This is the first of a two-part article on the political and economic forces surrounding marriage trends. Part Two may be found here.
Kate Bolick has ridden her Atlantic November cover article All the Single Ladies all the way to fame and fortune. It’s the most read article in the magazine’s history, was optioned as a TV show in development by Sony, and recently generated a book deal in the high six figures for Bolick. The book is titled Among the Suitors: Single Women I Have Loved. The announcement says “It develops a sly blend of autobiography and literary portraiture to question the conventional marriage trajectory.“
I congratulate Kate on her incredible success. She has clearly struck a nerve, and emancipated single women of a certain age are rushing to join the conversation and celebrate their single status. This is a marked reversal of the spinster lit trend of the last few years, where unhappily single women in their late 30s published memoirs attempting to come to terms with where they went wrong, and reaffirming their vow to continue their search for a life partner.
Ironically, the feminist media that champions Kate’s choice glossed over Kate’s opening in the Atlantic piece:
The decision to end a stable relationship for abstract rather than concrete reasons (“something was missing”), I see now, is in keeping with a post-Boomer ideology that values emotional fulfillment above all else. 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.
…What my mother could envision was a future in which I made my own choices. I don’t think either of us could have predicted what happens when you multiply that sense of agency by an entire generation.
Though feminism has brought us here, to a declining marriage rate and a female population more independent and educated than their male would-be partners, Kate Bolick and other women in her shoes are wise to focus on finding their bliss in life without a man. We’re facing at least a generation where a third of college-educated women will not marry college-educated men. This, among other factors, will continue to apply significant pressure to the declining marriage rate. It makes good sense for women to make the best life they can with or without a man, as many will not have the opportunity to marry.
Still, that’s different than championing singlehood over couplehood, which is where the momentum is now. Boston Magazine’s January issue featured an article by Janelle Nanos, Single By Choice, interviewing women (and one man) who prefer to remain single and do not want to be victimized by “singlism,” the social stigmas that unmarried people face. The term singlism was coined by Bella DePaulo, a psych professor at UCSB who is considered “the arbiter of the unmarried agenda.” And that’s the critical point here – there is an agenda that sees much more at stake than personal happiness and fulfillment.
Terri Tespicio, a writer who was interviewed for the article, said:
The idea that I would marry someone I loved has never crossed my mind. At 38, I feel more powerful and sexier and in control than I have ever felt…My life is a best-kept secret, and I wouldn’t trade it. As a single person, the world is my oyster. I’m just sorry that people who are married don’t have that freedom.
Even stronger proof of a political agenda may be found in a statement from Lisa Berkman, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health who states:
Single people who have strong social ties often have fewer health risks than those “greedy” married couples who isolate themselves.
There will be a great deal more shaming of married people in the next 20 years, as women engage in whatever cognitive dissonance (or hamsterwheeling) is necessary to find an escape from singlism and more importantly, a nagging sense of personal disappointment. The Single By Choice movement is described this way:
They come in all shapes and sizes. They’re young men, who are the fastest growing percentage of those living on their own. They’re well-educated women, who are refusing to “marry down” to their less credentialed prospects. They’re gays and lesbians watching their friends in same-sex couples ensconse themselves behind white picket fences. Some have taken up their own distinguishing monikers, calling themselves quirkyalones, singulars, onelies or spinsterellas.
In truth, the population most affected by these trends, and they account for nearly all of those who identify with the movement, are never-married women in their 30s and 40s. It remains to be seen whether 20-something women will get on board before they know whether they will have the opportunity to marry. When Kate Bolick asked the young women at our dinner together whether her single status at the age of 39 freaked them out, they all nodded, awkwardly but truthfully. Each one of them also stated that they planned to prioritize having a family over pursuing a career. I suspect that the up and coming generation of women views these celebrations of singleness as a cautionary tale, and they’re anxious to make sure they won’t be calling themselves onelies or quirkyalones if they can help it.
While I am a supporter of marriage as the bedrock of civilization, I support the right of any individual to choose to remain single, and to find their happiness in life where they will. But let’s not kid ourselves. The Single By Choice movement is political, not personal.
{ 889 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 … 6 »
This is just additional hamster-wheel rationalizing.
Proud and defiant on the outside, crying on the inside.
Be certain that when a group of women need to “celebrate” something, it is because they desperately wish it was worth celebrating.
If singleness was soo effing groovy, there would be no need for being such demonstrative behavior.
Methinks the hamster doth spin too fast.
When this stupid fad fails to be a balm to all their lonely hearts, we will eventually see the faces of total defeat and humiliation.
Consider this the “bargaining” stage.
Since then, she has graduated, passed the Bar exam, and found a job in a completely different field. She likes her life a lot better these days.
there are worse thinggs that can happen to you than having a law degree and not practicing law. I know several people in that circumstance; the degree stil opens doors for you.
Ask Doug1. ;-0
But seriously, I know people who work in the finance industry, banking, non-profits, and other places who have law degrees. At one point, my DH was thinking about law school as credential for the highest level of management in his corporation. He has no intentiion of every practising law.
Jonny:
“For many single people, its a lie to suggest your life has meaning from your job or accomplishments. Most people are not so talented that they leave a mark on society. ”
I saw your point. Most people who work will never make any real impact in their professions. Their accomplishments, no matter how sterling, will mean nothing 20 minutes after the last shovel of dirt is thrown onto their graves. One whose fulfillment is personal is just that — it is personal to him or her. While it certainly has meaning to him or her, it will likely have no lasting meaning beyond his or her own life.
I had a dear cousin who claimed a great life as an academic and college professor. She married when she was 40 to someone she claimed was a great and accomplished historian. In truth she only married him because he was in the US on a work visa that expired. She stayed married to him out of a sense of obligation. She didn’t really love him, nor he her. She wasn’t really a distinguished academic either. She was a part time lecturer at a community college, as was her husband. They weren’t tenured or published. They were teachers–plain and simple. That is not to denigrate their work or their professions; but it is to state that they felt a need to puff themselves up and misrepresent the true nature of their work.
About 20 years ago my cousin died a widow, destitute and alone. She had to move back to her childhood home in the Midwest (which she hated) because she could not afford to stay on the east coast where she loved hobnobbing with the wine, cheese and brie crowds. She had no children to care for her. She had only a few extended family. She left no legacy, no body of scholarly work, no property other than a few books, no offspring, nothing of lasting value other than a few memories which will end with my death.
This is where Bolick and her sisters miss the mark. Bolick’s writings will live on and perhaps someday they will mean something to some obscure historian studying the wreckage of this SMP. But most never married women like the hypothetical overworked social worker, the harried junior high school teacher, the underpaid, underappreciated legal secretary or the cougar lawyer, will truly lead lives which, in the end, will signify very little to them, whatever families they had, or their societies.
Captain Capitalism has an interesting take on Bolick and this piece here.
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2012/02/mgtow-vs-wgtow.html
I got the distinct impression that Bolick’s article was a web of rationalization. She is not really happy, did not want this to happen, and now need to build an edifice to convince herself that everything is great.
I don’t think she’s trying to build an edifice to convince herself that everything is great. I think she knows exactly what is going on, knows that half of her life is still ahead of her and wants to make that part of her life happy and meaningful. I have a few friends like that–though they were wallflowers, not glamor girls, in their salad days. The big question for them is “Now what?” Do they stand around watching their friends send kids off to college or plan kid’s weddings or do they try to enjoy life? The healthy ones make an effort to enjoy what they can. I’d do the same if I were in that position.
For many single people, its a lie to suggest your life has meaning from your job or accomplishments. Most people are not so talented that they leave a mark on society. The best thing most people can or should do is leave the world to the next generation.
The career fantasy is indeed a terrible thing to sell. They have this expectations of awards, recognition, lots of money, travels and a partnership in X number of years. But then few people actually can pull all that off anyway. I’m not saying that family is the solution but at the very least there is always satisfaction unless you are the type that needs people of power to praise you to feel successful. I had never felt more flattered that when a young girl told me that loved my book and feel in love with my characters (or the other way around when one of my villains was pulling a nice trick and she actually though it was good I broke her heart, I apologized of course but it was still good to know that I managed to make her so sneaky) not even after I won my literary award so at the very least I will feel a failure if all I had was my award and no one that actually LOVED what I did.
I do wonder if another important thing to teach is to recognize your personal love language if you will feel really successful if you have the career even if you don’t marry or marry older or have no children. I’m getting the feeling that many women follow the herd and is not till they are too old and late they realize they actually are not happy with what the herd told them they will be.
For one thing, it was just wrong. There is no hedge, the dining room is not wood-panelled. I was surprised those details made it in after I specifically refuted them. It happened with some other stuff too. I learned in this process that the fact-checking is a negotiation.
I’m astounded by this. I’ve been involved in situations that were misreported due to incompetence/inexperience, but I’ve always been able to get a retraction/corection printed. That’s just stupid and dishonest.
OTOH, I was having house envy, so now I feel better knowing that there is no hedge or wood paneling.
I have paneling in my dining room and den, but I live in a mid-century executive ranch. I would have loved a Victorian, but I suspect the upkeep on a ranch is easier.
Susan, I had said quite a few times in the past as to how important slut shaming was and you had, previously, said that you would not do it. That, IIRC, you were OK with it in concept, but that you would not do it yourself. Have you since changed your opinion?
@ Ramble
I do know a lot of older people, but the lifestyle I described is common for girls closer to my age as well. It’s just that it’s not really a big problem to lead that SATC-lifestyle at my age (provided you don’t have loads of unprotected sex). I think 27 is already an age where it begins to become a problem though. I think you should have some savings and have made some investments at that age.
I’m not one for joining ‘movements’, but I’m surprised so many here think a woman living most of her life unmarried/uncoupled is such a bad or sad thing.
