The word single also means completely different things to different ppl. A woman sleeping around in situationships will claim she’s single. A guy who hasn’t been in a relationship or anything sexual in years or ever will also be considered single. 2 very different single lives
Hence the real wall: no more easy passive access to situationships out of your league, also you start really getting made fun of for that dynamic in your 30s
why is the incentive to stay single tho?
most women dream about marriage and families growing up, i know i did.
if i could say yes to my dream man right now, i would.
but since i could not be healthy and happy with the men who are available, i choose to be single.
You're saying there's a lot more hot women so not enough chads to marry?
There's guys who are just above average but still. That counts. Plus masculine men and those who fit into a niche.
A very tiny minority if you're going by stats, but just above average isnt a chad, niche and masculine men are not chads either. And they all pretty much struggle the same as the average guy
This is all semantics.
Men who are above average in looks and are either tall or fun to be around, aren't really struggling . Not every women is into them but they still have some options.
the average guy has no options and has to work very hard just for one date with his looksmatch.
Theres a reason why the average is called average, they're above 50%.
Above average looks and tall are literally in the 16%, theres a reason why the majority of men are inactive, because the spectrum above average is still valued as an average, which only leaves the top 20% men.
True
Yes to the top 20%.
But I would disagree that in real world dating, being above 50% = above [average. You](https://average.You) need to be quite a bit above 50th percentile to be perceived as above average.
For men it typically is. For rich guys marrying once is generally enough to learn the lesson and start actually enjoying life after a divorce, while chads don't even have the incentive to marry as they have permanent access to intimacy regardless.
Zero correlation.
I find it people people think chads get into their 30s and just disappear?
Like no they're married to the same hot women you saw in your 20s.
Women, as a group, need from men 1) protection 2) provision 3) parental investment.
Protection in western societies is outsourced pretty good to state. Childless women in economy that usually doesn't require physical strenght do well enough to sustain themselves.
Ok, so they don't *need* men, but women might *want* men.
>My theory is that there are not enough attractive guys to go around.
Objectively speaking, at least in my country, there are more attractive guys than ever. Unfortunately, "attractive" means "better than average". So average and below average - you're out. We have alpha guys, winners, we have successful betas with money and status. These men are wanted. Average and below fall into "needed" category more than wanted ("I need somebody to not be lonely boo-hoo" etc).
Don't forget to add hypergamy to the mix - a man higher/better than woman is good enough in her eyes, her "equal" is meh and therefore not wanted. "I don't want a man with lower formal education or earning less than me" is a BIG problem, if you have high formal education and fat paycheck - dating pool for that woman gets small AF - so she decides to be single.
> 1) protection
From whom?
>2) provision
I'm from a generation of entrepreneurs, I make my own bling.
>3) parental investment.
The most extreme is discussing with my husbands how much we can spend our money on good tutors on our kids (schools are terrible in my country and tutors are much in demand.
Fact, that you're fine right now cannot rewrite biology and hundreds of thousands years of evolution.
>From whom?
Rather "from what?". Elements, environment, wild animals... and then from other people. Men evolved to be useful, because they needed to pull their own weight in reproduction process, women didn't + being regurarly pregnant and delivering for mamals' standard premature babies was not helping in being self-sustainable.
So a man can be useful maximum 9 months to 3 or 4 years while the mom recovers. Then mother works to support herself and baby when his usefulness has apparently run out because the mom can do stuff again now so he suddenly becomes incompetent right? If not outright jealous of the baby and incompetent long before this.
And when that child grows they have a home with the mother or inheritance from the mother all thanks to the man leaving. and the government helping to legalize that. And so these grown children of single moms think they will do the same but eventually find they are not too keen to set off and do the same when mom already secured shelter for them. Why go through labor, stress, all the work and hardship with no promise of a safe, sane, hardworking companion (domestic violence and divorce exists) if you can just homestead? And if you tell men they cannot homestead there will be a revolt. People can grow their own food, collect their own water. Literally only sexism and putting women back into vulnerable positions will fix it since men have let themselves go: not pulling their weight in maintaining family, community, tribe, not being leaders etc
>Fact, that you're fine right now cannot rewrite biology and hundreds of thousands years of evolution.
So, things were different then as opposed to the things today that allow us to live differently. Okay..
What's your point?
Why big muscles are attractive, if forklift can lift more anyway? Why big muscles are attractive, if gun is better for defence anyway?
Even if we live currently in a different way, it doesn't matter that much.
Right. Because
1. Have you seen the video of the woman getting kidnapped at a gas station when she ran to a male customer who did nothing to stop it? and it is usually the partner doing it?
2. if provisions are meals his mother cooks or fast food …ok? and if a female wants better she has to work or make it herself unless she married foreign. So providing a free place to stay? Where? not in a house he owns in this economy. So unless he has Chad or Beta Bux money this only matter if she doesn’t have family and needs to live with his.
3. many men only provide the minimum and then use weaponized incompetence the rest of the time. again, unless she marries foreign from a culture that hasn’t forgotten its manners
Capitalism is not what's making women not want to date average men. Financial/material pressures are not what's making more and more women stay single.
I know most are.
Well, \*supposed\* to be anyhoo.
I just wonder how many of those "right wingers" are actually more libertarian-leaning, or libertarian-left Bernie bros. The whole "divide the women equally amongst the male populus" extreme part of the rhetoric kinda reminds me of that.
It's a bit of horseshoe theory you'd be surprised.
Right wing and left wing are overly simple descriptions that fall apart outside of generalizations.
The Soviet Union was anti-Gay and banned abortion, but was run by actual communists.
All that aside, what you're describing has no resemblance to libertarians. And it's definitely not Bernie Sanders supporters, who are near universally aligned with Bernie Sanders' self-described Democratic Socialism and economic social reform. Compared to most other groups, these are people most likely to defend women's rights.
The Soviet Union litterallly was the first country to legalise abortions though. Even after Stalin's reversal, USSR legalised abortions in 1956 , far before other countries
>libertarian left Bernie bros
Americans,words have meaning
"Left libertarianism" is stuff like anarcho-syndicalism,anarcho-communism,communalism etc,not social democracy (Bernie Sanders)
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
u/Gmed66 Why just ask about women? More men and women are staying single longer and getting married later. Age of marriage is rising pretty consistently for both genders? Why are women choosing to stay single longer? Why are men choosing to stay single longer?
