Why a woman’s age at time of marriage matters, and what this tells us about the apex fallacy

by Dalrock on September 2, 2011

The basic relationship between a woman’s age at the time of marriage and her likelihood of divorcing is fairly well known.  As the chart above (source) shows, women who marry later are less likely to divorce within the first ten years of marriage than those who marry when very young.  However, what is seldom discussed is why this is the case.  The standard assumption is that women who wait longer are more mature, better able to pick a husband they can remain faithful to, and more ready for marriage.  Also, women who attend college generally marry a bit later, and college attendance correlates strongly with IQ, which has a very strong inverse correlation with divorce.  Undoubtedly there is some truth to these reasons, but there is something else very important going on.  A woman’s likelihood of divorcing in any given year is inversely correlated to her age.  Young women in the peak of their sexual  marketplace power are far more likely to divorce than older women are.  The chart below demonstrates this using data from the United Kingdom’s Office Of National Statistics (view table):

Note how aside from the very youngest age brackets, a woman in the UK’s likelihood of divorcing correlates strongly with her perceived ability to remarry.  The UK under 20 and 20-24 age brackets are perplexing, because they defy conventional wisdom on very young marriage, the US data on early marriage divorce rates, as well as expectations based on the sexual marketplace.  With this in mind, I suspect that women who marry that young in the UK are bucking the trend enough that they are a much more dedicated group regarding marriage.  The last chart was just a snapshot in time, but the basic effect has been remarkably stable in the UK for as far back as data is available:

Leaving aside the volatile under 20 age bracket, the lines almost never cross.  The only change is that the 20-24 year old bracket has moved between being the most likely to divorce, the second most likely to divorce, and the third most likely to divorce.  But the trend for women starting in their late 20s has always been the same;  the older they are, the less likely they are to divorce.  This has remained the case even as the age of first marriage has continued to grow.  This isn’t simply about divorces occurring in the very beginning of marriage.  There is a much stronger pattern involved here.

I have yet to find anyone who splits the US data out this way, but just this week I found the missing component I needed to roll my own chart:

The chart above combines data from the 2009 spreadsheet from the US Census (all races) on the percentage of women by age bracket who were married, with the data on divorces by age in 2009 from Table 2 in this recent census paper.*  Notice that while US divorce rates are significantly higher than UK divorce rates across the board, the same basic pattern we saw in the UK data exists in the US data minus the unexpected behavior for younger age brackets.

Taken together, this data soundly disproves the apex fallacy regarding divorce.  The common belief that divorce rates are driven by men discarding older wives for a younger model simply doesn’t fit with the data.  This is reinforced when you consider that the AARP found that 66% of the divorces in middle age were initiated by women (figure 2 on page 15).  This fits with the historical trends of women of all ages initiating divorce, as shown in page 3 of this paperEven in middle age women are still the ones driving divorce rates.  The myth of the unloyal husband dumping his hapless wife once he feels it is to his advantage is generally just that (a myth).  This won’t stop women from pointing over and over again to the rare case they know of in the media or in person where this has occurred, but in the scheme of things this is clearly an outlier.  Across age ranges divorce is being driven by women, and the likelihood of a couple divorcing in any given year tracks very strongly with whether the wife feels it would be to her advantage not to keep her promise.

*The specific rates for each group in the US chart may not be exact.  The figures in Table 2 from the new report on the total number of women in each age bracket vary slightly from the figures in the 2009 census report.  This appears to be due to the nature of the sampling they did.  Also, table 2 shows slightly different numbers of women and men divorcing and marrying in the same year.  This would be expected when looking at different age brackets, but not the overall figures.  At any rate, the differences aren’t large so the data still appears to be generally valid.  Lastly, using the figures in Table 2 I calculated the overall rate of divorce per 1,000 married women in the US in 2009 at 19.  This other source calculates it at 16.4 for the same year, however that report omits data from California, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Louisiana, and Minnesota.

{ 119 comments… read them below or add one }

Firepower September 2, 2011 at 10:00

Intriguing stats.

But, from what we ostensibly know today – from hundreds of accounts posted here, and from the site owner -

ANY man that marries today – then has kids – is an outright fool.

I can not feel sorry for the simpleton who continually sticks his tongue in a wall plug.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 78 Thumb down 20
Uncle Elmer September 2, 2011 at 10:15

I notice the data are from “England and Wales” but does not include correlation with women’s proclivity to become whales with increasing age.

