About “women delaying marriage”.

Recently the Christian manosphere has decided to blame women for the very high ages for first marriage.  They do this every few months, here’s a roundup of the latest with commentary afterwards.

Shorter Dalrock: Doug Wilson thinks lazy manbabies are keeping sweet Christian women from getting married at 22!  Joke’s on him, there are no Godly Christian women!  Churchian Carousel Bandits are keeping SUPER NICE TOTALLY MATURE AND GREAT CHRISTIAN GUYS WHO TOTALLY ARE MATURE AND STUFF from getting married at 22!  Additional Dalrock supplement to above, same premise.

Shorter Donalgraeme: I’m going to assert that later marriage is all womens’ fault and I assure you I will back it up with data at some unspecified point in the future.  But in the meantime, since most of my commenters agree with me, IT MUST BE TROOOOOOOO.

Shorter Moosenorseman: If women would just act more like dogs (amiriteboyz), there wouldn’t be a marriage crisis!

Anyway, the marriage issue is not solely the fault of naughty women and their hypergamy.  The evangelicals marrying young delay childbearing 5-10 years.  So they nominally marry early but then have kids late just like the people who delay marriage into their late 20s and early 30s.  This masks a lot of the manbaby stuff as well as the carousel issue.  Men are being more immature on average, and also in addition, women behave poorly and are immature and unrealistic as well.  Both pieces are true, not just one side of it.

And because childbearing happens at the same late 20s and early 30s point in time for most births these days, a lot of women figure that there’s no point in marrying young since they couldn’t have the kids right away anyhow.

We’re back to real vs. imaginary status again.  You get nothing marrying young and having kids right away except a lot of hassle and headache from people around you for being foolish with your childrens’ futures.  Marry young but hold off a few years, and suddenly things are fine, you were prepared.   Suddenly you might be worthy of a tuition check or ten from one set of grandparents.

Our kids are going into private school and every single one goes on at length about how you might want to hit up gramma and grandpa for that cash.  But of course, you also can’t have eight kids that way either, maybe not even four or three.

There is a lot of blaming women and parents (by which we mean MOM) for later marriage and childbearing, but basic needs are increasingly impossible to meet for people having kids right now at young ages.  This is why even single mothers overwhelmingly have a kid, not kids plural.

And as I already linked, there are Christians marrying before 25, you just have to admit that this is where the husbands and wives are (for Protestants anyhow). But for some reason, going where the young marriage is happening in America is not something any of these folks want to do….

ETA: commenter “thedeti” is going to spam now (1pm EST), so don’t reply to him if any get through.

Advertisements

191 thoughts on “About “women delaying marriage”.”

  1. Spot on about the numbers of young married delaying kids.

    With the exception of couples whose pending bundles of joy led them to the altar in the first place, every newlywed couple we know with a bride under 25 has put kids off for an unspecified amount of time while they get their ducks in a row. Every. single. one.

    So the whole point about young marriage as a way for a woman to maximize fertility at the best possible age is moot. Because the husbands don’t even want to have kids right away. We know a couple of brides who want babies but the husband is saying “not yet”. And these are devout Christian men, not secularists.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Elspeth said:

      “Because the husbands don’t even want to have kids right away. We know a couple of brides who want babies but the husband is saying “not yet”.”

      Yeah.

      By the way–about the Donal Graeme thread. It’s perfectly sensible not to be in a hurry to throw your daughters into the online dating shark tank.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Husband has in depth knowledge one would rather not have about the kinds of things “normal people” do online. He is wary of going there right away. People’s declarations of religious devotion don’t move him either.

        In a bit more time if it comes to that, he’ll see. But he doesn’t view it as a first option.

        By the way Maea, when you see this, thanks for sparing me the need to clarify further over on that other thread.

        If there’s one thing I can coach my girls on it’s how to do what they need to without full on sexual aggressiveness. Like you though, I thought it sounded as if more was being suggested.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. You’ve conflated what was said and the reason behind it.

      The whole point of young marriage is start building for a family, just because that takes longer than she wants doesn’t make him wrong for doing it.

      There’s also another solution: Date and marry an older man who has life’s ducks more in a row. A 23yo woman marrying a 29yo man is the way the world used to be.

      Like

      1. No the historical marriage data supports a 2-3 year age gap, guy older, not a 5+ one. I.e., the age gaps haven’t narrowed over time, just the timing of when marriage and kids happen. As for the first bit, sometimes both parties are on board the waiting, which is what happens when marriage is strongly assortative as it is these days.

        Like

      2. No, it’s not. Marriage in the Middle Ages wasn’t like this unless people were aristocracy or very wealthy; marriage wasn’t like this in early U.S. colonialism, and it wasn’t like this turn of the 20th century. The 1950’s was also an anomaly because men married even younger. A 5 year age gap was not typical.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. Well, I’ve seen in our IRL social circles men delaying kids because they want to play more even though they’re married now, and I’ve seen men delaying kids because they wanted some degree of financial security/protection before going into baby-having. Or saving up so mom can stay home a year or two with infant(s).

      The larger point there being, I agree that it’s not strictly women who are putting brakes on, whether the exact reasons are frivolous or serious.

      Like

      1. TPC said:

        “Well, I’ve seen in our IRL social circles men delaying kids because they want to play more even though they’re married now, and I’ve seen men delaying kids because they wanted some degree of financial security/protection before going into baby-having. Or saving up so mom can stay home a year or two with infant(s).”

        I think the desire to provide an SAHM for at least a few years is an unappreciated driver for later marriage and child-bearing.

        Middle class/upper middle class families also value being able to cut down mom’s hours so that school-age children are appropriately monitored and managed.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. The complaint is “women are driving the delay.” My response is, so what? Yes women are putting brakes on it but now that we all know it, what can we do about it? I’m not sure we can fix anything for a generation.

        Like

        1. I guess my response is “men are driving it too,” since I see more of that. I guess I think it’s a blended thing where men and women’s reasons may not match up perfectly, but the net result is waiting a long time.

          I only hope it’s a mere generation before things are significantly better.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. If you say men are driving it too, they’ll just say it’s because women made them (sighs). With this issue, it will always be womens’ fault.

            Liked by 1 person

              1. Stating that men are responding and reacting is not the same thing as “blaming” or that “women made them” do it.

                Men are noting, seeing, and identifying market conditions, and acting accordingly.

                That’s not “blaming” or saying “women made them do it”.

                Like

                1. A guy who wants to play more xbox and view more porn is hardly “responding and reacting” to his virgin bride regarding delays in child-bearing. He’s driving that delay, and there’s no shortage of that kind of delay. And yeah, I’m talking about married Christian men who married before 25 but kids took longer to show up and that kind of manbabyitis was a driver. Note, they did marry young, to virgins or brides who were with them before the wedding night.

                  A guy who wants to save up money so wifey can stay home is also not “responding and reacting”, he’s *gasp* leading. So men driving it can be ugly and sad or perfectly sensible and has jack to do with “market conditions” since both are already married to each other.

                  Like

                  1. You’re lying or grossly misinformed. Men who had the presence of mind to marry before age 25 are hardly wasting time watching porn or playing video games. And in the few instances of such married men, why did these women marry them? Looks like poor vetting to me.

                    Like

                    1. No, I’m going off what the men themselves said on these matters. It’s a big problem in Christian circles with young couples. And lol at how you blame the virgin Christian chicks for the porn and xbox habits of their husbands. Pavlovian again.

                      They marry right after college because they come from subcultures where that’s what you do right after college, it doesn’t require presence of mind. You should read the data showing that evangelical Christians do manage to marry before 25 before spouting off.

                      Like

                    2. Here’s something you see a lot around the manosphere:

                      “Women need to marry before 25! She has the pick of the best possible men at that age!”

                      And then whenever a woman marries before 25 and it goes badly for her, “Poor vetting!”

                      She’s supposed to marry very young and do so with the wisdom of Solomon, even though life experience is almost indispensable in learning how to read people and figure out whether or not to take them at face value. Let us not forget, the Christian manosphere’s female ideal is a young woman with no life experience whatsoever.

                      And with regard to porn and huge video game habits–that’s exactly the sort of thing that you don’t discover if you don’t cohabitate before marriage. Sad but true. It’s very easy to hide that sort of thing when your sweetie isn’t around 24/7.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    3. It’s also something a woman raised to not be pushy and assertive and dig around in her husband’s side of the closet will miss. You know, someone unobtrusive and respectfully submissive. It’s funny how the women who act the right way in manosphere terms still can’t get it right if their behavior doesn’t somehow *make* the guy not sin in x particular way.

                      Like

  2. “Because the husbands don’t even want to have kids right away. We know a couple of brides who want babies but the husband is saying “not yet”. And these are devout Christian men, not secularists.”

    But wait this still most be the woman’s fault. She clearly must not be respecting him. 🙂

    Liked by 3 people

  3. TPC said:

    “The evangelicals marrying young delay childbearing 5-10 years. So they nominally marry early but then have kids late just like the people who delay marriage into their late 20s and early 30s.”

    Right. My husband and I are super duper Catholic, but that was us, too.

    And even though we waited until my husband had an actual job-job, I had absorbed a lot of the Catholic happy talk about “you too can raise a large family on nothing!”, so I definitely didn’t hit the brakes hard enough on finances when we started having kids. As with a lot of new SAHMs, I didn’t realize how poor we were or how hard we would need to cut back lifestyle to ever be able to afford a house. My oldest was 4 or 5 before that really had sunk in, by which time there was a bit of a mess (fortunately not a huge one) to clean up. At that point, we were six years away from being able to buy our first home (and that was six years of serious debt repayment and serious saving). We had celebrated our 15th anniversary before we signed the papers on our first house.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Here’s a crazy thought:

      How about having churches run “SAHM U” for aspiring SAHMs?

      The session I would run would be entitled: “You’re poor now–get used to it.”

      Liked by 2 people

  4. We married young and had kids right away. Our oldest child married young and had kids right away, too. It’s been good, it’s a good thing. I’m glad we didn’t wait.

    That said however, some of these ‘spherians seem to be wallowing in the first 50 years of their perpetual childhood, so if women really were the ones delaying marriage, I can’t see how that would be anything but a wise choice. Those aren’t men, those are wounded man-children and a relationship with many of them would be doomed to misery and failure. First rule of dating, don’t ever go near a man who blames women for everything. That is like being unequally yoked with the stoopid.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. We married young and had kids right away too. Like 6 months after the wedding. Then again 12 months after that. Never regretted it but boy were there some lean, lean years that first decade. Built character and bound us together.

    But the economic landscape is different now.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Count us in on the get married young and have babies five years later group. Works well, honestly. Gives you some time to settle economically and learn to pull as a team before you add weight to the cart.

    Both members of the couple would have to be completely down for a counter-cultural life to make babies immediately happen – and prepared for that, financially in the man’s part and emotionally in the woman’s. (Count my husband firmly in the “we aren’t having babies until we have a house of our own” club – and then imagine how very, very motivated I was to job switch and climb the corporate ladder to make that happen asap. My total absence of any corporate loyalty always bugged him).

    That said, the young moms I know have enviable energy for the smallest people. If we restructured society so that was possible, it would be good to have babies much younger. But I don’t think that’s where you start with recreating traditional society. Infrastructure first (at least in part) then add participants and flush out the infrastructure as you find out what’s truly needed. Isn’t that how these things work best?

    PS “completely unsuitable” is not the same as “has some flaws”. Humans are flawed.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. and prepared for that, financially in the man’s part and emotionally in the woman’s.

    You know, my hubs provided well for us and we -for the most part- got on really well. It just took us nearly 8 years to save enough to buy a house because we had 3 mouths to feed.

    We look back on those years pretty fondly, as do our children. Of course, we were never poverty stricken either and were young enough that it didn’t take much for us to have a god time.

    I think too many people have sticks up their butts, frankly. a large part of weathering the ups and downs of marriage is not taking yourself too seriously, which is another reason to do it young.

    But what TPC said is true, there are some serious issues with both sexes (not to mention the parents while we’re at it and not just mom) pushing up the age of marriage.

    We live in a sucky culture.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You know, my hubs provided well for us and we -for the most part- got on really well. It just took us nearly 8 years to save enough to buy a house because we had 3 mouths to feed.

      A lot of people experience this reality, and it strikes me as surprising to see how it isn’t acknowledged much. It’s placing a lot of pressure on the wife, but a ton of financial pressure on husbands to 1. already have a well paying job 2. KEEP his job in this economic climate 3. continue to manage the financial demands with each successive child.

      Let’s just say we have a couple where wife quits her job and husband keeps his after wife gets pregnant. In today’s economy, the idea of “job security” is like believing the magical pie from the sky will fall into your lap granting your every desire. In 2008, we saw the results of a “mancession,” and men today continue to experience the financial upheavals from job losses, pay cuts, or “move here or no job.”

      It’s not 1989 anymore, or 1995. My dad was able to provide for a family of 5 in ’89 making less than 40K living on the east coast. Is that still possible?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. People do it, but fewer and fewer. Or to put it another way, a heat map of where the 5+ households are (2 parents and three or more kids and other folks) would not feature much of NYC or other major east coast hubs even though lower-income families are there in pretty big numbers due to fairly generous welfare systems. They aren’t having three kids on that 40k plus housing voucher and medicaid though.

        Like

        1. They aren’t having three kids on that 40k plus housing voucher and medicaid though.

          If they did, we’d hear howling about how irresponsible they are and taxpayers are suckers.

          Like

  8. Why is there always talk about how women pursuing a degree or graduate school is a strong driver behind delayed marriage when the MAJORITY don’t do it? Of course, who cares about the other women not going to college who are available for marriage. Maybe it’s damn hot chicks being so picky.

    I think a lot of the men need to admit there’s a level of hypergamous behavior on their part, too. Of course women have been hypergamous, and it was historically expected for high-quality women to be well-educated, have nice dowries, status, etc. What, did these guys really think the parents of those women just handed them out, too? Nothing has changed.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Yet, Lydia nearly shamed the family with her impetuous behavior and Wickham wasn’t any more honorable.

        Yes…that’s the kind of daughter you all should be raising.

        Liked by 1 person

      1. TPC said:

        “Also, I know you guys don’t forget this, but a lot of other folks forget that median does mean plenty of people (half, go figure!) are marrying below those numbers for first marriages.”

        Right.

        I’m especially struck by the WA DC number: 29.8 for women. That is ground zero for highly ambitious, highly driven, highly educated workaholic women and it’s a very high cost-of-living area and it’s the highest median given for the country–and yet half of them are successfully marrying before 30.

        The other thing to point out (which I feel like the manosphere doesn’t quite get) is that it takes a lot of lead time to get married. Texas women aren’t waking up one day at 25.7 and dragging the closest warm male body to the Justice of the Peace. There’s a certain amount of time for engagement and a certain amount of time for the dating leading up to engagement. I’m not sure exactly how much lead time we’re talking about, but it definitely gets us well before the famous “wall” that we’ve all heard about in the lower-age states–unless “the wall” strikes at 24?

        Also, come to think of it, isn’t it interesting that “the wall” operates at different ages in different states with different costs of living? It’s almost as though it’s driven more by cost of living, rather than women’s panic at their fading looks…

        Nah, that’s crazy talk.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. I just noticed something funny at the end of the Donal Graeme thread.

    Donal Graeme said:

    “Delay only reduces its effectiveness. I say this because I see tons of women who adopted that attitude, and it isn’t working so hot for them right now. I’ve dabbled in online dating myself, and there are tons of 30+ women on who have had profiles for a while. Not so much for the women in their early to mid twenties (or even younger).”

    “The younger women are when they try out online dating, the more success they will find. Period. They will have access to a larger pool of men, and be seen as more desirable.”

    I’ve read a lot of discussion about women’s online dating experiences, and I have an alternate theory to propose for the disappearance of early to mid twenties women from the sites. From what I’ve heard, a lot of them get so overwhelmed with the volume of junk replies they get (totally non-specific, lazy spammed approaches like “hi”) and/or repulsed by the grossness of the overtures, so they just pull the plug on their accounts and leave. Their disappearance does not necessarily signal that a successful match has occurred.

    The “easiness” of online dating for women is a bit of a myth.

    That said, online dating does seem to help a lot of wallflowers find each other who otherwise wouldn’t.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It’s a complete myth. Women do meet guys they marry online, but not necessarily through explicitly labeled dating sites. It’s more typical to meet someone online from a forum or shared hobby website or old friends you only “see” on facebook mention that they know someone. Basically the online version of taking cooking classes or rock climbing or friends, but technically, sure “we met online”.

      Like

      1. TPC said:

        “Women do meet guys they marry online, but not necessarily through explicitly labeled dating sites.”

        I know of at least two examples (Ann Althouse and Dorothy Cummings McLean) of female bloggers who married male readers/commentors. And both women were of a certain age when they met their admirers. (I have heard that there are some examples of stay-at-home-daughters meeting and marrying through their own blogs, but I don’t know of any personally.)

        This suggests to me that any single manosphere guys who ban female commentors are shooting themselves in the foot.

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Well, I wouldn’t want to be judged by my worst day on the internet…

            I think that a lot of the single guys are very young and socially inexperienced. This may just be a temporary phase that they’ll grow out of with more life experience.

            But no, I wouldn’t want my daughter to end up with a manosphere guy. A few reasons:

            1) failure to understand what exactly he is asking for (example: the long hair thing–I don’t think they get that there is about an hour a day of maintenance involved)
            2) failure to understand household economics
            3) failure to understand the job description of the contemporary SAHM
            4) lack of gratitude
            5) lack of generosity
            6) a conscious desire to manipulate
            7) lack of empathy
            8) lack of respect for either women or children as individuals

            Liked by 2 people

              1. Maeve said:

                “9) they’re not so much interested in putting a ring on their bride’s finger as they they want a choke collar around her neck.”

                That’s true, funny and terrifying.

                Like

                1. It’s not true. They’d like a woman they can trust to go with them where he’s decided they need to go. A woman who has to be managed with “a choke collar” (which never happens, because it’s illegal and any man doing so would be imprisoned immediately) isn’t worth the effort and is not a “high value” woman at all.

                  Like

                  1. Nope – I think it is true, Deti. And furthermore, I think they can’t wait for said opportunity.

                    There’s no “we” in their view of marriage – only “I” plus a bunch of satellites. It’s a sad and bleak view of something that should be profoundly wonderful. Two people getting married aren’t supposed to simply “stay themselves”; nor it is supposed to be where “she” is subsumed into “him”; rather, together, they’re supposed to become something new and beautiful and wonderful – they’re supposed to become “us”.

                    Also – you’re a smart man – you know I was being completely hyperbolic with the whole choke collar thing.

                    Like

                    1. I know you were being hyperbolic. It’s still illegal and any man doing this, even symbolically, would be frogmarched out of his own house. Any man doing anything to restrict anything his wife does is not legal and would be severely punished, and we all know this.

                      No, there is no “I plus a bunch of satellites” in the Christomanosphere view of marriage. There is only Eph. 5, and 1 Peter 3, which require her to respect and submit to her husband in all things; and require the husband to love her as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for Her. That is all that’s being asked.

                      It seems the request for “respect” is being glossed over with accusations against Christian men that they cannot or will not “love”. There’s a reason “respect” is mentioned first in Eph. 5. Consider that well.

                      Like

                    2. Look, Deti. you will NEVER hear an argument from me that husbands should not expect and do not deserve respect, love, devotion, and constancy from their wives. NEVER.

                      I just happen to think wives deserve the same from their husbands.

                      Like

                    3. Does a wife deserve biblical respect and submission from her husband? Is a husband required to submit to his wife as that term is used in Eph 5 and 1 Pet 3?

                      Respect as a human being, yes. Submission and deference, no.

                      Men in the Christomanosphere are not disrespecting women as somehow “less than human”, Moose’s analogy notwithstanding.

                      Like

                    4. Well, Deti, I rather saw it as “get on board with your man and stay there”. And I don’t how that conflicts with any of the attitudes I mentioned earlier.

                      At some point it seems only right that both parties understand that they’re equally necessary (in very different ways) to success of the marriage or mission or whatever you want to call it. Ideally, they hash out together the “who what when where why & how” details – and this maybe is the sticking point. I see it as something they both do TOGETHER; not as something HE determines all by himself and then lays out “and that’s how it’s going to be.”

                      Like

                    5. “At some point it seems only right that both parties understand that they’re equally necessary (in very different ways) to success of the marriage or mission or whatever you want to call it”

                      None of that requires him to biblically “respect”, submit to or defer to her as those terms are used/defined in Eph. 5 or 1 Peter 3.

                      Like

                    6. Further, most men are not going to micromanage the marital “vision”. Any man worth his salt who marries a high value, capable Christian woman is not going to stand over her shoulder telling her who what when where why and how. He has more important things to do. And if he has to do this with his woman, then he’s not a high value capable man; and she’s not a high value capable woman.

                      Like

                    7. Maeve said:

                      “I see it as something they both do TOGETHER; not as something HE determines all by himself and then lays out “and that’s how it’s going to be.””

                      Right.

                      Like

                    8. thedeti said:

                      “Further, most men are not going to micromanage the marital “vision”. Any man worth his salt who marries a high value, capable Christian woman is not going to stand over her shoulder telling her who what when where why and how. He has more important things to do. And if he has to do this with his woman, then he’s not a high value capable man; and she’s not a high value capable woman.”

                      I suspect that the number of aspiring micromanagers is very high percentage-wise in the manosphere.

                      Like

                  2. You’re lying. There are numerous examples of men abusing their wives and not immediately being put in jail for it. One of the major complaints among domestic violence activists is that the laws work great for divorce-bandits lying about abuse, but are terrible for women actually being beaten or choke-collared. Similarly with CPS– it’s hard to bring the law to bear against people who have no fear of the law. So middle class people who let their kids check the mail across the street have CPS woes, but not two drug addicts selling their children to their dealer.

                    Like

              1. Back in the day, I used to wear curlers to bed. The whole cycle of putting in the curlers, taking the curlers out, brushing the curls, using a curling iron, and spraying it into place took easily an hour of work every time I did it.

                It was very pretty!

                I should probably do it again occasionally, but I’ve got inhibitions about wearing curlers to bed with my husband.

                Like

              2. Hearthie, the hair thing probably depends largely on the thickness. I have thick hair and long hair did involve at least 15 minutes of brushing twice a day, or else it matted. Also, these days most (white) Americans are raised to wash their hair daily for some bizarre reason, so that’s at least another 30 minutes. Myself, I recently cut my hair to shoulder length. Luckily I was wise enough to never touch a manospherian with a ten-foot pole so I somehow remain undivorced.

                It’s not just the time involved though, it’s the fact that young children tend to grab said long hair as soon as it’s loose for five minutes, and so you end up wearing it in a ponytail all the time anyway, and so it might as well be shorter… but to know stuff like this one would actually have to have come in contact with women and children now and again rather than opining on the world expertly from one’s computer chair, and we all know who’s not doing that.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. My hair has varied between waist and hip length with one brief foray into “I keep sitting on it” since my firstborn was 2 – so I know this. 🙂 But yes, thickness has a huge amount to do with this, and what you DO with it. I wash it every other day, and I brush it. That’s all. I don’t blow dry. It’s fine – not baby fine, but it’s light, doesn’t hurt when I put it up. Keeping it nice (for me) takes very little time. But – YMMV. And my mom really does expect me to brush it 100 strokes (per side!) before bed every night. Her hair, treated properly, shone… of course she cut her hair when I was a toddler because she had a hour long routine every-other-day to keep it like that. (My hair would probably grow another foot without getting trashed if I did that too, but I don’t).

                  I have wide shoulders/short neck, so I look incredibly bad with hair between chin and shoulderblades, so that affects my decision.

                  Like

            1. There are some women cosigning manosphere nonsense online who might make suitable wives for men like this. At least they’d know what they are getting into.

              Like

      2. I think the hype behind online dating is to just get people to meet people, but it may or may not produce permanent relationships. A lot of people use online sites, especially niche sites, because they’re too busy to go out and socialize (sounds rather sad tbh) or because they need a centralized pool of their niche potentials. I do think for some people, getting a date off a site is a confidence booster making it easier for them to get dates from in person interactions. I’m sharing what others have told me.

        For niche sites, there’s shaadi, christianmingle, and catholicmatch. I met a woman who met her husband through blackplanet, which isn’t a dating site but a forum, like you mentioned.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I know people who have done well with online marriage partners, but they were common-interest partners. Who’s logging into their WoW account? -rolls on floor laughing- But seriously, that’s where they met. Nothing like slaying a few dragons together.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. I noticed the word “wallflower.” I wonder– are the majority of people wallflowers? I always thought wallflowers were a smaller minority. Are the majority of dating Christians wallflowers?

      Like

  10. Attention mothers:

    There has been a new helpful addition to the Donal Graeme thread.

    You need to:

    1. keep your daughters chaste

    2. make sure you’re not “sheltering, coddling and overprotecting her”

    It is super easy to do both, so no complaining!

    Make appropriate changes to your copy of the MOM MANUAL.

    Thank you for your attention!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Maybe he wants you to let your daughter date, but while wearing a chastity belt. LOL.

      Chastity comes from the morals that you instill when they are young. I went away to college, I dated a lot looking for a husband and my husband is the only man that I’ve slept with. My parent’s didn’t “keep me chaste.” I decided.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I didn’t say parents have to “keep their daughters chaste”. I was describing in part a chaste woman as a characteristic of her high value. It’s not easy to remain chaste. But in today’s society, a woman has total control over whether she has sex and who she has sex with. She is the ONLY one who decides when she has sex and who she has it with — even as a married woman.

        Like

        1. LOL. Just lol. You don’t hang around many married folks if you think that. I’m surrounded by middle class white married people who would also LOL at the idea that the wife is the only one who decides when sexin’ happens.

          Like

  11. My husband and I got married before 25 and had children shortly after marriage, but it took a lot to make that happen. We graduated with no student loan debt thanks to parents and scholarships. We both found jobs that paid well quickly and were able to save up for a house down payment and emergency fund quickly. Dh’s income increased so that we could afford a home in a nice area on his salary alone which let me to stay home when I got pregnant.

    Most people will delay childbirth until they are financially ready because it is a responsible thing to do.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. “If women would just act more like dogs (amiriteboyz), there wouldn’t be a marriage crisis!”

    Which isn’t what Moose said.

    The point is that the woman in the story (Moose’s wife) actually acted a bit like she kinda, you know, wanted to be with him. She went with him where he went. She SHOWED her interest IN HIM, TO HIM.

    “Not that she was obnoxious or pushy. She just showed up, quietly and unobtrusively, wherever I was. I talked to her briefly once, and then started walking away.

    “She went with me.”

    Would that more women might actually show some interest in actually being with these men they claim to want.

    Like

    1. From that blog post –
      I remember commenting soon after I met her that I felt like I had been adopted by a stray dog.

      If my husband said this about me I would be so ashamed. Reading that blog post gave me second hand embarrassment for his wife. There are ways to show that you are interested in a man without following him like a puppy or kindasortastalkinghim.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Maybe she actually, you know, kinda sorta liked him.

        But at the donal thread, we’re told that doing things like this:

        –asking a man out for a date

        –taking him food and drink

        –asking a guy to dance

        Are all “too forward” and are “taking the lead”.

        If you women want high value Christian men, you’re going to have to go out there and find them and demonstrate interest in an unmistakable, clear-as-day manner.

        Like

        1. It doesn’t seem to have worked out very well for the wife in question. She is being publicly compared to a filthy stray dog. If pursuing a man gets you a marriage where you are thought of as a stray animal that he took in, then no thank you. .

          Liked by 2 people

          1. It’s a comparison, an analogy. That you’re not comprehending the analogy doesn’t seem to speak well of you.

            The dog demonstrated his respect and admiration, and is well loved and cared for.

            The wife demonstrated her respect and admiration, and is well loved and cared for.

            The dog is a dog.

            The wife is a human being, who is treated as in Eph. 5 and 1 Peter 3.

            Sorry you don’t understand the analogy.

            Like

            1. So because I think that the dog analogy is insulting to his wife, I must not comprehend it? LOL. No, this – “I remember commenting soon after I met her that I felt like I had been adopted by a stray dog,” is not how I’d like to be thought of. There are plenty of ways that he could’ve chosen to describe loyalty or respect and admiration. He chose stray dog.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. Again – it’s too bad that you don’t see how much Moose loves and cares about his wife from the analogy he used.

                He loves and cares for that woman immensely, because she showed how much she wanted him and respected him and cared about him. Her desire for him, her respect for him and her concern for him and his well-being are all he has ever wanted. And she was and is willing to give it to him. He would do anything for her, give anything for her, and love her until one of them is dead, all because she desires him, respects him and is concerned for him.

                That you cannot understand the heart of a man like this is just…. wow. Just… wow.

                I understood perfectly and exactly what he was saying. And I’ve never had a dog.

                Like

                1. That you cannot comprehend that there are husbands who love and protect and cherish their wives without likening them to dogs, that you think a man must be like ol’ moosey and there’s no other way to go on the love/cherish/protect front is way more wowjustwow.

                  Like

            2. So, let me get this straight — we are human beings, yet people can keep calling us bitches. Ahem — a bitch, properly so called, is a female dog. And, quite frankly, I’m sick of being treated as a dog.

              I would rather amend this to say that the wife is loved and cared for AS LONG AS she demonstrates respect and admiration, and usually this means that she had better keep up the pace. Let her show that she’s a human being with her own faults and foibles, let her falter in trying to get the perfect holiday meal on the table that will make her husband think he’s been transported back to his grandmother’s table, let her have a grueling day trying to jam some algebra into her oldest’s head (who is not being rebellious, he just is stuck and neither of them have a clue how to proceed), plus teach the kindergartener how to read, and consequently dinner is either not on the table or warmed-up leftovers……oh, boy, just watch what happens. Let you come home from church, happy and content, and suddenly the roof falls in, and you have absolutely no clue as to why……because apparently *something* was said in the sermon and it *obviously* was geared personally to him and his parenting skills; and suddenly this is your fault and you have no idea why.

              I’m sick of being a dog, if that’s what I am. I’d far rather be considered a rational human being with a brain and something to contribute, rather than simply an animal expected to show unconditional admiration to someone and think they’re always the greatest. I was able to do that for a season of my marriage until I realized I was pretending things didn’t happen that did, brushing things under the rug, and hanging my head apologizing for things I didn’t do and wasn’t responsible for. Nope. Not doing it again.

              On the getting married and having kids right away…..we did that. I became pregnant on our honeymoon, and promptly ended up with hyperemesis gravidarium, made famous by Kate Middleton, only I didn’t get the same kind of attention lavished on me. I just had to suck it up and hope I could survive. I gave birth to a premature son, I had no milk to nurse him and had to bottlefeed from the start. I had six children in ten years. I have six grade levels to teach this year and I am solely responsible for their education, plus any extracurriculars (each plays one instrument and one sport; their music and P.E.). Additionally, I have all other traditional responsibilities of a wife and mother. Training your children to help you is an arduous task that requires loads of patience, loads of time and loads of effort…..not as simple as some would expect. The friends I have are in about the same boat as I. This is no bed of roses. I would never trade it for anything, but those who act like it’s no big deal should try it for a day, in addition to working full-time. I know more than one mother in this situation who additionally works part-time (these are people who are usually chastised on other blogs for earning money, even though it often is the stopgap between paying a bill and having the water turned off).

              Not to mention the fact that “scholarships” and “good colleges” are words that frequently float about here — words which always give me a knot in my stomach because it drives the point home what I’m expected to do. And, quite frankly, that’s something I don’t think I can do.