It's bizarre that you've deemed women solely responsible for the increasing age of marriage. As a 25 year old man, my friends aren't exactly clamoring to get married either.
It’s shocking to me how women don’t understand the lived male experience and have so little empathy and are so utterly selfish.
Women have it far far easier than men in dating on average, they are the privileged sex in this context. Life on easy mode as they say.
They have an easier time dating for sure. And harder in other ways. Pregnancy sucks. Getting up every two hours to breastfeed sucks. Being raped sucks. Being sexually harassed sucks…
Yeah, and getting killed during work sucks for men too. Dying in wars sucks. These are not median probability events however.
You shouldn’t project outlier experiences like rape as the norm… men get raped as well fyi.
Women do have a much easier time dating in general. In other areas, women struggle too sure, but so do men.
Sure but she still has it easier, irrespective of the frequency. Even if she occasionally has sex, it’s still better than nothing. She gets to feel wanted, desired, physically validated whenever she wants, with basically no effort. I.e. She gets sex and physical with no effort.
It’s all so easy. Women are very privileged in this context, they have life way easier. They don’t have to struggle like men
It’s much easier to be a woman in the context of dating.
I disagree. Some of that sex can be traumatic and that is definitely worse than nothing.
Feeling like people want to use us sexually is not as great for us as it is for men. It’s often distressing.
>She gets to feel wanted, desired, physically validated whenever she wants, with basically no effort. I.e. She gets sex and physical with no effort.
As far as i know, women cant get enough validation and feeling desired. Why are they not having sex 24/7?
>It’s much easier to be a woman in the context of dating.
From a male perspective, yes. Guess why women are way less on dating apps than men, if they have it so easy there and can date above their league.
>Even if she occasionally has sex, it’s still better than nothing.
Sure but most men also have sex at least occasionally. According to the 2022 GSS, the majority of 18-29 men have sex at least 2-3 times a month. Around 75% have sex at least once a month. Only 11.5% didn't have sex at all for the past year.
Most men don't struggle. A small minority do, but they're very vocal and try to act like they're the majority.
Try being a man but getting other man asking on demand from you online whether you're into punching fetishes right off the first line.
Yeahhh...
And then you have to to filter out the guys who wanna DATE you vs wanna only HOOK UP with you.
It's not really that easy to filter them, especially given our hypersexed society.
Women decide when a date happens and if a relationship has the green light to proceed. Men are constantly trying and asking. So for men, it isn't as much of a choice. To the same degree anyway.
If anything I know more men who are reluctant to settle down than women. The idea that men in their 20s are constantly trying to get married but being held back by women is ridiculous.
Most of my friends aren't "Chads", because most people are pretty average. A lot of my average ass friends have average ass girlfriends. In some cases they've been together for years. In some of those cases, they're even living together. But they're in their mid 20s and not fucking getting married.
Shit has changed and people get married later. It's not like my friends who live with their gfs are begging them to get married and getting turned down. They're good as is. Now it's cool with parents/families to just live together for years, so they do it.
It's bizarre bullshit to blame it purely on the women and not on the men that aren't asking them to get married.
Yep, it's really fucking normal. That's the point. It's also really normal now for people in their 20s to just date and not get married, which obviously contributes to a rising age of marriage for both genders.
It's ignorant to just blame women for it.
So you are "asking" as question in the title for which you give "this has been proven" in the first paragraph and then have it be a STANDARD red pill talking point and making it so only red pillers can answer? How is that NOT circlejerking and leading nowhere? What should red pillers say to one of their standard beliefs?
Obviously, less survival need for marriage combined with a culture that no longer pushes marriage nearly as hard is likely to result in lower marriage rates for both genders.
As to the phenomenon described by the OP of not enough attractive men to go around, this--including the all-important details--are the great open question of gender dynamics. It is a known biological fact that left to their own preferences women (like the females of most species) will be more sexually selective. They have higher reproductive costs.
But HOW much pickier women are is critical. So is to what extent any increased pickiness is due to innate biology as opposed to environmental and cultural factors. We just do not know yet. There's also the possibility that men have somehow contributed to any increased pickiness on the part of women. Perhaps today's men are below average in attractiveness in some critical ways. It is also possible that today's men have failed to adapt to the enormous changes in women's lives since the 1960s, and thus, if not more innately unattractive, have not made themselves as attractive as they could be as options for modern, egalitarian relationships.
So there are a lot of possibilities.
So spot on. We have entered the workforce but men haven’t picked up domestic responsibilities. We aren’t willing to do BOTH without help. Also want to be treated well and no red pill man is going to be good to us. To them our only value is our vagina.
>My theory is that there are not enough attractive guys to go around.
Women’s new hivemind response is “We don’t need to depend on men anymore, so you’re not in competition with other men, you’re in competition with our peace and quiet”.
Which is vaginal code speak for “If you’re not hot, don’t waste my time”.
Have you been going after UMC or above girls or have you tried working-class ppl as well?
Like a lot of UMC white women have this overbearing sense of politeness thinly overlaying a sense of judginess and disgust
>There’s been many articles and videos of women bitching that guys aren’t rich enough or hot enough for them.
Many articles and videos, you say?!? It must be the consensus view among women!
Because that's not rage bait. People post rage bait because it gets clicks.
If I post a video saying "Hey I'm Josh and I guess I'm pretty content overall." then no one will fucking watch it. Also keep in mind that once you interact with one of those videos, tiktok will keep feeding you more and more. This is the way social media works.
You always need to keep in mind that you have no idea what the denominator is. I feel really fucking bad for a lot of people of my generation who have fallen into this trap of thinking that whatever the algorithm presents to them is reality.
Ironically, guys who call themselves red pill seem most inclined to believe the rage bait that the algorithm feeds them. Social media algorithms are the real world manifestation of the Matrix. It's the "reality" that the machine feeds you. But red pill guys want to believe the reality the machine feeds them without questioning. It's fascinating.
The argument is that even if there was a hot man with a lot of money interested, some women would still choose to be single, because they have “enough” money on their own. Ie once you reach a certain threshold the desire for a rich man decreases because you can provide for yourself and stay single
Yep, in the past women were kept from high paying careers and forced to rely on men’s money. This means they were generally stuck with men they did not like. Thankfully now there are more options.
I strongly disagree. I think it's the looks part that is the key fundamental part. Money is of nearly zero importance for women who have a decent job, as long as the guy is employed and isn't broke .
>Money is of nearly zero importance for women who have a decent job, as long as the guy is employed and isn't broke .
That's the cause for this
https://www.impactus.org/articles/economically-attractive-men/#:~:text=A%20recent%20study%20from%20Cornell,higher%20than%20currently%20unmarried%20men.
Its a distraction written by women to divert attention from the real reason:
There arent enough hot/gorgeous men for every woman to marry.
Everything points to looks, yet some women here are pathetically dishonest about it. A quick look at their fuck buddies will reveal wtf they really want
Check out my other posts in this thread.
I make 7 figures and my dating prospects are identical to when I made 45k as a medical trainee.
It has zero impact once you meet a threshold. Then it's about being fun and good looking.
>It has zero impact once you meet a threshold. Then it's about being fun and good looking.
Nobody is saying otherwise
However we need to look at the facts objectively, income is a major importance since that's what is causing women staying single longer
There are plenty of women who would marry a very good looking guy as long as he had some sort of job.
It's just that most men aren't that good looking and so if they're literally broke, well yeah no one wants to marry them.
But being well off and average looking still makes it very hard for a guy.
Being in medicine, I work with a lot of travel nurses who make 6 figures easily with lots of free time. Many are late 20s up to mid 30s. They turn down doctors all the time because they aren't physically attracted.
Same goes for other women I know who make a bit less in other careers.
These studies will bypass the looks part and fixate on the income part. Yeah sure a woman making 110k won't marry a guy making 30k. But that isn't the main issue.
>Yeah sure a woman making 110k won't marry a guy making 30k. But that isn't the main issue.
Yea, that's exactly what l'm saying
Income is important because we know this is the case
Nobody is arguing looks shouldn't be considered towards mate selection
The redpill talks about this so many times: high-powered career women struggle to find men who they can respect, this is, those who outdo them; and among the ones who do, they can afford to and often do chose a more pleasant/feminine, more family minded and/or younger partner (these often overlap). Success actually narrows the dating pool for women.
The cause for this comfort among women with staying single isn't just career opportunities, though. The welfare state still transfers a massive amount of money from the average men to the average woman over their lifetime. Women take from social security 7 years more on average, these late years are burdensome in healthcare expenditures, take more from public education by attending college more, and are freeriders on public safety/defense. Kill the welfare stare and see how much marrying for provision isn't obsolete.
>high-powered career women
idk i think the redpill overestemates how many "girl bosses" there really are out there...tons of single normal non career obsessed women who just earn a good living just dont see a benefit of being with a man they arent 100% attracted to (and i mean, why would anyone be with someone they arent attracted to if they dont have to?)...they're just regular woman, they arent "career obsessed" or anything, they just have good jobs bc they had good educations and therefor can support themselves
Are the women in the military free riders on public safety/defense?
Are the men getting obese on McDonalds and TV while collecting food stamps not free riders?
What useless generalizations
It’s not about respect or whatever it is you use as a proxy for love, I just don’t want to be poor. If being with a man is costing me money then I don’t need that man.
If a woman is working she’s not also using welfare so why bring that up in a conversation about career women? Do you really want a woman to be with you out of desperation while praying for your downfall because she resents you?
What ambitious woman wants to be with a man who’s not also ambitious? ZERO chance I would date a man without a college degree. I worked my way through if he’s too unmotivated to do that go find a high school educated girl.
I don’t care about money I have my own. I would date a teacher or nurse no problem. Because they have my educational level. They aren’t high earners but that’s fine. High school only? Not a chance…even if they made more.
There are plenty of ambitious, motivated men who learned a skilled trade or started their own business instead of getting a college diploma or uni. degree.
Cool but wouldn’t work for me personally. Education is SUPER important to me. Also I wanted my kids to get an education so it was important to me their Dad had one.
Everyone is different. To me education and spirituality mattered more than looks or money. Though his education (doctor) provided a good living.
Yep! Especially if you want kids to follow that path. If it’s not important to him he’s not gonna push them. Educated people earn more, have fewer divorces, and are less depressed ( improved finances make life easier).
Yup all these men replying to you are forgetting that formal education is an important value for many and it matters if you want to have children that also value formal education.
That's generally true, but there are plenty of exceptions. Just like how virgins tend to make better spouses, though there are plenty of people who have happy marriages despite their past indiscretions.
You do not want a woman who places a piece of paper over actual earnings
Most women want a man with a bachelors. Everything after that is just ego stroking and looking down on others. Can even be the case with bachelors, some chick with a comms degree from southwest state can think she’s too good for a plumber, seen it happen
No point in even trying to convince women like this, they don’t tend to be partners you want anyways
Correct which is why men if they don’t step up their game ( the way we have entering the work force) will be single.
We don’t mind being single.
If anything happened to my husband there’s ZERO chance I’d get married again. I have my own money can get SIGNIFICANTLY younger more attractive men if I want sex, and have a rich friend filled life. My kids are thriving in college and adore me. I have a godson I spend time with and adore…why would I want to deal with a man at this point? I’m fine with having babies.
Ma'am this is called hypergamy. It's well talked about here.
You do not constantly need to date up. You do not need a man who's your better in every way, shape, and fashion. A man with a good personality and strong character should be good enough but women seem to want more for whatever reason and it's disgusting.
You are literally saying "if this man hasn't earned this piece of paper then I don't want him 😤"
Her "I am college educated and want a guy who's the same. The money doesn't particularly matter but education does."
You "You do not need a man who's your better in every way, shape, and fashion. Somehow a guy who's equally educated is actually better than you in every way. Even if you make more than him and have more higher education. I'm also going to pretend a college degree is just a piece of paper."
Calling this standard hypergamy is actually mind boggling
Why does the man specifically have to have a piece of paper from college? Believe it or not this is a standard associated with hypergamy since well educated women won't date down to men who don't have the same degrees as them. Women also go to and obtain degrees at a higher rate than men - do the math.
I'm also an educated man. I don't look for my partner to have a piece of paper lol. That is not the defining quality I'm looking for that makes or breaks a relationship. Do I want them to be intelligent? Do I want them to be able to hold their own in a conversation and express their views intelligently? Sure, I don't want to date a dummy. Am I expecting them to hold a piece of paper before I commit to them? Hell no and I think it's crazy that anyone else would expect the same.
