Summary: From 2000 to 2007, the rate of never-married white women that married in the next 5 years fell much faster than that of never-married white men. The most striking example is found in comparing the 30-34 y/o male and female cohorts. In 2000, the female rate was 34.1% that would marry in the next five years and the male rate was 28.7%. By 2007, the female rate had plummeted by more than 1/2 to 16.8% while the male rate had only fallen to 24.6%. What was a 5.4% female “edge” in 2000 became a 7.8% “deficit” by 2007, or a 13.2% relative drop in the female minus male rates.
In 2000, the 5-year marriage rates were higher for women than men across the whole 20-year span of 20-39 y/o. But by 2007, the 30-39 y/o men had much higher marriage rates than the similarly aged women and the 25-29 y/o men’s rate had reached parity with the women’s. And the 20-24 y/o men’s rate had nearly cut the gap in 1/2.
Also, of interest are the increasing percentages of never-married white men, similar behavior to that of the rising percentages for women. And in keeping an eye on any changes, is the slight dip in the latest 25-29 y/o male percentage an anomaly or is it a sign of a reversal in the generally-rising marriage-less trend?
Never Married White Men
I decided to produce the same plot for men that Dalrock did for women. I used his spreadsheet and simply plotted the data for men.
Note: To avoid bloated phrases, this post will mostly use the words ‘men’ and ‘women’ from here on out but it should be remembered that they’re white and never-married. I’m only focusing on whites because that is what data was available in the compilation by Dalrock.
Here is Dalrock’s plot for women, followed by my plot for men:
Broadly speaking, they both follow the same rising trend of delaying marriage. It’s also easily seen that women marry earlier. The slight dip in the 25-29 y/o men’s level in 2012 is interesting and bares keeping note of to see if that is the end of the rising levels of not marrying for the 25-29 y/o male cohort or whether it was just an anomaly.
It’s also interesting how the 45-54 y/o men’s level jumped up between 2002-2005 and has plateaued since. Older MGTOW? Are they choosing not to marry or are they unable? Probably some of both.
Calculating Men’s Rates of Marrying in the Next 5 Years
I follow the same steps that I used for calculating the women’s plummeting rates here:
http://www.justfourguys.com/marriage-rates-plummet-projection-of-never-married-rates-to-2017/
It’s possible to calculate what percentage of a given cohort got married within the next 5 years by comparing its never-married rate with that of the 5-years-older cohort 5 years later. For example, in the plot above, in 2000, 50.7% of the 25-29 y/o male cohort had never married. 5 years later, in 2005, this cohort had completely moved into the 30-34 y/o cohort, with a level of 28.4%. This means that 44% of the cohort married within those 5 years, ignoring the “error bars” on these numbers. Also, I take a 3-year average to smooth things out since I want to see the broad trends. So the marriage rates in the next figure are 3-year averages centered at the given year, except for the last year available, 2007, where I just plot that year. Since the 2013 data isn’t out yet, the 2012 data is the last we have and is used to calculate the 5-yr marriage rate for the men in 2007.
Here are the marriage rates (to get married in the next five years) for never-married white men by age cohort and year.
I find it interesting that the 30-34 y/o rate went up a bit before declining. A similar, though more noisy, pattern for the smaller sample of 35-39 y/o never-married men. Was that one last surge of marriage idealism before the Great Recession started to affect rates? Is the decline after 2005 (remember, that means how many married by 5 years later, so 2010 or later are the end points) due to the rising awareness amongst men about the unfairness of divorce laws and the unfitness for marriage that too many women display? The rise of the manosphere? 
Or are women just choosing not to marry as much and so the willing beta is left alone?
By comparing the men’s rates with the women’s we might get some insight.
Women’s Marriage Rates Falling Much Faster Than Men’s
Where it gets really interesting is to compare each of these 4 male cohort’s rates with those for the same age of women.
Look at how the 30-34 and 35-39 y/o women’s rates started out higher than the men’s in 2000 but then crossed over and fell much more rapidly. In 2000, the 30-34 y/o women’s rate was about 5% higher but, by 2007, it was about 8% lower. A change in the gap of about 13%.
And for the 35-39 y/o cohorts, in 2000, the rates were about the same. The men’s stayed roughly the same while the women’s fell quite a bit.
Note: I think the 0.9% for women in 2007 is an outlier due to small sample size so I wouldn’t infer that to be the true rate. It’s likely somewhere more in the 5-10% range and it will be interesting to see what it is when the 2013 data is released so we can get the 2008 5-yr marriage rate.
The next plot is fascinating too. The 20-24 y/o gap in 5-year marriage rates narrowed from about 10% in 2000 to 6% in 2007. And for the 25-29 y/o cohorts, the roughly 5% gap in 2000-2002 largely disappeared by 2007.
What’s Going On?
Clearly, the never-married white women’s marriage rates are falling faster than men’s, with the 30-34 y/o plot being the most striking.
Marriage is a function of two variables: desire to marry and ability to marry. It’s difficult to disentangle these two but we do know that women are at their peak attractiveness more from 20-29 than from 30-39. The fact that the 20-29 y/o female marriage rates are falling is likely due more to a lack of desire on the part of women, since their ability is at its peak. Many of them prefer career and fun over marriage…or at least they prefer to follow the feminist mantras that the alpha mares of the herd tell them.
Once women hit the 30-39 y/o range, they are somewhat less attractive (with some much less attractive and a few holding the line) and thus have less ability to marry. Some will never desire to marry but, at 30-39, a lot of the fun-in-their-20’s and the feminist power-career women are entering the age when it is now time to marry, so for most of these, the desire is greater than in their 20’s. It is likely that their ability to get married is diminished due to lessened looks and sky-high expectations.
Why Does the Women’s Rate Decline More than the Men’s?
I don’t know but here are a few speculative possibilities that came to mind:
- People might be marrying closer in age than before, bringing the 20-29 y/o rates more in alignment
- Never-married white men might be marrying non-white women a bit more (foreign brides?)
- Never-married white men might be marrying divorced women a bit more (not saying it’s likely, just throwing that out there)
Conclusion
For whatever reason, be it desire or ability, white men are now able to marry more readily in their 30’s than white women and the gap has vanished for 25-29 y/o’s. It’s clear that women are much more able to marry in their 20’s and should forget about the feminist nonsense to consciously put off marriage until 30 or 35.
Edit: I should mention these stats are for the USA.
So not only is it an inefficient use of human capital to push women towards career and partying and education, but it also causes women to fail to achieve their goals in life. If only there was a movement of people who could have warned society about the negative consequences of this sort of thing…If only…
It really is strange times we live in when those who are capable of making rational decisions are the ones who have to remain underground.
What is probably happening, is that you are seeing the effects of hypergamy. The hotter women who were married got divorced, and married a guy who had not been married before.
This has the effect of lowering the available marriage pool for women who have never been married. So women’s numbers climb, and men’s drop.
As an aside, many women who have not married do not want someone’s cast-off. They want a man of their own. So they won’t marry divorced guys, even if it is the ex-wife’s fault he is divorced. There are also religious strictures at play in this as well.
“***we do know that women are at their peak attractiveness more from 20-29 than from 30-39. The fact that the 20-29 y/o female marriage rates are falling is likely due more to a lack of desire on the part of women, since their ability is at its peak. Many of them prefer career and fun over marriage…or at least they prefer to follow the feminist mantras that the alpha mares of the herd tell them.”
This point needs to be amplified. It’s said over and over, but the fact is that women are not marrying in their 20s because THEY DON’T WANT TO, despite that this is when they’re most able to do it. I see a lot of women leveraging their attractiveness for carousel riding or watching. Those who aren’t sleeping with the hot alpha men are wishing they could sleep with the hot alpha men and lamenting the fact that they can’t.
Those who aren’t carouseling instead grind their noses into fluffy academic pursuits, thinking they must get great jobs so they can get access to higher status men.
I truly believe this: I truly believe most women in their 20s can marry if they want to. I don’t believe it is all that difficult to find a decent man to whom she could submit, fall in love with, and marry. What keeps her from it is what she would have to give up – or thinks she’d have to give up – to get it. She’d have to give up her constant choice addiction; her vying for men out of her league, her getting pumped and dumped, and her fun party down lifestyle.
This is entirely true. There is a technique in statistics for testing the direction of causation in observational retrospective studies. The name of the test eludes me at the moment. But I have seen it used to prove (kind of) that it is women in their twenties that are the drivers of the low marriage rates. However, the same study showed that in their thirties and beyond it is the men that are driving the low marriage rates. Men start to have advantage in the SMP and MMP in their thirties. By that time many of us have learned that we do not need a woman to help us spend our money. Many men also have decided by watching friends get chewed up in divorces that marriage and kids is a bad deal. So, women are just starting to have a glimmer that the odds of marrying in their thirties is starting to nose dive.
Actually I should refine my statement before.
Women who are avoiding marriage in their 20s when they are most able to marry, are doing so because THEY DON’T WANT to marry – not yet.
There are a few things going on there.
–Having fun, party/travel lifestyle, don’t want to be accountable to or responsible to anyone
–Working on education and career
–Riding the carousel (usually in conjunction with one of the first two)
If a woman sets her mind to it, she can find a suitable marriageable man. I simply don’t believe the trope I hear from many women, especially Christian women, that there are very, very few good marriageable men. If it’s a Christian man she wants, they are easy enough to find at church.
I also don’t believe that a woman has no way in her life to meet men besides the nightlife/bar scene. If that’s the case, that her social life is limited to bars and clubs, then she isn’t trying hard enough and she doesn’t want to put the effort into meeting men other than attractive players, and therefore doesn’t really want to get married.
