After several years of interruption I’m finally able to pull never married data by race and age again via the U.S. Census CPS data tool. This first chart uses three year averages to estimate the beginning, middle, and ending years in order to get the sample sizes up since it looks at specific ages instead of five year cohorts:
The chart above is for all races. As I’ve done in the past, I also broke it out just for White Non Hispanic women to minimize the impact that immigration and demographic changes might be having:
For both charts it is clear that nearly all women have married by age 45. This reconfirms two things:
- There will always be thirsty men willing to marry even the staunchest holdout, even though we are seeing what may be a small but growing number of men electing not to marry.
- Women still see marriage as an indispensable part of having it all, despite all of the talk about women no longer feeling the need to gain the status of wife. To understand how deep this need is, consider just how hard these women had to settle after assuring themselves for decades that they could do better. Choosing last sucks, and it sucks all the more if the reason you chose last is you were sure you could do better than the ever shrinking pool. These women didn’t get any younger, prettier, more fertile, or less entitled as they entered middle age. Their options didn’t get better as their 40th and 45th birthdays approached, they got much worse. What changed is the women decided to settle, and settle hard.
At the same time we can see that never married rates continue to increase dramatically for women under 40. This breakdown by age is a far clearer picture than the much simpler median age of first marriage. Ever increasing numbers of women are turning 35 without having married. In 2004 roughly 12% of 35 year old White women had never married, but by 2016 this had increased to an incredible 18%! At the same time, the continued delay of marriage in the younger age brackets means that the 35 year old husband hunters will be competing with a glut of never married younger women. In 2004 roughly 22% of 30 year old White women had never married. By 2016 this had jumped up to 35%!
The thing to keep in mind as you look at all of the charts on this post is that women postponing marriage during their twenties is seen as empowerment. But the goal isn’t to wait forever. Around age 30 a never married woman starts to panic. If she still isn’t married by 35 her panic intensifies. This continues until the panic is so great nearly all of them find a willing man–any willing man–and march him down the aisle.
The risks of this plan should be obvious. As ever increasing numbers of women make it into the panic zone, the potential for catastrophe increases. Delayed marriage relies on men as a group responding as desired to an ultimatum. You’ll marry her when she tires of having sex with other men, take it or leave it! But as more and more women delay marriage past the age where the SMP power position has shifted from women to men, this strategy becomes ever more tenuous. The greatest risk here is a mass panic by 30 something never married women. If 30 something women flip from greed to fear, men in their 30s and 40s could flip from fear to greed. If men were to respond by merely deciding to delay marriage by 2-3 years (on average) and play the field a bit longer, this would push large numbers of 30 something women from the starts-to-panic zone to the full-fledged-settling zone. If a small number of men at the same time decide to adopt Marcos’ con, the panic would be further magnified. What would happen after that is more difficult to predict. We have spent decades undermining the foundations of marriage. So far, nearly all White men and women still marry, and it isn’t clear what (if anything) we could do to change that. But we are collectively doing our best to exhaust men’s seemingly inexhaustible good will and find out where this limit is, the point at which marriage as an institution loses it’s cachet. As Larry Kummer brilliantly observes we are like monkeys in the nuclear power plant control room, furiously spinning the knobs and pushing the buttons.
In addition to the two charts above I’ve also updated the White Non Hispanic never married charts by cohort that I’ve shared in the past. All of the following charts show the same data, but the latter views strip out the younger age brackets to zoom in on the older brackets in greater detail:
Note that the spectacular jump we saw in 2014 for the 35-39 age bracket appears to have been statistical noise. However, it is clear that we are witnessing a steady increase in never married 35-39 year old White women, moving from 11% in 1999 to roughly 17% in 2017:
“For both charts it is clear that nearly all women have married by age 45. ” – until now
“There will always be thirsty men willing to marry even the staunchest holdout,” – your looking at the past, with the rise of the internet, the last 10 years as the rise of information. There really is no way this stat will be continued.
“If she still isn’t married by 35 her panic intensifies.” – i’ve tended to find they are almost delirious by 40, at that point a “pulse” qualifies.
Pingback: 2017 Never Married Data | @the_arv
” As ever increasing numbers of women make it into the panic zone, the potential for catastrophe increases.” – yes, suddenly their future fertility window collapses before their eyes. The life goal they never knew they had.
I guess this is why I’ve had women in their 40’s banging on my door. Not appealing in any way.
Men will only shoulder the costs if you are young, attractive, easily fertile and its worth it to them.
@Minesweeper
I don’t see this in the data. For White women a whopping 91% of 45 year old women have married. They may not have stayed married, but they managed to find a man and march him down the aisle. This stat has remained essentially unchanged since 2004. For all races the figures are a bit worse, moving from 89% to 87%, but it is still true that nearly all have married by the time they are 45.
Data is always backward looking. By the time you can measure something it is always in the past. But the data I’ve shared is from the recent past. Whatever impact we’ve seen over the last ten years is already baked in the data I’ve shared. We have no data for the future, only our best guesses.
@D, I agree with you and you are correct the data you are looking at won’t support men not marrying to that degree in the current or future.
Do you have the stats on current married ? Maybe more appropriate that a walk down a las vegas isle 20 years ago. As that is what determines what young men see as viable.
“You’ll marry her when she tires of having sex with other men.”
Nope: You’ll marry her when other men tire of having sex with her.
