Badger has an outstanding post up today titled Spinster Math where he suggests we could be witnessing a very important change regarding involuntarily unmarried women in the US. I’m not going to quote anything from it; you have to go there to read it. All I’ll add are some graphics. The first is the chart I created for Supply and demand in the marriage market:
The second is an artists rendering I was able to obtain of an aging feminist spinster for my post New battle cry of the aging feminist:
I created the chart age_of_marriage.jpg using data from the US Census. The original dinosaur image comes from Julie Patricia, who released it into the public domain. I hereby license both the chart and the modified dinosaur image (over30feminist1.jpg) as Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported.
And there it is….never married women a rising percentage in every age category, not just the twenty somethings allegedly “waiting” to get married. A
A great point that Badger makes and that is easily missed…..increases in the percentage of never married women make look small in comparison to the percentage of at least once marrieds, but those increases look large when compared to the previous rates of never marrieds. Thus, for 35 to 39 year old women, yeah,”only” 13.3 per cent have never been married, and, yeah, that is “only” a 2.3 per cent increase in that group since 2000, but it also means, when you turn the numbers around and look at them the other way, that that group has increased by more than TWENTY per cent in just ten years. The trend is clear….marriage is going down.
This is seriously great news for the cat world. Felines everywhere are rejoicing.
I’m going long companies that make cat food.
greenlander: yeah, my first thought was “it’s good for the cats”. Makes me wonder if there is an invisible cat lobby in D.C.
Investing in cat products seems like a good plan for anyone willing to profit from spinsters! 🙂
Increase in spinsters also means increase in bachelors not by choice…what happens to all these men who find them single?
“Increase in spinsters also means increase in bachelors not by choice…what happens to all these men who find them single?”
They live happily ever after. . .
Actually, the young ones get angry and rebel or drop out of society, which we are already seeing in the 14th generation males as they get cut out of the SMP because they don’t make the women tingle. So the above doesn’t make a wit of difference to men, but it will to women.
When they are older, they will either figure out how to get what they want out of women without marriage, or they will realize they’re better off, or the hide in the basement playing video games.
@Country Lawyer
Without seeing stats I’m not sure of the validity of the whole “peter pan” phenomenon, but to the extent that it is occurring the decision by young women to ride the carousel and delay marriage (which we do see in the stats) would seem like the likely culprit. If men don’t feel like they or their peers have prospects for even serious relationships with women, they will be less likely to be motivated to become independent, get a serious career, etc. The problem for their female cohort is these basement dwelling world of warcraft playing men can’t be easily converted into marriage ready men later on even if both the men and the women want this. This would seem like a potentially serious miscalculation on the part of current 20 something women.
“This would seem like a potentially serious miscalculation on the part of current 20 something women.”
I think they’re incapable of making the calculation. Maybe if we texted them.
“I think they’re incapable of making the calculation. Maybe if we texted them.”
I don’t think their cognitive ability extends beyond blaming Men….. i.e. they WILL blame Men for this outcome rather than consider their own actions.
Chels-
The problem is that “lonely” bachelors like myself do not believe that marrying one of these women will be fulfilling.
A big problem is that they will have to deal with the fact that it was their unrealistic expectations that was the problem. However, I expect that even if their brain acknowledges this fact, that their heart will not. Therefore, marrying such a woman is likely to put a man in a position of being seen as a consolation prize.
For me, being “settled for” doesn’t give me much hope that I would enjoy much positive attention from having this kind of girl as my wife. She already gave the best and mos enthusiastic of her years and sexual attention away for free to guys who used her. You think she has any of that left to give me? I doubt it.
I’m all for growing old together comfortable old age, but I don’t want that to be the only part of her life I get to experience.
And I will always resent that she would have never dated me when I was 25. Too busy giving it up for men who would not commit. It would be unjust to allow her to capitalize on my good character, career, life savings, and kindness. She would be gaining all the benefits without ever having invested in me.
I used to fear dying old and alone, but I don’t anymore. It sounds unpleasant, but I no longer dread it. Carousel-riding women and feminists taught me how to live without their approval, company, support, affection, and sex. Now men like me are like the proverbial fish that does not need a bicycle.
It is now mens’ turn to start telling women that most hated of statements. “Let’s just be friends.”
The gals will not like hearing it any more than the men did.
The Cat G-d will be pleased…..
Temple to cat god found in Egypt
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8468803.stm
“The problem for their female cohort is these basement dwelling world of warcraft playing men can’t be easily converted into marriage ready men later on even if both the men and the women want this. This would seem like a potentially serious miscalculation on the part of current 20 something women.”
Dalrock,
I know plenty of married men that play Wow and their marriage seems no more or no less than other married couples, which may suggest that the other couples have other addictions/problems, I leave that for others to muse upon.
So to use this to describe men as not “marriage ready” is perhaps incorrect, although I certainly implied it my own statement
The Ponzi scheme economy of the United States requires that men (not women, women are always net resource users, even their paper pushing jobs are just net user jobs) buy into the lies and do their part shoveling.
The foundation of a thriving society and culture gives men something to work for: family. Our society does everything it can to tear this away from men.
“Without seeing stats I’m not sure of the validity of the whole “peter pan” phenomenon, but to the extent that it is occurring the decision by young women to ride the carousel and delay marriage (which we do see in the stats) would seem like the likely culprit. ”
It doesn’t, as badger showed by his own math, need to be a large percentage for huge changes to occur.
I know you have children, and I know you have a vested interest in protecting them and wanting a bright glorious future for them (You are proof of my assertion that married men with children are vested in their society, no matter how corrupt) but I suggest that it colors your perspective.
So let’s take this to the next level. We can all agree that some number of the first time married women will end up divorced. We certainly know that most of those divorces will be initiated by women. Maybe someone has figured this out but it would be interesting to see what percentages of women in these age categories WHO HAVE MARRIED BUT NOW ARE DIVORCED end up never remarried again. Compare that to the same 2000 versus 2010 demographics or whatever spread you want.
