The Private Man

Attraction and dating information for all men

Generation Spinster

I’ve covered specific spinster blogs in past. Moxie turned me on to another one. Doing some digging via Google, I’ve turned up quite a few blogs written by women who are determinedly single, by choice or by circumstance. I’m not going to link to them because they are trite and without creativity.

These spinster blogs are on the vanguard of a huge number of soon-to-be spinsters about ready to graduate college. The numbers are scary and paint a bleak future for young women hoping to find love, husbands, and make families. I’ve covered this subject before but it’s worth revisiting.

Simply put, there will be a husband shortage, and soon. This is because of the imbalance of gender enrollment in higher education. Overall, 60% of college graduates will be women. Hypergamy combined with the constant “never settle” drumbeat of bad relationship advice for women is going to yield what I am officially naming as “Generation Spinster”.

Naturally, the short-term public pressure will be on men to “man up” and go to college so they can be suitable husbands and providers. Privately, however, more and more young men are electing a relatively low-velocity life without the pressures of the female-driven standard life script of college, marriage, house, kids. These kind of men have been excoriated by women and social conservatives as being in perpetual adolescence. Actually, they’re just really smart guys who have figured out the scam that was the American Dream and have adapted accordingly – some by learning Charisma and others by going their own way (google MGTOW).

As the demographic of young men continues to unplug from the mainstream media and finds – via the Internet – an acceptable (to men) alternative to the American rat race, Generation Spinster will only grow in size, frustration, and anger. Future spinster blogs will be numerous and depressing. There will be a huge marketing opportunity to single women. Investing in pet-related industries would be a good financial play.

Some may champion the educational success of women and their “empowered” singlehood. Guys with Charisma will certainly have a reason to celebrate because there will be many more opportunities to quench their libidinous desires. However, none will champion the unintended consequences of increased social pathologies such as unwed motherhood and a generation of men uninvested in their futures. The men invested in society are the ones who keep the society running smoothly. Generation Spinster will mark yet another unfortunate milestone in a long decline for our society.

Advertisements

Single Post Navigation

65 thoughts on “Generation Spinster

  1. I wish I could agree, but this analysis is overly optimistic.

    There won’t be a “husband shortage” anytime soon. You’re assuming that women want to get married as much as they did before. But in fact, their financial independence means they don’t really need marriage to the same extent, they can support themselves now. Their sexual outlet can be with a few ‘alpha males’ who won’t burden them with any commitments. They can also have children on their own, since that is economically feasible now given their new financial independence.

    You have to understand why the women remain single after college. They have a myriad of suitors whose numbers don’t decrease to the same extent as they did before. It used to be that when women got to their 30s their dating pool got smaller. That’s no longer true. For various reasons, older single men in their 30s and 40s continue to be on the market in nearly the same numbers in our times as younger men in their 20s. I even have a blog entry on this topic:
    http://ratiofactor.blogspot.com/2012/03/no-shortage-of-bachelors-over-30.html

    Put yourself in the position of a 25-year-old woman. She doesn’t want to get married right now, but even in 10 years when she’s finally ready, she’s not going to have a much harder time than she does now: the surplus of males in the US (for non-Afr-Am.) only starts to decrease after 50. Look at this analysis of the 2010 Census:
    http://ratiofactor.blogspot.com/2012/02/for-whites-parity-at-50-54-2010-us.html

    Thus, the 25-year-old woman who turns 35 in 10 years will still have surplus of single males to choose from. She need not become a ‘spinster’; nowadays, delaying marriage after college doesn’t hurt her chances at all, because there will still be plenty of options even in her 30s – and possibly beyond.

    • “Thus, the 25-year-old woman who turns 35 in 10 years will still have surplus of single males to choose from. She need not become a ‘spinster’; nowadays, delaying marriage after college doesn’t hurt her chances at all, because there will still be plenty of options even in her 30s – and possibly beyond.”

      This too is optimistic. Most of the men will be just coming off their first marriage (likely with children) and the 35-yo male alpha’s will not be interested in women on the downard slope of fertility and attractiveness. 35-yo’s who marry each other are settling, period. This is the best case scenario for anybody getting married over the age of 35.

      My observation of 35-yo single women is that they still have an inflated sense of their sexual market value and continue to fritter away chances. Then they turn 40 and the pool of marriageable men, and even the pool of halfway-decent paramours, abruptly becomes much, much smaller.

    • Candide on said:

      Duh… the more single women, the more single men. Out of those single men your hypothetical woman will encounter later on though, how many will actually be available for marriage? Very few, I’ll bet.

      • P Ray on said:

        @Candide:
        On the other hand, the women left unmarried with kids could be seen as a drain on finances by other working women, who may then put their heads together to come up with a secret sterilisation plan (one way would be with the help of gynaecologists … ta da, some of which are women).
        Of course, it may all be blamed on “men wanting to oppress women” eventhough in that future scenario my money is on the head gynaecologist being a woman (who, as we all know, is always forced to go along with anu/every evil nasty plan, because she has no choice, and nobody would believe her).

      • Candide on said:

        Nah the Bachelor Tax will come before the Evil Gyno.

    • You don’t know what you’re talking about. You have NO idea how hard it is to raise a kid as a single mom while working a professional job that has deadlines. That single mom will absolutely hate how full her life is of WORK.

      See, women don’t actually like work. They like money, but they don’t like work. I work with more women than men, and all the men are fine working. It’s the women who are unhappy. And these women are in their 20’s!!! If they are unhappy now, how will they make it to 65!? Let alone being a single mom trying to raise kids and handle another person’s life in their hands. It can’t be done en masse. There aren’t that enough corporate jobs to support a glamorous lifestyle AND daycare plus kid costs.

      The wall is coming and as I watch my once pretty coworkers turn into uglier late 20’s girls who have never been a gym one day because “they got money” they will end up alone or with low class men. It’s really just that simple.

      All my late 20’s friends are playing the field. We’re not dumb enough to get married now. We’ve seen the damage all around us. Yeah, we might knock a chick up, but the women end up alone. The marriage rate is 20% for 20-early 30’s.

      The facts are what they are and any man seeing this pile of dung unfold in real-time knows to get money and get in shape. I’m playing three girls right now and I am never getting married.

      What will these women do when they succumb to their biological clock and have an emotional realization that their life is more fulfilling by passing life on through themselves. That’s the 30 year old woman’s dilemma and it’s real.

    • j24601 on said:

      RFactor, there is an obvious flaw in your analysis, an absence of a critical aspect when looking at the marriage prospects of women, which is constantly considered throughout the manosphere, namely that the sexual market value of a woman declines rapidly, and practically falls off the proverbial cliff by her mid to late 30’s. Once this is taken into account it is clear to see that a woman’s prospects for marriage are greatly diminished as she ages, regardless of the availability of men of similar age.

    • You completely ignore bio mechanics. A women of 25, assuming average looks and personality, will have a decent pool of men to potentially choose from. That pool will be dramatically smaller once she hits 35. It isn’t too uncommon to see a 35 year old man with an attractive women 5-8 years his junior. Why would a man choose women in her mid thirties who, a) will probably not be nearly attractive as women 10 years her junior, and b) whose reproductive worth has peaked and in fact has decreased significantly. You forget that attraction is largely based on biology. We men are attracted to younger women because they are simply more fertile than older women, beauty is a direct correlation to this. Sure that 35 year old women will be attractive enough to ‘fuck’, but that it no way indicates that she is marriageable.

  2. The crop of women becoming spinsters is easy to explain once men understand that women never HONESTLY “settle downwards”. They almost always HONESTLY “settle upwards”.
    That needs explanation:
    (HONESTLY Settling Downwards) Women never “settle” for a guy they previously ignored, sincerely.
    They build a life with Joe Schmoe where he is put through a wringer of emotions, and always gets less than a 100% from her, with the excuse “I was hurt previously, so I need to protect myself”
    (HONESTLY Settling Upwards) This is more common, they look for the man better than the previous one they were with and offer abject devotion, no strings attached intimacy … and lies to use the guys she’s not interested in to get closer to Mr. Big. All the while with the handy excuse ready to escape her lips: “I didn’t mean to be attracted to Mr. Big, but if you really loved me, Joe Schmoe, you will want me to be happy”.
    In other words, she works on the double bind statements.
    Which is why I always say: please don’t compete for the affections for a woman. All you may be doing is financing her to get closer to some other guy that she really wants:
    A woman who wants you, will make no secret of it.
    A woman who does NOT want you, will demand that you jump through many hoops to compensate her for her lack of interest towards you.

    • A woman who wants you will think of you as the prize. A woman who can do without you feels as she is the prize. Use this knowledge accordingly.