The fact is that most women can still find someone to marry even in their 30s, when desire is high and ability is reduced. I’m still seeing even modestly attractive women (and that’s being diplomatic and generous) in their 30s finding men willing to wife them up. What this tells me is that if she really wants to marry, she can.
Any woman who wants marriage bad enough will put in the work and will find a way to find someone.
From what I’ve heard here, they want to marry – in the future. Somewhere in their thirties, and start having kids around 35. What to do in the meantime? try to get a nice job and have fun with friends.
Some of them get pregnant in the middle of the funk. As a way to trap a specific man I guess, but that doesnt work all the time.
BTW, marriage pushed to the thirties means getting at least 15 years of carousel. Is it appealing? as the same question to men.
This is why whenever asks if women are having sex for the sex or for commitment I ask back: commitment where? if women were after commitment none of this would be happening. This is all about the sex, the fun, and the ride. And then trying to capture it before it all goes away. Capturing stuff is different than commitment though.
*Is it appealing? ASK the same question to men.
Great article and analysis. I think there’s a great likelihood that marriage rates, for both men and women, will decrease for the foreseeable future. There is no turnaround strategy here, with both a bad economic outlook for the West, plus the increase in taxes on men for single moms and other Alpha Gov expenses – thus further reducing the economic output of men; and the increasing non-willingness of men to toe the line and marry post 30 year women, the trend is quite obviously going to get lower until it plateaus at some point in the future.
I really think we shall see a time when a full 30 -40 % of the population will never get married…
#5: “Any woman who wants marriage bad enough will put in the work and will find a way to find someone.”
I agree deti.
I think it’s comparable to other things…example, being physically fit, eating well, ect.
There’s a social component (the more fat people, the more acceptable it is to be fat, later marriage is more in vogue now). It’s also easy to put it off for tomorrow (“I’ll eat this donut today, tomorrow I’ll eat better. Really, really). The further away one strays from the goal the less likely it is to happen.
Eventually there’s the excuse to stay in limbo/maintain the decline (“hey! I might be fat but you’re ugly and I can always go on a diet”). Hence, with marriage (didn’t want that anyway!). For men, it’s comparatively easy to remain a bachelor, IMO. For women, I think it’s kind of instinctive to want to make a nest (often that desire seems to be put off until it’s ravenous and desperate).
I still remember reading a magazine interview with Jennifer Aniston in 1998. She told the interviewer that she definitely wanted children and she also wanted to make sure that she was a “young mother”. It struck me at the time because she was 28, and in my opinion that was already kind of old to start. Well….she did end up getting married a couple of years later, but the child ship certainly sailed.
@ FH
Why stop at 40% unmarried?
Many of the European countries have 60-70%+ unmarried as well as the black population which is reaching up into the 80% now. 70-80% of Japanese men are herbivores.
Well the idea of the family being broken up from frivorces and now people not getting married continues the big plan of government enslavement for everyone.
Women have only themselves to blame for that one.
And a woman would have an easy time finding a marriageable man if she wanted to. But she doesn’t because tingles and so forth…so this society is all on them.
Besides I’m too far down the rabbit hole…I wouldn’t even consider a 30 year old or older woman for marriage no matter what her story is.
Deep Strength, ouch! I would love to see some data though..
If one is worried about high social welfare costs and “alpha” government, Europe and Japan aren’t exactly emulation-worthy examples.
I think that one tidbit that isn’t being addressed is the propensity to put on a couple of pounds a year, every year. By the time they hit 30 they might be carrying an extra 15 to 20 pounds and they can probably look somewhat presentable, but the increased coating of lard has an impact. By the time they’re in their mid 30’s they identify as a BBW, tell themselves that they’re OK with that, and by the time they’re 40 they’re land whales. Feminist delusions of beauty sometimes has to be seen in order to be believed. Some of those photos are not for the faint of heart.
When one sees articles like this one from the Atlantic the silence concerning issues like 1 out of 4 women being on SSRI’s is deafening. They are fat, out of shape, living in poverty and taking anti-depressants in order to cope. Is it any wonder men don’t want them?
FH:
I estimated too high on the EU though I remember seeing somewhere that it was 60-70% for a couple countries. Guess not but it’s still pretty high:
In the EU-27 some 38.3 % of children were born outside marriage in 2010, while the corresponding figure for 1990 was 17.4 % (see Table 3). The share of extra-marital births has been on the rise in recent years in almost every EU Member State. Indeed, extra-marital births accounted for the majority of live births in Estonia (59.7 % in 2011), Slovenia (56.8 %), Bulgaria (56.1 %) and Sweden (54.3 %), as well as in France in 2010 (55.0 %). An even higher proportion of live births outside of marriage was registered in Iceland (65.0 % in 2011).
Japanese herbvores:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men
Additionally, two surveys of single men in their 20s and 30s found that 61% and 70%, respectively, considered themselves grass-eating men.
Black community:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39993685/ns/health-womens_health/t/blacks-struggle-percent-unwed-mothers-rate/#.UlWR3BCKzWE
The black community’s 72 percent rate eclipses that of most other groups: 17 percent of Asians, 29 percent of whites, 53 percent of Hispanics and 66 percent of Native Americans were born to unwed mothers in 2008, the most recent year for which government figures are available. The rate for the overall U.S. population was 41 percent.
Wouldn’t be surprised if it’s closer to 75-80% since that was 3-4 years ago.
@ Liz
Yeah, it’s socially unsustainable in the EU and Japan… not something to emulate. But it is going to get much, much, much worse in the US.
The discussion of black community’s 72% illegitimacy rate for childbirth completely ignores what’s really happening on the ground. From what I saw in Ensley, Alabama, a suburb of Birmingham, it all boils down to the financial incentives available from the State to any woman capable of cranking out a child… in an environment in which very little opportunity exists. The young women are frequently kicked out of their grandmother’s home at age 17 when they can no longer be claimed as a dependent for State/Fed benefits (thus, they become a liability) and in many cases getting knocked up is a rational economic decision within that environment.
@ Artisanal Toad
Not really. I worked in a small town in the mid-atlantic for part of my clinicals. You see the same thing there with white people as with black people.
The illegitimacy rate will continue to rise as long as the government supports all single mothers, not just black mothers. The black community is only 5-10 years ahead of where everyone else is headed.
#2 is delusional
@Irish Farmer #1
I think that the simple answer is that the apex people like things the way they are. We often rail against feminism and rightly so but even more important is that the apex men (and few women) like things the way it is. For the apex men the current situation provides lots of pussy, votes, customers and cheaper labor. The rich have never been richer.
Of course, underlying all of this is the incredibly wealthy world (compared to historical standards) we live in where danger and hunger are kept very much at bay in most parts of the developed world (and even in the developing world things are far better in terms of life expectancy than 100 years ago) due to technology fueled by relatively cheap energy.
@deti 3
Yes, women could marry if they wanted to in their 20’s (and most do, we must remember) but those that don’t need to tone down their 72-point lists, entitlement and unpleasantness.
It’s simply amazing how much attention most women in their 20’s get from men. They’re bombarded with interest. Now, some of them will dispute that since they don’t even register interest from lesser, and often equal, men. Look at pof.com where there’s usually a 2 or 3 to 1 men to women ratio, combined with the fact that men initiate most of the contact. I had a gf from there who was getting hundreds of messages a month! She didn’t even have time to read most of them.
And in a humorous twist on things, it was actually her gay male friend that was reading through a lot of them and he got a crush on me and was hoping I was bi and so he wrote back as if he were her. But he was a good friend and told her and so soon enough it was her writing back and we met up. I didn’t know any of this until after she became my gf. lol
@mikediver 4
If you find the link post it up here. Sounds interesting.
@deti 5
Another thing about some Christian women is they become these almost virtual hermits and are so set in marrying a man that’s a strong Christian in her particular church (plus the other 72 point list typical to many women) that the pool of men that is eligible in their eyes is miniscule. Of course, there are many decent men that could be good husbands but they’re not good enough for her.
So, what I see with many Christian women is that they have so many requirements that narrows down the number of men (and they don’t really think whether such few men would like them back), they go all hermit and don’t go out much, to either activities or on dates, and just think that God will provide someone. I know this one woman who goes to a really small church but insists on marrying someone from her exact same small church. And she’s pretty and has good character and not even too picky and so on but she’s so insistent on it being someone from her xyz church (couldn’t be a church that’s very similar in doctrine and lifestyle) that I doubt she’ll ever marry.
@Yohami 6
I think there’s a mix of not wanting commitment and only wanting it with someone that they’ve deluded themselves into thinking they can get.
@Feminist Hater 8
I agree that I think that the never-married rates will continue to grow for the foreseeable future, though, only time will tell.
As I projected in my post on plummeting women’s marriage rates,
http://www.justfourguys.com/marriage-rates-plummet-projection-of-never-married-rates-to-2017/
It looks like the 30-34 y/o white women’s never-married levels will hit about 1/3 by 2017 and the 35-39 y/o level about 1/5. How high things eventually go and to what extent cohabitation will replace marriage are not known.
@Earl 11
Too many of the elites benefit by creating large groups of dependents and giving them enough to survive but not thrive.
@Han
LOL. But really not so strange given that the characteristics of the SMP is moving closer to that of the gay community as well as my personal belief that women need to stop taking love/sex/relationship/dating advice from their gay male friends. Gay guys probably do know a lot about getting guys off, jerking the prostate or whatever, but a woman should not lose sight of the fact that there are some stark differences in hetero relationships.
Unless, of course, she is a liberal-progressive type who believe things like gender, race, culture, and other identities are merely fluid social constructs that are either oppressive or liberating depending on how well it serves her.
