Vox Day has a post up today on an article from Lauren Martin at Elite Daily: Ladies, The Smarter You Are, The More Likely You Are To Be Single
The Elite Daily article is truly a target rich environment. Cane Caldo has already covered the true meaning of Easter, so I thought I’d use this piece to host a (belated) manosphere Easter egg hunt. Astute readers should be able to find all of the following, and perhaps several others:
- Hypergamy (see Vox’s post)
- Ugly feminist
- Weak men screwing feminism up
- Sailers Law of Female Journalism
- The Writer
- Women with plenty of time to think about how men should treat them
- Rollo’s chart
- Choosing last is a terrible strategy
I’ve touched on the last item here and here, but Martin describes the fundamental problem for women who select a strategy of allowing other women to choose first:
Unfortunately, for all those women who thought a man would come later, other women capitalized on their youth, snatching up all the boyfriends and husbands while they focused on building their careers.
Women went into college with an intent to come out wives, slowly but steadily snatching up the number of available men for all those women who chose to attack their professional dreams.
Pingback: Choosing last sucks | Manosphere.com
Going back to the whole book sense does not equal common sense thing….
Pingback: Choosing last sucks | Neoreactive
Put another way, for women, academic achievement correlates inversely with marital happiness.
More “intelligent” women often have an easier time spinning things their way = more victim status like this article, or less responsibilities and more power like feminism = more drama.
What man wants more drama?
“Lauren Martin is a Senior Lifestyle Writer at Elite Daily. After graduating from PSU, she moved to NYC to write fart jokes at Smosh Magazine. Making her way to ED, she now writes riveting commentary on nude pics, condoms and first dates.”
There you have it, gentlemen. A chick that makes a living with low-brow humor, but yet complains that men are scared of her intelligence. I enjoy a good scatological joke, but after spending my day in a warehouse talk environment, is it too much to ask a girl to class it up a bit. And when I say class it up, that doesn’t mean debating some junk science that’s passed off as academia….
Dalrock, on choosing last… it depends on whether or not you are spending $250,000 to send your daughter to a finishing school surrounded only by the most promising men while your daughter earns her MRS degree. Consider this remark.
This is what Susan Patton suggested, pick first and early….
http://dailyprincetonian.com/opinion/2013/03/letter-to-the-editor-advice-for-the-young-women-of-princeton-the-daughters-i-never-had/
Never again surrounded by this concentration of men who are WORTHY of YOU.
Holy sh-t!!!!! This is what a hard core full on feminist becomes when you are fed a diet of nothing but red pill wisdom…. out and out refusal to back down on the ultimate point of the feminist imperative (that girls have value and boys do not)… but given that certainty, how can we get the most we can from men by playing their silly games????
The original article seems to conflate intelligence with education — not necessarily the same thing.
From my point of view, a woman’s intelligence is a good gift. She can apply it positively or negatively, as we would all recognize. However, since educational attainment is the credentialing apparatus for salaried (read: full-time and reasonably well-paying) employment, and since women are earning bachelors degrees 3-to-2 compared to men, degreed women are generally better situated in terms of earning potential. Men in their cohort fall victim to hypergamy since the pool of marriageable peers is constrained.
Dear Dalrock:
Unfortunately, for all those women who thought a man would come later, other women capitalized on their youth, snatching up all the boyfriends and husbands while they focused on building their careers.
This is a great observation.
Modern society seems to be an absolute goldmine for the serious young woman who wants to get married. I see the smart girls snagging men who in any other generation would be way out of their league. Today, almost any girl who isn’t hideous, who isn’t morbidly obese, who isn’t a total whore, and who is moderately polite can lock down a high quality man in record time.
Take advantage, ladies.
Boxer
It’s not her smarts keeping her single…it’s her prideful attitude in thinking she knows how the world works because she absorbed feminist brainwashing in school for years.
Any girl who keeps her femininity to me is smart. And she can attract a good man too.
“Smarts” seems to be somehow equated with “hyperactive rationalizaqtion hamster”.
Gee, I wonder why?
Fundamental attribution error and conflation of intelligence with education:
“It must be because we are smart (not because of what every man on Earth knows 4 years of college does to a girl).”
Non sequiter (attacking a position that has never been argued):
“Why don’t men want women with whom they can converse and who challenge them?”
False dichotomy:
“If you’re stupid, you’re not taken seriously, but if you’re smart, you’re taken too seriously.”
It goes on forever.
“It’s a tough world out there… full of awkward first dates, bad sex and limited chances at orgasms.”
I don’t think an intelligent person would start an article with this sentence.
Easter egg hunt is a good way to think of this article, but on the other hand Easter eggs are desired objects.
Lauren Martin’s article reminds me more of, hmm….cow pasture bingo.
Knew a guy whose wife was an engineer. yes an honest to goodness one while he was more of a trades guy though he made good money. His way of making it work: dominant personality … and spanking. So it’s possible to make it work if the guy has hand and that’s what the woman wants. But of course, Rollo’s performance thesis absolutely applies here.
@IBB
“This is what Susan Patton suggested, pick first and early”
Unfortunately, Patton’s good advice for girls was wrapped in snobbery towards men.
http://snowgoosechronicles.blogspot.com/2014/02/good-advice-for-girls-wrapped-in.html
“A record number of American women are “marrying down,” tying the knot with a husband who is less educated than they are, according to a new study.
Nearly 21% of married women in 2012 were better educated than their spouses, a threefold jump from 1960, according to the Pew Research Center. By contrast, a bit less than 20% of men had more formal education than their wives.”
But, as you’ll read in the article, they’re NOT actually “marrying down”.
In my opinion, the simple answer to the entire absurd article is that men want wives who love us, and that we can love and cherish – Not wives who think their jobs are to make sure that the world is challenging us enough and whom we have to look at as opponents.
Does the “ugly feminist” category include her subtle accusation about how terrible it is for other women to have different priorities than her? (Home and family instead of “impressive resume”)
“pestering pain all intelligent women feel as men continually take them out to dinner, have a great time then decide they’re not worth the work.”
Different set of books for sure! I think we are using different definitions of the term: “intelligent women.”
Hint: Pain in the ass, annoying, self-righteous, arrogant, BITCH is different than “intelligent.” Feminine, helpful, sweet, warm, bubbly is different than “unintelligent.”
Oscar, as I said, the feminist imperative is strong with this one. Here Princetonian letter to encourage girls to get that MRS degree, was a red pill as you are going to get from Susan Patton.
The Elite Daily article is truly a target rich environment.
It sure is, but then again I think it’s time we realized that ALL articles like this are deliberately written to be full of irresistible targets. We especially need to keep the following in mind: The Writers[TM] are attention whores. All of them. It’s their primary, if not only motivation for churning out this stuff. If the manosphere and its analyses of such articles didn’t exist, then writers like Mizz Lauren Martin, Mizz Laura Dipshitz, et al., would either not bother to write at all or would be spewing out other flavors of shallow drivel for outlets like Vogue, Cosmo, Woman’s Day and the like, outlets read by their own and on topics of no interest whatsoever to men.
That said, I don’t think it’s worth paying Mizz Martin’s puddle of verbal vomitus any serious attention other than to make a couple of casual observations.
Women now associate the dating landscape with the same risks many face going into the arctic tundra.
It’s cold, uncomfortable and it’s more than likely that you’ll die before getting that fire lit.
While it would have been more accurate for Martin to use the job hunt metaphor, it’s worth noting that today’s edjookayted StrongEmpoweredWoman[TM] always views intersexual relationships in Darwinian terms, full of adversity or competition. For some reason it never enters their estrogen-addled brainlets that men put up with competition and adversity nearly every hour of every day in the real world and that having to fight those same battles with someone of the opposite sex from whom they would seek love, respect, and support is, to put it much too kindly, not an appealing prospect.
The saying should be something closer to “ignorant women get the man and intelligent women never feel bliss.”
Actually, a much more accurate maxim would be “bitches get dogs and feminine women get men.”
The rest is just too much like shooting fish in a barrel, and since I’ve overdosed on seafood over the last few weeks, the angling prospect just doesn’t appeal right now.
Anyone (male or female) who can get into Princeton must by definition be pretty intelligent. Susan Patton seems to be saying that since women like to marry men at least as smart as they are it would be in their best interests to find a husband on campus while they can still marry their intellectual equal or better. I think this is what she means by “worthy of you.” This is pretty good advice in my opinion.
“The original article seems to conflate intelligence with education — not the same thing at all. ”
Fixed.
But men like a woman with a powerful career!!!
Hope everyone had a bloc Easter.
Well the dating/marrying down part could well become more common as we go along, insofar as more women are getting the college slots and degrees than men.
The rest is false-flag click bait. As if being an Extra Executive is the only proper choice, the only other option being Stepford Wife. What Mz. M means by “intelligent” is “woman who is Super Bossy Pants “challenged” by a supplicating collgrad to let him wash the dishes and do the laundry in exchange for pity nookie.” Anything else is the Super Boss woman betraying Womanhood by supplicating. In the perfect intersectionalist workers paradise, she should be Large and In Charge in order to land the Ace Alpha her degrees and 20-pound wallet say she is entitled to.*
While the really smart women are “intelligent” enough to know to be pleasant and feminine and thereby be a good spouse, helping her man to perform (using Rollo’s term). OK she can perform her job too, many households need that second income, but she can switch it off going out the office door.
*This book has already been written: see The Bitch In The House – a bunch of essays by Modern American cis-gendered female-type marrieds who hate hate hate their beta husbands but claim not to know why they do.
“Don’t let your boy’s schooling interfere with his education.”
Mark Twain paraphrasing Grant Allen.
Intelligence is a natural attribute. Schooling is a formal process of teaching one to think a certain way. Education is the acquisition of information and wisdom, which may or may not involve formal schooling. I like to state it this way: Content knowledge comes from reading and listening to others’ stories; Process knowledge is what you learn from actually doing something (e.g., read about dissecting a frog vs. actually dissecting a frog) . And intelligence is the natural ability (or lack of ability) to make use of both content and process knowledge.
Placing a degreed woman with a non-degreed man gives us no information as to who of the two is best able to navigate life. Over the long-term, chances are that the skill-sets of both will be needed.
But Lauren Martin is discussing bragging rights at the cocktail party. For that, being successfully paired, regardless of degree, is less important than being able to brag that you were good enough to snag a man who has more schooling than you – never mind whether he is a good fit for you or you for him.
Oddly enough, the only thing sensible about the article was the title. Highly intelligent men and women are more likely to be single (see the lifelong bachelor academic). It starts quite early on though as a lesser interest in the opposite sex, at least as shown by studies of first age of sexual experience correlated with IQ/SAT scores/education. There is so much of a focus on other things that relationships fall on the back burner.
Also, obviously very intelligent women will have far more trouble than men finding a partner as they need to *respect* the man they marry. If he is always making (to you) foolish decisions or unable to grasp “easy” points on how to optimize whatever you have been thinking about… the respect will wither and die and the marriage with it. Using IQ (not the best measure), a woman of highly superior intelligence (130+) relates to the average man (100) the same way he relates to a mentally incapacitated person.
The workaround here is cleverness and skills in other areas, people sense, mechanical ability etc. but the respect will not be built on an “intellectual” level as most women believe they require (but but but I want him to understand why I think what I think!!!!!). The man, while excellent in all respects, would be unable to do so. However, men look for different qualities in a wife (kindness, sweet temper, attractive, hard working etc.) so the raw intelligence is less important, providing she isn’t completely stupid.
But really, why do people feel as if a degree means they are educated? I have met a number of erudite high school dropouts and quite a few college grads who can’t read anything more complex than Cosmo.
@Emily
The only problem is the undergraduate men are not at all likely to be in the marrying pool. Far better to scout the grad and professional degree students.
From Lauren Martin:
When did the aversion to strong and intelligent women become a code orange?
When “strong and intelligent” was decoded to the real meaning: obnoxious, contentious, solipsistic, fickle, arrogant, gynocentric woman, maybe?
When avoiding “strong and intelligent women” became a survival skill for men, except for the PUA’s who like a short term challenge?
Target rich environment, indeed. I should skim the comments.
On a site like the Elite Daily, education = indoctrination which is substituted for intelligence and occasionally mistaken for wisdom. Even among the naysayers in the comment section, feminism reigns supreme.
@Rifleman
Yes. I would also have accepted (prize to mrb4852):
or (prize to Bucho):
Dalrok, after reading the comments on Laura Martin’s article, you should include a link to the “mound rebuilding.” They are scrambling to and fro is unbelievable. They just cannot accept that the postmodern feminist narrative is flawed in any way, and their hatred for those who question it is borderline frightening.
The same PHD gal who would never date a man who works at Mcdonalds, wants to crucify someone who casually cites hypergamy.
But they have had lots of trips to the Caribbean and the Mediteranian where they flew first class and had exotic vacations with their girlfriends slutting it up with all the local tour guides….. not to mention all the wine tasting parties and the 3 or 4 BMW leases they had all before age 35. Okay so she didn’t buy a house (or even a condo) and had to keep rolling her student debt over and over (never quite paying it down even a penny) and has lots of debt on the Visa and Mastercards, but d-mn, look at all those designer shoes in her closet!!!!! When she’s 35, she’ll expect someone like yourself to mysteriously appear and make her whole on all her debt and already have the house for her to move into and take possession of in marriage…. so get cracking TFH.
Too late for entries?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-freezing-my-eggs-restored-my-sanity/2015/04/02/4069fefc-cc07-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html?tid=sm_tw
THF,
A few thoughts on the false dichotomy between marriage vs. career. I don’t think many women realize how hard they have to work in order to be at the top of their field and how few people are actually at the top. If you start working at 22 right out of college, you’re not gonna be CEO by 24. I work in academia, so I’ve read a lot of articles from new assistant professors who claim it’s hard to date because of their workload, isolated locations where they may live, low pay, etc. They sometimes blame academia for their lack of prospects, but if truth be told, academia tends to attract people who are shyer, late bloomers, a bit social awkward, nerdy/geeky types who would have probably married later anyway had they chosen another profession. A lot of women blame their jobs for not being able to find a mate. It’s like “If I didn’t have to work so hard I could have time to date…” Not to mention, many careers (or jobs even) require years of schooling. I’m thinking law, medicine, and yes, college professors.
Now why the assumption is you have to do the professional thing alone I don’t know.
@Dalrock
I just posted a link to this clusterf*** on your previous thread about how women need to ask men out
because we are incompetent morons and mama’s boys.Go through her articles…….you will find a LOT to post about.
@Rollo
https://vimeo.com/123999016…………………….I don’t know if you saw this but,…”Rollo Tommasi literally saved my life”…….^5’s my friend! I love to read things like this! He is not the only guy that is grateful to you.Keep it up!
‘Hence, a woman who truly wants to marry at age 22 has an extremely vast choice of husbands available to her, due to lack of competition from other women her age.’
Yeah but they also have to overcome the hive mindset…it’s like the death star to women.
The funny thing is, there are far more high-IQ men than women because of the different shapes of the bell curves, so a high-IQ woman has plenty of high- or higher-IQ men to choose from. The 130-IQ woman doesn’t need to find a way to find the 100-IQ man attractive, because there is a surplus of 130+ men.
But the 130+ men are often a little nerdy, and they spend a lot of time inside on work that women don’t understand or find interesting, so they aren’t very taut or tan. They rarely ride motorcycles or get prison tats, so most of them are invisible to her. The ones who are dominant enough to be visible are probably banging a bunch of coeds and won’t give her the time of day. So she looks around and all she sees are: men she wants but can’t compete for, and men who turn her on but aren’t marriage prospects because they’re uneducated.
Poor thing, why can’t she get a date with a quality guy?
“While the really smart women are “intelligent” enough to know to be pleasant and feminine and thereby be a good spouse, helping her man to perform (using Rollo’s term). OK she can perform her job too, many households need that second income, but she can switch it off going out the office door.”
I’ve often wondered about this. I remember reading somewhere (Roissy?) that intelligence and beauty in women are actually usually found together. The question becomes, is it “more intelligent” for a woman to snag a high-quality man at 22, have several children, and be a homemaker? Or to get years and years of expensive specialized schooling and then struggle in a difficult profession to develop her career, which in my experience women don’t really derive much satisfaction from the way men do?
My grandmother had a career as a nurse or administrative assistant or something, which she immediately dropped to be a farmer’s wife. She’s been totally focused on serving the careers and health of her husband and sons ever since. She’s healthy (for her age), happy, satisfied, and surrounded by people who love her. Her sons volunteer to do things for her without being asked, and she gets visited by family all throughout her winter time in Florida. Is her IQ as high as the writer of the above article? Probably not, but who cares? One of them achieved their goals and is good at what they do, and the other one is a whiny “journalist.” I say intelligence has a strong practical component in it. If the choices you’ve freely made have caused you to be a failure at what you most wanted to accomplish, how smart are you?
Cail–
Pretty interesting analysis. I would push the “nerdy” label a little to the right though. 130 is not that hard to get. Once you are about 3 SDs above average, you really start to look weird though. Those guys spend their time contemplating things that almost no one can relate to. They aren’t concerned with personal hygeine, etc because they are busy solving the worlds most complex problems.
I’ve tested a few people in that range. It is pretty awkward when the subject is waaaaaay smarter than the doctor.
She could, but she won’t, because:
1) She’ll probably take 5-6 years to complete college. Heck, when I went way back in the 1980s, they were already telling people to plan on 5 years because most students blow a year somewhere along the way on a bad relationship or some other distraction.
2) Odds are she wants a Masters, now that degree inflation means a Bachelor’s is just enough to get you a job counting out pepperonis. That’ll take another year or two.
3) She deserves a few years after all that hard work in college, to travel, have an affair with an Italian painter, and basically have a multi-year bachelorette party before settling down. Plus she needs to get that fabulous career started.
So now we’re talking 28-29.
Scott, I suppose it depends a lot on where you hang out. About 1/40 people have an IQ of 130+. (As you say, the curve drops very fast after that, but 130 isn’t terribly rare.) According to stuff I’ve read about Dunbar’s number, the average person has about 150 stable relationships (family, friends, colleagues, etc.). So the average person would know 3-4 people that smart. But a guy in prison might know zero, while a guy who works at a genetics lab might know dozens.