              Like

              1. St. Thomas More Academy,

                Please consider the source. Commenter “thedeti” was spammed a while ago in this thread because of his hostile views based in unreality and his refusal to consider points that contradict his own.

                He hangs around, like a barnacle on a ship, all the manure-sphere sites and joins in their chorus of “WOMEN BAD, MEN VICTIMS.” If anything, his comments are not a reflection on reality, but the mental prisons he and his ilk have willingly thrown themselves in.

                My “advice,” if you could call it that is 1.) don’t listen to those who won’t/can’t support you 2.) don’t be ashamed to ask for help–you know exactly the limits of your capabilities and 3.) trust in God, in Him all things are possible.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. Hi Aelthelfrith,

                  Nice to meet you. Yes, I’ve had experiences with “thedeti” before, in fact stretching over just over a year. Of course, what’s even more amusing is that he’s married and always complaining about women, his wife, etc. I am surprised that the manospherians haven’t called him on his own whining, since they are so anti-whining in general — of course, anything women have to say is clearly whining, right?

                  I mentioned this one time before, and I think this example bears it out — in response to feminism, we now have masculinism. Both are poison feeding off one another. But the good thing is that if the organism ingests enough poison, it eventually dies. Which is what I think will happen with both movements.

                  But in the meantime — really, this would make a good soap opera, don’t you think? 🙂 LOL! Oh, what a world we live in…..

                  Like

        2. thedeti said:

          “If you women want high value Christian men, you’re going to have to go out there and find them and demonstrate interest in an unmistakable, clear-as-day manner.”

          Have you missed the part where virtually every one of the women on the thread is reasonably happily married and has been so for 10-30 years?

          I have a “high value Christian” husband already, thanks! (Although I squirm at the thought of using the term to his face–that’s not how a good wife refers to her husband.) And the way that I met him was by being career-minded and going to graduate school. Had I stayed in my hometown at home I’d be a spinster cat lady.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. All day, every day, I read in the Christomanosphere about women complaining that there are no men around who want them; that there are high value Christian women who cannot find good men to date and marry, etc, etc. ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

            “And the way that I met him was by being career-minded and going to graduate school. Had I stayed in my hometown at home I’d be a spinster cat lady.”

            Interesting.

            Like

            1. thedeti said:

              “All day, every day, I read in the Christomanosphere about women complaining that there are no men around who want them; that there are high value Christian women who cannot find good men to date and marry, etc, etc. ad nauseam, ad infinitum.”

              My take on that is that whatever the situation actually is, the manosphere advice makes things much worse than it needs to be.

              For instance, the manosphere pushes the idea of a “wall” for women that hits around 27 and the idea that if women don’t marry by their early 20s, they’ll die alone, surrounded by cats. Given that the median age of marriage for women in the US today is 27 that’s obviously false.

              Furthermore, trying to get young women to panic about DYING ALONE WITH CATS is counterproductive, as desperation and anxiety are unattractive. Attractive people are pleasant and relaxed and fun to be around, not clawing desperately for their ONE LAST CHANCE AT MARRIAGE.

              I think it’s much more productive to tell young women to be good, have fun, meet people, make money, and live their lives than to stress them out about how if they don’t marry at 22 that they’re going to die alone. As it happens, I met my future husband at 22 and got married before turning 23, but that was a total fluke. I happened to be in exactly the right place at the right time doing the right thing (and looking good doing it). A few years earlier, I had been in panic mode (where is my nice Christian boyfriend that I’m supposed to marry right after college graduation?), and it was very bad for me. Like it or not, meeting the right person doesn’t happen on any particular time table. We can be prepared and doing the right stuff, but we can’t cause the right person to materialize through sheer force of will.

              Christian girls panic all by themselves way too early–they need reassurance, not to be stampeded into doing stupid and/or immoral stuff. The more women are pressed with YOU’LL DIE ALONE WITH CATS the more attractive it is to give sexual immorality a whirl.

              “Interesting.”

              Yep. Small town.

              Liked by 1 person

          2. AmyP:

            Do you think that doing things like this:

            –asking a man out for a date

            –taking him food and drink

            –asking a guy to dance

            are all “too forward” and “taking the lead”? Do you think that any of those things are inappropriate for a “high value Christian woman” to do in order to demonstrate interest in a man?

            Like

            1. Weeelll, you’re talking to a lady that proposed to her husband (or so I’m told), so I may not be the greatest authority here on how to get or be a submissive wife.

              I did introduce myself to my future husband, but he called me and invited me out for a date, but I reciprocated along the way. There was a definite synergy going on–he’d ask me out and I’d ask him out and then pretty soon we were engaged and married.

              As to your questions, I’ve never asked a guy on a first date (but I have been turned down for a “friend thing” by a crush), but who knows what I might have done had I been single longer. Also, I wouldn’t take a total stranger food or drink unless I was doing the same for a bunch of other people. Also, not a dancer.

              Like

              1. I’m not suggesting that a woman take food to a guy she doesn’t know or just met. Geez.

                How about a woman going up to a man she likes and saying “Hi. My name is _________. How are you today?”

                HOw about a woman asking a man to dance? (The fact that you are not a dancer is irrelevant.)

                How about a woman asking a man for a first date? (The fact that YOU never did this is irrelevant.)

                The question is whether these are appropriate, not whether YOU would do or did do them or not. Are they appropriate for a Christian woman to meet men? IF not, why not?

                Like

                1. thedeti said:

                  “Are they appropriate for a Christian woman to meet men?”

                  Well, if there’s a common ground (go to the same college, are in the same swing dance group, have common friends, are volunteering at the same organization, working at the same theme park, etc.), sure, why not?

                  But I wouldn’t encourage Christian women to just be accosting strange men. I have to confess, I didn’t have a huge dating career (my carousel was apparently missing a whole bunch of ponies), and I literally never went out with anybody who wasn’t either a friend of a friend, met through volunteering, or met at a young adult Newman Center book club (my future husband). I said yes to going out with every single one of those guys, but it just wouldn’t have occurred to me to give the time of day to a guy that I didn’t have some sort of social or organizational connection to already. That was me as a late teen/early 20-something. I would encourage older, more street-smart women to be more adventurous (for instance, online dating), but kiddie pool dating was my comfort level and eventually worked out fine for me and I would not encourage women without very good street smarts to venture out of the kiddie pool.

                  As far as asking guys out, here are some theoretical approaches that I’ve never done but that come highly recommended.

                  1. Judith Martin (the etiquette guru) recommends the “I just happen to have an extra ticket to blah blah blah” method.

                  Possible variant: “I’m taking out a canoe tomorrow and I need a second paddler. Do you want to come?”

                  2. Dorothy Cummings McLean (the lady behind the Catholic site Seraphic Singles) suggests that female roommates organize dinner parties together and invite guys they are interested in. I did that solo early on when my future husband and I were dating, but DCM’s roommate version is better, because you never know exactly how rape-y a guy is until he’s got a chance.

                  So, yeah, theoretically I think women asking men can be done.

                  Liked by 1 person

                2. “How about a woman going up to a man she likes and saying “Hi. My name is _________. How are you today?””

                  These are appropriate but not attractive if the onus always falls on women having to initiate these things. How about the men do the same, oh that’s right the poor fellows are so scarred from being rejected they just can’t muster it. The kind of men women want are the ones not afraid of rejection. The ones that can take rejection and bounce right back. That is attractive. Being confident is attractive and women can pick up when men are afraid of rejection.

                  Like

                3. Are you kidding?

                  The kind of behavior you are suggesting is behavior that is not the behavior of a lady. No real lady would act like that because it’s forward and completely inappropriate. I certainly hope my own daughter would be more feminine and appropriate. MEN DO THE ASKING. MEN ARE THE ONES WHO SHOW THE INTEREST. The girl can hope and try to arrange circumstances in her favor, but ultimately she has no power whatsoever, except to show that she is interested in subtle ways. We were taught for centuries to behave properly. You men are always complaining how there are no ladies anymore. You can’t have it both ways.

                  Like

            2. If you are interested, express interest and make it explicit that you’re interested. Food and drink is my style… but when is this relevant? Are we going back to balls? Because I think that would be very helpful, if we started having ballroom dances again. (As a nice married lady, my job is to sip tea and chaperone and chat to the other married ladies, while making helpful suggestions to the unmarried. “Well, go fetch him a piece of that cake you baked, dear… you’re the best baker we have here…” “Sheldon, darling, look – Betty is positively drooping in the corner. Why don’t you go say hello?”).

              We don’t seem to have a functional courtship ritual in our culture at this time, and that’s a big problem. I don’t just mean in Christian-land, I mean period. Outside of school and bars, where is the mating dance held? How do you differentiate between “I just want to buy a book” and “It’s pickup hour at B&N!”? The people who just want to buy books are being annoyed while the people who want to meet other people are lonely. Broken, it’s broken.

              I had a talk (a long time ago) with a college-aged friend who told me that he would *terribly* embarrassed to invite a girl on a proper date, as that was simply not how things were done these days. I gather it’s all just amoebas blobbing along together, pairing off briefly and reforming and repeat until the pairings last… but that rather assumes you’ve gotten to be part of the amoeba in the first place, right? Are friends introducing friends in single-land these days? Making sure plenty of new blood goes and does things with the original group? How does one meet other marriageable people? MEETING is step one. Being interested and showing interest is step two.

              I don’t disagree that things are broken OR that ladies should have socially appropriate ways to indicate interest to gentlemen – but we should look at solutions, not just throw things at one another.

              Liked by 1 person

                1. Meeting people means getting out to see people in the flesh and experiencing social dynamics in real life. Not theorized methods which look pretty on the screen.

                  Liked by 1 person

              1. Hearthie said:

                “Because I think that would be very helpful, if we started having ballroom dances again. (As a nice married lady, my job is to sip tea and chaperone and chat to the other married ladies, while making helpful suggestions to the unmarried. “Well, go fetch him a piece of that cake you baked, dear… you’re the best baker we have here…” “Sheldon, darling, look – Betty is positively drooping in the corner. Why don’t you go say hello?”).”

                That’s adorable!

                Liked by 1 person

                1. One of the things that makes me respect Scott *madly* is the fact that he’s interested in doing something about the problem. He folded Courtship Pledge a while back, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t give it a go (and won’t do so again when he has kids of that age around).

                  I might not approve of a carrot/stick approach (or think that it’s feasible) but getting nice Christian young people together and letting them mingle is something we need to look at, as moms. And yes, you need some boots on the ground, because there are plenty of online folks who are adept at creating a persona, and we want everyone safe and as heart-whole as possible. That’s what’s been done for thousands of years. Guarding the circle of friends/associates is our job.

                  Two jobs as nice married ladies. 1) Fuss at our own children to get them to adulthood in a marriageable state 2) network with other nice married ladies and say things like, “Oh, Susie and Roger should meet. They have so much in common!” and then figure out how to make that happen.

