756»

All the Single Ladies

This past July, Kate Bolick, the gorgeous journalist you see on the cover of this month’s Atlantic, dined at my home along with five young women I’ve been close to for years. She is 39, and she has never been married. She has written a very interesting article about her experience, and the various factors that have influenced how and when Americans marry (or don’t). Kate has done something we’ll be seeing a lot more of in the coming years – she’s talking about the reality of single life for many women. There’s an element of choice, but also an acknowledgement that men are lagging behind women in education and career advancement. She rightly identifies the Women’s Movement as the prime influence in the deterioration of the SMP. Rather than bitching or blaming men, she’s living her life in a very positive and productive way.

Kate found HUS via plain old Google search. We spoke initially for an hour or two by phone. A few weeks later I received an email inquiring whether she might attend one of the “focus groups” I’ve been holding for the last three years with young women. I was floored. “Um, yes, sure, I guess so, let me see who’s in town.” I didn’t really believe it would happen, and I was somewhat surprised when she rang the doorbell promptly at 6:30 as planned the next Monday evening.

Kate is petite, a natural beauty. The night she came to dinner, she was in jeans with minimal makeup and her hair in a messy bun. Immediately the girls grew wide-eyed upon seeing her. They followed me into the kitchen. “OMG, she is so cool. I want to be just like her.” I said, “She’s here to pick  your brains on sex, dating and relationships. She isn’t married.” It was as if I could see the thought bubbles above their heads: “Oh sh*t, if she hasn’t found the guy, what are my chances?” To her enormous credit, Kate was completely open, not the least bit defensive. She had a warm and wonderful way about her. You’ll see what I mean when you read her article.

Kate spent 5 hours with us that night. She filled two notebooks and had a tape recorder going the entire time. I figured a mention of Hooking Up Smart was pretty much guaranteed, but I honestly had no idea what would be in the final article. When the Atlantic’s fact-checker called a few weeks ago, her first question was whether my eyes are green. I knew then that HUS was going to get real, bonafide mainstream media coverage. I’m still trying to wrap my mind around it!

I didn’t see the article until a few days ago. I’m extremely pleased to have been a part of the process. I think Kate wrote a brilliant article, objective and fair. While I wasn’t thrilled with every single word (trash dick? Gaaaahhhh!) I tried my best to get across what I think are the most important points about the contemporary SMP. I hope you’re pleased, and that my input accurately reflects the wisdom so many have shared as I’ve written this blog.

All the Single Ladies

If you’ve got a moment, go read it and leave a comment.

FYI, do read the whole thing, but the Hooking Up Smart bit starts around the middle of Page 3.

2 Pingbacks/Trackbacks

  • Some Handle

    …the gorgeous journalist…

    Why on earth did you say that?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Some Handle

      …the gorgeous journalist…

      Why on earth did you say that?

      1. Her very high SMV is supremely relevant. This is not some fugly feminist or harpy bitching about there being no good men.

      2. To counter the manosphere cliche that by 39 women have raisins for ovaries, and look like 5 miles of bad road.

  • Some Handle

    Nor the 40-ish journalist who, on our second date, driving down a long country road, gripped the steering wheel and asked, “Are you The One? Are you The One?” (Can you imagine a woman getting away with this kind of behavior?) Like zealous lepidopterists, they swoop down with their butterfly nets, fingers aimed for the thorax, certain that just because they are ready for marriage and children, I must be, too.

    Jesus Christ!

  • Some Handle

    One of Walsh’s pet observations pertains to what she calls the “soft harem,” where high-status men (i.e., the football captain) maintain an “official” girlfriend as well as a rotating roster of neo-concubines

    Susan, I come here because I am a fan, but, come on, you did not notice this…you, for a long time, thought that all men were making out like bandits until a bunch of men came along and set you straight. Only then did you notice things like girls saying “only 40% of guys are dateable”.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Some Handle

      Susan, I come here because I am a fan, but, come on, you did not notice this…you, for a long time, thought that all men were making out like bandits until a bunch of men came along and set you straight. Only then did you notice things like girls saying “only 40% of guys are dateable”.

      Whoa! I never said that was my original observation, nor does Bolick suggest that. I simply discussed it with Bolick as a real phenom in this SMP. Actually, I specified at great length how and where I’ve learned the male perspective, especially the 80/20 concept. She included mention of how important male commenters are here.

      For the record I first wrote about soft harems here in March, 2010, with full attribution to men for the insight, though it was a reader email that inspired the post:

      Scheherazade Goes to College

      Same deal with 80/20:

      Sex and the Pareto Principle

      And I observed the apex fallacy in the UNC article the minute it came out:

      I Hate Math, Especially on College Campuses

      Don’t tell me I’ve had no independent insights or original contributions. I deeply resent your nasty and accusatory tone.

      For the record, Bolick has read pretty much my entire body of work as part of her research.

  • Some Handle

    One of Walsh’s pet observations…

  • Some Handle

    It was your observation.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      It was your observation.

      From Bolick’s perspective, I shared an observation on my blog. The post makes it abundantly clear that I was not the original source of the concept. I recall her asking me about harems on the phone and we discussed it. It didn’t even come up at the dinner. Good lord, I can’t believe I’m defending myself against accusations of falsification. I’m not going to get into a pissing match with you. If you have a problem, I urge you to leave a comment at the Atlantic, where Bolick can see it and respond if she chooses.

  • Some Handle

    Don’t tell me I’ve had no independent insights…

    I didn’t.

  • Some Handle

    This is not some fugly feminist..

    I never said she was fugly.

  • Wayfinder

    I thought that the end of the article was one of the saddest things I’ve read all year.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Wayfinder

      I thought that the end of the article was one of the saddest things I’ve read all year.

      There is great sadness and poignancy in the article. Bolick was on the Today show this morning, and they played this as a “Single Life is Wonderful!” story. She is positive about single life, and grateful for the people in her life. She is at the top of her field in NYC. But she is not pretending to prefer being single. I gave her so much credit when she asked the women if seeing her freaked them out. And when they admitted as much, she was receptive and interested in learning why. She didn’t take anything personally. This is the first article of this kind I’ve ever seen with zero female defensiveness.

  • Wayfinder

    pet, adj.

    2.a. Specially cherished; for which one has a particular fondness or weakness; favourite; (also) particular.

  • Some Handle

    Susan, I understand that you did not tell her to write that. But, the fact that she did is not good. Again, I am a fan of this site. But her article was tough to get through.

  • Some Handle

    pet, adj.

    2.a. Specially cherished; for which one has a particular fondness or weakness; favourite; (also) particular.

    Can you look up the definition of White Knight for me?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Some Handle
      I cannot answer for Kate Bolick’s choice of language. She read the post and asked me about it. We also discussed the fact that most of Karen Owen’s conquests at Duke were men in LTRs with other women. She is highlighting alpha asshat behavior. I spent 8 hours talking with her, and I do not intend to be deposed by you. Again, please direct your challenges to her at The Atlantic.

      For my part, I’m delighted that the apex fallacy got into the article. As far as I know, it’s a first in the MSM. Even academics researching hookup culture have missed it to date. I discussed that more than any other single concept.

  • John G.

    I dunno, it was kinda disjointed. I don’t feel anything. It’s become all so cliche.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @John G.

      I dunno, it was kinda disjointed. I don’t feel anything. It’s become all so cliche.

      I don’t think she wrote the article to make you feel something. She analyzed the SMP in order to figure out how she got where she is today. She takes responsibility for her choices, and she doesn’t engage in self-pity.

  • Some Handle

    The post makes it abundantly clear that I was not the original source of the concept.

    Susan, I am not blaming you. I added that bit to emphasize what happens in articles like these.

  • Wayfinder

    @Some Handle

    I can’t read your post, the sun glinting off my armor was was too bright.

  • Höllenhund

    5-page-long article but not a single mention of female hypergamy, the main force driving the whole phenomenon in the first place. How predictable.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      5-page-long article but not a single mention of female hypergamy, the main force driving the whole phenomenon in the first place. How predictable.

      Isn’t the apex fallacy explained by female hypergamy? She talks about women who are 6s aiming for the hottest guys. Is that not female hypergamy? Or are you arguing about vocabulary like Some Handle? You’re disappointed she didn’t say “women are hypergamous.” I wouldn’t either, what an ugly sounding phrase.

  • Someguy

    Congrats!

  • Some Handle

    She is highlighting alpha asshat behavior.

    Unsurprising.

    I discussed that more than any other single concept.

    And good for you. Really.

    Susan, I highlight these things here because this is where the battle is happening.

    Also, I am familiar with how The Atlantic responds when certain people start saying some really honest things (i.e. any reference made about Steve Sailer).

    I come here because you have shown a willingness to think logically (however depressing it may be at times) about things are really happening in the real world…with input from both girls and guys.

    And, from that input, your focus has changed over the course of the blog. And, again, this is a good thing.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Some Handle

      I come here because you have shown a willingness to think logically (however depressing it may be at times) about things are really happening in the real world…with input from both girls and guys.

      And, from that input, your focus has changed over the course of the blog. And, again, this is a good thing.

      Thank you. You know, before I started the blog I wrote a manuscript for a self-help book. A literary agent liked it but decried my lack of a “platform.” Nearly three years later I’m amazed at how crappy that piece of writing is. So uninformed! So yes, I am very aware of how my perspective has shifted.

  • Some Handle

    Everywhere I turn, I see couples upending existing norms and power structures, whether it’s women choosing to be with much younger men, or men choosing to be with women more financially successful than they are (or both at once). My friend M., a successful filmmaker, fell in love with her dog walker, a man 12 years her junior; they stayed together for three years, and are best friends today.

    Yes, everywhere she looks: Brooklyn Heights, Chelsea, Cape Cod.

    Just the other day I met a man in Des Moines, a performance artist, who married a financially successful, older woman from North Dakota who is at the top of her field as a Fashion Magazine editor.

  • deti

    @ Susan:

    The article has a nice mention of you, this blog and your group. But aside from that, it seems to me just more Kay Hymowitz/Sandra Tsing Loh redux.   I read this as more of the same combination of wailing and gnashing of teeth with the “I have a fulfilling single life” tripe that really offers nothing in the way of solutions.    Bolick’s article is a mishmash of evolutionary history lesson, Bolick’s lonely heart dating history,  “where are all the good men” and “it’s all about me, I’ll never find a man” and then devolves into hamster spinning with “In the end, it’s all about me.  I’m single, don’t really wanna be, but I have a great life.”   Once again, the men she dates are mere supporting players, cast to say their lines on cue and exit when she tells them.   

    Bolick comes close to getting to the heart of the matter when writing about your focus group, their wealth of sexual experience, her marveling at that extensive experience at their tender ages.  She parenthetically notes she had nothing like that experience as a newly minted college graduate.   She seems to wonder aloud why the focus group women even want husbands.  Then Bolick averts her eyes because, I think, she does not want to hear their answers.   

    My other complaint is that these articles never tell us anything of much usefulness in the SMP and they almost always proceed from utterly false and demonstrably false premises.   They explcate the issue.   They talk incessantly about the problem from women’s perspectives.   She even comes up with a few incorrect causes.  Bolick repeats the canard and shibboleth that men don’t want to commit.  This is not correct.  Men want to commit.  Women just don’t want those men to commit to them.  And in the same sentence, she commits apex fallacy in saying that in societies where women outnumber men, men become promiscuous and don’t commit.   No.  SOME men become promiscuous, but only those high status men who CAN become promiscuous.   The rest — about 80% — are left with nothing, a fact which appears to have been conclusively established at this blog.  It’s really getting tiresome constantly having to correct these utterly erroneous conclusions women always trot out when this issue is raised.   

    In these pieces (and Bolick’s piece is no exception), rarely if ever is anything offered in the way of useful or sound advice or solutions for women.   The article comes off to my eyes as simply one more in an endless parade of kaffeeklaatsches in which Bolick invites women gather to complain and bemoan their plights.  There is no thoughtfulness about why they are where they are.  There is no introspection, no effort even to consider doing something different, something that might work.    Perhaps solutions could be offered such as no sex without commitment.  Or, if you want to have sex without commitment, then accept the likely consequences that many men will disqualify you and you might have problems getting pregnant later.   Or, escalating sexual commitment concomitantly with the man’s commitment.   Or maybe you ladies are looking at and attracted to the wrong kinds of guys who tingle you but do little else for you.  Perhaps you need to change what you’re looking for.  

    I’m reminded of a scene in Bull Durham where Crash (Kevin Costner) is coaching Nuke (Tim Robbins) on how to handle the press when he makes it to the majors.   Crash gives him lame one-offs like “I’m just happy to be here” and “hope I can help out the club”.   Nuke complains that it’s boring and it makes him look boring.   Crash retorts “Of course it’s boring.  That’s the point.”   

    Sometimes an LTR is boring.  Sometimes marriage is humdrum and routine and mundane.   Sometimes that’s the point.   Sometimes I’m boring.  Sometimes my wife bores me.  But you stay together even when it’s boring because of the good tradeoffs.      But too many women want excitement, adventure, and tingles all the time.  They want Mr. Big.    And they think that if they can’t get that all the time, it’s not working and it’s time to move on to something and someone else. 

      Writers like Bolick could offer something to women.   But instead, what we get is more “Oh well, guess this is just the way it is.  Some more tea?”

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Deti

      It’s really getting tiresome constantly having to correct these utterly erroneous conclusions women always trot out when this issue is raised.

      To be fair, she really did her homework. She spoke with Stephanie Coontz, Helen Fisher and other highly respected academics and researchers. You can’t blame Bolick for erroneous conclusions when there is not one single scholar talking about the apex fallacy, or even qualifying information about behavior with certain sex ratios. Indeed, the manosphere, which is the source of this concept, has never offered real proof either. I spent 40 hours last year combing through CDC and other stats to get at the truth of who is having sex. Studies published since then seem to indicate that in fact, the apex fallacy applies equally to both sexes when it comes to promiscuity. It’s just that men value promiscuity (their own) more than women do.

      In these pieces (and Bolick’s piece is no exception), rarely if ever is anything offered in the way of useful or sound advice or solutions for women.

      I agree with this. It’s obvious Bolick doesn’t have the solution. Nor did she choose to highlight my main message to women, which is to shape a strategy to get you to your life’s goals. It’s clear she didn’t ever do that – she talks about having arrived at each step “by default.” I also think this was very difficult for her – the idea that women might want to know how to avoid winding up like her. She loved it that the girls looked up to her, and was careful to indicate their clearly expressed preference to marry. But she was in no place or hurry to counsel them on how to do that. And while they nodded in answer to her questions, they were freaked out, and have discussed it privately with me since then.

  • deti

    @  Susan:  

    “Her very high SMV is supremely relevant. This is not some fugly feminist or harpy bitching about there being no good men.”

    I don’t agree she has a high SMV but it’s higher than most women her age.  Her SMV is relevant only that I think it might illustrate where some of your focus group might be in 15-20 years.   I suspect your focus group and the women who communicate with you are acutely aware of that.

     

  • wudang

    She is very hot. Kate, I have a couple of suggestions for you. Read Michelle langleys book on womens infidelity. It is a way better explanation of why women fall out of love with their husbands, why they cheat and how they behave than the explanations mainstream media gives. If you havent already gone into it, read through the blogs of the manosphere. It is filled with stuff to write about. Third, athol kays advice is, as you can see in the comment section of his blog, wildly successful at making relationships work. An article that delves into his advice would be a great read and help promote relationship advice that actually work as oposed ti make things worse for people. Fourth, there is a clear shift in the relationship advice given to women now by dating coaches. The pua blogger theprivateman has researched advice dating coaches give to women and found it has shifted strongly from the never settle eat pray love type advice and the.dont take no shit from a man meme ti something strongly resembling the advice given by the manosphere. These are some of the dating coaches though, not relationship columnists and dating columnists in magazines. Most importantly I would look into karezza and read the book cupids poisoned arrow by marnia Robinson. Karezza is fairly similar to what the oneida community practiced. It is a form of meditative sex were one avoids convensional “peak” orgasms and instead experiences a combination of preorgasmic bliss and the so called valey orgasm also called the internal orgasm/the.tantric orgasm/the yin orgasm. it is said in ancient texts from.various.cultures that this type of sex makes love and sexual attraction last indefinitely as oposed to conventional sex which.makes attraction die of after a few years. At the karezza forum at reuniting.info there are hundreds and hundreds of couples that have found this to be true for them. I have yet to see a single.couple who practice karezza say it does not work as it is claimed to. That is not to say no one who practices karezza breaks up, one can still be incompatible, but what always.is the case is that the couples maintain.high.and constant sexual attraction and a very strong feeling of pairbonding love that they find is highly different than the romantic love if the first few years and resembles the pairbonding love couples.usually feel after a few years but is so much stronger than normal and so coupled with strong sexual attraction that it is equaly satisfying as romantic love. The key reason couples break up is in my opinion not that they are.incompatible or that they loose attraction because of behavior but that loss of attraction is preprogrammed into us and this in turn leads us to not tolerate what we dislike and to behave worse. Karezza corrects this.and provides the emotions and sexual attraction that make people tolerate the behavior they dislike and behave better themselves. This can be backed up in three ways. One is that entirely seperate cultures.have this type of sex built into their mystical meditative traditions and claim the same benefit. The second is the the reuniting.info forum is filled with people who experience these benefits and can attest to them working. Thirdly, since Alice stockham invented/reinvented karezza it has been practiced by people in the west for a 150 years or so and the experience.of.these people.can.be found in books about karezza such as stockhams books and Stanley bass books. In addition ti this marnia Robinson has come up with a plausible scientific theory for why karezza works and relates it to doapmine levels. What I suggest you do is read one of Diana Richardsons tantra.books.first. She explains best how this type if sex is performed.and how it feels. Then read cupids poisoned arrow for the scientific theory. I also have a post at fastseduction.com under the name of wudang that explains karezza more in depth. You probably have to sign up to the forum to read the post as it is in the arcives somewhere. Oh, I forgot, an article about womens shit testing/fitness testing of men would be great too:)

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    I think Miss Bolick represented you, and by proxy, us, very well.  Once again, the Atlantic is a very, very elitist journal, and just to have your blog and the ideas that percolate around this blog enter this arena show that there is  openness to other ideas besides their own orthodoxy.  Unfortunately, I don’t think you opened her eyes all that much.  She’s a pretty privileged woman, and privilege clutches its ideological underpinnings pretty tightly.

    So, there is plenty of feminist orthodoxy in Miss Bolick’s article- men are weird, lazy, and untractable, their concerns are not important, and they are not really necessary anyway.  Most of the article that followed the HuS material seemed to be a celebration of impending idiosyncratic catladyhood, with the added comfort that she wouldn’t be alone.

    What I found disturbing about her anthropological smorgasbord of reflections on societies and their differing mating strategies was a lack of understanding that a society’s mating strategies are pretty central to their success and failure in the rugby match of the modern world.  After all, it wasn’t the Musuo people of Southern China who  gave her the use of her handsome mid-century apartment in Chelsea, or bequeathed her a charming Brooklyn aerie ; or put her up at a rambling Cape Cod summer house; or allowed a weekend at a place on Shelter Island to balloon into two weeks.  Here you have four stories that didn’t get told.  Neither  Deanan and her daughters, nor my wife and myself, will ever find ourselves in such well-tailored surroundings.

    My intuition is that there was masculine energy that went into the creation of each one of those places, and an unspoken agreement based on an outdated mating strategy that produced the comfort by which each of these women has reaped the benefit.

  • Ted

    Oh wow!  Wilkinsburg is on the same side of Pittsburgh as I am, but much closer to the city.  It is known as one of the worst areas around town for crime and poverty. I’m not surprised by what the author found there.

    I thought this was a good article.  I’m disappointed that it went in the direction of open marriages and poly lifestyle though.  If we continue with things as they are, men will have very little to no involvement in their own children’s upbringing.  I certainly don’t speak for all men, but it seems to me that being part of your children’s life is how you pass own you values.  Of course, that is assuming there are any values left to pass on.

  • Wayfinder

    From the article:

    I remember experiencing that same panicked exhaustion around the time I turned 36, at which point I’d been in the dating game for longer than that alarmed 22-year-old had, and I wanted out. (Is there an expiration date on the fun, running-around period of being single captured so well by movies and television?)

    Yeah. It’s called being mature enough for a real relationship. Aping the apex females doesn’t even work for the apex females all of the time (how many Hollywood stars are going to die alone?)

    I’m starting to suspect that some young women became so afraid of giving up their “freedom” that they never practiced being responsible for something. This lead to a gulf between them and the “good” young men, who are much more likely to have gotten a message about responsibility, duty, and the like.

    I swear, the two sexes are alien cultures who just think they speak the same language.

  • sandy

    I’m not sure she has high SMV. As pictured on the cover, I’ll give her 6.5 at best (she has a very unpleasant facial expression).

  • AnonymousDog

    I have to second MuleChewingBriars’s comments.

    Something which jumped out at me was the author’s relating how she ended an LTR at age 28 after a long string of boyfriends and relationships going back to her freshman year in high school while seemingly unaware that many people don’t have dating histories which are in any way comparable to hers. Yet she extrapolates from her own experiences to those of women generally.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Something which jumped out at me was the author’s relating how she ended an LTR at age 28

      This was my favorite part of the article. It was very honest, and it was pretty clear to me that she considers that a huge mistake that changed her life for the worse. At the very least, she worries that it was. She also confesses the utter idiocy of breaking up with a great man (an Atlantic editor no less!) because there was “something missing.” She’s touching there on what feminism did to women. The script we absorbed, fed to us by our newly liberated mothers. What’s different about Kate Bolick is that most women her age who are single not by choice are still eliminating men who don’t give off “sparks” or deliver the whole package on the first date. She is smart and introspective, and she understands how her views were shaped, and where she made mistakes.

  • Jonny

    The men she dated… “high-powered magazine editor”, “prominent academic”, “novelist”, “writer”, …. BAD CHOICES.

    “her second child, 15-year-old Ronicka, was pregnant” … “I had done everything I could to make sure she didn’t end up like me, and now this,” she told me….  TWICE DIVORCED.

    The article is so talky. It is clearly a woman’s conversation. I wished it would get to the point. Lots of details, but very little introspection.

    Being that women are outnumbering guys, I thought that there would be many women candidates when I was seriously looking for a wife. However, the women are not available. Quality women are just as hard to find as good men. So how can we seriously consider women’s blight as the supply has worsened?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      The men she dated… “high-powered magazine editor”, “prominent academic”, “novelist”, “writer”, …. BAD CHOICES.

      Oh, I don’t know. The high powered magazine editor sounds like a great guy, and he didn’t dump her. Novelists are a risky bunch, but for every John Updike or Philip Roth there’s a Tom Wolfe. Kate herself is at the top of the pyramid – it’s hardly a surprise that she’d meet and date men there too.

  • wudang

    In the article it says that were women are in the minority stable loving.relationships follow. But the degree to which this is the case rests on womens economic situation and the culutral norms and control.of womens sexual.behavior in those places. Were women do not nead men financially and there is not strong shaming of divorce women are serially monogamous. This is the case amongst the mosu and all other cultures that sets the conditions for women to be entirely sexually free. This article paints a picture of the men as creating a promiscuos disaster when they can get what they want while women are the noble loving creatures that creates life long loving families. that is an insane amount of bullshit. While it is true that men choose this sexual option when they can, which only alphas ever will be able to, once men are married with children they stay. Statistics show it is the women not the men who leave. So the reality is that it is the men who have what it takes to create stable loving families not the women. Women are notoriously serially monogamous and without external factors or a shit ton if introspection by the woman she will not be able to stay long term while her husband will. So.when.people blame absent fathers for the riots in London that is insane at the same time as it is true. It is true that the father being out of the picture creates.havock but he is gone not through fault of his own but because women through him out. And they through him out not because there was something wrong with him but because women unlike men are not designed for long term monogamy. Michelle langleys work demonstrates this well.

  • Wayfinder

    @Ted

    I thought this was a good article.  I’m disappointed that it went in the direction of open marriages and poly lifestyle though.  If we continue with things as they are, men will have very little to no involvement in their own children’s upbringing.  I certainly don’t speak for all men, but it seems to me that being part of your children’s life is how you pass own you values.  Of course, that is assuming there are any values left to pass on.

    I guess if she wants an alpha, that’s the kind of marriage she’s stuck with.

    @MuleChewingBriars

    Unfortunately, I don’t think you opened her eyes all that much.  She’s a pretty privileged woman, and privilege clutches its ideological underpinnings pretty tightly.

    So, there is plenty of feminist orthodoxy in Miss Bolick’s article- men are weird, lazy, and untractable, their concerns are not important, and they are not really necessary anyway.  Most of the article that followed the HuS material seemed to be a celebration of impending idiosyncratic catladyhood, with the added comfort that she wouldn’t be alone.

    I’m not sure she changed her conscious opinion, but I think the part near the start of the article, where she all but admits that marriage as we know it is dead is pretty telling. I mean, look:

    Coontz still didn’t think that marriage was falling apart, but she came to see that it was undergoing a transformation far more radical than anyone could have predicted, and that our current attitudes and arrangements are without precedent.

    This, while framed in an almost optimistic light, is basically an admission that you’re never going to have a marriage like your mother or grandmother had. Even if it resembles what they had, it’s going to be subjected to completely different pressures and be forced to weather an environment that is no longer constructed to sustain it.

  • Ted

    @ Wayfinder – I’m afraid it isn’t just young women that are putting off responsibility.  And to me, this is a huge part of the problem.  Young men and women are not taking their responsibilities seriously in many cases.  Sure, they may be working and paying a few bills, but they really don’t put much if any thought into how they should be improving their lives.  They don’t show much sense of duty in regards to being a functional member of society.  They show a huge sense of entitlement in all things, not just romantic relationships.

    In short, they are becoming self-centered brats who’s only concern is “what’s in it for me”? You cannot learn to be part of a couple by living alone.  Spending too much time only accountable to yourself makes it very difficult when you marry and become accountable to/for someone else, let alone having children.

  • sandy

    Wayfinder wrote:

    I’m starting to suspect that some young women became so afraid of giving up their “freedom” that they never practiced being responsible for something. This lead to a gulf between them and the “good” young men, who are much more likely to have gotten a message about responsibility, duty, and the like.

    Exactly. It looks like most women think that words “commitment” and “duty” cannot apply to them. They think that men should be bound and commited, but they should always have full freedom to choose (and it doesn’t matter what they promised before).

  • deti

    I doubt Susan wants this post to become a detailed analysis of Kate Bolick’s SMV.  But it bears repeating that to men, Bolick’s SMV is a function almost entirely of her physical appearance and her personality, whatever that may be.   Bolick’s prestigious career, her socioeconomc status, the people she knows and has met, the property she owns, her salary and the size of her bank account have no effect on her SMV.  Absolutely none.  

    I think the young women reading this thread should know that is the way most men view a woman’s SMV, SATC and Carrie Bradshaw notwithstanding.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      it bears repeating that to men, Bolick’s SMV is a function almost entirely of her physical appearance and her personality

      To be clear, when I said she has high SMV I was referring solely to her physical appearance. She is very attractive and charismatic in person, she exudes great warmth and affability. I know she was astounded that the Atlantic decided to feature her photo. That was an editorial decision obviously based on her looks. They want to get across the point that even beautiful, interesting, smart women are having difficulty finding life partners.

  • Toz

    Reading the article, I just felt profound pity for her. The whole thing was a well-written hamster spin with just a touch of inner reflection. It’s clear from her background that her values brought her to where she was. All parents would be wise to learn from this. The sense of entitlement starts early and there are some terrible consequences.

    Susan, I would have enjoyed an article from you in that publication much more.

  • John G.

    “I don’t think she wrote the article to make you feel something….” Well, a lot of these articles are written with that in mind. They try to convince you of something or change your perspective and make you feel uncomfortable or enlightened or amused or something. She has all the same points that had been made before, all the same anecdotes and observations. I was hoping that by mentioning you, she may have had something to add. She dinna.

  • Wayfinder

    @Ted

    I have noticed quite a few young men who I’d never trust with a job, but they seem never seem to have a shortage of girls fawning over them. The least impressive specimen of humanity I’ve ever run across was an apparently quite successful pickup artist.

  • Jonny

    The citing of these obscure academic studies is obscene. “we are free to pursue what the British sociologist Anthony Giddens termed the “pure relationship,” in which intimacy is sought in and of itself and not solely for reproduction.” AND “In 2006, the sociologists Naomi Gerstel and Natalia Sarkisian published a paper concluding that unlike singles, married couples spend less time keeping in touch with and visiting their friends and extended family, and are less likely to provide them with emotional and practical support. They call these “greedy marriages.”

    Hmmm. So why bother? Marriage is for reproduction. 89% of marriages have children. Usually, the support (emotional, financial, household) should be coming from the spouse (husband and wife). Isn’t a marriage where no outside person can cause division?

    Clearly, this author doesn’t like traditional marriage, yet pines for it at the same time. Like the forbidden fruit, she wants what she shouldn’t get. The fruit should only be consumed “as is” and not spoiled to her sensibility. Wake up. Marriage isn’t easy. Stop trying to reform it to your liking.

  • Steven

    She’s gorgeous and intelligent. I really don’t understand why she can’t find someone.

  • deti

    @ Susan: 
    “I also think this was very difficult for her – the idea that women might want to know how to avoid winding up like her. She loved it that the girls looked up to her, and was careful to indicate their clearly expressed preference to marry. But she was in no place or hurry to counsel them on how to do that. And while they nodded in answer to her questions, they were freaked out, and have discussed it privately with me since then.”

    I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall for those private discussions.  I bet you’ve heard things like this: 

    “I don’t want to end up like her.”  

    “What do I have to do to make sure I’m not 39, never married and childless?”  

    “How did this happen in this society?  There must be hundreds of thousands of Kate Bolicks out there.  Why?”

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @deti

      I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall for those private discussions.

      They did say those things, but they were also conflicted. I’m sure her mother would be extremely proud of her. In many ways, she is the ideal 21st c. female. (Ideal as in feminist ideal.) So the girls thought she was an awesome woman. They still want her to find the guy! One of them said to me that she hopes Kate’s appearances on TV (she’s also going on Colbert) would lead to new, dashing suitors.

      Kate didn’t put it in the article, but she also asked each girl what she would prioritize – career or marriage and family. Every single one said marriage and family. One of the women in a serious relationship is rethinking her decision to go to med school because of what that career choice is likely to mean during her 20s. I think she’ll wind up becoming an NP instead. Personally, I think it’s very difficult for a woman to be high powered in business and be a good parent. Not impossible, but very difficult. Sheryl Sandberg is often referred to as a shining example, but in the talk I saw her give at SWSX she forgot her daughter’s age, calling her 2 at one point and 3 later on. That says it all, really.

  • Ted

    @ Jonny: you said

    “Clearly, this author doesn’t like traditional marriage, yet pines for it at the same time. Like the forbidden fruit, she wants what she shouldn’t get. The fruit should only be consumed “as is” and not spoiled to her sensibility. Wake up. Marriage isn’t easy. Stop trying to reform it to your liking.”

    And this is the real issue I bitch about the most regarding marriage.  If you don’t like it, then don’t get married.  But stop trying to CHANGE marriage so that it suits your tastes.  If you want to have multiple sexual partners but remain in a LTR, fine.  Just don’t call it an “Open marriage”.  There is no such thing.

    Or maybe we should just simply get rid of marriage completely, from a government standpoint anyway.  Leave “marriage” to the secular/religious/spiritual folks.  Get rid of marriage licenses completely and just have couples sing legal documents for things like inheritance, passing of property from spouse to spouse, visitation and power of attorney documents, etc.  Then, only people that actually believe in marriage would get one, and everyone else can live however they want with the same legal protections, but without the label of marriage which carries a lot of meaning for many people.

  • Wayfinder

    @Steven

    I think my sarcasm detector must be broken.

    She spent decades actively rejecting men who actually wanted to commit to her. Some because they were desperate, icky betas, who she compares to butterfly collectors of all things.  She gave up her best shot at a good alpha because “I wasn’t ready to settle down”. I have absolutely no idea why she would still be single. No idea at all.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    @Steve

    It should be obvious.  She has the soul of an Eastern Seaboard real estate broker.  I thought she was writing for Architectural Digest half the time.

  • http://theprivateman.wordpress.com/ The Private Man

    For those of us in the Manosphere, articles like this, while frustrating, still serve to bring more attention to the core tenets of our approach to analyzing sexual and emotional dynamics between the sexes. How many Atlantic readers will find Susan’s blog and then dig deeper into the Manosphere?  Probably not a huge number but Atlantic readers represent the elite, the policy makers, the academics, etc.

    There is definitely a major cultural shift going on. Marriage and intimate relationships are broken and we are now attempting to find a solution or possible a completely new relationship arrangement. My research into successful dating coaches indicates that their advice is fundamentally different to mainstream dating advice. The idea that the masculine attracts the feminine and the feminine attracts the masculine is revolutionary despite being such common sense. Yet that statement appears more and more and could get some serious traction if the social expectations of political correctness finally evaporate.

    There are surprising numbers of women who read Manosphere blogs because such women have found mainstream media dating and relationship advice to be an utter failure. Is it any wonder why Athol Kay’s book (www.marriedmansexlife.com) is so popular with readers? Why is it that pick up artistry (PUA) is so popular in the Manosphere?

    I appreciate such articles and they only serve to bring more attention to the Manosphere.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Private Man

      The idea that the masculine attracts the feminine and the feminine attracts the masculine is revolutionary despite being such common sense. Yet that statement appears more and more and could get some serious traction if the social expectations of political correctness finally evaporate.

      Thanks for sharing your POV, that’s how I feel about it. Personally, when I read the article I shouted with glee that she nails her mother’s feminism right at the start. She had never even heard of hypergamy when I mentioned it. Yet she gives it equal weight (even more weight, perhaps) to Helen Fisher’s input. I’m honestly surprised that I succeeded in convincing her, but she is no feminist and she was very receptive to the ideas because they explain what’s wrong in the SMP. From that standpoint I see this as a huge step forward – these are good things to be discussing in the MSM.

  • Anacaona

    I can’t read your post, the sun glinting off my armor was was too bright.

    Heh funny and wonderful Alpha response *kissinthecheek*

    You cannot learn to be part of a couple by living alone.

    Yes as an experiment (and to save money in hotels) when I was waiting for the visa papers to be done after I married I lived alone for around 9 months. Living alone create terrible habits I can imagine an adult that lives alone for a long time getting a harder time adjusting to living with another person than someone that goes from sharing his/her space with many people to one people and slowly fits in it. Hubby lived alone longer and for him was a bit harder as well. This should be also a good advice living alone has become a symbol of maturity and status and I think is a faux maturity step.

    My prediction: Bolick will get married less than four years from now.

    Maybe is me but every time a “fabulous and successful” woman decides to write an article about the single life 70% of it is like a dating profile with more details and examples of how much of a catch she is and a great picture that shows both a more or less pleasant young looking face and a non fat body, in this case. She gets a level of exposure that she wouldn’t have in a dating site and an Alpha from a similar privileged group takes notice. Any executive that had a nerdy geeky past and how might consider advantages marrying will get the news from his social circle. Give her a call start dating she will behave the best she can because she knows she is being judged as a wife and voila! Wedding bells and motherhood (whether her or a surrogate). I might be wrong but I think I had seen this happening around a dozen times. Wait and see.

    Congratulations Susan!Is really nice that you had touched so many people and I do think the word is getting slowly out, I’m sure some people will like to dig further in this and find the truth our PC modern world is afraid to say out loud. But prepare for the backlash the people that will be drawn to the article will stumble upon the old threads and bring the feminists Thesaurus “Mysoginst, sexist”…again. Oh well I will be loading the intellectual bullets, the war is far from over.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anacoana

      But prepare for the backlash the people that will be drawn to the article will stumble upon the old threads and bring the feminists Thesaurus “Mysoginst, sexist”…again. Oh well I will be loading the intellectual bullets, the war is far from over.

      It’s funny how many battle metaphors we’ve been using lately. It really is a cultural war, and we have just taken the high ground.

  • Matt M

    I propose a new source of green energy, never to be exhausted: hamster-powered electric generators! Ms. Bolick could power all of NYC by herself.

    The lack of introspection and of questioning why things are the way they are is both staggering and expected at the same time. She readily quotes marriage and out-of-wedlock birth statistics among blacks but fails to even hint at a cause (the rise of the modern welfare state). She goes into gory detail of her almost-husband Allan and the feeling that “something was missing”. We here know what was missing: the guy was the worst sort of blue-pill beta. It seems she goes out of her way to quote ever fringe relationship researcher she can muster and coins some new words in the process (singleism? really?!?) Not once does she talk about the legions of men, all good providers and willing to commit, who can’t draw the attention of women because the polarized lenses of hypergamy. All in all, it was a paean to solipsism, and difficult to stomach.

  • Jonny

    @Susan:  “She loved it that the girls looked up to her, and was careful to indicate their clearly expressed preference to marry. But she was in no place or hurry to counsel them on how to do that. And while they nodded in answer to her questions, they were freaked out, and have discussed it privately with me since then.”

    Do you suspect that Bolick is merely looking for a support group to justify her decisions? She probably knows these young girls are following her path, but she refuses to acknowledge such obvious insights. Just let them fail. She’ll feel good about it. The old wise woman looks back and wonders “why couldn’t I help.” But she was a journalist and couldn’t get involved with the subjects’ lives. That was her responsibility or some other rationalization.

    Sick people can’t be the cure. She is still the patient. She can’t help those girls until she finally marries and she never will.

    Only you, Susan, can give good advice. All young people should ask the still married folks on how to get married and stay married.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Congrats +1000 !!

    Reading that article now.

  • Some Handle

    Maybe is me but every time a “fabulous and successful” woman decides to write an article about the single life 70% of it is like a dating profile with more details and examples of how much of a catch she is and a great picture that shows both a more or less pleasant young looking face and a non fat body, in this case. She gets a level of exposure that she wouldn’t have in a dating site and an Alpha from a similar privileged group takes notice.

    +1

    I never kept up with celebrity gossip, but I remember hearing that some chick from “House” (the show with Hugh Laurie) had recently gotten divorced. Well, no sooner did I suddenly see her face on the cover of every magazine at the supermarket.

    I couldn’t help but think that she was husband shopping. No one was better at that than Jennifer Aniston.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    I dont like Kate´s misandrist despective tone. At all.

    She is reporting a lot of data accurately, but putting all of the blame on men and painting women as saints / victims. How nice.

    If you want a husband, how about if you start by appreciating men, and take your own responsibility when it fits?

    One might hope that in low-sex-ratio societies—where women outnumber men—women would have the social and sexual advantage.

     In other words—capitalist men are pigs.

    the more successful a man is (or thinks he is)

    when a man hits 35 and suddenly, desperately, wants a wife.

    Really? aint that the other way around.

    where marriage-minded women are increasingly confronted with either deadbeats or players.

    frustrated romance among middle-class black women, where the prospect of marrying a black man often seemed more or less hopeless.

     it’s easy to see why women of any race would feel frustrated by their romantic prospects.

    professionally successful, college-educated women were confronted with a shrinking pool of like-minded marriage prospects.

     women are forced to choose between deadbeats and players

    this has either liberated young women from being ashamed of their sexual urges, or forced them into a promiscuity they didn’t ask for. Young men, apparently, couldn’t be happier.

    Aphex fallacy. Women forced into promiscuity? by whom.

    Do you think they have ‘trash dick’?

    Fuck you?

    Most of them said that though they’d had a lot of sex, none of it was particularly sensual or exciting.

    For centuries, women’s sexuality was repressed by a patriarchal marriage system

    And… male sexuality was liberated?

    now what could be an era of heady carnal delights is stifled by a new form of male entitlement

    … describe your desired era of heady carnal delights.

    Most striking to me was the innocence of these young women.

    Right. I cant bring myself to read the whole thing, there´s no point.

    I like the parts where she quotes you, Susan.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Yohami
      To be fair, I’m the one that said trash dick. I didn’t say it like that though – I told the girls I’d seen the phrase online (I had used it here as well) and asked if they had ever heard it. We were digging into that old favorite, male promiscuity. Anyway, I fought that with the fact-checker and lost. She just added that I’d heard the phrase on the internet.

      FWIW, some men do have trash dick. Trash dick results from a high partner count, especially with partners who also have a high partner count. By the way, have you heard that gonorrhea in the UK is just about incurable now? It’s resistant to all known forms of treatment, and it greatly increases susceptibility to other STDs.

      A harsh morality is going to clamp down on society when the number of trash dicks and vag’s gets too high.

  • dragnet

    I think this piece is going to generate a lot of talk—it’s going to be regarded as comprehensive, stimulating and groundbreaking.

    But for those of us in the manosphere, it’s mostly old hat…and an example of the many of the usual ex-post rationalization, solipsism, and half-baked arguments that characterize a lot of the feminized dialogue around these issues.

    Bolick is at her best and most informative when she describes the economic contributions that women have made to their families throughout history. The stay-at-home wife isn’t so much an invention of timeless male oppression as is was a holdover from the Victorian era when women were “kept” as a sign of status. The relic survived as industrial societies began concentrating production away from the home in factories, and men had to spend long hours away from their families, leaving the women to look over things. Before that the home was also the factory, and as such women were expected, and happily did, provide substantial economic value to their families. To the extent that feminism has once again normalized this ancient, one might even say “patriarchal”, paradigm it is to be applauded (although one can argue that advances in technology would’ve eliminated most labor-based gender roles in due time without 2nd wave feminism, but that’s another topic).

    But aside from that there isn’t too much redeeming value in this article. She mentions matrifocal and matriarchal communities as examples to considered—the Mosuo and urban black communities in particular. However she conveniently omits that matrifocal communities have high rates of male violence and very low rates of advancement in technology, medicine, transporation, etc. In other words: they are shitty civilizations. The reason why we have advanced medicine, agriculture, space travel, etc is because patriarchal societies circumscribed the sexual urges of both sexes and then channelled them into creating the excess capacity that makes an advanced civilization possible. Think Camille Paglia and grass huts. There’s plenty of sex in a matriarchy—but not too much else. That’s no way to run a civilization.

    She also writes that men are in dire straits because manufactoring jobs are “gone” and never coming back. Well, yes, but it pays to examine a bit more closely what actually happened. Sure, many of those jobs were eliminated by technology. But for the remainder, what really happened was that the business class and free-market conservatives got together and shipped the manufacturing jobs overseas where the men would work for cheaper. Foreign working class men were economically empowered at the expense of the American working class. These jobs didn’t “disappear” so much as working class American men were sold out for profit.

    And what on earth do we expect all of these idle men with no jobs, no prospects and no future to do? Well, what young men usually do—crime, violence, and other anti-social behavior. No surprise you find that stuff at high-levels in the urban black community as well as in the poorest parts of Appalachia which are also highly matrifocal. And as a side note, yes, there are twice as many black women as black men graduating from college…but only about 15 percent of black women have bachelor degrees, compared to 13 percent of black men so it’s not like a vast sea of black women are educated relative to black men—even though it’s easy to think that based reading articles written in the media mainstream.

    She also doesn’t really address the long-term economic consequences of all this empowered, claviroyant, inner-peaced singlehood that so many women are now experiencing. How will we establish and sustain expensive infrastructure, generous social welfare systems like univeral healthcare and social security, improve education and fund our military if the tax-base is shrinking because women of the higher socioeconomic status and our productive social classes aren’t having children? I can understand if a productive, world class intellect like Marie Curie forgoes reproduction—but an Atlantic writer? An HR rep? A trial lawyer? The vast majority of these single women aren’t going to be able to pay for their own healthcare or take care of themselves as they live increasingly longer lives—but they didn’t produce children to strengthen to the tax base they will inevitably become a net drain on. The Japanese are having this problem right now. I’ll say again, this is no way to run a civilization, and any civilization that can’t solve the basic problem of how to get its most productive men and women to come together and reproduce is a probably not going to be all that long-lived, especially since that problem was already solved by—yep, you guessed it—the evil patriarchy.

    The future is not with women like Bolick, or single-women who have managed to rationalize away their past frivolity and find some semblance of peace with their remaining infertile decades while residing in Dutch quasi-convents. No, the future lies with women who take stock of the errors of women like Bolick and look at the men around them, and become more appreciative of the few guys who are actually willing to take a chance on them. These social and demographic pressures will mean that women will not so foolishly throw away a good man’s love, and that women will come to appreciate these men more. You will see even fewer relationships, but they will be longer-lived, and this because women will be able to look around and see what it’s like to not have male investment, and they’ll be able to see the truth despite the rose-colored tint our pop culture likes to put on the single life. In this scenario, the “players”, “deadbeats” and commitphobes that Bolick repeatedly derides have a vital role to play: making women appreciate those nice, solid, boring guys for the first time since the days of the bad old patriarchy. In time most women won’t look at Bolick and see someone to emulate, rather she will be viewed as a cautionary tale.

    The future lies in a place where men are no longer viewed as disposable, with their needs and desires taken as seriously as those of women. When we stopping judging men according to what they can do for women, and how they can help them fulfill their dreams. And when we are finally honest about a core truth of biology: that while men and women generally like and desire each other and are generally synergistic, our reproductive goals are largely in conflict and giving men the security they need to invest completely in the social contract and the general welfare of all means limiting the sexual freedoms of women in some important ways.

    The future also lies in a vibrant working and middle class with a business class, capital markets and poltical & social elites subject to the rule of law and signficant social and cultural sanctions.

    More to say, but I have 2.30 meeting. Sorry my thoughts are so scattered.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Epic comment from dragnet, thanks.

      These social and demographic pressures will mean that women will not so foolishly throw away a good man’s love, and that women will come to appreciate these men more…In time most women won’t look at Bolick and see someone to emulate, rather she will be viewed as a cautionary tale.

      Agreed. I sense a real shift occurring here. She already is viewed as a cautionary tale. My sense is that young women (at least the ones in my dining room) saw her and thought “Yes, but….” They said straight out career will take a back seat to marriage and family. These women (white, upper middle class) have grown up with moms who have run themselves ragged in many cases, taking on too much. Whole families have borne the brunt of this stress. Kate Bolick is halfway between my generation and theirs – and she represents another data point in the spinster memoir trend.

      Interestingly, Kate talked about her own personal life, including the recent relationships that she had high hopes for. I won’t share it here, but the women listened very intently. I could see the wheels spinning (the non-hamster variety) as they evaluated the arc of her relationships, and the particulars of the men Kate had been with.

      I do want to address the feeling some have that Kate was misandrist or deriding men. I understand this feeling, especially since there is some derisive, or at least tactless language used. However, I think it’s far better than every other article I’ve seen of this kind. Kate does a much better job than William Bennet, for example. She doesn’t blame men for not measuring up or call them Peter Pans. Much of what she says about men I have also said. The facts tell a troubling story. We need to address immediately why our young men are not thriving. The 60/40 college ratio is something we should be talking about nonstop. And, by the way, that is going to be the real kicker in declining marriage. A third of college educated women are not going to marry men with degrees. She doesn’t go so far as to suggest this. I would have been great if she had talked about what needs to change in order for the next generation of women to avoid her fate. Instead, she chose to celebrate her single status, which isn’t a surprise – it’s her personal story, after all, and her life is probably less than half over.

  • Ted

    @ Dragnet – Very good post!  I hope things go in the direction you suggest, but my fear is that we will continue down this road to destruction until we are easy pickings for an invasion/take-over/or a simply collapse as seen in the former U.S.S.R. before its all said and done.  Yep, I’m saying that our present course in regards to sex and relationships can very well end in the destruction of the United States as we know it.  Let our economy tank for real, and you’ll see it happen fast.  China already own’s much of the U.S. in debt, and here we are sabotaging the very society that has supported us for our brief but successful run.

    But as I said above, I get the impression that young adults now don’t feel like they need to contribute to or work for our country and the greater good of society.  If we can’t show them what they get out of the deal, they just aren’t interested.

  • Andy

    Any bloke reading this knows why the past it whining female writer is unmarried. It ain’t her choice.

    20mins of my life I will not get back.

  • Hope

    Congratulations Susan! It’s so great that ideas like yours are getting more exposure.

  • deti

    @  Susan:

    “So the girls thought she was an awesome woman. They still want her to find the guy! One of them said to me that she hopes Kate’s appearances on TV (she’s also going on Colbert) would lead to new, dashing suitors.”

    Not likely she’ll find anyone who tickles her hypergamous fancy.  Bolick has reached a professional and personal pinnacle. She’s an accomplished, respected journalist who owns three homes.  In alli likelihood she would find only an infinitesimally tiny percentage of men attractive. 

      “Kate didn’t put it in the article, but she also asked each girl what she would prioritize – career or marriage and family. Every single one said marriage and family.”

    Your focus group’s responses would not have supported the thesis of Bolick’s article.  Not surprising it was excluded.

  • wudang

    I hope as many of you as possible also post in the comment section of the Atlantic. Hammer in hypergamy as much as possible and focus on the other core manosphere messages and provide links to key posts and articles in manosphere websites. It would also be good to mention the manosphere as a phenomenon because that would make.someone curious enough to research it a bit. Mention athols site and book because that is the easiest to swallow.and something people can see is getting good results. A key focus should be that the women cluster arround a tiny percentage and it is this hypergamy that causes most of the phenomenon not men. Another key point us that men at able to handle.monogamy long turn it is the women who have a hard time with it as divorce statistics.show.

