Why Are Modern Women Intent On Getting Married?

[MrMan]

They got everything they want....a good relationship with a good man and the relationship is going well and a commitment....why ruin it with the prospect of a marriage though?

Is it a power issue? Do women feel less power when they are in a domestic partnership as opposed to a marriage?

A lot of women have marriage as a goal. Foolishly, they sleep around and date men who want to just shack up or drop by for midnight booty calls.

They want the read commitment from a man.

Another thing is, isn't it embarrassing to be 40 something and say, "This is my girlfriend." When I see older folks, especially seniors doing that, I think, they sound like they are still in high school. An adult has a wife or husband, not a girlfriend or a boyfriend. When I was in my 20's, and I introduced my future wife as my girlfriend, it felt weird doing that. She felt like so much more than that to me. I wanted her to be part of my family. I wanted her to be my wife, and I wanted to introduce her as such. 'Girlfriend' is nothing, really. A wife is your family.

Maybe some of the women feel the same way. They don't want the man in their lives to be 'my boyfriend. They want a husband.

IMO, you get a totally different caliber of girl if you find a woman who doesn't want to lose her virginity before marriage and guards it. And the chances of her getting a divorce to collect alimony are much less.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Marriage is a means for wealth transfer (or theft depending on your perspective). Women want to marry to:

-Keep up appearances in peer group.
-To show off ability to convince a beta-provider to enslave himself to her.
-To have children that legally bind the beta-provider to provide child support funding to her for 18 to 23 years (depending on the state).
-To have alimony funding extracted from the male by the family courts.

The question should be, why would a woman NOT want to be married with that type of deal?

[The]

Marriage is a means for wealth transfer (or theft depending on your perspective). Women want to marry to:

-Keep up appearances in peer group.
-To show off ability to convince a beta-provider to enslave himself to her.
-To have children that legally bind the beta-provider to provide child support funding to her for 18 to 23 years (depending on the state).
-To have alimony funding extracted from the male by the family courts.

The question should be, why would a woman NOT want to be married with that type of deal?

Agree with you 100%....

Listen Im not against marriage......I just feel that if you are going to get married do so at an older age....As I always say, follow the Tina Turner model and don't marry until your 50+ years of age...

By the way as a side point...If the woman that your with is so desparate for a child that her biological clock is BOOMING and you love your partner sooo much and have a commitment from him, and he agrees to start a family, then why not start having kids??? Why do you need a piece of paper (something that a MAN DOES NOT NEED) in order to do these things??

You don't need a marriage for that!

[Halwick]

Marriage is a means for wealth transfer (or theft depending on your perspective). Women want to marry to:

-Keep up appearances in peer group.
-To show off ability to convince a beta-provider to enslave himself to her.
-To have children that legally bind the beta-provider to provide child support funding to her for 18 to 23 years (depending on the state).
-To have alimony funding extracted from the male by the family courts.

The question should be, why would a woman NOT want to be married with that type of deal?

Also agree with you 100%.
In addition to the court awarding her a financial subsidy (alimony), HIS assets and property through confiscation and HIS pension and social security, the woman gets quite an ROI.

Here's a flip side to your question: Why would any man STILL want to marry, given that type deal and probable outcome?

[S_Parc]

Marriage is a means for wealth transfer (or theft depending on your perspective). Women want to marry to:

-Keep up appearances in peer group.
-To show off ability to convince a beta-provider to enslave himself to her.
-To have children that legally bind the beta-provider to provide child support funding to her for 18 to 23 years (depending on the state).
-To have alimony funding extracted from the male by the family courts.

The question should be, why would a woman NOT want to be married with that type of deal?

Also agree with you 100%.
In addition to the court awarding her a financial subsidy (alimony), HIS assets and property through confiscation and HIS pension and social security, the woman gets quite an ROI.

Here's a flip side to your question: Why would any man STILL want to marry, given that type deal and probable outcome?

Because most American men are a bunch of p*ssywhipped losers. My brother-in-law is one of them. This guy has got nothing in life to look forward to, aside from watching his 100+ sports channels on cable, because my sister has destroyed everything about his life.

So sure, he can memorize every play, every stat, and so on, from baseball, basketball, tennis, golf, football, and soccer tournaments (all leagues, not just the USA ones) but outside of that statistician world, he's a shell of a man. He's barely alive.

[The]

Marriage is a means for wealth transfer (or theft depending on your perspective). Women want to marry to:

-Keep up appearances in peer group.
-To show off ability to convince a beta-provider to enslave himself to her.
-To have children that legally bind the beta-provider to provide child support funding to her for 18 to 23 years (depending on the state).
-To have alimony funding extracted from the male by the family courts.

The question should be, why would a woman NOT want to be married with that type of deal?

Also agree with you 100%.
In addition to the court awarding her a financial subsidy (alimony), HIS assets and property through confiscation and HIS pension and social security, the woman gets quite an ROI.

Here's a flip side to your question: Why would any man STILL want to marry, given that type deal and probable outcome?

Because most American men are a bunch of p*ssywhipped losers. My brother-in-law is one of them. This guy has got nothing in life to look forward to, aside from watching his 100+ sports channels on cable, because my sister has destroyed everything about his life.

So sure, he can memorize every play, every stat, and so on, from baseball, basketball, tennis, golf, football, and soccer tournaments (all leagues, not just the USA ones) but outside of that statistician world, he's a shell of a man. He's barely alive.

WOW...Just WOW!

He probably looks like the WALKING DEAD! LMAO!

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Here's a flip side to your question: Why would any man STILL want to marry, given that type deal and probable outcome?

Very complex question indeed. I think it is a combination of:

-Men naively acting on short-term feelings over longer-term, sagacious thinking.

-Men arrogantly assuming that "That only happens to other men, it won't happen to me."

-Social programming and conditioning by mothers, sisters, teachers, nursery rhymes, Hollywood films, literature, and last but not least a woman to dupes him into the marriage condition.

In order for feudalism and slavery to have existed for so long, the practices depended on most of the enslaved to accept (and even prefer) their plight. American marriage has this kind of a hold on most American men.

[MrMan]

Marriage is a means for wealth transfer (or theft depending on your perspective). Women want to marry to:

-Keep up appearances in peer group.
-To show off ability to convince a beta-provider to enslave himself to her.
-To have children that legally bind the beta-provider to provide child support funding to her for 18 to 23 years (depending on the state).
-To have alimony funding extracted from the male by the family courts.

The question should be, why would a woman NOT want to be married with that type of deal?

Also agree with you 100%.
In addition to the court awarding her a financial subsidy (alimony), HIS assets and property through confiscation and HIS pension and social security, the woman gets quite an ROI.

Here's a flip side to your question: Why would any man STILL want to marry, given that type deal and probable outcome?

I've read that most couples in America don't divorce. Some people divorce multiple times and run the statistics up.

You can also greatly decrease the chances of being victimized by divorce in three ways.
1. Be a decent man who attracts the right kind of woman.
2. By providing the right amounts of alpha leadership and beta comfort in the marriage.
3. By choosing a decent woman with good morals to begin with.

Reason 3. is why some men go abroad. It's not necessary to do that, though, if one can find the right subculture to marry into or the right individual. Feminists are also a bad risk to marry. So are sexually lose women. Women who go to church regularly and women who are virgins at marriage have a lower risk of divorce.

[jamesbond]

Marriage is a means for wealth transfer (or theft depending on your perspective). Women want to marry to:

-Keep up appearances in peer group.
-To show off ability to convince a beta-provider to enslave himself to her.
-To have children that legally bind the beta-provider to provide child support funding to her for 18 to 23 years (depending on the state).
-To have alimony funding extracted from the male by the family courts.

The question should be, why would a woman NOT want to be married with that type of deal?

Exactly, what woman could pass up that deal! She can divorce her husband, get half of his net worth, get custody of the kids, child support and alimony!

I read an article recently where they tracked married couples (who were on their first marriage) who have been married for 40 years. The study showed that after 40 years of marriage, 67% of the couples divorced!

So the divorce rate in the US is now a whopping 67%! America has the highest divorce rate by far of any country in the world!

[S_Parc]

Because most American men are a bunch of p*ssywhipped losers. My brother-in-law is one of them. This guy has got nothing in life to look forward to, aside from watching his 100+ sports channels on cable, because my sister has destroyed everything about his life.

So sure, he can memorize every play, every stat, and so on, from baseball, basketball, tennis, golf, football, and soccer tournaments (all leagues, not just the USA ones) but outside of that statistician world, he's a shell of a man. He's barely alive.

WOW...Just WOW!

He probably looks like the WALKING DEAD! LMAO!

The guy is what? ... a decade older than me and he looks like he's already a junior senior citizen, pot bellied, balding, wrinkles, you name it. I don't envy his life.

I read an article recently where they tracked married couples (who were on their first marriage) who have been married for 40 years. The study showed that after 40 years of marriage, 67% of the couples divorced!

So the divorce rate in the US is now a whopping 67%! America has the highest divorce rate by far of any country in the world!

At that rate, the rise of robotic companions, starting only some 10 years from now, will be the greatest sociological phenomena in the history of humankind. This will surpass what the Ford Model T did to the horse and carriage for the 20th century. We may see the end of marriage by the next century.

[MarcosZeitola]

At that rate, the rise of robotic companions, starting only some 10 years from now, will be the greatest sociological phenomena in the history of humankind. This will surpass what the Ford Model T did to the horse and carriage for the 20th century. We may see the end of marriage by the next century.

They are too damn expensive. Way more expensive then any car, so not comparable in any way to a Model T, popularized in large part due to it's affordability. The type of man possessing the funds to buy such a robot has enough money to never need one in the first place... it's the poor man who is most likely lacking in romantic companion, and the poor man who needs such artificial love. But he'll never be able to afford it. The rich man can get laid easy as f**k.

Hardly anybody will send massive amounts on a fake, creepy, uncanny-valley female robot when the same massive amounts grant him the status and ability to bang hot living, breathing, warm women of flesh and blood some of whom are good enough actresses to delude him into believing it's love.

It's not a thing I see happening... like the Japanese Real Dolls phenomenon, it's a relatively small fringe group consisting of almost exclusively social outcasts and other societal misfits. Not exactly a huge market likely to change the world or economic market drastically any time soon. The costs are higher then the results, it is creepy, and it won't happen. Mark my words.

PS: Hate them or love them, but no mentally sane man would choose banging a robot over banging a sexy woman of flesh and blood. It's nature. Can't fight nature. Eliminating nature isn't progress.

[S_Parc]

At that rate, the rise of robotic companions, starting only some 10 years from now, will be the greatest sociological phenomena in the history of humankind. This will surpass what the Ford Model T did to the horse and carriage for the 20th century. We may see the end of marriage by the next century.

They are too damn expensive. Way more expensive then any car, so not comparable in any way to a Model T, popularized in large part due to it's affordability. The type of man possessing the funds to buy such a robot has enough money to never need one in the first place... it's the poor man who is most likely lacking in romantic companion, and the poor man who needs such artificial love. But he'll never be able to afford it. The rich man can get laid easy as f**k.

Hardly anybody will send massive amounts on a fake, creepy, uncanny-valley female robot when the same massive amounts grant him the status and ability to bang hot living, breathing, warm women of flesh and blood some of whom are good enough actresses to delude him into believing it's love.

It's not a thing I see happening... like the Japanese Real Dolls phenomenon, it's a relatively small fringe group consisting of almost exclusively social outcasts and other societal misfits. Not exactly a huge market likely to change the world or economic market drastically any time soon. The costs are higher then the results, it is creepy, and it won't happen. Mark my words.

PS: Hate them or love them, but no mentally sane man would choose banging a robot over banging a sexy woman of flesh and blood. It's nature. Can't fight nature. Eliminating nature isn't progress.

The costs will go down dramatically. And it isn't about so-called human progress, it's about the proliferation of information technologies vis-a-vis high speed computing which is a macro-trend, affecting the world faster than ppl can adapt to it.

The current industrial multi-purpose bot, Baxter, is $25K. Something like that would have costed 5 to 10 times as much for a custom manufacturer, only a decade ago. Actually, it wasn't even available, you'd have had to buy several of those prior generation 'bots to do what Baxter could do at a fraction of the cost.

I'd written a lengthy thread on this whole topic. The real dolls/mannequins and all that jazz doesn't touch upon what's around the proverbial corner, though not exactly in the next few years, as the timing of it is non-linear, since it's based upon convergence.

viewtopic.php?t=10078

If you walk around any modern US or western city today, you'll see half the population completely hooked on their handheld devices. And why it that? It's an addictive interactive medium. A mannequin, however, is a fetish toy. It's no different than a kid playing with a plastic dinosaur. Eventually, kids lose interest and find themselves going for a newer toy. The kid, as a person, changes, the inanimate object, however, cannot. This is where software comes into play.

At some point in time, the voice on the other side of that digital assistant pad will be able to respond to one's actual questions and be able to host a conversation. That type of stuff will also fold into advanced robotics, down the road, as 'bots are an interface between vision processing and bio-mechanical information processing and synthesis.

Then, on the social front, add in the 2/3's divorce rate and the number of old people in hospice centers. Many will be helped by robot medical assistants and mobile digital companions, as a full time staff member would easily cost more than $25K by 2030 dollars. Insurance companies will love them, as it'll allow for a medical or hospice facility to be run, with half the current staff in place. Many 'bots will also be home care assistants, kinda like having a full time nurse in one's house. And then, there's be a convergence as the robot medic could also serve as a a surrogate sex partner and you'll see ... there will be sex robots, not too different from the Valerie 23 in the Outer Limits episode on the other thread, minus the red herring of consciousness, as AI will not be "conscious" until some distant century if ever, but its ability to perform like humans will occur much faster.

I've also attached it here.

[Cornfed]

I don't see the advantage of sexbots over actual females, since a female is a biological robot anyway. Perhaps with the sexbots you would only have to punch in their instructions once?

[SilverEnergy]

^^^
I am assuming that the sexbots will look and feel like a real human being as technology gets more advanced that we will have realistic looking robots in which their temperature and texture will be just like having a real human being next to you.

[MarcosZeitola]

At that rate, the rise of robotic companions, starting only some 10 years from now, will be the greatest sociological phenomena in the history of humankind. This will surpass what the Ford Model T did to the horse and carriage for the 20th century. We may see the end of marriage by the next century.

They are too damn expensive. Way more expensive then any car, so not comparable in any way to a Model T, popularized in large part due to it's affordability. The type of man possessing the funds to buy such a robot has enough money to never need one in the first place... it's the poor man who is most likely lacking in romantic companion, and the poor man who needs such artificial love. But he'll never be able to afford it. The rich man can get laid easy as f**k.

Hardly anybody will send massive amounts on a fake, creepy, uncanny-valley female robot when the same massive amounts grant him the status and ability to bang hot living, breathing, warm women of flesh and blood some of whom are good enough actresses to delude him into believing it's love.

It's not a thing I see happening... like the Japanese Real Dolls phenomenon, it's a relatively small fringe group consisting of almost exclusively social outcasts and other societal misfits. Not exactly a huge market likely to change the world or economic market drastically any time soon. The costs are higher then the results, it is creepy, and it won't happen. Mark my words.

PS: Hate them or love them, but no mentally sane man would choose banging a robot over banging a sexy woman of flesh and blood. It's nature. Can't fight nature. Eliminating nature isn't progress.

The costs will go down dramatically. And it isn't about so-called human progress, it's about the proliferation of information technologies vis-a-vis high speed computing which is a macro-trend, affecting the world faster than ppl can adapt to it.

The current industrial multi-purpose bot, Baxter, is $25K. Something like that would have costed 5 to 10 times as much for a custom manufacturer, only a decade ago. Actually, it wasn't even available, you'd have had to buy several of those prior generation 'bots to do what Baxter could do at a fraction of the cost.

I'd written a lengthy thread on this whole topic. The real dolls/mannequins and all that jazz doesn't touch upon what's around the proverbial corner, though not exactly in the next few years, as the timing of it is non-linear, since it's based upon convergence.

viewtopic.php?t=10078

If you walk around any modern US or western city today, you'll see half the population completely hooked on their handheld devices. And why it that? It's an addictive interactive medium. A mannequin, however, is a fetish toy. It's no different than a kid playing with a plastic dinosaur. Eventually, kids lose interest and find themselves going for a newer toy. The kid, as a person, changes, the inanimate object, however, cannot. This is where software comes into play.

At some point in time, the voice on the other side of that digital assistant pad will be able to respond to one's actual questions and be able to host a conversation. That type of stuff will also fold into advanced robotics, down the road, as 'bots are an interface between vision processing and bio-mechanical information processing and synthesis.

Then, on the social front, add in the 2/3's divorce rate and the number of old people in hospice centers. Many will be helped by robot medical assistants and mobile digital companions, as a full time staff member would easily cost more than $25K by 2030 dollars. Insurance companies will love them, as it'll allow for a medical or hospice facility to be run, with half the current staff in place. Many 'bots will also be home care assistants, kinda like having a full time nurse in one's house. And then, there's be a convergence as the robot medic could also serve as a a surrogate sex partner and you'll see ... there will be sex robots, not too different from the Valerie 23 in the Outer Limits episode on the other thread, minus the red herring of consciousness, as AI will not be "conscious" until some distant century if ever, but its ability to perform like humans will occur much faster.

I've also attached it here.

I suppose I haven't been looking at it from that angle yet... the most logical one: free and cheap labour. No pay, no retirement, complete obedience. It's a scary thought really, becoming so independent as to be disposable. I can only hope I'll be in my grave well before this happens, if it ever comes to that.

The whole robot-sex thing still freaks me out... but yeah, who knows what the future has in store. There'll still be poor countries in the future though. Poor countries breed poor people. Half of whom are women. Desperate women. Don't think we'll ever be without female sex companions. Real ones, that is. Your theory's pretty scary, man.