Thursday, May 09, 2013

Losing the waiting game

There are a lot of good-looking, well-educated Western women who are missing out on marriage and/or motherhood. The Daily Mail has yet another article on this today, featuring women who couldn't find Mr Right and so chose to become solo mothers in their late 30s or early 40s by using anonymous sperm donors (and sometimes overseas egg donors).

One of the women profiled was Jessica McCallin. Perhaps you can't tell everything from a photo, but she seems like an attractive woman, i.e. someone who ought to have been able to find a father for her children relatively easily. So what went wrong?



She doesn't attempt an explanation, but one of the other women profiled, Caroline Saddington, offered this:
‘In your teens you envisage marriage and two children,’ she says. ‘Then my 20s were career-focused and I got to my 30s and hadn’t met a man good enough to be a father. They fell far short of my expectations.

That's a losing combination of attitudes. She wants to not only defer family formation until very late in the piece but retain high expectations of men as fathers as well. The women who do manage to get out of the "defer family option" reasonably unscathed are the ones who aren't too fussy and who are willing to compromise in their very early 30s. But more on this later.

Dennis Prager has written a column which touches on the problem of deferral:
I was in college and graduate school during the heyday of modern feminism. And the central message to women was clear as daylight: You are no different from men. Therefore, among other things, you can enjoy sex just like they do -- just for the fun of it and with many partners. The notion that nearly every woman yearns for something deeper when she has sexual intercourse with a man was dismissed as patriarchal propaganda. The culture might tell her to restrict sex to a man who loves her and might even marry her, but the liberated woman knows better: Sex without any emotional ties or possibility of future commitment can be "empowering."

Feminism taught -- and professors on the New York Times op-ed page continue to write -- that there are no significant natural differences between men and women. Therefore, it is not unique to male nature to want to have sex with many partners. Rather, a "Playboy culture" "pressures" men into having frequent, uncommitted sex. And, to the extent this is a part of male nature, it is equally true of women's natures.

Another feminist message to women was that just as a woman can have sex like a man, she can also find career as fulfilling as men do. Therefore, pursuing an "M-R-S" at college is just another residue of patriarchy. Women should be as interested in a career as men are. Any hint of the notion that women want, more than anything else, to marry and make a family is sexist, demeaning, and untrue.
 
I don't entirely agree with the wording of this. But I think he is right that women have come under pressure to reject looking for love and marriage in their early 20s in favour of careers and hook-ups. And the problem is not just that this is a denial of better aspects of a woman's nature, but that it is a losing strategy for these women in the longer term.

In some ways, the very worst enemy of middle-class Anglo women right now are feminists. Why? An open-bordered country like Australia now has a lot of different ethnic groups. Amongst the women of these groups, upper middle-class Anglo men are strongly favoured and competed for.

I have met some of the women from overseas backgrounds who are successfully competing for the upper middle-class Anglo men. They are often very classily feminine (rarely brash), they dress very stylishly (think Parisienne), they are friendly, happy and non-aggressive. They are ready to meet a future husband when they are at university.

And what is being drummed into the upper middle-class Anglo women? They are raised with feminist ideas, such as that you prove yourself in career competition with men; that to be feminine is weak; that family formation is something you leave until your 30s; that it is empowering to emulate a male player lifestyle in your 20s; and that all that is owed men is a sexual relationship and even that is to be on your own terms.

It makes it very difficult for Anglo women to compete. An upper middle-class Anglo woman to have any chance with the men of her own age and peer group has to jettison the feminism that is drummed into her at school (and, even worse, sometimes reinforced by her own father). Some, I think, are beginning to attempt this and are trying to compete in dress and manners, but it may not be enough.

Finally, some women might read this and think "Well, why should we be competing for the men, they should be competing for us." And for men who aren't in as strong a position that no doubt remains true. But the most favoured men are in a position to choose and they won't choose women who don't turn up on time and who prefer to spend their 20s gloomily devoting themselves to career and counting down the years until it becomes respectable for them to try to make a go of a relationship.