I’m in my mid-20s and just ended a 7-year-long relationship with a man I love very much, who would have liked to stay with me forever. In large part, I chose to do so because I have doubts that a serious romantic relationship is something that is going to be more satisfying to me long term, than having my freedom is. I have nothing against relationships (I’m not the casual sex/dating sort anyway), but meshing my life and identity almost entirely with another person (ie marriage) is something else. I can certainly relate to where these women are coming from.
I don’t have a career and I certainly don’t plan to drink my life away with ‘my girls’. All but one of my close friends are in serious LTRs, some with kids, at this point, anyway – our time together is spent with me at their house cooking and playing with their dogs and babies. It’s wonderful to experience their domesticity but it’s very nice to go home and relish the solitude of my bedroom…
I know I’m a bit weird but I don’t even understand what it’s like to feel ‘lonely’. I feel better than I have in a very long time, these past few months I’ve been living alone and boyfriend-less… it’s so peaceful.
Additionally, I think some commentators are missing the fact that the desire to ‘leave a mark on society’ is a masculine trait (though certainly shared by many women, especially careerist women).
I have zero drive to do meaningful or important things; I just want to live my life as I please, in a way which will give me the most contentment. Many women I know are the same. I’d even say that most of us have children not because we feel it gives our lives meaning and importance, but because a]it’s the normal thing people do and b]we get baby fever, which is totally illogical/biological.
@deti
That put a big smile on my face, thank you.
Deti and others,
I disagree. I’m just into my 30s, am and will remain unmarried, and will also remain childfree. I define myself mainly by my work (DVM), my interests outside of that (piano, running, riding), my friends/family, and my religion.
“She left no legacy, no body of scholarly work, no property other than a few books, no offspring, nothing of lasting value other than a few memories which will end with my death.”
Effectively, outside of the ‘no property’ thing, the same will be said about me. And probably you. And nearly all of us, wedded or not, childed or not, within 50 years of our deaths. Or 100 years. Whatever. I’m continually amused by those who think it matters to history that they “left a legacy” or some such by having kids.
Who will take care of me when I’m old? My present self, through my work and assets, and my future self, through my preserverance and faith. Many of the people who think their children are going to take care of them are in for a rude surprise.
And this dying alone stuff? My step-dad’s first wife was rushed to the hospital for heart palpitations by her neighbors when my step-dad was out of town. She died overnight from a myocardial infarction before any relative could get to her.
My grandmother had a heart attack at night in a hospital. My
grandfather a final stoke. My other grandmother was found dead in her home. Her husband died years before.
They all died alone, despite having many children.
Die alone? You probably will anyway.
I’m a WGHOW, partnered with a MGHOW. It works for some. As long as you’re honest with yourself.
On all this “no children to care for you” stuff:
I cared for both of my aged parents for approximately 18 years. I’m glad I did it and would feel horribly guilty had I not. OTOH, I really would not want my sons to have to do the same. Although it did teach my sons some valuable lessons about compassion, it was a tremendous drain on me and my family. Balance the needs of two very elderly people with the needs of young children was exhausting.
I don’t look forward to my sons “taking care of me,” and I hope to be self-sufficient as long as I can be.
I see raising my own kid as the greatest accomplishment aside from just about everything else. My career isn’t distinguished although I make a good living and have two degrees. Despite the diploma, I don’t retain much else. The job is great. I love my monthly income, but it really is a job, not a career.
I see this as an issue of what do you find meaningful in this world. I think “Pip” is an exception to the rule of remaining single. Many women do choose to not marry and have children. The majority in this situation keep the hope alive despite all the choices that show that they really don’t want marriage. I suppose it comes down to an intentional choice, an inadventent choice, or unconscience choice to remain unmarried and childless.
As for legacy, I find these issues to be a side show. The emphasis is whether you find “more meaning” from being married with kids or not. The raising of kids is satisfying and I also derive satisfaction from leaving something. The legacy isn’t myself, but the next generation.
I really don’t mind dying alone. The difference is whether you can call up someone to help you, whereas a childless person has fewer options. Many people do die unexpectedly so I think the issue of dying alone to be unimportant; however, a visit from family while you’re in a convalecsent home might ease things a bit. Families are helpful in the transition when you age. Of course, I do see a distinction when kids don’t want to help when compared with childless seniors all by themselves. It is a choice that people make for themselves or a choice that others make for you.
Yeah, be thankful. Our roof leaks, the house is drafty. My husband and I have always been partial to this scene, from It’s a Wonderful Life:
My next house is going to be all on one level. Let’s trade
@Ramble
Whenever I support slut shaming, the negative responses are just about 100%. Women absolutely do not have the stomach for it. So mostly I don’t think it will work.
I do know some slutty women, and I love them, but of course they know very well I don’t approve. Don’t forget – my reservations are not moral. I think promiscuity, from either sex, is bad all around.
I don’t think anyone should look at having children from a selfish perspective, like “What will my children do for me?” or “I won’t be alone when I die!” It’s very hard work to raise kids, with sleep deprivation and stress. Nobody should go into it with pure idealism. Instead be realistic and know it will be a lot of work.
deti:
“The problem is that Bolick and her situation are a rarity. Only the most prestigious, beautiful, and financially successful 40 YO single women can live a life like Bolick. She will have opportunities that the vast majority of single women will never have. For most women, it is a life of work and drudgery. ”
Yes, it’s a mistake for the masses to emulate the apex.
The funny thing is that I know quite a number of single unmarried/childless people of both genders (more than a dozen) who are now in their mid-late 40s, and they ALL have master degrees/phds, own their own homes, are doing well financially.
Everyone I know on the lower rungs of the social ladder marry/pair up/have kids in their teens/20s.
Now, I don’t know if this “singleness” is going to trickle down the ladder, it’s possible, but I’m doubtful it will happen for quite a while if it does.
In my experience so far, the upper-middle class is living in a bubble. There are either stable marriages or singleness w/o children. The middle-middle is following the trends of the lower classes, not the upper. I’m not sure if these 2 camps will ever meet, there seems be a definitive line in place. Who knows eventually. ?
@Susan
http://blog.identified.com/2012/01/new-identified-research-reveals-engineers-far-more-likely-than-mbas-to-build-and-run-companies.html
You might want to start using this link from here onwards. I recollect you mention Beta STEM guys are the future to the economy. this study says it all for you.
Whenever I support slut shaming, the negative responses are just about 100%.
Yup, guys love sluts and girls (many, at least) want to have the option available without anyone getting all ‘judgy’.
Women absolutely do not have the stomach for it. So mostly I don’t think it will work.
Susan, there is a reason why they do not have the stomach for it.
There is a reason why girls have different reactions to different judgements:
– You are a coward.
– You are weak. You can’t even do one pull-up.
– You are fat.
– You are a whore.
Some of these sting more than others.
They don’t have the stomach for the slut shaming because it DOES work.
Granted, if you are/were just one lonely voice in the wilderness, then, yeah, it would have little effect. Lucky for you, you have one of the most popular blogs regarding our modern SMP.
To clarify from comment #169
“Now, I don’t know if this “singleness” is going to trickle down the ladder”
I meant
I don’t know if this *brand* of singleness will trickle down the ladder.
I do know people who are single parents/never married in the lower-middle class. But all of the Kate Bolick variety of singles that I know are educated, from the top 20% income bracket.
My dream house was a Victorian; DH’s was the executive ranch. His uncle lived in one while DH was a kid on welfare. It symbolized the “good life” to him. He wanted this house so badly, I didn’t have the heart to push for the Victorian. Maintainance was indeed brought up by DH though as a plus for this house as a negative on a Victorian.
I appreciate the offer of a trade, but I think my next house will be a downtown condo. (Close to restaurants and shops, as I try to sell my husband.) Who wants to deal with a house in their 60s or 70s?
I love “It’s a Wonderful Life.” Sometimes, DH and I call each other “old Building and Loan pals,” which is waht George calls Uncle Billy.
Hope- “I don’t think anyone should look at having children from a selfish perspective, like “What will my children do for me?” or “I won’t be alone when I die!” ”
Yes.
Children are not replicators of their parent’s DNA, or copies of personality, or utilities that can be switched on when needed. And there are about a zillion ways to make a positive contribution to the world other than having children. Even the Bible praises single people who make contributions in other ways. (for those who care about such things as the Bible.)
On top of that, having children is an extremely risky decision for a man, given the child custody laws in the US and the West. Again, I’d love to see traditionalists and social conservatives pour even half as much energy into changing these laws as they do pointing fingers at teh gays and teh menz. (And yes, I know not all traditionalists are like that.)
@ Ramble
I haven’t really read ALL of HUS, I don’t know how “slut” is defined here by Susan. Some say women whose partners counts are over a certain numbers or don’t use protection are sluts, some say a girl is a slut if she’s ever participated in casual sex.
The thing is guys can call girls sluts if they reject them, girls call other girls sluts when jealous.
I think even the girls who give negative comments to slut shaming, are not so open-minded they have NEVER labeled another girl a slut. But people’s definitions are different. And I too find it a bit ridiculous if a woman with 1-2 partners who’s never had an ONS or even an FWB creates the rules of how everything’s supposed to be.
lovelost….Betas STEM guys, MBAs, etc.
Not sure you can assume that holding an engineering degree, even an advanced one, automatically makes one Beta. As one data point GE CEO Jeff Immelt, got his undergrad degree in Applied Mathematics from Dartmouth. Doubt that Immelt is all that Beta….pretty sure his predecessor Jack Welch (PhD in Chemical Engineering, U-Illinois) would be considered Beta by very few.
OTOH, there are quite a few MBAs who **could** be considered pretty Beta.
Basically, I think the distinction between STEM people and non-STEM people tends to be a bit overdrawn. They’re not entirely separate species from one another.
Pip, that is absolutely not the point of “dying alone”. I can’t speak to any “legacy” stuff, but, IME, those that were dying and left behind a healthy family did so with much more ease than those that were “alone”.