I’ve seen it time and again, where women are taking advice about securing a relationship – essentially ‘how to get a boyfriend’ or move a relationship into commitment/monogamy from a gay male friend who has three part-time F-buddies, an “open” relationship that has lasted years, and hasn’t had a “date” in years – though still gets/gives BJ’s with random men down at Shaggy’s shack-a-lot on $2 Bud night.
Said another way. I have a buddy who is hooked on some new-ish app for his phone – something that gathers pictures from FB within some radius and he then likes them or not. His pictures are being sent around in kind too. Kind of a binary, boiled down version of the original facebook; a roulette of faces. In any case, it was originally developed as a hook-up tool utilized within the gay community. Basically “I am here; I am DTF.” The immediacy, optionality, and thus disposability (and deniability) are increasing, yet the satisfaction, happiness, and ultimate “success” of marriage seems to all be in decline. Hmmm.
Of course NAGMALT and a friend is a friend and they can broker deals (worked for you) but it goes to knowing your audience/market as well as “dating by committee”, which is an affliction that is only getting worse.
@Liz 9
Too many of the messages to women are precisely the opposite of “get married.” Rather, it’s delay, establish a career, have fun, and so on.
@Artisanal Toad 14
The added padding definitely takes a toll on women’s beauty. And the interesting speculation about SSRIs depressing depression, on Heartiste, I believe, was that women don’t feel as in need of a man to help her feel better and so they don’t pursue him as much. I definitely think that the combination of factors that make women not need men on the individual level as much anymore really kills true attraction that could exist if she felt the need of a provider and a protector and such a man–roughly of equal value to her–came along.
My point is that I think that women actually do feel some level of attraction to the provider and protector when she’s in need of such a man. But today, that need is very small, and so her environmentally-sensitive attraction triggers sense that and the parts that would feel attraction for the provider/protector are turned way down and the sperm-provider, tingle-generating triggers are turned way up.
I talk about that to some extent here:
http://www.justfourguys.com/evolutionary-incentives-why-women-are-going-for-badboys-and-players-instead-of-stable-providers/
@Deep Strength 15
Interesting stats about the out-of-wedlock birth rates in Europe and the Japanese herbivores.
In Europe, those stats are probably slightly not as grave as they seem since some of those non-marriage births would be in very-long-term cohabitations?
@Lazlo 25
Yeah, I think that women should take dating advice from gay men with a grain of salt, though perhaps said men are able to be more blunt with women and get through some points to them that straight men and women wouldn’t be able to. But if the gay man can’t channel a little bit of the straight eye for the queer guy then his advice and knowledge of men may not be fully accurate.
It is an interesting question: In what areas are gay men just like hetero men and in what ways are they very different? Knowing the answer would be important to knowing what areas of gay advice for straight women would be useful and which might be unique to the “average gay man’s” perspective or more similar to how women view things than hetero men.
Does anyone know if there are numbers for college educated women (CEW) by race?
I know CEW are more likely not to divorce once married, but I’m also guessing that they are the most likely of any group to never marry to begin with. They are the most likely to buy into the feminist mantra of “school, career, and then marriage.” Thus, they wait till after their most marriageable years are behind them to start looking for a husband.
And, I’m thinking white CEW are the most likely demographic to fall for the feminist mantra.
@8to12
I believe you could get similar data, for college-educated if you go right to the census bureau site and learn what the right data fields to request and so forth are. I haven’t taken the time to figure it out.
In the limited stuff I’ve found about college-educated people, the marriage rates are higher than the rest of the population and have declined a bit but not to the large extent as the rest.
I think I should write a post that summarizes what I’ve found in online articles, even thought it won’t give as much granularity as what we see here.
The reason Dalrock and I were so easily able to do these kinds of analyses is because the census (or whoever) provided the excel sheets already made. No need to figure out anything really.
@8to12
I thought your 7-point comment at Dalrock’s was good so feel free to post it here too.
OK.
A few thoughts on the increasing gap between white-female (WF) marriage rate and the white-male (WM) rate.
1) Females want to “marry up” the social/economic ladder.
2) Females earn more college degrees than men. This makes the pool of potential male husbands smaller than the pool of females (last I saw it was 140 female degrees for every 100 male degrees).
3) A higher percentage of WF’s earn college degrees than any other racial group, which further skews the ratio (I don’t know the number, but I would guess the ratio of WF/WM is greater than the 140/100 general number).
4) Males have no problem “marrying-down” the social/economic ladder–way down. Plenty of males with advanced degrees are happy to look right past the college educated WF and marry a woman with nothing more than a high school diploma. This further reduces the pool of male candidates.
5) IMHO, college educated WF’s are less likely to marry across racial lines than any other group. This is particularly true for the WF/asian-male combo (which, as far as I can tell, is all but non-existent). And while the white-female/black-male combo is is common on the lower end of the social/economic ladder, you don’t see that many college educated WF’s married to black-males. So, the pool of potential mates is further reduced by WF’s eliminated non-white males from consideration.
6) College educated males are, IMHO, more likely to marry across racial lines than any group. WM/Latino-female and WM/Asian-female are pretty common sites. Plus (as you saw in the sandwich story), there is a growing trend of college educated black females marrying college educated WM’s. Once again, the pool of potential male mates is reduced.
7) I could be wrong about this one (as I don’t know the numbers), but I would guess that the percentage of openly gay males is higher for college educated WM’s than for any other group (including the percentage of openly gay college educated WF’s). Again, reducing the pool size.
I think that the simple answer is that the apex people like things the way they are. We often rail against feminism and rightly so but even more important is that the apex men (and few women) like things the way it is. For the apex men the current situation provides lots of pussy, votes, customers and cheaper labor. The rich have never been richer.
Han,
I’m with you mostly here, but I want to point out that being rich/wealthy isn’t synonymous with the ability to score top-notch pussy….not unless you are literally paying for it which I’m sure some wealthy guys do. I think Client 9 is just one among many rich men who pay to have sex with young hot women.
So let me digress for a moment. I know some people will talk about how assortative mating is taking place amongst the UMC/UC set especially that high intelligence/high earning men are going to want to marry intelligent women. I actually don’t dispute that but I think that only scratches the surface of the totality of the dynamics. I believe many of those marriages are like the Clintons…they fit the “French”/old style European marriage where it was about combining interests and for breeding purposes. Meanwhile the guy is banging younger hotter pussy on the side, probably not too infrequently paying for it. My guess it is far more prevalent then anyone could imagine.
But back to my original point. I remember when I was first getting into Game/Red Pill stuff and was listening to the David DeAngelo Interviews with Dating Gurus. I can’t remember the guy…I could probably dig it up, but he talked about how he got into the “advice business” because some super rich guy who couldn’t pull diddly squat hired him to teach him how to get girls. There are a lot of dork finance guys in NYC pulling down 6 figure salaries who couldn’t pull shit UNTIL a woman is looking for a beta provider.
So my only point is you can’t necessarily wrap together extreme wealth with a harem of hot babes. They don’t necessarily go together. FWIW, one of the guys who I think is one of the best I’ve seen with women…it was just sick to watch how much pussy he scored was basically just making ends meet and didn’t have any assets to his name at all.
@Morpheus
You’re correct to distinguish between the different kinds of apex males, which I am aware of but wasn’t careful to differentiate in my comment.
It’s very true that some males can be apex in terms of wealth but not being sexy and vice versa, or looks, or charisma or athletic ability.
So a more careful version of my comment would be
“For the apex sexual-value men the current situation provides lots of pussy, for the female-pandering politician, votes, for merchants, female customers that purchase the largest share of discretionary items, and for companies, cheaper labor due to a larger workforce due to women working and globalization.”
So, I think it’s safe to say, that in their respective spheres of apex-icity, and perhaps with some exceptions, things are going very well, and in many ways, never been better.
Re: college and marriage delay
Japan is the most educated nation in the world.
It is also totally fucked.
Just remember that anytime someone tells you how devastatingly important it is to send every girl and boy to college.
Fascinating that nearly twice as many lesbians ended their civil unions than gay men.
Reminds me of the 65%, basically 2/3 of hetero divorces being instigated by women and 1/3 by men, though we can’t necessarily read too much into the similarity in the numbers.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/lesbian-couples-twice-as-likely-as-gay-men-to-end-civil-partnership-as-divorces-up-by-20-8866454.html
“In the seven years since gay couples were able to have civil partnerships, 3.2 per cent of male unions ended in dissolution, compared to 6.1 per cent of female couples.”
Marriage squeeze.
As men marry down in age (average 3 years) they pair up with future age cohorts of women. When fertility rates decline women are advantaged, when fertility rates go up men are advantaged.
Rates of change of fertility skew future sex ratios between different age cohorts.
Rough Example, fertility decline.
100 boys and 100 girls born 1970
95 boys and 95 girls born 1971
90 boys and 90 girls born 1972
195 boys are competing for 185 girls.
From the mid 50s to early 70s there was a steep fertility decline which was a boon for women marrying 20 – 30 years down the track (70s to 2000).
From the early 70s to early 2000s there has been a small gradual incline in fertility (1.6 to 1.9 – white non hispanic) which means there is marginally less marriageable men (not disastrous but it’s there nonetheless) than women.
So maybe there is something to “Where have all the good men gone.”
Hopefully a stats guru will be able to expand on this further.
@Johny
That is an interesting point, different sized cohorts and the difference in average age of men and women at marriage.
Are those numbers just illustrative?
The numbers are illustrative but that is what happened from the 50s to the 70s on a smaller scale, when you extrapolate it over a large population the numbers are quite large.
Funny, I tried to get stats from the US census site but even these guys have been furloughed.
“Funny, I tried to get stats from the US census site but even these guys have been furloughed.”
