you were 8, you had slaughtered a goat or chicken or some such. You had responsibility from the moment you could help out to the family and your neighbours, barn raising, calf neutering, helping with fence posts, etc. You learned that no man is an island.

    Not any more. Now we have a generation that believes that the only responsibility they have is to themselves, ergo, more social disruption, gangs, divorce, putting ma and pop into the old folks home so we don’t have to care for them!

    Really, really selfish time to be alive.”

  335. Casey says:

    @ Katie,

    Just to clarify your comments on ‘physical perfection’.
    I don’t mean to imply any woman who is 130 lbs is not necessarily fit or attractive.

    Each case has its own merits, and I have certainly known women who weigh > 130 lbs to be very slim & attractive. Muscle weighs more than fat tissue, and so someone fit can carry more weight while looking fit & slender.

    I think most men will forgive an imperfect body as changes occur within the lapse of time within a marriage. If you married young, your husband got the benefit of your youth and attractiveness…..and has built a life with you.

    What is occurring now is marriage is postponed into 30+ years of age, and youth & attractiveness were spent on other men. Perhaps foolishly so.

    It is unwise to pretend that biological clocks for women do not exist, or that desirable men in their 30s will not have greater options than they did in their 20s.

    Women need to display they have not bought into the feminist rhetoric that ‘They can have it all’. Men are watchful for that attitude. Men know that the phrase “Women can have it all……” is only a half spoken sentence. The remainder is “………but someone else will have to pay for it!”

    Women need to look for men who are still willing to lead and provide for a family. Our numbers are not only few, they are getting smaller.

  336. Casey says:

    @ Katie,

    Also………I am in total agreement with your comments on wheat flour, vaccines, pharmaceuticals.

    I am also in total agreement that attractive women do get away with more ‘crap’ than unattractive women.

    However, I disagree as to WHY they get away with it. It isn’t because they are not taken seriously. NEITHER beautiful nor unattractive women are taken seriously for feminist boasting.

    They get away with it because they are beautiful, and some hard-wiring within men (betas especially) tolerates it if it means a chance to get in their pants.

    I suppose that is one for OUR gender to work on, holding beautiful women accountable for their lousy attitudes.

    Not until we return to a structure that works for families (rural farming) will we get back to a place where both men & women not only KNOW their roles; they ACCEPT their roles as well.

  337. Katie says:

    What about women in Christian circles, such as mine, who never slept around, who (to my knowledge) were not sexually active at all? Women who had certain preconceived ideas of how a relationship should work…but the guys never really “pursued” them, they were no longer in an era where parents helped, and many have been taught that “He’ll show up as soon as you’re ‘content’ being single”? Theirs is the plight I am concerned about.

    Christians like to downplay good looks, which can be a good thing, but refusing to be ruthlessly honest about the fact that it is easier to get married at 25 than at 30, easier to get married at 30 than 35, and at 35 the chances are STILL better than they are at 40…the dishonesty is not helping. Waiting is NOT helping these women. They need to pursue marriage through appropriate venues (older Christian couples to introduce them, online if necessary, etc.) unless they really are okay with being single for life.

  338. Casey says:

    @ Katie,

    What you describe is a growing phenomenon. Women spending their youth ‘finding themselves’ rather than grooming themselves for matehood.

    Women have had this message of ‘self-reliance’ pumped into their head for 50 or 60 years without abatement. The message is a total farce, and it is helping no one.

    We are all interdependent on one another, and we can ill-afford this message any longer.

    Agreed, waiting is not helping these women. Beauty fades with age, and what remains is the essence of that person. If the essence of that person is unpleasant, then they have little to offer a perspective mate.