In my experience, when a guy calls a girl a slut, it does not “stick” that much. Especially if it came from a rejection (Sour Grapes and all that). Actually, almost all effective slut shaming has been born by females, from what I have seen. And, considering how evil some teenagers can get with that stuff, it can be important for the adult women to set the standard instead of leaving it to the young girls. But, that is, currently, not that realistic.
Different girls will have different definitions, and, in its aggregate, different cultures will have different definitions (say, Japan versus France, or Paris versus Gascony). But, in general, if adult women wanted to have an effect on teenage girls, I think they could easily do so. Considering that many of them either,
1.) Had some fun themselves, or
2.) Don’t want to be the bad guy
I don’t think we are going to see much of it anytime soon.
Susan : “Whenever I support slut shaming, the negative responses are just about 100%. Women absolutely do not have the stomach for it. So mostly I don’t think it will work.
I do know some slutty women, and I love them, but of course they know very well I don’t approve. Don’t forget – my reservations are not moral. I think promiscuity, from either sex, is bad all around.”
Slut-shaming just doesn’t work under the current climate.
Sluts are being rewarded with lots of male attention, financially, TV shows/gigs… there are just too many women jumping on board and enough men loving it.
There’s no religion/no other institution/authority outwardly opposing it, and there aren’t enough people standing firmly against it.
Ramble:
“Actually, almost all effective slut shaming has been born by females, from what I have seen”
When you say “effective”, do you mean – there’s a change in behavior in the slut or she just get’s hassled and tormented?
When you say “effective”, do you mean
That the girl being shamed seemed effected by the statement, and not simply annoyed.
But, again, I have seen very few guys (outside of a few crying in their beers) actually do any slut shaming.
If anything, the guys are more likely to attempt using the word “slut” in a playful way to actually get her to be sluttier.
“affected”. not “effected”.
@ Ramble,
so guys do not actually call girls sluts? The only way they “shame” the girls, are by not initiating a relationship with them? Which would normally have them change their behavior, if they aware of that being the reason, obviously.
Pip:
“I define myself mainly by my work (DVM), my interests outside of that (piano, running, riding), my friends/family, and my religion.”
Proves my point. You’re a doctor of veterinary medicine. You are highly educated and probably well compensated. Certainly you are not living paycheck to paycheck, I would think. You have eclectic interests including music and riding (probably horses). Equestrianism is a sport reserved for the well off. I’d bet you own at least one horse. That ain’t cheap. You have the time for running and keeping yourself in shape. You have been able to do very, very well for yourself.
You have friends and family. Since you are highly educated, I suspect you move in some social and professional circles that don’t revolve around nights in seedy taverns or Lonely Hearts Club dating services. You even have a MGHOW partner, presumably in a long term relationship.
You have a really great, full life. None of what I’m about to say is in any way or manner intended to denigrate you or wish you ill.
The point is, most women will never live the life you do, because they don’t have the drive, the money, the education, the wherewithal or the good fortune.
You have more than 98% of the women who will see Kate Bolick and conclude — wrongly — that they can be what she is, do what she does and live like she lives.
The other side of the coin is this:
A wage slave social worker who works among the most grindingly unfortunate of our society and hates her job but has to stay in it because this is the most she can earn with an MSW.
An overworked, plain Jane, somewhat overweight and out of shape schoolteacher who has no money for pursuits such as steeplechases or time for running 5Ks.
A harried, underappreciated legal secretary who has to figure out which bills she can afford to pay this month and who has just been pumped and dumped for the third time this year by yet another man she thought was The One.
You’re to be congratulated on your good fortune and great life, Pip. Most other never married women have no chance at your life.
Oh, like I said before, guys will call girls sluts, sometimes, when rejected. Though, you more often see a guy just not wanting to talk about it all. But, mostly, if that word is coming out of a guys mouth it is usually in jest or as a playful tease. And, more likely to be used on a girl he already knows, as opposed to some girl he might have just met in a bar.
The only way they “shame” the girls, are by not initiating a relationship with them?
I didn’t understand this question.
Ramble, Ana
Yes indifference is what works. Calling them out, judging etc, when it comes from a man, girls filter it through a different lense. AKA they attribute the criticism to something else, the guy being bitter, etc. Plus the guy is giving attention to her, even if its negative, it activates the courtship circuit: she´s evaluating him and not the other way around.
But indifference… that turns the circuit off. So yes.
I’m actually in Pip’s (163) camp.
Perhaps that’s because i’m at a point where i could care less if the earth was scorched by solar flares or hit by a comet. The survival of our race does not concern me, nor the continuation of our species. It’s destined to happen at some point. But feminist society deemed my troubles, my wants and needs unworthy, trite, even ridiculed. I owe this society nothing, this society that left me a long time ago.
Still Pip has every right to follow her own path as do i for our own reasons. Shouldn’t be seen as ‘lower than’ for making that choice, especially when the alternate choices contain zero appeal.
(Yohami) OK, I understand what she was asking now.
There would be a few exceptions to this, like, say, her friends father calling her a slut in front of other (female) adults. I am betting that would really sting and embarrass her. But, I can’t say I have ever seen anything like that.
But, I bet even a (male) school principal admonishing some “young lady” for “giving it away” would have little effect on her. She would probably shrug it off to him being old, boring and stodgy.
Ramble,
Yeah I was going to add that. She´ll listen if she likes you more than she likes herself, if she´s already looking for your approval, etc.
Ramble :
““affected”. not “effected”.”
Oh, OK.
@Mark Trueblood “On top of that, having children is an extremely risky decision for a man, given the child custody laws in the US and the West. Again, I’d love to see traditionalists and social conservatives pour even half as much energy into changing these laws as they do pointing fingers at teh gays and teh menz. (And yes, I know not all traditionalists are like that.)”
What you don’t understand is this fight for marriage isn’t merely the traditionalists and social conservatives. Women and liberals are in this fight too.
The laws are designed to protect women and children at the expense of men. This won’t change if women don’t perceive how the laws went beyond its intent and discouraged men to marry. Women need to insist on the laws to change. This has already happened in Massachusetts with alimony reform (key words: Alimony Reform Act of 2011).
Certainly, child custody must be changed as well, but usually this is decided by judges. The law usually uses gender neutral language. Custody should be awarded to be the best parent or made joint. Things have changed because most judges award joint custody, but mother have physical custody. I learned recently than many mothers eventually sign over custody to fathers when their children crip the mother’s love life. Child abandonment is done almost equally by mothers and fathers.
This is a cultural fight. I would love for traditionalists and social conservatives on the right to win it for men, but GIVE ME A BREAK. If you cared about what they have to say, why not give it to them on same sex marriage. The truth is they are losing and taking mens rights with them. Perhaps if lesbians and gays learn more about how family law works, they will seek the reforms that are so much needed.
@Lovelost
You have anticipated my next move! I’m working on a post about education, and I planned to reference that study. Thanks so much!
anonymous, I was correcting myself, not you.
@anonymous
Are they satisfied emotionally as well? And do you see a difference between women and men?
Agreed. In fact, I’d say that the majority of the guys in my b-school class would be considered beta.
Jonny-
I am well-aware that all political ideologies have a perspective on divorce laws and child custody. I am specifically calling out traditionalists and social conservatives, because they have done little else other than sit on their hands and shame men while whole generations of families (inside the church and out) were ripped apart. In fact, their great holy champion Ronald Reagan was the one who signed no-fault divorce into law when he was gov of California. (the first state to do so.)
Traditionalists and social conservatives have a long record of male-shaming and female pedestalizing on this issue. Dalrock’s blog (among others) have extensively covered that fact.
I’m saying, if we can’t even get social conservatives to genuinely defend traditional marriage, what hope do we have to convert liberals? In other words, remove stick from eye before pointing out the speck in others.
I strongly agree. I have no problem with people going their own way. I’m sure neither you nor Pip is focusing on how greedy married people are – it’s the antagonism that I don’t think is helpful. But that’s the political piece. Everyone should be allowed to find their contentment in life as they see fit.
“I have no problem with people going their own way.”
The Pips and Kate Bolicks of this world — intelligent, comparably affluent, well-rounded, self-sufficient, educated and self-actualized — will do just fine.
It’s those who will be misled into the never-married lifestyle, who believe that it is all fabulosity, who concern me.
It’s those who will make the poor choices that gradually winnow away their own options who concern me.
It is those never married young women who will see Bolick or read about great women like Pip and believe that their destinies inevitably will involve eclectic hobbies, the perfect dream job, time and money for musical and equestrienne pursuits, being constantly surrounded by good looking, healthy and interesting family and friends, and fielding multiple marriage proposals.
Yohami:
“they attribute the criticism to something else, the guy being bitter”
Yeah, but when the criticism comes from other women, they attribute it to being jealous. Then, they have the option of hanging out with all of the guys that approve of her behavior and become best buddies with them.
If you missed her post, Warm Woman was actually shamed by the men in her Indian culture.
anon
Ego * must * survive program.
Yohami:
“Ego * must * survive program.”
?? Not sure what you mean.
I actually don’t think that ALL of the slut-shaming from women is due to jealousy as it is just something that women tend to do in groups, which is to police each other. Go to a female forum and you’ll see how much PC and policing goes on. You have to play “nice” in female groups.
Now, mind you, I’m not saying women are good….. if the female group is full of sluts, then they’ll shame the virgins. So, in a group of good girls or wannabe good girls, they’ll shame the sluts.
But……
This is/was only effective when there’s gender separation- the girls hang out with the girls and the boys with the boys.
In a culture where the genders are constantly side by side and the promiscuous outnumber the chaste, women shaming other women is useless. They’ll just go hang out with the guys or with other sluts (and there’s plenty to accompany them).
Meh, his “Single By Choice” crowd is no different than the Shaming Fat-Shamers movement.
Shamers of Fat-Shamers: Fat girls are blaming men, soceity for not finding them attractive and trying to force (unsuccessfully) men to find them attractive because “they are the new average”. Call girls with normal BMIs anorexic, etc.