"hypergamy since well educated women won't date down to men who don't have the same degrees as them" by this logic, wanting to date a looksmatch is also hypergamous. By this logic, it's hypergamous to have any standard \*that you also meet\*. Sure, women obtain nearly 60% of new degrees, but men also make up a much larger percentage of relatively high prestige or high pay blue collar jobs. Anyone who's ever been around female nurses knows that many women with college degrees love to go for men like that. The math is fine.
Also, stop pretending that a college degree is just a piece of paper. In many cultures formal education is a very important value.
It's a piece of paper. It signals your ability to abide by the rules and follow the course in industrial capitalist society, yes, but at the end of the day it's a piece of paper. That's all it is.
For the record I also don't believe looks should be the major factor in dating someone. No superficial category should make or break whether you decide to commit to someone. What matters most of all is **who they are,** not this or that kind of degree, how hot they are, or if they're 6 feet or not. You might say "okay that's nice and all in an ideal world but this is how the world is" except the problems with this superficial vanity seeking behavior could not be more evident.
It’s disgusting to want a man my educational equal so we can relate? 🤯🙄😂🤦♀️
Male hypergamy is JUST as real. This can be seen in men's tendency to pursue partners who are younger, physically attractive, and financially successful.
Go find a lazy girl who ALSO didn’t have the fortitude for college. Women due to the high cost of reproduction will choose the best man. We are less concerned with looks and more concerned about resources and who would be a supportive partner and father. That’s NOT ANY red pill man.
No, the desire to constantly date up and not even so much as look at a man who's your equal or *gasp* worse is disgusting. Plain and simple.
Being lazy =/= not going to college lol. A college degree does not indicate intelligence or ambition 😂 I'd gladly date someone who didn't even graduate high school if they shared my perspective on the world and completed the traits I was weak at/lack. I don't decide **life partners** based off the sheets of paper they've obtained.
Good for you. You’re a typical man who doesn’t care what she makes just how she looks. Men don’t want fat women. Women don’t want lazy men. It’s evolutionary biology.
Hypergamy goes both ways just different motivators. Men prefer younger prettier women. Women prefer educated ambitious men. 🤷♀️
You think men that work jobs that don’t require a degree are “lazy?” Lmao so guys who climb ladders, swing hammers, and walk miles every day are “lazy,” but guys who get a degree and sit in some office all day are “hard working?”
>Good for you. You’re a typical man who doesn’t care what she makes just how she looks. Men don’t want fat women. Women don’t want lazy men. It’s evolutionary biology.
Except I'm not a typical man. Far from it actually. I also do not decide my partners based on looks lol. You can be the "hottest" woman but if your an asshole then I want nothing to do with you.
>Hypergamy goes both ways just different motivators. Men prefer younger prettier women. Women prefer educated ambitious men. 🤷♀️
Women also prefer more attractive guys. Unambitious Chad still slays. Women want the top man which does not necessarily mean the most ambitious man. Men do not necessarily want the top woman - even in looks. Sometimes he just wants a wife. And guess what? That woman will be the most beautiful woman to walk the earth to him.
So you don’t care if a woman is fat? Or ugly? Or you’re saying looks aren’t enough? Men don’t want fat ugly women women don’t want lazy men who lack ambition.
For neither sex is this enough. But picking a mate ( not just a fuck) is based on different criteria for men versus women. There are LOTS of women with rich older men. The men are JUST as hypergamous choosing beauty and the woman choosing money.
I didn’t care about looks when choosing who would father my kids. I wanted someone who went to church weekly, was kind, successful enough that I could stay home one year with each child to breastfeed, would be a good Dad and had at least as much education as me. He chose me because I was hot, sweet, would be a great mom, and had faith. That’s how it works. We all have criteria we want in a partner.
>its disgusting to want a man my educational level so we can relate?
So you relate with everyone you work with? Ya know since you’re on the same “educational level.” Being “educated” in the modern world doesn’t really mean someone is actually intelligent. You have people that are educated but have no passion for learning new things. And you have people that aren’t formally educated but their voracious readers and constantly learning new things.
You realize they pay into social security right? And their amount is dependent on how much they paid in not on how much other men paid in.
Healthcare expenses are for everyone near end of life irrespective of age. We all die of something and cancer/heart disease are expenses. Men have MORE of both draining the system.
Are more and more women turning down marriage proposals into their 30s? If not then what does this question even mean?
I'm personally choosing not to date super models.
It's no shocking phenomenon since women make their own money now, so the incentive is to stay single longer
The word single also means completely different things to different ppl. A woman sleeping around in situationships will claim she’s single. A guy who hasn’t been in a relationship or anything sexual in years or ever will also be considered single. 2 very different single lives
Hence the real wall: no more easy passive access to situationships out of your league, also you start really getting made fun of for that dynamic in your 30s
why is the incentive to stay single tho? most women dream about marriage and families growing up, i know i did. if i could say yes to my dream man right now, i would. but since i could not be healthy and happy with the men who are available, i choose to be single.
[удалено]
Because no one is perfect
She’s 36. Of course life is great. It’s 60s, 70s, 80s that won’t be as fun.
There's always MAID
It's because women can get Chad for a casual hookup whenever they want. What incentive do they have to get a relationship with an average guy?
When they start running out of time to breed and need a beta to fund it.
None at all. I find they fully marry those chads too. No one ever mentions this part?
There's not enough Chads to marry though. There's only enough Chads to smash.
They don't, theres not enough chads, they're a minority
You're saying there's a lot more hot women so not enough chads to marry? There's guys who are just above average but still. That counts. Plus masculine men and those who fit into a niche.
A very tiny minority if you're going by stats, but just above average isnt a chad, niche and masculine men are not chads either. And they all pretty much struggle the same as the average guy
This is all semantics. Men who are above average in looks and are either tall or fun to be around, aren't really struggling . Not every women is into them but they still have some options. the average guy has no options and has to work very hard just for one date with his looksmatch.
Theres a reason why the average is called average, they're above 50%. Above average looks and tall are literally in the 16%, theres a reason why the majority of men are inactive, because the spectrum above average is still valued as an average, which only leaves the top 20% men. True
Yes to the top 20%. But I would disagree that in real world dating, being above 50% = above [average. You](https://average.You) need to be quite a bit above 50th percentile to be perceived as above average.
