[RexImperator]

Margaret Wente Wrote:

Spend a little time with single women in their early to mid-30s, and you'll be grateful you're not one of them. The relationship scene is even more dismal today than when I was their age. All the women want serious relationships that lead to marriage, but many of the men they meet do not. All too often a woman moves in with some guy, hoping they're on the road to somewhere. Two years later, he tells her he's not ready for marriage and kids just yet. Splat.

But wait. Hasn't online dating made the mating market easier? Yes – for men. If you really want to hear a woman rant, just utter the word Tinder.

Single women are more equal and empowered than ever before. They have unparalleled sexual, reproductive and economic autonomy. In many ways, they're doing much better than the men. (Just look at the lopsided university graduation rates, which are now around 60-40). And yet, large numbers of young women admit their private lives are a sad mess.


If you're a gender studies major, stop reading here. You're going to hate what I've got to say next. I don't like it much myself.

In a nutshell, over the past few decades, the traditional relationship exchange has broken down. It used to be that men and women each had something the other really needed. Men needed access to sex. Women needed access to resources. Men couldn't get steady access to sex unless they had resources to offer, so they worked hard for them. The partnership between men and women was a grand bargain that (usually) left both sides better off.

For men, sex was traditionally expensive. The price tag was a long-term commitment to provide for a woman (and children). But today, sex is cheap. And that changes everything.

This is the premise of a bracing new book, Cheap Sex, by American sociologist Mark Regnerus. Sex got cheap because of three technological developments: the advent of the Pill, which divorced fertility from sex; the onset of mass-produced, high-quality pornography; and the arrival of online dating sites, which make it easy for men to find willing sex partners.

Sexual liberation is a fabulous thing – in some ways. But it can also turn men into louts, because women don't expect much in return for access. Today, most men can have all the sex they want for very little cost – no fancy dinner required. The irony, as Mr. Regnerus writes, is that today's mating market is probably more dominated by men's interests than ever before.

When women complain that marriageable men (sober, steady good providers) are harder to find than ever, they may well be right. The marriage rate is falling steadily, especially among the lower middle class, while long-term stable marriage is increasingly a privilege reserved for the better off.

A lot of women seem to have their act together these days. But a lot of men don't. "I think the greatest, most astonishing fact that I am aware of in social science right now is that women have been able to hear the labour market screaming out 'You need more education'… and men have not," MIT economics professor Michael Greenstone says in Cheap Sex.

What might explain this puzzling fact? Men don't have to prove themselves as providers any more. They can get all the sex they want anyway – including online porn on demand that can make the real thing feel mildly disappointing. (Ask younger women about men and porn. You'll get an earful.)

Like it or not, women have always been the gatekeepers for sex – not because they don't like sex, too, but because (no matter what you learned in gender studies) men's sex drive is innately higher. This means it's up to us to make the rules. "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" my father used to say. It drove me crazy when he said that. Now, it's dawned on me that he was right.

Since the women's cartel collapsed, women's bargaining power has seriously eroded. That's why so many single women hate Tinder, which has further commodified sex for the benefit of men. Women are just another consumer good in the shop window.

It may take a village to raise a child. But it takes a village to raise a husband, too. And modern society has largely abdicated from the job. "Good husband material doesn't occur naturally, but is instead the product (in part) of socialization, development, and social control," Mr. Regnerus writes. "[I]n the domain of sex and relationships men will act as nobly as women collectively demand."

Time to get our act together, ladies. If we don't, they won't either.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/opinion...e36365252/

[Easy_C]

Surprisingly candid article from a semi-mainstream paper. Will add more later.

[CleanSlate]

A woman really wrote this? Finally someone who gets it.

EDIT: Actually, upon re-reading it... no, she doesn't. That last line was a cop-out. Disappoint.

[Number one bummer]

I don't think she really gets it. Her hamster accidentally crash-landed in the ballpark but it doesn't know why. The author can name the symptoms but not the diseases or the cures. In her mind it is the fault of men that women wait until their 30's to get married and get rebuffed once their marital assets are gone.

If the author would have pointed out that it was staunch feminism then maybe she would be getting somewhere. It's popular to name the problem but not the solutions. I don't see her calling other women to become more feminine. I don't see her calling for a restructuring of courts and divorce law. I don't see her saying that waiting to your mid 30's to start having kids as a women is a bad idea.

Instead she finds it the fault of men for not "manning up" and marrying her single cat friends.