Remember too that the role of a husband has been so whittled down within modern culture that it can no longer be assumed that men will be drawn to the "office" of being a husband - it has lost greatly in status and prestige. A lot of men will therefore wonder about such commitments and winning them over means making the personal side of marriage a very strongly attractive proposition. That can happen if a woman is able to live up to a romantic ideal, but to appear in such a way to a middle-class man means being classy, feminine and genuinely warmly natured.

I guess I would like Anglo women to unleash their feminine souls and to give themselves a fair chance with the men of their own peer group. That is a better option than reaching 35, finally admitting that family matters, but having no husband to be a father for a child.

29 comments:

  1. Mark--I just wanted to tell you I really appreciate your blog. I think you are doing God's work. Please keep it up.
    Tom

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that when we are talking about the upper end of the educated class of women, at least in the US, it's curious combination of different kinds of reasons that is leading to this kind of result.

    One of the main drivers is that this specific type of woman tends to have been groomed for competition from a young age. They were prompted and encouraged by parents and educators to compete with boys academically, and keep up with them (although generally not compete directly) athletically as well. Fathers and mothers are culprits here, but really they are just falling into lockstep with the broader culture -- which in America (not sure whether it is like this in Oz) is stubbornly fixated on the achievement of girls, and bends over backwards to facilitate it and reward it. Therefore, by the time these women reach their 20s, they have been immersed in a culture of female achievement, and the celebration/reward for that achievement as females for years and years already. It's all they know, and it's a positive thing for them -- because they have been lavished with encouragement, support, praise and celebration for their achievements through that time. It is not realistic to expect such a woman to turn around at 22 and decide she wants to focus on something other than achievement, or something that could derail the achievement train. She's been raised/trained/educated/formed to value this as her core mission in life.

    Some of these women change their minds as they advance through their 20s and some don't. I think that depends very much on the underlying personality. Some women really are happier focused on careers, and really are competitive, and want to be like men. They aren't averse to having families, either, but not at the expense of the core mission of the self-actualizing career. Other women are less innately so, such that when the training begins to wear off as the workaday world grinds on, they realize that they, in fact, want a life focused on something else. Quite a few of this latter set gets married between, say, 27 and 33.

    It's the former set, the ones who really are ambitious in their core being, who tends to put off and put off and put off -- the reason is that, when you're looking at a high powered career in business or the law or what have you, the period before 40 is formative/determinitive in how the rest of your career trajectory goes. You can do it the other way, and start a few years later, but for the most part you will never catch up with your age peers. So if you really are the very ambitious sort, who wants the brass ring as her core mission in life, you are going to be very reluctant to step off the advancement train any time much before 40. So you don't even think about marriage until at least your early 30s, and then you are in no particular hurry. Some of these women also experience a change in mindset in the mid-30s as their biological clocks are ticking very loudly, but others do not -- this is very specific to the individual woman.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A problem, however, is that as these women advance in their own personal power and wealth in their careers, the population of men who are "suitable" as a husband shrinks substantially for two reasons: (1) the universe of men who is as accomplished or more so (which tends to be a key driver of "suitability") is of course smaller the higher on the totem pole she is herself and (2) the most suitable age-peer men tend to have gotten married by then, and to somewhat younger women (the ones who decide to marry in the later 20s). This generally tends to be very surprising to these women. I think the reason for that is that from 15-early 30s, men are basically "on tap" for any woman who is reasonably attractive. Even for marriage, really. Women are aware of this. Not a few of them have gotten proposals in their 20s or early 30s which were turned down due to "bad timing" (which is, of course, based on the security that there will always be an abundance of such attractive proposals in the future). They live in an atmosphere of abundance when it comes to men for most of their younger lives. It then comes as a shock that when they themselves are willing and ready to marry in the mid to late 30s, that the pool has shrunk as much as it has as compared with just a few years earlier. I think the women really are genuinely surprised at how their market position changes as quickly as it does (when considering premium "suitable" men for high-powered, wealthy, ambitious female executive types).