It may be that once married stats have very little baring at all on whats happening. Considering how little a marriage can last. From JeffS lawyers – 8 years was the avg for 1st marriage – and maybe only. In Amazon.cm they say, if the stats don’t reflect whats happening on thr gound, they are capturing the wrong stat. Which is why they have been so successful.
Just how long do people stay in a marriage in their entire life nowadays ? Maybe that’s a better measure.
I’m angling, harder than usual, to date a 46 year old never-married woman. (I’m 49.)
She’s thin, pretty, intelligent and responsible. And No kids!
Her profile says she is looking to marry. I’m not, but think she would make for a good companion.
With her retained beauty, I think she does not lack for suitors…but she is defintely in the no-more-games phase.
What happens when a never-married settler meets a been-there-done-that red-piller? Stay tuned!
As i’ve said recently, the panic rip cord nowadays is only pulled at 40. Even then, some women can squeeze out 1 child. The game has changed from panic at the disco at 30.
But then, just how man want to stay married, <50% I reckon.
The Taylor Swift song “The Way I Loved You” is the absolute best depiction anywhere in popular culture of why men MUST take the red pill.
@Jonathan Castle says:”I’m angling, harder than usual, to date a 46 year old never-married woman. (I’m 49.)She’s thin, pretty, intelligent and responsible. And No kids!”
no fertility neither ! You can save a ton on condoms.
Oh goodie…so I’ll get a woman for marriage who doesn’t want to have sex anymore. Pass. It’s not like I can say to all the wimminz I’m tired of working for a wage…marry me, take it or leave it.
I think the money chart is _currently unmarried by age_.
There a lot of women that are married and divorced by 30-40.
@Minesweeper
I shared multiple charts on this recently (here and here). However, I’m guessing you are talking about current White Non Hispanic women who are age 45. I just ran a quick query via the same tool I linked at the top of the OP, and came up with (avg of 2015-2017):
Feel free to use the same tool to pull up any point stats you might be interested in.
It depends on the question you are asking. No one stat gives the full picture. The question I’m addressing here in this post is what percentage of women marry, and when do they do so for the first time? This is an important view that I don’t see others exploring. Yes, nearly all women still marry. But an increasing share of them are doing so past the “empowerment” age, and large numbers of others risk doing the same (or giving up entirely). That is significant. Divorce and remarriage rates are related but distinct topics, and something I’ve written about quite a bit. But I’m not writing about them today.
It would interesting to see the stats of the never married & divorced women. That’s a more accurate take of how much women either don’t want to be married or don’t want to stay married.
@ Dalrock:
Second full paragraph under the charts, last 2 sentences:
In 2004 roughly 22% of 30 year old White women had married. By 2016 this had jumped up to 35%!
I think you mean: “In 2004 roughly 22% of 30 year old White woman had NOT married.” Right?
[D: Right. Thanks! Fixed.]
Dalrock
As ever increasing numbers of women make it into the panic zone, the potential for catastrophe increases.
What would this catastrophe look like?
Delayed marriage relies on men as a group responding as desired to an ultimatum.
Yes. Too many marriages rely on men as individuals responding as required to an ultimatum also…
But as more and more women delay marriage past the age where the SMP power position has shifted from women to men, this strategy becomes ever more tenuous. The greatest risk here is a mass panic by 30 something never married women.
Why is this a risk? What are women going to do that is so catastrophic?
Not rhetorical questions: exactly what catastrophe awaits if women panic? Could you be specific?
Will they get more entitled? More demanding? More shrill? More bitchy? More greedy? More shrill?
What’s this ‘catastrophe’ going to look like, exactly?
Points 1 and 2 are cogent.
Watch what they do, ignore what they say. There is a flip side to this: when women truly want to get married, the vast majority of them do that. Therefore when women in their 20’s say that they want to get married, it’s just words. Mouth noises with zero meaning.
It is important to note that point 2 relies on the thirst of men in point 1. As usual, women are taking men for granted, both as a group and as individuals. If men as a group find something else more attractive than women, such as sexbots and/or Virtual Reality porn, then the thirst might be reduced at least at the margin.
I won’t answer for Dalrock…but my thoughts are it could be catastrophic to their feminist dreams of having it all.
Men (at least the ones not deluded by feminism)…it’s really no risk or catastrophe at all if women hold out on marriage. We already know trying to have it all is a lie…because we tend to make choices and stick with them. I don’t know how many women know this.
“no fertility neither ! ”
Ha, I see the benefits of that, but am not ready to cross that barrier of being with a menopausal woman. I don’t know if I could be attracted to that.
We also have to keep in mind that what women are saying is very different from what Dalrock is saying.
Women claim they delay marriage because
–they have to get their educations because what if a man doesn’t want them
–they have to get jobs and support themselves because what if they never marry/divorce/he dies/he cheats and she divorces him/he leaves
–men don’t want to get married until they’re well into their 30s
–men aren’t ready to get married until they’re at least 30 and even then most don’t want to even if they can do it
–everything else has to be in place before we can get married – our educations, our jobs, where to live, can we buy a house, have enough money saved up, etc.
There’s more than a subtle amount of man shaming/blaming. “We women want to get married. It’s those pesky men who aren’t cooperating! They won’t marry us! They wait and wait until they’re 30 or so! Then they cheat on us, divorce us, leave us or die on us! They’re irresponsible with money! And we have to be ready for that! It’s men’s fault!”
Thanks for putting this together.
