She bought a fake engagement ring.

Jo Piazza is managing editor of Yahoo Travel, but instead of being jealous all her girlfriends talk about is the fact that she is 34 and still not married:

My girlfriends love to gossip. They’re bitches like that.

They particularly love to gossip about me, the last single woman standing in our group of college friends, the only one who didn’t get married last year.

“Poor Jo! She travels all the time. How is she ever going to find a husband?”

“She should have just married the last guy.”

Note to young women:  your status won’t come from your career.

This entry was posted in "The Writer", Status of marriage. Bookmark the permalink.

320 Responses to She bought a fake engagement ring.

  1. Pingback: She bought a fake engagement ring. | Manosphere.com

  2. Phillyastro says:

    Maybe she can buy a fake hymen too. Also, “He worked in finance, was shorter than advertised, and at one point leaned in to smell me.”

    Where in the Gospels did Jesus say the only unforgivable sin is to be a short man?

  3. After reading this, ‘the last guy” really needs to do a life evaluation and realize JUST how lucky he is that she didn’t “just marry” him.

  4. I find it amazing that women keep score with one another based on which ones are married and which ones aren’t. Men never keep score this way. When I was single I never felt pressured by my married friends to get married. Now that I am married, I never pressure my single friends to marry.

    It also amazes me that divorced women like to be friends with OTHER divorced women. Its kind of like a misery-likes-company kind of thing. Its not very often you see a divorced mom or two hanging out on a routine basis with the married women. They just don’t mix anymore. Whereas with men who divorced, they hang with both married men and single men all the time. Again, it is just not point of conflict the way it is with women.

    It comes as no surpise to me that she went and bought a fake engagement ring. Of course, she wants to fit in with her friends, and not feel “left behind.” But that ring wont change a thing.

  5. okrahead says:

    I guess she’s the only one who likes it enough to put a ring on it.

  6. At 24 it would have been, “Wow, Jo’s so lucky, she gets to travel and meet all those exotic guys. I wish I hadn’t settled down so early.” But by 34, most of them start to see what’s important — for their friends, if not for themselves.

    Ridiculous how she compares open-ended dating to taking religious vows. She accidentally lampshades the obvious difference when she talks about how nuns wear wedding rings (signifying a type of marriage to Christ): they made a commitment. Married women (one hopes) make a commitment. She hasn’t committed to anything except her own whims.

    But she’s skinny and blonde, so one of these days she’ll rope in some sucker, or she’ll decide her “best friend” was husband material after all, and some guy will get partial access to her “amazing” life.

  7. theasdgamer says:

    I’m sure her cats all love her, though.

  8. Eidolon says:

    My wife started to be allergic to the unmarried women she knew after we got married. That effect got even stronger during pregnancy, to the point where she pretty much cut off all communications with unmarried and especially divorced women she knew. Is that similar to the experiences of others?

  9. theasdgamer says:

    @ ibb

    Now that I am married, I never pressure my single friends to marry.

    Just by bringing up the pleasures of marriage, no matter how insignificant, singles can feel pressured.

  10. “She should have just married the last guy.”

    Absent from this line of thinking is the debate on whether or not the last guy even proposed? Maybe it never came to that and she was never given the choice.

    I have never known even one person who genuinely proposed to a woman and had his proposal rejected, not one. I’m thinking that if the last guy had proposed, she would be engaged.

  11. I guess she’s the only one who likes it enough to put a ring on it.

    It actually sounds like she has a beta orbiter (her “best friend”) who’d marry her, but he “just wasn’t her husband.” Yet another of those mysterious cases where he’s a great guy she shares everything with, but for some inexplicable reason, the stars just didn’t align correctly for her to feel right about committing to him.

    Just another girl delaying marriage until the last possible minute despite having clear opportunities. Par for the course.

  12. gamer,

    Just by bringing up the pleasures of marriage, no matter how insignificant, singles can feel pressured.

    To them, I have never done that. We just chat about sports, gaming, work, vacations and travel, other bullsh-t. No pressure from me.

  13. So funny. I guess misogyny comes primarily from women, not men.

  14. Her article clearly implies that “the last guy” at least broached the subject of marriage — otherwise it’s awfully presumptuous for her and her friends to assume she could have married him — and that she didn’t marry her “best friend” by her own choice. I’d even say his response to her buying the ring makes it clear that his offer is still on the table.

    We don’t really have to argue about whether thin blondes draw marriage interest again, do we?

  15. Eidon

    My wife started to be allergic to the unmarried women she knew after we got married. That effect got even stronger during pregnancy, to the point where she pretty much cut off all communications with unmarried and especially divorced women she knew. Is that similar to the experiences of others?

    Yes.

    Women either talk to each other about their marriages OR they talk about what they want their future marriage to be. If you have some women who are married and some women who aren’t, then the conversation lacks balance and becomes confrontational and conflict based. Women don’t do conflict well (least of all with each other.) So they tend to cease contact unless there is some real significant thing that binds their relationship outside of friendship (such as work, family, or even church.)

  16. @ Cail: “the stars just didn’t align correctly for her to feel right about committing to him”

    I often wonder which comes first, the chicken or the egg. Does she immediately see the guy on the friend ladder or is it his abdication to it the puts him there? Was she looking for a beta orbiter or is that all she can draw? The world may never know (or care).

  17. justdoit says:

    I looked at one of her TV appeareances on “Fox and Friends”, of all places.

    Even looking her best with all the TV makeup and slimming black pants, I would not hit that.

  18. Cail,

    Her article clearly implies that “the last guy” at least broached the subject of marriage — otherwise it’s awfully presumptuous for her and her friends to assume she could have married him — and that she didn’t marry her “best friend” by her own choice. I’d even say his response to her buying the ring makes it clear that his offer is still on the table.

    If he broached the subject and she didn’t give him any indication that she wanted to marry him, then its her own fault that she is not engaged. Its either that or she just doesn’t love him and really only wanted him for beta orbiter (like GiL said) in which case they absolutely should not be married. Either way its good for him that he found this out now (instead of later, after a bad marriage) so he can move on the next one.

  19. At 34 with a job that screams EPL, settling must seem like a lot. I don’t think a woman in her situation is going to be willing to settle for anyone obtuse enough not to see how much she is settling.

  20. I don’t think a woman in her situation is going to be willing to settle for anyone obtuse enough not to see how much she is settling.

    The thing is, whoever the guy is that could marry her, he is going to have to have a career that has a lot of flexibility. This woman (at 34) has an incredible job. She get to travel all over the world. She has travelled to 12 different countries in the last 9 months. Think about that for the minute, 12 countries in 9 months. Who does that other than international pilots, international flight attendants, and maybe political embassadors?

    Now having said that let me say this. Just because she travelled to 12 countries in 9 months for her job does not mean that her job impresses men enough to get them to want to marry her. I’m not saying that. I’m not saying that her career adds value to her MMV. It doesn’t. But by the same token, she is probably only going want to marry a man who can travel with her (all the time) the way she is used to travelling or else… why would she marry? I’m sure she hears it from her married friends all the time how jealous they are of her lifestyle perhaps not from a marital standpoint but from a fun/vacation/travel standpoint.

  21. Anonymous Reader says:

    Obvious question: who is the Alpha that got away, and how long ago was that?

  22. Bee says:

    @Phillyastro,

    “Where in the Gospels did Jesus say the only unforgivable sin is to be a short man?”

    The verse you are looking for is Zacchaeus 3:16.

  23. justdoit says:

    Note also how she had to put down the poor guy (the one date, working in finance) for smelling her hair and being short, in order to be able to tell a story that some man had stated she was attractive enough to marry.

    You may have heard of humble-bragging. It is time for a a new concept: Harass-bragging! (did someone invent the term already, I’ll have to google it).

    Harrass-bragging defined: When a woman demonizes a man for the purpose of being able to tell a tale of how hot and irresistible she is.

    Harrass-baiting defined: When a woman intentionally tries to bait a man into doing something she can later claim was harassment.

  24. @IBB, I think she has a better chance at finding a unicorn and becoming a revirgin than landing an alpha in her advancing years.

  25. jsr says:

    Off topic, but can anyone remind me what article(s) or comment thread(s) Dalrock discussed being bothered by husbands that were upset their wives were only offering duty sex and not bringing the passion?

    [D: Could it be this one?]

  26. Lyn87 says:

    IBB,

    Not only does her job not add to her MMV, it actually subtracts from it. I doubt she’s going to want to stop traveling, so any man who marries her has to know that that either:

    1) He has to quit his job so he can travel with her (making her the sole breadwinner – she’s unlikely to agree to that). Unless…

    3) He’ll have to find a way to earn good money while traveling on her itinerary (good luck with that). Or…

    3) He’ll be married to someone he rarely sees (then why get married?).

    Also, the ring is just silly. If she wants to buy herself a piece of jewelry because she likes it, that’s her business. If she wants to pretend that it’s in any way equivalent to a wedding ring (even those worn by nuns), she deserves all the ridicule that’s coming her way.
    __________________________

    @ Bee – Zacchaeus 3:16… good one.

  27. Dalrock says:

    @Phillyastro

    Maybe she can buy a fake hymen too. Also, “He worked in finance, was shorter than advertised, and at one point leaned in to smell me.”

    Where in the Gospels did Jesus say the only unforgivable sin is to be a short man?

    I think the subtext there was even a short man was obviously trying to figure out if her being never married at 34 should disqualify her. He wasn’t trying to prove himself to her, he was trying to figure out if she was worth his time. Her answer “I’m crazy” almost certainly echoed what he was thinking. She thought it would be funny to say it out loud, but it wasn’t. Her loss of SMV power clearly hurts as much as it startles her.

  28. “Her loss of SMV power clearly hurts as much as it startles her.”

    It’s kind of like when the kindergartener finds during his first hot lunch that sticking mashed potatoes up their nose is no longer “cute” despite what their parents might think.

  29. Or in other words “I’m crazy” coming from a peak SMV hottie is received differently than someone that seems to have cat lady status in their future.

  30. Pingback: She bought a fake engagement ring. | Neoreactive

  31. zodak says:

    if i see a girl with an engagement ring on the wrong finger i know she is either like this crazy woman who refuses to admit she is unhappy or someone who refused to give back another man’s engagement ring. both are girls to avoid.

    she thinks she will magically stumble on love in some other country but more men will be asking what is wrong with her & she will continue to get P&D while crying to her ex in the friend zone.

  32. JF says:

    Women best friends will time marriages, births, marital strifes, and divorces together. And in the interim of time while they are not in equilibrium, they will not talk to each other and will latch on to temporary stopgap friends until they come back into respective marital status equilibrium with their best friend(s) whereupon the stopgap friends are put on the backburner.
    I have seen all this happen with my own two eyes. My rebellious, erstwhile wife got pregnant within a few days of her best friend, and the day our daughter was born, the very next day after that my wife’s friend gave birth toa girl also.
    They did all of this coordination apparently subconsciously. There was no plan.
    There is a reason why women in close proximity for a time begin to synchronize ovulations.

  33. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock
    I think the subtext there was even a short man was obviously trying to figure out if her being never married at 34 should disqualify her. He wasn’t trying to prove himself to her, he was trying to figure out if she was worth his time.

    Which is a complete reversal of the role she’s lived since, like, forever. And it clearly is not fair, too.

    Her answer “I’m crazy” almost certainly echoed what he was thinking. She thought it would be funny to say it out loud, but it wasn’t. Her loss of SMV power clearly hurts as much as it startles her.

    Exactly. And again, there surely is an Alpha in her past she’s pining for.
    All the travel won’t make up for that.

  34. Not only does her job not add to her MMV, it actually subtracts from it. I doubt she’s going to want to stop traveling, so any man who marries her has to know that that either:

    1) He has to quit his job so he can travel with her (making her the sole breadwinner – she’s unlikely to agree to that). Unless…

    3) He’ll have to find a way to earn good money while traveling on her itinerary (good luck with that). Or…

    3) He’ll be married to someone he rarely sees (then why get married?).

    #3 is not that bad. I know a lot of marriages this way (know a few flight attendants who are married to husbands who don’t travel as much.) They see their wives even less than her presumed husband would.

    She travelled 12 times in 9 months, presumably she was on the road anywhere from 1 week to 2 weeks per international destination that is (say) 18 weeks travelling in a 40 week period. Even if he doesn’t get to go with her all the time, he’ll still see her.

    Sometimes absence makes the heart grow fonder.

  35. Anchorman says:

    Obvious question: who is the Alpha that got away, and how long ago was that?

    I don’t think there is one, or she’d probably write a line about him, hoping he’d read it and lament what he lost.

    I think the ex-boyfriend either told her he was gay or moved away. She chose fabulous job over best friend, which is really telling.

    Her line, “I’m crazy” was probably half-confession and half-please shout “No” immediately to allay the whispers.

  36. Her loss of SMV power clearly hurts as much as it startles her.

    Yes. I’m not the only one who reads articles like this and thinks they scream of whistling past the graveyard, am I? All the boasting about how she could be married but she’s just been too busy being awesome, mixed with self-deprecating snark to draw sympathy…. I know women who talk and act that way in real life, and if you can get them to look you in the eye, you can see the panic and fear.

  37. earl says:

    ‘Obvious question: who is the Alpha that got away, and how long ago was that?’

    I’m beginning to think the only alpha in that type of female’s life…is herself.

  38. earl says:

    See:

    ‘Nuns wear rings, delicate and understated gold bands on their right ring fingers, to signify their marriage to Jesus Christ. When I asked one about her ring, she replied matter-of-factly, “It’s about commitment. To God and to myself.”

  39. Opus says:

    I continue to be surprised by the American obsession with marriage especially when women like Piazza (can that really be her name?) pursue – in her latest job-change – a career that is EPL on steroids. I know you will say “Liz Jones”, but she is knowingly ridiculous and on the verge of decrepitude whereas Piazza is still young enough to settle-down if that is what she really wants.

    I have on occasion had cause to ask females – married and single – exactly what the variety of rings they sport, signify, but without ever receiving meaningful replies.

  40. Cail,

    Yes. I’m not the only one who reads articles like this and thinks they scream of whistling past the graveyard, am I?

    I am not convinced she even wants to be married. I think maybe her article about buying the fake ring was just her writing about something for the sake of writing it. I don’t think even she believes what she is trying to sell others.

  41. earl says:

    ‘I think I’m half-joking when I call it my engagement ring. I think about what the nuns told me. It’s a commitment to myself…’

  42. Exactly earl, she is “half joking.” It is not a serious article writen by a woman who is seriously looking to get married.

  43. javaloco says:

    ” My ex-boyfriend was my best friend, but he wasn’t my husband.”

    Forget about any of her shortcomings, this is telling about what just about anyone does or should expect from marriage. She even recognizes that your best friend is not your spouse.

  44. earl says:

    Well she’s fully serious about being committed to herself…the half joking is so that people don’t think she is crazy about buying a ring to celebrate it.

    I’ve seen plenty of these type of single women with rings on the ring finger BTW. Women don’t wear those type of rings if they are actively looking.

  45. jsr says:

    Dalrock: Thanks, that looks like one of them. But there was at least one other where you expressed a greater level of frustration at husbands’ unhappiness with low passion wives. It might have only been in the comments.

  46. I’m crazy is a beta screener. No comment is a healthy beta, “No, you go grlll.” is potential orbiter status, any answer in the affirmative is an indication of an alpha. Can you imagine her response if he had said “Do you own any cats yet?” or “Obviously.”? I’m thinking either a rapid conclusion to this dead end date or a PUA opening.

  47. Lyn87 says:

    Hmmm… in the article she writes, “The only finger it fit was the ring finger of my left hand,” but in the picture of the ring, she’s wearing it on her right hand. She pooh-poohs the idea that she should worry about men not approaching a woman with a ring on her left ring finger, but then when she actually wears the thing, she wears it on her other hand to signal her availability even though it doesn’t fit as well.

    It’s clear from that, and from the article itself, that she’s conflicted about her chosen path and her decisions. She writes that her friends are “bitches” when it comes to gossip, but clearly it hits her pretty hard. And it’s not because they’re jealous about her career (which, to be fair, sounds pretty great), but that she and they understand at some level that a woman is not defined by her employment like men are. Of the women in her friends-since-college circle, they all “outrank” her now, and they all know it, her protestations of her great” career” notwithstanding.

  48. And there is also this glaringly unanswered questioned does she have overtly offensive body odor?

  49. thedeti says:

    ”Obvious question: who is the Alpha that got away, and how long ago was that?”

    Brilliant. Surprised it didn’t come up before.

    In stories like these, there’s ALWAYS an alpha who got away. Or, more accurately, an alpha she couldn’t lock down. Nearly all these SIWs are alpha widows.

  50. earl says:

    I can imagine the ‘alpha that got away’ went like this…

    It was the guy she wish would possess her but after he found out what she was like he moved on. And she either hasn’t found anyone similar or refuses to think any of her betas have those characteristics.

    If she has had this personality all her life…what alpha would scoop that up?

  51. Of the women in her friends-since-college circle, they all “outrank” her now, and they all know it, her protestations of her great” career” notwithstanding.

    The script is:

    18-22 – College, get degree, have one serious boyfriend and a fling or two. Experience Life.
    23-28 – Have fabulous career, travel the world, have another serious relationship (maybe a short starter marriage) and a few more flings for experience, bang a brooding painter in Paris or Venice.
    29 – Start thinking about marriage, stop pushing away all the interested men.
    30-31 Marry Mr. Right, but continue fabulous career with his blessing and admiration. Pop out 1-2 children and get them into daycare as quickly as possible so they don’t interfere with your important work.
    39ish – Take stock of your life, make sure you didn’t “settle” for Mr. Right, continue fabulous career, but maybe cut back to part-time so you can also be super-mom and complain to your friends how overwhelmed you are. Look down on your friends who married too early and missed the fun or left it too late and are spinsters-in-training.

    That’s how it’s supposed to go. So if she’s not married at 34, something’s gone wrong. She missed Mr. Right when he went past at 30. (Actually, he missed her, because it can’t be her fault, and there aren’t any good men anymore.) She’s lost. She’s on a one-way street that’s not on her map. She knows she’s going the wrong way, but has no idea where to turn.

  52. Boxer says:

    A quick look at Jo Piazza (whose main claim to fame is writing a book on “breaking up” with one’s significant other) suggests to me that she’s a bisexual, if not a full-blown dyke. She’s got the manjaw and the masculine frame going in spades. She does seem to have moderate-length hair, which is the only feminine thing about her.

    If she has had this personality all her life…what alpha would scoop that up?

    Come on, Earl. You know you want a shot at that prize catch of a woman.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  53. Novaseeker says:

    Its not very often you see a divorced mom or two hanging out on a routine basis with the married women. They just don’t mix anymore.

    That’s because the divorced ones have lost status compared to the married ones. There’s a split there. Both are uncomfortable around the other at that point.

  54. Joe says:

    Mz. Piazza, I know where the good men have gone. They blew by you when you were 24 and thought that what a 27-35 year old professional man wanted to hear is that you were focused on your career, and were sure you never wanted to have kids. The implicit message of that mantra is, “I’m here to chase bucks, have fun and party and get sexed up.” Men looking for a wife will certainly take advantage of that but like a Kentucky basketball player, it’s one and done, take the trophy then go. I sure took advantage of that until I met a woman who was interested in getting married. Look on the bright side – for nearly 15 years, you got exactly what you said you wanted. Now it’s somebody else’s turn.

  55. Novaseeker says:

    Those kinds of travel schedules play havoc on relationships.

    I also work in international business and have had phases of travel like that. It’s not glamorous or enjoyable, but exhausting. And it very much detracts from home life. I still travel 6-8 times a year, but I avoid it like the plague and only do it when absolutely necessary. Seriously, a stream of airports, taxis, hotel rooms and conference rooms really isn’t that exciting, and the view from the window, or the evening having a nice dinner in a foreign city really aren’t worth the trip, IMO.

    I once had a business client who traveled so much that a major airline named a plane after him (was a “perk” for the few world top travelers in their frequency system). It cost him his marriage, and he couldn’t maintain a relationship after that, either. He didn’t mind, because to him the travel was like a drug — he felt more alive when doing that than when being in a “home base”. I can say that having worked in international business for ~25 years now and knowing all sorts of people who have worked exclusively in the area, it’s very, very detrimental to personal relationships precisely because of the schedule, the jet lag and the fatigue. It’s just too disruptive. The “non-married” rate among these people (who are in the social class with high marriage rates and low divorce rates) is very high, and there’s not much they can do about it other than change their line of work, which gets less appealing the more along and advanced they are.

    About the only thing worse for your personal life than being on the international travel schedule with that kind of frequency is living as an ex-pat (in my experience) while working for a US company (different from moving to another country and “going native”). Ex-patting takes years off of the success of your personal life, to be honest. There are fun aspects to it, but the social cost is very high and it locks you out of social networks back home during important times to be building them, while the networks you build while an expat are fleeting, temporary and die off once you move back home (and are social network wise behind the curve). Plus, it’s expensive as hell, and sets you back financially in almost all cases, even with a generous package including a COLA. Another one of those things that seems more glamorous than it actually is.

    So, yeah, jaded on the international thing, as an old international hand. Has more negatives than positives, to be honest. I only continue doing it because at this point I have a huge competitive advantage in it and not leveraging that would be simply stupid.

  56. new anon says:

    “I’ve seen plenty of these type of single women with rings on the ring finger BTW. Women don’t wear those type of rings if they are actively looking.”

    Oh yes they do.

    They do it to keep the “wrong” types of guys from hitting on her. Note how she complained about a short guy that worked in finance (code for boring/nerd/non-jock) and how she had to drive him away by saying she was crazy. These guys would have never approached her in her 20s, but now that her SMV has dropped they are.

    The aggressive, alpha bad-boys she wants are going to be deterred by a fake wedding ring (it has a blue stone), but the nice-guys (the ones she wants to keep at bay) will see a ring on her left hand and leave her alone.

    The ring is a sh!t test. One designed to filter out the nice-guys.

  57. new anon says:

    Make that “The aggressive, alpha bad-boys she wants ARE NOT going to be deterred by a fake wedding ring…”

  58. Opus says:

    Let’s face it: frankly, although she is not – in some photos – hideous, she is not really very hot. Guys her age can effortlessly pull girls still at their peak SMV. Alpha dudes will ignore her, dweebs she will dismiss. May she bask in her career, her three degrees, her published novel about a love rehab and her large dog.

    ..and worst of all Clooney is now taken.

  59. Cail,

    18-22 – College, get degree, have one serious boyfriend and a fling or two. Experience Life.
    23-28 – Have fabulous career, travel the world, have another serious relationship (maybe a short starter marriage) and a few more flings for experience, bang a brooding painter in Paris or Venice.
    29 – Start thinking about marriage, stop pushing away all the interested men.
    30-31 Marry Mr. Right, but continue fabulous career with his blessing and admiration. Pop out 1-2 children and get them into daycare as quickly as possible so they don’t interfere with your important work.
    39ish – Take stock of your life, make sure you didn’t “settle” for Mr. Right, continue fabulous career, but maybe cut back to part-time so you can also be super-mom and complain to your friends how overwhelmed you are. Look down on your friends who married too early and missed the fun or left it too late and are spinsters-in-training.

    There are movies about this….

    http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0173884/quotes

    Natalie Keener: I thought I’d be engaged by now. I thought by 23, I’d be married, maybe have a kid, corner office by day, entertaining at night. I was supposed to be driving a Grand Cherokee by now.

    Alex Goran: Well, life can underwhelm you that way.

    Natalie Keener: Where did you think you’d be by err…?

    Alex Goran: It doesn’t work that way. At a certain point, you stop with the dead lines. It can be a little counter productive.

    Natalie Keener: I don’t want to say anything that is anti feminist. I really appreciate everything that your generation did for me.

    Alex Goran: It was our pleasure.

    Natalie Keener: Sometimes it feels like, no matter how much success I have, it’s not gonna matter until I find the right guy. I could have made it work, he really fit the bill, you know. White collar, 6’1, college grad,

    Okay guys. You know that SHE KNOWS no matter how much success in life she has, none of it will be wiorth it until she has some guy signed up for marriage 2.0. And if you want to be married to the gorgeous and Ivy educated Natalie Keener, dont be born short, don’t be born stupid, and don’t be born satisfied with a blue colar job….

    Natalie Keener: ….loves dogs, likes funny movies, brown hair, kind eyes, works in finance but is outdoorsy.

    Works in finance but is outdoorsy. Alpha-McHarley-Rockband-Drummer-Millionaire

    Natalie Keener: ….I always imagined he’d have a single syllable name like Matt or John or Dave. In a perfect world, he drives a 4 runner and the only thing he loves more than me is his golden lab. And a nice smile. What about you?

    Alex Goran: You know, honestly by the time you’re 34

    Ironically, the age of our fearless heroine who loves to travel and buys her own fake engagement ring…

    Alex Goran: ….all the physical requirements just go out the window. You secretly pray that he’ll be taller than you, not an asshole would be nice just someone who enjoys my company, comes from a good family. You don’t think about that when you’re younger. Someone who wants kids, likes kids. Healthy enough to play with his kids. Please let him earn more money than I do, you might not understand that now but believe me, you will one day otherwise that’s a recipe for disaster.

    Marriage for men is for sex. Marriage for women is for the accumulation of resources. Never marry a man who accumulates less than you can do on your own!

    Alex Goran: ….And hopefully, some hair on his head. I mean, that’s not even a deal breaker these days. A nice smile. Yea, a nice smile just might do it.

    Natalie Keener: Wow. That was depressing.

    It sure is. Too many of the guys in the manosphere are f-cked if they want to marry a young intelligent hottie like Anna Kendrick.

  60. Anchorman says:

    suggests to me that she’s a bisexual, if not a full-blown dyke.

    Right.

    I think the questions by her friends, “Are you gay?” mixed with the lack of noticeable alpha, and a dash of somewhat indifference toward actually getting married vs. not being hammered by her friends over her single status gives me the same impression.