Please fix that discrepancy to an otherwise commendable essay.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 74 Thumb down 13
Stoltz September 2, 2011 at 10:17

Another thing to be taken away from the 3rd chart (“Divorces per 1,000 couples by age of wife”, 1957-2009) is th sharp increase across all age groups around 1972 and the decline across all age groups starting around 2005. The 1972 increase I hyopthesize is the result of the “female liberation” which began shortly before that era (late-60′s/early-70′s). The decrease starting around 2005 is interesting, but I wonder if that is more to do with marriage declining as a whole (e.g., men not being interested in marrying anymore), and thus only the “die hards” remain married? I guess we’d need to see a chart showing the rates of marriages over the same time period to get a better idea.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer September 2, 2011 at 10:18

“ANY man that marries today – then has kids – is an outright fool.”

The more young men understand Women’s Ways of Whaling there will be less of this foolishness.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 7
BertieW September 2, 2011 at 10:28

One possible explanation for the unexpected low divorce rate in the under 20 group may be that the wife wants to wait a year or two after marriage before she files for divorce. I would expect the majority of married women under 20 have not been married more than a couple of years, so perhaps they just haven’t got around to divorce yet.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 4
Uncle Elmer September 2, 2011 at 10:32

You could further delineate between racial groups, as Women of Colour whale differently that White Women Who Whale, although this might evoke outcries of racism and accusations of Moby Dickism, otherwise known as White Male Priveledge.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 8
Skeptik September 2, 2011 at 10:42

No Oddsock,
You’re close but not quite there mate.
It goes like this methinks.

Less marriage => more women’s wails.
Less marriage => less women’s males.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
Skeptik September 2, 2011 at 10:43

Sorry Oddsock,
I meant to address my previous post to Uncle Elmer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Opus September 2, 2011 at 10:55

Dalrock is I think mistaken. The charts clearly show something very different. What it almost certainly shows is predatory Lawyers encouraging poor hapless women into divorcing, and then sleeping with the divorced women. As you can see lawyers are only attracted to younger females, but they ignore the old ones which is why there is little grey divorce. As you can also see there is an otherwise unexplained jump in divorces in the mid-eighties which then subsided. As that was when I practised Divorce Law, the conclusions are surely incontrivertible. ;)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 10
Uncle Elmer September 2, 2011 at 11:05

“this might evoke outcries of racism and accusations of Moby Dickism, otherwise known as White Male Priveledge.”

Pardon me, I meant to say White Whale Priveledge.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 9
Uncle Elmer September 2, 2011 at 11:08

“lawyers are only attracted to younger females, but they ignore the old ones…”

Because while the younger ones are more difficult to harpoon, they are more exciting and less blubbery than the older ones.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 6
Survivorman September 2, 2011 at 11:17

What we’re seeing here is an acknowledgment of the well-known fact that as women age, their Sexual Market Value decreases. So they have fewer options, stay married, and drown their sorrows in a quart or three of Haagen Dazs..

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 4
Lyn87 September 2, 2011 at 11:23

Great insights, Dalrock. Data like this have been around for a long time, and the implications usually sail right over the heads of most people (feminists in particular seem devoid of the ability to derive inferences) but you have demonstrated the ability to turn information into knowledge. Bravo, Sir.

I’m pretty good at statistics and I wouldn’t have made the connections you made without reading your analysis. Again, Bravo.

The thing that jumped out at me is the left portion of the first chart. Assuming an average age-at-first-marriage in the low-to-mid 20′s, the data seem to suggest a guy who marries such a woman has a 2/3 chance of still being married to her ten years later. The data do not include divorces after the 10-year mark, or the impact of serial-divorces, but it does look like, all things being equal, for a man to marry this year is more like playing Russian Roulette with two rounds in the cylinder rather than the four-or-five rounds we usually assume.

That seemed low to me, so I did a bit more poking into the data. it turns out that the average length of marriages in the Anglosphere is just under nine years, which means that around 60% of couples who marry this year will end their marriages in a courtroom rather than a funeral parlor if current trends continue, although the longer a couple stays married the better their individual odds get.

That’s the kicker, though: if current trends continue.

The backlash is already well establish as young men in their prime marriage years are avoiding marriage in favor of other arrangements. With odds like that…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 0
Dalrock September 2, 2011 at 11:24

@Firepower

But, from what we ostensibly know today – from hundreds of accounts posted here, and from the site owner -

ANY man that marries today – then has kids – is an outright fool.

I can not feel sorry for the simpleton who continually sticks his tongue in a wall plug.

I can certainly understand why many men would decide marriage isn’t worth the risk. I don’t have any patience for those who would shame men into marriage, for example. But I don’t think we can so easily write marriage off entirely. Some men (like you) will go their own way, others (like me) will marry and have children. So far at least the latter group of men far outnumbers the former. Is the Spearhead only for men who have decided to go their own way? Marriage may not matter to you, but it matters to a huge number of men out there. I think they deserve better than for those men who aren’t married to simply chuckle and call them fools. The more information we can share on reality, the better we arm them to navigate what we all would agree are potentially very dangerous waters.

In addition, most of the misandry in our legal system doesn’t require marriage. Loss of custody, child support, false rape accusations, domestic violence accusations, all of these are risks to men who don’t marry but interact with women.

oddsock September 2, 2011 at 11:29

Skeptik

“Sorry Oddsock,
I meant to address my previous post to Uncle Elmer.”

Don’t do that mate, I am already slightly unhinged and suspicious without you making me think I have posted on something that I can’t remember or find any evidence of such a comment.

No wonder I am so feckin paranoid lol

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
oddsock September 2, 2011 at 11:33

Dalrock

“Some men (like you) will go their own way, others (like me) will marry and have children.” ( and I bet they all drink Budweiser ? )

And a few of us will become sane and buy inflatable sheep !

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 11:44

So you have to marry a 50 year old to have a divorce rate similar to marrying a 19 year old.

The rest is old news for Anglo-Feminist countries. The most pampered and privaleged women the world has ever seen love to divorce men in all age groups. Men aren’t safe in marriage, in fact marriage is a one way ticket to slavery, either in marriage, with the older set, or in divorce in the younger set. Like in other repressive societies children are used as pawns against their parents, in this case men to extort money and labor.

Don’t get married, don’t have children, learn to take care of yourself and be good to yourself, no one else will be.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 61 Thumb down 5
Traveller September 2, 2011 at 11:45

Roissy has already explained this very well.

Women divorce if they think they can find better alternatives, period.

Your analysis lack content when it does not takes account of the income. An old woman with a rich husband can easily divorce because she know she can buy young gardeners and chauffeurs.

If you want marry, are you saying it should be good marry a 99 year old woman? When she will divorce? :-)

And I would not feed the BS about correlation between college and IQ, specially in the female part of the equation (“I graduated in rape culture of the Middle Age Hindu poems” WOW you must be a brain).

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 3
Izzey September 2, 2011 at 11:45

@oddsock
“And a few of us will become sane and buy inflatable sheep!”

I found the perfect song for you to play to your inflatable sheep…the words are perrrrrfect for it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdDnqSFYXFs&NR=1&feature=fvwp

Izzey
;)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4
Robert September 2, 2011 at 11:47

What man wants to be owned by a woman?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 2
Dalrock September 2, 2011 at 11:48

@Lyn87

I’m pretty good at statistics and I wouldn’t have made the connections you made without reading your analysis. Again, Bravo.

Thank you.

That seemed low to me, so I did a bit more poking into the data. it turns out that the average length of marriages in the Anglosphere is just under nine years, which means that around 60% of couples who marry this year will end their marriages in a courtroom rather than a funeral parlor if current trends continue, although the longer a couple stays married the better their individual odds get.

Age at marriage in the US does seem to influence the odds a great deal, especially if you look at the very youngest brides. Race is another big factor. Other factors which correlate with age at first marriage and race is income, education level, and IQ (which all correlate with each other). However, I don’t have a point estimate on the likelihood of a marriage succeeding if a man does XYZ. Hopefully someone sharper than I am can make sense of all of it.

That’s the kicker, though: if current trends continue.

It is actually even worse than this. The data one would use to predict what percent of marriages end in divorce over a given period is by definition old, and often times quite old. The chart at the top of the page is from a CDC publication in 2002 (the latest I’m aware of for that breakdown), but it uses data gathered in 1995. Moreover, the data gathered in 1995 is looking backward. As I recall the data set in question looked at marriages and/or divorces potentially as far back as 1965. Fortunately the rest of the data referenced in the post is only a few years old (2009).

oddsock September 2, 2011 at 11:49

Hey Izzy where you been hiding wench ? Are you still playing hard to get ?

Love the song, thanks. Excellent

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
Geography Bee Finalist himself September 2, 2011 at 11:55

If people are still going to get married, shouldn’t the quality of marriages be based almost exclusively on the finish line (widow/late husband, widower/late wife or divorcé and divorcée) of said marriages and the intervening years afterwards (to account for suspicious deaths and predatory/parasitic ex-wives), instead of on the starting blocks of individual marriages?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Izzey September 2, 2011 at 11:56

@oddsock
Drying out after “Irene”. Got hit pretty hard.

I’m poking my head in…here and there.
Glad you liked the song.
;)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4
Anonymous September 2, 2011 at 11:57

Oddsock,

Why is there no sheep in your avatar?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 11:58

Oh boy, things are starting to heat for Izzy and Oddsock, what next?

Will Izzy start pumping out little child support checks, with none that match (get it….Oddsock’s…).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
Izzey September 2, 2011 at 12:05

Yeah, Rocco…
ain’t that ‘love-hate’ thing, a real bitch?