But considering the 130-IQ woman: odds are pretty good that she’s the only woman that smart in her acquaintance, while there are 3-4 men that smart, and they won’t typically be men with a ton of dating prospects. If she works in a high-IQ field like genetic research, her odds get even better, because there will be a few token women and all the rest will be high-IQ men. She really shouldn’t have trouble finding and snaring one if she makes herself presentable — and if intelligence is really a big priority for her, which it’s probably not.
I enjoy dating intelligent women but I have got to say that I have never seen any correlation between academic achievements and emotional stability. Some of the most emotionally out-of-control females I have known have had plenty of tertiary education; education cannot turn off female caterwauling or manipulation. In contrast one of the most level headed of my ex-girlfriends left school at fifteen.
Sometimes feminism prevents a feminist from even admitting she was wrong when she is FORCED to admit she was wrong because the entire world knows she was wrong
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-06/rolling-stone-can-t-even-apologize-right
included the link this time.
that didn’t take long…..
http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/06/media/phi-kappa-psi-rolling-stone-legal-action/
hey, red pill law talking guys, what kind of a case does Phi Kappa Psi have against Rolling Stone and/or UVa? Is UVa’s entire endowment fund up for grabs the way it was with the Duke Lacrosse case?
“So now we’re talking 28-29.”
For the umpteenth time, women are NOT men, and cannot manage their lives like men. Feminism has been an absolute tragedy for women. Women should be raised to be supporters and nurturers to men, rather than their competitors – it is womens’ natural role.
A woman at 30 absolutely will NOT draw the same men that she did at 20. A woman at 30 or 35+ will find herself in the position of having to “settle” for a man, rather than picking more precisely the man that she wants, like at age 20 – 22 – this will cause problems and resentment in any later marriage most likely. Further, older men, 35+, who are considered “catches” WILL be getting attention from a cohort of young 20 – 24 year old women that “get it” and are looking for a husband then – these older women will NOT be able to compete with these younger women for desirable husbands.
Oh, and when does her fertility start to plummet? Starting at 26 or 27, and it rapidly goes down from there, assuming she also wants to have healthy child. Men with half a brain understand this stuff, bizarrely and inexplicably, many women do not.
Just sayin’.
‘Women should be raised to be supporters and nurturers to men, rather than their competitors – it is womens’ natural role.’
What women get now is an education system telling them to hate men and motherhood. The role most women want is wife and mother and it is being brainwashed out of them by a society that wants them to focus on a career and promiscuity.
I’ve been wondering what all of you think about a talk I heard on Saturday. It’s a talk from the Mormon general conference about marriage.
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/sessions/2015/04?lang=eng
It’s the third talk from the Saturday morning session. The one by Linda Burton. This entire conference has caused many men I know to openly question marriage and the feminine imperative. The open discussions I’ve had over the last three days have been fairly shocking. Heavily red pill.
http://business.financialpost.com/financial-post/divorce-via-facebook-new-york-woman-told-she-can-serve-her-husband-divorce-papers-on-social-network
@TFH,
“Extremely few people truly have careers that are ‘impressive’. ”
Feminists have been lied to about how fulfilling and meaningful a job/career is. They are chasing an unbalanced life thinking all work will be satisfying and fulfilling. Especially sad are the ones who end up alone without any children in old age.
I worked 13 years for a Fortune 500 company in a white collar position. I received some workplace awards but they pale in comparison to the love and fulfillment from my family and from the people I have helped on their spiritual journey.
I wish I’d known this when I was 35. If I was getting interest from 20-24-year-old girls then, I didn’t notice because I never would have expected it, and certainly didn’t go looking for it. A shame.
Not to sound pessimistic…are there really 20-24 year old women seeking men 35+. People talk about it all the time but I have yet to see it anywhere in reality.
Yeah I meant marriage.
I find it amazing that in 50 short years women have managed to be brainwashed from what they truly need into a lifetime of wasted time, loneliness and heartbreak. I don’t even see an end to it. Young girls are still getting worthless degrees, doing drugs, gaining weight, tattoos, and meaningless hook ups. But if it wasn’t for the thirsty Plan B man to save them after their partying 20s…they may think twice.
I love Rollo Tomasi’s blog and his books, but I am of the opinion that Rollo left out a couple very important parameters with that SMV chart.
“Young girls are still getting worthless degrees, doing drugs, gaining weight, tattoos, and meaningless hook ups. ” – earl
Kinda reminds me of this time a friend of mine was fawning over this chick across the room at one of those chain restaurant bars. She had a sleeve tattoo and when he asked my what I though of her, I responded, “Meh…. That’s a large tattoo….” Dude got upset and spun his tires about how great tattoos are. I guess we’ll keep seeing more of these girls as guys keep accepting this….
“Education is no substitute for intelligence.”
Frank Herbert
@IBB Which parameters? I’ve read “The Rational Male – Preventive Medicine (Volume 2)” three times. I learn more every time I read it. He explains with clarity why women in their 20s find older men attractive. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He4hJpC8s3M
“Not to sound pessimistic…are there really 20-24 year old women seeking men 35+. People talk about it all the time but I have yet to see it anywhere in reality.”
Note that I said that the man is a “Catch,” not your typical American man at 35+, who is likely fat, out of shape, under-employed, or even divorced and impoverished at that still young age. By “Catch” I mean a man that “has his shit together” – e.g., a real, interesting, impressive, respectable career, with a well above average salary, who is in shape, not fat, not boring, not feminized, has their own home, not renting a studio apartment or living in their moms’ basement. Men in their 30’s or even 40’s like this attracting women in their 20’s is still possible in the U.S., but better to go overseas, where many of the women actually prefer older men, and many even refuse to date young men their own age (i.e., Latin America). American men are The Shit in southeast Asia – try even first world places like Singapore and Hong Kong. If you’re a man that is NOT a “catch,” then, well, yes, it can be difficult with younger women – but still try places like the Philippines or Thailand, where a man can actually be autistic and have “anti-game,” and still find women.
@earl,
They do exist, but a man will need to work at finding them and go the places where they are concentrated.
Best thing I personally found to meet girls in that age range was to visit universities and interact with the students there (in a non creeper way). I have a couple interesting stories from doing just that as a guest speaker. The other thing that comes to mind is to be working at a place the employs a lot of young women under 25. Often though, when I’ve encountered pretty young ladies at work, there was a lot of competition for their attentions/hypergamy in action. Church might be another possibility.
@bee,
Re: Income distribution. That’s a really good point, and something that is not portrayed realistically to young people — especially women. It’s the income outliers that get all the press, and help foster an unrealistic set of career expectations. The Income distribution pyramid is brutal. According to my google-fu, making $150,000 a year puts a man at the 95 percentile, and a woman at the 99th. What is even lest talked about it how much work, and how long it took that 1 man in 20 to get to that level. Most of these ‘lower-tier’ high earners are going to be over the age of 45, more likely in their 50s, and have spent much of their lives working or acquiring to get to that level. I’ve met people in their 20s who expect to make it to the inner circle of company executives in just a few years. As you say, they are not enlightened.
There’s a lot of disappointment to be had when real life doesn’t turn out like it’s shown on TV. And that often is carried over in damaging ways into future relationships. Everyone wants Mr. Big, but he’s the outlier.
LiveFearless,
They are attracted to the money and the power that the older male has. Yes. But that doesn’t mean that the “attraction” translated into s-xual attraction (his SMV.) Sure, the 23 year old gold-digger girl wants to marry the 38 year old plastic surgeon (and will if given the chance.) She will happily have his babies. And she might even stay happily married to him his whole life (provided the income keeps flowing.) But she still wants to f-ck the 19 year old pool cleaning boy/lifeguard or her own 22 year old personal trainer (two guys with basically minimual to non-existant income) much more than she does her own husband. It is not that she is NOT s-xually attracted to her own husband (she is) but he is probably not at the top of the list (not that he ever was.) That is as red pill as red pill gets. There may not be anything that anyone can do to prevent this little problem, anyone with half a brain can understand that money and power for men do not always equate to SMV.
OT: More young women choosing dogs over motherhood. Seems like many have given up already.
http://nypost.com/2014/04/10/more-young-women-choosing-dogs-over-motherhood/
‘but still try places like the Philippines or Thailand, where a man can actually be autistic and have “anti-game,” and still find women.’
The Philippines is a pretty Catholic country and it is one of the few places in the world where the women actually know it’s better to be virgins, to be courted, and they want to be married.
If you’re an older man interested in younger women and you want to see a master at work, watch Tom Selleck in the Jesse Stone movies. Of course, being a Christian, you won’t take them straight to bed as he does, so you’ll have to figure out for yourself how to keep them tingling for years while you wait for them to get interested in marriage.
As TFH said, getting them to sleep with you is one thing, but they aren’t interested in marriage. But that’s the case regardless of your age; they’re not interested in marrying a 25-year-old man either. So at 35, your chances of sleeping with a 22-year-old girl are just as good as they were at 25, and your chances of marrying her are just as bad. On the positive side, if you can find a pretty, 22-year-old girl who’s ready to marry, your odds probably aren’t any worse than if you were her age, and may be better.
If you want to try finding that unicorn, start by being fit. Not gym-rat fit like the young guys, but solid (again, see Selleck, who was in his 60s when he made those movies and is completely believable as a fighter who pulls 20-something tail). She doesn’t really care that you’re older, as long as you don’t throw it in her face by being weak or letting your body break down. (Hair is better than not-hair, but you can’t do much about that.) Older men who do physical work gain a solidity and toughness that younger men just don’t have, and women love that. If they admire your shoulders, you’re doing it right.
Along with that, keep your movement and reactions slow and controlled and your responses short. “No” is always good. That signals that you’ve seen it all, nothing surprises you, her drama won’t faze you, and you’re not trying to impress her. You don’t put up with nonsense; it’s beneath your notice. You should look at her as if you know her whole story already and you’re mildly amused by it. The Bratty Little Sister frame fits the situation well too.
If you have some sort of fatal flaw, like a drinking problem, that’s the cherry on top, but not strictly necessary. When she asks you about something like your last relationship, just say “That’s complicated,” and let her hamster build a fantasy to her preferred darkness.
Do all that and you’ll probably generate lots of interest from them, more than you ever thought you could when you were younger. Then you just have to filter through until you find one who’s not allergic to marriage.
Oh no, welfare queens won’t be able to take cruises
http://donsurber.blogspot.com/2015/04/oh-no-welfare-queens-wont-be-able-to.html
@Earl,
The last plate I dropped was twenty years old. I am mid thirties. It was annoying to have to buy the alcohol but she paid. She tried to give me the “I’d make a good girlfriend” or “I’d be a good mother” etc nonsense. It hurt my reputation with the white knights but helped with all women of every age who knew.
The only reason I think we don’t see it more is because men don’t realize that they can do it if they want to. And I think it is more prevalent then you believe. I know of this happening with four other guys.
The Philippines is a pretty Catholic country and it is one of the few places in the world where the women actually know it’s better to be virgins, to be courted, and they want to be married.
I can vouch for this. Earl have you been shopping in a foreign market?
‘Earl have you been shopping in a foreign market?’
Not shopping per se…but you can certainly interact with them via the Internets. Their attitudes are a 180 from most American women.
The smartest women I’ve known were low key on the profile. Quiet, soft spoken, and serious when necessary. They understood that men have no use for problematic women. Today, feral feminists demand that men accept them as they are. Hmmm…..I come from a very violent background that involved dangerous folks doing highly illegal things. One of the truly basic things was to never involve a woman in your business. Why am I mentioning this? Well, as anyone who is familiar with my comments will tell you, I seem to have a streak of the prophet Jeremiah in my bones. Hard times are coming. Intelligent folks know this. History is really harsh for those who aren’t familiar with it. Women cannot be trusted like you can trust a dependable man. God has made mention of this fact in many ways in the Bible. Interestingly, He says that a good woman is actually a gift from God himself. Feminism is very old, as I’ve stated elsewhere. Tied in with an ancient reptile. Who is still using the same tactics that he used on Eve. Yes, it’s wisest for a young woman to marry and build up her household. But, the snake insists that a woman should get to know the knowledge of good and evil, right? When I read the Bible, I know that God is teaching us. Evil exists, and it often springs forth from a feminist mouth. But, if you listen, and ponder over it, you can see that feminism sprang forth from “reptilian” logic. The vast understanding of the essential weaknesses of the feral female, for that is what Eve became, are truly something to behold. Appealing to a spirit of rebellion, and dressing it up as something to be coveted, well, that’s what we’re dealing with today. That’s why almost all young women today are feral. You can’t build a family with a bestial personality. So, just an opinion as to why marriage is doomed in this feminist society. BTW, Jesus had some interesting things to say about having to flee for your life…..He pointedly said that it was a real bad day for women with babies.
You just found the answer! If wives have any trouble judging when their husbands are giving them “clearly sinful” orders, they just need to eat more apples.
Yessir, tell a woman she can’t have something, and see what she does. After all, she’s Eves daughter, right? And that “apple” didn’t fall far from that tree.
Their attitudes are a 180 from most American women.
It’s like night and day, AND… they don’t mind making sammiches for their menfolk.
Gotta say that the Latinas from south of the border make good wives. Raised in a Patriarchal society, deeply religious, hard workers……basically everything feminists here ain’t……I speak idiomatic Spanish, and grew up in the culture. JDG……these women cook…..and I ain’t kidding, either, and they’ll have your children, and run the house. Seriously. You’ve got to learn the culture and Spanish. It’ll prove to be a wise decision.
Forgot to mention…..Catholic, Baptist, Evangelical, many types, but, I’ll mention this, they don’t play churchian. These folks love God and the Bible.
Not to sound pessimistic…are there really 20-24 year old women seeking men 35+. People talk about it all the time but I have yet to see it anywhere in reality.
I know of one case in real life. A male friend of mine, 35 years old, is going to marry a 24-year-old in a couple months. (They’re both Americans, but met overseas on the mission field). They say their wedding night is going to be the first time for both of them, and I believe them: I know both of them (him a little better than her), and she really is a unicorn. Christian, dedicated to following the Bible, keeps talking about how she wants to be a good wife for him and submit to his leadership… My friend is a lucky man.
Thing is, he pursued her deliberately. He asked her out about a month after they first started spending time together, and asked her to marry him about a year after that.
It takes knowing what you’re looking for, and not being afraid to snap her up when you find that rare woman who really is following God instead of her own feeeeeeelings.
Gotta say that the Latinas from south of the border make good wives.
I know some divorced men, both American and Mexicans, who would not agree with that.
People acculturate pretty fast now in the mobile society. The out-of-marriage birth rate
for “Hispanics” seems to support that as well.
Not to sound pessimistic…are there really 20-24 year old women seeking men 35+. People talk about it all the time but I have yet to see it anywhere in reality.
Seeking men for marriage? Not in English-speaking North America, no. In Latin America, Asia, or Africa, yes, absolutely.
Gents……what I was tryin’ to say pertains to Latinas that live in Mexico and points south. Oh, and culturally, they make no bones over an older man with a young wife. I guess the point is that this feminist culture infects and ruins women. Plain fact. I’ll give you an example…..true christians abhor abortion as murder……and so it is. ANYONE who says anything about a woman’s right to choose isn’t christian. However, all young women are raised to believe it’s their right. Some may say that they may not agree, but each woman has the right to choose……such a person isn’t christian. She is a source of moral contamination. Extreme? Nope, that’s just how the Lord views it. It all goes back to Eve and rebellion. Molech and Baal, also. NONE of the Latina women that I know have any sort of approval for abortion. BTW, Latinas WANT TO get married and mm aka good housewives.
My mother was a school teacher and had more education and was smarter than my father. Of course, they married in 1961, when Eve Arden was the role model for working women.
Education level does not matter if the woman respects the man. My mom respected my dad. My soon to be ex does not respect me.
slowly but steadily snatching up the number of available men for all those women who chose to attack their professional dreams
I don’t quite understand what that is supposed to mean.
For some reason it never enters their estrogen-addled brainlets that men put up with competition and adversity nearly every hour of every day in the real world
It’s due to the apex fallacy, as usual. In their brainlets, men are entitled dipshits who get everything handed to them on a plate from the day they are born. Only women face *real* struggles and competition. When a man thinks he’s struggling, he just has a sense of entitlement or is engaging in yet another pointless, needless dick-measuring contest due to being genetically defective. After all, if women ran the world, they’d be no wars, right? This is what they actually beleive.
Millennials: How Do You Make Peace With How You Were Raised?
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=954792
long~ husband is not supportive of religion, please help
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=954872
The Writers[TM] are attention whores. All of them. It’s their primary, if not only motivation for churning out this stuff. If the manosphere and its analyses of such articles didn’t exist, then writers like Mizz Lauren Martin, Mizz Laura Dipshitz, et al., would either not bother to write at all or would be spewing out other flavors of shallow drivel for outlets like Vogue, Cosmo, Woman’s Day and the like, outlets read by their own and on topics of no interest whatsoever to men.
As far as I can tell, Elite Daily has the same target audience. Ultimately none of this idiotic stuff is directed at any man, unless we take complete SWPL manginas into account. It’s all written to tell college-educated women what they want to hear, namely that none of their problems is their fault.
Miss Martin does get one thing right: University /college is the place to find a man. Tertiary education provides an environment where young men and women can meet, share time, classes and generally get to know each other without the ‘dating scene’ and all of the connotations that carries. They can genuinely interract.
Most women aren’t interested in finding a husband at this time. They are interested in parties, late night E-rages, waiting to get a highly paid job with a big disposable income that they can use for the next tick on the list: the well-stamped passport (Meanwhile, the women that do find a man at university do tend to find good ones).
The problem with female intelligence is that they do not know how to use it. They have a bad set of priorities.For men, intelligence is utilitarian – we apply our intelligence to solve complex problems. This is why men excel in the STEM fields. For women, intelligence is an accessory. It is used mainly to manipulate men into getting them to get her what she wants. Most men in the company get on with it and work. the only ones that play stupid games are the gay boys. Women spend valuable intelligence on manipulating men and other women. This is often mistaken for “good managerial skills”!
Th rate of divorce, separation, extramarital sex, privilege abuse (lecturer-student) in academic circles is because couples meet at university and marry their “equals”. Academic women don’t know or understand hypergamy, so contempt sets in and the husbands slowly get ground down to the point where something gives – such as an affair, depression, a drug habit or worse. That society chooses to double down on this folly by tilting the playing field to allow more women to get educated is testament to the fact that only the Return Of Christ can save us.
the Bachelor’s Degree is completed at age 22, and the best age for marriage for women is 22-24. She can simply marry immediately after college, to either a grad student or fellow undergrad she met there.