    Of course it's true that this type of thinking is also reinforced by media images of Hollywood women getting married at 45 and having children and so on, which is as unreflective of the typical person's reality as is the rest of such a superstar's lifestyle. And it's true that the chattering media reinforces this approach through and through, for the simple reason that it wants more women in the corner offices, holding the brass ring, as a goal -- whether they have family lives, or not. But the foundation of the issue generally goes back to the youth of these women, and their formation by their families. They are simply being raised to be highly competitive thoroughbreds by their families, with career advancement and self-actualization as the core mission. It's not that the families of origin don't want their daughters to be married and have children -- they do. But they want them to do it while they are holding the brass ring as well. They want all of it for their daughters, really. And that's where the mentality comes from.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "In some ways, the very worst enemy of middle-class Anglo women right now are feminists. Why? An open-bordered country like Australia now has a lot of different ethnic groups. Amongst the women of these groups, upper middle-class Anglo men are strongly favoured and competed for."

    It's a good point - non-Anglo women generally see middle-class Anglo men as a great catch, and if they've not yet been Anglicised they have no trouble treating their men decently. Many of the very successful Englishmen I know have non-Anglo wives; some white and some north-east-Asian.

    I don't think this is the main thing stopping Anglo feminist women from marrying, though. Mostly they deliberately avoid marriage until ca 35-38, and some have been living with an (Anglo) boyfriend for years - who dumps them. Then when they start looking, many still have an idea of their own desirability formed when they were ca 22, and ridiculously over-high expectations. While the available men are mostly not A-grade material; the A-grade men already married. There's the occasional handsome widower to snap up, but mostly the professional middle-aged woman has to settle for an oddball or a divorce-scarred survivor, and if they can't they stay single.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Finally, some women might read this and think "Well, why should we be competing for the men, they should be competing for us."

    I guess we should ask my two (white) cousins who married Asian girls, and my three (white) cousins who most likely will never get married. For some reason they prefer Asians or celibacy to competing for white women! How can we possibly understand the lack of interest of white men in competing for shrill, aggressive, unfeminine white women who are most interested in competing WITH men as men rather than competing with women to see who is the most feminine and attractive?

    Related - Taranto discusses women having their eggs frozen.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323372504578466864126836272.html

    As an alternative, Richards suggests, the young professional-school applicant "might ask a boyfriend who wants to wait a few years to start a family to pony up for the procedure." If we may inject a male perspective here, that seems to us a completely outlandish demand, one that begs to be answered with "Get ova yourself."

    Aside from these practical concerns, the whole approach to reproduction--notably excepting Richards's own sweet love story--seems cold, detached and unromantic. "The idea is tantalizing," Richards writes: "Once you land the job and man you want, you can have your frozen eggs shipped to your fertility clinic, hand him a semen collection cup and be on your way to parenthood." Again, a male perspective: That does not sound tantalizing.


    So basically, women want men to pay to have their eggs frozen and later on wank off into a cup. Hmmmm, on the one hand, the aging, unfertile white girl, who needs expensive technology in order to reproduce, and on the other hand, the young, fertile Asian girl... let me think...

    No discussion in the original article of whether a woman SHOULD have her eggs frozen in order to reproduce in her 40s, only that it's really great that she CAN do so, yaaay!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Blog should read Anglo-Oz Conservative

    ReplyDelete
  7. If not for mass immigration this would solve itself simply: women inclined to think they are far too good for any man they can actually get would just edit their snooty genes out of the gene pool, and the next generation of would include women who on average were more inclined to reproduce.

    The next generation would also be dumber or let's say less educable on average. That's the cost of having your education system be a vector of destructive doctrines: you are killing off your good learners, over time. So the population would get stupider, and more horny and stubborn, till that problem was fixed. But eventually it would get fixed.