    I wouldn’t doubt she even went to the convent hoping to find out it’s really a lesbian farm of some type and came away with the idea of marrying herself.

  61. thedeti says:

    “ Too many of the guys in the manosphere are f-cked if they want to marry a young intelligent hottie like Anna Kendrick.”

    Of course they are. I’ve ramped up my inner cynic lately, which might not be the best thing, but it’s the realistic thing, unfortunately.

    With unleashed hypergamy now finishing up its work on a second generation and starting on a third, we’re seeing the results. When women select men, looks and hotness are all. He needs to be ripped and shredded, he needs to look good and dress well, and he needs money money money.

    Gentlemen, that means most of you are never going to marry. Or if you do marry, you’ll have to wait until your wife is 35, banged out and desperate. Most of you are not sexually attractive enough to attract a woman in her mid 20s. Most of you are not in the top 25% of men. Most of you will have to wait until you are around 35 yourselves to marry, if you can marry at all.

  62. Morgan says:

    Finally, women have realized that, rather than being the kind of woman a man would propose to be with the rest of his life, they can just remain bitchy and purchase everything he would have on her own. Buy your own engagement ring, pay for your own single wedding ceremony, have a career, be artificially inseminated and end up alone. I’m sure it’s no coincidence that she and her boyfriend broke up around the same time she landed the dream job of travel editor. I bet she couldn’t fall out of love with him fast enough once she realized all the strange cock she would be exposed to traveling the world and leaving him behind. They have no idea what value a man would bring to their lives other than things they can buy. And they’re better off alone. Save a guy the trouble and cost.

  63. Entropy is my god says:

    @Deti

    Your comment is balm on a sunburnt mind, roasted in the flames of a militant feminism. A cancerous cist, force grown on the minds of innocent young men, mentally raped by their parents, their church, their nation, and their god.

    Nothing suits this country more, nothing assuages the scales of justice, than the absolute destruction of the virulent whore of Babylon that this U.S. of A has become.

    This pestilential female parasite is nothing more than the last dying gasp of a disease destroying its own host. She vomits out a fecal parade of self pitying curses meant to conjure up feelings of empathy. Her magic no longer works. The spell is broken. The end is near. Justice is coming.

  64. Eidolon says:

    @Deti

    It’s not as bad as that. There are good women, few and far between though they may be. I had the advantage of being attracted to shy women, which is a group far more likely to have virginal women in it. But there are decent women here and there. They’ll take some work, they won’t be prepared to be a good wife right away, but if you learn how to be attractive to women, they’ll appreciate you a lot. This type of Christian girl is pretty much the only type I would recommend. At this point simply being a virgin sets her apart to such a degree that she’s relatively likely to be trustworthy.

    Another approach is to date foreign women, or live somewhere else. Obviously it’s not easy, but if family is really important to you it may be worth it. From what I’ve seen (not having been there myself) Australian women are much sweeter and gentler than American women, for example. I’m sure CH or someone like that would have a list of places you can go for more pleasant dating experiences.

    I don’t think it’s hopeless, though it’s far from easy in this environment. I would highly recommend praying over your dating life. The woman I married surprised me by mentioning that she did that when we were first together. Afterward I could never understand why no one ever suggests that, and I never thought to do it before.

  65. Anchorman says:

    Is that from Hallmark?

  66. Entropy is my god says:

    @Anchorman

    Yes, it was stolen from a card.

    “This card brought to you by HYPERGAMY.”

  67. Opus says:

    Natalie Keener (of whom I had never previously heard) is an actress and presumably like most leading ladies fairly attractive. There are plenty of women in their twenties and beyond chasing their career but unable to attract a man who wants them other than for a ONS and seemingly unable to join up the dots as to why [excessive expectation/limited reciprocation].

    Women did not invent Feminism; men looking to have hot-tottie readily available arranged it so there would be a revolving door of women acceptable enough to pump and dump but without further complication.

  68. Eidolon,

    It IS that bad. I am sympathetic because I see wayyyy too many lonely guys whose entire lives are just going to suck. I see this in lonely women as well, their lives pretty much are going to suck because… they are ugly.

    Entropy,

    Your comment is balm on a sunburnt mind, roasted in the flames of a militant feminism. A cancerous cist, force grown on the minds of innocent young men, mentally raped by their parents, their church, their nation, and their god.

    It just occurred to me, my parents didn’t have a clue how hypergamous women from my generation were mostly because neither of them were and they just assumed that everyone was going to be like them. I thought my parents knew everything and how wrong I was. My dad offered me NOTHING in good advice with regards to women. His advice was pure blue pill filth (treat ALL WOMEN as if they were SPECIAL!) I am oh so careful what I tell my children to make sure it is red pill.

    My church that I grew up in? Useless. Utterly useless. There were no single women in it (just all old people) and almost no single men and the pastor(s) never offered any advice (good or bad) as to what kinds of women those men should seek. That was too politically charged a thing to talk about so nothing was discussed.

    My nation never really cared for me outside of my willingness to pay my taxes. Now my nation wants to penalize men with MORE taxes for not buying things they would never use to make those same things cheaper for women and old people because they DO use them.

    As for God? Well he’s always been with me even when I was at my most troubled points in my life so I wont be down on him as I would the mere mortals who are supposed to be in authority.

  69. Entropy is my god says:

    @Opus

    “Women did not invent Feminism; men looking to have hot-tottie readily available arranged it so there would be a revolving door of women acceptable enough to pump and dump but without further complication.”

    You are blinded by Apex fallacy. Did you really just blather this out and expect such a hot wash of tripe to go uncontested? Men did not invent feminism, a very small minority, at most the far right end of economic achievers, 3 STD to the right, around 1%. Starting to get the picture?

    Go peddle your feminine drivel where unprepared minds will accept it. Most men are not benefiting from feminism.

  70. Opus,

    Natalie Keener (of whom I had never previously heard) is an actress and presumably like most leading ladies fairly attractive. There are plenty of women in their twenties and beyond chasing their career but unable to attract a man who wants them other than for a ONS and seemingly unable to join up the dots as to why [excessive expectation/limited reciprocation].

    Natalie Keener is a hypergamous, feminist, Ivy-educated character played by Anna Kendrick in the George Clooney movie “Up In the Air.” It depicts a fictious company that could never exist in the real free market world (as all they do is fly around and fire people at other companies, that is their “service.”) No company that is so strung out financially as to downsize is going to pay more for someone else to do their downsizing for them. It is actually an exceptional manosphere movie, if for no other reason than Clooney plays the PERFECT MGHOW! His speech about “…whats in your backpack?” is pure red pill MGTOW trueisms.

    Anyway, Anna Kendrick is a beautiful young woman. But the Natalie Keener dialogue I just quoted was pure, honest, hypergamy, the way the mose beautiful, young, and educated women, think. That is their logic pattern. They want it ALL!

  71. Bango Tango says:

    “Finally, women have realized that, rather than being the kind of woman a man would propose to be with the rest of his life, they can just remain bitchy and purchase everything he would have on her own. Buy your own engagement ring, pay for your own single wedding ceremony, have a career, be artificially inseminated and end up alone. I’m sure it’s no coincidence that she and her boyfriend broke up around the same time she landed the dream job of travel editor. I bet she couldn’t fall out of love with him fast enough once she realized all the strange cock she would be exposed to traveling the world and leaving him behind. They have no idea what value a man would bring to their lives other than things they can buy. And they’re better off alone. Save a guy the trouble and cost”.

    Most men have no value to women beyond that. You MUST give her status with other women or it is the same as her being alone or worse. We know that men’s minds are tuned to think about sex sex sex with any number of women throughout the day. Women’s minds are tuned in a similar way….they are just thinking alpha alpha alpha instead. Most men will never understand this.

  72. David J. says:

    Eidolon says: “It’s not as bad as that. There are good women, few and far between though they may be. I had the advantage of being attracted to shy women, which is a group far more likely to have virginal women in it. But there are decent women here and there. They’ll take some work, they won’t be prepared to be a good wife right away, but if you learn how to be attractive to women, they’ll appreciate you a lot. This type of Christian girl is pretty much the only type I would recommend. At this point simply being a virgin sets her apart to such a degree that she’s relatively likely to be trustworthy.”

    I’m not that optimistic, because I married the woman you’re describing, and she frivorced me after 29 years and 4 kids. She was a Christian; she was shy; she was a virgin; she gave every appearance of being very grateful that I was rescuing her from a poor and dysfunctional family and taking her into my intact family, with very good economic prospects after law school, etc. Plus, I met her at a Christian college where she was taught explicitly that she was to submit to my leadership (though, with the benefit of hindsight and hard experience, I can see now that there were other subliminal messages that greatly undercut the explicit message). Nevertheless, within a surprisingly short time, submission had gone out the window in favor of whining, manipulation, nagging, disrespect, and eventually total contempt. Oh, and lots and lots of sexual refusal. By the end, it didn’t matter that she couldn’t point to any legitimate biblical ground to divorce me because she hated me so much (which of course was my fault) that of course God didn’t expect her to stay married to me, years of church-going and sitting under (mostly) Biblical preaching be damned. Opening my eyes further, most of her friends (who would also have been in the Christian, shy, virginal, grateful to be married camp at the outset of their marriages) were cheerleaders for the divorce.

    My youngest child graduates high school in May and heads to college out of state in the fall, at which time I plan to re-enter the dating scene. Not sure yet whether I’ll do so as a hopeless romantic sap, as a sex hound, as one who trusts God for wisdom and sovereign orchestration, and/or as a much wiser consumer who will be quite prepared to walk away from dating if it turns out there truly aren’t any trustworthy women out there. There is some comfort in knowing that the costs of another mistake will be almost nonexistent compared to those of the first divorce: I won’t be having any more kids so there’ll be no emotional blackmail or child support, and alimony is mostly a thing of the past. Nor am I likely to own a home (or at least to have much equity in a home) or other significant assets that will hurt to divide.

  73. thedeti says:

    @ Eidolon:

    “ It’s not as bad as that. There are good women, few and far between though they may be.”

    From a pure numbers standpoint, there aren’t enough such women to go around to the men who would want to attract them for relationships and marriage. Moreover, most men are not sexually attractive enough to attract them for marriage.

    It’s a similar situation to the top 20% of men, who women want for sex, relationships and marriage. There aren’t enough of those men to go around. Those men don’t settle down, because they don’t have to. They can get plenty of sex and relationships without marrying. Most women want those men, and won’t “settle” for less. When they are finally forced to settle, they do it kicking and screaming all the way to the maternity ward.

    So what you have is a situation where the top 20% of men clean up with most women. Most women are having premarital sex because they can get one of those men for sex but not for marriage, thus ruining them for marriage to the men who would actually have them. And around 75% of men are left with either (1) well worn 30ish women who are clearly unhappily settling for them, or (2) porn.

  74. Entropy is my god says:

    @Bango Tango

    “Most men have no value to women beyond that. You MUST give her status with other women or it is the same as her being alone or worse. We know that men’s minds are tuned to think about sex sex sex with any number of women throughout the day. Women’s minds are tuned in a similar way….they are just thinking alpha alpha alpha instead. Most men will never understand this.”

    Our world, filled with man hating propaganda spewed from the vicious maw of a savagely united media hydra, consistently tells men that taking this view is wrong, evil, mercenary, misogynistic, etc. The media says to recognize marriage for a transactional arrangement, status for sex, resources for loyalty, children for security, is base, corrupt, and against “love”. Men are now learning this, and we are very upset that the enemy has decreed that our mere knowledge of the fact is punishable by social ostracism, church expulsion, perhaps jail.

    We understand. All we are is status to you. All you are is a hole, a gaping, bottomless hole.

  75. Opus,

    Women did not invent Feminism; men looking to have hot-tottie readily available arranged it so there would be a revolving door of women acceptable enough to pump and dump but without further complication.

    Women most certainly invented feminism. This had nothing to do with s-x or even men (unless you link men to the resources they accumulate.) Feminism was about resources. Ugly unmarried women did not have access to men’s resources. They were born ugly, grew up ugly, spent their young adulthood ugly watching all their friends marrying, stayed alone in older adulthood ugly, and died alone ugly all the while never having the lifestyle the beautiful women had.

    Rush Limbaugh had his 35 undeniable truths of life. His most controvercial is truth #24: feminism was established as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society. He is right. You can substitute access to the mainstream of society to access to financial resources. Feminism was created for ugly women so that they may live better in the absence of men who wanted nothing to do with them. The patriarchy was working just fine for beautiful women (still does, always will.) But if you are a woman and you are born ugly, that is like being a man and being born short, poor, and stupid. You are f-cked for life.

  76. Entropy is my god says:

    @IBB

    Science postulates that 80% of women ever born have reproduced while only 40% of men have. Watch as my heart plays the smallest violin for ugly women.

  77. thedeti says:

    @ Eidolon:

    And, yes, I agree there are a few women who are marriage minded, who are pretty and feminine and want to marry. There are a few. But there are not nearly enough to go around. Some of those women are quite selective and picky, because they can be. They are in demand, and they know it. But more of them are gunshy and wary of marriage, and for good reason. They have the culture and church blaring in their ears that they should wait for marriage because they need to work or go to school. Or they need to “grow” and “travel” and “see the world” and “gain life experience” (all of which are euphemisms for “have sex with hot, fun, exotic men in tropical locales”).

  78. Eidolon says:

    @Deti

    There are far too few good women to go around, it’s true. I guess my point is that most men are not good enough with women to get the good ones, so there’s an opportunity, at the moment anyway, for men who can learn to handle women well. Men can increase their attractiveness to women greatly with practice.

    As for the society-wide situation, it’s pretty screwed. This whole generation of women is mostly ruined for any decent wife/mother material. My point was that individual men can find good women, not that there are enough for all decent men to have a decent wife.

    My feeling is that there will have be a substantial collapse before things get any better, and that that collapse is probably inevitable (and not even necessarily undesirable, if it refocuses society on what’s actually important and true). I thought it could be avoided right up until 2012, at which point I realized that people would rather have an idiot who was running things into the ground but who made them feel good about themselves, rather than admit that they had made a stupid mistake and bring someone in to fix things.

  79. thedeti says:

    Women invented feminism but powerful, apex men enacted it and gave it cultural life. They did this because they were persuaded that feminism would correct “unfairnesses”.

  80. Entropy,

    @IBB

    Science postulates that 80% of women ever born have reproduced while only 40% of men have. Watch as my heart plays the smallest violin for ugly women.

    Oh I didn’t say what I said to generate sympathy for ugly ducklings. I am only explaining how feminism came along and why we are where we are. The women wanted resources and (damn it) they WOULD have them even if no man would have them. The patriarchy does as much for ugly women as a woman’s hypergamy does for short, stupid, unattractive men.

  81. thedeti says:

    My advice to most men is to do absolutely everything they can to improve their physical appearances. They need to lose weight, get good hairstyles, and dress as well as they can. If they have glaring physical flaws (and every man has them), they need to find ways to conceal them or deal with them the best they can. The best thing most can do is lift weights and keep from getting overweight or obese.

  82. earl says:

    ‘Women invented feminism but powerful, apex men enacted it and gave it cultural life. They did this because they were persuaded that feminism would correct “unfairnesses”.’

    Nah apex man invented feminism and used the women and state as pawns to give it life. They did it to tear up the family and get more money.

  83. Eidonon,

    I thought it could be avoided right up until 2012, at which point I realized that people would rather have an idiot who was running things into the ground but who made them feel good about themselves, rather than admit that they had made a stupid mistake and bring someone in to fix things.

    Yes you are correct. Everyone should have voted for Romney. But people in our nation are stupid, prideful, envious, greedy, and short-sighted. We (as a nation) are not deserving of a man of Romney’s character and integrity. All we get is Obama and (now) Hillary.

  84. Lyn87 says:

    IBB, I tend to agree in principle, but I’ve known some truly hideous women who were able to get married. I mean southern-end-of-a-northbound-cow ugly. And it’s not just anecdotal, the year I was born the percentage of adults who were married was well over 80%, so it’s not ancient history. Those girls may not have married the captain of the football team, but they didn’t grow old and die alone, either. That means that most of the people in the bottom half of MMV found someone to marry. They just tended to marry someone of the opposite sex with a similar MMV. In those days rampant sluttery came with a high price tag, so you didn’t have 4’s and 5’s thinking they were “owed” an alpha because they hooked up with a guy at a party and then got the impression that – because they had a drunken ONS with a 9, they could get one to propose marriage. Thus the women probably had a much better feel for who was in their league than more modern girls do. Guys have always had to know their place on the totem pole – nobody ever lets us forget it.

  85. earl says:

    Or Jeb to make sure the spending and government continue to grow…via warfare.

  86. Eidolon says:

    @IBB

    I think it’s more to do with people being led around by the nose by the media. I had thought that the rise of the internet and alternate sources of information would decrease the influence of left-wing media sources, but I now realize they’re stronger than ever. I think Gen Xers and Millenials are actually more easily led than previous generations because people who have the internet think they’re smart, when in reality they simply have access to a lot of information. They think they know everything when they actually have very little information actually stored in their heads. This both prevents them from seeking knowledge (since they think they have it already) and makes it impossible for them to gain much wisdom, since it requires the synthesis of information from various sources to create insight. And of course, ignorant people are easily led by playing on their biases and prejudices, especially when you helped to create those too.

    Anyway I think seeking women in or from other countries may end up being the best option for marriage-minded men. It’s what I did; while I met her here, my wife isn’t from America. I’ve met some happily married missionaries as well.

  87. Lyn87,

    IBB, I tend to agree in principle, but I’ve known some truly hideous women who were able to get married. I mean southern-end-of-a-northbound-cow ugly. And it’s not just anecdotal, the year I was born the percentage of adults who were married was well over 80%, so it’s not ancient history.

    80%? When was this? When were you born, 4000BC? The census people didn’t start keeping track of married vs single adults until 1976. At that time is was only 72% of all people over the age of 18 (in our country) married. It has been going straight down ever since (down to 49.2% today.) It is still going down. Single adults are the majority for the first time in 2013. That is a fact, went to 49.8% of all people over age 18.

    I can’t imagine any time in our nation’s short history of the adult married rate being much higher than 72%. It just doesn’t make much sense.

    I have known “some” ugly women who were married, but not that many. Mostly the most ugly ones, their whole lives, single. Calling a woman “ugly” is the most hurtful, insulting thing, you can do to a woman. It is the most damning of words entirely because “ugly” is NOT profanity. It is not an ignorant word uttered by an ignorant person for the purpose of being hurtful. It is a purely descriptive word that has nothing but honesty associated with it. The word encapsulates a woman for all her days on this planet as having less in life than other women who are NOT “ugly.”

  88. From a pure numbers standpoint, there aren’t enough such women to go around to the men who would want to attract them for relationships and marriage.

    Right, because most girls are uninterested in marriage and/or their standard for a man who would inspire marital fervor in them is ridiculously high. They do exist, so marriage-minded John Smith can find one if he works at it by looking in the right places, making himself attractive, and learning some game. But all John Smiths can’t find one, just like every person in Musical Chairs can’t find a seat.

    So on an individual basis, there’s hope. On a societal basis, we’re screwed.

  89. myrealitie says:

    I agree with @innocentbystander.

    She has a cool life. And if she couldn’t get a really great guy to marry her for any number of reasons (not pretty enough, for example, as commenters above mentioned), it’s not hard to imagine that she’d prefer being single with a great life. Not everyone gets an A+ life (married to a dream partner with a dream lifestyle). Maybe this was the combination of outcomes that work best for her circumstances.

    If I couldn’t love the only guy I could get to marry me, and my career prospects were interesting and fun, I wouldn’t have gotten married either. It’s not all about the cock carousel either. Who wants to cook for and pick up the underwear of a man you don’t love when you can be eating take out over a good book?

  90. myrealitie,

    I agree with @innocentbystander.

    She has a cool life. And if she couldn’t get a really great guy to marry her for any number of reasons (not pretty enough, for example, as commenters above mentioned), it’s not hard to imagine that she’d prefer being single with a great life.

    You are right, she does have a cool life. And to some extent, her married friends (who now “outrank her”) might be jealous of her cool life. Still, she can’t really discuss anything with them. Hence…. this article.

  91. thedeti says:

    “most girls are uninterested in marriage and/or their standard for a man who would inspire marital fervor in them is ridiculously high.”

    Yeah, we’ve talked about that before. One of the characteristics of the set we’re discussing here (marriage minded young women serious about “saving it for marriage) is that they aren’t willing even to consider marriage until the man, the time and the circumstances are EXACTLY right. The man has to be absolutely PERFECT in every way – good looking, high status, good job, righteous, kind, intelligent, good sense of humor, etc. Like Natalie Keener’s list up there, except add to it “able to preach a sermon at the drop of a hat”.

  92. Eidonon,

    @IBB

    I think it’s more to do with people being led around by the nose by the media. I had thought that the rise of the internet and alternate sources of information would decrease the influence of left-wing media sources, but I now realize they’re stronger than ever. I think Gen Xers and Millenials are actually more easily led than previous generations because people who have the internet think they’re smart, when in reality they simply have access to a lot of information.

    It has more to do with MARRIAGE 2.0 than anything else. The Gen Xers and (more increasingly) the Millenials were children born into marriage 2.0, broken homes (divorce), or broken homes with no marriage of anykind what-so-ever. These young people, they look at Romney (a hardworking professional man who never smoke, drank, did an illegal drug in his life, nor did he ever partake of even one government entitlement) and his wife of 46 years (she was 19 when he married her), his 5 sons (all married to their first wives) and his 17+ grand children, and they can not in anyway, shape, or form, identify with a life like that. He never broke the law. He stole anything, never hurt/harmed anyone, never divorced anyone, never had s-x with anyone except his wife. They want that life for themselves but they never had it growing up and they will never have it in adulthood. As a result, they don’t like him. They resent his looks, his luck, his charm, his confidence, his money, his communication style, his education, his intelligence, his life, and are envious of the lives his kids had growing up in a whole, functioning, household.

    They can’t identify with that man, the prottypical AMOG. Forget about the LDS stuff, his life is just too….. perfect. And that made Gen X and Millenials envious and angry. Still does.

  93. myrealitie says:

    I think another factor is that raising kids is serious toil. And if you’re going to raise kids and your husband cannot confer them status and opportunity, it might not seem worth it to many women.

  94. earl says:

    I wouldn’t call a woman ugly unless I really meant it. And that’s not necessarily outside looks…it’s inner character.

    Exhibit A of ugly: Lena Dunham

  95. myrealitie says:

    Ugh Lena Dunham is a disgusting specimen.

  96. I think most of us agree that a woman shouldn’t marry a man she finds unattractive just to be married, because she’ll make him miserable. But she also shouldn’t be able to use that as a cop-out, as in, “Oh, I would have liked to marry, but I just didn’t meet the right man in 12 years, so it’s best that I didn’t. Woe is me.” That’s crap. It’s not that hard to fall in love forever; I’ve done it dozens of times.

    If she didn’t meet a man she wanted to marry in 12 years, that means what I said before: her standards were cranked up so high that no mortal man could reach them, or she was actively blocking husband-type men from her vision. That’s not the fault of men, and she would have adjusted to fix it in a time when all of society wasn’t encouraging her to ride the carousel. In a better time, her standards would have been pulled into sync with reality by the need for a provider and social pressure from other women.

    Her great-grandmother probably found a good husband within 50 miles, choosing from a handful at her church and her family’s social circle and neighborhood. Funny how that used to work, with such small pools to fish in, while now a girl can travel around the world meeting thousands of men and still be unable to find a catch.

  97. Entropy is my god says:

    @IBB

    “They can’t identify with that man, the prottypical AMOG. Forget about the LDS stuff, his life is just too….. perfect. And that made Gen X and Millenials envious and angry. Still does.”

    We were foisted upon, the flag was waved, work hard, be a man, get a job, go to school, serve your country, do your best, and you can have this.

    and we did.

    When the metal serving lid was revealed, no virgin wife, no single family home in the suburbs, no job with retirement. A banged out whore, who might have incontinence issues from the anal gang bang she did with the football team, a tiny studio apartment surrounded by “vibrant youth”, a job where you are no more than a cog that can be replaced just as easily.

    So many boomers fed our minds with visions. Visions of “Sucking it up” , “Taking it like a man”, “Doing what’s right!”. So we did. We sucked it up in Iraq and Astan. We took it like men when our wives left us, when our mother divorced our fathers. We did what’s right by paying child support and following the rules.

    ALL FOR LIES.

    No punishment is severe enough, no destruction final, till this decrepit bastion of sin and decadence lies salted at our feet.

  98. earl says:

    Between grandmothers looking to set up their grandsons, church or social gatherings, social media, dating sites, even walking around…a decent looking woman can have hundreds of suitors to choose from. If she can’t find one marriagable guy out of the bunch then I would question her standards too.

  99. You are right, she does have a cool life.

    She certainly is telling herself that, but she’ll have to keep raising the volume to drown out the voices.

    Look, there are women who are content with a cool unmarried life, and that’s great. Those nuns she interviewed, for instance. But such a woman would not have written this article, and be going through contortions to convince herself that she will get married but doesn’t need to get married but she could have been married but doesn’t like her friends pointing out that she’s single but is proud of her single life but keeps a “best friend” in orbit…..

    The whole point of the article is that she’s afraid her life isn’t that cool after all.

  100. Joe says:

    >>>..and worst of all Clooney is now taken.

    Yeah, but didn’t you hear, he married *up* by marrying a human rights lawyer. Because, you know, he never noticed she was smoking hot, 22 years younger, probably interesting to talk to, and smoking hot. That’s why Allen Dershowitz is holding out for Giselle Bundchen – because some day Giselle may decide she wants to leave that stupid jock Tom Brady and to marry up to a successful lawyer.

    I do think you guys are being too tough on Mz. Piazza about her looks. She’s not fabulous looking, but she’s not unattractive either. I wouldn’t call her a dyke or anything, that’s just mean. She’s just an average professional woman, optimized.

    What that means where I live near the D.C. area is that she’s just one more modestly successful, okay looking career woman who is zipping past her sell by date. Like 75% of the 30-something single women in this town, she is special in the “all snowflakes are special” sort of way but she’s really just another snowflake in the middle of a local blizzard of mid-range, mid-life career women with middling prospects.

    They all keep reasonably fit, optimize their looks with yoga or pilates, and bitch about all the good men being taken or gay, all the while getting periodically banged by Haawwtt guys who won’t date them. Meanwhile, they spend a lot of time disqualifying good men who are interested in LTRs because they don’t meet all 115 requirements on The List, and they aren’t Haaawt or rich enough to earn a waiver from the list.

    Piazza’s problem isn’t that she can’t get married. It’s that where she is in life means her SMV has dropped and she isn’t even on the radar of the successful, high SMV professional class guys she’s interested in. Her SMV is way lower than she thinks and she’s going to have to “settle” – the irony being that what she is going to have to settle on first is an honest appraisal of her own SMV.

  101. Novaseeker says:

    The thing is, it really isn’t that cool a life. And certainly not from a relationship perspective. This is “my tribe”, professionally, and the toll that “cool life” takes is horrendous over the course of time, almost universally. The grass is always greener, I suppose.

  102. Novaseeker says:

    What that means where I live near the D.C. area is that she’s just one more modestly successful, okay looking career woman who is zipping past her sell by date. Like 75% of the 30-something single women in this town, she is special in the “all snowflakes are special” sort of way but she’s really just another snowflake in the middle of a local blizzard of mid-range, mid-life career women with middling prospects.

    They all keep reasonably fit, optimize their looks with yoga or pilates, and bitch about all the good men being taken or gay,

    Hehe — yep. My world, too.

    There’s a reason why both Roissy and Roosh were based here. Remember that. It’s kind of the epicenter of what they write about.

  103. earl,

    I wouldn’t call a woman ugly unless I really meant it. And that’s not necessarily outside looks…it’s inner character.

    Exhibit A of ugly: Lena Dunham

    Lena Dunham is ugly. She’s physically ugly on the outside and (probably) because she knows just how ugly she is on the outside, it has made her oh so ugly emotionally and spiritually on the inside. And she knows it. And we all do.

  104. Opus says:

    I appear to have stirred a Hornet’s Nest, but I remain undeterred that Feminism is (despite female avowals of their sudden and entirely unexpected empowerment) essentially a male invention (albeit facilitated by male invented technology).

    To take one example which I know I have retold somewhere before: when I was a student and in an idle moment I, in the library, reached behind me and pulled out an edition of a legal magazine from about 1900. I turned to the letter page, and read ” Sir, I run a small law firm. I have been wondering whether there would be any reason why I should not for a stenographer employ a female. The only objection that I can find is that my maiden-aunt clients might withdraw their business if I were to employ someone of their sex”. The lawyer was as deluded as to the lack of problems as he was blinded by the possibility of free pussy wandering around his office. There was of course good reason why maiden aunt’s would be unlikely to approve of this lowering of female status.

  105. Opus, women have been doing secreterial work for men hundreds of years. Women didn’t refuse to do business with men simply because the man employed a woman. Your example above is not feminism at all, it is merely a “biblical office help meet” so to speak, a purely platonic professional Eve to the lawyer Adam. She was needed so that he could make more money. It was feminism that came along and said that the term secretary (the office “help meet”) was patriarical and politically incorrect. We don’t have anymore of those, just Administrative Assistants. And we really don’t have any of those anymore, just Office Managers and Microsoft Office. Heh.

  106. At the risk of sounding perpetually backwards and atavistic, Satan and Eve invented feminism. it’s based in selfishness and a desire to rule over men (and God). Feminism and structural greed has irrupted whenever Satan has had willing instruments to utilize for his plans to destroy what God allows him to.

  107. olympiapress says:

    I know one woman, even older than Ms. Piazza who had the great “cawreeer!” and actually managed to hook a guy very late. She was a journalist, later a techie for a major media company, married a successful IP lawyer when she was 38-39 and he 42-45. Both were part of the techno/goth/industrial scene (in DC). He was also a DJ of note, so either an alpha or a sigma.

    But that lass was 6′, rather a babe who kept her looks late. And I don’t recall her ever having any interest in kids.

    Everyone else I went to school with who got into journalism (or PR)… I really should’ve invested in cat food.

  108. Renee Harris says:

    Guys don’t want a real hymen at all.

  109. JDG says:

    Guys don’t want a real hymen at all.

    How would you know?

  110. Gunner Q says:

    Opus @ 4:40 pm:
    “I remain undeterred that Feminism is (despite female avowals of their sudden and entirely unexpected empowerment) essentially a male invention (albeit facilitated by male invented technology).”

    I tend to agree. Women have always had hypergamous instincts but feminism, as implemented in the Western world, is obviously intended to reward hypergamy and shield women from its consequences… until it’s too late. It’s men who are capable of planning and executing such a system, not to mention our leadership was all male until recently anyway.

    Sad story. Nobody wins, not even the Elites who are left to rule over a collapsing, disrespected nation.

    “Your example above is not feminism at all, it is merely a “biblical office help meet” so to speak, a purely platonic professional Eve to the lawyer Adam. She was needed so that he could make more money.”

    Come now, IBB. Hiring a woman over a man is a “purely platonic helpmeet” decision? Particularly since the lawyer even admitted choosing her would cost him business? My read is he was either a Gamma trying to say no to his battle-ax or an Alpha trying to coax the “experts” into saying they had no objection to his office kitten. Sigh, I’d give up modern medicine to have male spaces back.

  111. Renee Harris says:

    B/c I have a 28 old one . Best I’m kind homely and nerdy . Guys around date girls who put outs. So what I should say gugs. (Seems) only want a hymen if is to. 21 yr old blond with dd and I am a black chick, with “a great personality ” fake smiley

  112. GiL,

    At the risk of sounding perpetually backwards and atavistic, Satan and Eve invented feminism. it’s based in selfishness and a desire to rule over men (and God). Feminism and structural greed has irrupted whenever Satan has had willing instruments to utilize for his plans to destroy what God allows him to.

    Ummmm, no I don’t think so.

    Satan exposed a woman’s feral nature to rebel. That is instinctive of women, rebel against authority since women (by their very nature) lack moral agency. In Eve’s case, prior to moment she touched that apple, only God (not really not Adam “yet” since he didn’t need that much “help” in the Garden, not so much anyways) was authority. God said to the two of them, don’t eat this. Obey. Instinctively, she wants to eat it (now more than ever) because she doesn’t want to obey Him (or anyone for that matter.) Eve didn’t want to obey satan either. So satan just offered the motivation to go ahead and disobey because he convinced her that God was holding out on something (that being knowledge.) Anyone who understands the feral nature of women understands that the best way to motivate a rebellious woman to do something is to tell her that she is not ALLOWED to do it. There you go guys, GAME.

    Eve didn’t want to rule over God or Adam. She didn’t convince Adam to eat that apple to rule him. Oh no. She did it because the apple tasted good and she knew (the minute she ate of it) what that tingling in her ‘gina meant, and she knew (the minute that she ate of it) that only Adam could satisfy that tingle. Adam didn’t know yet. He knew immediately after he ate and went and covered himself in shame the minute he had those thoughts about Eve (the same thoughts we all have for women.)

    Eve wasn’t interested in destroying God. Eve was only interested in what interested her. What interested her was doing what God told her NOT to do. Thus, “The Fall.” Thus the reason why (prior to feminism) women (and only women, not men) were told on their wedding day to OBEY their husbands. That is what God wants of them. And good wives understand this which is why their submission to their husbands is so sexy and beautiful to us!

    And OBEYING is what wives largely did to their husbands until the last 100 years or so. Feminism was a product of the very early 20th century, not of Eve. Eve had no reason to be feminist. Eve was a beautiful baby factory and never had any trouble securing resources from Adam.

  113. GunnerQ,

    Come now, IBB. Hiring a woman over a man is a “purely platonic helpmeet” decision?

    It IS if (and only if) the lawyer in 1900 actually believed that he could never have actually found A MAN to do the work he wanted done in his office for the wage he was willing to pay. In that sense only… I guess.

  114. Al G. Braugh says:

    From the article: “I immediately texted my ex-boyfriend. We talk every day. Like I said: best friend, but not my husband.”

    I think the ex-boyfriend needs to establish some boundaries.

  115. Robert What? says:

    I suspect that by not marrying she has done some guy a tremendous favor.

  116. Bango Tango says:

    We understand. All we are is status to you. All you are is a hole, a gaping, bottomless hole.

    @Entropy. Were you referencing me when you said “you”? I’m not a chick, I’m just telling you how they think as depressing as it is. Women are far more shallow then men but of course there are evolutionary reasons for that. Don’t get mad, get MGTOW.🙂

  117. Renee Harris says:

    At ibb
    “Satan exposed a woman’s feral nature to rebel. That is instinctive of women, rebel against authority since women (by their very nature) lack moral agency” read sinful before the fall
    Can woman be save? Since Romans 3:23 is a lies bc Adam did not sin only eve did? Why did moss deed on the cross he is a guys therefore sin ?
    Not trolling. women are sinful bitches-I get that. But if only women sin than Christ blood is only for women not perfect men. So did Jesus lies ? John. 26:4 That not what my bible say

  118. IBB, not looking for a debate. Satan offered Eve the opportunity to “be like God”. It was a power play, greed was the motive. Adam was the head of all Creation and after Satan used Eve to turn Adam away from God, he (Satan) became the head of creation (Prince of the Power of the Air). He became the ultimate 1%er and Adam got demoted to working class beta.

  119. Renee, they both sinned. Eve was deceived (what the Bible says) and disobeyed God. Adam followed Eve understanding that doing so was going to result in his Fall. They are both fallen and culpable. Go listen in at the local church and you will find that it is men being told that they need women to be saved. Oh, the irony.

  120. And barring all else I’m just as much a son of Eve as you are a daughter of Adam.

  121. Emily says:

    She may end up like this. I sure don’t want this.
    http://firsttoknow.com/woman-who-married-her-two-cats/

  122. Lyn87 says:

    IBB disputes my statement about the percentage of people who had been married in the year I was born. My statement was, “… the year I was born the percentage of adults who were married was well over 80%…”

    Looking back on what I wrote, although my statement was correct, I could have worded it more clearly than I did. I thought it was obvious, but clearly it wasn’t obvious enough for IBB. Since I was talking about people who found someone to marry, I was including people who were divorced or widowed, since they had successfully found someone to walk down the aisle with them. In other words, those people were married, but 14% of them were not still married at the time due to divorce (5%) or death (9%).

    I was born in the early 1960’s, and according to Pew Research, in 1960 the percentage of people who had never been married was only 15%, which means 85% of people either were married or had been. Source. (Actual percentages rounded to the nearest whole number in 1960: 72% currently married, 5% divorced, 9% widowed, and 15% never married.) Thus my contention that the vast majority of people – including the overwhelming majority of women in the bottom half of the beauty scale – were marrying as recently as the 1960’s. I hope that clears up the confusion.

  123. greyghost says:

    This women really doesn’t bother me. She is fun to luck at and make conversation about, but old spinsters would get more favorable attention from me that some cunt that married and had kids and then decided the spinster life of travel was for her. I’d even say I respect this woman’s choices and her life style. If my daughters never committed to marriage I would hope they would be childless spinsters.
    In other words this women is fine

  124. Flip says:

    She clearly could get married if she wanted to as a non-fat, fertile white woman without children. She just doesn’t want who will have her.

  125. Oscar says:

    Phillyastro says:
    January 13, 2015 at 10:45 am

    “Where in the Gospels did Jesus say the only unforgivable sin is to be a short man?”

    Funny how that works, isn’t it? Women whine because men don’t like fatties, but women don’t like short men. And yet, a fat woman can make herself thinner with some hard work and self discipline. A short man can’t make himself taller.

  126. Spike says:

    It’s strange how single women write articles like this. They will go on at length about their fabulous lives, the countries they’ve visited, their amazing experiences, and say in a by-the-way fashion, that they are still single, declaring how “unworried” they are by it.
    It never seems to dawn on them that men are running the equation in their heads: Lots of overseas visits, fancy restaurants and a big shoe /handbag collection doesn’t make for a good marriage. It screams expensive tastes, unwillingness to share, accommodate his aspirations or compromise for him. It also says children will be second-lowest on the priorities list, the last rung being occupied by the unfortunate husband.
    The good news is that feminism has indeed lost control of the narrative last year. There are too many men awake to the game for feminists and their sycophants in the lying press to call them all ‘misogynists’.

  127. It’s just plain old projection. They find a man who has traveled the world and banged exotic women, who has expensive tastes and the money to spend on them, who is confident (arrogant) about his choices, to be attractive. They’ve been told all their lives that men and women are basically the same personality-wise, so they assume men will be attracted to the same things in a woman.

  128. Just think if she was able to marry the guy who her job, she’s making the world a harder place for her potential mates just as she is making herself less valuable to him.

  129. Anonymous Reader says:

    TFH, looks like a bit of manginist doubling down. Clearly the 12 year old boy needs to learn how to abase himself properly, without overdoing it.

    Implying that XX bearing people have genetic differences from XY bearing people is crimethink.

  130. Novaseeker says:

    <IShe clearly could get married if she wanted to as a non-fat, fertile white woman without children. She just doesn’t want who will have her.
    them
    Yes. But that is the default setting among women in this tribe. And it only get exponentially worse asen she travels like this, because almost all women who do this (trust me, I have worked with them of all ages for ~25 years now) will look down on, and not be attracted to, a man who is less well-traveled than she is. It’s a key hypergamy vector in this tribe, and an insidious one, precisely because she is “more” that most men outside the “international” career tribe.

    Having said that, looking as she does, she will find a man. Likely a settle, if she is willing.

  131. Boxer says:

    I do think you guys are being too tough on Mz. Piazza about her looks. She’s not fabulous looking, but she’s not unattractive either. I wouldn’t call her a dyke or anything, that’s just mean. She’s just an average professional woman, optimized.

    I didn’t point it out as an insult. I work around some dykes, and they all have this general air about them. Whether it’s a conscious, cultural thing, or just a byproduct of trying to make oneself attractive to other dykes, I have no idea. I can’t precisely define the dyke-vibe, but, like pornography, or a gray space alien who has journeyed light-years from the Dagoba system to stick a probe into my nether-regions, I know it when I see it, and it makes me vaguely uneasy.

    Anyway, as the urbane and hip Mizz Piazza will tell you, esp. given that she works in the culture industry*, being called a dyke is a high compliment, particularly if you are of the “privileged” cisgendered, non-queer prole class.

    Regards,

    Boxer

    *https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/adorno/1944/culture-industry.htm

  132. Alex says:

    “Gentlemen, that means most of you are never going to marry. Or if you do marry, you’ll have to wait until your wife is 35, banged out and desperate. Most of you are not sexually attractive enough to attract a woman in her mid 20s. Most of you are not in the top 25% of men. Most of you will have to wait until you are around 35 yourselves to marry, if you can marry at all.”

    I think you’re overestimating the power of Y if you believe that appreciable numbers of men will sign up for that deal – at least I don’t think they will, and the downward slope of the marriage rate supports my assertion to some degree. A 35 year old guy can buy his own house, have a decent car, a motorcycle or boat or whatever tech toys he fancies and hopefully some good friends to spend time with – he’s seasoned enough to know that marriage will spell the end of all that and the beginning of a life of purse holding, yes mam, slavery. I say that most 30+ women will not be sufficiently attractive a catch at that age to trap a man.

  133. BradA says:

    Eidolon,

    There was a good choice in 2012? I must have missed it.

    IBB,

    We (as a nation) are not deserving of a man of Romney’s character and integrity.

    PUKE. He was the one who had version 1.0 of Obamacare. He was a RINO big time. Republicans fought to lose, and they did. They will almost certainly do so again if they nominate Bush III.

  134. BradA says:

    You are wrong Renee. My bet is that you haven’t put yourself in the place where men who appreciate that are. You may also be in a tough spot since the modern welfare state has devastated many black families and thus black men. Some marriage does go across lines there, but not as much as some imagine.

    My experience is several decades older, but I was looking for a virginal wife who had a thin figure and consistent theology. Other factors were not high on the list. I am quite wacky at times and my wife did back off until God told her to not do that. How many have you backed away from?

    My wife was older than I would recommend now and we have had some of our own bumps, but God did lay the foundation and we continue to work things out. I appreciated her virginity and my own. Such exist, likely more for males, though they may be social awkward and even not the hottest looking, but they can be available and I would bet you have overlooked at least a few.

    Stop feeling sorry for yourself and put yourself in activities where such men can find you.

    ====

    That said, the modern hook-up culture is devastating for women too, especially those who really do want to be pure. They are really on their own in most cases without a strong father to look out for them.

    ====

    Opus, men didn’t create feminism, women did that all on their own. Some have certainly exploited it for their own ends, which is what it sounds like you are misled on. That may be political, sexual or something else, but it is merely playing to misled women thinking they can have it all.

  135. Eric says:

    I am not convinced she even wants to be married. I think maybe her article about buying the fake ring was just her writing about something for the sake of writing it. I don’t think even she believes what she is trying to sell others.

    I think she desperately wants to convince herself she doesn’t want to be married. That was the whole point of talking to the nuns. Is it possible I can be happy without ever getting married? Because right now I’m miserable.

    The fake ring is an aborted attempt to reclaim status in her circle of friends. Intellectually she knows it doesn’t work like that, but emotionally she’s trying to tell herself the only difference between herself and the friends who pity her is the lack of a piece of metal on her finger.

  136. Opus says:

    One never wins an argument on the net, but really, the idea that women ever created anything let alone something which could sweep away – and in a generation or less – the power of men (and at a time when western technology was sweeping all before it throughout the world) requires a faith far greater than any religion, that I know of, requires in its adherents. To suppose otherwise really plays into the female fantasy that they have powers previously unobserved but otherwise latent and repressed by the evil male and by this entirely unexplained mechanism women have sprung forth fully formed to enable them to take their natural place at the forefront of civilisation: that however is pure Feminist Boiler-plate.

    That is what I say to Brad A. To IBB I once again observe a fanciful and unsupported view of history, which is a pity as my little example (and probably the only thing I now remember from the time of my studies) is such a perfect snap-shot of and entrance into the time, that it takes some Marxist perversity to see it as a scam to obtain cheap labour. I appreciate of course that things may well have been more liberal and advanced in America before 1900 for my example is surely from somewhere in England’s Home Counties.

    Notice by the way, from my example, (difficult as it is to think ones way back into a mindset in a time none of us lived in; the past truly being a different country) that the notion of women (the wealthy ones anyway) being in some way oppressed is pure bunkum: my man is fearful of female power to wreck his practice, and moreover these women hold the purse strings of their family wealth without intervention or control by men. These women would surely have regarded the suffrage as an imposition with which they would no more wish to soil their hands than a modern corporate female would feel other than insulted by the suggestion that she should make the coffee, or do the washing-up or help in the physical rearrangement of office furniture. These women lived a life of idle-luxury and regarded it as their right to do so – as natural as the sun rising in the east – work of whatever stripe being the burden of the male of the species. As my Mother never used to tire of telling me, when she left school and announced to her own mother that she wanted to go out to work, she was informed that no woman in their family had ever so soiled her hands and that she (my mother) was not going to be the first. Grandmother was the daughter of a Lieutenant-Colonel (Indian Army) – and foreign travel was as readily available to Grandmother as it is now to any corporate female such as Ms Piazza.

  137. susanbotchie says:

    Why is it, so many men (?) on this site come off cattier than the average (female) cheerleader. Have visited this site on an off for some time, and the cattiness is business-as-usual.

  138. wobs says:

    innocentbystanderboston says:
    “I find it amazing that women keep score with one another based on which ones are married and which ones aren’t. Men never keep score this way. When I was single I never felt pressured by my married friends to get married. Now that I am married, I never pressure my single friends to marry.

    It also amazes me that divorced women like to be friends with OTHER divorced women. Its kind of like a misery-likes-company kind of thing. Its not very often you see a divorced mom or two hanging out on a routine basis with the married women. They just don’t mix anymore. Whereas with men who divorced, they hang with both married men and single men all the time. Again, it is just not point of conflict the way it is with women.”
    This shows us where the power is in relationships.

  139. Pingback: Unmarried managing editor of Yahoo Travel has to buy herself a fake engagement ring to impress her female friends | Stupid Girl

  140. earl says:

    ‘I don’t think it’s hopeless, though it’s far from easy in this environment. I would highly recommend praying over your dating life. The woman I married surprised me by mentioning that she did that when we were first together. Afterward I could never understand why no one ever suggests that, and I never thought to do it before.’

    Yes prayer is a far more powerful force than judgment and cynicism.

    And if judgment is still important to you…pray for prudence. It is a cardinal virtue after all.

  141. earl says:

    ‘That is instinctive of women, rebel against authority since women (by their very nature) lack moral agency. ‘

    Once again you are wrong about women lacking moral agency. They have weaker moral agency which is why they need to be led by a strong moral man (God, their father, husband). Eve told the serpent what God told them. It was not like she wasn’t clued in.

  142. Karl says:

    Now you know why I never read “travel sections”.

  143. thedeti says:

    Deti: “Gentlemen, that means most of you are never going to marry. Or if you do marry, you’ll have to wait until your wife is 35, banged out and desperate. Most of you are not sexually attractive enough to attract a woman in her mid 20s. Most of you are not in the top 25% of men. Most of you will have to wait until you are around 35 yourselves to marry, if you can marry at all.”


    Alex: “I think you’re overestimating the power of Y if you believe that appreciable numbers of men will sign up for that deal – at least I don’t think they will, and the downward slope of the marriage rate supports my assertion to some degree. A 35 year old guy can buy his own house, have a decent car, a motorcycle or boat or whatever tech toys he fancies and hopefully some good friends to spend time with – he’s seasoned enough to know that marriage will spell the end of all that and the beginning of a life of purse holding, yes mam, slavery. I say that most 30+ women will not be sufficiently attractive a catch at that age to trap a man.”

    I disagree. I think a large number of men will still sign up for that now and in the years to come, albeit in smaller numbers. The reason is simple: Men want sex, and most men cannot get sex outside a committed relationship. So, most men (though fewer than before) will still offer up marriage for the promise of regular sex. Most of those men will be bitterly disappointed, and a good percentage of them will get frivorced.

    You have to remember that most of these men will be in the wide middle of the curve distribution. THey aren’t in the top 20% of men who can be selective in their sex partners. But neither are they the bottom of the barrel, the hopeless omegas. They’re just regular guys of middling attractiveness, average jobs with average incomes, average intelligence and talents. There’s nothing really special about them, but they have a few good things to offer, mostly their steadfastness, predictability and provider bona fides.

    Most of the women marrying those men will see themselves as settling pretty far below what kinds of husbands they thought they were going to get. Most of those women will be considerably less sexually attracted to their husbands than to the men they used to sleep with. But, because these women want the status of “wife” and marriage, they will offer sex to these men and, after the man is hooked, will say “wife it up now, or the sex spigot will get turned off”. After all, these women are willing to have sex with these guys. These women aren’t totally turned off – they can hold their noses long enough to sex these “less than” guys, and they’ll do it for the potential of a ring and a wedding. These women know full well what they are doing – they’re using their most valuable asset to gain husbands. But, they know that if they ever want out (and most of them will), they can always get divorced. And a large percentage of them will end their marriages. And those men won’t see it coming.

    Most of those men think their wives are attracted to them because, well, their wives have sex with them every so often; and their wives don’t really talk much about it. So to these men, everything is A-OK, until the divorce papers come through. It will be then that these men will find out the truth – they were used as accessories; they were willing supporting actors in their wives’ dramas. When it came time for them to exit stage left, the papers were served.

    Now, granted, Alex, I think that this is going to happen less often and in smaller numbers as time drags on. But no, I don’t think that there will be any large scale marriage strike by most 30 something men anytime soon. Reason being that the thirst is real, the pull toward sex is damn near irresistible, and women want the status of being “Mrs” Somebody Anybody.

  144. The Brass Cat says:

    Opus says:

    One never wins an argument on the net, but really, the idea that women ever created anything let alone something which could sweep away – and in a generation or less – the power of men (and at a time when western technology was sweeping all before it throughout the world) requires a faith far greater than any religion, that I know of, requires in its adherents. To suppose otherwise really plays into the female fantasy that they have powers previously unobserved but otherwise latent and repressed by the evil male and by this entirely unexplained mechanism women have sprung forth fully formed to enable them to take their natural place at the forefront of civilisation: that however is pure Feminist Boiler-plate.

    Long before Feminism was an established ideology, back in the good ol’ patriarchal days, our civilization was already gynocentric. Women were protected and put on a pedestal, because they could do one thing men cannot: bear children. Therefore women were quite accustomed to being a protected class and felt that men owed them this, and men chivalrously provided this. Feminism can arise in such a climate because the men are preprogrammed to accommodate the demands of women, as long as these demands are parceled out gradually, one at a time. The demands of the Feminists increased exponentially into the 1990s and met little resistance.

  145. earl says:

    ‘These women aren’t totally turned off – they can hold their noses long enough to sex these “less than” guys, and they’ll do it for the potential of a ring and a wedding.’

    Well if their only asset is duping a guy into marriage through fogging him via sex, how is that any different from when she tried to do that with the guy she was really passionate about? So this guy is more thirsty and can be duped easier…and she’s going to end up miserable after the wedding glow ends. I call that fraud and if a thirsty man knows this is a method women use, it’s in his best interest to not be run by his smaller head.

    We really needs to happen is to get back to teaching young girls to cherish their purity and find other skills to attract a man besides their sexuality. Cooking, childcare, cleaning, for example. Men like merit and if being an ok sexual partner is all she’s got, that’s not marriage material at all.

  146. Pingback: 34-year-old career feminist buys herself an engagement ring | Wintery Knight

  147. new anon says:

    “I disagree. I think a large number of men will still sign up for that (marriage 2.0) now and in the years to come, albeit in smaller numbers.”