                  So how are we gonna get boots on the ground, people? Or do you see this problem IRL as much as online?

                  Like

                  1. Hearthie said:

                    “getting nice Christian young people together and letting them mingle is something we need to look at, as moms.”

                    Yes. I’ve done a lot of official campus hospitality stuff in the past, but this will be much more important as the kids get older.

                    You can do amazing things with pizza and cooking activities. For my oldest (who was a tween at the time), I’ve done a number of cooking playdates.

                    We have (potentially) a very good location for doing stuff. I’ve been a little out of it socially (as we have a preschooler), but it’s on the to do list.

                    Liked by 2 people

        3. Yeah, I didn’t do any of this stuff before I got married. I didn’t have to. This thread showed some ways these things can be possible for a woman to do, but no, they wouldn’t have been things I did to get married or be around guys who wanted to get married. Men approached me, asked me out, brought me food and drink etc, etc. Because I’m a normal woman and I married a normal man.

          Liked by 1 person

      2. Weeeel, I’ve made it rather clear to Daughter 1 & Daughter 2 that there’s nothing wrong with showing interest or initiating conversation or asking a guy out on a date. In fact, I’m in full agreement that it might even be necessary (especially if the young man in question is a bit shy).

        HOWEVER. If he walks away, doesn’t respond in some equitable manner (i.e., engages back, etc.), etc., then HE’S NOT INTERESTED TIME TO MOVE ON. Do not follow. Do not push. Do not pursue. Leave him alone. If you act otherwise, he will think you’re pathetic. you don’t need a man who think’s you’re pathetic.

        Liked by 1 person

  13. Well, my participation on this thread has been most enlightening. I must say that it hasn’t changed my mind, nor do I expect I’ve changed any of yours, but I have learned much and had most of my previous thoughts and impressions confirmed… again.

    Thanks to the host, and to the commenters.

    Like

  14. By the actions of most men – Christian or not – it is pretty apparent that in spite of all the things they say they want, the most important on the list is “hawt”. You can be all those wonderful things, but if you’re just average looking – not ugly or fat or anything, just OK – you’re at a major disadvantage.

    The men are not a lot different than the women they describe in this respect. I agree that women can show an interest without being “too forward”, not being aloof, being receptive, and so on, but some men seem to need a metaphorical 2X4 to the head as an indicator of interest. They seem to want to be seduced by a demure, submissive woman, and if you can’t see the contradiction there…

    I’ll just add that the fixation on “hawt” isn’t entirely their fault – it’s been pushed in much the same way feminism has been pushed – but until they admit this about themselves, traditionally minded men and women will remain at an impasse.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. I swore off the manosphere when I realized their goals are incompatible and unrealizable–

    1. Getting women is the most importantest thing
    2. Women are responsible for everything wrong in the world.

    I also realized that everything they were doing was just for the approval of more or less anonymous people who don’t actually care about them.

    I am disappointed that I haven’t gotten married by my age (30), but that’s because of a large number of things. Had I still the mind of a manurespherian, I would blamed hypergamy, the female imperative, the unfavorable gender ratio in my part of the country and people’s attitude about my race. But in reality, the reason I didn’t get what I want was because (1.) I am asocial by nature and did not work to overcome it (2.) I had many insecurities (3.) I squandered most of my free time (4.) I was not developing my career (which led to a harrowing 5 month stint of voluntary unemployment) and (5.) I did not hold strong values–I was intellectually Christian, but went astray with some bad subcultures.

    If any manospherean is reading this, I bet you dollars to donuts that most of your problems are internal. Yes, women can and do harm you, but how you respond is totally internal.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. If any manospherean is reading this, I bet you dollars to donuts that most of your problems are internal. Yes, women can and do harm you, but how you respond is totally internal.

      This realization shows you’re very introspective. Few people can overcome their problems without this trait.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. Aethelfrith said:

          “I did something many manosphereans highly disapprove of–seek professional psychological counseling.”

          Very good.

          I’m sure by now you’ve realized why the manosphere disapproves of it–if you wind up a functional, happy person, you won’t need them anymore.

          Liked by 2 people

              1. Now it’s time for my “favorite” part of dating–post 1st date anxiety. Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.

                Like

                  1. *sigh*

                    I made a big show with my supposed knowledge and self reflection, but starting at the beginning of this week, I crumbled like a matzoh.

                    Like

  16. “For instance, the manosphere pushes the idea of a “wall” for women that hits around 27 and the idea that if women don’t marry by their early 20s, they’ll die alone, surrounded by cats. Given that the median age of marriage for women in the US today is 27 that’s obviously false.
    Furthermore, trying to get young women to panic about DYING ALONE WITH CATS is counterproductive, as desperation and anxiety are unattractive. Attractive people are pleasant and relaxed and fun to be around, not clawing desperately for their ONE LAST CHANCE AT MARRIAGE.”

    Exactly. Then in panic mode you make stupid choices and settle for someone you aren’t really attracted too and obviously that can cause problems later. The message these men promote sounds like pushy sales people….buy buy buy now! LAST CHANCE, prices will never be this low again! You will never be this HAWT again!! Buy, buy, settle, settle now! Really, this make a lot of sense since the men that promote the “you’ll die alone with cats” theory are usually low ranking, weak men. So, of course they want to scare women into settling now. Its the only way they have a chance at getting a woman.

    “I think it’s much more productive to tell young women to be good, have fun, meet people, make money, and live their lives than to stress them out about how if they don’t marry at 22 that they’re going to die alone.”

    Like couples who can’t get pregnant because they are so stressed out about getting pregnant! But the stories go–that once they stop trying and really sort of give up on it, that is when it happens.

    “Christian girls panic all by themselves way too early–they need reassurance, not to be stampeded into doing stupid and/or immoral stuff. The more women are pressed with YOU’LL DIE ALONE WITH CATS the more attractive it is to give sexual immorality a whirl.”

    Yes, and they look to reassurance from men who they are told are to be their leaders and then if these supposed leaders can’t even have the courage to ask them out it must be rather depressing.

    Like

    1. Stone said:

      “The message these men promote sounds like pushy sales people….buy buy buy now! LAST CHANCE, prices will never be this low again! You will never be this HAWT again!! Buy, buy, settle, settle now!”

      Yeah. I was also thinking about the sales analogy. There’s a lot of similarity.

      “Yes, and they look to reassurance from men who they are told are to be their leaders and then if these supposed leaders can’t even have the courage to ask them out it must be rather depressing.”

      Right.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. Here are some more issues with the manosphere’s view of courtship.

    In those parts, they don’t ever talk about compatibility or shared interests. They tend to talk about physical attractiveness (on that famous 10 point scale) and sheer animal magnetism, but the other elements of compatibility are a dark mystery to them. I suppose that’s what comes of trying to christen pickup artistry…Pickup artists don’t care about long-term compatibility or shared interests, so Christian manosphere types that idolize them don’t, either.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The reason no one in the Christomanosphere talks about “compatibility” or “shared interests” is because the men there already know how to do those things. They need to learn “sexual attraction”. They also chose women who weren’t all that attracted to them, because, well they weren’t all that attractive.

      They also talk about sexual attraction because marriage is a sexual relationship. That’ doesn’t exist unless both are sexually attracted to each other. The sexual attraction part is what is or was missing in their relationships.

      The reasons sexual attraction is talked about so much are that these men’s wives are making it clear they aren’t all that attracted; these men aren’t attractive and need to learn attraction; and they realize sexual attraction is necessary for a sexual relationship. Plus, these guys already know how to do all the “nice” and “caring” and “be yourself” parts of relationships.

      Like

      1. “Plus, these guys already know how to do all the “nice” and “caring” and “be yourself” parts of relationships.”

        Now there’s a big pile of bovine poo! Those men don’t even know how to relate to one another, let alone a woman.

        Like

      2. thedeti said:

        “The reason no one in the Christomanosphere talks about “compatibility” or “shared interests” is because the men there already know how to do those things. They need to learn “sexual attraction”. They also chose women who weren’t all that attracted to them, because, well they weren’t all that attractive.”

        1. A lot of your young single Christian manosphere guys are pretty obviously under-socialized. I don’t know how to explain it, but they seem to have been raised by wolves insofar as they are completely innocent of basic human social norms and forms.

        Not to disability shame, but your single guys make my autism meter go PING PING PING.

        2. I never hear your guys seeing there as being anything to women beyond age, relative sexual attractiveness, and adherence or non-adherence to Christian manosphere orthodoxy. I never, ever see your guys wondering, “She’s pretty and we agree on religious stuff, but do we have anything else in common?” In fact, your guys often explicitly say that that’s all that matters.

        3. Compatibility and shared interests can be an important ingredient in sexual attraction. The more things one enjoys doing with one’s beloved, the more one enjoys being with one’s beloved.

        4. The whole “beta bucks” thing is mostly just depression and low self-esteem talking. In my social circle, I occasionally meet a guy that I suppose qualifies as an “alpha,” and I never meet one without wondering how his wife manages to live with him. The ones I’ve seen are insufferable jerks and I thank my lucky stars that I didn’t accidentally wind up with one.

        “The reasons sexual attraction is talked about so much are that these men’s wives are making it clear they aren’t all that attracted; these men aren’t attractive and need to learn attraction; and they realize sexual attraction is necessary for a sexual relationship.”

        Not to be crude, but maybe I should get my husband to write a book, “How to keep your wife having sex with you and liking it”?

        Every time I dip into the Christian manosphere, I find my mind boggled by the fact that the guys seem unaware that women are capable of enjoying marital sex. There’s something terribly, terribly wrong going on with how they deal with marital intimacy. I suspect it has something to do with being ignorant, lazy and selfish.

        “Plus, these guys already know how to do all the “nice” and “caring” and “be yourself” parts of relationships.”

        Not that I’ve seen, at least online, especially not the single guys and the divorced guys. The single guys seem to think of dating as a math problem or science fair project.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I actually suspect that “alpha bucks” is more of a thing than “beta bucks”.

          I have, in my social circle, seen a couple of high-achieving, high-earning jerks whose wives seem to put up with a lot. (The guys didn’t start out high-earning, but they were obvious go-getters who aggressively go-got their future wives and then go-got a big fat income in highly competitive fields.)

          Beta bucks is a myth. Women don’t have to get married these days. 4 times out of 5, we do so because we really like the guy, rather fancy the idea of having sex with him, and want to have his babies.

          I’m saying only 4 out of 5 because I’m being generous to the manosphere. I have no idea what the actual number is, but it’s at least 4 out of 5. I’ve never heard a woman not be head over heels enthusiastic about the man she was marrying.