Single By Choice: Invent “singlism”, create new “discrimination” against singles as a defense mechanism for being unattractive harpys no man wants to commit to. Blame couples for “shaming” them, and try to create a “new average” of perpetually single women.
It’s not that they’re not free to be as fat or as single as they want, it’s when they try to normalize it and force people to agree with them beyond merely toleration. Both movements will fail- they go against nature.
anonymous:
” The funny thing is that I know quite a number of single unmarried/childless people of both genders (more than a dozen) who are now in their mid-late 40s, and they ALL have master degrees/phds, own their own homes, are doing well financially.”
——————————–
@ Susan
“Are they satisfied emotionally as well? ”
I think they ARE at a better place emotionally than before, now that they’re beyond the childbearing years, so that pressure is off. But, I do wonder where they’ll be when they’re elderly and retired.
I’m not sure that all of their (the females at least) celebration of singleness is due to sour grapes as it *might* (emphasis on might) be a stage/phase that a lot of women reach during mid-life. I mean, a lot of married middle-aged women suddenly wish they weren’t (divorce or depression), right?
What if it’s just a mid-life crisis thing where many women, married or never married, suddenly wish they can relive their younger days?
The single ones might be glad to be single at this point.
I see this as a possibility, especially in our culture.
—————–
Susan: “And do you see a difference between women and men?”
Not particularly. I sense some regrets from both genders.
Note: my circle consists of many 1st-generation Americans of various cultures that are more traditional/family orientated than what’s pushed in the media, so there’s still some pressure to form families from their elders, though that’s becoming more acceptable.
“though that’s becoming more acceptable.”
Oops.
Though it’s becoming more acceptable to remain single, especially if you’re doing well financially and can hang out with family/friends, travel, etc..
deti:
“It is those never married young women who will see Bolick or read about great women like Pip and believe that their destinies inevitably will involve eclectic hobbies, the perfect dream job, time and money for musical and equestrienne pursuits, being constantly surrounded by good looking, healthy and interesting family and friends, and fielding multiple marriage proposals.”
I understand your sentiment, but I really can’t see it working out the way you describe unless, except for a few, all of these women are complete utter nutjobs (wait a minute mister, don’t you go there, lol).
I mean, I can see some becoming career women and passing up marriage so they can live like Kate, but I don’t see other women from the lower classes believing that they’re going to go from rags to riches overnight.
Why would women who have NEVER ridden a horse, have never gotten on a plane in their entire lives, even at 20, think that it’s how they’ll live when they’re older with no effort on their part and without winning the lottery.
Remember, the fantasy of marrying a b/millionaire doesn’t fit into the pursuit of singleness, so I don’t see too many women thinking like this.
Susan:
This thread’s played itself out. Time to put up a new one so we can all go back to railing about sluts like we usually do.
@ Deti
Come back to the “Defining Sexy” thread. I just launched another volley against the sex poz ship floating Skankslut bay. The vessel in question was under the command of Cpt. Tom.
@susan
“More easily able to support themselves, for one thing. Women in their 20s make 117% of what men the same age make. ”
Yeah, but they probably spend 200% of what the men spend, so the men are still more financially independent.
@deti
Part 2 tomorrow, but I don’t think that will be a major comment generator either. Too little controversy.
So true! Remember, Carrie Bradshaw couldn’t afford to buy her coop apartment, because she had 40K worth of shoes.
It is good that she is happy by herself, as that is how she will remain, so there is no reason for her to beat herself up over decisions long since past which she cannot change.
As a man approaching 50, I don’t date women older then early 30′s and I never will. I could give a lot of justifications for that, but the real reason is simple – I do not have to.
Idk. I’m going to say something that I know won’t be well received.
I think that the bitterness runs deep in a lot of men and they want to shame women like Bolick for the choices she’s made.
I don’t really care for her. She’s decent looking for an older woman, but she doesn’t sound like a good bet for a relationship. Yet, I don’t really think she poses much of a threat to the SMP. Certainly not as an individual, and not even as a voice in the media. If anything, I think she’ll just serve as a cautionary tale: the pretty, ambitious girl who grows up to be a lonely and pathetic cougar. Sucks to be her.
@Susan
“It’s true. Her last serious relationships were both with men 11 years her junior. They eventually felt the pressure of her ticking bio clock and bailed. She has made some very risky bets.”
Susan, this feels like a buried lede to me, or at least a clue. I haven’t followed the story closely, so apologies if I am missing something:
Since dumping her BF @ age 28, has she dated anyone within +/- 2, 3 years?
JM,
Interesting perspective. Bolick certainly isn’t the poster girl for the “choosing to be single” movement. She made it abundantly clear in her article that being single was never her intent, it “just happened.”
And yet, it’s not Bolick herself who poses a threat to the SMP. In some ways, it’s her attitude, the attitude of “eh, this is good for now, but eventually I’d like to do better.”
I have this friend from college. She has always wanted to have sex with one of our male friends who, frankly, everyone has crushed on at some point. She dated another guy for 2 years, a guy who was totally in love with her, but when she went abroad, she decided to “take a break” to fool around while she was out of the country. She came back expecting him to be waiting for her (even though she said repeatedly she would never marry him), but he wasn’t. So she found another guy… a friend of Mr. In Demand, our male friend who she really wants to fuck. In a sense, she’s always keeping some guy around, but hoping for something better.
That’s what leads to perpetual singleness, and that’s what puts this SMP in danger. I get the sense you’re pretty in-demand yourself, just from past comments and your experiences over the summer (plus you once said you’re an 8). Be careful, not everyone is so fortunate… some guys really are getting played in this SMP, and I don’t blame them for being bitter.
@JM (#212)
Why “pathetic”?
@Olive
I have a different perspective: I’ve known more than a few people who “just happened” to end up single. Every single one of them had been badly wounded and just felt like they didn’t have it in them to put themselves out there and try anymore.
The ones I knew had been incredibly kind and generous with me. So it’s really hard for me to hate on a man or woman who “just happens” to end up single.
Jackie,
My friend was kind and generous with me, sure. But she was nasty to her ex, who was completely dedicated in spite of the fact that she claimed repeatedly they would never marry. To this day, I do not understand why she kept him around for so long, knowing that they didn’t have a future.
It occurs to me that she was lonely and just wanted someone to be there. In fact, it occurs to me that many people in this SMP are just lonely, and are looking for relationships to escape the loneliness. They don’t understand that a relationship doesn’t keep you from being lonely… you have to do that. Hell, I spend days being lonely, and I’m in a relationship. It’s something I have to deal with, it has nothing to do with my SO.
@Olive
That is too bad about your friend– her poor BF.
And co-signed on many people in the SMP being lonely. For me, it’s the opposite: There is a sacred sweetness in being alone. It doesn’t feel lonely to me usually. Lonely is being in a room full of people with whom you have no shared values. THOSE kind of situations can be *crushingly* lonely, IMHO.
For the people I knew, most of them had low self-esteem at the time, and really felt the pressure to be in a relationship towards getting married. (Also, they are older, so it was a different time.) They were trying, desperately, to make something work with someone who was just not a good match for them. Or another one got cheated on and abused by the man she had devoted herself to (again, more low self-esteem).
It can be a mean old world out there. If people are by themselves, not actively hurting others, I have no wish to put them down.
We’re all soooo happy about it it toooo.
That expains the plethora of articles ans extentive po-mo narrative s proclaiming how er, happy we are about it.
A happy/content person is too ensconsed in happiness/contetment to ever speak of it.
You’re trying to convince yerselves.
Goot plark.
Disdaining what you can’t have is a common ego preservation mechanism and whenever it is people can’t achieve value in a given societal model they will seek to subvert it. This is mostly just another case of bitter people trying to convince everyone, but mostly themselves, that their lives aren’t a complete failure. I would pity them if what they were doing weren’t so harmful, so all I have is contempt.
On another note, this blogging “sphere” saves lives. Initially I was of the mind that I had my 20s ahead of me to date around and planned to settle down eventually by 3o. Ha! I just thank my lucky stars that I figured it out at age 22, with the help of this sphere, that I was only deluding myself and would most likely end up unhappy, alone, and bitter by then.
@Mark Trueblood “I’m saying, if we can’t even get social conservatives to genuinely defend traditional marriage, what hope do we have to convert liberals? In other words, remove stick from eye before pointing out the speck in others.”
Is this a non sequitur?
Do you have a concept of a traditional marriage to discuss when you focus on the breakup of the marriage? I’m sure many traditionalists and social conservatives have a very strong opinion about what a marriage is, but to discuss their concept of marriage when you’re talking about the terms of divorce and child custody is rather strange.
Let’s talk about traditional marriage. Yes, a woman should submit. A woman should have lots of children. The woman should stay home and take care of the household at least until the child(ren) can go to school. She should not have to work unless it is really necessary.
The man should be the head of household and earn the majority of the income. He should lead the household and be the final arbiter of disputes.
If the marriage should end in divorce, the house and the kids should revert to the husband/father. The wife/mother should be allowed to move on with her life if she chooses. She deserves alimony based on the length of marriage. Since the father has custody, she deserves no child support payments unless she is the custodial parent.
Thus, men have the most advantages. Will women agree to such an arrangement? I think not. The state of marriage continues to deteriorate.
I think there could be a middle ground between the extremes of today’s modern legal marriage/divorce/family law and something more equitable towards men. I have no idea of the best approach, but please start the conversation.
This is what class looks like.
As for Kate, she’s lost in the wilderness.
SINGLE HOOD AND THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS
OF BEING
Our editor has once again brought us an excellent precis of an intriguing topic; indeed, it was that which brought me to HUS. I have told you I pictured myself as the avuncular uncle pointing the way to a path that I presumed (dangerously) we all were headed. This topic posits a very different approach, one that requires me to take an admonitory tone.