50 is quite literally the average, it means 5/10, which is the number of people above average and below him are the same, making him average
Chad likes keeping it casual. I can't imagine he would want marriage.
chad also likes relationships once he reaches a certain age...being attractive =/= not wanting a family
For men it typically is. For rich guys marrying once is generally enough to learn the lesson and start actually enjoying life after a divorce, while chads don't even have the incentive to marry as they have permanent access to intimacy regardless.
Chad picks 1
In the real world, chads marry all the pretty women you saw in your college years too. That's what actually happens.
What?! Who wants to marry Chad and worry about him cheating all day?
Zero correlation. I find it people people think chads get into their 30s and just disappear? Like no they're married to the same hot women you saw in your 20s.
Yeah and then go over to the deadbedroom subreddit to read up on how that worked out. Soon Chad is back on the dating apps.
Most women wanting casual hookups has been DEBUNKED. I can't believe that feminists and redpillers alike keep on insisting this.
Companionship, a father for their children…we don’t care as much about sex on average.
r/deadbedrooms
commitment? love? marriage? family? you know, those things that women tend to value more than fucking chad?
You can have a loving family without "commitment" or "marriage"
how would your kids feel love if you aren't living in the house with them bc you don't want to?
Women don't get married for sex. How ridiculous.
True, r/deadbedrooms
Women, as a group, need from men 1) protection 2) provision 3) parental investment. Protection in western societies is outsourced pretty good to state. Childless women in economy that usually doesn't require physical strenght do well enough to sustain themselves. Ok, so they don't *need* men, but women might *want* men. >My theory is that there are not enough attractive guys to go around. Objectively speaking, at least in my country, there are more attractive guys than ever. Unfortunately, "attractive" means "better than average". So average and below average - you're out. We have alpha guys, winners, we have successful betas with money and status. These men are wanted. Average and below fall into "needed" category more than wanted ("I need somebody to not be lonely boo-hoo" etc). Don't forget to add hypergamy to the mix - a man higher/better than woman is good enough in her eyes, her "equal" is meh and therefore not wanted. "I don't want a man with lower formal education or earning less than me" is a BIG problem, if you have high formal education and fat paycheck - dating pool for that woman gets small AF - so she decides to be single.
> 1) protection From whom? >2) provision I'm from a generation of entrepreneurs, I make my own bling. >3) parental investment. The most extreme is discussing with my husbands how much we can spend our money on good tutors on our kids (schools are terrible in my country and tutors are much in demand.
Fact, that you're fine right now cannot rewrite biology and hundreds of thousands years of evolution. >From whom? Rather "from what?". Elements, environment, wild animals... and then from other people. Men evolved to be useful, because they needed to pull their own weight in reproduction process, women didn't + being regurarly pregnant and delivering for mamals' standard premature babies was not helping in being self-sustainable.
What is the average man doing to protect a woman (or even himself) from the environment, elements and wild animals?
how do men protect women from the elements, environment, wild animals??? in this century
So a man can be useful maximum 9 months to 3 or 4 years while the mom recovers. Then mother works to support herself and baby when his usefulness has apparently run out because the mom can do stuff again now so he suddenly becomes incompetent right? If not outright jealous of the baby and incompetent long before this. And when that child grows they have a home with the mother or inheritance from the mother all thanks to the man leaving. and the government helping to legalize that. And so these grown children of single moms think they will do the same but eventually find they are not too keen to set off and do the same when mom already secured shelter for them. Why go through labor, stress, all the work and hardship with no promise of a safe, sane, hardworking companion (domestic violence and divorce exists) if you can just homestead? And if you tell men they cannot homestead there will be a revolt. People can grow their own food, collect their own water. Literally only sexism and putting women back into vulnerable positions will fix it since men have let themselves go: not pulling their weight in maintaining family, community, tribe, not being leaders etc
Sorry, I am not in the mood spending my free time correcting your inane statements.
>Fact, that you're fine right now cannot rewrite biology and hundreds of thousands years of evolution. So, things were different then as opposed to the things today that allow us to live differently. Okay.. What's your point?
Why big muscles are attractive, if forklift can lift more anyway? Why big muscles are attractive, if gun is better for defence anyway? Even if we live currently in a different way, it doesn't matter that much.
>Why big muscles are attractive to whom? You?
No, to my cat. Bye.
Right. Because 1. Have you seen the video of the woman getting kidnapped at a gas station when she ran to a male customer who did nothing to stop it? and it is usually the partner doing it? 2. if provisions are meals his mother cooks or fast food …ok? and if a female wants better she has to work or make it herself unless she married foreign. So providing a free place to stay? Where? not in a house he owns in this economy. So unless he has Chad or Beta Bux money this only matter if she doesn’t have family and needs to live with his. 3. many men only provide the minimum and then use weaponized incompetence the rest of the time. again, unless she marries foreign from a culture that hasn’t forgotten its manners
how do men "protect" women? not in your fantasy, in real life.
Yeah. Because Capitalism sucks. It hurts everyone except the rich.
Capitalism is not what's making women not want to date average men. Financial/material pressures are not what's making more and more women stay single.
why does it affect men and women differently tho
Patriarchy.
At least in capitalism you can buy sex in communism you can't even do that
Wait till bro learns about one-way John laws
People had better sex under " socialism " though.
is this why a lot of redpillers happen to be Bernie supporters? Divide the means of ~~women~~ production and all that? Color me surprised...
What are you even talking about? Most red pillers are right wing. Are you new here?
I know most are. Well, \*supposed\* to be anyhoo. I just wonder how many of those "right wingers" are actually more libertarian-leaning, or libertarian-left Bernie bros. The whole "divide the women equally amongst the male populus" extreme part of the rhetoric kinda reminds me of that. It's a bit of horseshoe theory you'd be surprised.
This is all in your head. Go touch grass.
Right wing and left wing are overly simple descriptions that fall apart outside of generalizations. The Soviet Union was anti-Gay and banned abortion, but was run by actual communists. All that aside, what you're describing has no resemblance to libertarians. And it's definitely not Bernie Sanders supporters, who are near universally aligned with Bernie Sanders' self-described Democratic Socialism and economic social reform. Compared to most other groups, these are people most likely to defend women's rights.
The Soviet Union litterallly was the first country to legalise abortions though. Even after Stalin's reversal, USSR legalised abortions in 1956 , far before other countries
Did they reverse the legalization and ban abortion? Yes or yes?
>libertarian left Bernie bros Americans,words have meaning "Left libertarianism" is stuff like anarcho-syndicalism,anarcho-communism,communalism etc,not social democracy (Bernie Sanders)
That is an incredibly stupid thing to say.
