Dalrock on why men should avoid women who’ve wasted “a lot of courtship” and “used up their most attractive/fertile years.”
Woman with surplus courtship
Dalrock, a manosphere traditionalist with a great love of charts and statistics and other accoutrements of SCIENCE, has managed to figure out a way to stretch “don’t be so picky, ladies, or you’ll get old and ugly and no man will ever want you” out to 1500 words.
Here are a few of them:
Men foot the searching costs in the marriage and sexual marketplace (MMP & SMP). This means bearing most of the risk of rejection and expending the bulk of the resources to facilitate the process of meeting and getting to know one another.
Oh dear. We’re off to a very unpromising start here.
As the ones who bear the costs of courtship, men have a strong incentive to minimize the number of women they court and the overall duration of time spent in the process. However, as the consumers of courtship, women have an incentive to draw the process out as long as possible and to receive courtship from as many men as possible.
Here’s some surveillance footage of an average American woman being courted by several men.
But now — get this — the ladies are waiting longer to marry!
Just think about what this does to the dude navigating the marriage market hoping to “maximize his Pareto efficiency,” if you know what I mean and I think you do.
He needs to manage risk vs reward. When courting, there are two fundamental risks. These are the risk of wasting resources on the wrong women, and the risk of rejection harming the man’s reputation/MMV.
So watch out, ladies, because if you wait too long, guys are going to decide you’re not much of a bargain!
For a man who is managing the risks of courtship outlined above, the age of a woman is very important. The older a woman is, the more likely it is that she is very picky and/or not seriously looking for a husband.
Exactly! Because women never change their mind because they’re, you know, in a different stage of their life or anything.
Older women also are less attractive from a courtship perspective because they have used up more of their most attractive/fertile years, and while their attractiveness for marriage has declined their expectations for courtship have only increased.
This reminds me of that famous joke, you know, where that woman approaches Winston Churchill at a party and says, “Sir, you are drunk.”
And he replies: “And you, Bessie, have used up your most attractive/fertile years. But I shall be sober in the morning, and you will still have used up your most attractive/fertile years.”
That Churchill, what a card!
Consider the 25% of current early thirties White women who still haven’t married; unless they are terminally unattractive an awful lot of courtship has almost certainly been wasted on them.
Are there really a lot of guys who look back on the women they dated in their twenties and think, “boy, I wasted a lot of courtship on those gals! I mean, I wasted nearly 14 courtship on Jessa alone!” (Also, who knew that the women are always the ones to blame when heterosexual couples in their twenties break up?)
They aren’t just bad bets for courtship today, but (in retrospect) they clearly were bad bets for courtship for the last 15 years. …
Put simply, the extended delay of marriage by women has placed marriage minded men in a dilemma; older women are (generally speaking) known bad bets for courtship, but half of early twenties women are also poor bets for courtship.
Well, you could always marry a dude.
There are only two logical ways men can respond to women’s extension of courtship.
Wait, really? Please, please, please, let one of the ways be “marry a dude.”
The first logical choice is to recognize that these women are debasing marriage, and decide to “court” for sex and not marriage.
Damn. Anyway, sexual relationships are fine, but you are aware that there are other kinds of relationships — sorry, “courting” — besides sex and marriage, right?
Ok, we still have one more. Marry a dude. Marry a dude. Marry a dude.
But while “courting” for sex is a logical choice, it is not a moral choice, and we still do see men courting for marriage. For these men, having a fairly low age cutoff makes a great deal of sense.
That’s your, er, “solution?” Marry a teenager? Or a woman at most in her early twenties?
As Dalrock knows, but doesn’t want to believe, those who marry when they’re very young are much more likely to divorce than those who marry when they’re older. For evidence, see this chart, which I found elsewhere on Dalrock’s own blog:
But hope springs eternal for modern misogynistic manospherian marriage market minded men (MMMMMMM).