Actually she’s free to marry while in college as well, isn’t she?
But they have had lots of trips to the Caribbean and the Mediteranian where they flew first class and had exotic vacations with their girlfriends slutting it up with all the local tour guide
Yeah. In her mind, she was preselected by many hot and exotic men. The man who gets her in the end will be so lucky as a result, right?
Too late for entries?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-freezing-my-eggs-restored-my-sanity/2015/04/02/4069fefc-cc07-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html?tid=sm_tw
“I was 30, single and working as the wedding reporter for The Washington Post.”
What the Hell is a “wedding reporter”?
Rollo’s chart reminds me of Mercator’s projection: Sweden is too large in relation to India and those peaks and troughs of Rollo are too steep; nevertheless it is otherwise, in my view, sufficiently accurate.
My experience of being thirty-five was that, yes, indeed, young women (and I include teenagers) would sleep with me but unfortunately women of my age and older, who had somehow missed the boat – the S.S. Matrimony, or who had disembarked form it at an earlier port – would also throw themselves at me. Sometimes, it never occurred to me that such old dogs were making themselves available; I thought they were just being friendly that was until they went off bad-mouthing me or going passive-aggressive towards me and for no reason that I could divine. Some of those women, not used to taking ‘No’ for an answer, persisted and, of course, eventually I would cave in, and then feel thoroughly disgusted with myself.
‘Evolution and modern science have allowed us to live longer, healthier, more productive lives. With proper nutrition and medical care, we can expect to work into our 70s, and live well into our 80s and beyond. But our reproductive systems haven’t caught up. As the lady magazines so often remind their readers, a woman’s fertility peaks in her early 20s and is in rapid decline by her mid-30s.’
This is ‘woman’s intelligence’…we live longer therefore our reproductive systems should also go longer.
Even the ones that aren’t intentionally delaying marriage won’t do that, because Planning The Wedding is a months-long, full-time job that will consume every bit of her time and energy, while The Event itself will leave her exhausted and needing a few months to recover. She couldn’t possibly do all that while taking classes.
Actually she’s free to marry while in college as well, isn’t she?
I’ve mentioned this before on here.
When we talk like this with my mom and MIL they both have heart palpitations and start convulsing on the floor. (They are both of the baby boomer generation). Especially when we suggest our daughter might meet a man in college, drop out, get married and start having babies.
Consider this sentence:
“Unfortunately, for all those women who thought a man would come later, other women capitalized on their youth, snatching up all the boyfriends and husbands while they focused on building their careers.”
It is unfortunate that Lauren “Toots” Martin didn’t devote a bit more time to studying English Composition.
@Hollenhund2
I think what she meant was:
Ivar-
I was wondering if anyone else found that passage cumbersome.
Gents……what I was tryin’ to say pertains to Latinas that live in Mexico and points south.
Who tend to acculturate as soon as they are brought to El Norte, if they are poor to lower middle class. Mexican men in the middle and upper middle class, some of who have been divorced by those women, might disagree with your assessment of their women. At least, some of the Mexican nationals that I have worked with (especially the divorced one) would.
Gay marriage is legal in the Federal District. Feminism in Mexico has a different history from US femnism, but Hillary Clinton has many admiers in Mexico. There are other examples of transnational femism that can be found, outside of the very small pueblos – and since Mexico’s population is as a group moving out of pueblos and into cities (and sometimes on to El Norte), it behooves men to be careful. Not as careful as with American women, to be sure, but still careful.
Who tend to acculturate as soon as they are brought to El Norte, if they are poor to lower middle class. Mexican men in the middle and upper middle class, some of who have been divorced by those women, might disagree with your assessment of their women. At least, some of the Mexican nationals that I have worked with (especially the divorced one) would.
Gay marriage is legal in the Federal District. Feminism in Mexico has a different history from US femnism, but Hillary Clinton has many admiers in Mexico. There are other examples of transnational femism that can be found, outside of the very small pueblos – and since Mexico’s population is as a group moving out of pueblos and into cities (and sometimes on to El Norte), it behooves men to be careful. Not as careful as with American women, to be sure, but still careful.
It’s a class issue, I think.
The higher educated/professional class in Latin America has “high powered women” in it. The class overall is much smaller in most LA countries than it is in the US as a proportion of the population, so the percentage of women who are like that in any LA country is also smaller than it is in the US, but when you get to that level of those societies (lawyers, business execs), there are women there, educated ones, who are feminist and pushy. They are more *feminine* than American women are, because the culture places a lot of emphasis on femininity in appearance and demeanor (similar to the cultures of East Asia, really), but they are still quite pushy and feminist at *that* level of the society. In the masses below, of course, it’s a different story. Class divides in LA countries are huge, and race often tags along with class divisions such that the people you are dealing with in that class seem to bear little resemblance to the rest of the society in many cases.
Hollenhund2 rhetorical question:
Actually she’s free to marry while in college as well, isn’t she?
Cail Corishev:
Even the ones that aren’t intentionally delaying marriage won’t do that, because Planning The Wedding is a months-long, full-time job that will consume every bit of her time and energy, while The Event itself will leave her exhausted and needing a few months to recover. She couldn’t possibly do all that while taking classes.
Isn’t that what the mother of the bride, and perhaps a wedding planner, are for?
/rhetorical
Historical observation: one aged relative pushing 90 can still recall when she married right after WW II – in a clerical office in New York. Some relatives were witnesses. The parents of the groom took them out for a meal afterwards. Done.
A couple of other relations no longer living were married in the 30’s, basically either in the living room of a parents house or some civic clerk’s office. It was all about being married, “making it legal”, not a circus. I conclude that Wedding-palooza and the Bridezillas that go with it are a function of excess wealth. A bubble thing, like housing, that may in time fade due to economics. Then again, the cargo cults in the SW Pacific lasted a long time.
Scott:
When we talk like this with my mom and MIL they both have heart palpitations and start convulsing on the floor. (They are both of the baby boomer generation). Especially when we suggest our daughter might meet a man in college, drop out, get married and start having babies.
2nd stage feminism mindset clearly on display. All too common in the world now.
Some college men and women may just have to elope, in order to avoid all that angst, mother-of-the-bride anxiety, anger at betrayal of True Feminism, etc.
Hey, there’s a possible plot for a fictional work: update Romeo & Juliet, except instead of the Capulets and Montagues, Romeo comes from a churchgoing family that teaches male headship, and Juiliet’s single mother (who works in HR for a major corp. or for a .gov) desperately works to thwart the match, because Juliet hasn’t had enough years to “find her voice” yet.
Bonus points if it was sold in the YA market…
AR–I love that idea as a movie.
The comments to http://nypost.com/2014/04/10/more-young-women-choosing-dogs-over-motherhood/ are the depressing part. The level of psychosis in the west seems to be ever expanding. Young women who are choosing dogs over kids or families choosing a dog over an additional child The excuse of world population is given without looking at the demographics of the world population. A few of the male commentators seem to get the west and western civilization is over.
It’s a class issue, I think.
Agree. The Mexicans I know who have been divorced are all college educated, one had a PhD. As Anonymous Age 70+ made clear multiple times, the average Mexican woman knows better than to divorce due to resource limits. But on the whole, I do not think the average US middle class man would be all that attracted to such women due to cultural differences, attraction triggers, etc. I’m not saying that women from Mexico can’t be pretty or even beautiful, mind you, but there is a definite class and culture gap there.
As with any foreign national, a man should tread lightly, because cultural norms dictate that he’s marrying her entire family, including the drunken cousin who can’t hold a job.
Class divides in LA countries are huge, and race often tags along with class divisions such that the people you are dealing with in that class seem to bear little resemblance to the rest of the society in many cases.
This is certainly true in Mexico in my experience, and also in some Central American countries. I can’t speak to further South but it seems likely in Peru, maybe not so much in Argentina – each has a different history, and frankly the % of the population descended from Amerindians varies a lot.
tl;dr
Feminism in Latin America comes in a tight dress and good makeup, but it is still feminism; the Colombian on “Modern Family” being one example. Gynocentric norms exist in those countries and have for a long time, they just aren’t as “in your face” as US 2nd, and 3rd, stage feminism.
Ready for the marriage apocalypse?
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/07/opinions/costello-marriage-millennials/index.html
@Scott:
I lived in an apartment complex filled with divorced women and their children after my own divorce. The ones who had finished two years of college prior to the divorce almost always were successful in returning to college and completing a degree. In contrast, those who were high school graduates with few, if any, college credits were very frustrated by their poor job prospects, but either daunted by the prospect of attending college part-time for eight years OR they enrolled and dropped out after a semester or less.
Assuming that your daughters are smart (and I’ll bet that they are), let them start taking one or two college classes per semester while they are still in junior high or high school. They can do just as well at a foreign language or in a music or dancing class as an adult. They can also take CLEP tests in subjects that they have done well at in high school. High school has become so completely worthless that a fairly bright 14-year-old could probably enroll directly in junior college without ever attending high school. You might need to splurge on some math and science tutoring, but a lot of high school graduates also need some help on the side.
Personally, I think that marriage at 18 is too young, while finishing college before getting married is the gift that keeps on giving. Marriage when the bride is age twenty-one to twenty-four with a college diploma in hand, or just around the corner, seems to be the real sweet spot in my huge extended family. I don’t think that any of the marriages under those circumstances have ever failed.
Yes, that sounds about right. If the two of them want to get married at 19 both sophomores in college, then that is fine. If they want to get married at 26, then that is okay too. And everything in between seems to be best.
Earl, nice insight into the Millennial middle and upper middle class. The newsie is a classic example of carousel rider it appears. The text from Norway / Sweden not a surprise, it’s been out there for years, CNN just didn’t actually look. What else does CNN not know about, hmm? Not to mention those who rely on CNN for information…
Jackie Demate, also 21, agreed. “I would have a very hard time justifying spending $20,000 on a wedding when I could go to Europe.”
Duh. Simple wedding for $1,000 and drop the rest on a real trip / honeymoon? Elope and spend all $20K on a trip? This is not hard to figure out.
Earl,
December 2013 marked the first time marriage rates for people over the age of 18 in our country dropped below 50%. We dropped even further, down to 49.2% now. Marriage is pretty much gone from the lower social classes and it is vanishing in the lower middle classes. Marriage (in and of itself) has ceased being something that all people can take part in and is increasingly only a ritual for the wealthy. Entire generations of inner city welfare familes have not only never been married, they have never even been to a wedding ceremony!
By early 2021, I’ll already be 50 years old. At our current rate (dropping linearly) we will be at 44.8% of all people over age 18 being married. I expect before I’m 50, that the marriage rate for those over 18 will drop just below 40%. I think the rate of the marriage decrease, will only increase. I see no reason how we can save this sinking ship, it is taking on too much water much too fast. I weep for the future. You can not have a United States of America without marriage as its bedrock. Its simply impossible. Far too many of our social institutions that we depend upon (their moral underpinnings) depend on the majority of our people getting (and staying) married.
I will not enjoy this decline.
CNN is always the last racehorse to cross the finish line. Dalrock has been pointing this stuff out for years and CNN finally crawled out of the rock its been under.
Dalrock,
The current article writer also has another article which indicates she’s an alpha widow:
http://elitedaily.com/women/every-girl-one-guy-shell-always-go-back/939666/
Not exactly surprised.
Earl, nice insight into the Millennial middle and upper middle class. The newsie is a classic example of carousel rider it appears. The text from Norway / Sweden not a surprise, it’s been out there for years, CNN just didn’t actually look.
Yes, she was a longer term carouseler, it would appear. But at least she makes her own substantial money, and also didn’t want kids, so she has no real way to extort threatpoint against her husband. Hard to say that’s worse than the average AF –> BB lane changer.
The funny thing about all the social revolutionary types loving the Nordic systems is that in, say, Sweden, for example, alimony is pretty much unknown and child support is a fixed amount per child based on actual cost — not a percentage of income ersatz-tax like it is in the US. It seems doubtful to me that most of our North American social revolutionaries would be willing to give up their entitlement to a man’s income in a quasi-tax payment for decades in favor of the Swedish system, which is actually pointed at the cost of raising a child. If they were true equalists like the Swedes, of course, they would endorse that approach — but we know them better than that, don’t we.
What irritated me about the Scandinavian countries is the wild idea that they don’t want to get married yet they still think they can raise a kid on their own.
It’s one thing if you don’t want to get married…don’t be selfish enough to willingly bring a child into the world without two parents.
Earl,
No one wants to talk about this cr-p. Its hurtful. Its painful. It wounds a woman to realize that what she came to expect of her life (have fun for years and magically a husband will appear when she is good and ready and that husband will be great looking and provide her with enough income to pay all the bills she accumulated) wont be happening. I try to get into conversations about this with my father in law and he wont even talk about it. He’ll just get up and white knight himself right out of the room. Ignorance is truly bliss.
Also remember Earl, that if the wrong person brings up this discussion (any one of us on any public forum viewed by the general public) they are just going to accuse us of misandary. They will just call us woman-haters, set their phasers to shun, and for those who can’t shun, they will appeal to authority and have us banned from wherever we are posting. You and I (and Dalrock) cannot bring this conversation up because the majority of the world is simply not ready for the red pill. To eat that pill is to admit that feminism is wrong and everything that they have been led to believe…. is wrong. Its not going to happen, they have far too much pride.
StringsOfCoins—
Funny story. Sister Burton’s husband was my mission president for a time.
I was not entirely alert during the talk, as I’d been up late the night before. You caused me to re-watch it.
Thoughts as I watch:
“I am convinced that a husband is never more attractive to his spouse than when he is serving in his God-given roles as a worthy priesthood holder, most importantly in the home.”
I bristle at this, while at the same time understanding where she’s coming from.
The Burtons and I served in Korea. Korean men pay a lot more attention to skincare than American men do. This is kind of hilarious given that Korean men also have mandatory military service for two years. Imagine seeing a guy who served in Special Forces moisturize every morning.
Another missionary and I, somewhat bored, said, “Man, why don’t we take care of ourselves like that?” as a joke—but only kind of. What would a young white dude with cared-for skin look like? I still don’t know and probably never will, because we never tried it. But we happened to be batting this idea around while waiting to be interviewed by Pres. Burton (Sis. Burton’s husband). Since Sis. Burton accompanied Pres. on interviews, she was there and available for small talk.
We basically told her what we were thinking about, and said tongue-in-cheek “We want to be beautiful—how do we do it?” Keep in mind that I had been out for what felt like forever by this point, and I was pretty sure that non-Korean women were somewhat like Sasquatch: real, maybe, and some had claimed to have seen one, but for all intents and purposes nonexistent.
This sweet woman got it into her head that we were actually worried about our marriage prospects upon returning (in retrospect, maybe I should have been, ha), and immediately reassured us, “You know, don’t worry about that, you should really work on what’s inside first.” Had we been seeking actual advice maybe we would have been frustrated anyone reading this can probably understand, but as we were asking as a joke we just thought it was hilarious.
As I remember, she also told us a story to the effect that the moment she knew she wanted to marry her husband was when she saw him playing with some kids. I believe her.
I am, however, privy to some information she left out: her husband is tall, good-looking, practical-minded, and a very nice guy.
Rest of the talk is, despite my vague half-accusations of accidental hypocrisy, quite good. The problem is that it’s good in a way that the trained modern mind has built up years of defenses against.
So I am surprised that any men would find it particularly noteworthy, to the point of. It is true and based on good principles, but so is the periodic table. Why it would cause “many men I know to openly question marriage and the feminine imperative” is beyond me. I mean: here I am, a real-live, practicing Mormon, and yet I found it necessary to come here.
Haha, I’m loving those stories of women getting cats and dogs over having children.
Who would want to be brought up by those women anyway, you would be made insane? Their choice to not have children is the right one, quite frankly, I support them 150%.
Heck yeah! Marriage is the vice the state uses to squeeze your balls so tight you squeal like a pig.
OT, but related to things we have discussed previously here:
Yet another brief note about how much the men and women of the Washington DC region love each other: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2015/04/07/dana-perino-explains-why-guys-in-washington-are-undateable/
There’s a reason why both Roissy and Roosh emerged from the DC area.
I see no reason how we can save this sinking ship, it is taking on too much water much too fast. I weep for the future. You can not have a United States of America without marriage as its bedrock. Its simply impossible. Far too many of our social institutions that we depend upon (their moral underpinnings) depend on the majority of our people getting (and staying) married.
True. America cannot survive without a return to Marriage 1.0. This country, warts and all, has been a great blessing to the world. Now that it is being destroyed from within, it sure needs all the help it can get to bring back from the brink. Fact is, if America sinks, it will bring many other countries with it. Or maybe America’s role in God’s program is being wound up, and another country is to take its place? I don’t know for sure. But tears for the future is definitely an appropriate response. I sometimes shudder when I contemplate what is coming upon the world.
Birth control -> no-fault divorce -> legalized abortion -> marriage decline -> civilization collapses.
Dave,
Correct. Nothing good came of marriage 2.0.
Without a doubt, our greatest President was possibly a Prophet….
I listened to this sitting in the Lincoln Memorial in Walt Disney World in 1981. At the ripe old age of 10, I was given a level of wisdom that is absent from the majority of the people of our great (and dying) nation.
There isn’t any. No nation will take our place. No nation can take our place. We are in the End of Days. Ann Coulter said it best….
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2014-08-06.html
If America falls, it will be a thousand years of darkness for the entire planet.
And this ONLY if someone doesn’t blow the whole place up with a nuke.
The class overall is much smaller in most LA countries than it is in the US as a proportion of the population, so the percentage of women who are like that in any LA country is also smaller than it is in the US, but when you get to that level of those societies (lawyers, business execs), there are women there, educated ones, who are feminist and pushy. They are more *feminine* than American women are, because the culture places a lot of emphasis on femininity in appearance and demeanor (similar to the cultures of East Asia, really), but they are still quite pushy and feminist at *that* level of the society.
All that you say here is true, but I can tell you from direct personal experience that there is a very definite tolerance limit in Latin America for the expression of militant feminist behavior. While some “educated and empowered” Latin American women tend toward the obnoxious and pushy side, even these women express overt disdain for their American counterparts. Indeed, the contempt for what American women represent seems nearly universal in Latin America among both sexes, which can only be considered a refreshing positive.