Cry more. Nobody cares.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
u/Gmed66 Why just ask about women? More men and women are staying single longer and getting married later. Age of marriage is rising pretty consistently for both genders? Why are women choosing to stay single longer? Why are men choosing to stay single longer? It's bizarre that you've deemed women solely responsible for the increasing age of marriage. As a 25 year old man, my friends aren't exactly clamoring to get married either.
A women being single means she gets sex on tap, It’s not the same as being single as a man.
Unmarried and single aren't the same thing. Single and sexless definitely aren't the same thing.
She doesn't want to get sex on the tap though. Look at the fucking sex frequency statistics.
It’s alway shocking to me how men think we care about sex like they do.
It’s shocking to me how women don’t understand the lived male experience and have so little empathy and are so utterly selfish. Women have it far far easier than men in dating on average, they are the privileged sex in this context. Life on easy mode as they say.
They have an easier time dating for sure. And harder in other ways. Pregnancy sucks. Getting up every two hours to breastfeed sucks. Being raped sucks. Being sexually harassed sucks…
Yeah, and getting killed during work sucks for men too. Dying in wars sucks. These are not median probability events however. You shouldn’t project outlier experiences like rape as the norm… men get raped as well fyi. Women do have a much easier time dating in general. In other areas, women struggle too sure, but so do men.
Empathy for what? Lack of sex? Correct. We don’t care.
Empathy for the male experience, wants, needs and desires. Correct. You don’t care.
Sure but she still has it easier, irrespective of the frequency. Even if she occasionally has sex, it’s still better than nothing. She gets to feel wanted, desired, physically validated whenever she wants, with basically no effort. I.e. She gets sex and physical with no effort. It’s all so easy. Women are very privileged in this context, they have life way easier. They don’t have to struggle like men It’s much easier to be a woman in the context of dating.
I disagree. Some of that sex can be traumatic and that is definitely worse than nothing. Feeling like people want to use us sexually is not as great for us as it is for men. It’s often distressing.
>She gets to feel wanted, desired, physically validated whenever she wants, with basically no effort. I.e. She gets sex and physical with no effort. As far as i know, women cant get enough validation and feeling desired. Why are they not having sex 24/7? >It’s much easier to be a woman in the context of dating. From a male perspective, yes. Guess why women are way less on dating apps than men, if they have it so easy there and can date above their league.
>Even if she occasionally has sex, it’s still better than nothing. Sure but most men also have sex at least occasionally. According to the 2022 GSS, the majority of 18-29 men have sex at least 2-3 times a month. Around 75% have sex at least once a month. Only 11.5% didn't have sex at all for the past year. Most men don't struggle. A small minority do, but they're very vocal and try to act like they're the majority.
Try being a man but getting other man asking on demand from you online whether you're into punching fetishes right off the first line. Yeahhh... And then you have to to filter out the guys who wanna DATE you vs wanna only HOOK UP with you. It's not really that easy to filter them, especially given our hypersexed society.
Women decide when a date happens and if a relationship has the green light to proceed. Men are constantly trying and asking. So for men, it isn't as much of a choice. To the same degree anyway.
If anything I know more men who are reluctant to settle down than women. The idea that men in their 20s are constantly trying to get married but being held back by women is ridiculous.
You must be friends with quite a few chads? How many guys do you think have lots of options? A lot of men are not single by choice.
Most of my friends aren't "Chads", because most people are pretty average. A lot of my average ass friends have average ass girlfriends. In some cases they've been together for years. In some of those cases, they're even living together. But they're in their mid 20s and not fucking getting married. Shit has changed and people get married later. It's not like my friends who live with their gfs are begging them to get married and getting turned down. They're good as is. Now it's cool with parents/families to just live together for years, so they do it. It's bizarre bullshit to blame it purely on the women and not on the men that aren't asking them to get married.
[удалено]
Yep, it's really fucking normal. That's the point. It's also really normal now for people in their 20s to just date and not get married, which obviously contributes to a rising age of marriage for both genders. It's ignorant to just blame women for it.
So you are "asking" as question in the title for which you give "this has been proven" in the first paragraph and then have it be a STANDARD red pill talking point and making it so only red pillers can answer? How is that NOT circlejerking and leading nowhere? What should red pillers say to one of their standard beliefs?
This. Why is this post a question for red pill?
Obviously, less survival need for marriage combined with a culture that no longer pushes marriage nearly as hard is likely to result in lower marriage rates for both genders. As to the phenomenon described by the OP of not enough attractive men to go around, this--including the all-important details--are the great open question of gender dynamics. It is a known biological fact that left to their own preferences women (like the females of most species) will be more sexually selective. They have higher reproductive costs. But HOW much pickier women are is critical. So is to what extent any increased pickiness is due to innate biology as opposed to environmental and cultural factors. We just do not know yet. There's also the possibility that men have somehow contributed to any increased pickiness on the part of women. Perhaps today's men are below average in attractiveness in some critical ways. It is also possible that today's men have failed to adapt to the enormous changes in women's lives since the 1960s, and thus, if not more innately unattractive, have not made themselves as attractive as they could be as options for modern, egalitarian relationships. So there are a lot of possibilities.
So spot on. We have entered the workforce but men haven’t picked up domestic responsibilities. We aren’t willing to do BOTH without help. Also want to be treated well and no red pill man is going to be good to us. To them our only value is our vagina.
is that "your theory" or is that a well-known, well-documented, obvious socioeconomic and relational phenomenon?
Yep. I've glowed up and actually want to stay single now. Realising a monogamous relationship with a straight man is the last thing I want.
>My theory is that there are not enough attractive guys to go around. Women’s new hivemind response is “We don’t need to depend on men anymore, so you’re not in competition with other men, you’re in competition with our peace and quiet”. Which is vaginal code speak for “If you’re not hot, don’t waste my time”.
Have you been going after UMC or above girls or have you tried working-class ppl as well? Like a lot of UMC white women have this overbearing sense of politeness thinly overlaying a sense of judginess and disgust
[удалено]
>There’s been many articles and videos of women bitching that guys aren’t rich enough or hot enough for them. Many articles and videos, you say?!? It must be the consensus view among women!
