Why Aren’t More People Getting Married? Ask Women What Dating Is Like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A couple of points:

As a man I don't want to raise someone else's kids. (You want a good man? Don't have kids outside of marriage.)

Many women in DC are smart, that's great! But many are ~40+ and have prioritized their careers over family for most of their lives. I don't care about the status-level of my partner's job. I don't care how much money my partner makes. I do care if someone will be a good partner and can give me time and togetherness. (The DC area dating apps are filled with attractive, single, smart, 40 year old female attorneys.)

Women who are fat aren't attractive. (Most women who are online dating are obese. You want a good man? Have good hygiene, go to the gym regularly and diet.)

Women who are old aren't attractive. (You want a man? Lock one down before you turn 35-40. After 45 most women are invisible to men and you'll be stuck dating 60 year old men.)

Most people (men or women) who are still dating and never married by their late 30s-40s aren't partner material. (Emotional, psychological, sexual, commitment issues...)

Are looks important to men? Yes! And sex and a real emotional connection.

One easy fact about dating: if you want to find someone who will commit to you, date someone who is less attractive than you are. If you are a 6, date a 4 or 5.

This post is a really great example of why the quality of men out there is so low. Ladies, this guy above thinks he's a catch and a 'good guy'! And he's the most entitled, obnoxious clueless douchebag! Omg I am so glad I'm not on the market and needing to date guys like the above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read that piece and agree that there is some "male drift." Most college educated women I know want to marry professional men.

Also, sociology 101 shows that in populations where men are outnumbered by women, there are lower rates of marriage because men do not need to try to "lock down" women. Instead, they take the advantage of the availability of casual relationships, sometimes more than one at the same time.

Making up new jargon as quoted I'm the article to explain away the obvious that many women can't seem to cope with, and runs counter to the woke/progressive narrative peddled by the MSM, is not helpful. "Male drift" means what?

An obese unattractive unskilled unemployed or minimum wage baby mama in her 30s is.going to attract her male equivalent.

A professional woman in her mid 30s with a sketchy relationship history, emotional problems, attachment disorders, obsessed with feminism and woke politics, who is at best a "5" with a thick coat of makeup in dim lighting, but who believes she us too good for her male equivalent, is.going to be constantly frustrated.

A sexy attractive or even just average pretty girl next door type who is not overweight and actually likes men, does not have personality disorders or mental issues, and has realistic expectations in relationships, will have no problems at all. If she wants a good solid man for marriage she needs to be willing to have his children and raise them. Sure she can have a career but should be willing to prioritize caring for the children above that.

After all is she is looking for a family man doesn't she need to be a family woman?

If you are happily married, why do you care what single people do? Doth do protest too much, methinks.

It’s sad that this is the pitiful narrative you’re preaching to your children. Your sons will grow up hating women and treating them as objects, and your daughters will have some serious complexes.

Your lack of self love and support comes across as very sad to me.

Drowning your tears in a gallon tub of ben and Jerry's tonight?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read that piece and agree that there is some "male drift." Most college educated women I know want to marry professional men.

Also, sociology 101 shows that in populations where men are outnumbered by women, there are lower rates of marriage because men do not need to try to "lock down" women. Instead, they take the advantage of the availability of casual relationships, sometimes more than one at the same time.

Making up new jargon as quoted I'm the article to explain away the obvious that many women can't seem to cope with, and runs counter to the woke/progressive narrative peddled by the MSM, is not helpful. "Male drift" means what?

An obese unattractive unskilled unemployed or minimum wage baby mama in her 30s is.going to attract her male equivalent.

A professional woman in her mid 30s with a sketchy relationship history, emotional problems, attachment disorders, obsessed with feminism and woke politics, who is at best a "5" with a thick coat of makeup in dim lighting, but who believes she us too good for her male equivalent, is.going to be constantly frustrated.

A sexy attractive or even just average pretty girl next door type who is not overweight and actually likes men, does not have personality disorders or mental issues, and has realistic expectations in relationships, will have no problems at all. If she wants a good solid man for marriage she needs to be willing to have his children and raise them. Sure she can have a career but should be willing to prioritize caring for the children above that.

After all is she is looking for a family man doesn't she need to be a family woman?

If you are happily married, why do you care what single people do? Doth do protest too much, methinks.

It’s sad that this is the pitiful narrative you’re preaching to your children. Your sons will grow up hating women and treating them as objects, and your daughters will have some serious complexes.

Your lack of self love and support comes across as very sad to me.

Drowning your tears in a gallon tub of ben and Jerry's tonight?

NP. Are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

[Anonymous]

I think a lot of it is just luck.

But, I do have a couple friends who spent many years living with boyfriends that they felt unsure about. I strongly recommend against that and kind of don’t understand it. One of them is 39, the other is 43 and they did both recently, FINALLY leave their decades long relationships. They both still hope to get married and have kids.

I really just don’t get it…..they are smart, attractive women who just spent too darn long with guys they were unsure about.

In both cases, the men wanted to marry them and have kids with them!!!

Like why spend so long with someone at these critical ages when you want a family??

At a certain point, if you want a husband and kids, you have to just decide. Decide to leave, decide to take a plunge, whatever, but don’t spend your late 20s-your 30s with the same dude if you can’t decide whether you like him enough to get married.

I say this as someone who got married and is still unsure about my DH lol. But we’ve had a pretty good decade together, and two good kids together. Could I have done better? I don’t know. Maybe. But I also could have done worse or missed my chance for raising kids of my own in the context of a marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read that piece and agree that there is some "male drift." Most college educated women I know want to marry professional men.

