Yesterday the New York post ran an opinion piece entitled Cheap Dates: How the Price of Sex Has Dropped to Record Lows. Though the article doesn’t reveal new research, it brings sexual economics into the mainstream, and it’s caused many ripples around the webz. It’s sobering and jaw-dropping, especially when you think about all the good folks who will read it despite little interest in the topic of hooking up. Of course, I welcome the conversation, and am totally on board with the article.
Women are jumping into the sack faster and with fewer expectations about long-term commitments than ever, effectively discounting the “price” of sex to a record low, according to social psychologists.
More than 25% of young women report giving it up within the first week of dating.
Kathleen Vohs, a professor at the University of Minnesota who co-authored a recent paper on sexual economics with Roy Baumeister, sums it up this way:
The price of sex is about how much one party has to do in order to entice the other into being sexual. It might mean buying her a drink or an engagement ring. These behaviors vary in how costly they are to the man, and that is how we quantify the price of sex.
The NY Post:
By boiling dating down to an economic model, researchers have found that men are literally getting lots of bang for their buck. Women, meanwhile, are getting very little tat for their . . . well, you get the idea.
Sex is so cheap that researchers found a full 30% of young men’s sexual relationships involve no romance at all — no wooing, dating, goofy text messaging. Nothing. Just sex.
Men want sex more than women do. It’s a fact that sounds sexist and outdated. But it is a fact all the same...With gender equality, the Pill and the advent of Internet porn, women’s control of the meet market has been butchered.
With an imbalanced sex ratio [on college campuses], women are using hookups to compete with other women for men’s affections. Once they get out of school, the pool of successful, educated men also is imbalanced, and the bed-hopping continues.
Regnerus likens the price of sex to the housing market. Too many foreclosures in one community, and the price of neighboring homes start to plummet. This is why single women in New York sometimes feel as though sex on the first date is a given: According to the market, it is.
“Every sex act is part of a ‘pricing’ of sex for subsequent relationships,” Regnerus said. “If sex has been very easy to get for a particular young man for many years and over the course of multiple relationships, what would eventually prompt him to pay a lot for it in the future — that is, committing to marry?”
Did you answer, “Love”? You’re adorable.
“Sexual strategies for making men ‘fall in love’ typically backfire, because men don’t often work like that,” Regnerus says.
It’s little wonder that the percentage of 25- to 34-year-olds who are married has shrunk by an average of 1% each year this past decade — down to 46% now. Single women have been catching on, but those who don’t discount sex say they can’t seem to get anyone to “pay” their higher price.
Vox Day at Alpha Game points out that this news is bound to be unwelcome for the men not getting any action in this fire sale:
I’m not sure this news is going to cheer up the deltas, gammas, and omegas of the world. Failure is bad enough, but failure when success has never been easier throughout the course of human history really tends to indicate that you’re not going about it properly.
Back to the NY Post:
So, what can women do to return the balance of sexual power in their favor? Stop putting out, experts say. If women collectively decided to cross their legs, the price of sex would soar and women would regain control of the market. Like a whoopie cartel.
Women in less egalitarian countries do tend to restrict sex as a means of keeping the cost high. This makes sense when women have no access to education and employment. But in the US, it would take a major cultural movement for women to convince each other to say no to nookie.
“Let’s be realistic: It’s not going to happen here,” Regnerus says. “Women don’t really need men and marriage — economically, socially, and culturally — like they once did. What I hear in interviews with women is plenty of complaining about men or about the dating scene, but their annoyance is seldom directed at other women.
Stuart Schneiderman, in Love on the Cheap at Had Enough Therapy? acknowledges that a whoopie cartel isn’t realistic, which is a shame, because it really is the only solution; women policing women:
The research raises an important point that needs to be underscored. In a marketplace your behavior does not just affect you. It affects all other participants in the market.
When a group of participants bands together to lower the price of its merchandise, this affects all other market participants. Many other merchants will discover that they have a choice between matching the low price or closing up shop.
The solution is for women to band together and withhold their sexual favors, to pull a Lysistrata.