  3. Don’t forget how the man-hating feminists have made “marriage” little better than hell for men, along with a 50%+ chance of divorce — more and more men have are learning that every day, especially those who have already been exposed to it by proxy (via fathers, brothers, cousins, neighbors, acquaintances, and friends who have been through the Divorce Court grinder).
    Not to mention those men who have been exposed to the biased legal system via paternity fraud, and/or false and trumped-up charges of sexual harassment, ‘abuse’, DV, and rape.
    When you get burned enough, you’ll learn, especially if you’re smart.

    The ironic thing is that with their own misandric actions, women are creating more men who are becoming disillusioned with them, and causing more men who will GTOW or ‘Go Ghost’.

    Sure, there will ALWAYS be a few manginas, suckers and fools who will fall for the phony promises that women make — “there’s one in every crowd”, you know.

    But it’s not gonna be me.

  4. LostSailor on said:

    The consequences will be terrible. I probably be around to see the worst of it, or the end of it, but to quote Bob Weir, I may be going to Hell in a bucket, baby, but at least I’m enjoying the ride.

    Or to quote Heartiste: “I’ll be poolside.”

  5. You can’t retire on Charisma. To me, the most distressing part of this article is that while we may have Generation Spinster (unless the next generation of women learn to be ok with marrying men who earn significantly less and who want to be Mr. Mom), we will definitely have Generation Men on Gov’t Assistance.

    Going to college doesn’t guarantee a high income, but NOT going to college almost always guarantees a low income. Tough to deal with medical expenses and retirement on a minimum wage retail job. That is the scariest thing about the above post IMHO.

    • I don’t think there will be any such thing as “Government Assistance” in the next 10 or 20 years. Men will carve out their niches, or become itinerants. And with no more market for diversicrat, edumacator, or PR specialist, women will be offering their bodies whenever and however a man wants to take them, so long as he can provide a hot meal and safe quarters.

    • P Ray on said:

      Going to college but not having a degree that at least in part grants you a license to be employed in a “sop” (as in, variable quality of commitment, service-oriented field where there’s little chance to be fired, but little chance of promotion either) circumstance, is a sure way to wind up broke fast.
      What are the licenses giving you “sop” circumstances? Certificates/Degrees allowing you aged/youth care, teaching languages, childminding and food handling.
      While people can easily say “oh, a degree doesn’t matter, just a willingness to work” … heh, do you think the cartels are going to let that slide?

    • This is not going to be the case within a few years.
      The colleges have, in partnership with the student-loan companies, turned into degree mills. If you take out a loan, you can stay in school for as long as you want and not have to face adulthood. Women are opting for this in droves. It’s turning out a sea of educated idiots with degrees in “crotch studies”, as one person put it,
      In 10 year’s time, an employer will want to know dick about your goddamn degree. What they will want to know is: have you ever held down a job? Have you ever worked 8-5, 5 days a week? Have you ever done anything that someone else has wanted to pay you for? Have you ever paid off a loan?
      This will discriminate against women, but any policy whose goal is hiring effective workers is inevitably going to do this. Men as employees will always, always be in demand. When “must have a degree” begins to net more female than male hires, employers will switch the rules.

      • P Ray on said:

        True. But every business knows that sex sells.
        Even erotica for women doesn’t put Susan Boyle in a starring role.
        So there will always be a place for office candy – since not every woman is lucky enough to be beautiful enough to be paid for existing, or kept hidden away by a single man.
        And smart business owners know that growing too big will attract the diversity divas who will demand directorships for those patently unqualified to hold them (o wait, what am I saying – ex-politicians on the board of semiconductor companies? They MUST know a lot about transistors).
        Expect the tech industry to start taking hits from that. Established companies will have even more deadwood. An example: At an authorised laptop distributor I recently visited … ALL the sales staff were women. I am betting that is the same way large contracts for ERP systems get peddled too. Which explains the underperforming-for-their-price tag results so often, along with incompetent/unqualified MBAs (of either gender) as managers and project managers in technology firms.

      • Diversity is a luxury wealthy countries have. The current policies of the US elite are destroying the wealth of you rnation (not mine: I live in New Zealand). When you get poor again, and realize why I am carrying an HTC phone not a motorola or iPhone, then you will hire engineers on competence and vote out those trolls that insist on equity.

        They elite can afford live eye candy. The rest of us cannot.