Also, sociology 101 shows that in populations where men are outnumbered by women, there are lower rates of marriage because men do not need to try to "lock down" women. Instead, they take the advantage of the availability of casual relationships, sometimes more than one at the same time.

Making up new jargon as quoted I'm the article to explain away the obvious that many women can't seem to cope with, and runs counter to the woke/progressive narrative peddled by the MSM, is not helpful. "Male drift" means what?

An obese unattractive unskilled unemployed or minimum wage baby mama in her 30s is.going to attract her male equivalent.

A professional woman in her mid 30s with a sketchy relationship history, emotional problems, attachment disorders, obsessed with feminism and woke politics, who is at best a "5" with a thick coat of makeup in dim lighting, but who believes she us too good for her male equivalent, is.going to be constantly frustrated.

A sexy attractive or even just average pretty girl next door type who is not overweight and actually likes men, does not have personality disorders or mental issues, and has realistic expectations in relationships, will have no problems at all. If she wants a good solid man for marriage she needs to be willing to have his children and raise them. Sure she can have a career but should be willing to prioritize caring for the children above that.

After all is she is looking for a family man doesn't she need to be a family woman?

If you are happily married, why do you care what single people do? Doth do protest too much, methinks.

It’s sad that this is the pitiful narrative you’re preaching to your children. Your sons will grow up hating women and treating them as objects, and your daughters will have some serious complexes.

Your lack of self love and support comes across as very sad to me.

Drowning your tears in a gallon tub of ben and Jerry's tonight?

NP. Are you?

You cleaned out the freezer.case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

That you would compare a millionaire celebrity to ordinary women shows just how out of touch women like you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

That you would compare a millionaire celebrity to ordinary women shows just how out of touch women like you are.

The fact that it's happening even to those women says it all. Its much harder for women who dont have any public platform, just go from work back home, and dont have legions of male fans who would be interested in dating them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

[Anonymous]

Plenty of people are getting married. If you’re smart, reasonably attractive and not neurotic and needy your odds are good if you don’t stay locked in your apartment with your cats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

More cope. The reality is that life is unfair and sometimes things dont work out. And many attractive women rightfully have higher standards and arent willing to settle as much for the ugly guy, so they stay single. It is what it is. It's a fiction to imagine that life works out perfectly fairly and everyone finds their exact match.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of it is just luck.

But, I do have a couple friends who spent many years living with boyfriends that they felt unsure about. I strongly recommend against that and kind of don’t understand it. One of them is 39, the other is 43 and they did both recently, FINALLY leave their decades long relationships. They both still hope to get married and have kids.

I really just don’t get it…..they are smart, attractive women who just spent too darn long with guys they were unsure about.

In both cases, the men wanted to marry them and have kids with them!!!

Like why spend so long with someone at these critical ages when you want a family??

At a certain point, if you want a husband and kids, you have to just decide. Decide to leave, decide to take a plunge, whatever, but don’t spend your late 20s-your 30s with the same dude if you can’t decide whether you like him enough to get married.

I say this as someone who got married and is still unsure about my DH lol. But we’ve had a pretty good decade together, and two good kids together. Could I have done better? I don’t know. Maybe. But I also could have done worse or missed my chance for raising kids of my own in the context of a marriage.

These women have at a minimum have attachment disorders or perhaps personality disorders. They self sabotaged their entire lives but yet delusionally believe their prince charming is going to ride in on a horse and save them from the consequences of their neurotic bad choices. They probably had poor relationships with their fathers and have a basic lack of security with any man. The pickings will get even slimmer for them not better as they age.

You yourself obviously have some pretty serious commitment issues of you are still unsure of your husband after ten years and two kids.

There is no lol it is not a joking manner. This is a you problem. You married someone but never fully committed to him or the marriage. Your marriage will get better when you grow up own your choice and fully commit and stop half assing it.

Tons of women like you because you have been brainwashed by feminism and Disney to believe you are a princess who deserves a non existent Prince Charming to solve all your problems for you. No man is good enough so you hold back something. You don't fully commit in your heart and mind because you are weak and insecure. Then you blame the distance and lack of intimacy on him instead of yourself.

I'll bet your father was.weak or absent or you didn't have a great relationship with him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

More cope. The reality is that life is unfair and sometimes things dont work out. And many attractive women rightfully have higher standards and arent willing to settle as much for the ugly guy, so they stay single. It is what it is. It's a fiction to imagine that life works out perfectly fairly and everyone finds their exact match.

I am a reasonably attractive guy. I often date slightly less attractive women. Their personalities are soooo much better than women who think they are attractive.

Normally the better looking a women thinks she is, the meaner her personality is. 20 years from now the pretty woman won't be that attractive. The women with a great personality will still be beautiful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

More cope. The reality is that life is unfair and sometimes things dont work out. And many attractive women rightfully have higher standards and arent willing to settle as much for the ugly guy, so they stay single. It is what it is. It's a fiction to imagine that life works out perfectly fairly and everyone finds their exact match.

I am a reasonably attractive guy. I often date slightly less attractive women. Their personalities are soooo much better than women who think they are attractive.

Normally the better looking a women thinks she is, the meaner her personality is. 20 years from now the pretty woman won't be that attractive. The women with a great personality will still be beautiful.

And see, this is something a lot of guys think. That all beautiful women are secretly mean, probably because they have some trauma of being rejected in 8th grade or something. This is the reality for ACTUALLY beautiful women- having some kind of weird projection of a personality beamed onto you by total strangers who resent you for your looks. I'm glad someone posted it, because it's a phenomenon I've observed many times that truly, strikingly attractive women have to contend with. That's one of the reasons they have a harder time dating than average looking women