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).
@ Paradoxical Intention
Yup, mean the village. Thought you might be someone I knew.
[I hope I’m not making too many assumptions but I think you’d like St B.]
Irritable bowel boy,
If being submissive is a woman’s natural state, how come feminism exists? Why do reactionaries and abusers have to force us into submission? Why do you people have to fight so hard to keep us subjugated if that’s our natural state?
Also please provide evidence that it is our natural state. Scientific evidence. Not bible quotes.
So what about all these women who are telling you they are happier not submitting? What about dominatrices (dominatrixes? idk plural) and the men who submit to them? Femdom is a huuuuuuuge part of the porn industry. How does that fit your theory? And again, as katz said, what about those women who want nothing to do with men at all in their sexual and romantic lives? Nuns, for example, not just lesbians. What about men who prefer to have sex and enjoy romance and love with other men? What about men who have chosen to abstain from sex entirely like monks? How does any of this fit in your model?
Hell, how do MGTOWs fit your model, if they’re supposed to be happy ONLY if they are constantly chasing after, supporting, or fucking women?
katz: Exactly.
IBB: You’ve identified yourself as a man, right? Where do you get off telling women why they want? Are you psychic? Are you omniscient?
Especially since you’ve had a bunch of women here telling you no, that’s exactly what they don’t want.
Then how do you explain all the people here who just told you they don’t submit to their husbands and are perfectly happy?
Yeah, because women who like 50 Shades of Grey MUST represent ALL women as a monolithic whole, because women aren’t capable of thinking outside of the hive mind you believe we have, and there wasn’t abuse or rape or any bad things in that movie at all that several women have pointed out and took issue with, and some of those women couldn’t have possibly have been into actual BDSM or anything!
That was sarcasm.
Oh, fuck off.
Women aren’t your pretty little house-slaves. We’re people who want to be treated as such. We were treated like house-slaves in the past, and we’re rather sick of it now.
Why is that so hard for you to understand? We don’t want you telling us what we want. Stop trying to be our mouthpiece.
Is it odd that I would find that flattering? That you thought I was someone you knew, I mean?
And I’d have to do some research into her, but she seems pretty cool!
I’ve already done some personal research into Saint Dymphna, and I really identify with her, despite being pagan and all.
Weir,
Divorce rates are already going way down because marriage rates are dropping like a rock. Fewer and fewer are marrying, they are marrying later in life, and (unfortunately) marriage is increasingly becoming something ONLY for the middle class, the UMC, and above. That is a tragedy but not all that unexpected. This is the result of the feminist imperative and unilateral divorce law. Allow me to quote Megan McArdle… (emphasis mine)
https://fireflydove.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/a-libertarian-view-of-gay-marriage/
This is the result of feminism having a terrible impact on marriage. This is why MGTOW.
Seriously now, I am logging off, I have to go workout.
-8
It’s there a bible passage about judging people unless you be judged? Doesn’t that mean that you should let god do the judging of someone’s faith or worthiness of heaven or else you’re equating yourself with god and thus are going straight to hell? Because only god can judge who is worthy of his gifts and shit? Unlike some random person on the internet who takes the word of this Dalrock guy above the word of Christ who said nothing about women submitting to husbands and, in fact, pardon a prostitute of her sins or some shit who never married that I remember? IDK.
I’m pretty sure saying feminist can’t be Christian is making it seem someone knows what god wants of that person and is thus is judging them on believing what they think god wants to do with the person, even though they can’t possibly know what god wants because they aren’t god.
50 shades became a phenomena for three reasons. One, it was Twilight fanfic, and twilight had a built-in audience. Two, once it started to get popular, it increased popularity because it promised (and was marketed) to be an appropriate (but “inappropriate” *giggle giggle*) way for middle-aged women to express any sort of sexuality (the type of thing denied in a patriarchal/religious household). Third, once it was super popular, it attracted a ton of criticism from the people who aren’t actually ashamed of the sex they have for how it portrays abuse as romance. (And not abuse as in spanking or whipping; abuse as in psychological control and manipulation)
The popularity came from hype produced by people who didn’t understand the content. It was bought and enjoyed by people who glossed over the controlling and abusive portion and just focused on the Edward Cullen-esque super-man-falling-in-love-with-a-blank-template-of-a-woman.
The submission aspect is not why people like the book; it’s why people hate the book, and wish it would disappear and be replaced with something that handled mature content in an actually mature way.
Prove it. There’s a whole backlog of questions for you to respond to, specifically many women who deny your assertion that a woman’s fundamental nature and desire is to submit to men.
Not I.
I did read lots of feminist reviews and some reviews of it from the BDSM community and decided that it was disgusting rapey garbage that I won’t go near.
People like that crap because it’s risque, not because it’s good. Hype is a thing.
Here’s a good summary of why feminists agree with you why its bad (but not for the same reasons). http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2015/02/fifty-shades-of-disagreement-evangelicals-and-feminists-on-fifty-shades-of-grey.html
Also check out the graphic on sexual ethics.
You mean that thing that made it so that people (not just women!) who were in abusive marriages could get out without having to submit to their abusive partner?
That thing that made it so you could get a divorce if your spouse was terrible to you and would try to keep you in the relationship so they could keep being terrible to you?
How terrible! [/sarcasm]
IBB: You must lick my shoe.
Us: Why?
IBB: The Bible says “lick my shoe.”
Us: The Bible doesn’t say that, and if it did, why would we care?
IBB: It is the natural order of things for you to lick my shoe.
Us: We don’t want to lick your shoe.
IBB: You won’t be happy unless you lick my shoe.
Us: We’re not licking your shoe, and we are happy.
IBB: If you don’t lick shoes, you only care about money.
Us: There are lots of things we can care about besides shoe licking and money.
IBB: I know what women want, and they want to lick my shoe.
Us: We’re women, and we’re telling you we don’t want to lick your shoe.
IBB: You can’t get past the whole shoe-licking thing! Why don’t you just try it?
Us: Forget it, let’s substitute the word “sex” for “love” in Bible verses.
Okay, why does it matter if marriage changes from what it used to be? Why are you so hung up on the past? Oh right, because women were slaves in the past and we’re not now, and you’d rather go back to when women were slaves because that time was pretty awesome for men, gender-relations wise. I think that will basically answer any questions about your opinions.
I kinda think it’s better now, with computers and everything. You know, the technological advances we started to make once women started being permitted in the scientific and technological developmental communities. Also, I don’t want to be a slave to some man who doesn’t know me, doesn’t love me, and doesn’t respect me.
@ Paradoxical Intention
Not at all. I’m flattered that you’re flattered as it happens.
I was thinking of the actual village of ST B (although I’m sure the saint is also lovely); lesbian witch is a surprisingly large demographic there.
@Alan: Well, I’m a pansexual witch, but it still sounds lovely!
Ah yes, those two noted books of Scripture, Genesis and 50 Shades of Gray. A solid theological foundation, right there. (And “spin this around a bit?” That sounds like reframing to me! 😯 OH NO!)
I haven’t read 50 Shades of Gray. I read BOOKS, not trash.
Seriously, I’d recommend a grocery-store dime paperback romance novel before I’d recommend fifty shades.
I tried reading a sporking of it (where people read it/comment on it with a heaping helping of snark), and I couldn’t get past chapter sixteen. What those poor people read was just too horrifying and disgusting for me.
TRIGGER WARNING:
I couldn’t get through it because the “love interest” breaks into the main character’s house and holds her down to beat her, then rapes her into submission. I ended up having flashbacks of my own sexual abuse and had to calm myself down over the next two hours.
A Libertarian View of Gay Marriage
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/stewie-head-turn.gif
That entire article is such a fucking train wreck. No citations to support absolutely absurd assertions. It would take a Master’s Thesis length comment to correct. Holy shit.
@ Paradoxical Intention
It is; I’m sure you’d enjoy a visit.
Famously (well, round here anyway) one of the residents was the first person to register as a witch with the Inland Revenue so as to be able to claim the tax back against a cauldron.
That sounds amazing. Tax rebates on a cauldron just put a huge smile on my face.
Bless their face. They seem amazing.
Wow. This Dalrock thread attracts the goofiest trolls.
I JUST SAW THIS AND IT’S SO RELEVANT IT HURTS:
