Posted on 09/08/2019 5:54:09 AM PDT by rickmichaels
Edited on 09/08/2019 6:04:34 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I knew a woman who was married to a professional man. He worked hard, long hours, was always inventive, creative. He was a dedicated father; she demanded it, for sure, but even beyond that, he was all in and was an extremely active dad. She didn’t like to cook, didn’t think it was her job, so he learned how. She didn’t like to tidy up, and he was no Mr. Clean, but he gave it a go. She wanted him to be compliant, yet resilient, and he tried to be all of the things she wanted. He even pretty well achieved it. He’d come so far that he sent us all a poem about how to appease the women in his house, who wanted him to leave the toilet seat down, he learned to pee sitting down. What a mensch! Only, in the end, she tired of his acquiescence and left him for a belligerent roofer 10 years her junior.
The New York Post took aim yesterday at a study called “Mismatches in the Marriage Market” in the Journal of Marriage and Family, that explains that women often don’t marry because there is a dearth of marriageable men. Apparently, the definition of marriageable is “makes 58% more money than any of the dudes available right now.” The “patriarchy” used to keep men and women in their places, and now that women are achieving at higher rates than men, it’s still the “patriarchy” that is keeping everyone from being happy.
In the old system, women went to college to find husbands or got jobs as receptionists at law offices to marry an esquire before quitting the job market to take on the dual roles of housewife and mother. This imbalance in earnings and status was deemed to be just no good for the female half of the species, who ended up poorly educated, often jilted in middle-age, and back in the workforce without even a pretty face to get by.
Plus, men were not great. They lacked emotion, they were too focused on careers, ambition, status, fulfilling the role of provider. The patriarchy had done these dudes a bad turn, had made them so concerned with achieving the masculine ideal that they didn’t measure up to what their women wanted or needed. And women were stuck with the status quo.
A big push was made for women to go get more from life, husbands, love, family, all that stuff paled in comparison to what was achievable if women buckled down, hit the books, and entered the capitalist machine as worker bees eager for their own honey. Great, why not? Go get it, girl.
And they did get it. Under equity feminism, more women have college degrees than ever before, more women are successful in their fields, yet more women are unable to find suitable matches because men, it turns out, just can’t measure up to women’s expectations. Again.
If you’re one of the single ladies out there, this will not be a surprise. I cannot count how many intelligent, independent, attractive, [bleep] women I know who can’t find a guy they want to spend more than one night with, and even that is a stretch.
For a while, women were complaining that guys were afraid of commitment, that women couldn’t find a man who wanted a real relationship, babies, the works. But somewhere along the line, when the college degrees were awarded in greater quantity to the fairer sex, ladies began to have a different complaint. I started to hear friends carp about guys who wanted more than a hook-up, guys who wanted their time and attention when not rolling in hay as well. Why, just last night, a good friend, independent, hot, confident, all of that, told me she had to cut a guy loose because he was texting her asking how her day went instead of simply reaching out to find a suitable time for sex.
Is it any wonder that women out there who want to get hitched can’t find anyone suitable to hitch their wagon to? Guys have been overtaken by female accomplishments (kudos, ladies), and still have no idea what women want. A hookup? A commitment? A high earner? A hard worker? A partner? A housewife?
Women didn’t like how men were, so they demanded they change. Men changed, and now that they have, women don’t like what they’ve changed into. Women want soft, emotional, high achieving, career focused tough guys who don’t get angry, remember anniversaries, bring flowers, and can splurge on expensive meals and trips, without working all weekend, and still make it to little Johnny’s ballet recitals.
Contemporary woke feminism doesn’t care about equality. It demands that men strip themselves of their toxic masculinity, their desire to compete and achieve, to become more stereotypically femme, so that women don’t have to do all the emotional heavy lifting. Okay. But on the other hand, women want men to be high-achieving, breadwinning earners, who are professionally successful, and, if Tinder is any indication, taller than them as well.
The only problem is that these toxic characteristics are essential for success in the marketplace. When men let them go, all those things that these traits facilitated fall by the wayside as well. Men are emasculated for not achieving just as they are demeaned for those attributes that enable achievement. Wtf, yo?