    I actually agree that the MAJORITY of men will follow that path, but your post misses the point. The real question is what percentage of men dropping out does it take to create a perceived SHORTAGE of marriage-minded men. It doesn’t take a high number to create a crisis.

    If there was a 5% shortage of cancer drugs in the USA (meaning 5% of people who needed the drug and had the means to pay for it could not get it for treatment) it would be a crisis. 10% would be headline news. 20% and heads would be rolling in government and the private sector.

    When women say “where have all the good men gone” they mean the alpha/top-tier guys. They don’t perceive a shortage of marriage-minded nice-guy/beta-providers, which is why they are willing to put off marriage for so long in hopes of landing an alpha–they believe their backup plan (a nice-guy) will be there at a moment’s notice if needed.

    But, what if 10% of beta-provider/nice-guys stopped being marriage-minded. How would a 10% shortage in women’s backup plan affect them? 10% is enough to create a crisis. 15 or 20 percent would create widespread panic–even though, for the majority of women, their backup plan would still work.

    We’re not near the crisis or panic numbers…yet, but I think we’ll see them both in the next generation. I’m guessing we’re at most one generation behind Japan’s herbivore movement in numbers (with the 2008 crash significantly accelerating the trend in the USA).

  148. earl says:

    ‘Women were protected and put on a pedestal, because they could do one thing men cannot: bear children.’

    And they decided to contracept and abort that when men gave them the option. Ergo they don’t know what’s in the best interest for them unless a moral man is leading them.

  149. Anonymous Reader says:

    Novaseeker
    Having said that, looking as she does, she will find a man. Likely a settle, if she is willing.

    Probably true, but for how long? Between likely Alpha-widow status, and YuGoGrrl displeasure over “settling”, she seems a likely risk for divorce. It’s not too likely she’ll be able to have a child, but if she does the usual restlessness when the child is 4 or so years old will be especially intense, given her background. And if she can’t have children, but instead adopts, a similar effect can be expected.

    Would any man marry her if he knew she was a high risk for frivorce in 3 to 5 years?

    Women like this ought to be held up as a warning to younger women, not a good example.

  150. BradA says:

    Opus,

    I can’t really follow your point, even after rereading it a few times.

    and in a generation or less

    Feminism took far longer than a generation. John Adams talked about the “tyranny of the petticoat” almost 250 years ago. That is far more than a generation. Go back to when Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden for the curse of the woman wanting to rule over the man.

    It has been around a long time and will remain, even if things swing back to some form of sanity.

  151. new anon says:

    @thedeti,

    I disagree that men (even traditionally) have married for sex. That’s only one of three reasons they married:

    1) regular sex
    2) children
    3) to surround themselves with a family

    100 years ago, no man would have married a woman knowing she could not have children; nor would he have married her knowing that 10 years into the marriage she would divorce him and destroy the family he had built around himself.

    I think of this as a three-legged stool. Knock any of the legs out and the stool falls over, which is exactly what has happened with modern society.

    Marriage rates in general are down, because women are only bringing one leg of the stool–sex–to the table. A woman around 30 can’t promise a husband a houseful of kids (or even one kid for that matter). Nor can she guarantee she will never divorce him and take away his family.

    Men are ATTRACTED to women, because of the sex leg of the stool. But, they get married because of the other two legs: children and a family.

  152. JDG says:

    BradA says:
    January 14, 2015 at 10:07 am

    Brad I agree that women have tried to control men since the fall (part of the FI), but I think Opus is correct in that feminism could not have happened without men. If men corporately wanted feminism to end tomorrow, it would.

  153. JDG says:

    I will add that women have fought for and won exactly… nothing. Everything that feminists claim they won was given to them by men.

  154. “I find it amazing that women keep score with one another based on which ones are married and which ones aren’t.”

    Women are naturally much more “social” than us, which means they tend to talk a lot and, as the article makes clear, backbite with some regularity. It also means that they have a much harder time accepting the prospect of lifelong singleness than we do, another fact this article makes clear.

  155. thedeti says:

    New anon:

    “Marriage rates in general are down, because women are only bringing one leg of the stool–sex–to the table.”

    Disagree with just one thing here. It is true that men traditionally married for sex, kids and to head up a family. But that’s not why men marry now, from what I’m seeing. Most men are marrying in an often unsuccessful attempt to lock down a woman for sex, period, full stop. Kids and family are incidental. And most men are taking this approach to marriage because it’s the only way they can get anything in the way of sex. Most men aren’t attractive enough to get sex outside a committed relationship, and most women successfully pressure the man to convert that to marriage. You’re vastly overestimating the availability of sex to the average man in the broad middle of the curve. Most men are not attractive enough, and will never ever be attractive enough, to have many options in the SMP. Those who aren’t, opt for the only thing that will get them even a chance at sex, and that’s wifing up the girlfriend.

  156. earl says:

    Well morally speaking…men aren’t supposed to be getting sex outside of marriage. It’s using the sexual function outside of how God intended it. Once sex became cheapened, so did marriage.

  157. theasdgamer says:

    Women 40-54 have some chance of getting married. Must be because of kids & family.

  158. The Brass Cat says:

    earl says:

    ‘Women were protected and put on a pedestal, because they could do one thing men cannot: bear children.’

    And they decided to contracept and abort that when men gave them the option. Ergo they don’t know what’s in the best interest for them unless a moral man is leading them.

    Earl is right on target as usual.

    Women have ONE special and irreplaceable ability, but they chose to eschew it or abuse it. They use it as a tool to manipulate men and get a paycheck for 18 years if they are lower class. In the upper class they can’t be bothered to reproduce above the replacement rate.

    I’m not completely against gynocentrism in some respects, such as when it is practical. We have to acknowledge the differences between the sexes. For instance, I think it would be a horrible idea to draft women for a war. They’d be burdens and liabilities on the battlefield. But, thanks to toxic Feminism, me and most men aren’t volunteering to “go down with the ship.” When women take on the “privileges” of men they shouldn’t be surprised by the requisite sting of the burdens of manhood, yet they are surprised.

  159. The Brass Cat says:

    new anon says:

    @thedeti,

    I disagree that men (even traditionally) have married for sex. That’s only one of three reasons they married:

    1) regular sex
    2) children
    3) to surround themselves with a family

    Men are ATTRACTED to women, because of the sex leg of the stool. But, they get married because of the other two legs: children and a family.

    I agree that sex is only part of the equation. These days sex is pretty easy to come by without commitment. My rationale for getting married despite the dangers is to build a family and literally keep my family tree alive and growing.

  160. thedeti says:

    Earl:

    Yes, sex isn’t supposed to be outside marriage. But let’s be honest — most men are out there trying to get laid outside marriage. And men who can get laid outside marriage generally take advantage of those offers. So the fact that extramarital sex is illegitimate and immoral from a Christian viewpoint is irrelevant to the reality on the ground: If a man can get sex outside marriage, he generally does.

  161. new anon says:

    @thedeti,

    You are right for a significant number (probably the majority) of avg. Joes–the guys who are not alphas, but not hopeless either. They will marry to secure a lifetime supply of sex.

    But, the number of avg. Joes who won’t marry just to obtain sex is rising every year. I’ve seen numbers suggesting the Japanese herbivore movement is as high as 40% of young men. Biologically, Japanese men have just as much drive (and need) for sex as western men, yet over a third of young Japanese men have decided that sex (much less marriage) is more trouble than it’s worth.

    One third is nowhere near a majority, but it’s a large enough number to completely disrupt and destroy Japanese society.

    I’m an older guy, but I work in tech with tons of young guys: early, mid, and later 20’s; well educated; make good money; the typical beta-provider; and they are red-pill as he!!. The majority of these guys probably will someday fulfill the the beta-provider role society has assigned them, but a significant percentage won’t. And by significant percentage, I’m talking Japanese numbers: 20-30%.

    A decade from now, we’ll be hearing about America’s herbivore problem, and it will be because (as these 20 somethings are telling me now) that they have weighed the risks vs the benefits and found that the gain of sex alone isn’t worth the risk.

    Again, it won’t be the majority of young men making that decision, but it will be such a significant minority that (just as in Japan) it will disrupt American society.

  162. earl says:

    ‘But let’s be honest — most men are out there trying to get laid outside marriage. And men who can get laid outside marriage generally take advantage of those offers. So the fact that extramarital sex is illegitimate and immoral from a Christian viewpoint is irrelevant to the reality on the ground: If a man can get sex outside marriage, he generally does.’

    Then those are the men who are ruining it for everyone. And we tout those cads as the alpha 20 percenters we should all ascribe to be. After some good rationalization from the cads of course for the next guy to come along. We pleasure your future wives to fulfill our own selfish desires and then give you game to try and restart what’s left of her fledgling desire for you after we already took it. But lets face it we’ve probably ruined her for you and then blame your ‘betaness’ on it and we don’t care because we can get another one anytime we want.

  163. thedeti says:

    “A decade from now, we’ll be hearing about America’s herbivore problem, and it will be because (as these 20 somethings are telling me now) that they have weighed the risks vs the benefits and found that the gain of sex alone isn’t worth the risk.”

    Yes, except the time frame is too short. More like 20 to 30 years, I think.

    It won’t be just the beta providers, the guys you know. It will also be the working class and underclass men. They have no money, no jobs, no assets and no skills, and no way to get any of them. They have no hope at all of attracting women, but the rare one among them will be able to through raw sexual bad boy appeal. These are the men who I think will comprise the majority of men who will opt out entirely of sex and marriage.

  164. new anon says:

    @earl,

    If it will make you feel better, (imho) the next phase in modern marriage won’t be a return to traditional values, it will be polygamy. Instead of ruining your future wife, the alpha male will keep her along with other women. So, you actually won’t have a wife to worry about at all.

    Not sure if it will be be called wife, concubine, or something else, but there will be some sort of modern designation that will allow multiple women to tie themselves to a one man for the purpose of benefits.

    It goes back to my previous post. If a herbivore movement rises in America as it has in Japan, I don’t expect western women to be as passive about it as Japanese women. Rather, they’ll argue that women should be able to marry the men that are willing to marry, even if that means multiple women marrying the same man (due to the herbivore cause man-shortage).

    Of course, we know from history that most women would prefer to have part of the top-dog than have all of the runt of the litter, so I expect this change to happen quickly (certainly more quickly than gay marriage).

    So don’t worry that, as an avg Joe, some alpha will ruin your future wife. Historical changes have already been set in motion to ensure you (Mr. avg. Joe) won’t get a wife.

  165. earl says:

    ‘Not sure if it will be be called wife, concubine, or something else, but there will be some sort of modern designation that will allow multiple women to tie themselves to a one man for the purpose of benefits.’

    They already have that…it’s called child support.

  166. new anon says:

    @thedeti,

    A generation is 20 years. What you are saying is that the grown children of the current generation of 20 somethings will be the ones dropping out of the marriage market.

    I believe there will be a significant dropout rate by the current generation of 20 somethings. I’m not sure it will be Japanese sized, but I’d be it will be in the double digits (at least 10%).

    The recession, imho, sped this up. Many men who would have been well on their way career wise by now were stalled at the ground floor. Call them bitter or just realist, but they understand exactly why women don’t show interest in them–they don’t have a job–so they have figured out how to get along without women. When they do start to make money, they’ll know why women are suddenly showing them interest, but having managed to get along without women for years, many will decide these women interested in them for their money aren’t worth their time.

    The next generation (the one you referenced) will come closer to Japanese numbers.

  167. jbro1922 says:

    “Call them bitter or just realist, but they understand exactly why women don’t show interest in them–they don’t have a job–so they have figured out how to get along without women. When they do start to make money, they’ll know why women are suddenly showing them interest, but having managed to get along without women for years, many will decide these women interested in them for their money aren’t worth their time.”

    Are you saying these women should have been interested in them when they were unemployed and/or under-employed?

  168. TheRhoubbhe says:

    ‘If it will make you feel better, (imho) the next phase in modern marriage won’t be a return to traditional values, it will be polygamy.’

    It doesn’t make me feel better. When you look at the history of civilization. not a single polygamous society achieved an stability, prosperity, or higher technology. Polygamy only functions in hunter/gatherer societies; it will not work in an advanced technical society; it would be a step towards the beginning of the end of our civilization.

  169. Boxer says:

    Dear Earl:

    Then those are the men who are ruining it for everyone. And we tout those cads as the alpha 20 percenters we should all ascribe to be. After some good rationalization from the cads of course for the next guy to come along. We pleasure your future wives to fulfill our own selfish desires and then give you game to try and restart what’s left of her fledgling desire for you after we already took it. But lets face it we’ve probably ruined her for you and then blame your ‘betaness’ on it and we don’t care because we can get another one anytime we want.

    It’s a mistake to think that such men are the top 20 percent of anything. You could have meaningless sex with lots of attractive but otherwise useless women if you wanted, as could any man (disabled and brain injured dudes may have to go without, but only if they dodge the desperate).

    Watch your local club around closing to get the idea. You’ll see skank-ho wimminz leaving with anyone they can find, just so they can brag to their friends the next morning. Most of these “chosen” men are total losers, who were just in the right place at the right time.

    This is the underlying truth of game, the Hegelian internal contradiction that brings the whole structure in on itself, and is one of the few good insights that comes from running ho’s on weekends. Man grows up thinking women are powerful and beautiful, and he comes out of the chateau knowing that they’re people, as we are.

    This also leads to a new gestalt. Playas who have achieved their hollow success gain a much deeper understanding of the values of a traditional society. Example A:

    http://www.rooshv.com/the-contradiction-of-pursuing-casual-sex-while-advocating-for-traditional-values

  170. new anon says:

    @jbro1992,

    If it’s wrong for a man to treat a women as a sex-object (showing no interest in her other than what she can do for his sexually), then isn’t it wrong for a woman to treat a man as a success-object (showing no interest in him other than what he can do for her financially)?

    It’s not that the women are uninterested in them when they are under-employed or unemployed. It’s that women don’t even see them as human beings. Women literally treat these men as if they are invisible non-entities. Then when the men do get on their feet and land a good job, suddenly not only are they not invisible to women, but women are suddenly showing interest in them. What was the one and only change? Money. The men are now success-objects; they are financially ogled by women; admired and loved not for who they are, but for their money.

    The 2008 recession generation of men will recognize this fact of life more clearly, and they won’t like it.

  171. Boxer says:

    Dear TheRhoubbhe

    It doesn’t make me feel better. When you look at the history of civilization. not a single polygamous society achieved an stability, prosperity, or higher technology. Polygamy only functions in hunter/gatherer societies; it will not work in an advanced technical society; it would be a step towards the beginning of the end of our civilization.

    Many of the dudes here are quite deluded. It is common to hear people on Dalrock foolishly fantasize of polygamous society, as though it were some sort of utopian sexual paradise for men. Such dolts really aren’t worth arguing with (facts are no object to how high these castles in the sky can be built).

    Those of us who have seen such societies, on the ground (i.e. Mormons with relatives who rock “the order”) know differently. Polygamous society is governed by a couple of men who sit at the top of the food chain. The rest of the dudes are pulled between these guys, and their wives, who get to sit at home all day planning how they’re going to manipulate their poor chump of a husband.

    It’s also not a healthy way to grow up as a kid. The average father has so many children that he can’t properly tend to all of them, leaving the children in pretty much the same situation as the average single-mom raised brat you find in the ghetto.

    Why so many dudes who complain about the difficulties of being married to one chick would want to amplify their burden is a funny running question to me, but there you have it.

    Regards, Boxer

  172. new anon says:

    @TR,

    I don’t disagree with you, but that doesn’t mean polygamy won’t become a reality again.

    We seem to be entering another “everyone did what seemed right in their own eyes” phase of history, which is always troubled times. The best anyone will be able to do is to baton down the hatches and try to avoid trouble. Hence my prediction that significant numbers of men will shun marriage. It will be seen as too risky given the times.

  173. Scott says:

    “It’s a mistake to think that such men are the top 20 percent of anything. You could have meaningless sex with lots of attractive but otherwise useless women if you wanted, as could any man (disabled and brain injured dudes may have to go without, but only if they dodge the desperate).”

    I would assent to this. I don’t perceive myself as being particularly Alpha, and during my dating years (16-23 before my first marriage and 29-37 before my second) I really didn’t have any trouble finding a cute girlfriend or even a one night stand. It’s really not that hard.

    I often wonder about this part of the manosphere/PUA/Game/Red pill lore. It’s the one part that doesn’t jive with my own personal experience.

  174. new anon says:

    @Boxer,

    I am NOT advocating polygamy as a good thing. It is a practice that corrodes and damages society. But, I can also recognize the cultural forces pushing for it.

    Sharia law, which recognized polygamy, is making inroads in the west. Polygamous marriages are being recognized for the purposes of retirement systems in some western countries (Canada, I believe is one of them). The forces on the left that have pushed for gay marriage (because their real goal is to undermine marriage period) are moving to support polygamy. The Mormon church recently “clarified” its position on polygamy, causing some to wonder if it is laying to groundwork to reintroduce the doctrine.

    25 years ago (1990–the first Bush was still president) nobody thought gay marriage would become a reality. Now it’s all but a done deal.

    Saying polygamy is on its way isn’t promoting polygamy, it’s facing (and getting prepared for) reality. Accusing everyone that points out this fact of secretly wanting polygamy (in an effort to shut down the discussion) is sticking your head in the sand.

  175. Scott says:

    One thing I did notice was, “Christian” girlfriend or not, it really doesn’t matter. Pretty much everyone is sexually active outside of marriage. No one really bats an eye about it.

  176. new anon says:

    @Scott,

    It was the close knit communities and families that kept it in check.

    I watched the John Wayne movie “The Quiet Man” recently (some great red-pill lessons hidden in the film, brtw). The story revolves around the strict dating and marriage rituals of a small Irish town. Even hand holding is described as “taking liberties” with a lady.

    I was struck by the reality that the children of the people portrayed in the movie (just one generation later) completely abandoned these customs and became libertines.

  177. feeriker says:

    We really needs to happen is to get back to teaching young girls to cherish their purity and find other skills to attract a man besides their sexuality. Cooking, childcare, cleaning, for example. Men like merit and if being an ok sexual partner is all she’s got, that’s not marriage material at all.

    For that to succeed requires, in significant numbers, an older generation of women with these skills and the same outlook on life to pass on to the younger generation. Given the utter failure of the last two-plus generations of women to do any such thing, I’m led to believe that are so few women who are either capable of this or who have any desire to do this that it’s essentially an impossible goal. It’s akin to wanting to train all men to be blacksmiths as a fallback skill. The problem is that the craft itself is all but extinct, so there is almost no one left to resurrect it and propagate it among future generations.

  178. Scott says:

    New Anon-

    Music to my ears. We reviewed The Quiet Man on my website, for those very reasons. We have forced all our children to watch it.

    http://courtshippledge.com/2013/08/update-on-watching-the-quiet-man-as-a-family/

  179. jbro1922 says:

    @new anon. I see your point. Thanks for clarifying.

  180. New anon,

    Since you mentioned Japanese herbs, do you know if that’s happening in Japan? Is there a push for polygamy there? I’ve heard about all the men resorting to porn, but (naturally) not much about what the women are doing.

    The thing about the time frame on all this is that, even if enough men reject late marriage to cause a crisis, women won’t realize it until the crisis has already happened — until they reach that point in their life-script at about 30-35 where they expected to marry. Then it will take another decade for them to realize they really did get squeezed out, and maybe another decade for the truth to sink in. (I know women hitting 60 who haven’t given up yet.) We’re just starting to reach that point now, with these “where did all the men go?” articles.

    But then they have to understand the problem and be honest enough to tell younger women the truth about it. Not snarky articles about how they missed out on marriage because their lives were just too cool, but: “I was wrong, and I’m paying for it. Do not do what I did.” Then you need enough such women to make a dent in the loud mainstream voice that’s saying the opposite.

    By the time that happens, another whole generation of women will have aged past the sweet spot. So you’re looking at at least 2 generations before the message starts to get to girls young enough to learn from it and make changes. So maybe the boys who are being born today will grow up to a world where the girls they date in their 20s don’t treat marriage as a dirty word.

  181. honeycomb says:

    Do you know what polygamy and monogamy have in common?
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Well polygamy is having one to many wives …. And, so is monogamy!

  182. I don’t perceive myself as being particularly Alpha, and during my dating years (16-23 before my first marriage and 29-37 before my second) I really didn’t have any trouble finding a cute girlfriend or even a one night stand. It’s really not that hard.

    Guys are very bad judges of their own alpha level, and the more naturally alpha they are, the worse they tend to be at it. The best natural alphas tend to look at other guys and think, “What’s wrong with you guys? You’re not repulsive. This girl stuff is easy. Just get out there and ask; they’re giving it away left and right.”

    A lot comes down to confidence and willingness to approach. If you were weren’t afraid to approach women, and you weren’t hideous, and you had a modicum of game do you didn’t bore them to death, you did fine. If you were afraid to approach and waited for friends to set you up or girls to give you big flashing green lights, you spent a lot of time alone even if your looks were fine.

  183. Renee Harris says:

    “Gentlemen, that means most of you are never going to marry. Or if you do marry, you’ll have to wait until your wife is 35, banged out and desperate. Most of you are not sexually attractive enough to attract a woman in her mid 20s. Most of you are not in the top 25% of men. Most of you will have to wait until you are around 35 yourselves to marry, if you can marry at all. ”
    I don’t get this one thing: there are men in manophere with daughter Approaching marriage age. And godly men want to marriage ? You guys can uses this community to crested a man created and controlled marriage market? Right so is that not happening. ?

  184. Anonymous Reader says:

    Then again, maybe she won’t need or bother to marry at all but might decide to have a child.
    Then she can form a “family” with other women who also were impregnated by the same sperm donor.

    Like this: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/23-hollywood-moms-same-sperm-763403

    I’m sure all these children will turn out just fine. Another feminist victory.

  185. new anon says:

    @Cail,

    As I understand it, there is a similar movement among Japanese women to shun marriage and relationships, but for different reasons.

    In Japan, it’s all but impossible for a married woman to move up the corporate ladder. Once a woman gets married, it is assumed she will either quit working or remain in a lower level job so she can spend more time as a homemaker/mother. Married women simply don’t have much luck climbing the ladder in Japanese businesses.

    So, you have men shunning marriage, because they don’t won’t to spend their lives at the grindstone grinding themselves down to a nub to support a family.

    On the other hand, you have women shunning marriage, because they’ve decided to spend their lives at the corporate grindstone.

    The two groups come close to balancing each other out numbers wise. So, while the govt. is freaking out over the lack of births and population drop, men and women as groups seem lackadaisical about the situation.

    While I think the experiences of Japanese men corresponds to American men (both American and Japanese men have traditionally been marriage pack-mules), I don’t think the experiences of Japanese women corresponds to American Women. Married American women are not discriminated against in their careers (in fact, we keep passing laws designed to make it easier for married women–especially those with children–to work). Plus, despite the fish and bicycle talk, a women who ends up as a childless old-maid is still regarded as something of a failure in life–even by progressive women (the American feminist motto is “you can have it all” which means BOTH a career and husband/child/family).

  186. PuffyJacket says:

    @ Cail “Guys are very bad judges of their own alpha level, and the more naturally alpha they are, the worse they tend to be at it.”

    True. But more often then not men are bad judges in the opposite direction (claiming to be alpha when they are not).

    Also understand that the dating scene is vastly different now than it was 20-25 years. The learning curve today is steeper and far more men are excluded from accumulating the necessary experience to do well with women right from the get go.

    Case in point is my old man. He’s a great man. And he did okay with women in his hey day (now married, to the same woman). But at 5’9 and a buck forty, mustache and glasses, he would get killed in todays dating market. If you could time warp his younger self to today, most likely he would be a MGTOW and involuntarily celibate. Conversely, if you could time warp the MGTOWs of today to 20-25 years ago, many would do reasonably well. Not alphas by any stretch, but likely a stable girlfriend and doing well enough to avoid a life of bitter loneliness.

  187. new anon says:

    @AR,

    I’m surprised the Christian right hasn’t gone after sperm banks. I’m not sure of the percentage breakdown, but they only seem to used for 3 purposes:

    1) to allow gay couples to have children
    2) to allow single females to have children
    3) to allow married couples where the husband is infertile to have children

    All of them, including #3, are sketchy from a biblical standpoint.

  188. KP says:

    TheRhoubbhe,

    not a single polygamous society achieved an stability, prosperity, or higher technology. Polygamy only functions in hunter/gatherer societies

    You really need to get out more.

  189. JDG says:

    New Anon-

    Music to my ears. We reviewed The Quiet Man on my website, for those very reasons. We have forced all our children to watch it.

    http://courtshippledge.com/2013/08/update-on-watching-the-quiet-man-as-a-family/

    One of my favorite movies.

  190. Anonymous Reader says:

    new anon, as I understand it sperm banks were created in the ’60’s for your reason #3. They even included descriptions or maybe photos of the donor men in order to pick someone who would look as much like the father as possible. Some time in the 70’s or 80’s, I don’t know when, the Female Imperative demanded the right for single women to have access, your #2. It’s only been in the late 80’s or 90’s that your #1 showed up.

    I’m not prepared to discuss the theology. But for the Christian right to go after sperm banks they’d have to be willing to tell single women “no baby for you”, and given the way babymommas are treated in a lot of churches, I don’t see that as likely.

    In an abstract way, all those Hollywood women are in the sperm donors harem. Genetically speaking, he’s quite the success.

  191. Anonymous Reader says:

    8oxer on polygamy
    Those of us who have seen such societies, on the ground (i.e. Mormons with relatives who rock “the order”) know differently. Polygamous society is governed by a couple of men who sit at the top of the food chain. The rest of the dudes are pulled between these guys, and their wives, who get to sit at home all day planning how they’re going to manipulate their poor chump of a husband.

    It’s also not a healthy way to grow up as a kid.