I am not sure this will matter to the Millennials. The sex is so easy for all of them that the incel is the rarity. The betas are sleeping around pretty often as well. So, I think for their generation the men and women will both look at the 20s as career/fun/sex and then 30s is consider marriage. Both groups will not mind since both have been sexually active a long time and will view it as just the needed growing up time.
The guy who should be very nervous is when encountering the girl with an N count 2x-3x as high as his, or he did not sleep around because lacked opportunity or was a chaste Christian. That guy facing the girls changing their plans will be excited about the attention but have little idea about the implications. That guy needs the red pill most because he has the potential for the biggest shock and disappointment.
Also, the guys are also not pushing their careers as much in the 20s so they don’t seem to care about signaling provider status until the girls are ready. They may be following their lead.
It amazes me when my wife shows me all the fat millennial girls she knows getting married. What guy thats not fat marries a girl that starts marriage fat? Its only going to get worse.
The real investment opportunity is fertility drugs and products. Because biology doesn’t care about the stupid feminist life plan.
I think we will see transition to European style marriage or lack of marriage and lifetime partnerships. Fertility will crater, and over time evolution will wipe out feminism and our godless culture and the Amish and Muslims can emerge to fight the next great religious war.
@Anon Reader
There are two separate but compounding risks. If you are say a 33 year old never married woman hoping to jump off the carousel at the last minute, you don’t have a lot of time to work with since you have already squandered so much. Your attractiveness is declining as is your fertility, which create real but difficult to exactly quantify deadlines. The reality is you are going to have to settle or go without. Your choices aren’t getting better, they are getting worse. The risks are:
1) Other women panic and start poaching the very group of men you are trying to bring yourself to “settle” for. More specifically, women a few years younger than you start poaching the best men out of the pool.
2) The men you are hoping to “settle” on have less fear of not being able to marry, and start getting choosier or just play the field for a while. As I wrote in the OP, this would be compounded if even a small minority start implementing Marcos’ con. Men have to behave a specific way for the delayed marriage plan to work as intended. The idea that they might not do so is therefore rightly terrifying (see item 1 immediately above).
We could see a cohort of women with a suddenly contracted set of prospective husbands. Some of these women will beat the others. Some will dig so deep it makes the wedding guests cringe. Still others will see the clock run out on them, even if they ultimately marry after their fertility window is closed.
The thing is, when markets shift even the buyers who managed to out compete the rest still feel a great deal of pain. In real estate the buyers that “win” during a seller’s market end up paying much more for much less than they had originally expected. But this isn’t just a place to live we are talking about, it is the capstone to their life script.
But like I wrote in the OP, the larger impact on marriage as an institution is a tougher thing to predict.
@D, thanks for the reply, maybe it would be better to use the stats they state married and still living together i.e. not seperated.
I’m really not seeing 70% intact and living together marriages. Although those stats are hard to obtain.
My local (remote) setup : 4/7 married, 1 cohab, 2 single. My last church I would say married and living together about 50%.
OT: Doug Wilson clarifies what he means by servant leadership (last section):
https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/the-great-servant-leadership-mistake.html
He says several good things here, and for once doesn’t take away with his right hand what he gives with his left. But there’s still a lot more that needs to be said… and (from elsewhere) unsaid.
There are two potential inflection points in these trends. Minesweeper points out one: more young men observing older men and deciding not to marry. But there is a second, seldom mentioned. Dalrock discussed it in “Why we need to stop telling women to settle.”
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/why-we-need-to-stop-telling-women-to-settle/
Think about these women who marry in panic mode in their 30s. They settled, got their ring and 2 kids, put them in school. But they have low attachment to their husbands and were raised to value independence as a top goal.
We might see a rise in divorce rates. Pushing them from “bad for men” to “obviously insane to take the risk.”
My guess (guess!) is that this is a fools’ paradise for America. It superficially looks stable and functional, but is a house of cards.
@LK
Great point. Another group that would seem likely are the same women, same outcome, without the kids. We know that a significant percentage of these women will have out-waited their fertility window. With no kids, the cash and prizes from divorce are much less, especially for a short marriage. The status hit will be more subtle, but still very real. Remarriage would help, but this is getting harder too. The spinster/can’t-keep-a-man stigma will be there, despite the rather sad wedding pictures they can share.
Dalrock
We could see a cohort of women with a suddenly contracted set of prospective husbands. Some of these women will beat the others. Some will dig so deep it makes the wedding guests cringe. Still others will see the clock run out on them, even if they ultimately marry after their fertility window is closed.
Ok, so what?
If a bunch of young men drink way too much alcohol, puke their guts out and then have massive hangovers the next day, is that a “catastrophe” or is it the logical result of their actions?
Women ride the cock carousel for their prime years, then discover it’s more difficult than expected to nail down a
suckerhusband. Logical result of their actions.Where’s the catastrophe? What’s catastrophic about a woman not getting her fried ice, on time, piping hot?
You say that there seems to be an endless supply of thirsty beta boys who will be dragged down the isle by an aging ex-carousel rider. What are the motivations of the beta boys? My guess is that the woman gave him the first blow job he has had in years. Maybe ever. Unfortunately the men don’t realize that the blow jobs stop after the wedding and he is on the hook.
My Mother always said that women enter the rooster phase at age 30. Any-dude’ll-do!
Think about these women who marry in panic mode in their 30s. They settled, got their ring and 2 kids, put them in school. But they have low attachment to their husbands and were raised to value independence as a top goal.