  • Ceer

    I’m of two minds about the article.  First, as some of the other commenters noticed, there isn’t a lot of conclusion seeking.  Honest, goal-oriented introspection is a BIG part of what helped create the techniques we now call pua/game.  Without it, I’m sure that women will continue to be left wondering why  society hasn’t given them a loving family, when they have their great careers and take-charge personalities.  The flip side, is I’ve observed women being very resistant to change in many cases, especially if they are on the receiving end of information that may threaten their perceived SMV.  Men can be like this too, sometimes, but as the primary approacher, he experiences much more acute pain when his actions don’t reflect reality.  This disconnect is what’s catching up with women.  Unfortunately, these women in particular are taking a hit for not playing by the rules defined by men.

  • Random Angeleno

    It’s easy to attack Bolick’s article.

    But heck, did you disappointed fellas really expect MSM rags like The Atlantic to keel over and espouse manosphere memes just like that? Seriously? For me, just that an article like this that discusses things like the Pareto Principle as applied to the college SMP is out there, that is huge progress. Rome wasn’t built in a day; we didn’t come to this pass in a day and we won’t reverse feminism in a day either.

    But … the cat is scrambling out of the bag and into the spinster’s home!

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    I was having fun reading it, up to the “singlism” part.

    “Singlism?” Really? Should I brace myself for even more politically-correct rules about what I can and can’t say, just because it’ll hurt someone’s feelings? Victimology is too pleasant a racket, it looks like. That guy can shove it.

    Anyway, I tried to read on, but the hamster-driven fantasies about how wonderful it would be when males are relegated to inferior status just drove me crazy. I didn’t see one mention of unfair divorce rulings, anti-father child custody enforcement, or the man-hatred commonly promoted in K-12 schools and universities. It’s good that HUS got some mention, but writing sympathetically about men would have gotten her thrown out of the magazine on her ear, I figure.

    That being said, she should come here and maybe leave a comment or two.

  • wudang

    The std thing is.interesting. If everything continues and we go towards open relationships and endless streaks of promiscuity wouldnt that necesarily come to a natural stop in such a large society because the spread would be insane. I have read that married swingers have more.stds than prostitues. I dont remember the numbers but they were extremely high

  • Anacaona

    For me, just that an article like this that discusses things like the Pareto Principle as applied to the college SMP is out there, that is huge progress.

    Agreed the manosphere sometimes suffers from slow activism fast results syndrome, given that there is no real outcry for MRA’s except for the very open and big internet expecting for the scene to change overnight is very unrealistic. A small step for manosphere and a big step for MRA’s, YMMV.

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    I agree that an article like this, for all its flaws, is a step in the right direction.

  • Hellhath

    I liked parts of the article, however I feel like rather than go off on some of the tangents she did it would have been better to ask some critical questions as to the underlying causes to some of her assertions. I believe raising points and not addressing some of the possible causes is poor journalistic form (other than shallow ones). I will
    take small steps toward progress but there is room for a follow-up article.

    Example: Why the seeming disparity between the assertion that being more “empowered” and “making their own way”. So if women are free to choose men regardless of their traditional roles as protectioner/provider how does this fit with the
    assertion the next line that the eligible pool is smaller because less men are
    more successful than them? You would think if you were ignorant of hypergamy
    that you would conclude it should increase not decrease the pool of “good
    men”. It isn’t that we don’t know the answer but I wonder why the obvious contradiction
    so close together.

    How about a discussion of the fact that industrial and factory jobs were replaced with white collar jobs, and eliminated or moved. Remember the promises of moving from the steel mills to the office. Put in your time doing this work and your children can go to
    college and work your way up and out. So what jobs replace those white collar
    jobs? Life coaching? Service ones? Honestly if I had it to do all over again I
    would stay out of this desk job and kept to my first love wrenching bikes.

    My biggest disappointment in the whole article was the whole point near the end concerning what amounts to single mothers raising children. Women cannot impart a sense of healthy masculinity into their boys any more than a Man can teach his daughter how to be truly feminine. You can guide them, you can give them the perspective of your experience but you cannot teach a boy to become a Man. That is not even taking into all the things an unhealthy single mother can do to a child such as
    projection, emotional incest, shaming due to her issues/fears, etc. At best you
    will raise a boy with a feminine frame of masculinity, at worst a traumatized
    and lost child stuck as a boy. I know so many mothers who raised their children
    to be what they thought a good husband should be not what a good man should be.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      My biggest disappointment in the whole article was the whole point near the end concerning what amounts to single mothers raising children.

      She was obviously of two minds about that herself, as she included a disclaimer on that. It really is one thing to say those women in PA were close, and quite another to suggest that’s a healthy model for raising kids. I’m close with my female friends too, but they didn’t raise my children for me. We need to address how to get men back into the family, not think about families that don’t require men. Admittedly, that’s a very intractable problem.

  • Passer_By

    To be honest, I’m sure she’s nice and smart and all that, but I found it a bit incoherent and hard to read.  It seemed to like 5 pages of hamster wheeling  to avoid addressing the obvious issues of hypergamy and choice addiction that plague her and similarly situated women (and which are probably exacerbated by her career).

  • Jonny

    I reread the article once more. Why is it that women who chose to not marry seek alternatives? If you don’t want a family via a husband and kids, why seek another family? Women seem to want options. This is so convenient for them. The truth is there are limitations to non-family options. You’re really alone if you don’t have your own family. Certainly, a woman can lose her husband and friends, but her children will remain. No woman looks at men and see the same future, but in the end, a women will be in the same situation as single men. Most single men spend lots of time by themselves.

    This article tells me she regrets her choices despite making the right choice for herself. It is the ultimate in self deception. She went so far to one side that maybe she will flip to the next side.

  • wudang

    One thing people tend to forget.when.disucssing matrifocal societies.such.as.the mozu is that while they have brothers in the role of the father and many males living right next to them in the village we will not have anything like that. Because we dont have ten children.but one or two or three, there wont be enough brothers to fill this role and the brother will often live far away. Good luck getting a system were the brothers we do have live with their sisters. Instead we will have the state in the role of the father which wil.mean there will be less male influence on children than in any society we have ever seen.

  • Jennifer

    “Never forget, you are merely an Alpha agent of righteous karma”

    Yep, there’s the PUA gospel for you. And never feel sympathy for a woman who God forbid thought education would help her. That kind of sentiment tempts me to lose sympathy for the “fallen” good guys.

  • http://lafemmeroar.wordpress.com/ lafemmeroar

    “men are lagging behind women in education and career advancement” is that evolution balancing things out? I don’t know, but I agree that the woman’s movement has impacted the female evolution from domestic goddess to corporate “queen.”

  • Some Handle

    But heck, did you disappointed fellas really expect MSM rags like The Atlantic to keel over and espouse manosphere memes just like that? Seriously?

    When our host calls an article “brilliant”, you go into it with high hopes.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      When our host calls an article “brilliant”, you go into it with high hopes.

      It exceeded my expectations. Perhaps I got a little carried away. I knew from the start what her angle was – her own plight. I hammered home what I thought was most important, and the result was better than I’d hoped.

      I do like the article, though. I think it’s very well written.

  • wudang

    One thing people tend to forget.when.disucssing matrifocal societies such as.the mozu is that while they have brothers in the role of the father and many males living right next to them in the village we will not have anything like that. Because we dont have ten children.but one or two or three, there wont be enough brothers to fill this role and the brother will often live far away. Good luck getting a system were the brothers we do have live with their sisters. Instead we will have the state in the role of the father which wil.mean there will be less male influence on children than in any society we have ever seen.

  • Petruchio

    Did ever Dian so become a grove
    As Kate this chamber with her princely gait?

    Such wind as scatters young men through the world
    To seek their fortunes farther than at home,

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Petruchio

      From the comments at the Atlantic. Shakespeare never fails.

      OPHELIA I was the more deceived.

      HAMLET Get thee to a nunnery

      Hamlet Act 3. Scene I

  • deti

    “Trash dick”?   Oy, that’s harsh.

    “A third of college educated women are not going to marry men with degrees.”

    I wonder if many of them will simply not marry at all.  A female friend years ago agonized over whether to marry her longtime BF.  She had a master’s degree; he wanted to be a police officer.  He couldn’t get on the force and instead became a tradesman, telling her he wasn’t going back to college.  She called me (yes, then the ever present emo tampon), distraught that her BF would not return to college.  She essentially told him she wouldn’t marry him if he didn’t have a BA or BS after his name.  She was seriously torn up about the possibility that her man wouldn’t have a degree and she had two.   She had a big problem with it.   Aaaaand, she broke up with him and married somebody else — who had an associate’s degree.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Aaaaand, she broke up with him and married somebody else — who had an associate’s degree.

      I cracked up at this.

      I think there are several problems with the idea of women marrying men less educated than themselves.

      1. It’s not what women want – which is to marry up.
      2. It’s not what men want, which is to have more status than their women.
      3. There will be plenty of smart men in the trades, but they will not be having the same conversations or priorities as men who work in white collar jobs. Women will consider them too rough around the edges.
      4. Society really isn’t set up for easy mingling between socioeconomic levels. How will these educated women meet these less educated men, even if they are open to the idea?

  • Some Handle

    It exceeded my expectations.

    I am curious: do you find the response here, so far, to be:

     

    • a little surprising
    • a lot surprising
    • not surprising at all

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Some Handle
      Not surprising at all. The only surprise of the day was your early pushback – that threw me. Otherwise, it’s pretty much what I expected. I knew some guys would see this as good for the manosphere and some would dismiss it. I would like to humbly suggest that if we demand that every article cover everything on the manosphere hit list, we’ll be perpetually discouraged. But then, I’m used to working on the margins, in baby steps.

  • wudang

    My mother once met a young woman who told her something extremelyrelevant to this discusion. She had been planning to have a top career in marketing and not have children at all. But while studying she had a part time job sitting in the rooms of dying elderly ti notify the nurses when.something happened. Out of.curiosity and boredom she startet to make statistics on how people.dealt with death. What she found was three different groups having markedly different reactions. Those who had children although experiencing some anxiety generally resigned with death ok and of course were often visited by their children. Priests and others who had very very strong active religious.lives and did not have children dealt ok as well. Those who had only a faith tha had not lived out actively or were atheists and did not have children had tons of anxiety and often.could.find no peace with death at all and the moment of death itself was filled with anxiety rarely peace as for many of those with children. After this the woman changed priorities and put the career behind having children as a priority. Related to this is the fact that it is no fun.being 70-95 and not having children come.visit or help. that is a substantial and.vulnerable part of life that people give.zero consideration when they think about their priorities in life. if.this can be researched properly and brought to the attention of more people it will act as a very usefull tool in motivating people to have children.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @wudang
      What a fascinating story! I wonder if that’s been formally studied.

  • ExNewYorker

    @Susan,

    Wow, that is one heck of a navel-gazing exercise (well written, if I may say).  She may seem nice and attractive enough, but her article really is mainly a treatise on making herself feel better.

    She starts of with a bright-eyed endorsement of her mother’s feminism, not realizing that the “limitless possibilities” it offered had it’s own downsides, and that it made her feel like “that there would always be men we wanted to marry, we took on faith “.  She then switches to some historical info, trying to piece together some excuse as to why there’s no good men.  Then, a little bit of sympathy for the minority family as the canary in the mine, and then a visit with our blog hostess, only to mostly ignore what she finds there.  And then an elaborate portion trying to find “those who had gone off-script with unconventional arrangements” (with a dig at the neolithic revolution, which moved us away from the garden of eden where everyone shagged everyone).  A little bit of sympathy again for the minority family, who seemed to have found such one wonderful “unconventional arrangement”, while forgetting the words of the mother in question: “I had done everything I could to make sure she didn’t end up like me, and now this”.  And then a paean to alternative old folks homes, ending with the hope of “a room of one’s own”, not realizing she was describing something more akin to a coffin.

    Well, as a cautionary tale, it may work.  Boy, if hypergamy protects STEM men like me from such women, well maybe it isn’t all bad :-)

     

  • Scipio Africanus

    I knew she was nice looking as soon as she mentioned in the article that she’d had a more or less uninterrupted string of boyfriends from 9th grade to roughly the age of 30.  All the girls I’ve ever known like that were towards the top of the looks hierarchy.

  • Wayfinder

    The thing that concerns me whenever a spinister talks about having children without men is that they sound disturbingly like the highschool girls who get pregnant because they want someone who will always love them. Kids don’t work that way.

    Perhaps a deeper issue is that the picket fence fantasy they’re imagining won’t happen, men or no men. Their marriages, if they happen, won’t look like their mothers’ marriages, for better or worse.

  • wudang

    Deti: a woman I know dated a waiter. After a year he asked her to marry him. She yes, but only if you get an education. And he did. Long term I think mens motivations for education will go up when, after the new smp has cooked for a while so that the education gap is properly felt and digested by the culture.

  • pjay

    I think you touched somebody deeply…her name is Amanda.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2011/10/11/_marriage_market_theories_are_simply_inadequate_to_explain_the_s.html

    “…that the whole nation looks like New York City’s notoriously brutal dating marketplace, that there’s a meaningful difference between a woman who terminates a long-standing cohabitation and a divorcée, and that Susan Walsh should be treated like an expert in dating when she’s better described as a charlatan whose only credential for giving advice is her shockingly sadistic misogyny (and who likes to diagnose feminists from afar as mentally ill because they question her immoveable belief that dating is really a war between men and women in which each tries to extract what they want from the other with as minimal contribution of love or sex as possible, depending on the gender stereotype).”

     

  • Johnycomelately

    Wait a sec,

    This chick is writing half arsed articles that aren’t even current with modern trends (evo psych, hypergamy, game, sex ratios, socialism, feminism, economics of free trade, fiat banking etc.)  and is getting payed handsomely for it?

    While I  read infinitely superior writers like Roissy, Dalrock, Rollo, Susan and the rest for free?

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Johnycomelately

      This chick is writing half arsed articles that aren’t even current with modern trends (evo psych, hypergamy, game, sex ratios, socialism, feminism, economics of free trade, fiat banking etc.) and is getting payed handsomely for it?

      I have to say I’m surprised that the Atlantic funded trips all over the place, including California and Amsterdam. I was kinda taken aback they were willing to fly her to Boston! I had no idea there were such big budgets for articles like these.

      While I read infinitely superior writers like Roissy, Dalrock, Rollo, Susan and the rest for free?

      Haha, which of these does not belong with the others?

      Thanks for the vote of confidence, though.

  • wudang

    Scipio: thats why I think the best looking women have substantially higher partner.counts than the more plain ones. The endless.string o boyfriends add up to a high count in itself. Add in that the better looking women are far more likely to cheat and the count goes.up. Add in that they leave relationships earlier and the count goes up. Add in that almost all the good looking girls start to party early, are invited to all the frat parties, go clubbing much more because the attention makes it much more.fun.for them and the count goes up.because being in these settings all the time leads to hookups. Add in that the hotest women between the boyfriends date all the time and because if hookup.culture just a few dates easily leads to sex. In total this adds up to a much higher count for a lot of the most attractive girls. I at least experience that in social groups with lots of people in the 3-5 range people are generally a lot more timid and carefull, they dont party half as much, they loose their virginity later, they have had few boyfriends and the relationships lasts long. The hotties on the other hand find the pairbonding stage too boring.and think it is something wrong with the boyfriend and so dumps him. In the groups.with lots.of hot girls all is reversed.from the less hot.groups. I attribute.my own former belief that partner counts were way higher than they actually are to the fact that I have always been in groups of very attractive people. The super sluts though I think are often in the 5-6.range for some.reason. Maybe because they have some access to alpha and good enough looks to land a good beta despite their number. The lesser looking ones need to keep their numbers down so they can sell purity for lack of looks and they dont really have access to alphas.

  • ExNewYorker

    @Susan,

    Boy, Amanda Marcotte really doesn’t like you very much.  Kinda rich having her criticize you as “a charlatan whose only credential for giving advice is her shockingly sadistic misogyny”, considering her well attested misandry (i.e. Duke case) and that her dating advice boils down to “more feminism!”  Good thing you hate all those young women you want to see happy in relationships!

    That you have a such enemies is a sign you’re on the side of the angels :-)

  • Esau

    Susan, I’m glad that you (and your commenters) are getting wider recognition.  The best thing that’s likely to happen as a result of this article is that more people will take up reading your blog!  and eventually your book (s?).

    Other than referring to you, though, I don’t see very much to admire in the article or the author’s thoughts.  Saying that Bolick represents an advance over Hymowitz may be true; but so is saying that scrimmaging on your own two yard line is better than only being on the one.  Really, my sympathy level fell absolutely to zero reading this tripe:

    marriage-minded women are increasingly confronted with either deadbeats or players.

    Really, the blindness and casual cruelty are just breathtaking.  You say that she’s at least been informed about the wider world.  But note that she frames things like the 80/20 concept only by quoting you, as though she’s not really convinced and wants to keep her distance; while she re-states the vomitous tripe with the authority of her own narrative voice.

    Ah, well; if the journey to sexual enlightenment begins with an MSM article in which at least a few sentences are not outright misandrist, then I guess this is a start.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Esau
      I hear you. Thank you for the support anyway. I too cringed at the deadbeats and players thing. Perhaps it can all best be summed up in the text my daughter sent from work when the article went up:

      SMP sucks

  • SayWhaat

    That you have a such enemies is a sign you’re on the side of the angels :-)

    True that, although if this gets bigger be ready to defend yourself with bazookas. I’ve only mentioned a few manosphere tenets to some friends and was met with heavy pushback (from guys, even)! Heavy stuff.

    That being said, this article is a good step in the right direction. I wish she hadn’t gotten off on that “singlism” stigma thing at the end and would have rather she talked about the implications for society and whatnot. I think it’s interesting that your focus group wasn’t mentioned as prioritizing marriage and family over career. A year ago I was struggling with that same question, and now I can definitively say that I would prioritize marriage and family over any career I may have.

    Anyways, I think Anacaona’s right. This article will get Bolick’s wedding bells ringing in a few years (and I really do hope she finds someone soon). Did you hear that Mormon chick finally got laid? A year after her first article about being a 27yo virgin came out.

    Major props, Susan! I shared the article with a bunch of friends. : )

  • deti

    pjay:   Oy, the Marcotte screed.   Thought we could be done with Marcotte, at least for a bit. Oh well,  here goes.  Quick take:

    Marcotte complains that evo psych is “21st century phrenology”.  Never mind that it explains deep seated desires and behaviors women and men exhibit and have exhibited for thousands of years.

    Then she complains that the SMP analysis or applying economic models to the way men and women connect with each other ignores love, or removes love from the equation. Gee.  How quaint.   Anyway, the flaw in Marcotte’s main premise is that most people never get to the matter of love because they can’t even get the other gender’s members to notice them.   IOW, emotion doesn’t even enter the equation when those in the marketplace are struggling just to connect to each other. 

    You can’t fall in love until there’s attraction.  There can’t be attraction until you know what is attractive, what you find attractive, and until you know what others find attractive in you.   Those attributes  can be assessed and quantified.  Once assessed and quantified, they can be displayed for others to evaluate and quantify.  Men and women evaluate and size each other up all the time. That’s what women do with weight loss, makeup, clothes and hairstyles.  That’s what men do with improving appearance, showing dominance and confidence, becoming good conversationalists, and getting their cocky-funny on. 

    Some of the product looks better than others; some sells better than others; some get more takers than others; some don’t get any takers at all; some need better advertising,  some take their products off the market for retooling and then put them back out there.  

    That, my friends, is a marketplace.

  • Gerard

    I’ve found this site though that article, and find it much more interesting. I’ll be revisiting, I’ve found concepts like the Apex Fallacy and some of the comments here interesting. I’ve been unsuccessful in getting a relationship, and now stumbling on stories like hers and sites like yours in an attempt to understand why. I’m a guy, so not really your target audience, but you make a lot of interesting points.

    As to the article by Kate Bolick: It’s an interesting read, but I have the feeling she’s not entirely honest with herself. There are to many conflicting parts to the story. It did give me some insight: If there are many women like her, who divide the men in the world into “players” and “deadbeats”, then no wonder they end up single.

    I do think wudang points to something interesting. The way we treat our elderly has changed a great deal. In the past marriage and children was the best insurance in old age. Today nursing homes and pensions take care of the basics. The need is a lot less urgent, which coupled with contraceptives has lead to a less committal attitude.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Gerard
      Welcome. You’ll soon notice there’s no shortage of guys around here :-) They boast a great deal of wisdom so do revisit and read the comment threads. Join in anytime!

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    More women may be entering and graduating from college, but how many of these women are actually doing something useful? From what I’m hearing, most of them are just running up five- and six-figure debt with no chance of steady employment. Why do you think so many of the “We Are the 99%” crowd are complaining about college debt?

    Women’s so-called “victory” may well be hollow. I’m not saying that the country will return to a beta-friendly SMP — the elites favor women too much — but it does mean that these women will have to reexamine the bill of goods they were sold about how wonderful they are for being women.

    As for the jobless men, the government is busy regulating the crap out of productive employment, because making stuff and extracting resources is “greed,” or something.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @CrisisEraDynamo
      Sorry, the spam filter caught you randomly. I’ve whitelisted you to prevent that from happening again.

  • Rum

    I hate to say this, but perhaps Kate has suffered for some time under a severely distorted sense of her true SMV. I know that other women will tell her that she is extremely good looking but no guy on here would give her much over a 6 – and she is as we speak hitting the steep part of the slide into sexual invisibilty. For all I know, she was the real deal some years back. Probably like most women, she never knew anything but desirabilty in male eyes since she hit puberty.  Therefore, she could easily coast on that presumption for some time against the headwinds of her changing reality.

    And her professional success… That can improve a womans value as a marriage partner in the eyes of a particular kind of marriage-minded older man. That sort of thing has some status currency that some guys want. Maybe she meet such a guy.

    But as to sexual attractiveness? Zip. Zero, Nada. That zero added to her faded looks =  not that great a deal for most valuable men.. She needs to offer a guy a lot more than sex appeal at this stage.

    Part of her problem has been that her professional success has put her in the same room with alpha guys who were willing to bang her apparently. But does this make her a 10? No. It just means she got to bang some alphas. But how could she understand the difference? Feminism sure would not explain it.

  • A.

    Marcotte’s comments that the “market theory” leaves out love is like Keats complaining that Newton explaining the rainbow robbed the rainbow of its beauty.  (Except that Keats knew enough to complain only as a joke)

  • Jennifer

    She’s supposed to be only a six? Good God, no wonder women are pissed off at beauty standards.

    What the DEVIL is it with this “BF. ” and similar annoying grammar marks?

  • Jennifer

    Geez, it wasn’t supposed to look like “BF”. Several of the “A’s” in people’s previous posts had infuriatingly confusing dashes over them.

  • wudang

    Gerard I highly recomend reading rollo thomassis blog therationalmale. Also.marriedmansexlife.com, yohami, dalrock. Theprivateman and several.of the others in the manosphere. By all means mention their names in the Atlantic thread as well. They need to read it.

  • El Marqués

    Congratulations Susan. Guess you gained your platform, whatever that meant…

    Or the writer (yes, another one) who announced after six months together that he had to end things because he “couldn’t continue fending off all the sexual offers.” And those are just the honest ones.

    This in the original article made me laugh hard. Brilliant strategy. Claim victim status, works great for women, too…

    They want to get across the point that even beautiful, interesting, smart women are having difficulty finding life partners.

    Yet they always seem to miss the point that it’s men who define whether or not she’s beautiful, interesting or smart. I’m with Sandy here, she’s not even cute (7).

    I agree that the woman’s movement has impacted the female evolution from domestic goddess to corporate “queen.”

    Lol. You mean the devolution from woman to cheap chinese imitation of a man?

  • Jennifer

    Amazing, this woman’s gorgeous and there are still morons who wouldn’t rate her worthy enough.

  • Anacaona

    Related to this is the fact that it is no fun.being 70-95 and not having children come.visit or help. that is a substantial and.vulnerable part of life that people give.zero consideration when they think about their priorities in life. if.this can be researched properly and brought to the attention of more people it will act as a very usefull tool in motivating people to have children.

    I don’t know why but her article and story reminded me of the playboy model that was found dead after a few days in her apartment, she was over 80 and obviously lived a very fun life…to end like that. Many of the jezzies feel sorry for her and blamed the patriarchy for not longer appreciating her after her looks faded.Is so hard to see them not being able to connect that if you don’t cultivate links with the new generation no matter how many peers are friends with you you will end up alone do them dying and getting sick at the same time that you do. The lack of logic is amazing.

    If you are convinced that the best is to live in the now, now is all the world owes to you.

    pjay

    Let me guess Amanda never had been interviewed by The Atlantic in spite that she has been writing a lot longer than Susan?

     

    True that, although if this gets bigger be ready to defend yourself with bazookas. I’ve only mentioned a few manosphere tenets to some friends and was met with heavy pushback (from guys, even)! Heavy stuff.

    Heh I can say I never talk about the manosphere themes with anyone but the hubby and even the hubby has a sanitized PC version of the themes we discuss. We will need a big name endorsing this for the manosphere to be more or less discussed without raging fits…is Madonna endorsing any new philosophy now?

    Anyways, I think Anacaona’s right. This article will get Bolick’s wedding bells ringing in a few years (and I really do hope she finds someone soon).

    Heh I’m starting to think that in the past women were told to enroll in college to get husbands, maybe nowadays they will be told blog to find a husband.

    A year ago I was struggling with that same question, and now I can definitively say that I would prioritize marriage and family over any career I may have.

    I’m very proud of you. I do hope that more women in your generation know that  colleges were created to give you the best human chance to get a degree and economy is designed in a way that most people can and will get a job, but marriage is not longer a given any moment they want to and it comes with a deadline and there are no schools or institutions with a secure course to get a marriage that is functional and last so you better focus in it before is too late if you really want it to happen.

     

  • Rum

    Jennifur

    Apparently you are in the habit of telling men what they should want- and getting away with it.  Apparently you are used to men putting up with yur shite.

    But, then again, you are not from around here.

  • Rum

    Next, some femmy will chime in with stern instructions for men to lust after double chins and abundant, hairy FUPAs.

    It is worse than useless. Men are not influenced in this manner in the same way women are. And the speaker is instantly assumed to be a Fattie.

  • Anonymous

    If you don’t want children, then the single life is fine, have at it.  But if you want children, there is no better structure than a two parent home and marriage with active father influence.  Sorry, but that is truth.

    Women need to understand basic human biology instead of persisting in wishful thinking.  And that is, female fertility is gonna start dropping off a cliff starting about age 32 or so.  Spending your 20s ignoring that fact is quite possibly going to leave you in a jam with no husband and no children.  Another tenant of basic biology is that men will want to find the most fertile woman with whom to pass on his genes.  This means you are in your prime in your 20s.  Seize the opportunity while you can. Work, career, travel, etc. all of that can go on until your 70s/80s/90s.  But you are only fertile and pumped up with estrogen in your early years.  This is your window to marry and reproduce.  The rest can come later.

    Credential yourself in your 20s, get your degrees and begin your career.  Remember you are at your most fertile and beautiful in your 20s.  Find your man then at your most desirable.  I agree with Susan that the women in their early/mid twenties need to begin in earnest to find the father of their children.  Then, have your children when you are very fertile.  Continue to work if you have to or need to during your 30s, but know you can’t have it all.  Then, kick it in high gear career wise around 40-45 when your competence counts and your looks begin to fade.  Your children are older and begin to pull away.  You have another 20-25 years to accomplish alot.   And time to travel, hang with friends, pursue hobbies, etc.

    Don’t fight biology.  It always wins.  I don’t want a bunch of women in their early 20s to make the same mistake Kate made, which was passing on a wonderful guy at the absolutely prime of her reproductive years.

     

     

     

     

     

  • Jennifer

    Lol  I’ve been around here plenty, and elsewhere. Don’t men constantly tell women when their expectations should be reasonable, esp. on the manosphere? I get tired fast of self-entitlement from men and women, and am not in the habit of either giving or receiving shite.

  • Jennifer

    Yes, this woman is SO close to a double-chin and hairiness. Good Lord.

  • Petruchio

    SayWhat,

    “although if this gets bigger be ready to defend yourself with bazookas”

    They’re shit tests, not arguments.

    Never defend.

    Agree and amplify.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Petruchio can’t stay away…and I have no idea why he would want to!

  • zed

    Amazing, this woman’s gorgeous and there are still morons who wouldn’t rate her worthy enough.

    Well, if you think she is so gorgeous, then feel free to marry her.

  • Petruchio

    Gerard,

    “In the past marriage and children was the best insurance in old age.”

    Still is.

  • wudang

    In certain respects feminist Norway is way ahead of the us in turning the tide. Marriage laws are far better, a whole bunch of the young male intellectuals have completely left feminism.and started writing articles about male.rights and cultural repression of males. in webforums manosphere truths are widely.regarded as true by a large.portion of the guys and a fairly large portion of the women. Alpha male attraction, shit testing, women having different value and in the sex and marriage market which in Norway has been termed.the princess syndrome etc. Men have rights to paternity leave for a third or so of the total.time the man and woman is given in total. Men are loudly claiming their importance and rights as fathers and women largely agree with them, a lot of women now.volutarily agree to joint custody, it is widely.recognised by.men that the courts are unfair to them, agood amount of.press is given ti this, the former minister of equality, a woman, took the side of men so much.the labour partys womens group had her removed, men argue they are tired of being responsible.for everything in bed and women.need to start doing some more work, men are critical of paying for dates, women are scolded.online.for fooling men with.paternity and lying about being on the pill when not to get pregnant which means a couple of sins previously left in the dark is now shamed, a.recent documentary series made.by a.famous.commedian used evolutionary research to totally trash all the blank slate social.sciences such as sociology, gender studies, criminality, education etc. They came of as total idiots and were totally defeated and the huge national debates that followed. There is almost always.someone with.at least some knowledge about pua in the threads were attraction is discussed.MEn are fighting back with statistics showing female violence against spouses children and their sexual.abuse, it is widely recognized that men are henpecked. Recently a documentary from Sweden showed the crisis centers for women being largely run by extremists with female separatist ideologies and a huge national debate followed. The number of Asian imported.brides is as far as I can see when walking outside getting.very high. Maybe the tide has turned quicker here because we went further than you ever did.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    First off, congrats on the press Susan… I don’t really care for the article too much (although it had some decent moments), but glad to to see you getting the recognition. Well deserved.

    Couple of other observations:

    Amazing, this woman’s gorgeous and there are still morons who wouldn’t rate her worthy enough.

    • I haven’t noticed anyone saying she “isn’t worthy”… yet several women have called her “gorgeous.” Pretty strong language there, and I just can’t see any guy thinking the same. Good for her age? Sure. Acceptable? Yeah. But if we’re talking objectively here, she’s not going to compare to an average 26 year old. That’s just reality.
    • I don’t mean to be a hater, but I don’t see why anyone in their right mind would look for serious relationships in New York.  Cities like Indianapolis, Kansas City, Charlotte, Nashville, etc. have always struck me as a much better bet.
    I don’t really have anything else to say that hasn’t already been said by several other people: The article has Apex Fallacy written all over it, Girls are just as commitment averse as guys (I’d even go farther to say they’re more averse than guys when they’re < 25), and the thought that most guys are either “players” or “deadbeats” is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard.
  • Hellhath

    We need to address immediately why our young men are not thriving. The 60/40 college ratio is something we should be talking about nonstop. And, by the way, that is going to be the real kicker in declining marriage. A third of college educated women are not going to marry men with degrees.

    While true wages may correspond to degrees, and other opportunities I do not believe it realistically measures value (even SMV/MMV). A man’s value does not correspond to that piece of paper. For a majority of positions available today I do not see a need for a college degree. It is overkill. Even for quite a few technical positions a better or more thought technical trade school might be a better option. For the price tag of a college degree you get an entry level job where the first thing they do is have you forget all the theory you learned in school and learn practical applications. I have read (I will look up the references later) as well as seen just how little a college degree (AS/BS) sometimes mean. It is treated no different than a high school diploma was treated years ago. A minimal requirement used for screening not as a necessity on the job. Call it education inflation if you will. An AS/BS is a quantifier for HR departments who really don’t understand the job requirements in the first place.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hellhath

      A man’s value does not correspond to that piece of paper.

      I agree, but what about the perception of value? We all take shortcuts when dating to assess a person’s mating value. Today, women will rarely choose a man with less education, but it’s entirely possible that will change dramatically in the next 20 years. Some women will adapt to this, many will not.

  • (r)Evoluzione

    I read the article, and I must say that I did find her work reasonably thoughtful.  I’ll give examples, so I don’t come off as solipsistic as those who accused her of being thoughtless:

     

    • She approaches the evolutionary angle–Sex at Dawn is cited throughout.
    • She covers alternative arrangements like the dutch pseudo-nunnery.
    • She asks thoughtful questions about what it means to be single in a dyadic-pair dominated society.
    • she appears to be a bit contrite, even regretful (subtlly of course) when describing her irrational, inexplicable breakup with Alan, at age 28, the year she became an official Cougar. (heh)
    • Historical examples from the Civil War and post-WWII Japan and Europe.

    Look, it’s clearly  a high quality piece of journalism. Of course it has rationalization hamster footprints all over it, but what do you expect?  Look at who wrote it.

    Those that scream “Thoughtless!” appear to be pursuing their own agenda on this thread.

    Another comment spoke to the whitebread, upper middle class hautiness of the tone of the article, a criticism germane to the publication itself. I found this entirely warranted, but to be fair, it’s the cultural context of this woman’s life, so that’s what she has to write about. Credit her for even visiting the black community in Pennsylvania. She clearly travelled a lot for this article, but despite the travel, it written from a  very East-Coast sensibility.

    Bolick pivots the story strongly off the idea of sex ratios and “dyadic power,” which is the part where Susan and the HUSies (sorry) come in. The demographics of collegiate and post-collegiate professional life all figure in prominently, but here I must remind the readers, as I have done before, that demographics are not uniform throughout the US.  It’s different in the inter-Mountain west. Part of why all the East Coast colleges and cities are overrun with women is that a lot of men–perhaps the most masculine, adventurous  men, seek the wild and untamed places in the West.  The University of Colorado at Boulder is 53% male.  Summit County, Colorado has 185 single men per 100 single women. Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, and the Dakotas, all sport similar demographics.  To some degree the hookup culture is a national pandemic, but in my observation, women hold a lot of sexual-economic power in these places, and there seems to be a whole lot more competition from men for the ladies, and a whole lot more wifin’ up going on.  What goes on in the Left & Right coasts isn’t necessarily what’s going in the hinterlands.
    Overall I thought the article, and Susan’s role in it, were well-done, some subtle misandric leanings, no doubt relics of her hyperfeminist upbringing, notwithstanding.
    One of these days, we’ll start to see some real masculininist writings in mainstream publications. Until then, we’ll all have to be content with Roosh, Roissy, Welmer, Badger, and the rest, to represent in the manosphere.

     

     

  • 108spirits

    Kate Bolick wrote a truckload of words and said so very little meaningful things with them. Susan, I think you and your girl group vastly overrated her intelligence and attractiveness. I see hardly any evidence of intelligence through that insufferably long article, and while she may look alright for a 39 years old, she is, well, 39 years old.

    Congrats to Susan for the publicity though.

  • Rum

    Jennifer

    How do you know what a man sees when he looks at a woman? The truth is, you cannot. Period. You are merely presuming to know what men see. You call this woman “gorgeous”.  Do you even care whether or not men see her in the same way or even as bangable? There is no evidence that you do. It looks to me like you would never dream of ASKING a guy about it. Maybe you do not think they deserve to have an opinion. – at least unless you supplied it to them.

    You want to take a chance?  ASK the men here to rate the bangability of this angry faced, middle aged woman with thickening arms.

    I F…ing dare you.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      You want to take a chance? ASK the men here to rate the bangability of this angry faced, middle aged woman with thickening arms.

      Thickening arms? OMG. She is slim and petite. Just stop.

      Look, reasonable people can disagree on what constitutes attractiveness. But it’s not like women haven’t figured out through a lifetime of observation which women men find hot. Most of us cracked that code in middle school. Having been in her presence I would say that Kate Bolick is not “hot.” She is very feminine and demure, soft spoken and warm. I keep saying warm, but she really does radiate a warmth. She seems almost anachronistic – like she could be on Mad Men or something. She is not an entitled narcissist snowflake. Not at all.

      I was the one who said she is gorgeous. My husband thought she was lovely. Others may disagree. But I won’t stand for anyone trashing her looks gratuitously. Heaven forbid she should come here and see that. I won’t be a party to it.

  • I thought *I* was Bob

    I’m 52 and married, so she can’t have me, but she looks pretty good considering she was probably made up before and photoshopped afterward. She might look her best in friendly light and without warpaint. I suspect few see her that way.

    I wonder just how divorced from reality you can get as an apparently wealthy writer with three domiciles and a mondo expense account?

  • Jennifer

    “Well, if you think she is so gorgeous, then feel free to marry her”

    LOL Yeah, I expected that. I hear conflicting reports in the game world all the time, some saying men don’t care that much, others tearing up women who actually try to keep up their appearances, and of course as stupid as the whole “fat and hairy is hot” thing is, I also get sick of self-centered PUA advice to threaten leaving a woman if she doesn’t drop some pounds. Apparently many males are just as self-entitled as the whiny “I want a NICE alpha!” girls.

    “ASK the men here to rate the bangability of this angry faced, middle aged woman with thickening arms”

    Her arms are skinny; you’re insane. I have no damn idea what every individual man sees, but I know the difference between fat, wrinkly, hairy and not.

    “I F…ing dare you”

    Ooh, I’m f*cking intimidated. “Bangability” describes the shallowness of so many online men anyway; I might as well ask a noxious teen girl to be kind in her description of a guy who doesn’t fit her personal standards. The guys here can say what they want; if they’re shallow, it doesn’t surprise me, and nor would another reaction. I’m used to seeing members of the same sex contradict each other even after people have claimed to figure them out. Having different beauty preferences is one thing; calling a well-shaped woman with clear skin and great hair old, or comparing her to a slob who doesn’t take care of herself is another.

     

  • DelFresco

    As a man I do think she’s attractive, but she does look angry. (Not that she’d be interested in me either, just sayin).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      As a man I do think she’s attractive, but she does look angry.

      Although I think she looks awesome in the pics, they’re not characteristic of her demeanor. On the Today show, she was much more like herself. She is quite gentle and friendly. She looks like the mom that everyone would like to have. Honestly, this woman should reproduce, she is so smart and attractive.

  • Jennifer

    “I see hardly any evidence of intelligence through that insufferably long article, and while she may look alright for a 39 years old, she is, well, 39 years old”

    So that means she automatically has no beauty?

  • Petruchio

    Susan,

    OK, your blog is irresistible. Just don’t get any ideas…

    Jennifer,

    Women who struggle like Kate here maintain unrealistic standards that no one can meet.They do this, and hide the reasoning from themselves, for a reason.

    The optimal mating strategy hard-wired in their brain is to find a stepford boyfriend/husband to adore and support her in exchange for no sex/respect but at  least he gets the entire culture off his back, with an alpha to provide genes for sexy sons on the side in exchange for the sex, affection, and respect she withholds from her boyfriend/husband.

    The key thing is that the first must be so far below her value that he never dreams of leaving her (the entire culture tells him how lucky he is to have her), so he doesn’t have to meet the standards, but the standards still allow her to justify treating him like shit for making her settle for the likes of him.

    The thing little understood is that she wants no commitment from the second. He’s there for the genes then needs to leave. You’ve heard the old saying about why top men hire prostitutes? They don’t pay them for the sex, they pay them to leave after. Likewise the woman will make sure to choose a man shallow/enough above her level to reliably leave. If he starts showing any redeeming qualities,or if she starts developing feelings for him, she’ll tell him he’s too good for her and he’ll be expected to leave.

    You’ll notice who is missing from the whole picture – the good men who have supposedly disappeared. Well, he disappeared for a reason – he’s got a modern civilization to maintain and wouldn’t be very happy with a woman pursuing a mating strategy from the stone age, no matter empowered it makes her feel. She’s empowered alright – like Genghis Khan, leaving a trail of corpses in her wake.

    The only way a good man with many redeeming qualities can win the game is to power through her (recent – there is the chink) cultural programming and dominate her frame*. But he can only do this if he is aware of what is happening, hence the importance of the Ro’s and Susan (?) in getting the word out.

    * – if this sounds bad to you, consider both the alternative that we have and the plight of children caught in the cuckoldry blender.

    Conversely, a man’s standards, at least looks-wise, are easily meetable. I met four (new) women today who would meet them. Youth, though, does play a major role. Given Susan’s recommendation moreso than that picture, I wouldn’t turn her down, but I’d be looking for more than looks to light the spark.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      The only way a good man with many redeeming qualities can win the game is to power through her (recent – there is the chink) cultural programming and dominate her frame*. But he can only do this if he is aware of what is happening, hence the importance of the Ro’s and Susan (?) in getting the word out.

      +1 on exactly what Game is for. Ro’s? Roissy and Rollo?

  • Jennifer

    Thank you, the last two gents, for your thoughts.

  • Hellhath

    1. It’s not what women want – which is to marry up.
    2. It’s not what men want, which is to have more status than their women.

    I know the desire, but is how we see “value” hard-wired or is it open to interpretation. Is it up to us (individually or collectively) to decide how to meet this need? Who holds the key to the definition of value. Right now we have women and men using historical (and possibly outdated) definitions but is it static or a social construct?  I really don’t know the answer.

    3. There will be plenty of smart men in the trades, but they will not be having the same conversations or priorities as men who work in white collar jobs. Women will consider them too rough around the edges.

    This is true, a men who work in non-white collar jobs may lack some sophistication. But honestly I will tell you this for a fact, I have read poetry among bikers, discussed philosophy in dive bars, played chess in strip clubs. People sometimes lack access to culture or sophistication, sometimes they lack the desire, but everyone has things they are passionate about. Men were built to be a little rough around the edges (personal opinion of course). For every person who thinks one of my brothers is too… well whatever I am glad. Personally I want men to find more of their wildness inside, to get out that passion . The world needs men who have full hearts.

    4. Society really isn’t set up for easy mingling between socioeconomic levels. How will these educated women meet these less educated men, even if they are open to the idea?

    Society is a coward , judgmental and very very brittle. But yet, it is surprising the number of people who are willing to slum it up a little. I think there are many people in the world who need to remember that the other 65-95% exist and are decent people. Some of the most honorable, kind-hearted, loyal men I know in the world are people who are invisible to most of Society. To mingle among the classes is as problematic as the other SMP issues. I will do some thinking about it and see if I can give better answers to that question.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hellhath
      Thanks for your thoughtful reply re men and education.

      Personally I want men to find more of their wildness inside, to get out that passion . The world needs men who have full hearts.

      Eric Taylor, the football coach in Friday Night Lights, said this to his team before every game: Clear eyes, full hearts, can’t lose.
      It got to me every single time.

      I agree with you. I think a man who is living his passion is demonstrating very high value. In fact, there are plenty of men doing hard work, e.g. military, ranching, that will have enormous appeal to women regardless of education. I believe I’ve read that high testosterone is negatively correlated to IQ, so the most educated men may actually lack something women screen for. I don’t think it’s that women care whether a guy sat in classrooms for four years. I think the real issue is whether a guy is happy and productive by his own measure. I fear that young men opting out of college when they might have gone are less likely to be able to say that. And of course, geography matters. The same guy will look very different in NYC vs. Wyoming.

  • Petruchio

    Susan,

    “Today, women will rarely choose a man with less education, but it’s entirely possible that will change dramatically in the next 20 years. Some women will adapt to this, many will not.

    Heh, my high school students already are.

    Old Wisdom: Boys are such slackers for not going to (4-year) college.

    New: Hmmm, boys are pretty savvy for spotting that bullshit before we did.

    Jennifer,

    “So that means she automatically has no beauty?”

    The most beautiful woman I know is eighty-five (the truest beauty is in the eyes). Doesn’t mean I’d want to marry her.

    Here’s what we’re talking about there.

  • Jennifer

    “Well, he disappeared for a reason – he’s got a modern civilization to maintain and wouldn’t be very happy with a woman pursuing a mating strategy from the stone age, no matter empowered it makes her feel. She’s empowered alright – like Genghis Khan, leaving a trail of corpses in her wake”

    I couldn’t agree more. But the thing is, I thought that Susan and this article implied that she was not in fact one of those women.

    “The only way a good man with many redeeming qualities can win the game is to power through her (recent – there is the chink) cultural programming and dominate her frame*. ”

    Yes, I’ve heard this warning to men over and over, what Bellita described as “damage control; women are damaged and men must control them”, regardless of which level the individual person describing this is focusing on. I’m still of another tradition, one that sees certain people as not worth pursuing period, and that such people are not the overwhelming majority (I could be wrong, more or less, about that last part though). And I see marriage as two people dying for each other, practicing real love and respect. It is possible.

    “Given Susan’s recommendation moreso than that picture, I wouldn’t turn her down, but I’d be looking for more than looks to light the spark”

    You sound perfectly reasonable.

  • Rum

    Jennifer

    So, your kind is looking for guys eager to offer total, lifelong commitment (a house, college for the kids, alimony afterwards) to a sperm-stained, cellulite  bloated skank-whore of a “wife”?

    What part of “NO” do you not understand.

  • Jennifer

    I’m about ONE step away from either gutting the Internet or this damn computer and its REFUSAL to download this effing site properly, and submit my replies WITHOUT freaking grammar typos, or half of it cut off! Anyfreakinghow..

    “The most beautiful woman I know is eighty-five (the truest beauty is in the eyes). Doesn’t mean I’d want to marry her”

    No argument there, and that’s very sweet. I’m the same way, can find someone attractive without being attracted to them personally. Also agree that women’s beauty is mostly controllable, and I found this woman’s beauty very well-controlled.

  • Jennifer

    “So, your kind is looking for guys eager to offer total, lifelong commitment (a house, college for the kids, alimony afterwards) to a sperm-stained, cellulite  bloated skank-whore of a “wife”?”

    Rum, your reading comprehension f*cking sucks. Not even worth a further response.

  • Hellhath

    I agree, but what about the perception of value? We all take shortcuts when dating to assess a person’s mating value. Today, women will rarely choose a man with less education, but it’s entirely possible that will change dramatically in the next 20 years. Some women will adapt to this, many will not.

    Well one of the things that has allow humans to dominate other species is the fact that we have this wonderful part of the brain that forms patterns. We are constantly forming associations and patterns to short-circuit thoughts. In ancient times it served us very well because we did not have to reinterpret every hint of danger. We heard something, matched the pattern and reacted. Those women who are capable of forming new patterns given the evolution will thrive, the rest will suffer the same fate as any species that over-specialized and is facing a shortfall in food. Great competition, emotional starvation, and eventually possibly extinction.

    One hope for adaptation is something that has been mentioned here before. A man who is passionate about something is sexy to a woman. I believe that the education inflation simply can not keep up. It is cost more and more and returning less and less value.  Going to college is the defacto result of high school. There is hardly a consideration of whether it is right path or even sane given the cost and benefit. It is just assumed as a right of passage. That you are not a real adult until you graduate or at the very least experience college.

    Personally I would rather see college be something people do for extremely intense fields (medical/engineering/etc) or alternatively for personal enrichment later in life. Believe me I have worked in white collar jobs most of my adult life. I know first hand how much we assume that working with our brains is somehow better than working with our hands. It has taken me 15 years or working in a field ripe with brain-envy to realize that it isn’t necessarily so. Society just needs to catch up with that realization.

    (As an aside… I was expelled from 3 high schools, GED’d, never attended more than one semester of college, went to 2 year technical school)

  • jameseq

    i was reading the atlantic today, came across the single ladies article. my eyes bugged out of my head when i saw your name and involvement with the piece. so i came over to read your thoughts on the article

    congrats susan!!! :)
    a nice write up of you and your work.
    also congrats on getting up the marcotte’s nose, lololol
    great work

  • Sandy

    Jennifer wrote:

    Amazing, this woman’s gorgeous and there are still morons who wouldn’t rate her worthy enough.

    You might think that she is gorgeous, but her SMV is defined by sexually active men and not women. Women and men look at people through different eyes, SMV is related to sexual arousal, hetero women are not aroused by looking at women, so they perceive an image very differently from men. Women might think that she is absolutely gorgeous, but that’s totally irrelevant to her SMV.

  • Esau

    What are the odds that Kate Bolick is reading this very comment thread?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      What are the odds that Kate Bolick is reading this very comment thread?

      I would say almost nil yesterday, but perhaps very high she will read it at some point. You can be sure she has a google alert set up on the article.

  • Rum

    Our reigning civilization has depended upon numerous beliefs and  assumptions about the true nature of the sexual instincts inherent in young human females – – that happen , imho, to be (all) absolutely wrong.

    The next few years will be interesting.

  • Interest piqued

    Susan, I like many others found your website through The Atlantic article. I’m a 24 year old male who has previously read tidbits of Manosphere writing but had never really jumped into it in a major way. After reading the article, I spent the rest of my day (inbetween doing work) reading various columns on here or ones linked from the comments, and it’s been fairly informative. From my experience in political and philosophical discussion, learning is best accomplished through interaction, and I think what sites like this do is offer a great forum for men and women to better understand each other. With society telling us that men and women are very different, it’s important to not fall back into easy statements like “women, you’ll never understand them” and to instead engage. It can only help.

    Keep up the good work, and I’ll keep reading.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Interest piqued
      Welcome, I’m so glad you found us! You’ll certainly find a lot of political and philosophical discussion here. It’s not always pretty, but nearly always informative. I’ve been blogging three years and I would say I get new insights every single day from the readers. I’m kind of like a book group moderator or something. I provide the material to start the convo, then we hash it out. I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

  • Petruchio

    Jennifer,

    “that’s very sweet”

    It ain’t sweet, and neither am I.

    It’s the truth.

    “Ro’s? Roissy and Rollo?”

    Roosh will not be happy…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      “Ro’s? Roissy and Rollo?”

