There's been a long term trend away from glorifying the production of children, which is the physical world reason women need men. First, they need sperm, though that could be obtained by sperm bank or ONS with Chad T. Second, and more important, they need the extra income and helping hand a man provides to raise children, especially more than one.
Why don't people in general, and especially women, want children like they did in the 1950's? Demographics is a mystery. French population stagnated in the 19th century while that of Germany and Britain exploded. African population is continuing to explode while everywhere else it is stagnant or even declining. Urbanization appears a factor. Education of women a factor. Rate of population growth almost always goes up after a war or other crisis. In wolves and wild boar, hunting and other stressors tends to increase rate of reproduction regardless of effect on food resources. (((Orthodox))) have no economic or media power but reproduce like rabbits, as do the similar Amish and Mennonite and polygamist Mormons. (((Elite))) have economic and media power greatly disproportionate to their numbers (though absolute power is still limited because numbers are so small in absolute terms) but extremely low birth rates. Etc, etc. There no easy answer. If you think you fully understand why attitudes about children have changed in most of the world since the 1950's, trust me, you are mistaken.
The physical need for sex is a minor factor. Masturbation can take care of that, but many women don't even need masturbation because their sex drive is just low. Men are all the same: high sex drive or your ancestors didn't reproduce. Women are not all the same. Historically, lots of men preferred women with no or very low sex drive because these women wouldn't cheat. They did their wifely sexual duties same as they scrubbed the toilet and cooked dinner. The real biological necessity in women is to bond to and desire to nurture children. That necessity can be converted into bonding/nurturing pet cats or pet immigrants or other children surrogates.
So much for physical reality. Lets turn to psychological realm, or realm of validation. In the past, a woman needed sex with a man to feel validated as a success. Now she can get validation from orbiters on social media, or she can identify as a lesbian and have real sex except not with a man and be validated that way, or she can identify as a tree or frog (go crazy, in other words) and have sex with no one and still feel like a validated success because there's now a support group for crazy people like that somewhere.
Putting the physical reality and psychological factors together, we see demand for men has been declining since the 1950's and will continue to decline for decades to come, whereas supply of men is greater because no male deaths in war.
So what to do? Unless you're Chad T (top 1%), your best strategy is to learn to live without women for long periods of time and to share women with other men. Men on whaling ships went without women for years on end. Then when they finally stopped in at port, they shared a small group of whores. I'm not advocating either whaling or whoring. My point is simply that going without women for long periods and sharing (ONS and short term relationships with sluts is as much sharing as P4P) are neither unprecedented nor the mark of faggotry/betaness/soyification/etc. You don't have to identify as MGTOW but you should be prepared to live MGTOW for much of your life of you want to be happy. Because for all but Chad T, making your happiness dependent on constant and exclusive sexual access to a quality women is a formula for misery under current and foreseeable conditions.
Why don't people in general, and especially women, want children like they did in the 1950's? Demographics is a mystery. French population stagnated in the 19th century while that of Germany and Britain exploded. African population is continuing to explode while everywhere else it is stagnant or even declining. Urbanization appears a factor. Education of women a factor. Rate of population growth almost always goes up after a war or other crisis. In wolves and wild boar, hunting and other stressors tends to increase rate of reproduction regardless of effect on food resources. (((Orthodox))) have no economic or media power but reproduce like rabbits, as do the similar Amish and Mennonite and polygamist Mormons. (((Elite))) have economic and media power greatly disproportionate to their numbers (though absolute power is still limited because numbers are so small in absolute terms) but extremely low birth rates. Etc, etc. There no easy answer. If you think you fully understand why attitudes about children have changed in most of the world since the 1950's, trust me, you are mistaken.
The physical need for sex is a minor factor. Masturbation can take care of that, but many women don't even need masturbation because their sex drive is just low. Men are all the same: high sex drive or your ancestors didn't reproduce. Women are not all the same. Historically, lots of men preferred women with no or very low sex drive because these women wouldn't cheat. They did their wifely sexual duties same as they scrubbed the toilet and cooked dinner. The real biological necessity in women is to bond to and desire to nurture children. That necessity can be converted into bonding/nurturing pet cats or pet immigrants or other children surrogates.
So much for physical reality. Lets turn to psychological realm, or realm of validation. In the past, a woman needed sex with a man to feel validated as a success. Now she can get validation from orbiters on social media, or she can identify as a lesbian and have real sex except not with a man and be validated that way, or she can identify as a tree or frog (go crazy, in other words) and have sex with no one and still feel like a validated success because there's now a support group for crazy people like that somewhere.
Putting the physical reality and psychological factors together, we see demand for men has been declining since the 1950's and will continue to decline for decades to come, whereas supply of men is greater because no male deaths in war.
So what to do? Unless you're Chad T (top 1%), your best strategy is to learn to live without women for long periods of time and to share women with other men. Men on whaling ships went without women for years on end. Then when they finally stopped in at port, they shared a small group of whores. I'm not advocating either whaling or whoring. My point is simply that going without women for long periods and sharing (ONS and short term relationships with sluts is as much sharing as P4P) are neither unprecedented nor the mark of faggotry/betaness/soyification/etc. You don't have to identify as MGTOW but you should be prepared to live MGTOW for much of your life of you want to be happy. Because for all but Chad T, making your happiness dependent on constant and exclusive sexual access to a quality women is a formula for misery under current and foreseeable conditions.