"Where have all the good men gone?" Here we go again…

[red_johnParticipant 24]

Dear all,

I guess all of you have heard versions of such rants… Mainly made by women complaining that marriage prospects are bleak for them. That men should man up, stop behaving like children etc etc…

Nothing new here. Until I stumbled upon a very interesting study that applies the same “marriageability criteria” to both men and women. My first impression was “all hail equality!”:

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2014/10/08-marriageability-employment-childbearing-sawhill

 

Interestingly the result is that, as always, media have it backwards! Truly marriageable women (no kids, employed etc…), under equal criteria, have a ratio of 162 to 100 in their favor. I thought I should bring it up here.

 

It confirms what I always thought and frankly, I am not even happy about it. The conclusion is AGAIN that the odds are rigged against men.

[StargazerParticipant 12505]

Well yeah, when you consider that men have traditionally been willing to marry almost any female, regardless of her socio-economic status and that females only want to marry tall men with more money and better prospects than they already have, it would seem that the numbers are skewed in favor of men.

For a female, asking where all the good men are is just like going into a donut shop and asking “Where are all the good donuts?” The shop is f~~~ing FULL of donuts… you just don’t know how to choose one that’s good for YOU because none of them are dipped in gold and sprinkled with diamonds and that’s the only thing your kind is capable of recognizing as having any sort of value whatsoever.

I swear.

[tsParticipant 109]

Being employed is and never was a serious criterion for a “marriageable woman”. It always was about a healthy body and a healthy mind (100 % of western woman are out of the equation now) and maybe the dowry. I would also set a maximum age to 24 (the optimal age is 16-18). The study looks at women aged 25-34, which are all not marriageable, because they are just too old to bear healthy children. A simple biological fact.

Of course, that doesn’t hinder people with psychology and sociology degrees to create their own distortion of reality. They don’t get anything.

[red_johnParticipant 24]

docfenderson> Call me crazy, but I just do not deem hairdressers or secretaries fit for marriage. I dated one of each. Kind of pretty. But that’s pretty much it. I didn’t stick around for long – they were a pain in the ass. But the secretary just got married. Why do guys marry such girls? Don’t they realize this is retarded?
Also I think you can label the ones that unable to find a husband as misfits… The study says clearly they have the upper hand. If a woman cannot find a husband, she must be bottom 10% of the population! I mean the criteria is just so low… But she will dress it as “I am demanding” “I am a strong woman nobody can handle”. It is more likely that she is just bottom stupid and ugly.

[StargazerParticipant 12505]

Agreed, men these days are realizing that partnering with a female with few marketable skills and little ambition is not a winning proposition… but in the days before “feminine equality”, women were not judged at all by their ability to generate income but rather by their fecundity (as determined by youth, health, body proportions, etc) and their ability to “carry their weight” by raising a man’s children and managing his home.

Of course, females don’t want to do these things any more and claim that they would rather work for themselves than be kept by a man… and in this light, the only meaningful way a man can judge a female’s suitability for partnership is either how close to equal she is to him or the ratio of physical desirability to psychological tolerability she presents.

Setting aside for a moment the unequal and significant risk I would be incurring by signing a marriage contract, I’ve yet to meet a female who I felt was anywhere close to my equal in terms of intelligence, ambition and wealth generation ability, not to mention emotional stability, taste and style or any number of other criteria I might choose to apply. I’m not saying she doesn’t exist, just that I haven’t met her yet and I’ve been looking. So for me it really comes down to “how much do I desire her versus how much of a pain in the ass is it to have her around.”

You might guess how that’s working out.

[MendokusaiParticipant 256]

I don’t know,call me crazy but if I was ever to get married (in some other space/time continuum) I would choose a womin from a traditionally female occupation like Hairdresser,Secretary,Waitress ect,because they are used to serving men already and don’t think too much about political ideals. Their idea of the news is ET and they are content to be a stay at home mom while letting the man be the breadwinner.

[red_johnParticipant 24]

steld> This is a fair take. Assuming that the hairdresser, the secretary or the waitress have a traditional mentality… But I believe the assumption is wrong… Probably you want to believe that women with such professions expect traditional roles by choice. Here is my take with a tentative argumentation:

1. Speaking from personal experience, the hairdresser (29) and the secretary (31) i dated were huge party animals. Nowadays, #yolo and party mentality is for everyone! It was successfully made so democratic that I might even think there is a correlation: low socio-economic status in a world that favors women education-wise = she wasted her youth in fruitless occupations. They are the mildly prettier girls/early bloomers that were too cool for school.