We might see a rise in divorce rates. Pushing them from “bad for men” to “obviously insane to take the risk.”
I think that’s part of what we’ll see. But what Minesweeper pointed out is part of what’s driving current trends – fewer marriages and age at first marriage pushed out further and further. And that’s men on the margins refusing marriage altogether. All it takes is a few more percentage points to make a real difference, and that’s what we are seeing. But, it’s true, that most men and women marry, meaning women are settling hard and men are so thirsty they’ll cave to the “Marry me or I’m moving on and no more sex for you!” threat/ultimatum.
This is fascinating information, Dalrock. Thank you very much for taking the time to assemble and post.
I’m still digesting all of this, but I think one question that I have is what are men really thinking in these commensurate age groups? Even if these 30-45 year old women are in panic mode (I agree that they really are), and even if they believe they have to compete with 18 to 27 year old women, the truth is they really don’t have to.
Why? Because American women age 18 to 27 ARE NOT THE LEAST BIT INTERESTED IN MARRIAGE.
What are they interested in then? College degrees. Starting careers. Online shopping for shoes and handbags with their new credit cards. And acts of fellatio among different men that they perceive as “hot”.
I keep hearing repeated claims that so called “Red Pill knowledge” in spreading rapidly among men online, and that new philosophies and ways of life like “Mgtow” (men going their own way), are also growing exponentially since about 2013/2014 time frame.
I don’t believe that anymore.
If that is true, then would we not see that reflected in these numbers already?
From what I can tell, we are NOT seeing that effect. However “hard” women are now “settling” on low quality, less-than-optimal men, they are still marrying them.
Which means the majority of such thirsty, marry-minded men are still clueless and unaware of:
1. the prohibitive legal risks of marriage and divorce
Husbands bearing ALL legal responsibility and accountability, but wield zero legal or institutional authority, and zero reproductive rights)
2. the financial risks of marriage and divorce
Husbands bearing ALL financial responsibility and accountability, but often zero financial authority, and rights).
3. the sexual & reproductive risks of marriage –
The extent of STIs, uterine cancers and sterility among American women has never been higher, despite decades of sexual education and PSAs.
The extent of active SSRI prescriptions among American women has also never been higher.
The extent of illicit drug use (including marijuana, hashish and painkillers) have also never been higher.
Having children with women in the 30+ age group is fraught with high reproductive risks for deformities as it is, without the above bolt ons.
In terms of sex, agreeing to marry 30 year old plus western women today is pretty much equivalent to marrying a truck stop road-whore. That’s not hyperbole.
College educated women are openly reporting that by age 25 and age 30 that they have already had between 30 and 40 different male sex partners. This is catastrophic in terms of a woman’s marriageability, mental health, and her ability to form genuine attraction, normal human pair bonding and long-term love relationships with ANY man, let alone a man for whom she already likely harbors a certain degree of superiority, resentment and hidden disdain (for having to settle on someone like him).
The one benefit to these legions of ignoramus dudes for agreeing to marry such old, high-mileage retread women is that the older she gets, the fewer hypergamous options at her disposal, and the LESS likely she is to divorce him: https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/why-a-womans-age-at-time-of-marriage-matters-and-what-this-tells-us-about-the-apex-fallacy/
The truth about modern day marriage, however, in my view remains still hidden with in the numbers. What we still cannot see with any certainty, for example, is the miserability within those marriages that did not and do not end in divorce, but instead endure.
The divorce rate in the US is still prohibitively high for first marriages, and higher still for second and third ones. And yet these high numbers are still woefully understated because if husbands had the same termination clause in divorce as what wives currently enjoy in the US, then men would be filing for divorce and fleeing sexless marriages like jailbirds, and likely never returning again.
Most men are clearly marrying these high mileage retreads, and trying to stay out of her divorce crosshairs as best he can.
But is that a marriage?
I call it hostage taking.
How can you analyze this though? Challenging to say the least.
Millennials on average are sleeping around less than boomers or x’ers.
Tinder, instagram, bumble, all just help women want and think they can get bigger and better. So way more millennials are celibate than you might think.
Dalrock’s charts plus these Pew Research articles are interesting food for thought:
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/18/theyre-waiting-longer-but-u-s-women-today-more-likely-to-have-children-than-a-decade-ago/
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/10/facts-about-u-s-mothers/
Related, has anyone else read this recent offering from Lori Alexander?
https://thetransformedwife.com/women-are-no-longer-marriage-material/
“As Larry Kummer brilliantly observes we are like monkeys in the nuclear power plant control room, furiously spinning the knobs and pushing the buttons.”
You mean Larry Kummer, EDITOR, do you not?
And, uh, ‘brilliant’? Really? I mean really, bro?
LOL
Larry Kummar
Think about these women who marry in panic mode in their 30s. They settled, got their ring and 2 kids, put them in school. But they have low attachment to their husbands and were raised to value independence as a top goal.
This has been a cliche in the manosphere for years. 6 or 7 years ago when “only” 60% of frivorces were filed by women, there was a bump up in the 35 – 45 age group, where 65% were filed by women. Simple arithmetic explains it: Carousel rider marries at 30, has first child at 32, has second child at 34. When second child is 5 t 6 years old, aging
skankdelicate flower of womanhood discovers that she has a Problem With No Name, is not haaaaaapy, “loves him but is not in love with him” and frivorces. Ca$h & prizes!It’s a cliche. Glad you discovered it.
