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).
Heh. Our brother just doesn’t call us anything at all now; he’s still adjusting. I don’t think our parents ever actually learned my last name.
I look forward to the day I can change our legal name. Our current legal name is one I’d rather never be called again.
An old friend of Mr C’s, who’s also Chinese but the youngest in her family, used to joke that whereas her older siblings were “Big Sister”, “Big Brother”, and so on, what they all called her was “Hey You”, which was an accurate reflection of her place in the sibling heirarchy.
At some point my lovely sister took to calling me Puta, and my mother loved it. Ah, family.
I also don’t think incest is necessarily an issue if the partners are adults and roughly the same age, within same generation or not. Growing up together might complicate issues (on which I’m certainly not an expert), but people who grew up together are unlikely to be sexually attracted to each other in the first place.
Societal attitudes could be a problem, if you consider that an ethical argument. I dunno how much you can socially and legally “get away” with incest if you’re related by adoption rather than blood.
As for reproduction and genetic issues, evaluating risks (of offspring health problems and unwanted pregnancy) is important. Same applies to any couples who just happen to have a high risk of incompatible alleles. I should note that while full siblings are 1/2 genetic relatives, first cousins are only 1/8 genetic relatives.
I heard recently in Iceland they started marketing a smartphone app that helps you check your family records, ostensibly in case you were going to accidentally have a one-night stand with your second cousin or something. I just don’t see how that could be construed as incest if you had never even heard of said second cousin. Also I’d think, considering the population dynamics of Iceland, that the average person is about as close to you genetically than your legally recognized second cousins.
I’d rather have an app that rakes through my partner’s Google hits and warns if there’s association with manosphere sites.
This is why they need to marry teenagers and outlaw divorce .Notice the last part of the brain to fully develop and that doesn’t finish until early 20’s.
http://www.edinformatics.com/news/teenage_brains.htm
This response is not worth the electricity used to type it.
You have presented no logical response, statistics, factual evidence or even social science theories to counter Dalrock’s arguments. There is nothing on this website but childish emotional disagreement.
I’m glad your blog second to Dalrock’s blog in the Google search listing results so people can see your reply.
You don’t even come close to showing where he is wrong.
“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?)”
We don’t have an expiration date. YOU DO.
AGAIN you women make the mistake of thinking you are equal to men. YOU’RE NOT. We have different roles and biological realities. We are not equal in these regards. Women are better than men in many ways. Men are better than women in many ways. But men and women are NOT EQUAL. That is the crux of your problem.
Assuming I become a successful high income earning man who keeps in great shape (which I already am but let’s stay hypothetical for the sake of argument shall we?) I will NOT be the one “wasting” 14 years of my courtship on Jessa in your example.
Jessa is wasting 14 years of her courtship / youth / beauty on ME. If we started dating (i.e. having sex on a regular basis) at 18 and break up at 32 Jessa is PAST HER PRIME. At the same time I’m nearing MY PEAK. Jessa wasted her youth and most fertile years on a man who CLEARY REFUSED TO MARRY HER AS HE SUCKED UP HER MOST YOUTHFUL AND FERTILE YEARS.
Jessa is a good person for being monogamous – but sadly she did not adhere enough to traditionalism and now faces a painful adjustment with a rapidly declining sexual market value in the dating market at 32 years old.
As long as you refuse to recognize this reality. As long as you choose to “have it all”. As long as you choose to ride a Ferris wheel of men during your peak years – or otherwise squander those years away – you will continue to see QUALITY MEN YOUR OWN AGE refuse to get married to you. You will continue to see the number of unmarried women over 29 increasing.
I leave you a quote from Ayn Rand:
“We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality”
Think about this sometime ladies..
Thank you.
Oh Mikey, there ain’t nothing scientific about Dalrock’s blatherings that would require things like statistics or theories to back it up. But since you asked, here is a nice critique of evolutionary psychology that Dalrock is loosely basing his ramblings on:
http://www.ou.edu/cls/online/LSTD5700behavior/pdfs/unit4_gannon.pdf
Well, see, there’s your problem right there. You’re a moron. Any logical argument is going to go right over your head.
A shitty quote from Ayn Rand, plus a wall-o-drivel, is supposed to convince me that I’m making A Terrible Mistake?
No, son. The terrible mistake would be to take you and your shit seriously.
The only true thing you said. Pity you couldn’t stop there.
Otherwise known as DATING. You know, that process whereby people find out if they want to spend more time with someone, or if he’s just another jackass with retrograde notions about women, sex and “science”.
The curious thing about both the Ferris wheel and the carousel is that, in both places, you pick one place to sit and then stay there for the entire ride. Which makes them kind of lousy metaphors for hopping from one guy to the next.
First a carousel, now a Ferris wheel? We’ll get a whole fairground of rides at this rate.
Bags I the ghost train. 😉
I’ve been on the roller coaster. Totally NOT worth the price of admission!
Just stay away from the Tilt-a-Whirl.
Come to think of it, all amusement park rides work like that. And often, you’re buckled in with a scary set of restraints, too. Not at all an apt metaphor for dating around.
I used to love that ride when I was a teenager.
Never go on it twice in a row, though. The stomach does not approve.
The Funhouse of Feminism, where women dressed as Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem jump out at you to scare you. The Tilt-a-Whirl of Hypergamy. The Teacup Ride of Manginas.
Wouldn’t a Ferris wheel make a better analogy for rationalization hamsters?
Bina – it’s a very apt metaphor for the way these turdeaters want to treat women, though.
Michael seems to believe quality men are those like himself. If they refuse to get married to me, oh well.
Or, actually, hooray. I’ve escaped a life of being quoted Ayn Rand all the time.
The Ferris wheel is powered by a giant hamster!
… unless it’s that useless Southern Star thing here in Melbourne. Visitors: don’t waste your money on that thing! First, it’s been out of commission for years; second, now they “fixed” it, it still doesn’t work and you have to stand plastered against the wall of the cabin; third, there’s nothing worth seeing from where it is. Rail lines and industrial ‘burbs aren’t exactly scenic.
The predictions of eternal loneliness feel a little less dire to me given that a quality man my own age already did marry me.
Hmm, come to think of it, the Southern Star is very MRAish. Doesn’t work, is a menace and a waste of time/money, and doesn’t even provide a good view.
It’s that, all right. Round and round you go, shackled to the damn thing long after you’re sick of its shit.
I heard somewhere that if those rides were used as torture devices, no one would get on. That sounds about right, too.