I can’t help but believe that the numbers would skew even more heavily towards non marriage (a second time) for all age categories. Sure, someone who married at twenty would not be remarried at 22 if they didn’t get divorced until they were 30 so that would automatically skew numbers but think about it for a second.
The available alpha men with options will likely never commit
The betas and greater betas with options who have been mangled in divorce are probably a lot less interested in running the gauntlet again especially when the rose colored glasses have thankfully been shattered.
The omega types still don’t stand a chance.
All this hit home with me when I thought about a conversation I had last weekend. Out for a beer with a few buddies, one of which is an alpha in every way shape and form. Still married but struggling. I was relating with laughter some of my dating experiences as a mid forties man with options. He interrupted me just to say the following:
“If you ever get married again I will not come to the wedding!”
He wasn’t joking. Nuff said.
@Interested
I think the US Census SIPP data may have what you are looking for. It generally agrees with what you are suggesting, and tracks with the data I’ve shared around Post Marital Spinsterhood (here and update here). But the data is challenging to interpret because being divorced seems to have a significant negative impact on longevity. Divorcées tend to drop out of the data set the older the age bracket you are looking at. I noted the same trend with the other Census data in the past.
@Country Lawyer
I didn’t intend this as a slur against gamers. I’ve been known to play video games myself. I was alluding to the peter pan metaphor of the young men who never get out and make their way in the world. As I said before, I’m not totally sold that this is really a trend. But if it is, when today’s 20 something women hit their early 30s they won’t have much luck converting an unmotivated 30 something peer into a breadwinner husband. The prospect of marriage could have motivated them in their 20s, but by their 30s it is much more difficult to change this kind of pattern (even if in theory he would want to). This was my only point. Some men will actively decline marriage, and some number of others won’t be suitable due to their reaction to women postponing marriage 10 years prior.
I know we have different takes on this, and that is to be expected. We can only gather data on what is actually occurring now (or occurred in the recent past), and speculate on the future.
Another thing Badger does not mention, that will likely inflate the impact even further, is that women aren’t ALL waiting–there is still a fairly decent subset of women who are either fundamentally decent old-fashioned women who marry young, or somewhat feminism-infected women who still have the good sense to snap up a guy at a young age. I don’t know the numbers, but that group clearly exists; plenty of women marry younger than 20, and many of those remain married.
In reality, that 5% spinster rate may be out of the 50% of women who don’t have the reasonably good sense to get married before their late 20s. If that number increases to 15%, that would mean a full 30% of carouselers would wind up spinsters. That is a HUGE percentage that would have enormous ramifications, as the carouselers are one of the primary sources of cultural discord in the modern era.
I get Dalrock’s point:
If, in fact, the Peter Pan syndrome is as pervasive as the feminists would have us believe, it is already too late for those men.
Ten years of career slacking, if it is actually happening will not be able to be made up on the large scale. Some men may make great strides in recovering this lost ground, but most would not.
This means that the female failure/refusal to invest in the men that are their contemporaries will yield poor or nonexistent returns.
Young women over-invested their youth, beauty, and emotional and moral support in the alpha-male casino, rather than investing in the beta-male business.
The results of gambling, on a large scale, is always predictable. The alpha males walked off with a great couple decades, living fat on plentiful female resources.
Those resources now spent, the men in whom they should have been invested were left to fend for themselves and see no reason to strive to a goal that appears to be unattainable.
The ladies gambled – and lost.
“they won’t have much luck converting an unmotivated 30 something peer into a breadwinner husband. ”
What Dalrock is talking about we used to call “confirmed bachelorhood.” Or “stuck in his ways.”
“Increase in spinsters also means increase in bachelors not by choice…what happens to all these men who find them single?”
Men have to be suckered into marriage while they’re horny. Most men, as they get older, rise in status so they can get sex for free. Also, older=wiser and men in their thirties and over are FAR more likely to be aware of the dangers than a horny, heedless twentysomething. Therefore he stays a bachelor or MGTOWs.
Some men in their thirties and above still want to get married, but these are the unattractive and desperate ones. Enjoy, ladies!
All the statistics, (Badger) no matter how interpreted, will not alter the basic fact which is that men like to have a woman (i.e. marraige) and women don’t care to be trapped. Women may complain (not that I have ever come across it) that there are no good men, but it is women who enjoy complaining, and their complaints should not be taken seriously as they are merely a fitness test. In the west the reality is this: that unless you are married, the likelihood of meeting a single, childless woman, who is not ruined by promiscuity (once you are say out of your teens) who has any interest in you, is virtually nil. It is for this reason that so many men look abroad (europe, asia). For those women, western men have something they cannot get where they come from – money. Maybe all this is different in the United States. Not that I am complaining: I am sure that I have had more relationships, and girlfriends than any of my ancestors, and frankly none have lived up to Dalrock’s check-list. One must adapt to the prevailing circumstances, which is why Feminism has not (per the previous thread) won – the battle of the sexes being an ongoing, never to be ended duel. Maybe I am misreading things but I observe not the slightest sign that women cannot get exactly what they want or that men have now lost interest in the opposite sex, no matter how difficult women are and can be.
Pretty much what I get from this post is that, you have to STRIKE while the iron is HOT…
And women are doing a horrible job of striking…
When the marriage strike comes, no matter how it is produced… Will hit women like a ton of bricks (see: The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell )… And marriage is not really the issue…
Women not saving their money for this inevitable event (so they can live comfortably in spinsterhood) is what is f*cking them over, and BIG GOVERNMENT can’t save ’em this time… (Welfare state is unsustainable…)
This event is better than any daytime soap opera screenwriter could have dreamed up…
@Opus
I think you are underestimating women substitutes (p*rn, video games, introduction of s*x bot technology) anything that can pass the time for men…
I guess it all comes down to cost-benefit analysis…
Test & Subscribed
@Opus
This is part of the story. Right now in the US at least white women have every reason to expect that marriage is theirs for the taking. They look at women in their late 30s and early 40s and the few outliers who never managed to find a husband make perfect sense. They may not know the underlying stats, but their gut read of their slightly older sisters is accurate; nothing to worry about here. We see this in the attitude of young women commenting in the manosphere as well.
