[Tuthmosis]

Quote:

"But I look 25! But someone with decent eyesight once said I look like Angelina Jolie's lovechild! How can this be?" I cried.

I'm shocked at the number of girls I hear claiming they "look" some lower age than they are. If that were true, she would be having to beat back the quality dudes back with a stick.

The dick is one of the most honest organisms in the animal kingdom. Cock, in other words, don't lie.

Does this look 25 to you? And who knows how old this picture is. You can bet your bottom dollar it wasn't taken yesterday and that it's hella flattering to her.

EDIT: I've left the size of the image large so you can see the detail on the face. Despite the artistic blurring, you can see all kinds of forehead and smile lines. If you look closely enough, you can spot some chickening of the neck too.

   

[Excelsior]

(03-31-2012 02:22 PM)MSW2007 Wrote:  

Women who do not reproduce aren't necessarily precluded from passing on their teachings. Consider the number of (probably) childless Women's Studies professors, passing on their vile spew, possibly without ever reproducing. And that will effect a lot more people than she could by simple reproduction alone.

Fortunately for us, this is actually not the case. You're giving the influence of education far too much credit. Aside from genetics (which are a factor), you're also ignoring upbringing. That is the biggest factor in all of this.

Your first school is in the home. Your first teachers are your parents. The influence that parents have on children is far greater than that of any school-they define you. You are a product of your upbringing. Your ideology (as well as whether or not you grow up with or without a host of mental/social disorders and other maladies) is primarily determined by the home you grow up in. Exceptions exist and the young can (and do) deviate a little here and there, but one cannot count on this for long. At the end of the day, the apples do not often fall far from the trees.

The most effective way to ensure the perpetuation of your ideology is to produce children and bring them up entirely within the scope of said ideology.

To give an example: the generation of feminists we deal with now are a product of their upbringing. They were raised by the same people who brought about the "New Left" (themselves a product of post-war abundance and peace), which created the sexual revolution and the modern forms of liberalism we are used to now. Their parents were the ones who presided over the rise and institutionalization of modern feminism, the authors of the founding guidelines of modern leftism. They were the ones who set the rules for modern dating/sex (example: making it more casual) as we know them.

Their children are the way they are because of how they were raised. All of the issues we complain about that they show are mere manifestations of what their parents told them.
They were taught to be "independent, strong women" who could "be whatever they wanted in life" and should "never settle for less" than what they "deserve". They were told that they should always "speak their mind" and "ignore rigid gender roles". They were taught that men "weren't essential", that they should "enjoy their prime years" and avoid "committing too soon" to men while young, as previous generations of women may have done.

These are things that their mothers (who were the first sex positive feminists) and fathers (the men who married these women and did much legislating/protesting in their favor during the 60's and 70's) have told them since birth. It is all they have known. Since there were so many of them (baby boomers are very numerous and influential), they brought these teachings to the mainstream, which is why you see it in most schools, media, laws, etc. They're just preaching to the choir.

You see the same thing on the other side of the political spectrum: conservative women are marrying young and having larger families because this is what they have been brought up to do. The importance of family and stability was drilled into them from birth.

Will they deviate? Sure. A handful will suffer abuse and/or other maladies as little girls, and go totally off the rails (becoming pornstars, even). Other young religious/conservative girls will slip up and hop on some strange, secular dick from time to time if it is "sexy" enough. At the end of the day, however, they will end up (or, at the very least, try to end up) just like their mothers and fathers wanted: married with 3+ kids. No amount of feminist programming will change this-the idea of waiting until 30+ to look for a mate and having a tiny family (one or no kids) is antithetical to all they've grown up with. This is an ideological divide that will never be bridged-they simple will not live the way their more urban, progressive peers do.

As for her more progressive counterparts, the ideology they were raised with all sounded great on paper-the problem is that now these progressive/liberal women (and their brothers, for that matter) aren't really reproducing. They are the only ones who have truly been bred within the confines of this ideology, and they're the only ones who can pass it on.

If they cannot do this (and it does not look like they can), then it will decline or disappear. There is no avoiding that or making up for it with professorships at Wesleyan (there won't be anyone to teach).

Bottomline: One does not simply undo decades of ideological inculcation (sourced from family, the people one trusts most on earth) with a few Women's and Gender Study Courses from strangers over a four year period. That's just not realistic.

If this is what they are counting on to perpetuate their ideology instead of reproduction, then they're already finished.

[rudebwoy]

(03-30-2012 11:35 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

Let's not get carried away here, a 34 year old woman may not be at her prime, but she isn't exactly out of the market either. If you read the ratio factor blog(a VERY interesting blog, btw), you'll see that single men in their 30s in America STILL outnumber single women.

If you're a single American man, the demographics are not on your side.

1) Single men outnumber single women in the 20-30s.
2) Women have been graduating from college at a higher rate than men(status mismatch)
3) The recession is hitting men harder than women
4) Economic liberation for women means men are options for them, not a necessity, thus:
a)they are delaying marriage to later and later ages
b)they are less willing to compromise and be reasonable with their expectations
5) Single women over 30 go out less while single men over 30 go out as much as they did in their 20s meaning cockfests are the norm, and tacofests are almost unheard of. Balance only happens if there's control at the door.
6) A 34 year old woman can post a dating profile and still be flooded with responses.

I am so glad you stated this fact, single men outnumber single women in American, Canada (I am sure) and most Western countries.
Add the fact that alot of those single women maybe over-weight compared to the single men, not a pretty picture indeed.

So now you have miss 34 yr old, who let's face it does not look that bad; holding out for Mr Big or the kinda of guy she thinks she deserves. She obviously thinks she is high value, her profile states she lives between New York and London. I wonder what she calls "living"?

I have met/dated alot of women in there 30's, they are a very entitled lot to say the least. Most of them always have a torch for some guy from the past, some guy that broke there young heart's.

Once they reach a certain age, you start to see the fear in there eyes. They will always mention a friend or relative that just had a kid or has a kid. Deep down they want too find a man that will support them and there off-spring, which is tough for most men to do in this economic climate.

[Pilgrim37]

Does location of upbringing and residence have an effect on the women's outlook?
Does the Big City vibe/culture infect them and destroy biological needs till it's too late?

Small town girl rather than NYC,CHICAGO,LA native or transplant with according ambitions.
Surely they want to settle down late 20's max cause there's nothing else to do i.e. 2 bars in town,a couple restaurants,a cinema,a mall or High street...what else is there to distract them from their biological urges and maternal instinct?
And if they haven't left for the big city it's cause they're not interested in the Sex and The City fantasy?

Do guys need to move to smaller towns ,maybe after a couple of years of the rat race in the bigger cities?