On a separate note, I’ve never met an American man who is involved in a romantic relationship with a woman from a nation south of the Rio Grande (all points south thereof) who has not made it brutally and abundantly clear from the beginning that any hint of drift toward North American feminism will be met with severe consequences, including an immediate end to the relationship, the message essentially being “we have more than enough militant feminism of the domestic variety and we’re not about to import any more.” Then again, most women in that part of the hemisphere seem to possess enough common sense to know that the main (only?) reason yanqui/gringo men are paying them any attention is because of the absence of militant feminism among them.
Earl,
Welfare and public housing for never-married-moms moms -> end of domestic adoption in the United States -> birth control -> no-fault divorce -> unilateral divorce -> routinely granting restraining orders with no evidence -> marriage 2.0 -> legalized abortion -> massive government deficit spending -> NAFTA -> structural unemployment -> marriage decline -> civilization collapses.
FTFY.
I seem to have arrived at a wake; for the worldly remains of U.S.America Esq.. Whilst you are drowning your sorrows consider the following:
“As for America, the standard bearer of the west, she’s not simply in decline, she’s dieing from a combination of greed, paranoia and social injustice and her death throws drive her to ever more dangerous feats of brinkmanship”. Whether that be true or not, they are words placed into the mouth of John Gielgud (bewailing and blaming America for the disaster which was Suez and all that followed) in a movie, The Whistle Blower, from twenty-nine years ago.
@ Earl, IBB
What you have is two things:
1. Incentives for non-marriage (welfare, decreased stigmatization of sex and pregnancy outside of marriage)
2. Incentives to blow up marriages (unilateral divorce + cash and prizes, less pair bonding)
1. Civilization prosperity -> Welfare and public housing for never-married-moms moms + decreased stigmatization of sex and pregnancy outside of marriage -> end of domestic adoption in the United States -> massive government deficit spending -> NAFTA -> structural unemployment -> marriage decline -> civilization collapses.
2. Civilization prosperity -> birth control + decreased stigmatization of sex and pregnancy outside of marriage -> less pair bonding and decreased emphasis on family -> no-fault divorce -> unilateral divorce + cash and prizes -> routinely granting restraining orders with no evidence -> marriage 2.0 -> massive government deficit spending -> NAFTA -> structural unemployment -> marriage decline -> civilization collapses.
Opus,
29 years ago, there was a Soviet Union and there was not a Sept 11th 2001. Communism was the enemy (for liberals and conservatives alike) and Islam was… what is that exactly, Scientology? I think you and I can both agree that John Gielgud (whatever his point about the Suez and America’s decline, or lack-there-of) would not apply today.
You guys had it easier than us. The world was not flat, there was no globalization, and feminism was just a housewife in Mary Poppins wearing a ribbon around her chest asking for the vote. The Crown could handle those problems. In 1588, you showed the entire world that you were masters of the sea. That mastery made you the only ones who could effectively police the world (efficently and effectively.) And your army, 120 British riflemen could defeat 12,000 Zulus. Couple that with the Industrial Revolution and British stiff upper lip, and your patience and temperance allowed you your role that you handled admirably for almost 400 years.
We’ve been taking it on the preverbial chin JFK got elected because (unlike you) we’ve never been respected. Cuba, Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Cambodia, feminism, abortion, Watergate, inflation, OPEC, divorce, race riots, ghetto scenes, illegal drug use, 40+% b@stardy rate, the Devil has been laughing his @ss off. The entire 20th century was completely his.
@IBB
Gielgud (in his role) was bemoaning the loss of Empire. In that role, he saw America as finished. It was just a matter of time… That was thirty years ago and yet the forebodings in that movie never came to pass and indeed America has gone on to even greater wealth hegemony and prosperity. Soviet Russia was in 1986 just three years form collapse and if TFH is right Feminism will implode in another five.
I suspect that America is big and tough enough to weather what for her is in the form of Radical Feminism a gnat on the back of an elephant.
Thanks, however, for the kind words and never forget that America began at 59 Palace Street, Canterbury.
I suspect that America is big and tough enough to weather what for her is in the form of Radical Feminism a gnat on the back of an elephant.
Make no mistake. Feminism is not a gnat on the back of an elephant. It is a quietly spreading malignant tumor that is just about to choke the air off the lungs of a once great nation. As of today, feminism has achieved what all the armies of of the Soviet Union could not do, and that without firing a single shot. Right now, this country does not have a single institution which has not been weakened and almost totally destroyed by feminism:
Our Law Courts? Check
Schools? Check
Industries? Check
Religious establishments? Check
Family? Check
Relationships between the sexes? Check
Military? Check
Media? Check
Child bearing to replaceable levels? Check
Of all of the above, the American spirit could still rise and rebuild. But the worst part of it all? The men are no longer interested in putting their lives on the line to support the system. They are deliberately checking out and doing the minimum possible. This is the great tragedy.
Truth be told, left unchecked, America is finished. The only way out is God Himself, through an earth-shaking, heaven-sent, Holy Spirit revival from coast to coast.
“Especially when we suggest our daughter might meet a man in college, drop out, get married and start having babies.”
That is exactly what my mother did (in the early 1950’s.) None of us kids are unhappy she took that path!
KP-
The funny thing is, there are a million ways for a woman who decides to do this to complete a degree later–if she really has a passion for something. There are online courses, degree completion programs, etc. People take so many differnt paths today.
But the sheer horror the thought of using her youngets/healthiest years to fill the house with babies is palpable. It really is strange to behold.
@Deep Strength: Great find! Good gravy the Alpha widow cred of this writer is scary. That could have been written by Roissy as a parody.
I lived in an apartment complex filled with divorced women and their children after my own divorce. The ones who had finished two years of college prior to the divorce almost always were successful in returning to college and completing a degree. In contrast, those who were high school graduates with few, if any, college credits were very frustrated by their poor job prospects, but either daunted by the prospect of attending college part-time for eight years OR they enrolled and dropped out after a semester or less.
My only problem with this is it appears to be a backstop/prep for divorce.
I have to put my money where my mouth is. It is a common troupe (and not entirely invalid) that men around these parts with daughters are the achilles heel of this “movement.”
That is to say, they talk a good game, but for MY daughter it’s college, masters degree, and the potential husband must be independently wealthy before he even talks to my daughter.
I am ready to offer my daughter (I only have one) and her potential husband the help, support and whatever else they need to succeed. If she is abandoned, there will be an unsolved murder, and then my daughter and her children would move back in with us.
@Earl
“What irritated me about the Scandinavian countries is the wild idea that they don’t want to get married yet they still think they can raise a kid on their own. ”
From what I understand, in the Scandinavian countries, the children born out of wedlock nonethless tend to be born into two parent households (just not formally married).
Dave,
That is pretty much what Ann Coulter has been saying.
Yes. It’s common to find a Boomer woman who married fairly young, using college for a Mrs. degree if she went at all, who is still married and appears to be happy about it, who enjoys being surrounded by her many grandchildren in her comfortable house or travelling with her husband on his generous pension — and yet she’s horrified at the idea of one of her younger female relatives doing the same thing. A typical Boomer woman will encourage her granddaughters to put off marriage as long as possible, and if the alternative is shacking up with a guy for a while, that’s preferable. Anything to keep her single.
It makes you want to ask: are you secretly that unhappy, and hate your life that much, that you feel compelled to steer other girls away from following in your footsteps? Or are you so influenced by group-think that the recommendations of TV and magazines outweigh your own first-hand experience? It has to be one of those two things.
Because my daughter will have given up a way to make a living for herself to follow a man who promises to provide. We will teach her submission, sweetness, etc, and if she is abondoned, what else can she do but come home? Our entire “thing” is to do everything we can to reduce the chances of any of that happening.
If we are going to throw everything in reverse and go back to traditionalism, (men with headship who are also accountable for everything that happens under their roof) than all those old rules apply too.
In other words, my daughter will be taught that divorce rape is not OK in our family.
I sure hope there are enough folks raising daughters like you are, Scott, so that my sons may have a chance at marital happiness once they are grown and ready for it.
Linda
1) Why would he abandon? This is very rare behavior, contrary to the ‘feminist’ narrative. Even in countries where the man can toss out the woman without difficulty and keep the kids (Iran, Saudi Arabia), the divorce rate is low.
This is why the comment is so easy for me to make. I realize it is very rare.
2) Alimony and CS laws have gone to the other extreme, as you know. For each highly infrequent abandonment, there are 10,000 Jenny Eriksons.
Again, I’m not really worried about it. I am banking on a Christian/red-pill guy
3) How will the murder be ‘unsolved’? You will be identified as having a motive, and since you have no practice in murders or network of mafiosi to support you and help you escape, how on Earth do you think you can get away with it.
This should have been immediately recognized as hyperbole/joking as I blog in the open with my real name. Sorry if it sounded too serious
4) Will your daughter marry no later than age 22? As a virgin? Will she bear 3 or more kids? Only if those are true do the ‘old rules’ even begin to apply.
Yes. Everything we teach her is in the service of this kinf of very young marriage
5) Clearly, you don’t think the same extra-judicial punishment should apply to selfish frivorcing women, even though those are 10,000 times more common than a man doing what you described, and they actually glorify it as something noble.
Agian. Bad joke, sorry it didn’t come off that way.
I realize there is alot of anger around these parts for the way things are today. I am willing to move create a small Amish-type commune in Montana after I retire to make this work. I and Mychael are that serious about it.
It makes you want to ask: are you secretly that unhappy, and hate your life that much, that you feel compelled to steer other girls away from following in your footsteps? Or are you so influenced by group-think that the recommendations of TV and magazines outweigh your own first-hand experience? It has to be one of those two things.
It absolutely does have to be one of those two things! It is so awkward when this comes up, too. I am not one for blaming an entire generation for the problems of the next, but man it is hard not to.
It seems like the boomers were so bored, so addled with nothing better to do that they–as a way to entertain themselves–systematically dismantled everything of value that came before them. All the institutions, all the legal structures, the entire enlightenment (and everything that led to it) in one giant flipping of the bird swoop.
I sure hope there are enough folks raising daughters like you are, Scott, so that my sons may have a chance at marital happiness once they are grown and ready for it.
There are almost none, I am afraid. And I totally understand why TFH doesn’t believe that I am.
@Crank
I ran some data on this a while back, and the Scandinavian countries all had lower in wedlock birth rates than the US but higher rates of adolescent children living with both parents than we have.
TFH-
Right, but that is why the “saving the seeds while the fire rushes over the forest” analogy (H/T Dalrock) is the only anwer. As a Christian man with children of both sexes, I have no other choices.
1. Do the right thing. Tell the truth. Raise my children to be good spouses.
2. The risks you speak of are real and I do not blame any man for staying out of it.
Both things are true simultaneously. The ambivalence it causes is maddening. I get it.
What Scott describes (minus the hyperbole) was once the way parents would deal with a son/son-in-law gone bad. Thing is, they were equally demanding of their daughters. If a daughter showed up at her parents’ house a month into the marriage, whining because hubby wanted too much sex or wouldn’t buy her a new dress, they would have hauled her back to her marital home, tied up if necessary, kicked her through the door, and told her to get on with the job she asked for and stop embarrassing them.
We still have people who feel that way about sons/sons-in-law, at least in conservative circles, but we have very few people who would still treat a rebellious daughter that way.
But just so we are clear. I am not going to actually kill anyone.
What Scott describes (minus the hyperbole) was once the way parents would deal with a son/son-in-law gone bad. Thing is, they were equally demanding of their daughters. If a daughter showed up at her parents’ house a month into the marriage, whining because hubby wanted too much sex or wouldn’t buy her a new dress, they would have hauled her back to her marital home, tied up if necessary, kicked her through the door, and told her to get on with the job she asked for and stop embarrassing them.
We still have people who feel that way about sons/sons-in-law, at least in conservative circles, but we have very few people who would still treat a rebellious daughter that way.
YES! If my daughter comes home with that kind of complaint, the response will be: “He is your husband. We have taught you what that means. Go home.”
I think its a third thing, just the curse of Eve. Women are told they can’t do something, so they want to rebel against authority and do it. They do it because they think that will make them happy. Then after they have done it, they regret it. Then they want to be made whole. But not before telling all the other women about how happy they were doing it because that way, they can keep their pride manifested by the feminist imperative.
Married women at home raising children and obeying husbands don’t know how happy they really because for so many of them, they have no point of reference. They haven’t lived the other life to know what they are missing that feminism would deny them. They married younger and virginal. But they think they aren’t happy because those women that DIDN’T marry young and virginal, all they tell the married women is about how happy they are and how great life is for them. But in reality, these unmarried women are not only bullsh-tting the married women, they bullsh-t themselves. And for those that DID live that other life when they were younger (working for pay, staying in university for 7 years, cock-carrosel, and finding themselves) they long for the married life but ONLY on certain terms. That is the feminist conflict.
Sunday night I watched a flick from 1982, An Officer and a Gentlemen. This movie should be manditory viewing for red pill men to understand the culture class that exists for feral women rebelling against God while at the same time, desiring marriage (but ONLY to the AMOG.) Paula and Lynette wanted to get married, but ONLY to a pilot. So they both used their p-ssy to try and get an OCS candidate to fall in love with them in the nine weeks (before liberty) those men have to roam around the area while in school. Its a total blue-pill, red-pill culture clash, a movie that could never be made today. But it explains very clearly the third thing I am talking about, the Curse of Eve: Paula and Lynette have ridden that cock carrosel and they know what the life is like. They don’t like it. They aren’t happy. But they had to experience the other life to know what WOULD make them happy. And married women who watched it in 1982, they looked at their husbands and (if he wasn’t a naval officer) they might start to think that maybe they TOO aren’t all that happy? See where this takes us, the path straight to hell.
Bonus red pill question for any red pill man who watched An Officer and Gentlemen: Richard Gere gets in two bloody fist fights in the movie, one with a local at the bar and one with his drill instructor. He starts fight number two but was walking away from fight number one. Can anyone tell me why he wanted to beat the sh-t out of his drill instructor and for extra bonus points, why did the local guy want to beat the sh-t out of Richard Gere at the bar, what was the local guy’s motive (who was he angry with and why?) If you get these, you are truly red pill.
I’ll bite at the 2 item officer and gentleman red pill quiz.
The guys at the bar were frustrated beta orbiters annoyed because the hot girls only went for the alpha mcbadboy pilots.
The drill instructor was a proxy for Geres unresolved daddy issues.
@Scott:
Are you assuming that your future son-in-law will be able to support a wife and children by himself? If it ever becomes necessary for your daughter to work, and she has to take the kind of job that is available to a female with no college diploma or other post-high school qualification, then your daughter is in trouble if she has to re-enter the workforce with a child who needs daycare, and she is in a crisis situation if she has two or more children who need daycare.
Most young people these days are NOT earning much, even if they have a diploma. But the cost of daycare is extremely high. If your daughter moves out of state with her husband, and the marriage fails, she may very well be forced to live in the jurisdiction in which the divorce took place until the youngest child is 18 OR settle for very limited custody rights and be subject to a child support order herself if she moves back home. She might be desperate and broke, but she wouldn’t be able to move back to your house and take the children with her without court approval.
If your daughter is willing to consider nursing, it’s the best back-up career that there is for a housewife, as far as I can tell, because nursing pays well on an hourly basis even if you only work part time, or pick up an occasional shift. Spending a decade or more in college and grad school and racking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt is a bad decision for a woman, but with the divorce rate being sky high, a woman with no job skills is taking a huge risk. The majority of divorces may be initiated by women, but there are still plenty of wives getting dumped by their husbands.
@TFH,
“You cannot remove Jenny Erikson risk. She married at 19, probably as a virgin, ”
I don’t think she was a virgin. In her Purity Culture Ruined My Life article Jenny hinted very strongly that she gave up her virginity to an Alpha who then did not marry her. That must have been before Leif.
I just did a quick search but could not find the article.
But the sheer horror the thought of using her youngets/healthiest years to fill the house with babies is palpable. It really is strange to behold.
Can you imagine millions of adults, from at least three generations, at some point asking their mothers “Mom, was I a ‘regret baby?’ Were you angry at having had me because it threw a monkey wrench into your career? Did you have me just to check off a box on your feminist ‘To Do List’ in order to earn a feminist ‘Merit Badge?””
It would be interesting to hear the answers, most of which would probably be hamsterbated lies.
Not any more. I used to say precisely that to young women: go for nursing or teaching, for they are family-friendly. But there are too many teachers and nurses being produced, and they cannot get the first year of work done required for registration, because there are not enough jobs. If you can get in AND you manage to get through the first year, then that will apply.
But that option is disapperaring fast. Besides, nursing school and teachers college make women’s studies look like kindergarden: you have to be a SJW to graduate.
Yes. It’s common to find a Boomer woman who married fairly young, using college for a Mrs. degree if she went at all, who is still married and appears to be happy about it, who enjoys being surrounded by her many grandchildren in her comfortable house or travelling with her husband on his generous pension — and yet she’s horrified at the idea of one of her younger female relatives doing the same thing. A typical Boomer woman will encourage her granddaughters to put off marriage as long as possible, and if the alternative is shacking up with a guy for a while, that’s preferable. Anything to keep her single.
It makes you want to ask: are you secretly that unhappy, and hate your life that much, that you feel compelled to steer other girls away from following in your footsteps? Or are you so influenced by group-think that the recommendations of TV and magazines outweigh your own first-hand experience? It has to be one of those two things.
I would say it’s not so much that they are secretly unhappy, because they believe they did the best that was socially acceptable in their day. I would say it’s more that they are 100% certain that if they were growing up in a world with the social rules of 2015, there is no way in hell they would have made the same decisions again themselves, so they don’t want to see the young women of today doing so. The idea is “I didn’t have the same opportunities, but if I did, I would have made very different choices than I did, so you should also not make the same choices I did, which I only made because I had a more limited set of choices”.
I think AI/Deep Learning is the key, because it will filter out FI from millions of economic decisions that today are made with deference to FI.
Which is, quite generally (whether it relates to AI or anything else in tech), the reason why there is so much feminist hysteria currently about getting women en masse into tech companies. The concern is that the tech is not being made/designed/developed in a way that comports with much of PC/feminism — at least not as much as it would be if there were large numbers of women in those companies policing the design choices and ensuring that they are not “anti-woman” (i.e., “anti-FI”). They know that the way tech is being designed is literally changing the way people live, think and work, and the fact that the people who are designing are overwhelming men scares the shit out of them. Literally.