    As things stand with mass immigration, the snooty girls add to the disaster. They leave the next generation of whites dumber, fewer, and less able to compete in every way. They also indirectly pressure a lot of white men to marry out, just to get a feminine wife.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm not overly religious but I can't help feel that western women's problems are divine punishment for betraying their men.
    They will be brought low and only the most noble will continue the occidental tradition.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Blog should read Anglo-Oz Conservative
    I'm glad Mark gives us Anglos some content to read.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So basically, women want men to pay to have their eggs frozen and later on wank off into a cup. Hmmmm, on the one hand, the aging, unfertile white girl, who needs expensive technology in order to reproduce, and on the other hand, the young, fertile Asian girl... let me think...
    Having spoken to leading fertility scientists this trend will result in mass infertility with white people.
    Each subsequent child brought into the world with unnatural means is less fertile than the next.
    In maybe the next hundred years there will be entire nations unable to breed naturally if not at all.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This analysis seems to assume the views of these women are entirely determined by culture.

    However, scientific research indicates that are views on core political issues are at least 50 percent due to genes.

    Let these upper middle class feminists die out and focus on helping those lower-middle class men and women who actually want to have families.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi there, Mr Oz Conservative!

    Let's throw another perspective into the mix by also looking at what men were told prior to feminism really taking hold.

    Kinsey and the sexual revolution.

    Kinsey, who destroyed the notion of chastity for men and then for women, falsely reporting that a great percentage of men and women were sexual deviants who couldn't stay monogamous if they tried.

    Kinsey, who made a whole generation wonder about the fidelity of their spouses, and their children wondering about the sex lives of their parents.

    Kinsey, who paved the way for no-fault divorce, where abandoned spouses were left impoverished rather than being automatically awarded alimony and all the property. Women then had to be able to work so that if they divorced at least they'd be able to fend for themselves and their children.

    That was to treat women like sexual playthings, to lie to them and tell them what they wanted to hear just to get them into bed, to then discard them afterwards. That was from 1950's and that view was promulgated in the men's magazines of the times.

    No wonder feminism has been widely received by women, who at least want to feel they can look after themselves if they can't depend on men.

    It's a massive mess, and I for one see the article that you link to on women feeling like they are bereft of choice when it comes to marrying at least raising their standards, somewhat - belatedly unfortunately. And conceiving via IVF is a terrible evil as well.

    But, but, but .. women do need to raise their standards when it come to men, and they have to stop putting out to all the men that won't commit to them. Once that happens, men will become worthy again, I believe. Until then, you'll see a whole lot of men who get it all - the girlfriend, sex on tap and no need to commit or financially invest. No wonder a lot of women don't see these men as marriageable.

    ReplyDelete
  13. As these women's Residual Value approaches zero they are expecting to find the same value of men as that would be able to attract when their Residual Value was at its maximum. That's the problem.

    see pg 116 onwards for description of Residual Value.

    http://books.google.com.au/books?id=5uVUwCE3Vm4C&pg=PA113&lpg=PA113&dq=gynoid+fat+gynoid+fat+gynoid+fat&source=bl&ots=4GAZixbBsr&sig=9Tr9cHDnrGakcxmAKbgiHUlrCvo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UGCLUYHFHuaNiAfg3ID4DA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=true

    ReplyDelete
  14. "The next generation would also be dumber or let's say less educable on average. That's the cost of having your education system be a vector of destructive doctrines: you are killing off your good learners, over time. So the population would get stupider, and more horny and stubborn, till that problem was fixed. But eventually it would get fixed."


    Or it could just make intelligence sex-linked.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Sexual playthings, to lie to them and tell them what they wanted to hear just to get them into bed, to then discard them afterwards...putting out to all the men that won't commit to them...whole lot of men who get it all - the girlfriend, sex on tap and no need to commit or financially invest."

    Sorry but that is complete nonsense, you are talking about a very small minority of men <10%, the vast majority of men cant engage on those games even if they wanted to, look up apex fallacy.

    The whole premise is wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Sorry but that is complete nonsense, you are talking about a very small minority of men <10%, the vast majority of men cant engage on those games even if they wanted to, look up apex fallacy.

    You don't get it. That only a small minority of men benefit from the destruction of monogamy is a totally predictable outcome. In any non-monogamous system, a small minority of men monopolize the sexual attention of the majority of women, and most of the males are left out in the cold.

    Among other things, this explains why elite males are just fine with no fault divorce. That allows them to become polygamists. For each rich guy who has five wives in succession, there are four men lower on the totem pole who get no woman at all.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Tom, thank you.