Bastards! haha
@ Han Solo, deti
Indeed, many heavy conservative Christian women fit the bill of hermits. But there are also heaps of Christian women who drink, go out and socialise regularly. I am one of them and I know plenty others.
Here’s the nitty-gritty though:
When trying to meet a man in that environment you have to be very alert – for instance, some new Christians have quite an unresolved baggage; reason why they suddenly turned to God for help. You also have to be very accepting of people’s past. Some may have been into drugs, had heaps of sexual partners and other lifestyles that don’t match traditional Christian values. Thus, those on the liberal spectrum will be more accepting than those who err on the conservative side. Similarly, liberal ones won’t necessarily want to be with a man who is too conservative, which limits the Christian mating pool.
re: marriage and Japan
Interesting article here: http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/33-of-japanese-think-marriage-is-pointless-survey
33% percent think marriage is pointless!
Another few interesting articles:
1. http://www.wa-pedia.com/gaijin/westerners_japanese_marriage.shtml
There is a kind a tacit understanding between spouse that after 10 years of marriage (loveless anyway) and a few children, the man is free to satisfy his libido somewhere else. That is why the sex industry is so prosperous in Japan.
2. http://www.wa-pedia.com/culture/sex_in_japan.shtml
Hentai, anyone?
Arranged marriages, extramarital affairs, thriving sex industry – all culturally accepted.
Let me link to a hilarious comment by someone many of you probably recognize, Alte/Vanessa/Black&German:
“You have to remember that the TFR of 1.3 masks a native rate closer to, or even BELOW!!, 1.0. That’s an exponential collapse that can only be reversed by crowding everyone together and ensuring that there are enough women to go around. You need, in fact, slightly more women than men to get the interfemale sexual competition up to the level where women will even bother to marry anymore. Without marriage, women hardly reproduce. (That, incidentally, is why Asia is even more screwed than Europe.)”
ozconservative.blogspot.hu/2013/08/why-arent-germans-having-children.html?showComment=1377433865592#c6617318339439175704
Alright, point taken. But did you get that? Women only BOTHER to consider marrying if they see enough attractive men competing for them. And it’s the truth! Her other comments there are also accurate.
The delusional Christian women deti has mentioned are basically screwed because they are looking for unicorn men i.e. men attractive enough to engage in regular casual sex and short-term flings BUT refusing to do, men who COULD cheat anytime but decide not to. It doesn’t make sense to waste attention on them.
John Derbyshire makes good points about the Japanese demographic crisis here:
johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/NationalQuestion/roboticsvshelotics.html
We have to keep in mind that there’s a fundamental conflict of interests between average men and women when it comes to marriage.
Think about it. What would the average beta prefer? To get married in his early 20s or mid-20s to a woman of roughly equal age and sex rank, but delay parenthood for 5-10 years. In other words, secure all the potential advantages marriage brings to a beta (regular sex i.e. no more need to keep dating which is a PITA for a beta in this SMP, social validation and status, sharing of expenses and pooling of resources, a helping hand in housework etc.) while at the same time delaying and minimizing its disadvantages (sex life, social life and free time pretty much all disappearing completely due to having children, while the need to provide skyrockets – in other words, getting turned into an unsexed slave).
What would the average woman prefer? To keep having fun and independence, then in her early 30s marry a stable but more or less attractive man and instantly have one or two children in order to lock him down, rob him of opportunities to cheat and gain social status for herself.
That’s a huge conflict of interest that prevents marriages between people who otherwise actually want to marry.
#35: That is interesting HS.
Not too surprising though…imagine the drama of that scene.
The joke ‘What do lesbians do on the first date? Move in together’ rings largely true. They also have less sex than either male homosexuals or heterosexuals. Link:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-passion-paradox/201206/the-ins-and-outs-sexual-frequency
Anecdotally, male homosexuals more often have an “understanding” about sex outside of the partnership (differs greatly from the way male heterosexuals view their relationships with women, where infidelity is generally verboten).
HH – “That’s a huge conflict of interest that prevents marriages between people who otherwise actually want to marry.”
When its put in written form in such a basic way, it really is a glaring disparity.
So, the “old” model of marrying young and building a life favored men, and the “new” model of delaying marriage until the last possible moment favors women. What’s the happy medium? Marry in late 20’s start having kids in early 30’s?
And interestingly enough, I know of several guys that are on marriage number 2 (myself included) that has a totally different vibe to it. And these guys aren’t aware of the ‘sphere or the Red Pill. However, the interesting thing is, in all cases (including my own) children were already established (meaning already born and well past baby/toddler stage when they require the most time and effort) and that means there is no intentional effort put into “starting” a family. In addition, the children being older take less time, which means the marriage can be more like a “romantic relationship” in that there is time and money to go out and do things.
These guys (including myself) married the first time rather young. (I was just barely 26 the first time. Most of the other guys I’m thinking of were that or younger.) Seems like we all went the “lock it down early” route, but didn’t manage to put off the “starting a family” part. (NOTE: my first wife was a single mother when we met, so I walked right into “starting the family”) Once the kids got old enough to be relatively self sufficient, the marriages went sour and ended. In my case, it left me looking for something entirely different in a woman, because I was no longer searching for the “mother of my children” and instead focused on things that *I* wanted in a wife far more than what I thought my children would need in a mother. To be sure, I wanted a woman that would make a great step-mother, but overall my primary concern was to make sure any new woman in my life wasn’t somehow a negative for my children.
What is the most fascinating is looking at how different the new spouses are compared to the first. And I’m not just talking about for the guys. The ex-wives all found new guys, and in all cases those guys aren’t very much at all like their first husband.
So I suspect there is some real truth to your statement Hollen. When starting a family isn’t in the picture, people tend to make very different choices in mate selection. For better or for worse, it certainly indicates there are some conflicting desires being sussed out by a lot of folks.
I saw a prophetic Bible verse on another site that really seems to fit with the scenario described above:
For seven women will take hold of one man in that day, saying, “We will eat our own bread and wear our own clothes, only let us be called by your name; take away our reproach!”. – Isa 4:1
This is the last line in a section that starts at Isaiah 3:16 about how women have become arrogant and overtly sexual, and how God punishes them.
The Japanese herbivore male phenomenon is just fascinating to me. I think that there are at least three particularly interesting components:
1. Herbivore as representing a contemplative lifestyle and realistic cost-benefit analysis. There may be a monastic or even samurai ascetic appeal here for some Japanese men. For most others—fully a third of Japanese men are now reporting that marriage is “pointless”, with slightly higher percentages among men in their 30s—it may seem like an escape from Purgatory.
I can see how a lifestyle that allows plenty of time for surfing Shikoku, avoiding mindless work/consumerism hamsterwheeling and keeping “lifestyle bleed”—expensive status-competition signals that have demonstrably rapid hedonic decay—to a minimum, and then using the now-free resources to more fully enjoy manga, anime, hentai, video games, kendo, karaoke, and cosplay restaurants such as “maid cafes”, would be preferable to a traditional lifestyle path for many Japanese men.
This would be particularly true if they had grown up seeing their fathers working ceaselessly at sarariman jobs, coming home late at night following hideous commutes (possibly drunk and slurring jingoistic company songs after mandatory after-work company morale gatherings), and then sleeping all weekend (apparently the #1 weekend activity of sararimen is sleep). For all of this, the sarariman traditionally turned over his earnings to his wife, who managed the household and gave him an allowance that he could use to purchase cafeteria lunches and so on, and had a >50% chance of being in a clinically sexless marriage.
If the sarariman route is the alternative, a rational young Japanese male may feel that if he is going to be celibate, he may as well actually enjoy the other portions of his life.
Is this so different from MGTOW…?
2. Herbivore as prophecy for this side of the Pacific. Is a significant percentage of American males destined to follow this path?
3. Herbivore impact on the SMP. I would imagine that a lot of these guys were originally supposed to be lining up to serve as the willing long-term johns and milquetoasts in whatever passes for a “beta-provisioning” pay-to-play relationship market in Japan. These probably were not the successful players who were jumping from bed to bed (for an expat’s view of that lifestyle and an unsympathetic look at the behavior of Japanese males, pick up “Black Passenger, Yellow Cabs”) or the alphas who were landing really hot, SMV-9-10 sexy wives. When herbs withdraw en masse from the SMP, what are the downrange effects?
Bastiat: “This would be particularly true if they had grown up seeing their fathers working ceaselessly at sarariman jobs, coming home late at night following hideous commutes (possibly drunk and slurring jingoistic company songs after mandatory after-work company morale gatherings), and then sleeping all weekend (apparently the #1 weekend activity of sararimen is sleep). For all of this, the sarariman traditionally turned over his earnings to his wife, who managed the household and gave him an allowance that he could use to purchase cafeteria lunches and so on, and had a >50% chance of being in a clinically sexless marriage.”
Two words: Ouch, ouch.
Sounds like a culture that misses Seppuku.
Perhpas they were attempting to emulate it in a comparatively less violent, yet more agony-sustaining, way.
@BB,
The Japanese herbivore movement is a precursor to a similar movement happening in the US. Entitlement minded women; husband expected to marry and sacrifice his life for his family; husband’s marriage rights shrinking each year; wife’s marriage rights growing each year. It’s the same pattern as the US, just to a more extreme level.
I’d guess we’re two generations behind the Japanese at most. But, given the speed of change in modern society it could be less. Notice it only took a 30% drop out rate for men to brink Japanese society to a crisis point.
The Us, like Japanese culture, has historical models for not following mainstream societal norms. From monks to the independent “go west young man” attitude, MGTOW could easily cast itself as a higher calling.