I have no quarrel with single hood; my favorite philosopher, Epictetus, was single, although he encouraged his followers to marry (one of whom said “Ok, I’d like to marry your daughter”). So were many others. There have always been those who preferred the completeness of their own world to bargaining for, with and against the vicissitudes of outrageous fortune. They didn’t want distraction. Ok for them.
But if I’m reading this correctly, what is being posited here isn’t that, not really. It is the personal choice to reject ab initio the notion of committed love for what is described as a “political” impulse. Oh boy.
Our editor puts her finger right on it-the choice between personal happiness and fulfillment and…..well, I’m not sure. The quotes above confuse me. In Tom Wolfe’s “The Bonfire of the Vanities” he borrows the idea that there is no “self”, that we are defined by the boundaries of the social milieu, what others expect of us, the status rewards conferred by our adoption of same, and without them we do not exist. So, is this “single hood” impulse a way of rejecting that, saying “I will define myself precisely on my own terms and reject this institution as a constraint on that power”? Well, Uncle Tom will tell you- ain’t no free lunch. Go in with your eyes open, and I hope it works. Ignore the lyrics from “Desperado” (Eagles et al): “Freedom well, that’s just some people talking/your prison is walking through this world all alone”. Godspeed.
There is also the dynamic tension between romantic individualism and social activism as explored by Tom Robbins (lot of Toms write) in “Still Life with Woodpecker”. This is a little bit of a stretch, as the character who portrays it has killed someone by bombing in order to protest the bombing and killing in Viet Nam. He lost perspective-as everyone does who fails to connect social activism with personal happiness, who thinks we’ll just take this brief “time out” from our humanity while we impose usually appalling butchery and slaughter and once we get a few hundred, or thousand, or million people out of the way we’ll be restored and thus free to move on to utopia. On a smaller and more personal scale, the “single” is the “romantic individual” who sacrifices for the good of the order, to more or less prove a point. Life does not have a point-by God it is here to be lived. Ask me how I learned this.
My title is a little disingenuous-being is not unbearably light, but having a committed partner through it all does anchor us while it at the same time lifts us. I don’t want to make this a chronicle, but now when I hug my Susan we really hug, we really really kiss-I cannot imagine what this would be like without her. THIS is freedom, this is love, this is life.
Ok remember what I said about no free lunch? You want that freedom lonesome cowboy have at it. But Uncle Tom has-well, by God it’s a parable!
This parable concerns me and (most of you). Goes like this. Some of you may feel sorry for me in my situation. Don’t be. Imagine it’s late at night in the city; you’re outside the best Italian restaurant, hungry as hell, but you’re not sure you’re going to get seated. Just as you arrive Munson steps out into the clear night air, so obviously sated with a few good bottles of wine and an excellent, lingering meal that he’s smiling the (somewhat) smug look of the satisfied, and as he calls for a cab his wife Susan joins him, and they stand there arm in arm bracing each other against the chill, share a small joke, laugh, kiss. The image stays with you as you enter to see of you can get a table.
Or you can drive yourself alone to Taco Bell to be able to get home in time for the “Sex and the City” reruns on cable (History/ESPN channels for the guys).
@Munson
Superb as usual. clap clap clap
I had a relative that was surrounded by a lot of fabulous singles in New York that used to hammer home how free and wonderful their lives were as much as possible (they outnumbered her so probably that is why they decided they could get away with this). She, very cruelly I might add, started to cut out, or/and print and remember all the people found death in their apartments days after the fact. I must say that it did managed to shut the “happy singles” after a couple of this comments from my relative. No one wants to hang out with a person that might have a point it seems like.
Susan:
“I’m working on a post about education, and I planned to reference that study”
What I don`t understand is when the education gap between women and men already being as large as it is that guys with an education haven`t yet noticed a very clear demand from women just by having an education. If we look at those with an education as one SMP the gender imbalance is as or more extreme than the one you find in Russia or Latvia and other places were the women are chasing the men. Maybe it just haven`t started to show yet because the women are still not settling in the belief they will find the ideal man. But in 10-20 years I would think reality sinks in an then for a man having an education should be a huge benefit in the SMP. If he has an education that is prestigous and leads to a high paying job such as doctor, lawyer, engineer etc. He should be golden. Even more so since women tend to take so much more of the fluffy degrees that leads to little pay and no career.
Idk. Cougars always seem to be desperately clutching at fading youth.
Some data to consider here. There’s a Marriage decline in/for All Ages but particularly @ ages 18-29, & now a clear Minority of marriages with “64 percent of men aged 25 to 29 [were] still single in 2011, up from 59 percent in 2008.”
” Among adults ages 25-34, fewer than half (44%) were married in 2010, compared with 82% in 1960. Although most Americans in their mid-30s onward are married, the proportions have declined notably since 1960.”
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/12/14/barely-half-of-u-s-adults-are-married-a-record-low/
College educated women seem to still be doing much better here, perhaps working against their instincts and ignoring some of the recent miserable advice from the professional feminist lobbying groups. Just by trying a bit harder, thinking better & more clearly, and yes, being willing to try and sacrifice and even {{GASP!}} Consider settling earlier than always waiting until they bump up against their natural limits of fertility is a decent start.
Much like the college women who regarded KB as literally the ‘Ghost of X-Mas’ future & past with some repressed horror, the standard issue cognitive dissonance here needs to be radically informed by the facts. There are currently very select populations of younger males willing Or able to start families @ around 30 say. Most are not matching up well with the standard ideal of ‘cute, handsome, tall & lovely, ymmy, strong but haughty and insolent’ alphas of most feminine dreams and imagining as influenced by Hollywood & TV.
No, they’re most likely quite ordinary looking and seeming. The tall but ‘adorkable’ chemistry dude who plays weekend hockey and has a touching bromance with his retriever. He hunts a bit, but has a solid job doing bench chemistry for a large Fortune 500 company. It’s tough work & long hours, but he remains lonely just the same, as he’s deemed ‘not cool enough’ to satisfy most of the women he seeks out in local bars & dating sites online. He’s invisible to them mostly, as are most of his ‘average & ordinary’ contemporaries. They talk too slow, perhaps take life all too seriously seemingly, or are a bit quiet for anyone’s taste.
They’re independent plumbers, the sole proprietor electricians, the industrial welders, even yes the guy who owns the local car repair shop or works diligently in the service department. Small town accountants, lawyers, tax preparers, CPAs, and small biz owners. Most of these guys? Get married, have kids and live very stable & successful lives. They used to be, and often still are, the bedrock of their communities. Many will become quite wealthy beyond their & your imagining. But they’ll never quite be as ‘smart’ ‘hip’ or ‘cool’ as all those Hollywood’ dudes you’ve seen in movies, on TV or SATC/imagined in whatever Harlequin type romance you were primed for during those youthful and halcyon college years you recall so fondly & well.
And there’s the rub: the increasingly unrealistic expectations of yes, basically one sex for the other means that they’ll only sparingly come to realize their short sightedness quite late, perhaps only by 35-40+ when their SMV is/has declined to such a degree that they’re only now willing to consider much of the rest of the 80% of the population as potential mates. Ladies? By that time, yes, many of the ‘good/normal’ guys Are ‘taken’ and/or Have already been married. Get used to it. Ditto for the guys who wait out their ‘opposition’ that long too. Very few women, even from distant foreign lands want to marry a 50 something who’s looking to start a ‘new’ family. It’s a lot of work, effort & money to try and pull this off, when the opportunities could have been had much easily, even a decade earlier, in-country.
So why we arrived here may be problematic to discover. But there’s no denying the reality of the declining marriage rates. Even more slowly for college educated women, they’ll know if they want kids and/or the ‘respectability’ & stability of marriage, something’s got to give, and the widely sold fantasy of their fondest dreams has been a fiendish commercial lie. Life is more boring and often more tragic than it is on TV. Teeny moms are not universally celebrated & feted around the country, no matter how cute they imagine themselves to be. No matter how telegenic, they’re candidates for welfare and hard times for their next 20 years, even if they’re very lucky to have married the father Or some thoroughly decent man (sometimes deluded too) who wants to ‘take care’ of them.
Many of us imagine we might forgo these very hard life choices, to remain in effect ‘juveniles’ for more than half our lives, well into our 40′s. But when we do AND remain Unmarried? It means that family formation suffers, and our likelihood for a successful union may remain quite fleeting and/or short. Someone who marries for the first time @ 36+ say is not only less likely to have more than 1 child, but they’re more likely to live apart from their spouse for significant segments of time, due to death, disability, or injury. That’s the natural life course of events. Try and postpone them indefinitely, (for whatever reason), and it’ll still wind up impacting the rest of your life nevertheless. ‘Nuff said. Cheers, ‘VJ’
[Sorry for the length]
This whole conversation is radically gynocentric. How typical.
This article was popular(among women) because it reinforced their objectifying of men. That women derive their great value from having a vagina, while men derive their value from their money(so most are losers.)
I personally love the stream of bigoted articles and conversations the MSM has heaped onto us for the past 3 years. More and more men are waking up to the fact that modern women do not view them as human beings. They view men solely as utilities for women.
She’s had a string of relationships. The last two were both with younger men, two years each. She references one in the Atlantic article – going to meet his family. I think that one ended at least a year ago, if not more.
“On top of that, having children is an extremely risky decision for a man, given the child custody laws in the US and the West. Again, I’d love to see traditionalists and social conservatives pour even half as much energy into changing these laws as they do pointing fingers at teh gays and teh menz. (And yes, I know not all traditionalists are like that.)”
The politicians are middlemen. They won’t do anything about this because their employers, the voters(mostly female,) would never have it. Men aren’t at risk bc of these laws. They’re at risk bc women and white knights seek to enslave them.
@David Foster #176
Not sure you can assume that holding an engineering degree, even an advanced one, automatically makes one Beta. As one data point GE CEO Jeff Immelt, got his undergrad degree in Applied Mathematics from Dartmouth. Doubt that Immelt is all that Beta….pretty sure his predecessor Jack Welch (PhD in Chemical Engineering, U-Illinois) would be considered Beta by very few.
