Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Have you seen their options? I get it
I am late twenties, single, and child-free. I am not single/child-free because I wanted to focus on my career, casually hookup, and party it up in my 20s. I always wanted to get married young and family is important to me. However, I have not found a quality partner in this area who is attractive to me and treats me well and shares my values. I think I would prefer to be alone than to be with a man who treats me poorly and whose character I don't respect.
I don't think women are the only part of this equation. My peers and I wish we had more decent options.
absolutely. Women have upped their game over the years. Many men... not so much. They think they should be able to get any attractive woman just because they have a pulse and a job. A woman doesn't want to marry a man-baby.
I don’t think most women have upped their game at all.
I think elite tier women have, yes
But your average flyover woman was WAY more attractive 60 years ago.
Men have dropped their game also — agreed.
As problematic as this post is, I agree somewhat. Not only because of weight - but also because of fakeness. Way too many Kardashian-type fake body parts and overly made up Instagram wannabe looks. People in the past were more naturally beautiful.
Speaking for myself, I’m conventionally attractive, but I think more by a modern standard than traditional beauty. I’m big into fitness and weightlifting. Not as traditionally feminine as women 60 years ago.
I’m sure you look great and amazonian but if you are under 5’7, the whole anglo/American gym weightlifting women trend just makes you look like a cartoon character.
Mainland euro women are always roasting how American women are “sporty”…and it’s not in a good way.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Have you seen their options? I get it
I am late twenties, single, and child-free. I am not single/child-free because I wanted to focus on my career, casually hookup, and party it up in my 20s. I always wanted to get married young and family is important to me. However, I have not found a quality partner in this area who is attractive to me and treats me well and shares my values. I think I would prefer to be alone than to be with a man who treats me poorly and whose character I don't respect.
I don't think women are the only part of this equation. My peers and I wish we had more decent options.
absolutely. Women have upped their game over the years. Many men... not so much. They think they should be able to get any attractive woman just because they have a pulse and a job. A woman doesn't want to marry a man-baby.
I don’t think most women have upped their game at all.
I think elite tier women have, yes
But your average flyover woman was WAY more attractive 60 years ago.
Men have dropped their game also — agreed.
As problematic as this post is, I agree somewhat. Not only because of weight - but also because of fakeness. Way too many Kardashian-type fake body parts and overly made up Instagram wannabe looks. People in the past were more naturally beautiful.
Speaking for myself, I’m conventionally attractive, but I think more by a modern standard than traditional beauty. I’m big into fitness and weightlifting. Not as traditionally feminine as women 60 years ago.
I’m sure you look great and amazonian but if you are under 5’7, the whole anglo/American gym weightlifting women trend just makes you look like a cartoon character.
Mainland euro women are always roasting how American women are “sporty”…and it’s not in a good way.
Anonymous wrote:Is it because most British women are better educated and do more schooling than 4 years of undergraduate studies? I was 32 when I finished my formal education. Iff I had wanted to have children before age 30, it would have been doing part time studies and taking longer to finish my schooling.
No doubt that it continues to be a challenge to be have a career and be a parent as a woman. Not sure why this post is significant.
Among white boys from disadvantaged families only about 10% will go to university - the lowest of any social or ethnic group.
Deprived boys from other ethnic backgrounds, such as black and Asian, are much more likely to go to university.
"That is why our recent university access guidance for the first time called for specific support for white boys from the poorest homes."
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Have you seen their options? I get it
I am late twenties, single, and child-free. I am not single/child-free because I wanted to focus on my career, casually hookup, and party it up in my 20s. I always wanted to get married young and family is important to me. However, I have not found a quality partner in this area who is attractive to me and treats me well and shares my values. I think I would prefer to be alone than to be with a man who treats me poorly and whose character I don't respect.
I don't think women are the only part of this equation. My peers and I wish we had more decent options.
absolutely. Women have upped their game over the years. Many men... not so much. They think they should be able to get any attractive woman just because they have a pulse and a job. A woman doesn't want to marry a man-baby.
I don’t think most women have upped their game at all.
I think elite tier women have, yes
But your average flyover woman was WAY more attractive 60 years ago.
Men have dropped their game also — agreed.
As problematic as this post is, I agree somewhat. Not only because of weight - but also because of fakeness. Way too many Kardashian-type fake body parts and overly made up Instagram wannabe looks. People in the past were more naturally beautiful.
Speaking for myself, I’m conventionally attractive, but I think more by a modern standard than traditional beauty. I’m big into fitness and weightlifting. Not as traditionally feminine as women 60 years ago.
I’m sure you look great and amazonian but if you are under 5’7, the whole anglo/American gym weightlifting women trend just makes you look like a cartoon character.
Mainland euro women are always roasting how American women are “sporty”…and it’s not in a good way.
Anonymous wrote:Is it because most British women are better educated and do more schooling than 4 years of undergraduate studies? I was 32 when I finished my formal education. Iff I had wanted to have children before age 30, it would have been doing part time studies and taking longer to finish my schooling.