          Like

  18. I just came across a thread on a very secular site with some stuff on online dating.

    http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2016/04/ask-dr-nerdlove-help-lifestyle-hindering-dating-life/

    Here are some things that some women said about their online dating experiences:

    “As a woman who’s used OKCupid, I can verify this. I get tons of “hey”, “how are you”, “you’re beautiful”, among other much less savory messages. I just delete them. Doesn’t matter what their picture looks like or what the supposed match percentage is. However, if they say something even remotely insightful that suggests they actually read my profile and care about the contents, I’ll usually respond.

    “The key, to my mind, is find that common ground. Find something in their profile that calls to you. Ask them a specific question but open-ended question about it: “I noticed you’re into X. I find that really interesting too. What are your thoughts about Y.” Then follow up with some of your own thoughts. Mention some of the ways you’re involved in the same topic. That gives the recipient the ability to talk about themselves and also gives them a window to ask about you and keep the conversation going.”

    Another woman:

    ” Okay, 98% of my inbox is filled with

    “- ‘hey’
    – variations of ‘hey’
    – COPY AND PASTE MESSAGES (you seem interesting, wanna talk?) BUT WHAT PART OF ME IS INTERESTING, KEN?? WHAT PART?!?
    – ‘wanna [BLEEP]'”

    Despite being a very secular environment, I do have to recommend Doctor Nerdlove to awkward Christians guys and gals (with appropriate caveats for inappropriate sexual stuff). The social stuff is great, though–there is a lot of social stuff there that anybody who was accidentally raised by wolves may have missed out on.

    “I’m wondering if this is one of those things that men weren’t socialized for? Like, how do you make friends? (DO they have friends?) By asking questions about them and SHOWING INTEREST IN THEM AS A HUMAN BEING. Its like, Basic Human-ing 101. If you want to get to know someone, ASK QUESTIONS.”

    Like

    1. I know a couple of happily married people who met on online. That would never have worked out for hubby and I. The man literally wrote me letters that said, “hey.” Sometimes he left messages on my machine, “hey.” If he was feeling particularly chatty, he would say, “yo.” He’s a big fan of non verbal communication.

      There are of course some men who are great poets or full of words, but for the most part I think there really is a gender gap there and men often have a hard time talking to women.

      Like

      1. insanitybytes22 said:

        “There are of course some men who are great poets or full of words, but for the most part I think there really is a gender gap there and men often have a hard time talking to women.”

        And/or a small talk gap.

        I’m not naturally a social or small talk person, either, but being at least a little social and having a little small talk IRL is part of my “job” and I’ve put a lot of effort into sucking it up and figuring out stuff to say to people I barely know and figuring out what our areas of common interest are. Because otherwise, a 90 minute playdate or a two-hour birthday party gets reeeally long…

        So I always want to kick guys (especially lonely single guys) around the block when they say that they only socialize with men, don’t socialize much IRL, don’t have any small talk, etc.

        On the other hand, maybe this points to the value of intermediaries to help the shy and socially unpolished find their common ground.

        “Lucinda, meet Roderick. Roderick, Lucinda is a Civil War re-enactor and costume designer. Lucinda, Roderick molds and finishes miniature Civil War soldiers. I’m sure you two have SO much to talk about!”

        Liked by 2 people

  19. Bahahaha! Soooo many great LOLs to be had on this thread. Good ones.

    I had to pretty much bend over backwards to put my man in a position where he actually had the guts to ask me out. We found out after dating a while that we’d ‘started liking’ each other on the same day. It took months of me demonstrating interest and the becoming progressively more aggressive/obvious for him to know I liked him, and once he KNEW I did, he—wait for it–waited 2 more months to ask me out.

    The point about us being told to desire and encourage leadership (which in many ways, means INITIATING stuff) is contrary to this idea that we need to be as obvious as a little puppy following someone around. I felt pathetic many times. I don’t find the puppy analogy as upsetting as the others here, not at all. But when we are told we need to put ourselves in a place that feels like initiating and leading…well, don’t be disappointed if that dynamic continues throughout the marriage. It has in mine. It’s definitely wayyyy easier on the guy to sit back and let the woman do all the work in certain situations.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Oh yeah ok I was trying to say but got distracted: the point about “we’re told to desire leadership from men but also told to pursue men like puppies and that’s confusing and contradictory” is spot on.

    I was very confused about what I should do or not do before I started dating my husband.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It truly doesn’t make sense to expect people to do a 180. It doesn’t work that way at all. I have to wonder if a lot of these guys have much for social skills or get out at all. When people are dating and eventually marry, they’re hoping the other doesn’t change because what you see is what you’re supposed to get.

      But when we are told we need to put ourselves in a place that feels like initiating and leading…well, don’t be disappointed if that dynamic continues throughout the marriage. It has in mine. It’s definitely wayyyy easier on the guy to sit back and let the woman do all the work in certain situations.

      For a while, I was in your position. It’s been several years now and the dynamic is changing. It does create a lot of frustration and confusion, and it’s detrimental to marriage. I see why you’re frustrated.

      Liked by 2 people

  21. Not to be crude, but maybe I should get my husband to write a book, “How to keep your wife having sex with you and liking it”?

    Apparently it would be a best seller, so if he needs a collaborator and is willing to split the profits, I can check with the man…

    But seriously, Booky MBookerson’s posted a link over on her blog which was written by an honest man and introspective man:

    http://henrymakow.com/design-the-perfect-woman.html

    I mean seriously, not even half of us are or ever were as beautiful as our gracious hostess (love that pic by the way. Awesome hair!) But there is something in the water and while I agree with the men that the women of this generation have drank the tainted kool-aid, my problem is with the fact that they refuse to acknowledge that they have drank it well and been adversely affected in ways beyond just “I can’t have find a hot yet demure, sexy yet chaste woman to marry”. It is really is a systemic disease affecting the very way people look at the opposite sex and not only women are panting for a mate out of their league.

    Men are just more inclined to settle in with “good enough” a lot sooner.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. E:

      Sexual attraction has its place in a marriage. A marriage is a SEXUAL relationship. They’re SUPPOSED to be sexually attracted to each other.

      The primary problem in most marriages is that the vast majority of women come to marriage with some sexual experience under their belts. And they’re marrying men they are considerably less sexually attracted to than the men they used to have sex with as younger women. And the men they are marrying are objectively less sexually attractive than the men these women used to have sex with, before those women started thinking about getting married.

      Men value sexual attraction highly. It’s supposed to be like this. God made us men this way. But men’s valuing sexual attractiveness is not a primary cause of the problems in marriage today, Dr. Makow’s article notwithstanding. The primary cause of the problems in marriage today is women marrying men they’re just really not all that attracted to, because they want to be married, and because the “hawt” guys these women really want will not marry them.

      Like

      1. I know a marriage needs chemistry Deti. It has never been my intent (or anyone else”s here so far as I can tell) to argue otherwise. Of course attraction matters.

        But it was never God”s intent for it to be the primary thing. We read the same Bible I assumed.

        The fact that you can’t even begin to entertain the idea that men’s attraction triggers have been affected by this culture and media speaks volumes.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Yes, men’s attraction triggers have been affected by the culture and media. So have women’s. I have never said otherwise.

          But NONE of that has changed the fact that men value women’s sexual attractiveness and youth highly. It has always been this way since time immemorial. Fantasizing about changing that is a major theme in this thread, and it’s a pipe dream.

          Like

          1. So what happens when we start to get older and our hair begins to turn grey?

            Hair dye contains all sorts of carcinogens, so there’s no way I’m going to color my hair. I’m going to accept my grey as “earned” (my kids did it for me, LOL. 🙂 And I’m forty now, so I am seeing silver threads ever so gradually…..there’s an advantage to being a blonde. 🙂

            As for my aging body, well, I eat properly and exercise for these reasons — to keep in good health as long as possible, to have enough energy to run after my preschoolers, and to live the life span God has destined for me as best as possible. What’s pathetic is seeing forty year olds trying to look and act like they’re twenty. No, thank you.

            I’m not young anymore. But then again, neither is my husband. Get used to it. We all age.

            And for a side note — if anybody is Catholic at all here, we all know that the primary purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children. There’s lots of wide liberty there in whether or not a couple should or should not use NFP. The sexual attractiveness hype isn’t as much of an issue among really committed Catholic couples with their sights set on eternity. This is just. plain. stupid. bunk. that ought to go on the rubbish heap with a lot of other things people obsess over. C’mon. Give it a rest.

            Like

        2. Elspeth said:

          “The fact that you can’t even begin to entertain the idea that men’s attraction triggers have been affected by this culture and media speaks volumes.”

          Right.

          Liked by 1 person

      2. thedeti,

        Cite?

        I know you are reciting the manosphere creed, but the evidence for it is very thin.

        Also, I have an awful feeling that your solution to the non-existent problem is that women should marry very young, to men they aren’t sexually attracted to, so they won’t know what they’re missing…As if as soon as we’re married, we can’t see good-looking guys anymore.

        Honestly, I’m a woman, and I married a guy I was crazy about and couldn’t keep my hands off. I suspect pretty much every married woman on TPC can say the exact same thing. As it happens, I married in my early 20s, but that’s luck of the draw–plenty of women get married to men they are crazy about much later in life. I had another serious offer of marriage several years earlier from a guy I didn’t think was right for me and 19-year-old me was totally right–he wasn’t the right guy, and it horrifies me to think that under slightly different circumstances I might have married him. Fortunately, that was pre-internet, so there was no chorus of people warning me that this was my last shot, so I’d better marry him or DIE ALONE.

        Pretty much nobody except manosphereans is telling women to marry men they are unattracted to.

        If you want to blame anybody for women winding up with men they are meh about, blame the “SETTLE NOW OR DIE A CAT LADY!!!!” chorus.

        Like

        1. You didn’t read a word I wrote.

          The problem is women marrying men they are not attracted to. SO no, I am not going to tell women they should marry young to men they don’t want to have sex with. The manosphere is not telling women to marry men they’re not attracted to. I certainly don’t say that. No woman should ever marry for any reason other than she is head over heels in love with the guy (which includes her being really, REALLY sexually attracted to him). And the manosphere isn’t telling women “settle now or die a cat lady”. The manosphere doesn’t tell women to settle at all.

          I’m not impressed with a claim that all of TPC’s commenters are really attracted to their husbands. That might be true, but that doesn’t tell us anything about general trends in society.

          Like

          1. deti,

            What’s your proof that there’s an epidemic of women settling for and marrying men that they are not attracted to? I’m just not seeing it.

            And yeah, the manosphere totally does threaten women with becoming cat ladies if they don’t settle right now.

            I think one of the mistakes you’re making is believing that women are like baby ducklings and that we immediately bond to the first guy we see. It really doesn’t work like that.

