The Rationalization Hamster 500!

Few topics generate more excitement for rationalization hamsters than the question of why women don’t (re)marry later in life.  Merely bringing this topic up is the equivalent of grabbing a megaphone and shouting:

Hamsters!  Start your engines!

If you have followed this blog for any period of time you have no doubt already noticed this from the comments section.  Perhaps you were thinking though, maybe this is just here.  Maybe it isn’t the same way on other blogs.

It’s that way everywhere.

Blogger extraordinaire Solomon II has another fine post titled Old Maids Over 40 Still Feed Rationalization Hamsters! He discusses a post by unmarried-in-her-late-30s bloggerette Gooseberry Bush titled Anecdotal & Statistical Proof That Women Over Forty Are Not Destined To Be Old Maids.

What’s that I hear?  Is that a starting gun?

Yes, it is!  Gooseberry Bush has started the rationalization race early, giving herself an unfair advantage!  Tires smoking, she lurches from the starting line:

Eighty percent of all women are married by the age of forty. Of those women who remain unmarried, they have at least a 40% statistical probability of eventually marrying, maybe even better! And those statistics are probably not accounting for lesbians or for women who don’t even WANT to get married, for whatever reason.

I’m always on the lookout for actual data on this sort of thing, so I scoured her post for the link to the source of this statistic.  While links abound, I never did find the one for this piece of information.  What I did find instead was a link to a study saying that only 15% of never married 40 year old women are likely to marry within the next 10 years.  The prognosis is slightly better at 20% if the woman has a degree.

So if I’m doing my math right, out of 1,000 never married 40 year old college educated women, 20 can expect to marry in the next year.  And the remaining 980 are free to try again next year.  Of course, the longer they wait the less likely they will be to marry and the quality of man they can attract decreases.

But no self respecting hamster would let reality get in the way.  That is the whole point of a rationalization hamster!

Unfortunately over eager hamsters have a tendency to over-steer and put themselves into a spin:

when a woman is in her teens and twenties she starts to put up many barriers to screen out unwanted suitors. After 40, it might be time to lower the drawbridge. Let down your guard a little. When you were younger and there were many, many unsuitable suitors it made sense to give the men some hurdles to jump. Now, not so much. Men are intimidated by them. They want a woman who’s approachable – another quality that the younger women have in spades because they don’t have the battle scars that come with dating over time. The approachable thing might take some work.

Ouch, my head hurts!  Is she saying women are more approachable when they are in their 20s, or that they put up barriers to approachability in their teens and 20s?  And as a woman ages she goes from having many, many unsuitable suiters to having very few unsuitable suiters, so stop turning away the unsuitable suiters?

Never mind.  This is a hamster race and rational thought has no place!  Plus, there is competition on the field now.  No time to start thinking logically.  Dashing white knight runtobefit comes skidding onto the track out of nowhere:

What I find most interesting is that men, after the death of a wife, will likely marry again. However, women often don’t need to marry again. I believe this is because women are much stronger and independent than men. They are the foundation to which most of us men stand on. Women keep us steady and level headed. Without a woman, whatever age she may be, a man may feel disjointed. A woman makes all the pieces fall into place. A woman is a foundation on her own, capable of so many things. I know I have this view because I had a single mom growing up. I guess it made me realize that a man often needs a woman, but a woman rarely needs a man.

Outstanding move runtobefit!  The fact that men have better odds and options to remarry when older must prove that women don’t need men!  This puts him squarely in the lead!

But he isn’t the only competition.  Running hot (on the wrong track) is Pattie with this mispost on Gooseberry Bush’s about page:

Love this article. How encouraging. I’m divorced and have been for many years. Am still looking to get married “someday”, but right now am enjoying my singleness and independence. We “older” women have a lot of great qualities and experience that those cute young things lack. I agree with you. Get out there ladies and strut your stuff. These guys won’t know what him ‘em!

Thats right.  She may be an older model with a bored out big block and a lot of few miles on her, but her hamster has clearly been rebuilt and sports a new high performance cam.  She is here to prove that post marital spinsters can rationalize with the best of them.  You go girl!

What do you say esteemed readers;  who is the winner of the Hamster 500?  Is it the blogging spinster in the pink car?  The white knight in the yellow car?  Or the post marital spinster making good time but running on the wrong track?  Or is it one of the many other competitors on the original blog post which I didn’t mention?

See Also: A post-marital spinster’s rationalization hamster in the final stages of exhaustion.

Hamster racing pic from Will 210.  Hamster pic from Love hamster.  Checkered flag from Ewan ar Born.  I combined the last two to create the hamster 500 pick.  You are free to use this new picture so long as you are in compliance with the original two image licenses.

This entry was posted in Aging Feminists, Choice Addiction, Finding a Spouse, Manosphere Humor, Marriage, Post Marital Spinsterhood, Rationalization Hamster, Remarriage Strike and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

109 Responses to The Rationalization Hamster 500!

  1. Mathematician says:

    “What I did find instead was a link to a study saying that only 15% of never married 40 year old women are likely to marry within the next 10 years. The prognosis is slightly better at 20% if the woman has a degree.

    So if I’m doing my math right, out of 1,000 never married 40 year old college educated women, 20 can expect to marry in the next year. And the remaining 980 are free to try again next year.”

    20% of 1000 is 200.

    [D: Over 10 years.]

  2. Thag Jones says:

    20% if the woman has a degree.

    So if I’m doing my math right, out of 1,000 never married 40 year old college educated women, 20 can expect to marry in the next year.

    Wouldn’t that be 200 out of 1000?

    [D: Over a 10 year period yes.]

  3. Will S. says:

    “The race is on, and here comes pride in the back stretch…”

    The winner loses all…

  4. Zammo says:

    It’s The Big Lie for the over 45 crowd of single women. The lie is so big that it’s actually easier to believe and so the hamster must run faster.

    Mr. White Knight, runtobefit, again repeats the lie which is promptly digested by the rationalization hamster so it can run faster still for any single woman over 45 who happens to read his post.

    Gooseberry, of course, resorts to shaming language as “rebuttal” on her blog. Such shaming language is usually indicative of hitting a really sensitive spot.

    Here is the Big Lie so we can all keep up to date: A woman’s sexual value increases with age, especially after 45.

  5. dalrock says:

    I just added links to gooseberry’s site to the post. I had originally held off on direct links in case she wouldn’t want trackbacks from my site to lead her readers here and see themselves being heckled. However, she is pointing them to this blog now anyway so it no longer makes sense to withhold the links.

  6. Thag Jones says:

    Ah, OK, I think I get it now. I suppose it would most likely be a sliding scale in which the numbers dwindle over the ten years. I read the post at gooseberrybush and boy, lots of wishful thinking going on there. I suppose they all think they will be the exceptions. They’d be so much better off assuming the opposite and preparing for that, since that’s the most likely outcome. Anything else would be a happy accident.

  7. J says:

    I think you are mis-reading Gooseberry. The way I interpret it is this:

    1) Younger women are more attractive to men. No argument there. GB attributes this to less emotional scarring. Some truth to that, but youth is more important.

    2) Younger women get more attention and can be choosier and can put up barriers.

    3) Older women get less attention and thus need to lower their barriers. No argument there either.

    4) Older women who keep putting up barriers like they did when they had more SMV are just sending men elsewhere. Particularly men with options, the ones the older women most desire.

    There is some confusion with approachable and attractive but I think GBs over-arching point is valid.

    So it’s between Pattie and runtobefit, and while Pattie puts in a great effort with the “yeah I’ve still got it”, runtobefit is the clear winner. I’m sure his mother was strong. She was strong not because she had options, but because she didn’t and had no choice.

    That hamster is a thoroughbred.

  8. dalrock says:

    Good point on the sliding scale Thag.

    As for the wishful thinking, not only does this set them up for disappointment, but it probably also sets them up for failure. If you don’t understand the odds you can’t make the right choices.

  9. Thag Jones says:

    Another thought, it’s no wonder men run away from these people. They are making themselves crazy with this delusional inflation of their own market value. Then they rationalize that by saying “men are afraid of/intimidated by smart, older women.” Puh-lese!

    Luckily (I suppose) for me, I look young – I’m 38, and I’ve had men of 27 (and even younger) want to date me, but I put them off because, well, it’s silly. In 10 years I’ll be pushing 50 and they’ll be not even 40, and I’m not interested in the alternative of being a sad old cougar having hot sex with young men… hey, wait a minute. Seriously though, it may not seem like a big deal now, but it will be in a very short time, and these women with their Ashton Kutcher Demi Moore fantasies…come on! It’s a sad spectacle and I’d rather just go gracefully. I know in a few more years I’ll be mostly invisible – it’s not that I don’t find that disheartening at times, but what can I do about it? Latching on to whoever will take me right before my looks fade into oblivion is just too selfish and pointless.

    [D: By thinking clearly you already put yourself in a 20% or smaller group of women your age (any age?). I imagine attitude and outlook is a key differentiator, and as you say you still can turn heads. You don’t have to beat the bear, you just have to beat the other hikers. But I also agree that it doesn’t make sense for women to marry if not head over heels in love.]

  10. nothingbutthetruth says:

    Cutes pictures of hamsters, by the way.

    Let the hamster run. Let the female blogs delude the nation… http://www.lyricsdepot.com/carly-simon/let-the-river-run.html

    Seriously, these older women only have their hamsters and their cats. So why wake them up? It gets very lonely without animal companionship.

    Older women who keep putting up barriers like they did when they had more SMV are just sending men elsewhere. Particularly men with options, the ones the older women most desire.

    No, J, you have it wrong. Men with options, the ones the older women most desire, are not coming to these older women, regardless whether they put barriers or not. They have options, so they can be with a younger woman with less emotional baggage.

    Men without options (the unsuitable suitors of their youth) can be interested in these women if they are more available than the younger women they crave and they cannot have. But when they see the barrier, they can go elsewhere.

    Between a younger woman with a barrier and an older woman with a barrier, the men without options will choose the former. He won’t probably get none of them, but, if both are equally hard, the younger woman will win, hands down. And the fact of being rejected by a young (in-demand) woman is more bearable than the fact of being rejected by an older woman who has a low demand (you feel like the biggest loser in the world).

    So the advice of lowering the barrier is not for attracting men with options, it is for attracting men without options (as opposed to not attracting any man). Men without options: The many, many unsuitable suitors of their youth, that they are few now.

  11. Zammo says:

    The ol’ “men are afraid of/intimidated by smart, older women” nonsense. I know it well. That’s the hamster in full stride, the wheel briskly moving and all is at peace in the world of cognitive dissonance.

    Men aren’t afraid of that kind of woman. We’re simply repelled by the bossy and domineering nature of these women. They’re delusional self-esteem regarding their sexual (or even personal) worth doesn’t help.

  12. Solomon II says:

    Dalrock, I’ll be in your area in the next month. Drop me a line at patriarchalkarma@gmail.com if you’re interested in grabbing a beer.

    [D: Sounds great! I’ll shoot you an email.]

  13. WP says:

    No, J, you have it wrong. Men with options, the ones the older women most desire, are not coming to these older women, regardless whether they put barriers or not.

    I disagree slightly. The effort required to bed an older woman must correlate to their SMV.

    In other words, much less effort will be required on the part of the man. Not to go as far as to say the cougar needs to do all the leg work, but she certainly must cut out the drama, tests, attitude, etc, that only a younger girl can afford. This is, of course, on top of the assumption that the older lady has kept herself in shape.

    Men with options will hit up a cougar, but any whisper of an attitude = “See ya”

  14. Hope says:

    I think the scientific term for this is cognitive dissonance. People are biased to think of their choices are good and right no matter what. Most of the time they do research on mundane choices like appliances or products, but this applies to big life-changing choices as well.

    To say that older women are “just as attractive as younger women” or that they “intimidate men” is lying, and it’s an enabling lie that really serves no one’s interests. We ALL age and die, so accepting this reality is better than trying to pull a wool over your own eyes and denying it vehemently.

  15. nothingbutthetruth says:

    I disagree slightly. The effort required to bed an older woman…

    Well, these older women don’t want to be bedded, they have had years of this. They want a long term relationship.

    But yes, if it is about sex, I agree with you. An American man would fuck every thing that is available as long as she breathes. This is the proof:

    http://www.inmalafide.com/2010/11/09/the-necessity-of-game-in-one-picture/

  16. Doomed Harlot says:

    What I wonder is WHY the topic of middle-aged women’s chances in the marital/dating “market” is of such intense interest in the so-called “manosphere.”

    It strikes me as petty misogyny. That is, it seems as though men on sites like this one are crowing at what they imagine to be the humiliation of aging “sluts.”

    Am I misreading the tone of these posts? And, if not, what is the explanation for this constant concern with the lives of women who stay single? And why the use of shaming language such as “old maid,” or women with “a few miles” on them?

    I may be a long-married myself, but I take issue with the implication that my marriage is the thing that confers dignity on me and that, without it, I would be some washed-up old broad to be discussed with contempt.

  17. Paul says:

    Wow, that response to you (and Solomon II indirectly) she wrote was something else. Ad Homs, grammar shots, a complete misreading of your “beating up a grilfriend” post, shaming langauge, and a wish that you’d never reproduced.

    Ah, if only she’d made fun of your genitalia, I’d have a bingo.

    [D: I saw that. I was grateful she implied that I’d be allowed to keep my existing children. It seemed like a veiled threat to have this site taken down too. It would be more fun if she had more than a trickle of traffic at her site. She made how awful I am her main topic of the day and she doesn’t even show up in my normal stats dashboard page as a referrer. I had to expand it out to see that she only sent me 2 links, and I’m assuming at least one of those is her.]

  18. Höllenhund says:

    I wonder who invented the phrase ‘rationalization hamster’.

  19. dalrock says:

    Doomed Harlot,

    Are you stipulating that:

    1) Women feel the need for male investment late into life.

    and

    2) They have trouble getting it late in life if not already married?

    Or are you just asking me to stop making my case because I’m doing it too well?

  20. Badger Nation says:

    Hund,

    I first saw it on Roissy a couple years ago IIRC. Don’t know if it started with him but he does have a way with words.

  21. Author says:

    @Hope, I think your comment hit the nail on the head.

  22. dalrock says:

    I just asked Roissy, and he (or Citizen Renegade) confirmed that CR coined the term Rationalization Hamster.