Quote:

"Good husband material doesn't occur naturally, but is instead the product (in part) of socialization, development, and social control," Mr. Regnerus writes. "[I]n the domain of sex and relationships men will act as nobly as women collectively demand."

She was so close when she said that, but again her solution is women just need to double down and pressure men into bad marriages. She doesn't realize that women becoming better marriage material will cause better marriage options from men.

[azulsombra]

Just saw a picture of the author.
Makes sense..she is far past the wall.
Reality set in, at least she isnt delusional like the women who try and deny the wall.

My biggest gripe with the article is of course she is talking to ALL women about the top 15% of men, the only ones that exist to them. Does she actually believe "most" guys can get sex any time they want? Assuming they want to bang something that isnt overweight, obnoxious, tatted up or a single mother, that just isnt the case for "most" guys. If it was so easy, then Game would be redundant.

[bbgun]

she neglected to mention that more women in the work place = less good paying jobs for men, which leads to a paucity of desirable, marriageable men.

[ExploringReality]

"Why are men that I want not settling for me?". There, fixed. No talk about betas at all, really show how invisible they are to women. At least there's some recognition about women being part of the problem.

[Vaun]

This article entirely blames men. She makes a very thin, laughable argument that the only reason men needed women for is sex. Sex has been available to men from the beginning of time.

Men married and marry women now for support. To multiply their resources by helping to create a happy, stable home, with healthy off spring. To assist them men as they go out and slay dragons, build empires, or even just pick up trash.

If a man has to come home every day to a cold, dark home, with no food in the fridge and no help in assisting his activities in the world, he is better off alone. Even worse, coming home to a battle ax that fights him every step of the way, drains his resources, wastes his money and makes bad decisions, cheats, goes on social media to talk to exes, flirts with every guy in the office; what incentive does a man have to marry someone? The unicorn in all of this is the happily successful, loving dual-income marriage. Its very rare.

Lady, its not just sex.

[LeBeau]

For non Canadian readers, I can explain about the Globe and Mail.

It might as well be called the Feminist and Mail for the vast majority of it's coverage. However they keep this author (Margaret Wente) on staff as the resident contrarian for many subjects that politically correct Canadians hold dear. It accomplishes a few things:

1) People will read her column just as clickbait or fodder for outrage
2) It allows the paper to point to her and say "See, we have balanced coverage" in between publishing multiple anti-Trump articles per day and gems like this:

http://nationalpost.com/news/globe-spike...-felt-like

Long time G&M contributer Tabatha Southey was also the woman responsible for this: thread-25620.html

Thankfully both Leah McClaren and Tabatha Southey have recently had their freelance columns cancelled, but I suspect this is more about readership than any ideaological changes or commitment to honest journalism.

[Penta Sahi]

Best thing about this article is the comment section:

Quote:

I was almost 40. Married 15 years with three kids. Successful business owner. Nice cars and nice house. Vacations. Volunteered as a coach, and our household revolved around kids' activities. Proud that my wife was able to stay home with the kids (her desire as well).
Then suddenly....Armageddon.
Wife met single dad at kids' school. Apparently, he had an 'aura' or something. They carried on for months - I, of course, was clueless.
When the hammer finally hit my head and all was out in the open, I was in for an even greater shock that I could have ever imagined.
Kicked out of my dream house. Ordered to pay wife half a million...either by taking a loan or selling the business. Ordered to pay a combination of alimony and child support that left me in a basement apartment. And the worst part? Paying 10s of 1000s to a lawyer whose advice summed up as "Suck it up, sunshine. That's our laws. Doesn't matter what she did....you pay. And pay".
Why would any sane man get married?

Lots of men with similar stories piping up.

[Suits]

Heh.

[The Beast1]

Comments section is full of honesty albeit depressing honesty. Good to see there are more men out there waking up.

[Lunostrelki]

(09-24-2017 10:05 AM)Penta Sahi Wrote:  

Best thing about this article is the comment section:

Quote:

I was almost 40. Married 15 years with three kids. Successful business owner. Nice cars and nice house. Vacations. Volunteered as a coach, and our household revolved around kids' activities. Proud that my wife was able to stay home with the kids (her desire as well).
Then suddenly....Armageddon.
Wife met single dad at kids' school. Apparently, he had an 'aura' or something. They carried on for months - I, of course, was clueless.
When the hammer finally hit my head and all was out in the open, I was in for an even greater shock that I could have ever imagined.
Kicked out of my dream house. Ordered to pay wife half a million...either by taking a loan or selling the business. Ordered to pay a combination of alimony and child support that left me in a basement apartment. And the worst part? Paying 10s of 1000s to a lawyer whose advice summed up as "Suck it up, sunshine. That's our laws. Doesn't matter what she did....you pay. And pay".
Why would any sane man get married?