8to12: I agree that the US has historically not followed “mainstream societal norms” by comparison with most.
Per Japan, it’s exactly the opposite. They (along with most of Asia) are cultures of conformity.
@Liz,
What I mean was that the Japanese ancient traditions of monastic and samurai ascetic lifestyles provided cover for Japanese men to break from modern societal expectations. They can assert that it is modern society that has diverged from the cultural path, and it’s the herbivores who are actually being true to traditional Japanese culture.
Whilst I do agree that Western Society doesn’t follow mainstream societal norms as much as other cultures, I think conformity exists everywhere to a greater or lesser extend. The established ‘code of conducts’ one must follow in Western Society are implicit and not as visible as in Japan.
(http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/looking-in-the-cultural-mirror/201212/how-cultures-make-people-conform)
They key in understanding Japan’s ‘code of conduct’ is knowing that the support for the community supersedes individuality. That’s what Japanese people told me. You are part of a team – always, which is embedded quite strongly in people. Saving face and all that. Basically, the needs of the nation are more important than your individual needs. Thus, you get married for the convenience of raising a family – having children. You need to excel to show others that you come from a good family.
The pressures to be accepted by society over there! Children commit suicide because they are not good enough. A girl I know, who once taught in Japan, told me that one of her students stabbed a pen in his eye solely due to him failing his exam. Not even exaggerating one bit. Not surprising either. Remember how some Japanese committed suicide because their Tamagotchi died? How crazy is that?!
A bit OT in the end, but Japanese society is very interesting!
@Bastiat 48
Very interesting thoughts about the herbivore culture. If a sexless (or lesser than desired) and hen-pecked marriage is all you get for being a long-hours work horse then most men aren’t going to want that.
The herbivore movement can be seen as a rational response to such a stultifying society.
The basic question that many men start asking is, “Why am I working my ass off for this?”
I think some men in the west are starting to do the same thing.
Many women like the increased freedom they have plus the plug-and-play provider they have thought is always there.
I think that the thought of the beasts of burden awakening and casting off the yoke and the plow is disturbing to some/many women and so they like to shame men out of thinking and talking too much about their lot in life. This works very well in person because most men are herd-following pussy beggars (no offense intended to men, just calling a spade a spade) and don’t want to risk being driven off from the herd and thus having to go without sex (and also jobs in today’s feminazi society where feminazi-gestapo informants are lurking at every corner waiting for men to slip up so they can be reported to HR for crimespeak).
The internet, to some extent, provides men the ability to congregate and speak their minds without as much fear of being sentenced to sexlessness or convicted of crimespeak (though feminazis, gamma males and others often try and sometimes are successful at outing those who crimespeak too much or too effectively).
I think that’s why some women get so disturbed by men getting together and speaking their minds…because it threatens to end the gig of men still behaving like beasts of burden but not getting as much (or any) reward for doing so while feminism and technology have brought about much greater independence for women.
Of course, there are women that are fair-minded and like to discuss things and not keep men from discussing these things, like Liz and Starlight here, and Girl Writes What and others.
@8to12
Interesting you mention those verses. Just yesterday, I was thinking about them in relation to how too many young women are just flat out arrogant and bitchy these days.
I suppose the 7 women taking hold of one man would be a post-massive-war or collapse where a huge amount of men had been killed and then there would be a large female-to-male ratio and you’d start getting lots of female intrasexual competition and having one of the relatively few men would be a status symbol.
Off topic but I was alerted to this guy’s take on Miley Cyrus and her virgin to slut transformation.
This is interesting in that it basically says (or at least caused me to think of this) that societal breakdown leads to women acting slutty.
This might seem to be in conflict with the idea that stable and rich and safe societies lead to women being slutty because the provider/protector that sticks around is no longer needed. However, I think both factors can lead to women being slutty, but out of different motivations.
I think there is the scenario of war and total collapse where the risk of some men just taking women by force (rape) rises and so it would be evolutionarily advantageous to the woman, if she is going to get pregnant by one of the marauders/rapists anyway then she might as well try to get the best genes she can. So, why not offer herself up to a top male by overt displays of sexuality? That way she gets his genes (and, who knows, she might be able to curry a little bit of his providing and protection if she can really work some girl game).
So a way to combine the two theses, rich and safe environment leading to sluttiness and dangerous environment leading to sluttiness, into the modern, developed world would be that today is a safe and rich environment so that leads to women being slutty due to not needing a man to stick around so she can be slutty and also choose out of her league men but also, due to the many cases of divorce or out-of-wedlock births, that triggers this hypothesized female psychological chaotic-environment mechanism to get pregnant and fast by the best male possible, so that lesser-value males don’t impregnate her.
I think both factors are at work. Thoughts? Refinements?
Another thought is that in dangerous environments with low life expectancy, you better mate fast, while you’re still alive. Yeah, chances of offspring survival may be low but I guess enough of them survive for the population to continue. This would seem to be more the case in tropical climates where you don’t need significant clothing and shelter and where there’s probably some food somewhere, as opposed to the winter environment of more northerly or southerly latitudes.
This doesn’t remove the logic that having a provider/protector stick around in the dangerous environment is beneficial. But if things have broken down so much that that often isn’t an option then you can either go celibate (genes die out) or you can risk having a kid and so in that dire situation a woman might as well get the best genes she can. At least she’s taking a shot at it and you only score if you shoot. However, if she were able to find a protector that will stick around, that would be more optimal in a really dangerous situation.
And I’ll emphasize that today’s developed world isn’t dangerous at all, compared to a war zone or prehistoric settings where wild animals, hunger and warring tribes often lurked everywhere. However, the emotional trauma of divorce or being raised without a father might trigger some of these things, kind of mimicking what are actually more dangerous environments.
The Japanese seem to be ahead of other Western nations in experiencing the pathologies brought about by the Four Horsemen of the Sexual Apocalypse and all that. Germany isn’t much different. They are basically facing the problems the USA or the UK will face in, say, two or three decades. Or maybe just one? I cannot tell.
The reason their pathologies appear to be so severe is probably due to their utter defeat in 1945. Again, the German situation is the same. They cannot muster any sort of national purpose besides manufacturing cars, in fact they are psychologically blocking themselves from setting a national endeavor they can be proud of. It’s simply impossible to hold onto traditions in such an environment.
@hoellen.2
“The delusional Christian women deti has mentioned are basically screwed because they are looking for unicorn men i.e. men attractive enough to engage in regular casual sex and short-term flings BUT refusing to do, men who COULD cheat anytime but decide not to. It doesn’t make sense to waste attention on them.”
Totally agree. I think at some point I’m going to write a post about my Christian church days where many of the prettiest women were so picky that they are still single to this day while their assortative male counterparts had to go down 0.5 or 1 point to get married (interesting how the men adjusted more so than the women). And then you have the case of women in small churches in smaller cities or towns so there really are few total candidates (because they only will marry someone in their church) and even the slightest amount of pickiness leads them to remaining spinsters. And due to the more fem-friendly focus of Christianity lately (and in some ways for a long time, even since it’s inception; also true of many other religions that encourage the more feminine virtues and downplay the masculine virtues), you get more women than men. Ironically, many of the top women don’t clue into the intrasexual competition and are still really picky and end up spinsters.
Also, interesting comment by Alte.
Japan is economically destroyed. They never truly recovered from their early 90s recession. Germany had a pretty big economic problem until this decade, too, when labor reforms basically kick-started their labor markets and gave people an opportunity for jobs. Their wages have been held down and there is no central government minimum wage.
I would say that the economic prospects of the two nations have directly devastated their birth rates. Japan is far more advanced.
America can do better with affordable family formation. Surprisingly, liberal-minded people can be quite open-minded to this idea….see Matt Yglesias at Slate, with his blog Money-Box. He’s liberal in that he doesn’t like Republicans and wants health care, but one of his BIG points is loosening zoning regulation to lower land prices and, in effect, allow more family formation.
Concerning the herbivors, Japan’s fertility rate has been steadily declining since WWII, meaning that there are more men competing for fewer brides.
When this is the case women delay marriage (which has been the case) and the ‘marriage age gap’ is reduced , meaning women marry men closer to their own age.
(When there are less men than women, men marry much younger and the age gap is larger)
Since Japanese women are in demand the effect is that sexual competition for males is brutal, women are delaying marriage and want partners closer to their own age.
I guess the anecdote is that if you force men to wait too long, demand too much and give too little in return (mature brides) they will simply walk off the ranch.
Captain capitalism has a great post on this, when men simply give up.
@Johny
That’s certainly consistent with post WWII where you had the soldiers come back and get married very young…with several hundred thousand young men killed, that would affect the ratio of young people enough to probably tilt things. Look at this link and graph showing how the average age of marriage decreased through and after WWII.
http://www.genealogyintime.com/NewsStories/2010/May/marriage_and_age_differences.html
“America can do better with affordable family formation. Surprisingly, liberal-minded people can be quite open-minded to this idea….”
Huh? Isn’t the current administration, which they support, enacting regulations designed to destroy Whitopias in the name of diversity?
Re: #56
What you’re describing isn’t sluttiness, strictly speaking. When social order breaks down, it’s a very risky strategy on women’s part to get themselves knocked up by the alpha tug leaders and hope that they will be provided for. What actually happens is that men that are too beta or too alpha are simply eliminated swiftly, and women compete for the rest and trade protection for sex on an individual basis. One example is the average Red Army officer choosing a “field/front wife” (or whatever they were called) from the subjugated local female population on the Eastern Front in 1944/45. Such women were generally no longer under the threat of random gang rapes, since it was made clear that they are officer’s property, so to speak.
#64: That’s a good example HH.
I’m reminded of the scene in band of brothers when the soldiers handed a carton of smokes to the disgraced Holland woman (ostacized and ousted from the village, carrying an infant fathered by a German soldier during occupation).
If only the manosphere was an actual geographical location.
That being said, Han this is such a loaded post with so much that should be discussed that I don’t think any of us could do it justice. The comments have also been insightful and relevant. I’ve been reading for the last 3 days and every time I’ve gone to venture into the discussion I’ve been prevented, but fortunately I have a husband who is willing to play devil’s advocate over dinner. Through our discussions we’ve come to the conclusion that no established culture can maintain it’s foundations over time. Two notions kept leaping out. The first:
Change is constant.
And the second is from the prose of the Desiderata:
You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars;
you have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.
Perhaps we shouldn’t be focused entirely on what was so much as how we can establish the new relevancy of manosphere ideology.
“He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” Matt 11:15
Kudos to you Han.
@practicallyperfect2
Thanks. I agree that we should try to figure out better ways to spread the truth to more people. Any ideas?
And that is a nice quote from the Desiderata.
Ahhh, that’s the catch, how to spread the truth. One thing we need to remember is that not everyone is going to go along, but alas we have to share the planet. What you gentlemen are doing here helps by giving a public forum without the vitriol. This is a safe place were I can direct men to hear the truth, that is not overtly PUA, religious, MGTOW or political. I remember my first voyage into the manosphere, I still cringe when I think of it.
Having a public figurehead(s) is important for changing the image. Someone or some couple of consequence who we can point to who demonstrates the conscious choice to live in natural gender roles and are able to intellectually articulate the view point.
Using the tactics that liberals and feminist have used. It’s my life, my choice.
We also might want to think about how we create community. Something tangible outside the internet.
I doubt we will ever go back pre feminism. Personally I believe there are one or two good and inevitable things that came out of the movement (ducks for cover) but sacrificing one half of humanity for the other is not right and feminism is not the right solution for women.
Virtuous people are MADE, not born.
Ever watch 300? Those guys are fundamentally Betas that just happened to be raised in a brutal environment. They were crafted into legendary soldiers because that’s what Sparta wanted them to be.
Beta:
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/7/74798/1724644-300_wallpaper_q.jpg
Beta:
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/7/73958/3124183-viking.jpg
Beta:
http://depletedcranium.com/Lunchbasicversion.jpg
Beta:
http://www.conservapedia.com/images/thumb/6/66/Yeoman.jpg/300px-Yeoman.jpg
Just got through Early Middle Ages history. It’s amazing how pathetic the feudal societies were at making war. No one valued infantry in the slightest, and the Knights weren’t very interested in fighting. They didn’t CHARGE with lances, they THREW their lances at other people. It was a society which didn’t understand WHY they created a society in which it was easy to raise cavalry, nor a society that valued the military contributions of less flashy but vitally important “low-men.”
That changes with the Swiss. Apparently, get enough Swiss Betas together and convince them to just stand there, and it becomes very intimidating to charge them!
http://0-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/tg/image/1336/93/1336937170375.jpg
Again
MADE
not BORN
Darn! Moderation due to links!
Yeah, lots of links will do that. I approved the comment and so it’s up now as #69.
Excellent, my thanks
#69: I doubt that the original 300 looked like a bunch of chippendales dancers. What makes you think the warriors of Thermophylae were fundamentally beta?
If virtuous people are made, not born, why would this concept not apply to alphas as well? They certainly did some manly enough shite. Ever read Gates of Fire?
I have a few friends 3 cohorts plotted who have married either ladies of colour, oriental though canadian for 6 generations, and of course southern asian India mostly. One fellow had been married to a white non hispanic lady, but she came through with her true colours 6 years into the marriage, he barely got out of that one with his skin intact. In Canada we are slowly becoming a brown country, but it is with white males leading the charge towards ladies who are not white, and they dont want to be white either.
Liz,
Men operate in a socio-sexual hierarchy. The majority of men at any particular time in any particular society are Roissy Beta or Vox Delta, by definition . They still need to follow the rules of their society and cannot act like frat douche-bag alphas, or else the society would collapse.
For example, the Greek Phalanx is not the formation of Alpha. It requires standing shoulder-to-shoulder and even the slightest variation dooms the phalanx. Actually, that was how most phalanx battles were resolved. Everyone would try to slide right to be protected by his neighbors shield, which made the left side of the phalanx extremely weak.
So you put YOUR best troops on the right side and tried to collapse the enemy left before he broke yours, and also because those guys would not break.
Fundamentally not the attitude of a guy who sets his own rules, at all. Know your role and shut your mouth.
I know it’s tough to look at the mass of men you see today and see warriors, but from that stock is where we descend.
See:
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/fatter-wimpier-more-pathetic/
Moving forward requires acknowledging that there is no problem with the fundamental stock of the American people, but how we chose to raise them.
Great article. I sent it to my sister (who is 26 and looking). Thanks for bringing some DATA to bear on this.
Re: ADBG
You’re dead right about the Phalanx. The 300 Spartans were, in all likelihood, mostly run-of-the-mill betas. They did what betas have always done: they did as they were told, suffering and dying early as a result.
Permit me to copy my comment to that nonsensical Roissy post here:
“Your average modern white man isn’t the descendant of „great warriors”, „brilliant thinkers” or any other top-tier group that has always been a small majority anywhere. He’s the descendant of average betas – manipulated, controlled, ignorant chumps as unimpressive and miserable as he is. There was a time when labor and sacrifice was demanded from all of them, which meant that their interests were factored into the reigning social norms of the time and their overlords at least pretended to be on their side. But those times are gone, thanks to „progress” and all that.
Western civilization was always destined to self-destruct, because it depends on permanent technological progress, and that progress requires an ever-growing army of dutiful beta nerds, all of whom are incapable of tempting young and fertile women into sex and motherhood. This wretch of a civilization not only fails to reproduce, now it’s spreading its own degeneracy and social dysfunction among more or less intact civilizations by promoting feminism, planned parenthood, female empowerment and the nonsense of „sexual equality” all around the globe. Soon the entire human race will be doomed in the same way Western Civilization currently is. The aborigines of Sub-Saharan Africa and Central Asia at least knew how to erect social structures that last. Whites don’t.”
HH, what do you suppose is the root cause of beta nerds not being able to tempt women, and do you think it is fixable?
The obvious root seems to be that the virtues necessary for a nerd – or any sort of craftsman – to economically thrive are not only useless for attracting women in the current SMP but are in fact hindrances to any attempt at attracting women. If you’re a young man who wants to build a career in a STEM field or by being some sort of craftsman, you have to bust your ass, train and challenge yourself constantly, you need to utilize logical thinking everyday. Social skills and any sort of emotional sensitivity are secondary, even redundant. You work in an all-male environment. You don’t solve problems by talking to people, you solve them by using tools and fixing machines. In other words, you’re the complete opposite of an alpha. You aren’t mysterious and unpredictable. In fact, you cannot even afford to be any of that. Hell, you cannot even spend dozens of hours interacting with women every week because you don’t have the freetime. You aren’t socially savvy and will never be.
@cdw100
I anecdotally see more white male to non-white female marriages than vice versa. I think that does explain some of what’s going on.
@Virtue
Thanks. You might like to send her this post on “girl game,” my take on the most important things women can focus on to attract suitable men for LTRs.
http://www.justfourguys.com/girl-game-is-simple-yet-so-hard/
“The fact that the 20-29 y/o female marriage rates are falling is likely due more to a lack of desire on the part of women, since their ability is at its peak. Many of them prefer career and fun over marriage…or at least they prefer to follow the feminist mantras that the alpha mares of the herd tell them.”
Can you provide a survey reference of women’s ideal age to get married? Just based on my anecdotal evidence *which is worthless* I find that most women want to get married anywhere between the ages of 21 to 27 and have a fear of being single by the time they are 30. Are you unaware of the stigma attached to unmarried women in their 30’s? It’s rather hard for me to believe that there is a lack of desire.
I’m also wondering how many of these women who stayed unmarried actually wanted to get married but the man they were dating did not want to propose.
http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2012/01/dont-let-guy-waste-your-most-eligible.html
Personally I wanted to get married when I was 23. At the time, I was dating a man for over 3 years. Head over heels in love. He was still unsure about our relationship. I saw this as a sign to get out. I’m now engaged at 26 and will be married at 27 with another man.
I find it interesting that early on you mentioned about the rising awareness amongst men about the unfairness of divorce laws and the unfitness for marriage that too many women display. It seems to contradict the “Desire + Ability = Married” for women formula. Attitude men have toward marriage affects a woman’s ability to marry. Some women may just have the desire without the ability.
“I find that most women want to get married anywhere between the ages of 21 to 27 and have a fear of being single by the time they are 30.”
The main reason why that doesn’t lead to early marriage appears to me to be the conflict of interest I described at #44. Even if a woman gets married in her early 20s, realistically speaking she cannot look forward to anything but years of childless cohabitation, because the couple will have a difficult time establishing the financial stability necessary for raising children (house/apartment, car, stable income etc). Simply put, few women are willing to put up with something like that, because in her mind it turns her into nothing but an unpaid object of male sexual access.
The simple fact is that the average woman isn’t psychologically prepared for a prolonged period of casual sex. Tradcon women are right about that. Indeed no woman is designed, so to speak, to be the convenient sperm bucket for dozens of alpha louts. Moreover, she isn’t designed to be the source of free sex for just ONE man either. She cannot become something like that without becoming psychologically damaged as a result. And franky there’s nothing wrong with that.
