American Women Are Giving Up on Marriage (Wall Street Journal)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Both genders are becoming increasingly unattractive to the other. You have more men growing up to be directionless incel losers, you have more women becoming fat and having delusional standards.

Politics is more extreme now so conservative men and liberal women are finding decreased ability to find common ground. Economically men are losing their appeal, women need them less and they have less to offer in the first place. Socially, there are fewer places to meet in person so we see increased use of online dating which is a very harsh environment and fosters the idea that everyone you meet is disposable, top 5% of men rake it in while bottom 95% get next to nothing.

I strongly disagree in a post-GLP1 world—half my neighborhood has shrunk.

[Anonymous]

It’s interesting because my understanding is that the sociological data shows that married parents have high levels of happiness. Having a stable family is an overall benefit to the individuals involved and society.

Certain demographic groups are more successful in forming and maintaining families including the college educated professional class, Asian Americans, and more religious people.

We talk about this issue with our teen. Alongside college and career prep, we want him to know the importance of family and the value of intentionally prioritizing a good marriage. It doesn’t just magically happen. Effort is both required and rewarded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Hard truth time: a large portion of the male population has always been comprised of "incompatible marriage partners" but women didn't used to have the agency to opt-out like we do now.

It goes both ways and is partially self fulfilling. The typical woman nowadays isn’t someone most men would want to marry. Men historically were motivated to work hard and become attractive by the prospect of marriage and supporting their family. If you look around and the available women don’t appeal to you, or give away sex without commitment, what’s the point in making yourself a marriageable man? If young men are losing hope that a good future spouse for them even exists, it greatly reduces their drive to become marriageable.

Typical "blame the women" mentality, bro. Some men can't handle the idea of an independent woman they'd need to treat as an equal and not a substitute mommy/sex slave/subservient underling. So yeah, those men see the "typical woman nowadays" (i.e a woman with agency) as someone they wouldn't want to marry.

This is less "it goes both ways" and more you proving the pp's point: those men would've only been able to secure wives in a time when the wives had fewer/no options and had to go along with male bs to survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Hard truth time: a large portion of the male population has always been comprised of "incompatible marriage partners" but women didn't used to have the agency to opt-out like we do now.

It goes both ways and is partially self fulfilling. The typical woman nowadays isn’t someone most men would want to marry. Men historically were motivated to work hard and become attractive by the prospect of marriage and supporting their family. If you look around and the available women don’t appeal to you, or give away sex without commitment, what’s the point in making yourself a marriageable man? If young men are losing hope that a good future spouse for them even exists, it greatly reduces their drive to become marriageable.

reminds me of this clip:

bzackly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Hard truth time: a large portion of the male population has always been comprised of "incompatible marriage partners" but women didn't used to have the agency to opt-out like we do now.

Exactly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Marriage is a losing proposition for a lot of higher earning women. They do most of the housechores, childcare while still earning more.

Would a man want to sign up for a marriage where he does most of the housechores, childcare, and bring home most of the income? I don't think so.

Marriage is a losing proposition if you don't marry someone with similar ambitions, work ethic, values, and emotional intelligence.

It is THIS simple folks.

High value men or women will seek out high value men or women.

If you give up on yourself being high value b/c of some article or "not seeing what I like out there" that's pathetic and on you. Be the best you can and let the chips fall where they may. At least you'll have less regrets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting because my understanding is that the sociological data shows that married parents have high levels of happiness. Having a stable family is an overall benefit to the individuals involved and society.

Certain demographic groups are more successful in forming and maintaining families including the college educated professional class, Asian Americans, and more religious people.

We talk about this issue with our teen. Alongside college and career prep, we want him to know the importance of family and the value of intentionally prioritizing a good marriage. It doesn’t just magically happen. Effort is both required and rewarded.

Nope - single women are happiest, followed by married men. I forget whether single men or married women are least happy.

We talk with our teen DD about choosing a partner who shares your values and will pull their weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Both genders are becoming increasingly unattractive to the other. You have more men growing up to be directionless incel losers, you have more women becoming fat and having delusional standards.

Politics is more extreme now so conservative men and liberal women are finding decreased ability to find common ground. Economically men are losing their appeal, women need them less and they have less to offer in the first place. Socially, there are fewer places to meet in person so we see increased use of online dating which is a very harsh environment and fosters the idea that everyone you meet is disposable, top 5% of men rake it in while bottom 95% get next to nothing.

I strongly disagree in a post-GLP1 world—half my neighborhood has shrunk.

It's truly unbelievable how perpetually obese people are not even clinically overweight. Still no muscle tone or exercise plans or cardiovascular health, but not obese. Seems like many of the men got cocky as well, like mid life crisis cocky with their rapid large weight loss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting because my understanding is that the sociological data shows that married parents have high levels of happiness. Having a stable family is an overall benefit to the individuals involved and society.

Certain demographic groups are more successful in forming and maintaining families including the college educated professional class, Asian Americans, and more religious people.

We talk about this issue with our teen. Alongside college and career prep, we want him to know the importance of family and the value of intentionally prioritizing a good marriage. It doesn’t just magically happen. Effort is both required and rewarded.

agree. need a big picture and community goals.
so much lack of community in AMerica right now in some sections and online chats won't be the answer. No church/temple communities, adult sports or teams, dating and set ups, volunteering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t Lume vag deodorant?? lol

Anonymous wrote:Care to elaborate on why you find this funny?

This is funny because Katie started coaching leadership in her twenties when she had no credibility as a leader or coach and chose an awful brand name. Her oblivious business marketing casts suspicion on her dating strategy - “Maybe we’re doing it wrong ... [to] put 10,000 hours into and end up right where you started.”

The other women left deadbeats and cheaters. Katie attended Stanford Engineering and Harvard Business School, places full of eligible men. She is slim, with long, flowing hair and a clear, fair complexion. Yes, she is doing it wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Hard truth time: a large portion of the male population has always been comprised of "incompatible marriage partners" but women didn't used to have the agency to opt-out like we do now.

It goes both ways and is partially self fulfilling. The typical woman nowadays isn’t someone most men would want to marry. Men historically were motivated to work hard and become attractive by the prospect of marriage and supporting their family. If you look around and the available women don’t appeal to you, or give away sex without commitment, what’s the point in making yourself a marriageable man? If young men are losing hope that a good future spouse for them even exists, it greatly reduces their drive to become marriageable.

Typical "blame the women" mentality, bro. Some men can't handle the idea of an independent woman they'd need to treat as an equal and not a substitute mommy/sex slave/subservient underling. So yeah, those men see the "typical woman nowadays" (i.e a woman with agency) as someone they wouldn't want to marry.

This is less "it goes both ways" and more you proving the pp's point: those men would've only been able to secure wives in a time when the wives had fewer/no options and had to go along with male bs to survive.

“Women are doing comparatively well when it comes to education and their early years in the labor force, and men are doing comparatively badly,” said Brad Wilcox, a fellow at the conservative Institute for Family Studies and a sociology professor at the University of Virginia. “That creates a mismatch, because people prefer to date in terms of comparable education or income.”

Men’s economic struggles seem to be having the biggest effect on women without a college degree, whose marriage rates by age 45 have plummeted from 79% to 52% for those born between 1930 and 1980, according to research by Cornell University economist Benjamin Goldman. “Young men without a degree are struggling so much as a group that there simply aren’t enough with steady jobs and earnings for non-college women to date,” said Goldman.

Rachael Gosetti, a 33-year-old real-estate agent in Savannah, Ga., said she broke up with her boyfriend, with whom she shares a 5-year-old son, over a year ago because she was tired of doing most of the child care, cooking and scheduling while also earning almost double her boyfriend’s salary. She has yet to date anyone else in part because she worries about living in a red state with a six-week abortion ban. “I have a child that I can’t leave behind to drive to Virginia if I had a pregnancy scare, and I definitely can’t afford another child as a single mom,” she said.

[Anonymous]

So Rachel Wolfe wrote a biased article to self-soothe and comfort her girl boss friends. Sounds about right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do we know who isn't settling and who has no options for settling so only appear to decline non-existent offers?

Ha! Women can ALWAYS settle. There is always some loser out there looking for a mommy housekeeper breadwinner. Men can be very practical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Hard truth time: a large portion of the male population has always been comprised of "incompatible marriage partners" but women didn't used to have the agency to opt-out like we do now.

This is true, but also, historically LOTS of people didn't marry. Many jobs didn't accommodate families, so if you didn't have your own business/land you could be SOL in terms of supporting a family. People who didn't marry lived with their siblings, or got jobs in other people's homes, or took religious orders, or joined the military.
Today people expect they will pair off and marry, but the married couple as core social structure is relatively new.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Hard truth time: a large portion of the male population has always been comprised of "incompatible marriage partners" but women didn't used to have the agency to opt-out like we do now.

It goes both ways and is partially self fulfilling. The typical woman nowadays isn’t someone most men would want to marry. Men historically were motivated to work hard and become attractive by the prospect of marriage and supporting their family. If you look around and the available women don’t appeal to you, or give away sex without commitment, what’s the point in making yourself a marriageable man? If young men are losing hope that a good future spouse for them even exists, it greatly reduces their drive to become marriageable.

Typical "blame the women" mentality, bro. Some men can't handle the idea of an independent woman they'd need to treat as an equal and not a substitute mommy/sex slave/subservient underling. So yeah, those men see the "typical woman nowadays" (i.e a woman with agency) as someone they wouldn't want to marry.

This is less "it goes both ways" and more you proving the pp's point: those men would've only been able to secure wives in a time when the wives had fewer/no options and had to go along with male bs to survive.

Totally...another loser trying to " both sides" it.