      • P Ray on said:

        er…
        http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/6745886/When-doors-keep-closing-for-refugees
        “Tewodros Demisse, known as Teddy, is just one of thousands of refugees and asylum seekers on a benefit because no-one will give him a job.

        He has tried everything to get work – gaining a computer science degree, offering to volunteer, sending out hundreds of applications and door-knocking employers.”

        I do have to point out that universities in NZ place engineering graduates.
        Not CS ones though.

        And it’s the same kettle of fish for Oceania:
        New Scientist 2007 – 30% of all Australian and NZ women born since 1975 … will NOT be able to find a partner (I’m guessing possible racism or prejudice against Asians, Africans, Arabs may also be to blame, along with entitlement mentality + no. of sex partners :O )
        Bernard Salt has more on that too.
        Plus the “man drought” (really the “alpha man drought”).

        Asia ain’t so hot either, e.g. China, Singapore, South Korea, Japan (falling birth rates).
        Hypergamy may simply be the natural state of almost all women.

      • P Ray on said:

        Another fun read about hypergamy (this time from the !Kung tribe) (even Africa isn’t safe)
        http://justbeamanaboutit.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/paleo-origins-of-hookup-culture-the-shocking-revelations-of-nisa/

        “The often repeated maxim that 5 minutes of alpha is worth more than 5 years of beta holds true today as it did in tribal times. Besa’s security and willingness to provide for her and her offspring pale in comparison. She would rather share Kantla. Why?

        Because Besa, his heart was very big toward me. But even then, my heart was small toward him, even when we first lived together. My heart never cried for him; it was really only a small part that went out to him.

        In her old age towards the end of the book she still recalls bad boy Kantla fondly:

        But today, only a small part of my heart is with Kantla, because his ways have ruined my heart. He is deceitful and bad. He has another woman. What can I do when he’s with her? Yesterday, I spoke to him about it. I told him to drop her, but he didn’t listen. He said I was being jealous. I said, “No, I’m not jealous. I’m afraid of getting sickness from her.” That’s why some days my heart refuses him. But other days, my heart is still very strong for him.”

        Good times :O

  6. just visiting on said:

    Nothing will change until the culture changes its attitudes on divorce. Back in the day, when men were running off with their secretaries, feminists used this as a tool to manipulate womens fears. Hence no woman, not even myself would feel comfortable about sending her daughter off into the world without the proper tools to look after her self or eventual children.

    In this day and age, women are initiating divorce, and mens movements are using this to manipulate mens fears. As a result, men are not comfortable about sending their sons off into the world of marriage and children.

    Divorce fear would seem to be the common theme.

    • P Ray on said:

      It’s not divorce fear that stops men from marrying.
      It’s the subsequent asset theft and unending alimony along with assumed paternity and a criminal record if one is unwilling to comply with onerous/unjust rulings.

      If it was simply a parting of the ways … I _really_ don’t think most men would mind divorce.

      • Yep. If a woman thinks I’m risking a $400k net worth on her she’s ducking nuts. Unless she’s a multi-millionaire

      • Is this going to drive men to seek women of a similar net worth for marriage? Or will the correlation between less femininity and career women put men off marriage entirely?

        Its difficult to find truly feminine women who are also high earners. I suspect they will be in high demand in the next generation.

      • P Ray on said:

        They may be in high demand in the next generation.
        But most will be just as clueless about the difference between sexual market value, and marriage market value.
        And remember: women are the ones who CHOOSE to be in a relationship.
        Want to bet they will NOT marry men less rich than them, less educated and shorter than them?

  7. zorroprimo on said:

    As long as being a single mother is not shameful, we will have a plethora of single mothers raising the prison population of the future (and their slut sisters).

  8. Once Upon a Time on said:

    What happends when all these young men are called upon to serve their country some Peacekeeping effort? (Euphemism ironic). Will the Spinsters call up the troops? Will they listen and go? Or will there be a revolution?

  9. Mike43 on said:

    Just visiting; there are other reasons, witness this:

    My son’s ex-girlfriend was getting frustrated with him. He wasn’t doing the “right” things. (He’s a college grad, with a real job (according to his friends), with salary, benefits, et al.) Professionally, he’s a writer, and pretty good. His dream is to go to NY, work for a magazine again, and he’s saving up for that. Her dream: live together, marry, buy a house, have kids, stay at home. He’s 25, she’s 23. This drama drug on for a month, she said fine that’s it, and slept with 3 guys. (Not all at once, over a period of 2 weeks.) She got revenge.