    Brendan, another high quality comment, thanks. I agree with you about parental influence.

    Anon,

    I'm a traditionalist so of course I identify with the Anglo tradition I belong to. It's particularly important that I'm open about this as the Anglo tradition is the one "that dare not speak its name".

    Lucia Maria, you're right that in the 1940s and 50s it was men like Kinsey and Hefner who did much of the damage when it came to a culture of family life.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "I have met some of the women from overseas backgrounds who are successfully competing for the upper middle-class Anglo men. They are often very classily feminine (rarely brash), they dress very stylishly (think Parisienne), they are friendly, happy and non-aggressive. They are ready to meet a future husband when they are at university."

    Yes but see...

    We're dealing with racial qualities here. You can't change who you are...I've never been exposed to feminism but I'm very aggressive and brash but I don't think in a bad way at all. But I can't compete with Asian women who open their legs so easily and go "yes sir"

    The truth is these white men are choosing immorality over white women.

    They are choosing the easy way out.

    You make us sound like bitches and harpies...

    White women with the qualities you listed give birth to white men and women who speak truth like Enoch Powell and Margaret Thatcher.

    But whatever...Blame Us.

    Every interracial relationship I know of is based Not On Feminity....

    But Easy Sex..."I love you long time"

    So sorry that a guy has to earn it with me and put some work into it....

    so so so so sorry

    ReplyDelete
  19. My real world experience just doesn't add up to any of the things you say on your blog Mark. I'm so sorry.

    My asian friends were just so easy. You can't compete with that shit if you were raised right.

    I feel like you guys tell me to have taken any guy that showed the slightest bit of interest in me when I was younger....

    But the thing is...I genuinely didn't like those guys. They were jerks. One guy was blonde blue eyed and told everyone he was hispanic even though he was ethnically norwegian and finnish.

    Then I went through the phase of trying to 'straighten a guy out'...where I target a guy I liked and then tried to get him to have all the right beliefs about immigration and IQ and such...

    He then turned around and PURPOSEFULLY married a non-white girl who was yet again...

    Sexually Accessible. She's a live-in whore..they lived together for a year before marriage and she had no job...she just lived in his apartment.

    I mean that is what you are telling me with all this. I do regret not being easier when I was younger.

    My biggest regret at age 30 is not getting laid when I was in the freshman dorms.

    That's what the real world application of your 'femininity' means to me.

    And that's heartbreaking that I've been reduced to this.

    But continue on...

    Obviously those Asian women are better than girls like me. Obviously.

    ReplyDelete
  20. The other week I was hitting on a very nice guy age 34 (handsome/just my type if not better than my type)...and I actually had a date lined up when I go to visit a friend in their neighborhood...

    But I ruined it...

    Here's why...the guy joked "Good. I was just testing you" after I answered one of his questions.

    Do you have any idea how close that guy came to getting killed in that instant?

    I'm still pissed. I'm not rationally sure why I'm pissed. But I'm really angry.

    "I was just testing you"

    Well honey, I was just trying to have a nice conversation with you and connect as friends or something more.

    Anyways...so then I changed the subject real fast and privately stewed while cracking light-hearted jokes.

    Then I stewed for two days before emailing him and picked a fight (in serious hopes of him saying something that may be redeeming) of which I haven't received any further communication.

    But see...some of your feminine non-Anglo women would totally ignore that and just go out with him and have sex.

    I just can't do it. I can't act like I care about someone or let them piss me off and get away with it.

    But frankly I think I'm better than the women who just accept shit. Because if and when I do get married...My Kids Will Be Better.










    ReplyDelete
  21. One more thing....

    There's an image on Stormfront depicting the Asian IQ Curve versus the White IQ Curve.

    The Asian IQ curve has a low standard deviation and is centered very high.

    The white IQ curve has a super wide Standard Deviation...lots of people at the top...lots in the middle...lots at the bottom.

    I think what is happening with the proliferation of Asian Women/White Men Marriages ISN'T the lack of feminity of white women.

