Twice now, I skipped through and listened to everything she said. She said she dates seriously because she wants to marry and have more children.
In other words, she doesn’t play around. By ‘high standards,’ she means she only wants to date a serious man who will love her child, too.
You’re all pro-life, right? So, when these women end up as single moms, you don’t think they should ever marry anyone?
As I said, the topic is not really single motherhood but the hypergamic culture that has taken hold of women around the world.
It’s a well-known phenom that these women will screw around in their 20’s. However, when they reach their 30’s they will try to redeem themselves by wearing clothing suited to the Amish to try and make it appear that they are something that they weren’t a few years prior.
Yes, there are single mothers who are good women but were dealt with a bad hand. Their husbands died or they weren’t able to discern that their high quality, in physicality and income, were really low quality in their character and weak in their ability to commit. |
Hypergamy is not about those type of women. Hypergamy is about using men. In their 20’s, they allow themselves to be used by high value men and are damaged in the process. The beta males, during this period, are absolutely dumped on by these women. They will savage him if he gets the gumption to just say hi. She will get him fired from his job if he tries to talk to her socially. He is a worm to her, in her mind, during this period. I do not exaggerate in the least about this for these men.
Once the women gets out of her ho phase, because her options have dwindled to where he is now competitive, she will then try and convince him to be a husband because she now needs a provider and she couldn’t land the big whale that she really wanted.
If he agrees to marry her, she will always compare him to the guy that she slept with one time. She will tell him that she could have had this guy, because he was willing to sleep with her once.
These men are mostly celibate outside relationships. If they went to the bar alone, they will go home at 2am alone. So they don’t go out. They tend to their life. If they do marry, quite often they are celibate within the marriage. The woman in question cannot bring herself to sleep with her husband on a regular basis, because she is forever in love with the big whale that she landed once. So the man in question, who was involuntary celibate in his twenties, is now involuntarily celibate in his thirties. Except he now has the responsibilities of marriage and being nice to her without a comparable reciprocity from her.
The woman who rejects him in their 20’s is stil rejecting him in their 30’s, except she is using him for financial support to provide for her children that are not his. He gets to be stuck in the marraige because divorce means losing most of his assets and child support.
Do you understand now what the issue is?
Your entire mindset is warped, as indicated by the fact that you conflate "having high standards" with "deserving to have those standards met in the real world."
A "broke, dusty" 45-year-old man, balding and paunchy, barely hanging on financially, is certainly to be commended for having "high standards," right? Isn't he admirable for having such "high standards?"
I mean, he's "holding out" for a slim, attractive cover girl in her 20s, with firm Christian values. Further, she should also have a bankroll, so that they can live in comfort while raising a big family.
How could you possibly criticize him for having "high standards," after all?
Because they're UNREALISTIC!
Because the women he wants, DON'T WANT HIM!
By the same token, men who are finally "coming into their own," have boosted their SMV through hard work, accumulating capital, acquiring societal status, building a career, etc. - DON'T WANT / have no reason to "settle" for a woman who was profligate during her peak SMV years, who would have spurned him in his 20s, when he was still struggling, but is now willing to accept him as a step-father to her children.
About being "pro-life": I most certainly am - but that does NOT mean that the woman shouldn't have to pay a penalty (bear the consequences) of her previous bad behavior. It most certainly does not mean that the man has any obligation to "step up" and "rescue" her from the unhappy consequences of her bad behavior.
Regards,
I think that there should be absolutely no societal onus upon men to "step up" and rescue these women. No "looking askance" at men who honestly state that they worked hard to get to their station in life, and don't feel that they should have to "bail out" these women.
Our society as a whole should take all of the rhetorical energy currently being expended to convince high-value men to accept single mothers and instead apply it to inculcating young women with a better understanding of the law of "cause and effect," and that "actions have consequences."
"With great power comes great responsibility." Young women at the height of their SMV have great power. They should therefore be made well aware of the consequences of whimsically squandering that (unearned) power. For the majority of recorded history, that was the case!
Men in their late 30s are at the height of their SMV. Society should not try to "shame" them into squandering that (earned) power.
Regards,