We might see a rise in divorce rates. Pushing them from “bad for men” to “obviously insane to take the risk.”
Maybe a brief blip in frivorce rates, but it is also likely to see a decline in divorces due to a decline in marriages outside of the UMC and religious communities (both less likely to divorce). TradCons will celebrate this…
tl;dr
Larry, you’ve discovered what a lot of other men have been saying for years. It’s where we are heading. Now, what do you propose to do about it?
Lori Alexander done gone and done it again. All across the internet, tradcon women’s heads explode.
Lori Alexander done gone and done it again. All across the internet, tradcon women’s heads explode.
Sound the general alarm! Incoming timeless truths from Alexander! This is not a drill!
Feminist church ladies unite to launch immediate counterattack!
Gregoires to your UTube stations!
Another viral worthy post because it is true. We’ll just have to wait and see if Shelia and her ilk find it to cry their feminist crocodile tears over.
As always the issue under all this is resourcing the first five years of a babies life if one can be produced before the Downs\infertile window closes.
As the numbers of unmarrieds 30-39 rise, in many cases doubling, it means one of three things.
1. Women not having babies without securing providers until the chance of infertility, complications becomes a given, again incentive for the guys to marry that?
2. Women are having babies unmarried during fertility but need a ongoing provider so are chasing either uncommited babydaddies or new men to raise someone elses child, again incentive for guys to marry that?
3. Women are having babies on their own by choice as career women and want to marry for ststus or a care giver to said child, again incentive for guys to marry that?
Note a pattern in the incentives for the guys?
Add this to the other financial incentives.
Given one in 3 are unmarried at 30 and one in 5 at 35, assuming similar numbers on the male side, it would only take about one in 10 men withdrawing to have a significant impact.
But it won’t happen. The above incentives are too good!! (Sarcasm)
I’m sure their counterattack will be tears and pointing out how worthy all women are in God’s eyes…you know basically not addressing the point of what Lori is saying because they can’t refute it.
How do these charts compare to the stats for men?
Are men marrying the same ages, or marrying younger?
First mover advantage to the subset of 18-24 that are married. Does that advantage translate into better mate quality? Next mover advantage to the 25-29 grouping that marry. Did they marry an older man? Younger? (doubtful).
Men control commitment, so when do we see the first large differences in never married men?
On a large enough scale, it is both a logical result and a complete catastrophe.
Catastrophe is about scale of damage, and the scale of bad behavior and the scale of expected damage is a hazard to plan for and around.
Blessed is the sober man who keeps his cool and stays on mission amidst these times.
Pingback: 2017 Never Married Data | Reaction Times
P.s. Doesn’t even have to be Marco’s con.
Just imagine a 33 year old meets Mr. Ok.
Courtship takes a good year to get to engagement. No guy this far along falls for the twu wuv lets be impulsive and get married! (Ok a few thirsty morons but they deserve it.)
Then maybe another year post marriage honeymoon to begin considered baby making.
And any guy who reaches 30+ not an accidental father knows the baby making traps and so baby making will be a considered affair.
That is a long time for Ms. I’m Panicing To Have Baies to be on good behaviour.
Odds of her saying something mean, entitled, or stupid, showing her true colours are high. Bailing after a year LTR or even a year of marriage is no big compared to twenty years of what he just saw.
It gets blown up legitimately.
On top of the Marcos who do it for fun.
So now she is 35! And has to start over! Again! And is even more paniced, evern more hard to be on good behaviour. A deadman’s spiral.
“Wasting” a relationship becomes like dog years.
A failed 6 month STR at 35 is like 4 years at 25 for the paniced.
Lori Alexander’s article is ok. The comments are completely predictable. Churchladies of all ages do not like having ugly truths pushed inside of their pretty-lie bubble. The response from the feminists will likewise be predictable, but some entertainment is possible.
Guess I better get some more popcorn…wouldn’t want to run out while laughing at feminist butthurt screeching on YouTube.
Jonathan Castle
Not to be harsh….but what the hell for??
Date her fine, sleep over, etc.
But her beauty etc are on their last legs. And most importantly….
You have 10 years, 15 tops to Get Ready For Retirement!!!!
Look at your 401k!
Now cut it in half!!!!!!
Even if she stays with you, you will be supporting two into retirement!!!
Unless she is one of the few women with money.
And I gaurantee as soon as you are married she finds a way to stop working!!!
Companionship, sex, great. But keep seperate houses, seperate money.
Women at 40+ are a penny a dozen!!
Dude….Run The Numbers!!
What everyone ignores…
At 45 plus a day, you are closer to 60 than you are to 30!!!!!
In our minds we are all young…until Boom, we are not.
(Jonathan….at 46 she is hiding menopause or is on the cusp within a year or so!)
vfm7916
Are men marrying the same ages, or marrying younger?
Well, let’s think about it.
IF average age of a US woman at first marriage = 27
AND
IF women prefer to marry a man at least 2 years older
THEN
there’s the answer to your question.
First mover advantage to the subset of 18-24 that are married. Does that advantage translate into better mate quality?
Define “better mate quality”.
From a man’s perspective, marrying a girl under 25 means higher mate quality…
Next mover advantage to the 25-29 grouping that marry. Did they marry an older man? Younger? (doubtful).
It is rare for women to marry a man younger than they are, especially women under 30.
Men control commitment, so when do we see the first large differences in never married men?
There is a hint in the graph here:
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/08/30/evidence-of-a-marriage-strike/
mgtowhorseman says:
September 4, 2018 at 3:34 pm
So many women, attitudinous and entitled to begin with, become so bitter and bitchy by the time they hit 40 (to say nothing of a lifetime of accumulated and ingrained bad behavior that has gone unchecked) that they’ve essentially become “man repellent,” even to desperate, thirsty AFCs.
@AR. In general yes, but I’d like to see the data.
@vfm7916
I shared a pretty detailed breakdown of both past and present the other day.
@Dalrock, “However, I’m guessing you are talking about current White Non Hispanic women who are age 45”
actually I would really like to see that across ages and broken down via age as you had done previously on “once married” v “never married”.
so a age based “once married” v “never married” v “currently married” chart
I had a look at the CPS tool, I couldn’t find out in my limited attempt how to get that data. It may be this data just isn’t available. When I checked some regions of the UK, on the last census there was a huge disparity for males 35-45 unattached v females, in the males favour. Interestingly the latest census dosn’t go into that data anymore, last I checked.
Mgtowhorseman: yes! Thank you for your caution. I am NOT desiring marriage for all the reasons you stated.
Having made that clear, i think the manosphere often underplays men’s need … well, let’s call it strong desire … for feminine companionship.
That’s why we’re pissed. God said it’s not good for man to be alone. But feminism has robbed us of our would-be feminine partners.
I’m not opposed to sharing resources with a woman. It’s a man’s nature to want to help ‘his’ woman. But I am opposed to a woman having undue power over me (again). Or my sons.
You can’t explain this to a prospective woman. They never get it and never will. You can just say I won’t marry again and leave it at that. Maybe you live together, maybe you don’t.
Increasing numbers of women 35+ will accept these terms because they have no choice. They can be totally without their complement (the masculine) in this world or they will accommodate themselves to the best deal they can get.
waow, Lori’s new post, cold have been written by yours truly – D.
You didnt ghost write it did you ? 😀
But I am opposed to a woman having undue power over me
Guess you won’t be getting married, then.
Increasing numbers of women 35+ will accept these terms because they have no choice. They can be totally without their complement (the masculine) in this world or they will accommodate themselves to the best deal they can get.
Yup. Cohabitation in lieu of marriage for the over 35 likely will become more common outside of the upper middle class / upper class, and seriously religious subgroups. If so, it should become visible in GISS or some other data in a few years. This will mean a lower divorce rate, because you can’t get divorced if you aren’t married. TradCons will rejoice…because they are stupid.
“Yup. Cohabitation in lieu of marriage for the over 35 likely will become more common ”
Also, a lot more ‘living together apart ‘ too. My uncle who’s 84 did this for 30 years after his divorce.
He made no bones about it. He wanted companionship but wasn’t ever going to live with a woman again after getting so emotionally burnt by his ex-wife.
Interestingly another uncle (his brother) got married a 2nd time after an absolute horror-show of a divorce. …and got burned very badly again! (He was a sucker for crazy femme-fatales.) Really drove him to long-lasting emotional problems and depression.
Given these two test cases, I choose option #1
@JonathanCastle says: “I’m angling, harder than usual, to date a 46 year old never-married woman. (I’m 49.) She’s thin, pretty, intelligent and responsible. And No kids! Her profile says she is looking to marry. I’m not, but think she would make for a good companion.”
I stopped when I read, “Her profile.. So am I correct that you have not yet met this woman in person, are relying on her profile and trying somehow to meet this woman for a date? If this is so and she doesn’t live around the corner from you it’s most likely a Fake Profile and a scam. If she asks for money for travel expense….Bingo!
I think the talk of a “catastrophe” for women in the comments is wishful thinking. What I take from the unchanged never-married rates at 45 is that women are unreservedly winning the war of the sexes: women will suffer absolutely no material consequences for their alpha-**x-beta-bux dual strategy, other than fewer children.
The notion that woman are having to “settle for the dregs” is obviously wrong if you consider the group of women as a whole, unless the quality of men as a whole has fallen. It’s a zero-sum game: the collective quality of the pool of men is a constant, so one unwise woman’s loss is another woman’s gain.
Actually, I think the dual strategy has increased the quality of the pool of men: (non-alpha) men are more desperate, so they’re offering more provisioning and more submission than ever before. (Okay, maybe that makes them a little less sexy, but a woman can have affairs without shame.)
Contrary to what other posters are saying, I think this situation is not only stable, but superstable (nearly impossible to break out of), as women benefit so much. It will persist (and get even worse for the men) until a dramatic reduction in resources (I mean some people literally can’t get enough food to eat) changes it. That might not happen for another 200 years, when the fertility rate reduces whites to just a few percent of the US population. Until then, women will enjoy a hedonistic sexual utopia and pay no price.
@Johnny Caustic says:”Contrary to what other posters are saying, I think this situation is not only stable, but superstable (nearly impossible to break out of), as women benefit so much. It will persist (and get even worse for the men) until a dramatic reduction in resources (I mean some people literally can’t get enough food to eat) changes it. ”
Its already happening, massive gov debt looms which props up the whole system. Considering men pay almost 75% of the tax bill, without the incentives of having too, as some point they will stop. Women take out almost 75% from for gov coffers. There was a recent NYT piece about the worry that men are now earning like women, which means tax’s and then women’s plans for life are screwed.
If this young gen of men <30yo go through their life earning like women, the tax input will be half of normal. And with whites being a minority society will become far less stable and far more expensive to police.
I mean, men aren't that stupid, without reward and the need to achieve, why work 100hrs a week as a farmer ? So some fat obnoxious cow can stay at home and bitch at you when you make it back at 11pm exhausted ?
@JC, in the USA, only white and asians males pay net into the system, when you factor race and sex into tax input and output. If those groups get overwhelmed by the demands of the others who knows what will happen.
Gov subsidies\welfare stops alot of rioting\crime. If that runs out- time to head for the hills.
@JC, society is built upon the backs of motivated men, who want to impress their women and gather resources to fund a family. And women willing to do their part.
This is why Dalrocks work is so very important, even beyond the implications of family life. Family literally defines civilisation and whether it will continue.
A civilisation only lasts 3 generations, within 3 generations everyone is dead or as useless as.
If all the women in the west stopped breading today, how long would it last without kids ?
In Japan they have some prefects where schools that used to have 1400 kids, now have 30. Even the people living there>50yo say they dont want to be alive any more, there is no point to life if you don’t see children running around or have any. These areas are dying and will return to the ground within a few years – entire large towns are disappearing. Once the old people die off they will disconnect the utilities as its not worth supplying a town with 30 dwellings inhabited out of 2000.
It is absolutely crazy to see something like that happen and many places this is happening in Japan.
@Dalrock, I think I see what you mean now, the goal of women is to be at some point married, not to stay married.
I was coming from the view of being in a marriage as success, but that’s clearly not what they regard as a goal. Marriage for women is just a fleeting statistical blip of misogynistic oppression in their long feminist empowered life – its something you endure into like a cold bath, rather than the goal of life itself.
Minesweeper, more people want to get married than want to be married. They are two different groups. Feel free to drop this little bomb wherever you wish. It can be especially interesting to see the reaction of churchgoing people.
@AR, strange, ive never felt to need to “get married” but not be married, to get that stamp on the passport. is it like cheating to pass an exam ? you got the qualification but really means nothing to you.
This will mean a lower divorce rate, because you can’t get divorced if you aren’t married.
You forget that in many jurisdictions within the Anglosphere, a man and woman who live together for a certain number of years as husband and wife are considered to have a Commom Law marriage. Expect more and more jurisdictions in the future to adopt this as law as a means of extorting more resources from men to transfer them to women as fewer and fewer men want anything whatsoever to do with the perversion that now passes for legal marriage.
@Minesweeper, @AR, I like the way Blackdragon phrases it: “Women love getting married, women hate being married.”
Conclusions reached here appeared in the comments first. Can’t find them now. Coincidence?
@archerwfisher
“Millennials on average are sleeping around less than boomers or x’ers.
Tinder, instagram, bumble, all just help women want and think they can get bigger and better. So way more millennials are celibate than you might think.”
They are sleeping around less than boomers and x’ers only because they are far, far, far more obese than previous generations. Millennials of a normal body weight are having *many* more casual sexual experiences than previous generations, with a triple-digit cock count by the early 20’s not uncommon for reasonably attractive young women.
@Dalrock
Yes. Is it directly comparable to the extensive female data though? Same age cohorts, etc?
@Minesweeper
Ha! Not exactly. They want to get married, and they want to be married. But they don’t want to have to stay married if they aren’t feeling it. And there is also a time component to it.
I’ve taken a couple of cracks at explaining what look like contradictory signals from women in this regard. The short version is here, and the longer version is here.
“You’ll marry her when she tires of having sex with other men.”
Nope: You’ll marry her when other men tire of having sex with her.
Ain’t that the truth. As Turd Flinging Monkey said a few days ago: (language & subject matter warning)
“This is exactly what women do when they’ve hit the wall, they act like they’ve matured, they act like they’ve grown up, but no really they just got forced off the Cock Carousel. It’s not like they got off of their own volition. They got off when they were kicked off, kicking and screaming and clawing, they were dragged from the Cock Carousel, out into the dumpster… And the worst part is the guys who take this deal, the guys who may up these Born Again Hos. They resent the men they settle down with, because secretly they want to get back on that Cock Carousel, they never actually wanted to leave. They didn’t choose to get off, they were thrown off.”
the guys who Marry up these Born Again Hos.
Goes along with most women don’t want to be married. They certainly want a wedding…but they don’t want a marriage.
They want to get married, and they want to be married. But they don’t want to have to stay married if they aren’t feeling it. And there is also a time component to it.
And a peer group impact element as well. If/when he girls in the peer group start to sep and divorce, the dynamic that encouraged them to marry in the first place (keeping up status-wise with the rest of the peer group who was marrying) starts to run in the other direction, such that she feels more “peer group permission” to divorce herself once others in the peer group start divorcing. This is one significant reason why divorce seems to be contagious among peer groups of women — the peer group impact effect is working in reverse by removing the pressure to get and remain married.
I think men easily and often overlook this, because we are generally much less subject to acting out of peer group pressure on these kinds of issues than women are, so we tend to overlook the impact on women’s behavior, which is large.
@Novaseeker
Dalrock showed in a posting some years back how divorce tends to propagate (my word) across social networks, but I cannot find it right now.
