Saturday, November 16, 2013

Longer means less

Dalrock explains why men are withdrawing from the courtship process even prior to opting out of marriage:
What does a woman’s age have to do with courtship?

For a man who is managing the risks of courtship outlined above, the age of a woman is very important.  The older a woman is, the more likely it is that she is very picky and/or not seriously looking for a husband.  Older women also are less attractive from a courtship perspective because they have used up more of their most attractive/fertile years, and while their attractiveness for marriage has declined their expectations for courtship have only increased.  In short, the older a woman gets the worse a bet she becomes (on average) when it comes to courting her.

There is another impact of women increasing the time period they expect courtship, and this is on men’s willingness to court younger women.  Consider the 25% of current early thirties White women who still haven’t married;  unless they are terminally unattractive an awful lot of courtship has almost certainly been wasted on them.  They aren’t just bad bets for courtship today, but (in retrospect) they clearly were bad bets for courtship for the last 15 years.  Even more telling, just shy of half of all late twenties White women have never married, which means five years ago 50% of early twenties White women were a complete and total waste of traditional courtship risk and resources.  Given the direction of the trends over the last five years, the risk is even higher today.

Put simply, the extended delay of marriage by women has placed marriage minded men in a dilemma;  older women are (generally speaking) known bad bets for courtship, but half of early twenties women are also poor bets for courtship.  And this is before the man in question starts to consider which of the good bets for courtship (in general) would be a good bet for him personally to court.
His logic is amply supported, if not turbo-charged, by the reported preferences of unmarried women as revealed in a recent British poll.

"The proposal should be made approximately three years and four months into a relationship, after the couple have been living together for a while and after a number of discussions about marriage. But while girls like to have had a couple of 'deep and meaningfuls' about marriage, they also want the proposal to be a complete surprise and something their partner has given great thought to."

In other words, a man is expected to invest sufficient time to have four children in  a woman before he even PROPOSES to her. Is there any wonder that even men who are interested in marriage can't be bothered to jump through the ever-increasing number of hoops that women have come to expect? How can any man rationally justify wasting years on a woman that he may not even marry?

It appears that women increasingly like the idea of postponing marriage and "having fun" in their twenties before "settling down" in their early thirties. And they assume that men must therefore think the same way. But the young men inclined toward marriage are learning that there is no point courting a woman with no intention of getting serious during the next 10 years; how many times is it reasonable to expect them to be told "no, I'm not interested" and still keep trying?  Meanwhile, the young men less inclined toward marriage hit their thirties and discover that not only are there more young women in their twenties who just want to have fun being made every single day, but those women are actually more inclined to have fun with them than their predecessors were a decade before.

The reality is that six months is a sufficient period of time to determine whether a woman is marriage-worthy or not. If you require more time than to make up your mind, then you've already made up your mind and she is not worthy. If you have any genuine concern for her, have the decency to next her and move on to the next girl. Don't string her along for the additional 34 months it will otherwise take her to realize you have no intention of marrying her.


tz said...

Dalrock uses the term "courtship", but I'm not sure ít applies to most of the activity. For the PUAs, they are aiming for and getting what they want, so it is an exchange. Beta providers get tired of being bonus money. "Dating" replaced courtship half a century ago. The purpose of courtship was marriage. The women and men were on the marriage market - when few women worked. Dating became a substitute, partially an end in itself. Now courtship doesn't really exist - the 30 somethings with loudly ticking bioclocks then want to be courted. The young 20-somethings don't want to be courted, they want to have fun (cue the song). The first problem with finding someone of suitable MMV is finding the marriage market.

Doom said...

Actually, I think you hit this one on the absolute mark Vox. Six months is more than fair. Now, a year of courtship, once the decision is made, is good. Get her in to marriage counseling and spend a lot of time with her in that year and six months. No sex though. Seriously. That's all I would add.

They are out there. But you have to look for them like you were looking for that cherry job, or that perfect deal on a car, or researching that perfect item, and get off the games for a bit. Maybe shave. Gah! Talking to myself again. Never mind.

Peabody said...