But just because the women ten years older than them could afford to take marriage for granted doesn’t mean women in their 20s today necessarily can. Moreover, just because the women you observe aren’t the least worried about their prospects of getting married, it doesn’t mean this isn’t important to them. This is the other story told by the stats. 90% of white women still marry despite the feminist “you don’t need a man” message. They talk a great game about not needing a man, because they have the feeling of security of knowing they can find a husband at any time. There is a huge status for women which comes with marriage to a worthy man. Take away that certainty and panic would set in. This is the rest of the picture, and something very few are considering.
As an analogy ask people to rate what matters to them most in air travel. Safety records won’t come up near the top of the list. All airlines in the west are extremely safe; it is a given. But this doesn’t mean people wouldn’t freak out if this expectation was no longer a given.
Marriage rates are down but I still think it is mainly due to women making the choice to ride the carousel. Also i don’t think men and women of the same age marry. 32 year old men marry 22 year old women I think is more like the norm. When i married the number one reason was to get a uterus to have children. Women today due to cultural influence guiding their attitude in relationships have nothing to offer other than sex. With children being the only reason to marry, a young woman that wants kids is the way to go. I always felt even before discovering the manosphere that a 32 year old woman would always divorce after having a child or two. (thats usually the way you found them if you met one that age,divorced with kids) Marrying a woman past useful child bearing is done for the companionship a skill feral women no longer have. (See cheering and laughing on day time TV at news of drugged man having penis cut off) So the carousel riders will and are filling the void. With more men learning I think the marriage rate being what it is is from inertia of the tradtional values.(Blue pill) Many men That have broken loose will never marry and openly say so and there are plenty of women to make that lfestyle not one of sitting in moms basement jacking off. The feminist inspired carousel riders make it all possible.
Adonis (@MOTRenaissance) says:
September 22, 2011 at 5:07 pm
Don’t forget, reading MRA blogs.
@Legion
Do you think men like us are really having a impact right now… if not this second, what about in years time… And when the marriage apocalypse hits will we be a big reason why… or are we just observers with no impact…
What is the worldwide manosphere population right now… 10,000 strong or over a million…
Pinpointing social upheaval is a tough science…
I don’t know the impact i will have. I don’t even know the impact I have on my son.
I’m just going to take care of myself and my son when he needs me. Other things I have heard that makes sense to me is help other men when i can. That would be above and beyond my advise for them to take the red pill.
“Young women over-invested their youth, beauty, and emotional and moral support in the alpha-male casino, rather than investing in the beta-male business.”
Amazing quote right there!!
Check out this comment, this is somethone that is playing dumb.
“Increase in spinsters also means increase in bachelors not by choice…what happens to all these men who find them single?”
The answer to this question is today a new girl is climbing aboard the carousel. Need one a little older? tomorrow we will have a carouseller looking for a chump to marry and divorce while she can still get pregnant. With carouseling and feminism as her only teachings on relationships a man of the red pill is ready to enjoy her last years of fertility with regular kinky sex. No baby no man no child support no half of his pension no chance for some old bitch with no personality to get a second chance.
I hope that answers the question for all
Check out this comment, this is somethone that is playing dumb.
I’m definitely not “playing” dumb, but rather I am dumb when it comes to manosphere issues. As well, it just doesn’t seem like it’s a good move for anyone to have men being alone.
Lastly, not all men are equal. The top 3% of men (e.g. George Clooney) not marrying has a bigger impact on female happiness than the bottom 30% claiming they are MGTOWs. This is because George Clooney uses up the prime years of many attractive women, forcing them to later on settle for much less, or not marry at all.
I guess I need to pay my dues in the PUA/Venusian Arts sector… Help the movement along…
Agreed. Chels is just trolling for gina tingles (received by getting hysterical and then getting smacked down by a man’s logic),
Can we stop with the personal attacks? They’re laughable anyway and absolutely, and utterly ridiculous.
2) That feminists cherish partial-birth abortion laws in order to extend the duration that a woman can erase the consequences of her decision to procreate with a particular man
This is interesting and reminds me of the mothers that eat their young in the animal kingdom if they are sick or they lack resources for them survive or they get pregnant by a superior male. Is possible that deep down females have the same instincts and without social pressures for loving “unconditionally: they can’t bond with a sub-par baby or can lose the bond if they find the mate unsuitable? Its horrific to even consider this but its not totally crazy IMO. That could also explain why some women keep babies conceived during rape, their bodies are bonding in spite of the circumstances of the conception because of the particular genes she might be carrying.
I do wonder if infanticide by mothers had rose in the last decades, I know that it seems like it but anecdote is not data so…any data available?
Count me as a 29 year old that’s figured out that I’m better off without marriage. Not only can I enjoy video games, but I have plenty of time to work on computers and go mountain biking.
If I need a “release” there’s always limitless internet porn.
Besides I don’t make enough money for any of these little princesses, so this way I don’t have to work as hard anyway, and I couldn’t care less.
There’s so many things I want to learn and enjoy, such as baking, cooking, learning more about computers, going fishing, travel, but if I was married into slavery, I’d never get a chance to do them.
I don’t see women bemoaning decreased marriage prospects. I see them cheering the ability to have kids by an Alpha, on their own. The increased popularity of single motherhood, and that a lot of women choose it, seems to me to indicate a broad shift away from the nuclear family and towards single motherhood. Probably most women are perfectly happy with their choices, viewing a kid by an Alpha, and their own earnings, as better than life with a Beta Male.
In a way, I don’t fault women for this. They can’t see the bigger picture of hour our society is rotting from the inside. They’re just responding to the short-term incentives. Through Big Government, it’s possible to get the resources of the betas without having to put out for an actual living beta (eeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww). Feminism is just a multi-generational shit test that Western society failed.