  23. WP says:

    Doomed –

    The manosphere takes note of the aging woman’s peril in the dating market simply because this aged woman was once reaping the benefits of her youth with callous disregard for men. She probably took several things for granted.

    For example, maybe she traded in her husband & family at a chance to “Eat. Pray. Love.” and find a more “fulfilling” relationship. Maybe he was “just boring” ala Sandra Tsing Loh’s ex-husband.

    Dalrock explains the encouragement by society for women to do this in his “whispers” post. The unfortunate part that isn’t explained to women, and that the manosphere has noticed, is that there are risks to this strategy…ones that, it seems, women don’t take into account when planning their actions.

    I agree it seems vindictive at times. But its probably deserved, as well. There’s a lot of men who got royally screwed over on an emotional whim. Lost his kids, his family, etc.

  24. Thag Jones says:

    That post she put up was a laugh, if embarrassingly hysterical. At least she’s earned a nice cozy spot on several levels of Dante’s Internet.

    [D: Funny! I’ve never seen that before.]

  25. Julie (JD) says:

    Dalrock: Yep, what Doomed Harlot said – Why is this such a favorite hobbyhorse of yours? It seems to piss you off if women don’t adhere to a rigidly defined lifescript – marry in late teens or early twenties; have kids (how many?) and stay married NO MATTER WHAT. And if women just don’t live by this mandate, it’s pile on the “shaming language” (sorry! that phrase has been worn into the ground, hasn’t it?).

    In the end, people just make the choices they do, some for good reasons, some not-so-good. I personally take no pleasure in seeing a woman make a mess of her life by tossing away a perfectly good husband for excitement or to “find herself” (Eat, Pray, Barf) nor do I cackle with glee to see the nice, average guy who can’t even get a date try to turn himself into a PUA asshole and lose his humanity in the process. There’s a lot of tough guys cruising the manosphere, but I suspect a good many are extremely lonely, broken and just as sad as the washed-up “cougars.”

    I take my leave of this board permanently now. Good Night, and Good Luck!

    [D: Don’t go away mad.]

  26. nothingbutthetruth says:

    I just asked Roissy, and he (or Citizen Renegade) confirmed that CR coined the term Rationalization Hamster.

    A really useful concept, IMHO. Roissy was a genius to have invented it. I think it is only second to “shaming language”.

  27. Thag Jones says:

    It seems to piss you off if women don’t adhere to a rigidly defined lifescript – marry in late teens or early twenties; have kids (how many?) and stay married NO MATTER WHAT. And if women just don’t live by this mandate, it’s pile on the “shaming language” (sorry! that phrase has been worn into the ground, hasn’t it?).

    I think it may have a little to do with the fact that a lot of these older women washed up slags, after slutting it up in their twenties, complain about a lack of desirable men who want them. As Hope pointed out, the cognitive dissonance is obvious and they’re not doing themselves any favours by deluding themselves into thinking they are just as attractive as a younger woman to the majority of men. Sure it happens, but the more probable outcome is that it won’t. And y’know, you put up a public blog post, you might get some criticism; it’s a bit childish to respond with an internet hissy fit. Address the issues raised, sure, but don’t get all huffy over it.

    P.S. I also like the term “rationalization hamster.” I’m still trying to kill mine off, but I think it’s managed to get on life support until I can find the plug to pull.😛

  28. Lily says:

    Thag, do you know many women irl who slutted it up in their 20s? The ones I know are the least likely to be on the internet complaining about a lack of desirable men who want them. Most of them don’t have issues getting men and for all the slut shaming that goes on in the manosphere, it’s not on the top of their mind irl if a woman is hot. There are a ton of women who don’t/didn’t slut it up in their 20s, per Haley’s blog. They don’t have a queue at their doors, to reward them for their chaste behaviour. To say that any woman who is single in her 30s or 40s must be a former slut is rationalization. I understand where doomed and Julie are coming from because it’s not just this blog stumbled upon today written by some woman whose past we know nothing about, it’s practically the same theme in every post.

  29. dalrock says:

    @Lily
    I understand where doomed and Julie are coming from because it’s not just this blog stumbled upon today written by some woman whose past we know nothing about, it’s practically the same theme in every post.

    I never called the blogger a slut. For all I know she is a former nun. I would think my regular readers would recognize that I’m not really concerned with whether or not a woman marries for the first time late in life, unless she is an aging feminist. I’m much more interested in blowing through the smokescreen around divorce empowerment and whether women really care that men are invested in them.

    The criticism seems to be that what I’m saying is too cruel because it hits women where it hurts most. Besides, it isn’t true…

    I’d be happy if my critics picked one. It is only cruel if it is true. And if it is true, it is cruel to not point out the truth. If it isn’t true, why is it pegging the hysteria meter?

    Besides, I’m interested in the truth. Why else did I take on the sacred cow of the marriage strike? I took some heat over that but I don’t have MRA’s leaving in a huff because they think I just want to be cruel to marriage strikers.

    But of course anyone interested in leaving in a huff is always welcome to, man or woman. 🙂

  30. Josh says:

    @ D. Harlot, Julie

    The reason this topic receives attention is because the fear of spinsterhood and the attendant shame is one of the many methods by which traditional societies control female sexual behavior.

    If the goal of Dalrock and others is to return sexual norms to a pre-feminist era, than this is one of the areas that must come under scrutiny and attack. The feminist is constantly trying to remove societal constraints on women. The normalization of promiscuous behavior, the de-sanctification of chastity and virginity, “fat-pride”, and of course, the promotion of divorce, cougar-hood, and single moms.

    By pointing out the extremely poor outcomes of middle-aged women, perhaps that would convince them to reconsider their career-love balance, their temptations towards divorce, or single motherhood. This would all be to the advantage of men, and traditionally-minded women.

  31. Thag Jones says:

    Lily, I’m curious as to how you’re (re)defining chaste. In comparison to the average slut, they’re chaste, or they’re actually chaste? Because most modern women fall pretty far short of any proper definition of chastity.

    Even if she wasn’t a slut, it’s the delusion here that’s a problem – see post above by WP. And again, bitch on the Internet, be ready for criticism. Also, it’s not that if you stay chaste you’ll have men lining up when you’re 40 either because you’re still past prime at that point, it’s just that it’s a fair bet that most women who are single and 40 have not been chaste all this time waiting for Mr Right. There are so many variables here as to be ridiculous – maybe they were too fussy, maybe they were just unlucky, maybe they’re nuts, maybe all the men in their village are nuts – but that doesn’t mean the generalizations don’t hold.

    Maybe what it is is that they were attractive and as such grew accustomed to lots of male attention and are now are wondering where it all went, figuring it was going to be an endless wellspring.

  32. Doomed Harlot says:

    Dalrock,

    I don’t stipulate that “women” want anything in particular (such as male “investment” later in life). “Women” are such a diverse group that it is impossible to generalize. One problem that I have with traditionalists is the one-size-fits-all mentality.

    I am not asking you to stop making your “case.” Hey, it’s a free country. I am more interested in the motivations of men who like to bitch about women, especially someone like you who is happily married.

  33. Lavazza says:

    “I guess it made me realize that a man often needs a woman, but a woman rarely needs a man.”

    Well, the less a man needs a woman or a certain woman, the more likely he is to be called sexist, woman hater, womanizer and so on, and the more a man needs a woman the more likely he is to be called clingy, bitter, loser and so on. There is no standard for the right amount of neediness/un-neediness, but everything is decided by each woman’s emotions at any given time.

  34. Lavazza says:

    “I am more interested in the motivations of men who like to bitch about women …”

    A: Men are such a diverse group that it is impossible to generalize.😉

  35. Lily says:

    @dalrock
    My comment about the slutting it up was to Thag as she used the term ‘washed up slags’.

    In relation to the ‘truth’, talk to your mother’s friends, talk to your grandmother’s friends. Women are different. Just like men. Some women need/want male investment later in life, some don’t. Some who don’t want it have the option to have it, some who do want it, don’t have the option. Others get what they want. It’s not rocket science.

    [D: I have spoken with my mother and my mother in law, and heard what they had to say about friends and relatives their ages and older. I heard the anecdote long before I found the data backing it up. Women start guarding their husbands especially carefully from other women around age 55-60. The amount of attention these guys get from unmarried older women is quite obvious.]

    Some people divorce for good reasons, some people divorce for what others consider aren’t. Often we really don’t know. You’re happily married, good for you. I’d count my blessings.

    [D: I do.]

  36. Gunslingergregi says:

    ””””’gooseberrybush | November 10, 2010 at 11:13 pm
    I agree that we need to have equality. When men vote for the Equal Rights Amendment and women start getting equal pay for equal work, then we won’t need alimony. As for child support, that’s for your child. If you don’t want to pay child support, then don’t have a child. Otherwise, male or female, you’re nothing but a deadbeat. Maybe you think that children should also work for their keep or that you should be able to end that relationship as well.
    ””””””

    Well I guess the real reason for the big final push for marriage make sure to get that alimony check by 50.

  37. Lily says:

    @Thag I don’t have time to look up now but I’ve seen posts on Haley’s about women who by age say 32 had one or 2 boyfriends, not just anecdotal friends of hers but entire groups of women. I’ve also seen some stats Thursday had. Whilst I saw on Samson’s blog when I checked it out earlier about 3 women he had ‘committed relationships’ with who seem to have had a past sex life along the lines of group sex with college football teams. I don’t know women like that personally, though my friends aren’t exactly virgins. So yes, I’d say Haley’s women are chaste.

  38. Gunslingergregi says:

    So men of the west just make sure not to get married. I mean who needs to get married when you have companionship and love. Just enjoy each others company and that should be enough. No need to make it legally binding when it doesn’t benefit a man at all.

  39. novaseeker says:

    One data point on this phenomenon: Elizabeth Wurtzel. Harvard grad, bigshot lawyer in NYC, published author (and great writer, imo). But still wistfull as all hell about losing her youthful looks: http://www.elle.com/Life-Love/Sex-Relationships/Failure-to-Launch-When-Beauty-Fades/View-ELLE.com-s-tips-for-healthy-living-and-create-your-healthy-lifestyle

    Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. I’ve known a few Lizzie Wurtzels in my life, she is in my same cohort. Oh well.

  40. grerp says:

    Lily – I don’t know a lot of women who slutted it up in their twenties, but I do know one who could be Exhibit A for The Spearhead: thug after thug passing through the revolving door of her bedroom for years, three kids born out of wedlock, decent but not so well paying, go-nowhere government job. She smoked, drank, and tanned for years, and it shows. And she keeps posting these letters to her future (hypothetical) husband on Facebook, mental pick-me-ups listing what a great catch she is and how she is certain she and he will make their way to each other. Complete attention seeking “Affirm me!” behavior.

    Another FB friend just posted that she keeps waiting for her knight in shining armor and the only ones who show up are dorks in tin foil. She is 37, at least 80 pounds overweight, in debt, and often emotionally unstable. She can also be really sneaky and back-stabbing. She should pray for dorks in tin foil.

    I did not have loads of unsuitable suitors swarming over me when I was 2o and cute. I did, however, have one suitable one, one kind and good man, who wanted to make a life with me. That’s all I needed.

  41. Doomed Harlot says:

    Josh, Thanks for your response. I agree that with your analysis of what is likely a large part of the traditionalist motivations for shaming older single women. Ironically, the whole “I don’t need a man” mentality is likely a response to the traditionalist message of “ZOMG!!! If you don’t have a man, you are NOTHING!” In reality, a straight woman like me “needs” a man for love, comanionship, sex, having children, and an economic safety net, just as I hope my man “needs” me for the same purposes. But I (and women like me) don’t “need” a man at the cost of our dignity, autonomy, professional goals, etc. In other words, we love our men but don’t “need” a man so much that it is worth slavishly trying to meet traditionalist standards of submissiveness, chastity, etc.

  42. Doomed Harlot says:

    Lavazza, I agree that men are a diverse group! That’s why I confined my question to those who like to bitch about women. Most men I know seem to like women just fine. At least, they like me!😉

  43. Thag Jones says:

    dorks in tin foil

    Ha ha ha ha haaaa! I have to remember that one.

  44. Omnipitron says:

    “I am not asking you to stop making your “case.” Hey, it’s a free country. I am more interested in the motivations of men who like to bitch about women, especially someone like you who is happily married.”

    Then all you need to do is take a quick look at the lamestream media, read article after article which is misandrist in nature which denigrates men and fatherhood while thanklessly taking male contributions by manipulation or by force. Why is Dalrock doing this? Because he wants to know why women like to bitch about men after achieving much more of their vaunted ‘equality’ that their parents could have hoped for?

  45. ExNewYorker says:

    @Lily
    My wife’s closest childhood friends are “chaste” women along the “Haley” model, and all of them have married men who are quite attached to them (the last of the group to marry was about a month ago, to whose wedding we were happy to attend) . I was actually shocked when first dating my wife since I didn’t believe such women existed much these days, and I figured that such friends were a good reflection (and influence) on her.

    However, my wife’s acquaintances where she works are a whole another ballgame. She works in a primarily female field, and there is a host of crazy young woman behavior, with all the associated drama, particularly from the cohort two to three years out of school, who treat their job as a way to get some spending money for their real pursuit of living la vida loca. It moderates a bit for the ones near or around 30, since they’ve been at the job a little longer, and the additional responsibility isn’t synergistic with going clubbing 5 nights a week…

  46. “We “older” women have a lot of great qualities and experience that those cute young things lack.”

    Somehow I don’t think she is talking about her skills as a cook and laundress.

  47. nothingbutthetruth says:

    “What I wonder is WHY the topic of middle-aged women’s chances in the marital/dating “market” is of such intense interest in the so-called “manosphere.”

    Well, it has nothing to do with slutdom. It boils down to schadenfreude. The fact that these women who have thought for decades that they are too good for you, that have treated you with unspeakable contempt, as if they were princesses and you were a worm, that have divorced good men like you….

    … the fact that these women reap the consequences of their actions, it is enlightening for younger women and schadenfreude for men. It is like realizing that there is justice in the Universe.

    It may be petty but it is true. Of course, we are talking about middle-aged women who fit (or seem to fit) this profile.

    (This is my theory. Personally I don’t feel schadenfreude anymore but I once felt it. When you have younger women, why do you want schadenfreude?)

  48. tspoon says:

    DH, we aren’t really bitching about such women here. We’re laughing and pointing at them. There’s a difference…

  49. dalrock says:

    I can’t speak for anyone else, but the reason I’m focusing on it is to allow those who haven’t made bad choices yet have good information to work from. Life is far better when you learn from other people’s mistakes instead of insisting on making every possible mistake yourself. Cautionary tales like Suzie of the Y and Brothers Grimm are a wonderful thing. They are like a flu shot.

    You get the immunity without actually having to suffer through the flu.

    Well, that and the whole pointing and laughing thing tspoon mentioned. But mostly it’s about the better choices part.

  50. J says:

    @NBTT

    Of course, it’s schadenfreude. It’s refreshing to see someone finally admit it.

  51. dalrock says:

    J, do you really think there is no value in telling the truth here? Because you won’t see this in books or movies, and as this very post points out denial is running rampant.

  52. J says:

    In reality, a straight woman like me “needs” a man for love, comanionship, sex, having children, and an economic safety net, just as I hope my man “needs” me for the same purposes. But I (and women like me) don’t “need” a man at the cost of our dignity, autonomy, professional goals, etc. In other words, we love our men but don’t “need” a man so much that it is worth slavishly trying to meet traditionalist standards of submissiveness, chastity, etc.

    Well said, DH. It’s amazing to me how many men in the manosphere would rather be “needed” than truly loved.

  53. J says:

    D: Women start guarding their husbands especially carefully from other women around age 55-60. The amount of attention these guys get from unmarried older women is quite obvious.

    J: I’m rapidly appoaching that cohort, but I haven’t starting guarding my husband yet, and I don’t think I will. That mindset really kills me. It’s as though the man is some sort of inanimate object that some other woman can “steal,” as though the man has no choice in the matter. Although I would be very upset if my husband left me for another woman, I’d be far more angry at him for breaking his vows than at the other woman for taking him. If some other woman can take him that easily, he’s not worth having.

  54. J says:

    D: J, do you really think there is no value in telling the truth here? Because you won’t see this in books or movies, and as this very post points out denial is running rampant…

    J: I was commenting on the general attitude of glee over women’s suffering in the manosphere, not necessarily about this post. I do believe it is schadenfreude.

    A significant part of the manosphere is made up of men who have been rejected by women and don’t want the women who’ve rejected them (or women like them) to come crawling back to them when their “alpha” options are used up. That’s why when it became apparent on CR that I married late, the accusations of carousel riding were flung about without any basis. That’s why Susan Walsh had the same experience. Getting stuck with a carousel rider who would not have given you the time of day 5-10 years earlier is the manosphere’s biggest fear–even to the point of wrongfully accusing two old married ladies. And it’s based in a generalized anger at women because of previous rejection. That’s why “I used to be a beta till I wised up” is such a common theme.

    One thing that always makes me wonder is what your interest in all this is. You had the good luck of finding love at a relatively early age, and you’ve been fortunate enough to have fidelity and longeviety in that relationship. You haven’t been adversely affected by the SMP. Why are you so passionate about all this?

    [D: Are you saying you don’t care about the culture we are passing on to our kids, just because it all turned out well for you?]

  55. Lily says:

    dalrock, TV tip for you, Desperate Housewives. I think you’d enjoy it more than the Lifetime channel or whatever it’s called. I think you’d particularly enjoy the first bit of this week’s show.

  56. Double E says:

    @ J

    “Well said, DH. It’s amazing to me how many men in the manosphere would rather be “needed” than truly loved.”

    In that you speak truly. You’ve just hit on another fundamental difference between men and women. I and most men I know would rather be needed and respected than loved if given those two as mutually exclusive options– or even the two had to be compared.

    As surprising at it sounds men can go on for quite enough time without love from their women. Yet he doesn’t consider checking out until he discovers he’s not needed. I think this is why so many high-powered competent career women have trouble finding men– they really don’t need a man for most things. Men perceive this very quickly and accurately. “You don’t need me? You have it all together? See ya.”

    Interestingly enough the Bible mentions something along similar lines when men are told to love their wife and women are told to respect their husband. It wasn’t mentioned the other way around.

    Your suprise at this sounds very similar to a career woman who’s finally discovered that men don’t judge her career the way she judges theirs.

    On another note, you got it right that most men in the manosphere are / were rejects. The manosphere is the Barnes & Noble self help section equivalent for men. Good for them. Yes, they’re angry at having gotten it wrong for so long and at how rotten the culture is. I suppose the key is to progress past the initial shock and anger and take the lessons needed to ‘get there’ whatever their goal may be.

  57. Thag Jones says:

    I think it’s good to have this stuff around for the potential lessons to be learned. I wish I’d learned them sooner, but hey, at least I’m not deluding myself into thinking a choice man is going to want to marry a divorced, 38-year-old mom of two, even if she is still pretty hot.😛 I probably would have realized that without these blogs, but I’d still have everyone else telling me “you never know, maybe your prince is just around the corner!” Riiiiiight. With the evidence to back up the unlikelihood of such an event, I’m less likely to fall into delusions. It’s hard for younger women to realize that there will come a time when they are more or less invisible. It sucks, but it’s the reality. Do they even notice the old ladies walking around? Take a look gals, that’ll be you one day, should you be lucky enough to live that long.

    J, as Dalrock commented to you, I could also just as easily grab a bag of popcorn and watch all this hilarity from afar, but I have kids and it matters to me what they inherit, how they end up. Maybe if I were one of those middle age animal substitute women I’d be all prideful and bitter too, but truth is worth more than pride.

  58. dream puppy says:

    The rationalization hamster wheel runs on beta compliments😉

    @J and D: My husband is quite handsome, and as we get older he will eventually outshine me in terms of looks (sucks!!!). I agree with you J, i do not feel I will have to ‘guard’ him. However, I do feel I will have to continue to be a loving wife and not give him any extra reasons (aside from my fading looks) to stray. I think most moral men who have a kind, loving, easygoing wife who takes care of the house (or splits the finances), and takes care in her appearance would not be prone to cheat. The trick is to find a moral man : /

  59. Lovekraft says:

    Schopenhauer said that you can have youth without beauty, but you cannot have beauty without youth.

  60. dream puppy says:

    @Love,

    Well my little hamster would like to come out an play now. I believe that although women of a certain age cannot attract the same men they would by younger, they can RETAIN their men by being great wives AND taking care of themselves. Also, turning 50 (especially with the magic of plastic surgery) doesn’t mean you suddenly become a monster. You can still stay attractive. Staying thin is such a big part of it.

    My 50 year old mother still gets hit on (actually more now than when she was 35 and 25 pounds overweight). Look at Anette Benning: http://www.ruggedelegantliving.com/a/images/Annette.Bening.05.golden.jpg

    She’s not going to get some hot alpha now, but she’s cute. This is what I am hoping for. Don’t crush my dreams, guys.

  61. Doomed Harlot says:

    Double E says: I think this is why so many high-powered competent career women have trouble finding men– they really don’t need a man for most things.

    Stephanie Coontz (linked below) cites a study that 88% of women between ages 30 and 44 who earn over $100K a year are married. That’s compared to 82% of women in general in that age group.

    http://www.stephaniecoontz.com/articles/article36.htm

  62. Doomed Harlot says:

    The other problem with “cautionary tales” about sad, washed up middle-aged women is that you can easily counter them with “cautionary tales” about middle-aged women (or men for that matter) saddled with awful spouses they settled for when they were young and dumb. Or women who did all the “right” things, only to find themselves divorced by their husbands and without many options on the job front because they invested all their energy at home instead of cultivating an education and/or career.

    Freedom is about making hard choices and risking the possibility of making a choice one regrets. It is ridiculous to tell women that there is one correct life script that we must follow to insulate ourselves from the slings and arrows of life.

  63. Badger Nation says:

    “I think this is why so many high-powered competent career women have trouble finding men– they really don’t need a man for most things.”

    Like Doomed, I also believe this is an overplayed meme. Almost every “high-powered competent career women” I know has a man, a pool of men she’s considering for LTR, a marriage in progress, etc etc. Two groups I see who do have trouble with men are true ball-busters and women who spent their young 20’s REALLY focusing on their careers (law school/partner track, surgical residency, PhD, you get the idea). They bleat that men are intimidated but that’s really a rationalization – it’s usually a combination of opportunity cost favoring their careers when they were younger, and being very unpleasant towards everyone including the men they date.

    I find it very rare a man is truly “intimidated by a successful woman.” Women who put “well-behaved women rarely make history” on their bumpers have no right to complain that well-behaved women rarely make good wives.

  64. Doomed Harlot says:

    I suspected that gloating over the (supposed) defeat of the princesses of one’s youth is only human. It’s an emotion I can relate to and understand — but it’s petty and I would be embarrassed to spend so much time reveling in it as folks in the manosphere seem to do.

    As a former princess type myself, I would also note that some of these gorgeous young women who rejected you may have been caught in a tough situation. Try a kindly, face-saving approach to letting down a young man and you get accused of “stringing him along” or “leading him on.” Try a blunter form of rejection and you’re a “bitch.” It’s a tightrope that can be hard for a woman to walk, especially when she is young and inexperienced. And she can get aggravated by the constant pressure! She is a person too!

    Look, I understand that it’s hard to put yourself out there and pursue a member of the opposite sex. It’s scary because there is a huge possibility of being rejected and thus feeling foolish or humilated. This risk and burden is almost always on the man in our culture (unfortunately). It makes sense that a fair number of men are going to respond to this fear and sense of vulnerability and humiliation with hostility towards women, especially pretty, desirable women. But it’s not a very mature or productive response.

    I’m no Buddha, but it seems to me that schadenfreude, while intensely pleasurable, is not particularly good for a person spiritually. It is far better to realize that we are all — even the beautiful people who seem to have it all together — just people, people with soft tender egos, muddling along as well as we can.

    (And J, thank you for your kind words. I enjoy your comments as well.)

  65. dalrock says:

    @Doomed Harlot
    The other problem with “cautionary tales” about sad, washed up middle-aged women is that you can easily counter them with “cautionary tales” about middle-aged women (or men for that matter) saddled with awful spouses they settled for when they were young and dumb. Or women who did all the “right” things, only to find themselves divorced by their husbands and without many options on the job front because they invested all their energy at home instead of cultivating an education and/or career.

    We have whole sections of bookstores and at least two cable channels devoted to cautionary tales about women who end up saddled with the wrong men or were wrongly divorced by their husbands. Have you been in a coma or something?

    Freedom is about making hard choices and risking the possibility of making a choice one regrets. It is ridiculous to tell women that there is one correct life script that we must follow to insulate ourselves from the slings and arrows of life.

    Agreed. If you ever catch anyone telling women there is one correct life script make sure you point it out. I don’t mean vaguely accusing them of such a thing, but point out in specific where they did so.

  66. novaseeker says:

    It’s not a generic “Schadenfreude” as much as it is a come-uppance kind of Schadenfreude. The bigger they come, the harder they fall type of thing. It’s very human and almost universal, really. It has less to do with specific rejection — most guys learn in high school where “their league” is — as with the idea of being “of lower caste”, which is essentially the way the SMP works. Most men are automatically of a lower sexual caste than their peer females until they get a bit older, yet it’s during those formative years that the experience of being “lower caste”, and the resentments relating to that, are developed. It’s only the exceptional men who are not lower sexual caste before 25, and for many that stretches out until the late 20s at least.

    As I have advocated for younger men elsewhere, a key — unless you are one of the true standouts, in which case you probably aren’t reading because you’re literally swimming in women — is to get through your 20s without getting completely bitter about women. It’s not as easy as it sounds – I remember what it was like being in my early 20s as a lower caste male. But the key is hanging on until you age a bit out of being the typical lower caste young male, so you can emerge in the late 20s and around 30 and then engage with women coming from the perspective of a middle or higher caste male.

    Women and men have different kinds of “suck” here. Most men “suck” on the front end, for the most part, not really gaining much in terms of attractiveness until the late 20s or around 30 (relative to where most men are at 22-24, say). And for many men, as long as they stay in shape, they can ride that for a while, well into the early-mid 40s. Women, on the other hand, start off very strong (or at least, at their strongest, generally speaking), and then the “suck” begins to set in later, as they age into the later 30s and beyond — as our friend Lizzie Wurtzel realizes. The “suck” is relative, of course. Wurtzel knows she can still “attract men” — that isn’t her issue. It’s that the “suck” has nevertheless begun to set in, and she can’t attract the same kinds of men, or be the same kind of “hottie” that she was before. The “suck” sets in at different ages for men and women — it’s front-loaded for men and back-loaded for women. So for men, who experience the “suck” first, there is Schadenfreude at the point when women start to experience the “suck” for themselves. And women, when young, tend to be just as brutally dismissive of most men around them, particularly if they are high SMV at that age, often to the point of ridicule. This is normal. It isn’t pretty, but it’s normal because the SMP is a competitive environment — men and women are competing against themselves and each other, and that leads to some resentments on both sides. I suspect this was always the case, but the fact that the dating/mating game now spans 15-20 years for many people really exacerbates the level of negativity and resentment that can build for many. Let’s not forget that there are plenty of bitter women as well.

    Obsessing over it is unhealthy, I would agree, but the feeling itself is perfectly normal.

  67. dalrock says:

    @dream puppy
    My husband is quite handsome, and as we get older he will eventually outshine me in terms of looks (sucks!!!). I agree with you J, i do not feel I will have to ‘guard’ him. However, I do feel I will have to continue to be a loving wife and not give him any extra reasons (aside from my fading looks) to stray. I think most moral men who have a kind, loving, easygoing wife who takes care of the house (or splits the finances), and takes care in her appearance would not be prone to cheat. The trick is to find a moral man : /

    Yes, a good man isn’t going anywhere and if another woman tempts him to stray that is his own failing. By guarding I meant that they notice other women frequently bringing their husbands baked goods or wanting their husbands to teach them things like horseback riding, fly fishing, etc. After a while they start to get on the lookout for these sorts of things.

  68. Badger Nation says:

    “By guarding I meant that they notice other women frequently bringing their husbands baked goods or wanting their husbands to teach them things like horseback riding, fly fishing, etc. After a while they start to get on the lookout for these sorts of things.”

