Posted on 03/24/2025 5:58:27 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
After a handful of underwhelming relationships and dozens of disappointing first dates, Andrea Vorlicek recently called off the search for a husband.
The 29-year-old always thought she’d have found her life partner by now. Instead, she’s house hunting solo and considering having kids on her own.
“I’m financially self-sufficient enough to do these things myself,” said Vorlicek, a Boston-based accountant. “I’m willing to accept being single versus settling for someone who isn’t the right fit.”
She sees her plans for an independent future as making the best of a lousy situation. “I don’t want to sit here and say I’m 100% happy,” Vorlicek said. “But I feel happier just accepting my reality. It’s mentally and emotionally a sense of peace.”
American women have never been this resigned to staying single. They are responding to major demographic shifts, including huge and growing gender gaps in economic and educational attainment, political affiliation and beliefs about what a family should look like.
“The numbers aren’t netting out,” said Daniel Cox, director of the survey center at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative think tank. He ticked off the data points: More women than men are attending college, buying houses and focusing on their friendships and careers over dating and marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
The only axe I have to grind is that many men do not make good husbands, but you think that if 70% of divorces are initiated by women, it’s just because “feminism ruined women.” What a simple-minded take.
MOST men? Take another look around you. Think of every jerk you've encountered on the road, at the gym, in the office, behind a desk, wearing a badge, in public office... think of every man we've seen in the news getting arrested for violent crime, for possessing child porn, for gang-related violence, for drug addiction, for corruption and embezzlement... what kind of husbands do you think they are? Most of the same people we rage against in every other thread on this forum has at least one woman they've inflicted themselves on. Think about it.
I do agree with you on the point that, if men want to be considered a prize, they should be trying to be the prize. A woman’s desire for her mate to be a prize is as valid as a man’s desire for the fidelity of a woman’s character and her loyalty.
I appreciate that.
The jerks tend to overlap in several areas. They just have the mentality, but it is not representative of most men. If most men were as you say, you’d be living in a country like Somakia or Liberia where violence is the norm. Women who make these generalities are often from violent homes, but makes their experiences skewed because they see the men in their lives and their dysfunctional behaviors and apply it to men in general
Men are more aggressive than women, but most men, like 90% of them, do not use use their aggression towards women.
Look, even if it were 99% of all divorces being filed by the women, you could still - using your logic - argue that "the men made them do it."
The fact is that we don't have any facts beyond the given figure of 70%.
The simplest (not "simple-minded") solution (Occam's Razor) is that 70% of all divorces are initiated by women because, in 70% of the cases, the women simply were the ones who wanted out.
It would be nice to have stats on the percentage of divorces initiated by women who cite "domestic violence" (which has been adjudicated as such) - then we'd know for sure.
The only other thing we have to go on is the "generally accepted" narrative of women "wanting to find themselves, feeling trapped, wanting to go on a journey of personal discovery," etc. (The idea of a man citing that as a reason is laughable.)
And I'd think that you'd agree that those are pretty lousy reasons.
Regards,
Actually, you make my argument for me!
Most of the people I encounter in daily life are, in fact, not jerks.
Perhaps you are laboring under selection bias.
You have, e.g., one unpleasant interaction with a fellow motorist on the road, and unconsciously assume that that is representative of all motorists. When in actual fact most motorists are kind, calm, and cooperative human beings.
(Just like most FReepers - esp. those who conclude every posting with a pleasant closing salutation).
Regards,
Regards,
Seen it with my own eyes. Even fit healthy real women can’t compete with airbrushed porn.
I don’t know how old you are, but I would suggest that perhaps a few things have changed between your time and mine. Namely the proliferation of online porn that skews men’s perceptions of what an attractive woman is. Even a 20-year-old in good shape can’t compete with the airbrushed images.
So in your previous post you say women aren’t visual creatures, but then you also share a meme in which the woman treats the good looking guy better than the ugly guy. Which is it?
Decades ago I was one of the “creeps”—but of course did not realize it.
Once I discovered the manosphere I learned what I needed to do to be one of the “hot” guys.
It was a lot of work—and took a year or so to make the necessary changes.
The differences were obvious.
Suddenly women at work were flirting like crazy—to the point of being disruptive of my work day.
I began to appreciate the good old days of being a creep so I could get my work done without constant interruption.
Lol.
I'll grant you that men outnumber women on dating sites, but that ought not to matter!
So humans behave exactly the same when mates are scarce as when potential mates are all around them? That's an interesting perspective.
The rest of your post seems to revolve around the assumption that women are too dumb to realize that more men than women use dating sites. It is entirely possible thatyou know such women, but that is not the general female population.
So your answer is: U.S. men are this way because our culture vilifies masculine traits and pedestalized "The Feminine."
Do you dispute that?
If "The Feminine" is pedestalized by our culture why is there a 4400% increase in girls identifying as boys? Seems to me it would be the other way around if masculinity really were as vilified as you say.
Detransitioned Teens Explain Why They Regret Changing Genders
Graduated in 94. Yes that was 30 years ago and yes I'm aware things have changed. That said, I have nieces and nephews who just finished college and one of my 2 best friends (all 3 of us were college roommates) has a daughter at our alma mater right now. Sure "pr0n" is more available now than it was when I was in college. That said, 99% of all guys would much prefer a real live girl right in front of them than what they can see online.
High school boyfriend: Overweight, unattractive redhead, below me in high school pecking order. As I stated, I weighed 120 lbs. in high school. He asked me if I "really needed" to put salad dressing on my salads, implying I was too fat. According to your worldview, such a boy should have been grateful for the attention, not complaining because I don't resemble an ultra-thin porn star.
College boyfriend #1: Stalked me after we broke up.
College boyfriend #2: Tried to get me drunk so he could take advantage of me.
I'm just glad I kept my virginity for my husband because none of those idiots deserved it. It's worth noting that none of these men were "Chads". They were average guys who simply didn't see why they should treat me, as the one who supposedly held all the cards in the relationship, with the minimum of respect. I have never insisted that a man be a 10 to date me because I know I'm around a 5-7. But setting low standards for physical appearance ultimately did not help me.
I'll wager that either you are talking out of your hat, or you suffered severe facial disfigurement in an auto wreck in your teens. Or you were raised in an Amish community.
No, I'm just an average-looking woman who suffers from a degree of social awkwardness and growing up in the age of online porn.
Women are, obviously, not blind. But the way they process visual information is different, and has other parameters.
Some pre-Internet examples:
Back in the day, most teenage boys went through a phase during which they obsessed over, e.g., old Playboy magazine they found stored in the garage and/or passed around on the junior high school playground. Even frayed and worn nudie pix had a magnetic draw for those boys.
Men paid good money to gawk at strippers. As a prelude to their "marital duties," husbands will generally undress their wives or watch with barely concealed anticipation their wives undress themselves.
There are studies in which the eyeballs of men were tracked using lasers, while they were shown slide shows of beach-goers. Findings: Even 85-year-old men would gaze in a triangular pattern (breasts - crotch). I could go on...
The reverse is not true.
You are a woman: Do you agree?
An adult man can go walking through the woods, and see a somewhat misshapen tree whose curvaceousness gets him thinking about a woman's thighs. A teenaged boy might actually start acting on those urges (with risible results if he's caught).
If you reversed the sexes, would that ring true?
Women certainly select for certain visually recognizable traits like height, symmetrical facial features, a lean jaw-line, stunningly blue eyes, etc. - but that doesn't get them immediately tingling "down there." It doesn't motivate them to immediately want to have sex with the object of their attentions.
In the Animal Kingdom, with the exception of some exotic birds and such, the male doesn't have to so much impress or attract a female before mounting her - as a rule, it is sufficient if he can overpower her.
Any visually-based preferences which human females might have inherited from their primitive forebears are relatively recent, from an evolutionary standpoint; they are hence not as deeply ingrained. The sexuality of male humans, however, is deeply rooted in the most primitive part of the brain, and even a line scribbled on a piece of paper can cause those synapses to start firing.
The visuality of women and that of men are thus worlds apart.
Regards,
Another factor worth discussing is that women—ancient or modern—are social creatures.
If their female peer group considers a guy “hot” then he is good to go with almost all of them.
If their female peer group considers a guy “a creep” then he is doomed with all of them.
It does not matter what criteria the women choose to make their evaluation—the social consensus is what matters.
If a man is attracted to a women—even one not approved by his peers—he will not by deterred in pursuing her.
Source please.
Just discussed this with my wife, seeking affirmation and a better insight into the female psyche, and would therefore like to now formulate my thesis more succinctly:
Men are visual creatures, and their sexuality can be easily activated by the merest visual clue, e.g., a curved line drawn on paper. Given explicit visual clues, this can almost automatically trigger urges and elicit conspicuous behaviors, even to the point of initiating sexual activity.
Women, in contrast, use visual clues like an expert horse-trader dispassionately assessing the value of some horse flesh. "Symmetrical face? Check! Properly spaced eyes? Check! 6'4"? Check!" Etc. The man has now been "pre-selected" and found "eligible." But no semi-autonomic mechanism in the woman's limbic system has been triggered.
In a less-blatant example, a woman gazing at an attractive man will view it as an ethereal experience... a sublime esthetic process.
Worlds apart!
Satisfied now?
Regards,
Correct!
Which is why the fear of rejection on the part of guys is so much more grounded in reality than women imagine!
For millennia, our forebears lived in rather small communities, where everybody knew everyone.
A strapping young male "shooting his shot" with a girl and being repaid with a stinging public rejection was risking extinction. His genetic line (dating back to the Cambrian Period) might die out!
Even if it wasn't a public rejection, you can be sure that the woman in question quickly gossiped about it with her girlfriends. "Can you imagine!? That lowlife thought he had a chance with me!"
And even one of the other woman who might have previously thought the guy acceptable, and who even after the gossip would have liked him to court her, can now no longer do so - for fear of the wrath and scorn of the "in-group."
Regards,
You're still not understanding: The user-experience conceals, to a large degree, the disproportionate number of men on the app and/or allows the female user to tacitly assume that it's her extremely high value that has yielded her those results - not the skewed sex ratio!
Unless the woman has devoted her life to statistical analysis, she doesn't have to (consciously) acknowledge that the apparently phenomenal results she is garnering are due not to her supposed fantastically high Sexual Market Value, but rather to mere numbers.
An additional thought just occurred to me:
In a normal, real-world social situation - say, at a square dance or parish breakfast or such - men wishing to "shoot their shot" had to risk the devastating consequences of being summarily rejected in a public setting, with the inevitable result that all the females in his cohort would now gang up, form a consensus, and pronounce the gentleman in question "undatable." The higher-ranking females had a powerful tool here!
But now, with semi-anonymous apps, that hurdle has been removed. Men are still rejected in droves - but the consequences are less overt and/or it doesn't diminish his chances with the remaining ladies. Hence: Women on apps get far more approaches than they ever would have gotten in real life.
Women on apps can thus bask in the limelight, revel in the hundreds of "swipes" they garner, without even having to actively respond (which might sometimes be embarrassing) and without having to outright reject anyone.
The women thus get the dopamine "hit" of an approach. The men, at least, aren't crushed by the rejection (small consolation!).
I can imagine that women can become as addicted to these "swipes" as some men are to online porn.
Does that make sense? Or do you perceive some flaw in my reasoning?
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.