    And now, she doesn’t understand why he doesn’t want to even talk to her, and settle their differences.

    Divorce fear? Maybe American Woman fear.

    • P Ray on said:

      It says it all “she doesn’t understand why he doesn’t want to even talk to her, and settle their differences.”
      Is he allowed to have sex with 3 other women over a period of 2 weeks?
      Or is that a privilege only she has?
      After all, like I keep saying “Men and women are equal”.

    • Talk about lucky — it really sounds like your son successfully dodged a bullet!
      He found out what a complete lack of character, morals and honor she has, and relatively cheap! If she acted like this now, God only knows what she would have tried to get away with if he had had the misfortune to marry her!
      It is just so ironic that it was she who demonstrated what a complete tramp she is!
      The best of luck to him!

      • just visiting on said:

        Well, it wasn’t a smart move on her part, but a predictable one. I’m not going to excuse her behavior, but explain something. Most women, especially young women are working without a solid framework when it comes to relationship. If they buck what society or their mother have taught them, and decide to go traditional, they have no working model. And a ton of scorn to deal with. Men don’t get this.

        Future daughter in law felt like a beta chump and when mixed with volatile emotions went with hard core validation . Again, not excusing, but explaining. She might have an idea of a traditional model, but slutting it up is the one that’s been reinforced by the culture. Pining by the phone just in case your son phones to work things out is not going to go over well with the “herd”. And you can bet they had theit input.

        Which brings us to the next thing. Her character is suspect, but your son is no prince either. He’s stringing her along. You expect an old fashioned morality from her, but back in the day, (I’m assuming they were sexual with each other) his ass would have been kicked by her father or brothers.

        Your son and ex girl friend are probably very nice people. But expectations, framework, sex and morality are all very muddled. Sad, but predictable.

      • P Ray on said:

        “Her character is suspect, but your son is no prince either. He’s stringing her along.”
        I notice no mention of how long they were going out.
        What period of time exactly defines “stringing along”?
        Besides that, we know nothing about how she behaved on dates either. That kind of behaviour does not appear without some bad history behind it – otherwise, she really would be considered insane.
        It’s doubtful a (normal) guy would turn down a woman really head-over-heels with him, that he found attractive.

      • just visiting on said:

        @ P Ray

        Considering their ages, I don’t think that it would be unusual for the young man to feel that he wasn’t ready to marry. Even if he met a great girl. I have no idea how long these two were going out for, but if marriage was up for discussion and argued about before the split, I think it’s fair to assume that they’d been going out for a while. (Hey, I could be wrong.)

        Was he stringing her along. Of course. But that’s par for the course for relationships these days. And this is my point. This post and the readers aren’t too impressed by some of the ball busting unfeminine, you go girl types. She was willing to buck the system and be traditional. But her frame work isn’t there to support her. She doesn’t live in a society where a guy is going to have to present himself front and center to her male family members and state his intentions, or GTFO. (Or risk being subjucated to physical demonstrations of male dominance on his ass by male family members.)

        Now, if she’s been brought up in a religious household, she might be in luck. If not, tough luck toots. She’s on her own. Which means carousel lite. It’s just not condusive to cultivating femininity.. It just isn’t.

        The seeds were there. Despite every thing ever taught to her, (Probably) she went against the grain for traditionalism. When he revealed that he wouldn’t marry her, it reinforced everything her mother, the herd and society has been telling her her whole life. Traditionalism is for chumps, you pathetic owned, house frau wannabe.

        In a true traditional relationship and society, she wouldn’t be sleeping with the guy. Or if she was, marriage was incumbant. One thing that has always been acknowledged by men in generations past, is that if they wanted feminine women, they had to help cultivate it. Because her prime directive will be to follow her man’s lead. Good or bad. Hence male family members guiding certain aspects. Women scorned have, through out history been known to make very primal choices. Not sleeping with a suitor would tame that aspect somewhat. Make it easier to move on to another suitor without too much drama.

        We don’t have that frame work anymore. So I’m reluctant to judge her by old fashioned standards and not him.

      • (Or risk being subjucated to physical demonstrations of male dominance on his ass by male family members.)
        So that’s the bit of traditional you like… how about her having to be a virgin?
        Does he get to execute her? (it’s in Deuteronomy)
        Not so good?

        “When he revealed that he wouldn’t marry her,”
        I didn’t see that. Pass me the sentence, please.