The strategy of depending on Big Government makes sense in the short term. It’s not a bad strategy as long as one can count on the continued presence of Big Government. The problem with that strategy is that the promises of Big Government can’t be kept over the long term. It’s obvious to anyone who can understand math beyond algebra. My prediction is that we have another ten to twenty years before it seriously starts to unravel. After that, it’s hard to predict what will happen. The masses will be Seriously Pissed when the free cheese comes to an end. The most likely results are a stagnant, corrupt, inefficient government with a devalued currency (see Brazil, Ukraine) or a dictator (Roman Empire, post Wiemar Germany).
In the meantime, go seduce some 32-year-old chicks that think they want to get off the carousel. It’s just good clean fun if you know how to push their buttons: you can twirl them around your fingers and throw them into the gutter like a bubble gum wrapper. If your society is handing out panem et circenses, the you better enjoy your fuckin’ bread and circuses because bread and circuses is what you’re getting whether you want good governance or not.
“The top 3% of men (e.g. George Clooney) not marrying has a bigger impact on female happiness than the bottom 30% claiming they are MGTOWs. This is because George Clooney uses up the prime years of many attractive women, forcing them to later on settle for much less, or not marry at all.”
I really don’t buy this. The women Clooney deals with and then dumps (“10’s” all) probably have no trouble getting not only a man, but a pretty high quality man, to marry them, if that’s what they want. He only stays with a woman for a year or two, so it’s not like he uses up all of their “prime years.” Conversely, top guys who do stay with supermodels, etc, for all of their prime years are thereby “using up” fewer women.
Most women have no chance with Clooney, et al, to begin with. Back in the day, every woman could marry precisely because all, or nearly all, men were in the marriage market. Thirty per cent is a huge hole in that former demand. Thirty per cent of men opting out of the marriage market entirely, even if they are “the bottom” thirty per cent, means that thirty per cent of women (the bottom thirty per cent, who were never Clooney GF material) will have no husbands (minus a few per cent, perhaps, for women who marry divorced men, but then, of course, a corresponding number of women will be in the category of once married but no longer).
“That feminists cherish partial-birth abortion laws in order to extend the duration that a woman can erase the consequences of her decision to procreate with a particular man.”
Before so called “partial birth abortions” were performed, the exact same age fetuses were destroyed within the womb and evacuated, so called D and E (dilation and evacuation). This procedure is risky for the woman due to possible blood loss and harm to the cervix. “Partial birth abortion,” ie Dilation and Extraction (D and X), was developed to prevent these dangers. The fetus is partially removed from the woman’s body and then destroyed. Most D and X abortions occur during the 20 to 24th weeks. Very, very few occur in the third trimester (when viability is actually an issue) and those are done to prevent severe risks to the woman or the birth of a severely damaged baby. D and E and D and X abortions themselves constitute only a tiny fraction of all abortions (the overwhelming majority of which are performed in the first trimester by other methods). And at least some of the D and E and D and X abortions are performed to protect the health of the woman. as women do not always recognize the signs of pregnancy, and some complications do not develop early on. And others are undertaken to prevent the birth of babies with defects which did not develop or were not recognizable during the first trimester. Some of them, perhaps, are undertaken for the reason suggested here, and certainly some are done for other non health reasons. But that would be as true of D and E abortions (non “partial birth” abortions) as they are of D and X abortions (“partial birth” abortions), both of which take place at the same point in the pregnancy (ie the second trimester).
So, no, “patial birth abortions” do not really extend the time that a woman can reject a fetus because she has rethought the desirability of procreating with a particular man. They simply make an abortion performed at the same time that a D and E abortion would have been performed safer. Or, in the very rare case of third trimester abortions, they make a procedure undertaken for health reasons safer (third trimester abortions are not performed for anything other than health or life of the woman or extreme birth defects of the fetus reasons).
The term “partial birth abortion” is not a medical one, it was invented by the anti abortion crowd. Since the fetuses are not viable when the vast majority of D and X abortions are performed, it really is misnomer as a baby is not “born” during the procedure, but rather a non viable fetus is partially extracted before it is destroyed.
Also, it was the anti abortion crowd who first made a legal issue out of “partial birth” abortion. There were no “partial birth laws” on the books, until the anti abotionists, in yet another of their endless attempts to circumvent Roe, came up with the term and enacted prohibitions on such procedures into State and Federal law.
“I don’t see women bemoaning decreased marriage prospects.”
I do, all the time. On line, in magazine articles and books, and IRL. Go to the bookstore, there is a whole section aimed at woman about how to get a man to commit. And that is the main theme of many, many articles in leading women’s magazines. And of many on line message boards that actually deal with real women and their concerns, as opposed to feminist claptrap. Or go and eavesdrop on some thirty and forty something women at the office or beauty shop or wherever, and take not of what they talk about.
@Dalrock
I feel a little smarter after you broke down 3rd down abortion to me…
Anacaona
“Is possible that deep down females have the same instincts and without social pressures for loving “unconditionally: they can’t bond with a sub-par baby or can lose the bond if they find the mate unsuitable?”
Wow, what an incredible observation.
@ Dalrock
One of the things that I noticed when I was in America is that as a country it has much more diverse groups of people than where I come from (perhaps because it is so much larger) – Britain is more homogenous. I mention this as when one reads sites like The Spearhead one might gain the impression that all women in America are gold-digging sluts: that was not my experience atall and I can only think of one woman I met who revealed offensive entitlement-princess syndrome (I walked out on her, mid-drink – I was not putting up with that! – that was in Manhattan by-the-way ).
Coming from Britain I live in a country where twice in the last hundred years a vast swathe of the young males were wiped out leaving an excess of single women (I am assuming this did not happen, or at least to such an extent in the U.S.) and although I am too young to have known the 1st World War spinsters, I do remember the ‘maiden aunts’ and ‘widows’ of the second. They had little choice but to find work – Nursing, Teaching, Clerical – and live single. They survived in a fairly tolerable manner.