Posted on November 18, 2013, in a woman is always to blame, evil old ladies, evil sexy ladies, evil women, marriage strike, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, oppressed white men, patriarchy, playing the victim, reactionary bullshit and tagged marriage strike, misogyny, traditionalism. Bookmark the permalink. 1,428 Comments.
Women are the consumers of courtship now? I thought we were the supply curve.
I thought these dues were against marriage, because she’s just going to divorce them and leave them on the hook for child…er, bon-bon support forever. So why would they care about fertility?
But if you want a young woman who has nothing to compare you to…oh, I get it now.
LOL
Oh fuck, he actually made acronyms for them.
Um, in BioTruth talk, isn’t this backwards? The women are the ones who will carry and give birth, the men are essentially sperm donors. Wouldn’t the women be the picky ones? Don’t other MRA types actually SAY THAT!?
And of course the rest is just typical “marry a teenager” stuff. Yawn.
Have fun getting a divorce, boys.
In other words: ladies, it’s your fault that these misogynistic men don’t get married, so you should just wed the first guy you meet and have his babies, even if he’s an asshole.
I guess you marry one teenager and, when she wises up and divorces you, you go looking for another one? Of course there will always be young women available, because every young woman dreams of marrying a middle aged or elderly misogynist.
Also, seriously, ew, why would anyone besides fellow teens want to bang teenagers? They don’t have experience and are rather immature as a whole and…
Oh wait…
I’m gonna go on the record saying Dalrock doesn’t make courtship sound like fun for the suppliers OR the consumers. But if all demand for the product ceased tomorrow, he’d just be complaining about how those pesky women/consumers are so fickle we ruined a perfectly good economy or something.
It sounds like he should work on increasing his courtship output. Maybe he should upgrade his courtship refinery.
As a teenager, I used to obsessively doodle “cloudiah <3 some random middle-aged sexist" over and over, while day dreaming and twirling my hair around my fingers.
That’s why my next husband is going to be an elderly sexist. Hypergamy.
Ya, as a teenager, whenever much older men would hit on me, my first thought was always “wow, this guy obviously really cares about me and wants to marry and take care of me,” not “this guy is totally creepy, halp halp.”
Has he considered forming a courtship co-op with his fellow MRAs? That can really help with keeping costs down.
This kind of “traditionalist” thinking is like playing Jenga: more justifications and nonsense get loaded to on top of the desired structures, even as the foundational reasons are knocked out from underneath it.
When I was a teenager, I used to dream that someone like Roosh would choose me as his wife. I’d tend to his every need, and he’d call me a bitch, and he’d cheat on me, and we’d totally be a happy family. It’d be TRU LUV based on BIOTRUTHS. And I’d be a proud wife, even when he sleeps with teenagers after our honeymoon. *dramatic sigh!*
Is there anything more romantic than conceptualising relationships through a capitalist lens? I think not.
Nothing says “husband material” quite like treating humans beings as commodities.
I guess pretending that they have options helps them get through their day. It’s that or sit in the corner crying into a pint of ice cream.
If the first sentence is complete bullshit, should I even bother reading the rest? Maybe I’ll just read the parts that David wrote.
Otter brain-bleach:
This Sexual Marketplace and Sexual Market value stuff seems to be the new thing with the Game afficionados. Certainly Theodore Beale has devoted several blogs on Alpha Game to explaining/defending it. As pointed out above, this is definitely an excuse, excellent in their eyes, for pursuing very young women. What this guy does not bring up, at least not in the passages quoted, is that SMV also is based on attractiveness as well as age. And women, of course lose their SMV much more quickly than men… So we’re back to the idea that women are of worth only for their youth and beauty, an idea that these guys seem incapable of escaping. Which sets them up for disappointment and emphasizes/reinforces their misogyny. Some times I get so tired. Lather, rinse, repeat, ad infinitum.
Hm. David has mentioned the fact that there’s a higher risk of divorce if you marry young before. I always thought that me and Husband married young (I was 24 and he was 22), but we’re in the second oldest category in that chart.