        “In a true traditional relationship and society, she wouldn’t be sleeping with the guy.”
        Modern women manage not to sleep with men who they are not attracted to, pretty often.
        In that way, they’re … DOWNRIGHT traditional!

        Which old fashioned standard BTW? Solomon had how many concubines?
        You can’t cherry pick traditionalism – in for a penny, in for a pound.
        Otherwise, all you are doing is playing bait and switch.

    • just visiting on said:

      Traditional as in traditional western cultural standards.

      The virginity aspect would be a given if she’s not sleeping with the guy. Or any others for that matter

      Does he get to execute her? Get back to me when you feel like being reasonable.

      Modern women not sleeping with men that they’re not attracted to has nothing to do with traditional cultivated femininity and everything to do with hypergammy.

      You can’t cherry pick traditionalim. Exactly. You guys want to slag the girl on traditional values, be prepared to do the same for the guy.

      • “Does he get to execute her? Get back to me when you feel like being reasonable.”
        Looking in the mirror means you can recognise your own imperfections.
        I’m guessing you’re a real handful to guys you see no use for.

      • From my huge quote file:
        “Here’s a liberal guy writing some stuff on gay marriage who’s inadvertently proving the first this point:

        “Because, honestly, which traditional definition of marriage do we want our Constitution to protect?

        …The one from Book of Genesis when family values meant multiple wives and concubines?
        …Or the marriages of the Middle Ages when women were traded like cattle and weddings were too bawdy for church?
        …Since this is America, should we preserve marriage as it existed in 1776 when arranged marriages were still commonplace?
        …Or the traditions of 1850 when California became a state and marriage was customarily between one man and one woman-or-girl of age 11 and up?
        …Or are we really seeking to protect a more modern vision of traditional marriage, say from the 1950s when it was illegal for whites to wed blacks or Hispanics?
        …Or the traditional marriage of the late 1960s when couples were routinely excommunicated for marrying outside their faith?”

        Get back to me on that.

      • just visiting on said:

        You tell me P Ray. At what level of femininity do men want women? Then take it from there on what level of traditional frame work would be needed.

        As for calling you out on unreasonableness. Trust, if you were a woman or the most amazing alpha on the planet, my answer would have been the same.

        PRay, my point is that the two young people involved are probably very nice people. But let’s be fair to them. They don’t live in an old fashioned framework. Judging by those standards would be non productive. And if your morality can’t help but judge in that manner, don’t cherry pick.

        I’m not sure if I can add anything more to the conversation. I think we’re starting to cross the line into bickering.

      • P Ray on said:

        In times like this I bow to the wisdom of George Burns:
        “Do you know what it means to come home at night to a woman who’ll give you a little love, a little affection, a little tenderness? It means you’re in the wrong house.”

      • Mike43 on said:

        Just visiting; Here’s some more info for you. My son and his ex met while in college. Despite her age, she is the more experienced of the two, and had been in two serious relationships. My son went to an all male high school, by his choice, and is a rather serious young man. Number 5 in his HS class, academic scholarships to a great university here in Texas. Just a bit wanting to explore the world without being in the military. (That was my route.) As I said, this was his first girlfriend.

        In game parlance, I thought he was a serious beta. Total nice guy, rearranged his schedule, where he lived, etc to make it easier for her to attend college. I think they would have married eventually, because they worked well together, and supported both financially and emotionally as he finished his undergraduate degree. She didn’t attend his college due to her academics. They met when both were working at a restaurant.

        He comes from a traditional family. We’ve been married over 30 years, still together, and still in love. Both sets of grandparents were and are still married. There is only a tradition of fidelity and faithfulness in our family.

        She is a child of divorce, when she was quite young. And it seems her parents have been on again, off again all her life. She may think that breaking up/reuniting is a standard feature of relationships. But she hasn’t done it with her exes.

        The problems seemed to arise when he got a decent job as a copywriter for an internet company. I don’t know whether she decided now was the time to force a committment, or she was afraid of losing him to his new responsibilities and lifestyle. She’s still in college, having changed majors for the third time, and still works the bar/restaurant scene. My sense is she saw him outgrowing her, and wanted to either seriously jump on the train, or keep him with her.

        I know there are things he regrets about the relationship and the ensuing break-up, and he was truly heartbroken. But there are some boundaries that can’t be crossed.

  10. just visiting on said:

    American woman fear…yeah, I can see that. No incentive to be feminine.