    It’s very much not healthy. The extreme example in the US would be the fundy Mormons (FLDS) who routinely exile boys / young men over 13 in order to keep the sex ratio skewed. Do a search on “lost boys”, or read this Wiki piece.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_boys_%28Mormon_fundamentalism%29

    Or just look up Dan Fischer.

    Polygamy can really be a bad way to grow up.

  192. thedeti says:

    “The thing about the time frame on all this is that, even if enough men reject late marriage to cause a crisis, women won’t realize it until the crisis has already happened — until they reach that point in their life-script at about 30-35 where they expected to marry. Then it will take another decade for them to realize they really did get squeezed out, and maybe another decade for the truth to sink in.”

    That’s what I see as likely with women, because it’s what happened with men after the sex rev, and it’s still happening now. In the late 1960s and early 70s, no fault divorce, the Pill and Roe v. Wade converged to give us the Sexual Revolution, in which women could have sex like men and get out of bad marriages.

    The rules were quickly changing to a world in which young single women were having sex with ordinary guys before marriage. Then they quickly discovered they could have sex with the hottest men for hot sex and bragging rights, and maybe a lottery ticket and a longshot to locking him down. After that, married women started offloading and jettisoning husbands. They started cheating on husbands in greater numbers.

    At the same time, women played “Hide the Ball” with men by concealing the rules changes. They proclaimed to the heavens that they just wanted “nice guys”. They enlisted the Church to help them hide the rules changes too. By the late 1980s and early 199os, hookup culture was in full swing on college campuses. By the late 90s, it was in full force everywhere.

    A few men just started figuring out something was amiss in the early 1990s. (Remember the ads for the “pickup” books you’d see in men’s magazines?) Things ramped up a little with the usegroups and bulletin boards of the late 90s (FastSeduction was one of them). Then Mystery Method; then Neil Strauss’ “The Game” in 2006. The manosphere didn’t come into its own until around 2008 or 2009. Things started really going in the manosphere in 2012-13. In 2013 and 2014 you started seeing “Red Pill” knowledge seeping into mainstream consciousness. Now you see more and more younger men figuring out the score.

    It’s now 2015. That’s 25 years for so-called “red pill” thought and concepts to gain any traction. And the people who are “in the know”, so to speak, are still a tiny number of people when compared to the general populace.

    (A big part of this is because men just don’t tend to communicate with each other about sex and “girl problems”, for obvious reasons. Another big part of why knowledge of “red pill” hasn’t spread among men is that there isn’t, and never will be, a recognized, above board, officially “sanctioned” network of support systems for men seeking or needing help with intersexual relationships. But there IS that network and support structure for women. Society wants to help women; society expects men to do for themselves and figure it out for themselves.)

    “(I know women hitting 60 who haven’t given up yet.)”

    I was talking with a woman at another blog who is 40 and never married. She still harbors hope of meeting a virgin man of around that age who wants to be a first-time father. And she still believes that she will become a mother. The poor woman is, at best, unrealistic—she has slim (at best) odds of even getting pregnant, much less carrying a child to term.

  193. thedeti says:

    “The thing about the time frame on all this is that, even if enough men reject late marriage to cause a crisis, women won’t realize it until the crisis has already happened — until they reach that point in their life-script at about 30-35 where they expected to marry. Then it will take another decade for them to realize they really did get squeezed out, and maybe another decade for the truth to sink in.”

    That’s what I see as likely with women, because it’s what happened with men after the sex rev, and it’s still happening now. In the late 1960s and early 70s, no fault divorce, the Pill and Roe v. Wade converged to give us the Sexual Revolution, in which women could have sex like men and get out of bad marriages.

    The rules were quickly changing to a world in which young single women were having sex with ordinary guys before marriage. Then they quickly discovered they could have sex with the hottest men for hot sex and bragging rights, and maybe a lottery ticket and a longshot to locking him down. After that, married women started offloading and jettisoning husbands. They started cheating on husbands in greater numbers.

    At the same time, women played “Hide the Ball” with men by concealing the rules changes. They proclaimed to the heavens that they just wanted “nice guys”. They enlisted the Church to help them hide the rules changes too. By the late 1980s and early 199os, hookup culture was in full swing on college campuses. By the late 90s, it was in full force everywhere.

    A few men just started figuring out something was amiss in the early 1990s. (Remember the ads for the “pickup” books you’d see in men’s magazines?) Things ramped up a little with the usegroups and bulletin boards of the late 90s (FastSeduction was one of them). Then Mystery Method; then Neil Strauss’ “The Game” in 2006. The manosphere didn’t come into its own until around 2008 or 2009. Things started really going in the manosphere in 2012-13. In 2013 and 2014 you started seeing “Red Pill” knowledge seeping into mainstream consciousness. Now you see more and more younger men figuring out the score.

    It’s now 2015. That’s 25 years for so-called “red pill” thought and concepts to gain any traction. And the people who are “in the know”, so to speak, are still a tiny number of people when compared to the general populace.

    (A big part of this is because men just don’t tend to communicate with each other about sex and “girl problems”, for obvious reasons. Another big part of why knowledge of “red pill” hasn’t spread among men is that there isn’t, and never will be, a recognized, above board, officially “sanctioned” network of support systems for men seeking or needing help with intersexual relationships. But there IS that network and support structure for women. Society wants to help women; society expects men to do for themselves and figure it out for themselves.)

    “(I know women hitting 60 who haven’t given up yet.)”

    I was talking with a woman at another blog who is 40 and never married. She still harbors hope of meeting a virgin man of around that age who wants to be a first-time father. And she still believes that she will become a mother. The poor woman is, at best, unrealistic—the odds of her getting pregnant, much less carrying a child to term, are slim.

  194. thedeti says:

    And, from about 1970 to 1990, women and churches (and, pretty much everyone else) were phenomenally successful in concealing the rule changes. And if any rule changes were found, they were quickly hamsterized and rationalized away. So that was another 20 to 25-year head start women had in pulling the proverbial wool over men’s eyes.

  195. The Brass Cat says:

    honeycomb says:

    Do you know what polygamy and monogamy have in common?

    Yeah. In both you can have multiple wives.

    Just in monogamy it’s one at a time.

  196. Gunner Q says:

    new anon @ 3:35 pm:
    “I’m surprised the Christian right hasn’t gone after sperm banks.”

    Why bother? It’s almost a self-punishing crime these days. You might as well mail blank checks to complete strangers as father children with multiple, RANDOM modern women. There’s no way that little “we’ll keep you anonymous” agreement will stand up against a tyrannical gov’t increasingly desperate for funding. Not to mention how all the medical databases Obamacare is building can accomplish the same thing indirectly.

    It won’t be long before everybody’s DNA is on file with Big Brother. I just dropped out of Obamacare because the private companies here are voluntarily building a medical database for the California government as a show of “goodwill and customer service”. It freaked me out so much, I didn’t even wait to cash in on my free mammograms.

    Bunch of crooks.

  197. deti,

    A few men just started figuring out something was amiss in the early 1990s. (Remember the ads for the “pickup” books you’d see in men’s magazines?) Things ramped up a little with the usegroups and bulletin boards of the late 90s (FastSeduction was one of them). Then Mystery Method; then Neil Strauss’ “The Game” in 2006. The manosphere didn’t come into its own until around 2008 or 2009. Things started really going in the manosphere in 2012-13. In 2013 and 2014 you started seeing “Red Pill” knowledge seeping into mainstream consciousness. Now you see more and more younger men figuring out the score.

    I do what I can.

    http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-01-14/what-the-us-gets-wrong-about-education-spending

    Scroll to these comments. My red pills spun up a nice little firestorm.

    McMegan,

    And those disparities are also not primarily about the dollar amounts going into schools — Detroit spends well above the U.S. average per pupil, and yet one study found that half the population of the city was “functionally illiterate.”

    Should we fix the issues with those schools? Absolutely — and doing so might mean spending more money. But that doesn’t mean that we need to increase the overall level of educational funding. It means that we need to identify ways to improve those underperforming schools, then find out how much more it would cost to implement those programs.

    You could put Camden NJ and Ferguson MO in for Detroit to make the same point (massive spending per pupil) and you’d still be wrong. Students there are functionally illiterate but that is less a problem with the quality of the schools in these cities (and money spent at them) and more a problem that the kids are born illegitimate. Spending more money for the schools will do nothing to fix the illiteracy problem. That is like giving chemotherapy to treat someone who is diagnosed with the clap.

    You have to fix marriage. Which means you have to get men to want to be bothered to get married. Which means you have to remove the disincentives men face regarding marriage. Which means the federal government must step in and amend the Constitution at the Federal level removing unilateral divorce law at the state level, return headship to men so men chase women when the men are much younger because they will want to take wives. That way the wives no longer will be able to threaten divorce unilaterally if he doesn’t keep her happy, she would need “grounds for divorce” which most women that divorce unilaterally do NOT have. They are just unhappy. Force people to stay married even in unhappiness specifically for their children. Now marriage is a better deal for men (which means more men chasing women for marriage, more weddings at younger ages, more functioning homes, and better kids and more literacy.) Moreover, more marriage means less government largess to support those fewer illegitimate children and much much less government spending for prisons to house them when they break laws as adults.

    As Senator Daniel Patrick Monyihan said in the mid sixties regarding education and its failing the students and waht to do to fix it, “…it all comes back to family.”

    I can’t do this alone guys. I need you all to contribute on other forums, really challenge people to think with pure red pill thought. Give them red pills as a solution to a problem. Throw it back at them that if they out and out refuse to swallow that pill, they acknowledge that the problem they are discussing is not troublesome enough that they would be willing to do whatever it takes to truly fix it.

  198. honeycomb says:

    The Brass Cat …

    I think you understood exactly what I was saying. In other words (iow) we’re on the same page.

    It’s all good. For us single men anyway … j/k

  199. Boxer says:

    Dear New Anon:

    I am NOT advocating polygamy as a good thing. It is a practice that corrodes and damages society. But, I can also recognize the cultural forces pushing for it.

    Right. I was actually referring to a small crew which operates in these comments sections, loosely led by a gent who calls himself “Artisanal Toad”. They can (and will) often write rambling manifestoes, pages and pages long, about how polygamy is hunky dory because it was practiced in the mythology of the ancient Hebrews.

    In writing all this stuff, they purposely refuse to address a lot of salient points, such as the fact that the text only describes the men at the very top indulging in this lifestyle. Simple arithmetic suggests that it’s impossible to have a functional society where every man gets ten wives. The ratios at birth just aren’t proportional.

    They also fail to provide evidence that the divine monarch approved of it. This is a basic principle of logic (i.e. just because the Hebrew god doesn’t specifically condemn jaywalking, he must want us all to do it at every opportunity). King David had more than one wife. He also iced his best friend and fucked that guy’s wife. Nowhere in the story is this painted as a good idea. (It’s a literary device to show the humanity of the protagonist, and also serves to caution the reader against hubris).

    Anyway, I was/am expecting this crew to pop up again. I don’t know why they don’t quit typing long enough to expat to Colonia Dublan, where they can live like the rest of the half-civilized in plyg heaven.

    Best, Boxer

  200. Renee Harris says:

    I work for pubic aid, much of men on welfare I meet are clients or are recipients of services, thus due to my Code of conduct , untouchable. I’m on food stamps.
    I am mad because I did not ride the carousel and now I am Virgin old maid because I kinda understand God like sexual sin about as much you genlenen like ms Durham

  201. boxer,

    They can (and will) often write rambling manifestoes, pages and pages long, about how polygamy is hunky dory because it was practiced in the mythology of the ancient Hebrews.

    The thing is, our current culture already has polygamy. That is the whole concept of f-ck buddies, or friends with benefits, the casual s-x relationship. How does the math make this work? Simple.

    When a woman consents to a F-W-B relationship, she is usually in the lower tier of the SMV, like a 2, 3, or (at most) a 4. She is ugly. But she desires intimacy, she must be touched by a man but can’t get married and can’t get laid any other way (not only will no man marry her, they wont even date her because she isn’t worth paying for dinner!) So it is F-W-B or nothing. But he can’t be ugly. There is no intimacy, no fantasy for her if he is her SMV equal. He better be an 8 or a 9 if she is going to trade s-x to him for nothing for her.

    When a man consents to a F-W-B relationship, he is usually in the upper tier of the SMV, like a 10, 9, or (at least) an 8. She is AMOG, pure AMOG. He f-cks for conquest. He doesn’t have an unlimited supply of money but he does have an unlimited supply of charm and good looks. But he MUST f-ck. Why settle for one measly 9 that costs you $200/week in upkeep when you can have ten 4s for free? More to the point, the 3s or 4s that consent to have s-x with him, he doesn’t have to introduce them to his friends or family. They just meet to have s-x and that’s it!

    What ends up happening is there are 100 or more 2s, 3s, and 4s, that are hooking up with the 10 or less 9s or 10s. That is the math.

    The above scenarios encompass the majority of the women in the lower levels of the SMV who have access to the internet (which is everyone.) They go the F-W-B route and for those women who they share in that information, they make it sound like this is really all they want, like this is a good deal for them. Feminism has brought us to this point, mainstreaming polygamy on the down low.

  202. greyghost says:

    Anybody married to more than one woman is crazy. I’d rather have two artificial wombs to sex up.
    MGTOW/family is the answer. Young man becomes productive hires a surrogate for his family and hires a nanny cheaper and more stable than the love game. I can almost guarantee the nanny will be more polite and likely to behave in a cooperative manor rather than as a disruptive to the home competitor.

  203. Anonymous Reader says:

    Gunner Q
    It freaked me out so much, I didn’t even wait to cash in on my free mammograms.

    Dang. Think of the fun you coulda had.

  204. PuffyJacket says:

    @Deti

    It’s noteworthy that men were far slower to adjust their behavior in response to the new “rules” of the sexual revolution than women were, as this is the root cause of our problems today. Had men adjusted their behavior tit-for-tat in the 60’s -80’s, feminism would be nowhere near the force that it is today. Unfortunately the behavioral response of men today is only now where it should have been 25 years ago.

    With each wave of increasing bad behavior on the part of women, policymakers reacted by attempting to shift the costs onto men. The sole purpose of our radical restructuring of family law in the West was to prevent women from bearing the costs of their poor behavior and to shift those same costs onto men. Unfortunately the costs have become so high today that virtually no men (among my generation, anyways) are willing to foot the bill, with the exception of some manginas. Hence, there will be no other option but to allow the bubble to “collapse” and the costs to fall back onto women. As painful to women as it would have been to allow the bubble to pop in the 1960’s, it will be 10x more painful when it ultimately happens in the next decade or so.

    Also I think you underestimate the awareness of “red pill” knowledge amongst men, particularly those of my generation (Gen Y’ers and Millenials). I’d say it’s incredibly rare to find men of my generation able to go about their life not realizing something is seriously, seriously wrong. It’s almost impossible today and the worst is still yet to come. Even if they don’t have a complete understanding of the cause of today’s problems, most know well enough they need to change their behavior to avoid being burned by modern women (i.e. video games, porn, avoiding marriage, PUA, etc). In the end, that’s all that matters.

  205. Are you saying these women should have been interested in them when they were unemployed and/or under-employed?

    Yes. My mom and grandmothers all did, and wound up happily married for life, surrounded by grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Two of them married men right out of high school. None of the three men had college degrees or “careers” in today’s terms, beyond working for their dads and local farmers/businessmen while they saved toward their own homesteads. None owned homes or land or expected significant bequests. All three spent time in the military as enlisted men.

    These women used good judgment and leaned on their parents’ judgment, and ultimately took a risk, for the sake of grabbing a man they wanted and getting on with life. So yes, I do expect women to do exactly that. I realize today’s economy, based as it is on cheap foreign labor inside and out, makes that riskier because it’s not as easy for a man with a strong back to make a living, but it’s still the way it’s supposed to work.

    Men are told to take a chance on a woman who can divorce him and take his kids away. I don’t see anything wrong with telling women to take a risk on a man who might not be able to support an easy lifestyle someday.

  206. I watched the John Wayne movie “The Quiet Man” recently (some great red-pill lessons hidden in the film, brtw).

    That reminds me: one of the local broadcast stations here picked up a new channel called GRIT. It’s all movies for men: John Wayne, Eastwood, Stallone, war movies, westerns, fight movies, etc. It’s great. Some of them aren’t exactly good movies, but at least they’re movies about men.

    One thing I’ve noticed is that quite a few have a scene where a man grabs a protesting woman and kisses her (or more) while she flails ineffectively for a bit and then gives in and wraps her arms around him. Then in the next scene she’s gazing at him with devotion. You sure won’t see that in modern movies.

  207. Scott says:

    “Yes. My mom and grandmothers all did, and wound up happily married for life, surrounded by grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Two of them married men right out of high school. None of the three men had college degrees or “careers” in today’s terms, beyond working for their dads and local farmers/businessmen while they saved toward their own homesteads. None owned homes or land or expected significant bequests. All three spent time in the military as enlisted men.”

    We would be OK with this arrangement. We have already announced to our oldest (18) that if he finds a girl and he is not fully established, they can live on our property while he gets on his feet. The next two are too young to discuss this with, but we will offer them the same deal.

  208. PuffyJacket says:

    @ TFH

    I guess “interesting times” are ahead of us, so to speak… to experience that much change in the space of only 5 years.

    Just curious, what do you make of Jim Rickard’s analysis regarding an imminent 25-year “Great Depression” that I keep seeing in these stupid pop-up ads. Sounds a little bit extreme, even to my ears.

  209. Renee Harris says:

    At bradA
    I work for pubic aid, much of men on welfare I meet are clients or are recipients of services, thus due to my Code of conduct , untouchable. I’m #not# on food stamps. Added: I hate my phone.
    I am mad because I did not ride the carousel and now I am Virgin old maid because I kinda understand God like sexual sin about as much you genlenen like ms Durham.
    But I like blogs like one. My problem is I am the girl with ” inter beauty”. I told told wait he’ll find you. Now I am 28. I not an active feminist read : I bough into the old unmarried maid crap bc I black and have CP .
    I don’t know special olympics had a marriage race.
    once you get the Word and The fact that an osgams is not worth enteral seperstion from God but still be fun to try without have to repent, you became another girl betting a horse half way thrus the race. God told I will get marry but I’m thinking I’m a sarah

  210. Anonymous Reader says:

    Say, here’s a question for Opus, he being one of those learned fellows. What’s up with
    this report from a well known accurate and unquestionably unbiased legal publication,
    Ye Mirror?

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/woman-reveals-raped-sleep-over-4977362#rlabs=16

  211. Anonymous Reader says:

    Cail
    One thing I’ve noticed is that quite a few have a scene where a man grabs a protesting woman and kisses her (or more) while she flails ineffectively for a bit and then gives in and wraps her arms around him. Then in the next scene she’s gazing at him with devotion. You sure won’t see that in modern movies.

    You may not viewed the John Wayne movie McLintock in a while. It’s worth looking up, and reallly the whole movie is one big buildup for the last 10 minutes. Maureen O’Hara does just as good an acting job in that film as in Quiet Man, although a very different role. Both should be mandatory viewing for young men. Maybe in the chronological order.

  212. greyghost says:

    Paper Moon was good one. Miss Trixie Delight. Now that was some marriage material there. She just needed a real man that’s all

  213. MarcusD says:

    23 Hollywood Moms With Same Sperm Donor And One Crazy Vacation
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/23-hollywood-moms-same-sperm-763403

    When Sarah Fain, a TV writer-producer for The Shield and The Vampire Diaries, decided at 37 to be a single mom, she started online sperm-donor browsing. “It’s like online dating, only you don’t have to have a relationship with the person,” she says.

    It is interesting how feminism (an offshoot of critical theory, no less) has taken to eugenics (e.g. “if I’m going to get a donor, I may as well get the best… and maybe change the eye color, too”).

  214. Boxer says:

    Paper Moon was good one. Miss Trixie Delight. Now that was some marriage material there. She just needed a real man that’s all

    For some reason, I got all the way to adulthood without ever hearing of this film, until I discovered it last summer.

  215. embracing reality says:

    Deti,

    “I was talking with a woman at another blog who is 40 and never married. She still harbors hope of meeting a virgin man of around that age who wants to be a first-time father. And she still believes that she will become a mother.”

    I’ve dated carbon copies of the above and many more childless “Christian” reformed sluts who aren’t holding out for a virgin husband but have the same ambitions at starting a family at 40 and beyond. I met most of them from dating websites now I won’t even entertain dating one once. I do enjoy, thoroughly enjoy, enlightening them on the realities of their position in life. Goes a little something like this;

    ‘Why would a man anywhere near your age who wanted a family simply not choose a woman several years younger who is more fertile?’

    ‘Adoption? With the large supply of single mothers looking for husbands why would a man need to adopt a child with you if he wanted to be liable for somebody else’s kids?’

    With suchlike parting gifts it’s usually the last time I hear from them. I give because I care.

  216. feeriker says:

    Men are told to take a chance on a woman who can divorce him and take his kids away. I don’t see anything wrong with telling women to take a risk on a man who might not be able to support an easy lifestyle someday.

    But, but, but … that’s like … equality!

  217. MarcusD says:

    I want to leave the Church because God won’t help me find a spouse (“I am a 27 year old Catholic male convert”)
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=937888

  218. greyghost says:

    MarcusD
    The guy needs a link to https://heartiste.wordpress.com/ . Having him find that link is God’s help in get females off his pedestal so they will have a reason to at least manipulate the guy into thinking they were marriageable. The Christian Church seem to have more faith in blissful ignorance than they do faith in God.

  219. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Puffy Jacket: >> there will be no other option but to allow the bubble to “collapse” and the costs to fall back onto women. <<

    The rationale for maintaining the costs on men is "But why should the children suffer for their mother's misbehavior?"

    Doesn't matter how bad the woman, or how good the man. A woman can be an unfaithful slut. She can initiate a frivorce. DNA can prove a man is not the father. Or a man might sign a sperm bank contract "guaranteeing" anonymity. The situation doesn't matter. The man always pays, because ….

    Why should the children suffer for the mother's wrongdoings?

  220. Gurney Halleck says:

    I wouldn’t send anyone to Heartiste — dude traffics too much in Race stuff, to such an extent that there’s a widely held suspicion that that blog now is substantially a group blog meant as a recruiting site for WNs. Roissy of the 2007/2008 era was quite good though.

  221. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Speaking of double standards…

    A woman can discard a baby at any “drop off center,” no questions asked. She can walk away from her responsibilities during, or even after, pregnancy, on pure whim.

    A man can’t walk away from his “responsibilities,” even if the baby isn’t his.

    If a man complains about child support, he’s told, “Well, you should have thought of that before you dropped your pants.”

    But no one tells a woman, “You don’t want the baby? You should have thought of that before you pulled up your skirt.”

  222. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Renee Harris, 28 is not an old maid. Your clock is ticking, but you still have time.

    But God will not send a man to your doorstep. You must get out there and seek. Look for men in places men gather. Computer clubs. Science fiction conventions. Places that have high ratios of men vs. women. Show up, express an interest, ask questions, and you’ll find men eager to explain things and help you.

    Men and women have different interests. I once took an art class, and was one of only two male students. There were nine female students, mostly young and pretty.

    Tough to find a woman in a computer club. Easy to find them in art classes. Visa versa if you’re seeking men.

  223. Gurney Halleck says:

    innocentbystanderboston #5:56 pm,

    There really has not been any research done on this question. I recently emailed a prominent Evo Pysch professor with a similar observation.

    This was the email I sent (provoked by something he had written/said recently about PUA).

    “I’m wondering what you think of this idea mentioned in Robert Wright’s “The Moral Animal” (relevant chapter: Marriage Markets):

    The system of strictly enforced monogamy that was extant prior to the Sexual Revolution in the U.S was a system that had the effect of equitably divvying the good of female sexuality among males. If everyone is getting married, nearly every man is getting sex and a relationship.

    However, the Sexual Revolution normalized serial monogamy. The interesting thing about serial monogamy is that it can be a form of polygamy. If Bob is a high status male in some way relative to other males (personality, intelligence, wealth, etc) the Sexual Revolution gave Bob permission to hoard female erotic capital through serial relationships. Let’s paint this as simply as possible: Say Bob dates one girl (of similar age) from age 16 to 26, but then breaks up with her and marries a younger woman (say, 22.) In his lifetime, Bob would be getting the “best years” (i.e, when women are their most fertile/beautiful) of more than one woman. The cumulative effect of many Bobs behaving this way is that there’s a shortage of available young women in the so called “sexual marketplace.” And of course Bob could keep repeating this behavior a few more times, perhaps cumulatively dominating in his lifetime two women’s child baring years if he, and the women who select him, so chose.

    Robert Wright referenced a paper about his point that serial monogamy is a form of polygamy. He also said that there were more unmarried men than ever (vs unmarried women.) That was more than twenty years ago.

    His response: “Very good points. There’s been a lot of chatter in evolutionary psychology about the resurgence of serial monogamy after the divorce boom, but not much analysis yet of how it affects the operational sex ratio for young men — e.g. to what extent the older men are snatching up the best young women. ”

    Of course it’s not just that older men are snatching up the “best” younger women but top men cumulatively dominating 1.2 or 1.3 or 1.5 times a normal woman’s fertility window, regardless of whether that monopolization is spread over ten relationships or over two.

  224. Gurney Halleck says:

    The last paragraph is my commentary on his response.

    Curious why no one seems to be interested in this question though…

  225. Opus says:

    I enjoyed the quotes from Up in the Air that, IBB set out above: the lifestyle of the International Business Traveller certainly sounds glamorous and, no wonder, women wanted to cease to be excluded from such a lifestyle, even though I would guess such a life is largely as recent as the Globalization boom of the mid-80s and certainly no earlier than the modern jet airliner – that is to say the 1960s. It seems to me however that there is a quantifiable difference of experience as between the male and the female business traveler, for from the moment the Taxi arrives in the beltway to take our heroine to Dulles, BWI or the renamed Washington National (and what a great little airport that is) the female business traveler being waited on hand and foot assumes a position only previously meted out to Royalty or Celebrity. Whether it is the Maitre D or the Pool Boy or the Barman or any of the other men who effortlessly move her luggage and facilitate her stay in the downtown Hilton in some far away city, she has men dancing attendance on her and she knows that anyone of them will, should she make it clear provide and at little or more likely no extra cost – than a smile – provide any personal services that she may require. Not that she is like that of course but there was that guy in Acapulco, or was it Rio – she can’t now remember – who was so cute, so Hawt, … it just happened.