Women are creatures of the herd; this is why they have that 4:1 ingroup preference AKA “Team Woman”, it is why preselection works, and it is why a man must vet not just a prospective mate but her family and social circle. Since “social circle” now includes a whole panorama of social media, vetting must include her Instagram / Facebook / Pinterest etc. links.
It makes leading a little more complicated than it was 20 or more years ago.
It is almost certain this was a large factor in getting my wife to finally go against her Christian beliefs and file for divorce. She was getting more into social media, and especially Facebook.
Mommy blogs are some of the worst poison on the internet. Nothing worse than some stupid, unqualified cow writing about her “emotions” and marriage difficulties in a room filled with other women. If your wife reads mommy blogs you are guarenteed to have problems.
Anon Reader, I think this is the post you had in mind.
Dalrock, that is the posting I was thinking of. Still very valid 8 years later. Thanks.
squid_hunt
Mommy blogs are some of the worst poison on the internet. Nothing worse than some stupid, unqualified cow writing about her “emotions” and marriage difficulties in a room filled with other women. If your wife reads mommy blogs you are guarenteed to have problems.
There clearly is a hierarchy of danger. Mommyblogs are surely near the top, because they tend to devolve down to the level of “Scary Mommy Blog”. One of our favorite frivorcers started off as a mommyblogger…
In addition the commercial stuff like Jezebel, Cosmo, etc. is problematic, as the kids say. But Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr etc. can be just as dangerous. Even Pinterest has risks, to a woman who isn’t grounded. It’s a cliche in the manosphere to denigrate / worry about Facebook because of the “old boyfriend” problem, but that really only applies now to women in their 30’s, 40’s and up. 20-somethings are not on Facebook, or are dumping it.
The problem with any social circle is when the whispers get going in that circle combined with the contagious nature of divorce.
Now we’ll see if I embedded correctly….
There is zero incentive to marry and every incentive to stay single if you are a man. I’m in my mid-50’s and in my core-group (the women I see at least once week) none of them are over 25. That is my cut-off age – they get over 25 and they are gone. Women tend to get the baby-rabies around that time.
Most women are brought up by single-mothers these days and seek the acceptance of a strong male (father) figure. If you’re male, it behooves you to enjoy them for all they offer. Just never make the mistake of thinking any of them are worth more than sex. Always been looking for the next replacement – have enjoy in line so that you always have several to take care of your needs. Been doing it for years – methods had to change as I’ve gotten older, but the basic idea remains.
Feminism has created a man’s dream world – enjoy it for all it offers. Nothing better than opening a new young girl for business – she’ll love you forever. Give as many of them that chance as you can.
The economics of these statistics don’t work. There seems to be a part of the story missing. Black and Hispanic women are not marrying because they get government benefits for being a single mom. Charles Murray in his 2012 book “Coming Apart” described the marriage rates of lower class whites collapsing because lower class white women can earn more through government benefits than through a husband, So why aren’t these lower class white women showing up in the never married statistics? Or are lower class single mom white women really marrying once they hit their 40s? If they are marrying, they must be getting benefits from either the government or from the baby daddy.
Warren Farrell has talked about the approximately 50% of the couples with children who are not married will likely drift apart in the coming years. One of the reasons that these couples don’t marry is because the man is not earning enough money. So are these women then finding someone else who is making more to marry her even though she has children?
And what about all of the obese women? The obesity rate is something like 40% now. Are all of these obese women finding someone to marry them? I find that hard to believe.
Women generally avoid marriage with low income men. There is something like a quarter to a third of young men still living with mom. OK, maybe they eventually move out and start to earn more, but are there really enough women to willing to marry them?
I have three friends who work with inner city children. All three say that virtually none of the children (black, Hispanic, or white) live with both parents.
And Theodore Dalyrmple writing from London has been talking about the collapse of marriage in the lower third of British white society. For those Christians reading this, Theodore Dalyrmple has an interesting book called “Admirable Evasions” concerning how psychology undermines morality. He’s a prison MD / psychiatrist, and describes how his patients use psychology to avoid responsibility for their actions. It’s worth a read as are any of his books.
I wonder if a better statistic might be currently unmarried women or female headed households. However, even these statistics might not capture the reality of life. Another interesting statistic would be government welfare spend. Welfare spend = single moms.
I don’t think I’ve ever posted here before, but I really appreciate Dalrock and other commenter’s insight.
feeriker says:
September 5, 2018 at 12:44 am
“You forget that in many jurisdictions within the Anglosphere, a man and woman who live together for a certain number of years as husband and wife are considered to have a Commom Law marriage. Expect more and more jurisdictions in the future to adopt this as law as a means of extorting more resources from men to transfer them to women as fewer and fewer men want anything whatsoever to do with the perversion that now passes for legal marriage.
Not so. In the U.S. at least, common-law as a route to legal marriage is declining, with ever-fewer states having this. Now, Palimony? I am not sure on this, and know that Canada at least is moving towards expanding it.
How do we know that people aren’t substituting “Shacking Up” for marriage? There could be just as many couples out there, but more are skipping the formality?
Pingback: Experts at failing. | Dalrock
Pingback: 2018 Median Age of Marriage | Dalrock
Pingback: Old Women Settle | ‘Reality’ Doug
Pingback: John Zmirak is mostly right. | Dalrock
Pingback: Tucker Carlson says unmentionable things about marriage - Fabius Maximus website
Pingback: Why is illicit sex so enticing, and so prevalent? | Σ Frame
Pingback: The weakened signal hits home. | Dalrock