Lots of men with similar stories piping up.

[deleted by mod. Don't advocate for illegal activity.].

This used to be the attitude, not "why I'm okay with being in an open relationship" idiocy or "pump-and-dump alpha" barbarism. Rebuild law and responsibility.

[LeBeau]

(09-24-2017 10:32 AM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  

[deleted by mod. Don't advocate for illegal activity.].

This used to be the attitude, not "why I'm okay with being in an open relationship" idiocy or "pump-and-dump alpha" barbarism. Rebuild law and responsibility.

[Germanicus]

(09-24-2017 09:46 AM)azulsombra Wrote:  

My biggest gripe with the article is of course she is talking to ALL women about the top 15% of men, the only ones that exist to them.

(09-24-2017 09:48 AM)ExploringReality Wrote:  

"Why are men that I want not settling for me?". There, fixed. No talk about betas at all, really show how invisible they are to women. At least there's some recognition about women being part of the problem.

That's just it. To these urban professional women a "good man" is a well-off stockbroker or lawyer who somehow doesn't work long hours so he can spend time--- and a whole lot of money-- on them. He's also got a very athletic physique that he somehow hones through not spending too much time at the gym-- and he can't be too muscular either; just the right size. He's also ideally over 6 feet tall but 5'10 is ok, you know, if a girl wants to settle. A "good man" is also a feminist; but not skinny-fat and soy and weird like male feminists are. He's rugged and masculine but not toxic masculine.

So here's the checklist of what you gotta be to land an early 30's professional woman in Toronto (and many other cities in the Anglosphere)

-- Have job that pays more than 100 grand but somehow is 8 hours a day or less.
-- Have muscular, athletic body that a pro athlete in his prime would have. You cannot spend more than an hour a day on this.
-- Be 6 foot plus. If you're short, like 5'10, you may be barely acceptable.
-- Be masculine. But not too masculine. You have to be feminist too. You have to somehow be enthusiastic about being her bitch and constantly apologizing for your biological sex while simultaneously being rugged and manly.

Did you meet all of these requirements? Almost but there's one you said no to? Sorry, you're not a "good man."

You met all these requirements? Congratulations! You can now date a 35 year old career woman who is "analytical" and "deep" and a "challenge." Maybe even wife her up. Until she decides its over when you fail to satisfy her ever changing whims.

I really don't understand how these women are not able to get or keep a man. Seriously, it's confusing.

[polar]

Quote:

Today, most men can have all the sex they want for very little cost – no fancy dinner required.

Apex fallacy spotted.

[Bluto]

(09-24-2017 09:46 AM)azulsombra Wrote:  

Just saw a picture of the author.
Makes sense..she is far past the wall.
Reality set in, at least she isnt delusional like the women who try and deny the wall.

My biggest gripe with the article is of course she is talking to ALL women about the top 15% of men, the only ones that exist to them. Does she actually believe "most" guys can get sex any time they want? Assuming they want to bang something that isnt overweight, obnoxious, tatted up or a single mother, that just isnt the case for "most" guys. If it was so easy, then guys like Roosh would be out of a job.

FIFY

[Dan Woolf]

(09-24-2017 10:05 AM)Penta Sahi Wrote:  

Lots of men with similar stories piping up.

Almost all the marriages these days end like that. Or if the marriage lasts, it becomes a dead bedroom type situation. Humans aren't naturally monogamous for life and now all the societal, political, religious etc. restraints that discouraged cheating, cuckolding and divorce have been erased. You can't out-alpha that. Even Donald fucking Trump has been divorced and he's paid tens of millions to his ex-wives.



Men haven't won anything, collectively, from liberalization of the sexual market. Like most markets, a minority eventually hoards the most commodities, in this case pussy. We acknowledge a wealth gap as problematic, but not the pussy gap.