      Roosh will not be happy…

      Shoot, he’s the one who’s been nice to me. ;-)

  • 108spirits

    “The only way a good man with many redeeming qualities can win the game is to power through her (recent – there is the chink) cultural programming and dominate her frame*. ”

    No, he will win by dating a much younger unspoiled and baggage-free version of her.

    “No argument there, and that’s very sweet. I’m the same way, can find someone attractive without being attracted to them personally. Also agree that women’s beauty is mostly controllable, and I found this woman’s beauty very well-controlled.”

    Why don’t you marry her then? What you find attractive is irrelevant to her article, because it is not the kind of attraction that would lead to a relationship or marriage, which is the point of the discussion. She would’ve been a very beautiful 39 year old woman looking exactly the same, had she been a wife & mother for, say, close to two decades to a loving husband and a bunch of kids, i.e: http://solomonreborn.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/proverb-28-women-can-age-beautifully/  By beautiful, I mean, beautiful (of the feminine kind) to her husband, and that should be the only thing that counts. Plus she’d earn the admiration from everyone else.

    But as it stands, she’s an aging, about to hit the wall hard, 39 year old spinster who’s still in la-la land regarding relationship & marriage and who threw away the perfect man for her at an age (28) when she should’ve got her shit sorted out. In the patriarchal past, women got that sorted out at 10 years younger. This is why I have to question Susan and her girls’ impression of this woman as being intelligent. She may sound intelligent (people with an overpaid liberal arts education tend to) but her actions & choices in life so far have shown the opposite. Remember one of the cornerstones of Game? “Judge a woman by her actions, not her words”.

    Susan’s focus group would benefit a million times more by reading that Solomon Reborn’s blog post I linked to than her overpaid and tedious article.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Susan’s focus group would benefit a million times more by reading that Solomon Reborn’s blog post I linked to than her overpaid and tedious article.

      Actually, that’s a great idea. I think I’ll write about it soon.

  • Petruchio

    Susan,

    You must be getting a lot of traffic. I got here just in time.

    Can you take care of that double post for me?

  • Odds

    I’ll be more interested in seeing what she writes over the course of the next year.  Red pill stuff takes a while to percolate.  It’s no surprise that what she posted was, by manosphere standards, watered down (still a blast from the hydrant by MSM standards, and kudos to SW for her part in it).  What will she have to say about men and relationships when she’s 40?  How will she respond to seeing what she’s learned recently as it gets reflected in real-life situations over the next few months?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I have actually found myself thinking of the Dutch faux convent since I read the article. WTF. Men are not allowed to spend the night? If only our college dorms still had such rules!

  • Jennifer

    “Why don’t you marry her then?”

    Because I’m not a man. But maybe one of the other guys here who found her attractive would be interested; thank God one man doesn’t stand for all.

    “She would’ve been a very beautiful 39 year old woman looking exactly the same, had she been a wife & mother for, say, close to two decades to a loving husband and a bunch of kids, i.e: http://solomonreborn.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/proverb-28-women-can-age-beautifully/”

    But since she’s unmarried, she’s not beautiful and a man couldn’t find her sexually attractive? Or are you saying she’s unattractive because of what you perceive to be her attitude?

  • 108spirits

    Read that blog by Solomon Reborn first, Jennifer. The answer to your question is in it.

  • Mike C

    Perhaps unwise of me to chime in on this point, but I’ll step into it.  First, in my opinion, alot of guys have what I call Internet rating syndrome where they consistently rate a woman  at least 2 points lower than what would be the reality if she was standing right in front of them flesh and blood.  She is definitely above average in physical attractiveness.  That said, no way she is gorgeous and again (because I like to make this point) that is just allowing her personality and other attributes to spill over into the raw assessment of her physical beauty.  She is a 6-7 depending on the guy and seeing the body in addition to the face might bump her up or down a point.

    Hearing women comment on female beauty is leading to me a new theory that relates to facial recognition.  Based on everything I’ve learned these last several years, women are no doubt hardwired to instinctively recognize alpha personality type traits that go unnoticed by most men.  Similarly, I am beginning to think men instinctively recognize the facial and body differences from a 39-year old compared to a 23-year old that go unnoticed when women look at the exact same two women.  We pick up the small things that I think most women are oblivious to.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      Similarly, I am beginning to think men instinctively recognize the facial and body differences from a 39-year old compared to a 23-year old that go unnoticed when women look at the exact same two women.

      I am certain you are right. Most of the attraction science happens below the level of consciousness anyway. It’s a complicated process.

      My feelings about her were quite maternal, I didn’t view her through a mating lens. I have no stake in whether men think she’s hot or not, I just don’t think it’s necessary to say she has thickening arms! She’s not a stick insect, true. This is where the men really do get brutal rating women online.

  • Jennifer

    Read it, and the end was lovely; thanks for confirming. Glad the dirty-mouthed oldster had appreciation for real beauty, and what a revelation. Sad what Solomon 2 became, though; he should have listened to his former wife (someone told me she warned him that his lifestyle would severely harden his heart). And serves the a**hole he was with that night right, the player who found out that his wife was cheating on him. What’d you expect, pal? Staring at the floor morosely, thinking what a raw deal you got with her, when you had about five women on your own list. One of the last commentaters was right: karma’s a bitch.

  • An Unmarried Woman

    Wudang, are you partnered up? If not I know several women who would love to correspond with you. ;)

  • Jennifer

    Funny how we see things. I’d think a woman who’s a 7 would be gorgeous.

  • Jennifer

    Wudang, if things are improving so much, I don’t know why imported brides would be increasing. Please check your use of periods, it can get hard to read.

  • Mike C

    Just watched the segment:

    http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44864288#.TpUhpt5CqU8

    Interesting.  I find the meme “I am a single lady loving life rocking and rolling” actively choosing kind of interesting.  Listening to the women they interviewed and Kate as well, the whole thing strikes me a bit with the “methinks the lady doth protest too much”.

    There is a very bizarre aspect to this.  You watch that segment and you’d think all these older single women just LOVE their lives, and maybe they do, but then you get the shaming stuff about Peter Pans and not manning up and marrying.  There almost seems a sort of bipolar schizo aspect to all of  this.  Yes, marry us, no don’t, we’re perfectly happy being single.  I suspect the internal cognitive dissonance between the core drive to find a husband and be maternal yet also follow the path of blazing a path in terms of “success” must go to 11 on the mental volume dial.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C
      Agree totally on the schizo segment. I was really surprised. The Today show pitched this as “I love single life” and it’s very, very clear that’s not what she is saying in her article, which has a lot of sadness in it. She really has a sense that she made a major life mistake in dumping Allan. She’s looking for a way to love the life she has left, knowing that her time is running out. She comes right out and says she knows she’s competing with younger, more attractive women.

      Watching her during that interview, I got the sense she’d been pushed into that box. Of course she wanted to be on the Today show! But I don’t think she wanted to be pitched that way. To her credit, she highlights the plight of men in a way that I think is compassionate. Policy makers need to hear that, and she’s got a long record of writing for highly respected media outlets.

  • Anacaona

    As a man I do think she’s attractive, but she does look angry. (Not that she’d be interested in me either, just sayin).

    Well the article was not about celebrating singlehood she does express that she would like to be married she left the exploring singlehood as a plan B that she is considering not a happy option. I stand by my idea that she is husband fishing and she cannot appear a happy singleton for that. She needed to show that she was available and ready to commit and see who takes the bait. Wait and see.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anacaona

      . She needed to show that she was available and ready to commit and see who takes the bait. Wait and see.

      I agree. She likes intellectual guys. If she stays out of the “11 years younger” pond she could easily attract a very successful male. I’m thinking Wall St., divorced (grab him now before the bonuses dry up). Over the weekend Sir Paul married a 51 year-old woman, when he could have gone with half that age.

  • Mike C

    Funny how we see things. I’d think a woman who’s a 7 would be gorgeous.

    If a 7 is gorgeous, than what adjectives do we set aside exclusively for 9s and 10s?

    I’m of the school of thought that words have fairly precise meanings and it is actually counterproductive to effective communication when we start redefining what they mean

    I hate to get pedantic, but it is necessary:

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gorgeous

    Splendid, magnificant.  A gorgeous woman walks down the street and EVERY SINGLE GUY”s head turns.  I think we like to change the use of words like this due to the Lake Wobegon effect.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      A gorgeous woman walks down the street and EVERY SINGLE GUY”s head turns. I think we like to change the use of words like this due to the Lake Wobegon effect.

      Fair enough. I would just point out, however, that the very same woman may turn a few heads when she’s in a bulky overcoat and no makeup, more heads when she’s running in no makeup, and every head when she’s going out for the evening with smokey eyes and long, bare legs.

  • Sojourner

    Ironically, as I came to the end of reading this, the song Eleanor Rigby started playing in my head.  Namely, the chorus, “Look at all the lonely people”

    That alone made this a sorrowful thing to read.  I mean truly, look at what we have wrought.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Sojourner

      Ironically, as I came to the end of reading this, the song Eleanor Rigby started playing in my head. Namely, the chorus, “Look at all the lonely people”

      That just sent chills up my spine. That’s it exactly.

  • Mike C

    Well the article was not about celebrating singlehood she does express that she would like to be married she left the exploring singlehood as a plan B that she is considering not a happy option. I stand by my idea that she is husband fishing and she cannot appear a happy singleton for that.

    Did you watch the Today segment?  That is NOT at all what she said.  To hear her and the other woman being interviewed marriage is the old paradigm and older, single women need a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      To hear her and the other woman being interviewed marriage is the old paradigm and older, single women need a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

      Ironic then that she blames her mother for sending her to school in t-shirts of the fish/bicycle variety. She is really a product of feminist dysfunction, although she is exactly what feminists are saying women should want.

  • allie

    I too just watched the segment and I’m a little confused. The women in the segment and Kate have no intention to compromise and yet isn’t that one aspect of being in a relationship in the first place? I just don’t understand how they expect to have their cake and eat it too. (Live the fabulous single lifestyle and have the “perfect” man to boot.)

  • allie

    In the Today segment she wasn’t selling the happy single lifestyle to me. She looked pretty sad. I don’t want to end up like her at all.

  • Anacaona

    Hearing women comment on female beauty is leading to me a new theory that relates to facial recognition.  Based on everything I’ve learned these last several years, women are no doubt hardwired to instinctively recognize alpha personality type traits that go unnoticed by most men.  Similarly, I am beginning to think men instinctively recognize the facial and body differences from a 39-year old compared to a 23-year old that go unnoticed when women look at the exact same two women.  We pick up the small things that I think most women are oblivious to.

    I think you might be right evobio says that whatever leads to more success passing off the genes is a trait that becomes persistent the male strategy of banging every available female only works if the female is fertile, so it makes sense he can tells them apart easier than a woman whose gene survival depend entirely in a different set of skills. That without counting that few female (or male for that matter) lived long after their childbearing years and the few that did gained a status as advisers elders not sexy. It would be fun to see if there is any study with males rating attractiveness without knowing the age of women in a set of pics

    Wudang, are you partnered up? If not I know several women who would love to correspond with you. ;)

    Heh you definitely also need a “lonely hearts” section Susan. It would at least serve as a practice of how to make effective profiles.

  • Anacaona

    Did you watch the Today segment? That is NOT at all what she said. To hear her and the other woman being interviewed marriage is the old paradigm and older, single women need a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

    I meant the article in the magazine she has the “angry look” in the cover. I need to watch the Today show to see what was that about.

  • Mike C

    In the Today segment she wasn’t selling the happy single lifestyle to me. She looked pretty sad. I don’t want to end up like her at all.

    Well, to me the words being spoken didn’t match up with the vocal tone, body language, and demeanor.  Now the African-American psychologist?therapist? seemed to really believe what she was saying.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      Well, to me the words being spoken didn’t match up with the vocal tone, body language, and demeanor.

      I agree. She seemed nervous and ill at ease, but it wasn’t because she was on TV. When I google image’d her I found photos of her hanging out with movie stars.

      bolick

  • Jennifer

    “If a 7 is gorgeous, than what adjectives do we set aside exclusively for 9s and 10s?”

    Nines would be drop-dead or stunning, while tens are considered almost non-existent. Some, however, think there’s little difference between numbers with just one level in-between.

  • http://whiskeys-place.blogspot.com whiskey

    Bolick’s chances? Really what quality, A-list Alpha guy would want to marry her (as opposed to sex?) Really?

    Lets see: 1. No real ability to have kids. 2. History of bailing on relationships. 3. Bad boy addiction, Literary edition. 4. Career focused, and her career is both pointless and stupid (she’s not curing cancer, saving patients, she’s writing boring elitist articles for the Atlantic, last relevant in 1965). 5. Any guy who can meet her criteria can … yes wait for it … get YOUNGER. HOTTER. TIGHTER. [Yes that's crude, that's the point. Women need to know that they are simply disposable once they age out of their twenties to near-age peers, to Alpha guys.]

    The woman is delusional. And actually harmful because she’s part of the great female-oriented consumer marketing machine hurtling our civilization off the cliff, to fulfill transient sexual needs for bad boys by “empowered” women.

    Guys did not change, neither did women, genetically. Guys are the same genetically as their fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers, whom the female ancestors of women like Bolick willingly married, at younger ages. Guys did not suddenly become ugly, any more than women became unattractive. Women just got raised higher in status, and found most guys unattractive. Duh.

    Bolick is not unattractive. She can find an Alpha to marry her. He’ll just be 65, and with his own kids, who will inherit most of his money.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Guys did not change, neither did women, genetically. Guys are the same genetically as their fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers, whom the female ancestors of women like Bolick willingly married, at younger ages. Guys did not suddenly become ugly, any more than women became unattractive. Women just got raised higher in status, and found most guys unattractive. Duh.

      +1 True story.

  • http://whiskeys-place.blogspot.com whiskey

    I do agree with Bolick that the nuclear family is dead, dead, dead, but it is killed by … women.

    She pretty much comes out and says, she can’t be happy with a guy who is not Alpha. Its why her relationships failed. She kept searching for Mr. Alpha Goodbar.

    But her clap-happy future of free-floating sex ala Gays in gay marriages (wildly promiscuous btw) is a load of idiocy, something so stupid only a woman could write it. [Men are not as stupid about relationships as women, generally, men have their own stupid field  about which they are delusional, but that is another topic.]

    The future of America, of the West, is not some happy/hippy Alpha land, where women share the bad boys, and beta males slave happily away, sexless and outside society.

    Nope. It’s Federline away! And that’s just generation One. Joe Average cannot become Alpha, but he can become a total D-bag. I believe you wrote about it, Total Douchebag Domination, and it is inevitable. As women chase Alphas, exclusively, beta males adapt by going full douchebag. And no, not only “a few” but nearly ALL women want that. Look at Bolick. She could have had any guy she wanted. [As for Bolick being washed up, she's OK for sex, but for any commitment? Please even higher beta males would laugh at her.]

    Generation Two, now that’s the feral man-boys. Raised by single moms, abused by a parade of lovers, they’re going to be become the baddest, most feared predators around, because that’s how they compete for women. And they’ll be extremely possessive. Possession enforced by extreme violence, see Dalrymple, Theodore, Life at the Bottom.

    Generation Three, the violence from alpha predators becomes so intense, that men band together under some power-patronage leader. Think Mussolini, Lenin, Franco, Augustus, Charlemagne, Charles Martel. These societies are based on total in-group male domination, military orientation, and brutal punishment for transgressors.

    The West, and America in general, can expect poverty, violence, chaos, technological decline and worse. Kids will fare worst of all. You have no idea how in history beta males have treated Alpha male spawn (hint: not well).

    And no, the young women were not innocent. Since they’ve all had from the article I infer around 25 lovers or so, their ability to form any pair bond is pretty much nil. Good for casual sex, but nothing more. Just like the Duke Lister. Its all she’s good for. Even a higher beta male would not commit — they are just not worth it.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Whiskey
      Stop this:

      something so stupid only a woman could write it.

      Please. It weakens your arguments, which are valid.

      And no, the young women were not innocent. Since they’ve all had from the article I infer around 25 lovers or so, their ability to form any pair bond is pretty much nil. Good for casual sex, but nothing more. Just like the Duke Lister. Its all she’s good for. Even a higher beta male would not commit — they are just not worth it.

      First, she was not describing sexual innocence, obviously. Second, here are the partner counts of the five women present: 2, 4, 13, 7, 25. Or something very close (haven’t checked since July!). The two women in serious relationships are the 4 and the 7. In fact, the 7 has sex like a rabbit, but she’s done it within monogamous relationships. The 25 has had about four flings a year for six years. As many guys here have pointed out, the number itself is fairly meaningless without context. The 2 is the prettiest of the bunch, very self-disciplined. The 4 is also the one thinking about med school, she was a very serious undergraduate student.

      So you are 80% incorrect. I do fear that the most promiscuous woman has impaired ability to bond in relationships. She also has the most troubled family history. I’m very fond of her and I worry about her. Not one of these girls comes close to the Duke Lister (the 13 in her presentation were just the tip of the iceberg, the alpha-est alphas that she banged. I know this because the 2 went to college with her).

      For the record, both boyfriends are totally beta, I know them both. The woman with a count of 13 has a real taste for alphas – rugby players and the like. The 2 has beta orbiters who read this site and really need to implement what guys are talking about here.

  • Wayfinder

    @Jennifer

    “Well, he disappeared for a reason – he’s got a modern civilization to maintain and wouldn’t be very happy with a woman pursuing a mating strategy from the stone age, no matter empowered it makes her feel. She’s empowered alright – like Genghis Khan, leaving a trail of corpses in her wake”

    I couldn’t agree more. But the thing is, I thought that Susan and this article implied that she was not in fact one of those women.

    I don’t know about Susan, but the whole article implies that she is exactly one of those women. She compares marrying an aging beta with a butterfly getting caught in a net for crying out loud!

    A certain segment of the manosphere seems to jump straight to criticizing a women’s looks. I think that they get it from Rossy. I suspect that it also has to do with a reaction to women who shame betas who admit that they don’t find certain women attractive. I view this as the rough equivalent of the women who immediately start casting aspirations on the number of sexual partners a man has had, and whether or not he lives in his mother’s basement. I respect logic, not ad hominem attacks.

    In this case it’s slightly relevant. Her looks, after all, are one of her assets in the sexual marketplace. And she is probably above average in the almost-forty set. Thing is, I passed literally dozens of twenty-something girls today who looked much better by virtue of their youth, and a significant number of them will probably be at least as good-looking as Kate when they turn forty. And they don’t have her baggage or her rapidly declining fertility.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Wayfnder

      She compares marrying an aging beta with a butterfly getting caught in a net for crying out loud!

      If a man driving down a country road gripped the steering wheel till his knuckles turned white and started shouting in an agitated tone “Are you the One? Are you the One?” I’d take my chances and roll out with the car moving. Seriously, she’s lucky her body wasn’t found in the woods months later.

  • El Marqués

    There is a very bizarre aspect to this.  You watch that segment and you’d think all these older single women just LOVE their lives, and maybe they do, but then you get the shaming stuff about Peter Pans and not manning up and marrying.  There almost seems a sort of bipolar schizo aspect to all of  this.

    Mike C, there is a psychological aspect to this, I agree, but my guess would be pathological narcissism. It’s so rampant in current generations of women and men, that it will disappear from the next edition of the DSM ( Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) . I’m not kidding.

    If you don’t know about her already, Dr. Tara’s blog is a worthy read for any young man or woman and a good way to learn about the red flags of narcissism and other mental disorders.

  • Jennifer

    Great points, wayfinder. I confess, I didn’t read the article; I went by Susan’s comments.

    Sojourner, ain’t that the truth :(

  • 108spirits

    Wayfinder, the fellas only brought up her looks because Susan’s emphasis on how “gorgeous” she is. It’s very relevant here, because young women look to the older ones like Kate and somehow believe that their attractiveness and sexual power can last until that age and beyond. No it doesn’t. Kate could well have been gorgeous when she was younger (and thus wielding a huge amount of power over men), but she is not that now. She might for some reason look highly attractive in women’s eyes, but men wouldn’t rate her that high. Mike C’s theory has some legs here, I think. Men can detect subtle fertility cues on women that women can’t, and likewise, women can detect subtle alpha characteristics on men that men can’t see.

  • Lavazza

    I guess she is richer than most of us guys here and she definitively is in the top 5 % for her age, so for any single man over 45 here she would be worth a go for a childless LTR, since we would only have to pay our part, or less. But I am not sure thats what she wants, i.e. older guy who is not earning more and who is not interested in having (more) children, unless its with a much, much younger woman.

  • ExNewYorker

    @Anacaona

    “Did you watch the Today segment? That is NOT at all what she said. To hear her and the other woman being interviewed marriage is the old paradigm and older, single women need a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”

    That whole segment was a bizarre defense of “the new paradigms” and how all these women were “choosing” to be single.  At the end, they threw in a lukewarm “some people will still choose marriage” (God forbid), but it does lend credence to the idea that the Atlantic article was a way to rationalize the choices that led to her current situation.  I also liked the George Clooney reference…apex fallacy yet again…

    I liked the music at the beginning… “I’m every woman!”.  Well, at the rate things are going, it may be the case…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I liked the music at the beginning… “I’m every woman!”. Well, at the rate things are going, it may be the case…

      How tacky was that? And that purple graffiti on the white screen! That looked like something from a middle school play.

  • David X.

    Nice job Susan! Have you been contacted by the NYT yet? :P

    But, it’s good to have this issue raised by the popular media. But, that’s not very meaningful unless young women being wanting to change their behaviour. I read an article a few days ago that talked about how HS students are not buying snacks from the new and healthier vending machines.

    If you can’t even convince people to do well for their own health then how you can convince them hook-up with guys they’re obviously attracted to (in the short-term)?

     

     

     

  • Isabel

    Ha. Did some of the guys here expect her to verbally excoriate herself just to please their sensibilities? It was a good article imo; a tad too lengthy and waffly in places but still decent. If I had read the comments before her piece, I would have probably thought she was a hairy misandrist goblin who snacks on betas for breakfast. Meh. Stop overreacting. She’s done more than most and no amount of vitriol aimed at her “thickening arms” is going to change that.

    Also, Jennifer: Mike C was on point, as usual, with the e-standards comment. Add +1 to every rating. +2 if the guy rating starts to mention pointy elbows or interocular distances.

    Generation Three, the violence from alpha predators becomes so intense, that men band together under some power-patronage leader. Think Mussolini, Lenin, Franco, Augustus, Charlemagne, Charles Martel. These societies are based on total in-group male domination, military orientation, and brutal punishment for transgressors

    Lol.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      If I had read the comments before her piece, I would have probably thought she was a hairy misandrist goblin who snacks on betas for breakfast.

      LOL. There were a couple of very angry MGTOWs who highjacked that thread. It’s a pity, I had hoped I might join the conversation there, but the quality of commentary was terrible.

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    Aw, I feel like a jerk for trashing her in the comments. Oh sure, there were a few hamsterizations — she needs to keep her job, after all — but at least she put forth an honest effort.

    (“You’re supposed to LIKE being a jerk, you damned beta! What’s wrong with you, you white-knighting mangina?” shouted the PUA as he read this.)

    We have to realize we can’t get everything we want in one fell swoop. Sometimes, the perfect is the enemy of the good.

    And she is attractive for her age. It’s just that most women can’t pull it off.

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    Oh, and Bolick, if you’re reading this, thanks for not being one of those feminist hatemongers that we’re all too used to dealing with.

    (Somewhere, a PUA punched his computer screen at this display of betatude.)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Oh, and Bolick, if you’re reading this, thanks for not being one of those feminist hatemongers that we’re all too used to dealing with.

      (Somewhere, a PUA punched his computer screen at this display of betatude.)

      That is not betatude! That is accurate and fair. If you treated her like Marcotte or Valenti you’d be insane! Bolick is anti-feminism, at least when it comes to mating.

  • Petruchio

    That picture looks to me like a 14-year-old girl desperately wondering how many times she has to put on mommy’s make-up and roll her hair in mommy’s curlers and look into the mirror with a sultry look like those girls who got the real men to commit to them before she’s allowed to be a grown-up for real.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Petruchio

      That picture looks to me like a 14-year-old girl desperately wondering how many times she has to put on mommy’s make-up and roll her hair in mommy’s curlers and look into the mirror with a sultry look like those girls who got the real men to commit to them before she’s allowed to be a grown-up for real.

      Funny, it reminded me of Holly Golightly. She too was pretending.

  • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

    Whiskey is a highly respected writer in this corner of the internet. And I deleted his comment for this:

    Bolick (really so stupid she could only be a woman)

    Dude, why waste the time typing?

  • VJ

    OK, I’ve just killed enough brain cells to qualify for political office by reading all the comments here & there. My thoughts:

    1.) Kudos to Susan for the notice and taking the time to give KB her thoughts.

    2.) Ditto for the fact that we’ve actually got more thoughtful comments here, and most of them are not as ‘snarky’. (Well mostly).

    3.) It goes downhill from here. Despite being reasonably well written & researched (hey it’s from the Atlantic), it’s also reasonably clear that Kate B. actually still Wants to be married. And yet, she’s actually unable (or unwilling?) to tell us why. Or how or why she feels differently about marriage now than when she was, yes, ‘More Marriageable’ @ age 28 a decade ago to the perfectly acceptable (now as then) Allan. Or how she came to change her mind. This sort of self knowledge and acceptance and ownership of adult needs & desires seems to be curiously missing from the article. Perhaps it’s not really meant to be that self revelatory. But at an advanced age she still can not tell us (and perhaps herself) what it is she’s actually ‘looking for’ in a potential mate or partner.

    4.) Umm, the next bit is going to leave a mark. Sorry in advance. I’m about the same age as Susan, I’m far from prudish, and this is about the ‘table talk’ with the college kids/grads in MA. I’ve said it before here & I’ll say it again, I rarely if ever have heard any of my male contemporaries ‘grade’ their sexual partners as thoroughly and regularly as evidently many women, and especially younger women, are seemingly wont to do. It’s just exceedingly rare, especially with any past partners who might still be ‘active’ or even ‘living’, and certainly not commonly among college grads. It’s as incomprehensible to me as it is completely mystifying and utterly depressing. Decades spent lecturing men on ‘all the manifest the harms of the degrading of women in every sphere possible’, (including the ever present and irrepressible but effective advertising), evidently have not made an impression on any of the gals! Even with all the feminist theory. I know, they were promoted for a ‘survey’. But other than Tucker Max & other of his ilk, or some well known PUA’s (whose business relies on such DHV etc), I just don’t hear it from the guys. One off expressions of Admiration and Affection and not abject scorn are much more common and yes, indeed are heavily sanctioned if expressed at all publicly.

    The depressing part comes from all that ‘miserable/misbegotten’ frenetic sexual experience, and yet deriving so little satisfaction or even lasting comfort & friendship or memorable pleasure. Kids, if it don’t feel good, why the hell keep doing it?

    From the Atlantic article: “Some had had many partners, and they all joked easily about sexual positions and penis size (“I was like, ‘That’s a pinkie, not a penis!’”) with the offhand knowledge only familiarity can breed. Most of them said that though they’d had a lot of sex, none of it was particularly sensual or exciting”.

     

    More Depressing is our collective abject failure here: “Most striking to me was the innocence of these young women. Of these attractive and vivacious females, only two had ever had a “real” boyfriend—as in, a mutually exclusive and satisfying relationship rather than a series of hookups—and for all their technical know-how, they didn’t seem to be any wiser than I’d been at their age”.

     

    This is the essence of pair bonding. Not getting any decent ‘practice’ at that vital skill spells an early doom for many more desirable and serious relationships in later life. Which will naturally fail at higher rates for more trivial factors. Like ‘it’s missing something’. Perhaps Salt, or Oregano, garlic, or olive oil. Try it, you might like it?

     

    5.) “I realize some of this comes with ‘age graded expectations’ too. But both Kate B., and plenty of younger women live fine lives of entitlement in evey sphere possible, and yet like fish swimming in the water they live, remain wholly ignorant of this essential fact. These wonderfully able, well educated and accomplished women live life in the Apex fallacy. They demand the top <20% of the best men possible at the advanced ages (over 35) when they finally become ready for marriage, and then wonder ‘where are all the decent, good, well educated, marriage minded men’? They’re already Married, dears! You deal with the trajectory of ‘life history’ choices that are available at that age grade: the divorced, the ‘squirrely’ never married, the nerds, the retreads. The tradesmen with quick minds if you’re lucky or the well read contractors with their own businesses”.

     

    6.) So Bottom line? The regretful ghost of present and future ‘swinging spinsterhood’ shows up for an evening soiree, and the imparted knowledge leads not to any talk of behavioral changes or even suggestions for reform(?) or hopeful adaptations. Everyone present seemingly desires marriage & LTR’s & BF’s, yet no one is any more successful in accomplishing this goal just yet. Why is that? Whatever it is, it’s a perfect description of a kind of market failure.

     

    So yeah, a very interesting article. And I hope that older Atlantic editor is feeling better about himself now, I guess! Cheers, ‘VJ’

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @VJ
      I’m glad you brought up the wisecrack about the penis. When one woman told that joke I wanted to grab the words right out of the air before they reached Kate’s ears.

      I have heard from many guys here that men just don’t do that. I consider it extremely poor behavior on the part of women. I’ve heard stories of women texting reports on penis performance to friends during sex. It’s terrible behavior, because every woman knows that men tend to be anxious about the size issue. Ridiculing them, even in their absence, is just incredibly cruel.

      When Juicy Campus was still active, there were lots of disgusting posts about the size, smell and dryness of women’s vaginas. Women were devastated by these reports. I am 100% convinced that they were all written by other women, not men. As a sort of bizarre and sadistic form of female sexual competition.

      The regretful ghost of present and future ‘swinging spinsterhood’ shows up for an evening soiree, and the imparted knowledge leads not to any talk of behavioral changes or even suggestions for reform(?) or hopeful adaptations.

      OMG that’s brilliant. A sort of SMP Christmas Carol. I’m swiping that idea.

      And I hope that older Atlantic editor is feeling better about himself now, I guess!

      Seriously. His wife is probably grinning like the Cheshire Cat. If I were her I wouldn’t suggest any more shopping excursions.

  • Höllenhund

    I think it’s first and foremost the jaded, cynical expression on Bolick’s face – exactly the sort of worn-out gaze one expects from carousel riders – which makes her unattractive, not her arms or body shape.

  • Höllenhund

    Second, here are the partner counts of the five women present: 2, 4, 13, 7, 25. Or something very close (haven’t checked since July!

    Oh please, Ms. Walsh. We all know we can safely multiply those numbers by 3. We’ve discussed the reasons numerous times before. I mean, come on.

    Whiskey is 100% right.

  • http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/ Slumlord

    Reading between the lines in the last part of her article, I got the the got the impression that she was trying to make the best of the sub-optimal hand which she had dealt herself. No matter how she dressed it up, she was a failure and she knew it.

    Feminism really didn’t turn out like it was meant to.

    Still I have no sympathy.

     

     

  • Höllenhund

    the fellas only brought up her looks because Susan’s emphasis on how “gorgeous” she is.

    Exactly!

  • Some Handle

    But I won’t stand for anyone trashing her looks gratuitously.

    Susan, when I responded with, “Why on earth did you say that?“, I was trying to warn you. It is like declaring that someone is a great songwriter, and then you go on to hear mediocre music. People are going to respond (for better or worse).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Some Handle

      Susan, when I responded with, “Why on earth did you say that?“, I was trying to warn you.

      It seems I misinterpreted nearly everything you said yesterday. My mistake. And Hollenhund’s point is fair. It didn’t occur to me there would be any disagreement. :-/ And I actually think it’s OK – as I said, her looks are relevant to the story. I just thought some of the criticism was harsher than necessary. “Wouldn’t hit it” will generally suffice.

  • Some Handle

    There is a very bizarre aspect to this.  You watch that segment and you’d think all these older single women just LOVE their lives, and maybe they do, but then you get the shaming stuff about Peter Pans and not manning up and marrying.

    +1

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      then you get the shaming stuff about Peter Pans and not manning up and marrying.

      I’m going to disagree about the shaming. Not in general, just in this particular segment. Not sure if that’s what you meant.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Re: Women marrying men less-educated than themselves, society not being set up for mingling between socioeconomic levels…..I’d note that the “socio” aspect and the “economic” aspect may increasingly part ways. A man without a degree in a highly skilled trade (toolmaker, for example) or running his own trade-based business (air conditioning contractor, say) may wind up making a *lot* more money than someone with a masters degree in some squishy-soft subject whose destiny is a futureless adjunct-professor position or a meaningless “policy” job (if he’s lucky) or a job at Starbucks (if he’s not.)

     

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      .I’d note that the “socio” aspect and the “economic” aspect may increasingly part ways.

      For women’s sakes, I hope so. Those men are going to have their pick if they are marriage-minded.

  • Some Handle

    …gripped the steering wheel till his knuckles turned white and started shouting in an agitated tone “Are you the One? Are you the One?”

    That is really interesting.

    …gripped the steering wheel and asked, “Are you The One? Are you The One?”

    I think that you and i read different articles.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I think that you and i read different articles.

      No, I just got the Walsh embellishment gene. I never let details get in the way of a good story.

  • Lavazza

    david foster: Still there is not much mingling. The high earning contractor mingle with other high earning contractors as a first choice and with less earning tradespeople as a second choice, not with intellectual people earning the same or less. They might live close or have kids in the same school and so on, but the socio part is more important than the economic part.

     

  • Workafrolic

    I just discovered HUS and it is a revelation.

    I have hated for a long time the holier-than-thou attitude of many of my female friends.    “I deserve a good man!” (But I am a bitch, boring, lazy, entitled and antisocial.)

    I am happy the playing field has been leveled. Not resentful.

    As a 30 year old single woman newly in Manhattan, this dialogue is welcome.

    Happy to be here and curious to hear and participate in the conversation.

    Thanks Susan and everyone else for participating!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Workafrolic
      Welcome, thanks so much for introducing yourself right away! Grab the RSS feed or email subscription if you’d like. I generally post 2-4 times a week.

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    @ Susan Walsh

    Thanks. But to clarify my previous post, I didn’t trash her in the Atlantic comments — in fact, I didn’t comment on the Atlantic at all. I was merely apologizing for implying here on HUS that she was some man-hater.

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    @ Workafrolic

    Welcome to HUS, Workafrolic! We’ll be happy to discuss today’s romantic marketplace with you. Mind you, some posters can be a bit prickly, but we all mean well here, so don’t hesitate to comment.

  • Some Handle

    No, I just got the Walsh embellishment gene.

    Still, it was interesting which part of the article you chose to embellish.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Still, it was interesting which part of the article you chose to embellish.

      It was only in my mind, to be honest, because you pasted it here with that “Jesus Christ!”

  • deti

    Mike C touched on this way upthread, I think. 

    Am I missing something here?

    I’ve read and digested Bolick’s Atlantic article.  That article seems at least a little sympathetic to manosphere concerns.  I also watched the Today show interview which was, I thought, wholly incongruous with her Atlantic article.   In the written article Bolick seems to lament her single life and regrets missed opportunities with good men.  But in the Today show piece she talks about loving single life while squirming uncomfortably, shifting her eyes and using seemingly unnatural gestures.   It seemed to me she didn’t really believe what she herself was saying.  And it did not line up with her Atlantic article. 

    I almost wonder if the producers told Bolick to play up the “Look at me! I’m an attractive single lady and I love my rollicking good time single life” bit so the segment wouldn’t be a downer and would line up with the MSM message.

    My point is that the interview certainly doesn’t help young women who we are continually hearing saying things like “where are all the good men” and “why can’t I find a husband” and “I want to get married but….”    The Today show piece projects an image counter to what women are saying over and over that they want — they want to meet men to marry.  

    Anybody else notice this?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @deti

      I almost wonder if the producers told Bolick to play up the “Look at me! I’m an attractive single lady and I love my rollicking good time single life” bit so the segment wouldn’t be a downer and would line up with the MSM message.

      My point is that the interview certainly doesn’t help young women who we are continually hearing saying things like “where are all the good men” and “why can’t I find a husband” and “I want to get married but….” The Today show piece projects an image counter to what women are saying over and over that they want — they want to meet men to marry.

      Anybody else notice this?

      Definitely. That’s why I said I thought she’d been put in a certain box on the show. Not only that, she seemed surprised to me. I can tell you that during dinner she was open about hoping to meet someone and marry. I suspect she would like to have a child or two. By the way, I know a bunch of women who had kids in their early 40s. Yes her fertility is greatly reduced but it is not at all unlikely that she may still have kids. I had a pregnancy “scare” at 43 and I was terribly disappointed when I got my period. I would have been thrilled to have that unplanned baby.

      Her body language and gestures were very anxious. She did look up a lot, and seemed a bit tongue tied. Who knows.

      I’m surprised no one has mentioned that one of her recent relationships was with a man 11 years her junior. He asked her to dinner and next thing she knew she was spending Christmas with his family. Assuming that just ended, he would have been 26 or 27 at that time. That was not a good choice on her part, if she wanted to marry.

      That’s the big question. Did she decide what she wanted and pursue that aim strategically, or did she go with the flow and stay entirely “in the moment?” We know the answer to that question. Kate is a cautionary tale, and I think she knows that.

  • Workafrolic

    @ CrisisEraDynamo

    Thank you. :) Can you clarify some shorthand that I’m not familiar with?

    SMP – is that sexual marketplace?

    Can’t think of the others, but either can you tell me the other key abbrs. I should know or is there a link with definitions? Thanks!

    Also, as a female, I signed up for Hot or Not (read that in some post) to determine my objective rating as a female. I think the most important thing I’ve gleaned from this conversation so far, is it’s absolutely critical to determine your value in the marketplace and know what you’re after and what you can get. That is the #1 mistake I see many of my friends make. They think they are 8s or 9s and in fact they are 5s (on a good day.)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Workafrolic
      SMP is sexual marketplace.
      SMV is sexual market value.

      Having a glossary is actually a really good idea. I’ll get on that. Just shout out whenever you don’t understand something. We do use a lot of acronyms and slang around here!

  • dragnet

    Kate Bolick is a good-looking woman. Sure, 20 years ago she was probably top shelf, but even at age 40 she looks good and is clearly better looking than most other women at that age. She can still marry an alpha—just not one her age. She should probably look at guys in their early to mid 50s who have kids already.

    As for the article itself, although there is the usual self-justifying mental masturbation and a fair bit of misandry—it’s better than what we’re used to getting from The Atlantic. On balance, I think it’s helpful and the best starting point we’re going to get from the mainstream media. If she’d written an article laying down the full, unadulterated truth it would never have made it past the editor’s desk.

    As for the women in Susan’s group—they don’t seem like especially egregrious examples of females behaving badly, if you ask me. By today’s standards. Rating guys on cock size and their performance—no, it’s not a shining mark of character but I really can’t get all that worked up about it, probably because I tend to welcome that sort of press. As for the partner count, by the time a girl is 30 she could easily be in double digits if she’d had one guy per year since high school. And I’ll admit that part of the reason I find it hard to judge those women is…because I passed 25 many, many partners ago. Doesn’t mean I advocate putting rings on sluts just that I tend not to be too judgemental about a girl’s number, for obvious reasons. And not all girls with high(er) counts are hardened, mannish, worthless sluts—sometimes there are other issues there. Once again, I’m not excusing them or telling betas to wife it up—just that they are symptom of larger cultural problem rather than a cause. As am I.

    And to me, the most relevant conclusion to draw from the Today show segment is to note how intent our culture is on shielding women from the consequences of their bad decisionmaking. Instead taking her story as a cautionary tale, the segment plays up the glamour of the single life for aging woman. The show literally goes out of its way to distort the real take-home message because we have culture that is designed to shield women from hard truths regarding sex and mariage and transfer the costs of their poor judgement onto men generally. Between our gynocentric pop culture, pussy worshipping manginas, man-hating feminists, and clueless social conservatives it’s no wonder young women are lost and young men are choosing to arbitrage sexual market inefficiencies as opposed to investing long-term.

    And it’s nice to hear Amanda Marcotte howling in agony. This truth is motherfucker—and things are just getting starting.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @dragnet
      Thanks for your view on the strategic usefulness of the article. That was precisely my objective. I was careful to be very clear about my views because I didn’t want any possibility of having my words twisted out of context should she turn out to be a feminist. In fact, I assumed she was when I first heard from her. I mean, what are the chances she wouldn’t be a sex poz woman in NYC? It was a gamble because we know how almost any conversation can be made to sound a certain way. But they were very professional, from Kate, to the fact-checker, to the editor. i argued some points and they were all seriously considered. I didn’t get everything I wanted – taking out “trash dick” and also characterizing the whole group as “sexually experienced.” I warned the girls about that and they really didn’t care since it was all shared anonymously anyway.

      I also agree about the Today show segment. She said she’s going on Gayle King and Colbert, possibly other shows. I’m especially curious to see how Colbert treats this. Should be interesting.

      And it’s nice to hear Amanda Marcotte howling in agony. This truth is motherfucker—and things are just getting starting.

      Haha, yeah. She told me last summer she would never acknowledge my existence again. Looks like I won. I’m not even tempted to rebut her Slate article, though Jezebel has one I’m tempted to take on.

  • Höllenhund

    I’ve said this before, I’ll say it again. The lack of so-called eligible men as a problem of young women is vastly overstated for at least one reason:

    China, India and the oil kingdoms of the Persian Gulf are FULL of high-earning, traditional-minded young men looking for wives. Due to the massive local gender imbalance, many of them will not find wives from their own country even if they try their best. There are tens of millions of them. This provides a huge market for young American women looking for wealthy, reliable husbands. That’s a huge opportunity for market correction right there.

    Stop rolling your eyes. I’m 100% serious.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Stop rolling your eyes. I’m 100% serious.

      Go East, young woman, go East.

      Yeah, right. I don’t think we’ll see American mail-order brides in our lifetimes.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Lavazza…”Still there is not much mingling. The high earning contractor mingle with other high earning contractors as a first choice and with less earning tradespeople as a second choice, not with intellectual people earning the same or less”

    I woud agree that there is not much mingling…I’d also argue that having a college degree, including a masters or PhD, does not make one an *intellectual person* in today’s world. In all too many cases, it merely reflects the willingness to spend 18 or 20 years of seat time performing defined tasks…sometimes but by no means always, it involves acquiring useful specialized knowlege, but learning law or hydrodynamics does not automatically make one intellectually broad. Recent studies by ACTA and others have demonstrated just how little knowledge and skill the typical college graduate really acquires.

    It’s ironic: a primary reason for the increased government support of higher education, starting with the GI Bill, was to reduce class barriers and improve social mobility. It did have that effect for a while, but is now doing exactly the opposite.

     

     

     

  • Hellhath

    @ Susan

    “Wouldn’t hit it” will generally suffice.

    I think the comments I read pretty much said they would hit it, just not commit to it. Which is in vein with why we are here is it not?

  • Some Handle

    Ridiculing them, even in their absence, is just incredibly cruel.

    Susan, didn’t you mention that you had made comments about a guys small size to your roommate once?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Susan, didn’t you mention that you had made comments about a guys small size to your roommate once?

      No never. In my post on penis size I pretty much lay it out. I encountered one micropenis in my youth and one ginormous one. Neither encounter was headed for intercourse in any case, but those are the only two outliers I’ve ever seen. TBH, all the women I’ve ever known don’t really distinguish much among penises one standard deviation from the mean in either direction. I do think this generation of women does it, though. Clearly. And it’s not just that. During dinner that night one woman was complaining that her bf wasn’t good at fingering her. Too Much Information! Tell him what you like, not us!

      I haven’t ever ridiculed a man’s genitals, I don’t think. My roommate and I did talk penises, but more in the spirit of loving them in general :-) Mostly we were trying to figure stuff out, like circumcised vs. not circumcised, what feels best to a guy, what was a FAIL, etc.

  • Some Handle

    It was only in my mind, to be honest, because you pasted it here with that “Jesus Christ!”

    Be honest; after reading this:

    Like zealous lepidopterists, they swoop down with their butterfly nets, fingers aimed for the thorax, certain that just because they are ready for marriage and children, I must be, too.

    Did you not cringe at least a little?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Did you not cringe at least a little?

      I pictured a character from a Tim Burton movie. I think I took her at her word that the guy was really, really strange. But I do think there is some hamsterwheeling in that comment.

  • deti

    Worka:

    SMP:   Sexual marketplace

    AFC:  Average frustrated chump

    HB:  Hot babe  (as in HB8 or HB9)

    Your descriptions of women’s self-ratings are spot on.  It’s because those 5s you know can hop in the sack with an 8 or 9 alpha male for sex.    He pumps and dumps her.  Or, if she’s really lucky, that 5 woman gets him for a month or two until the shit testing starts, or she blows up his phone, or she gets too needy-clingy, or she otherwise becomes a hassle.  Then he dumps her.   She then thinks because.she once pulled an alpha for a romp or a little boyfriend treatment, she’s now an 8 or a 9.    She rationalizes away the P & D or the breakup as the alpha just didn’t realize how awesomely awesome she is.

  • Workafrolic

    @ Susan Walsh

    You’re welcome. I’m already subscribed. Hooked. :)

  • Workafrolic

    @ deti

    Thank you! Was wondering what AFC was. LOL @ awesomely awesome.

  • deti

    Now, Worka, on that scenario I posted above:  I know you’ve seen this play out with people you know.  I’m sure you have.

  • Workafrolic

    oh, what’s “shit testing?” thx.

  • Some Handle

    Yes her fertility is greatly reduced but it is not at all unlikely that she may still have kids.

    It is not just the fertility that matters. Their is growing evidence that when women have their first child after, say, 35, that certain health problems, for the child, are much more likely.

  • deti

    “I can tell you that during dinner she was open about hoping to meet someone and marry. I suspect she would like to have a child or two. By the way, I know a bunch of women who had kids in their early 40s. Yes her fertility is greatly reduced but it is not at all unlikely that she may still have kids.”

    Women can have kids into their 40s but it’s unrealistic.  It’s harder to get pregnant, it’s harder for her to carry the baby, and the odds of birth defects and miscarriage are greatly increased.  And then it’s not just having the baby, it’s 20 years after that of caring for him and rearing him. If you’re 40, you’re facing caring for a child well into your 50s.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      And then it’s not just having the baby, it’s 20 years after that of caring for him and rearing him. If you’re 40, you’re facing caring for a child well into your 50s.

      I knew one couple. When they married, she was 30, first marriage. He was 65, third marriage, five grown kids. They had two more. At 40 she died of breast cancer, when her son was 7. Her daughter was 12. Just terrible. Dad was 75! Honestly, delaying childbirth does come with a whole host of problems.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Hollenhund

    China, India and the oil kingdoms of the Persian Gulf are FULL of high-earning, traditional-minded young men looking for wives. Due to the massive local gender imbalance, many of them will not find wives from their own country even if they try their best. There are tens of millions of them. This provides a huge market for young American women looking for wealthy, reliable husbands. That’s a huge opportunity for market correction right there.. 

    I don’t know about India and the other countries, but in China, it’s not just the gender imbalance.

    A friend of mine whose job requires a lot of travel around Asia recently told me that there are three sexes in China: “male, female, and female with a PhD.”

  • deti

    Shit test (also referred to as “fitness test”):    a test that women impose on men to challenge his mettle as a man and determine whether he will stand up to her.  It can come in several forms but the best response is to ignore it, say nothing and walk away.  With shit tests, the woman almost always gets something she wants either way.   If the man complies with her request, he fails the test and becomes less attractive.  If he passes, she knows that he will stand up to her and her attraction grows.

    The classic textbook shit test is the “does this make me look fat” or “does this make my butt look big” question.   The woman does not really want an honest response.   The man is put in a difficult situation.  If he says yes, she replies indignantly “You think I’m fat!!”   If he says no, she replies indignantly “You’re lying!   You DO think I’m fat, you just don’t want to say so!!”    The best response is to simply walk away  and say nothing.  If she presses him, he should joke around and say “Sure.  That makes you look HUUUUUGE!!”   Then she knows that  of course, he is kidding her.

    Another shit test is the “you need to ditch your friends and be with me tonight” ploy.  In this test, the man has plans to do something with his male friends, but she wants him to do something with her.   The woman wins either way:  If he complies, she gets him for the night, but she learns he won’t stand up to her and “be the man”.  .  If he doesn’t comply, she knows he can “be the man” and tell her no.  She also knows that he has a life of his own and isn’t a needy-clingy beta. This is what she really wants to find out with this test.    The only way for the man to pass this test is for him to stick to his guns and hang with his friends, and tell her he’ll talk to her tomorrow or the day after.   If he complies with her demand, ditches his friends and goes to her, she knows she can control him and her attraction to him fades.

  • Workafrolic

    @ deti

    Yes I’ve seen this with a current friend who hooked up with a guy her physical superior and assumed they were dating exclusively. She was very upset when she realized he had moved on to someone else and anointed her GF. She has gone on two other dates since then with seemingly nice guys who treated her well, but she said “I’m not attracted to them.” Then she wonders why she’s still single.

  • Höllenhund

    @Susan

    Go East, young woman, go East.

    Yeah, right. I don’t think we’ll see American mail-order brides in our lifetimes.

    That’s not how I pictured it. What may happen is

    a) Upper-class American couples with a daughter (or daughters) realizing in the near future that their country has hopelessly gone to shit, with very few high-status, high-earning young men left, whereas China and India are growing and developing economies, and thus grooming their daughters to learn Eastern languages and expatriate to marry some “big man” there, in order to avoid her becoming some childless spinster with cats. It’s a good way to grow ties with other oligarchies in the world.

    b) Younger American career women making the same realizations on their own and moving to Asia. I don’t think it would be as hard as it sounds. You won’t even need to invest that much into learning the language because most of the local educated people speak English. And the trade-offs are great. Finding a job will be easy, because the economy is growing and many companies will probably be happy to pimp themselves as the employers of educated Western expatriates (it’s a sign of status). You’ll pretty much be guaranteed to find a wealthy, loyal husband fast. If you accept the local political regime, it will coddle you because any Westerner supporting them is considered a status symbol.