Perhaps women from such professions expect traditional roles because they don’t have a choice! It’s either “I am all traditional honey… You’re a lawyer right?”, or marry the plumber.
2. The most traditional girls are frankly quite educated. They come from solid 2 parents families, where the dad put them to school and made sure they did all their homework. The mom played her role too.

What do you think?

[AntaresParticipant 208]

I’ll agree with Red and coming from personal experience, women in traditional female occupations have their own hazards.

My marriage was struggling and due to circumstances we lived a distance apart. She wanted something better than a minimum wage job, so I suggested a trade. After thinking about her options, she decided to become a hair dresser, and I paid for her schooling.  In hindsight I kind of laugh about how I struck a death blow to my marriage doing this. It seemed so innocent at the time.

You have to keep in mind that women are VERY susceptible to the “hive mind”. I agree with Red, that most of those women just wanted to go out and “have fun” and party. I unwittingly sent my wife into a den of snakes.

I was only able to stay with her on the weekends, and the moment I stepped through the door she was already mad at me due to conversations she had with co-workers throughout the week. She’d start babbling about random stuff, and I’d look at her puzzled wondering where she came up with all that s~~~. As long as I’d known her, she hadn’t been or sounded like that.  By the time the weekend was over I’d manage to deprogram about 50% of the s~~~ they filled her head with, only to have her return to her job and pick up more of their garbage. She’d suddenly be unhappy over trivial things she’d never even considered before, and so on.

This is one of the things I’d warn younger guys who think they can find the golden NWALT.  Maybe you can find the perfect woman you agree with and she seems sane. But all that’s required is one bad apple in a group she falls in with years down the road, and she can go bad very quickly.

Price is what you pay, value is what you get. -- Ben Graham

[TheNinjaUWannaH8Participant 386]

@docfenderson’s Quote of 2015 so far:  “For a female, asking where all the good men are is just like going into a donut shop and asking “Where are all the good donuts?” The shop is f~~~ing FULL of donuts… you just don’t know how to choose one that’s good for YOU because none of them are dipped in gold and sprinkled with diamonds…”

That’s the best analogy to describe “Where are all of the Good Men’ (WAATGM)!

[StargazerParticipant 12505]

Lol, thanks man. Honestly it took me a few tries to write that because I just couldn’t figure out a simile that was as stupid as the real thing.

[fporrettoParticipant 26]

I’m not sure it makes sense to mate-search among single women according to their occupations. Granted that some woman-heavy occupations tend more toward femininity than others, a man intent on acquiring a wife only needs one….and he might encounter her anywhere.

The most attractive, feminine, appreciative woman I’ve ever known was a materials engineer, and a very highly placed one at that. I often think of her wistfully, regretting that we didn’t manage to make it a lifetime thing. All right, so she hid the fact that she was on powerful drugs to control her paranoid delusions, stopped taking them, and tried to murder me in my sleep. Everyone’s allowed an eccentricity or two, right?

[ScottParticipant 0]

It makes a lot of sense to mate-search among single women according to their occupations. Like many others, I had disastrous consequences with my marriage. I supported a woman for twelve years. The last time we were together, “she” ended up being arrested for abuse. Funny thing, she got the better of me in court. We never had children, but for some reason I still owed her a ton to money because I made more than her. She also got the house! I was lucky, however, my support finally ended. After ten years of marriage in some states, the support goes on indefinitely. You poor bastards who are stuck in that situation, you have my empathy.

Anyway, it’ll be a cold day in hell before I marry someone whose income isn’t comparable to mine. Actually, it’ll be a cold day in hell before I get married anyway.

[fporrettoParticipant 26]

Ah, but you’re arguing for evenhanded, objectively defined criteria, you running-dog lackey of the patriarchal white Euromale conspiracy, you! These days, there is no “objective truth.” Only her desires and feelings count — and if you dare to claim that yours are as important as hers, you’re being phallocentric!

(Just about the only good thing about contemporary feminism is how easy it is to ridicule it: just reply to it in its own terms.)

[Anonymous 5]

The real question is “Where did all the good women go”? But men don’t ask dumb things like that because we already know the answer. Men didn’t change. We are the same as always. Women on the other hand have turned into HUGE bitches within the last 50 years.

[Author]

Posts