Hi David, I totally agree with you. I can speak for myself and some of the STEM guys who are my professional contacts on LinkedIn. No, having a STEM degree doesn’t make you a beta.
However, the context here is SMP. In my professional life I know I am a alpha, i say this with all humility, not bragging about it. Let me give you an example, during my grad school, I had the opportunity to meet grad students
from MIT at a conference. Are they beta, yes some of them when it comes to dating. But what about their professional life, and research, no they are not alpha, in fact they are super-alphas.
They publish in Nature, Science and PNAS type journals. They are the top 5% of the STEM population in this world and are the Super Alphas.
however at HUS the context is SMP, there a lot of STEM guys are beta, including me, BadgerHut is an exception. Speaking for myself, and it is still applicable today, I loved my research a lot and enjoyed, thus
long hours even on weekend, and thus wasn’t part of the social scene a lot. So i think in the context of dating a lot of STEM guys, are beta.
Basically, I think the distinction between STEM people and non-STEM people tends to be a bit overdrawn. They’re not entirely separate species from one another.
I am ready to compete with whomsovever when it comes to STEM, but I have my limitations too, does that makes me a beta in my professional life, yes again to some extent.
“overdrawn”
yes, but provides a some what clear distincition when used in the right context, i.e. SMP.
On Jack Welch, he created the most super-competitive and super-alpha environment at GE, only the 8-10 score people become Managers, and rest pack your bags. There goes a beta STEM using his grad school experience to create a super-competitive and super alpha environment.
& Susan #195
Agreed. In fact, I’d say that the majority of the guys in my b-school class would be considered beta.
I don’t know if that holds today, when everyone is fighting to get their share of the pie, also IMO, Globalization was not pervasive back then compared to what it is now. Circumstances and environment
does make you more competitive, it is a well know fact. Don’t get me wrong that you’re not competitive, things are just more diffcult these days.
@Susan #192
You have anticipated my next move! I’m working on a post about education, and I planned to reference that study. Thanks so much!
I am getting to know you better, “girl”.
@ Susan
“She’s had a string of relationships. The last two were both with younger men, two years each.”
I’m surprised with the amount of women who do this.
A recent post on Rules Revisted about Older women said something I’ve been observing for quite some time:
“Guys interested in long term relationships will not consider older women seriously. On a few occasions I was dating women who were older by six to ten years, and really enjoyed their beauty and company. However, when it came time to cut it off or have a relationship, I cut it off. Reconsidering my motivations for those decisions now, I recognize one that dominated the others: despite my attraction for those women at the time, I didn’t want to look around myself ten years later and see a hotter, younger girl – closer to my own age – and think “I could have been with a girl like that instead.” When my wife starts aging, I want the other girls I could have had (i.e. those in my age-range) to be aging with her, so that I won’t be constantly reminded of the sacrifice I made to be with her – even if it was one I know was worth it. The grass is already always greener on the other side; a man doesn’t need an age disparity contributing to that effect when his woman starts losing her initial shine.”
From what I’ve seen around me as well, very few men (with options) consider women older than themselves as a great option long-term. Looks might be part of it, along with other factors such as open-mindedness (older women can be cynical and a bit tied up in their current lifestyle).
It surprises me that so many women in their thirties try their luck with younger men – it rarely gives good results. I would imagine someone like Kate – who obviously do a lot of research on these things, would choose differently.
Olive,
Don’t get me wrong, I know that there are many women out there like your friend. I broke off an engagement because I suspected the woman I was with of being like that, in a way. Or different, but just as bad. It felt to me like she had her fun with asshats and then turned to me when it was time to do the responsible thing. So I walked.
But I don’t think that bitterness helps anyone. Blaming someone else for your problems puts you in a position of powerlessness. Nobody can “play” you without your consent.
For what it’s worth, I spent many years of my life being bitter. That bitterness brewed beneath the surface for most of that time, and I wasn’t even aware of it. I thought I was very much like Megaman. Whenever I read Megaman, I’m reminded of my old self. But the bitterness was there, lurking beneath the surface.
I don’t know that I would say I’m in-demand at the moment, but I do know that I was passed up by girls for most of my life. And honestly, I hated them for it. I would have denied that a year ago–not just to others, but to myself–but now I know it was true. And that hatred was really just a hatred of myself. I didn’t feel worthwhile. I didn’t feel attractive. I didn’t feel like I deserved to be in-demand. I blamed women for making me feel that way. So I was in the very confusing position of hating women for making me feel that way and then loving any woman who showed me the least bit of attention.
And I’d always felt like that. I had a mom who not only made me feel that I wasn’t worthwhile or attractive, but actually told me that.
Here’s the thing: it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Bitterness makes you ugly. If you’re a guy who’s a 5, bitterness is going to make you a 1 or a 2. You can say that you don’t blame guys for being bitter, but be honest, do you find it attractive? Of course you don’t. You might pity them, but you don’t lust after them. Only sick people would.
I see men here interpreting everything female-related as negative. Any time they come across a woman who’s decent, they cry “outlier.” Calling decent women “outliers” is just a way to preserve the negative schema that supports their bitterness.
Sure, there are crappy women, and there are a lot of good ones besides. But being bitter is going to repel instead of attract the quality women. And instead of taking responsibility for their problems (“maybe it’s me… maybe I’m too bitter…”), they chalk it up to women liking assholes. “See, here I am, a nice fucking guy, and nobody appreciates it. Instead, they want assholes.”
Getting over their bitterness would help men better evaluate women, and it would make them more attractive. For men, SMV is so much more about attitude than appearance. People talk about women in their twenties having so much more power in terms of relationships than men, but really, men have so much more control over their SMV than women. At any age.
Byron,
I was an 80s anti- thatcherite. Did a few marches/ralleys.
Even attended a few SW meets (thats Socialist Worker not Susan Walsh btw)
I have somewhat calmed down since those days although still consider myself vaguely left of centre (uk perspective- not USA obviously)
but, now looking back….
1.the middle class was big enough to ensure her majority- they could not have been that rare (cue debate on aspiring working classes….)
2. UK industry was already destroyed by the unions. not her fault.
3. she did indeed take on the unions. at the time i hated her for that. now i think she was 100% right. imo.
4. look where her free market capitalism has got us today ! but to be fair many countries copied that market model.
5. i hated the poll tax at the time but i remember watching michael portillo argue with tony been over the issue and i thought portillo won the arguments (thus began my own seeds of doubt over socialism). one could argue that the poll tax was more fair and democratic than the council tax banding system (which was demonstrably unfair). there was certainly no justification for the poll tax riots (nor was there for the recent riots either)
6.CCTC cameras are a good thing. the only people who dont like them are criminals surely? i used to work with the police on violent crime years ago. My boss at the time told me that 90%+ of all violent convictions included the use of CCTV footage. And this was years ago!- its probably even higher now.
7. her intolerance was quite revolting. (and cynical- she must have known some of her own cabinet were gay)
8. she was an awesome leader- but her inability to mix styles (yes i have been on those naff leadership courses!) led to her downfall.
i have mixed feelings about her tenure. She did advice female rights by virtue of her status and she was one of the 1st environmentalists (oh yes she was!). She was often ridiculed for her worries over CO2 etc and was an advocate of lean burn technology. She has been so proved right there.
She didn’t produce a facist state though (a bit daft to suggest that I reckon) and I dont really think she broke up communities at all. I think the overly soft welfare state bred laziness and selfishness and in that sense she was right to say society ‘doesnt’ exist- because we do all put our families 1st. thats not to say there isn’t a wider civic duty to help others and pay our taxes- its just a recognition of peoples real priorities and motivations in life.
I hated her for 13 years- but now- maybe, just maybe I would attend her funeral and pay genuine respects when the time comes.
Wow, jess showed up for something other than defending promiscuous women. How’ve you been, jess?
“Yet, I don’t really think [Kate Bolick] poses much of a threat to the SMP. Certainly not as an individual, and not even as a voice in the media. If anything, I think she’ll just serve as a cautionary tale: the pretty, ambitious girl who grows up to be a lonely and pathetic cougar. Sucks to be her.”
But Bolick’s life and her misguided choices won’t be a cautionary tale. That’s the point. A lot of women will try to emulate her, thinking it will be all jetsetting and wine/cheese/caviar parties. In fact their reality will look more like the social worker, the teacher or the legal secretary. It’s not about male bitterness. It’s about female unhappiness and lack of reasonableness and realism, and the societal breakdown to which it contributes.
In her article she bemoans and complains about her singleness. She tells Susan’s focus group she wants to get married. Deep down, she has deluded herself that marriage, 2.4 children and the house with the picket fence are just around the corner, though she claims to have resigned herself to the real possibility that she might never get married.
The cold hard facts are that her marital options dwindle by the day. Her odds of having children are even less. Her best chance for marriage is a wealthy older man to whom she can generate some attraction. Those men have options out the ass, are as rare as hen’s teeth, and have more women than they know what to do with.
not too bad thank you JM.
i have always been something of a political animal actually…
just to be clear I’m on record as advising against extreme promiscuity and unsafe sex particularly.
I just think its healthy for men and women to enjoy a few flings when young and settling down with a compatible partner a little later in life.
Dont wanna start up another debate- just setting the record straight there.
deti,
I disagree. Sue said that the girls in her focus group all expressed the desire to get married and have a family. None of them seduced by the glamor of that lifestyle. And, like you said, Bolick, “bemoans and complains about her singleness.” I don’t imagine that many girls are looking to emulate that.
Jesus @ 234 That was a great and very honest post. Sometimes there is a lot of negativity on some boards, most prevalent in how some men relish the idea that women get older and “hit the wall.” Ironic that game is so much about aloofness but some men spend their time obsessed and bitter about women.