A colleague of mine claimed, on the other hand, when someone remarked that me and Husband married so extremely young (the average age here for first marriage is 33 for women and 35,5 for men… just checked the statistics in order to confirm that my experience of friends and colleagues getting married in their thirties wasn’t a fluke) that the risk of divorce is lower if you marry younger. I guess both he and David could be right if a) Sweden differ from the USA or b) both countries have similar trends, but the risk of divorce first declines with a higher age and then rises again when the ages of the people involved get even higher.
In any case, it would be a pretty useless strategy to base all your decisions in life on the assumption that you and everyone around you are gonna be statistically average in everything.
More brain bleach (sorry about the music, I couldn’t find the original):
Um, didn’t he say at the beginning there that the men spend the most on courtship and are at higher risk for rejection and such? If that’s the case, there’s another choice to add at the end of his treatise here: encourage women to actively court men too. You know, encourage women to ask men out, take men to dinner, buy men things? The only reason men are expected to be the ones to actively court women is because women are expected to sit and wait around for men to ask them out. Wouldn’t it be better to just start telling women that it’s okay to ask men out?
No? Well, okay then.
That guy with the beard has got some moves.
Search costs? What does he think he’s doing, looking for a house or car to buy?
And “courtship”? Seriously? What
decadecentury is he living in?Feck, a seventeenth-century man has a more up-to-date attitude to relationships than Dudblock.
Terminally Unattractive: Thrash metal
Two Logical Ways: Electronica duo
Bad Bets for Courtship: Country blues. Their greatest hit: “Wasting Resources on the Wrong Women.”
Early Thirties White Women: All-female garage rock band. Their greatest hit: “Not Seriously Looking for a Husband (We Just Wanna Rock)”
“that the risk of divorce is lower if you marry younger”
It could also be true if you consider all marriages and not just first marriages. Second or third marriages with the prior ended with divorce have ( I think) a higher risk of divorce. and also happen at a higher age.
Terminally unattractive = all MRAs, PUAs, MGTOW, etc. They could be the ultimate distillation of male beauty physically and they’d still be terminally unattractive.
I also wasn’t aware that “unattractive” was a terminal condition. Being “ugly” doesn’t usually kill a person, the way, say heart disease or cancer does.
Consumers of Courtship – Doo-wop
Risk of Rejection – Punk
Terminally Unattractive – Emo (2nd album – Incel Blues)
Extended Delay of Marriage – Improv Jazz
Debasing Marriage – Psychobilly
Freebasing Marriage – Trance
Freemage, it appears that someone forgot to oil the otters.
Apparently “being unattractive to men who can barely hide their pedophilic tendencies” is deadly for women.
This lot are terminally unattractive to me in the senses that they’re going to be repulsive lifelong. I don’t want to add the other half of that thought, it might be triggering.
Doesn’t it not matter if women are “terminally unattractive” anyway since we can all apparently get laid no problem?
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
baileyrenee – good point, and aren’t the guys trying to get married just betas anyway, grateful for the alphas’ leavings?
Hey, I have that single!
Kitteh – I guess the logic is betas = marry whoever they happen to love, Alphas = marry for BioTruths?
If we’re terminally unattractive past the age of (whatever) does that mean that wrinkles literally kill?
(I await the explanation as to how people whose ugliness is supposed to kill can get laid any time they want, no problem.)
chibigodzilla: I’m adding my “BWAHAHAHAHAHA!” Zing!
And what’s that saying? “Beauty is only skin deep, but stupid goes all the way to the bones.” I think that applies nicely to Mr. Dalrock.
If wrinkles were death rays for misogynists, I’d never bother with foundation again.
I must say, when Terminally Unattractive (Thrash Metal) and Terminally Unattractive (Emo) collaborated for A Courtship Perspective (Less Attractive) it was ambitious, but ultimately not the best work from either group.
