Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.



View Active Topics       View Your Posts       Latest 100 Topics       FAQ Topics       Switch to Mobile


My thesis: Modern men lose the dating game

Discuss and talk about any general topic.

Moderators: fschmidt, jamesbond

My thesis: Modern men lose the dating game

Postby Someone » December 12th, 2013, 1:15 am

There are some optimistic bloggers in the "manosphere" who pen articles with titles like "Why Women Lose the Dating Game. You can read their arguments at your leisure. The general meme seems to be very popular in the media and pop-culture: women get older and their pool shrinks, while all the eligible bachelors are snapped up quickly.

In my opinion the promulgators of this myth are wrong, dead wrong. The losers in the modern dating game are men, not women.

Here's why:

1) Single women tend to be quite happy and well-adjusted and lead productive, fulfilling lives, while single men are lonely and usually afflicted with serious psychological problems stemming from loneliness. The reason for single women being happy and content is that they maintain good social networks consisting of friends and family; on the other hand, men don't network very well, and tend to lose their social connections in adult years. This creates acute loneliness for single men which is not the case for single women. Thus, men depend on women for companionship, while the reverse isn't true. The same applies to sex. Men depend on women for regular sex much more than vice-versa.

2) If men uniquely depend on women for sex and companionship, what do women depend on men for? Historically, resources -- a general term for financial or material investments. But the current generation of women is economically independent and well-educated, which is different from before. Thus, women don't depend on men for resources to the same extent as before, they have resources themselves.

3) So far, the score is 2:0 (sex/companionship vs. NO dependency). What about social stigma? Aren't spinsters stigmatized in society, and don't women want to be mothers? No and no.
a) Social stigma: single men are actually more stigmatized by society than single women. They are treated as potential criminals or outcasts, and also often suspected of being homosexual. The same doesn't apply to women to the same extent. Women are rarely suspected of being deviants or lesbians.
b) Motherhood: In modern Western counties 20-25% of women are childless, but even the ones who have children didn't necessarily want them. In my experience, women's "maternal instinct" is a gross exaggeration, with just as many if not more men wanting kids than women.

So we actually have an environment right now where more men than women strive to get married as soon as possible. They seem to have far more dependencies on the other gender than women do, from companionship to social adjustment. Without some kind of pressure from the outside, and if resources aren't an issue, there is little incentive right now for women to get married, but men are rightly concerned about their single status.
Someone
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 171
Joined: November 20th, 2011, 4:08 am





Re: My thesis: Modern men lose the dating game

Postby Cornfed » December 12th, 2013, 1:55 am

Someone wrote: 1) Single women tend to be quite happy and well-adjusted and lead productive, fulfilling lives, while single men are lonely and usually afflicted with serious psychological problems stemming from loneliness. The reason for single women being happy and content is that they maintain good social networks consisting of friends and family; on the other hand, men don't network very well, and tend to lose their social connections in adult years.

This is plain nonsense.

2) If men uniquely depend on women for sex and companionship, what do women depend on men for? Historically, resources -- a general term for financial or material investments. But the current generation of women is economically independent and well-educated, which is different from before. Thus, women don't depend on men for resources to the same extent as before, they have resources themselves.

Which is to say, women are dependant on the communist system that robs men and gives the resources directly to women, without the women having to do anything in return.
User avatar
Cornfed
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 5505
Joined: August 17th, 2012, 5:22 am

Postby Maverick » December 12th, 2013, 1:56 am

This is something that has been mentioned here often.