The fact is this: whenever a woman has sex with a man, any man, she expects to be paid in one way or another. The payment itself can take many forms: attention, time, money, emotional exclusivity. But it has to take at least one form if she is to feel emotionally content with that relationship. In her mind, sex is meant to be exchanged for resources. If such exchange doesn’t take place, she will want out. If her husband keeps sexing her regularly without impregnating her, the whole thing just seems wrong to her.
“The payment itself can take many forms: attention, time, money, emotional exclusivity.”
Damn, I forgot to add “children” to that list.
One more anecdote to add: I vaguely recall a poll linked by one of Roissy’s commenters. It was done among a group of married yet childless American women and the issue in question was the theoretical male birth control pill. The women were asked how’d they feel if they found out that her husband was secretly taking the male birth control pill while she was trying to get pregnant. The majority of the women answered that they’d consider it to be the equivalent of rape, because they’d feel that they were robbed of something.
@Monika 81
Thanks for your comment and pointing out something that wasn’t that clear in what I wrote.
I should have been clearer and said that it’s a portion of women that doesn’t have enough desire to marry in their 20’s, either at all or to the men that would commit to them, and that then drives the average age of marriage up for women, not into the 30’s but into the upper 20’s.
We know that the median age of first marriage is 27 for women so obviously 1/2 of the women get married at or before 27 and the other half afterwards. Such a stat is a little misleading without deeper thought though because it doesn’t account for women that never marry that effectively have a marriage age of infinity or never. Anyway, from that stat about what women do, much more useful than what they might say in a survey, we see that most women marry by 30.
See here that only 30% of the 30-34 y/o women (of all races in the US) have never married (go to the last plot).
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/11/24/more-grim-news-for-carousellers-hoping-to-jump-at-the-last-minute/
So, many women want to, or at least do, get married in their early to mid 20’s, by 27, but half of those who marry do so at or after 27, and then a bit less than 15% never marry at all.
So compared to the age of marriage in the 50’s, see comment 62, the age has gone up a lot. I believe this is more due to women delaying it than men but men also have some influence on things.
Take a look at this post that quotes a survey that college women (not all women) say that the late 20’s is the ideal age to get married and that more young-20’s men want to get married now than women do.
http://www.justfourguys.com/women-start-marriage-strike-men-complete-it/
As to the lack of desire, I think it’s more that a portion of the over-achiever career crowd of women really buys into feminism saying that women should postpone marriage and so they do so, even though a big part of them doesn’t want to. See this post and the articles I quoted within:
http://www.justfourguys.com/feminists-and-raunch-queens-are-the-dominant-alpha-mares/
This delay on the part of women, plus the delay caused by some men (though I’d attribute more of the delay to women than to men), has driven up the average age of men.
As to women being with men that don’t want to marry. Well, that is in large part due to women choosing to be with the wrong man. Such a man may just be happy to be in a marriage-light relationship where he gets sex and companionship but doesn’t have to tie the knot, in some cases because the woman’s not good enough for him to marry (he may or may not be delusional in thinking that but he thinks it nonetheless; if he could get a more attractive-to-him woman and eventually does then he was not delusional and it was the woman who was batting out of her league), in some cases he may be immature or, as hoellenhund2 says, he may not have enough money or career yet to feel ready to live up to his or her expectations for marriage.
Yes, to the extent that men are becoming more wary of marriage due to unfair laws this reduces their desire. However, it doesn’t mean they desire it less than women in their early 20’s. But if things continue as they have I imagine that at some point young men will desire it less and women will start to feel the partial marriage strike or postponement (I’m speculating about the future) and perhaps start to feel more anxiety and realize they better lock it down in their early 20’s when they’re at their peak sexual value instead of waiting til late 20’s or even later, and ending up a very educated and successful spinster like Kate Bollick.
I think the delay marriage thing is more a part of the university-educated and highly-ambitious cohort of women that tends to buy into the career is more important than marriage and motherhood at that stage in life message of feminism. Also, black women have the lowest marriage rates of any race/ethnicity of American women.
@hoellenhund2
I agree that most women aren’t built for continual casual sex and want to, and should, get something more substantive in return for sex than just the ego stroke and inevitable letdown of a pump and dump from a higher-sex-value guy.
But, since there’s a virtually limitless supply of guys that will perform such a pump and dump, it has to be the woman that decides that that’s not for her and limit herself to the men that will not fuck and flee.
Also, it’s interesting to not that, in 2012, 36% of black women 40-44 have never married.
Compare this with my projections (based on some reasonable though not infallible assumptions that the white-women never-married rate for 30-34 y/o’s would reach about 1/3 by 2017.
However, the 40-44 y/o rate would still only be about 14%.
But the white women are following in the path the black women have already trod (though they can’t be compared too much since they’re not populations of identical properties).
@Monika
One more point is that even if only a portion of a group has less desire and the rest stays the same then, on average, the whole group’s desire has decreased. So, in that sense, my saying that the 20-29 y/o cohort has less desire (than they did 50 years ago) would still be true, even if it’s only a portion of that cohort that desires it less.
I think those are the big issues, HH. It isn’t just that men are lied to. It isn’t just that men don’t get it.
It’s that the very traits that make us good and valuable to the world at large, do not at all reward us in the things we want most.
I think that’s the biggest kicker right there. Who the F wants to be a martyr?
@Hansolo
Thanks for the links. I couldn’t read the whole TIME article with the Match.com survey about men wanting to marry more than women. I did a Google search to see if anyone posted the whole article somewhere else and I found this.
“While overall, as many men as women wanted to marry, age played a big role in their preferences. Younger (ages 21 to 24) and older men (50 and up) were more favorably disposed to legal lifetime unions than their female peers.”
I wonder if most of the 21 to 24 year old men in this study only have a high school degree. It would really correlate with the results of the study below.
http://www.today.com/id/3088165/#.UmNxixAWUqc
I found other quotes from the TIME article that I found interesting.
“Men’s greater inclination toward parenthood, however, seems to hold across every age group. While more than half the single men ages 21 to 35 wanted kids, only 46% of the women did. After that, the difference widens further, and not just out of biological reality. Only 16% of childless women in the still fertile years from 35 to 44 wanted kids; 27% of the men did. Plus, more women than men were prepared to say definitively that they were skipping parenthood.”
“Women are much more interested in their independence than men are,” says Fisher. They value certain parts of their single lives more than men do: according to the survey, women are likelier to want to have their own bank accounts, their own interests, their own personal space and solo vacations, even if they’re in a committed relationship. They also care more about nights out with buddies.”
I know this only mention about parenthood and I might be wrong for connecting marriage and children together but it seems like women’s rate of marriage might be falling faster because of a lack of desire for children.
Monika,
That is interesting that the younger men wanted marriage more than the women of that age.
In the today article, it did say that the desired age of marriage, or when they start looking, was older for college men.
Interesting stuff about women valuing independence and freedom more than men and wanting kids less than men. As we know, due to the apex fallacy of looking at what the most attractive men do and want, the media and many women are of the opinion that all men can get sex with any woman they want, whenever they want, and are just immature playboys that never want to settle down. Of course, the reality is far different when you look at all men and not just the most popular ones. But such men are fairly invisible to women.
I find it fascinating how many women put on their online profiles that they don’t want kids or are unsure. Part of it is their intrinsic lack of desire but part of it is their perception that men don’t want kids and don’t want to come off as baby crazy. But again, that’s the apex fallacy at work, because as you pointed out, men want kids more than women (though no doubt other studies may find the opposite but the point is that there isn’t some huge phenomenon of men not wanting kids). But since women are more focused on the upper males and their perception of them as playboys that don’t want kids, then the women hide some of their desire for kids. But this article also made me think that many of them are perhaps being more forthright and really don’t want kids. It’s surprised me often on dates how many women say they don’t want kids or don’t want them until much older.
What do you think about the misconception of what most men are like based on what the top males want?
“I find it fascinating how many women put on their online profiles that they don’t want kids or are unsure. Part of it is their intrinsic lack of desire but part of it is their perception that men don’t want kids and don’t want to come off as baby crazy.”
I think they’d be better off just being honest and declaring:
1) My bio-clock is going off and I desperately want to have children and a family.
2) I’ll dedicate the next 20 years of my life to my husband & children and promise to be the best wife & mother anyone could hope for, if only some man will marry me.
Of course while #2 is exactly what most men want (and what most men are expected to do: dedicate their lives to their wife & children), it is a huge stumbling block for women. If they could get over that they’d find a husband. If they could stick to it, they’d be happily married for the rest of their lives.
@ Hansolo
If a woman who makes a false claim to not want children to attract alphas then I would assume they are more likely to get pregnant on “accident” to trap these men. I wish there were studies out there about women who do this. It would be hard to prove this since they wouldn’t admit it if they did.
I’m one of those women who would put down that I’m unsure about children *if I had to* if I was to date online. Mainly because I never had the urge to have them outside of being in love. I think it would be wise not to even mention about one’s desire for children on your profile. Women give too much information on their profile. They are opening themselves up for scrutiny if they honestly changed their mind later.
Monika, check out the article and comment on the http://www.justfourguys.com/sex-whats-in-it-for-you/ post about how 45% of Japanese young women don’t want sex but just over 25% of young men don’t. Seems like the women are more herbivore than men there.
@8to12
Yeah, I think men would find it refreshing if women would be more forthcoming if they want kids. As long as she isn’t below his league so that he just wants to fuck and flee, most men will welcome the fact that she wants kids and presumably marriage beforehand. It’s more in the attempt to quell the higher-value man’s tendencies to bolt from any hints of her wanting to tie him down with kids or commitment that cause the woman that wants kids to obfuscate.
She doesn’t want him to flee before she gets her chance at winning the lottery (his commitment) and will try to win him over by the charms of her radiant personality and her vacuuming vagina.
