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).
Mikey confuses beauty with sexual attraction (I know, I know, contain your shock). Lots of beautiful people out there, and lots of people who have no desire to have sex with them.
I’m just hoping Mikey doesn’t turn out to be blog herpes back on form. I’ll be very disappointed if he’s just a recycled troll instead of a brand new one.
Please let him be new, and have some staying power. I want to believe!
Also random thing I just noticed – where are interracial marriages on Dalrock’s bar graph? I know he doesn’t approve of us, but that’s no reason to pretend we don’t exist.
Val Kilmer’s a change from Brad Pitt, at least.
Also random – this quote?
Conflates two things that are completely separate. An older woman is more likely to be picky, because she’ll have learned to stop creeps like Mikey a mile away, but how hard is the average 18 or 22 year old looking for a husband? More like looking to avoid a husband, at least until she’s got her life path established a bit more.
Poor Mikey. Young women don’t want to get married (and wouldn’t want him in any case) and older women who do want to marry don’t want him.
Funny, isn’t it, how he’s shrieking to high heaven about women not marrying, all the while shrieking, ditto, that he doesn’t want to marry. You’d think anyone with more than one brain cell would figure out that works quite neatly.
University Studies by Professors and research teams! Oh my!
Which ones? Who were the authors? What was the name of the study? Where were they published? When were they published? Link to this overwhelming scientific evidence you have. You can’t just say “University Studies and Professors and research teams” and that magically makes your bs true.
I do know the difference between singular and plural, though.
Protip: Attempting to insult opponents while using bad grammar will fall flat.
…for people who sign up for match.com. You cannot generalize that to the population.
Oh Mikey. You don’t science, do you? This sentence is incredibly hilarious.
I can her you and your brainwashed Feminist ilk going ape-shit right now screeching like howler monkeys.
I think you accidentally the sentence right here.
For Mikey. An explanation of scientific controls and why it is important.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_control
::snicker:: Yup, nothing like screaming in RANDOM CAPS to show how cool and logical and not at all emotional one is.
Mikey does seem to be rather emotionally labile, doesn’t he?
Febrile, too! 😀
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. This may well launch you into TOTY contention Mickey….. which kinda gives me a sad at the poor crop we’ve had these last two years
He’s definitely more fun than any of the trolls from last year, and I really hope he keeps it up.
(If he’s actually upsetting anyone then I’ll stop encouraging him, though.)
He’s not upsetting me, he’s way too entertaining. Which is why I want to believe he’s a new troll, too!
Nah, Mikey’s hilarious. Was it mildlymagnificent who said earlier that he made her feel good about her own relationship? I can relate.
Yes, it was! I can relate to that too. In fact I’m thinking most of us who’re in happy relationships, or are happy singles, are feeling all the better about our situations (even though we’re all SPINSTERS) after Mikey’s rantings.
Plus katz did the best acronym-meaning ever for it.
Dude, he’s solving my case of “I’m crazy and thus unloveable” (which not even my pharm student can manage, which is annoying as ze’s the only person I want to have sexytimes with) — cuz seriously, it’s like “oh, right, I’m sure I could find someone who wants to take advantage of my craziness, but fuck no, not again, standards, I haz them”.
In short, I’d rather be single than worrying about running into anyone as manipulatively gross as Mickey here. (Sort of single? Mostly single? In a not currently active poly thing? It’s complicated, and the 500 miles in the middle do NOT help!)
Long-distance relationship?
I don’t sp’ose it’s any comfort, but Mr K had some major issues that made him look very unlovable, back in the day, and certainly made his relationships capital-D difficult. Yet the relationships were there. He loved and was loved, even if they did manage to make a bollocks of it most of the time. And it did have a happy ending. 😛
Thing is, Argenti, whatever issues you may have it seems pretty clear that the person they cause the most hurt to is you. Whereas Michael has decided to base his life around the principle that bashing every woman he meets over the head with his issues is a cool and awesome thing to do. So, if it was a choice between dating him and dating you? You win, no contest.
(Even without a condo ON THE BEACH.)
Here is a feminist manifesto for Mikey’s enjoyment.
I have difficulty posting feminist manifesto links sometimes because my emotional reactions get in the way.
SPINSTER HOWLER MONKEYS!
Behold! A visual representation of why it would be pointless to try to help Michael gain a more reasonable attitude towards relationships.
On another note, the constant “your” for “you’re” thing and the “women” for “woman” are thing kind of grating. But that’s okay, I can forgive Mikey for that just by imagining him screeching GO WALK YOUR DOG!!! hahahaha.