In the US, women have it far better than men when it comes to dating/relationships/marriage/divorce. Not exactly ground-breaking.
Maverick
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 573
Joined: May 18th, 2013, 11:46 pm

Postby Bane » December 12th, 2013, 2:09 am

I can agree with the idea that women maintain better "social networks" into their later years with their girlfriends. This will allow them to feel less lonely as time goes on.
"A dreamer is one who can only find his way by moonlight, and his punishment is that he sees the dawn before the rest of the world." -Oscar Wilde

"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent" -Sun Tzu
Bane
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 310
Joined: August 1st, 2011, 1:58 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Postby Falcon » December 12th, 2013, 4:54 am

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/ ... 1xdn0.html

This article can be summed up in one brief question:

"Where are all the good men?"
A: Ranting on this forum :P


The high expectations of professional women are a big part of the story. Many high-achieving women simply are not interested in Mr Average, says Justin Parfitt, the owner of Australia's fastest growing speed-dating organisation, Fast Impressions. Parfitt adds: ''They've swallowed the L'Oreal line: 'Because you're worth it!' There's a real sense of entitlement.''

During their 20s, women compete for the most highly desirable men, the Mr Bigs. Many will readily share a bed with the sporty, attractive, confident men, while ordinary men miss out. As Whiskey puts it at whiskeysplace.wordpress.com: ''Joe Average Beta Male is about as desirable to women as a cold bowl of oatmeal.''
User avatar
Falcon
Experienced Poster
 
Posts: 1827
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 12:59 am

Postby Hackenfall Backslash » December 12th, 2013, 7:07 am

The Australian man-drought! Never thought that old thing would see the light of day again. You know, if men weren't so hung up on looking homosexual, I'd say they should reach out to other men. Why not seek relationships and understandings with members of the same sex who are going through what you are? Not going to happen, but it's a too-easy solution to loneliness.

Anyway, someone posted a link to an article that sounds a lot like the blueprint for the poindexter system. Boink the alphas when you're young, nab the betas when you're old (while you still continue to boink the alphas). Me? I couldn't settle. If you can't give me your best years with a high sexual market value, why should I give you mine as a goal-oriented, successful blah blah person? Not a fair trade, stranger.
Image
Avatar: Edward and Alphonse Elric (Fullmetal Alchemist)
Signature: Demi-Fiend (Shin Megami Tensei Nocturne)
Hackenfall Backslash
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 39
Joined: December 9th, 2013, 9:25 pm
Location: Southern USA

Postby tre » December 12th, 2013, 8:51 am

Bane wrote:I can agree with the idea that women maintain better "social networks" into their later years with their girlfriends. This will allow them to feel less lonely as time goes on.


I agree with this as well. I think it could apply to middle years as well. If we all had exciting networking opportunities, there would likely be less posts on this forum and others like it. Men are so focused on women and sex that many will only allow time for their male friends if all else fails. In contrast, women easily meet in groups to watch shows like "Sex in the City" over a glass of wine. They would be MUCH more likely to drop a date with a guy to meet up with "the girls" than the other way around...
tre
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 604
Joined: September 15th, 2013, 9:08 am
Location: USA

Postby Someone » December 12th, 2013, 2:47 pm

This is plain nonsense.


Read the study, my friend!
http://www.health.harvard.edu/newslette ... ens-health
Quote:
The New England Research Institute reported that 66% of men rely on their wives for their primary social supports; only 21% rely on other people, and 10% have no such supports. Clearly, subtracting a wife greatly increases a man's risk of isolation.

Men are so focused on women and sex that many will only allow time for their male friends if all else fails.

Keep in mind that reaching out to male friends after 30 isn't something a lot of men will do for fear of being seen as homosexuals.
Someone
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 171
Joined: November 20th, 2011, 4:08 am

Postby fightforlove » December 13th, 2013, 7:31 pm

You're theory assumes that more friends = more DSR. I don't think having lots of friends makes it any easier to find dates/sex/relationships than having few friends does. I had lots of friends and acquaintances in my mid 20s; now that I look back on it, most of them were clueless and immature and held me back from having success with dating. I didn't find success with dating until I learned to branch off more on my own when it came to seeking women.
fightforlove
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 529
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:41 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby SilverEnergy » December 13th, 2013, 8:16 pm