    Women need to ‘get right’ with themselves by admitting the following:

    1) I want children
    2) I want a man to provide & protect for me and my children
    3) I want these things more than I want the feminist claptrap mantra of “I can have it ALL!”
    4) I will ignore the teachings of Sheryl Sandberg & Oprah Winfrey to have the things I truly want.
    5) I will groom myself in thought & actions to attract the things I truly want in life.
    6) I will learn to cook & keep an efficient running household (a very, very important role).
    7) Men are not reducing me by suggesting the best place for a woman is in the home, caring & nurturing her familly.
    8) I will put effort into my appearance to attract & maintain a good relationship.

    A women who bristles at the above list has not accepted what she wants. In turn, she is not what men want.

    I know nothing of the women you mention. Perhaps they have been chaste all these years…..but, probably not.

    Bring this list to them…..and mark their reaction to it. If they dismiss some or all of it, then they alone are the reason they are single.

  339. me says:

    Wow….maybe you’re just boring? Maybe the problem doesn’t rest with some fault in everyone else…maybe it is just you?

    Perhaps…just perhaps, the world doesn’t hinge on a woman cashing in on her looks to get married, maybe there is more to her than that…perhaps she wants to know more about herself and what she wants before settling down? Maybe women no longer want to worry about depending economically on some drip and to be self reliant so they can settle down with the person they want to share their life with, rather than someone who can pay their bills?

    The unfortunate truth for you is that your beliefs and expectations are antiquated and more in line with a society that no longer exists where women have zero power of self determination and end up marrying out of necessity, which rarely ends well for the woman.

    Pandora’s box is open and isn’t going to be closed again, no matter how much you pray or wish it to do so. You can sit under it and complain and wish it was still closed, or you can get with the times and realize that this is also liberating for men. I no longer need to strap myself to a non-earning, stay at home economic liability and can find someone with a career that can share my tastes for travel and the finer things in life and contribute to them. I get to be with a women or woman who know what they want and who choose to be with me because they want to and like spending time with me, not because they need to or have fewer options. I get to be with women that know what they like and who can share that, rather than a neurotic, passive, poorly socialized shell of a person. they are stimulating intellectually, they have experiences to share, they are well rounded, smarter, more fun, more participatory…and so on.

    Also to the original post’s comment of ‘It didn’t even matter if the guy was black’, well….I guess that pretty much establishes the historical context of your viewpoint as being stuck somewhere in the 1950s. It DOESN’T matter if they are black, unless of course you are racist, in which case it would.

  340. deti says:

    “ you can get with the times and realize that this is also liberating for men.”

    Feminism was liberating for SOME men. A few men will reap the benefits of endless parades of women presenting themselves for sex.

    For the vast majority of men, feminism means grinding dry spells and no access to women at all.

  341. Opus says:

    Why do I get the feeling that ‘me’ was a woman posing as a man? As Deti explains, the result of sexual liberation is not a marry-go-round of deliriously contented interchangeable partners but a large proportion of ordinary women shagging a small number of top-men (unable to find commitment) and a lot of women at the extremes (the very well to do-and the very ugly) equally unable to find a man. The remark at the end (the sucker punch as it were) about Race is oblivious to the fact that most people go with people like themselves; the only race-mixing I observe is either Land-Whales with Black Guys or Aging Caucasians with Thai-Brides: this is not a case of free choice but one of Hobson’s choice.

    ‘me’ may accuse us of living in the 1950s but (s)he seems to be living on that fabled and never to be reached Island of Utopia. ‘me’ seems to aspire no higher than to a (wo)man who has been every one else’s play-thing: (s)he is welcome to it.

  342. Pingback: Getting to the church on time (a second time). | Dalrock

  343. Pingback: Women are having fewer kids, and demographers don’t know why | WashingtonExaminer.com | Observing the Decline

  344. BradA says:

    me is a woman, no doubt about that.

    Katie, we need some form of matchmaker for women who are attractive in godly ways (and who do their best with the physical assets they have). We also need the same for men. Though men can still get run over if this submissive woman changes her mind later, which is a huge flaw with the modern system and does not bode well.

  345. Pingback: Women are having fewer kids, and demographers don’t know why | Observing the Decline

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s