    I’m not saying either is very likely or will become widespread but I think it’s a good idea.

     

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Clearly Bolick is an intelligent and reflective woman. The thing that irks me about this article is that it rambles on for a long while and ends with no real conclusion.

    As I perched for a moment in each spot, trying her life on for size, I thought about the years I’d spent struggling against the four walls of my apartment, and I wondered what my mother’s life would have been like had she lived and divorced my father. A room of one’s own, for each of us. A place where single women can live and thrive as themselves.

    The appearance of Allan at the beginning and the end of the article strongly suggests that Bolick doesn’t actually relish the Woolfian idea of a room of one’s own. The article seems to paint the picture of a woman who regrets the decisions she’s made, decisions she doesn’t even fully understand herself.

    The sociological bit is obviously her hamster hard at work. She mentions “agency” somewhere on the first page of the article, but then much of the remainder of the article examines various cultural and societal norms and trends. So then, you know, which is it? Is she a woman with agency or is she a victim caught in the midst of social and cultural upheavals? She can’t have it both ways.

    The whole escapist bit about the medieval bastion at the end, where women go to live like monks and effectively retire from the world is definitely over the top. Who’s this chick kidding? Even in the hallowed halls of her pseudo monastery, the specter of Allan would be haunting her still. Is this the ultimate conclusion to all her research and reminiscing–that perhaps the best way is to retire from the game altogether?

    IDK. There’s a streak of self-pity that runs through this whole article that rubs me the wrong way.

  • Jonny

    “I can tell you that during dinner she was open about hoping to meet someone and marry. I suspect she would like to have a child or two.”

    In the article, she said “I don’t know.” If I’m dating her and I get this response, I’ll immediately rule her out as I have done in real life. Flaky women is a horrible waste of time. I experienced this with my first wife. One minute its no kids, the second minute is have kids. Flaky women are essentially saying you’re good as husband material, but not father material. I’ll settle with you to marry, but not to have my kids. My marriage didn’t last.

    “SMP is sexual marketplace.”

    There’s a ton of articles out there about call girls working these days regardless of reason (stripping to pay for college expenses, runaway call girl novelist, European call girls). I wonder if this is the price to pay for non-marriage. How things change. It’s almost like the old novel “East of Eden” by John Steinbeck, which features a woman who trades motherhood for prostitution.

    These days, women are trading relationships and commitments for freedom, independence, and sluthood.

  • deti

    Dragnet:  

    And here’s another thing.  That Today show segment tried to portray Bolick as an “ordinary woman”.   Kate Bolick is not “ordinary” by any measure at all.    She looks better than 80% of all other women in her age range, owns three homes, gets photo ops with well known actresses, is interviewed on national television, and has a distinguished career as a writer and editor.   Her standard of living is above 99 percent of other women in her age range.  

    It does “ordinary women” a grave disservice to portray Bolick as some sort of average Everywoman    She isn’t, not by any stretch of the imagination.

  • Adriana

    Im 31, single, and really enjoyed reading Kate’s article. I came to your blog because of it, and I liked it too. I even shared both the article and the blog with my friends, married and single. Im surprised to read so many negative comments about it. Kate really spoke to me. I dont really care about marriage per se, and I dont want to have kids, so allegedly I have “more time” than some other girls my age. I do care about love, though. I’ve had wonderful, caring boyfriends with whom I wasnt in love with, and the relationship ended being more like a burden than a positive thing in my life. So I chose to be single unless I actually like the person a lot. I do realize that I might never find a partner for life. I would rather find it, but if not, well, not everyone does, and I plan to be happy anyway. I enjoy  my own company, I love my work, I have great friends, I can have sex when I want to (I know, Id rather have it with a loved one, in the meantime…). What else are we supposed to do? Anyway: keep the good work, because you are truly reaching lots and lots of appreciative single girls out there. Thanks!!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Adriana
      Welcome, thanks for leaving a comment. You raise a really important point, which is that some women will be single no matter what. They may be self-aware, self-disciplined and do everything right and still not wind up with a life partner. It’s a good thing for single women to enjoy their lives, their disposable income, their childlessness, whatever. Why wouldn’t we want everyone to be happy with their lives if possible? I think single women can be a great support for one another, as Kate has found.

  • Höllenhund

    @Susan

    I have heard from many guys here that men just don’t do that. I consider it extremely poor behavior on the part of women. I’ve heard stories of women texting reports on penis performance to friends during sex.

    Sometimes men in an all-male company  will make snarky remarks about some woman’s breasts or ass, whether they had anything to do with her or not. But that’s not the same as chatting about penis size. After all, anybody who looks at a woman can safely determine her real ass size and cup size, so it’s not like you can reveal embarassing information about any of that.

    I’ve never heard about men discussing the vaginal odor of any woman. It’s probably a rare occurence if it exists at all.

  • Wayfinder

    @Susan

    I pictured a character from a Tim Burton movie. I think I took her at her word that the guy was really, really strange. But I do think there is some hamsterwheeling in that comment.

    Oh, the guy is definitely a beta, which probably has something to do with how you pictured him. And the apparent desperation doesn’t help.

    Still, this is the exact thing that young betas are brought up to think that they should be doing. They think it’s what women want!

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Hollenhund

    Younger American career women making the same realizations on their own and moving to Asia. I don’t think it would be as hard as it sounds.

    It’s even harder than it sounds.

    A few years ago, I read an article by an American career woman whose company sent her to the Asian office for a few years. She said she would never have said yes if she had known no one would ever ask her out. I don’t know many foreign career women, and can’t corroborate anything about her experience, but she said her case was not a special one and that there were scores more like her in cities all over Asia.

  • Höllenhund

    Another thing that needs to happen is American men move to Eastern Europe en masse. The USA has a men surplus, Eastern Europe has a men shortage. You do the math. The SMP is essentially global and there needs to be a market correction. It will be good for the local economy and demographics. People who speak foreign languages are in high demand there.

  • Höllenhund

    @Bellita

    She said she would never have said yes if she had known no one would ever ask her out.

    She probably failed to send IOIs and didn’t signal that she wants to marry a local man.

  • Höllenhund

    The whole escapist bit about the medieval bastion at the end, where women go to live like monks and effectively retire from the world

    For some reason that reminds me of Countess Elizabeth Bathory.

  • dragnet

    @ Höllenhund

    </blockquote>”She probably failed to send IOIs and didn’t signal that she wants to marry a local man.”</blockquote>

    No. The problem is that American women have an image problem abroad. They really aren’t highly sought after for relationships by foreign men. They are, generally, viewed as slutty, loud, obnoxious, etc. This goes for Anglo women, too.

  • VD

    I’ll admit that part of the reason I find it hard to judge those women is…because I passed 25 many, many partners ago.

     

    Sure, but as an alpha, or perhaps sigma, it’s not your judgment that matters to most women.  It is the judgment of all the less successful betas, deltas, and gammas who don’t necessarily like the idea of marrying or getting involved with a slut.  The man to whom 10 partners is a rounding error usually couldn’t care less if a girl has been with 3, 6, or 12 men.  The man who has only been with 3 or 4 women usually cares greatly about it.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Hollenhund

    The casualness with which you recommend that people move abroad makes me curious. Have you ever lived abroad? Do you think all countries are the same, just with different food? Culture clash is a huge factor that sometimes simply can’t be talked around.

    You’re probably right that the woman didn’t want to marry a local man and remain in the country forever. I can see why that made her seem less desirable as a relationship prospect (a fact to which she would have been blind), but I don’t blame her. I lived in a first world country for two years, moving there with the intention of becoming a permanent resident someday, but left because even after making native friends and learning to fit in, I knew I’d just turn into one of those angry immigrants.

  • deti

    @  Adriana:

    “I can have sex when I want to (I know, Id rather have it with a loved one, in the meantime…).”

    From the horse’s mouth. 

    Adriana, please just know that there are many, many men who would love to have sex when they want to, but cannot.  Sex on demand in today’s SMP is a privilege reserved for any woman with a sex rank of 4 or above, and alpha men.  If you hang around here or other manosphere sites, you’ll soon learn this.

  • Wayfinder

    Re: the innocence or otherwise of the girls.

    They’re clearly not sexually innocent. In fact, from the brief description, they seem to be sexually experienced in the exact sorts of ways that turn off the commitment-oriented guys with lower numbers.

    It sounds like the article did correctly portray them as being inexperienced with dealing with men and relationships, though. All the sexual experience in the world won’t help you afterwards, when the refractory period hits.

    By the way, that’s one explanation for why guys will have sex and never see the girl again. During the refractory period, if there is no connection other then sex, he’s going to be active driven away from her. Add in that sexual contact in the refractory period can be literally painful for some guys, and that there’s often a period of low physical desire for sex for a while afterwards, and you can start to see why having sex with a guy before commitment will sabotage a girl.

  • Isabel

    @ Johnny

    These days, women are trading relationships and commitments for freedom, independence and sluthood.

    Promiscuity is abhorrent. However, I fail to see what’s wrong with freedom or independence. What do you mean by that?

  • Wayfinder

    @dragnet

    No. The problem is that American women have an image problem abroad. They really aren’t highly sought after for relationships by foreign men. They are, generally, viewed as slutty, loud, obnoxious, etc. This goes for Anglo women, too.

    I would expect that most western women would have numbers way too high for a wealthy, conservative Saudi Muslim looking for a wife.

    @Adriana and deti

    I can have sex when I want to (I know, Id rather have it with a loved one, in the meantime…). What else are we supposed to do?

    Yes, this pretty much the exact attitude that would have this particular commitment-minded man showing you the door.

    For the guy thinking of marriage, it basically translates too “I haven’t found someone to love me, so I’ll just sleep with whichever alpha/player/lucky stiff meets my fancy right now.” The wording even implies that it wasn’t in the context of any kind of relationship. If the guy has never been able to have much sex “in the meantime” you’re setting the stage for at best resentment.

     

  • Tom

    @ Whiskey

    And no, the young women were not innocent. Since they’ve all had from the article I infer around 25 lovers or so, their ability to form any pair bond is pretty much nil.

    ____________________

    Seriously? You really believe this garbage?

  • Adriana

    Hi Deti,

    Yes, I understand that, but what can I do about it, really? I’ve been single for about a year now. Should I refrain from ever having it? I like to read about others perspectives, and I suppose it should be also interesting to read about mine. For example: I never had a guy NOT call me after a one night stand (I didnt have a lot of those, but sometimes, well, I like to have fun just like the next person). I even had one night stands turn into long term relationships. So it is not ALWAYS true that guys will not “value” a woman who will sleep with them quickly. Honestly, it just means that I find them very attractive, not that I sleep with everything that moves. And also, if I guy concludes that Im worthless because i just slept with them, well, he is not the kind of men Id like to be with anyway. So there! There are always differences, I think people generalize too much.

  • Wayfinder

    @Isabel

    I can’t speak for anyone else, but these days I see too many irresponsible people who value “freedom” and “independence” over their fellow human beings. People who don’t show up for their jobs, quit without notice, leave their mess all over the metaphorical roadside and expect the rest of us to pick up after them.

    True freedom is a hard-won thing. Fake freedom, where you rob everyone else so you can follow your narcissistic whims, is easy.

  • dragnet

    @ VD

    Sigma? Delta? Gamma?

    And as for the other guys here, I wouldn’t come down too hard on Adriana. She’s really just a logical byproduct of the shitty culture we have. She’s just a symptom, not the cause—just like the players/sluts/spinsters I talked about earlier.

    In a better and less self-destructive culture, women like wouldn’t exist.

  • deti

    “It is the judgment of all the less successful betas, deltas, and gammas who don’t necessarily like the idea of marrying or getting involved with a slut.”

    Yes.  And it’s those betas, deltas and gammas who will be doing the hard work of investment, commitment and marriage that I keep hearing so many women say that they really, truly want.

  • Some Handle

    I think people generalize too much

    Am I the only one that sees the irony?

  • Jonny

    @Isabel “Promiscuity is abhorrent. However, I fail to see what’s wrong with freedom or independence. What do you mean by that?”

    In this context, freedom and independence mean not being married. So women who go on the single track end up being sluts and in some cases, prostitution. By not being bound in marriage, which to some women means a sex slave, household maid, and baby popper, she ends up servicing many men for free or in exchange for company or material value.

    In other words, nothing has changed at all. (sarcasm).

  • AnonymousDog

    Re: Discussing size, odor, performance, etc. of partner’s genitals.

    In my 50-some years only once did I hear a man (drunkenly) mention the scent and taste of his wife’s genitals, and he was NOT complaining.

    I have heard frustrated husbands, loosened up by a few drinks, complain about their wives’ sexual tics in general terms, but I have never heard any man, married or otherwise, describe or criticise his partners’ genitals

  • Workafrolic

    I think as single women we are conditioned to be “strong, independent, Sasha Fierce” types (thanks Beyonce, who has an alpha male and baby on the way). What we really want is to partner up and make babies (unless we don’t and power to those women all the same.) But the majority of us do want to meet someone and create a romantic, passionate, sex-filled life with a hubby. And we pretend to be strong and fine with being single to cover up being sad and frustrated and scared with not knowing how to accomplish this.

    I think we are ill-equipped for this new world order. Life myself, I’d never heard of any of this perspective until a friend linked the Atlantic article on her Facebook and I traced it the HUS blog.

    What we need to do is educate women (and men) how to navigate this world without disempowering or disparaging each other (and entire genders.) That’s why it’s so important that this discussion reach a wider audience, so we can all be clued in.

    I know I will be approaching dating and the pursuit of marriage much differently now but many women still haven’t got a clue.

    And as Susan says, the end game is to find love, that’s what she’s about, for men and women to find sustaining, fulfilling relationships.

     

  • Wayfinder

    I’m trying to be gentle here, so I hope you take this as it was intended. And I do think your perspective is a very useful one to have here.

    That said, let me go over some of the reactions you’ve been getting, so you can maybe see where some of the guys are coming from:

    Yes, I understand that, but what can I do about it, really? I’ve been single for about a year now. Should I refrain from ever having it?

    There are many good, decent guys for whom your period without a sex would be a rounding error. They are some of the ones most likely to be hurt by the current environment. Unfortunately for women, they were also the population most likely to marry them.

    For example: I never had a guy NOT call me after a one night stand (I didnt have a lot of those, but sometimes, well, I like to have fun just like the next person). I even had one night stands turn into long term relationships. So it is not ALWAYS true that guys will not “value” a woman who will sleep with them quickly.

    Men usually make up their minds about a relationship long before sex, and having sex seldom gets them to change their minds either way. Different men will filter in different ways and with different criteria.

    Honestly, it just means that I find them very attractive, not that I sleep with everything that moves.

    But to a guy who is looking to give commitment to someone, “I just found him attractive, so I had sex with him” gives him zero reason to ever marry you. You’ve basically told him that he isn’t attractive enough to have sex with right away. Unless you can find a way of offering him something stronger than sex, he has no reason to commit to you.

  • dragnet

    @ deti

    Can somebody clue me in on sigmas, deltas and gammas?

    Or were you just being facetious?

  • wudang

    The newbies her should really read the post about testing/shit testing/fitnesstesting. I think it would be the most enlightening

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    I am seeing something interesting among single men in my age group, 50+.  They are reaping the benefit of the endgame of the sexual strategies of the Adrianas and the Kates of the world.  Most single men in their fifties, if they have any appeal at all, are successfully pursuing women Kate’s age.  If they don’t, they have usually given up on women altogether.  But there is a small subset of men in their fifties and sixties who respond with interest to women their own age, and as you can imagine, they are very highly solicited.   They end up with the top 10% of women in this age group who are slender, well-preserved, and still attractive, even though they are no great shakes themselves.

    However, the women don’t appear to want to form genuine relationships with these men.  Like Ellen at the Begijnhof, what they want is sex without the encumbrance of a man underfoot all the time.   However, and this is a big however, they also want the appearance of a relationship, and the appearance of monogamy.  Most of these guys can juggle several women at the same time as long as they can convince each of their paramours that they are being exclusive.    None of the women believe in this exclusivity in their heart of hearts, but as long as the man is willing to put forth a minimal effort to produce some Hamster Chow, the women appear willing to suspend their disbelief.

    The real pyrotechnics come out when the men start sleeping around in the woman’s social circle, thus destroying the illusion, or when the woman’s hamster begins to demand more Chow than she is worth to the man, and she is not-so-quietly replaced.  If she is lucky to find another man willing to continue this masquerade, she learns to keep her hamster acquiescent.

  • deti
  • Jennifer

    “(“You’re supposed to LIKE being a jerk, you damned beta! What’s wrong with you, you white-knighting mangina?” shouted the PUA as he read this.)”

    LOL You just ignore the dumb douches. That’s one of the essences of being a man, doing things your way.

    I don’t believe it was woman’s raised status that lowered men in her eyes, but the feminist ideas telling women to mentally and emotionally feminize men.

    VJ, you read everything here?? Ech.

  • Adriana

    Hi Wayfinder,

    I am taking it gently, dont worry. You are just telling me what you think, as am I. I find it interesting. What I dont understand from some of the comments is the aggressive tone. Guys, Im not attacking you. Im not interfering with your chances of finding the type of girl you want to commit to. Im just not that girl, obviously. Im fine with that. People are different, they want different things. Im happy the way I am. I dont think Im a victim or that in a “perfect culture” (whatever your concept of that is) I wouldnt exist. I hope that is OK with you all. And hopefully we will all find happiness, in whatever shape it comes. Even if we are single. Which some of us will be.

  • dragnet

    @ Adriana

    I didn’t say a “perfect culture”—I said a “better culture”. And I stand by the statement.

    Sure, there have always been women who frivlously discard their boyfriends, have no desire to marry or have kids or what have you. This isn’t the problem. The problem is that our crappy culture churns out these women in bulk, whereas in previous iterations of human civilzation very women few tended to turn out this way. The vast majority of women and men who have ever lived have had a biological imperative to reproduce, but so many of the young women I knew coming up said they never wanted children. Why the discrepancy? These women aren’t genetically different from their ancestors—it’s a shitty culture we have that has made them that way.

    I’m not hard on you, because without girls like you guys like me couldn’t exist—I simply could not lead the life I do without these kinds of women. But the fact that is good for me individually doesn’t mean it’s great for society at large.

    It’s not.

  • Ted

    @ Adriana – Welcome!

    What you don’t understand is that men like myself, Wayfinder, Dogsquat, etc. are concerned that there will be no women left (or at least not many) that feel the way we do because popular culture has made casual sex the norm. You see, as more and more women feel like you, less and less will have the same conservative views we are looking for.

    So, it isn’t so much an attack as a panicked shout. The crux of it all is that there are far more men that care about sexually conservative attitudes in women than women that are sexually conservative. We are getting squeezed out.

  • deti

    I don’t intend to come down hard on Adriana.  I just find it fascinating to read comments from a flesh and blood participant in this SMP confirming everything I read about every day in the manosphere.

  • AndrewV

    I left the following comment over at Slate:

    The idea that Amanda is capable of loving a man, is an astonishing one. Given her track record it (e.g. Duke Lacross scandal) never once occurred to me that such a thing was possible..

    Congratulations to Amanda if that is indeed your current status. It is a little late, but hopefully it is a step in the right direction to becoming a decent person.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Andrew V
      Heh, I wonder how long that comment will stay up. Maybe Slate doesn’t give Amanda the power of censorship. Let’s hope. I confess I keep hearing she has a serious relationship, and I never fail to be astounded. She’s really got an “eat your peas” demeanor, aside from her objectionable views.

  • Isabel

    Wayfinder,

    What’s the difference between true and fake freedom then, out of interest?

    In this context, freedom and independence mean not being married. So women who go on the single track end up being sluts and in some cases, prostitution. By not being bound in marriage, which to some women means a sex slave, household maid, and baby popper, she ends up servicing many men for free or in exchange for company or material value.

    What if some women don’t want to be ‘bound in marriage’ though? Then what? Not sure I’m following tbh. Being a whore is not the only alternative to being a wife, especially now that long-term cohabitation is becoming more and more common/expected for both genders. Traditional marriage as an institution is dead anyway. Gay marriage and adoption is on track for 2015, ‘humanist’ marriage ceremonies are one of the fastest growing sectors in the wedding industry and common law gives the same marital rights to those who have been together for more than 8 years and/or have children. At worst, single women could be considered lonely or past it in their 40s and above but whores? Not reaaaaally. We’ve come a long way since then, not even the conservatives would go that far I’d say. One of our most prominent politicians and possible Prime Minister is a Socialist Atheist Jew with two children out of wedlock and a long-term partner he married  just this summer. Wouldn’t have happened 30 years ago but then times have changed.

    In my experience, people don’t care enough about marriage to go around ruthlessly stigmatising old single women anymore. Or maybe they do but they keep it a secret out of PC?  *shrug*

    Blegh. I’m so conflicted on this. Part of me just wants to do away with tradition and ban it altogether whilst another larger part frets about children and young men/women. Genuinely does my head in. >.<

  • Blues

    As for the article it was a long, misandry filled (Yohami and Esau showed most of those), rationalization of her own situation. At best it’s a step forward by the MSM to uncover a problem the manosphere found ages ago, at worst it’s a another “this is the current situation” tale that offers no real solutions or key info to young women and ironically that’s the problem right there, while to a woman with red pill knowledge this is a clear cautionary tale, to the average woman it’s another “everything’s alright, there’s still options after 40, you don’t need a man at all, it’s all a bunch of fuss over nothing really” (page 5) article that’s gonna do more harm than good in the long run.

    Similarly, I am beginning to think men instinctively recognize the facial and body differences from a 39-year old compared to a 23-year old that go unnoticed when women look at the exact same two women.

    Not really, IMO it’s just how women’s brain work, women are wired to screen for alpha traits (confidence, BL, physical fitness, yada yada yada) and (mostly) ignore age, what you’re missing is that it’s applied to everyone instead of just men.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Ted,

    First and foremost: don’t panic. I don’t think that all women are sluts. Those that are sluts are out of the running for relationships for men who want something different.

    I do think that a lot of men here (I’ve been guilty of this, I’m sure) try to shame slutty women. The problem with that is that you can shame the slut into hiding, but she’ll still be a slut on the inside. It’s not just the act of casual sex itself that makes a slut a slut, but her casual attitudes about it. At least we have a situation now in which the sluts are out in the open. They’re not only acting on slutty impulses, but they’re being open about it. I think we should encourage sluts to be more open, if anything. It makes it easier to discern who we do and don’t want relationships with.

    When I think about it, the only way I got my ex-fiancee to open up about her past was to encourage her honesty about it. If I would’ve shamed sluts, she would’ve clammed up. If that happened, I’d be newly wed to a slut today.

  • Anonymous

    Don’t want to be rude. But she’s cute? We have way better in South Texas.

  • zed

    “Why don’t you marry her then?”

    “Because I’m not a man. ”

    And that is exactly the point being made here.

    This blog is mostly about what is called the “Sexual MARKET Plance.”

    Any even marginally astute marketer would put more weight behind the opinions of a people who are possible consumers than they would give to those who are not in any way potential consumers.

    At least a couple of women have raved about how “gorgeous” this woman is, (rated her beauty and attractiveness) while at the same time you have several men who actually could be considered as potential buyers of her attractiveness saying “Meh.”

    The ensuing discussion, which starts to look more and more like an argument the longer it goes on, reminds me of an argument I had about 15-20 years ago with a grossly obese woman, dripping in jewelery (which she had bought herself) and wearing makeup applied with a trowel. I made some comment about what I found attractive in a woman, and she jumped in and said “NO! You’re wrong. Let ME tell YOU what ‘men’ find attractive.”

    I just laughed in her face. I think it was about 5 years later that she finally figured out what I was laughing at her about.

    In order to determine whether Kate is actually attractive, someone would need to throw her in a shower, wash the raccoon-face makeup off, put a hair band or barrette on her to get her hair out of her face. Then we might get a chance to see what “Kate” actually looks like. All we have seen so far is a very likely airbrushed or photoshopped cover designed by some artistic director with east-coast tastes (and very likely either female or gay) thinks looks attractive.

    In one of the comments above someone remarked about her “alpha” stance. Not long ago I saw a post – I’m pretty sure it was on this blog – about how to “appear” attractive to the opposite sex. Basically it boiled down to – for women, smile, for men, don’t smile.

    What we have in this cover is a woman in a pose that if it were a male in that pose, women would find it attractive. When a lot of men point out the very common tendency of women to grossly overestimate their SMV – either their own or in this case another woman’s – instead of regarding it as feedback from a consumer group which everyone says isn’t buying, it turns into an argument.

    This right here should explain why women are turning into sexual Edsels and cannot find any buyers willing to pay their asking price.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @zed

      In one of the comments above someone remarked about her “alpha” stance. Not long ago I saw a post – I’m pretty sure it was on this blog – about how to “appear” attractive to the opposite sex. Basically it boiled down to – for women, smile, for men, don’t smile.

      What we have in this cover is a woman in a pose that if it were a male in that pose, women would find it attractive.

      You’re right, that was here! Wow, this is an eye opener. I’m attracted to her stance because I would be if she were male. For the record, though, we all thought she was very attractive, and my husband was quite impressed by her. Interestingly, as I said upthread, she wore jeans, little makeup and her hair up in a messy bun, which may have been a better indicator. She had a natural, wholesome look. The Today show clip shows her pretty well, though she is uncomfortable, and that doesn’t help. She also looks older on TV than I recall. Oh well, none of us is for all markets.

      I do agree that women don’t get to tell men what they find attractive, and vice versa. Lots of us don’t want to be told that we tingle for the dark triad traits, and that happens quite a bit too here, lol.

  • Anacaona

    But in the Today show piece she talks about loving single life while squirming uncomfortably, shifting her eyes and using seemingly unnatural gestures. It seemed to me she didn’t really believe what she herself was saying. And it did not line up with her Atlantic article.

    ITA. She was not happy and she answered the question with the saddest way you could say happy. She looked like she was telling it to herself more than she believed I think Today show make her plea even more PC. Did you checked the votes of how many people believe a single woman ca be happy? A lot voted yes, of course is their website they don’t attract bitter spinsters.
    Now I wish Kate makes a second part article about men “choosing to be single”, the women will flip their shit one of the feminists dogma is that men can’t be happy without women, that is sexist!, YMMV.

  • Jennifer

    “My point is that the interview certainly doesn’t help young women who we are continually hearing saying things like “where are all the good men” and “why can’t I find a husband” and “I want to get married but….”    The Today show piece projects an image counter to what women are saying over and over that they want — they want to meet men to marry.”

    Amen to that.

    “I have heard from many guys here that men just don’t do that. I consider it extremely poor behavior on the part of women. I’ve heard stories of women texting reports on penis performance to friends during sex. It’s terrible behavior, because every woman knows that men tend to be anxious about the size issue. Ridiculing them, even in their absence, is just incredibly cruel.

    When Juicy Campus was still active, there were lots of disgusting posts about the size, smell and dryness of women’s vaginas. Women were devastated by these reports. I am 100% convinced that they were all written by other women, not men. As a sort of bizarre and sadistic form of female sexual competition”

    Unbelievable trashiness.

    Hollen, that’s a very interesting idea you have.

    These are AWESOME comments, guys!

  • Ted

    @ Jesus Mahony – No worries, I’m not in a panic. If all goes well, I won’t have to deal with the SMP again in my lifetime. If everything doesn’t go well… *shrug*

    I was simply trying to explain that there is a real passion that sometimes borders on fanaticism from men that are unhappy about the SMP as it exists today. No one was attacking Adriana, but the abrupt backlash towards her ideas could easily be seen as one. It isn’t.

    My investment in this conversation centers on my children. I don’t want my daughter to feel that she has to slut it up to compete with the other young women in her age group to find a quality man. I don’t want my son to have to marry a highly promiscuous women with questionable morals and ability to commit because there are no women left that actually value sexual intimacy for something other than physical pleasure.

    I’m not in a panic, but I still feel that things are looking pretty grim.

  • Hellhath

    @ Susan
    <>

    Well I’ve had the opportunity to move quite a lot in my life, including gypsying up and down the East Coast. NYC is a great place to visit, but the vibe there is a little too surreal for my taste. In my travels I have mingled with a lot of different elements of society from the criminal to the complacent. Regardless of where we bubble up we are all just variations on the same themes. If anything I found that the higher up the social strata the thicker the veneer of bullshit is layered, but underneath there remains the same concerns, the same causes. Thoreau had it right, except now there is gender equality. Most of us are living lives of quiet desperation; Maybe not so quiet for some, but still pretty desperate. There is the same lack of introspection, the same pursuit of distractions, and the same need for shedding the delusions. So many walking wounded so many lives that will be unfilled unless they swallow the red pill. More people are waking up to the realizations that both sides of the fence have been manipulated and lied to for the benefit of others. What is important for many of your readers to understand is that many men are waking up to the manipulations and will neither abide the behavior nor acquiesce to unreasonable one-sided demands; Men make great allies and piss-poor enemies.

    @ Workafrolic
    <>

    Well some people’s end game is that, some people’s end game is to maximize their enjoyment in life. Selfishness is not necessarily a bad thing. For myself end game is cutting through bullshit (slaughter the sacred cows of society) and help men recover their balls. Self-actualization, holistic masculinity, and self-knowledge are my passions. Which is really motivating me to work on my writing (some of my comments have been embarrassingly full of errors) and revitalize my blog. I want men to reach their goals, whatever they may be; I want to help them bring out what has been shamed and cast into the shadows.

    Turning my discussion back to the ladies and what I would advise my teen niece. Nurture compassion, nurture acceptance of things as they are not as you wish them to be, explore your intellectual curiosity, dedicate your life to bridging the gender gap (don’t expect the bridge to be built to you) . Stop looking at men as if they were screwed up women; At least some of us will try to remember that women are not screwed up men.

    Study and question what it means to be a woman. Not feminism (except maybe in what not to do) but what is the nature of feminine. Question everything, challenge it, make them prove to you, and then try it out for yourself. Go look at Women Within (http://www.womanwithin.org/), look inside yourself and find your beliefs and challenge them, kill the entitled princess within yourself. Do not do all this work to attract or keep a man. Do it because under all the things you have been through, feminine is what you are at your natural core. Getting and keeping a good man, a good partner to walk through this dream is a bonus.

  • AndrewV

    @Susan Walsh

    I keep hearing she has a serious relationship, and I never fail to be astounded.

    I was being sincere with my comment. Quite frankly, I believe that she has limited her future options by her previous behaviour.

    For example, it is currently non-trivial for a woman to get an entry into RegisterHer. She really has to work at it, and Amanda has achieved it.

    http://register-her.com/index.php?title=Amanda_Marcotte_–_Bigot

  • Jennifer

    Zed, it turns into an argument when, once again, a woman who is more than reasonably attractive (according to many GUYS here as well) is insulted and made bogus criticisms about. I get tired of hearing people on either side whine about unrealistic expectations. Not that you were, necessarily, but for crying out loud, you don’t have to be ATTRACTED to someone to admit that they look pretty nice or decent. I pointed out she looked the latter and better, IMO, and in return got fussed at because, it was implied, men’s penises only perk at fertile women. For one, that doesn’t mean she’s not pretty or very pretty. And for another, if taken to the extreme, that’s not completely true, because it would then dictate that men can’t get aroused over their middle-aged and older wives.

    It IS pretty funny that a woman told you what men are attracted to. That wasn’t my intention; my point was, different men have a variety of tastes and this woman’s in pretty damn good condition. No offense itnended towards you. (She DOES look angry, btw, but a sultry look would probably work better).

    Now, this is my last comment for a good while. Not only are these posts too fast-moving to keep up with, but in any secular online site, there can be disheartening comments that distract me from life. And on top of all this, my damn computer REFUSES more than half the time now to load this damn thread, or sometimes the whole site. If I keep trying to return here, I fear for my computer’s health.

    You’re awesome, Susan. Really like the majority of you commenters too.

  • Blues

    @Workafrolic:
    “Also, as a female, I signed up for Hot or Not (read that in some post) to determine my objective rating as a female. ”

    Errr, i dunno about letting the internet judging your looks, it could be very skewed one way or the other. I think Susan or someone else once suggested asking a male gay friend if you had one, that way you get a male perspective that’s not biased.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    I think women here are finding her “gorgeous” because she has a high status air about her. She inspires respect etc. She´s got an alpha thingy in her.

    Do I care about any of that? no. I find femininity and vulnerability attractive. And youth. And happiness. And deep emotions. And nurturing. And she looks dry on all those fronts.

    Hard to rate her. She looks fine for a 39 year old woman. But I have never been with any girl older than 27… So that makes her a… 4? and then she loses all of that after reading her thoughts. So, negative value here? I mean, she looks ok. But I would never ever go there.

    I do see how some men would find her attractive. Like, the lucky men who need the love lottery to score. Men I dont want to be associated with.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    So, how much of this “gorgeous” thing is about the character? would you find her gorgeous if she wasnt in a cover, and she was the broke concierge of the building mother of four, who by the way is fucking your son?

    This is what I would call gorgeous

    http://www.vicioyocio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Candice-Swanepoel-12.jpg

    Now compare her to your gorgeous character again?

  • Jonny

    @Isabel , Are your responding to me or Wayfinder?

    “What’s the difference between true and fake freedom then, out of interest?”

    There is none, actually. What women describe as the new freedom is no different than the freedoms inherent in traditional marriage. You bring up a lot of issues that don’t relate like gay marriage. For all the talk about gay marriage having no affect on traditional marriage, it appears that there is an affect.

    Cohabitation is a cop-out. There is no stability in it. I should be best described as advanced dating or its proper term as shaking up. Its just two people having a comfortable interim relationship of indeterminate length and destination. No real commitment or expectation.

    “Part of me just wants to do away with tradition and ban it altogether whilst another larger part frets about children and young men/women.”

    Your conflicted because you’re not making any sense. What’s the point of doing away with a tradition that many don’t participate in? There is no point. Banning it solves nothing. It still makes single women pine for something they are ambivalent about and have no idea about how to fulfill their wants. Many single women don’t have a clue about how to be a wife and mother, yet they want the perfect husband and kids. Many single women end up being the bystanders of life while other people (the minority of the community) are having real lives and families.

    As for you comments on shaming, I agree this is useless. No point in shaming women or men, but this is an example of projection. Women seem to enjoy shaming and gossip. Men don’t care (or care as much as women).

  • Blues

    @Workafrolic: Boomark these sites, they’ll clear most of your doubts on acronyms, if there’s one not there, just ask, someone will answer but do check those first.

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/
    http://www.pualingo.com/pua-acronyms-list/
    http://www.pualingo.com/pua-terminology-list/

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Kate has “pro” level of hair and makeup and clothing in the pic. If I cover most of her face with my hand, she could be anyone. There´s a lot of mask and production there. I remove my hand, and there´s something that profoundly disgust me about her. Something in her demeanor. Very dominant, but yet passive thing there. Walls. And age. And something unwelcoming.

    I guess we put dominance + passive (calm) + walls + age in a man, and women would find him attractive?

    Or… whats going on? because I dont look for makeup hair or clothing when I rate a girl. My eye skips quickly all the layers of mask and goes to what´s behind of it.

    In Kate, when I look behind of the makeup and production, I kind of see a dude.

  • deti

    @ Jennifer:

    “She DOES look angry, btw, but a sultry look would probably work better).”

    I suspect the art director was trying for sultry. At least to some, she looks angry.

  • Isabel

    So, how much of this “gorgeous” thing is about the character? would you find her gorgeous if she wasnt in a cover, and she was the broke concierge of the building mother of four, who by the way is fucking your son?

    Er, you can’t really lecture us on conflating her looks and character when you just put her in negative territory for her thoughts alone.

  • zed

    Zed, it turns into an argument when, once again, a woman who is more than reasonably attractive (according to many GUYS here as well) is insulted and made bogus criticisms about.

    Perhaps the gratuitous comment about “that’s a pinkie, not a penis” set the stage for a less than gracious interaction.

    To paraphrase Marshall McLuhan, the medium is the messenger – throwing out pointless digs then squawking when the digs come back sounds a lot like “You can’t pick on me because I am a girl.”

    The point I made that we were not even presented a real photograph of her – just some contrived rendition. Making any judgments on how “attractive” she is based on that is like judging her appearance based on a cartoon of her.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Isabel,

    Er, you can’t really lecture us on conflating her looks and character when you just put her in negative territory for her thoughts alone.

    Im asking a question, not giving a lecture. I already stated what I see. Feel free to state what you see. That will help me understand whats going on, and it might help you too.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Her looks are really irrelevant to the article.

    “Trash dick” was uncalled for. I wonder what kind of reaction she would’ve gotten by alluding to promiscuous women as having “swamp pussy.”

  • Some Handle

    Do I care about any of that? no. I find femininity and vulnerability attractive.

    http://www.vicioyocio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Candice-Swanepoel-12.jpg

    I certainly agree with finding feminine and vulnerable girls cute, but as nice as that picture is of Candice, she sure as hell is not displaying any vulnerability.

  • VJ

    Susan, I had missed that bit where Kate B. was seriously dating a gent 11 years her junior. If she actually thought it was serious, then she was seriously delusional on that score. So a very smart, well accomplished and yes, very rich woman is still playing with kids, well… because she must enjoy the entertainment & ‘fun’! Guys doing this will be accused of ‘stalking’ the college crowd as ‘dirty old men’! Here, it’s just a passing ‘fancy’. But if she still wants to marry someday & perhaps even have kids? She really needs to think a bit harder here and stop rationalizing her advanced case of ‘cognitive dissonance’. Like other famed women writers (Mary P.), she Might be able to ‘get a kid’ out of the deal, but not really a serious, durable adult relationship of ‘equals’. But perhaps that’s the point. We just don’t know quite what she wants, and likely neither does she (KB)!

    That’s my bottom line thought here. Kate B, despite being very successful in most other realms of her star-crossed, high profile life, seems to this day to not have much of a clue as to what she wants in a relationship with the opposite sex, well Other than the Sex! This SATC lifestyle was meant to be largely a fictional creation, and certainly can’t be lived for decades, but I guess in NYC there’s still some women able to try and live ‘the dream’. And yes logic and experience tells us that this ‘freewheeling’ lifestyle can not, and does not last much longer beyond 40 something, even for the very exceptional, well toned, well rested, rich NYC ‘singetons’ with the time to indulge their various fantasies about all those ‘young studs’ ‘lying’ around.

    That’s the hidden subtext here behind all the world travel to ‘research’ a topic that can be discovered almost everywhere, but lies essentially within. ‘Know thy self’ being one of the oldest instruction for the acquisition of wisdom, and yet this knowledge seems to be lost now to many generations. Just a thought. Cheers, ‘VJ’

  • zed

    “I think women here are finding her “gorgeous” because she has a high status air about her. She inspires respect etc. She´s got an alpha thingy in her.”

    Ding, ding, ding!!! I think we have a winner, folks.

    On my way to work this week I have passed dozens of women who look enough like her – wearing that generic “makeup-face” – that I probably couldn’t pick her out of a lineup a month from now.

  • Isabel

    Yohami,

    What do I see? A somewhat hostile but pretty older woman. It’s fairly futile for me to be rating women as a heterosexual female but I DO know that she isn’t ranked rock-bottom like some seem to be making out. I don’t see anything alpha about her at all tbh. She just looks bored to me. :/

    I wonder how caustic the appraisals would have been had she written a Manosphere friendly article.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Some Handle,

    I certainly agree with finding feminine and vulnerable girls cute, but as nice as that picture is of Candice, she sure as hell is not displaying any vulnerability.

    Yeah, candice looks masculine and has an intimidating alpha thingy in her too, but still gorgeous in my book, I thought it was a fair comparison.

  • Some Handle

    Isabel, this is much less about her attitudes toward, or about, the manosphere and much more about the seeming need of women to proclaim how gorgeous she is.

    The shame of it is, is that she did not really bring much of this on herself. While she did have an heir of entitlement in her article, and that never helps, it is not like she proclaimed herself to be all that pretty.

    Had the hens simply described (if they felt the need to, at all) her looks as “nice”, that would have been fine. But, the combo of her age, what it is that she is really looking for, what her total package is (i.e. character), that look on her face, her body language and the title and sub-title (which she may very likely not have chosen), well, the menz are likely to come out and correct the mistakes.

    It is a little like some “pathetic, Zelda playing, basement dwelling loser” being highlighted in GQ as being hot, well, the hens would come out and correct that right quick.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Isabel,

    What do I see? A somewhat hostile but pretty older woman. It’s fairly futile for me to be rating women as a heterosexual female but I DO know that she isn’t ranked rock-bottom like some seem to be making out. I don’t see anything alpha about her at all tbh. She just looks bored to me. :/

    Thanks. If people were calling her that, “a somewhat hostile, bored, but pretty, older woman” instead of “gorgeous” we wouldnt be having an argument here.

    As for her rank, it depends on who are you ranking her against.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Susan,

    I recommend http://www.mediatemple.net hosting over whatever service you are using now. They have a 50 bucks virtual private server plan which handles loads of traffic well.

  • Tom

    I don’t want my son to have to marry a highly promiscuous women with questionable morals and ability to commit because there are no women left that actually value sexual intimacy for something other than physical pleasure.
    _______________
    I think that is what we all want for our kids…….But what makes you think that a promiscuous woman doesnt value sexual intimacy in a RELATIONSHIP for its emotional value as most of us do? Are we as guys not able to have non emotional sex, but get totally emotional with the woman we love?..Guess what, women are capable of the same thing.
    Some one earlier today made the comment to the effect that if a woman would stop her sexual adventures, she could become a decent person (or something like that)…. I bet we all have met people who we would consider good upstanding “decent” people. But as soon as some people here found out she has had casual sex, she somehow is not a decent person anymore. THAT is a really fugged up attitude. True she might not be relationship material that suits YOUR taste, but it has nothing to do with her being a decent person.
    Also just because a person has had casual sex does not mean they are incapable of sustaining a relationship. It happens ALL the time.
    I think to each his own…….This reminds me of the gay rights movement of a few years ago.. Today most people could give a damn if a person is gay or not….
    I remember I knew this guy from my club who was the nicest guy I ever knew. We worked out side by side, showered at the club at the same time talking baseball, or football, golfed in outings together. He died in a car accident and at his funeral I over heard a couple “obviously” gay guys saying they`d miss him and “Jim” his mate would never be the same. I thought,”he was GAY?” I never knew, but I never thought less of him either, he was still a decent friendly helpful funny guy.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Susan, http://www.mediatemple.net has a plan for you. 50 bucks. Drop whatever hosting provider you´re using now. The blog is hurting.

  • zed

    I wonder how caustic the appraisals would have been had she written a Manosphere friendly article.

    Good observation – probably not very.

    As Yohami pointed out –
    “If people were calling her “a somewhat hostile, bored, but pretty, older woman” instead of “gorgeous” we wouldn’t be having an argument here.”

    Those guys who her headline claims are “falling apart” would almost certainly consider “would you hit this?” (and quit it) and “Would you wife this?” as fundamentally different questions.

  • Blues

    @Dragnet:this is the classification that includes Sigmas, Deltas and Gammas.

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2010/05/explaining-sigma-again.html

  • Isabel

    Some Handle,

    1. Fair enough. It’s pretty self-evident that men are always going to rate a woman more objectively and truthfully than women are for various reasons. I wasn’t really disputing that. It’s just that I think people have allowed their distaste for her bad decisions, alpha chucking and opinions in general to influence their criticism of her looks. Can we just get back to discussing the flaws in her logic and not her eyeshadow? O_o

    2. There is nothing wrong with Zelda. Wtf.

    Last I’m saying on her looks… as of now! -_-

  • Höllenhund

    She indeed looks hostile, jaded, worn-out. I wouldn’t say she’s ugly but she sure as Hell ain’t gorgeous. Then again, there’s no problem with that. After all, 39-year-old women normally aren’t gorgeous and generally aren’t expected to be so, in sane societies anyway.

  • Some Handle

    It’s pretty self-evident that men are always going to rate a woman more objectively and truthfully than women are for various reasons.

    Well, I dunno about that. There will be plenty of guys who will say, “She’s a pig! I wouldn’t fuck her with Amanda Marcotte’s dick!

    But many will tell it like it is. Especially when they feel confronted with utter bullshit.

    There is nothing wrong with Zelda. Wtf.

    I don’t care what video game a guy plays in someones basement. But, then again, I am not the ultimate arbiter on who is hawt to the womenz.

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    Well I’m a woman and I don’t find her gorgeous. Especially not in this photo. However on the TV interview she looked cute. And remember, considering that most 39 year olds in this country are overweight, her fit figure adds at least 2 points to her market value.

    “China, India and the oil kingdoms of the Persian Gulf are FULL of high-earning, traditional-minded young men looking for wives. Due to the massive local gender imbalance, many of them will not find wives from their own country even if they try their best. There are tens of millions of them. This provides a huge market for young American women looking for wealthy, reliable husbands. That’s a huge opportunity for market correction right there.

    Stop rolling your eyes. I’m 100% serious.”

    I’m not. In fact I dated men from all those regions back when I was a youngun and yes, you are able to find old school romance with them.

  • Ted

    @ Tom – You said:
    “I think that is what we all want for our kids…….But what makes you think that a promiscuous woman doesnt value sexual intimacy in a RELATIONSHIP for its emotional value as most of us do? Are we as guys not able to have non emotional sex, but get totally emotional with the woman we love?..Guess what, women are capable of the same thing.”

    I’ve covered this from my perspective a few times, but here is the short version. I am not the type of person that can have “non-emotional sex” , whatever you define that as. I firmly tie sex and love together. To me, anyone that can have casual sex has a diminished capacity to value true intimacy in a sexual relationship, because frankly they only value sex for pleasure. Do those same people get MORE pleasure out of sex in a LTR? Very likely. However that does not change the fact that they VIEW sex differently than I do, and that difference will never be rectified.

    To me ALL sex should have emotional value. How can I ever trust that a woman that has had casual sex feels the same way I do about the value of our sexual relationship? When I decide to allow a relationship to get physical, I am not just giving the woman an orgasm (well hopefully anyway, lol) , but I am also sharing myself to her in a way very, very few people have ever experienced. I am exposing myself to her entirely, and I damn well want to be sure she is on the same page.

    It has very little to do with the actual act of having sex, and everything to do with how I view sexual intimacy.

    And for the record, I have never called any man or women a “bad person” for having casual sex. I am friends with men that have and still do actively pursue casual encounters. If the subject ever comes up when I’m around, I tell them that I dislike their behavior and I think it is self-centered and a bit immoral. And I ask them if they would want their daughters to be treated they way they treat the women they “hook up” with, if they have/want children. I love the reaction to that one…

  • Anonymous

    She’s attractive – certainly better than a 6 if you factor in age group. More like 7+. But “gorgeous” is an overstatement. The problem is that the picture is not flattering, and looks cooked up by somebody female or gay to create a certain “independent woman” image. Unsurprisingly, that doesn’t appeal to most men.

    She also came across as a bit wooden and cold in the interview, but perhaps she was uncomfortable on TV. I would be.

  • zed

    In Kate, when I look behind of the makeup and production, I kind of see a dude.

    That was the point I was making which Susan responded to above –
    women think she is so “gorgeous” because she has mastered “guy Game.” Men don’t think much of her because she has no “girl Game” at all.

    Game is so powerful that it even works for women to make other women find them attractive.

    Wow.

  • Passer_By

    Woops. That last one was from me.

  • anonymous

    DelFresco
    “As a man I do think she’s attractive, but she does look angry”

    I think they selected a photo that matched the title “What, Me Marry?” That wouldn’t fit well with a photo of her with a wide smile or a sexy look, no?

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    “They had two more. At 40 she died of breast cancer, when her son was 7. Her daughter was 12. Just terrible. Dad was 75! Honestly, delaying childbirth does come with a whole host of problems.”

    Not to mention that kids are embarrassed of old parents, which makes the parents feel bad and the entire family ends up in therapy. That 7 year old should be his great-grandchild, not his child!

  • http://aplace-formythoughts.blogspot.com/ Renee

    Tom,
    I think that is what we all want for our kids…….But what makes you think that a promiscuous woman doesnt value sexual intimacy in a RELATIONSHIP for its emotional value as most of us do? Are we as guys not able to have non emotional sex, but get totally emotional with the woman we love?..Guess what, women are capable of the same thing.
    Some one earlier today made the comment to the effect that if a woman would stop her sexual adventures, she could become a decent person (or something like that)…. I bet we all have met people who we would consider good upstanding “decent” people. But as soon as some people here found out she has had casual sex, she somehow is not a decent person anymore. THAT is a really fugged up attitude. True she might not be relationship material that suits YOUR taste, but it has nothing to do with her being a decent person.
    Also just because a person has had casual sex does not mean they are incapable of sustaining a relationship. It happens ALL the time.

    I pretty much agree with you here Tom. I am still not sure why the link between promiscuity and infidelity, decency (or lack thereof), and trust always seem to apply only to women.

    I’ve read explanations. Like how men are able to separate women they only sleep with from women they would marry, but women form emotional attachments to whoever they sleep with and are unable to separate partners like men can. Or how women compare one past fling to a guy she may be with currently.

    Then again, I’ve also read that generally, promiscuous people, male and female, are more likely to be unfaithful anyway. But then guys would say “Oh those guys are alphas”, as if betas would never do such a thing.