Even Ron White knows better than these guys:
(Still some eye-rolling parts, but for the most part, pretty good, Ron)
Random but does anyone have the link to that beaver trying to cross the road? Someone posted it here and I want it for FemBorg’s cuteness section. (Thanks for the cute banhammer!)
This one?
A Courtship Perspective (Less Attractive) was met with tepid reviews and a general round of head scratching from music critics.
I would listen to Early Thirties White Women, most definitely. I’d also probably enjoy Two Logical Ways, as long all the tunes were intrumentals.
In other news, Nutmeg just unplugged my modem. Bad kitty!
Without wanting to gazump your blog, I wrote a response to Dalrock on my blog. Basically, I think the solution to the cost/benefit dilemma he raises is to dump American dating rituals altogether and take up British ones – head down to the pub with your mates and all get wasted and see who you’ve landed in bed with the next morning. Much cheaper and less chance of rejection!
I had an entire poem typed up and stuff, but it boiled down to “Ehgads, so wrong”, so I’ll just write that:
Ehgads, so wrong.
—
The “solution” to the “Cost / benefit” dillemma he raises is to realize that “Cost / benefit” is bullshit when applied to social rituals as designed to create social events. It’s bad enough to yammer on about a sexual market place, once you start talking marriage market place (MMP!? MMP!!??!? There are not enough expression marks to express my withering inability to comprehend just how much someone saying that does not understand anything even approaching economics).
Terms like “inflation” and “investment” and “supply and demand” and “pareto optimality” and “consumers” and “producers” and “price elasticity of demand” and “Keyneesian macro economic expansion” and “Neo-classical understanding of labor market forces confluxing with wage stickiness and market instability” has no place when talking about sex, and much, much less of a place when you talk about things like marriage, wherein two people decided to do something together that is a social ritual with very little cost.
I’m going to type out a very, very long blog post one day about why this is all wrong, if it keeps coming up. And then I’d have to get a blog. And then i’d have a vehicle for my own ongoing talking, and then I’d frankly just never stop q:
Wow. Worst attempt to scare young women into their beds…EVER.
Middle-aged/elderly men plus very young women equals mismatched sex drives…on average. Also, we know you guys are insecure and like the idea of a woman who has never seen a penis before. Of course dudebros hate the idea of women with smarts and good self-esteem, because deep down they’re always wondering “Who the hell would marry me?” Delusional Answer — a hypothetical 19-year-old who doesn’t know any better.
I’m not sure I grasp the internal logic here. Women are getting married later in life than they used to, which means a woman in her 30s or 40s more likely to want to marry you, so if you want to find somebody to marry… pursue young women?
I guess it’s less about logic and more about advocating preying on teenagers.
Viscaria, how’s Bailey?
I’m just walking home to check on him. I think he’s fine, but I want to take a look at him tonight.
Fingers crossed!
Baileys is all okay :-3
Sorry for the OT.
Kitties are NEVER off-topic. I’m so glad he’s okay, the naughty string-eater.
Wait a minute….if men hate women so much now and are refusing “courtship” Then why are all my female friends dating and/or married. Most men seem to like women just fine and vica/versa…could it be that red pillers are just full of crap?
Fibinachi, I know of a group blog that’s taking submissions, if you wanted to write that post after all.
@Shiraz
“Like the idea of a woman who’s never seen a penis before”..
Well not even that. See, being a slut is horrible, but being inexperienced means that your crime is not pleasing peens at the expense of all else basically. Of not being of utility to the men. So It’s the old madonna/whore thing again. it’s not as if you will ever win. I don’t have to explain why these guys hate ‘sluts’ so damn much, but if not that then your a barren wasteland of asexuality since women can always get laid if they really wanted to, because socially anxious women don’t exist. Obviously she is training to be a nun or waiting for marriage or doing what Jesus wants or some shit, so don’t waste your time, dude (blah blah)..
These dudes whine about sluts of course, but then the same guys have made similar assumptions about female virgins sucking in bed and hating sex put simply.
Slut shaming is not even about favouring this sort of inexperienced girl you would think that they would want. Nope. It’s about hating on women as always. Anyways, Just wanted to point that out quick.
Lol @ chibigodzilla. It seems like my taste for thrash metal is entirely appropriate then.
Yay tags work on phones too :) I thought they might not for some reason
Ha, Coolies, the html monsters are just waiting for you to get confident and then …
You’re right, it’s about hating women. Whatever we do (or rather, however we exist) is wrong, according to these morons.
Funny how they’re the ones whining about nobody wanting them …
In my wasteful twenties, I used to leave the courtship running all the time when I left the house. Now that I’m in a pickier stage of life, I’ve installed compact fluorescents to conserve the precious, dwindling male attention. The savings have been incredible.
Still, I worry about how society will manage now that we’ve hit Peak Douche. Will we have to rely on dirtier, less efficient forms of validation?
Don’t go for the low-wattage courtship lights, though. They claim to be the equivalent of 75W but they’re really dim.
They can give you a nasty headache. Plus, they’re incredibly unflattering to all skin types.
Yes, it’s a strain trying to do any reading or knitting or anything useful at all, with those dimbulbs. They make the atmosphere quite murky.
1) Courtship, repeated a thousand times and used as a verb, noun, and adjective, is more than a little creepy. Also, certain elements of his bizarre diatribe lead me to believe he doesn’t really understand what the word “courtship” means. But either way, it’s kinda gross.
2) I didn’t realize menz reputations were damaged by being rejected. Their egos, sure. Their feelings, yeah. Welcome to rejection in general. But reputations, seriously tho. Not once in all my years of dating… courtship, sorry, wasteful courtship, has another person leaned over suddenly and whispered “Hey, you shouldn’t be seen with this guy out in public, he was REJECTED, TWICE!”
3) However, once someone leaned over to me at a bar and whispered “I see yr going out with Mr. X, you should be careful, he assaulted my friend on their third date”, whereupon Mr. X’s courtship was promptly wasted, cuz yeah, I listen when someone gets to the point of daring to tell completely strangers shit like that. Oh, wait. Was his courtship wasted, or did I waste the courtship? Damn you, Dalrock, now I don’t know!
4) Is it just me, or is Dalrock a totally great LoTRs type name? Or maybe Star Wars. “Go back from whence you came, Dalrock! Forthwith thou art banished to the Courtship of DOOM!”
I dunno, Dalrock just reminds me of Gyprock, a company that makes plasterboard and stuff. Inspiring it ain’t. :D
Of course being rejected once = being rejected forever and having their reputations trashed, because the Feminist Hivemind means all women know when one rejected a (totally noble and deserving) dude.
OT:
1) Margaret Atwood is in my city giving a talk at a theater. I got there a few minutes before she was due to speak and the theater was over capacity with ≈820 people in a space regulated to ≈750 people. My sister is lucky enough to be among those who found a seat. (An older sister is stewing in Edinburgh because she isn’t stateside to hear Margaret Atwood speak.)
2) I watched most of “North Country” in a class about women and politics tonight. “North Country” is a movie dramatization of “Class Action: The Story of Lois Jenson and the Landmark Case That Changed Sexual Harassment Law” by Clara Bingham and Laura Leedy Gansler, both of which are about the hostile environment sexual harassment that Lois Jenson faced when she worked at a taconite mine in Minnesota. To make things short: I am enraged. It’s not because Margaret Atwood has come to town and I missed out on hearing her. It’s because of what Lois Jensen and the other women who worked at the same mine had to bear, and because I realize that such environments still exist in the United States and online.
I know that I have problems, but I feel like keeping a stiff upper lip when I think of what women have faced and fought.
[Note: "hostile environment sexual harassment" is not a typo but a term differentiating it from quid pro quo sexual harassment, where a supervisor seeks sexual favors in return for something else.]