  11. Brendan on said:

    No incentive for either men or women to behave. It’s a Hobbesian world now between men and women.

    • P Ray on said:

      Nova,
      It didn’t get there because of the men the women didn’t want.
      It got there because of the incentives most women gave a few men that THEY were afraid of losing to other women (because in the mating/marriage market the only time a man is valuable is when other women want him).

  12. just visiting on said:

    Depressingly true.

  13. “Young man, I was once in your shoes…..”

    theprivateman has touched on all essential aspects. I would like to place my dabs upon his canvas as it were.

    First of all,not the irony. Feminists have been saying for decades that marriage is some sort of haven for the male, that it reflects our status in a patriarchal society blah blah blah. BULL FUCKING SHIT. My dad, and his generation bought that hook line sinker. And what did they find? RAISING A FAMILY SUCKS! IT MEANS YOUR OPTIONS ARE FEWER, YOU HAVE TO KISS ASS IN THE RAT RACE (OH YES-VERY FEW RATS ARE IN THE FRONT-EVERYONE ELSE LICKS), YOUR LIFE IS NOT YOURS. THEY DRANK. MY GENERATION WAS NEARLY AS BAD. You do not repeat do not need this hassle. Never get married never.

    Are you ready to walk the talk? Vasectomy now. Yes, this will prevent you from a lot of grief.The only I mean only reason for a secular man to get married is to have a family. Family=ball & chain. If you’ve made it single to your mid-20’s, the news gets better. You are over the worst of the testosteronal urges; from now on it gets better. You’ll still have plenty of spunk to keep the gals happy, but your over the game-changing fuck up sex. I know most of you will not man up and vas-I didn’t, and that is the only fool proof way out of involuntary commitment (marriage and insanity have much in common).

    Marriage is bullshit. I had a good one; we got married in 1981. Not one of the couples who attended our marriage is still married. Read that again. Not one. There are your odds.

    Marriage is a crock of shit. Marriage w/o kids is a half full crock of shit; you can get out easier, and you have’nt fucked up anyone’s life.

    Do not under any circumstances even consider getting married. You are the 1st generation of American men who have a shot at evading the noose. DO NOT BLOW IT.

    Getting married is like buying a car and saying this is the only car I’ll have for the next 20, 3 40 , 50 years. Nuts, huh? Well, men have been doing it for decades. Don’t be one of them.

    I don’t listen to any eunuch jelly fish ball-less whining about being alone-we are at all times and always alone. Do not confuse momentary distractions with anything that does not exist.

    Build on your independence, starting today. Celebrate each day you exist w/o any formal attachment. Luxuriate in your freedom; make it more and more necessary with each breath you take.

    If you follow my advice, you will never thank me because you will never even have an inkling of the misery have rescued you from. I ask nothing of you; heed me as one who as only good intent toward you.

    I have done all I can. It is finished,

    • Bravo, Munson. All I can add to this is: When Munson married in 1981, he married a jewel of a woman. The character of women at that time was different, too.

      Now, marriage is a bad deal for men because most women aren’t marriage material. Either they’ve spoiled themselves or the culture spoiled them.

      Take Munson’s advice. Don’t marry unless you want kids; and even then think long and hard about it.

  14. Meant you don’t listen to jelly fish crap re alone. Typed too fast.

  15. In addition to generation spinster, I predict women becoming even more ferociously competitive to secure the ever decreasing number of “eligible” husbands to satisfy their hypergamy.

    Some will turn up the slut factor to compete, and others will fight off their competitors, becoming more aggressive and masculine, like Moxie.

    What the dear cupcakes fail to realise, is that by denigrating their fellow woman in order to gain our “approval”, they become bitter and desperate in our eyes. Similarly, slutting it up only leads to a multitude of pump and dumps.

    I look forward to using game to take my pick of the best of the future generations of spinsters.

    Let the games begin.

    • P Ray on said:

      One of the easiest ways to discover whether you need to leave a relationship is her use of antidepressants.
      Remember, as new women like to tell previously hurt men “I didn’t hurt you, I don’t care”
      Therefore
      New men must tell previously hurt women “I didn’t hurt you, I don’t care”.
      After all, women also say “I am not responsible for somebody elses’ feelings”
      Therefore, men have the right to say that too.
      Because men and women are equal.