There are various memes in the man-o-sphere which I believe to be pure fantasy:
1. Women hit some kind of wall at thirty-five. I do accept (and your statistics bear this out) that after thirty-eight (an age at which traditionally in England an unmarried woman was said to be a ‘spinster of this parish’) they are unlikely to marry or conceive, but that is a different matter.
2. That women are hypergamous, always ditching their husband for someone more wealthy. That is not my observation – if anything it is the other way round, but generally from year to year people remain stable neither divorcing or settling in with a new love – by the way you must update us at some time on your wife’s friends Amir and Aban.
3. That women set out to hurt men. I find them so self-centered that they do not notice the hurt that their behaviour induces, as, not being very good at cause and effect and lacking normal (male) empathy, they can only see things form their own viewpoint. They genuinely believe they are victims – even when they have taken their husbands to the cleaners in divorce.
Opus
3. ………………………………. I find them (women) so self-centered that they do not notice the hurt that their behaviour induces, as, not being very good at cause and effect and lacking normal (male) empathy, they can only see things form their own viewpoint. They genuinely believe they are victims – even when they have taken their husbands to the cleaners in divorce.
This is a very good observation you have made. And I believe is the number one reason for the destuctive disaster of feminism. The derfeat of feminism will be when it is in the selfish interest of team woman to do away with it. It will never come from a realization of the harm done to society. That is why I am so for the PUA, MGTOW, and in general the idea of having as many women as possible enjoying involuntary childless spinsterhood as possible. The purpose is to deny any benefit of feral behavior peiod. The natural solipsism and childlike selfishness combined with adult rights without responsibilties there is no other way. With the vote that woman at one time didn’t have (I wonder why) they have managed to make their selfish feral nature enforcable by law.
@TFH who loves to point to George Clooney. Here is an extract from Star magazine:
“I wouldn’t have any expectation of anything serious,” Daily tells Star. Going on to suggest that the 31-year-old stunning wrestler “enjoy him,” but brace herself for heartache.
“Girls think they can tame him,” Daily, who is known as E.G. to her friends, explains. “But it will never happen. They’re wasting their time.”
Opus:”I mention this as when one reads sites like The Spearhead one might gain the impression that all women in America are gold-digging sluts: that was not my experience atall”
That’s because the American women were attracted to you, and were putting on their best face. You have a British accent, which is like cocaine for american vaginas, and you seem to know the score on how to attract women.
They wanted to show you their good side, in the hopes you might inject a million Winston Churchills into her cervix.
@TFH
I don’t disagree with your basic point. To some degree this is surely happening. Not all women who marry later in life run into this. But they 1) Chose last, and their quicker to the draw sisters on average snapped up the best available men. and 2) Waited until they were less attractive than at their peak years. This reinforces the point I made above to Opus; the fact that 90% of women do marry proves that it is extremely important to them. The fact that they do this in the face of declined prospects proves it even more. A large number of women are in fact settling for bottom of the barrel men. They wouldn’t do this if the status having married didn’t have great meaning to them.
@Opus
What we are conjecturing is a very different scenario than what happened there. The generation of unmarried women you are talking about had a different view of the world. They weren’t brought up thinking they could “have it all” like today’s women are. They would have grown up during the depression or the war. Either way during a period of great deprivation. Also, they had the comfort of a society which understood their loss, and that it was no fault of their own. It was a lasting legacy of a shared societal sacrifice; there was even a name for it. Today’s 20 something women are entirely different. They expect they can have it all. Getting married is so much a given they really can’t conceive that it won’t happen. This is likely reinforced by their parents telling them they have all the time in the world. We also have books and other media telling them this message. But not all women are waiting. They are watching a good number of their peers marry. It may freak them out momentarily to “always be the bridesmaid”, but they are confident in their safety (just like buyers in an asset bubble). But when (if) this turns it won’t be something society understands. Almost all of the girls they grew up with will have married (Badger’s prediction was 80%). They will remember the serious boyfriend they tossed aside or the not serious one they stayed with because they had all the time in the world. Until they didn’t. Their mothers, aunts, and friends will send them copies of the book Marry Him, in an effort to help (making it all the worse).
I think the wall exists, but you can’t set your watch by it as many would seem to assert. 35 is probably too low. Lifestyle also seems to have something to do with this, in my own observation at least. I’m sure genetics do as well. But variability doesn’t change the fact on average.
I’m not sure who really argues this except for J and those selling divorce. What is generally asserted in the manosphere is that many women divorce with delusions of finding a better man. They tend to get pumped and dumped or otherwise used until brutal reality sets in (often with an assist from the wall). The stats show that some of these women eventually remarry, but not nearly as many as who originally expected to. And TFH’s point above is valid here too. The fact that some managed to marry at a time in their life in which they hold a much weakened SMV hand doesn’t mean those who married married as well as expected. Many very likely settled down a few notches. This fits with mine and my wife’s observation, but not with J (all divorcées in J’s world have happy endings).
I don’t have an update on Amir and Aban. No real change. Very troubling.
Agreed. They are generally more like a clueless bull in a china shop than a malevolent force. They are often unaware of the wreckage they leave in their wakes (this is the meaning of the buoy in the pic for this site).
@ TFH:
“Thirdly, the nationwide marriage stats look good because of rural America, where carousel riding and men becoming PUAs are not present. An analysis of data from the big cities only will show many of the memes of this ‘sphere (marriage strike, women missing their chance to marry, etc.) as definitely present to a significant degree. Note how many black women simply cannot find a suitable husband. Urban white women over 35 are in a similar predicament, but don’t distort the nationwide stats enough to be noticed.”
It is actually more accurate to say that the SMP memes dsicussed are less pronounced in rural America.