Women have unique psychological cues. Irresistibility and adorability are feelings a woman has about herself that influence her self-esteem.
I think there is really a 3-leg effect occurring here in the way guys respond and promiscuity in and of itself is the least relevant:1. Promiscuity2. The discriminatory price of sex charged3. Deception by either flat-out lying or omission3>2>1 in terms of how much it damages the guy’s ability to commit to you.
If I were single today, and I met a girl and had sex with her on date 2 or date 3, and early in our relationship found out she had slept with 20 guys but otherwise she was an awesome woman, I think I would really try hard to work through any misgivings. I really do.
Now, if I have to date her for 3-6 months to finally have sex, put in a ton of time and commitment, prove my “worthiness” and then I find out she had a bunch of one-night stands and sex on dates 1, 2, 3, then I feel like a chump. Basically, in a nutshell, your sexual attractiveness must not hold a candle to all these guys she fucked right away. I think you actually nailed it when you made the comment that it feels kind of like a minor cuckolding.
The most serious is the deception. I suspect for 99.9% of guys this is the deal-breaker they cannot get beyond. And omission is basically the same as lying in this regard once the subject is brought up. I think, “What if my girlfriend told me today she hadn’t been with 4 guys but actually 30 before me?” I would be DEVASTATED. It would literally break my heart into a ton of pieces, but I would know I couldn’t put a ring on her finger and commit to her for the rest of my life.
Blogger Rollo Tomassi at Rational Male (#2 hat tip to Mike C) recently went further and admonished men not to wait for sex:
When a woman makes you wait for sex you are not her highest priority. Sexuality is spontaneous chemical reaction between two parties, not a process of negotiation. It’s sex first, then relationship, not the other way around. A woman who wants to fuck you will find a way to fuck you….The girl who tells you she needs to be comfortable and wants a relationship first is the same girl who fucked the hot guy in the foam cannon party in Cancun on spring break just half an hour after meeting him.
…If you’re still trying to figure out what the magic words are to convince some girl that she ought fuck you after 3 dates – or longer – you’re in desire negotiation hearings, counselor. You are wasting your time and limiting your opportunity with better prospective women in waiting out a woman who would defer less than 100% of her real desire to have sex with you. The sex will NEVER be worth the wait.
…If she’s perceiving your value as as high as it should be, she wont hesitate longer than a few dates to become sexual – and she certainly wont tell you she’s making you wait. Hypergamy doesn’t afford a woman much waiting time with a man she sees as superior stock.
…If a woman, point blank says, “I’m not having sex with you until X,Y, and Z happens”, what is her MEDIUM telling you? That there is a precondition that’s more important to her than fucking you with genuine, uncontrollable passion.You want her to be so into you that she’s willing to break the rules. The ideal situation is for her genuine passion to be so uncontrollable for you that she’d renounce her religion and throw her convictions to the wind to be with you.
This is a lot to think about. I recently explained how men want a woman to be easy to get – selectively. That is, easy for him, hard for every other guy.
Women who don’t want to go the slutty route are up against it today. On one hand, the number of men willing to invest time and resources for sex is rapidly dwindling. On the other, men are reluctant to commit to sluts.
{ 939 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 … 5 6 7
Susan, I am thinking about how to verbalize what I do/did. I will post it here when I get something that isn’t too identifying, and is applicable to a broader audience than Yours Truly.
“If you stick with her, you’re going to have to be strong as hell and the soul of a servant”
If she’s been abused, it sounds like she has those things already.
Nice. I don’t claim to come from any one particular pile, and I wouldn’t necessarily call myself a “good guy.”
I’m 28, but I actually WAS a typical sexually frustrated college kid back in the day. No shame in that. I think that describes most college guys. Hence the word “typical.”
And I didn’t mean to insult your girl or your choice. I was just giving my POV.
Anyway, the idea was about 2 piles, not 37, and it’s really just a variation on what Sue says men do to women: slut pile and relationship pile.
And frankly, I couldn’t give a good god damn what happens with your girl friend. Maybe you’ll take her home to meet the folks and she’ll fuck your dad. Maybe she’s talking junk about you while your best friend takes her ass at this very moment.
I’ll say this: for a guy who lacks the creativity to even come up with a name (asdf123?), your artistic spirit seemed to come to life when imagining me. Two explanations for that: 1. you like me. (sorry, I don’t swing that way); 2. you’re describing yourself. As for the real me, I don’t think sluts are bad people. I just don’t think they’re good relationship material. For reasons I’ve described elsewhere.
Finally, I’m not whining about anything, because it’s really not difficult to get what you want from women once you know what they find attractive and can read the IOIs. I’m simply trying to articulate the mindset of men who disqualify promiscuous women for relationships.
Tom, I’m pretty sure I can say whatever I’d like. I’m not sure whether human males are genetically conditioned to want to spread their seed. But whether or not they are, it doesn’t mean that they have to obey their base instincts. So I’m pretty sure I can have it both ways. Of course we’re animals. But one of the things that separates us from other animals is our ability to reason. We don’t have to act on our instincts.
P.S. I’m not sure that I’ve ever claimed that we have an innate fear of being cuckolded. It doesn’t sound like a particularly pleasant experience, but I don’t like the idea of what’s innate, since I don’t think we can really know.
Dogsquat:
Dear Pioneer Valley Woman,
Please recommend a book to me. I’d like that book to be one that, in your opinion, best explains/explores an aspect of gender or women that a person of my background (white male, over 6′ tall, lower socioeconomic class upbringing, poorly educated, not religious) usually never considers.
Alternatively, a book you wish all men would read would be good, too.
Thanks for your time,
My reply:
Hi, Dogquat! What a fun exercise–I’m glad you are interested in hearing an ideal book I would recommend, and I’m quite glad to do so! Thanks! I would come up with a reading list, if, for example I were putting together a reading list for a graduate students’ seminar. That would be fun too. But for now, one simple book, easy to read, grounded in the context I use in teaching women’s history from a place most people can recognize and understand–women in society based upon law and legal practices and how different forms of feminist theory respond to those–truly practical, relevant and nuanced, although it can be liberal in its places. I do give them credit, though, for recognizing the different forms of feminist theories, conservative as well, offering discussion questions and for offering a great bibliography after each chapter. Drum roll: Nancy Levit and Robert R.M. Verchick, Feminist Legal Theory: A Primer (NYU Press, 2006). I refer to it all the time, in my own teaching and writing.
Enjoy! Do you have a blog–if you get a chance to read it over the winter break, and post on it, I can then reply.
@Megaman
It’s really hard to say. I haven’t seen stats on breakups in relationships prior to marriage. I know women are pickier than ever before, even while they’re unhappily single. I’m not sure about their behavior once they do get into relationships though. If they weren’t too keen to begin with, I’d say they wouldn’t be very committed to working through problems. So perhaps it depends on whether they feel they’re “settling.”
@Dogsquat
No hurry. I was intrigued by your statement and wondered how you go about selecting women. I think both sexes could benefit from this, though I certainly understand why you don’t want to divulge your secrets.
Tom,
No fear, Tom. That’s one line of bullshit I’ll never direct toward you.
Good grief guys, let’s chill down the profane insults, shall we? Gotten personal.
Thanks, Pioneer Valley Woman! I will read and think.
No, I do not have a blog. Susan graciously lets me spill my bile here.
If you feel like taking a peak at the other side, I recommend “The Things They Carried” by Tim O’Brien. I was going to write a book about my war, the Iraq war, and then I came across O”Brien’s book. Even though he writes of Vietnam, he said everything that needed to be said.
Dog…………..As I’ve said in previous posts here – this is how I’m wired. I give not one fuck that you think I’m insecure. Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. I’ve got exactly who I want in my life, with no compromise made
_________________
Keep on thinking you are not insecure, that those thoughts are coming from another place, if that makes you feel better
look I repect most of what you say. A lot of logic goes into your thought process… But judgeing people too harshly for something as small as a few indecressions is not being logical. Not many guys, myself included, would want the total slut with 100 guys under their belt. But I learned a long time ago it is pretty easy to get to 20 over a 10 year period..