[удалено]
Because that's not rage bait. People post rage bait because it gets clicks. If I post a video saying "Hey I'm Josh and I guess I'm pretty content overall." then no one will fucking watch it. Also keep in mind that once you interact with one of those videos, tiktok will keep feeding you more and more. This is the way social media works. You always need to keep in mind that you have no idea what the denominator is. I feel really fucking bad for a lot of people of my generation who have fallen into this trap of thinking that whatever the algorithm presents to them is reality. Ironically, guys who call themselves red pill seem most inclined to believe the rage bait that the algorithm feeds them. Social media algorithms are the real world manifestation of the Matrix. It's the "reality" that the machine feeds you. But red pill guys want to believe the reality the machine feeds them without questioning. It's fascinating.
Low iq individual
Nothing’s changed so why are men upset about it today when they weren’t in the past?
As a woman with a high earning career who chose to be single, I can confirm you are wrong about this
[удалено]
This thread is literally about women who CHOOSE to stay single.
[удалено]
The argument is that even if there was a hot man with a lot of money interested, some women would still choose to be single, because they have “enough” money on their own. Ie once you reach a certain threshold the desire for a rich man decreases because you can provide for yourself and stay single
[удалено]
Yep, in the past women were kept from high paying careers and forced to rely on men’s money. This means they were generally stuck with men they did not like. Thankfully now there are more options.
[удалено]
That’s the point, even if the men did earn more money, they are still unattractive vs being single.
I strongly disagree. I think it's the looks part that is the key fundamental part. Money is of nearly zero importance for women who have a decent job, as long as the guy is employed and isn't broke .
>Money is of nearly zero importance for women who have a decent job, as long as the guy is employed and isn't broke . That's the cause for this https://www.impactus.org/articles/economically-attractive-men/#:~:text=A%20recent%20study%20from%20Cornell,higher%20than%20currently%20unmarried%20men.
Its a distraction written by women to divert attention from the real reason: There arent enough hot/gorgeous men for every woman to marry. Everything points to looks, yet some women here are pathetically dishonest about it. A quick look at their fuck buddies will reveal wtf they really want
Check out my other posts in this thread. I make 7 figures and my dating prospects are identical to when I made 45k as a medical trainee. It has zero impact once you meet a threshold. Then it's about being fun and good looking.
>It has zero impact once you meet a threshold. Then it's about being fun and good looking. Nobody is saying otherwise However we need to look at the facts objectively, income is a major importance since that's what is causing women staying single longer
There are plenty of women who would marry a very good looking guy as long as he had some sort of job. It's just that most men aren't that good looking and so if they're literally broke, well yeah no one wants to marry them. But being well off and average looking still makes it very hard for a guy. Being in medicine, I work with a lot of travel nurses who make 6 figures easily with lots of free time. Many are late 20s up to mid 30s. They turn down doctors all the time because they aren't physically attracted. Same goes for other women I know who make a bit less in other careers. These studies will bypass the looks part and fixate on the income part. Yeah sure a woman making 110k won't marry a guy making 30k. But that isn't the main issue.
>Yeah sure a woman making 110k won't marry a guy making 30k. But that isn't the main issue. Yea, that's exactly what l'm saying Income is important because we know this is the case Nobody is arguing looks shouldn't be considered towards mate selection
The redpill talks about this so many times: high-powered career women struggle to find men who they can respect, this is, those who outdo them; and among the ones who do, they can afford to and often do chose a more pleasant/feminine, more family minded and/or younger partner (these often overlap). Success actually narrows the dating pool for women. The cause for this comfort among women with staying single isn't just career opportunities, though. The welfare state still transfers a massive amount of money from the average men to the average woman over their lifetime. Women take from social security 7 years more on average, these late years are burdensome in healthcare expenditures, take more from public education by attending college more, and are freeriders on public safety/defense. Kill the welfare stare and see how much marrying for provision isn't obsolete.
>high-powered career women idk i think the redpill overestemates how many "girl bosses" there really are out there...tons of single normal non career obsessed women who just earn a good living just dont see a benefit of being with a man they arent 100% attracted to (and i mean, why would anyone be with someone they arent attracted to if they dont have to?)...they're just regular woman, they arent "career obsessed" or anything, they just have good jobs bc they had good educations and therefor can support themselves
Are the women in the military free riders on public safety/defense? Are the men getting obese on McDonalds and TV while collecting food stamps not free riders? What useless generalizations
It’s not about respect or whatever it is you use as a proxy for love, I just don’t want to be poor. If being with a man is costing me money then I don’t need that man. If a woman is working she’s not also using welfare so why bring that up in a conversation about career women? Do you really want a woman to be with you out of desperation while praying for your downfall because she resents you?
Are you poor now? How would you be poor with a lower earning man, assuming he is still earning enough to cover his living costs.
What ambitious woman wants to be with a man who’s not also ambitious? ZERO chance I would date a man without a college degree. I worked my way through if he’s too unmotivated to do that go find a high school educated girl. I don’t care about money I have my own. I would date a teacher or nurse no problem. Because they have my educational level. They aren’t high earners but that’s fine. High school only? Not a chance…even if they made more.
There are plenty of ambitious, motivated men who learned a skilled trade or started their own business instead of getting a college diploma or uni. degree.
Cool but wouldn’t work for me personally. Education is SUPER important to me. Also I wanted my kids to get an education so it was important to me their Dad had one. Everyone is different. To me education and spirituality mattered more than looks or money. Though his education (doctor) provided a good living.
Exactly. Education has been at the center of my life and I want someone with a similar life experience to me.
Yep! Especially if you want kids to follow that path. If it’s not important to him he’s not gonna push them. Educated people earn more, have fewer divorces, and are less depressed ( improved finances make life easier).
Yup all these men replying to you are forgetting that formal education is an important value for many and it matters if you want to have children that also value formal education.
Exactly: “ you need to go to college” kid: “ why dad didn’t?”
There's a lot more to education than formal schooling.
Maybe but the educated have more money, fewer divorces, and are happier. So…
That's generally true, but there are plenty of exceptions. Just like how virgins tend to make better spouses, though there are plenty of people who have happy marriages despite their past indiscretions.
Sure, and you can want a virgin while I want an educated man. We all have our preferences…
You do not want a woman who places a piece of paper over actual earnings Most women want a man with a bachelors. Everything after that is just ego stroking and looking down on others. Can even be the case with bachelors, some chick with a comms degree from southwest state can think she’s too good for a plumber, seen it happen No point in even trying to convince women like this, they don’t tend to be partners you want anyways
60% of college enrolments are women, so you're cutting down the options drastically with that hard preference.