The Pill, sexual liberation and feminism have allowed young women to have sex without kids and marriage. Divorce has made that the twenty-something girls are hit by twenty-something, thirty-something and forty-something men. Hence, young women have a false sense of abundance of males and a false perception of their value in the relationship market. They think that lots of men are interested in a relationship with them, while these men only want to have sex with them (this is projection because women don’t have sex with a men if they don’t judge him relationship-worthy). In addition, the fact that several alphas have pumped and dumped them inflates the perception of their marriage worth. The Hollywood and TV culture (where a prostitute or a maid can land a millionaire) inflates even more this delusion. Women who are 6 think they are 9.

So no average guy is good enough for these princesses. Even if they get married, they think that they could do better. When they get older, they delude themselves for years (rationalization hamster) before they see the reality. This is because modern culture teach them to follow their feelings instead of controlling them and also prohibits men in their lives from doing the controlling. When they see the reality, they get desperate, depressed, but then it is too late (Wile E. Coyote moment). And that "epiphany" isn't even real. They want to settle down, yeah, and some of them do, but if they could take a pill that would make them physically 20 year old again, they would all get back on the cock carousel the very next day.

So, at the end of the day, the causes are:

- Sexual liberation, which frees women to follow their impulses and follow a pattern of seeking the alpha male, like the African savannah.

- The pill, which makes possible to follow this behavior for years (without the pill they will get pregnant in months). Also, when a female animal gets fucked thousands and thousands of time by tens, maybe hundreds of males without getting pregnant, that probably won't help her mental health.

- Modern culture (including feminism and Sex and the City-like movies), which creates insane expectations.

It is the perfect storm. This is the future women chose, surprisingly similar to our primate past or the West African present. As Oscar Wilde said: "They have wonderfully primitive instincts. We have emancipated them, but they remain slaves looking for their masters, all the same."

What's the cure? Sex bots and artificial wombs, societal collapse leading to the return of patriarchy or getting conquered by Islam. In the meanwhile I suggest you enjoy the decline.



Ps. Female promiscuity fucks them up for good. https://imgur.com/a/k2TB8

[Bluto]

(09-24-2017 10:32 AM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  

[deleted by mod. Don't advocate for illegal activity.].

This used to be the attitude, not "why I'm okay with being in an open relationship" idiocy or "pump-and-dump alpha" barbarism. Rebuild law and responsibility.

I take it that you support this initiative:
Bring Back Deuling Petition

[Tactician]

(09-24-2017 10:32 AM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  

[deleted by mod. Don't advocate for illegal activity.].

This used to be the attitude, not "why I'm okay with being in an open relationship" idiocy or "pump-and-dump alpha" barbarism. Rebuild law and responsibility.

The overwhelming majority of men don't have this attitude and never will.* When they get divorce raped, they are seriously stunned that the women they loved would do this to them. They probably can't believe that what's happening is real and that they'll wake up any minute and everything will be OK.

The only person they might be thinking of killing is themselves.

On the flip side, I suspect a man who would off any bitch who betrayed him would be much less likely to be betrayed...

*Edit: And that's what pisses me off about these situations. The men in them are overwhelmingly really good men who are trying their best to be good husbands and fathers, but feminism has set up the legal system in a way that they are basically lambs to the slaughter.

[Tactician]

(09-24-2017 12:00 PM)polar Wrote:  

Quote:

Today, most men can have all the sex they want for very little cost – no fancy dinner required.

Apex fallacy spotted.

Haha this reminds me of this one time I was talking to a Korean chick. A solid 8.

I remember off-handedly mentioning to her that having a 6-pack was rare.

Her reply? "No way! In Korea, every guy has a 6-pack."

[HighSpeed_LowDrag]

It's telling just how big an influence/reach the manosphere is starting to obtain that comments like these are in the majority in the comments sections of major newspapers like the G&M.

[CRR]

Interesting, and spot on responses all around.

For once, I'd like to see a mainstream media source publish something like the following:

Sorry Ladies, Time For Some Introspection

The marriage rate is going down. More and more women are reaching their 30s and beyond without a husband in sight. Yet all we here from you is "Where have all the good men gone?", followed by lectures about men having to "man up".

First off, you don’t get to tell men what to do, anymore than vice versa. You keep harping on ‘education’ as a main attribute that is desirable for both men and women. You harp on beauty at any size. You expect men to tolerate your behavior or else they are sexist and/or misogynist.

Have you ever asked yourself, are you a good woman? Do you have the attributes that a typical man that you are interested in is looking for? If you are overweight, entitled and in your mid-30s, yet you desire a fit, successful, charismatic man in his mid-30s, never mind the hypocrisy, but you’re probably out of luck. Even if you think you’re job is so important and you used to be hot stuff, you are probably going to lose out to the mid-20s admin girl who is supportive and pleasant to be around.