    White women with IQs of 120+ are Feisty...brash..opinionated...Curious (Curiosity is a big white-only trait) Men who want docile wives will think this is a bad thing...but it's a direct result of white women being a bit smarter/more intellectually curious-active..and white.

    So White Men in the IQ range of 120+ then have an Unlimited Supply of Asian Women with 115 IQ's which is PERFECT.

    The woman isn't smart enough to challenge you, but she has a good job that you can brag about to everyone who will listen.

    And that's what we're seeing.

    Basically the men are traitorous wretches and I can only hope the adultery part of the 10 Commandments is very true.

    ReplyDelete
  22. So should men stop competing for women, white women, because its too hard? I'm inclined to agree that those who marry Asian women are coping out. There is no good solution when everyone is pointing their finger at everyone else.

    Its important that women embrace feminine values but its also important that men not abandon masculine ones because the going is tougher.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Jesse,

    The kind of men I'm talking about don't have to compete. They're good looking, well-educated and family oriented. Asian women like them and will pitch at them. I'd like white women to pitch at them too in a timely way, rather than counting down the years until it's respectable to have a go.

    Anon,

    I don't understand why you got so upset at a man for saying "Good. I was just testing you."

    Maybe something got lost in the translation here.

    Why would you pick fights with men you're interested in?

    There aren't a lot of men who go for "feisty, brash, opinionated".

    Maybe you're being way too aggressive in "fitness testing" the men you are interested in: seeing if they can put up with what you throw at them.

    You have to be careful doing this. The whole "fitness testing" thing is something that takes a lot of men a while to come to terms with. If you do it too soon, a lot of men will just walk away, wondering why women are so unfriendly and difficult to deal with.

    Not being easy ought to mean waiting or wanting to be courted. It shouldn't mean testing the commitment of a man by making him fight through the barriers of unreasonable behaviour that you put up. If the man is testing the waters with you, it's unlikely he'll want to play those kind of games.

    You've got to well and truly hook him first and you do that the normal way by looking nice, pushing his masculine buttons by acting womanly, lots of smiling and laughing at jokes, expressions of admiration at his masculinity etc.

    You've got to get his commitment before you can test it.

    If you want to be discriminating with men, and not just say yes to whatever, then set a standard of character or intelligence or values or compatibility with the men you meet. Yield on that basis.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Mark,

    Men always have to compete just as women do. Who's stronger, who's better looking, who's more competent, this is the game of life. The kind of men who it just comes naturally to are top tier alphas or other types of men who are strongly appealing to women. Younger women are still happy to settle with these kinds of men and you see it all the time as for every single younger person out there there's another in a longer term relationship.

    The idea that it all comes down to women's choices doesn't in my opinion play out in practice. Men are generally more immature these days, are happy to play around and also find settling difficult. There are many reasons for this but it doesn't all come down to modern women.

    ReplyDelete
  25. To Anon.

    Promiscuity is not a feminine trait. So every time you refer to those "easy" feminine women, you are stating an oxymoron.

    ReplyDelete
  26. European-American and European-Australian men aren't picking Asian women because of those women's sexually promiscuity. Those men are picking Asian women because those asian women they pick are not sleeping around. It is the exact opposite of what the anonymous woman commenter is saying.

    If people want to know why so many Ethnic European men around the world are picking foreign women, just read the female anonymous posters comments. Unbelievable.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Phil, I couldn't agree with you more. A most noticeable phenomenon is how a white woman will seldom, if ever, insult a black woman but will not hesitate to insult an asian woman. My wife is Korean and never have I heard her bad mouth a woman of another race. Indeed, living in Korea never have I heard a bad word spoken about other races of women period. Although I once was asked by a young Korean woman why western women often seem angry. White women have called my wife submissive, ignorant, a whore, and so on. She is, of course, none of these things. I suspect, but cannot prove, that these upper class white women see themselves at the top of the sexual pyramid so to speak. It must be a rude awakening to realize they aren't.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Dumb bitches don't DESERVE to reproduce! They're so clueless about their own biology and men, that they don't deserve to reproduce; they did us a favor of breeding themselves out of the gene pool...

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.