Jesus,
Tom, I’m pretty sure I can say whatever I’d like. I’m not sure whether human males are genetically conditioned to want to spread their seed. But whether or not they are, it doesn’t mean that they have to obey their base instincts. So I’m pretty sure I can have it both ways. Of course we’re animals. But one of the things that separates us from other animals is our ability to reason. We don’t have to act on our instincts.
P.S. I’m not sure that I’ve ever claimed that we have an innate fear of being cuckolded. It doesn’t sound like a particularly pleasant experience, but I don’t like the idea of what’s innate, since I don’t think we can really know.
____________________
You are right you can say any hypocritical thing you want.
you are also right we dont have to act on our instincts.. Many of the “men” here, and I use that term loosly, seem to think the double standard is something men are ok with because of all the “inate” processes at work. Im a man (sorry to dissappoint you) and I think the double standared is BS. Not because I want to see all women having sex with as many men as they can, but because we men tend to look down our noses for the very thing we also do. Hypocritical to say the least. Somehow men are going to have to get over the ,”women are gathers and men are the hunters” theme. That is knuckle dragging mentality. People are individuals now more than ever in the past. Some women have been driven into being the providers, and some men “house husbands” fit a different role. Like it or not the pill changed everything. It freed women to act on their desires without fear of getting prego. Im not saying it is right, but I am saying we guys need to face a reality the Jenie is out of the bottle, and she is not about to go back in. Any man who calls a sexually active woman a slut ESPECIALLY if he does the same thing, is using an old outdated sexiest term that was originally created to help keep women in their place. That place, mind you where WE men wanted them to be.
Dogsquat October 5, 2011 at 2:09 pm
Thanks, Pioneer Valley Woman! I will read and think.
No, I do not have a blog. Susan graciously lets me spill my bile here.
If you feel like taking a peak at the other side, I recommend “The Things They Carried” by Tim O’Brien. I was going to write a book about my war, the Iraq war, and then I came across O”Brien’s book. Even though he writes of Vietnam, he said everything that needed to be said.
My reply:
You’re welcome! I wonder whether this is an author I have heard of before, writing about Viet Nam–one of these local “meet the author” type events with a reading….
Picky with love, but casual with sex? Not the most attractive combination, at le. The former is probably keeping a lot of decent guys single, and the latter, well, you’ve discussed it’s effects on women. Maybe less of both and there’d be fewer unhappily single people.
@ pioneervalleywoman October 5, 2011 at 7:26 am
Your recommendation was to Dogsquat but the book sounds quite interesting!
Some years ago I took a course called Race, Gender and the Law. The conversations were quite illuminating. One of the best discussions was sparked by a classmate who was white, male and poor. He expressed how his background could be a benefit, as well as a limitation, depending on the circumstances. He also realized that, with a formal education, especially one in the legal field, he could get the resources to completely reshape his life. It started a series of comments that have stayed with me to this day. Ever since then, I’ve been interested in sources that explore various forms of intersectionality.
I come from a military family and we were impacted by several conflicts.
At my previous place of employment, I was afforded the privilege of assisting Veterans. Some of the more recent ones expressed their views about having a “second birthday.” Perhaps you’re familiar with the term.
I’m not sure if you were wounded during the Iraq War, and if you don’t want to discuss it, I’ll certainly understand. If it is helpful, there are some great resources out there, like the Wounded Warrior Project.
Tom,
The double standard is NOT hypocritical. If I said that men should not have sex without monogamy and then went out and had casual sex, then THAT would be hypocritical. The double standard is rooted in the understanding that men and women are essentially different.
That said, I’m not claiming that women can’t sleep around. Women can sleep around all they’d like. I’m friends with a couple of women who sleep around. They’re good people and I enjoy their company. I just wouldn’t consider being in a relationship with them. I’m pretty sure I have that right.
Women also have the right to decline relationship offers from promiscuous men. And many do. What’s more, nobody tries to shame them by calling them insecure. Their choices are respected.
Tom, you’re sore because you’re engaged to a woman that most of the men on this blog (and elsewhere) would identify as a slut. I’m really not sure what to tell you other than tough shit.
I have the right to think of promiscuous women as sluts. I also have the right to think of guys who drive around blasting gangsta rap out of their cars as assholes. And I have the right to think of you as a weak man trying to convince the world that you’re not a total moron for marrying a woman who’s been around casually.
Just like you have the right to try to shame the men here into celebrating relationships with slutty women by calling those men insecure, jealous, beta, etc…
Dogsquat,
“The Things They Carried” is an amazing collection of short stories. Great recommendation.
Octavia said:
“I’m not sure if you were wounded during the Iraq War, and if you don’t want to discuss it, I’ll certainly understand. If it is helpful, there are some great resources out there, like the Wounded Warrior Project.”
_______________________________
Yep, Ali Baba got a piece of me.
All things considered, I am very lucky. I have gotten back to almost where I was before, and I am not missing any limbs. I am far better off than many of my friends. I used to schedule a bunch of work on my second birthday so I didn’t freak out, but (thankfully) I didn’t even notice this past one.
Wounded Warrior folks are just about the best people on Earth, if you ask me. I am fortunate to be able to help out fellow vets, and it does my soul good.
Thanks for your concern, despite our recent rather harsh exchange.
We might not agree on a lot, but I hereby deem you A Good Egg.
Thanks again, Octavia.
Tom, I’ve been cheated on before in a terrible way. It was one of the hardest things I’ve ever overcome – and that includes war, relative poverty, depression, and debilitating injury.
I’d rather not have to do that again, so I am much more calculated in my choice of partners. I don’t require a woman be a virgin, or even that she’s never had a one night stand. I do have a very low threshold of tolerance for some behaviors, though.
If that makes me insecure in your eyes, so be it. I don’t care. If thinking that makes you feel better in some way – great. I’m happy to serve. Call on me anytime.
You make your choices, I’ll make mine. Hopefully you’ll recall that I’ve never before commented on your choice of partners, nor your reason for choosing them. We are different people, and I am not interested in your criteria for a wife. They are probably not compatible with mine in any number of ways.
I wish you health and happiness.
Octavia:
@ pioneervalleywoman October 5, 2011 at 7:26 am
Your recommendation was to Dogsquat but the book sounds quite interesting!
Some years ago I took a course called Race, Gender and the Law. The conversations were quite illuminating. One of the best discussions was sparked by a classmate who was white, male and poor. He expressed how his background could be a benefit, as well as a limitation, depending on the circumstances. He also realized that, with a formal education, especially one in the legal field, he could get the resources to completely reshape his life. It started a series of comments that have stayed with me to this day. Ever since then, I’ve been interested in sources that explore various forms of intersectionality.
My reply:
It is a very interesting book, an accessible one which addresses the kinds of questions Dogsquat raises, one book that in my view is the most comprehensive in discussing some of the key issues that come up in women’s lives. At the same time, it spans the political spectrum, from what some people would look at with raised eyebrows, to what others would say, “yes, nothing to look at there, moving along.” In addition, it also raises the questions of intersectionality you speak of. I am trying to think back over the years; there might have been some young white men in that demographic who were in my classes. They might have addressed some of those issues you talked about, but not in that exact fashion. One thing I did in those types of classes was to assign materials that would raise the questions whether or not any students were in the class to address them. Interesting–I’m glad his observations stayed with you all this time! If you buy the book, I hope you enjoy it. At the same time, though, I’m aware that the book has not experienced a second edition and as such it has not spoken to some newer topics which I think should be included. But it is a start.
@ Dogsquat and Jennifer:
Thanks for the good wishes. I’ll definitely try to read up on that book when I have the time…
Not many guys, myself included, would want the total slut with 100 guys under their belt. But I learned a long time ago it is pretty easy to get to 20 over a 10 year period…
20 in 10 years is nothing, IMO. A lot can happen in ten years – it’s a long time.
I don’t know if you’re familiar with the Veterans History Project. Perhaps you are comfortable having your story archived. http://www.loc.gov/vets/about.html
I participated in interviewing some Veterans and support staff from the wars. The experience was wonderful, as they had some impressive stories. (If I remember correctly, one couple even met during a war and the two are still together.) It was like a Ken Burns documentary right in front of me.