And you don’t hold any moral high ground whatsoever. You say ‘education’ but what you really mean is ‘money’. You trash men for not finding overweight/obese women attractive, but you wouldn’t be caught dead with a short guy. Setting aside the fact that height cannot be controlled whereas weight can, and I believe BOTH men and women have the right to be attracted to whatever they are attracted to, it is important to bear in mind that most men desire a woman of NORMAL weight and height whereas women often list “must be 6’0+’ and ‘earn 100k’ as desirable traits. So men look for women in a broad range, whereas women like men to be in the top 15%. Yet we are the shallow ones?

So it’s time to look in the mirror, literally and figuratively. It’s not up to men to adapt to your changing wants and desires. Free will goes both ways. You admonish men for dating younger women, except you were once that younger woman. You hate that men choose women based on looks, but wouldn’t consider an average guy on an average salary. And that’s perhaps the main point. Face it, you’re average. Most people are. Your education/job doesn’t make you more attractive unless that is what a guy is looking for. Being overweight/obese isn’t attractive to a lot of men, especially the men you desire. Similarly, a bitter mid-30s career woman is less attractive than a pleasant mid-20s woman who has a more broad, selfless outlook on life. And there is nothing you can do about any of this except for what men have always done, which is to accept reality, that the world doesn’t revolve around you, and adapt accordingly.

[Lunostrelki]

(09-24-2017 01:03 PM)Tactician Wrote:  

(09-24-2017 10:32 AM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  

[deleted by mod. Don't advocate for illegal activity.].

This used to be the attitude, not "why I'm okay with being in an open relationship" idiocy or "pump-and-dump alpha" barbarism. Rebuild law and responsibility.

The overwhelming majority of men don't have this attitude and never will.* When they get divorce raped, they are seriously stunned that the women they loved would do this to them. They probably can't believe that what's happening is real and that they'll wake up any minute and everything will be OK.

The only person they might be thinking of killing is themselves.

On the flip side, I suspect a man who would off any bitch who betrayed him would be much less likely to be betrayed...

*Edit: And that's what pisses me off about these situations. The men in them are overwhelmingly really good men who are trying their best to be good husbands and fathers, but feminism has set up the legal system in a way that they are basically lambs to the slaughter.

The problem isn't that these are good men, but they're leaving out a fundamental component of manliness which is the ability to stand up for yourself and take charge. Many hardworking and intelligent liberal guys out there I know are like this, they're conscientious people, the kind of guy who'd help his friends and family without hesitation. All excellent qualities. But they've been indoctrinated to reject their natural gender roles in favor of a nonexistent equality. They've been taught to think it's not right or ethical to order their wife or girlfriend around, or to exercise power over her.

The solution is to be a good man, but let others understand that you have a sense of honor that you will not betray. If you can't place honor and order higher than comfort and status in your own life, you can't expect others to respect those standards.

I once asked my wife, "how do I know you won't cheat?" She was almost angry that I asked. "If I cheat you can just kill me."

She has to believe it, even if it won't actually happen. I bet that most men who want to find a faithful wife can screen out 90% of unsuitable women by stating their nuclear policy up front.

[Tactician]

(09-24-2017 02:31 PM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  

I once asked my wife, "how do I know you won't cheat?" She was almost angry that I asked. "If I cheat you can just kill me."

She has to believe it, even if it won't actually happen.

This is some next-level shit. I agree with the rest though.

I'd never advocate violence or being a 'gorilla pimp' as a way to keep women in check, but, to be candid, I've always been a little surprised that there aren't more cases of men with nothing to lose knocking on some family court judge's door.

There's an apocryphal story about Genghis Khan from this book that goes like this:

One day it is reported to Genghis Khan that one of the women he had chosen to be his concubine is sleeping with another man. Upon hearing this, Genghis Khan takes a moment to think. Meanwhile, everyone involved is expecting both the concubine and the man involved to be completely fucked. Boiling oil poured down their throats or crushed by boards weighted down by rocks or some shit. Instead, Genghis says, "Give them both provisions and send them away. I am ashamed to have chosen a woman of this character."

I'd never forgive a woman who tried to take my money or property, but it's always been my view that if a women cheats on you, it's more reflective of you than anything, regarding both your ability to judge others and also your own attractiveness.

Edit: grammar