This is nothing new that we already don't know.
"Allow me to show you the Power Cosmic!" - Silver Surfer
SilverEnergy
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 958
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:41 pm

Postby Hackenfall Backslash » December 13th, 2013, 8:50 pm

Let them go, SilverEnergy. Let them go.
Image
Avatar: Edward and Alphonse Elric (Fullmetal Alchemist)
Signature: Demi-Fiend (Shin Megami Tensei Nocturne)
Hackenfall Backslash
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 39
Joined: December 9th, 2013, 9:25 pm
Location: Southern USA

Re: My thesis: Modern men lose the dating game

Postby Teal Lantern » December 14th, 2013, 11:11 am

Someone wrote:There are some optimistic bloggers in the "manosphere" who pen articles with titles like "Why Women Lose the Dating Game. You can read their arguments at your leisure. The general meme seems to be very popular in the media and pop-culture: women get older and their pool shrinks, while all the eligible bachelors are snapped up quickly.

In my opinion the promulgators of this myth are wrong, dead wrong. The losers in the modern dating game are men, not women.

Here's why:

1) Single women tend to be quite happy and well-adjusted and lead productive, fulfilling lives, while single men are lonely and usually afflicted with serious psychological problems stemming from loneliness. The reason for single women being happy and content is that they maintain good social networks consisting of friends and family; on the other hand, men don't network very well, and tend to lose their social connections in adult years. This creates acute loneliness for single men which is not the case for single women. Thus, men depend on women for companionship, while the reverse isn't true. The same applies to sex. Men depend on women for regular sex much more than vice-versa.

"Happy and well-adjusted", you say?
Females are more than 2.5 times as likely to take [antidepressants] as males, with nearly a quarter of all women aged 40-59 taking antidepressants. Non-Hispanic white persons are 10 percent more likely than non-Hispanic blacks and Mexican-Americans to take the drugs, the report showed.

The report also provided insight into how long people are taking antidepressants. More than 60 percent of Americans have taken their antidepressants for at least two years, while 14 percent have taken the medication for 10 years or more.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/antidepress ... diagnosed/

Someone wrote:2) If men uniquely depend on women for sex and companionship, what do women depend on men for? Historically, resources -- a general term for financial or material investments. But the current generation of women is economically independent and well-educated, which is different from before. Thus, women don't depend on men for resources to the same extent as before, they have resources themselves.

3) So far, the score is 2:0 (sex/companionship vs. NO dependency). What about social stigma? Aren't spinsters stigmatized in society, and don't women want to be mothers? No and no.
a) Social stigma: single men are actually more stigmatized by society than single women. They are treated as potential criminals or outcasts, and also often suspected of being homosexual. The same doesn't apply to women to the same extent. Women are rarely suspected of being deviants or lesbians.
b) Motherhood: In modern Western counties 20-25% of women are childless, but even the ones who have children didn't necessarily want them. In my experience, women's "maternal instinct" is a gross exaggeration, with just as many if not more men wanting kids than women.

The women in the comment section of this piece seem to have not gotten the memo about how happy they are.
‘Social infertility’ refers to those women who are single, childless and unable to find a partner to have children with whilst it is still possible.

DoubleWhammy seems to be a black hole of shame, sucking women into a silent vacuum of excruciating grief and self-condemnation. It’s as if all the promises of equality and feminism are vanquished by the impending event horizon of being both single and childless. Of not being ‘chosen’ for either partnership or motherhood.

http://gateway-women.com/2013/10/29/dou ... childless/
не поглеждай назад. 8)

"Even an American judge is unlikely to award child support for imputed children." - FredOnEverything
User avatar
Teal Lantern
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2766
Joined: August 14th, 2012, 12:48 am
Location: Briar Patch, Universe 25

Postby djfourmoney » December 15th, 2013, 12:17 pm

Teal that last link is priceless...

In the comments section and the the poster, are both jokes and here's why.