I live in what you would call “flyover country” in a small city in the midwest. We have all the SMP dysfunctions. We have them to a lesser degree and with fewer participants, but we still have them. Hypergamy, “I’m not haaaappy” divorce; the carousel, entitlement princesses, attention whores, status whores, marriage delay: we’ve got it all, just not as prevalent here as on the coasts, I suspect. Most of it is brought on by media saturation: SATC, EPL, cultural influences on dress and behavior. The churches here certainly don’t help, what with all the messages about men having all the responsibility and women having none.
The most pronounced problem we have is out of wedlock pregmancy which I suspect is probably more common here than the coastal cities.
From what I read, the PUA/carousel scene and the 80/20 principle (i.e. 20% of the men getting 80% of the sex) is enormous in the college towns and the coastal cities. At least it was when I was in college.
“If men don’t feel like they or their peers have prospects for even serious relationships with women, they will be less likely to be motivated to become independent, get a serious career, etc”
Agree. I’m 28 and I don’t really see the point in “advancing”. Advance to what? I have a stable job paying high five figures. I have more then enough money for myself even though I do a fair bit of expensive things. Health problems make small business ownership impracticle. I could bust my ass and maybe increase my earning power at my job 10-20%, but why? What do I need the money for? Who am I providing for?
Simply put, life doesn’t have much purpose. I don’t need anymore money/status/”success” to do the things I want to do. Mostly I just focus on hobbies/fitness/books/travel/banging sluts because what else is there in life? I have yet to be with a woman I’d want to marry, so no family. I’m extremely unlikely to conquer the world given my circumstances and limitations. If I’m aimless its because I have nothing to aim for.
And here’s another thing about divorce in flyover country: A divorced woman who thinks she’ll remarry here is taking a huge gamble, and she’ll likely lose. Her expectations are high due to all teh cultural encouragements. But there aren’t enough men around to meet those expectations. There aren’t even enough low value men.. Second, the men who are single, in her age range and high value don’t want her even as an STR, much less as a wife. She is seen at best as pump and dump material.
But a single or divorced man in his 40s or 50s is in extremely high demand if he has anything at all going for him. He has the run of the single women in the 30 to 50 age cohort in his locality. Soft harems are not likely, since everyone knows everyone and word gets around fast. But he can pull serial STRs and the occasional pump & dump and SNL, no problem at all.
ruddyturnstone says:
September 23, 2011 at 12:54 am
“There were no “partial birth laws” on the books, until the anti abotionists, in yet another of their endless attempts to circumvent Roe…”
Roe (Roe vs. Wade) is not a law. It is the Judicial branch of the Fedreal government unconstitutionally usurping the law making abilities of the Legislative (Congress) branch.
Let it be overturned as it should be. States allowed abortions before that travesty and it’s guaranteed more states will allow abortions after it’s overturned. It’s called Federalism and it’s what our Constitution is about.
Whiskey – ”Probably most women are perfectly happy with their choices, viewing a kid by an Alpha, and their own earnings, as better than life with a Beta Male.”
I tend to see it differently. Plenty of (established career) women go into the process of becoming a single mother with such lofty “empowered” ideals. But then, reality tends to be the ”game changer”. I’d point out Lori Gottlieb, who decided to become just such a self-supporting single mom – then had a change of heart as reality over-took her.
Hers’ my “slightly” paraphrased version of her exhaustive essay on “Settling”:
Don’t be a single mother. It sucks, it’s hard, it’s expensive. Find some schlub to marry you. All that matters is that he have a job. Once you’ve got him under contract, you don’t even have to have sex with him any more (wink, wink – he doesn’t even have to be the father, if you know what I mean).
But, not only will you have his income to help out, he’ll help with child care duties, and become your built-in babysitter for girls nights out.
And, if he happens to have a house, investments, and/or a good pension – BONUS! – cause you’ll get half of all that in the divorce.
As for the majority of single mothers (by choice), their “own earnings”, assuming they have ANY, aren’t going to suffice. Thankfully, they can settle for the best kind of beta husband there is – the government. All the benefits of a beta provider, with none of the demands from him nor responsibilities to him.
@ Dalrock
I have re-read Badger, because it appears that I am missing something here. With a ninety per-cent marraige take-up rate, to which one must surely add non-marrying cohabitors, it appears to me that ‘partnership’ as opposed to ‘singledom’ is still much favoured. Is that where the drop in marraige has gone? To suppose that waiting means a ‘worse deal’ is I would suggest not by any means necessarily the case. What I fear, however, is that those women who wait are not really interested – (even if they might comfort themselves with the notion that they are just waiting for Mr Right) – or else they would have married sooner. There is a reason why hormones are so powerful for the young!
Perhaps, as I said, it is different over here, where one has always to firstly consider class and then we are generally not quite as affluent, so perhaps women are less entitlement-conscious. No Pizza Restaurant Waitress over here could afford to run a new car, yet I dated one in Pennsylvania who could afford (with the tips) to do just that. As I indicated above, there are many Americas – which suggests to me that involuntary spinsterhood is going to hit proportionally harder in places like New York – where the young ladies have had and believed that they could have it all; I assume that things will go on as usual in the Bible Belt and the Mid-West with comparatively early marraiges.
You suggest that marraige is important to women, but what I have observed, particularily with young women is herd-like mentality, so that when one one marries, those remaining single, feel that they are missing out, and promptly follow suit, yet equally when one divorces, they all do likewise. Marraige becomes a fact of life. I cannot honestly say that I have ever noticed a plethora of unhappily single women, unable to find a man. The situation is actually the reverse, with English men resorting to Asian/European (Russian) women, who it must be said are younger, slimmer and better looking, but I doubt they would have gone to the lengths necessary to do this if English women were showing any interest. They aren’t; yet when they do feel so inclined, they themselves search out the bazaars of North African Muslim Countries for a younger man who assures her he loves her but really seeks that E.U. passport. We live in strange times.
“Roe (Roe vs. Wade) is not a law. It is the Judicial branch of the Fedreal government unconstitutionally usurping the law making abilities of the Legislative (Congress) branch.”