    I really don’t know Tom. But yeah, you were on point when you started to talk about decency. I may not be for casual sex for either gender, but no one’s perfect. I’m not going to look down on someone and deem them indecent simply because of a promiscuous past (or present).

    Yeah, I’ve kind of gotten OT here, sorry about that lol.

  • Petruchio

    “She can still marry an alpha—just not one her age.”

    I could certainly get younger, hotter, tighter; but I imagine that Karenin was once an alpha himself, and I’d rather not share his fate.

    Kate and I share some similar missteps – the fact that mine left me in a stronger MMV position and hers in a weaker doesn’t change the potential for the sort of mutual understanding upon which a more deep and lasting bond could be built.

    And I suspect the mean-girl misandry and ham-fisted mirroring (posing like an attractive man, for example, imagining that would attract men) would reassure me that the competition is likely to be less fierce than it otherwise would be, given her obvious appeal in other areas, as most men would be, and have been, put off by such things.

    As the savvy women used to seek otherwise strong men with anti-game that they could repair once his love and commitment were secured, her naive malice could be susceptible over time to transformation into a knowing devotion by a man of sufficiently strong will.

    Will, and understanding. For that awkwardness arose from spending the majority of her time and energy on academic/intellectual/professional pursuits instead of understanding interpersonal (specifically male/female) dynamics – there is a trade-off. Made a similar trade myself, until in fact at almost exactly her age (not so long ago at all) deciding to embark on a crash-course in game and related subjects, which ultimately landed me here.

    My only concern would be a temptation on her part to wait until she had had the opportunity to put such knowledge into practice herself, to test whether her results could be as dramatic as mine. Then again, who better to learn from than a recent master? Especially one whose general aspirations are not inconsistent with her ever more pressing biological imperatives.

    Oh gentle Kate, I suspect that I will enjoy the last laugh, whether you are laughing along with me or crying alone.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      “Thus have I politically begun my reign
      And ’tis my hope to end successfully
      My falcon now is sharp and passing empty,
      And, till she stoop, she must not be full gorged,
      For then she never looks upon her lure,
      Another way I have to man my haggard,
      To make her come and know her keeper’s call
      That is, to watch her, as we watch these kites
      That bate and beat and will not be obedient.

  • Wayfinder

    True freedom vs. Fake freedom?

    It’s deeper than I can cover in one post, but I’d summarize it that true freedom is freedom without short-changing any responsibilities and fake freedom is a freedom that comes at the expense of other people.

    We all live in this world together, and we all owe a lot to other people: parents, friends, employers, etc. In turn, they owe things to us. If people trust each other, there’s no reason to keep score, and we’ve developed systems to help strangers trust each other (like money).

    Someone who has true freedom has fulfilled their responsibilities to the rest of the world as far as they are able, by holding up their end of things and trying not to be an unnecessary burden on anyone else. They no longer owe anyone anything, so they can do what they want.

    Someone who has Fake freedom does what they want, but without first putting themselves in a place where they can do that without hurting anyone. Too many women (and men) got their “freedom” at the expense of someone else. Sometimes without even realizing that their actions are hurting others.

    Marriage and true freedom go hand-in-hand. You give up certain rights and gain certain responsibilities, but you still have the freedom to do what you want within that framework. Fake freedom, freedom without responsibility, destroys marriages, destroys lives, destroys friendships, destroys nations.

  • Workafrolic

    @Blues

    LOL. Thanks for the heads up, I will consider it as one piece of information to be informed by. I wonder actually if the site is legit as it seems everyone I encountered man or woman was rated 7 and above.

    Also not sure of the objectivity of a close male gay friend either.

    I asked my brother once but that again is not a trustworthy objective source plus it was a little weird. :)

    Also, thanks for the links. Will check them out.

  • Workafrolic

    Susan — Have you ever thought of hosting a conference and inviting different bloggers to participate? I know I would buy a ticket and travel for that one.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @workafrolic
      Are you a blogger? I haven’t thought of that, I can barely write my posts, lol!

  • wudang

    Workafrolic I am not sure I would use the actual.number people rate you as as a sure bet. But it seems reasonable that once you get a number you can compare yourself to the looks of others that have gotten roughly the same number at that site. There are a couple of other people.i will reply tomorow. I dont have time now

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Susan — Have you ever thought of hosting a conference and inviting different bloggers to participate? I know I would buy a ticket and travel for that one.

    That´s a million dollar idea.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “In fact, the 7 has sex like a rabbit, but she’s done it within monogamous relationships.”

    Hot, frequent monogamous sex with a beta male?

    …I’ll be right back, I think I need a glass of ice water.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Hot, frequent monogamous sex with a beta male?

      …I’ll be right back, I think I need a glass of ice water.

      I keep telling you and you never believe me! Her current bf is a big teddy bear. Adores her, but he’s not a doormat. She said “I love you” first and he told her he needed time to think that over. Well played, she was in a tizzy. He plays football on a local team, and he’s definitely the Mike Oher of the gang. I gather he’s pretty dominant in the sack, though.

  • wudang

    Recommendation to the newbies. Read David deidas books. The mist important one for the guys is the way of the superior man. All the rest are are great for women and most of them for both genders. Puas recomend him a lot. He goes very deep into.these things.

  • Workafrolic

    @ Hellhath

    Also a cool course is the PAX courses http://understandmen.com/
    They are for women and basically attempt to teach women how not to de-masculinize men. Some of the course I found tedious, but the overall message is great – You cannot expect someone to love and adore you if you are constantly berating and breaking him down.

  • anonymous

    Odds
    ” I’ll be more interested in seeing what she writes over the course of the next year. Red pill stuff takes a while to percolate.
    What will she have to say about men and relationships when she’s 40? How will she respond to seeing what she’s learned recently as it gets reflected in real-life situations over the next few months?”

    Lots of people go through a mid-life crisis in their 40s (in varying degrees from mild to severe) where they want to start checking off a bucket-type list- thinking about all of the things they might want to accomplish in their lives. This is regardless of whether they’re married or not. So who knows which direction she’ll take?
    Everyone (male & female) I know who is single and never married 40s -stop focusing on finding “the one.” It’s like they’re kind of over it. Now, I’m sure in private, they occasionally struggle with some self-doubt, but their numbers have grown so they’re not alone with their experience.
    I know so many I too wonder if they’ll have regrets later on or not.

  • zed

    You cannot expect someone to love and adore you if you are constantly berating and breaking him down.

    Now there is a piece of wisdom for the ages.

  • Sandy

    Mrs Robinson wrote

    And remember, considering that most 39 year olds in this country are overweight, her fit figure adds at least 2 points to her market value

    No, if other 39 year olds are overweight, it means that their extra weight subtracts 2 points from their market value

    Anonymous wrote:

    She’s attractive – certainly better than a 6 if you factor in age group

    Sexual marketplace is a single marketplace, it doesn’t have tiers according to age. So 20-year olds compete against 40-year olds and usually win. If some 70-year old woman looks better than 99% of all 70-year old women, it doesn’t make her SMV equal to 10

  • Petruchio

    “Here firm, though all be drifting”

    – Winston Churchill, on his marriage toClementine Churchill.

    If your young women are seeking a role model, they could do far worse. Likewise his illustrious ancestor.

  • Petruchio

    Susan,

    “And, till she stoop, she must not be full gorged,
    For then she never looks upon her lure,”

    A hit.

    A palpable hit.

  • Workafrolic

    @ Susan

    Not yet. :) But I think there’s a huge untapped audience of intelligent women who this conversation would make a difference for. Plus I want to meet everyone instead of staring at their avatars.

  • Butterfly Flower

    Not to mention that kids are embarrassed of old parents, which makes the parents feel bad and the entire family ends up in therapy. That 7 year old should be his great-grandchild, not his child!

    Young parents can be just as embarrassing; having to deal with people hitting on your parents in front of you…

    I think it’s sad a lot of kids these days won’t be able to develop long lasting relationships with their grandparents. They’ll probably be in their late 60’s by the time their grandchildren are born.

  • Sandy

    Kate Bolick’s marriage market value is low and certainly below average:
    1. Due to age her fertility is likely to be in a bad shape – chance of inability to conceive, Down syndrome, various complications is very high
    2. Her looks are likely to deteriorate quickly in a few years – she is approaching the Wall
    3. She has no biological ability to form oxytocin-based pair bond with a man – due to large numbers of sexual partners
    4. She is likely to be jaded, and to have serious psychological problems related to sex/relationships (due to her history)
    5. Her vast experience with different guys will allow her to quickly find faults in a new guy (comparing him to previous ones)

    Also she has high standards, a guy who is good enough for her can easily attract a women like her but 15 years younger.

  • Jennifer

    “I suspect the art director was trying for sultry. At least to some, she looks angry”

    LOL Whoops. Personally, I think women can look attractive while fierce if it’s in the right circumstances. Besides, when sizing her up, I noted the clearness of her skin and the softness of her hair, not merely her expression. “Angry” instead of “strong”, “serious”, or “seductive” doesn’t work as well for me on either male or female (actually scratch that, the seductive look is extra stupid to me). Good Lord, attracting women because she looks “masculine”? Interesting theory, but I think we’re officially over-analyzing.

    “Perhaps the gratuitous comment about “that’s a pinkie, not a penis” set the stage for a less than gracious interaction”

    I wouldn’t be surprised. Didn’t even see that comment.

    “Making any judgments on how “attractive” she is based on that is like judging her appearance based on a cartoon of her”

    I wouldn’t go that far..

    “If people were calling her that, “a somewhat hostile, bored, but pretty, older woman” instead of “gorgeous” we wouldn’t be having an argument here”

    Good grief. Susan called her gorgeous and people disagree; not a huge deal.

  • Workafrolic

    @ Butterfly Flower

    “I think it’s sad a lot of kids these days won’t be able to develop long lasting relationships with their grandparents. They’ll probably be in their late 60′s by the time their grandchildren are born.”

    Let’s not generalize about “kids these days”. My parents born in ’39 and ’45 didn’t marry until my dad was 38 and my mom was 32. All my grandparents have passed away now and I got to know 3 of the 4 to varying degrees. None of them were a strong influence on my life. Now my parents….

    … have been married for a solid 34 years.

    Older parents, such as those beginning to procreate in their late 30s and early 40s (not women having babies at 50) can actually provide much better for their offspring both in terms of financial and temporal resources. Plus the children of older parents are usually very wanted and well provided for. Not only that, marriages that occur later in life tend to have lower divorce rates providing more stability for children.

    Simply because someone procreates at an early age does not meant that is better for a child long-term.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “I keep telling you and you never believe me! Her current bf is a big teddy bear. Adores her, but he’s not a doormat. She said “I love you” first and he told her he needed time to think that over. Well played, she was in a tizzy. He plays football on a local team, and he’s definitely the Mike Oher of the gang. I gather he’s pretty dominant in the sack, though.”

    A guy I used to coach with told the parents that offensive linemen are the nicest guys on a football team, because they’ve been big their whole lives and have always been told to be gentle because of it (betatization in action!)

    It does seem to be a rule that the smartest, most put-together and flake-free guys are on the O line. You need some mean on the line, but linemen have to be very disciplined. You can get away with a lot fewer brain cells if you play on defense. (Personally, I always preferred to play defense).

  • Jennifer

    “Besides, when sizing her up, I noted the clearness of her skin and the softness of her hair, not merely her expression”

    In fact, I don’t like her expression at all. I’ve been looking at her individual features for so long I didn’t pay much attention to that scowl until now..

  • Jennifer

    “A guy I used to coach with told the parents that offensive linemen are the nicest guys on a football team, because they’ve been big their whole lives and have always been told to be gentle because of it”

    Sounds like that adorable guy from “The Blind Side”. Gentle giant, but he sure rose to the occasion on the field.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    Does this rabbit have a similarly-demeanored sister?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Does this rabbit have a similarly-demeanored sister?

      Yup, a twin (fraternal). Here’s a story. Four years ago she had a ONS with a guy while visiting his college. On the basis of that single encounter, they began a LDR that is still going strong. She has graduated college and moved to NYC for a marketing job. He has just gotten a job teaching Spanish in a high school there. After all this time, they will live in the same place. And he is a very sweet and earnest boy. Not sure about her sex life – she’s very introverted, unlike her sister, so I don’t get details. It’s a relief to have a couple like that.

  • Anacaona

    I agree. She likes intellectual guys. If she stays out of the “11 years younger” pond she could easily attract a very successful male. I’m thinking Wall St., divorced (grab him now before the bonuses dry up). Over the weekend Sir Paul married a 51 year-old woman, when he could have gone with half that age.

    I think she can and probably will. What many guys of the manosphere forget is that a man in certain circles even if he can pull a woman young enough to be his daughter, he will certainly won’t do to both societal pressure and choosing a woman their friends wives will deem as inferior and mock her, which could mean social death. There is a plateau in which a man can operate without backlash a more or less middle class man with not a lot of social life can get away with banging women regarding their age, but upper classes still need to marry well. That is the target audience Kate is probably aiming to either way. I mean Donald Trump could get away with it, but his status as celebrity gives him more wiggle room that many other millionaires with private lives and small circle of friends, YMMV, as usual.

    I think Susan or someone else once suggested asking a male gay friend if you had one, that way you get a male perspective that’s not biased.

    Heh this is another service that HUS could provide, honest dating market ranking by the males around here, the honest truth about a woman’s looks. This blog really can become a goldmine Susan, IMO. ;)

  • Jennifer

    “She said “I love you” first and he told her he needed time to think that over. Well played, she was in a tizzy.”

    Well-“played”? I hope that wasn’t just a play.

  • Jennifer

    “honest dating market ranking by the males around here”

    However much it’s sweared by, if there’s one thing I’ve found it’s that the rank is useless among a mass of people.

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    Guys, the reason why women rate mens’ sexual performance or lovemaking skills more than men do womens’ is because no matter how unskilled we are in bed, you guys are still going to orgasm and get your pleasurable release. Our anatomy does not work the same way. Bad sex for us means more than just bad sex, it means no orgasm. That’s why we women get addicted to men who are good in bed. The way to a man’s heart may be through his stomach but the way to a woman’s heart is through sexual satisfaction.

    I think the upper limit for having a baby should be 40 for the mother and 45 for the father. Kids are painfully ashamed when they have parents old enough to be their grandparents, what to speak of parents old enough to be their GREAT grandparents!

    Susan, do the girls you have focus groups with comment on this blog? Do they ever discuss commenters here at your focus groups?

  • Christian J

    I found the entire article totally irritating and it read just like a delusional feminist would write. Self praising and self interested female who quotes the man hater Maureen Dowd automatically get ruled out as being anything but sensible and lobbed into the female fantasy world of “it’s man’s fault and we are blameless”.
    How typical of women to brag about being SO intelligent when we know for a fact that the entire educational system guarantees their free ride and caters to their learning methodology as well as granting them preferential treatment meanwhile deny it even exist but it’s blatantly obvious to any male on campus. How typical for women to take the high road by trying to state how superior they are when they do indeed donat very little to society except being users and back each other up at the expense of men..
    How typical of females to blame men for their situation when they are the main instigators of their own undoing and then claim that to be just the right way of going about it..
    The entire article reeked with the usual pathetic and endless excuses and denial that women have introduced into their conversation. The entire article is just another excuse for women to justify their “akward position” while at the same time living in their own manufactured dream world..
    You may have increased your hits by posting this endless drivel but you have lost me..
    Shame..

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      You may have increased your hits by posting this endless drivel but you have lost me..
      Shame..

      Just as well. I was wondering as I read your rant why you’re even here. Newsflash: This is not an MRA site. I am a woman. Here are some of the things I am not crazy about:

      1. AWALT
      2. something so stupid has to have been written by a woman
      3. American women are disgusting
      4. Women, you’ve made your bed (1965) so lie in it (2011)
      5. the usual pathetic and endless excuses and denial that women have introduced into their conversation

      I know it sucks that everyone is now concerned about the marriage rate declining and women can’t find a husband. No one was concerned about men during the last 40 years and they are still not. It’s women here, men there, and No Man’s Land between. Well, this blog is supposed to be a sort of No Man’s Land. No shooting allowed.

  • Jennifer

    So you didn’t like the article, Christian?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      So you didn’t like the article, Christian?

      Haha, tell us how you really feel!

  • Passer_By

    @sandy

    “Sexual marketplace is a single marketplace, it doesn’t have tiers according to age. So 20-year olds compete against 40-year olds and usually win.”

    That’s a gross overstatement. Most people prefer to pair up for LTR within a narrow age range. As a guy in my late 40s, if I were single, I might prefer to bang a 20 year old once or twice, but I’d be very unlikely to want an LTR with her. Unless I wanted kids again, this gal would probably be in the age range I’d be seeking. But her “more ex boyfriends than I can count” status might disqualify her.

  • Passer_By

    I think you’re jumping to conclusions, Jennifer. I didn’t get that from his comment.

  • Mike C

    Sexual marketplace is a single marketplace, it doesn’t have tiers according to age. So 20-year olds compete against 40-year olds and usually win. If some 70-year old woman looks better than 99% of all 70-year old women, it doesn’t make her SMV equal to 10

    Here is what I find ironic and it sort of falls into the category of many women NOT “knowing thyself”.

    Guys know that all else being equal there really is no way a 40-year old can be as sexually attractive as a 22-25 year old. I’ll be a bit blunt/crude but go to a top-tier strip club and count the number of 22-year old dancers versus 40-year old dancers. Now a 40-year could potentially bring some things to a RELATIONSHIP that a 22-year old might not.

    But clearly many of the comments indicate that many women think Kate for one reason or another is pretty high on the sexual attractivenesss ladder. But ironically, in the very next breath, you’ll hear the very same women explain why a 23-year old woman would never be sexually attracted to a 40-year old man. I’m reminded of this because just recently on a Dalrock thread a commenter Kathy swore up and down to high heaven there is no way any 23-year old would be open to a 40-year old, and then just a litte bit further down the thread a 40-year old guy was talking about a 23-year old he was banging. And the fact is if a guy is 40 who has his shit together a good number of 23-year olds will find him attractive for the same reasons Susan’s focus group of young twenty-somethings were so enamored with Kate.

  • Workafrolic

    @ Christian

    Exactly what Susan said. The point isn’t to point fingers, the situation sucks for men and women alike. The question is not who’s to blame, but how we do move forward from here?

    Blaming each other never creates progress.

    Also hating on women is not a good strategy for getting laid…just sayin’

  • Jennifer

    “I think you’re jumping to conclusions, Jennifer. I didn’t get that from his comment”

    LOL

  • Karen

    Good going susan. Thanks for setting Christian J straight. Too many radical MRAs think that because you are advising women to think before they act, that this blog is pro-MRA and bashing women will be given a pass.

  • Karen

    “Sexual marketplace is a single marketplace, it doesn’t have tiers according to age. So 20-year olds compete against 40-year olds and usually win.”

    20 years young women are not interested in 40 year old men. Even 30 seems “old” to them. The few that are interested in men that old don’t need to “compete”. All they have to do is snap their fingers and homeboy comes running, panting and rolling out the red carpet.

  • S

    Hi Susan. I’ve been an avid reader since finding you 6 months ago. Thanks for what you’re doing.

    I’d love to point everyone to the debate on the value of higher education that’s happening between Peter Thiel and Vivek Wadhwa. (There’s an actual debate being streamed now, but the key points exist in articles that have been written by the two of them over the past couple of months.)

    Thiel thinks too many Americans are going to college and is making some provocative claims that relate to the SMP (even though he doesn’t know it yet.) In part, he’s hinting that women’s rights, and all this college-going, are contributing to the downfall of capitalist democracy.

    Is anyone else following this?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @S
      Welcome, thanks so much for introducing yourself! I confess I know nothing about the debate you mention, or even the two scholars. I am extremely interested in learning more about this. Should I just google or do you have a good source?

  • El Marqués

    “Also hating on women is not a good strategy for getting laid…just sayin’”

    No, but just like in some Zen Koan, indifference – which is the real polar opposite of love, not hate – is a supreme strategy for getting laid…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      No, but just like in some Zen Koan, indifference – which is the real polar opposite of love, not hate – is a supreme strategy for getting laid…

      Yes, this is why Angry Bitter = Creepy Loser and Indifferent Brooder = Sexy as Hell.

  • Some Handle

    …and choosing a woman their friends wives will deem as inferior and mock her, which could mean social death.

    That is an interesting point. However, something that I have noticed is that nowadays, married couples, including those without children, are pretty asocial.

    They see each other at their children’s birthday parties and maybe at New Years, and that is it.

  • just visiting

    Christian is free to start his own blog and try to get interviews from the Atlantic. Freedom of expression doesn’t mean you get to demand what blogs and magazines print. Talk about entitlement.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    Susan,
    Come on, you know that’s not the answer I was looking for!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Badger

      Susan,
      Come on, you know that’s not the answer I was looking for!

      I thought it was interesting that the random hookup turned into a couple that will probably marry soon! They had full-on sex as strangers! I think what happened, really, is that they are both in that 80% I always talk about, and they went a little crazy with a stranger. Why not? What happens in Syracuse stays in Syracuse! But rather than doing the whole “I’m going to pretend you were never born” routine, they went for it. They actually look a lot alike, which is kind of funny. They both have red hair.

  • just visiting

    @ some handle

    I’ve noticed that couples have become insular. Sometimes it’s time constraints, but more often, friends can get toxic toward a happy marriage.
    (No longer married, but when I was, life was easier with out my friends making catty comments about my husband, or his friends crossing the line with me.)

  • Sandy

    2 Passer_By

    That’s a gross overstatement. Most people prefer to pair up for LTR within a narrow age range.

    Do you have stats for that, how do you know it’s “most people”?

    As a guy in my late 40s, if I were single, I might prefer to bang a 20 year old once or twice, but I’d be very unlikely to want an LTR with her. Unless I wanted kids again, this gal would probably be in the age range I’d be seeking. But her “more ex boyfriends than I can count” status might disqualify her.

    I was talking about sexual market place and sexual market value. It’s not the same as marriage market place or LTR market place. For example, all porn stars have high SMV, but it doesn’t mean that many men want to marry them

  • Abbot

    “3. She has no biological ability to form oxytocin-based pair bond with a man – due to large numbers of sexual partners
    4. She is likely to be jaded, and to have serious psychological problems related to sex/relationships (due to her history)
    5. Her vast experience with different guys will allow her to quickly find faults in a new guy (comparing him to previous ones)”

    ________________________________________

    Of course there is a chance that may not be true for that type of woman in all cases and none of those traits suggests that she is not a good citizen or a well-meaning person of good “character” for all sorts of occasions. That is the universal understanding and all that anyone needs to know. How a man thinks of her in terms of commitment is solely his business and only an agenda-focused pathetic fool would attempt to shame or in any way tell men how they should quietly and respectfully view her

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Abbot
      I’ve missed you and that is a great comment! Yes, it is each man’s business, his own cost/benefit analysis to conduct. I give you credit for intellectual integrity here. Props.

  • pvw

    Ted:

    I ask them if they would want their daughters to be treated they way they treat the women they “hook up” with, if they have/want children. I love the reaction to that one…

    My reply:

    This reminds me of a joke I heard once, I think it might have been something Ryan O’Neal said, that men in their 40s are terrified that men in their 20s will treat their daughters the same way they treated other men’s daughters when they were young men in their 20s.

    Ms. Walsh:

    I have been thinking about some of this recently, as I just visited with a younger relative living the craziness of a big city SMP.

    Here is something that occurred to me, as I read Ms. Bolick’s article and as I think back to conversations I have had over the years with this relative.

    Both you and Ms. Bolick mentioned the messages baby boomer mothers who married young tended to tell their daughters, that their independence should be paramount (the mothers were wistful for what they believed they missed) and how this has affected their girls’ ideas about men and relationships.

    I can’t say this younger relative’s baby boomer mom ever stressed the message of independence from men as compared to having an ability to be self-sufficient whether or not marriage ever occurred. So they pushed her towards professional school.

    But what I do recall from talking to this relative when she was younger relates to this notion of “being ready,” in that when she was a few years out of college, she was acquainted with men who seemed to be “ready” and had she continued dating them, she could have been married by now.

    What I’m getting at here, is whether enough mothers are getting their daughters “ready” for marriage at the ages when they should be thinking about it. I imagine the more traditional and conservative ones are.

    This relative, her parents were married by their early 20s, it is a good and stable marriage of almost 40 years duration. Her beta brother has been married for almost a decade, with three young children. So all her examples growing up should have propelled her towards the marriage mindset, it seems. As in Ms. Bolick’s case, she is the auntie. I think her relatives have written her off, that she will likely never marry.

    Yet, even though her mother might not have had any clue of the SMP her daughter was entering, I wonder whether they raised her to be marriage minded at the age when it would have been most possible, when she was in her early 20s. The mindset just wasn’t there and thus she was not as strategic as she could have been.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @PVW
      That’s a really great comment, I think you’ve touched on something very important. Not surprising, you’re a professor of women’s history!

      As best I can recall, there were a few different things going on, and a lot of variability among families. For example, my best friend (43 years now!) had parents who were very traditional. Her dad was LAPD and her mom was happy being a homemaker. She was a dynamo, but she was not guided by her parents so much. She was bright and social and everything she touched turned to gold, and she came of age at a time when opportunities for girls were exploding everywhere!

      My family was different. My mother was resentful – she’d set aside an art career to have three kids by the time she was 24. She was rather dysfunctional in a Betty Draper sort of way. So she was bitter about my father getting to go to work and meet interesting people and work in the city, etc. She resented cooking meals, and in 1970 or so she took an “assertiveness training course” that had us hiding under the bed for weeks. So she angrily warned me not to do what she had done.

      On the other hand, my father celebrated my abilities and nurtured my confidence. He used to say, “Susie, you’re going to set the world on its ear.” He was aware that opportunities for women were there for the taking, and he groomed me to take them. When I was sort of stagnating in a job I didn’t love, he spurred me into applying for grad school. He was my mentor, and because he was so positive, he cancelled out my mother’s negativity.

      It sounds like Kate Bolick had a very different experience. Her mother was politically identified with the movement, and recruited her, as she puts it. Who dresses their third grader in political slogans? She barely mentions her father, so I got the sense he was not a strong presence in her life as she came of age.

      So there were these massive changes taking place, but these tiny islands of culture within each family. And that could make a huge difference.

      I note your use of the word strategic in relation to marriage, and of course that is music to my ears. I wasn’t terribly strategic myself, but when I found someone I knew I could love, I made it my first priority, even though I was graduating from business school at the time. Several of my classmates abandoned relationships for great job opportunities, and a rather surprising number of them were single and wistful at the 25th reunion. They delayed that all-important relationship, but most of them were 26 or 27 when they graduated. On to a new city, a new job – and they didn’t meet the guy. It just never happened. That’s hard for women to think about – should I have stayed with my grad school boyfriend and moved to Chicago? I think in many cases the answer is yes. That is certainly what I would tell my own daughter. Someone once told me that no tombstone ever says, “I wish I’d worked harder.” It’s fantastic that women can pursue what interests them, but the women I’ve known who have sacrificed relationships for career have regretted it. Not all of them, but most.

      Oh and please feel free to call me Susan.

  • Desiderius

    “Welcome, thanks so much for introducing yourself! I confess I know nothing about the debate you mention, or even the two scholars. I am extremely interested in learning more about this.”

    I’ve been hinting at it here and there. Kids are looking at their older siblings buried under crushing debt with very sparse job prospects (in the education field, the older teachers make 2 or 3 times what the starting teachers make, but their jobs are sacrosanct, while the first cuts get borne by the last hired – screw the younger generation. The Me Generation to the grave.

    Those kids and thier parents are starting to join Theil in seriously questioning the utility of going directly from high school to (five-year) college. In my experience, that’s a questioning that should have happened at least 10 years ago, but the Laura Bush administration wasn’t much into that and there was enough extra money sloshing around to keep everyone happy.

    No more.

    For many men it feels like the I Love Lucy life roles switcheroo episode is coming to an end (as Strauss and Howe predicted it would) and Desi’s already figured out that he’s lousy at the female roles and gained a new appreciation for how difficult they are and meanwhile Lucy’s just beavering away at the male roles, as oblivious as ever to how well she’s doing or how important they were in the first place.

    We’re never going back to barring women from doing whatever they think they can hack professionally, but all the AA for the female majority is well past its sell-by-date. Credentialocracy crowds out meritocracy.

  • Rudy

    Susan, with all due respect, as a woman, you’re not in position to judge whether men would find her ‘gorgeous’. Only they can assess her ‘value’ as defined for the purposes of this article/discussion.

    While she certainly isn’t ugly, I doubt she was ever ‘gorgeous’ (as rated by straight men) at any point in her life and she certainly is not at her current age.

    In fact, if you were to post her photo to a men’s site like Roissy’s (now called “Chateau Heartiste”), I highly doubt she would get to a 6.0/10.0.

    Why does this matter? Because as you know, the dating/sexual market runs two ways. All the arguments (rationalizations?) she made about the current dynamics of the dating market in general and hers in particular really boil down to one salient point from the guy’s perspective: she is well past her sell-by date.

    Once that date is reached, the pool of available guys (eligible or otherwise) will plummet massively, rendering all the other drivers of SMV more or less irrelevant…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Rudy

      Susan, with all due respect, as a woman, you’re not in position to judge whether men would find her ‘gorgeous’. Only they can assess her ‘value’ as defined for the purposes of this article/discussion.

      You know what? I thought she was gorgeous so I said she was gorgeous. Was I wrong about how men view her? I guess so. Her male editor didn’t think so, though. I believe this is only the sixth time the Atlantic has ever put a writer on the cover. Her two pics are clearly designed to convey glamour and tough female fortitude. I agree that is a fail, but that doesn’t change my opinion of her looks. The point is, I wasn’t saying someone should marry her. I wasn’t saying, “What is wrong with you men? You’ll marry a 40 year-old and you’ll like it!” It was really just my personal opinion. I spoke about her with fondness the way I’d speak about any one of my “girls” who come to dinner.

      As for her being past her sell-by date, that’s a point she makes herself in the article. She’s not fooling anyone, least of all herself.

  • Esau

    Workafrolic @385: “The question is not who’s to blame, but how we do move forward from here?”

    Extra points if you can place this quote without help:

    “Please! This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let’s not bicker and argue over who killed who. ”

    Really, asking to move on without discussing blame is the classic ploy of the party that knows they’re at fault and would lose the argument. Transparent as glass; just sayin’….

  • http://www.therulesrevisited.blogspot.com Andrew

    It should be interesting to watch the tone of the comments change with the influx of readers from a left-wing publication like The Atlantic come to see this blog – perhaps even in this thread it has happened, I’ve only read the first group of comments.

    While I don’t consider myself an adherent to either end of our current political spectrum, I would be willing to wager that most of the people agreeing with what is posted on this blog lean (if only slightly) to the right.

    Anyway, it will be interesting…

  • http://www.therulesrevisited.blogspot.com Andrew

    Oh and congrats Susan, the publicity is well deserved

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Andrew
      Good to see you here. I have to say, I’m addicted to RR. I just read the heels piece a moment ago. You are really onto something there – we gotta get you linked to other sites women flock to.

  • jack

    Susan:

    Please check out a great post on the gender war – but ESPECIALLY check out the drawings. I think the Good Captain has betrayed a mote of sentimentality in the first of the three drawings.

    http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2011/10/you-started-it-but-well-finish-it.html

    It certainly reflects an era I never saw and knew nothing of.

    Btw: You received my email?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jack
      Wow, what a post by the Captain! Sounds like there is going to be a lot of carnage.

      I did get your email, it’s in the queue. Glad to hear you’re a regular on some of my favorite blogs. I’m adjusting to the name change.

  • Jennifer

    Sell-by date, good grief. The remark “only men can judge her ‘value'” really f*cking pisses me off, because combined with the overly-critical comments here, it puts in mind judging women on a deeper level. Like we really do expire and lose our use as human beings. Screw that, and the as*holes at Roissy’s who readily see women as f*ck toys, required to be extremely young, and little else, and who congratulate themselves on banging and using the barely-out-of-college girls. Thank God men are different.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      The remark “only men can judge her ‘value’” really f*cking pisses me off, because combined with the overly-critical comments here, it puts in mind judging women on a deeper level.

      Yes. All men can say is whether or not they find her sexually attractive. I obviously don’t find her sexually attractive, I find her attractive in another way. So when I say “she’s gorgeous” it doesn’t mean that any man here has to get a boner looking at her pic.

      By the way, I’ve had people tell me my pasta carbonara is gorgeous (they were British). We need to loosen up and stop being so literal.

  • Sandy

    2 Jennifer

    Sell-by date, good grief. The remark “only men can judge her ‘value’” really f*cking pisses me off, because combined with the overly-critical comments here, it puts in mind judging women on a deeper level.

    Nobody made a remark about judging her ‘value’ in some abstract or all-encompassing sense, people talked about estimating her sexual market value, which is a well-defined and narrow metric

    Like we really do expire and lose our use as human beings.

    How do you use a human being? A 90-year old man is a human being too, do women want to be treated as people treat him?

    Screw that, and the as*holes at Roissy’s who readily see women as f*ck toys, required to be extremely young, and little else, and who congratulate themselves on banging and using the barely-out-of-college girls. Thank God men are different.

    Classy

  • Jennifer

    Sorry for the outburst Susan, though I’m sure you understand my personal irritation, having to do with a much deeper frusteration than whether one guy merely expresses his own opinion; general ‘value’ of women ought not to be stated by a few males as though all share the same thought. Anyways, my computer’s lifespan and my temperament both seem to be wearing thin, so I’m off this one. Keep up the great work.

  • zed

    Why don’t you tell use how you really feel, Jennifer? ;)

    Does it bother you so much that men assign such a low SMV to her that the ubiquitous threats to withhold sex may not be as threatening as you would hope?

  • Jennifer

    Thanks for the stab of humor, Zed :P It’s the obsession with sex period these days that upsets me. This is a woman who looks pretty well-kept, and let’s say she was bright and happy in her article; I still have a feeling some would ram her simply because she’s not at the peak of her fertility anymore. Do that many men near her age really want kids anyway? Sexual “value” and looks now appear to be the #1 thing people consider when looking at or judging a person’s potential value as a mate, and it’s depressing. I know sex is vital, and I also know that there are many kinds of beauty and far more to being a worthy mate than baby-popping uteruses. These many visits on secular sites have really begun to take their toll; I’m feeling worn-down in discouragement and last night, too, rose to the occasion of aggression more than I usually do, without even feeling anxious about the person’s reply; that’s almost unheard of for me. Part of what I said in a reply to Sandy was: simply saying you don’t care for someone’s looks is enough, not harping on about the SMP and what “all” members of a group would think. Some men have already said she’s lovely, others that they’re not strong for her. What I dislike are the harsher tones of some and the practical scolding Susan got for disagreeing, as well as how her opinion was attempted to be disqualified. I feel better now though, thanks. Something else is probably gnawing at me under the skin, too.

  • RubyRidge

    Maybe someone’s mentioned it, maybe not, but the effects of divorce on men seem curiously absent from this piece. The prospect of signing a contract that basically says “Hey RubyRidge, you hereby agree to give this other person half of your wealth and possibly alimony for an ultimately arbitrary time….if she decides she no longer likes you,” doesn’t have me jumpin’ for my quill. It seems that wisdom and literary competency can and do exist as distinct entities.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @RubyRidge
      It is somewhat surprising to me that the risk of divorce hasn’t been addressed wrt this article. I don’t think it came up in the Atlantic comment thread either. Perhaps because she is well-established in her career, may not have children, etc. that risk is considerably lessened.

  • Jennifer

    Good points, Ruby.

    See you guys some other time. Signing off..

  • Dogsquat

    Susan said:

    “I have a strong desire to see a woman walk into a bar and loudly ask who wants to f*ck her, something men here have often hypothesized. It would be fascinating to see the men respond.”
    _______________________

    Susan, I’ve seen that happen several times. Once when I was in the military, and the rest when I was working at as a bouncer.

    In each case it was at last call. What happened was, the guys that heard looked at her, looked at each other rather sheepishly, and several approached the woman. The woman wrapped herself around the man of her choice (apparently the selection was made watching the guys approach) and the pair sped off into the night.

    I saw one girl do this twice a month for a year or so – she was very attractive and smart, but she suffered from sexual abuse in her past, and I belive was a rapidly cycling untreated bipolar.

    Creeped me the fuck out, it did.

    Later you said:

    “Well, this blog is supposed to be a sort of No Man’s Land. No shooting allowed.”
    _________________________

    Susan, did I tell you about the new rifle I got for my birthday? If you put ten rounds through it, you’d change your mind. That thing is pure bliss chambered in .308. It’s more fun than riding a motorcycle, and is a close second to sex on my list of favorite legal activities.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Dogsquat
      Good lord, who are these pieces of female detritus? That story sounds like it ends with her shooting up in a tenement stairwell.

      Yeah, I recall your gun love. Thankfully, you’ve never once taken a shot at anyone here.

  • Dogsquat

    Workafrolic said:

    “Not yet. :) But I think there’s a huge untapped audience of intelligent women who this conversation would make a difference for. Plus I want to meet everyone instead of staring at their avatars.”
    ________________________

    My avatar pic is actually a low-quality scan of my driver’s license pic.

  • Dogsquat

    Badger said:

    “A guy I used to coach with told the parents that offensive linemen are the nicest guys on a football team, because they’ve been big their whole lives and have always been told to be gentle because of it (betatization in action!)

    It does seem to be a rule that the smartest, most put-together and flake-free guys are on the O line. You need some mean on the line, but linemen have to be very disciplined. You can get away with a lot fewer brain cells if you play on defense. (Personally, I always preferred to play defense).”
    _______________________________
    This is so true.

    I was an All-State O-Lineman.

    I coached HS ball for a few years, too, and getting my pulling guards to earhole D tackles so hard they puked was quite a chore.

    I actually didn’t get a mean streak until I was issued one in the USMC.

    Looking back on the teams I played for and coached is interesting in light of what Susan’s trying to do here. There were always a couple kids on the line, usually a bit goofy, nice, and really bright, who got snapped up by attractive girls. The kids I coached usually stayed with them, too. One of my kids ended up marrying his HS sweetheart a little while ago. Warmed my cold, black heart a little.

    I brought my ex to a couple of team events, and the head coach (a former quarterback) complimented me on her attractiveness. He said something like,”I’ll never understand you o-line dudes. I’m the quarterback, but I never had the hottest, smartest girls in high school or college. It’s always some dumb-ass right tackle that lands them. That ain’t fair, and how do you do it?”

    Right in front of his wife he said that, which is part of his problem, I think.

  • Matt T

    As for the woman, I’d totally hit that, but for obvious reasons I wouldn’t LTR.

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    Sandy October 12, 2011 at 9:04 pm
    2 Passer_By

    That’s a gross overstatement. Most people prefer to pair up for LTR within a narrow age range.

    Do you have stats for that, how do you know it’s “most people”?

    As a guy in my late 40s, if I were single, I might prefer to bang a 20 year old once or twice, but I’d be very unlikely to want an LTR with her. Unless I wanted kids again, this gal would probably be in the age range I’d be seeking. But her “more ex boyfriends than I can count” status might disqualify her.

    I was talking about sexual market place and sexual market value. It’s not the same as marriage market place or LTR market place. For example, all porn stars have high SMV, but it doesn’t mean that many men want to marry them

    SANDY –

    Porn stars actually have low sexual market value. The SMP and LTR Market or Marriage Market are the same in manspeak. When the men here refer to SMP they are talking about the value of a woman for a relationship.

    As far as people “preferring” to pair up with others in their same age group, I don’t know if its a preference but its what they do. Most people date and marry within a 10 year age range up or down.

    Most 20 year old women are not interested in 40 year old “uncles”. Heck, most ain’t even interested in 30 year olds. Those who are and those who do date much older men are outliers.

    If I were a man I’d question the motives of a woman 20 years younger pursuing me.

  • Lavazza

    Workafrolic:

    “Exactly what Susan said. The point isn’t to point fingers, the situation sucks for men and women alike. The question is not who’s to blame, but how we do move forward from here?”

    Under 30 women have the upper hand when it comes to sex and, by extension, LTRs/marriages. Over 30 men have the upper hand when it comes to LTRs/marriages and, by extension, sex.

    Since women have the power earlier in their lives it seems lika a good idea for women to take the initative to change their behaviour.

  • Lavazza

    Matt T: “As for the woman, I’d totally hit that, but for obvious reasons I wouldn’t LTR.”

    Why not? If she pays her way and understand that you giving her children is out of the question, why not see how it goes for a longer time? Or do you mean that you want children and don’t want to waste time with women who are not likely to become good mothers?

  • Jon

    YouTube Kate Bolick and she’s actually a lot better looking than what she appears on the magazine cover. 7.5/10, probably had the potential to be a 9 during the 20s.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0U_gg0ZMyk

  • pvw

    Thanks for the invitation to call you Susan!

    Reading your story about your graduate school friends, I am recalling the old saying that youth is wasted on the young!

    And being strategic is important! I can’t think of many young women I know now who have done what Ms. Bolick did, break up with a perfectly good partner for no discernable reason whatsoever.

    But I can think of other poor strategies: drifting into relationships without discerning; not assessing men’s strategies in the SMP; not thinking about the implications of moving to certain SMP….

    Speaking of what you are thinking about regarding your friends from graduate school sacrificing relationships for careers, a collegue is writing a book on women and work-family balance. Once she tells me it has come out, I’ll be sure to send you the information.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @PVW
      Thanks, I look forward to reading that!

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @pvw
    This reminds me of a joke I heard once, I think it might have been something Ryan O’Neal said, that men in their 40s are terrified that men in their 20s will treat their daughters the same way they treated other men’s daughters when they were young men in their 20s.

    Ha! Two years ago, the same Ryan O’Neal ended up hitting on his estranged daughter Tatum at Farrah Fawcett’s funeral. He really didn’t recognize her. Very, very extreme, yes, but another thing for men in their 40s and beyond to worry about, especially given the breakup of families!

  • Isabel

    Kate is pretty much Voldemort to the Manosphere.

    – Pumps and dumps alphas.
    – One time cougar.
    – Successful career.
    – Owns three homes.
    – Feministy-ish.
    – Unmarried.
    – No babies.
    – Presented as aspirational in MSM.
    – Seemingly content. (enough to fool other men and women)
    – Described as attractive.
    – Popular.

    And most heinous of all is the fact that she still has a chance of finding a good partner and possibly a small family as a result of this exposure. Wouldn’t want to take her route in life but it still makes me lol.

  • Workafrolic

    @ Dogsquat

    I can barely see what the photo is even of! :)
    If I can ever figure out how, I’ll upload one of me.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Re the debate about higher education’s value or lack of same, the Instapundit (Glenn Reynolds) links to items about this frequently. Just search “higher ed bubble” at Glenn’s site:

    Instapundit

  • Rudy

    @ Susan, thanks for your response and your points are well-taken. I also give the author credit for acknowledging the difficult fact that she waited too long and will be paying the inevitable price…

    @Jennifer, getting angry with my ‘sell-by date’ comment is, logically speaking, the same as getting angry with gravity for making an object fall rather than rise when you drop it. I didn’t make the rules of biology, I’m just living with them…

    As much as 40+ years of (failed) feminist ideology have tried, you can’t change immutable facts: as a species, we are hard-wired to seek to pass on and mix our genes with the highest quality partners we can find.

    For men, that means young, beautiful, nurturing women (young because they are best equipped physically to produce and raise children, beautiful because beauty is a proxy for quality genes, nurturing because they make the best wives and mothers).

    For women, that means, strong, bright, stable and resource-rich men (all of which connote good genes), which will accomplish two things–high quality offspring and a safe environment in which they and the mother can grow).

    Just as few women would choose a simpering, feckless dolt with a part-time job at the DMV, few men (with options) will choose a middle-aged, never beautiful, male-imitating ‘career-driven’ woman–they just aren’t attractive to us on any level.

  • Some Handle

    Her male editor didn’t think so, though.

    Susan, I seriously doubt that the editor put that picture on the cover because he thought she was gorgeous. The title is not selling sexiness, the subtitle is not selling sexiness and The Atlantic is most definitely not Cosmo in attempting to sell what is hot and sexy.

    Especially with that look on her face.

    Still, she is in better shape than most 40 year old women.

  • Sandy

    2 Mrs Robinson

    Porn stars actually have low sexual market value.
    The SMP and LTR Market or Marriage Market are the same in manspeak.

    No, SMP and marriage market are not the same. Some men a looking for hook-ups, some men are looking for a wife and those two markets are very different. Porn stars have high SMV, otherwise they wouldn’t make any money

    When the men here refer to SMP they are talking about the value of a woman for a relationship.

    No, that’s wrong. When men describe a woman with a number, such as 6, it describes only her SMV or attractiveness, ignoring other things needed for LTR or marriage

    As far as people “preferring” to pair up with others in their same age group,
    I don’t know if its a preference but its what they do. Most people date and marry
    within a 10 year age range up or down.

    Many highly attractive men date much younger women (Hefner, Clooney)

    Most 20 year old women are not interested in 40 year old “uncles”. Heck, most ain’t even
    interested in 30 year olds. Those who are and those who do date much older men are outliers.
    If I were a man I’d question the motives of a woman 20 years younger pursuing me.

    If a man is wealthy or highly attractive, he has no problems getting a 20-something years old

  • Sandy

    2 Isabel

    Kate is pretty much Voldemort to the Manosphere.

    – Pumps and dumps alphas.
    – One time cougar.
    – Successful career.
    – Owns three homes.
    – Feministy-ish.
    – Unmarried.
    – No babies.
    – Presented as aspirational in MSM.
    – Seemingly content. (enough to fool other men and women)
    – Described as attractive.
    – Popular.

    And most heinous of all is the fact that she still has a chance of finding a good partner and possibly a small family as a result of this exposure. Wouldn’t want to take her route in life but it still makes me lol.

    If it were true, Oprah would be Voldemort, and Kate would be her very low-ranking minion

  • Jesus Mahoney

    If it were true, Oprah would be Voldemort, and Kate would be her very low-ranking minion

    Was Oprah a one-time cougar who pumped and dumped alphas? IDK. I don’t really follow Oprah, but she doesn’t really strike me as the type.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      There are lots of rumors that Oprah is gay.

  • dragnet

    Just took a look at Kate Bolick on the Gayle King show. The guys here need to stop the bullshit—she’s a good-looking woman. Not ‘gorgeous’—but attractive, yes. And it’s easy to see she was a knockout 20 years ago. I’m 28 and I’d hit it. Repeatedly.

    But what’s more important here is the tagline:

    “Writer Kate Bolick explains why at 39, she’s single and loving it.”

    This mentality is a disease. This tagline is evidence of how incredibly hard our society has worked to shield women from any public scorn or material consequences of their poor decisionmaking. And when women are at last confront with the inevitable downsides of their frivolity, our cultural then goes out of its way to make it seem as if these consequences are either desirable or completely immaterial. We don’t teach women to cultivate the power of feminine dignity, because we’ve decided to attempt to give them lifelong sexual power by celebrating cougardom and botox addiction. We don’t teach women the value of family, because we celebrate women who are too “independent” for children while at the same time encouraging single motherhood and consequently, the notion that men & fathers are disposable. I know it’s old news, but this never ceases to astound me—the vast cultural architecture we’ve erected to keep (young) women from being confronted with the full impact of their decisionmaking. And we haven’t worked one-tenth as hard to do the same for young men.

    @ Isabel

    “Kate is pretty much Voldemort to the manosphere.”

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks. Even in the most strident of patriarchies, upper class, beautiful women lived very different—and privileged—lives (even compared to most men). The issue here isn’t that some of Kate’s wealth, status and looks can have her cake and eat it too, the issue here is that the vast majority of women can’t pull this off—but are being told they can by the fucked gynocentric cesspool we are all swimming in. Kate B. was always going to have a good life and buck the trends—but not Amber from the trailer park. Thing is, there are many, many more Ambers than Kate Bs.

    Stop with the strawmanship.

  • Isabel

    If it were true, Oprah would be Voldemort, and Kate would be her very low-ranking minion

    Wormtail? :D

  • Some Handle

    My understanding was this: everyone knows Oprah is gay. But, people do not hound her about it, in general, because she makes no effort to make it a big deal.

    That is, she is a lot more interested in talking about giving everyone a free pontiac, or talking to Jenny McCarthy about Autism, then being some gay icon. She would much rather be an icon to the yentas.

  • Wayfinder

    Because I was curious, I went poking around. The results surprised me.

    Apparently, a man’s genetic success is maximized if he marries a woman 15 (!) years younger: A Study in Biology Letters looked at pre-modern Sami populations and counted the number of surviving grandchildren [1].

    Now they do note that even back then only 10% of marriages had age differences that high. But apparently, evolutionarily speaking, there is huge selection pressure to choose radically younger women.

    Today’s age distribution, at least in England and Wales, shows that, in 2001, 11% of marriages had a groom 10+ years older than the bride, and 20% were in the 5-9 range. In comparison, only 9% of marriages had brides 5 or more years older [2].
    Interestingly, “age difference does not show a strong association with likelihood of divorce” [3].

    [1] http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/4/1/75.abstract?sid=894d4382-c773-4a69-9984-e2ceabab5126
    [2] http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/population-trends-rd/population-trends/no–120–summer-2005/the-age-difference-at-marriage-in-england-and-wales–a-century-of-patterns-and-trends.pdf
    [3] http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/population-trends-rd/population-trends/no–132–summer-2008/age-differences-at-marriage-and-divorce.pdf

  • http://gravatar.com/otc1 OffTheCuff

    20 years young women are not interested in 40 year old men. Even 30 seems “old” to them. The few that are interested in men that old don’t need to “compete”. All they have to do is snap their fingers and homeboy comes running, panting and rolling out the red carpet.