"The women and men were on the marriage market - when few women worked."

One historical oddity - odd to me, anyway - was when the textile mills in Lowell, Massachusetts hired young women for the stated goal of helping them earn a dowry and develop good work habits that would improve their prospects for marriage.

I remember being surprised when I read that in a history book. None of the girls in the class knew what a "dowry" was. When the teacher explained it, most laughed. How quaint! Women had to PAY men to marry and support them! For the most part, the guys agreed the idea had merit. If girlfriends were expensive, wives and children must be more so.

This was back in the early eighties. No doubt those girls went on to become Strong, Independent Women (TM).

maniacprovost said...

Well, a dowry was partially meant to support widows and the occasional abandoned wife. It was "their" money, which could be invested in the family business or whatever, but would be theirs in case of death or the rare divorce. Or if the oldest son, who inherited everything else, did not want to support his elderly and long-suffering mother.

Now the concept of a woman bringing something into the marriage is quaint, but they still expect to take something out of it.

I don't know this from experience... I married a Native American. There are pros and cons to that but you don't have to deal with the post-civilized Modern Woman.

Anonymous said...

Wow, that poll is amazing. These women aren't just delusional; they're also incapable of adding one- and two-digit numbers.

We already knew that the typical girl plans to enjoy her "independent" lifestyle and hard-charging "career" until the baby rabies hit at about 30, and then settle down. That was ridiculous enough. But now we find that she expects to find a guy, date a while (presumably), move in together for 3-4 years, then finally accept his proposal. Then of course there has to be a 1-2 year engagement, so she has plenty of time to wallow in bridal magazines and plan out the perfect way to spend $20K or so of her parents' or her groom's money on giving herself the bestest wedding ever.

So even if she picks the right guy right away, she's going to be 36+ by the time they're actually married. Now, I realize these people don't feel any particular shame if the first baby comes before the marriage (she can't be pregnant for the wedding, though -- the perfect dress wouldn't fit -- so if that happens, the marriage has to be put off some more), so maybe she can have a kid by 35. But what happens if guy #1 isn't Mr. Right? What happens if she reaches 34, and the guy she's been living with for three years hasn't proposed on schedule, so she starts pressing him and he bails? Now she's starting this 4-6 year process all over, and will be 38-40 before she can walk down the aisle. If #2 doesn't work out, her baby-making years may be completely gone before she can get anywhere with #3.

Anonymous said...

"Marriage worthy." This criteria must be different for different men.

Weouro said...

Basically what happened with my cousin. Successful career, owns a house, had a boyfriend living with her for years. They broke up last year, and she's 33, spends a lot of time with wine. I pity her, but I don't sympathize much. said...

I basically think you should get engaged (or at least be planning as a man) to be married at six months or do a mercy dump if you care about her. Otherwise, you're just wasting time. It doesn't take too long to figure out the basics of compatibility. Since people change a lot anyway, it's not like this "perfect match" is gonna happen. Same religion, stable parents, looks good, not a bitch, knows how to cook, wants kids, not sporting a wizard sleeve . . . . it's all pretty simple. But surprisingly hard to find these days!

GB said...

Twice I have had girlfriends tell me I was "the one" and that they knew we were going to get married some day. When I informed them I never had any plan to ever get married, they each took it as a challenge and said they would wait as long as it takes. This prompted me to break up with them, I just felt too bad about it. They both were devastated at the time, but eventually thanked me for allowing them to get on with their lives. They are both married with kids now, one happily, one not so much (she still chats me up on FB and floats offers for booty calls which I ignore. Gotta have some ethics.)

Now compare that to women with their vast network of Friendzoned dudes who they routinely tap for free food/drinks/rides/help moving/fixing stuff, and if the guys ever wise up and move on the woman acts like she was the one being duped.

Matamoros said...

Vox: Don't string her along for the additional 34 months it will otherwise take her to realize you have no intention of marrying her.

It is far more often the woman stringing the man on to get more goodies, before turning him down or latching on to a new guy.

In this article ( a not that good looking woman led on an older guy and sucked $200K out of him. Everything from breast implants and tummy tuck, to a $25K loan.

Then when he popped the question she turned him down. The guy gave her an itemized bill for all the money he spent and wants it back. Of course her hamster is running overtime as, "She believes his billing her for the money is his way of getting revenge for the rejection", because except for the loan the $175K "was given to her out of kindness."

It doesn't say how long her dated or courted her, but obviously it was far too long.

PRCalDude said...

I proposed to my wife after about 6 months when I was 25. She was 23. We've been married almost 8 years. Everything written in the post is true.

Meanwhile, formerly hawt women from my high school and college don't look so good now in their 30s but are still unmarried having pissed-away their 20s. It's a shame.

Unknown said...

The purpose of a dowry was to give the couple a financial leg up. If women had to pay large dowries to men they would be more careful who they married, especially if the man could keep everything if they divorced.

Trust said...

The laws of supply and demand apply as much to the SM as to economics.

The law of supply = as price increases, suppy increases. The more women are eager to reward (pay) bastards with sex, the more men will behave like bastards towards them in order to tap them.

The law of demand = as price increases, demand decreases. The more women make unreasonable demands and become financial and emotional vampires, the less men will be inclined to marry them and otherwise support them and put up with them.

The same laws apply to family law as well, the more you pay women to ass rape men in divorce, the more women are willing to do it(supply), and the less men are willing to sign up (demand).

Feminists are creating the same deficits in the SM as they have in the federal budget.

I mean, duh, this is basic economics ladies.

kh123 said...

"...not sporting a wizard sleeve..."

In all fairness, is one of the more blatant signs that they've been well versed in the arcane arts of potion taking, carousel riding, and possibly humors. "Ask me about my parents' divorce", if I remember correctly.

Ben Pratt said...


My wife and I have always used the word courtship to describe the time beginning with our first date and ending with our engagement 16 days later. The 12 years since then have been a great adventure. This isn't exactly rocket science, but until you see it (despite the cultural impediments), it might as well be quantum field theory.


Anonymous said...

Too many of you are white knights, breaking up with good pussy just to save her from childlessness. She's an adult and can make her own choices.

Anonymous said...

@Opened Eyes

No kidding. It's not like I don't offer tips and friendly advice to the girlfriends on how to make themselves more marriageable. (Most of which gets blithely ignored.)

An old adage is that anything a woman does sexually for you, she won't do for you after the wedding; given what girls seem to be willing to do these days prior to marriage, post-marriage life is a truly intimidating thing.

Jason773 said...

Opened Eyes kinda hit it on the head.

Vox, you are usually around 99% on point with your posts, but this is in the 1%, especially that last paragraph. First, I honestly don't know any guy (mid-20s) who would entertain marriage after 6 months, as 1yr is usually the minimum for this discussion. Second, grown women can make their own decisions and they don't need men to WK them even more, looking out for their "best interests" by breaking up with them in order to keep their romantic future on track. If a broad wants to stay with a guy, even if he has no intentions of marrying her, then that is on her, not him, so let's cut the schtick.

Anonymous said...

Jason773, a basic rule of game is "next her". If she's not marriage material after 6 months, she won't be at 12 months, and you just wasted 6 months of your life giving exclusivity and commitment with nothing of value in return. Sex can be acquired without 6 months of commitment.

Jason773 said...

Aaron, no, just no. First, I think, as many other men do, that 6 months is not enough time to know. Second, I'm probably in the small minority of men on here and other sites who actually dates and sleeps with 26yo and under women, so I have that covered. The amount of absurd "game theory" and "wat do" advice that comes out of married and/or delta/gamma commenters on here is laughable, because they are not actually participating in the largest subset of the dating game (namely young females). Third, it's completely fine IMO to have an exclusive relationship with a female for a given amount of time, even if she probably isn't marriage material (this is especially true if one if upfront about these expectations, as I'm not here to baby women and make sure that they don't waste time finding the one). Companionship, consistent sex, similar interests, etc., are all fine reasons that many would deem as solid short-term value, even if there is no lifetime value seen.

Post a Comment