At any rate, you’re not half bad yourself. LOL And you’re most welcome.
I recommend Critical White Studies by Delgado and Stefancic. It has some fascinating points and counterpoints.
I love sources that contain opposing views. I used to roam libraries for materials like that. Now I tend to roam the internet. LOL Even when I’m invested in an idea, if someone offers another perspective, it is often extremely rewarding.
Dog
I’d rather not have to do that again, so I am much more calculated in my choice of partners. I don’t require a woman be a virgin, or even that she’s never had a one night stand. I do have a very low threshold of tolerance for some behaviors, though.
___________________
I hear you Dog.. Once again you have proven you are one of the better, more logical posters here.
Here’s a funny comment left on the Contact page:
dave
Submitted on 2011/10/11 at 3:25 pm
i have to say i was appalled by your blog, as were many of my both male and female friends. perhaps your audience is intended to be younger? myself and my peers are all in our early to mid thirties, and most of us are ethically non-monogamous and very happy with our lives.
the tone of your articles reminded me of cosmopolitan magazine—condescending and simplistic, as if everyone out there desires the same thing. except cosmo—for whatever else i find objectionable about it—is very sex-positive, at least.
Thanks to Dave for demonstrating that I’m doing something right. I live to appall sex-positive fools! Dave got so exercised he has already gathered feedback from his poly support group!
so now some guys are expecting all girls to have sex with them before commitment? I’m not going to lie, that is very annoying. For a lot of women, including myself, sex is not just physical but emotional. Most girls, when we do it with a guy we hope that it will bring us closer in intimacy and take our relationship to another level. I am one of those girls who thinks that and for me i need to know the guy i am about to knock socks with. Why? No not because i am trying to withhold power, but because I need to know that this person i am about to share my body with is a good, kind and loving guy who respects me. I am taking a lot of risks by sleeping with him, pregnancy (it can happen even with birthcontrol and condoms lets be serious), STDs (if i dont know him that well how can i trust him to tell me this), and my feelings (when you put yourself out there and say hey i really like you, a person can really fuck you over by just fucking you and leaving). This is the same for many girls as well as guys. I cant say that everyone shares this view, to some sex is really just fun and something they like to do with a lot of people without commitment. That’s their business, whether they are a woman or a man. So both genders need to stop pointing fingers at the other with these sweeping generalizations. What i say is screw statistics and screw the norms, and just do what you want to do. If you want a girl who will have sex with you before you guys get into a relationship, fair enough but you shouldn’t expect every single women to be that way. There are plenty of women like that so stop chasing the ones that make you wait and go after the ones that put out. Though bewarned, usually girls who have lots of casual sex with guys fast have commitment issues just as guys who have lots of casual sex tend to have commitment issues. Not saying this is true for all people out there, but ultimately its up to you. I think its not fair to make anyone do something they don’t want to do. For the girls who want relationships, the problem for us is there are a lot of guys in the dating pool, who are in the dating pool still cause they cant commit and this limits our choices. There are also a lot of great guys who cant get a date because girls are so caught up in getting a guy thats fits into their idea of how their boyfriend should be. I think girls need to learn to figure out and pick up cues that indicate whether or not a guy is still dating because he’s commitment phobic or because all these girls wouldn’t give him a time of day. With all that said, Whats most important is finding someone you are compatible with and being able to communicate with them openly and maturely about sexual needs and emotional needs.
LOL Rock on Susan, you SCORED!
@M
Welcome, great comment.
1,000 times yes.
I think you’re onto something here. Guys get game, they go crazy, and they succeed – with girls who have lots of casual sex. Just ask Jesus (a regular guy commenter here). But the nature of those guys has not changed all that much. They are still commitment-oriented at heart. And now they’re having sex with women who aren’t.
Just wanted to put an out-of-the-box comment in here to point out that, to an outsider, this comment thread is so American!
Folks in the USA are a bit like the fish who can’t perceive the water they live in. Madonna/Whore is so pervasive in the USA, so much a part of your environment, and is an unquestioned assumption. You frame your questions and answers within that world-view, and find it very difficult to step outside the box.
Will that ever change? Perhaps the economic and demographic circumstances swirling around your country will force change. But for now, your assumptions are showing . . .
@Don
Yes, perhaps we’ll become like the UK, with average age of first marriage way over 30 and rising and marriage rates falling through the floor. By transcending this base desire for a partner we can depend upon, we’ll realize that we never wanted marriage in the first place…
Don, that’s a pretty strange comment. I don’t really understand what you’re getting at, especially with this:
“Madonna/Whore is so pervasive in the USA, so much a part of your environment, and is an unquestioned assumption. You frame your questions and answers within that world-view, and find it very difficult to step outside the box.”
Dude, half the comment threads here end up hotly debating that very idea, and it lies at the heart of sex-positive feminism. To call it an unquestioned assumption appears (to me, at least) inaccurate.
Am I missing something? I’d like to understand what you’re trying to say. Also, is this the reason I have gills? I’ve been wondering about that for awhile now…
There is no doubt what the prime years are for a woman in terms of appearance and attractiveness. Her 20′s. Beyond that she begins a decline while men get better with age. I respect women who make an effort to find someone and settle down before hitting 26 years old.
Sounds absurd and maybe it’s too late to get back to that, but I can’t see myself marrying anyone older than 28 or so, even when I’m 40. Even 30 would be a stretch, depending on the woman’s circumstances.
If I was single and female in my early 20′s this would be the best advice I could take. Find something serious now. Don’t delay that process for a novel’s worth of one-night stands.
@PBateman
Good to see you here, thanks for commenting. I appreciate the advice to young women, very sound. I see you’ve got a blog. If you plan on posting regularly, let me know and sign up for Comment Luv if you’d like to link.
The women here keep asking for a solution that will be immediate. The sad truth is, it took 40+ years to get here, it is going to take at least 40 more. Maybe men are becoming more like women and just saying one thing (a half truth) and leaving the other half out, which I think is “you fXcked us for X amount of years, well you get fXcked X amount + interest until justice is served. I think that is why you see an attitude of men wanting to see things go to hell in a hand basket.
I don’t this being the case at all. I’m 42, fairly well educated, good looking and make 80k per year and I cannot find a respectable (reasonably attractive and not an old alcoholic slut) woman to have sex with at all. I spent 3 years putting tremendous effort into finding a mate. I had sex with 20+ women in that time, bringing my lifetime high score to around 80 plus or minus. As fun as that was, I really wanted to find a partner. It left me depressed because the decent ones were crazy or dumped me for professors and lawyers. As for your dilemma, you’re talking about the women that are sleeping with the top 5% of men – trying to snag a superior man (if you live by a superficial value system – which 99% of women do). No man with status and self respect is going to partner with a woman that can’t count all her sexual partners on one hand, preferably about 2-3 fingers. You’re completely delusional. If you ladies weren’t such cruel, hypergamous, sociopaths, I’d feel sorry for you, but I know better and don’t. Thanks to feminism the overwhelming majority of females have been brainwashed to have nothing but seething contempt for anything but the top man. I’ve lived both sides of the street. When I was a young fit, and popular athlete, females would hunt me down sight unseen to have sex with me based on reputation alone. It’s all about who’s shagging the most females and it’s snowball effect. You’re like lemmings running off a cliff! Men are adapting, social restraints and taboos can and will be broken down for men too. Bachelors forever. Educate young men and encourage them to be players.
Why are people blaming feminism? We should be blaming human instinct which people follow despite the fact that effective contraception makes it meaningless. Our instincts are based on possibility of pregnancy, which contraception prevents, and resource allocation by men, which is no longer an issue for women with financial independence in our modern world.
@Random male: you blame women for being superficial, yet you base the value of a woman on how few partners she’s had. That’s superficial and, you guessed it, hypocritical. You’ve also slept with “20+” women while you expect them to have slept with only 2-3 men. Hypocrisy again. Please stop blaming others for your owns faults.
« 1 … 5 6 7
{ 4 trackbacks }