    You totally misunderstand. The 40 year old-women compete with 20 year-old women for a given man’s attention. In other words: both the 40 and 20 snap — which woman does the guy go to?

    Even if this was the topic, you’re wrong about older men. My cousin in her late 20’s is easily a 9, very fit and is a gym junkie, and married an average guy in his late 40’s. There’s a 40-year old who lost to her younger, hotter competition.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    My understanding was this: everyone knows Oprah is gay.

    Like, for reals? I had no clue. And to be honest, it feels kind of good to be so insulated against the mindless, pointless gossip that masquerades as “popular culture.”

  • Wayfinder

    @Jesus Mahoney
    I lost a lot of respect for one of my previous girlfriends when she picked up one of the gossip magazines as we were going through the grocery store checkout.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I lost a lot of respect for one of my previous girlfriends when she picked up one of the gossip magazines as we were going through the grocery store checkout.

      Haha, my daughter recently started receiving a subscription to Entertainment Weekly. She couldn’t figure out why – she had never ordered it. It turns out it was complimentary after she placed an order on Ticketmaster. Every time one arrives she buries it in the recycling bin. She’s afraid someone will see it. I’m just thankful she isn’t interested.

  • Some Handle

    Like, for reals? I had no clue. And to be honest, it feels kind of good to be so insulated against the mindless, pointless gossip that masquerades as “popular culture.”

    For most of my life, I knew absolutely nothing about celebrity gossip. Then, my gym starting leaving about a NY Post (or Daily News, I don’t remember) with it’s page 6 always open. Suddenly, I could tell you the finer details of Kelsey Grammar and his apartment shopping woes.

    And to think, for years, I though Hannah Montana was a ski resort in Big Sky country.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Yea, I’m so clueless about “culture” today that I sometimes feel like a foreigner when it comes to conversations with friends. I don’t know a single American Idol winner, I’ve never seen an episode of Lost, Big Brother, Dr. Phil, Survivor, Dancing With the Stars, 2 1/2 Men, or… (I don’t even know the names of other current TV shows). I realize that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are having problems, because I see the magazine covers, but I have no idea (nor do I care) what those problems are. I can’t name a single Top 10 hit, though I can tell you an awful lot about free jazz, funk, japanese hardcore, 80’s nerd pop, classical and avant garde musics. I can discuss modern literature and art. I even know a bit about foreign film, though I honestly couldn’t name 3 films playing in “regular” theaters today.

    I don’t believe in popular culture.

  • Anonymous

    Cracking up at the comments on her appearance. She’s probably turned down, even recently in her older years guys, who are better looking and richer than most of the men criticising her looks here.

    Susan said gorgeous, not drop dead gorgeous or stunning.

    No wonder y’all whining about being losers in the SMP. More than 80%+ of women are invisible to you. And if they are visible to you you think they are only worthy for a pump and dump.

  • Sock!

    @ Mrs. Robinson “the reason why women rate mens’ sexual performance or lovemaking skills more than men do womens’ is because no matter how unskilled we are in bed, you guys are still going to orgasm and get your pleasurable release.”

    SOOOO untrue! We get our pleasurable release so often in spite of women’s ineptitude, such as lying there like a dead fish, because we make it happen! Your statement is only true because we take agency for our own pleasure rather than passing it off to women, as you’re trying to do with us …and we do talk. In fact, an earlier post was critical of the girls commenting on penis size and ability. That was honest banter, and I take it for what it is… as a guy who’s been around “with the offhand knowledge only familiarity can breed” I can attest that we talk not only about women’s ability, but vaginal attributes, of which size is one of many. BTW, vaginal variation is approximately equal to penile variation… Please feel free to think of all the euphemisms regarding this is public culture, but isn’t taken seriously openly, as the glorious gilded vag is always place upon a pedestal…

    Overall I was glad to see an article written by a successful woman noting what she did… I found that simply remarkable. The GMA show was horrible in comparison. While I can quibble over details the big picture is that this type conversation is starting to go mainstream, which is a good thing…

    As far as the Kate Bolick ‘gorgeous’ comments, I think she is… a ‘gorgeous’ example of everything we’ve been discussing and so often railing against… In her presence I probably would be enamored by her, but when you take everything else we now know, and I would be screening for such, not so much…

    At the end of the article I was left wondering if she was going to take charge of the ‘agency’ she described earlier and pursue marriage or keep the view she already has…

    BTW, Allan’s wife must be sooo unhappy about this article…

  • Ted

    @ Sock! – There may be some real truth to your orgasm comments.  I’ve had this conversation with a few women, but the one I found the most interesting was from a women that is rather orgasmic.  She claimed the reason she has orgasms so easily is because she takes responsibility for it and works toward that goal every and anytime she wants one.  She said any women that thinks they can just lay back and relax without putting in any effort and have mind blowing orgasms is delusional.

    Men must take responsibility for their orgasms by default in most cases.  Since men tend to be the aggressor (don’t like the word choice but it works) during sex, that active role puts them in control of their orgasm.  In contrast, unless a woman makes a conscious choice to “get active” during sex, she really doesn’t have to.  And I’m not talking about just looking interested, making noises, or generally being a cheerleader for your sex partner.  I mean GET INVOLVED!  Treat sex more like an exercise routine and less like a spectator sport.

    I don’t know the mechanics of it from a woman’s perspective, but I think the short of it is: Be active, not passive.

  • Passer_By

    @Sandy:

    You’re really missing the point here on SMP and ranking.  The discussion of her looks was only relevant insofar as it impacts her marriage prospects.   She’s not looking to pick you up in a bar.  And most men don’t behave like hue hefner, for whatever reason, though they’d prefer something a little younger than them, particularly as they get into their late 30s or 40s.  Consequently, her target market is men in their mid to late 40s looking for LTR – i.e., me (and probably not you).  And I would certainly rate her higher than 6 when judged against the women who would be competition (which would not include 20 year olds, but might go down to low 30s).   But, like I said, “gorgeous” is an overstatement, since most of us take that word to mean something like 9 or 10.

    @Anonymous

    “She’s probably turned down, even recently in her older years guys, who are better looking and richer than most of the men . . .”

    You’re probably right, but doesn’t that prove the point?  If she has, she is the product of her hypergamy run amock.  Her decently paying career may be glamorous to other women, but men don’t care all that much.  And, while I would say she’s attractive, her looks don’t merit turning down the men you describe.  In all modesty, if  she’s turning down a bunch of guys who are better looking and more successful than I am, she has received the spinsterhood she deserves.   But I don’t think it’s all about looks or money.  She seems to have the typical female attraction to men with careers that women find glamorous – artsy type careeers like writers and so forth.  Those men seem to have a lot of options and to avoid commitment, for the most part, because women get wet in the panties over them.  Had she fallen for some STEM guy, or a lawyer or accountant or whatever, she’d be married, and the guy would probably make more money and be better looking than most of the writers or editors or whatever.  What exactly is a “high powered magazine editor”?  My perception is that people in that industry don’t make all that much money – maybe I’m wrong on that.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      What exactly is a “high powered magazine editor”? My perception is that people in that industry don’t make all that much money – maybe I’m wrong on that.

      I don’t know either, but I know one woman who graduated from college and joined Harper Collins as a junior editor in NYC for 27K. Publishing doesn’t pay, period. There are too many young people happy to take those jobs.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    My perception is that people in that industry don’t make all that much money – maybe I’m wrong on that.

    I don’t know the average salary for a magazine editor for a national rag, but I can tell you that you can make well into the 6 figures as a freelance writer with a lot of persistence and a modicum of talent.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I can tell you that you can make well into the 6 figures as a freelance writer with a lot of persistence and a modicum of talent.

      What??? Hmmm, it may be time for a career change.

  • Really

    Are ya’ll a bunch of bible-beating, gun-toting, racist, right-wing, homophobic, anti-women’s rights misogynists? Let me guess, conservative christians?

  • Sandy

    2 Passer_By

    You’re really missing the point here on SMP and ranking. The discussion of her looks was only relevant insofar as it impacts her marriage prospects.

    No. Susan said she’s gorgeous, and then people started to discuss her looks. Attractiveness is not the same as MMV.

    She’s not looking to pick you up in a bar.

    I know, I don’t like bars, so if she wants to pick me up she needs to go to the right places.

    And most men don’t behave like hue hefner, for whatever reason, though they’d prefer
    something a little younger than them, particularly as they get into their late 30s or 40s.
    Consequently, her target market is men in their mid to late 40s looking for LTR – i.e.,
    me (and probably not you).

    Are you an alpha? If yes, you can do better than her for LTR or marriage, if no then she’ll reject you.

    And I would certainly rate her higher than 6 when judged against the women who would be competition
    (which would not include 20 year olds, but might go down to low 30s).

    For some reason you exclude 20 year olds from competition, but you never explain why

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson
     SANDY, your point about smp and ltr market has already been put forth by a number of other women before and the men shot it down.  SMP and relationship market mean the  same thing to men.  We women get confused because of the “sex” in sexual market.
    The fact that you had to name celebrities has examples of much older men with much younger women proves my point.  It just does not happen amongst ordinary folks anywhere near the scale it happens in LA LA Land.  
    And you mentioned very wealthy men getting much younger women – precisely why I said if I was a man I would be very suspiciou of the motives of a much younger woman pursuing me.
     
    SOCK, you also confirmed my point.  If you reread my comment you will see I said that because of our anatomy we women cannot orgasm as easily as men, especially when the sex is bad.  You are lucky that your anatomy allows you to get off in spite of a bad lay.  Our’s doesn’t.  At least not at the time we are in the middle of it with our sex partner.  After he finishes, then of course we can masterbate ourselves, but that’s a different story.
     
    As far as Kate, I know several women, less good looking than she, older and with kids who found partners so that there are men out there who would be interested in her is not the issue.  The issue is, would she be interested in them?
  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    <blockquote>Are you an alpha? If yes, you can do better than her for LTR or marriage, if no then she’ll reject you.</blockquote>

    Bingo.

  • Wayfinder

    @Really 458

    I think you have this site confused with something else.

  • Tom

    @ Ted

    To me, anyone that can have casual sex has a diminished capacity to value true intimacy in a sexual relationship, because frankly they only value sex for pleasure. Do those same people get MORE pleasure out of sex in a LTR? Very likely. However that does not change the fact that they VIEW sex differently than I do, and that difference will never be rectified.

    To me ALL sex should have emotional value. How can I ever trust that a woman that has had casual sex feels the same way I do about the value of our sexual relationship? When I decide to allow a relationship to get

    _____________________

    Ted I respect your opinion, really I do. You want someone who views sex exactly as you do. From a different perspective, talking from experience, people who have had casual sex CAN revert back to true intimacy and view sex between them and their mate as something special because they reserve sex for just themselves no one else. I know a lot of people, me included, can compartmentalize sex. If its casual, it is for fun, if it is in a relationship it is an expression of love and devotion (and for fun) Maybe some people just do not have that capasity, but many people do.

    I dont put blame on people who feel like you do, it is honorable. But your side of the equasion has to understand that having casual sex, for millions, does not diminish the ability to fall head over heels in love and become devoted to just one person. Works that way for both genders.

  • CrisisEraDynamo

    Let me break down each leftist term of abuse:

    Bible-beating — takes the Bible seriously

    gun-toting — knows how to use a gun

    racist — does not always damn white people and/or Western civilization; willing to criticize nonwhite cultures

    right-wing — believes in individual liberty and the free market, as opposed to endless social engineering schemes and a government-controlled economy, complete with bureaucrats dictating every second of your life “for your own good.”

    homophobic — willing to criticize or poke fun at homosexuals as a group, or someone who criticizes a prominent homosexual or homosexual organization. You need not actually hate gays.

    Anti-women’s rights — anti-abortion

    misogynist — anyone willing to criticize or poke fun at women as a group (much as women do to men), anyone who opposes the family courts’ hatred of fathers, or anyone who opposes other special favors for women

    Conservative Christians — if leftists had their way, they’d all be in re-education camps.

    There! All done. Susan, I know Really’s post is just a bit of off-topic trolling, but it had to be answered. I will henceforth not answer his or her posts again, unless they’re on topic. :)

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    “For some reason you exclude 20 year olds from competition, but you never explain why”

    Because most 20 year olds are not competing for most 40 year old men.  Brad Pitt and Johnny Depp do not count as *most* 40 year old men.

  • Butterfly Flower

    <I> Most 20 year old women are not interested in 40 year old “uncles”. Heck, most ain’t even interested in 30 year olds. Those who are and those who do date much older men are outliers. </i>

    Before I met my boyfriend, I used to flirt with 30-ish year old guys. The most common response was amusement. I’d receive this “Awh, look – a little girl has a crush on me!” sort-of smile [although I kinda look underage so that might have been why...]

    These days, there’s a stigma attached to dating younger women; even ten years younger. I live in NYC and it certainly would go against the norm.

  • Ted

    @ Really – I suspect you are trolling, but…

    You said: “Are ya’ll a bunch of bible-beating, gun-toting, racist, right-wing, homophobic, anti-women’s rights misogynists? Let me guess, conservative christians?”

    I am by no means a bible thumper.  In fact, I stopped calling myself a “Holiday Catholic” well over a decade ago. (A Holiday Catholic is someone who only goes to church on holidays in case that term isn’t widely known…) I do own several guns, but to the best of my knowledge I have never “toted” any of them.  I have many friends that are non-white and/or homosexual.  I am conservative, but also have some libertarian leanings.

    Anti-woman’s rights – That is a trick question to me.  There is a WHOLE lot of politics and emotion tied up in “Woman’s rights”.  I believe women should be treated equally in terms of equal pay for equal work, civil rights, etc.  But I truly feel that the current family court system and laws are severely slanted in favor of women.  I feel that stop-gap programs such as Affirmative Action need to be tossed out at this point.  After all, how can we every treat each other equally if some of us get preferential treatment based on sex or race?

    And I suppose you are some left-leaning, liberal, feminazi that gets their jollies by taking potshots at Christians?

  • Passer_By

    @Sandy

    “Are you an alpha? If yes, you can do better than her for LTR or marriage, if no then she’ll reject you.”

    Well, by “me”, I meant men in my age group, not so much me specifically.  But I agree with you on the point.  Everything about her signals to me that (whether or not she realizes it) she considers 99 percent or  more of the men out there to be beneath her, but those to whom she’s attracted can all do better than her.

    “For some reason you exclude 20 year olds from competition, but you never explain why”

    I’ve explained why.  In my experience, the overwhelming majority of men in their 40s are not looking to have an LTR with a 20 year old, and vice versa.  Perhaps that’s because of societal pressure, perhaps because they want somebody with more similar experiences. I don’t know why it is. But it is what it is.

  • Sandy

    2 Mrs. Robinson

    SANDY, your point about smp and ltr market has already been put forth by a number of other women before and the men shot it down.

    I don’t care who shot down what. May be you just misunderstood something

    SMP and relationship market mean the same thing to men.

    No, they are not. Hookup and marriage are not the same thing. Many men wouldn’t decline sex with a porn star, and in the same time wouldn’t want to marry her.

    We women get confused because of the ”sex” in sexual market.

    So you got confused. I beleive it

    The fact that you had to name celebrities has examples of much older men with much younger women proves my point.

    No it doesn’t. If a man is alpha, he can attract 20-somethings without any problems

    It just does not happen amongst ordinary folks anywhere near the scale it happens in LA LA Land.

    Yes, a divorced 40-something beta who pays child support for 2 children and lifetime alimony to his ex-wife wouldn’t be able to attract a young and pretty girl for marriage.

    And you mentioned very wealthy men getting much younger women – precisely why I said if I was a man I would be very suspiciou of the motives of a much younger woman pursuing me.

    All women are attracted to alpha, social status and wealth.

  • Lavazza

    I just lost a post. Anyway I think that window of opportunity for smart women to get a bargain is short, like 1-3 years. Not 3-7 years. The men that are bargains will gain confidence and/or be snatched up by smart women  in quite a short time. Or go the player route.

  • Isabel

    Are ya’ll a bunch of bible-beating, gun-toting, racist, right-wing, homophobic, anti-women’s rights misogynists? Let me guess, conservative christians?”

    Dear God,

    Please guide Abbot to this person’s house.

    Signed,

    – Humanity

    (PS: I’m atheist and a LibDem. Stereotype fail. O_o)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Dear God,

      Please guide Abbot to this person’s house.

      Signed,

      – Humanity

      HAHA! Thanks Isabel, that was a great one. You all are so much more humorous than those grumpy feminists.

  • Sock!

    @Mrs. Robinson

    Bad sex is about a lack of arousal, stimulation and a measure of skill, not anatomy… for either sex…

    So sorry to hear women’s anatomy is such that it forbids them
    from taking agency of their pleasure until after the event is over…  In my naïveté I incorrectly assumed that a
    woman has every right and ability to voice her concerns and take control of the
    physical/sexual situation by being the lead and getting the job done with her
    partner, as men do on a regular basis…  I assumed because women are able to, they’re also capable of…  why else would she masturbate after the fact if she wasn’t able to orgasm?  Unless it wasn’t something with anatomy to begin with, but something else…  …such as a sense of agency, willingness to learn and develop with a lover, or a lack thereof?

    Funny I sense this is just a one sided issue of gaslighting
    (a form of psychological abuse in which false information is presented to the
    victim with the intent of making them doubt their own memory and perception).  I get that some people make better lovers than others.  Just don’t blame it on anatomy
    when that’s not really the issue, when it’s actually about choice…

    But perhaps I miss a greater lesson and opportunity, to which I’ll have to try to learn from… next time I’m with a woman who just can’t make it happen for me, due to ‘my anatomical’ differences, I’ll make sure to masturbate next to her prior to cuddling…

  • Kurt

    The early 1990s witnessed the dawn of “hookup culture” at universities, as colleges stopped acting in loco parentis, and undergraduates, heady with freedom, started throwing themselves into a frenzy of one-night stands. Depending on whom you ask, this has either liberated young women from being ashamed of their sexual urges, or forced them into a promiscuity they didn’t ask for.

    Her line about women being forced in promiscuity is probably the most absurd statement in that article!  Unless those women were raped, then they obviously made a conscious decision to be promiscuous.  The author also neglects to mention how this “forced promiscuity” screws over the men who aren’t participants to the hook-up culture.  Women can very easily participate in the hookup culture if they choose to do so unless they are hideously ugly, whereas a lot of young men will never be able to participate even if they want to do so.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kurt

      Her line about women being forced in promiscuity is probably the most absurd statement in that article!

      I agree with you. The word forced means nonconsensual. Women are definitely consenting. They may be making a poor choice, but no one is forcing them to go to frat parties and hook up with douchebags. That is entirely voluntary. And many woman are sitting it out – so they managed not to be “forced” into doing something the didn’t want to do.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    ” bible-beating, gun-toting, racist, right-wing, homophobic, anti-women’s rights misogynists? Let me guess, conservative christians?”

    Stereotyping much?

    There are more things in heaven and on earth than are dreamed of in your philosophy, Really.

     

     

  • Kurt

    Even if this was the topic, you’re wrong about older men. My cousin in her late 20′s is easily a 9, very fit and is a gym junkie, and married an average guy in his late 40′s. There’s a 40-year old who lost to her younger, hotter competition.

    I think that the earlier poster mentioned than few 20-year-olds would want a man 20 years older, which I think is true.  However, a woman in her late 20s is usually much more mature and is more likely to realize that it is extremely difficult to find a compatible man suitable for marriage and is more likely to give an older man a chance.

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    “My cousin in her late 20′s is easily a 9, very fit and is a gym junkie, and married an average guy in his late 40′s.”

    It happens.  Its not the norm.  But I never said it NEVER happens.

    Women in their early 20s are fresh out of their teens.  They are generally not interested in non-celebrity men 20 years their senior.  Now, divorced women in their late 40s maybe more interested in men 10-20 years older, I have seen that occasionally.  But I can honestly say that I have never in my entire life and with all my experience seen a woman in her early 20s paired with a non-celebrity man in his 40s.  Of course it happens.  Exceptions prove every rule.

    They really did Kate injustice with this photo.  In the videos she is an attractive woman.  Bad hair, makeup and dress job.  I wonder if it was on purpose?

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    Sock!

    You’re right.  You don’t get it. I’m a very vocal woman in the sack and never shy away from letting my partner know what I want.  Nevertheless, due to all the nooks and crannies in our monds venus and the hit or miss nature of the strike, sometimes it just doesn’t happen for us.

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    “Yes, a divorced 40-something beta who pays child support for 2 children and lifetime alimony to his ex-wife wouldn’t be able to attract a young and pretty girl for marriage.”

    Then we agree!

    :)

  • Passer_By

    @Mrs Robinson

    “You’re right.  You don’t get it. I’m a very vocal woman in the sack and never shy away from letting my partner know what I want.  Nevertheless, due to all the nooks and crannies in our monds venus and the hit or miss nature of the strike, sometimes it just doesn’t happen for us.”

    I’m suddenly overcome by conflicting urges to go have sex and to eat a hot toasted Thomas’ English Muffin.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I’m suddenly overcome by conflicting urges to go have sex and to eat a hot toasted Thomas’ English Muffin.

      Hilarious retort by Passer By, bizarre description from Mrs. Robinson. The mons venus is the rounded area of fatty tissue above the pubic bone. It should be smooth, not full of potholes. Might be good to have that checked out.

  • Abbot

    people who have had casual sex CAN revert back to true intimacy

    Well there you have it.  Summed up rather nicely. Choosing a dedication-worthy person who does not require reversion back to something as critical as true intimacy is a no brainer.  Going with a Reverter is waaay to risky and entirely unnecessary.

     

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    The real issue is that neither Hugh Hefner nor Kate Bolick are your “every man” or “every woman”.  They are outliers.

    Just as 99.999999999% or more of men will never live a life even remotely similar to Hugh, so too, most women will not have the “glamorous” job landing them a cover on The Atlantic and fit physique at 39 that our Ms Bolick here has.

    What works for them won’t work for us ordinary mortals with ordinary jobs and the ordinary looks and social skills to match.

    Maybe we should go back to arranged marriages, or something.

  • Workafrolic

    Not really “on topic” I suppose but after 400 some odd comments I’m guessing I can post something else. Hope that’s okay.

    Anyone see the NYT article today about how makeup can make women appear more competent? Thought it was interesting and there was a good quote by Daniel Hamermesh, an econ professor at University of Texas in Austin and he said, and I quote,

    “we conflate looks and a willingness to take care of yourself with a willingness to take care of people.”

    Another reason to work out, eat right and present yourself in a polished manner to the world.

    Any other thoughts on this?

  • Andy

    Just seen an interview with this bird.

    Not at all attractive. Sorry she’s past it.

  • DviX

    My cousin in her late 20′s is easily a 9, very fit and is a gym junkie, and married an average guy in his late 40′s. There’s a 40-year old who lost to her younger, hotter competition.

    Then there’s a young man who lost to his older competition.

     

  • Abbot

    “what does the damage to future bonding is not so much the sex but the breakup”

    A breakup is a type of separation and the easy-come-easy-types are damaging in their own way. Its more subtle. Its not readily apparent.

  • http://thefatprince.blogspot.com Matt T

    But the young man will have a chance to win again later. The old woman won’t. And therein lies the difference.

  • Mike C

    Just watched the Gayle King segment….I don’t know…I still get the impression she is selling hard “I’m so happy not being married” and it almost strikes me like she is trying to convince herself. Of course, I’m just an armchair psychologist so I might be totally full of shit.

    I think upthread Susan you made a comment about your Mom not being happy in the life she had and when she grew up motherhood and children was the expected role. In contrast, today’s expected role is for liberation and empowerment when some women probably would prefer motherhood and children.

    I guess my thought would be to anyone really think about what you want out of life. What does make you happy? My sense is so few people really engage in deep introspection and just take life a day at at time doing what they think is expected…playing the role that parents or culture told them was the “right” one.

    My sense is some women would be happier as wives and mothers, and others would be happier with empowered, liberated, independent career success. But it would behoove you to figure that out as quickly as you can so that you can capitalize on your primary asset which is youth and before biology and the passage of time limit the choices you can actually choose from.

  • asdf

    Bolick is quite good looking. The Atlantic cover photo is actually unflattering relative to how she actually looks.

    Watch her in this video here (2nd one on the page):

    http://www.thedailyown.com/on-the-gayle-king-show-a-full-topic-day-with-john-avalon-kate-bolick-and-anna-netrebko

    A 7.5, perhaps an 8 when younger.

    Here’s a still image:

    https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-HY2sxqFDPjs/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/LOnFusJQOd4/photo.jpg

  • Anacaona

    Ha! Two years ago, the same Ryan O’Neal ended up hitting on his estranged daughter Tatum at Farrah Fawcett’s funeral. He really didn’t recognize her. Very, very extreme, yes, but another thing for men in their 40s and beyond to worry about, especially given the breakup of families!
    Growing up we all heard stories of brothers and sisters (and fathers/daughters and even grandfathers and gradndaughters) getting “married” because his father was seeding kids all over the place without anyone knowing, this is a small island after all, so there was one of the reasons many women actually want their kids and “the others kids” to meet and many men actually end up confessing their liasions right before the kids hit puberty. Bizarre situation to be in it.

    which woman does the guy go to?
    Is is an Alpha…both. :D

    I lost a lot of respect for one of my previous girlfriends when she picked up one of the gossip magazines as we were going through the grocery store checkout.
    Mmm I regularly read the headlines in the line to pay but I find them hilarious they look for the worst picture of Jennifer Aniston and the headline is: JENNIFER ALONE AND MISERABLE!! I can’t believe anyone believes them so for me is funny, I hope my husband doesn’t think of badly of me for that.

    I don’t believe in popular culture.

    I do try to learn as much as possible of what is in because is a good way to a) feel the culture pulse and what is moving the masses and as a human student I have to know and b) so you can have any conversation with anyone from upper classes to lower classes same purpose. If you can’t talk to the guy that cleans the building your are running you are missing out in a lot of info, YMMV.

    Dear God,
    Please guide Abbot to this person’s house.
    Signed,
    – Humanity

    Abbot will kill them with his arguments alone! Poor bastards didn’t stand a chance once he showed the world tiniest violin :)

    There are more things in heaven and on earth than are dreamed of in your philosophy, Really.

    I love a quote from L.A. Story ;)

    Might be good to have that checked out.

    Took the words out of my mouth Susan

    If I had to use Harry Potter for name calling I would say that Oprah is Voldemort, Melissa Gilbert is Bellatrix Lestrange and Kate at best is Narcissa Malfoy trapped into a situation that she didn’t expected and willing to take a way out if possible.
    Now we need our own Harry Potter, Dumbledore, Snape and Hermione. But I get the feeling that we are in the first rise of Voldemort before there was a chosen one :(

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    “My cousin in her late 20′s is easily a 9, very fit and is a gym junkie, and married an average guy in his late 40′s. ”

    “There’s a 40-year old who lost to her younger, hotter competition.”

    “Then there’s a young man who lost to his older competition.”

    “But the young man will have a chance to win again later. The old woman won’t. And therein lies the difference.”

    Being that the old man in question here is described by his nephew as being an “average guy”, the old woman will have plenty of chances later. Chances are never an issue with women. The issue is do we want the guys we have chances with?

    “Growing up we all heard stories of brothers and sisters (and fathers/daughters and even grandfathers and gradndaughters) getting “married” because his father was seeding kids all over the place without anyone knowing, this is a small island after all, so there was one of the reasons many women actually want their kids and “the others kids” to meet and many men actually end up confessing their liasions right before the kids hit puberty. Bizarre situation to be in it.”

    Anacaona, what island is that, pray tell?

  • Abbot

    This author Kate is the right role model for promiscuous women and does not attempt to shame the millions of men who do not want to wife them up. She is happy and proud of how she runs her life, will probably not begat daughters to carry the lineage, personally accepts that promiscuity disqualifies women in the eyes of quality men interested in marriage and has now *gasp* introduced mainstream America to the “soft harem” phenomenon.

  • jack

    Susan-

    The apex fallacy and soft harem concept being introduced into the mainstream discourse may be the best available option.

    It is possible that “slut-shaming” could be effective, but it is unlikely to gain traction because of our culture’s unwillingness to be critical of women or say things that make them “feel bad” or that they are “being judged”.

     

    However, mentioning the apex fallacy and soft harems is a more indirect way of addressing the problem and probably comes across as less judgmental, and therefore more likely to gain traction in popular discourse.

    This article could mark an inflection point in the public discourse about this whole topic.

  • Ted

    @ Tom – You said:

    “I dont put blame on people who feel like you do, it is honorable. But your side of the equasion has to understand that having casual sex, for millions, does not diminish the ability to fall head over heels in love and become devoted to just one person. Works that way for both genders.”

    I’ve heard this before, every time from someone that has been having plenty of casual sex.  The problem is, it is very much like a crack addict that says they can clean up.  Sure they can!  But their chance of ending up back on crack are substantially higher than someone that has never used before.

    And I’ve never once said that having casual sex diminishes the capacity for love. I am very positive there are people having casual sex right now that can love as much if not more than I do.  But, I believe that having lots of casual sex DOES make a person prone to getting bored with sex in a monogamous, long-term relationship.  They get hooked on the rush of the “strange”.  They want that excitement they get from having sex with someone new, and that is NOT compatible with my ideal for a relationship.  Just like the former crack addict, they will always have a craving for casual sex, and even if they can succeed at keeping that desire in check, I really don’t want to be with someone that doesn’t find ME adequate enough to fulfill their sexual needs.  That has nothing to do with love.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    What??? Hmmm, it may be time for a career change.

    The trick is to find high demand/low competition markets. Business writing, for example: biz to biz and biz to consumer writing is in high demand, but most writers eschew that type of thing because they want to write something more creative or glamorous.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    MikeC,

    “Just watched the Gayle King segment….I don’t know…I still get the impression she is selling hard “I’m so happy not being married” and it almost strikes me like she is trying to convince herself. Of course, I’m just an armchair psychologist so I might be totally full of shit.”

    I saw it last night – there’s clearly a snowjob going on. At best, the tone was “life wound up this way for me, I’m making the best of it.” Check out the broken look in her eyes when she says “I reached 35 and I wasn’t married…”

    I don’t we can overlook the fact that Gayle King is a (divorced) black woman whose show is bankrolled by the most powerful black woman in America (Oprah), and college-educated black American women have been dealing with this “not enough men at our level of achievement” thing a lot longer than white America. So it might have been reflexive to spin it as “single and loving it” because they don’t really have any other option. So I can’t really fault the platform for spinning it the way it did, not that it means I’m going to take it seriously.

  • Patriarch

    “Just seen an interview with this bird.

    Not at all attractive. Sorry she’s past it.”

     

    I just saw her being interviewed on MSNBC. She’s average at best. The interview was the most MISANDRIST things I’ve ever seen on TV. Both White Knights and 2 feminist sitting there laughing and cracking jokes about men hysterically. Broke my heart. Truly the most offensive thing I’ve seen in yrs.

    I wish someone would have commented that men are looking forward to increased taxes of successful women to pay for a wealth of Social Programs and spending. I’m also looking forward to women losing massive custody due to their work hours and matriarchal dominance, Massive alimony payments to men who were married, affirmative action adjusted for all males (white or otherwise), increase in sexual harassment suits against the paragons of the Sexual Revolution, etc.

    Men are going to REDISTRIBUTE women’s wealth in some fascinating ways and women will have NO excuse. We will merely take not of their Matriarchal priviledge and dominance and laugh all the way to the bank to pay for those horrible boys. Want War? They got it. Can’t wait till those female service jobs are off-shored for cheaper labor.

  • Abbot

    I really don’t want to be with someone that doesn’t find ME adequate enough to fulfill their sexual needs

    You mean a REVERTER? Choosing a dedication-worthy person who does not require reversion back to long-term true intimacy is a no brainer.  Going with a Reverter is waaay to risky and entirely unnecessary.

    Bonder vs Reverter. Choose wisely.

     

     

  • Ted

    @ Abbot – Exactly.  Look.  As I’ve said before, I’m not a bible thumper.  My conservative views on sexuality stem from the concerns I’ve written here.  I did not participate in the Casual Carousel because I didn’t want to teach myself that sex is mundane.  I didn’t want to get used to jumping from bed to bed and learning to enjoy it.  Sure, I get it.  Sex feels great!  I love having orgasms, so I really do get it.  But just because something is fun and feels good, does NOT mean we should do it.  Should we get shit faced drunk every weekend?  Nope.  Should we do illegal drugs because of the “high”? Nope.  Should we have sex like rabbits because orgasms feel great?  Nope.

    I did not want to find myself with a women I truly loved, and be unhappy with her as a life long sexual partner because I had spent time having sex with any women that would have me, and got hooked on the “high” of new sex.  Not only did I not pursue casual sex, but chased away at least a few women that would have been very happy having a Friends with Benefits situation with me.  It isn’t that I didn’t find them attractive, but when we got to the point where sex was on the table, they weren’t willing to commit and be exclusive, so I walked.  I knew I wouldn’t be with them for the rest of my life, so I didn’t see any possible good that would come from continuing the relationship just for the sex.

    So you see, I consider my sexual choices to be proper respect and consideration for the women I’ve had real relationships with, and the women I may have a relationship with later.  I have always thought that even if I am not with a women today, that doesn’t mean I should not consider her in the things I DO today.  Because when I meet her tomorrow, I want to know that I bring to the relationship a lifetime of choices that makes me a better partner, not a lifetime of doing what feels good and hoping I can STILL be a good partner.

  • Abbot

    This article could mark an inflection point in the public discourse about this whole topic.

    Aside from some quips in the comments section on Slate, Amanda Marcotte has purposely retreated from discussing the article so as to not draw attention to it. The last thing she wants are terms like “apex fallacy” and “soft harem” spreading any further into a national conversation. Feminists are NOTORIOUS for buzz terms and controlling the message and yet Marcotte has not figured out how to neutralize the Atlantic article.

  • pvw

    Mike C:

    My sense is some women would be happier as wives and mothers, and others would be happier with empowered, liberated, independent career success. But it would behoove you to figure that out as quickly as you can so that you can capitalize on your primary asset which is youth and before biology and the passage of time limit the choices you can actually choose from.

    My observation:

    But here is the thing, I think a fair number of women are in the middle, not one or the other, for very practical reasons having to do with how many mothers raise their daughters.  They know that their daughters are likely to have to be self-supporting and so they push them towards lucrative high-earning fields–fields that have traditionally been male dominated.  And just because they are in these fields that enable them to be empowered, liberated and independent doesn’t mean that they reject femininity and don’t want to be wives and mothers.  But the stereotyping does occur, without question that women in those fields are too career focused to be interested in traditional pursuits or are obnoxious, etc, when a fair number are not.  On the other hand, there are cases of men liking women in those fields, because it looks good for the men professionally and/or because they like the idea of their children having a brilliant and accomplished mommy bent upon getting them into Harvard, etc.

  • pvw

    Ted:

    I did not want to find myself with a women I truly loved, and be unhappy with her as a life long sexual partner because I had spent time having sex with any women that would have me, and got hooked on the “high” of new sex.  Not only did I not pursue casual sex, but chased away at least a few women that would have been very happy having a Friends with Benefits situation with me.  It isn’t that I didn’t find them attractive, but when we got to the point where sex was on the table, they weren’t willing to commit and be exclusive, so I walked.  I knew I wouldn’t be with them for the rest of my life, so I didn’t see any possible good that would come from continuing the relationship just for the sex.

    So you see, I consider my sexual choices to be proper respect and consideration for the women I’ve had real relationships with, and the women I may have a relationship with later.  I have always thought that even if I am not with a women today, that doesn’t mean I should not consider her in the things I DO today.  Because when I meet her tomorrow, I want to know that I bring to the relationship a lifetime of choices that makes me a better partner, not a lifetime of doing what feels good and hoping I can STILL be a good partner.

    My reply:

    I loved reading this!  You remind me of one of my male cousins whom I admire.  He is a conservative Roman Catholic with a very similar attitude towards sexuality, it reminds me of the “theology of the body” concept, the conservative Catholic response to the sexual revolution.  He married about 14 years ago when he was in his late 20s, to his then-girlfriend, who was raised conservative Christian but who converted to Catholicism.  He was her sponsor.  They were both virgins when they married.  All these years later, they are happily married and raising 3 children.  He is a high status beta lawyer, she is a stay-at-home mom.  She keeps up the law license, doing a bit of legal work here and there.  Other wise, she works on different community boards, ie., their condo and their church, while taking care of the children.

    My husband’s attitude towards sex right before we began dating was similar to yours.  He had spent a long time in horrible relationships with women that began primarily in the bedroom so they never tested their compatibility outside of the bedroom and the relationships began to falter because of that.  He took a long time off from dating to get his head together and think about what he wanted in a relationship.  I found him appealing because he could realize where his mistakes were and because, drumroll, he had been celibate for about five years when we began dating–this was his choice, and it made him so attractive in my eyes!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I found him appealing because he could realize where his mistakes were and because, drumroll, he had been celibate for about five years when we began dating–this was his choice, and it made him so attractive in my eyes!

      I always love a testimonial rewarding male selectivity!

  • Anacaona

    Anacaona, what island is that, pray tell?

    Dominican Republic.

  • zombie roissy

    “gorgeous” “natural beauty”? please susie, her (heavily made up, and probably retouched) picture is right there…

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Ted wrote:

    You cannot learn to be part of a couple by living alone.  Spending too much time only accountable to yourself makes it very difficult when you marry and become accountable to/for someone else, let alone having children.

    This draws very bad picture of marriage when age of first marriage will be 30-35 years (and marriage is not actually followed domestic partnership).

  • zombie roissy

    and, not more than a few sentences in to her piece, “Surprisingly, a 2007 study commissioned by the Justice Department suggested that male virgins outnumber female virgins on campus.”  (emphasis added)

  • http://thequestfor50.wordpress.com Dagonet

    I searched through the comments but I don’t see anyone (aside from Dalrock) talking about the fact that Bolick got the 80/20 concept completely wrong.

    She says it means “20% of men and 20% of women are having 80% of the sex.” When in reality, we know it means “20% of the men are having sex with 80% of the women.”

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (Poor Kari ™)

    Susan Walsh wrote:

    I spent 40 hours last year combing through CDC and other stats to get at the truth of who is having sex.

    CDC = Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ?

    (There was also mentioned GSS = General Social Survey)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Dagonet wrote:

    She says it means “20% of men and 20% of women are having 80% of the sex.” When in reality, we know it means “20% of the men are having sex with 80% of the women.”

    I guess that that is what Susan Walsh said.
    Susan Walsh wrote:

    Studies published since then seem to indicate that in fact, the apex fallacy applies equally to both sexes when it comes to promiscuity.

    This looks like same claim with different words.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari
      Dagonet is correct, as are you. I have been very clear on this point, after doing some considerable analysis of the data. It’s very popular in the manosphere to say that 20% of the men get 80% of the women, but my own analysis shows that nowhere near 80% of women are even in the mix. About 20% of men and women are promiscuous, and they basically service each other. I have not encountered another blogger who has studied this, but several studies confirm this general data. In fact, some studies show that only 10% of college students have >6 sexual partners over four years.

  • Hope

    Wow, this thread sure exploded.

    “I always love a testimonial rewarding male selectivity!”

    I agree, Susan. That’s also what I found so attractive about my husband. He was extremely picky, but he picked me. :P

  • Aaron1988

    I’m a 22 year old guy from England, and reading this article made me feel so naive because I have never even kissed someone that I wasn’t dating. I know most people my age probably sleep with large numbers of people but I have only ever slept with / kissed two people:- my ex who i was with for 3 1/2 years and my first girlfriend who I was with for 18 months. I have, however, now decided that I am going to refrain from sexual contact with any future girlfriend until I’m married because both my ex’s seemed to be only intrested in one thing, and this has always caused problems because I want to get married and have children and both my ex’s seemed to be terrified of commitment.

    So to me the only way to find true love and a marriage that will last forever and that will be my “happily ever after” is to date and stick to my “old fashioned” values that I gave up for what I mistakenly perceived as love.

    -Aaron

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Aaron
      Welcome, thanks for commenting. Wow, you are a very unusual young man. I admire and respect your choice. A famous American anthropologist said that sex is never casual. She meant that our bodies have very elaborate chemical responses to arousal and sex. Physiologically speaking, it is a very serious act. We pretend otherwise, but our biology doesn’t lie.

  • Mister Y

     

    Without reading the article in question, going only by what has been discussed here, I know why she chose to dump Alan 10 years ago. Because he followed her in the job change, thereby becoming too much of a Beta in her eyes to be attractive to her. Given her strident feminist mother, it is all but certain that she requires a lot of Alpha and very little Beta to be attracted to a man.

    Therefore, it is likely that if she had married Alan at 29, by now she’d be single again, because at some point he would have fallen short of the degree of Alpha that she demands. Perhaps due to job stress, certainly in the wake of childbirth, it is inevitable that he would have become unattractive to her at some point. And since she is clearly quite self-centered in crucial ways, it would be very unlikely for her to have the strength of character to see her through those periods of his Beta status, nor would she be perceptive enough to assist him in regaining those properties that attracted her in the first place.

    It is quite possible that Alan is better off for all of this, and she may be better off as well. I doubt that being a divorced woman with a child would be her choice.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @MisterY
      So good to see you! You’re the first person to make that point, and I think you’re right. Allan let her lead – that is what was “missing.” Of course, over the years she has seen him be a great husband to someone else, and she realized she let a great man get away from her. But you may be right that she would not have tolerated his lack of dominance.

  • Blues

    She says it means “20% of men and 20% of women are having 80% of the sex.” When in reality, we know it means “20% of the men are having sex with 80% of the women.”

    This is true however hasn’t  S.W. has said before that she has a theory that all the sex in college is mostly the sluts and alphas that make too much noise and it paints a different picture  which is the one where 20% of men fuck 80% of women (personally i don’t buy it)?, Bolick may have been referring to that, then again it’s simpler to ask the source: Susan, did Bolick misquote/misinterpret you or not?

  • GT66

    meh… We see this all the time: women who think so highly of themselves that no man or his companionship can ever measure up. I know this woman (I mean her type), I’ve worked with her, I’ve dated her, I’ve been judged by her. It’s the same old story of what men are according to women like her: because we’re easily contented, we’re lazy; because we’re not hyper controlling, we’re sloppy, because we’re not maniacal social climbers, we lack ambition, because we keep in touch with our playfulness, we’re a “man child,” because we wear the same pants for a week straight and drink  from the bottle, we’re low brow goons (I don’t roll in the friggin dirt so why wash the pants and I’m the only one that drinks that juice so why do I need to move it from one container to another container before I drink it?). This woman is a just another fading light trying to make a buck out of her own arrogance and bad decisions and at the same time desperately trying to convince herself that the fact she’s alone isn’t ENTIRELY her own doing. I get the distinct impression that a date with this woman is like taking the SAT all over again on EVERY date. And not that many men aren’t scoring well, this woman just always thinks the next  guy will score a little higher. So why “settle?” All this “I’ve discovered the single me” will be her new schtick as the proud single empowered woman until she can find a sucker she can marginally tolerate at which point all this  “single me” personal discovery malarkey will be forgotten. So cliche and so… meh…

    Also, I find the fawning of the author of this article over this day-old-bread to be odd. Are you trying to give Bolick an ego boost or convince some of your male readers to waste some time at this woman’s altar of never-good-enough?

     

  • ruddyturnstone

    …the gorgeous journalist…

    Why on earth did you say that?

    1. Her very high SMV is supremely relevant. This is not some fugly feminist or harpy bitching about there being no good men.

    2. To counter the manosphere cliche that by 39 women have raisins for ovaries, and look like 5 miles of bad road.

    Meh, from my (male) perspective, she looks like a perfectly ordinary, perfectly average forty year old woman. Not fug ugly, not like five miles of bad road, but not “gorgeous” in any way either. The overwhelming majority of women age eighteen to thirty are, again, to me, much, much more attractive than this woman. What her ovaries look like, I couldn’t say! But her face, in the picture, looks like it has quite a bit of make up on it, probably to cover wrinkles. She looks in reasonably good shape, but her body is not “bitchin” in any way (which is what I think of when someone says “gorgeous”), and her neck shows her age quite clearly. We can’t actually see much of her arms or the rest of her body. For all we know, her breasts are saggy. And she’s wearing black, which slenderizes.

    Again, this is not to say she is ugly, she just ain’t no gorgeous woman either.

  • ruddyturnstone

    Bollick also competely messes up the eighty/twenty thing, and cites you for a source.

  • Esau

    Susan at 522, via Mr. Y at 517: “I think you’re right. Allan let her lead – that is what was “missing.” …. she would not have tolerated his lack of dominance.”

    But this is exactly the point.  The picture emerges here of KB as someone who literally wants an impossible, self-contradiction.  As a feminist she insists that her career success be given equal or greater weight in a relationship; but she simultaneously can’t be sufficiently attracted to a man who agrees to that arrangement.  The fatal flaw is purely a defect within herself and has nothing to do with the men around her in the world; and yet she refuses to recognize her own fatal, internal contradictions and instead blames men for being somehow insufficient.

    It’s maddening, really, and only drives the readers farther from understanding the world.  As you know, I think this massive introspection fail is absolutely typical for young American women, particularly attractive ones.  But it’s even less forgivable for an intelligent 39-year-old to suffer the same, self-serving blindness.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Esau

      As a feminist she insists that her career success be given equal or greater weight in a relationship; but she simultaneously can’t be sufficiently attracted to a man who agrees to that arrangement. The fatal flaw is purely a defect within herself and has nothing to do with the men around her in the world

      I don’t disagree with you, but I see her as more of a tragic tale. She was raised by an ardent feminist who dressed her in political slogans by age 9. A sort of twisted inverse version of the 9 year-olds we see today in sexually provocative clothing. As she aged, she found her desire for romance and relationships with men was anathema to her mother. She barely mentions her father as having had any role in her life. She clearly states that she has never dated stereotypical alpha males, and I agree that Allan, and probably all the other exes, were brainy, attractive guys in her literary world.

      Much as the men here claim they were lied to and betatized by parents and others, Kate might claim she was led astray in her own childhood.

      I read the article a bit differently – I believe that Kate does recognize her fatal, internal contradictions, and knows that it’s too little too late. She’s speaking out to say that feminism derailed her, and she’s unlikely to marry. She’s trying to come to terms with that.

  • Anacaona

    I agree, Susan. That’s also what I found so attractive about my husband. He was extremely picky, but he picked me. :P

    Add me to the picked by picky man. 108 spirits misunderstood many of my stories is true that my husband wasn’t popular but he was not interested in the majority of the women either, and he will drop a crush like a hot potatoe if she did something stupid, so totally attractive to me that he found me smart, crazy but smart.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Steven wrote:

    She’s gorgeous and intelligent. I really don’t understand why she can’t find someone.

    Kate Bolick wrote:

    Ten years later, I occasionally ask myself the same question. Today I am 39, with too many ex-boyfriends to count and, I am told, two grim-seeming options to face down: either stay single or settle for a “good enough” mate.

    Good question Steve.

    Mister Y wrote:

    Given her strident feminist mother, it is all but certain that she requires a lot of Alpha and very little Beta to be attracted to a man.

    Perhaps it is on here?


    (Got morning coffee.)

  • Jonny

    Let’s not keep pondering the question. She can never marry because she would settling and she can’t have that. Plus, she doesn’t know if she wants kids, but kids will always be in the picture, so she can’t take the risk despite the fact that she may never get pregnant at her age. Hope remains eternal. She can always get a husband and children so that’s why she never does.

    No one is good enough for her. In a patriarch, her father will say no man is good enough for her. In a matriarch, her mother will say no man is good enough for her. In a modern woman, she convinces herself that no man is good enough for her.

  • Aaron1988

    I personally think a relationship should be equal and that both parteners should have a say. So I don’t understand why guys are supposed to be dominant, surely if they are dominant eventually they will stop taking your wants, needs, thoughts and feelings into consideration and think only of themselves?

    To me if you are in a relationship (hopefully it will lead to marriage) you would love and care about your wife/girlfriend/fiancé enough to respect her and her decisions as well as her thoughts and opinions on matters that effect both of you, after all if they effect both of you, you should both get to voice your own opinions on the matter shouldn’t you? Why does doing things this make you seem like a bad boyfriend/fiancé/husband, I have never really understood this.

    -Aaron

  • Mister Y

     

    Susan, I have been reading Hercule Poirot in my spare time which stimulates the little grey cells, and also studying applied psychology as well. The problem this woman has is she is not really introspective; she does not know what her attractors are and she doesn’t realize at the gut level how untypical she is. The pool of men she is willing to consider is simply tiny, perhaps less than 200 or so men on the entire East Coast would even merit her glance – and many of them are not on the market for one reason or another.

    And furthermore…

    Esau is correct, what she wants is <i>fried ice</i>. Thus she will continue to be disappointed.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mister Y
      Yes, this is the crux of the issue. Not knowing her own attractors at 39 is a serious problem. I don’t think she is alone by any means, this is why we have an increasing number of women singing this tune in their 30s.

  • geyghost

    They want to get across the point that even beautiful, interesting, smart women are having difficulty finding life partners.

    They have already found them and had them. They just are not sexually arroused by them.  The men in her field that have acheived anything are in a feminized field. Those guys due to the fact they have jobs will never bring on the gina tingles. The guys she is dating are feminized and so is she . Feminized PC violate the laws of attraction basic savage mating biology. She also has the female status whore thing in the way. She is holding on to a lie (the feminist ideal) and to her letting go of the lie is settling. She was set up to fail from day one and will fail. She will never find a man as the woman she is.

    Also she had a man that met the feminized pc standard but he violated her bio nature. He quit a job and moved with her to her new job. That was on her PC chart a wonderful good man.The real chart the bio female nature the doesn’t agree with feminist PC said “something is Missing”  the gina Tingle and the feminist PC perfect man are not the same man. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_uRIMUBnvw  Check these guys out as a reminder and then reach down and check your snatch for wetness.

     Susan take the woman to see what mating  biology for her is http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/wrapped-around-his-finger/  She and all of her colleagues spend the majorty of their time studying the mens sites, in paticular the PUA and sites discussing game.  Get her to talk dirty with you and describe some real sexually arousing things about what she needs. Not the touch her here rub her real fast there crap. The situational stuff  things that are on the surface not sexual but are arousing emotionally and physically. That is how you “fix” those type of woman.  

     This paticular woman has aged out. So for her it is just finding answers.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (continuing)

    Men, which want marry,  are likely to want children. At about 40 it is likely that she can get most one child. Also, because she have not children, fertility is not proven.

    Kate Bolick wrote:

    But somewhere along the way, I decided to not let my biology dictate my romantic life. If I find someone I really like being with, and if he and I decide we want a child together, and it’s too late for me to conceive naturally, I’ll consider whatever technological aid is currently available, or adopt (and if he’s not open to adoption, he’s not the kind of man I want to be with).

    On other hand

    Mister Y wrote:

    Therefore, it is likely that if she had married Alan at 29, by now she’d be single again, because at some point he would have fallen short of the degree of Alpha that she demands. Perhaps due to job stress, certainly in the wake of childbirth, it is inevitable that he would have become unattractive to her at some point.

    Also at about 40 single mom is not probably something what men marry although fertility is proven. On that case marrying means taking care of some other man’s children.

    However is there is also possible start with domestic partnership, then got child. And then marry after child is born. After all that (on my point of view) is quite common.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Jonny wrote:

    No one is good enough for her. In a patriarch, her father will say no man is good enough for her. In a matriarch, her mother will say no man is good enough for her. In a modern woman, she convinces herself that no man is good enough for her.

    Well said.

    (However, this is no advice.)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @Jonny, also noted on the article comments.

    Gotchaye wrote:

    My biggest problem with the article was the feeling I got that the author believes that most men who aren’t “players” are “unmarriable”.

    This summarizes it.

  • Blues

    Much as the men here claim they were lied to and betatized by parents and others, Kate might claim she was led astray in her own childhood.

    I read the article a bit differently – I believe that Kate does recognize her fatal, internal contradictions, and knows that it’s too little too late. She’s speaking out to say that feminism derailed her, and she’s unlikely to marry. She’s trying to come to terms with that.

    This may be true, but unlike men that get red pill knowledge and use game to improve themselves she does little to improve her own chances of marriage instead choosing to rationalize or see the “bright side” or “alternative options” of spinsterhood.

    Are her chances slim? yes, are they exponentially slimmer by rationalizing her behavior instead of breaking from her programming? most definitively.

  • Petruchio

    Susan,

    “She’s speaking out to say that feminism derailed her, and she’s unlikely to marry.”

    Well, it derailed many of us men too, including some alphas, so there is hope*. The key element is that introspection. I was speaking with an “It’s Just Lunch” representative last year as she attempted to sell me on spending $1900 to get some lunch dates with her stable of fabulous professional women around Kate’s age. I told her about the introspection I had done and (serious) adjustments I had made, and asked if any of her candidates had done likewise, given their late singlehood.

    She looked at me like I was speaking Chinese. No sale.

    * – young women today making the same mistakes can’t count on this, because young men are not nearly as amenable to feminism as those Kate’s age were.

  • Dogsquat

    Susan said:

    Much as the men here claim they were lied to and betatized by parents and others, Kate might claim she was led astray in her own childhood.

    She got some bad intel for sure – at least as bad as any guy here.  I think her attractiveness blinded her WRT what was actually going on in her life.  There were tons of guys after her, she just “hadn’t found the right one yet”.

    I hope some of you hardcore MRA folks can look at that and find a little empathy for her.  The same thing happened to her that happens to all of us guys – the consequences are different, but just as bad in their own way.

    However:

    “I read the article a bit differently – I believe that Kate does recognize her fatal, internal contradictions, and knows that it’s too little too late. She’s speaking out to say that feminism derailed her, and she’s unlikely to marry. She’s trying to come to terms with that.”

    I dunno, Boss Lady – I think that cart is still a tad bit in front of that thar horsey.

    I think she knows there’s something wrong, but hasn’t grokked the problem in it’s fullness.  She may not.  Think about how devastating that realization will be if it hits – she may never accept the whole truth, out of simple self-preservation.

    I fully admit that my opinion is a guess and you know her better, but I’d expect to see some different verbiage in the article if she really internalized her plight.

    Damn, I feel bad for her, actually.  I’m a random blue collar schlub with a limp and PTSD – but I bet I’m roughly 800% happier than she is at any given moment.

  • Dogsquat

    Mr Y said:

    Susan, I have been reading Hercule Poirot in my spare time which stimulates the little grey cells,

    _______________

    If you read too much of that stuff, you’re going to grow a permanent upturned little Belgian mustache.

    I just want you to be aware of the risks, okay?

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Wayfinder wrote:

    I have noticed quite a few young men who I’d never trust with a job, but they seem never seem to have a shortage of girls fawning over them.

    Are you referring to same phenomenon than this article:

    Why bad boy Bond will always get the girl (@Kari Hurtta)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @Kari Hurtta, although chicadujour commented on the article comments that there is a whole group out there of divorced dads that have kids already.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @dragnet,well said.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (Poor Kari ™)

    Susan Walsh wrote:

    One of the women in a serious relationship is rethinking her decision to go to med school because of what that career choice is likely to mean during her 20s. I think she’ll wind up becoming an NP instead.

    NP = nurse practitioner ?

    Or was it

    NP = nondeterministic polynomial time ?

    NP Complete task?

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (Poor Kari ™)

    Susan Walsh wrote:

    […] but in the talk I saw her give at SWSX she forgot her daughter’s age, […]

    SWSX = South by Southwest ?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari
      Yes, you got both right. NP = nurse practitioner, SWSX is South by Southwest a popular annual music and lately also technology festival.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Susan Walsh wrote:

    A third of college educated women are not going to marry men with degrees.

    They either will be spinsters or abandon hypergamy.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      They either will be spinsters or abandon hypergamy.

      Precisely. Some will do the latter, but many others will foolishly persist in their hypergamous impulses during their peak years. We’re going to hear a lot more waaah-waaah-waaah in the coming years.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (Poor Kari ™)

    Susan Walsh wrote:

    […] those women in PA were close […]

    PA = Pennsylvania, a state of the United States of America ?

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Aaron,

    I personally think a relationship should be equal and that both parteners should have a say. So I don’t understand why guys are supposed to be dominant

    Reads like:

    I personally think a sexual relationship should be equal and both partners should have a say. So I dont understand why the cock is supposed to be hard and piercy and why the vagina is supposed to be wet and soft.

    surely if they are dominant eventually they will stop taking your wants, needs, thoughts and feelings into consideration and think only of themselves?

    Dominance and selfishness are not the same thing. There are plenty of non-dominant, but self-centered selfish people in the world. Find a guy who is dominant, self centered, and generous. Now see how women respond to him.

    Dominance is the required base trait, the primary trigger of attraction. Why? for the same reason the cock has to be hard.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Blues

    They either will be spinsters or abandon hypergamy.

    Abandoning hypergamy for women it’s like telling a guy to chop his dick off, not gonna happen, what could happen is for hypergamy to be curbed just like it was on marriage 1.0 days, but i find it unlikely.

    PA = Parents Association (i think)

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Blues

      Abandoning hypergamy for women it’s like telling a guy to chop his dick off, not gonna happen, what could happen is for hypergamy to be curbed just like it was on marriage 1.0 days, but i find it unlikely.

      Very unlikely. Hypergamy will only be curbed when female sexuality is restrained, by whatever means. There will be a few women who select for character traits – those who read this blog, for starters. Several women on here are living proof that women do select beta guys. But many will founder on the shoals of the SMP.

  • Petruchio

    Dogsquat,

    “she may never accept the whole truth, out of simple self-preservation”

    More likely because she (unlike the majority of her peers in the same situation) does still have many quite appealing options, and will continue to have them until someday she’s in that nursing home with no children to come see her. At that point she would have the battle with self-preservation.

    Until then it will likely require a powerful man to challenge her assumptions; the necessity of motherhood, given the alternatives, being insufficient to spur her to re-invention.

     

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “One of the women in a serious relationship is rethinking her decision to go to med school because of what that career choice is likely to mean during her 20s. I think she’ll wind up becoming an NP instead.”

    I was thinking about this, and someone who wants to work in medicine is in trouble if they are in the “donut.” Being a specialist is hard and long, but very challenging and rewarding (intrinsically and $wise). Being an NP/PA means you get to do day-to-day medicine but don’t have to screw around with running the actual business of the practice and having the responsibility for everything in the office. But being a regular practitioner is intense time pressure, lots of problems without a lot of time to solve them, huge management challenges, ultimately to scrip out antibiotics, order blood draws and hope you made the right choice sending the guy with the rash home with some lotion instead of sending him to a dermatologist to get checked out for serious illness.

    So if you don’t think you have what it takes to make it in a speciality, the PA route might be the best bet.

    (BTW I have heard medical residency programs are a major cock carousel).

    There’s a similar phenomenon in law. If you neighborhood family attorney or a mid-level criminal defender or something, it’s a tough road to hoe, lots of pressure and time and not a huge amount of reward unless you really enjoy the job itself. If you want to do bigtime serious law like Johnnie Cochran or the ACLU, be ready to put your whole life into it.

    “A third of college educated women are not going to marry men with degrees.”

    More than a third, as some of the educated men will marry non-college degreed women, and some will not marry at all.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      More than a third, as some of the educated men will marry non-college degreed women, and some will not marry at all.

      Ah, good call, you’re right.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Badger
      I’ve been thinking more about your comment on female career choices. Obviously, feminists will hate me for this (what else is new?) but I encourage women to plan early, say at age 21, whether they want to marry and have children and to choose careers accordingly. My daughter worked for Teach for America in college as a student recruiter, and several women who were accepted into the program wound up turning it down. They realized that delaying med school or law school for two years right out of the gate was going to be problematic given their life goals.

      Business is not very open to part-time work. I had to be an independent contractor in order to work part-time. Law and medicine are better about that, but med school especially does require enormous time up front. I think that in the next generation of women we’ll see people specifically choosing careers that accomodate marriage and family. The Wolfert Stevenson study at Wharton makes it pretty clear that my generation was totally stressed out and fairly miserable.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (Poor Kari ™) Badger wrote:

     Being an NP/PA means you get to do day-to-day medicine […]

    PA = Physician’s Assistant ?

    (Another PA this time, NP was already mentioned.)

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    “Also at about 40 single mom is not probably something what men marry ”

    It happens all the time.

  • Mister Y

     

    DogsquatIf you read too much of that stuff, you’re going to grow a permanent upturned little Belgian mustache.

    Hmm. And my standards for food & wine must become higher as well?

    I just want you to be aware of the risks, okay?

    Now I am wondering who still makes the wax for moustaches…

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    pjay wrote:

    I think you touched somebody deeply…her name is Amanda.

    “Marriage Market” Theories Leave Love Out of the Equation

    Word love means attraction. Then question is what are attraction factors…

    When you talk about factors, then we can go to theories. Saying word love may work just that these attraction factors are subconscious.

  • Dogsquat

    Badger said:

    “So if you don’t think you have what it takes to make it in a speciality, the PA route might be the best bet.”

    ____________________________

    Lots of people are coming to the same conclusion.  Where I live, the PA school is actually harder to get into than the med school.  The average stats (Science GPA and MCAT score) of the PA students are higher, too.

    If you (generic reader) are thinking about this route, make sure you shadow several PAs in several disciplines. It’s a really, really, good career but it does have some drawbacks.

    “(BTW I have heard medical residency programs are a major cock carousel)”.

    Big hospitals in general are that way.  I’ve worked in a couple, and I will never walk into a call room without knocking again.

    The good thing about hospitals is how fast rumors/gossip travels.  You can’t get away with anything, and I think that tends to keep the inhouse booty-time to reasonable levels.

  • SayWhaat

    Big hospitals in general are that way.  I’ve worked in a couple, and I will never walk into a call room without knocking again.

    The good thing about hospitals is how fast rumors/gossip travels.  You can’t get away with anything, and I think that tends to keep the inhouse booty-time to reasonable levels.

    I was actually meaning to ask you about this. My friend’s step-father works with big hospitals and remarked that everyone he knew was cheating on their spouses. I guess that sort of environment is common. Figures, medicine is an alpha profession.

  • Abbot

    More toe to toe with Marcotte and her feminist fantasy world brigade.

    http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/culturefashion/kinky-stuff/analyzing-park-slope-and-skirtgate/

    After writing this piece and tiring of my own opinions on the matter, I was curious to see what others had to say about the Park Slope contretemps, so I reached out to a few people who I knew would view the incident through different lenses. The first of which was Susan Walsh, author of the popular blog Hooking Up Smart(HUS), a strategic take on dating, sex, and relationships. Walsh was a guest on my radio show back in the day. She was recently profiled in this tremendous piece about the lives and realities of today’s single woman. HUS has a large following and is worth a weekly check-in.

    Next, I contacted the aforementioned Jaclyn Friedman, Feministing.com’s Jessica Valenti, and author and speaker Amanda Marcotte, all avowed feminists and leaders of the movement.

  • GT66

    SW wrote “I read the article a bit differently – I believe that Kate does recognize her fatal, internal contradictions, and knows that it’s too little too late. She’s speaking out to say that feminism derailed her, and she’s unlikely to marry. She’s trying to come to terms with that.”

    Really? Because the byline of the cover picture at the top indicates precisely otherwise.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @GT66

      SW wrote “I read the article a bit differently – I believe that Kate does recognize her fatal, internal contradictions, and knows that it’s too little too late. She’s speaking out to say that feminism derailed her, and she’s unlikely to marry. She’s trying to come to terms with that.”

      Really? Because the byline of the cover picture at the top indicates precisely otherwise.

      Yes, it does. There’s a major disconnect between the way the story was pitched and the story Kate wrote, and the way she talked about her own life when we met.

  • Rum

    Call room sex? What did you think? But it is very bad form to talk about it. Rumors tend to get started from nothing as it is. Give them some truth and things get out of hand in a hurry.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “I’ve been thinking more about your comment on female career choices. Obviously, feminists will hate me for this (what else is new?) but I encourage women to plan early, say at age 21, whether they want to marry and have children and to choose careers accordingly.”

    I sense that Bolick and her cohortmates have this reluctance, pushed by feminism, to admit that marriage and children are serious life goals of theirs. It’s like it’s shameful to want that. Thus they seemed to have this idea that they’d just live their lives, and if Mr Right appeared that’d be great.  Not beginning with the end in mind is a really bad idea when making long-term life plans, and especially in the next generation where marriage is going to be harder to come by, women are going to need to think strategically as to how to meet, date and land husbands from a very tender (adult) age.

    “My daughter worked for Teach for America in college as a student recruiter, and several women who were accepted into the program wound up turning it down. They realized that delaying med school or law school for two years right out of the gate was going to be problematic given their life goals”

    All top white-collar professions are competitive inhibitors to family life and to relationships in general. I saw women spending years 22-27 getting PhDs, then two years postdocing, then the six-year tenure clock starts when they become assistant professors, then they are 35 before they can stop going ovaries-to-the-wall and relax their working schedules. Where is there time for courting, marriage and children in there? I’m usually not into listening to complaints about “mommy-tracking,” but that the tenure years coincide with the prime childbearing years is a systemically unfair thing for women in academia. (I am hoping this issue is what blows up the tenure system. Any port in a storm.)

    That being said, I’m in line with Sheryl Sandberg’s advice – go 100% full bore at _something_, and if you don’t like it,you can switch, or downshift. Don’t, as she put it, “reserve options that you don’t have yet.” It’s MUCH easier to downshift when family becomes primary, than to jump back on the career track at 26 when your plans to get married fall through or you decide you don’t want kids.

    Feminists have long complained that men can ‘have it all” and women can’t, but a high-powered career man “having it all” doesn’t get home for dinner a lot, and doesn’t make his kids’ baseball games. That’s not something to envy.

    “Business is not very open to part-time work. I had to be an independent contractor in order to work part-time. Law and medicine are better about that, but med school especially does require enormous time up front. I think that in the next generation of women we’ll see people specifically choosing careers that accomodate marriage and family. The Wolfert Stevenson study at Wharton makes it pretty clear that my generation was totally stressed out and fairly miserable.”

    There are a whole bunch of problems with planning, at the outset, on a part-time career:

    1. Any work you can do part-time or can push until later is not going to be the most interesting, fulfilling work you want to do. In fact, in my experience in life and work, working on projects that are really fulfilling and prideful require even more than 40 hours a week. With the time parents are expected to spend on and with their kids these days, it’s very difficult to get on choice projects and climb the ladder.

    2. If you’re planning on part-timing when the kids are little, daycare is expensive, and the money brought in from part-time work is probably not going to cover it. Hell I’ve heard that full-time white collar hobs barely break even when daycare prices are considered.

    3. Going part-time in a white-collar field requires a massive up-front investment of full-time success to gain enough credibility. Say you’re a doctor or attorney, and you want to be a part-time consultant in your specialty. That means you’re not blowing through cases in your field every week like the full-timers. So anybody hiring you is going to want to see that you have a full CV of expertise in the field – if you’re not doing it full time now, you better have done so in the past. It’s not like being a part-time delivery man, where you just drop off fewer packages each week. The knowledge economy requires you to keep your knowledge sharp.

    My take as an unmarried guy with no children (that I know of), I think managing career and kids for either gender requires two things:

    1. An effort to avoid attachment parenting (don’t get all guilty because you’re not spending every waking moment with your kids, they are very resilient)
    2. An effort to avoid bringing work home mentally (leave your competitiveness and rage and stress at the door)

    Easier said than done.

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Jennifer wrote:

    “[…] while she may look alright for a 39 years old, she is, well, 39 years old”

    So that means she automatically has no beauty?

    Beauty on her age class.
    Petruchio wrote:

    Doesn’t mean I’d want to marry her.

    That is however what there is talking about when question is that is she looking all right.

     

    Rum wrote:

    ASK the men here to rate the bangability […]

    That is another way to say same thing, but someones wast more PC version.

     


    Waiting for morning coffee.

    Browser’s speller seems not accept someones -word.


    Waiting for flames.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @Kari Hurtta, typo

    […] someones wast more PC version.

    ⇒ someones want more PC version.

    wast: (archaic) Second-person singular simple past tense indicative of be.


    Got a morning coffee.

    This editor plugin seems not accept <Q>-tag.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    108spirits wrote:

    No, he will win by dating a much younger unspoiled and baggage-free version of her.

    Younger version of her does not want commit.

    Aaron1988 write:

    […] I want to get married and have children and both my ex’s seemed to be terrified of commitment.

  • Dogsquat

    Sassy said:

    “I was actually meaning to ask you about this. My friend’s step-father works with big hospitals and remarked that everyone he knew was cheating on their spouses. I guess that sort of environment is common. Figures, medicine is an alpha profession.”

    It’s an insular profession, and I think that’s a big part of it.  We work long, weird hours.  I actually took my girlfriend out for a beer at 9AM yesterday.  I’d been off enough time for a nap, and she was getting home after a 10 hour shift.  It’s hard to have a normal life with those hours, and I can see how it would put stress on things.

    Also, it’s hard to excitedly brag to your spouse about picking up Torsades before the patient went in to V tach, and dumping enough mag and antiarrythmics into bilateral AC big bores fast enough you didn’t even reach for the defibrillator pads.

    It would take a long time to explain that to someone without a bio/chem/anatomy background – long enough to feel like a lecture and kill any tingle whatsoever.

    As far as cheating goes –

    Yeah, it happens.  I think more goes on up on the floors than down in The Pit where I work.  It’s almost never slow enough in the ED, but there are slow, quiet times on the med/surg floors every once in awhile.

    As far as medicine being an alpha profession goes – yes, but not in the way people think.  Most docs are nerds.  They’re the people who studied rather than partied.  All of a sudden at age 25 (or whenever) they’re the boss and everybody has to ask them to do anything and addresses them by their title.

    That twists some of them up.  They aren’t alphas the way a Marine Infantry Captain is, or even a construction foreman.  It’s more brittle, somehow, and doesn’t translate to other environments.  I’ve taken a really awesome doc under my wing a little bit- the guy is a genius, good looking, and funny as hell, but he’s in his early thirties and only kissed one girl.  No shit.  All he’s ever done is medicine, and he sucks at everything else.  His unit is run perfectly, he makes well into the 6 figures, and does amazing things – but he is not an alpha without his white coat.

    Imma get that guy some Swagger eventually, so he can finally land a girl that deserves him.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (Poor Kari ™) David X. wrote:

    […] how HS students are not buying snacks from the new and healthier vending machines.

    HS = High School ? (not Health System ?)

  • Dogsquat

    @Badger and Susan:

    “Mommy Track” PAs and Docs are contributing significantly to the medical provider shortage we have/are going to have.  There’s been a seismic shift in the last 10 years as far as work hours and lifestyle for providers goes, and it’s going to get more severe.

    I don’t blame the Docs/PAs/NPs at all, by the way.  It’s the people who set up residency and training programs who haven’t been paying attention.  Back in the day, you could train a doc and he’d see patients for 60-80 hours per week for 40 years.  They Powers That Be are still thinking that way.  Now, though, more than half of the people in med school are female.  A significant portion of them are going to work 60-80 hours a week until they have kids, then roll it back to 30 hours a week while the kids are in school, then maybe 40-50/week until retirement.
    I know multiple female PA-Cs  that work 2 days per week so that they’re home the rest of the time with their kids.  The PA track is very female friendly, especially in Emergency Medicine and Family Medicine.

    This is something that makes me laugh.  See, nobody is allowed to talk about this hours-worked gap, because the feminists will scream.  I would give almost any endocrine organ to be working a shift in 20 years when, say, one of those Feministing writers needs some pain meds.

    “I’m sorry, Ma’am, but the doctor is busy.  She hasn’t had time to give me an order yet.”

    “You people should staff this facility better!  I’m in pain!”

    “We have fifteen docs on staff, Ma’am, and that’s more than enough.  Unfortunately, two are out on maternity leave, Dr. Smith is on vacation, Dr. Willis cut her hours to be with her kids, and Dr. Jones had to go to her son’s play.  Now, is there anything else I can do?”

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Workafrolic wrote:

    Thank you. :) Can you clarify some shorthand that I’m not familiar with?

    SMP – is that sexual marketplace?

    Can’t think of the others, but either can you tell me the other key abbrs.

    So it is not just Poor Kari ™ which asks about these all abbreviations. ☺

    SMP can be sexual marketplace or

    SMP = (…)

    or

    SMP = Statutory maternity pay


    Susan Walsh wrote:

    @Kari Hurtta
    Sorry about all the acronyms.
    SMP: sexual marketplace
    SMV: sexual market value
    SES: socioeconomic status

     

  • Desiderius

    Dogsquat,

    “I’ve taken a really awesome doc under my wing a little bit- the guy is a genius, good looking, and funny as hell, but he’s in his early thirties and only kissed one girl.  No shit.  All he’s ever done is medicine, and he sucks at everything else.  His unit is run perfectly, he makes well into the 6 figures, and does amazing things – but he is not an alpha without his white coat.

    Imma get that guy some Swagger eventually, so he can finally land a girl that deserves him.”

    He’s an alpha already. He has options. He’s lucky to have you there to open his eyes to them and help him realize them. Susan has me reflecting on my past and I’ve realized that my SMV rose at least two points when I was with my alpha uncles. That’s how all my best relationships started.

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Höllenhund write:

    China, India and the oil kingdoms of the Persian Gulf are FULL of high-earning, traditional-minded young men looking for wives.

    Susan Walsh wrote:

    Yeah, right. I don’t think we’ll see American mail-order brides in our lifetimes.

    How about Chinese or Indian mail-order fiancés ?

    Except that they are no longer high-earning if they come to USA.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Dragnet wrote:

    Sigma? Delta? Gamma?

    Is it this?
    The socio-sexual hierarchy

    • Alpha: The alpha is the tall, good-looking guy who is the center of both male and female attention.

    • Beta: Betas are the good-looking guys who aren’t as uniformly attractive or socially dominant as the Alpha, but are nevertheless confident, attractive to women, and do well with them.

    • Delta: The normal guy. Deltas are the great majority of men. They can’t attract the most attractive women, so they usually aim for the second-tier women with very limited success, and stubbornly resist paying attention to all of the third-tier women who are comfortably in their league.

    • Gamma: The introspective, the unusual, the unattractive, and all too often the bitter. Gammas are often intelligent, usually unsuccessful with women, and not uncommonly all but invisible to them, the gamma alternates between placing women on pedestals and hating the entire sex.

    • Omega: The truly unfortunate. Omegas are the social losers who were never in the game. Sometimes creepy, sometimes damaged, often clueless, and always undesirable.

    • Sigma: The outsider who doesn’t play the social game and manage to win at it anyhow. The sigma is hated by alphas because sigmas are the only men who don’t accept or at least acknowledge, however grudgingly, their social dominance.

    • Lambda: Those men who have quite literally no interest in conventional male-female sexual relations

    That was random hit what from from search.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari
      Yes, that is Vox Day’s classification of male types. I like it – he defines beta much the way I do.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @Kari Hurtta, Oops

    That was random hit what from from search.

    That was a random hit what I found from search.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @Blues, OK. That

    Explaining sigma. Again.

    is another version than what I found

    The socio-sexual hierarchy

    but it looks like same list.

     

  • Blues

    He’s an alpha already. He has options. He’s lucky to have you there to open his eyes to them and help him realize them. Susan has me reflecting on my past and I’ve realized that my SMV rose at least two points when I was with my alpha uncles. That’s how all my best relationships started.

     

    He’s a social alpha, not an SMP alpha, all his options are worthless if his hard work of 30+ years can be taken from him by a no fault divorce because his wife got bored.

    Teach him Dogsquat, give him the tools or simply send him to the manosphere, don’t let him lose all he accomplished with years of effort by lack of knowledge.

  • Blues

    Kari : Yeah, don’t worry it’s the same because the author it’s the same but on different blogs.

  • jess

    A- “Some had had many partners, and they all joked easily about sexual positions and penis size (“I was like, ‘That’s a pinkie, not a penis!’”) ”

    B-Of these attractive and vivacious females, only two had ever had a “real” boyfriend—as in, a mutually exclusive and satisfying relationship rather than a series of hookups

    C-when I asked if they wanted to get married when they grew up, and if so, at what age, to a one they answered “yes” and “27 or 28.”

    D-“Take a look at me,” I said. “I’ve never been married, and I have no idea if I ever will be. There’s a good chance that this will be your reality, too. Does that freak you out?”

    ////////////////

    Above are quotes from the interview. I have some questions for Susan:

    A- This is the type of conversation I have heard 100’s of times. Would you now accept this is the general concensus of most women on the issue?

    B- so we have a mixture of experiences here- all of which appear perfectly valid, normal and healthy

    C- i think latish 20’s is a good time to either get married or commit to an LTR. but early 30’s is good too. more variable if you know for sure you don’t want kids.

    D- Now this really interests me. Is Kate unmarried because of choice? or has she been rejected due to her sluttery? or not being slutty enough? or has she aimed too high?

    and does she know lots of women, her age, who cannot get guys to commit to them?

  • Wayfinder

    @jess

    B-Of these attractive and vivacious females, only two had ever had a “real” boyfriend—as in, a mutually exclusive and satisfying relationship rather than a series of hookups

    C-when I asked if they wanted to get married when they grew up, and if so, at what age, to a one they answered “yes” and “27 or 28.”

    B- so we have a mixture of experiences here- all of which appear perfectly valid, normal and healthy

    C- i think latish 20′s is a good time to either get married or commit to an LTR. but early 30′s is good too. more variable if you know for sure you don’t want kids.

    B: I don’t think they sound very healthy, or at the very least it certainly doesn’t sound like what these girls want. Do you really think that they want to spend their 20s hooking up with guys who never call again? They’re complaining that they can’t get what they want from hookups and you insult them by trying to call their experiences healthy, like getting pumped and dumped is some kind of spa treatment?

    C: By which time the men have started to lose interest. If you want to be married by your late 20s, you’d better start looking in your early 20s. The women who see that the average age at first marriage is 28 and decide to start looking then forget that those relationships took time to develop. You can’t just pick a husband up off of a shelf.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    ” I know multiple female PA-Cs  that work 2 days per week so that they’re home the rest of the time with their kids.  The PA track is very female friendly, especially in Emergency Medicine and Family Medicine.”

    Feminists go crazy about the gender “wage gap” among specialists, but it’s known that women disproportionately apply for specialties with more flexibility and sounder hours like dermatology and pediatrics.

     

  • jess

    Wayfinder

    B- i don’t think the article went into detail about whether girls did or didn’t hate every single casual experience. Sure they may want something different now but I didn’t get the impression they were harmed or regretted ALL their sexual experiences. I certainly wasn’t insulting them- they sound like great girls to me.

    And we will have to disagree, my own personal experience aside, I had known many women recount highly enjoyable and fulfilling flings. But I would accept that most women prefer great sex in an LTR. Me too.

    C- Well I did say early 30’s too didn’t I?

    Anyway- meet at 27, marry at 29? doesn’t seem so odd?

    I would always advise against at marriage before 21- its just too darned young…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jess

      B- i don’t think the article went into detail about whether girls did or didn’t hate every single casual experience. Sure they may want something different now but I didn’t get the impression they were harmed or regretted ALL their sexual experiences. I certainly wasn’t insulting them- they sound like great girls to me.

      I provided the specific sexual histories of the girls near the start of the comment thread. I consider two promiscuous, and they are the two unhappiest women. There’s no question that the most promiscuous one, with 25 partners, is deeply troubled and vulnerable. She has a traumatic family history and seeks solace in every fling. She has been pumped and dumped every single time. She refers to this as guys “pushing the all set button” on her. The one with 13 partners was in a relationship for a long time, but when that ended she sorta went crazy with the alpha guys. She’s taken a vow of celibacy, I don’t know how long that will last. The other three have had few partners. One of those was the girl who made the pinkie comment, an unfortunate joke since she was talking about her current serious bf, a man she may marry.

      I’ve known 2 of these girls all their lives, 2 since 7th grade, and the pinkie joker for three years. All of them are fully on board with the HUS philosophy, though 2 have poor impulse control, apparently.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @Renee, I have answered to Tom that

    On Who’s Really Having Sex in College? it was almost half (42.8 %) of men which did not have intercouse. These men all have all right to request that partner of them have not promiscous past (on college for example).

    Let these men which have fucked these promiscuous women marry them.

    Men whch have not itself promiscuous have all right to reject them (promiscuous women) on that basis.

    YMMV

  • jess

    kari

    that would only be correct if the 42% (wow that high?) deliberately chose to remain celibate.

    i.e. they could impose mutually standardised ethical or religious principles to their prospective partners.

    mind you, it’s a moot point- I still maintain that for the vast majority of guys, number count is only one of many factors in male selection and much lower down than looks and humour for example.

  • Blues

    mind you, it’s a moot point- I still maintain that for the vast majority of guys, number count is only one of many factors in male selection and much lower down than looks and humour for example.

    Just because that majority is made of blue pill men, for red pill men it’s a completely different story.

    that would only be correct if the 42% (wow that high?) deliberately chose to remain celibate.

    So those that were forced to go sexless don’t have any right to filter for promiscuity?

  • Abbot

    You can’t just pick a husband up off of a shelf.

    Because such men feel much safer there given who is doing the picking

    number count is only one of many factors in male selection

    It most certainly is. Now why is that a factor when it was not for grandpa? Suddenly, “numbers matter” for some reason. And why is it the ONLY factor that reeaaaly gets feminist boxers all in a twist? That is a valid question and yet no answer has ever been provided.

     

  • Abbot

    if they do decide to filter on those grounds, and they were not celibate by choice then they have no claim to a moral or ethical superiority.

    No such claim is being made. That filter exists only because men have options. No options, no filter. Men have no need to make excuses for dong this no matter what they did by choice. Its a personal matter that has no negative impact on women so its confusing as to why feminist hate The Filter

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “C: By which time the men have started to lose interest. If you want to be married by your late 20s, you’d better start looking in your early 20s. The women who see that the average age at first marriage is 28 and decide to start looking then forget that those relationships took time to develop. You can’t just pick a husband up off of a shelf.”

    Today’s young women are going to have to come to grips with an old truth: life is what happens when you’re busy making other plans. You can’t live your life schedule in an “a la carte” manner, saying “OK now I’m READY to get married…OK now i’m READY to have a child” and expect to snap your fingers and make it happen. If you wait until you’re “ready” you’ll get suboptimal results, because the time to strike the iron will have passed. My track coach used to say “some of you don’t want to race because of butterflies; if you don’t have butterflies, you’re not ready to race.”

    The upshot of this is that you may meet your perfect partner a year or two earlier than you planned on, and you’re going to have to decide to accelerate your life plan if you want to have that hot marriage you’ve dreamed of. I am guessing that’s part of why Bolick dumped Allan, it felt “too early” to settle down. As I will put in my response post to Bolick, women (like her, she admits it) think that eligible men who want to marry them will always be there, but in fact a typical woman probably only dates two or three men who might end up marrying them. If you drop one because you’re “not ready” or whatever, then you’ve just burned up to 50% of your chance to get hitched.

    Re: men losing interest, I commented earlier that men draw tremendous benefit from a good marriage in their 20’s as they are trying to establish their careers and themselves as true adults, and if educated women are set on marrying at 28 to 30 they are going to reduce their prospects because the men they seek to marry will have gone through those formative years without a mate, and learned to be OK without it.

  • Constance

    If that woman is “gorgeous”, that is very good news for the female population. Or maybe American standards of beauty is just different?

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    Does anyone else wonder what this comment thread would look like if Susan had not used the word “gorgeous”?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Does anyone else wonder what this comment thread would look like if Susan had not used the word “gorgeous”?

      Heh, I’ve learned my lesson. Tomorrow I’m going to post another article, me and Amanda Marcotte going head to head. The journalist is gorgeous, but as her pic is not included, I will resist the temptation to praise her looks.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    One of those was the girl who made the pinkie comment, an unfortunate joke since she was talking about her current serious bf, a man she may marry.

    Yikes. Unfortunate for him.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Yikes. Unfortunate for him.

      I met him recently, and the good news is he didn’t seem familiar with the blog. I pray he doesn’t see that article – I suspect it’s a sensitive issue.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “B- i don’t think the article went into detail about whether girls did or didn’t hate every single casual experience. Sure they may want something different now but I didn’t get the impression they were harmed or regretted ALL their sexual experiences. I certainly wasn’t insulting them- they sound like great girls to me.”

    Jess makes a good point. Solomon II posted more than once on women who had a rollicking good time in the party scene, then when they wanted to sell themselves as marriage material, they re-branded their partying days as a “mistake,” when the photographs make clear they were quite enjoying things back then.

    Then there are those who regard that as a regrettable troubled time in life. Problem is that women have been double-talking about this for so long that guys don’t know who or what to believe. Makes it hard to have faith in your woman’s character.

    http://solomonreborn.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/proverb-16-mistakes-and-the-women-who-love-them/

  • Jesus Mahoney

    mind you, it’s a moot point- I still maintain that for the vast majority of guys, number count is only one of many factors in male selection and much lower down than looks and humour for example.

    The problem with # count is that it doesn’t tell the whole story. By my age (28), you can have had a two-digit count while maintaining respectable standards. Of course, you can have that same two-digit count having had flings with douche bags. It all depends.

    At a certain point, though, a high number will begin to cause a man to wonder. A woman who’s at 20 is either a. a one-time slut, or b. really, really bad at maintaining relationships.

    Take Sue’s girl, for instance. 13’s a bit high if she’s in her early twenties, but if she’s in her late twenties, it could be an acceptable #. If I hear a girl at 28 has had 13 guys, I’d be cool with it (as long as she wasn’t f*cking with the #, mind you… excluding guys who were just head, or guys who didn’t finish in her, etc….). However, knowing the whole story, the whole going crazy with alphas thing, I’d kick the girl to the curb in a heart beat.

    So #’s not everything. There’s context to contend with as well. A high number suggests poor decisions in her past. But you can have a woman with a low number that’s made slutty choices in the past as well.

    And yes, there are men who will overlook it. Some men will be so happy they’ve got a hot girl, they’ll overlook her past. Some will be so enamored by her personality that their critical thinking faculties will stop working.

  • Abbot

    the most promiscuous one, with 25 partners, is deeply troubled and vulnerable. She has a traumatic family history and seeks solace in every fling. She has been pumped and dumped every single time.

    Thats a woman who will be deeply unhappy as her comparative experiences will likely make her feel “sexually or emotionally incompatible with their mate.”

  • Jesus Mahoney

    The whole “mistake” bit is disingenuous. Like a girl wants you to believe that she tripped over her shoelaces and landed mouth first on some guy’s cock.

    The only mistake involved is her not realizing that such a strategy might come back to bite her in the ass later.

  • Abbot

    And yes, there are men who will overlook it. Some men will be so happy they’ve got a hot girl, they’ll overlook her past. Some will be so enamored by her personality that their critical thinking faculties will stop working.

    There are a myriad of circumstances. But in each one, the Number Matters, or is considered or thought about.  The goal of these sex pozzies is to crush it into irrelevancy so women can fulfill themselves enough to maintain careerism and independence…from men….and then, when they decide, turn-a-round and get the good man for a family without a peep out of him about all the non-husbands.  Yeah, those guys over there, snickering in the corner pointing at you.

  • Abbot

    The only mistake involved is her not realizing that such a strategy might come back to bite her in the ass later.

    Well, now that the sex pozzies are pretty much giving up on getting men to change their way of thinking, all the effort is now going into keeping the truth about how men feel from women. Or neutralizing it somehow, especially if it hits the mainstream media.

  • jess

    blues,

    sorry- i did reply- my response appears to have vanished.

    I think I said that guys have the right to choose precisely as they wish.

    However I would urge men and women to be slow to be judgmental and give prospective mates a chance.

    That doesn’t mean, ignoring bad behaviour or keeping your eyes shut, just maybe adopting a less pessimistic view of the other sex.

    Wouldn’t it be a pity to miss out on the love of your life because you heard a rumour about her? or because her number was too high according to the guys on this site? The choice is yours, and yours alone.

    Put it this way- in my last job I knew a girl who was openly chaste and fairly attractive. She was from a good family and good at her job. Yet she was unpopular because she was a cold and an unpleasant character. Would you really choose her over your ideal partner who had, say 10 exes? (i paint an extreme example but you get my point)

    Your choice entirely but there are other viewpoints from warm and decent people. thats all.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jess
      FYI I will delete any comment that characterizes other commenters as bitter and jaded. You’re sabotaging my blog, and I won’t have it.

  • Abbot

    The choice is yours, and yours alone.

    Finally

    Would you really choose her over your ideal partner who had, say 10 exes?

    Not an immediate deal breaker at 29, and was able to recall each of their full names and did not make you wait any longer for sex than any of them waited

  • http://danielpargman.blogspot.com Daniel Pargman

    Writing from a Swedish perspective, and just having read the Bolick text, I wonder why I haven’t noted the same phenomenon in Sweden. Doesn’t it exist, or does it exist but I don’t see it?

    I presume it doesn’t exist, or at least not to the same extent. I just don’t see the same “marrying up” culture among (young) women, even if I suspect the same basic dynamics are there. Some observations:

    It seems young Americans are whisked away to college and by default dump their GFs/BFs over the summer before their freshmen year, and then having to contend with whoever else is on campus. We don’t really have insular universities where people never leave campus, so the student population is more integrated with the general population.

    While there are more female students at our universities, my guess is that they don’t feel the same “pressure” to find their betters (men with better education or higher income). I would guess the pressure is lower in a more egalitarian society, though not absent.

    The state takes on a larger responsibility in terms of monetary transfers. We have high taxes but really do get something out of them. Subsidized high-quality day car (very affordable). Maternity/paternity leave that lasts for 18 months for most people and most men taking out at least part of that time (from one or a few months up to half the time). Finding alternatives to this state-sanctioned “fast track” is more difficult though. Staying home with your children for years on end will be a financial drag, most families have/need two, or 1.5 incomes. As apart from many other (southern European) counties, we have high birth rates and that probably has something to do with the “ease” of combining worklife & children.

  • jess

    Susan

    The vulnerable girl, poor thing, I hope she finds stability soon. STD’s, depression etc all loom if she can’t find help of some sort.

    The other 4. I totally get they want proper LTR’s- sounds like they would all be much happier and grounded if they got that.

    Am I to gather all the sex they have has up to now was totally awful? I mean no positive reports at all? Im not trying to score points here- Im really interested in this dynamic.

    And why don’t you think the celibacy vow girl can keep to it? Is she addicted to the attention? the validation? or does she actually like the sex but wants to limit her number?

    And were all these girls being safe? The average uk girl can be very sloppy with safe sex conduct…

    Finally, of the 2 promiscuous girls, do you think their promiscuity is the source of their unhappiness? or is it perhaps the other way around?

    Ta, Jess

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jess

      Finally, of the 2 promiscuous girls, do you think their promiscuity is the source of their unhappiness? or is it perhaps the other way around?

      I think it’s pretty clear that promiscuity followed a need for reassurance, validation, affection, whatever. The women who openly boast about their sexual conquests are nearly always sort of sad stories. Of course, the hookup does provide a short-term fix, and the cycle continues. It can be a form of addiction, I think.

      As for the quality of the sex, it was basically acknowledged that all the casual sex has involved a lot of alcohol. Hooking up sober is in a totally different realm, and unusual. So complaints of “whiskey dick” are common. Condoms are often dispensed with. The most promiscuous of these women has been treated for several STDs since I’ve known her, and has serious Pap smear abnormalities due to HPV.

  • Abbot

    We don’t really have insular universities where people never leave campus, so the student population is more integrated with the general population.

    Does that mean the women are less pre-maritally “prepped”? Sweden does not get on the list of nations men tend to think of when detouring around feminism.

  • Aaron1988

    I personally don’t see why you would judge a potential partener on how many people she has slept with. Your past is part of who you are, it has lead you to be the person you are today, your beliefs, your opinions are, at least in part, due to what you have learnt from your past, are they not?

    I have only had 2 sexual parteners, and my 3rd and final sexual partener will be my wife (when I meet, date and then marry her) would I marry someone who has had x or xx amount of sexual parteners yes as long as we get on well with each other, are in love with one another, and have the same sort of beliefs (money,marriage,children,faithful,polite etc) and as long as she can accept that I don’t want sex again until I’m married.

    -Aaron

  • Abbot

    why you would judge a potential partener on how many people she has slept with.

    There is no judgement. Only preferences. Some people also prefer not to marry “former” alcoholics who may very well never get hooked again. We all respect each others preferences.

  • jess

    susan re promiscuous girls,

    fair enough- sounds pretty familiar actually. sadly the condom thing too. (do they not understand the possible consequences?)

    btw- do those girls read this blog? may wanna delete the last 2 posts?

    (will one girl want everyone knowing about her std’s?)

  • Abbot

    reassurance, validation, affection, fix, sad stories, addiction, alcohol, STD, HVP, dick complaints...oye

    Ya know, forget context. Its out the window. Men these days really should not obligate themselves to sort through this awful mess. Yes, men were utilized to create it, but men can also break the cycle by not enabling this festering madness to reach the next generation.

  • jess

    susan re ‘bitter’

    eh? was that the post to blues that went missing? did I call him bitter? if i did i really didn’t mean to…i was actually trying to be very positive and helpful.

    as for sabotage? I know I often beg to differ with you but sabotage? in what way?

    -courteous posts?

    -advice from my ICT friend when your site was running slow?

    -frequent instances when I am in agreement with you and others?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @jess
      What I object to is when you address lurking female readers by saying, “the guys here are bitter and not at all representative of men in real life.” That’s for me to judge, not you.

  • Mike C

    susan re promiscuous girls,

    fair enough- sounds pretty familiar actually. sadly the condom thing too. (do they not understand the possible consequences?)

    btw- do those girls read this blog? may wanna delete the last 2 posts?

    Maybe Susan is more than capable of deciding what to post without you injecting your “superior” insight into the equation.

  • jess

    well mike perhaps she may have overlooked it as she has 100’s of posts to read.

    i doubt a kindly intended suggestion will cause her to feel too patronised.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “I met him recently, and the good news is he didn’t seem familiar with the blog. I pray he doesn’t see that article – I suspect it’s a sensitive issue.”

    Is it at all possible word doesn’t spread like wildfire about those five girls? They’ve just been quoted in a major magazine.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Is it at all possible word doesn’t spread like wildfire about those five girls? They’ve just been quoted in a major magazine.

      Nah, I think they’re fine. They got complete anonymity. They were also five of about two dozen that have been part of my groups over the last three years. Any one of them could say they weren’t there.

  • Dogsquat

    Blues said:

    “Teach him Dogsquat, give him the tools or simply send him to the manosphere, don’t let him lose all he accomplished with years of effort by lack of knowledge.”

    Dude, if I could I’d sent him right to Athol (emphasizing that fine Gentleman’s RN credentials) and Dannyfrom504 (Navy Corpsman, Blessed Are They).  I’d have him follow up with Badger, Kane, Frost, Dalrock, and Private Man.  A couple other good one’s I’m forgetting.  I’d print out some of Roissy’s early stuff so he didn’t get too jaded reading some of the more brutal ideas there.

    The guy just isn’t ready.  He’d reject it out of hand, because it paints people in a (sometimes) terrible light and he has no context for the underlying pain of the manosphere.

    He works on patients who usually have good families and lots of love and hope around them.  Aside from a few weeks in a nice ED in med school and residency, he’s never seen people for the animals they are.

    I’ve even told him about some stuff I saw in Iraq and Liberia, and some hairy calls I’ve been on, and he still doesn’t believe people people are sometimes bastard coated bastards with bastard filling.

    For right now, I’m trying to hook him up with a specific girl of great character I know, but he’s so beta and nerdy he’s fucking it up.  Maybe the painful brush-off he’s going to get will serve as a catalyst.

    We shall see.  If he comes around, though, he’s going to be a monster.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @jess, What is done, matters. Other is speculation.

    Speculation, that is celibate deliberately or not, does not matter.


    Waiting for morning coffee.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari

      Waiting for morning coffee.

      I admire your ability to jump online here before coffee. Even I don’t do that!

  • jess

    kari

    not if one is claiming (as many have done) that their ‘filtering’ is based on some ethical standpoint or superiority in character.

    unless of course one wishes to say that incompetence in ‘seduction’ is somehow superior to success. In this case the intent would be the issue.

    now people can do what they want to do of course… they don’t actually have to justify anything to anyone.

    but most people have a conciensce… and are capable of self reflection…and I would imagine many or most people, would look at themselves and their motives with these things and the decisions they make.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    jess wrote:

    not if one is claiming (as many have done) that their ‘filtering’ is based on some ethical standpoint or superiority in character.

    Well, on that what I commented, that ‘filtering’ was blamed on superiority in character.

    Tom wrote:

    See how selfish, childish and insecure he is?..

    And now there is blaming of that filtering, because of incompetence in ‘seduction’.


    Got morning coffee.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      And now there is blaming of that filtering, because of incompetence in ‘seduction’.

      Indeed. I do not understand why anyone should have any opinion whatsoever on anyone else’s filters. If anything, having fewer people share your filters increases your own pool. If you like women with a bit of mileage, you’re in excellent shape! You value most highly a very abundant resource. Why are you asking for competition?

  • Abbot

    now people can do what they want to do of course… they don’t actually have to justify anything to anyone.

    Likewise, promiscuos women and their sexy pozy advocates dont have to justify their behavior to anyone. Yet, they can’t seem to help themselves.

  • Abbot

    And now there is blaming of that filtering…

    Whatever possibly diminishes the person engaging in the filtering arbitrarily deemed objectionable, no matter how weak or what ass it was pulled out of, is gonna be what they say. The goal is to get the despised filtering to stop and redefine what attributes men determine marriage material to be.

    Its a personal matter that has no negative impact on women so its confusing as to why feminists hate The Filter

  • Fold

    Susan Walsh said

    @Anacaona

    . She needed to show that she was available and ready to commit and see who takes the bait. Wait and see.

    I agree. She likes intellectual guys. If she stays out of the “11 years younger” pond she could easily attract a very successful male. I’m thinking Wall St., divorced (grab him now before the bonuses dry up). Over the weekend Sir Paul married a 51 year-old woman, when he could have gone with half that age.

    Don’t kiss that frog ladies, your hero will be here shortly.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “Any one of them could say they weren’t there.”

    True, but would they want to? They just got profiled in The Atlantic. The status boost would be tremendous. I’ll be curious to see if the lid stays on down the road.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      True, but would they want to? They just got profiled in The Atlantic. The status boost would be tremendous. I’ll be curious to see if the lid stays on down the road.

      Hmmm, good question. I mentioned earlier that Kate asked them incredibly personal details. “Tell me how you lost your virginity, tell me about your sexual experiences, etc.” It’s no surprise she characterized them as sexually experienced. They all had some ability to talk about sex, and she asked extremely specific questions. As they were answering her, to a woman they asked for extra reassurance that their names would not be in the article. Although one woman did request, “Please put in there that _________ is a total douche and was bad in bed.”

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jess,

    The thing is, of COURSE promiscuity among women is an issue for the men here. People who don’t have a problem with the current hook up script are not likely to be regular readers of a blog like this.

    But for the most part, the men who are enjoying casual hook ups are not looking for a committed partner. I mean, eventually they will be, when they reach their sell-by date. But guys have a longer shelf life than women when it comes to attracting the opposite sex.

    Things are different today than they were in Sue’s day (and perhaps in yours, idk). At least it seems so, anyway. While it’s probably not too difficult for beta males to find relationship sex, they are for the most part being left out of the casual scene. At the same time, more and more women are participating in the hook up scene to one degree or another.

    Now you may say, who cares? The answer is: men. To boys and young men, for whom a simple smile can cause a throbbing erection (something that happens several times a day I can assure you), being left out of the sex scene is very frustrating. They should get over it, you say? They can, providing they don’t have to spend their lives with a girl who indulged in it.

    Imagine a man who spends his life fucking porn stars. They love him, but only for the fuck. He’s hung like a stallion, lasts a bazillion hours and can go 6 or 7 times a day everyday. This man indulges for as long as he can. But eventually he starts graying and isn’t as attractive and his once indomitable stallion dick can no longer provide the type of service these women require of it. He tries to make one of these porn stars fall madly in love with him, just so he can have something stable, but it just won’t work. A porn star is a porn star for a reason, after all.

    Then this man meets you and thinks, hey, you’re not nearly as hot as the women I used to pull, but you’ll stick around, I bet.

    Now you, Jess, have spent your life falling for men who’ve all turned out to be porn star fuckers. You’ve gotten to know some and thought you’d be able to really make them happy. But thoough they enjoyed being your friend, they weren’t about to give up fucking porn stars for lil ole you. So again and again you’re burned by these porn star fucking men and again and again you try to find a man who doesn’t fuck porn stars.

    So now you meet this man who wants to get serious with you. You know he’s spent the hottest years of his life fucking porn stars. But now his glory days are done and he wants to settle down with you because he knows you’ll always be there in the morning. Part of the reason he knows you’ll always be there in the morning is because you’re not as hot as a porn star, of course. But he’s willing to settle because he wants stability.

    He’s got a wonderful personality. He’s still a bit hot, though not hot enough to pull porn stars anymore. But then, you’re not a porn star. He’s carefree and sweet, and he thinks you’re very sweet, too.

    Do you nab him?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I’m sure if pinky dick reads the article or comes across the site, he’ll know what’s what.

  • zed

    re: pinky dick

    1.  If she lies and says she wasn’t there, will her BF believe her?

    2. If any of the BFs of the 2 dozen women who have been Susan’s regulars read it, the girl might have some ‘splaining to do even if she isn’t the one who said it.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      If any of the BFs of the 2 dozen women who have been Susan’s regulars read it, the girl might have some ‘splaining to do even if she isn’t the one who said it.

      Well, as I said earlier, I wanted to grab those words right out of the air before they reached Kate’s ears. The fact checker didn’t even run that one by me – it was obvious Kate had it on tape.

  • zed

    Well, as I said earlier, I wanted to grab those words right out of the air before they reached Kate’s ears. The fact checker didn’t even run that one by me – it was obvious Kate had it on tape.

    Well, the girl did say them, Kate did get it on tape, and it is out there for all and sundry to see. Interesting question – if the fact checker did run it by you, would you have told the truth or lied and claimed it was not said?

    I wonder if Kate had been interviewing a group of young men, and one of them had said “that’s not a vagina, that’s a pothole” if it would have been brushed aside as indicating nothing more than his level of sexual experience.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @zed

      . Interesting question – if the fact checker did run it by you, would you have told the truth or lied and claimed it was not said?

      I would never lie about that. It was said, and I knew when it was said that she had made a grave tactical error. If I had been prepared to lie, I would have denied saying “trash dick.” Instead, I asserted that it was taken out of context and conflated with the question, which was true. In the end, they acknowledged it was true so they added in the qualifier that I had heard the term online somewhere. She told me “it’s just too good to leave out altogether.” There’s definitely some fudging that goes on, it seems.

      I wonder if Kate had been interviewing a group of young men, and one of them had said “that’s not a vagina, that’s a pothole” if it would have been brushed aside as indicating nothing more than his level of sexual experience.

      Ha, you don’t wonder and neither do I. He would never have gotten away with that. To Bolick’s credit, she doesn’t join in the laughter. I think she put it out there to show just how coarsened young women have become.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I wonder if Kate had been interviewing a group of young men, and one of them had said “that’s not a vagina, that’s a pothole” if it would have been brushed aside as indicating nothing more than his level of sexual experience.

    Right, if some man were caught saying buddies, “What do K___ and the Ozone Layer have in common? One frighteningly big hole,” it might be deemed misogynistic. Hypothetically speaking.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Esau wrote:

    Susan, […]  and eventually your book (s?).

    Is there book?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Is there book?

      There might be if I ever get my act together and write one.

  • Wayfinder

    @Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms

    There was a book. Susan wrote one, her agent said that she needed a platform to be able to talk about it, so she started this website. She has since stated that the book is completely outdated and that she needs to write another one.

  • Mister Y

    I think it’s pretty clear that promiscuity followed a need for reassurance, validation, affection, whatever. The women who openly boast about their sexual conquests are nearly always sort of sad stories. Of course, the hookup does provide a short-term fix, and the cycle continues. It can be a form of addiction, I think.

    It’s the dopamine most likely. Each new encounter spikes up the dopamine for a while, a very good feeling. The dropoff that follows being pumped and dumped leaves her wanting more of the same. If you look at it purely in brain chemical terms, promiscuity in women looks a lot like some sort of addiction to a chemical – which it is, because cocaine also spikes dopamine. Research into brain chemistry and how we rewire ourselves is going to turn up some facts that many people won’t like – the sex-positive feminists just for a start. If I’m correct about the dopamine, then the old notion of women remaining chaste until marriage could well have science behind it. And the same might be true of men, to a lesser degree. Nobody is going to want to hear that. Nobody.

    Thinking about Bolick some more while I do not think it would be a good idea for her to read this posting and comment stream, Susan, if you were to have further contact with her perhaps you could work on just one thing: her attractors. We agree she doesn’t know or understand what attracts her. Figuring that out would be useful. Every woman should do so, frankly.

    I bet if you asked her what she finds attractive about a man, she’d reel of the usual stuff, “Kind, gentle with people, caring, gives me my space” and so forth. If someone explained to her that those are the things she wants in a man she’s already attracted to, and then drew her out on things that she finds attractive at a first meeting, they likely would include “Taller than me, a baritone voice, full head of hair, big shoulders, walks purposefully” and so forth.

    There’s another point to the exercise. Once she comes to terms with her attractors, whatever they are, she needs to come to grips with the fact that she’s not going to get everything in one package & she needs to prioritize. It seems likely that she doesn’t really know what is critical vs. desirable to her in a man, and what is negotiable vs. non-negotiable in terms of “don’t want, ever”.

    Finally, there is a downside for her to this exercise. It is quite possible that there is a man out there to whom she would be attracted, who is wealthy enough to engage her hypergamy, but who doesn’t live where she lives, who has his own busy life, and who might want her to downsize her career. She needs to face the possibility that she has already chosen over and over again her career over marriage, and that at this late date it’s possible she might have to scale back some of her business life in order to even have a married life. But she needs to face this square on, because it is a very real possibility such a compromise may be required in order to not just get married but stay married.

    Maybe that’s not a conversation you feel comfortable having with her, but someone needs to do so, if she’s serious about what was said in the article.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mister Y
      I wouldn’t dream of initiating that conversation, though I do think your advice is very sound.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Jennifer wrote:

    I’m about ONE step away from either gutting the Internet or this damn computer and its REFUSAL to download this effing site properly, and submit my replies WITHOUT freaking grammar typos, or half of it cut off! Anyfreakinghow..

    This site with articles which have 1000 comments are little to big bite for browser (one page was about 1,6M bytes bite).


    Wayfinder wrote:

    @Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms

    Hmph. It is Poor Kari ™.

    Thank you.

    There was a book.

    That is a manuscript.

     

    Susan Walsh wrote:

    There might be if I ever get my act together and write one.

    Good luck and sweat.

     

    Missus said that I must recommend nanowrimo (). She is planning to participate.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari
      Ha, a novel might be the way to go! There are many drama-filled stories on this blog. I’m a sucker for happy endings, though, and I don’t want to perpetuate unrealistic romantic comedy thinking!

  • http://www.singlemind.net Amir Larijani

    The beginning of that article by Bolick is ominous.

    Passing on a good catch–thinking “there are better ones out there” or “I’m not ready to settle down–is an extremely risky decision. This is true for both men and women. I have a college friend of mine who turned back a woman, and he could have been married 10 years ago. He has had no serious prospects since. And he’s now 54.

    Along similar lines, I know women who passed good men up when they were young. They eventually either settled or remained single. None are happy, either.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Amir Larijani
      Yes, ominous is a good word. The moment I read that, I had a sense of foreboding. Of course, I already knew the story, haha, so maybe that wasn’t it. But I can’t help picturing her going to her grave with that huge regret.

  • Kisha

    I think women are more serious with their commitment and duties. More passionate about the things in life.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Susan,

    I got a tenet of the manosphere into a mainstream publication. Even Roissy hasn’t done that.

    There´s no male friendly equivalent magazine out there? who´s going to interview him and to be published where?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Yohami
      Roissy has been quoted in the Weekly Standard and in The Guardian. It’s not about male or female friendly. The Atlantic is a very liberal publication – getting this tidbit by the editor is something I am grateful to Kate for.

  • Wayfinder

    @Yohami

    There´s no male friendly equivalent magazine out there? who´s going to interview him and to be published where?

    Didn’t there use to be a bunch of men’s magazines? GQ, Esquire, etc.? Seems to match the demographic, or they used to. Back in the 50s anyway. No idea what they are like today.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Wayfinder,

    Eh, I´ve seen these mags around. They are selling boobs, not sure they are selling manliness.

  • ExNewYorker

    @Susan,

    “But I can’t help picturing her going to her grave with that huge regret.”

    The article, on first read, does seem to suggest that. But if you re-read, in light of her interviews on the Today Show and the Gayle King one, you see that she really isn’t looking at things with much regret at all.  What she does say seems to be more along the lines:

    1) Because of changes in society, you might wind up unmarried. It’s ok to be single (and it can be fun) and …

    2) We need new “structures” to allow women to flourish outside “traditional” marriage (which is dead, according to her).

    From her piece, there’s a part right after meeting with you, Susan:

    “But now that 35 had come and gone, and with yet another relationship up in flames, all bets were off.  It might never happen. Or maybe not until 42. Or 70, for that matter. Was that so bad? If I stopped seeing my present life as provisional, perhaps I’d be a little … happier. Perhaps I could actually get down to the business of what it means to be a real single woman.

    It’s something a lot of people might want to consider, given that now, by choice or by circumstance, more and more of us (women and men), across the economic spectrum, are spending more years of our adult lives unmarried than ever before. “

    She’s not trying to be a cautionary tale, but more along the lines “we’re going to have to do things differently since lot’s of people will be in my situation”.  It’s more of the “me first” mentality that is endemic to our times…

    I think Allan was lucky here.  I can’t see a women like Kate B. wanting to “settle down” (at least now with you average mill guy).  He’s probably better off with a woman who actually wanted to marry him…

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @ENY
      Your analysis of Kate’s commentary is fair. Perhaps I’m projecting. I can’t help but think there is an element of marketing in these TV appearances. And while I got the distinct impression she would very much like to marry, she is also clearly trying to come to grips with the fact that that might never happen. Frankly, I thought the bit about the faux convent in Amsterdam was over the top.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @ExNewYorker

    Re: It’s ok to be single (and it can be fun)

    I know an older woman who made some bad choices in life and is now unmarried at 50. The way she sees it, she could be middle aged and miserable or middle aged and happy–and I think it’s good for everyone who has to live with her that she chose to be happy. But that’s just damage control.

    How many women do you suppose are doing the same damage control while denying there was any damage, and so selling it as a viable lifestyle choice?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      How many women do you suppose are doing the same damage control while denying there was any damage, and so selling it as a viable lifestyle choice?

      +1
      Yes, this is the spin.

  • Lavazza

    Reminds me of a dirty joke ending with “I am here looking for my bicycle”.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lavazza
      I don’t know that one! Tell us!

  • Anacaona

    Missus said that I must recommend nanowrimo (). She is planning to participate.

    Ohh cool me too! I’m terrified Twivember and Turkey days parties (at least 2 if they don’t do one at my work place) are going to make it even harder…why didn’t they picked an easier month like October :(

     

  • Anacaona

    @Susan if anything The Atlantic should do a piece on single men that love it! I would love to see society reacting to THAT!

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    @Susan if anything The Atlantic should do a piece on single men that love it! I would love to see society reacting to THAT!

    YES. That would be liberal. Supporting the strength and independence of women while blaming and bashing men isnt liberal anymore.

  • Desiderius

    Yohami,

    “YES. That would be liberal. Supporting the strength and independence of women while blaming and bashing men isnt liberal anymore.”

    Never was. Some very illiberal people, parties, and policies have successfully marketed themselves as liberal. Likewise with regressive (for instance, stone-age mating strategies) and progressive. The only way I see turning things around is denying them a label they did not earn.

    Call a spade a spade.

  • Wayfinder

    @Yohami

    Well, I haven’t actually looked at any of the issues that were published after I was born, so who knows?

  • jess

    –susan re page loading,
    .
    i don’t know how others are finding it but its taking about 5 attempts to load the site this past few days.
    .
    –susan re bitterness,
    .
    do you mean the dalrock comment? in the other thread?
    if so I am mystified in this particular case.
    .
    He said that he criticised a girl for choosing to sleep with him and that women should never approach guys.
    .
    I think that it is hypocritical, backward thinking and very damaging advice.
    .
    Everyone on this blog is offering insight, opinion and advice left, right and centre. He gave his ‘advice’- I gave mine.
    .
    As it happens Im sure many lurkers would see the ludicrousness for themselves but I felt it couldn’t escape some comment…
    .
    Also some female lurkers, who may not know many guys, might think men feel that way. What on earth is wrong with putting their minds at ease?
    .
    If someone (or you) wishes to rebut me then fine… but of course in this case it would be defending the indefensible. Most guys would be amused and aghast at those 2 Dalrock comments in equal measure.
    .
    Given this is a blog about human relationships I cannot think of a more germane contribution and observation.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      –susan re page loading,
      .
      i don’t know how others are finding it but its taking about 5 attempts to load the site this past few days.

      Are others having difficulty? I moved the site to a new host with a lot more bandwidth, after limping along like a fat lady in need of two knee replacements when the Atlantic traffic hit. I have been happy with the load times on my end.

  • Jennifer
    “Yes. All men can say is whether or not they find her sexually attractive. I obviously don’t find her sexually attractive, I find her attractive in another way”
     
    Thank you for understanding my point.
     
    Kari, too true, this site was a big cookie for my computer to bite.
     
    “I didn’t make the rules of biology, I’m just living with them”
     
    But you do choose which words you use.
     
    “will choose a middle-aged, never beautiful, male-imitating ‘career-driven’ woman”
     
    What projection. Clearly some disagree.
     
    Thank you, Dragnet. Passer By, perfect post.
     
    “For some reason you exclude 20 year olds from competition, but you never explain why”
     
    Because they’re clearly in totally different markets.
     
    “All women are attracted to alpha, social status and wealth”
     
    Not above everything else.
     

    “Aaron,

    I personally think a relationship should be equal and that both parteners should have a say. So I don’t understand why guys are supposed to be dominant

    Reads like:

    I personally think a sexual relationship should be equal and both partners should have a say. So I dont understand why the cock is supposed to be hard and piercy and why the vagina is supposed to be wet and soft.”

    Uh huh. Aaron, unfortunately, this is the age of “me, me” for both sexes.

    “Find a guy who is dominant, self centered, and generous”

    That reads, “find a guy who thinks a lot of himself and loves to be generous to show off his greatness.”

    “Badger, Kane, Frost, Dalrock, and Private Man”

    The third and the last there both have some pretty snobbish and/or over-arching ideas about women.

    “I’ve even told him about some stuff I saw in Iraq and Liberia, and some hairy calls I’ve been on, and he still doesn’t believe people people are sometimes bastard coated bastards with bastard filling”

    He does need to learn more confidence and that pandering doesn’t work. He does not need to adapt personally to the animalistic natures of brute men and trashy bloggers.

     

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    “I personally think a relationship should be equal and that both parteners should have a say. So I don’t understand why guys are supposed to be dominant”

    In the context we are using and discussing the word “dominant” it does not mean dominating your partner but being dominant in some spear of your own life so that you are set apart from other men who may just blend into the woodwork.  In other words, socially dominant in some way.  It will get you noticed.

     

  • jess

    J Mahoney re porn stars

    Sorry just seen your post- scrolling isn’t working properly on this site for me at mo so Im missing stuff.

    With your particular example I would not nab him for 6 reasons:

    1. massively increased std risk due to 100’s or even 1000’s of partners (and the link between drugs and the sex industry)

    2. painfully oversized… anatomical accrutments

    3. painfully oversized…ego

    4. scorn of my family

    5. jaded intimacy due to 100s of multiple partners

    6. poor role model to my possible future kids

    However, I do get your point, so to answer it I am going to modify your description by saying a conventionally attractive guy, 40, with a goodish job, with a fairly good body and has been with 40 women otherwise all the other aspects are the ones you used.

    Its difficult to answer with authority because I have always felt wanted by my previous partners. I was never felt to feel 2nd best really. Thats not to say I haven’t felt jealousy- my partner has an ex so stunning I fancy her myself!- I can’t even bear her name being mentioned. And I always felt very inadequate at school, with my looks.

    So, if we liked each other? Well I wouldn’t be over the moon with 40 exes if Im honest. And it would hurt, suspecting that I was the homely one, the one he was ‘settling’ for.

    But you know what, if we loved each other and we clicked, yep, I would nab him. And no I don’t think that makes me a sucker.

  • Desiderius

    I was never felt to feel 2nd best really.

  • ExNewYorker

    @Bellita,

    “How many women do you suppose are doing the same damage control while denying there was any damage, and so selling it as a viable lifestyle choice?”

    I think she has the perfect right to follow whatever path she wants to follow.  I think the issue arises if she wants to normalize her experience to everyone else, and try to advise people to accept their lot without making any changes.

    It’ll be interesting to see if she really does get married at any point.  The cynical part of me sees her article and tv appearances as a “I’m out there and available” indication.  Maybe it’s a smart strategy for her, but the proof will be in the pudding…

  • ExNewYorker

    @Susan,

    “I got the distinct impression she would very much like to marry, she is also clearly trying to come to grips with the fact that that might never happen. “

    I’m only reading between the lines of her article and her tv appearances.  You actually got to meet her, so maybe your impression is closer to the truth.  Though, if she trying to come to grips with the fact that it may never happen, the whole “alternative arrangements” may be an attempt at that.  She’s a woman who has met a lot of “high status” people…that kind of puts a limitation of the number of men who might live up to that.  You should email her Anacaona’s hypergamy article (I almost wrote Anaconda)…it might be useful to her :-)

    “I have been happy with the load times on my end.” 

    It’s much better now…

  • Anacaona

    (I almost wrote Anaconda)

    Thanks for not to. Oh well at least no one will get to use a similar handle with an obscure Taino reference :)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Passer_By wrote:

    That’s a gross overstatement. Most people prefer to pair up for LTR within a narrow age range. As a guy in my late 40s, if I were single, I might prefer to bang a 20 year old once or twice, but I’d be very unlikely to want an LTR with her.

     

    That makes sense.

    Sandy wrote:

    Sexual marketplace is a single marketplace, it doesn’t have tiers according to age.

    But marriage marketplace is divided by age groups.


    Susan Walsh wrote:

    On the basis of that single encounter, they began a LDR that is still going strong.

    LDR = long-distance relationship

    I assume.

    / Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms


    Susan Walsh wrote:

    Are others having difficulty?

    This site seems load (although browser was taking time to load all tabs after crash).


    Seems that morning coffee is ready. ☻

  • Abbot

    I think that it is hypocritical, backward thinking and very damaging advice.

    Women who are out fucking around have no reason to care about what men think of them. Thats obvious enough.

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

     

    “For some reason you exclude 20 year olds from competition, but you never explain why”
     
    20 year olds don’t compete for much older men.
     
    This is where I cue the Clooney and Hefner examples that will surely be trotted out because these 2 are the go-to examples that get recycled ad infinitum on websites, which of course only goes to prove how rare it is down here on the ground.
     
    When every commenter on every blog can provide 10 examples from their neighborhood block, then I’ll say its been normalized.  Til then Clooney and Hefner will continue to be the “see see I told ya! Young women love old men”  go-to examples.
     
     
  • Anonymous

    With your particular example I would not nab him for 6 reasons:

    1. massively increased std risk due to 100′s or even 1000′s of partners (and the link between drugs and the sex industry)

    There’s also an increased std risk for a woman who’s had dozens of partners.

    2. painfully oversized… anatomical accrutments

    Obviously doesn’t translate when we reverse the sexes.

    3. painfully oversized…ego

    This does translate. This goes right to what we’ve been saying about women who overrate themselves because they can score short term success with guys above their league.

    4. scorn of my family

    Personally, I don’t care much about my family or what they think, but if my friends found out that I married a woman with 2 dozen partners, I’d receive not their scorn, but their ridicule… or at least pity.

    5. jaded intimacy due to 100s of multiple partners

    I would say that this applies to a woman with a couple dozen partners.

    6. poor role model to my possible future kids

    Agreed.

    So you pretty much get it then. That’s cool.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    That anonymous was me.

  • Wayfinder

    @Susan

    I haven’t noticed any loading problems since the (very obvious) upgrade.

    @Mrs. Robinson

    On age differences, 31% of marriages in England and Wales had a groom at least 5 years older than the bride (and 11% were 10+). So while a 40-year old won’t necessarily marry a 20-year-old that often, a 30-year-old is not unlikely. If a woman is 35, she’s competing with 25-year-olds.

    Also, did you really intend for your handle to imply what it does?

  • Jess

    J Mahoney,
    I have always got the ideals and suggestions made here. There is nothing intrinsically illogical about the ideas of virtually anyone who has posted here. If you look at things from a certain angle and avoid the greys you get a certain world view.
    .
    I guess as I have gotten older I see more greys and more room for… I dunno…manoeuvre?…compromise?
    .
    Anyway to the matter in hand…
    1. More partners increases std risk no question. But 400 is a lot risker than 40. I had 22 safe sex partners and have been tested all my life. Nothing. But I know one girl who got HIV from her 2nd LTR. There are no guarantees. There was a program last week of a girl who got herpes from her husband too.
    .
    2. the research i have seen says ‘laxness’ comes from underuse, VERY oversized toys or in some cases natural childbirth. So I would only partially agree with you there.
    .
    3. Many of the women I know and have known, were very insecure despite their beauty. I think ego varies for both genders. Not all women are like the sex and the city brats- yuk.
    .
    4. Ridicule and pity? Then if I were you, they wouldn’t be my friends in that situation anymore.
    .
    5. Would completely disagree with you there. Many of my experienced friends are totally in love with their hubbies. Yet not ago I attended a divorce party for a girl who married her 1st love. On the example we used the guy had 40 partners at 40. So thats 2 per year from 20 to 40. I can’t see jadedness being a certainly there at all.
    .
    6 yey!

    Jx

  • Lavazza

    SW: Since you are active you can delete it quite soon. I know dirtier jokes but this is on the extreme end. A guy was fingering a girl. She was groaning pleasantly and asked him to put in two fingers. Then three fingers, then the whole hand. When the guy had his whole arm inside her, she said “Ah, what the fuck, why don’t you crawl in”, which the guy did. After some time he met another guy there and asked him what he was doing there, and the guy answered “Oh, I’m just looking for my bicycle”.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lavazza
      That’s hilarious and I wouldn’t dream of deleting it.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    166 Mike C wrote:

    Based on everything I’ve learned these last several years, women are no doubt hardwired to instinctively recognize alpha personality type traits that go unnoticed by most men.  Similarly, I am beginning to think men instinctively recognize the facial and body differences from a 39-year old compared to a 23-year old that go unnoticed when women look at the exact same two women.

    You may be correct. ☺

     

  • Jennifer

    Mrs. Robinson, you’re awesome.

    That joke is revolting.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    228 Susan Walsh wrote:

    No, I just got the Walsh embellishment gene. I never let details get in the way of a good story.

    647 Susan Walsh wrote:

    Ha, a novel might be the way to go! There are many drama-filled stories on this blog.

    You may be good in telling a story.

     

  • http://www.yesmrsrobinson.com Mrs. Robinson

    “Personally, I don’t care much about my family or what they think, but if my friends found out that I married a woman with 2 dozen partners, I’d receive not their scorn, but their ridicule… or at least pity.”

    ^This. Unless a man is the rare rugged individualist loner or outside of mainstream society, he will care what his buddies think about his girl.

  • Abbot

    if my friends found out that I married a woman with 2 dozen partners, I’d receive not their scorn, but their ridicule… or at least pity.”

    of course

  • http://gravatar.com/otc1 OffTheCuff

    You don’t get it. I’m a very vocal woman in the sack and never shy away from letting my partner know what I want.  Nevertheless, due to all the nooks and crannies in our monds venus and the hit or miss nature of the strike, sometimes it just doesn’t happen for us.

    You are proving Sock’s point here. Being “hit or miss” is not a result of being female, it’s due to either you, or your lover being bad in the sack. Plenty of women are never “hit or miss”, I married one.

    (And WTF about the mons venus?)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    478 Susan Walsh wrote:

    What??? Hmmm, it may be time for a career change.

    Go for it. ☺


    Hmm. I think that morning coffee is ready.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    301 Isabel wrote:

    […] common law gives the same marital rights to those who have been together for more than 8 years and/or have children.

    Where is that?

    There is also something on Finland, but it does not exactly have same marital rights.

    98 (@ Feminism Produced Price Drop for Sex, Price Hike for Commitment) Kari Hurtta wrote:

    Domestic partnership is taken account. Now (since 2011-04-01) in Finland there is financial risks on domestic partnership if it is long enough (5 years) or if there is children.

    Ministry of justice, Finland: Laki avopuolisoiden yhteistalouden purkamisesta voimaan 1.4.2011 / Lagen om upplösning av sambors gemensamma hushåll träder i kraft 1.4.2011 / Act on the Dissolution of the Household of Cohabiting Partners entered into force on 1 April

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    690 Kari Hurtta, on the original of quoted text there was q-tag but that HTML-editor blugin does not accept it.

  • Lisa

    Longtime reader, first time poster…

    Susan (and others), if you wouldn’t mind, I’d like your take on this… I’ve experienced it for most of my young adult life, and this Atlantic article calls it to mind again.

    I’m early 30s, married a year. Looking back, I would have planned to marry earlier (as Badger laid out), but the so-called wise older women in my life kept telling me that I was being impatient and that I needed to work, travel, find myself, blah blah blah, and a husband would eventually find me in all my glory and marry me then.

    I didn’t date much in my 20s, so it wasn’t like I was deliberately putting off marriage to sleep around either. I just trusted those who were telling me not to tie themselves down so quickly. They weren’t as blatant as Bolick’s mother, but I could tell they were projecting their disappointments in life on me.

    The crazy thing was, all of these women who said to “not rush” into marriage were the types that had married at 21, had 2-3 kids, got divorced at 38 and now were “living life.” But in the next breath after telling younger women to not tie themselves down, they would talk about how much they loved their children and loved being mothers — never making the connection that for those of us who wanted to have children, we kinda needed to get married, you know? (well, if we wanted to do things the right way)

    I finally broke out of the mold on my own when I realized this advice was getting me nowhere, found myself a wonderful guy, left my so-called glamorous job (let’s just say in the same field of work as Bolick) to take a steady 9-to-5 that is conducive to family life — and really pays about the exact same amount as the jet-setting, glamour job and has better benefits.

    And just the other day, I had some late 40-something woman (presumably divorced) ask me with disdain, “You left that GREAT job to get MARRIED?” I said absolutely, and that I found it much more important to be a happy wife and mother than to be a jet-setting career woman and that I likely wouldn’t die wishing I had traveled more or spent more time in a fabulous career, but I would feel regretful if I had never married or had children.

    The woman said, “Well, if it was up to me, I would have picked the job.”

    I have no idea if this woman has children, but I just couldn’t believe the myopia going on there… and that if she did have children (whom she probably claimed to love strongly) that she would then question why I would put family life over a superficially glamorous career.

    And yet, once I announced my engagement a while back, all the men in my office expected me to leave and all of them were very supportive. They said they completely understood why I would leave.

    Have you seen any deliberate acts of sabotage like this Susan? Or anyone? I am very grateful that I started listening to myself (and some like-minded, family-oriented women) before I found myself much older and out of the prime marrying/childbearing years, but I guess I’m still surprised when I meet women like the above who wouldn’t have had her children if not for being married then show such disdain for a late 20-early 30-something woman’s desire for the same.

  • Ted

    @ Lisa – Welcome!

    Often times people have a “grass is greener” view of life.  They may be miserable, or not, but they always seem to believe that things are better elsewhere.  “If I hadn’t married young I could have been a CEO”.  Or, you could have died alone and childless after spending your entire life busting your ass to make someone else money in the hopes of becoming a CEO someday.

    I tend to simply focus on the hear and now, and generally don’t look at the grass on the other side of the fence.  It doesn’t matter if it is greener or not.  It still requires maintenance and cutting, and that yard may be twice the size of mine!  I have no desire to cut more grass…

  • Ted

    @ Lisa – oops, I cut off a section that actually answered your last question…

    I was raised by a single mother.  She worked very hard to make sure I had everything I needed.  But my entire life I was told what qualities a woman wants from a husband, and most of them turned out to be wrong.  Well, not entirely.  All of the qualities are indeed desirable, but I didn’t have a male role-model to rough up all my smooth edges. In essence, my mother raised me to be a beta.  I truly don’t think any of it was “intentional sabotage”, but the end results were the same.

    My guess?  Those “wise” women honestly believed they were giving you good advice.  The problem is, they were basing that advice on greener grass.  If you want to know what choices to make, find someone that made them already and are happy with them.  Talking marriage to a women that was unhappily married is probably not going to be helpful.  Talk to happily married women.  Talk to career women that are happy about their success, and then decide which happiness is for you.

    My problem with the current social climate is most women seem to jump at the chance to tell young women how lousy marriage is and how great a career is, but most of those women are divorced or in miserable marriages.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Ted,

    most of those women are divorced or in miserable marriages.

    And if they are like most people, in miserable jobs too.

  • anonymous

    The social climate is family unfriendly. Parenting is the part that’s often left out of the discussion and it plays a major component to where we find ourselves today. IMO, parents are the most influential in not instilling or modeling family values to the youth. They’re the ones wanting to eliminate all accountability from their offspring. Just look at who has pushed schools to give undeserved good grades, pushed for every kid to get a trophy at little league, pushed for the college prep route even for kids who are lousy students, don’t want their kids to hold jobs while in school as people have done in the past, overinflate their kids’ heads, let them return home after college to mooch off them, and on and on and on. They may have good intentions but they sure are shortsighted.

    Exhibit A- Lisa at 12:29  “the so-called wise older women in my life kept telling me that I was being impatient and that I needed to work, travel, find myself, blah blah blah, and a husband would eventually find me in all my glory and marry me then.

    Exhibit B- Kate Bolick “And the elevation of independence over coupling (“I wasn’t ready to settle down”) is a second-wave feminist idea I’d acquired from my mother, who had embraced it, in part, I suspect, to correct for her own choices. I was her first and only recruit, marching off to third grade in tiny green or blue T-shirts declaring: A Woman Without a Man Is Like a Fish Without a Bicycle, or: A Woman’s Place Is in the House—and the Senate, and bellowing along to Gloria Steinem & Co.’s feminist-minded children’s album, Free to Be … You and Me (released the same year Title IX was passed, also the year of my birth). Marlo Thomas and Alan Alda’s retelling of “Atalanta,” the ancient Greek myth about a fleet-footed princess who longs to travel the world before finding her prince, became the theme song of my life. Once, in high school, driving home from a family vacation, my mother turned to my boyfriend and me cuddling in the backseat and said, “Isn’t it time you two started seeing other people?” She adored Brian—he was invited on family vacations! But my future was to be one of limitless possibilities, where getting married was something I’d do when I was ready, to a man who was in every way my equal, and she didn’t want me to get tied down just yet. “

  • anonymous

    Ah, forgive my gramatical errors, there are no editing options, are there?

  • Lisa

    Hi Ted! Thanks for the warm welcome and for your tips and your perspective. I do agree that even some more well-meaning people in our lives do more to harm our overall development than help! The problem is, the thing they think they’re saving me from is actually what is probably the most beneficial choice for my life!

    I just wanted to note that I didn’t seek out this woman I met last night. My husband and I were at an event, and our mutual friend introduced me to this woman because she and I had done work in the field I just left. After talking shop for two minutes or so, that’s when the woman, out of the blue, said, “And you left all that to get married???”  I was just taken aback because it came by surprise really. And it was rather rude too, in my opinion. I didn’t ask for her opinion on my marriage and my choice to abandon the rat race for marriage.

    Since I had my mental transformation, so to speak, I have worked to surround myself with men and women who value family. I currently work in a heavily Catholic organization where nearly everyone is married (if they aren’t nuns or priests) and children/grandchildren are frequent visitors to the office. I’ve joined a young women’s volunteer organization that also has a pro-family feel. Most of the women are my age (early 30s), but already have a toddler or two. Two of the women in the group are currently pregnant. This is not a religious group or a political group, but it’s interesting to see how it attracts a very upper middle class, pro-family, pro-child type of woman.

    This is completely different from my former life, and I am pleasantly surprised how much I enjoy it all.

  • Ramble

    Lisa, I am curious, had a number of women come to you when you were, say, 18, and asked what it was that you wanted to do with your life…and, in these conversations, it was often mentioned that your best chance of having a healthy first child is to get pregnant before the age of 27, what would your reaction have been?

  • Lisa

    Hi Ramble. Good question.

    Honestly, if that had happened, I would have taken dating more seriously when I was in my early 20s. I would have looked more at men who would be husband material and been a lot more focused instead of taking on the mantra of, “if it happens, it happens.”

    I was not a carousel rider at all, by the way. I often spent more time than not deliberately not dating because I felt that the wrong relationship would distract me from my career goals. Plus, many of the women in my family had their first child in their early 30s, so I didn’t have that fear of what could happen if I didn’t marry earlier.

    But, like the young women at Susan’s house who visited with Kate Bolick, I pictured myself marrying at 27 or 28, and maybe having that first child at 29 or 30.

    I think that one thing that helped me wake up was the fact that one of the women in my general age range who was held up to me as a role model was never able to get pregnant. She is highly educated, married at 34 to a great guy, waited at least two years after that to keep working on career goals and then they started trying to conceive. They discovered issues that might not have been a problem if she had been 10 years younger, but when they were discovered (and treated) when she was 38, it was likely too late. So here is a fabulous educated couple who waited until everything was “perfect” and they couldn’t have kids after all that.

    I find it interesting too that when I brought up this woman’s story to the naysayers, they just dismissed it as being an unfortunate situation for her, but they then brought up all of the other 39-year-old women they knew who gave birth. Sigh.

    That was a long answer to your question, wasn’t it? Sorry about that. But the short answer is that I would have been much more serious about dating seriously while in college, grad school and the early stages of my career so that I could have married by my late 20s, like I wanted.

  • Ramble

    Lisa, good for you.

  • jess

    Lisa,

    I’m so glad you realised what you wanted in life and went for it. Its so important that people have the freedom to choice their own path.

    I think people that INSIST on delayed marriage or a high profile career are just as bad as those INSISTING on early marriage or early babies.

    Whilst I would prefer my daughters to go to uni, have a profession and then marry and have kids in their early 30’s thats MY ideal blueprint and not theirs.

    Im not going to hide my preferences for them but my overriding message to them will be that, within reason, I want them to be happy and ultimately they have to follow their hearts and make their own mistakes and decisions.

    on a similar theme, heaven preserve us from ‘trendy parents”….

    “Hey kids, just call me Brian”

  • Ramble

    Whilst I would prefer my daughters to go to uni, have a profession and then marry and have kids in their early 30′s thats MY ideal blueprint and not theirs.

    Jess, how familiar are you with the data (that is starting to pile up) that indicates that women having their first child after an age as early as 27 are more likely to have unhealthy babies?

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    306 zed wrote:

    All we have seen so far is a very likely airbrushed or photoshopped cover designed by some artistic director with east-coast tastes (and very likely either female or gay) thinks looks attractive.

    Yes, it is quite likely that people, what we have on magazine pictures, are not real.


    Waiting for morning coffee (as usual). ☻

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ 699 Ramble, It occured to me that I have quoted a age of the first marriage, but that a age of the first child is at least equal instresting.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    697 anonymous wrote:

    […] there are no editing options […]

    Not now. On one point there was edit link (for half hour after post, I think), but Susan Walsh removed them, when all plugins was too heavy.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (continuing)

    However, now there is better editor plugin. I do not know is edit link after posting possible with that same editor plugin at all. I guess that it is not possible.

     

     

  • Anacaona

    Or, you could have died alone and childless after spending your entire life busting your ass to make someone else money in the hopes of becoming a CEO someday.

    Funny thing is that I know many career driven MEN that after breaking their backs for 10 years in an office realize that they will never become CEO’s and get terribly depressed or just become lazy at work. I wonder how the majority of women in the same situation cope with that. Specially if they never had a family. Sacrificing everything for a dream that never came true can be devastating. Do feminists account for that or the career girl is always happy and satisfied and if she is not is patriarchy’s fault?

    I currently work in a heavily Catholic organization where nearly everyone is married (if they aren’t nuns or priests) and children/grandchildren are frequent visitors to the office. I’ve joined a young women’s volunteer organization that also has a pro-family feel. Most of the women are my age (early 30s), but already have a toddler or two. Two of the women in the group are currently pregnant. This is not a religious group or a political group, but it’s interesting to see how it attracts a very upper middle class, pro-family, pro-child type of woman.

    Please tell me that you live in Southern California, pretty please?

     

  • Wayfinder

    most of those women are divorced or in miserable marriages.

    And if they are like most people, in miserable jobs too.

    The thing I shake my head at with feminists: what they call a “glamorous job” I call a “hell-hole”.

  • Jennifer

    Ted, you described perfectly what happened: your mom taught you how to be good, but you didn’t have a dad to teach you how to be a man. That’s the problem: boys used to be taught how to be men from the get-go. So it was ok to say “be nice”, because the fact that they were masculine was already established. But now, masculinity has become greatly devalued.

  • Abby

    wow, the article + the conversation = interesting!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Abby
      Welcome! Join the conversation any time, we have fun here!

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    708 Anacaona, all man are not intresting of career. ☺

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    307 Anacaona wrote:

    She looked like she was telling it to herself more than she believed I think Today show make her plea even more PC.

    PC =politically correct ?

    / Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms


    (a coffee ready?)

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    312 Jennifer wrote:

    If I keep trying to return here, I fear for my computer’s health.

    Yes, your computer may get some bad infection.

  • Lisa

    Anacona, sorry, I’m in the cold, gray, rainy Midwest. Central Indiana area. I’m not from here though, but my husband is.

    The volunteer group I’m in is national though. Actually pretty well known… it’s the Junior League. People have all sorts of stereotypes about it, but I’ve found the women to be a lot more varied in background and lifestyle than they might have been in the past. But most are married (or are about to be) and have children (or plan to soon).

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    396 Sandy wrote:

    I was talking about sexual market place and sexual market value. It’s not the same as marriage market place or LTR market place.

    I had impression that it was marriage what was talked about:

    She is 39, and she has never been married.

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    404 Susan Walsh wrote:

    Her dad was LAPD and her mom was happy being a homemaker.

    LAPD = Los Angeles Police Department ?

     

    / Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Kari you are batting 1000 on the acronyms!

      Oops I just realized you will now have to google “batting 1000″

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    415 zed wrote:

    Does it bother you so much that men assign such a low SMV to her that the ubiquitous threats to withhold sex may not be as threatening as you would hope?

    Hmm. Perhaps you have point on here.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “When I was sort of stagnating in a job I didn’t love, he spurred me into applying for grad school.”

    Trapped in a not-unhappy job? You were riding the career carousel!

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    720 Susan Walsh wrote:

    Oops I just realized you will now have to google “batting 1000″

    OK:

    batting 1000 = 100 % success against tremendous odds.

    or

    batting 1000 = When a baseball player has had a hit or a walk every time he has come up to bat.

     

     

     

     


    (I think that I got girl to sleeping.)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari
      It means the former, but is a baseball term. You are doing well with all the acronyms! What a way to improve your English!

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    417 RubyRidge wrote:

    Maybe someone’s mentioned it, maybe not, but the effects of divorce on men seem curiously absent from this piece.

     

    “Hey RubyRidge, you hereby agree to give this other person half of your wealth and possibly alimony for an ultimately arbitrary time….if she decides she no longer likes you,” doesn’t have me jumpin’ for my quill.

    Perhaps this is not have hit (yet?) to general knowledge?

    430 Susan Walsh wrote:

    Perhaps because she is well-established in her career, may not have children, etc. that risk is considerably lessened.

    Maybe.

    If divorce risk is considered too high, that increases usage of cohabitation/common-law marriage/domestic partnership. Then laws change and more of same risks than on marriage are included to domestic partnership.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @kari
      You are right – I think many men are unaware of American divorce law, which varies considerably by state. Until recently my own state was one of the worst in the country, but we didn’t have a lower marriage rate because of it.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    420 Dogsquat wrote:

    My avatar pic is actually a low-quality scan of my driver’s license pic.

    I think that I do not believe that.
    Dogsquat

  • jess

    Ramble,

    Hi, sorry I must have missed something… what evidence are you referring to?

    J

  • Dogsquat

    Kari, I grew my hair longer since then.

  • jess

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2008/09/24/older-mothers.html

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1299390/Working-mothers-dont-harm-baby-But-afford-good-childcare-claims-study.html

    Ramble,

    Its true there is an increased chance of compromised health of a baby to an older mother.

    According to the NHS the sudden increase in risk gradient is about 38 for infertility, difficulty in conception and child disease/disability.

    For this reason I would prefer my grandchildren to pop out of my children late 20s to early 30s.

    But if my kids want to have kids at 21, I get to play grandma whilst still mobile! Great!

    but if they never want kids at all- well, think of all the extra holidays they can treat me too in my old age and Ive got loads of nieces and nephews to cuddle anyhow.

    what will be will be. Of course one doesn’t know what medical advances we will have in 15 years.

    Maybe by then babies will come from amazon.com or an iTunes download.

     

     

  • Anacaona

    Anacaona, all man are not intresting of career.

    Heh true. Neither all women, but say that out loud and see the pitchforks and torches come running to you.

    @Lisa

    Googled it. It looks very nice I will research. Thanks for the heads up! :)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    388 Karen wrote:

    20 years young women are not interested in 40 year old men. Even 30 seems “old” to them.

    Or then 20 years young women are not interested in a man (20 or 40 year).

    Kate Bolick wrote:

    We took for granted that we’d spend our 20s finding ourselves, whatever that meant, and save marriage for after we’d finished graduate school and launched our careers, which of course would happen at the magical age of 30.


    (Morning coffee is ready?)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    728 Dogsquat wrote:

    Kari, I grew my hair longer since then.

    I think that you then gimped your picture to a little prettier.

     


    Got morning coffee.

    Found this (via TinEye)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    426 Jon, @ The uploader has not made this video available in your country.

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    435 Workafrolic wrote:

    I can barely see what the photo is even of! :)

    @ 724 Kari Hurtta; As you see, gravatar.com scales picture for you.
    Just change s -paramater. Here s=96: gravatar.com

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    453 Sock! wrote:

    The GMA show was horrible in comparison.

    GMA Network ?

     

    / Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    486 Mrs. Robinson wrote:

    Maybe we should go back to arranged marriages, or something.

    Maybe.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Hmm,I think that I have lost on here.

    373 Badger wrote:

    Does this rabbit have a similarly-demeanored sister?

    393 Badger wrote:

    Susan,
    Come on, you know that’s not the answer I was looking for!

    But never mind.

    (
    382 Susan Walsh wrote:

    Yup, a twin (fraternal). Here’s a story.

    )

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ 511 zombie roissy; yes that is only surprise to her. And it is questionable is it really suprise.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    516 Aaron1988 wrote:

    I’m a 22 year old guy from England, and reading this article made me feel so naive because I have never even kissed someone that I wasn’t dating.

    Uhh. I do not seeanything strange on this.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I’m a 22 year old guy from England, and reading this article made me feel so naive because I have never even kissed someone that I wasn’t dating.

      Uhh. I do not seeanything strange on this.

      There isn’t anything strange about it, or shouldn’t be. Now this guy is made to feel inadequate for not hooking up. This is a vicious cycle.

  • Jess

    Mick jagger has really let himself go…

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    519 GT66 wrote:

    I get the distinct impression that a date with this woman is like taking the SAT all over again on EVERY date.

    SAT = Scholastic Aptitude Test ?

    / Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    740 Jess wrote:

    Mick jagger […]

    Me? I guess that this is something impolite.

    Yes, I’m late.

  • Luke
  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    588 Blues wrote:

    that would only be correct if the 42% (wow that high?) deliberately chose to remain celibate.

    So those that were forced to go sexless don’t have any right to filter for promiscuity?

    Yes, this seems to be the message.


    Got a morning coffee.

     

    @ 740 Jess; Yes, I’m late on comments. Deal with it. Must go.

     

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (continuing)

    This is the message, because these which are studying instead of partying are left.

    571 Dogsquat wrote:

    Most docs are nerds.  They’re the people who studied rather than partied.  All of a sudden at age 25 (or whenever) they’re the boss and everybody has to ask them to do anything and addresses them by their title.

    and

    I’ve taken a really awesome doc under my wing a little bit- the guy is a genius, good looking, and funny as hell, but he’s in his early thirties and only kissed one girl.  No shit.  All he’s ever done is medicine, and he sucks at everything else.

    And other “suitable” men have not longer left.

    208 VJ wrote:

    […] wonder ‘where are all the decent, good, well educated, marriage minded men’? They’re already Married, dears!


    590 Abbot write:

    No such claim is being made. That filter exists only because men have options. No options, no filter.

    On 586 (which start this subthread) I referred Who’s Really Having Sex in College?. It says that 37% of women (and 42% of men) did  not have intercourse.


    Got girl from a riding lesson. Hmm. Seems that coffee is ready.

    (Missus warns that I must be fast or she drink all coffee.)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari

      Got girl from a riding lesson. Hmm. Seems that coffee is ready.

      (Missus warns that I must be fast or she drink all coffee.)

      I enjoy these reports of Finnish domesticity :-)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ 743 Susan Walsh; To get nested blockquote, you need to use HTML -tab on editor plugin. Visual -tab does not work on here. ☻

     

  • jess

    Kari,

    Sorry, you have lost me- not sure what you are saying.

    re: filters etc

    I thought I had replied. Guys and girls can select on whatever they wish. But

    1. i dont think many select along the lines you suggest

    2. there is no compelling reason for them to do so

    3. there is no ethical superiority in doing so unless they have deliberately chosen celibacy

    NB, to avoid any ‘shaming’ accusation you may swap the phrase ‘incompetence’ with ‘lack of success for whatever reason”

    Hope that clarifies…

    J

  • jess

    Another reference from the uk media.

    on page 18 -22 of ‘Fabulous’, the Sun’s Saturday magazine they discuss ‘early’ marriages.

    Turns out they are the source of the highest amount of divorces in the uk.

    Psychologists put this down to the relative immaturity of both partners and the differences they undergo from 20-24.

    They advise waiting till slightly later in life for a more stable and happier union.

    Comments svp?

  • Sydney Carton

    To me it seems like she’s stayed in the game just a bit too long and the article is a long justification for her life choices.  The pining for an odd communal set up like that one Chinese sub-set was particularly revealing and disheartening.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Sydney
      I agree. I actually found the Dutch semi-convent even more depressing. Grown women are not allowed to have male guests!

  • Pingback: The Path Forward for the Sexual Marketplace | The Badger Hut

  • iknowexactly

    Yes, she’s a 6, because for men attractiveness is all about FERTILITY, not her presentation as sculpture.
    I’d take any pliable 16 year old cheerleader over her in a state where it’s not feminist outlawed.

    To try to illustrate to women, the equivalent of sexuall attraction of an infertile woman is about the attraction a dumpster diving homeless, penniless male has to a women.

    Zero.

  • Pingback: Head of Female Opinions – Susan Walsh « stagedreality

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    OT

    629 Susan Walsh October 17, 2011 at 8:37 am wrote:

    I admire your ability to jump online here before coffee. Even I don’t do that!

    It takes some time to get coffee ready.

    / Kari Hurtta
    ( Must soon go to back to school. Parents (or guardians ?) was also welcome to class.)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    753 iknowexactly December 7, 2011 at 12:06 am wrote:

    I’d take any pliable 16 year old cheerleader over her in a state where it’s not feminist outlawed.

    But was cheerleaders to considered to be top on that (school?) hierarchy?

    If it is, then claim says nothing about attractiveness of fertility (except if that Kate Bolick was claimed to be top on hierarchy).

    You did not wrote:

    I’d take most 16 year old girls over her in a state where it’s not feminist outlawed.

    I do not claim that fertility is not attractive.

    / Kari Hurtta

  • ConfidentNiceGuy

    Women like Bolick are a major cause of male impotence. The exhaustion … “I … I … I … I …. blah blah blah … ” ” … me! … me … and more ME!!!!!”

    I think the technical term is “narcissism”. It is a bit of a turn-off, unless you are narcissistic yourself of course.