When I was a senior in high school there was a guy at my job that looked like an overgrown ewok. He was hairy and chubby- but he was SO COOL- both aloof and hilarious. We were good friends, and had he shown interest(which for me, would be something very overt as I am aloof as well) I would have totally dated him. Looks are part of it, although not everything (although to be perfectly honest we would have had a “talk” about the gut). I mean, here I am ten years later talking about him….
I haven’t had time to read the epicness that is these comment threads so forgive me if you have already mentioned it- but how’s your love life now? Has it improved once you learned to let go of your bitterness? Frankly i think a lot of women are bitter too.
From Fight Club: ” We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars, but we won’t. We’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off”
Women have been taught by media and society that they are the most unique special beautiful creatures on earth and that they would marry those rock gods and millionaires (“someday my prince will come”)…and that doesn’t happen- and they’re very very pissed off- so they write columns justifying their bad choices
for what its worth, all the girls at my previous work place (bar one), said they wanted a family in the future.
currently some are in LTRs, some are dating
JM,
Good points all around. I suppose I come at it from a different angle, having been surrounded by college-age women for the last 5 years and watching them do the relationship dance. If men are bitter, women are whimsical. Or maybe that’s not the right word, as it implies a happy, carefree spirit. No, women just don’t know what they want. Or maybe they do, as the men here claim: maybe they want assholes who won’t commit.
I’m all in favor of personal responsibility, and I think that some of these ‘sphere guys are more wont to blame than embrace responsibility. But on the other hand, women aren’t taking responsibility either. Maybe the young ladies in Susan’s focus group want to get married, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re on the marriage path (not that I claim to know what path they’re on).
Let me go back to my friend. It’s not that her ex is bitter; in fact, he’s one of the greatest, least-bitter guys I know, and he didn’t let his failed relationship stop him from putting himself out there again. But it’s her behavior that I’m more concerned with: she wants nothing more than to get married and have kids, but as far as I’m concerned, she hasn’t set herself up to achieve that goal. It’s just one dead-end relationship after another. That’s the kind of lifestyle Bolick has led, and it’s what engenders bitterness in the men. I don’t think anyone would want to be the kind of guy a girl strings along as she’s trying to decide what she really wants.
I admire your ability to use your past as an opportunity for personal growth. I wish more people were more interested in introspection than victimization, and that goes for both genders.
“Guys interested in long term relationships will not consider older women seriously.”
I don’t know if this is a principle, but I did marry an older woman for my first marriage. She was one year older. It didn’t last. There is a control issue with women in general and older women in particular. So I don’t recommend dating and marrying older women. Women’s hypergamy gets in the way. She did want someone better. She left me to get it and she didn’t (ha ha ha).
I am now married with my second wife who is 10 years younger. She is much more easier to get along with. She doesn’t have a power issue with me. Younger women are nicer (although she is now at the same age of my ex when she divorced me 10 years ago).
Flavia,
Yes, I’m in a relationship now and things are going extremely well.
Olive,
Only damaged girls want to date assholes who won’t commit. If those women aren’t dating “nice guys,” then score one for the nice guys.
What engenders bitterness in people is unrealistic expectations, not other people.
I don’t see that my friend is particularly “damaged.” If she was, it’s because she bought into the Disney Princess Entitlement shit, but she doesn’t have some weird childhood past or something.
In fact, if this is true, then damn. The vast majority of my female friends are “damaged.”
Um, yea.
@ Jesus M:
It is very true that a lot of men need to get over their bitterness. That takes time. Some turn inward. Some write comments on blogs to get it out because no one other than people writing comments on blogs even understands the concepts that they now grok and that frustrated them for so many years. Some of those men have good reason for their bitterness. Those reasons are beyond the scope of this comment. That said, those reasons do exist, they are real, they have caused untold agony and economic destruction for millions of men, and they need to be addressed if any headway is to be made in the ultimate goal of getting men and woman into lasting relationships.
I believe in that goal. It’s one of the reasons I keep coming back here and banging my head against this wall. I have a son who I desperately want to prevent from making the mistakes I made. I want him to get some game so he can expand his options and live his life the way he wants. I don’t want him becoming a woman hater but I don’t want him living in my basement wanking to internet porn at age 30 either.
I have a daughter who I pray will be smart about her sexual choices. I don’t want her to be a prude who fears men. I also don’t want her getting blackout drunk, letting playas use her as a sextoy, destroying her pair bonding ability, and ruining her SMV and MMV either.
I understand MGTOW. I understand some men have sworn off women. But that lifestyle just won’t appeal to most men.
There are good women out there. Some comment on this blog. I am sure many more are reading. But many women, despite their good qualities, can be quite unrealistic, unreasonable and just plain dumb. And many crappy women are quite good at passing themselves off as quality women. And many quality women fall for assholes, time and time again. It is true that some do not. But it is undeniably true that there are many women — good yet unreasonable, short sighted women — who do fall for assholes while sneering and turning up their noses at good men. The fact that they keep gravitating to assholes doesn’t necessarily make them bad. It shows them to be unreasonable, immature, reckless, even stupid, but not “bad” or worthless.
So men do need to get over their bitterness, yes. But women must also do the concomitant work of letting go of their unreasonable expectations, and see men for who and what they are rather than solely what men can do for them.
I see where you got this, but I think I have to disagree. Not every single attitude is rooted inside a person. People are products of their environments in many ways. It doesn’t mean they can’t overcome the environments, but when the environment itself is fucked up, it’s time to change.
JM,
How do you think people become damaged?
Olive,
The environment is never “fucked up.” It is what it is. Some environments are more stable than others. Some are friendlier than others. But none is “fucked up.”
There are two types of things in this world: things we can control and things we can’t. People who are bitter focus on the things that can’t control too often.
+ a million.’
I have to believe that people can change, and that environments can change, and that society can change. And on a mass scale, women need an attitude overhaul. I wish I could bring you guys to college… you’d see that it’s not just my friends who are “damaged,” it’s women in general who are confused and mixed up about what real relationships are about. It’s not about “good women” and “crappy women,” it’s about a society that has made its mark on a generation of women who are mixed up and reeling in this hookup culture. If I thought the “crappy women” were beyond repair, and that the “good women” could do no wrong, I would shut down my blog.
How vain are all these Glories, all our Pains,
Unless good Sense preserve what Beauty gains:
That Men may say, when we the Front-box grace,
Behold the first in Virtue as in Face!
Oh! if to dance all Night, and dress all Day,
Charm’d the Small-pox, or chas’d old Age away;
Who would not scorn what Housewife’s Cares produce,
Or who would learn one earthly Thing of Use?
To patch, nay ogle, might become a Saint,
Nor could it sure be such a Sin to paint.
But since, alas! frail Beauty must decay,
Curl’d or uncurl’d, since Locks will turn to grey;
Since painted, or not painted, all shall fade,
And she who scorns a Man, must die a Maid,
What then remains but well our Pow’r to use,
And keep good Humour still whate’er we lose?
And trust me, dear! good Humour can prevail,
When Airs, and Flights, and Screams, and Scolding fail.
Beauties in vain their pretty Eyes may roll;
Charms strike the Sight, but Merit wins the Soul.
DETI @ 248 FTW
“So men do need to get over their bitterness, yes.”
Hmm. Why? Why not hold on to it? There is little meeting of the minds between women and men. Until the situation improves, more bitterness will be the result.
Perhaps things will change and men will get over it. I’m not so sure. I’m still stewing over my 1st divorce. Betrayal isn’t something that you can just get over. Nonetheless, I try to shelter my bitterness from my current relationship, who shall never know the extent of my previous experience… long past, a long long time ago.
As for women falling for assholes, perhaps we should stop worrying about such things that we have no control over. You can only control yourself and your emotions. Focus on the women who don’t have such feminist ideas. The right women are out there. Many are probably at home doing nothing and are waiting for the right guy to come along.
Again with the semantics.
“Fucked up” is just my way of saying what you’ve already said: that some environments are not friendly or stable.
Environments can be controlled. That’s what social movements are all about: exercising agency and changing society’s beliefs. Check out the Civil Rights Movement… each single black person could focus on personal agency within the environment, or they could band together to change the environment. And that’s what they did.
Sometimes personal growth is useful. In social work, we call it “micro-practice.” Sometimes, a problem goes beyond the scope of what an individual can do, and in that case, social movements are useful. We call it “macro-practice.”
Incidentally, my focus in grad school is macro-practice. That shouldn’t come as a surprise.
Agreed.
Agreed. And ditto for men.
Olive,
Of course certain aspects of one’s environment can be changed. Those things would fall under the category of things that can be controlled.
Because it’s bitterness and it doesn’t feel good?
I know for a fact that people can change. I just think that people need to begin with themselves and be the change they wish to see in the world, you know?
no it doesn’t. but bitterness, like black coffee, helps keep the eyes open and prevents you from accidentally swallowing the blue pill and falling for NAWALT and repeating the past.
Bitterness has to run it’s course. Only then when you’re seeing the world properly with your new eyes and understand your new world are you ready to venture into it and navigate it.. without bitterness, but with knowledge.
All woman aren’t like that. Olive isn’t like that, though she does seem to know a lot of skanks at school. But there are women like the one’s on this blog in the real world.
Right. So in this case, we’re discussing hookup culture. The “environment” (the SMP) needs to change.
Here’s your hangup, I think. You’ve placed women into two categories: “quality” women, who are good for relationships, and “non-quality” women, who aren’t good for relationships. Sounds like you got what you consider a quality woman. Good on you.
But with all due respect, I think your thinking is simplistic (and it usually isn’t). “Quality” women can be just as full of the bad shit as “non-quality” women, and “non-quality” women can be sweethearts. Take my friend. I’m still good friends with her because, even though she’s confused as hell about relationships, her heart is in the right place, and she’s earnest.
And regardless of whether she fell for assholes in the past, it’s the attitude she carries into the future that will determine her success. She can change.