Scott,
Thank you for participating.
Good guess, but wrong. Remember Sid Whorley (David Keith) and Zach Mayo (Gere) were sitting in the bar with the locals (at peace) long before Paula and Lynette arrived, drinking beer. There was NO conflict until Paula and Lynette showed up. And when they did, the guys were giving them wolf whistled and knew them by name, but the girls didn’t even acknowledge their existance. The girls KNEW these guys (worked with them at the mill, probably went to high school with them, maybe even slept with them back in the day) but refused to even speak with the locals. The locals weren’t good enough for them anymore.
Their anger? At the girls for no longer thinking the locals were good enough for them AND at themselves for not bettering themselves. They didn’t even care about the OCS candidates until Paula and Lynette made them feel bad. They just took it out on Zach.
No. Zach (wrongfully, irrationally) blamed Foley (the DI) for Sid’s suicide because Foley accepted Sid’s DOR and let him quit. In quitting, Sid’s whole world ended. That would not have happened if Foley told Sid that he would not let him quit.
Laura @ 4:42 pm:
“@Scott:
Are you assuming that your future son-in-law will be able to support a wife and children by himself?”
It’s a safe assumption. Men are willing to work incredibly hard to support their families, even more so if their wives are the loyal and frisky type. In fact, Scott’s approach is how I see devout Christians restoring marriage: father of the bride gets her married off to a promising young man who he then invests in heavily. Giving your new SIL the education/vocational training instead of your daughter is one heck of a good dowry because even the frivorce courts can’t repossess professional skills.
Poof, the young man gets the financial investment & training to qualify for good work before he’s 30, his wife gets busy with a family while young and the father isn’t paying for anything he wouldn’t have paid for anyway.
Assuming a wife does end up needing to work to support the family, she’s still better off working minimum wage with no college debt than twice as much with student loans. College degrees are not linked to earning power these days and all debt is slavery; don’t let the Elites tell you otherwise. Don’t fall into the careerist trap of thinking the workplace is the only place to make a buck, either; several of the women in my mother’s sewing circle are semiprofessional, either to help out hubby or buy nice things without tapping the family budget. Grow a garden, become a garage sale hunter, clip coupons, there’s lots of ways a wife can stretch her husband’s income without signing a W-2.
Novaseeker,
Yes, I suppose there’s a grass-is-greener thing there: “Yes, I’m happy with my life, but how much happier might I be if I’d had more choices?” Or even: “Yes, I’m glad I married Jim and had this family, but I could have spent several years adventuring and having fun and then settled down and had this good second life.”
There’s also an extra factor with Boomers, in that they identify so strongly with their generation’s changes. Since they brought us the Independent Career Woman, they take it personally when a woman passes up that role.
Novaseeker makes a perceptive comment about Boomers and how their decisions were made in the light of what was then socially acceptable – it is of course also the case that boomers had it far easier than their parents and grand-parents generation – so one should not be too envious.
It strikes a chord with me as (having rejoined Facebook after a three year period) and looking up an old flame, I came across the Facebook page of her daughter – and the impression I got was how much happier the daughter looks than did her mother at the same age. Mother (from the working-class) sought and with her good looks for a while achieved middle-class respectability and some affluence; daughter (not blessed with those same good-looks) has abandoned all that for new-age hippy-dom. Hippydom was surely largely un-doable before say 1970.
Are you assuming that your future son-in-law will be able to support a wife and children by himself? If it ever becomes necessary for your daughter to work, and she has to take the kind of job that is available to a female with no college diploma or other post-high school qualification, then your daughter is in trouble if she has to re-enter the workforce with a child who needs daycare, and she is in a crisis situation if she has two or more children who need daycare.
What I’m about to say might as well be written in Abkhazian or ancient Sumerian, since most people today, even of the older generations, can’t even begin to comprehend the concept, but here goes:
Young couples with children actually can get by on incredibly little money if they know how to economize, manage money, budget, and set priorities for what’s really important in life. (*****GASP!!!! NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! NOT THE DREADED “R” WORD!!!!!*******************)
This means, among other things:
1. Not buying the latest and greatest of everything just because the Joneses next door have it.
2. Not buying things, whether or not they’re the latest and greatest, if they’re not essential to the sustainment of the household (i.e, not getting that super-channel cable or satellite package with 600 sports channels and 100 channels full of trashy movies; not going out to eat every other night of the week, or not having a new car every two years).
3. Not buying a house that you can’t afford and with a mortgage that will only invert itself in today’s Bernankified, fiat money-polluted economy.
4. Last but not least, simply putting God, family, and the essential priorities of life over mammon, status, and material goods.
Not to pick on you, Laura, but permeating your statement is the obvious assumption that wifey just HAS to work in order to ensure that the family can maintain the comfortable UMC lifestyle that is rotting modern society and civilization to its core. I say “not picking on you,” because you are not at all unique in this outlook; indeed, it has been the default attitude and assumption by society at large for most of the last 40-plus years – tragically, even –especially– among self-described “Christians.” For Christians, it is simply another form of capitulation to the secular culture, the imbibing and internalization of worldly values that ignore scriptural commandments to put God and his plans first, along with family.
Yes, I know personally from whence I speak here. For much of my history as a husband and father, I was an active duty enlisted man in the U.S. military, stationed in very high cost of living areas on a rather meager salary. My wife did not work for most of those years, as we had a daughter with physical disabilities who needed her mother to be there for her. Yet with careful budgeting, self-discipline, and focus, we not only survived, but thrived. No, there weren’t many luxuries in life and we couldn’t follow the examples of our neighbors (who, even though they were “lower middle class” by the standards of the day, managed to be able to buy a lot more and do a lot more than my family could). BUT, we had everything we needed: a roof over our heads in a safe neighborhood, food on our table, clothes on our backs, and transportation.
As for daycare, simple economics will usually demonstrate that, all other things being equal (no, they usually aren’t, but it doesn’t change the analytical outcome), daycare is an economically losing proposition. That is, it costs more for a wife to work outside the home than it does to for her to stay home and care for the children. The money saved on daycare can contribute to the payment of other household expenses. PLUS, given the absolutely INSANE tax code in the U.S., more often than not a family is penalized by having a working wife, especially if she makes above a certain income threshold.
So, all of that said, I think that your concerns are really overstated. Also, consider that Scott has already said that he is willing to do a great deal to help his daughter and future SIL adjust and cope. If more parents did this, then the transition to self-sustainment for many couples and their young children would be much smoother. Sadly, Scott is an aberration. Most parents today, even so-called “Christian” ones, just can’t be bothered (“Thank GOD they’re outta my house and outta my hair! Time to live it up!”)
TFH,
Kudos to you sir. The emphasis I put on the second sentence just sums it all up, perfectly.
I think if feminist women that only responded to ‘gina tingle had some kind of control over the money flow from technology (limited control that did NOT permit them to get the money directly), they would find a way to siphon money away from men they find unattractive and give it to men that gave them the ‘gina tingle. Then at least, they might be able to get their tingle and resources at the same place. But now they can’t. So, well… you said it better than I ever could.
@Cail Corishev
You are of course correct as far as the bell curve, although it is a quite unpopular point at present. The problem is of course although the odds are good, the goods are odd. For both the men and women. And that is why I tell all overly intelligent women to become interested in D&D, tabletop gaming, and larping. Lots of men, many are smart, and you can learn to tolerate the quirks of extreme nerdiness. Also 130 is low of course, but it’s still far enough from average to cause significant difficulties for both partners.
Now to be clear, this should be the article. Instead it’s some crap from a woman of average intelligence that believes that she is an intellectual of the highest order. I imagine she would immediately next any genuis level men who would try to date her.
@Scott
You are very correct about the futility of testing higher IQ patients. It really tops out about 145, but being able to measure functional decreases or problems is a bit hard when the figures are still above average. BTW which testing do you like to use? I had a couple different ones in my neurosyche tests, stanford-binet mostly, and it was always interesting as it found giant problems but the ultimate score would be Triple 9 society range. For instance, I’m absolute crap at recognizing faces, worse than 50/50. Funny that…
@GunnerQ
We obviously move in different circles. There are a few young couples in my family in which the wife will have a high standard of living without ever needing to work, but most of the men have very ordinary jobs with ordinary incomes, and without the wife’s income they would not be able to buy a house in a decent/safe neighborhood.
My parents and nearly all of my aunts and uncles married between the early 50s and early 60s. All of the women were back in the workforce by the time the youngest child was six or eight years old. My mother worked full time even when I was an infant, and that was in the late 50s. If average people had trouble making full-time motherhood possible during the years that housing was relatively inexpensive, and most public school districts ran usable schools, then I don’t see how the underemployed, deeply indebted millenials are going to be able to make it happen.
I cannot think of a single example of a family in which the father of the bride paid the tuition of his son-in-law. I know of many couples in which the WIFE supported the husband through graduate school, and the lower her earning ability, the tougher that was.
I agree with you that all debt is slavery. Student loan payments are now so burdensome that young married couples are having trouble buying a house and starting a family. The future of the family does not look rosy to me.
Isa-
The only one we trained on in graduate school was WAIS.
I can administer and interpret a bunch of neuro tests though. Rbans is the army’s favorite.
I would say it’s not so much that they are secretly unhappy, because they believe they did the best that was socially acceptable in their day. I would say it’s more that they are 100% certain that if they were growing up in a world with the social rules of 2015, there is no way in hell they would have made the same decisions again themselves, so they don’t want to see the young women of today doing so. The idea is “I didn’t have the same opportunities, but if I did, I would have made very different choices than I did, so you should also not make the same choices I did, which I only made because I had a more limited set of choices”.
This is precisely what they say.
Cail Corishev
It makes you want to ask: are you secretly that unhappy, and hate your life that much, that you feel compelled to steer other girls away from following in your footsteps? Or are you so influenced by group-think that the recommendations of TV and magazines outweigh your own first-hand experience? It has to be one of those two things.
Either or both of those two things is certainly at work, we must bear in mind that women are more “herd oriented” than men are, and the typical Boomer woman has a beta or betaized alpha husband who can’t / won’t rein her in. But there is another effect at work IMO.
People often tend to revert to their initial training under stress. This is axiomatic in some fields of human endeavor, but we often fail to apply it broadly. The typical 60-something leading edge Boomer, born around 1946 or so, marinated in second stage feminism in college, in grad school, on the job,etc. She may have even given it up to some extent, but when she looks at a granddaughter or neice / grandneice, etc. she sees…herself… in college and all that 2nd wave claptrap just wells up in her mind and overflows. Note the intensity of the emotion that accompanies these bizarre moments – it is not an accident. She’s emotionally reliving “liberation” of her college years, be they in the late 60’s or the 70’s or even the 80’s. Because much of the appeal of 2nd stage feminism, for all its “dialectical” trappings, was emotional and only emotional.
The intensity of a memory is directly proportional to the emotion associated with it. This seems to be part of what drives PTSD, by the way, but I digress. When aging people are reminded of some great emotional moment in their youth, they will not – not – not react in a logical fashion, as a rule.
In a sense, the aging Boomer feminist-influenced woman who sees a youn, 20-25 year old woman contemplating marriage is “seeing” her own “self” being smothered, IMO, hence the intense emotional reaction.
Off topic:
http://www.fox10phoenix.com/story/28731607/court-hearing-set-in-high-school-rape-investigation
The sad fact is that most people are going to have to learn to get by with less. Buying a house may not be in the cards for a lot of folks in the future in spite of the wife’s contribution. Things are not likely to be the same for our children as they were for our parents, not in this country.
Also, I know plenty of families where the husband is the only one employed full time and more than a few where he is the only one employed, and they get by. The children are better off for it too. Are things tight? Sure, but they are paying the bills and can still enjoy an occasional night out. What they don’t try to do is keep up with the Joneses.
feeriker
While some “educated and empowered” Latin American women tend toward the obnoxious and pushy side, even these women express overt disdain for their American counterparts. Indeed, the contempt for what American women represent seems nearly universal in Latin America among both sexes, which can only be considered a refreshing positive.
Of course LA feminists have disdain for NA feminists – women’s intrasexual competition pretty much mandates it. That says exactly nothing about how LA women’s own hypergamy plays out, though. IMO it is more a difference of style than of substance. We can test this by watching divorce rates and divorce laws in the big LA countries such as Brazil and Mexico; as the median income increases, we should see more and more efforts to incorporate North American style frivorce laws. I do not know if that is happening or not, frankly, but the divorced Mexican PhD I knew back in 2004 was under some decrees that looked remarkably familiar.
@feeriker
“Not to pick on you, Laura, but permeating your statement is the obvious assumption that wifey just HAS to work in order to ensure that the family can maintain the comfortable UMC lifestyle that is rotting modern society and civilization to its core. I say “not picking on you,” because you are not at all unique in this outlook;”
You completely misjudge my attitudes, standards, and spending habits. I paid cash for my house, I spend very little on clothing, gadgets, travel, etc., and I have always been thrifty. My parents were very thrifty, too, yet my father always wanted my mother to work full time.
The median wage in the USA last year was something like $29,500. Many twenty-something males are finding it difficult to find full-time jobs that pay much above the minimum wage. I agree with you that many young people fritter away money on useless trinkets, and many have taken out student loans that they have no reasonable hope of ever repaying, but even the thriftiest are going to balk at living in a ghetto apartment.
Most women are going to end up working most of their adult lives. Being uneducated just means that the jobs they hold will be miserable and poorly paid. The only way the wife stays home for any length of time after the children are born is if BOTH parents are thrifty, and BOTH are highly committed to a SAHM lifestyle. The two-income family has been the middle-income norm for decades, and was increasingly common even before the sexual revolution, women’s liberation, etc.
We are probably in agreement that greed, envy, false pride, etc., lead many couples to make foolish lifestyle choices.
JDG,
They shouldn’t be in the cards because MOST PEOPLE are NOT credit-worthy. That is how we got ourselves into so much collective trouble in 2008, giving loans to people who had no business getting loans.
My first house, I got clobbered on the mortgage. It was just a short-term (15 years), the interest rate was still way too many basis points above the average rate AND I had to pay two-points! That is because I wasn’t yet fully credit worthy with so little credit history. I quickly paid that loan off and have been dealing from a position of strength (in dealing with lenders who want my business) ever since. Too many people are simply unwilling to get that first bad loan deal, they think they are deserving of the same low rates with no history of paying. It doesn’t work that way.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. I said this very thing to my parents and their best friends when the five us went out to dinner one night, 23 years ago. I remember that evening like it was only yesterday. I kept saying that the standard of living for people my age would be less than that of my own parents. And I said that TO my parents. And their friends said… “welp, that is what people say.” This was an old conversation.
Instead of repeating that old tired conversation (that might very well be true) what we should be asking ourselves is how can we make things better for our kids and their kids? I say, stop deficit spending and change divorce laws to make marriage stronger. That (I think) would fix quite a bit of it.
IBB
>If the two of them want to get married at 19 both sophomores in college, then that is fine. If they want to get married at 26, then that is okay too. And everything in between seems to be best.
I have to disagree with the “26” part. Expecting a man to remain a virgin until 26 is rather unwise. Better to accept reality, and get him married off by 22-24. Of course, that means the women need to be accepting of marriage by 18-22, with the loss of freedom this entails. Not sure how to solve that objection/problem…
Laura
>If it ever becomes necessary for your daughter to work, and she has to take the kind of job that is available to a female with no college diploma or other post-high school qualification, then your daughter is in trouble if she has to re-enter the workforce with a child who needs daycare, and she is in a crisis situation if she has two or more children who need daycare.
It is generally unwise to plan your life or make general policy based on the exceptions. Sure, he could lose his job and not work for 2 years. Highly unlikely, but marginally possible. So what? Most men can provide for a family, if they are willing to have a small home, only one used car, no professional sports for the children, etc.
I know I have it great financially, as God has blessed me very much. For me, if a woman told me she could not live solely my income, I would know she is unsuitable for marriage. (And not just with me. Sure that is arrogant, but I think also correct.)
The negatives of a woman having an education far outweigh the slight possibility of benefit in a “crisis”. Women with choices exercise them. Unfortunately. If she depends on her husband, with no welfare or misguided charity available, they will have a stronger marriage. And that is better in the end for her, even if it means living in poverty for awhile. And yes, I admit I prefer to live in plenty.
>but with the divorce rate being sky high, a woman with no job skills is taking a huge risk. The majority of divorces may be initiated by women, but there are still plenty of wives getting dumped by their husbands.
As you acknowledge, most divorces are initiated by the wife. You seem to disagree that the women are also more likely to be the problem when the man gives up and leaves. Plus, the point above applies here. Should a woman prepare to be abandoned, even if this preparation makes it more likely she herself will do the abandoning? If you give a woman the ability to betray her husband, this is unlikely to have either no effect or a positive effect.
Gunner Q and feeriker had excellent responses as well; see above.
Laura is correct about “all debt is slavery”. If a couple stays out of it, that will help greatly. No car loan, so get a cheap, used car.
No student loans, so only the husband does school, and even that likely only a trade school. Who needs a four-year degree at an expensive university to be a software programmer? Take a one or two year program at a college. I did a two year program, then extended it for a 4-year degree. As far as I know, the degree has not helped at all. I enjoyed some of the training, but never used it. Not time well spent.
Thanks guys, it’s a really good idea for a woman’s dad to invest heavily in his SIL. I’ve had my mind focused on building my business so that my son has a place, but hadn’t even considered using it to build up the SIL as well.
I don’t know if I will be able to provide the SIL training/education. But I will have enough land by then for all my kids to live a very private life on our property in the early years of their marriages.
http://www.catholicmatch.com/institute/2015/04/5-things-you-should-always-do-on-a-first-date/
Dale,
“Better to accept reality, and get him married off by 22-24. Of course, that means the women need to be accepting of marriage by 18-22, with the loss of freedom this entails.”
Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose. It’s a tough world out there for young folks just starting out – a lot easier to make it as a team and most young women are sensing it, too. The problem is the older generations still giving the bad advice and not supporting them by changing the broken family court laws etc… that make marriage a bad deal for young men.
“Dating” (chaperoned) in middle school, “going steady” in high school, nothing exclusive after that without a ring (or a pin if he’s got one) was how my grandparents did it. That schedule works well to get things rolling at the appropriate ages.
As you acknowledge, most divorces are initiated by the wife. You seem to disagree that the women are also more likely to be the problem when the man gives up and leaves. Plus, the point above applies here. Should a woman prepare to be abandoned, even if this preparation makes it more likely she herself will do the abandoning? If you give a woman the ability to betray her husband, this is unlikely to have either no effect or a positive effect.
Good points, which I slso might have added to my previous comment. This also relates to the dynamic of the wife competing with the husband for the upper hand in the marriage rather than being the helpmeet she is commanded scripturally to be.
Dale makes an excellent point too about the abandonment mentality. The prevailing attitude now, even among so-called “Christians,” is that any man a woman marries is going to almost certainly be either a failure or an abusive scumbag who is NEVER to be trusted. She had better damn well keep a “bailout bag,” in the form of a “good” job, her own money, a network of friends and relatives, and a good legal pretext for taking the kids should anything not go her way. This of course injects distrust, resentment, and hostility into the marriage from Day One, thereby all too frequently resulting in its destruction (which is of course NEVER her fault). The term “self-fulfilling prophecy” applies fully here.
@IBB
“”the Devil has been laughing his @ss off. The entire 20th century was completely his””
I got this quote,which I saved,from a Catholic link provided on this site.I believe it was from a link that Earl had provided.
“”Pope Leo XIII had a vision in the mid 1800’s that was so terrible it caused him to faint and when he woke up, to compose the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel. Satan appeared before God and said he could destroy faith in God and the Church if he was given 100 years. God permitted it. The century God gave him in the vision was the twentieth century so we have been through alot – two world wars and the holocaust, Korea and Viet Nam, the industrial revolution, the sexual revolution, the feminist revolution,the homosexual revolution, increased materialism, many crisis within the Church, natural disasters and on and on.””
Very believable!
How to explain modesty and swimwear to a friend?
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=955099
Dear Prudence: Help! I found my dead husband’s diary and it’s filled with yearnings for his ex-girlfriend
http://news.nationalpost.com/life/dear-prudence-help-i-found-my-dead-husbands-diary-and-its-filled-with-yearnings-for-his-ex-girlfriend
>NB: He didn’t get divorced.
Talking about SIL training… I’ve always wondered what happened to the previous generations actually training the future ones. It seems to me that the boomer generation just left that to government and teachers. Not only parents but businesses are completely unwilling to train newcomers, they would rather poach prospective employees from other companies via LinkedIn..
Doesn’t bode well for the future.
Feministhater.
That is the feminine imperative subroutine running. Tradition and passing down knowledge is a man thing. Talk tradition, standards , historical to women and she will think sexism. The reason being is that it is a man thing, they have no concept. Look at a wedding. we talk about the vows and the honor and God. Women talk about the ceremony. They don’t give a damn about vows and honor. Expand that to a civilization under the feminine imperative subroutine.
H/T to you Scott. America surely needs many more fathers like you.
The role most women want is wife and mother and it is being brainwashed out of them by a society that wants them to focus on a career and promiscuity.
Then let the real men stand up and defend these women from being brainwashed. I understand that some men are doing it, but we need many more of them. I have always maintained that women are as much victims of feminism as men. Even more importantly, women are worse victims, because their exposure to the cancer of feminism started even before they were able to develop a sense of right and wrong.
Dave
Big time white knighting there. Women vote they aren’t victims of anything . It is like saying a guy doing an armed robbery is shot by a store clerk and is paralyzed from the chest down and then claiming to be a victim of violent crime.
BTW I would say that my 9 year old son was exposed to feminism before his birth.
Women became wives and mothers because in a responsible civilization that is where the hypergamy takes them. A woman can lead a joyful and full life of privilege and love bringing pleasantness to everyone and never once giving a damn about anybody but herself. That is the sole purpose of civilization. Living by the truth and faith in God with give man the wisdom to achieve that or at least get close to it. Women are not victims of shit. The option of being a wife and mother is still on the table and always has been.
@ dale
As you acknowledge, most divorces are initiated by the wife. You seem to disagree that the women are also more likely to be the problem when the man gives up and leaves. Plus, the point above applies here. Should a woman prepare to be abandoned, even if this preparation makes it more likely she herself will do the abandoning? If you give a woman the ability to betray her husband, this is unlikely to have either no effect or a positive effect.
The more education a woman has the less likely it is that her marriage will end in divorce. Poor, uneducated women are the most likely to end up divorced. Clearly education, and with it the ability to support oneself has a positive impact on marriage.
It is a sad thing if a man has to rely on his wife having no other options to keep his marriage together. He might need to undergo some self improvement and become the kind of person that someone would actually want to be married to.
It is a sad thing if a man has to rely on his wife having no other options to keep his marriage together
Nonsequiter. Arguing against a position that was not put forth. Good try though.
Which is, quite generally (whether it relates to AI or anything else in tech), the reason why there is so much feminist hysteria currently about getting women en masse into tech companies. The concern is that the tech is not being made/designed/developed in a way that comports with much of PC/feminism — at least not as much as it would be if there were large numbers of women in those companies policing the design choices and ensuring that they are not “anti-woman” (i.e., “anti-FI”). They know that the way tech is being designed is literally changing the way people live, think and work, and the fact that the people who are designing are overwhelming men scares the shit out of them. Literally.
I don’t mean to discount this entirely, but there is a simpler reason underneath shared by most SJWs attacking the tech industry. Namely, there’s a lot of money there. There’s a lot of money not (yet) being paid out in legal extortion schemes through diversity initiatives, foundation grants, “non-profit” programs and so on. The “logic” of disparate impact and group rights are now so entrenched that anywhere the left sees wealth that is not distributed according to racial and sex percentages in the general population they immediately cry “no fair” and the public, or a big chunk of it, agrees. Everyone not included wants “their share” which they believe they are owed simply by existing, by being part of a group that is not participating.
So left-women see an industry that is 80% male (or whatever) and where the biggest winners are 99% male and they want what they think is “theirs.”
It’s not really much different than the Microsoft anti-trust suit, when DC looked west and got mad that Microsoft was not spreading the lobbying cash around the way all Fortune 500 companies are expected to. So they got punished.
Funny, when women had less education there was less divorce.
Nothing wrong with education, the problem lies in education making women wast time and lead them to sin and less ability to pair bond with their future husband. That combined with the feminist education, which isn’t education at all, being taught instead of teaching women to be wives and mothers causing women to use divorce and child custody as a weapon against their husbands, to which they vowed to be with for life.
It’s a sad thing if a woman has to rely on an entire legal framework, government interference and strong-arm/police brutality tactics, geared towards destroying her husband or keeping him under the threat of divorce day in and day out, when she spent her better years being ‘educated’ but still cannot support herself without money from either the state or a husband.
No worries though MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM, you fucking slut, men are increasingly becoming ambivalent towards marriage and women. You made your bed with femskanks, now sleep with them.
Earl: “Not to sound pessimistic…are there really 20-24 year old women seeking men 35+. People talk about it all the time but I have yet to see it anywhere in reality”
I’m 44 and I get interest from girls in that age (even younger) frequently, but I’m married already which might have some part in it. Women are definitely attracted more to taken men. I’m also 5’11” and 200lbs, Lift heavy weights.
@ feminist hater
Name calling, really? Grow up.
As for men becoming increasingly ambivalent towards women and marriage, isn’t it actually women who are less interested in getting married than they were in the past?
OT. Someone else might have put this up already:
http://www.app.com/story/life/family/relationships/2015/04/06/reasons-marriage-just-work-anymore/25349495/
This is by Anthony D’Ambrosio, a 29 year old sex advice columnist for the Asbury Park (NJ) Press. His two year marriage ended in divorce. He met his now ex wife in 2004 and married her in 2012, so knowing each other shouldn’t have been a problem.
Excerpts:
“I don’t know about you, but I am an extremely sexual person. Not only do I believe it’s an important aspect of a relationship, I believe it’s the most important. *** It’s no wonder why insecurities loom so largely these days. You have to be perfect to keep someone attracted to you.
***
“You want to know why your grandmother and grandfather just celebrated their 60th wedding anniversary? Because they weren’t scrolling through Instagram worrying about what John ate for dinner. They weren’t on Facebook criticizing others. They weren’t on vacation sending Snapchats to their friends.
“Nothing is sacred anymore, in fact, it’s splattered all over the Web for the world to see.
“Everywhere we go, everything we do — made public. Instead of enjoying the moment, we get lost in cyberspace, trying to figure out the best status update, or the perfect filter.
***
“Immediately, people will assume that my failed marriage is why I am expressing these emotions; that’s not the case. It’s what I see around me every single day that inspired me to write this article.
“Marriage is sacred. It is the most beautiful sacrament and has tremendous promise for those fortunate enough to experience it. Divorced or not, I am a believer in true love and building a beautiful life with someone. In fact, it’s been my dream since I was young.”
******************
Poor guy. It’s that last paragraph that is his downfall.
But then, I suppose he must have just “chosen poorly”. Never mind that he knew her for EIGHT YEARS before they married. Nah. He’s just a bitter, resentful, rageful, angry man.
Here’s one of his male detractors, intoning the predictable “man up” refrain:
“If you were (one of) the “people being portrayed” here, she would be well within her right to hold back the “nookie” if you can’t hold a conversation with her, have a cup of coffee, have a little INTIMACY! Hate to mention that, but you failed to point out intimacy out in the article, I guess because, intimacy is something that a person in the relationship is responsible for which may just eliminate the need for a cell phone, but judging by the article, responsibility is nowhere to be found. Grow up son, man up and when you remarry, be the man she needs you to be.”
Blah, blah, Shove it, femcunt!
I hope so, the less men and women getting married, the better.
Mmhmm
As for men becoming increasingly ambivalent towards women and marriage, isn’t it actually women who are less interested in getting married than they were in the past?
At which age?
That is right honey men are not wasting their lives trying to be bluepill marriageable any more. And the ones that are just aren’t very attractive to todays women. When these women finally get kicked off the cock carousel due to lack of acceptable physical appearance the marriageable men don’t want to and no longer wife up sluts. Enjoy the decline. This is happening with men that have never heard of the manosphere.
Looks like she got our attention with that line.
Nonsequiter. Arguing against a position that was not put forth. Good try though.
@ Scott
Your comment wasn’t even a good try. The reason given for not educating women was that it would give them the option to leave their husbands.
Where?
@ Hank Flanders
At all ages. There was a time when almost every woman would marry. While women would try to get the best man that they could, they would take whatever man they could get. Staying single wasn’t really an option. Now the floor for an acceptable husband is higher and staying single is a better option than marrying certain men. Those men would still like to have wives but can’t find any takers.
There are plenty of women complaining about being unable to find husbands, but they are looking for men above a pretty high floor and uninterested in the large numbers of single men below that floor.
Also, you have changed the argument, subtly.
You understand the difference between “rely on his wife having no options to keep his marriage together” and incentives that make HER leaving more likely.
No one in this thread has argued for relying on this, since the current divorce/family court system makes it all just window dressing.
Scott
She is just saying that because that is the feminist teaching today. Marriage is not about a commitment to a good man for todays women. It is about getting something out of need. If she doesn’t need him she doesn’t have to respect him. The union is out of romance and happiness. That is why women make bad marriage partners and why we have MGTOW. She is being truthful on this one. It is how women think. With the government and now the church’s backing this is not going to change anytime soon and she knows it.
MMMMMMMhmmmmm, fuck slut femcunt, yeah you… women who are married shouldn’t have the option to leave their husbands, that’s why it’s marriage for life. You know, making a vow for life. Of course a slut like you as never heard of a vow and thus treats the marriage covenant as a piece of paper. Under your rules, yeah yours, a husband should have the option to trade in his wife for a newer model because his wife obviously had nothing else to keep him with other than her looks.. funny how women need protection from that?
If you chaps haven’t figured it out it yet, this is one of Dalrock’s old trolls. Different name, same bullshit. She’s a tart, just give her her tingles and drum her off the site. Works for a couple months or more..
“I would say it’s not so much that they are secretly unhappy, because they believe they did the best that was socially acceptable in their day. I would say it’s more that they are 100% certain that if they were growing up in a world with the social rules of 2015, there is no way in hell they would have made the same decisions again themselves, so they don’t want to see the young women of today doing so. The idea is “I didn’t have the same opportunities, but if I did, I would have made very different choices than I did, so you should also not make the same choices I did, which I only made because I had a more limited set of choices”.”
Yeah. This is exactly the same reason why you see so many married men telling younger men not to marry at all and not to have children, especially around this corner of the web.
Mmmmm,
You tell us. I can tell you the single guys here pretty much aren’t interested in marriage and its pretty obvious why they aren’t. That said, pretty much every single woman I’ve ever met has been VERY interested in marriage (and re-marriage if they frivorced #1 provided they wouldn’t be sacrificing too much alimony in the re-marriage.) If you know something different as to why women are less interested in getting married (and most importantly, WHY) then please share. Don’t just leave us hanging there.
fh, let her talk. Stop calling her c-nt.
Patience.
Oh, women are VERY interested in marriage but only to a subset of men. At least she’s honest, the bottom 80% or so of men simply don’t matter, they are not required, according to women that is. The economy and infrastructure is something else though.
I find that rather liberating though, men MUST learn that they’re not wanted or needed, that women have NEVER, EVER loved them at all. Women don’t care about you, the person, they only care about your looks and power or earning ability. The man simply doesn’t matter, and when that same man who used to supply her with those things no longer can, then out he must go and then she wails about how he wasn’t able to keep her and she goes EPL. It’s the same story.
I love it when women come here and show their stuff. MOAR!
Mmhmm
At all ages. There was a time when almost every woman would marry. While women would try to get the best man that they could, they would take whatever man they could get. Staying single wasn’t really an option. Now the floor for an acceptable husband is higher and staying single is a better option than marrying certain men. Those men would still like to have wives but can’t find any takers.
There are plenty of women complaining about being unable to find husbands, but they are looking for men above a pretty high floor and uninterested in the large numbers of single men below that floor.
Do you see the point you just made there? Your first statement (or implication) I cited was that women were less interested in getting married than men than in the past, not that women’s standards were simply higher now. I agree that young women are less interested in marriage than in the past. They want to experience other things first. I also agree that older women’s standards are higher than they were in the past, but they’re still interested in getting married all the same. As you said, they’re complaining about being unable to find husbands, which indicates the desire to marry is still there in full-force.
” Poor, uneducated women are the most likely to end up divorced.”
That used to be the case. Actually, today, poor, uneducated women are the most likely never to marry in the first place.
@ Scott
Also, you have changed the argument, subtly.
You understand the difference between “rely on his wife having no options to keep his marriage together” and incentives that make HER leaving more likely.
No one in this thread has argued for relying on this, since the current divorce/family court system makes it all just window dressing.
I think that it is a distinction without a difference. The argument was essentially that women should have limited options so that they wouldn’t divorce. Well limited options should not be what hold a marriage together.
My main point, which you are ignoring, is that education decreases the chances of divorce. The person that I was responding seemed to think that education and the options that education gives women makes divorce more likely.
@Mmhmm
>The more education a woman has the less likely it is that her marriage will end in divorce.
Any statistics for this claim? I have read the opposite claim, which seems far more believable, given:
-she has extra years of independence in university, thus making it harder to submit in marriage
-she has years of free-spending ways, with no male restrictions on incurring debt to fund luxury purchases, thus making it harder to submit in marriage
-she has been exposed to feminist training and friends in university, thus making it harder to submit in marriage
-she likely has had several sex partners, thus making it harder to bond in marriage
-she likely has had several sex partners, thus being less desirable to him. (Who wants to put his penis in a woman that has had five other guys in there? Disgusting. Virgins are far more desirable, if the man wants marriage rather than a ONS.)
-she is older, and thus less desirable at the beginning, thus is less fulfilling of his needs in marriage
>It is a sad thing if a man has to rely on his wife having no other options to keep his marriage together. He might need to undergo some self improvement and become the kind of person that someone would actually want to be married to.
Your assertion assumes that women are naturally good and loyal, and thus having options will not encourage her to exercise them, which was entirely my point — perhaps you missed it. Women, in general, prove themselves to be incredibly selfish and short-sighted and willing to exercise those options; see
– abortion rates – yes she will kill a child for sake of her convenience
– divorce rates – yes she will break up the family ’cause she is not “getting what she needs to be happy” (couple I know)
And what is wrong with saying marriage is supposed to be permanent, therefore they should both have no other options? If a guy wants to keep contact info for a former girlfriend, in case things do not “work out” in the marriage, is that okay? “It is a sad thing if [the wife] has to rely on [her husband] having no other options”, right?
Sheesh. What part of my comments lead you to believe I am too lazy for self-improvement? You are reading in what you want to see.
Dale, the claim is that women who are educated get married far later than women who are not. Therefore, they have less time to divorce and remarry. Any women will less likely divorce if her chance to remarry is incredibly low. Hence the low divorce rates for older women.
Educated women get married much later. Sure, you have a less chance of getting divorced if you marry a 35 year old, but she will be older, she will have partied for many years, she will not respect you, she will not love you as she ‘settled’ for you after having done many guys in college. If men want to go this route, I wish them luck. Their marriages will probably last a lifetime, a lifetime I wouldn’t want to live at all.
@ Dale
Top 2 search results from googling marriage divorce and education.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w15725
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/07/24/marriage-divorce-education-study/13105595/
@ Hank Flanders
Do you see the point you just made there? Your first statement (or implication) I cited was that women were less interested in getting married than men than in the past, not that women’s standards were simply higher now. I agree that young women are less interested in marriage than in the past. They want to experience other things first. I also agree that older women’s standards are higher than they were in the past, but they’re still interested in getting married all the same. As you said, they’re complaining about being unable to find husbands, which indicates the desire to marry is still there in full-force.
They are interested in getting married but not interested enough to settle and marry no matter what like their grandmothers did. They are interested in marriage, but less interested than their grandmothers were because marriage is no longer necessary for survival.
They are complaining about not being able to find husbands, but what they mean is that they can’t find the type of husbands that they want, not that they can’t find husbands at all. Those men below the floor still seem interested in marriage.
@ thedeti
That used to be the case. Actually, today, poor, uneducated women are the most likely never to marry in the first place.
And if they do marry they are more likely to divorce. But yes, poor men are below the floor that I mentioned upthread, even for poor women.