Why not just let men be men with all of their bumbling, masculine, competitive energy? The truth is that most women want the opposite of a woke Gillette ad. They want high-achieving, strong men to be partners with. Even if they don’t know that they want that, or don’t want to admit to it, reality reveals they sure as hell do. Otherwise, no intelligent woman who got her man to do everything she claimed she wanted, including coming up with an ingenious way to make sure the toilet seat was permanently in her preferred position, would leave him for someone who promised nothing but stereotypical masculinity.
I was only trying to be helpful about confusion caused by the way the objective “them” was presented in the last line of the post. It was unclear who was being referenced.
I had no idea that there was some kind of p#ssing match going on about allegations of homosexuality. My post to clarify the verbiage was merely meant to indicate that I had confusion, also, about the way the sentence was written and to explain what I thought the original poster meant.
I won’t try to be helpful ever again.
Agreed.
The basic premise of radical feminism is they hate men. Once you get over that, you can understand all of their actions.
“Women file because men will move out and live with other women while still married.”
Sorry if that happened to you or someone close. That would be a biblically justifiable reason for divorce. I have observed a lot of divorces. That scenario doesn’t happen often. Today, many times the woman is the one in adultery
You have writer’s skills for conveying those personal stories. Should put them on a blog — would draw regular readers and followers. Meanwhile, I am looking for — and possibly have found — an Asian wife. Only problem is location difficulties (she’s in Spokane and can’t really leave her Air Force job right now). She is very traditional and widowed like me. I also know one single American/white woman who likes me and would make a great wife. Only problem there is that she is 40+ years younger! What good could come of that except I might finally have my own child?
:-). Happens to me also, especially in the morning before coffee.
Bump that bud! No kiddin,’..
I disagree. They SAY that's what they want. Reality shows what they want is a masculine man no matter what they actually say. Let's face it. Mr. Sensitive Manbun never gets laid. She always goes for the "jerks". Mr. Sensitive Manbun is just there to listen to her complaints and pick up the pieces when she gets dumped.
Aw cmon. I’m in my late 50’s. My mom called my dad, dad or his first name. Growing up I never heard neighborhood wives call their husband Mr._______
A wife who has to call her husband “Mr. Smith” is just plain weird.
And people wonder why conservatives are “Handmaidens Tale” stuff.
Izzat Big Mike Obama in a tennis tutu?
The funniest thing about Sex and the City....and I found the series funny and entertaining....was the happy ending they just HAD to stick on the end. They all in their late 30s or early 40's after sleeping around for 2 decades, found good attractive dudes their own age who had their lives in order to marry. Uhhh, no. Sorry. Doesn't happen except on extremely rare occasions. Overwhelmingly, men stop wanting women their own age after their mid 20s. It really becomes pronounced in their early 30s. The women who don't figure this out until their early to mid 30s...the ones who have absolutely no foresight in their 20s end up alone.
Haven’t a clue what is going on, nor do I care about troll posters.
As to you, I am Israeli and, while I speak English, it’s not my native language. To the extent this causes confusion, I apologize.
As to the troll, I don’t care. He can crawl back to his trailer park.
Uhh plenty of us won't. Choice is not a one way street. I've turned down plenty of women who wanted me. I need to get what I want too - or I'd rather be single. Besides, I can't be a good husband if I'm not getting what I want so its ultimately better for everybody than to get married for the sake of getting married. I have friends who have done that and they got divorced, are currently getting divorced or are miserable.
You were doing so well...till.....
Attractive Alpha males in their 40's prefer fertile women in their 20's or 30's. And they can get them.
Example: Donald Trump started dating Melania when she was 28 and he was 52.
You’re right
Working class whites which is a vanishing breed as well
Don’t marry
Course many of the women are obese with half black babies by 17
Lucky u
Oh bull on the sex for pleasure part
The rest yes
Sex is for intimacy actually and reproduction
Intimacy transcends pleasure
God knew we needed that
I agree with setter
Weird as hell
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.