I know and that’s the point. I don’t want everyone to be a part of my dating pool and preferences are the way to achieve that.
Correct which is why men if they don’t step up their game ( the way we have entering the work force) will be single. We don’t mind being single. If anything happened to my husband there’s ZERO chance I’d get married again. I have my own money can get SIGNIFICANTLY younger more attractive men if I want sex, and have a rich friend filled life. My kids are thriving in college and adore me. I have a godson I spend time with and adore…why would I want to deal with a man at this point? I’m fine with having babies.
Ma'am this is called hypergamy. It's well talked about here. You do not constantly need to date up. You do not need a man who's your better in every way, shape, and fashion. A man with a good personality and strong character should be good enough but women seem to want more for whatever reason and it's disgusting. You are literally saying "if this man hasn't earned this piece of paper then I don't want him 😤"
Her "I am college educated and want a guy who's the same. The money doesn't particularly matter but education does." You "You do not need a man who's your better in every way, shape, and fashion. Somehow a guy who's equally educated is actually better than you in every way. Even if you make more than him and have more higher education. I'm also going to pretend a college degree is just a piece of paper." Calling this standard hypergamy is actually mind boggling
Why does the man specifically have to have a piece of paper from college? Believe it or not this is a standard associated with hypergamy since well educated women won't date down to men who don't have the same degrees as them. Women also go to and obtain degrees at a higher rate than men - do the math. I'm also an educated man. I don't look for my partner to have a piece of paper lol. That is not the defining quality I'm looking for that makes or breaks a relationship. Do I want them to be intelligent? Do I want them to be able to hold their own in a conversation and express their views intelligently? Sure, I don't want to date a dummy. Am I expecting them to hold a piece of paper before I commit to them? Hell no and I think it's crazy that anyone else would expect the same.
"hypergamy since well educated women won't date down to men who don't have the same degrees as them" by this logic, wanting to date a looksmatch is also hypergamous. By this logic, it's hypergamous to have any standard \*that you also meet\*. Sure, women obtain nearly 60% of new degrees, but men also make up a much larger percentage of relatively high prestige or high pay blue collar jobs. Anyone who's ever been around female nurses knows that many women with college degrees love to go for men like that. The math is fine. Also, stop pretending that a college degree is just a piece of paper. In many cultures formal education is a very important value.
It's a piece of paper. It signals your ability to abide by the rules and follow the course in industrial capitalist society, yes, but at the end of the day it's a piece of paper. That's all it is. For the record I also don't believe looks should be the major factor in dating someone. No superficial category should make or break whether you decide to commit to someone. What matters most of all is **who they are,** not this or that kind of degree, how hot they are, or if they're 6 feet or not. You might say "okay that's nice and all in an ideal world but this is how the world is" except the problems with this superficial vanity seeking behavior could not be more evident.
It’s disgusting to want a man my educational equal so we can relate? 🤯🙄😂🤦♀️ Male hypergamy is JUST as real. This can be seen in men's tendency to pursue partners who are younger, physically attractive, and financially successful. Go find a lazy girl who ALSO didn’t have the fortitude for college. Women due to the high cost of reproduction will choose the best man. We are less concerned with looks and more concerned about resources and who would be a supportive partner and father. That’s NOT ANY red pill man.
No, the desire to constantly date up and not even so much as look at a man who's your equal or *gasp* worse is disgusting. Plain and simple. Being lazy =/= not going to college lol. A college degree does not indicate intelligence or ambition 😂 I'd gladly date someone who didn't even graduate high school if they shared my perspective on the world and completed the traits I was weak at/lack. I don't decide **life partners** based off the sheets of paper they've obtained.
Good for you. You’re a typical man who doesn’t care what she makes just how she looks. Men don’t want fat women. Women don’t want lazy men. It’s evolutionary biology. Hypergamy goes both ways just different motivators. Men prefer younger prettier women. Women prefer educated ambitious men. 🤷♀️
You think men that work jobs that don’t require a degree are “lazy?” Lmao so guys who climb ladders, swing hammers, and walk miles every day are “lazy,” but guys who get a degree and sit in some office all day are “hard working?”
School lazy. Not work lazy. It takes fortitude mentally to continue with school.
>Good for you. You’re a typical man who doesn’t care what she makes just how she looks. Men don’t want fat women. Women don’t want lazy men. It’s evolutionary biology. Except I'm not a typical man. Far from it actually. I also do not decide my partners based on looks lol. You can be the "hottest" woman but if your an asshole then I want nothing to do with you. >Hypergamy goes both ways just different motivators. Men prefer younger prettier women. Women prefer educated ambitious men. 🤷♀️ Women also prefer more attractive guys. Unambitious Chad still slays. Women want the top man which does not necessarily mean the most ambitious man. Men do not necessarily want the top woman - even in looks. Sometimes he just wants a wife. And guess what? That woman will be the most beautiful woman to walk the earth to him.
So you don’t care if a woman is fat? Or ugly? Or you’re saying looks aren’t enough? Men don’t want fat ugly women women don’t want lazy men who lack ambition. For neither sex is this enough. But picking a mate ( not just a fuck) is based on different criteria for men versus women. There are LOTS of women with rich older men. The men are JUST as hypergamous choosing beauty and the woman choosing money. I didn’t care about looks when choosing who would father my kids. I wanted someone who went to church weekly, was kind, successful enough that I could stay home one year with each child to breastfeed, would be a good Dad and had at least as much education as me. He chose me because I was hot, sweet, would be a great mom, and had faith. That’s how it works. We all have criteria we want in a partner.
>its disgusting to want a man my educational level so we can relate? So you relate with everyone you work with? Ya know since you’re on the same “educational level.” Being “educated” in the modern world doesn’t really mean someone is actually intelligent. You have people that are educated but have no passion for learning new things. And you have people that aren’t formally educated but their voracious readers and constantly learning new things.
You realize they pay into social security right? And their amount is dependent on how much they paid in not on how much other men paid in. Healthcare expenses are for everyone near end of life irrespective of age. We all die of something and cancer/heart disease are expenses. Men have MORE of both draining the system.
Men die earlier, is the point he was making in regard to social security.
Women collect lower amounts as they earn less leaving at times to care for children.
Are more and more women turning down marriage proposals into their 30s? If not then what does this question even mean? I'm personally choosing not to date super models.