“M” is showing hypergamy at work in the legal and social climate we live in now. That is how women see it when they are out getting dicked. Men just need to understand it. She is telling everyone here MGTOW and surrogacy is the way to go for men today. There is no wife
Mmmmm,
Of course. They have so much to lose. You think Bill Maher is ever going to get married? Why should he? That is the point, the husbands they can’t find are really the AMOGs and the BetaBux guys who have swallowed red pills and figured out… there is nothing in it (for them) in marriage. All potential loss, and basically, no gain. So…. why play?
Of course. They have much less to lose. You can’t take blood from a stone, nor can you take alimony and child support from a minimum wage man.
But you still haven’t explained to me why single women are increasinly not willing to marry. That is not what I see at all……
Women see the same thing. That’s why they are not marriage material to them. These decisions are made based on family law.
Mmhmm,
Yes, government has made single women…. whole. Your “survival” was created by POTUS Obama’s Life of Julia. Of course, men below the floor are the ones paying for that life (against their will.) They get nothing from that other than shame. So really, for men below the floor (your words) why should they bother doing anything productive? Perhaps they should all just quit their minimum wage jobs, put on those silly V for Vandetta masks, occupy Wall Street, burn down Taco Bells (not just in Ferguson, Camden, and Detroit, but everywhere) and live on the street and call you a c-nt? Give them a reason not to. I mean what is the difference, go to prison and sit in a cell and just wait to die or bust their @ss for chump change just to give you money for your Life of Julia until they die? They have no freedom either way, now do they?
Oh, women are VERY interested in marriage but only to a subset of men. At least she’s honest, the bottom 80% or so of men simply don’t matter, they are not required, according to women that is. The economy and infrastructure is something else though.
80% is way too high. Bottom 25% maybe are unwanted maybe and still some of those men will be settled for. But nearly all of those men would’ve been taken by someone in the past. Today women would rather be single than marry one of those types.
Mmhmm,
I was being brutally graphic but do you understand the point I’m making? We have men here on this forum that have NOTHING to offer hypergamous women, nothing. They were led to believe their whole life that if they worked and behaved, they would have a virginal wife one day who would love them and obey them. NOT!!!! That never happened, and it is never going to happen. So of course, the logical result of that (after consuming that red pill) is to move back home, live in the basement, smoke a big bong, play video games, and surf on-line pron for 10+ hours a day. Maybe work part time for a little money or not. What’s the difference? Their hardwork and perseverence (in absense of their height, intelligence, education, and looks) will never be rewarded with what they want. The world has repeatedly told them that what they want, doesn’t matter. They don’t count, they are expendable, as they are “below the floor.” But it worse for them because other blue pill men think they can fix the problem by “shaming” the “below the floor” men. That does nothing, does not add any value at all other than making the “below the floor” men who already feel like sh-t, feel worse.
All the cultural underpinnings that society used to have for far below average men having even a mediocre existance, any chance at a happy life, are gone. They have been ripped away by government reform of laws regarding marriage, welfare, housing, education, everything. So your “below the floor” men are yearning for something (anything) that gives then even one reason to get up in the morning and get out of bed. As far as their concerned, were it not for your desire to tax their meager wages for your Life of Julia, they assumed you would rather they just go ahead and kill themselves.
greyghost,
Of course. They have much less to lose. You can’t take blood from a stone, nor can you take alimony and child support from a minimum wage man.
If Mmhmm is really an honest feminist woman and not some disgruntled guy posing as a feminist woman on a red pill site, then we have some real value here in her input. But I have my doubts. We’ll see.
I think this post will be helpful to those of you debating the education vs. divorce rate stats. https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/06/25/whistling-through-the-graveyard/
Mmhmm
They are interested in getting married but not interested enough to settle and marry no matter what like their grandmothers did. They are interested in marriage, but less interested than their grandmothers were because marriage is no longer necessary for survival.
They are complaining about not being able to find husbands, but what they mean is that they can’t find the type of husbands that they want, not that they can’t find husbands at all. Those men below the floor still seem interested in marriage.
Being picky about whom one will marry does not make one less interested in marriage, though. I’ve been interested in getting married my all of my adult life and maybe even before that, but I’m also still picky in who I’ll marry. (However, after seeing what some of my love interests turned into, I’m not sure I was picky enough). Anyway, I’m not at all a part of the men who are going their own way. Those men are going their own way, not so much due to what they perceive as a lack quality prospects from my understanding, but because of what they perceive as too great of a personal risk, regardless of the quality of the person they end up marrying. That situation is contrasted with mine and women’s who are simply holding out for someone of a certain caliber. Men going their own way are literally not interested in marriage to anyone at all, yes? Women who are simply not interested in marriage to certain men have not lost any interest in marriage itself any more than I have.
When it comes to these femc–s types–I always think of the fallen angels in the Book of Enoch. Knowing that their time was up, they chose to corrupt as many others as they could instead of you know, accepting that they were wrong. Today, we can see men are very quickly waking up to the situation (sham) and the gravy train for the eat-pray-lovers is about to crash… but still, the fc’s will continue to advise young women to pursue the delusion… to encourage the “strong independent lifestyle” as if that entire structure _ISN’T_ propped up by men they have now chosen to disdain.
.
@ ibb
Why can’t those below the floor men be contentedly single like the women who would rather be single than marry them? Do you think that circumstances that force women to marry men that they don’t want to marry are better than what we have currently?
BTW I do think that Bill Maher will eventually get married. Clooney claimed that he was never going to marry either. Eventually almost all men want to settle down.
Gents……it’s really simple…..the higher the level of education, the more indoctrinated she is in the feminist-marxist kant. If she’s a successful female, she’s a feminist. Plain fact. Nowadays, men are watching out more for feral females. Red Pill is the solution, and MGTOW is the rational response to such misandry. That’s why snowflake ain’t attractive.
@ ibbb
by “content” I mean not “burning down Taco Bell.” Productive and nonviolent.
Mmhmm,
Because they are Christian and horny and want to have s-x (they MUST have it) and they don’t want to be sinning. DO you have any idea how strong the desire to have s-x is for men? Do you think it is good that they just jerk off to pron for the rest of their life? Because that is what they will do. Or maybe you think they should sin by paying a wh-re? Would that be better?
I think that whatever we have right now, is bad. Hypergamy and unilateraly divorce are both bad. You simply can’t have a civilized, functioning, modern society were more than half of the people over age 18 aren’t married. That is what we have now (because women are hypergamous and men with assets are cautious.)
Clooney was divorced so it is a little different. And unless the divorce laws changes, Maher will not be getting married. Why should he? He gets laid whenever he wants and he already had a live-in playboy bunny girlfriend sue him for palimony when he booted her @ss to the street and she failed in court. So he knows how sinister women are and what they all want from him, ($$$$$$$.)
Those femcunts are hardly content, lol, they scream and cry like the cunts they are, asking themselves why their butt hurts! Lololssldzlzolzozl!
Mmhmm,
Sure. That is just not working, sitting in your parents basement, playing XBox, and masturbating to HD on-line, streaming, free, pron for 10+ hours a day. It is not the least bit productive, but it is entirely non-violent. Why should they be productive in a society that has no use for them other than as “mules” from which to extract resources? Why should they work?
There is no point to production if you don’t get to reproduce, fuckstick!
Oh, and society hates them, I think that’s a good reason. When this shithouse burns, I’ll be sitting cool and drinking a cold one!
BTW, seeing as how feminism depends on men for protection……how’s that going to work out, I wonder? Black knight behavior is growing. There are instances where men have stood around when women were being beaten. This is what happens when men decide to withdraw. It’s going to get much worse. This is a sign of a societal collapse. Men build the society, and feral females destroy it. By the time the women realize what is going on, it’s too late. Alienated men will never come back. Like Cappy says, enjoy the decline.
Off topic, but fascinating, especially as controversial Jewish practices mostly fly under the mainstream radar:
Jewish Rabbi kidnaps husbands who won’t grant their wives a divorce:
http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/crime/fighting-to-be-free-the-lengths-orthodox-jewish-women-will-go-to-for-a-get/ar-AAazQzH?ocid=mailsignoutmd
fh, I am not sure Mmhmm is a woman. It might just be a guy. So don’t get to worked up over mmhmm’s comments.
IBB, Mmhmmmmmmmmm is probably a plant here to stir up resentment. I don’t really care if it’s a he or a she. They’re a piece of shit as far as I’m concerned.
Mmhmm:
Those men being contentedly single – the MGTOWs, are doing just that. The thing is, women who prefer to be single rather than marry are completely miserable. Maybe not in their 20s, and sometimes even in their 30s they are still content, but around the time they hit their 40s+ (Dalrock has posted the data on this several times) women are the most miserable they have ever been throughout all of human history. I think you are underestimating how powerful the biological urges are for a woman to carry a baby in her womb. There is a huge difference between “someday I will later, just not right now” and “I lived my whole life and never got to do this, I have missed all of my chances” when it comes to having a baby.
After she has disappointed her own ticking biological clock, and permanently lost out on the very important social status of being a mother, and after aging is now completely invisible to the men who used to provide her with important validation and attention. There is nothing ‘content’ about the situation she finds herself in, it’s miserable. If in her bitterness and jadedness she manages to convince just 1 girl that “men are scum, you need to look out for yourself first” to the point that that girl ends up getting a divorce (that framework is a prime stage for it to happen), then instead of 1 lonely spinster, her misery has now permanently effected the lives of 2 adults and all of their children. I don’t think I have to begin discussing the innumerous negative effects that happen to children when their parents divorce.
@ ibb
I think that whatever we have right now, is bad. Hypergamy and unilateraly divorce are both bad. You simply can’t have a civilized, functioning, modern society were more than half of the people over age 18 aren’t married. That is what we have now (because women are hypergamous and men with assets are cautious.)
Society is not going to fall apart because a few men can’t get laid. Those men can either stay single or improve themselves until they are above the floor and will be considered for marriage.
@ bob
Women who want children and don’t have husbands tend to just have children. Very few women who want children wait until it is too late and then cry about it. single motherhood is not a good thing, but women choose it over childlessness if they can’t find suitable husbands.
Or it could be that they are not suitable wives
Yes aging, unhaaappppppyyyyy women contribute to the decline of society, but there’s a bumper crop of feral females being raised right know. There’s nothing that can be done b to stop them. That being said, all men can do is quit protecting women. Let them pay for their actions. A drunken coed lying in the street? Leave her alone. Black knightery! Feminism has never really faced a leaderless subversion. Just let women protect themselves. Don’t want to get raped? Well, sister, you’re free and independent! How dare a man tell you how to dress. How dare a man tell you it isn’t safe to go to that bar. Men can’t stop what’s fixing to happen to this society. All we can do is decide who we will help survive. Fact is, not a woman reading this believes a word of it. Viral subversion destroys. Black knights didn’t invent the art of subversion, but we are willing students. MGTOW is subversive, plain fact. The worst thing we can do to this society is withdraw, and spread our subversion.
This is exactly the sort of shaming nonsense that has never worked, ratcheted up another ridiculous notch.
In the old days, the vast majority of women would find a nerdy kinda guy and make something of him, then they’d live a comfortable life as he rose through the ranks of polite society.
Today, wimminz (not women) are too lazy for this sort of project. Occasionally I’ll see one get close, but she usually ends up becoming a naggy bitch, rather than an effective persuader. Most wimminz would rather get fat, squeeze out a few thugspawn, and bang playas on the side, while working a menial, shit job. These same women end up complaining about “no good men”, just like you did above. Any of these wimminz whining about her sad lot in life has no one to blame but herself.
In the interim, men have relaxed into “equality” and are now doing what they want. Often this is nothing much, but sometimes they achieve greatness without a naggy bitch holding them back. Wimminz ought to see such men as an example of their utter failure. That man’s money will eventually go to the tax collector, rather than to her. Such is the way things go.
Boxer
“Women who want children and don’t have husbands tend to just have children. Very few women who want children wait until it is too late and then cry about it. single motherhood is not a good thing, but women choose it over childlessness if they can’t find suitable husbands.”
There are some cultural and class distinctions to make here. There is a growing trend of professional, educated black women who are single remaining childless from fear of looking “ghetto.” They are too educated to live off the state and chase some man down for child support. Many of these women tend to be at least middle class (and so had more access to higher education) and have at least middle management jobs so even though they could afford to raise a child (provided they budget, which we assume college educated people can do), but they choose not to because of the cultural stigma against single motherhood in the black community. Think Maury, Jerry Springer, paternity court, etc. They don’t want to further prove the stereotype. As a black woman I can only speak for black women.
And some women may have moral objections to being a single mother. Lot of black single women in the church whose religious convictions take single motherhood off the table as an option.
My sister, who teaches at the graduate school level, told me recently that while a few years ago female students often waited until post-graduation (age 26 or older) to look for a husband, she has noticed in the past year or two that the female students are getting very anxious if they don’t have a fiance prior to graduation.
Maybe the tide is beginning to turn.
Mmhmm,
Society will not fall apart because a few men can’t get laid. But society has already fallen apart because men who are “above the floor” wont get married. We are not talking a few here, we are talking MANY. And it is increasing.
You think society works right not?
This is called society NOT working. These women marry government. They get a check from government to support their b@stards that they simply had to breed out of wedlock. And then their b@stards wind up having b@stards of their own or they wind up in jail…. or both. But they hate this society that they born into and with good reason. They wanted their mom and dad married (and stayed married) and that never happened.
The only reason why this happened is women were given the vote. They voted for people to give single moms government benefits creating more and more single moms. When you pay for something you get more of it.
There are instances where men have stood around when women were being beaten. This is what happens when men decide to withdraw. It’s going to get much worse.
Sadly, yes, it’s going to get much, much worse. Most western women have never experienced true misogyny, though they are quick to label anyone with dissenting opinion a misogynist. I give them a few more years and they will know firsthand what that often abused term means. I am only worried about the collateral damage.
She must not have ever seen Detroit. It is not about getting pussy that is easy. It is about being a respected member of society. Men know the country hates them. And besides that the society is falling apart. And she doesn’t care not the slightest hint of concern for the well being of the nation. (that commenter is definitely a woman) That is why MGTOW is the way a man goes today. When he is young and with a high sex drive he lives as a PUA and as he ages away his sex drive he spends less time chasing worthless tail and settles for a regular booty call. A family man is best served by using a surrogate
Arguing logically with a woman including showing how she is hurt is foolishness. Let the wicked selfishness work for you. Do what it takes to let her hypergamy lead her to virtue as a way to try and satisfy her hypergamy
A little insight into why the modern poor uneducated woman is more likely to divorce? The life of Julia. (Welfare). This is totally unrelated to what happens when modern femskanks go off to be indoctrinated at college to believe that only white men can be abusers and get their SJW merit badge.
To see men kicking women’s ass go to youtube and watch. Liveleak will have the good stuff youtube pulls. Still a few white knights here and there but most seem to enjoy seeing a women punched full on.
Society has been falling apart for the past 30 odd years. Some people refuse to see. We have with, quite regular frequency, destructive economic crashes that lead to ever increasing needs for more liquidity that needs to be repaid in future. When men become unproductive, you get an economy with little actual production but lots of funneling money around, aka Emerica! While the sun is still shining, I’ll enjoy what little freedom I have left, I’ll enjoy the money I earn and I’ll keep enjoying watching my current same age peer women wailing about not finding a man to commit to them. I’m sorry, after knowing the truth, it’s hard not to laugh at these people and yourself. I used to think about marrying these women, yet now I thank God I did not. It’s amazing what 10 years can do to a woman; she quickly becomes crazy and not in a good way.
Anyway, It’s not about getting ‘laid’. Any man can do that, it’s about finding a person, at a young age, to share your life with, to build a family with, a person who supports you to become the best that you can. Women don’t do that. Instead they tear men down. Exactly as Mmmmmmmhmmmm has done here.
Society is not going to fall apart because a few men can’t get laid. Those men can either stay single or improve themselves until they are above the floor and will be considered for marriage.
You seem not to get the picture. Men are getting laid like there is no tomorrow. Women are getting even more aggressive to pursue men these days. It is not about sex at all. The cost of sex is at an all time low these days, even to the picky guys.
Rather, we are referring to family and having children. Unless there is a strong reversal of the trend, America will most definitely collapse, and it a’int gonna be funny. I mean, it will be catastrophic.
Right now as we speak, immigrants have taken over several countries in Europe. Russia is shrinking so fast the government had to institute a “stay at home to make a baby day” to gear up their dwindling population. If not for America’s friendly immigration policy, this country would be shrinking so fast as well.
Guys are getting sex but they are shunning marriage in large numbers. Even the most comfortable men among them are not particularly keen to sign up for Marriage 2.0, which should be more aptly called “Crappy contract for the foolish man”.
My last comment was similar to feministhater’s. I didn’t see his before posting mine.
As far as “contentment” in the blue-pill cum MGTOW crowd, I don’t think so. Are women content? No they want to burn down the “patriarchy”. Women won’t let these guys be content, even in their parents basements they are being hounded by SJW’s telling them what to watch, what games to play, what kind of pron is “acceptable”, what stories to read, and what type of music they should listen to. SJW entrants are going after every reserve of masculinity, there will be a pushback. A society of dropouts and HR department SJW’s isn’t going to be a productive one.
Here is a little something something with commentary about feelings on the subject of hitting back. society is falling apart enjoy the decline yall
fh,
Yes and that b-tch Elizabeth Warren wants to reach into your pocket and take more money out of it by expanding Social Security benefits.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-08/elizabeth-warren-is-delusional-about-social-security
Why can’t those below the floor men be contentedly single like the women who would rather be single than marry them?
Why can’t those “creepy” men be content to be slaves to a corrupt system that supports lazy hypocritical women? Maybe because they have no reason to.
The Quebec Women’s Federation was recently reported to say that cuts to the state affect women disproportionately, due to the fact that they make up 75% of personnel in public sector jobs.
Imagine that. 75% of these public sector jobs (which are supported by tax payers – the majority of which are men) are held by women, and these women claim that it is sexist to cut funding that supports these jobs because – wait for it – 75% of the employees at risk of losing their positions are women.
It’s the same type of rationalization that Mmhmm is using in regards to men and marriage. It’s the same rationalization that brought us feminism to begin with.
At 2:52 pm my reference to marriage should read “marriage” or perhaps marriage 2.0 because what is practiced today in this country (or most any western country) is not marriage.