[…] seeping into the female herd’s collective awareness. The reality of elder-sluts living in permanent spinsterhood, along with the increased risk of divorce correlated with a woman’s number of previous sexual […]
[…] Summary: From 2000 to 2007, the rate of never-married white women that married in the next 5 years fell much faster than that of never-married white men. In 2000, the rates were higher for women aged 20-39. […]
I speak about this on http://www.redonkulas.com
[…] had previously shown that in 2000, white women had higher 5-yr rates of marrying than white men in all 4 cohorts from […]
hello, i am a cool guy looking for a cool white girl to fall in love with, i mean a long term relationship that will lead to marriage with promise to always be there for her, i am a easy love without pains….. just try me & see how good i am. i don’t boost but i am act out here contact email. frankwestly@outlook.com
Great article.
The fact so many people posted shows a lot of white men are worried about their future with white women.
The cause? Its obvious. White women are confused…..they say they want freedom, but also say they want the Fairytale Wedding and marriage. Stats show most white women who marry are educated but also marrying educated men…..with money. ie White women want to marry into money. That leaves lots of women with unrealistic expectations about marriage and money, so they choose independent sexual lives and free-wheeling careers, and all the risks that come with those choices. This also includes drug use, partying, travelling, numerous affairs and lovers, mistresses, seeking sugar daddies, stripping, bar tending, and all sorts of immoral and irrational behavior and careers.
By the time white women are in their 40’s, the party is over…..and they now look at their traditional other’s advice from 20 years ago, and think wow…..I wasted my time with losers, its time to find prince charming. But he is looooooong gone. So the pool of available white men for these women is zero.
Now we know white women are having fewer children and having MORE children out of wedlock, many interracial. We have white women shacking up with the “bad boys”; the losers and the unemployed, or going down into drugs and pills to cope, stripping, etc; and their wild lives have ended at dead ends. Long ago they rejected the “good guys” and so lost their chance at love and security and in many cases financial security with a good marriage partner. That’s fine until you realize white women still have this hidden desire to marry a rich white man and settle down. But alas…..they are a dying breed. So, they are trapped by their dual-belief systems which are in conflict.
Men, and white men especially, don’t have time for all that drama…..so many of us are marrying interracially and finding the love, and respect, and GREAT interest from non-white women. Its very easy now for white men to find brides…..because most non-white women are not into these games, and complexities. They come from very traditional married parents and families, so being loyal and loving one man is very easy. Tis is from my direct experience.
The ONLY way we will solve this is to have the generation of women 48 or younger raise their girls with more realistic value systems and reject the fairy tale wedding and the fake need to marry the good guy but desire the bad boys. All that fails and doesn’t work in America for white women……it just leads them to avoid marriage till they are 50 and by then they are alone and without family. Young white women who are having children need to teach their kids that money and sex and power and selfishness is not the answer……education, loyalty, moral, values, and love is. Until the younger mothers and fathers change the dialogue, white women are trapped by unrealistic expectations about men that doom them NOT to marriage, and then condemn themselves to immoral lives and failed marriages, if marriage at all.
White men should NEVER marry white women. to many white men fall into the trap of alimony and excessive child support. White men need to learn from the black boys, use them, have fun and they “respect” you. go for the slutty 20 something white women. Stay in shape in your free time and acquire money especially fro retirement when all the black boys and white girls welfare and social security medicare runs out in about 10-15 yrs! White men wioll be set due to their financial skills and low cost lifestyle. Then just buy the 20 somethings when your in your 60’s. win win all the way around. i am 40 white and never been married. Funny how I am also debt free and get 20 somethings.
Also white men need to play that they all have money. You can rent expensive cars for dates, buy imatation type business clothes, suits are sometimes cheaper than dress clothes and sports type clothes. The racial sterotype is that ALL white men are rich. So play it off, and bang the hot 20 somethings and get them pregnant. That renforces our race and the welfare state can work to our advantage since the women will be using wefarer in order to survive. Your payroll taxes will finally go to your own kids instead of someone else. Get yourselves to a gym, change the diet a bit and work on the acting. Amazing how the hotties fall all over you. Then when they have white babies they can go out with the poor but “bad boy” black guys. stop being the suckers and use your minds and navigate the system instead of complaing or slaving to it.
Women have walked all over men…
They do not have equality in America because they have complete privelege…
Women have thousands of choices for dating and marriage through social media…Which has created such ego that you just dont even want to deal with the average western women anymore…
These same women literally indoctrinated and brainwashed to think they are princesses through walt disney princess movies…
Maternal presumption guaranteeing a woman gets the home even if she cheats on her husband…
Lifetime alimony….payments for past use of a vagina for a womans entire life…
Child support.
No fault divorce settlements which is literally prostitution…
Welfare…the safety net of women throwing men out of the home for child support and welfare checks…
The soft definition of workplace sexual harrasement where a woman only has to basically state that she felt like she was sexually harrassed when she may have not been for cash…The only proof being “she felt like she was harassed.”Hell,If I was a chick I might abuse that too!!
Judges throwing out prenups.
Sperm donors in some cases made to pay child support…
Men who arent even biologically fathers paying child support for being “father like,”to children that arent even theirs…
Men have no reproductive rights as women abort babies without male consent…
Women being given jobs over men and college admission through affirmative action which completely discriminates against men…
Women in criminal courts getting lesser or no sentences for the same crime a man would commit…
Women now commit half of all domestic violence…
Women initaite 75 % of the 50% plus of marriages that end in divorce….
Women are increasingly obese,shallow,goldigging,narcassistic,combative and very masculine…
Covering themselves with tattoos,cutting their hair off making themselves look masculine….Many women refuse to exercise…
They require us to be alpha male tough guys,atm machines,sperm donors for welfare checks and child support,they require us to be the heavy lifting,dirty jobs guys….Require us to be alpha males but then want us to hang with their gay friends and cry on their shoulders the next minute….
While women refuse their traditional roles of atleast looking and acting feminine,making a meal or keeping a clean home…
If I am expected to play my traditional role,why do women refuse theirs…
Women need to decide if they want privilege or equality……because at this point they own the gambling casino and are the dealers also in the casino’s….
What has happened is simply put like this….
The only way I could compete with a woman,is to become a woman!!
Which is what happened with feminism…Women are our “equals,”simply put to be equal to men,women became men!!!
Feminism that inspired many of these laws is an outright disease….
Femism wasnt about getting women to work,it was about getting twice the taxes out of the American people and destroying women,children,the men,chivalry and the family unit as a whole….
Western women through the ages have always had the privelege of living off of men…..having men take care of them….
Now things are so out of wack……women have privelege times 100….
Its how we became a country of 400 pound women with princess attitudes…who are broke single mothers who live with their mothers….Who for some reason think they are gods reincarnate on earth…
While the obese,broke single father living with his mother is seen by women in the same place in life,as a “looser.”
This whole country has been upended by feminism….
It is becoming such a raw deal now…..the dating,marriage and children game…
That men are finally walking away….
Its a fight or flight…monkey see,monkey do world….
I monkey see and monkey dont all my male friends that have been divorced,bankrupted and begging to see their own children as mom moves in her new boyfriend in the same house that her ex husband is paying for!!
Women have gone to far…and on another note….Such ego,narcassism and entitlement that western women have would do exactly what such grandiose sense of self worth would do….and thats destroy the person…
So its no wonder that western women have destroyed their bodies,their health,their minds and spirits….
When a woman tells you who is obviously completely overweight,that if you dont like her then screw you….
That is actually her inner self telling you that some sucker somehwere will have her,that she doesnt care about herself or her appearance….and that she feels completely entitled….
I dont know about you…but average is my fantasy concerning American women and we cant even find that….
The average woman who is obese,angry,combative,masculine,broke,no job or future and doesnt care to better herself who has someone elses kids who is a two…..Has made the average woman who is a 6 out of ten feel like she is a ten so you cant deal with her either…lol!!
I dream of an average woman…who has average looks,some meat on her bones here and there…who makes her own money who would bring average finances,morality,looks and femininity….Is so laughable at this point….
I might as well take up drinking again…lol
Because Russia is the father of no fault divorce for people who read…No fault divorce caused the starvation of millions in russia as when no fault divorce was imposed ….women left their men in droves as for each child a woman was paid one thirf of a mans wages….So women left….
The men in russia stopped farming……who’s women left them and became alcoholics….because they became literal slaves…Men who werent married,just like myself pulled out of the dating and marriage game after seeing their brothers and fathers bankrupted and destroyed,so they pulled out of the game also….
Stalin after seeing what no fault divorce had done…..got rid of no fault divorce in russia and instituted it on any countries it took over or could affect politically….
Men are simply realizing….not only are women increasingly not even physically attractive…but there is simply no reason to ever involve yourself in the game of marriage,no fault divorce,lifetime alimony,child support or maternal presumption…
Quite simply because American “women”are initiating 75 percent of all divorces…
What has happened to our once great nation???????????
If you look at the second graph regarding “Never married Non-Hispanic White Women by Age” you’ll see that in the 45-49 demographic the difference has only increased by a few percentage points overall in the last decade. By focusing only on the difference seen in the 30-34 group, you are missing the point. Most of these women are still eventually getting married….why do you care if women get married when they are older? Obviously someone wanted to marry them. Also the data from the comparative graph for me still shows that more men have not married by the time they are 50 than women. This entire premise that is somehow supposed to scare women into getting married earlier is false.
(Editor’s Note: There are some questions you have not answered that I have asked you on part one of this post. Find and answer them to my satisfaction, and all will be well. If not, expect to continue being the Incredible Vanishing Plain Jane! As always, your choice.
)