I never said Roe was a “law,” in the sense of it being a statute. It’s a Supreme Court decision. As for the rest of it, it was based on the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which puts a check on the lawmaking abilities of the State legislatures. (The Federal legislature, Congress, was not implicated in Roe). I understand that you disagree with the decision, but terms like “unconstitutionally usurping” are simply rhetoric. The challengers to the State laws pled the fourteenth amendment, and the court agreed with them. At that level, no unconstitutiona usurpation occured, unless you don’t think judicial review is legitimate.
“Let it be overturned as it should be. States allowed abortions before that travesty and it’s guaranteed more states will allow abortions after it’s overturned. It’s called Federalism and it’s what our Constitution is about.”
Some States allowed it, most didn’t. Federalism is a great thing, but so are Constitutional rights. I, for one, do not want to see the fourteeth amendment repealed. I think the case was rightly decided. You don’t. But the formal procedures were not illigitimate.
Opus-
You have mistaken the discussion of hypergamy. Nearly all women have a hypergamous impulse.
The desire for better is always there, even though most married women are not acting on it by divorcing.
Even though many women are willing to bear the emotional and economic costs of divorce, only the most foolish of women would ever think that it is without cost.
Now, while it is true that men AND women want the best possible mate, there is a subtle difference. Men are more into quantity – some call it polygamous, although it is not the most accurate word since it implies wanting to MARRY them all. We don’t; mens’ feral nature means that we would like to screw as many attractive women as possible. To a feral man, a harem of 8s beats a single 10.
Women do not crave this simultaneous variety. If a woman is cheating on her husband, she ONLY wants sex from the lover, but stays with the husband for pragmatic reasons, but in her heart (or perhaps someplace a little lower…) she has moved on.
Anyway, it is specious to suggest that the man-o-sphere is full of men suggesting a cycle of continuous divorce. This is not an accurate representation of the man-o-sphere argument.
It is more accurate to say that the hypergamous impulse is a major element in many divorces, and that popular culture and the divorce-fantasy genre of media SELLS the idea (eat, pray, love, etc) that a better man and a better life is just a divorce away.
The hypergamous impulse is not really disputed by most people who look at the issue openly. Women are not so much monogamous as they are serially monogamous. The overlap between guy 1 who is on the way out and guy 2 who is the new love is much shorter for women than men.
————————————————————————-
Every girl should be sat down and shown a picture of a swimming pool and a glass of water. The swimming pool represents the supply of men who want to have sexual contact with you.
The glass of water represents to supply of men who will marry you, stay with you to the very end, and drive you to dialysis treatments and help you out of your wheelchair.
Hint: These are not the ‘hot’ men that are showing you so much charm and attention. Those men just want into your panties, no matter how convincing they are to the contrary.
Pay now or pay later. Ride the carousel now and look for your wheelchair-pushing beta later? You can try, but most gamblers do not know when to quit. Or learn to love a good, but less exciting man, and be set for life with a soul mate and loyal companion.
Only the HOTTEST women can ‘have it all’. The rest must make choices that involve tradeoffs.
It would be poetic justice if the carousel riders were the ones ending up as spinsters, but I think we’re mixing up two different types of women here, although there may be some overlap. This classic essay:
http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html
argues that mastering social skills is hard and challenging work, and that academic/professional high achievers can struggle in their relationships because they don’t dedicate as much effort to that area of their lives (relative to those who do instead of focusing on good grades/professional achievement).
In other words social IQ (“game” when it comes to the SMV/MMV) is often inversely related to academic/professional achievement. I would say that the exception is people who benefited from growing in up strong, supportive families, but that’s another topic.
Your typical carousel rider is a woman with a high social IQ who knows there is no hurry to settle down with a beta provider, that she is savvy enough to pick an orbiter at any age up to 32-34 (she’s also usually savvy enough to appreciate him when she does), so she might as well take her best shot at landing an alpha (high social IQ male). She can run into some trouble as society undervalues the high social IQ female relative to the past in its efforts to push women to be high achievers, so sometimes she can overrate her value, but usually I don’t see these women having any trouble finding partners, and good ones.
Men appreciate that social IQ, especially betas who lack it and need her help (in exchange for his wisdom in the affairs of the world – this is the traditional exchange, and its a healthy one. The bitter betas are the ones having trouble finding it due to the growth in the number of high achieving/socially retarded females).
The spinsters on the other hand are the high achieving women that never really developed their social IQ beyond what they use in their professional lives (mirroring, golden rule) which end up being disastrous strategies in relationships due to the gender differences we’re all here familiar with. As she has met with so much success in her academic/professional career, she finds excuses to avoid the higher risk of failure that awaits her if she takes risks in her social life, which ends up compounding the problem as she’s deprived of the practice that would improve her performance (a problem with which male betas are very familiar).
The women often end up in LTR’s and sometimes marriage with lower betas and even omegas, and have often turned down a string of much better men out of their fear of failure. This is actually the target audience of the well-meaning but misguided crowd promoting EPL. These women often are selling themselves short, but by the time they’re 30, it really is too late to fix the problem.
The bitterest of betas* are good men who were raised by high achieving women (including many first wave feminists) and thus are attracted to women who remind them of their female role models. These women are often rejecting these greater betas* not out of lust for the alphas, but out of fear that they might get rejected themselves due to their social IQ shortcomings., while they cling to lesser beta boyfriends that often become settled for husbands, then exploited divorcees.
See the Finkel case.
* – this was my situation before I learned (non-PUA) game. Eric, you can power through it and change that woman dramatically. Read The Taming of the Shrew.
An example of the high social IQ carouseler landing well, see Kristen Wiig’s character in Bridesmaids.
And no, that’s not a chick flick. Way too honest/funny.
The most pronounced problem we have is out of wedlock pregmancy which I suspect is probably more common here than the coastal cities.