            Another typical manosphere error (which you may or may not hold) is believing that as soon as a woman is 22, there’s this huge line up organized where she gets to choose from a huge pack of men who are interested in marrying her. That’s also not how it works. For most of us, there’s a guy, then a long break, then another guy, a long break, etc. There’s no opportunity to choose from all of one’s potential admirers at the same time.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. “What’s your proof that there’s an epidemic of women settling for and marrying men that they are not attracted to? I’m just not seeing it.”

              –Nationwide 50% divorce rate.

              –Nationwide 38% divorce rate among Christians.

              –Nationwide 25% divorce rate among Roman Catholics.

              –70%+ of divorces are filed by women. It’s mostly women who want out of their marriages. And most of those women are seeking no fault divorces, i.e. “I just don’t want to be married anymore”.

              Like

              1. The primary reason most women end a relationship or a marriage is because the woman doesn’t want to have sex with the man any more for whatever reason.

                Like

              2. So, if a woman were actually attracted to her husband on the day she married him, she’d never divorce him, no matter what?

                That doesn’t seem very likely.

                Like

              3. This was studied by a woman who looked at the census statistics and found that some of these are projections, not hard data. I’m going to get her book and look it over, and post what it says. Probably before the end of the year, but likely not sooner.

                Like

              4. deti,

                That’s not proof. Your stats beg the question that all divorces come from marriages with no initial attraction.

                Liked by 2 people

          2. Jadwiga of Poland wasn’t in love with Jagiello of Lithuania, either. She wanted to marry the man to whom she had been betrothed. She married Jagiello in the interests of her country. It worked out very well. Read “Catholic World Culture” by Dr. Anne Carroll for the story, at least that’s where I read it. Many people have married out of duty towards one’s family and country.

            We have a family here in our parish who met only a month before their marriage. It was arranged for them by their parents. Their oldest daughter was recently married, and it was arranged by their parents as well. While this may sound odd to us in these modern times, there probably was a good reason why marriages were arranged in previous times. Most parents truly had their children’s interests and happiness at heart — unfortunately Henry/Katherine marriages happened as well, but there was more stability, more emphasis on one’s duty to family , society and country, and less emphasis on sexual attractiveness.

            I’m not saying this is the answer to problems. I’m just saying it’s some food for thought.

            Like

            1. Henry 8 and Katherine of Aragon didn’t have an unhappy marriage until Henry wanted a hotter, younger thing to bear him a son. He begged the pope for a dispensation to marry his brother’s widow.

              Liked by 1 person

        1. I said “most married women are marrying men they are considerably less attracted to than the men they used to have sex with when they were younger women”.

          The “less attraction” part is a huge problem in marriages. I have talked with, in real life and online, hundreds of married men who have had this problem — and even THEIR WIVES are saying it too.

          Like

          1. There is zero evidence that this is the case. You’re asserting without evidence. I have hundreds of anecdotes in the opposite direction, and yet you claim my anecdotes are inferior data to your anecdotes, even though mine are more backed by what statistics we do have about attraction and marriage over the last few decades.

            Some people having a problem does not actually mean most people are having that problem, no matter how many times you say so.

            Like

            1. Anecdotes are evidence. The fact that you don’t like my anecdotes, or have other contradictory anecdotes, doesn’t detract from their validity.

              You claim your anecdotes are more backed by statistics. By all means, I’d be interested to see your statistics and explanation on how they support your claims.

              Like

              1. I do post statistics. You just ignore them. You don’t post any statistics showing a majority of married women are not particularly sexually attracted to their husbands, nor that sexual attraction is the primary reason for the majority of divorces. You assert those things, but you don’t actually show data to support them.

                You don’t like either my anecdotes or my data, because you have a narrative and you’ll restate it until you’re purple in the face rather than look at the actual reality of marriage and dating today.

                I started blogging with certain assumptions in mind and when the data showed some of them were wrong, I said “gosh, ought to rethink those assumptions!”

                You do not do this in the face of facts that don’t fit your narrative.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. What facts? What statistics? Where are they? I’m searching your blog now for them, and I don’t see them. All I’ve seen are your stats that say homeschooled kids marry before age 25 and delay having kids; and that public schooled kids marry later.

                  How does any of that contradict what I’ve said?

                  Like

                  1. No, homeschooled kids don’t do so more frequently. Evangelical Protestant private school attendees marry before 25 more often than homeschooled kids, who marry in their late 20s just like public schooled kids.

                    You didn’t read anything, and your own words trap you in your lying.

                    Like

          2. Garbage in, garbage out.

            If you google for something online, you can always find it. I read a lot of general marriage advice and pay attention to real life, and there’s a much broader range of marital issues. For example:

            –disagreements over whether or not to have children and how many
            –SAHM?
            –how to educate children (public, private or homeschool)
            –how tight a leash to keep on kids
            –where to live/work
            –what kind of relationship to have with extended family
            –relationships with friends (too much? too little?)
            –how to spend money/joint or divided finances
            –making minor and major decisions without spousal input
            –micromanagement
            –religious disagreements
            –chore division/childcare division
            –household norms of cleanliness and order
            –substance abuse
            –media use/overuse
            –gambling
            –porn/inappropriately chummy relationships with persons of the opposite sex
            –diet and exercise
            –personal hygiene

            I notice that in the Christian manosphere, this stuff is rarely discussed in any sort of detail, and particularly not when the husband is at fault.

            Liked by 1 person

              1. Pornographically? Uh, no. It’s really just a group of married men who want to have normal sex lives with their wives. No, it’s not “just the marriage bed and nothing else matters”. Your stating this indicates you really don’t know what’s talked about in the sphere.

                OK, I’ll take my leave. Thanks for the interesting discussion.

                Like

              2. TPC said:

                “Yeah, it’s funny how they define marriage pornographically. There’s just the marriage bed and…nothing else matters. Which is funny what with the Christian part supposedly being important to them and all.”

                Nah, you’re being a little unfair. There’s also toilet scrubbing and cooking and there’s something else I’m forgetting…oh, yes–kids.

                But yeah, the manosphere’s wifely to do list looks like this:

                –SEX SEX SEX
                –toilets
                –cooking
                –kids

                (I’m not a technologically gifted person, but just imagine that “kids” is in tiny, tiny almost unreadable font.)

                Liked by 1 person

                1. I dunno, I remember seeing even cooking and toilet scrubbing sexified. Posting about food you cooked for your own husband was an occasion to sin because it made them lust for a wife who was a good cook. Poe’s law 4eva.

                  Like

  22. No. Not interested in trying to get men to want old fat ugly chicks. No one here implied that. That is what you hear when you don’t like what”s being said. I’m not young but I am not in the hunt for a man. I am more than satisfied with the one I have.

    I just want them to notice the young, fit cute enough modest chicks. You misunderstood me (not to mention everyone else here) if you think this is a crusade on behalf of undesirable women.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. E, we have been around this mountain so many times. I said nothing about you or others wanting men to be sexually attracted to old fat ugly chicks. I also didn’t say this is a “crusade on behalf of undesirable women”.

      What I said was that the women here want men to change themselves to not prioritize sexual attractiveness. And that has been implied with the citation to Makow’s article.

      Men DO notice the “young, fit, cute enough modest chicks”. Men DO notice them. It’s just that the men who do notice them and are actually willing to invest in them are average looking, and thus “not good enough” for those “young fit cute enough modest chicks”. Because the young fit cute enough modest chicks ALSO want the top 20%, smooth player, but they want him to commit to her.

      The average guys aren’t good enough for the girls you’re talking about. That’s been made quite clear in today’s marketplace.

      Like

      1. Ok, deti, you’re incoherent, you argue out of both sides of your mouth and you repeat the same talking points regardless of whether the comment you are responding to is related at all to your pet hobbyhorses. Find a way to clarify your positions if you want to retain ability to comment here.

        Like

        1. Here’s the detiest thing I’ve seen in this thread–

          “Anecdotes are evidence. The fact that you don’t like my anecdotes, or have other contradictory anecdotes, doesn’t detract from their validity. ”

          Translation: I reject your reality and substitute my own!

          That said, I believe you can alter your reality by right thinking and right attitude. What does it say about manurespherians that they choose to focus on how victimized men are and how awful women are?

          Like

      2. Uh….we’re not chicks. We’re human beings created in the image and likeness of God. I have drummed it into my daughters to BEWARE of anybody using an animal term to describe them…..that’s a person that cannot be trusted when the day comes when she is sick, no longer young or pretty, etc.

        Like

  23. Reading manosphere guys always makes me want to delay marriage, and I’ve been married for like 12 years now

    Liked by 3 people

    1. LOL.

      To your point/joke, if I was an unmarried woman I’m not sure I’d want to marry if the manosphere is representative of devout traditional Christian men.

      Like

      1. Mine is an agnostic who voted for Bernie. He’s watching a video about browning butter. He pauses it: “you learning anything good over there?”

        “There’s this weird guy on this lady’s blog who… well, I guess I’m not totally sure what his issue is. He thinks women should think he is hotter or something. He had been upset about this for some years”

        “….ok” *resumes butter vid*

        Liked by 1 person

    2. I know, right? I’ve been married 30 years and reading those manospherians makes me wonder what the heck I was thinking. On the bright side, I really do feel as if I won the hubby lottery.

      Like

    3. Yep.

      I feel like there’s a real failure to apply the golden rule–do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

      If the shoe were on the foot, would the manosphereans want the deal that they are offering women?

      Like

  24. Part of deti’s comment from here

    https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2016/05/02/empowered/

    “Yesterday and the day before I was, ill-advisedly, at two female run blogs where the topic of discussion was

    “those autistic, unattractive, wimpy, whiny, afraid of rejection, complaining about nonexistent ‘nuclear rejections’, bitching-about-feminism men of the manosphere, always complaining about women not wanting to marry and men not being able to find marriageable women. If only those men would man up and start acting like men and start asking out women and stop fearing rejection, why, we’d be SO much better off!!”

    Men and women understand each other even less than they did 5 years ago when I stumbled across this place. It’s getting worse. Increasingly, the manosphere is seen as a bunch of autistic, spergy, malformed, Cheetos-dusted, poorly socialized, seethingly angry and resentful men who couldn’t finagle a handjob out of a chubby 4. And you know, to a degree, that’s correct. Thing is, those guys KNOW this about themselves. That’s why they’re there in the manosphere and on Reddit’s r/theredpill. If these guys knew how to get girls, they wouldn’t be on the internet trying to figure out how to get girls. They know the problem is with them, with girls and with our fucked up legal and cultural system.”

    Well, its true…if men would do their part women would be better off. Be the strong, leaders who aren’t afraid of rejection. Women are told to submit it up, but of course men can’t lead until women first submit it up. His lament is to the tune of “If only women would just submit and bring me a sammich….” we would be so much better off! If only they could do all the work so I don’t have to.

