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       Mobile Friendly Theme


What percent of American women are marriage material?

Discuss what's wrong with American women. Share problems, experiences and stories about them and why they suck so bad that you've had to resort to dating abroad and foreign women.

Moderators: fschmidt, jamesbond

clowny
Freshman Poster
Posts: 291
Joined: January 30th, 2013, 10:05 am

Post by clowny » February 25th, 2013, 11:40 am

Jester wrote:Among White Californians, 0%.

Among smalltown White Southerners, 10%. But they go fast.

The OP is actually an interesting question - it gets to the heart of why AM are HA.

For looks? No. Once you eliminate the obese 55%, remaining AW compare well with LA and Asia etc. Percentage wise probably more 8's and above in the U.S. than in typical AM destinations.

So it's not looks. It's that they can't form committed submitted marriage relationships -- or the nagging and mannishness is so great, we can't stand to live with them.

I suspect the marriageable % in Mexico is like 75% - after allowing for 10% sluts, 10% bitches, and 5% insufferable "fresa" princesses.
Magnificent post.

I am amazed by some of the other respondents who say the number is absolutely zero. In the US, do you see many women in the malls wearing feminine clothing, such as dresses? A huge portion of Australian women are infected by feminism and the majority are definitely not marriage material, but there are still some women wearing dresses in public. I have noticed that the women who wear these beautiful dresses tend to have more feminine behaviour too, and are more likely to be the traditional types. These types of women might be marriage material.




Check out our Dating Sites and International Romance Tours!



marklambo
Junior Poster
Posts: 709
Joined: November 4th, 2012, 1:37 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Post by marklambo » February 25th, 2013, 8:25 pm

drealm wrote:
marklambo wrote:
drealm wrote:By American what do you mean?

Living in America?
Born in America?
Citizen of America?

Pretty much all 3. If they're born here, just forget about it. Citizens...well it depends on how long they've been a citizen here and also how long they've been living here. Usually within a coupe of years, they become infected by this disease called feminism.
Well what about immigrant women that live along the border, whom are illegal aliens and don't speak English? These are hardly American.

And what about ultra religious groups? Muslims, Orthodox Jews some Christians? Go into a Mosque and you won't find a anything American. Heck the women aren't even allowed to congregate with men.

I think women who survive in America without turning into feminists should be awarded a medal. This is why I think it's important to distinguish.
yea, those are the rare 0.0001% of women. The truly traditional ones you see are usually already married anyway. Some have been married from their country and the whole family came here together. The odds of landing those types of women are very slim.

A good warm hearted traditional woman would be scooped up quicker than you can blink. Also, a lot of these types of women marry within their own circle and outsiders are rarely welcomed.
Private Investment Club
3%-5% a month average returns. No trading involved, all collateral based with low risk. PM for details.

Private Jet Flights
PM for details.

marklambo
Junior Poster
Posts: 709
Joined: November 4th, 2012, 1:37 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Post by marklambo » February 25th, 2013, 8:32 pm

clowny wrote:
Jester wrote:Among White Californians, 0%.

Among smalltown White Southerners, 10%. But they go fast.

The OP is actually an interesting question - it gets to the heart of why AM are HA.

For looks? No. Once you eliminate the obese 55%, remaining AW compare well with LA and Asia etc. Percentage wise probably more 8's and above in the U.S. than in typical AM destinations.

So it's not looks. It's that they can't form committed submitted marriage relationships -- or the nagging and mannishness is so great, we can't stand to live with them.

I suspect the marriageable % in Mexico is like 75% - after allowing for 10% sluts, 10% bitches, and 5% insufferable "fresa" princesses.
Magnificent post.

I am amazed by some of the other respondents who say the number is absolutely zero. In the US, do you see many women in the malls wearing feminine clothing, such as dresses? A huge portion of Australian women are infected by feminism and the majority are definitely not marriage material, but there are still some women wearing dresses in public. I have noticed that the women who wear these beautiful dresses tend to have more feminine behaviour too, and are more likely to be the traditional types. These types of women might be marriage material.
If you've lived in America, you will understand that women you see in malls that dress up feminine, etc, are not dressing up for you (the man). You will sometimes also see women wearing sexy dresses but when men look at them, the women get creeped out, they start to pull their dress down or cover their cleavage. They wear such clothing but if a man looks at them, they get offended. Women dressing feminine is no indicator of them being truly feminine. Women compete with each other over here. They dress up for competition with other women, not to impress a guy or appear feminine. You have a lot to learn about American women my friend.