  16. RufusT on said:

    Something, I don’t think many of you are considering is that although while up to age 50 or so there may be a surplus of males, far more males then females are in situations or have conditions which render them unsuitable for marriage in the eyes of your average American woman…..This according to an article I read some years ago…Some Examples: Far more men then women are in prison..This is true even not counting Afro-Americans….More men then women have serious drug & alcohol problems..Check out the gender ratios in any big city skid row…I used to work next to the skid row area in Portland..The winos were 90+% male…..More men are homeless and/or unemployed…There are far more males with mental retardation,autism or more serious mental disorders such as schizophrenia..(By the way ladies,there’s also far more male geniuses)…Due to the fact that males predominate in dangerous occupations, there are far more male amputees and paralysis victims , & more males suffering from a wide variety of physical disabilities…Throw in our recent wars with the tens of thousands of wounded combat vets, ( still overwhelming male), returning minus limbs or suffering from depression, PTSD and anger and substance abuse issues and the pool of “suitable” suitors willing to be considered by our entitled princesses shrinks even further……Must be nice to get wounded for your country only to return home to discover that 99% of the woman at home no longer find you “suitable” for a relationship/marriage)…About the only catagory of unsuitability in which women predominate is obesity…….The article concluded that by the early thirties, the gender ratios of acceptable partners is now skewed heavily in favor of men………

    • How many men are on skid row (etc) *as a result* of being reamed in a divorce? How many couldn’t keep it together because their wives or significant others destroyed them emotionally? HOw many women *would* be in Skid Row if not for supporting mother’s payouts? Control for that, then look at the statistics again.

    • Don’t ignore the “sentencing discount”, that allows women to escape prison sentences.
      In the UK, they are considering closing womens’ prisons:
      Does that mean that women commit no crimes?

  17. Firstly, Samantha Brick’s column was ridiculous and she deserves the scorn but she is already married. Just to set the record straight after reading the comments.

    Most of the commenters are deluded. I have no doubt that the phenomenon you are describing and/or embodying is real and that there will be a lot of single women in the future. You’re deluded about marriage being a bad deal.

    Research shows marriage is a good deal for men – it makes them happier, more successful at work and healthier so they live longer. Google it.

    The value of truly falling in love and being loved is incalculable. If you never experience this in your life that would be a sad, sad thing. If you love someone and the relationship is functional and you can’t imagine being without that person then marriage makes a lot of sense.

    A person is not a car. You don’t stop loving your mum or your brother and in a good relationship you don’t stop loving your partner. Every relationship has normal ups and downs but if you ride out the downs you are repaid with immeasurable companionship, security and happiness.

    The odds are not as bad as they look. Everyone talks about the 50% divorce rate but that is a bogus statistic. Firstly it is American and if you are reading this almost anywhere else in the Western world the rate is more like 30%. (The difference is that Europeans and Astralians often live together without getting married and only marry if they’re really sure). Secondly it is a statistic for all marriages, not first marriages. The survival rate of first marriages is much, much higher. The statistics are skewed by the same people getting married multiple times.

    There are plenty of good women around as long as you’re willing to be an equal partner. I’m not alking about housework – just the sense of agency that you are both adults withequally important needs and wants.

    If you judge a mate by a crude measure of attractiveness, fertility or anything else then you’ll never be happy. Simple as that. Same goes for women who have “lists”. It is not “settling” to love a person as they actually are, instead of a notional ideal. It is wisdom.

    • Candide on said:

      I’m in one of those 30% countries (must admit I haven’t checked the actual stats of my country). It’s awesome, we get to play Russian Roulette with 2 loaded bullets instead of 3 like you Americans!

    • You don’t know about the common law rulings in Oceania, i.e. if you have lived together for 2 years, you are considered married?
      Gaps in the knowledge, doesn’t mean that there’s no divorce there.

  18. PS My comments are directed at the other commenters who are discussing “playing the field” etc, not the author of the post.

    • The problem is in the different definitions of what constitutes a relationship:
      To me, 2 people are not in a relationship until they can both say they are, to each other and the public, and ACT LIKE IT.
      Otherwise what you have are people who CHOOSE to hook up, and then complain about the other person moving on.

  19. I’m 41, I still shag women in their 20’s. My ex who dumped me 8 years ago is now a bitter, miserable spinster at 36 who can’t find a man, no husband, no children. She went off the deep end when my daughter was born 2 years ago. Her looks are gone and she has a shit personality. She made her bed…..

  20. CHECK OUT REDONKULAS.COM FUNNY STUFF THERE

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: