My point is that most young women have a large selection of men to choose from, so they have to turn many men down. I'm not claiming it's bad or good. It's just reality. Many young men are not successful in the dating market because they have so much competition.
Well, I'm claiming that it's bad, and unnatural!
In a healthy society, young people would pair up in a process known as assortative mating. Since there are roughly as many young men as there are young women, neither sex would be at an advantage. A (male) "7" would pair up with a (female) "7," a "4" with a "4," and so on.
(Of course, ideally, this whole process would be curated by the parents - but that would be only an added benefit, and isn't an absolute prerequisite for this set-up to function.)
Instead, in today's society, a female "4" can - at least temporarily - hook up with a male "9." The female "4" then thinks that she must, in actuality, be at least a "6" or a "7." (This fault of female psychology is now even amplified by the current "You're a QUEEN" meme.)
In actuality, the male "9" ends up having a loose "harem" of lower-ranking women (some of whom delude themselves into believing that they are enjoying exclusivity, and/or have at least a chance to "land" the man - perhaps by "accidentally" becoming pregnant).
And by the same token, the majority of men (ranging from "6" on downwards) have to scramble for the crumbs. They, in contrast, will experience year-long "droughts," struggle with self-esteem issues, etc.
The familiar pattern then emerges: Come age 30 ("The Wall"), these lower-ranking women, whose pair-bonding ability has been shot to hell (clinical studies show this), suddenly experience an "epiphany."
"Hallelujah! I'm a born-again virgin! And (paradoxically) I'm gonna RAISE my standards!"
The (middle- and low-ranking) men who have been struggling through their 20s are now understandably loathe to "bail them out."
Is any of this making sense to you? Does it ring at all true to you?
The situation is actually much worse, because feminism + liberalism + the Nanny State + the generally gynocentric culture (Oprah) have convinced ALL of these women that "they are the PRIZE." Secondary and tertiary effects mean that you can actually encounter statistically significant numbers of women who flatly state that they got pregnant (without any prospect of marriage) because they wanted to have a baby to pamper and coddle and play with!
In a large section of the Black population, one actually finds the mindset that getting married is a bigger and more-momentous decision than getting pregnant! Of course, some of that may be due simply to retroactive self-justification and rationalization (they didn't really want it, but now they've got to pretend that it was their "master plan" all along) - but by all appearances, a great many of these Black women hold husbands for superfluous!
You imply that men are equally to blame for the desolate state of modern "dating" (I always put that in quotation marks, because TRUE dating should always be a short, deliberate, and mindful process whose ultimate goal is to STOP DATING.) But the "dating" behavior of men is dictated 95% by their gonads, and men's gonads haven't changed all that much since the Pleistocene Epoch. Men have always striven to spread their seed as far as they can. Men don't need a reason (to couple), just an opportunity. Etc., etc.
In contrast, the behavior of women (in the sexual realm) is determined not so much by visceral urges, but rather by social cues, social one-upmanship, a need for social validation, gossiping, group dynamics, and manipulating men by dangling/withholding sex in exchange for resources.
The amplification of bad and, in many cases, downright evil messaging ("Men and women have equally strong sex drives!" "Men and women should both play around!" "Don't need no man!" "A single mother is brave, strong, and independent!" "As the 40-year-old mother of four kids - through three baby-daddies - my value has only increased!") through feminism, and abetted by a Nanny State that funds their insanity, has only worsened the situation.
Regards,
To your posts # 299, 300, and 301:
>"Many conservatives yearn for the 1950s."<
I wasn't alive in the 1950s, but we agree on the following point:
>"TRUE dating should always be a short, deliberate, and mindful process whose ultimate goal is to STOP DATING"<
I would like the word dating to return to its original meaning: If a man asks a woman to date, he should mean dinner and a movie, or simply spending quality time together, with no other 'expectations' (if you get my drift). Unfortunately, since I was young, more and more people have been using the word date to mean something entirely different.
However, I know of many young couples (in their 20s now) who dated with respect for each other before marrying. So, I do not make assumptions about people who say they are dating. The woman in the video used the term relationship, but I will not make assumptions about her, either.
I don't understand what people want this woman to say. Do you think a single mom should have low standards? Should she sleep around with lowlifes who use her and dump her? Should she parade men in and out of her child's life? Or, maybe she should not date at all? I would say she should not date if dating means 'adding to her body count' or bringing strangers around her child.
However, I spent much time for many years around a large number of Christian families. A small number of the men and women had had children with other people - a few out of wedlock - before marrying and raising another family. Some other people lived a wild life in their younger years and settled down later. Many people make mistakes and then wise up later. People are imperfect. So, men and women can and do learn from their past and turn their lives around.
>"The . . . men who have been struggling through their 20s are now understandably loathe to "bail them out."<
Perfectly understandable. Notice that I never said men should be expected to bail out women. I never said men (or women) should or should not date or marry a single parent. People make their own choices.
>"(This fault of female psychology is now even amplified by the current "You're a QUEEN" meme.)"<
And men are referred to as "kings" now.
>"The top 90% of all women (in the relevant age bracket) and the top 10% of all men have all the power. They establish the "rules of the game." They determine who gets to play."<
Yes, a relatively small percentage of men 'date' a larger percentage of young women. So, then, you agree with me that most young women have many options. Furthermore, both young men and older men chase young women. So, young men are competing with a large number of men over a young woman. So, we agree on that point.
>"- Mr. Kevin Samuels<"
I found some information about Mr. Samuels. I hope young men aren't following advice from a man who was married and divorced twice and continued to sleep around up to his death. It would be like following the advice of Hugh Hefner. No wonder so many young men are cynical and they can't find a date.
>feminism + liberalism + the Nanny State + the generally gynocentric culture (Oprah) have convinced ALL of these women that "they are the PRIZE."<
I never hear women talk that way in Real Life. I have a large extended family, and we were associated with a large Christian community for many years, and NONE of the women talked that way. Again, many of the young women married in their 20s, and they are raising their own families now. You mentioned the 'black population.' I knew many churchgoing black families who raised their kids with good, solid values.
I know that many young men are not marrying or even dating, but many factors are at play. One is the economy. Young men need more job opportunities. Some young men today do not seem interested in dating, probably because they still live 'at home.' At the same time, the young men who want to date are searching in the wrong places.
Many young women don't date, either. They might have options, but they are waiting for a man who wants to commit, which many young men don't want to do. One theory is that young men are not ready to marry, until they reach their late 20s, and then the young man will marry the woman he is dating at the time.
And then nothing is guaranteed. Some people pretend to be 'good,' but they have dark secrets. I have sat and listened to some beautiful young Christian women cry because their 'Christian' husbands cheat on them, and many young women say their husbands are addicted to porn - which is a big problem.
You're ignoring all the male 4's and below who won't settle for anything less than a female 8. To put it in high school terms if you're that overweight guy with the pocket protector and the bad hygiene but refuse to settle for anyone other than the cheer captain (who must be simultaneously a virgin and knowledgeable about how to please a man sexually), whose fault is it really that you're still single?
But the "dating" behavior of men is dictated 95% by their gonads, and men's gonads haven't changed all that much since the Pleistocene Epoch. Men have always striven to spread their seed as far as they can. Men don't need a reason (to couple), just an opportunity.
So you're saying that if a fit woman of reproductive age but a horribly burned face was willing you'd have sex with her? Her facial burns don't affect her ability to carry your baby to term, after all. And her face means she's bound to have a low body count. Or maybe men do have standards besides mere reproductive fitness after all and that is 100% okay. The only problem happens when people of either sex have standards above what they can reasonably expect to attract AND take it out on the opposite sex (since people with unrealistic expectations alone will simply be alone forever, not unlike many celibate priests and nuns).
I don't have a cure for the 4's who think they are 10's. From what I've seen it's a disease that affects primarily white American men, though I have no experience dating European men, so it's possible they're just as bad. I just count myself fortunate to have found a husband from a country not yet contaminated.
I'm actually glad most men don't think primarily with their genitals, that they can control themselves if they so choose, for that would make them unfit leaders. I don't want a leader who will start a war to prove that his "nuclear button" is larger than another leader's "nuclear button". Russia already has that. We don't need it in America.