No doubt that it continues to be a challenge to be have a career and be a parent as a woman. Not sure why this post is significant.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don’t know anyone who had a child before 30. And I got married young. I had my first at 30 and was one of the youngest.
+1
Well, there was this girl in HS who dropped out. But everyone else who figured out how to use birth control waited until they were ready.
Imagine being smug about waiting until your 30s to have your first child. High probability you and/or your husband die before you experience the joy of grandchildren.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Have you seen their options? I get it
I am late twenties, single, and child-free. I am not single/child-free because I wanted to focus on my career, casually hookup, and party it up in my 20s. I always wanted to get married young and family is important to me. However, I have not found a quality partner in this area who is attractive to me and treats me well and shares my values. I think I would prefer to be alone than to be with a man who treats me poorly and whose character I don't respect.
I don't think women are the only part of this equation. My peers and I wish we had more decent options.
absolutely. Women have upped their game over the years. Many men... not so much. They think they should be able to get any attractive woman just because they have a pulse and a job. A woman doesn't want to marry a man-baby.
I don’t think most women have upped their game at all.
I think elite tier women have, yes
But your average flyover woman was WAY more attractive 60 years ago.
Men have dropped their game also — agreed.
As problematic as this post is, I agree somewhat. Not only because of weight - but also because of fakeness. Way too many Kardashian-type fake body parts and overly made up Instagram wannabe looks. People in the past were more naturally beautiful.
Speaking for myself, I’m conventionally attractive, but I think more by a modern standard than traditional beauty. I’m big into fitness and weightlifting. Not as traditionally feminine as women 60 years ago.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Have you seen their options? I get it
I am late twenties, single, and child-free. I am not single/child-free because I wanted to focus on my career, casually hookup, and party it up in my 20s. I always wanted to get married young and family is important to me. However, I have not found a quality partner in this area who is attractive to me and treats me well and shares my values. I think I would prefer to be alone than to be with a man who treats me poorly and whose character I don't respect.
I don't think women are the only part of this equation. My peers and I wish we had more decent options.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Being a mother is literally THE most important job any woman can do. What other occupation contributes more to humanity than sustaining our species?
Too bad society treats mothers like dirt.
This is the unintended consequence of feminism and “women can do everything men can do.” Yes, women should be able to work and men should do half the housework. But it doesn’t actually work that way. My mom was a working mom in the 80’s (out of necessity not choice) and I saw what a raw deal it was. I was determined to be a SAHM or not at all and that’s what I did. I didn’t and don’t feel treated like dirt, but my only job for the last 15 years has been raising my children and running the house. It’s not actually a bad job if you don’t also have another job. I have two daughters and I will support any choice they make, but I will alert them to this reality.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Being a mother is literally THE most important job any woman can do. What other occupation contributes more to humanity than sustaining our species?
A lab scientist working on Covid or any number of diseases. Also climate change. Glad you think women are just walking incubators and child care workers.
If that’s what you got out of that post, I feel absolute pity for you.
Being a mother is not the most important job any woman can do. It is NOT a woman's job alone. There are fathers, aunts, uncles, neighbors, grandparents, church members, teachers, and community members who also act as "mothers." You don't get that child rearing is a community based activity, not some mantle a woman has because of her uterus. Birthing a child does not make a woman a mother and there are more ways women can contribute to society. In fact, wasn't the person behind the covid vaccine a woman? I am sure she will tell her kids about her achievements one day. Because women are NOT one thing. And if you don't get that, you can crawl into your hole.
For most women, motherhood is easily the most important accomplishment of their lives. It's hard to deny that women seem to have a biological hardwiring that predisposes them to be the primary childcarer. It does not mean having children should be the only focus of a woman's life, and fathers should be heavily involved too. But, frankly, the whole idea a woman can give birth and then expect a whole "village" to jump in to help raise the children is both clueless and impractical. Most people have very limited interest in other people's children. A teacher or neighbor can never replace a mother. Even aunts and uncles are not the same as your own parents. The nuclear family model is one that provides the most support, and going from all sociological studies in modern nations, nothing can ever come close to replacing the strong support of a nuclear family arrangement - assuming, of course, it is a good one, and that is not always the case.
The delayed births in Western nations seems to be correlated with rising cost of living more than anything else.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don’t know anyone who had a child before 30. And I got married young. I had my first at 30 and was one of the youngest.
+1
Well, there was this girl in HS who dropped out. But everyone else who figured out how to use birth control waited until they were ready.
Imagine being smug about waiting until your 30s to have your first child. High probability you and/or your husband die before you experience the joy of grandchildren.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don’t know anyone who had a child before 30. And I got married young. I had my first at 30 and was one of the youngest.
+1
Well, there was this girl in HS who dropped out. But everyone else who figured out how to use birth control waited until they were ready.
Imagine being smug about waiting until your 30s to have your first child. High probability you and/or your husband die before you experience the joy of grandchildren.