    It is not like that however for Novaseeker as he travels the world. Certainly the characters don’t change, but there is of course neither any sexual frisson with the Taxi-driver as he loads your suitcase into the back of his cab or with any of the other supporting actors in his latest trip. Novaseeker and his Taxi-driver are two guys on a mission or at least with a mutual object and will facilitate each other to achieve that goal, but if a romantic escapade is what is on his mind, Novaseeker is going to have to seek it out and pay, and that makes it rather hard to see the liaison as a romantic encounter. Men do; women are, and thus posing by the pool-side or having that manicure or massage between flights is not on his hoped for agenda; fun is fun, certainly but work is more fun and it is for work that he got up at the crack of dawn in the dark to set out for his next international meeting and not for an opportunity to go EPL.

    Her girlfriends – as they set about sorting out their young brood – may secretly envy their friend Jo Piazza, but do they not as they receive the airbrushed Facebook status-reports of her glamorous life-style make a note to enquire personally, the next time they meet, exactly what happened and did she not meet at least one desirable man. She is thirty-four now, and as one can see from her publicly available C.V. and LinkedIn page, Travel Journalism is after a number of years of flying a desk a new (to excuse the pun) departure for her. Is this, they wonder, desperation or empowerment.

  226. greyghost says:

    ,

    why should the children suffer for the mother’s wrongdoings?

    Surrogacy, get her out of there. society wins, man maintains top productive ability to take care of his own, Child wins, grows up under the guidance of a productive capable man (most likely red pill), Man wins, he can freely love without the threat point and betrayal. his psychological and emotional well being remains more intact. His dragons to slay are day to reality.
    This is where MGTOW is going. Look up surrogacy on google and look at the numbers. The industry is growing due to old bitches careerism and gay coupling.

  227. greyghost says:

    Don’t lose your sense of humor and always try to relate good conversation with the day to day grind.
    Red pill eyes make life more fun

  228. earl says:

    ‘Most of these “chosen” men are total losers, who were just in the right place at the right time.’

    I’m glad somebody gets it. One of the worst ideas out there is basing man’s merit by how many women are attracted to him. If the stuff is true about the low quality and standards of women nowadays…I wouldn’t consider that something to brag about.

  229. Spacetraveller says:

    For Renee Harris and everyone else in despair about finding a spouse:
    This song is for you:

    Renee, I know it is not easy. I particularly feel for you regarding your disability. I was older than you when I got married – a virgin. Trust that it will happen for you too. And take the advice some of these gentlemen have given you: get out and meet men. No-one will come to your house and ask for your hand. You should mingle. Out there. Anywhere. Supermarket, library, church, at the park, anywhere. And keep your chastity. It is a good thing.

    I promise to keep you in my prayers.🙂

  230. Spacetraveller says:

    Ah, I must apologise to the gentlemen who are ‘looking’. The above video is much too ‘feminine’ for your tastes, I think.
    From the same country, I found you a song that perhaps suits your masculinity more.
    May you find your *fairytale*, you young studs.
    I keep you in my prayers too.🙂

  231. Spacetraveller says:

    At the risk of appearing ‘woolly-headed’ and fantasy-driven, Renee, I present the last of my hat-trick of inspiration. The last I heard, Susan Boyle is dating an Emergency Room doctor. She is 52 now, I think, and suffers from a disability too (I think in her case, it is Asperger’s syndrome).
    She was a (self-proclaimed) virgin at the time of this video, aged 47.

    Nothing is impossible with God, especially for those who help themselves. This woman braved the incredible odds against her and got herself on the show, knowing that she would be laughed at, which she was – at the beginning…

    Get yourself out there and God will help you. Same as He helps anyone who seeks His help, irrespective of the enormity of the hurdles in one’s way.

    I am not saying you will get an ER doctor. But you will get the someone you want if you work with God to put you in his path. That someone is perhaps seeking you too. You just need to meet, the two of you.

  232. Opus says:

    Americans may be forgiven for supposing that all Norwegians (the country that made ‘nul point’ a defining national characteristic) speak English. Whatever failings America may have had it may claim to have been entirely innocent of any responsibility for Euro-Trash.

    Where would we have been without those instantaneous English/French announcements from glamorous milf, Miss Boyle (Katie of course rather than Susan).

  233. Renee Harris says:

    @ Spacetraveller thank you. After watching that video, I feel ashamed bc God loves me as Christ’ death shows. An ER Dr needs a certain type of woman as due to his work schedules…( she be in change of oversee the home without him most of the time) I wish… I don’t want to should an idiot but a man wife is a secretary and office manger for personal ambition and most important, his personal ministry. She does not boss him around but take care the the small stuff bc he has the game plan, big pic in mind. She need to skill for his career: I am B of A in speech communions and I want a MA theology in leadership. So I guess a want a Godly man who would use for that….

  234. Scott says:

    D-

    In the past, you have graciously allowed me to link stuff like this on your most recent/active posts. I thank you in advance on this one.

    http://westernphilosophyeasternfaith.blogspot.com/2015/01/throw-military-suicide-rate-in-reverse.html

    You have quite a few military/ex military readers/commenters who find this interesting.

    Carry on, and thanks again.

    Scott

  235. Scott says:

    Correction: “might find this interesting.”

  236. The Brass Cat says:

    TFH says:

    MORE manginas doubling down :

    Mangina professor : ‘False rape accusations don’t go far enough in destroying patriarchy’

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/200988/

    Feminists believe in collective guilt and collective punishment.

  237. Novaseeker says:

    FWBs and so on aren’t with women in the 2-4 range primarily, they’re mostly with women in the 4-7 range who are sleeping with guys in the 6-8 range. It’s the mid-level women who are the bulk of the supply, not the low level ones.

  238. @ greyghost., concerning “red pill” eyes, I’ve noticed that they help in work/social relationships. I was literally worried that I would get in trouble in a mixed office environment with my new perspective and be getting a sit down with HR. In fact, things are now going more smoothly with the women at work (they like doing me favors now without me asking).

    Here is an example of one exchange revolving around my recent “screw you society, I’m growing a wild man beard”.
    Office gal exclaims: “I’m surprised your wife lets you grow that thing!
    To which I ask “Why?”
    Office gal: “Because she has to look at it every day and kiss around it.”
    I say: “She doesn’t seem to have any problems kissing around it”
    Then I add the kicker: “Besides you wouldn’t expect me to tell her to lose 20 pounds, why would you expect her to tell me to shave?”
    Office gal” “I can’t believe you WENT THERE.”
    I shrug and walk out of her office. Now she comments when I where a shirt that accentuates my muscles……..

    Love those red pill eyes.

  239. thedeti says:

    @Puffy:

    “It’s noteworthy that men were far slower to adjust their behavior in response to the new “rules” of the sexual revolution than women were, as this is the root cause of our problems today. Had men adjusted their behavior tit-for-tat in the 60’s -80’s, feminism would be nowhere near the force that it is today. Unfortunately the behavioral response of men today is only now where it should have been 25 years ago.”

    Yeah. As TFH said, responses aren’t linear. It can lumber slowly, or it can move in fits and starts. And as I said, there are a lot of reasons for that, the prime ones being that the culture, church and women all conspired to play Hide the Ball from men, and did a really good job of it. There is also the fact that there never has been and never will be any sort of systematic “help” for men needing it on intersexual relationships. The “help” you get in the manosphere is pretty much all there is, imperfect and disjointed and confederated as it is. You’re fooling yourself if you think you’ll get it at a therapist, or church, or from Dad (if you even have one), or from a teacher.

  240. thedeti says:

    The majority of women in the 2-4 range I’ve seen lately are actually in “baby mama” relationships or LTRs or married. These women seem to be aware of their low value so they respond to it in one of two ways: They lock down a man by getting pregnant by him. Or, a bit less often, they seek marriage to the best man they can muster, usually a 3-5 Lower Delta or Gamma, as quickly as they can.

    The women in the 4-7 range are the FWBs and f*ckbuddies because they’re right in that middling range where they are hot enough to pull their own SMV +2 or +3 for sex but not for marriage. At the same time the sex rank 4-7 men who are their SMV counterparts aren’t attractive enough to these women for anything, sex or marriage.

  241. jbro1922 says:

    “There is also the fact that there never has been and never will be any sort of systematic “help” for men needing it on intersexual relationships.”

    Are there efforts underway to start some? Why or why not? The need has been identified.

  242. Opus,

    I enjoyed the quotes from Up in the Air that, IBB set out above: the lifestyle of the International Business Traveller certainly sounds glamorous and, no wonder, women wanted to cease to be excluded from such a lifestyle, even though I would guess such a life is largely as recent as the Globalization boom of the mid-80s and certainly no earlier than the modern jet airliner – that is to say the 1960s. It seems to me however that there is a quantifiable difference of experience as between the male and the female business traveler, for from the moment the Taxi arrives in the beltway to take our heroine to Dulles, BWI or the renamed Washington National (and what a great little airport that is) the female business traveler being waited on hand and foot assumes a position only previously meted out to Royalty or Celebrity.

    You need to watch the movie. Thank you for those nice words about the quotes, but you completely missed the point of why I quoted the movie. That was in response to what Cail said about women and their “timelines” for career and marriage. It had less to do with our 34 year old Yahoo traveller heroine.

    But please watch the movie. George Clooney played the perfect MGHOW, perfectly. The job he was doing (travel around the United States domestically and consult at various offices by firing downsized staff) was his business. That is all he did and it required travel, 100%. He LOVED the travel. It afforded him the ability to accumulate a certain number of airline miles which is what he was all about, ironically. Moreover, the constant travel enabled his perfect 10 looks and his desire for conquest to f-ck as many different women as came into contact with him. A two-fer. He saw no purpose for marriage, none at all! He even had a dialogue in the movie where he insisted that someone sell him the concept of marriage (2.0) and she failed, that person being Natalie Keener.

    Natalie hated the travel. She wanted to revolutionize Clooney’s business by having them all stay in their office in Nebraska and fire people over the internet (via Skype.) Why travel to the office when the soon to be ex-employee could just be escoted into a room and have Clooney fire them from a screen? She thought she was being good to the people in that office and her entire purpose for change destroyed everything that Clooney loved and valued in his job. But of course she wanted to do this because…. she wanted to get married to 6’1″, white colar, college educated man, and breed with him all the while keeping her corner office (where she fires people over the internet) by day.

    Anyway, watch the movie.

  243. HammerSix says:

    Looks like unmarried women are rethinking spawning outside of marriage, or they are having greater difficulty convincing their live-in to fertilize them.

    The article makes the correlation with economic conditions, but I wonder if the proper overlay is the Sex-in-the-City crowd hitting the wall. (As Dalrock has demonstrated at length).

    http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/01/15/first-comes-the-marriage-gap-then-comes-the-baby-gap

  244. thedeti says:

    @ jbro:

    Because men and women approach the issue of intersexual relations in fundamentally different ways. Women act on it and solve it through the “herd” – mostly other women. Men solve it individually, and as anonymously as possible.

    Men are expected to “just get it” and just figure this stuff out for themselves, after their dads give them a few guiding principles and form them up properly to stand on their own two feet. For lots of reasons, that hasn’t been happening, mostly because of incompetent, feminized or absent dads.

    And there’s a lot of shame involved in it too, which is why most men flail about doing the same things they have done for years and not succeeding – they don’t want to admit that they really don’t know what they’re doing and never learned it properly. They’re ashamed at failing, and this is a big thing for men, because a man who fails too often and repeatedly is left behind and kicked out of the “tribe” for not having his shit together.

    A third reason is the feminine imperative. Dating, sex and intersexual relations are about what the WOMAN wants. What the man wants is decidedly secondary. “Approved” advice for men must align with, and serve, women’s interests. If it doesn’t it’s driven underground. That’s why what goes on here won’t ever go “mainstream” – it’s too politically incorrect. We just cannot have any kind of mainstream place where what men want is given primacy. Women read it and run from the room (I’m not exaggerating here), screaming about “misogyny” and “male sexual entitlement” and “rape culture” and “losers” and “bitter, angry men who can’t get laid”. I’ve been at at least two female-run blogs, one defunct, one still operating but completely remodeled and refurbished, where this exact phenomenon has occurred.

  245. TheRhoubbhe says:

    @KP

    “You really need to get out more.”

    A pathetic response. I was commenting on the impact of polygamy on society; which has been well documented throughout history. Do better “boy”.

  246. jbro1922 says:

    @thedeti,

    Thanks for your response. I figured women had a lot to do with the lack of support systems for me, but I didn’t know as much about the first two you mentioned. What’s the difference between “the herd” and “the tribe”?

  247. jbro1922 says:

    Sorry, that first sentence was supposed to read “I figured women had a lot to do with the lack of support systems.”

  248. A third reason is the feminine imperative. Dating, sex and intersexual relations are about what the WOMAN wants. What the man wants is decidedly secondary. “Approved” advice for men must align with, and serve, women’s interests. If it doesn’t it’s driven underground. That’s why what goes on here won’t ever go “mainstream” – it’s too politically incorrect. We just cannot have any kind of mainstream place where what men want is given primacy. Women read it and run from the room (I’m not exaggerating here), screaming about “misogyny” and “male sexual entitlement” and “rape culture” and “losers” and “bitter, angry men who can’t get laid”. I’ve been at at least two female-run blogs, one defunct, one still operating but completely remodeled and refurbished, where this exact phenomenon has occurred.

    Yes to all this. But it is not just women. This is also the case for men who are decidedly NOT red pill.

    I showed this forum to a white-knight that I worked with and after reading the posts here for half an hour, he concluded that all you guys are just a bunch of s-xually frustrated short men suffering from “short-man’s-syndrome” and you couldn’t get laid just because you were short and you demanded that women value you s-xually regardless of your shortness. Then he walked off and dismissed the MRM utterly. I showed it to a white-knight man at church and after an hour he concluded that all you guys were just a bunch of stupid, uneducated men, who didn’t do what you needed to do in your younger years to make yourselves more appealing to women (get graduate and PhD degrees in STEM) and its too late for you now. You want to change the rules to life because you can’t play the game of life, you bring nothing to the table. I asked for clarification and he kept refering to the people who got all angry about all the needless education about the pointless credentialization that comes with higher education. He BELIEVES in credentialization even if the majority of the manosphere does not. Then he walked off and dismissed the MRM utterly.

    Its not just the women who need these redpills. If white-knight men refuse to even have any kind of dialogue with a MRA, we can’t really expand the base. I try real hard at Bloomberg and I believe I am making headway. A couple of other posters came to my aid in defending my position but it takes great courage and integrity to step outside the “group think” and look at life differently in a public setting. Shunning and ostrazation are simply too terrifying for most people. What is often moral to them is whatever the majority thinks is right.

  249. Novaseeker says:

    Are there efforts underway to start some? Why or why not? The need has been identified.

    Well, the manosphere, the red pill, etc., are all around now and becoming more widespread. It’s not “official”/mainstream, however, and never will be for the reasons deti states. You can’t approach these issues from a male POV without being denounced as a misogynistic shitlord, essentially, even tough magazines they sell at the checkout counter of the supermarket are loaded with all kinds of strategies for women in order to attract hot men. For men, you have to buy into the mainstream “be yourself” stuff, or you get denounced. But the information is out there, it’s just not mainstream. It is spreading nonetheless, however, especially among the younger set because they are internet natives, and this info lives mostly on the internet.

    In thinking of herd and tribe, think about how men evaluate each other as compared with how women evaluate each other. Men generally rank each other based on achievement in the relevant area (whether that’s sexual, professional, athletic, etc.). Women generally cluster with similar-sex-ranked women and try to fit in. This is why, for example, fashion is much more of a thing for women than it is for men — it’s about fitting in with “this season’s look”, which is what the herd expects you to look like this season. For men, it’s all about hierarchy and where you fit in, in the pecking order. Women know that some of them are hotter than others, which is why they tend to separate into groups of similar sex rank — but within these groups, it’s more egalitarian and fitting in, rather than being arrayed in a hierarchy.

    One place this makes mischief is the workplace (and it’s a good example at how the difference manifests in everyday life). Men are comfortable with hierarchy, because it’s how we relate to each other. So, if one guy, who is the most competent/leading guy, dominates a meeting or a conversation, the other guys aren’t going to get pissed at him (unless they think his rank is undeserved, in which case they will try to topple him eventually).. The fact of one person dominating the situation, if the person is competent, is not off-putting to guys — it’s our hierarchy. Again, as long as the hierarchy isn’t rigged. Women, by contrast, hate this — they loathe it. They feel “excluded”. They feel “unvalued”. They feel “overlooked”. Women like a format where everyone gets a say, where everyone is asked to participate, where everyone gets a prize, etc. It’s because they are used to a “flat herd”, while we are used to hierarchy. So, this is why corporate HR has basically changed the way leadership works (at the larger companies at least) to focus more on “collaboration”, “teamwork”, “inclusion” and so on. It’s done because women like this, and women make up a large percentage of the population of workers at these companies now. The men don’t care for it in general, and women are more natural at this as well — which is the main reason why women now are coming to dominate middle management positions. They have the skillset the company wants for that level of leader, because that style is naturally female and not naturally male (there are men who can do it, but it’s not the natural style of men). Above that level, when you get to senior leadership where it’s more about steering the entire ship and corporate strategy, major decisions and so on — and not keeping the rank and file happy due to feeling “included” at the staff meeting — it’s much more male heavy, because at that level the male style of leadership (competence based hierarchy) reigns.

  250. Hammer Six,

    The article makes the correlation with economic conditions, but I wonder if the proper overlay is the Sex-in-the-City crowd hitting the wall. (As Dalrock has demonstrated at length).

    http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/01/15/first-comes-the-marriage-gap-then-comes-the-baby-gap

    I liked that article. I think its a good trend. It shows that unmarried women are having less and less kids and they should have less kids. If you are a woman and you are not married, you shouldn’t be having any kids. I don’t care if you think you can’t get married (as a significant percentage of women can’t) you shouldn’t be having kids out of wedlock.

    I find it ironic that the author of that article tried to make it like it was a bad thing that unmarried women are having less children citing the TFR (1.86 births per woman which is far below mere replacement rate at 2.1 births per woman). Absent from this line of thinking is the greater moral good that stipulates that if we as a culture have given up entirely on Biblical marriage (and we have, we defaulted to marriage 2.0) then perhaps our culture is not permitted to replace itself even at zero population growth?

  251. thedeti says:

    jbro:

    The “herd” is essentially all women. It’s “Team Woman”. This is because women are collectivist at their core. Women evolved to be this way because women are physically weaker and require protection. You’ll notice that all women spring to the aid of an injured, alone, hurt, downcast or dejected woman. Even devout Christian women will leap to the defense of a slut. Even female red pill bloggers will defend women from attack from other women or even from red pill men. This happens because the disadvantaged person is a woman. All women are part of the monolithic “herd”.

    There are many tribes. Men comprise a “tribe”. There is no one monolithic tribe of men, because men are individualistic at their core. Tribes form for a common purpose among the members – to work, to go to war, to earn money, to defend against an enemy, a pastime. These are the only reasons to form tribes — a common purpose exists, and it is to each individual’s benefit to organize to achieve that purpose, or because the objective cannot reasonably be achieved through individual effort. The tribe’s purpose is to win – to gather stuff for the tribe and to defeat other tribes. A man can be brought into a tribe, leave a tribe, get kicked out of a tribe, or form his own tribe. Vanquished tribes are usually dispersed, or currently, surviving members absorbed into other tribes or conscripted into the conquering tribe’s service.

    A woman is part of a herd because she’s a woman. She just IS, so she’s in the herd. Not so for men. A man does not get to be part of a tribe just because he’s a man. To be part of a tribe, that man must bring some value. Most are worker bees, drafthorses and packmules. Some bring money. Others bring goods like food or supplies. Still others bring intelligence and tactical planning.

    If a man ceases to bring value, even through no fault of his own, he gets kicked out of the tribe. Take too long to recover from an injury? Out of the tribe. You can’t pull a wagon anymore? Out. You don’t want to do what others tell you? Out. You f*ck up too many times? Out. Get someone killed or consume too much of the goods? Out. You’re dead weight, you’re of too little value and too great a cost to the tribe, so you’re out. You either go it alone, or you find a tribe that will take you, or you do your best to form another tribe.

  252. thedeti says:

    The tribe’s purpose is to win and to achieve its stated objectives. If the tribe isn’t doing this, then it’s failing and needs to be either defeated or disbanded.

    By contrast, the herd’s purpose is simply to continue to exist with as many members as possible. That’s another key difference. The herd succeeds by merely continuing to exist and by keeping as many individual women “in the fold”. The herd succeeds by keeping its members alive. As such, the herd will never be defeated or disbanded.

  253. New2theManosphere says:

    My gf wants to travel to Ethiopia to pursue her dream. I am letting her go. But we’ll break up when she goes. I would marry her but it shows that she is selfish and want to settle after she’s found herself. By that time I will be long gone.

  254. BradA says:

    JDG,

    Opus is correct in that feminism could not have happened without men

    I wasn’t saying men weren’t involved, just that they were not the driving factor Opus claims. I think some men certainly do use it for their own ends, but women are most of the point, even if it is only 51%.

    Renee,

    I wouldn’t look for men at your job anyway. I suspect the men there are far from what you should aim at anyways. Though it could be your career choice has biased your views. I know my stepmother got heavily biased by her teaching career and such even though she remains a regular church goer long after divorcing my father decades ago for no valid Christian reason.

    What activities do you do outside of your job? That is where you should connect. You will face a challenge though, as you are older. The time to really position yourself is past, but you can only deal with what you have now, as spacetraveller notes.

    I married my wife when she was your age, so it is not impossible. Though you may be headed to be like a friend of my wife’s who did not marry until she was in her 40s. I suspect that was more her responsibility than anyone will acknowledge.

    RPL,

    Why should the children suffer for the mother’s wrongdoings?

    Because that is the only way we will keep more future children from the same suffering. Society is not ready for that message, but it is the reality that will eventually come home to roost.

    Computer clubs. Science fiction conventions. Places that have high ratios of men vs. women.

    Great point! Lots of “geeky places” are full of men who would swarm over an even somewhat attractive woman. You would have to filter for the worst of the blue pillers, but it could certainly work if you could find something you liked to do in that area.

    Renee,

    I am B of A in speech communions and I want a MA theology in leadership. So I guess a want a Godly man who would use for that….

    Ah, we may have found the problem. A Biblical marriage has the wife following the husband, not the other way around. I would almost bet you have filtered out many men along the way because you would have adapted too much to fit their direction. I wanted a wife, not a business partner. A MA in theology has no appeal to that and I would expect to be the head of my own home, not to constantly be corrected (in theology) by my wife.

    Could you handle a man strong enough to handle you?

    thedeti,

    You’ll notice that all women spring to the aid of an injured, alone, hurt, downcast or dejected woman.

    Only in some cases. In others they will pile on and cut her down even more. You ignore the cattiness of many female groups.

  255. BradA says:

    The idea that polygamy will be common is stupid. It never was all that common in the past. A few may have had multiple wives, but most had one, at most. A few women would share (at the same time) a hot man, but that would be more limited than most of you think.

    The problems also multiply, as the Biblical examples illustrate. It is not the Nirvana many think it is, even for those who are willing participants.

    What cannot continue, won’t. We will see a correction, but I have no idea when that will be and it could easily be after I am long gone from this Earth.

  256. deti,

    The “herd” is essentially all women. It’s “Team Woman”. This is because women are collectivist at their core. Women evolved to be this way because women are physically weaker and require protection.

    Yes, YES! To all this. So far with you 100%.

    You’ll notice that all women spring to the aid of an injured, alone, hurt, downcast or dejected woman.

    Now you just lost me. You lost me because what you are saying is invalidated by a woman’s prime directive (a directive not shared by men), that there is essencially NOTHING important enough that is worth her feeling physical or emotional pain, NOTHING that is worth any personal risk of injury to her, NOTHING that is worth losing her life over. NOTHING. That prime directive TRUMPS the secondary directive of always aiding of an injured, alone, hurt, downcast or dejected woman.

    I’ll give you two quick examples as they come ot my mind. You like this one. You ever see cheerleaders get thrown in the air? You ever watch a college football game (not professional as this only happens in college) and see cheerleaders held way up high in the air by young male cheerleaders when they aren’t tossing them? The girls who get “tossed” into the air, the ones held way up high in the air are called “flyers.” These are the most petite, skinny cheerleaders who are brave enough to put their bodies in grave jeapordy. It might interest you to know that their likelihood of injury (real serious bodily injury) is far greater than that of football players. And you know why? Because sometimes the “flyers” are tossed into the air, held way high in the air by girls, not young men. This is a serious, deadly dangerous problem for the “flyer” not because the girl/woman holder her can’t lift her or toss her. She can. It is a problem because quite often the “flyer” gets tossed the wrong way or is held in the air wrong and they are coming down the wrong way, hard and fast. And when that happens, in that split second, if the person holding her is a woman, the prime directive kicks in and the woman tends to RUN AWAY from the falling “flyer.” They run away because there is a tiny chance that the “flyer” landing on them in the wrong way runs the risk of serious injury to them. They would rather the “flyer” get maimed or killed than they get a broken arm or a broken nose trying to break her un-natural fall. A young male cheer leader who held her or tossed her would NEVER allow this to happen, he WOULD let himself get hurt terribly if he could break her fall and reduce risk to the flyer. But this kind of honest discussion about the data regarding the injury to “flyers” is not permitted as to even discuss it runs contrary to the feminist imperative. It identifies the obvious differences between men and women.