One commented said she had TWO, count'em TWO difficult relationships. Holy hell girl didn't learn ANYTHING from the previous bad relationship? I guess not and it cost you the opportunity to have children.

Western women are ridiculous and are doing this to themselves, on purpose.

This is another example of the Western White Woman Echo Chamber...

Woe is me, I'm in my late 30's, early 40's and I may not ever have children because I can't find a suitable partner, on top of that, as the poster/blog-master pointed out, why would a man in his late 30's, early 40's (like me) choose to be with a woman over 38 years old that odds are against her being able to have a child?

The answer is THEY DON'T and I don't understand idiot men who claim they want to have children but are still dating women in their 30's and 40's because they lack attention and make it easier to you to have sex regularly, that's missing the point ASSHOLE!

I as state several times here and tonight at the Reunion that Mark, Anna, Law and Alyona (and the kids) hosted; there is no point in looking for women over 35 especially if you want to have children.

Men have lost the dating war in America, its time to look elsewhere, if that isn't painfully obvious to you by now I don't know when or EVER if it will get through some of these guy's thick skulls.

Thanks for the link Teal it was worth a laugh or two, maybe three. How in the f**k can you feel sorry for White women who find themselves in this predicament?

Can find a suitable partner? That's code, they couldn't find a suitable White partner....
djfourmoney
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: October 17th, 2010, 12:09 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Maverick » December 15th, 2013, 11:49 pm

djfourmoney wrote:Teal that last link is priceless...

In the comments section and the the poster, are both jokes and here's why.

One commented said she had TWO, count'em TWO difficult relationships. Holy hell girl didn't learn ANYTHING from the previous bad relationship? I guess not and it cost you the opportunity to have children.

Western women are ridiculous and are doing this to themselves, on purpose.

This is another example of the Western White Woman Echo Chamber...

Woe is me, I'm in my late 30's, early 40's and I may not ever have children because I can't find a suitable partner, on top of that, as the poster/blog-master pointed out, why would a man in his late 30's, early 40's (like me) choose to be with a woman over 38 years old that odds are against her being able to have a child?

The answer is THEY DON'T and I don't understand idiot men who claim they want to have children but are still dating women in their 30's and 40's because they lack attention and make it easier to you to have sex regularly, that's missing the point ASSHOLE!

I as state several times here and tonight at the Reunion that Mark, Anna, Law and Alyona (and the kids) hosted; there is no point in looking for women over 35 especially if you want to have children.

Men have lost the dating war in America, its time to look elsewhere, if that isn't painfully obvious to you by now I don't know when or EVER if it will get through some of these guy's thick skulls.

Thanks for the link Teal it was worth a laugh or two, maybe three. How in the f**k can you feel sorry for White women who find themselves in this predicament?

Can find a suitable partner? That's code, they couldn't find a suitable White partner....


True.

I recently met a girl through a social group that I'm in. She has a very good reputation there, claims to want a long term relationship, and is very physically attractive.

All well and good until I found out that she's 34 years old (8 years older than me). Since I would like to have children one day (not today though) and I'm looking for a long term partner, this girl is not a very good match. However, I'm extremely curious to know what happened to bring her to this point (of seemingly wanting to have marriage and kids, being pretty, but not having it).

I feel like she will be a very good case study. I will keep you guys updated when I find out more.
Maverick
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 573
Joined: May 18th, 2013, 11:46 pm

Postby Cornfed » December 16th, 2013, 12:20 am

Females are more than 2.5 times as likely to take [antidepressants] as males, with nearly a quarter of all women aged 40-59 taking antidepressants. Non-Hispanic white persons are 10 percent more likely than non-Hispanic blacks and Mexican-Americans to take the drugs, the report showed.

Don't forget all the single females taking prescription painkillers as happy pills. Single Western females over thirty are the most miserable and crazed people on the planet.
User avatar
Cornfed
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 5505
Joined: August 17th, 2012, 5:22 am

Next

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 9 guests