I've read many of your posts and I notice that you always try to justify that American women are great. Trust me, they're not any different than women from Australia, UK, Canada, etc. I'm not sure if you're planning to move here but you're in for a major rude awakening if you do. I'm sure that the fellow members here can also vouch for what I say.

I'm not trying to burst your bubble, I'm trying to help you out and giving you the proper info of how it really is. You may not like what you read, but later down the road you will thank me and the other guys who have warned you.
Private Investment Club
3%-5% a month average returns. No trading involved, all collateral based with low risk. PM for details.

Private Jet Flights
PM for details.

Maker55
Junior Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: December 17th, 2011, 1:08 am

Post by Maker55 » February 25th, 2013, 9:20 pm

marklambo wrote:
clowny wrote:
Jester wrote:Among White Californians, 0%.

Among smalltown White Southerners, 10%. But they go fast.

The OP is actually an interesting question - it gets to the heart of why AM are HA.

For looks? No. Once you eliminate the obese 55%, remaining AW compare well with LA and Asia etc. Percentage wise probably more 8's and above in the U.S. than in typical AM destinations.

So it's not looks. It's that they can't form committed submitted marriage relationships -- or the nagging and mannishness is so great, we can't stand to live with them.

I suspect the marriageable % in Mexico is like 75% - after allowing for 10% sluts, 10% bitches, and 5% insufferable "fresa" princesses.
Magnificent post.

I am amazed by some of the other respondents who say the number is absolutely zero. In the US, do you see many women in the malls wearing feminine clothing, such as dresses? A huge portion of Australian women are infected by feminism and the majority are definitely not marriage material, but there are still some women wearing dresses in public. I have noticed that the women who wear these beautiful dresses tend to have more feminine behaviour too, and are more likely to be the traditional types. These types of women might be marriage material.
If you've lived in America, you will understand that women you see in malls that dress up feminine, etc, are not dressing up for you (the man). You will sometimes also see women wearing sexy dresses but when men look at them, the women get creeped out, they start to pull their dress down or cover their cleavage. They wear such clothing but if a man looks at them, they get offended. Women dressing feminine is no indicator of them being truly feminine. Women compete with each other over here. They dress up for competition with other women, not to impress a guy or appear feminine. You have a lot to learn about American women my friend.

I've read many of your posts and I notice that you always try to justify that American women are great. Trust me, they're not any different than women from Australia, UK, Canada, etc. I'm not sure if you're planning to move here but you're in for a major rude awakening if you do. I'm sure that the fellow members here can also vouch for what I say.

I'm not trying to burst your bubble, I'm trying to help you out and giving you the proper info of how it really is. You may not like what you read, but later down the road you will thank me and the other guys who have warned you.
Yes sir and that's why American women are turning lesbian in droves.
You're where you're at in life because of your thoughts.

What you think about the most is what you will eventually manifest in your life.

marklambo
Junior Poster
Posts: 709
Joined: November 4th, 2012, 1:37 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Post by marklambo » February 25th, 2013, 11:30 pm

Maker55 wrote:
marklambo wrote:
clowny wrote:
Jester wrote:Among White Californians, 0%.

Among smalltown White Southerners, 10%. But they go fast.

The OP is actually an interesting question - it gets to the heart of why AM are HA.

For looks? No. Once you eliminate the obese 55%, remaining AW compare well with LA and Asia etc. Percentage wise probably more 8's and above in the U.S. than in typical AM destinations.

So it's not looks. It's that they can't form committed submitted marriage relationships -- or the nagging and mannishness is so great, we can't stand to live with them.

I suspect the marriageable % in Mexico is like 75% - after allowing for 10% sluts, 10% bitches, and 5% insufferable "fresa" princesses.
Magnificent post.

I am amazed by some of the other respondents who say the number is absolutely zero. In the US, do you see many women in the malls wearing feminine clothing, such as dresses? A huge portion of Australian women are infected by feminism and the majority are definitely not marriage material, but there are still some women wearing dresses in public. I have noticed that the women who wear these beautiful dresses tend to have more feminine behaviour too, and are more likely to be the traditional types. These types of women might be marriage material.
If you've lived in America, you will understand that women you see in malls that dress up feminine, etc, are not dressing up for you (the man). You will sometimes also see women wearing sexy dresses but when men look at them, the women get creeped out, they start to pull their dress down or cover their cleavage. They wear such clothing but if a man looks at them, they get offended. Women dressing feminine is no indicator of them being truly feminine. Women compete with each other over here. They dress up for competition with other women, not to impress a guy or appear feminine. You have a lot to learn about American women my friend.

I've read many of your posts and I notice that you always try to justify that American women are great. Trust me, they're not any different than women from Australia, UK, Canada, etc. I'm not sure if you're planning to move here but you're in for a major rude awakening if you do. I'm sure that the fellow members here can also vouch for what I say.

I'm not trying to burst your bubble, I'm trying to help you out and giving you the proper info of how it really is. You may not like what you read, but later down the road you will thank me and the other guys who have warned you.
Yes sir and that's why American women are turning lesbian in droves.
Oh yea definitely. That's another topic on its own too!
Private Investment Club
3%-5% a month average returns. No trading involved, all collateral based with low risk. PM for details.

Private Jet Flights
PM for details.

Slick
Freshman Poster
Posts: 147
Joined: February 24th, 2016, 6:50 am

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by Slick » August 10th, 2017, 11:56 pm

Only a small percentage of American Women are marriage material. A very small percentage. Out of ten, maybe 2 or 3 of them are.

I'd rather marry a Mexican Woman before I think about coming near an American Woman.

MrMan
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2341
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 3:52 am

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by MrMan » August 11th, 2017, 1:03 am

Here's how I'd figure it up if I were in the market. Many years after I met my wife (an Indonesian) I read that about 3% of American women were virgins at marriage. I dont know what the figures were when I married. But let's go with 3% being virgins. Then add to that whatever percent were virgins when they got married... once... and were widowed. What percent are widows? What's 3% of that. (Assuming the 3% figure remained constant, which isn't likely.) Then whatever percent of that are genuine Christians with certain spiritual characteristics and compatable beliefs, submissive, easy to get along with, kind, not greedy, and what I'd consider attractive, and my age or younger.

That would have been the way to figure it up for me when I was looking. Not everyone insists on a virgin or widow who has been sexually moral.

Adama
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 5633
Joined: August 23rd, 2009, 10:37 pm

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by Adama » August 11th, 2017, 6:41 am

A better question might be:
-What percentage of American women are submissive and hate feminism?
-What percentage of American have feminine voices and mannerisms?
-What percentage of American women can cook?
-What percentage of American women like being women?
-What percentage of American women like men for the men, and not for what the man can do for them?
-What percentage of American women don't have the chip on the shoulder, sassy, snappy attitude?
-What percentage of American women are honest and not practicing deception?

User avatar
Cornfed
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 5906
Joined: August 17th, 2012, 5:22 am

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by Cornfed » August 11th, 2017, 6:56 am

The trouble is that even if the females didn't all suck like they do, they would still be unsuited to marriage for the following related reasons:

1. Females are already married to the government because resources are looted from men and given to them. Therefore they don't need individual men and we have less to give them anyway since most of it has already been looted. It would be as if you employed people and the government offered to pay them their wages whether they turned up to work or not. You would expect shitty employees after a while, regardless of how conscientious they were when they started.

2. Females want alpha males and white men in the West can't be alpha males. Alpha males don't allow themselves to be pushed around by pigs and shitskins, and we do. Not our fault on an individual basis of course, but that cuts no ice with female hindbrains.

You might be able to use various devices to string the female along in the short term, but it is a shit sandwich in the best case scenario. If we want good marriages we are just going to have to bite the bullet and stand up to the ZOG.

MrMan
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2341
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 3:52 am

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by MrMan » August 11th, 2017, 5:31 pm

Adama wrote:A better question might be:
-What percentage of American women are submissive and hate feminism?
-What percentage of American have feminine voices and mannerisms?
-What percentage of American women can cook?
-What percentage of American women like being women?
-What percentage of American women like men for the men, and not for what the man can do for them?
-What percentage of American women don't have the chip on the shoulder, sassy, snappy attitude?
-What percentage of American women are honest and not practicing deception?
That's a pretty good list. Feminine voices is a matter of taste (though probably the something a majority of men want, and probably something biologically hard wired into us to want.) A girl can't help having a naturally deeper voice, just like she can't help it if she is homely. But women can cultivate the practice of trying to sound and act feminine with whatever they've been given. But if it were me, yeah sure, feminine voice. I wouldn't want to be married to a woman who sounds like or looks like a man. Yuck.

The only one I think a man can give on a little is if the woman cannot cook. If she is young and can only cook a little and she's willing to learn, that may be okay. I knew a Filippina whose Japanese husband cooked better than she did. When she was single, she was working to support younger siblings and going to college, and didn't have time to cook or to learn to cook. My wife could cook a little, but she lived in a boarding house before we got married and didn't have free reign of her own kitchen. But she wanted to learn to cook, and now her cooking is top notch. She had chef gigs at a fine dining type place a few times when we were in business. People have paid $40 a plate for her food. She hasn't done the full-time job thing. We've done lots of one-off businesses together, and she's done some cooking gigs like that on her own.

Adama
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 5633
Joined: August 23rd, 2009, 10:37 pm

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by Adama » August 11th, 2017, 5:36 pm

MrMan wrote:
Adama wrote:A better question might be:
-What percentage of American women are submissive and hate feminism?
-What percentage of American have feminine voices and mannerisms?
-What percentage of American women can cook?
-What percentage of American women like being women?
-What percentage of American women like men for the men, and not for what the man can do for them?
-What percentage of American women don't have the chip on the shoulder, sassy, snappy attitude?
-What percentage of American women are honest and not practicing deception?
That's a pretty good list. Feminine voices is a matter of taste (though probably the something a majority of men want, and probably something biologically hard wired into us to want.) A girl can't help having a naturally deeper voice, just like she can't help it if she is homely. But women can cultivate the practice of trying to sound and act feminine with whatever they've been given. But if it were me, yeah sure, feminine voice. I wouldn't want to be married to a woman who sounds like or looks like a man. Yuck.
A deep female voice is an indicator of a lack of femininity. Women with bass in their voices have mostly abandoned their femininity, similar to the women who cut their hair extremely short: they have shunned femininity in favor of masculinity. It means they want to be in control. That they have shed the bonds of submissiveness to a husband.

Every woman I can think of who had a deep voice was a predator. That is not to say that sweet voices mean she's feminine, but it is to say that a deep voice is a no-no. Just like a woman with short hair would be a no-no, just like a bossy woman is a no-no.

A feminine, submissive woman would feel shame for speaking with a deep voice. Just like a man might feel bad for talking with a high pitched voice.

MrMan
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2341
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 3:52 am

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by MrMan » August 11th, 2017, 7:08 pm

Adama wrote:
A deep female voice is an indicator of a lack of femininity. Women with bass in their voices have mostly abandoned their femininity, similar to the women who cut their hair extremely short: they have shunned femininity in favor of masculinity. It means they want to be in control. That they have shed the bonds of submissiveness to a husband.
Maybe you've got something in mind that I don't. Charlotte Johanson has kind of a deep voice, at least for the way she looks. It's deeper than most, but not like a man's voice. I'm not holding her up as someone to marry, just a woman with a deeper than normal voice.

Anyway, I remember reading a bit out of Canterbury Tales in school. The teacher said the author made us of a theory that immoral characteritics showed in physical characteristics. Long hair meant something. A long face meanth something. These were supposed to portray the individual's personality and character.

I don't agree. Some people are physically ugly on the outside, but it doesn't mean they aren't on the inside. Some women just have deeper voices than others, and not by their own choice. Their are also women who have thick necks, big arms, wide, stout waists and other characteristics that I find unappealing, who have these characteristics but aren't immoral. Deep voices can fall into that category.
Every woman I can think of who had a deep voice was a predator. That is not to say that sweet voices mean she's feminine, but it is to say that a deep voice is a no-no. Just like a woman with short hair would be a no-no, just like a bossy woman is a no-no.
So what if a nice, submissive girl has a deep voice. What's she to do? She can try to talk with a higher voice, but her voice is naturally deep. Why does that make her bad? Why judge a girl's character over such a thing? If you aren't attracted to her fine. Don't marry her. But why judge her character over it?

There are a lot of women I'd think were physically unattractive with ugly faces, stout bodies, deep voices, too much body hair, etc. That doesn't mean she'll be an unsubmissive wife.
A feminine, submissive woman would feel shame for speaking with a deep voice. Just like a man might feel bad for talking with a high pitched voice.
If a girl has a deep voice and feels ashamed about it, do you think she's a bad person? If a man has a naturally high voice, does that make him immoral?

MrMan
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2341
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 3:52 am

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by MrMan » August 11th, 2017, 7:08 pm

Adama wrote:
A deep female voice is an indicator of a lack of femininity. Women with bass in their voices have mostly abandoned their femininity, similar to the women who cut their hair extremely short: they have shunned femininity in favor of masculinity. It means they want to be in control. That they have shed the bonds of submissiveness to a husband.
Maybe you've got something in mind that I don't. Charlotte Johanson has kind of a deep voice, at least for the way she looks. It's deeper than most, but not like a man's voice. I'm not holding her up as someone to marry, just a woman with a deeper than normal voice.

Anyway, I remember reading a bit out of Canterbury Tales in school. The teacher said the author made us of a theory that immoral characteritics showed in physical characteristics. Long hair meant something. A long face meanth something. These were supposed to portray the individual's personality and character.

I don't agree. Some people are physically ugly on the outside, but it doesn't mean they aren't on the inside. Some women just have deeper voices than others, and not by their own choice. Their are also women who have thick necks, big arms, wide, stout waists and other characteristics that I find unappealing, who have these characteristics but aren't immoral. Deep voices can fall into that category.
Every woman I can think of who had a deep voice was a predator. That is not to say that sweet voices mean she's feminine, but it is to say that a deep voice is a no-no. Just like a woman with short hair would be a no-no, just like a bossy woman is a no-no.
So what if a nice, submissive girl has a deep voice. What's she to do? She can try to talk with a higher voice, but her voice is naturally deep. Why does that make her bad? Why judge a girl's character over such a thing? If you aren't attracted to her fine. Don't marry her. But why judge her character over it?

There are a lot of women I'd think were physically unattractive with ugly faces, stout bodies, deep voices, too much body hair, etc. That doesn't mean she'll be an unsubmissive wife.
A feminine, submissive woman would feel shame for speaking with a deep voice. Just like a man might feel bad for talking with a high pitched voice.
If a girl has a deep voice and feels ashamed about it, do you think she's a bad person? If a man has a naturally high voice, does that make him immoral?

MrMan
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2341
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 3:52 am

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by MrMan » August 11th, 2017, 7:09 pm

Adama wrote:
A deep female voice is an indicator of a lack of femininity. Women with bass in their voices have mostly abandoned their femininity, similar to the women who cut their hair extremely short: they have shunned femininity in favor of masculinity. It means they want to be in control. That they have shed the bonds of submissiveness to a husband.
Maybe you've got something in mind that I don't. Charlotte Johanson has kind of a deep voice, at least for the way she looks. It's deeper than most, but not like a man's voice. I'm not holding her up as someone to marry, just a woman with a deeper than normal voice.

Anyway, I remember reading a bit out of Canterbury Tales in school. The teacher said the author made us of a theory that immoral characteritics showed in physical characteristics. Long hair meant something. A long face meanth something. These were supposed to portray the individual's personality and character.

I don't agree. Some people are physically ugly on the outside, but it doesn't mean they aren't on the inside. Some women just have deeper voices than others, and not by their own choice. Their are also women who have thick necks, big arms, wide, stout waists and other characteristics that I find unappealing, who have these characteristics but aren't immoral. Deep voices can fall into that category.
Every woman I can think of who had a deep voice was a predator. That is not to say that sweet voices mean she's feminine, but it is to say that a deep voice is a no-no. Just like a woman with short hair would be a no-no, just like a bossy woman is a no-no.
So what if a nice, submissive girl has a deep voice. What's she to do? She can try to talk with a higher voice, but her voice is naturally deep. Why does that make her bad? Why judge a girl's character over such a thing? If you aren't attracted to her fine. Don't marry her. But why judge her character over it?

There are a lot of women I'd think were physically unattractive with ugly faces, stout bodies, deep voices, too much body hair, etc. That doesn't mean she'll be an unsubmissive wife.
A feminine, submissive woman would feel shame for speaking with a deep voice. Just like a man might feel bad for talking with a high pitched voice.
If a girl has a deep voice and feels ashamed about it, do you think she's a bad person? If a man has a naturally high voice, does that make him immoral?

Adama
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 5633
Joined: August 23rd, 2009, 10:37 pm

Re: What percent of American women are marriage material?

Post by Adama » August 12th, 2017, 4:12 pm

The connection between voice tone and humility is not fragile. If you ever notice that when people are cruel, they often have deep, baratone voices.

If you go to Africa, you'll meet many black women with soft, feminine voices. In the states, you can meet women with the same geneotype who have very deep voices. It is a solid connection, not a weak one.

A submissive woman will not have a deep voice. That is what I have been saying. Submissive women do not come that way. It's not possible. Women with deep voices should be ruled out right off the bat, from the start. They have no intention of yielding to the man. They want to be the man.

If a man has a naturally high pitched voice, it may be that he has chosen to speak that way to show humility and kindness.

As for Charlotte or rather Scarlet Johanson, I don't think she's a good example of much of anything. I also doubt she is submissive.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Anti-American Women Rants”