    I’ll give you another one. If it is late at night and a woman is driving alone (or perhaps with only her kids in the car) and she sees another woman stranded and alone on the road begging for help, the prime directive kicks in and she will most likely bypass that stranded woman. There is a chance that in her stopping in such a dangerous area something terrible might happen to her (the driver.) I have never in my life driven past a female motorist broken down on the road who was trying to get me to stop to help her. It is worth the risk to my life to help her incase her life is in danger.

    Even devout Christian women will leap to the defense of a slut.

    Of course. There is no real risk to her defending the slut in doing so.

    Even female red pill bloggers will defend women from attack from other women or even from red pill men. This happens because the disadvantaged person is a woman. All women are part of the monolithic “herd”.

    When SSM or Elspeth defend a woman from attack, they tend to do it not because of the “herd” mentality. They tend to do it because they know that you draw more flies with honey than with vinegar. If you want that slut to swallow the red pill and repent, this is best accomplished if the slut doesn’t think that the whole manosphere is out to “get her.”

  257. thedeti says:

    IBB:

    I disagree with much of your fisking of my herd/tribe distinction. But “red pill women” don’t defend a woman because they’re trying to get her to repent. They defend her because they are women in the herd trying to protect another woman in the herd. The herd’s purpose is to protect and preserve — individual members’ protection so they stay alive to reproduce and/or do whatever they wish to do; and preservation of the herd so it can continue to protect individual members.

  258. jbro1922 says:

    Thanks guys for your responses regarding tribe vs. herd.

    For Renee, I would also recommend co-ed sports leagues, even if you’re not real athletic. Techie things are also great. Just being friendly and speaking to people does volumes. At the grocery store, in line at the bank, anywhere. I’m a 31 year old unmarried black woman so I understand where you are coming from. The guys on here offer good advice for the most part. Dalrock has got some great posts about the modern dating scene.

    @New

    I’m sorry you have to break up with your girlfriend. I guess it’s not feasible for you to go with her? If that’s what she wants to do, then I guess that’s it…Hopefully, you will meet someone who is better suited.

  259. But “red pill women” don’t defend a woman because they’re trying to get her to repent. They defend her because they are women in the herd trying to protect another woman in the herd. The herd’s purpose is to protect and preserve — individual members’ protection so they stay alive to reproduce and/or do whatever they wish to do; and preservation of the herd so it can continue to protect individual members.

    Almost. You are right that women “herd” and men “tribe.” That was perfectly described. What you are missing is that a “herd” is made up of animals and a “tribe” is made up of humans. These distinctions define the prime directives of the herd vs the tribe.

    A “herd” mentality differs from a “tribe” in that perservation of the herd so they can stay alive and reproduce and/or whatever they to do is more important than any member of the “herd.” A “herd” of deer are grazing. One deer is shot and wounded. The “herd” NEVER goes to aid the wounded deer. The “herd” RUNS AWAY (like the woman who tossed the cheer leading flyer in my example) so that the “herd” can stay alive and reproduce and/or whatever they to do. A “tribe” will run to protect their fallen and even go after the shooter and kill him.

  260. new anon says:

    BradA says: The idea that polygamy will be common is stupid. It never was all that common in the past.

    The idea that people living together instead of marrying will be common is stupid. It never was all that common in the past.

    More U.S. Couples Living Together Instead of Marrying, CDC Finds

    The idea that out of wedlock births will be common is stupid. It never was all that common in the past.

    41% of all US births were out of wedlock in 2012

    The idea that same sex couples marrying will be common is stupid. It never was all that common in the past.

    132,000 gay couples reported to the census that they were married in 2011 (how many more are there 4 years later?)

    Take your head out of the sand. We live in strange times, and they are getting stranger. Uncommon in the past is no guarantee it won’t become common today.

    And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach. – Isaiah 4:1

    Of course, we’re all to smart and sophisticated to believe any of that Bible prophecy stuff. Right?

  261. Exfernal says:

    @IBB
    This is also a herd in action. Guess who forms the frontlines.

  262. BradA says:

    That is for a brief period of time NA, in both cases. I was going to mention that, but forgot. That will not be the standard, it is abnormal and will only be for a short period.

    Things revert to the mean over the long term.

  263. Lyn87 says:

    Renee Harris,

    I’m not picking on you here – I think your heart’s in the right place, but I have to say this so you can work on improving it. You wrote:

    I work for pubic aid, much of men on welfare I meet are clients or are recipients of services, thus due to my Code of conduct , untouchable. I’m #not# on food stamps. Added: I hate my phone.
    I am mad because I did not ride the carousel and now I am Virgin old maid because I kinda understand God like sexual sin about as much you genlenen like ms Durham.
    But I like blogs like one. My problem is I am the girl with ” inter beauty”. I told told wait he’ll find you. Now I am 28. I not an active feminist read : I bough into the old unmarried maid crap bc I black and have CP .
    I don’t know special olympics had a marriage race.
    once you get the Word and The fact that an osgams is not worth enteral seperstion from God but still be fun to try without have to repent, you became another girl betting a horse half way thrus the race. God told I will get marry but I’m thinking I’m a sarah

    We all make mistakes from time to time (including me), and grammar Nazis are generally not welcome… but honestly, you write like a first grader. In a different post in this thread you wrote this, “I am B of A in speech communions and I want a MA theology in leadership. So I guess a want a Godly man who would use for that….” I take it that you have a B.A. (from a foreign college that doesn’t require any writing in English?), and want an M.A., but just the snippet I italicized has at least nine errors in it. Honestly, if I met an adult who speaks English like you write it I would assume that person has a severe case of Down’s Syndrome, unless he/she had a very thick foreign accent. Having said that, if you think you’re going to get an M.A. from an American university, you’re likely to be disappointed… and quite a bit poorer. Such programs require a LOT of writing, and it has to be done correctly: most faculty will accept a handful of errors in a 25-page paper, but nobody is going to accept scores of errors on every page, nor will they have the patience to help you acquire a skill that you should have mastered by the end of junior high school.

    I tell you this because people will judge your suitability based on your perceived intellect, and most men worth having do not want a wife with the intellectual capacity of a small child… and that’s how you come across. Learn to speak and write like an adult with a B.A., rather than a six-year-old just learning her A-B-C’s.

    Again, I’m not picking on you – I’m trying to offer constructive criticism. I spent more than two decades as a military officer, and if I’m blunt it’s because I don’t want you to feel better… I want you to be better. I’m cutting you some slack because I assume that English is not your first language, but you should know that you are unwittingly putting up a huge barrier when you cannot communicate at an adult level in the language of the country in which you live.

    Now… having written all that, I’ll agree with whoever noted that a Master of Arts in Theology in Leadership is not a selling point for a woman looking for a strong Christian husband. I cannot think of a single reason for a woman – especially one looking to marry – to pursue such a degree. I’m willing to be wrong on that, but that would be a red flag for me.

  264. JDG says:

    My gf wants to travel to Ethiopia to pursue her dream. I am letting her go. But we’ll break up when she goes. I would marry her but it shows that she is selfish and want to settle after she’s found herself. By that time I will be long gone.

    Wise decision IMO.

  265. Are there efforts underway to start some? Why or why not?

    No. To Deti’s good reasons, I’d add: all “lets get together to help each other” efforts are feminine in nature, because they’re based on making you feel better about your problem, not solving the problem. Support groups rarely offer actual solutions; they’re mostly about listening to your problem and comforting you. Women enjoy that; men don’t. A man may get some small cathartic benefit from telling others his problems and getting sympathy, but when he wakes up the next day and the problem still exists, he may be more frustrated than he was originally.

    When a man has a personal problem, he wants to solve it, and for that he generally needs to discover the solution himself or get it from the guidance of one other man whom he respects. That’s usually a good father or a close friend, preferably over several beers. Beyond that, guidance from men is generally unspoken, consisting of setting and following examples, using jokes where direct advice would be embarrassing, and so on.

    The manosphere contains many solutions to different problems, but not in a self-help group format. The information is there, like a new frontier; it’s your job as a man to explore it and discover the gold. A few guys have tried starting services where guys can contact them for help, but again, it’s done in a direct man-to-man way, not as a group effort (and I don’t know if any of those survived).

    So, basically: men don’t work that way, and won’t. Men will change individually, through individual discovery of the truth or one-on-one transmission of it. Nothing organized, nothing that can be guided or accelerated from the outside.

  266. Spacetraveller says:

    Lyn87,

    I could be wrong but I think the ‘CP’ Renee Harris refers to in her comment is cerebral palsy. Hence my commiserating with her about her disability. At least this is the assumption I made. Correct me if I am wrong, Renee.

  267. Renee Harris says:

    Ah, we may have found the problem. A Biblical marriage has the wife following the husband, not the other way around.
    Umm dud …. I want to following my husband. I just like theology
    ” I would almost bet you have filtered out many men along the way because you would have adapted too much to fit their direction.” I don’t get this, is because I think a should know god is leading him, God not gonna tell me his going . I founding him ,not leading him.
    ” I wanted a wife, not a business partner.” I want to Stewart my husbands home in such a way that he can take important stuff: what God has ever him you do.
    Brad you don’t cook the food or clean the house. She does. You lead. She take care of the Loire stuffs, knowing it your home not her.
    A MA in theology has no appeal to that and I would expect to be the head of my own home, not to constantly be corrected (in theology) by my wife.

  268. Renee Harris says:

    At lyn87
    You are right. I do not write or spell as though I have a bachelors degree in speech communication. I did receive my bachelors degree from an American university: not Yale🙂 Advancements in adaptive technology for students with developmental and learning disabilities compounded with the lackluster commitment to excellence in the American higher educational system is the reason why I have my bachelors.
    The notable improvement evident in this comment is due to the fact I dictated it using an app on my phone. This is how I wrote most of my papers. I appreciate your honesty.
    Naturally being a child of the late 80s I thought that I would use this technology to get my masters’ degree. Due to the fact that I had a difficult time learning the rules if written american English , I do not know any other languages.
    I’ve learned not to be insulted when I hear or or read comments like this after all it is the truth.
    Nevertheless, is always difficult for me to be reminded of my intellectual short comings.

  269. Lyn87 says:

    Renee,

    Like Spacetraveller, I saw your earlier “CP” reference – I didn’t know it denoted Cerebral Palsy, though. That’s a different matter entirely, and certainly would explain your difficulty with written English. There’s no reason to be ashamed about it: it’s not like you had any say in the matter.

    FWIW, I have a few very noticeable quirks myself, and they have caused me no end of grief almost my entire life. I developed what is almost certainly a mild case of Tourette Syndrome around puberty… and nothing turns high school and college age girls on like a scrawny kid with acne and TS. The acne eventually cleared up – the TS didn’t. So I feel your pain – it’s not nearly as bad as CP, but it still sucks and I can relate a bit. Since I know how awkward it is to have someone point it out, I apologize if I caused you any grief: that was not my intent. Also FWIW, I once had a superior tell me that I could overcome it if I just decide to Stop. Doing. That, as if I was choosing to be this way. (He was a bit of a douche-nozzle.)

    Anyway, I’m not sure what your treatment options are, and I’m sure you’ve looked into them, but I’m sure you understand that CS is a tough sell, so doing what you can to mitigate the effects is likely to be worthwhile.

  270. Isa says:

    @Renee Harris

    I feel you. I’m going to assume you live in the US? If so, concentrate on certain ethnicities. I.e. Arab/middle Eastern, African (not African American), and Latino. There’s quite a bit more respect for virgins, as it is frequently viewed as a status symbol (for the man that gets a wife like that, that is). Your typical American or European (not the esteemed Dalrock readers) will frankly not like it so much.

    The advice for looking for geeky men is also good as well. In Uni I was responsible for running the anime room during the table top gaming convention, and can say that every guy that wondered into the room has more than a passing interest (I was spotty and a bit fat, so it wasn’t my physical charms). None were Christian, so I had to pass, but the odds were good even if the goods were odd.

    All the women that I know that did Dungeons and Dragons, Warhammer 40k, larping etc. married someone they met through that. The 20:1 odds really help!

  271. Isa says:

    @Lyn87
    Lovely superior you had. A friend in high school with very severe tourettes was always punished by the teaches for disturbing class. Especially if he happened to have a seizure as well. I’ve been lucky with work, but at hospitals? Not so much. I once woke up triaged with all my belongings confiscated. No one believed I had insurance and didn’t take illegal drugs, so after failing all the neurological tests and misreporting that I took gabapentin and prozac, they decided I was off my meds and put me the the psyche ward for 12 hours. Fun times, fun times.

  272. Lyn87 says:

    Isa,

    Wow, that blows. Mine isn’t nearly that bad – nothing that prevented me from flying military aircraft in my younger days, in fact. Then again, I’ve never been diagnosed, otherwise I might never have made it into the military at all.

  273. KP says:

    Rhoubbhe,

    I’ve actually spent years living in polygamous, non-hunter-gather* societies — what about you?

    Otherwise your silly taunt is meaningless.
    ———————————–
    *And that’s the whole point–not that I’m recommending such arrangements, far from it. But your dismissing a cartoon version of the practice does little to recommend your critique.

  274. Kyo says:

    From the linked article, about nuns:

    Each of them is ostensibly single (technically married to Jesus, but he isn’t around all that much).

    “Not around all that much”? And here I was thinking that Jesus was always with them; indeed, that that was the reason to pursue a religious life.

  275. Kyo, yeah, that’s true for the nuns. But if you’re a narcissistic woman-child, God’s love just doesn’t give you the constant affirmation and tingles that you require.

    One thing that’s clear from these articles by women who fear that they delayed marriage just a bit too long is that, while they officially scoffed at marriage when they were younger, they also built it up in their minds as something that would be a dazzling adventure someday. She expects to find a husband who will be out there slaying dragons, but also “around” making her feel good about herself all the time. A guy who’s independent and a leader of men, yet hanging on her every word.

    It’s no wonder she just can’t seem to find him.

  276. Isa,

    In Uni I was responsible for running the anime room during the table top gaming convention, and can say that every guy that wondered into the room has more than a passing interest (I was spotty and a bit fat, so it wasn’t my physical charms).

    I would wander into that room at gaming conventions when they played the Space Battleship Yamato/Starblazers videos or the Gatchiman/Battle of the Planets/G-Force stuff. I had no interest in Arika. Robotech, or the other mundane crap.

    All the women that I know that did Dungeons and Dragons, Warhammer 40k, larping etc.

    My sister played in the “Vampire” L-A-R-P at every convention she attended. She’d stay up all night with the lot of them, wander the whole “floor of rooms” the convention center gave them. Not my cup of tea. I spent my time at 1830/1856, Titan, Star Fleet Battles, and A&A. I actually won the A&A championship two years in a row at the Total Confusion convention in Massachusetts (typically held in late January and early February.)

  277. Dalrock says:

    @Cail Corishev

    One thing that’s clear from these articles by women who fear that they delayed marriage just a bit too long is that, while they officially scoffed at marriage when they were younger, they also built it up in their minds as something that would be a dazzling adventure someday.

    Yes. Their expectations have increased at the same rate their options have declined. Their younger nonchalance was based not on not caring whether they married or not, but their certainty that a husband would be there for the taking, whenever they want.

    This is why we hear such an enormous racket from such a small group of women. It would be easy to assume (if we didn’t have the data) that we had large numbers of 30 something white women who couldn’t find a husband. The reality is women like Piazza are fairly rare. 74% of her peers have already married. But when she decided it was safe to put off marriage 15 years ago, a much larger percentage (82%) of 30-34 year old white women had married.

    Edit: I should add that chances are still fairly good that any given 34 year old never married white woman will marry in the next 5 years. Only 16% of 35-39 year old white women have never married. This of course means there is a great deal of settling going on, as inflated dreams collide with a depreciated MMV.

  278. new anon says:

    BradA says:

    That is for a brief period of time NA, in both cases. I was going to mention that, but forgot. That will not be the standard, it is abnormal and will only be for a short period.

    Things revert to the mean over the long term.

    What do you mean by “a short period”?

    Feminism has only been around a “brief” time–60 years and I expect it to be around for a brief time longer–at least another 60 years.

    Even if you assume that eventually things will return to normal, we’re talking several generations: 40, 60, 80 or more years. In the big picture, that is a short period, but it is a period of time longer than our, our children’s, and even our grand children’s lifetimes.

  279. thedeti says:

    Cail Corishev: “while they officially scoffed at marriage when they were younger”

    Dalrock: “Their expectations have increased at the same rate their options have declined. Their younger nonchalance was based not on not caring whether they married or not, but their certainty that a husband would be there for the taking, whenever they want.”

    This was one of the tougher things for me to accept: It really is true that young women want the sex. More to the point they want the attention and validation their high SMVs give them. By their conduct, they are literally screaming from the rooftops that they do not want to marry, not yet, not until they’ve had their fun.

    And yet, women are still out there saying that they have always wanted to marry. Even in the manosphere, people offer the most transparently ridiculous femsplanations trying to convince us that women who are out there sleeping with the most attractive men they can find are doing so because they just want to find an attractive man who will marry them.

    “Oh, they always just wanted to get married.”

    “They are doing it because they have hope. They hope that that attractive man will ask her hand in marriage.”

    For me to believe that, I have to accept a woman is incapable of learning from her errors. How often does she have to get pumped and dumped before she figures out that that strategy isn’t working? How many times does she have to get blackout drunk and go home with players before she figures out that these attractive men she likes to have sex with are never, ever going to marry her? How many?

    It’s just not true, and the sooner that men accept this, the better. Most attractive women – including Christian women – are having sex because they like the sex and the like the power, and they can exercise that power with impunity and without adverse consequence. A good number of them are having sex with a series of attractive men because they like the power it gives them. They don’t hope these men will marry them; they want the attention and validation, the bragging rights, the free stuff, the fun experience. A distant afterthought is the longshot odds that maybe one of these attractive men will fall at her feet and pledge undying love.

  280. Dalrock says:

    @theDeti

    It’s just not true, and the sooner that men accept this, the better. Most attractive women – including Christian women – are having sex because they like the sex and the like the power, and they can exercise that power with impunity and without adverse consequence. A good number of them are having sex with a series of attractive men because they like the power it gives them. They don’t hope these men will marry them; they want the attention and validation, the bragging rights, the free stuff, the fun experience. A distant afterthought is the longshot odds that maybe one of these attractive men will fall at her feet and pledge undying love.

    You are mixing two different things. You are right, when they are young and having sex, they do it for the power and enjoyment of it. They aren’t hoping these men will propose. But they also have convinced themselves that they will always be highly sought after, and that once they are ready to marry they can simply reach out and grab the perfect husband. They also rationalize in their minds that their years of riding the carousel are a form of preparation which will help them when they want to find a husband, as well as when they are married. They tell themselves that they are giving their future husband a gift by being slutty. Yes, it is irrational. But this doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

  281. Dalrock,

    …they also have convinced themselves that they will always be highly sought after, and that once they are ready to marry they can simply reach out and grab the perfect husband. They also rationalize in their minds that their years of riding the carousel are a form of preparation which will help them when they want to find a husband, as well as when they are married.

    Ummm, I don’t think that the women riding the cock carousel see that riding it is in anyway a form or preparation for the perfect husband when they are ready. Instead, they just don’t see it as any detracting quality. Women (be they Christian or not) do not look at virginity as a gift that they have to preserve to give only to their husbands. That type of thinking (to them, and the majority of the world) is antiquated.

    That being said, let me say this. For the men that DO regard women who ride the cock carousel in a negative light, they don’t give a damn what he thinks. If he writes her off as marriage material because her N is greater than 0 (or 1, or 10, or whatever the cut-off is) in her mind that is only because HE is insecure. HE has no self-esteem. HE feels in adequate. And these things are (to her) major turn-offs. She won’t be attracted to him and she wont want to marry him anyway so… for her riding the cock carousel with regards to immature virgin-boy writing her off, nothing was lost. Immature virgin-boy can’t get laid because no woman will have him so he is not good enough to be her husband anyway, not now, not ever.

    At least that is how I look at it.

  282. JDG says:

    Feminism has only been around a “brief” time–60 years

    Sorry to quibble, but closer to 165 years IMO.

  283. This was one of the tougher things for me to accept: It really is true that young women want the sex.

    Same here. If you were one of the guys on the outside looking in, it was easy to believe that girls weren’t that interested in sex. After all, they sure weren’t interested in sex with you. Once you get behind the curtain, you realize they’re far more willing and into it than you could have imagined. Their urges and reasons for wanting it are different from men’s — it’s often more of a means to an end for them, a way to gain status or emotional commitment, while for men it’s mostly about the sex itself — but yes, they do want it.

    “Oh, they always just wanted to get married.”

    Yeah, that’s after-the-fact rationalization. It’s definitely part of the script, but only in its place, which currently lies at about age 30. Before then, she always wanted to get married someday, like a 25-year-old guy might say he wants to retire and spend his days fishing — someday. But the 35-year-old woman who can’t find a decent husband and claims she always wanted to get married, as if she’s been trying for 17 years, is simply lying. Probably to herself most of all. If she’d really wanted to be married all those years, she would be. Odds are she started wanting to be married at about 29, and has now convinced herself that she always did, because that way she can claim that A) it’s not her fault, and B) she didn’t waste a decade on purpose.

    When she’s 20, she thinks the next decade is going to be filled with dashing men, important career achievements, and exciting travel; so when she gets to the marriage part of the script, she’ll have a great resume to explain what she’s been up to. When the reality turns out to have been 10+ years of pointless clerical work, more cheap wine coolers than she can count, and “dating” guys she now calls losers, she’s not so excited about claiming that that was her plan all along.

  284. BradA says:

    Feminism was around even longer than that JDG and NA, though that is a good example that is longer than 60 years. Try the Garden of Eden. The pull is always there, how it is or isn’t restrained varies.

    Polygamy has been around almost as long (a few generations from Adam and Eve is the first discussion of it), but it is not practical for all but a few men, for logistical reasons if nothing else. I have read that most men still only had one wife even when polygamy was more common in leaders. Potiphar only had single wife, for example, even though Pharoah likely had a harem. Joseph was only given one wife.

    A stable society cannot survive for long under widespread polygamy. Those who do the work will not work really hard to support the “alphas” with lots of wives any more than they will continue to do so under the current arrangement (for long at least).

  285. BradA says:

    Lyn87,

    I have been told that the Army does not allow anyone with Asperger’s syndrome, yet I KNOW my youngest son had it, denied though, and served well until he had an injury that prevented further service.

    Some “disabilities” can end up being a help. It is quite likely Bill Gates has Asperger’s as well (a mild form of autism) and it is what allowed his tremendous focus, as is true with many in the tech field.

    Renee,

    You do face some challenges based on what is written, but I would add to the recommendations to be involved where you can skew the results in your favor. My wife was your age when we wed and we have made it almost 27 years now. She had to put up with many of my quirks and I have had to do the same for hers.

    You don’t face an easy challenge, but neither does anyone in the modern marriage meat grinder.

  286. thedeti says:

    Dalrock:

    Agreed with most of what you said, but I’m not sure that I’ve mixed up two different things. Maybe you can straighten me out on that.

    I am not sure that carousel riders PRESENTLY rationalize their sexual experience as helping them find husbands or as gifts to the men they eventually marry. It’s a rationalization to be sure, but it’s a backwards, retro-rationalization, utilized to femsplain her past sordid conduct. It’s not something she presently considers as she goes home with Alpha McGorgeous. “I’m doing this to burnish my future wife cred and get some on the job experience with different positions. This will stand my future husband in good stead.” No, that’s not what she’s thinking. She’s thinking about the fun, the validation of her sexual worth , the ego boost, the bragging rights to her girlfriends, and hoping the guy doesn’t have a pencil dick.

    My reference to “It’s just not true” was a disagreement with the femsplanation that they are having sex with sexy men because [ cue plaintive wail] “I just want to get married” or “I was always looking for a husband all along” or “All I wanted to do was find a man to love me for me”. The claim is that the carousel riding is auditioning husbands.

    Bullshit. They’re NOT looking for husbands; they’re looking for sex with the most attractive men they can find. If they really wanted husbands, they could have husbands. But they didn’t want men who would marry them, mostly because that would mean ceding their sexual power to men they deem unworthy. Hell, in the age of Sheryl Sandberg, there isn’t even any effort to conceal that fun sex for a decade or so is the clear goal.

  287. JDG says:

    Feminism was around even longer than that JDG and NA, though that is a good example that is longer than 60 years. Try the Garden of Eden.

    IMO you are confusing the FI with feminism, which arguably started in the mid 1800s. The FI has been with us since the fall in the Garden of Eden.

  288. deti,

    My reference to “It’s just not true” was a disagreement with the femsplanation that they are having sex with sexy men because [ cue plaintive wail] “I just want to get married” or “I was always looking for a husband all along” or “All I wanted to do was find a man to love me for me”. The claim is that the carousel riding is auditioning husbands.

    Bullshit. They’re NOT looking for husbands; they’re looking for sex with the most attractive men they can find. If they really wanted husbands, they could have husbands.

    They are looking for husbands. With just one exception, every woman I had s-x with, wanted me (at one point or another) to be her husband. I could have married… any of them.

  289. Kevin says:

    The good Christian virgin woman may need everything to be “exactly right with perfect man, place, and time” but the “Christian” female sluts have the exact same approach and desire despite their MMV is in the toilet. They just don’t believe it since they are born again virgins (I have changed, last month was forever ago…). Everyone wants an alpha and the dream life.

    As far as no good women, I am not so sure. Society is rotten so good women are corrupted and can be made bad for marriage, but if we all want to marry Anna Kendrick. Yah – you are screwed. But if women have to accept God, reality, and marry a man who is not George Clooney then most men need to accept they will marry women that are not 8, 9, or 10s. If you prioritize virginity and Christian values than they should be more important than looks and there are alot of good, but kind of average looking, women who would love to be married. If you want to be happy all your life, marry an ugly wife – its not a bad idea. Sure, if good men want to have a bunch of sex than marry a virgin who is a 10 and perfectly amazing and devoted to God then you better be a rapper or pro athlete. Otherwise – that is crazy. NO strategy is perfect, the pressures of society and the power of the state to blow up the marriage always exist, but if men lower some less important standards I think they will find lots of women out there who would be incredibly happy to marry and be devoted.

  290. thedeti says:

    “They are looking for husbands.”

    No, they aren’t. If they were looking to get married they could accomplish that with one sentence, said to every player and cad in the vicinity:

    ‘No sex until I get a ring and a date.’

    And then another sentence to the rest of the men:

    ‘I am looking for a husband and to get married as soon as possible.’

    That’s it. That’s all they have to do.

    Watch the cads and players and PUA vanish; watch the marriageable men line up for their turn.

    Now, the quality and caliber of men who will be willing to marry them will be more along the lines of their rough SMP counterparts. But they can get married. If what they want is marriage, they can get that any time they want. Might not be to the best man, or the man they can get for sex. But they can get married just the same.

    With just one exception, every woman I had s-x with, wanted me (at one point or another) to be her husband. I could have married… any of them.”

    That might be your experience, but it sure wasn’t mine. Every woman I had sex with except two were in it for the fun, not for marriage.

  291. Kevin,

    But if women have to accept God, reality, and marry a man who is not George Clooney then most men need to accept they will marry women that are not 8, 9, or 10s.

    No.

    I wasn’t willing to marry any woman unless she was a 10. I found my 10 (took 10 years of looking) and married her. And because I refused to settle, I don’t blame any man if he does the same.

  292. Dalrock please adjust the html above, thank you.

  293. Gunner Q says:

    Kevin @ 1:27 pm:
    “But if women have to accept God, reality, and marry a man who is not George Clooney then most men need to accept they will marry women that are not 8, 9, or 10s.”

    Most men will eagerly choose a 5 if she openly appreciates him. It’s women who are hung up on physical perfection. We explain to women how a respectful attitude is essential and the Bible explicitly says a woman should care more about her behavior than her appearance, but instead they insist upon dressing like a whore, snarking at us and wondering why it doesn’t work even as we repeat ourselves at higher volume.

    I can buy my girl a boob job. I can’t buy her a good attitude. Why is this hard?

  294. Deti,

    The proof is in what a 25-year-old carousel rider says if someone asks why she’s banging the guy(s) she’s currently banging. Now, if the person asking is her old-fashioned grandmother, she may claim that she really really just wants to get married, and she doesn’t understand why these guys keep pumping and dumping her.

    But if it’s a friend asking, or especially if it’s her current boyfriend asking, then (in my experience), she will say things like:

    “I do want to get married someday, but I’m not ready yet.”
    An alternate to that one: “I’m not mature enough for marriage yet; that wouldn’t be fair to him.”
    “I need to finish school/career/travel/book/whatever first.”
    “I’m not ready to get serious yet; can’t we just take our time and get to know each other better?” (The guy is especially likely to get this one.)
    “I’m not sure he’s the one, and it’s such a big decision.” (Doesn’t matter if they’ve been living together for years, she’s still unsure.)
    “Marriage is too important to rush into.” (Again, even after years of shacking up.)
    “It just doesn’t seem right yet. I’ll know when it’s right.” “How?” “I’ll just know.”
    “If it’s meant to be, it’ll happen.” (As if it can happen without her consent.)
    “I don’t have time to plan a wedding right now.”

    All these are just fancy ways of saying, “I don’t want to get married yet, and certainly not to any of the guys I’ve banged so far.” If you ask her how a guy can be bang-worthy and not marriage-worthy, she’ll probably just look at you confused, because she doesn’t understand what you’re getting at — the two have nothing to do with each other as far as she knows.

  295. No, they aren’t. If they were looking to get married they could accomplish that with one sentence, said to every player and cad in the vicinity:

    ‘No sex until I get a ring and a date.’

    SSM and Elspeth have already been over this. They both had to have s-x with their husbands before their h-sbands would marry them. Any woman who says this gets no dates from anyone, least of all the guys she would be willing to marry. What you are saying shows integrity. Integrity here has a price. The price is, no men and a life of singleness.

    I actually knew a woman who said this to me (well pretty much to all men she met.) I met her on plane ride to Atlanta when I was 25. The two of us were just yakking and she told me that she was Christian and I asked for her number and she said she was hoping I was to say that. And then we both did Bible study together and I found out that she was pushing 40. She was never married, no kids, pushing 40, and virgin. Outside of Christ, we had nothing to talk about.

    Well…. I continued to “see her” (see her = we meet for Bible Study, go to Super Bowl parties and company Christmas parties, a Christian fellowship ski-trip, and stuff like that) but really all I saw in her was… a friend. And then not even a good friend. And then not even a friend because I learned (at 26) that men and women can’t be friends. There is just a whole bunch of stuff that she and I couldn’t do as friends.

    Anyway, I eventually had a real gf and I told her that we really couldn’t see each other anymore (not that we were seeing each other to begin with.) There was really no point. It was then that she told me over the phone that she was “at peace” with the fact that she was likely to spend the rest of her life a single woman. But why tell me that on the phone? Why tell me that then? Me thinks she doth protest too much. I am SURE she wanted to be married (and wanted that for a long time) wasn’t even remotely “at peace” with her marital status. But that is the COST that a remark like yours is likely to have on a woman today.

    And then another sentence to the rest of the men:

    ‘I am looking for a husband and to get married as soon as possible.’

    That’s it. That’s all they have to do.

    She doesn’t want to marry (or even date) any of the “rest of the men.” The rest of the men are short/fat/ugly/stupid/uneducated/don’t-make-enough-money/don’t ring her chimes. That is why they are “…the rest of the men.”

    Watch the cads and players and PUA vanish; watch the marriageable men line up for their turn.

    You don’t know how women think, do you?

    To a woman, most women (the ole NAWALT dislaimer applies) only the cads, players, and PUAs are marriagable. The men who aren’t cads, players, or PUAs aren’t cads, players, or PUAs because they are AMOGs with integrity. Instead, they aren’t cads, players, and PUAs because they are too short/fat/ugly/stupid/uneducated/don’t-make-enough-money to be cads, players, or PUAs. There is no “third category of men” who are sincere, wholesome, Christian, virgin, attractive, and marrigable. There just isn’t (not until she is in her late 30s to early 40s at least when there is only one category of men, single and not into guys which means, pretty much anything will do.)

  296. Isa says:

    @innocentbystanderboston
    I personally didn’t play very much, Killer Bunnies and the Quest for the Magic Carrot, Settlers of Catan, and of course Magic when I was younger. The vampire LARP is very popular, although I don’t really understand why. Ours always took place in the library which had a very strange layout and 5 levels. I assume they mostly would try to get to the 4th floor where you could open the windows to get on the roof if you were being hunted. At least, you would if you were smart🙂

  297. Dalrock says:

    @thedeti

    I am not sure that carousel riders PRESENTLY rationalize their sexual experience as helping them find husbands or as gifts to the men they eventually marry. It’s a rationalization to be sure, but it’s a backwards, retro-rationalization, utilized to femsplain her past sordid conduct. It’s not something she presently considers as she goes home with Alpha McGorgeous. “I’m doing this to burnish my future wife cred and get some on the job experience with different positions. This will stand my future husband in good stead.” No, that’s not what she’s thinking. She’s thinking about the fun, the validation of her sexual worth , the ego boost, the bragging rights to her girlfriends, and hoping the guy doesn’t have a pencil dick.

    These two things aren’t mutually exclusive. In fact, the rationalization that she is getting “better” for her future husband frees her to focus on the fun. You don’t just hear this kind of rationalization after the fact, but you hear it from younger women as well. The book “Last one down the Aisle Wins” is one example. It tells young women exactly what they want, what they are already thinking: “having a fabulous single life leads to an even better marriage later.” You even see this indirectly with “A”, the slut from the NYT piece who talked about insisting that her drunken hookups only occur in the guy’s place so she doesn’t have to deal with the wet spot:

    ‘I’ve always heard this phrase, ‘Oh, marriage is great, or relationships are great — you get to go on this journey of change together,’ ” she said. “That sounds terrible.

    “I don’t want to go through those changes with you. I want you to have changed and become enough of your own person so that when you meet me, we can have a stable life and be very happy.”

    In this case she is talking about her future husband, but she clearly sees this as applying to herself as well. He’ll be lucky that she has so much “life experience”.

    The thing is, very few sluts accept their ride on the carousel for being slutty. They rationalize it as “hard knocks” they have to absorb in order to eventually find Mr. Right and marry (and stay married). If they have to marry and divorce a few men along the way to find the right one, the same rationale applies. These women don’t see themselves as incapable of commitment, they see themselves as heroically searching through a sea of unworthy men looking for the one worthy one. This doesn’t change the point that you make, that when they are young and in the SMP power position the last thing these women want is a marriage proposal, let alone a “serious” boyfriend.

  298. Isa says:

    @Lyn87
    That was actually the nice bit compared to the collection calls 5 months later for a 5 figure bill I never got, which was completely wrong as… it wasn’t filed with insurance. But being a very very organized engineer who had all the documentation, I sent lots of certified letters and faxes and called every 2 to 3 days until I was told not to call them anymore rather than the other way around. I’m lucky that everything is generally very well controlled by medication that isn’t that expensive.

    In any case it’s quite an amusing story in hindsight🙂 Silver linings in hurricanes and all that🙂

  299. thedeti says:

    IBB:

    SSM and Elspeth are special cases, almost sui generis. They are female SMP lottery winners.

    SSM and Elspeth actually accomplished what almost every other premarital nonvirgin claims to want. They were very, very lucky. They locked down sexually attractive men for marriage. They won the jackpot. They married alpha providers.

    So, to hold SSM and Elspeth out as examples of something seems far fetched. Most women will never, ever be able to do what they did.

  300. SSM and Elspeth are special cases, almost sui generis. They are female SMP lottery winners.

    SSM and Elspeth actually accomplished what almost every other premarital nonvirgin claims to want. They were very, very lucky. They locked down sexually attractive men for marriage. They won the jackpot. They married alpha providers.

    So, to hold SSM and Elspeth out as examples of something seems far fetched. Most women will never, ever be able to do what they did.

    Yes. Right. Agreed. They did win the SMP lottery.

    Sadly, for women today, in order to win an SMP lottery, you have to actually buy a lottery ticket. If women go your way, they can’t win because they aren’t playing.

  301. thedeti says:

    “These women don’t see themselves as incapable of commitment, they see themselves as heroically searching through a sea of unworthy men looking for the one worthy one.”

    The “heroic searching” part might be more believable if it didn’t always seem to involve drinking to oblivion, hooking up at parties with guys they barely know, and cab rides of shame in which she carries her heels in one hand and her panties in her purse with the other the next morning.

  302. thedeti says:

    Cail:

    “ All these are just fancy ways of saying, “I don’t want to get married yet, and certainly not to any of the guys I’ve banged so far.” If you ask her how a guy can be bang-worthy and not marriage-worthy, she’ll probably just look at you confused, because she doesn’t understand what you’re getting at — the two have nothing to do with each other as far as she knows.”

    Thanks Cail. I think you put into fewer words much of what I was trying to say. But to add to it, I’ve never ever heard any woman say while they were riding the carousel that they were hoping that this guy was The One, that she wants “something more”; that she wants him to be husband material.

    It’s only later, when she looks back on the wreckage she’s left behind, that she hamsterizes it and says “but I did it because I just wanted to be a wife and mother. I always wanted to get married.”

    I guess now that I write it, it makes more sense to add “someday” to the end of the statements: “I did it because I just wanted to be a wife and mother someday. I always wanted to get married someday.” Because I firmly believe that any woman attractive enough to ride the carousel is attractive enough to get married right then – if that’s what she REALLY wants. The point of course is that they don’t want marriage, at least not then.

  303. Kevin says:

    @IBB
    Good for you. However, there are many men that complain and wail about how they can never be married. They might have more options if they wanted to be married and be fathers by lowering their standards in some ways as I suggest. As we all learn in economics everyone settles because no one has perfect information.

    @Gunner
    Clearly it goes both ways. Men care about the way their potential wife looks. I don’t think this requires any other commentary. My point was your point – choose the good attitude with slightly less good looks. Men can get distracted by prioritizing looks just like women can get distracted prioritizing the need for a bad boy. Both would be better off restraining and redirecting these impulses.

  304. Isa,

    @innocentbystanderboston, I personally didn’t play very much, Killer Bunnies and the Quest for the Magic Carrot, Settlers of Catan

    I liked Settler. I absolutely “cranked” the “longest road” aspect, locked in those two measly victory points each time I played. But too much of that game is based on randomness. If I am looking for people to roll 6s or 8s, I’ll go to a casino and play craps.

    and of course Magic when I was younger.

    Buddy of mine had a killer-blue-deck. The old “fill-your-opponent’s-hand-with-cards-and-put-out-a-bunch-of-black-vices-to-end-his-game” kind of deck. He put all these worthless “unsummon” cards with howling mine artifacts and the braingeyzer and the recall and all the very expensive power-9 blue cards. And NO critters. Just fill your opponent’s hand with cards and watch them bleed on the vice. Very effective.

    I went the other way, speed green, empty my hand. I played all these 1-1 elves and anything and everything that generated green mana and just laid them down. I actually had 4 Forces-of-Nature (8-8 trample) that required massive green mana upkeep so I would summon one of them and end my opponent’s game.

    I actually won a big tourney with a deck full of red and blue “commons.” I had no MOXes at all, just commons (with 4 rare land cards), lots of little red critters, 4 blue TIMs (for direct damage), 4 Counter spells, 4 lightning bolts, and 4 Keldon Warlords. It was great. I played with very little mana (just 12 land cards in a 60 card deck) and gambled with 4 volcanic islands and weenies. If I got just one Keldon Warlord into play, he would come in as a 9-9/10-10 or whatever and I would TIM any small blockers and just have them walk right through my oppenent. The deck was vulnerable to black decks with pestilence or a black deck with 4 Terror cards, otherwise, it was a winner.

  305. The “heroic searching” part might be more believable if it didn’t always seem to involve drinking to oblivion, hooking up at parties with guys they barely know, and cab rides of shame in which she carries her heels in one hand and her panties in her purse with the other the next morning.

    Right, she’s not really searching yet; but that’s what she tells herself, because otherwise she’s just a slut. It doesn’t have to make sense.

    So she can push away multiple guys who got “clingy” (after sleeping with them for a while or not) with the “You’re a great guy and I hope we’re friends forever, but we’re just not right for each other”; sleep with numerous other guys for the experience; and string sexual relationships out for years while avoiding the topic of marriage and turning up her nose at it if the man brings it up — and tell herself she’s been searching all that time and has just had really bad luck. She’s a Good Girl, really!

    And her dad, her pastor, her orbiters, and any other white knights in the vicinity will probably believe her.

  306. I’ve never ever heard any woman say while they were riding the carousel that they were hoping that this guy was The One, that she wants “something more”; that she wants him to be husband material.

    Great point. I have heard women say that, and you know what happened? They got married. If not to that guy, because he hit the road when she started pressing, then to someone else, but it didn’t take all that long.

    There are men who don’t want to get married, of course. But they aren’t that hard to identify, so a woman who keeps winding up with them is doing it because she wants to. The typical man, whether or not he’s particularly anxious to marry, will marry a woman if she wants it, as long as he’s happy enough with her that he’s not already thinking of leaving. In other words, if he’s happy with his woman right now and doesn’t see any big danger signs on the horizon, and it’s either marry her to keep the status quo or watch her walk away, he’ll usually marry her.

    That means an anti-marriage woman doesn’t have to turn down a lot of proposals. Mainly she just has to fail to bring it up herself, avoid the Nice Guys with wedding bells in their eyes, and sprinkle her conversation with hints about how she has Big Things she wants to do with her life before she settles down. The man she’s banging will take the hint and keep drinking the free milk. Then a decade later she has deniability, because no one ever proposed to her, so how was she supposed to marry?

  307. new anon says:

    @Brad A,

    You completely missed my point.

    I don’t disagree that polygamy isn’t workable for a society in the long run, but you seem to latch onto the idea that it will be tried and then 2, 3, or 4 YEARS later it will be abandoned.

    The more likely scenario is it will be tried, and then 2, 3, or 4 GENERATIONS (40-80 years) later it will be abandoned.

    A lot of damage can occur during that time frame. What society will look like on the other end of that 40-80 year time period is anyone’s guess.

  308. JDG says:

    If you prioritize virginity and Christian values than they should be more important than looks…
    – agree

    and there are alot of good, but kind of average looking, women who would love to be married.
    – disagree

  309. JDG says:

    Kevin says:
    January 16, 2015 at 2:47 pm

    If you think that less attractive western women are more virtuous, you have seriously deluded yourself.

  310. thedeti says:

    “I have heard women say [they want “something more”], and you know what happened? They got married. If not to that guy, because he hit the road when she started pressing, then to someone else, but it didn’t take all that long.”

    Yep. If a woman wants more from her hookup, fling or BF, all she has to do is ASK FOR IT. All she has to do is say “where is this going?” and she will get her answer very very quickly. One would think a woman would figure out to ASK for what she wanted, maybe after the first couple of failures. Or after five. Or even after 10.

    But in keeping with “watch what she does, don’t listen to what she says”, I try to think back not only to what these women said, but also what they in fact did.

    I saw these women not actually doing anything to indicate they wanted more, either. I saw them continue to hook up. I saw them continue to date players and cads they always complained about. I saw them continue to ignore, insult and denigrate the so-called “good men” they continually said they wanted.

    I didn’t see them do things like, uh, you know, NOT HOOK UP with the players. I didn’t see them stop the partying, stop the hooking up, or break up with men who didn’t want to marry them. I didn’t see them seek out marriage minded men, or even appear to express interest in marriage minded men.
    ___________

    “There are men who don’t want to get married, of course. But they aren’t that hard to identify, so a woman who keeps winding up with them is doing it because she wants to. “

    Yeah. But then you hear the refrain: “I never got married to any guys because, well, none of them ever asked me. The players and thugs and dickbags are the only ones who ever asked me out, so… whaddya want me to do?”

  311. Gunner Q says:

    “There is no “third category of men” who are sincere, wholesome, Christian, virgin, attractive, and marrigable.”

    IBB, Dalrock’s blog is probably the worst place on the Internet to claim that. Don’t pretend we don’t exist.

    When the time comes, I hope some fat, bald battle-axe tweets “where are all the good men?” half a second before the Rapture.

  312. There is no “third category of men” who are sincere, wholesome, Christian, virgin, attractive, and marrigable.

    IBB, Dalrock’s blog is probably the worst place on the Internet to claim that. Don’t pretend we don’t exist.

    Yes Gunner, you do exist. You just don’t exist… to her. Even Dalrock would make that claim.

    When the time comes, I hope some fat, bald battle-axe tweets “where are all the good men?” half a second before the Rapture.

    Don’t you mean, half a second after?

  313. BradA says:

    JDG,

    IMO you are confusing the FI with feminism, which arguably started in the mid 1800s. The FI has been with us since the fall in the Garden of Eden.

    I would tend to argue that modern feminism is just an outgrowth of FI in the modern prosperous age. First world problems using the FI.

    Kevin,

    If you want to be happy all your life, marry an ugly wife – its not a bad idea.

    I believe ugly wives divorce a fair bit as well. Someone had a post about the failure of “marrying down” as a solution to the problem.

    I think they will find lots of women out there who would be incredibly happy to marry and be devoted.

    Not necessarily. Many of those have an over-inflated view of their value and I do not believe gratefulness is high on anyone’s list today, including those who got a “good deal” in the marriage market.

    IBB,

    The price is, no men and a life of singleness.

    BS. It is certainly more difficult, but that is not an absolute.

    I also am quite skeptical of your “I married a 10” line. As the Internet saying goes, “pictures or it isn’t true.”

    She may have seemed a 10 to you, but perfection is very rare. Though you do come across as a special snowflake many times.

    You also seem to not know Settlers well, if you only pursued a single strategy. It is all about adapting to what happens, not a fixed end goal. Though it is a “baby game” in the genre. I own about every version that has come out, but I play others far more often. Much more challenging too, though I am almost always up for a Settlers game as well.

    New anon,

    I don’t disagree that polygamy isn’t workable for a society in the long run, but you seem to latch onto the idea that it will be tried and then 2, 3, or 4 YEARS later it will be abandoned.

    Where did I say that? It could run some period, just not for the long run, as I have noted. It would fail, even in a desperate female society. Most of those having lots of sex do not want to support those they do that with at all. It won’t suddenly flip. You don’t need to make up straw men, though your original reply implied a more permanent shift to it, not the temporary one you note later in this reply. 40 to 80 years is nothing in the scheme of life!

    A lot of damage can occur during that time frame.

    We already have damage. It may add more, but it won’t be the only source.

  314. BradA says:

    Yes Gunner, you do exist. You just don’t exist… to her. Even Dalrock would make that claim.

    That isn’t what you claimed IBB.

    Note that Empath chastised me in another thread for taking things too literally, but I will continue to do so when the initial point is repeated over and over. You were just saying a general “few men are like that”, you were asserting none and have done so at many times.

    Either such exist or they do not. One of the keys for even small groups to survive a collapse is to work to connect people with common views here. It is certainly an uphill climb, but pretending all attractive men have sex does not help the situation and is inherently in error. Religious convictions still exist.

    I am not as attractive now, except for my earnings, but I am confident I could have played more if I didn’t have a conviction against it. This is especially true since both my father and grandfather had serious issues in playing around too much and I share many of their traits. I did not because I wanted to please my Lord more than I wanted to get some temporary pleasure.

    Arguing that many women don’t see eligible men is perfectly valid, but that is a far different target.

  315. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock, Cail, Deti: it is called a rationalization hamster, not a rational one for a reason. Twu Wuv involves a lot of endorphins…eh, let me put it another way.

    There is a French term that I can’t find right now, but it translates to “straw love” – something that sparks quick, burns hot but [poof] doesn’t last. Good endorphin rush in the mean time. So then, what? Then…on to the next roller coaster. Until the amusement park pass expires, then it’s Waaaah! Where is the reliable but boring car ride home that I need?

    Nothing rational in the process. Rationlizing? Oh, yeah.

    The Western world has turned into a version of Short Attention Span Theater. Way too many women have starring roles.

  316. JDG says:

    Brad –
    I would tend to argue that modern feminism is just an outgrowth of FI in the modern prosperous age. First world problems using the FI.

    This is similar to what I think. I think the FI manifests in different ways, feminism being one of them. Also, while I don’t think feminism has been in continued existence since the fall, I do believe it has popped up it’s ugly head now and again throughout history.

    There are writings dated during the decline of the Roman Empire that describe rebellious and perverted behavior in many women. They didn’t call it feminism, but the behavior attributed to those women is similar to what we are experiencing here today. The Roman Empire split and eventually fell, and the “feminism” of Rome disappeared.

  317. JDG says:

    Here is a short break down of social changes in ancient Rome that I borrowed from here (emphases are mine):

    ~5 century BC: Roman civilization is a a strong patriarchy, fathers are liable for the actions of their wife and children, and have absolute authority over the family (including the power of life and death)

    ~1 century BC: Roman civilization blossoms into the most powerful and advanced civilization in the world. Material wealth is astounding, citizens (i.e.: non slaves) do not need to work. They have running water, baths and import spices from thousands of miles away. The Romans enjoy the arts and philosophy; they know and appreciate democracy, commerce, science, human rights, animal rights, children rights and women become emancipated. No-fault divorce is enacted, and quickly becomes popular by the end of the century.

    ~1-2 century AD: The family unit is destroyed. Men refuse to marry and the government tries to revive marriage with a “bachelor tax”, to no avail. Children are growing up without fathers, Roman women show little interest in raising their own children and frequently use nannies. The wealth and power of women grows very fast, while men become increasingly demotivated and engage in prostitution and vice. Prostitution and homosexuality become widespread.

    ~3-4 century AD: A moral and demographic collapse takes place, Roman population declines due to below-replacement birth-rate. Vice and massive corruption are rampant, while the new-born Catholic Religion is gaining power (it becomes the religion of the Empire in 380 AD). There is extreme economic, political and military instability: there are 25 successive emperors in half a century (many end up assassinated), the Empire is ungovernable and on the brink of civil war.

    ~5 century AD: The Empire is ruled by an elite of military men that use the Emperor as a puppet; due to massive debts and financial problems, the Empire cannot afford to hire foreign mercenaries to defend itself (Roman citizens have long ago being replaced by mercenaries in the army), and starts “selling” parts of the Empire in exchange for protection. Eventually, the mercenaries figure out that the “Emperor has no clothes”, and overrun and pillage the Empire.

  318. “A good number of them are having sex with a series of attractive men because they like the power it gives them. They don’t hope these men will marry them; they want the attention and validation, the bragging rights, the free stuff, the fun experience. A distant afterthought is the longshot odds that maybe one of these attractive men will fall at her feet and pledge undying love.”

    A former church friend of mine is following a similar trajectory.

    During a platonic lunch, we were talking about the negative aspects of being single Christians, like the jealousy or depression that sometimes creeps in when we saw couples in public. I told her that God delivered me from that – the implication being that He could do the same for her. It didn’t seem to click. She’s now dating a law student (hypergamy much?) whom she readily admits may not be saved.

    It’s probably a good thing that he’s a law student, because he’ll know the ins and outs when….well, you know.

  319. Boxer says:

    Dear Gentlemen and Ladies,

    Only topical in the most general way; but, there’s another SJW (Social Justice Faggot… er… “Warrior”) who appears to be a complete phony.

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/01/17/i-taught-shanley-kane-how-to-troll-and-im-sincerely-sorry/

    Shanley Kane, the outspoken feminist nut best known for her embarrassing public meltdowns on twitter, got her start as the girlfriend of (hardcore neo-Nazi internet hacker) Andrew “Weev” Aurenheimer. Her feminist schtick is (surprise!) just a money-making scam. I guess asking for donations from radical White racist types was not lucrative enough to keep her in that particular game. She found the feminists much softer targets for her scam, apparently.

    Regards,

    Boxer

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

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