I will say that the problem is out of wedlock births I wouldn’t be surprised if there simmilar numbers in pregnancies (according to many PUAs american women are very fond of bareback sex) but that coastal women get an abortion at higher rates.
@slwerner
Wow and I though Hitler had a dark mind that essay was disgusting…
Only the HOTTEST women can ‘have it all’. The rest must make choices that involve tradeoffs.
Most Pride and Prejudiced fans want to think they are Lizzy Bennet no one wants to be Charlotte who was very realistic about her age,looks and marriage prospects married Collins and settled in a comfortable domestic life that she could find happiness in. Try to tell them that Charlotte made a great choice and see their hamsters exploding in rage, they rather be Lidya (ignorant slut saved of shame by the leading man by a hair but at least banging a bad boy) than Charlotte. Sad but true.
@Desiderius
I am not rooting for carouselers to be inducted in the Hall of Spinsterhood… If I was, I have checked myself on it… These women have a right (that they have freely exercised that right BTW) to pick the best man that their beauty and swagger can allow… Again, that is not an issue… I root for these women to find happiness where ever they can get it
Women feel like it is a given or feel entitled that I, or a guy like myself will be her 3rd – 4th draft pick, consolation prize, her fallback guy… And scream loudly when beta men don’t play that savior role for them… I am sure if men could be arrested for this offense, women would co-sign it…
Here is the black version of the Western spinster math
Same rhetoric, enjoy
SSTTE
Excellent link motrenaissance, he says it all
“(according to many PUAs american women are very fond of bareback sex) but that coastal women get an abortion at higher rates.”
I don’t know that they’re “fond” of it, but they aren’t too fussy about getting an unshod dick in their snatch. I used to go bareback all the time before I found out almost half the chicks in America have some form of herpes (Must have had the STD angel watching over me or something cause I still got a clean bill of health).They’re actually pickier about cut vs uncut cocks than they are about raw vs raincoated, which foreign women tell me is a weird prejudice to have.
which foreign women tell me is a weird prejudice to have.
I will say most women in my country are terrified of STD’s we all know several women that got AIDS and died from their husbands cheating on them regularly so we are very paranoid about it. When I meet my hubby before the first trip I asked him for all the STD’s test possible and I did the same to show goodwill (I was a virgin so of course I was clean) I can’t imagine anyone that grew up during the AIDS’s scare being so careless about that, even if is chronic nowadays who wants to get ill just for a better orgasm? I can’t wrap my head around that and you are right about the cut, uncut dick is weird to get fixated on that, cultural differences I suppose.
Here’s an example of low social IQ/high achiever woman.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/fashion/sometimes-its-not-you-or-the-math-modern-love.html
Notice that she eventually chose a low social IQ mate. Early in life she likely tried to mimic the traditional complementary pairing (one partner high achieving, the other high social IQ) with the genders reversed – a.k.a. chasing cads.
She downplays the much overdue introspection, especially regarding the negative attitude, but the awareness that this was an issue likely tempered the problem enough for her to eventually find a decent man who wasn’t repulsed by her, and her ego enough to appreciate him enough to get him to stay.
@Desiderius
Interesting…
Also, keep in mind, that high social IQ means little when they are no takers…
Even PUAs need willing participants… And that is why I am interested in the next 5 years about marriage stats… I do think the grotesque divorce laws will be reformed tho, so that should help a little…
3. That women set out to hurt men. I find them so self-centered that they do not notice the hurt that their behaviour induces, as, not being very good at cause and effect and lacking normal (male) empathy, they can only see things form their own viewpoint.
Dalrock
Agreed. They are generally more like a clueless bull in a china shop than a malevolent force. They are often unaware of the wreckage they leave in their wakes (this is the meaning of the buoy in the pic for this site).
FWEEEET!
Flag on the play! Are y’all discussing the inherently empathetic, too-sensitive-to-other-people’s-needs-to-ever-focus-on-their-own, kinder, gentler sex?
Cognitive dissonance alert! I’ll have to consult the rulebook to see how many yards are involved.
Hi guys!
I have another question, I hope I’m not annoying but I’m curious about something.
I heard the MRA maxim that “women get the men that they deserve and had since the dawn of times” so what about third world women like me (Latinas, Thais, Easter Russians as well) whose countrymen are not…good to use a word. Do you think we deserve them?
Also if you do (or don’t) what is the position of women like me, that outsource?
I would be after all escaping my own mistakes and destiny or whatever you call it.
Again this is not a shit test I just want to know how third world women that reject their own men are perceived around the red pill men of the first world.
Thanks for the help! 🙂
motre,
You know, I kind of like her eyes.
I bet she got a lot of lesser alphas in her youth with those eyes but lost them in the morning with the rest of her face, setting her up for failure until her feminist entitlement finally wore down and she got the beta she could have had any time in the previous 20 years.
Anacaona: The men get women who want to leave the country to find better men, so I guess they get the women they deserve. There is also always a bit of lag, so for a while women or men will get better or worse women or men than they deserve, when men or women in their primary market change for the better or worse.
The way laws and society looks in the Anglosphere women have been getting better men than they deserve for husbands and fathers for a while.
Thanks for the answer Lavazza, much appreciated 🙂
You’re welcome. I also think that the lag is longer for “getting worse” than “getting better”. Improvements are more visible and deteriorations can be hidden quite easily (or rationalized away).
“”Don’t be a single mother. It sucks, it’s hard, it’s expensive. Find some schlub to marry you. All that matters is that he have a job. Once you’ve got him under contract, you don’t even have to have sex with him any more (wink, wink – he doesn’t even have to be the father, if you know what I mean).
But, not only will you have his income to help out, he’ll help with child care duties, and become your built-in babysitter for girls nights out.
And, if he happens to have a house, investments, and/or a good pension – BONUS! – cause you’ll get half of all that in the divorce.””
What a fucking LOSER!….this is exactly the kind of thinking that makes for all the single women today! I would not walk across the street to spit in the face of a loser whore like this! A woman like this is very easy to HATE!