    LOL on the rest of his comment. They understand less because the more you spend in the manosphere the more it turns your mind to mush. Their is a critical time to get out when you have learned all you can learn or else it starts working against you. And, YES, when the same old men have been commenting over and over the same thing for 5 plus years, that is not helping them. The more dominant men originally involved in the manosphere left long, long ago. They are actually out conquering the world and mastering women. Others, prefer to stay in their comfort zone of keyboard warriors. So, its 5 years and they still can’t figure out how to get girls. How attractive. Perhaps its best these men stay the lost boys of the interwebz. I think that speaks a lot to what the women say here.

    Like

    1. I am going to make a post about it, but the problem the manosphere faces is that Millennial men who marry have the upper hand, the shift’s already happened. The husband can work or not work, can do household stuff or not lift a finger, it’s all on the Millennial wife. But couples just a few years older don’t have the same shift to anywhere near that extent.

      They don’t “see” the married men who don’t have to even earn money to retain status as husbands, just like they don’t see those mens’ wives doing all the job-having, childcare and even yard work.

      It’s not limited to Millennial husbands, it’s just much more common with the younger set and admitting that this shift has happened kinda undermines the entire manosphere conceit.

      I also need to do a post on the history of mass porn consumption by men before and during marriage in America since it goes back to WW2.

      Apologies for using this reply to make some notes to self!

      Like

    2. I have a bunch of stuff to say about the autism angle, as I was probably the one who first used the term in the thread. I’ll try to explain that I’m not just name-calling–the autism/Asperger’s angle is actually very relevant in understanding the manosphere.

      Here are some features of the autism spectrum that are relevant to the manosphere:

      1. People on the spectrum can have a hard time making friends and dating. Hence, the manosphere is very attractive. It’s not that the guy himself has some off-putting behaviors he needs to seriously work on, it’s that women are hypergamous [BLEEPY] [BLEEPS] and 20% of alphas are getting 80% of women.

      2. The manosphere offers an all-inclusive theory of everything, a ready made “special interest” for the young male Aspie to geek out over. That is incredibly attractive. I’m sure we’ve all seen the blogs where the guys are happily building further epicycles into their theories of what is wrong with women.

      (If only they’d just get into super heroes! But come to think of it, alphas are a bit like super heroes and super villains for our guy.)

      3. People on the spectrum can be very obsessive and prone to perseveration. Hence the repetition that we are all familiar with.

      4. People on the spectrum can be bad at reading other people and social situations. They can have a lot of trouble seeing their role in social situations that go sour–it’s always the other person’s fault, the other kids’ being mean.

      5. There can be a lot of naivete and gullibility. (Hence the Dalrock guys’ hanging on the every word of people who make a living selling pickup and who are, by their own admission, accomplished professional liars. But they wouldn’t lie to you guys while selling you books, would they?)

      6. People on the spectrum are prone to black-and-white thinking. This is definitely a factor in the virgin-or-slut dichotomy that we are so familiar with.

      I’ll have more to say later about the autism spectrum and marriage.

      Like

      1. If there is (as I am quite certain) a large overlap between the autism spectrum and the Christian manosphere, what are the implications for marriage?

        Unfortunately, the stuff I have described previously is bound to create a marital trainwreck, especially when combined with the strong view of wifely submission that is the consensus view in the Christian manosphere. The autistic young husband as God Emperor of his family is a recipe for disaster, and it’s actually a very fortunate thing for everybody that the guys have so much trouble finding wives.

        So, what should they do? I don’t have a well-developed view, but here are some thoughts:

        –admit that there are some things about yourself that you need to fix (and not just that your pimp hand isn’t strong enough yet)
        –be able to say yes
        –don’t micromanage
        –don’t be harsh
        –get past black and white thinking–there are generally more than two solutions to any problem–get some more options on the table
        –work on flexibility
        –learn how to collaborate (I really like Dave Ramsey for showing that it is possible for a man to be warmly authoritative in his family and yet make an honored place for his wife at the decision-making table)
        –be willing to listen to experienced women talking about what it’s like having a family
        –Read TPC’s guide to care and feeding of the SAHM
        –be an active member of your religious community. If you’re Catholic, go to confession, and not just The Only Real Priest in Our Tri-State Area.
        –be willing to see a therapist
        –read stuff about marriage and relationships and friendship that isn’t red pill and is (*shudder*) in a book, not on the internet.
        –This is going to sound really frivolous, but I’ve really gotten a lot from watching Big Bang Theory. The sex comedy can be tiresome, but the comedy of autism and relationship stuff is very helpful

        Good luck! If you do this stuff, you may well be spared one of those divorces that are always taking manosphere guys (but nobody else) by surprise.

        Like

      2. My word, I never thought of that. Really. This is a really good point.

        I had autistic children in my classroom when I was still teaching in charter schools, and didn’t make the connection until now. I’m interested. If anybody decides to do some studies on this or makes posts like this, please let me know, I would like to know. Please drop me an email or a comment at my blog.

        Like

    3. It’s not that they haven’t figured out how to get girls…it’s the girls they want don’t want them. Based on some of the stories I’ve read about supposed devout girls who cavorted with the wrong guy, or some girl playing games with a guy, it makes you wonder if it’s that old high school thing where the nerdy guy wishes he could have a chance with the hot chick. Without handing over 1K for a month because the girl ruined her mom’s suede jacket…

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Maea said:

        “Based on some of the stories I’ve read about supposed devout girls who cavorted with the wrong guy, or some girl playing games with a guy, it makes you wonder if it’s that old high school thing where the nerdy guy wishes he could have a chance with the hot chick.”

        And this is where I’d ask the guy, “What do you have in common with the hot chick? What could you talk about without boring each other to tears?”

        Like

  25. Regarding the puppy dog thing:

    I just realized that as a college student, I did pretty much exactly that with my big college crush for 2+ years. I figured out when he had dinner at the cafeteria and I was there “coincidentally” at the same time as often as I could manage. There was more, but that’s the least embarrassing thing I did. I couldn’t stay away.

    Did that get me anywhere? Nope. Was it undignified? Yep. Was that how I landed my future husband? Nope. Would I have a word with a grown child of either sex who was doing that stuff? Yep.

    (And, for the record, my college crush was a short skinny virgin (or so his roommate told me). So, obviously, not one of these 8 foot tall alphas that allegedly monopolize the womenfolk.)

    It’s one of the great paradoxes of the manosphere that after figuring out what didn’t work for them, the guys recommend exactly the same stuff to women. The puppy dog guy and deti want women to be “beta orbiters.” And, as another example, the Dalrock guys preach pure blue pill to women–if you’re having trouble with your husband, be nice. And if that doesn’t work, be even nicer. The worse he is, the nicer you need to be! Repeat ad nauseam.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Came across this

    https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2016/05/03/navigating-the-biblical-basis-of-attraction-and-marriage-with-others/

    Let me make this real simple for those who analyze the hell out of these things…..

    https://twobirdsstone.wordpress.com/2016/05/03/a-bird-visual-of-what-women-want-in-men/

    There should be a “this not that” book for men and women (like those food books).

    He also says:

    “Dominance with women is the X factor. If a man is charming and charismatic with women he will tend to have many suitors regardless of a mediocre or potentially non-existent Protector and/or Provider.”

    I did not know men had suitors these days! Its true though, if he is that charming he might just get men as well.

    Like

    1. Stone said:

      “I did not know men had suitors these days!”

      I think the word he was looking for is “groupie.”

      Like

  27. I know we’re not supposed to reply to new deti stuff, but I have to talk about this old comment:

    “How about a woman going up to a man she likes and saying “Hi. My name is _________. How are you today?””

    This has some problems.

    1. How does she like him if they don’t know each others names? That’s possible, but not likely.

    2. Unfortunately, deti has provided his hypothetical go-getter woman with a a conversational dead end. This isn’t original to me–I saw a discussion of online dating where the consensus was that “How are you?” totally stinks as an online dating opener between two people that barely know each other. And the reason for that is that there is a formula for that conversation. This is how it goes:

    A: How are you?

    B: Fine! How are you?

    A. Fine!

    This conversation is now OVER.

    We need to teach our girls (and boys!) to give the interlocutor more to work with.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Ugh. No. No, no, no.
    1. I read on the Christo-manisphere for 2 years. I got there because I was (I’m yelling this part) trying to figure out WHY I was NO LONGER attracted to my husband. Not why I “married him in spite of never being attracted to him, ever.”
    2. I found my answer there: there are NUMEROUS posts on how women and men have HUGELY DIFFERENT attraction points. Men=physical. The end. Women? Well, multiple posts explored this. I read them and analyzed them because I wanted AN ANSWER DANG IT. And yes, I know what it is to be SEXUALLY ATTRACTED to a man. I wanted it back.
    3. Women have a much more nuanced, complicated attraction “vector” system. Ha ha using that language, even. They even came up with acronyms: PSALMS. And LAMPS. The manosphere men discussed and explored these vectors AT LENGTH. Understanding the DIFFERENCES in female attraction vectors is KEY in learning how to PICK UP WOMEN.
    4. Completely, utterly unacknowledged by certain ppl is that people, MALE AND FEMALE ALIKE, can LOSE ATTRACTION to someone over time. Hence, it is TOTALLY POSSIBLES that what happened to ME has happened to countless women AND MEN throughout history.
    5. Men acknowledge that if something CHANGES about their wife’s PHYSICAL appearance, they lose the sexual attraction they once had.
    6. So guess what. If one of or several of the husbands “vectors” changes, the WIFE’S attraction, sexual attraction, can and does fade.
    7. In conclusion, it’s not always “she married a man to whom she wasn’t even sexually attracted!!!” It’s not that straightforward for men, and it’s not that for women. If you can acknowledge that women’s attraction points are different, then acknowledge that those things changing can affect a woman’s sexual attraction.
    8. Porn is a problem for the Christian marriage bed. It affects your sexual relationship. Period. This CANNOT be ignored or treated as a non-issue.
    9. I am not a feminist, do not want to divorce my husband, and believe I have contributed to the marital issues I have.

    Sheesh.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I am sympathetic to the lack of interest issue. It’s not a problem I’ve had, but I can definitely see how it might happen. That said, men aren’t totally visual, they’re just the visual ones ccompared to women.

      Like

  29. Oh, yeah. And…I read numerous times on the manosphere that THE ONLY DIFFERENTIATING FACTOR BETWEEN MARRIAGE AND OTHER RELATIONSHIPS IS SEX. Over and over again, that was DRILLED into my brain. So to say that’s not a meme of the manosphere is silllllyyyyy.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.