    Wouldn’t it be great if they spent their entire marriage doing things like this, instead of simply noticing other women doing it late in his life?

  69. Doomed Harlot says:

    Aaaargh. I didn’t mean to be so preachy.

    Nova’s points are interesting and mostly on the money.

    I don’t think men become physically more attractive as they age. At the risk of revealing my lecherous side, I appreciate beautiful young men more and more the older I get and the more I am surrounded by middle-aged people. But because men become more rich and powerful as they get older, an older man’s attention can seem exciting and flattering to a young woman. An older woman is less likely to have personal power, accomplishment, and wealth with which to lure the beautiful and the young — but that may be changing with women’s changing role and status in society.

  70. WP says:

    DH-

    An older woman is less likely to have personal power, accomplishment, and wealth with which to lure the beautiful and the young

    I think you’re projecting what women find attractive onto young men. Men, the overwhelming majority anyway, couldn’t care less about a woman’s “power, accomplishment, and wealth” (or, put another way, things garnered over time). They care about:

    1) Physical attributes (of which weight is probably 90% of it)
    2) Attitude/demeanor

  71. WP says:

    Also, to further clarify, nobody gets “more physically attractive” as they age (weight and the like remaining static).

    Men value physical attractiveness primarily – those fade over time in women.

    Women value a VARIETY of things (of which physical attractiveness is but one slice of the pie) – these other things typically increase in men as they age.

    So, while their looks are degrading, it doesn’t nearly impact men as much as women. It still does, just not as much.

  72. At 55, all I want in a wife (and I largely have it) is that she look OK for her age (now 50) and that she is nice to me. I don’t care about her “accomplishments” or whatever. And if I were ever on the market again, which is highly unlikely, I would look for a reasonable looking woman in her forties with a good character and some brains. I wouldn’t be interested in her having “power”, “status” or “accomplishments”. Those things would actually be a negative.

  73. nothingbutthetruth says:

    Novaseeker expressed what I meant better than I could

  74. Most men “suck” on the front end, for the most part

    The problem here is that sucking on the front end doesn’t help men who watch the few men that don’t “suck” get most of the women. Even if you wait until women begin to suck, the problem is that most men will have their choice of women, but it’s the women that they never wanted. I’ll refrain from using myself as an example, but will the average man who couldn’t get laid at the age of 20 with women of his own cohort magically get hot 20 year old women at thirty or will he get stuck with other 30 year old women that haven’t been secured by men with better qualities and talents?

    So while women reminisce about the top shelf lovers they once had, most men will never have the opportunity to ever claim such an experience even in their best years. The dynamics simply don’t work out this way and will never allow these men to be happy.

    a key…is to get through your 20s without getting completely bitter about women

    It’s hard not to when you see women dating men with questionable characteristics. Ultimately, in our modern society, it’s going to be an issue that we’ll have to deal with, and I wonder how many men are going to be patient enough to wait for their turn to be in the driver’s seat of a car that nobody else wanted. Other than becoming a porn addict that wants nothing to do with women, how does one manage to spend those years being sexless without becoming bitter or depressed?

  75. Pingback: Linkage is good. | Dalrock

  76. I agree completely that older women can remain attractive. Maybe I am a bit unusual, but I don’t care so much if a woman is not very young. Men who fixate on 20 year olds are going to be disappointed eventually, at least in the real world.

    My wife has just turned 50, and I still find her quite bedworthy.

    I agree with many of the Manosphere memes, but this “women lose it past 30” idea is just bullshit.

  77. dalrock says:

    @David Collard
    I agree with many of the Manosphere memes, but this “women lose it past 30″ idea is just bullshit.

    Agreed. But this isn’t the point at all.

  78. Lavazza says:

    Well, a woman you have been with since her twenties will of course look better to you in her fifties than other women in her fifties.

  79. Thag Jones says:

    I agree completely that older women can remain attractive. Maybe I am a bit unusual, but I don’t care so much if a woman is not very young. Men who fixate on 20 year olds are going to be disappointed eventually, at least in the real world.

    David, do you have a younger brother?😛

  80. Yes, good point, Lavazza. For starters, if you marry a girl who is 25, she will be your type, and that won’t change. Physical type I mean. Also, she will age slowly and it will not bother you as much. And you will be older yourself. But I am a bit unusual, as I rather like older women. What are crudely called MILFs.

  81. theobsidianfiles says:

    Hi Dalrock,
    Been lurking for awhile now, gotwind of your blog by way of Ms. Walsh’s HUSand a few other spots in the blogosphere. This post is excellent, and I note that Grerp’s spinoff post is a good companion piece to what you’ve written here. Overall, I like your vibe and when my blog’s back and running, I’ll add you to my blogroll.

    Personally, I have no problem with the choices Women make, for whatever reason they wish. What I have a problem with, is with so many Women – and keep in mind, as a Black man, I’ve had something of a headstart on these kind of things in this regard, listening to so many Black Women complain one way or another about their inability to find “eligible” Black Men – who refuse to own up to the paths they’ve chosen, and the inevitab;le consequences that flow therefrom. So, if a Woman wishes to turn up her nose to what she deems as the lesser Men around her, more power to her – but she then forfeits her right to complain, whine and moan about her not being able to find the kind of Men she wants or thinks she deserves. She’s made her choice. She must deal with it, the good and the bad.

    Personally, I see nothing wrong with Men celebrating a bit in the misery of those Women who went out of their way to pass otherwise decent guys by in years past, only to discover that now that the years haven’t been kind and they can’t find their Prince Charming, they want everyone to commiserate with their misfortune. That’s life and that’s human nature-deal. After all, Men do all the time.

    Again, keep up the good work!

    O.

  82. Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Tease Edition

  83. ElectricAngel says:

    “Hamsters, start your engines” is about the funniest thing I’ve read in a week. Thanks!

    That son of the single mother has been emotionally crippled by her. What a nightmare!

  84. J says:

    D:Are you saying you don’t care about the culture we are passing on to our kids, just because it all turned out well for you?

    J: No at all. But I do feel that as parents we are better off working on our respective kids than on social trends. I have little influence on what people outside my family do. I just try to immunize the kids against all the crap out there.

  85. J says:

    Hi Dream Puppy,

    My husband is quite handsome, and as we get older he will eventually outshine me in terms of looks (sucks!!!).

    You know, the frequency with which you bring this point actually worries me a bit–and it’s not necessarily true. Twenty-some years ago, my DH and I looked about the same age and had the same level of attractiveness–not movie stars by any means but a truly handsome couple. Now, I appear to be in my late 30s or early 40s, and he looks his age. We are over 50, though still handsome, I think. We both still turn heads–but it just doesn’t matter the way you think it will. It’s the icing, not the cake.

    not give him any extra reasons (aside from my fading looks) to stray.

    Honestly, and I say this as sort of motherly advice, your “fading looks” aren’t reason for a man to cheat. That’s not license to put on 300 pounds, but no one is as thin or fresh at 50 as at 20. On the other hand, you’ll notice that the middle aged married men of the manosphere all claim to be married to “smoking hot,” middle aged woman. What are the odds that all those women look 20? Zilch. They don’t, but their husbands are looking at them with the eyes of love.

    When my husband and I were dating, we passed once an elderly couple on the street. The husband was very dapper; the wife, though old, had retained a certain prettiness and elegance. My husband turned to me and said, “One day, J, you’ll be an elegant old broad.” I liked that. It was an acknowledge that he knew we’d both be old one day and that it was OK.

    The trick is to find a moral man : /

    The trick is not to settle for an immoral man.

  86. J says:

    @Dream Puppy
    Also, turning 50 (especially with the magic of plastic surgery) doesn’t mean you suddenly become a monster.

    No, no, o, no, no. Plastic surgery can make you a monster. No one will EVER come near me with a knife.

    You can still stay attractive. Staying thin is such a big part of it. My 50 year old mother still gets hit on (actually more now than when she was 35 and 25 pounds overweight).

    Sweetie, I am both older and heavier than your mother, and I still get get hit on. It’s not as hard as you think. Stay healthy, be friendly, laugh a lot, be interested in people, be happy. Men love that.

  87. Pingback: Addiction to divorce fantasy is also about power. | Dalrock

  88. J says:

    @DH

    And J, thank you for your kind words. I enjoy your comments as well.

    Thank you!

    I liked this comment in particular. Yes, I too can understand the hurt and rejection, but a person has to let go at some point. If I were in the market for a second husband. I’d avoid a guy like that like the plague. Who wants a guy who can’t let go of the past? What a misery to live with someone like that!

  89. theobsidianfiles says:

    J,
    Given your focus in this regard, I must ask: what do you recommend Men in the manosphere discuss instead? If it were up to you, what woud you have them do? I’m just curious. Thanks!

    O.

  90. Dream Puppy says:

    @J You made me feel better, thanks. My husband always says I am a very strange mix of very vain and very insecure. But then again aren’t all women? My culture (South Americnan/European) is very looks centric. Too much!

    And you’re right about the lightheartedness, I notice when I am in a nice happy mood that people just respond better in all aspects of life. I would say this is especially valued in Western women due to the perception that we’re all killer banshees put on this earth to suck the life force (and $) from men.

  91. J says:

    My husband always says I am a very strange mix of very vain and very insecure.

    They go together. You’ll get over it. Weirdly, aging has made me more secure. I’m less worried about what I don’t have and more grateful about what I do have, less likely to concentrate on things I don’t like about myself and more likely to feel that I look terrific for my age–though less likely to feel it really matters.

  92. Pingback: Single in the Suburbs | Freedom Twenty-Five

  93. Pingback: Intermediate guide to selling divorce; overcoming women’s better judgment. | Dalrock

  94. Interested says:

    I stumbled across this blog this week and I have to say it has been enlightening to read. I am back in the market after a divorce from a woman who bought into the whole divorce business with all the typical behaviors. Affairs, rewriting history to make me worth casting aside. Enough time has passed that I don’t feel angry anymore at the situation or even her. Why do I tell you this? Because it seems that basic thoughtful commentary gets overshadowed at times by the “shaming” that some posts offer.

    I just want to validate some of the earlier posts about “cognitive dissonance” I have reentered the dating scene and can tell you that Zammos post is spot on.

    “The ol’ “men are afraid of/intimidated by smart, older women” nonsense. I know it well. That’s the hamster in full stride, the wheel briskly moving and all is at peace in the world of cognitive dissonance.

    Men aren’t afraid of that kind of woman. We’re simply repelled by the bossy and domineering nature of these women. They’re delusional self-esteem regarding their sexual (or even personal) worth doesn’t help.”

    I am not desperate to be married again. I have options. Friends and co-workers have set me up to meet friends of theirs and my experience has been that many of these women have the same inflated sense of self importance described in these posts. They are running on that hamster wheel as fast as they can. It’s one thing to read about this disconnect in a blog. I can assure you it’s quite another to see it in person.

  95. Pingback: Old Maids Over 40 Still Feed Rationalization Hamsters! | Solomon II's Lost Gold

  96. Pingback: The plankton generation | Dalrock

  97. van Rooinek says:

    old thread….kicked up by a websearch….but just HAD to comment:

    “…..What I find most interesting is that men, after the death of a wife, will likely marry again. However, women often don’t need to marry again. I believe this is because women are much stronger and independent than men….”

    Seriously? Does she actually not know the true reason?

    It’s all about sex. Most men can’t handle celibacy. So, if they’re the marrying kind to begin with (by inclination and/or in obedience to their faith), and they lose their wives to death, OF COURSE they want to get married again!!!! Marriage was their only sexual outlet. DUH!!!

    It really is that simple.

  98. van Rooinek says:

    It’s amazing what you can learn from Wikipedia:

    The name hamster derives from the German Hamster, which itself comes from earlier Old High German hamustro. Possibly related to Old Russian choměstrǔ, which is either a blend of the root of Russian khomiak “hamster” and a Baltic word (cf. Lithuanian staras “hamster”) or of Persian origin (cf. Av hamaēstar “oppressor”) — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamster

    Hamaēstar = oppressor !!!!!!!!!! Indeed many good men can attest to the truth of this.

    NB., The rationalization hamster is classed as Mesocricetus rationalis

  99. Pingback: Evidently I’ve hit a nerve! | Dalrock

  100. Pingback: Nothing is more subversive than the truth - The Spearhead

  101. AlekNovy says:

    Ouch, my head hurts!  Is she saying women are more approachable when they are in their 20s, or that they put up barriers to approachability in their teens and 20s?  And as a woman ages she goes from having many, many unsuitable suiters to having very few unsuitable suiters, so stop turning away the unsuitable suiters?

    I was confused by this part too.

    -> First she says that young women are unapproachable when they’re young because they can afford to be

    -> then she says that when you’re older you can’t afford to do this as young women are approachable and you have to compete with them

    Wtf? That’s one confused paragraph.

  102. P Ray says:

    I think she’s trying to say that with what the men now in their 30’s-40’s have accumulated, in comparison to women in their 40’s, women in their 20’s are less demanding and more in awe of what the men in their 30’s and 40’s bring to the table.

    Which, I suppose, goes back to what I’ve said elsewhere that feminism has had only 2 main goals:
    1. To ensure unlimited sexual license for females, giving them the authority to “tell”(via social shaming) men who to be attracted to so that
    2. Older men can never have relationships with younger women, since the women of step 1 want a sexually starved cohort of men they can easily find a husband from once they get off the cock carousel.

  103. FT says:

    I love this blog post and the related ones. Such a refreshing dose of reality. (How did a married guy get so doggone interested in this topic?) I hope women wake up and smell the coffee. You probably aren’t going to remarry if you’re over 40 and divorced. Time to get a life.

  104. Pingback: My Eyes Are Open « Complementarian Loners

  105. Pingback: A Gedankenexperiment to Disprove the Existence of the Rationalization Hamster « Patriactionary

  106. Pingback: Father Know’s Best: Dalrock’s Donnerstag Dozen « Patriactionary

  107. Pingback: A Discussion About “Nice Guys(TM)” – And An Object Lesson In Female Mating Psychology‏ | Just Four Guys

  108. Pingback: Dwyane Wade & Gabrielle Union: Living Proof That “Big Man Culture” Is Alive & Well In Black America‏ | Just Four Guys

  109. Pingback: Proclaimed Christians Aren’t All Christ Followers | The Society of Phineas

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