And people want to change. A few weeks ago an old regular e-mailed me saying she feels the guys at HUS would throw her into the “non-quality” category if she continued posting here, so she’s either lurking or decided to head out. The point is that she’s not inherently bad for a relationship, and she’s young. She’ll mature and grow, and will hopefully make a guy very happy. “Non-quality” women can become “quality” and vice-versa.
Olive,
I agree with all of that. But if we’re talking about relationships, then a “quality” woman would be one that would be a good choice for a healthy relationship, no?
And I never said that we shouldn’t work to change the SMP. I’m not sure why you were arguing that point….
@ Jesus
Don’t conflate the exception with the rule. The women on HUS are the rare breed at the moment.
Many have self admitted they view things differently now only because of running through HUS. Our hostess Susan can attest to this just by looking through her archives.
When i see the sea-change in attitude and run into more women in the dating scene who recognize and praise HUS as a valuable resource.. then i’ll agree.
I agree. I once said I started my blog for myself, and I’m still doing it for myself. If people get on board with what I’m doing, cool.
Also I’m not really “like that” or “not like that.” To be honest, I cherry-pick what I say here… I have not been dishonest, but I have not disclosed all my personal information. In other words, don’t think that the good women are all coming to Susan’s blog.
Some stuff about me would probably make you cringe. Doesn’t mean I can’t have a fruitful relationship (which is awesome these days, by the way!).
Olive:
“it’s women in general who are confused and mixed up about what real relationships are about. It’s not about “good women” and “crappy women,” it’s about a society that has made its mark on a generation of women who are mixed up and reeling in this hookup culture. If I thought the “crappy women” were beyond repair, and that the “good women” could do no wrong, I would shut down my blog.”
Technological changes led to cultural, political and legal changes that brought about the society we now have — a society marked by completely unrestrained hypergamy. Game is feminism’s bastard child.
The women you spoke of your post are merely products of that society and environment. This environment is f**ked up and it’s producing f**ked up men and women. A lot of women think relationships are about hookups, Snooki, Kim Kardashian, and Britney Spears.
A lot of women have completely unrealistic expectations. They think they can screw 10, 15, 20 or 40 men, it will have no effect on them whatsoever, and then when they are around 32 or 35, the perfect men will simply show up with a dozen roses and 2-carat solitaires.
Some think relationships are women’s channel movies of the week in which their perfect husband earns a tidy six figures and has big pecs, washboard abs and a huge, always hard pecker ready to service her on a moment’s notice. She lives in a 5 BR 3.5 BA, 5000 SF house in Flushing or suburban CT with him, and her kids are perfect and earn straight As at the exclusive private school around the corner. She, meanwhile, works at an exciting, cool job in advertising, law, medicine or business, which never stresses her out, never requires late nights, and always involves adventure and intrigue.
Women need to let go of these silly fantasies and see life for what it really is and not what this culture tells them it should be.
I’m not sure that they’re as rare as men here make them out to be. Not saying that there aren’t an abundance of trashy women today, but I think that there are more quality ones than most men here assume.
JM,
I only argued it because your MO lately has been “these guys need to quit being bitter and find the good women.” I just don’t think it’s that simple.
This. I was a dumbass before I found HUS.
Olive,
I wasn’t putting you on a pedestal or anything. I was simply saying that you’re not hung up on assholes who won’t commit.
At one time, I was.
Olive,
No. I think the men here would be better off not being bitter. But I didn’t say they should just go out and find the good women. Honestly, I wouldn’t have a problem if they all wanted to go out pumping and dumping the bad women.
Yes. You’ve said that. And I would’ve advised men to avoid you if they wanted a relationship.
Jesus,
Didn’t say trashy. Rare as in:
- being introspective/looking inward
- understanding their own nature, hypergamy
- willing and able to comprehend the world from the male interest/perspective
- caring about and striving towards ending injustices against men and looking for solutions
Mike,
In my opinion, a quality woman is one who wants a happy and healthy committed relationship with a man she loves and desires sexually. I don’t care if my gf understands the “male” perspective, as long as she listens to “my” perspective. The male perspective thing is bullshit anyway. The fact that we’re having this debate at all is proof of that.
“Many are probably at home doing nothing and are waiting for the right guy to come along.”
That’s probably the biggest mistake someone can make. It’s a lot easier to meet people than one thinks, IMO. It just requires getting out of the house, smiling at people and breaking the ice.
With the internet and meetup.com, there are so many single and professional social events now these days.
You should tell my BF, he can still get out now.
Although I’d be devastated…
I haven’t been perfect, but I’d like to think I haven’t been a bad relationship bet over the last few years.
JM,
Just for the record, when I met my BF I was still in asshole mode.
Olive,
I know you were. I think you’ve made some very positive changes. I wouldn’t tell your bf to get out now. But in the beginning, I would’ve told him he was a fool.
Sometimes the risky bet pays off though. That’s good.
Re: this, you’ve been pretty forthright, so unless you were wanking off more than one guy at a time or something totally trashy, I don’t think I’d be surprised. And anyway, I know some pretty awful people. Whatever the case, people change. Sometimes for the worse, but sometimes for the better.
Jesus,
Not seeing it the way you are. I wouldn’t really care to be with a woman who ‘listened’ to my perspective but didn’t give a shit or concern about it. She can listen to me crow about frivolous divorce all she wants and nod her head, but if she’s not willing to examine it from ‘the male perspective’ then it’s on my head when i’m lining up for my second divorce because she’s unnnhhhappy that i’m not a Cullen or Salvatore.
The fact that we’re having this debate at all only proves that there’s a long way to go before i’m convinced women en masse earn the right to claim NAWALT. You disagree, so be it.
A quality woman is one who wants a happy and healthy committed relationship with a man she loves and desires sexually… i don’t know a single woman who wakes up in the morning and says ‘im going to strive for a miserable unhealthy abusive relationship with someone i detest and hate and have no desire for. End goal =/ comprehension of logical path to achieve it. All women strive for their happy ever after. Does not follow that 100% of women out there are quality women.
Sometimes, the “nice guys” are all we really want.
Falling for assholes, IMO, is really about self-hatred. If you don’t much like yourself, you won’t take nicely to being treated well. You know what I think? Kate Bolick and entitlement princesses and all my “damaged” friends just really hate themselves. 3 years ago, I hated myself too.
Feminism and the Sexual Revolution have created a generation of miserable women who don’t know the true meaning of “self-confidence.” It’s hard to be confident when you’re surrounded by a bunch of miserable people. That’s why I’m afraid of women these days. Don’t want to move backwards.
Her best chance for marriage is a wealthy older man to whom she can generate some attraction.
I think she can pull off if she signs a prenup and looks the other way at the older rich man “indiscretions” she can actually get him to sign the dotted line.
We should give her Doug’s contact info.
Mike,
Whoa. Who said anything about not giving a shit about it? My point is that “my” perspective is “mine.” It’s not a “male” perspective; it’s Jesus Mahoney’s perspective. I don’t think you should ever settle for a woman who doesn’t give a shit about MuffManMike’s perspective.
@deti
I don’t think so. That’s what led to the conversation about whether the girls would prioritize career or family. They heard her story, and one of them said, “I don’t think I can do this (dating) for much longer. I know I don’t want to do it until I’m 39.” They started talking about timing, and all of them agreed that if they found the right guy now, they’d be happy to lock him down. Not a single one was looking for another few years of partying. At 22-23, these girls have experienced all the partying and drinking they could handle since they got to college at 18, and they want to stop. They’re sick of it – they don’t even go to bars anymore. Their male peers have also stopped partying and drinking so much. I think the Millennials are going to reject Gen X’s path.
Olive,
I agree that women who like assholes hate themselves. That’s why I think men shouldn’t stress over not scoring with them.
Jesus M:
“The male perspective thing is bullshit anyway. The fact that we’re having this debate at all is proof of that.”
That explains a lot. This isn’t an attack, I’m just sussing out your take on things so I can make sense of your comments here.
Your approach is that if something no longer affects Jesus Mahoney, it no longer exists. If it no longer affects Jesus Mahoney, it used to be a societal problem but isn’t anymore. Or if Jesus Mahoney cannot see it, it does not exist. Or if Jesus Mahoney believes the evidence does not support the existence of a problem, then it is not a problem.
deti,
No. That’s a strange interpretation of what I said. My perspective is that I want a woman who understands me as an individual, not as a part of MEN WRIT LARGE. Because obviously, each individual man has a different perspective.
JM,
And that’s why I think women need an attitude overhaul. The difference in our opinions, I think, is that you don’t seem to think girls who like assholes are as common as I think they are. I don’t know if that’s because you hang out with a lot of girls and they’re great people, or if it’s because you’ve been out of college for awhile and aren’t around girls that much, or what. But I can tell you that as a whole, women are going for assholes. I feel very certain.
And if that’s true, it’s also true that the non-assholes aren’t scoring at all, for the most part. So there are two options: become an asshole, or remain celibate.
Or the women can get their shit together.
Susan @ 286: I hope you’re right.
@Susan
To quote the Angry Video Game Nerd wrt to Godzilla tournament fighters.
“God damn it, I was born too fucking early! “
OK, Jesus M. I don’t agree that my interpretation is strange, but whatever.
I hope so, Susan. That’s not what I’m seeing in grad school.
Olive,
Most of the women I know socially are ones that my friends are dating. My friends aren’t assholes, ergo…
If women are mostly going for assholes, then men should hold out for a good one. And spit some asshole game if they want to get laid.
Or not. It’s up to them.
Selection bias, my friend. I’d wager the single girls my age are not the girls your friends are dating…
Yup, they’re the 80%.
I calls ‘em like I sees ‘em.
You’re 23? Some of them are, but not all. But they’re into artistic types. Most of my college friends are writers and artists. My friends from high school are more of a mixed breed, but few of them are “assholes.”
That was in response to me? I’m not surprised you see it that way, deti. I think your vision is extremely skewed.
« 1 2 3 4 … 6 »
{ 2 trackbacks }