Gents……it’s really simple…..the higher the level of education, the more indoctrinated she is in the feminist-marxist kant. If she’s a successful female, she’s a feminist.
Yup. PFCS (Plain F***ing Common Sense). It pains me greatly to see that even on a site as blood-red pill as this one, there are plenty of guys who can’t (or more likely just refuse to) see the obvious.
@feeriker
Leave Immanuel and his categorical impertaive out of this.
(I think you meant cant not the great Kant).
Well, yeah. The women who have NOT ended up within the bureaucracy are struggling. Their qualifications mean naught. Locally, we have young women with law degrees applying for personal assistant / admin jobs (designed for those who can type and administrate, and not requiring a degree: NZ is not that stupid, yet) because there are no law jobs in the big firms: I have mentioned the issues with teaching and nursing upstream.
I also know of people who are graduating medical school who cannot get a job: the intern jobs in NZ are reserved for citizens of our nation, and there are no extra places for those whe train who do not have a NZ passport.
But we have a generation of women who have swallowed the koolaid. They will continue to be miserable. We have a duty to pray for them. But not to provide for them, and not to listen to their policies.
For they are profoundly dysfunctional, and despite their IQ, have blinded themselves to the consequences of these policies. Which are not apparent in our societies, as the friction of over-regulation kills the USA (and Australia and the UK) those who could not afford such excess are stepping up and replacing them.
For in this time being rich is a handicap for a society that shields citizens from thei consequences of their behaviour.
Time to lower some standards….
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/04/07/last-ioc-in-marine-experiment-drops-two-officers/25418867/
What seems to be missing in M&M’s “analyses” here is the following: men who have their act together (i.e., not the bottom dwellers below her floor) are MUCH less incented to marry today. MUCH less incented. That is increasing as the ratio of highly educated women:men increases, because these men are in the cat bird seat. This will only get worse as our system continues to encourage one sex at the expense of the other.
It’s true that, for *either* sex, if you are yourself above a certain threshold, it is much better being single, much, much better, than it is to be married to almost anyone — the bar is extremely high to pass if you yourself are above a certain threshold.
@Dalrock,
He’s baaaack…
http://markdriscoll.org/
@Novaseeker
Though no one mentions it, probably the main stimulus to marriage was, for a man, the access to sexual and the exclusivity of sexual favours. Take that away (by providing sexual access gratis a priori marriage) and a main incentive disappears. Add in to the mix women delaying marriage such that male candidates for marriage are no longer quite so burning in the flesh or have sampled some goods anyway, then the incentive to marry reduces still further, such that the only growth area in marriage is now bizzarly between people of the same sex – in the case of men the ultra-promiscuous.
Men and women will then, it is asserted, marry for love and that is all very fine but marriage usually needs for consummation some sort of economic push. Happily I do not suffer from yellow fever, and thus will not be seeking a Thai bride nor do I care for a bride COD as, though fit, I would not trust those east Europeans further than I could throw them. My own people made it clear decades ago that chewing stinging nettles was preferable to matrimony.
‘The Philippines of 2015 won’t be the Philippines of 2026. The US and UN are both pushing ‘feminism’ as the primary world ideology,’
I talked with a gal from the Philippines…they got birth control pushed in, now they are trying to cram divorce down their throat. Sounds like the Catholic church is the only opposition to it.
I talked with a gal from the Philippines…they got birth control pushed in, now they are trying to cram divorce down their throat. Sounds like the Catholic church is the only opposition to it.
You are correct on all counts. The US & UN have been exporting feminism (along with birth control, abortion, homosexual acceptance and who knows what else) for some while now. I saw a news report of the law passing on Filipino TV and told my wife that feminism had it’s foot in the door and it was only a matter of time (unless someone stopped it now). She thinks the Catholic Church can hold, but I’m not so sure. I think when the old guard passes on, the younger ones will probably be more accepting of gradual changes (in the wrong direction).
The other thing that may work against the encroach of feminism is poverty, but India has shown that that isn’t a guarantee. Still, I think that if India were a wealthy country the feminism over there would be worse.
2026 in the Philippines (if there is one) will probably be worse than now, but 2036 or 2046 are what concerns me for the sake of my son and my wife’s family.
Earl if your going to get one you might want to seal the deal pretty soon just in case.
@Rollo, Mark Driscoll is the Pastor of what? A glorified blog or does he actually have a congregation to abuse? I’ve never been a fan of titles, especially for people DOING ministry.
Scott and pukeko60, I’d like to thank both of you for the careful and serious discussion of the various increasingly common mental disorders. It’s much more interesting and useful to read what you two licensed practitioners in the field have to say than the usual “well, I read DSM and I think” kind of chitchat. The history of some of the disorders is interesting as well, in that some of these conditions appear to be side effects of increasing urbanization.
If nothing else, your comments provide useful warnings to men both young and old on what sort of women to avoid at all costs. Again, thanks.
“Yes and that b-tch Elizabeth Warren wants to reach into your pocket and take more money out of it by expanding Social Security benefits.”
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-08/elizabeth-warren-is-delusional-about-social-security
This comment is not accurate and if not a misunderstanding, it is misleading. One must understand Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) in order to properly understand how federal government funding and economics really works. The federal government does NOT need to “reach into your pocket and take more money out of it to fund expanding social security benefits.” The federal government can fund itself essentially – The federal government is monetarily sovereign. You cannot equate the federal government budget with a household budget – the federal government issues its’ own currency, whereas a household obviously cannot – there are very important implications of this fact that most people do not recognize and understand. The federal government can indeed fund many important programs that are beneficial to society, without funding from federal income taxes.
See:
http://mythfighter.com/2009/09/07/introduction/
http://mythfighter.com/2014/08/19/the-vast-difference-between-the-effect-and-the-real-purpose-of-federal-taxation/
http://mythfighter.com/2009/09/08/ten-reasons-to-eliminate-fica/
http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/search?q=modern+monetary+theory
Rollo, that web page has been up for a while. I don’t see where Driscoll has landed anywhere yet, he appears to still be floating around, probably “guest preaching” at any church gullible enough to host him. So he’s not “back”, he never “left” in vaporware terms.
Anyone can put up a web page, y’know.
India has a much more elaborate media and film industry via which to drill memes into people.
Yes, I forgot about that one.
India, being an English-language country drawing laws from other Commonwealth countries
I missed that one too.
When these ‘role models’ spout boilerplate crap, the speed of destruction is fast.
No doubt! Sadly, English is the second language of the Philippines, but at least their media isn’t as prominent as in India. Still they do have their own internet tv services with FI centered episodes.
You actually have given me a little hope that the Philippines might be able to hold out longer than I previously thought, but I won’t hold my breath. I will pray, however.
Thank you for the input TFH.
@Anonymous Reader
Increasing urbanization may increase mental disorders, but the increasing use of day care centers and the increasing size of public schools may have had as much or more to do with the rise in mental illness. Both of my parents attended relatively small schools where they knew the name of every teacher and every pupil, and they left with a great deal of respect for schools as institutions. They never really understood how much “meaner” the huge consolidated schools of the 60s and 70s were. The level of alienation that leads to a “Columbine” is difficult to develop in a high school with just a few hundred students.
And now we have Facebook and other social media to convince kids that everybody else is having a better time than they are..
Dalrock,
I’ve been trying to be at least a little sympathetic here on this concept of choosing last and how it sucks. Yes it does suck. But something about this topic just bothered me a little bit and I haven’t been able to put my finger on it until just now.
It does suck to choose last, but there is something worse than choosing last. That is (of course) have no choice at all. I think we all agree that for the majority of young men (the precious few that want to marry, and that number is ever dwindling), there really aren’t any worthy women available to them for marriage as those who are worthy, wouldn’t have them. So no choice. I would further contend that for the majority of young women who do want to get married and ARE worthy of marriage, they are basically getting zero marriage proposals. So no choice.
Life for singles who want to get married is not meeting in the playground for a game of kickball. You don’t just stand around and wait to get chosen to be married the way you expect to either pick or BE picked on a kickball team. It doesn’t work that way. Nor is it like the movie/screenplay “Lil Abner” where the single women chased the single men through the forest to try and catch one and the all the men and the women can be assured that they will ALL be married on that day, it is just a matter of when you will be chosen. If marriage were that easy (provided it was 1.0) that would fix so many problems. Alas…..
Fact is, is that there is a (sadly) increasing percentage of single men and women on this planet who (of no fault of their own) will never be chosen no matter how much they want to marry. It does not matter one bit how much their try to improve their lot in life, they will always be below Mmhmm’s floor. Either she will always be too ugly/stupid/ or he will always be too ugly/short/stupid/ for anyone to even notice them as marriage material.
So yes, choosing last does suck. But I think you might have done a little reframing with your argument on that one.
If nothing else, your comments provide useful warnings to men both young and old on what sort of women to avoid at all costs. Again, thanks.
Of course!
feministhater @ 2:52 am:
“Talking about SIL training… I’ve always wondered what happened to the previous generations actually training the future ones. It seems to me that the boomer generation just left that to government and teachers. Not only parents but businesses are completely unwilling to train newcomers, they would rather poach prospective employees from other companies via LinkedIn..”
I can’t answer for the transnationals, the companies who keep demanding H1B slaves, but this issue is caused mainly by the cost of employing people. Taking California as an extreme example, an employee can cost up to $25,000 per year to employ on top of his actual pay because of workman’s comp, insurance and other employer mandates. When you view the hiring decision as costing your business $50,000 per year plus training costs for a $25k apprentice or $75,000 per year with lower insurance premiums for an experienced $50k journeyman, you realize the new guy is almost as expensive as the veteran.
This is why you see employed people running overtime while unemployment is high, because the incremental cost of headcount is unbelievable. Making things worse are “tripwires”. Hiring your 21st employee might mean yours is no longer a “small business” and you now have to satisfy even more mandates and regulations… for each of your 21 employees, not just the new guy. And don’t get me started about the illegal-immigrant workaround.
@Mmhmm
Thanks for the links. I am curious about the results shown in the first study, in particular, how numbers would change if showing successful marriages for all participates, rather than only those who managed to marry. I.e. are there more marriages that last 30 years in a group of 100 college women, or in a group of 100 high school drop-outs? This is a different question than the one you were addressing however. The study abstract makes the claim the college educated women are becoming more likely to marry, and they may be compared to the past, but the data given shows they are still less likely to do so than non-college women.
The tables on page “Tables-1” however do agree with your claim that college women who manage to marry are less likely to encounter divorce, and to rate the marriage as unhappy. I would be more interested in cross-figures — for 100 college educated men, how many of their wives are still with him and says she is content? And for 100 college educated women, how many husbands are still with her and he is content?
Most interesting thing about that data is that the rates of divorce, for the marriages that did start, are roughly the same for college grads and “High School or less”. Only those with a partial college education see a consistent spike. (Authors do address this.)
Table 4 shows the claim that in 1980, the average married woman had 3.8 children; low of 2.1 for College grads to a high of 4.37 for HS dropouts. This data seems highly suspicious, as it is not even close to what I see. I may be misreading the data, otherwise this study is suspect.
Regardless of the above, I think a college educated woman is less likely to be the kind of wife I want. (As noted by others upthread.) As you identified of women, if I cannot have a good spouse, I choose to have none. The study talks about the transition the authors saw from a shift from families focused on production to families focused on consumption and leisure. These “me-first” transitions do not make me eager to pursue a woman from this culture. Nor do the 31 to 38% divorce rates (1980, white women).
The study suggests that college women may divorce less, as they have the resources to pursue the leisure and consumption pursuits of both. This is not what I see as positive for me, as I have no intention of having a luxurious marriage. I try to live below my means, at a level many see as frugal.
If a man wants a feminine wife, a group of women who have prepared for a man’s role though getting a degree is the wrong place to look.
@beeker
>The federal government can indeed fund many important programs that are beneficial to society, without funding from federal income taxes.
Are you actually suggesting it is good that the government fund programs by debt rather than current income (taxes)? That is incredibly hateful to the current and future generations.
If a man wants a feminine wife, a group of women who have prepared for a man’s role though getting a degree is the wrong place to look.
Quote of the month, and added to my personal collection of “Quotable Quotes” (with full attribution, of course).
Mmhmm says:
April 8, 2015 at 1:32 pm
“Society is not going to fall apart because a few men can’t get laid. Those men can either stay single or improve themselves until they are above the floor and will be considered for marriage.”
Welcome to the concept of a zero-sum game. As one man rises, another one (relatively) falls in the view of women. Combine that with only 10-15% of men being attracted to women, and guess what? Most of the remaining men get deincentivized to excel and produce anywhere near their capacity. It’s only logical; why bust your tail beyond what you need (and a man who isn’t going to support a wife and children doesn’t need that much money). Of course, things like any technology that didn’t exist prior to WWII (best case) can be expected to moDstly go away,
@IBB
Choosing last is Hobson’s Choice, that is to say it is no choice. It may of course be that the person one then gets is exactly the person most suited – certainly that was the view of the late Robin Skinner, the psychologist. For myself: ever since my first girlfriend ditched me (I had chosen her as the hottest out of a large selection of young females) I knew that every other female would be less desirable and worse still I would be dating someone else’s cast-offs.
I should have had the courage of my fifteen year old’s conviction and withdrawn from further interest in the opposite sex.
… and then aged nineteen or twenty she went and married Wiseman. He may have been a year older than me but of all people – what a loser – how could she have married him; he wasn’t worthy to lick the ground on which she placed her dainty little foot. It was at that moment that I realised how beautiful the sunset and the dolphins were.
… not that I had been faithful, far from it, for as soon as one acquires a first girlfriend, a second one turns up. This was the beginning of my harem. The first girl was brunette and the second blonde – I like variety, and as a man I instantly regarded it as my God-given right to have two, nay three or four women beholden to me. That at least was the theory.
and just like that we get this –
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/08/elizabeth-plank-beyonce-flip-the-script_n_7026128.html
TFH says:
TFH, it sounds very promising, but I have to wonder about the human element. Will there be humans who act as gatekeepers who will set parameters and impose illogical/inefficient “compassionate” rules? Surely the FI will want laws against the cold logic of the machines. What’s your thoughts on that?
Brass, exactly what was crossing my brain. The AI boundaries are still set by humans. Most likely bettah’s
Kind of like “three laws safe” from iRobot or “prime directives” from Robocop?
TFH,
Thanks for the reply.
It looks like AI is arriving right on time to save mankind from the effects of the demographic crash. Otherwise, the future for all our children would involve working for us in assisted living facilities. A bleak, slightly urine-tinged future.
Just a note, Philippines is at least as literate in English as India is. And their native languages have a lot of loanwords from both English and Spanish. India has more total speakers, but at under 11% of the population having English, vs. the 56% of the Philippines, I don’t think it is accurate to say that India is more “English” than the Phils. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_English-speaking_population
Pingback: Wrong In So Many Ways | Retrophoebia
I am hoping that the Philippines is spared the full onslaught of feminism. I find it tragic that my home country that once spread the Gospel to so many parts of the world has now become a major purveyor of evil through out the world.
>>>> hey, red pill law talking guys, what kind of a case does Phi Kappa Psi have
location, location, location
It’s a civil case. The plaintiffs attorney could (if clever enough) select nominal plaintiffs/craft the complaint in a way that allows him to file in (crazy example) the Federal District Court of Micronesia.
Jann Wenner has VERY deep pockets. It’s only a matter of time.
I suspect that India has been drowning in misandry since 1857. As an occasional viewer of Bollywood I have been struck by how blue-pill the films are (I think the word Movie, whether or not preceded by the letter B should be restricted to cinema emanating from America) but what else can one expect when hunky guys are expected to perform song and dance routines (lip-synched yes but not the dance itself – regrettably no body-double there) and routinely end the film by seeing-off the bad-guy at which point the heroine (who has herself disposed of the evil mother-in-law) realises that marriage to Mr Beta was what she wanted all along. THE END – until the next three hour, five song and dance numbers epic.
Pingback: Choosing last sucks | Truth and contradictions ...
At what point should virgin give up on marriage to godly men? What she do instead beside die a virgin. Not being sarcastic. The man I had felling for is dating a young girl with MA and who is not a virgin. She is a kind woman. But he said was given The gift of celibacy…
@Renee Harris
You sound like a whiny beta-man who complains there are no godly women left anywhere in the world. Stop it.
@Opus
My Indian friends all confirm that, indeed, India is drowning in a sea of misandry. Their DV laws (Google “dowry abuse law”) are significantly worse than ours. And people there only recently abandoned traditional culture, which was the only glue holding anything together.
Iran is having a similar experience.
We don’t really appreciate how good we have it in America vs the third world.
John, Renee is a woman. She wants a Godly man for a Christian marriage. She has saved herself for that man. I don’t mean to whiteknight for her but YOU stop it.
People complain here all the time about how their lives suck. And in many cases it does suck. Such is the case for Renee. She asked an important question.
Thank you. I read all “menopause begin the 24” stuff and I let despair overtake my thought lies that seem trig about how I should realize if I wanted to get married I would’ve chosen not to be Born with cerebral palsy( lies) not to be ugly ( I know am I’m not) and not have gone to college. ( I have no I have no excuse at one I want to prove something to myself: I was not retarded ) But I did all of those things I have no one to blame but myself my lack of husband the truth was I honest never through I could get married so I did not prepare for it ; The preparation for something I knew was never coming to break my heart make me a horrible person to be around) .
The true appears to be if you don’t sleep with the man he won’t marry you. And if you’re over the age of 12 virginity in the longer an asset. Both of those are lies but so easy especially with the “man I married to baby mama movement”
As an ugly woman, I like red bill stuff because girls Who sleeps around not respected but ugly girls don’t get husband. I am childish I know .
So what do you tell the ugly ( by the wold and manosphere standards ) 28-year-old woman virgin inst cool with sexual sin and who can’t married ? kill yourself or became a man. (Half joke i’m not making fun of suicide I battled thought but God owns my life and don’t I don’t have the kill myself or any other person)
God’s law says I can’t do either. So I’m going to try to help people what else can I do….
At least I’m starting to see the light at the end of tunnel…. As I read about how horrible marriage is for men I rejoice in the fact that I would never put a man to that. I can never get a divorce because I’m too ugly to get married Brightside kinda
I “know” I’m not ugly but no one don’t wants you; it feels that way.
Sorry I went on so long.. I know I’m a pest but christian’s blog for women don’t give truth or productive