Don’t worry, things will be back to ‘normal’ soon enough.
Nothing wrong with a smile amidst the fury….on occasion.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4
evilwhitemalempire September 2, 2011 at 12:06

MGTOW isn’t going to work long term folks.
All it’s going to do is weed out smarter, wiser men from the gene pool in favor of the masses of dupes. (who are mostly dupes for genetic reasons.)
Then, with the smart out of the way, misandry will run rampant as never before.

Note to creationists: You don’t have to believe in evolution to understand this. (but it helps)
If you only believe in ‘micro evolution’ then you should have no trouble understanding this.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 3
Lyn87 September 2, 2011 at 12:10

@ Dalrock,

You’ve hit upon a real problem with marriage and divorce statistics with this

The chart at the top of the page is from a CDC publication in 2002 (the latest I’m aware of for that breakdown), but it uses data gathered in 1995. Moreover, the data gathered in 1995 is looking backward.

Since millions of people marry, divorce, and die all the time, and other factors such as multiple divorces muddy the waters, it is literally impossible to know the divorce percentage for any age cohort that is still alive, much less the likelihood of what the odds are for someone who marries today. We can, of course, point out that current laws heavily correspond to bad outcomes for men and children and there is little indication of them changing much, barring a catastrophic event.

I also liked your response at 1124, especially after I read the article you linked to on your blog. I have a few thoughts on that, but if I respond I’ll do so on your blog so as to not sidetrack this thread.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
Firepower September 2, 2011 at 12:20

Dalrock

The more information we can share on reality, the better we arm them to navigate what we all would agree are potentially very dangerous waters.

Perhaps, but we also swim in the reality waters of the Thermonuclear Torpedo: No Fault Divorce in which one-half of a “partnership” (the wife) can vaporize a marriage and traipse off with the kids to a foreign country.

Today, males enter into a marriage/child situation handing women a club to mercilessly beat them over the head with. This is the current reality I write of.

You are discussing a response to an injustice that will take decades to realize. I realistically estimate…thirty years.

Should it be done? Of course, yes. But if the reader adds thirty years to his present age it must be realized that MUCH will change for that man during that long, long span.

Men no longer need marriage to have sex no more than they need it to have children. Until then, keep the courts out of the bedroom, nursery and life.

Marriage today is a snake – a shark – all know what it is before they play with it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 12:25

And here, because they care so much about us menz the women mock the mrm and feature this at Divorce-Po:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-e-cordell/divorce-civil-rights_b_944283.html

Celebrating the destruction of the Indian family, ahead of schedule:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/02/bitter-halves-are-better_n_946898.html

And that indeed, as I have stated here, prostitution is important to a healthy society and our women think that extends into marriage:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elizabeth-abbott/why-mistresses-have-every_b_945733.html

Of course our modern women argue in the comments that what is needed today are “Misters”, men that married women can cheat with that are socially approved.

I guess since women gave up on marriage two generations ago, they are moving on. Us men are just coming to realization this has happened, maybe what women say about men is true, men don’t really listen to women.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 0
oddsock September 2, 2011 at 12:25

Izzy

Listen flower, try and keep in mind I am no different to many of the men you see on here ( apart from sheep ) I do tend to vent when I suspect something is not right, that’s all. I am simply on mens side and tired of tip toeing around female sensitivities.

Sorry I didn’t realize you had been on the sharp end of ” Irene “. I trust all is well? See. I am really quite a nice guy, I have even been known to get out of the bath for a pee.

P.s. I will wait until you have dried out and recovered before I charm you any further with my classy smooth lines.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 5
Rebel September 2, 2011 at 12:27

How do we go about teaching young men that marriage has got absolutely nothing to do with the affairs between a man and a woman?

One more time: marriage is the surrendering of all your rights and property to the government.
When you marry, it means instant crucifixion by government drones.

The gobmin will transfer all your belongings, present and future, not because they prefer women but because women will hurridly spend/waste so the the gobmin recuperates most of it in no time flat.
And use the money to make wars. And send you to the slaughterhouse.
Marriage is about money. Mo-ney!
Mon-ey!
Money!
M-oney!
Mmmmoney!

Why is it so hard to understand?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 1
oddsock September 2, 2011 at 12:43

Rebel

“Why is it so hard to understand?”

That’s pussy power for you. It will pull a man further than dynamite would blow him.

For most young guys and probably much older, one good show stopping BJ followed by a quick knee trembler and he is pussy struck. Feck me, it can even open a scotsmans wallet with ease. Now that is sheer power !

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 2
Rebel September 2, 2011 at 12:47

@Rocco,
“Celebrating the destruction of the Indian family, ahead of schedule:”

The family is strictly a government affair. I see no reason in the world to be or feel concerned about its destruction.

We must think outside the box and always, always, always ask ourselves the same questions, repeatedly:

. . .”WHAT’S IN IT FOR ME?”

And: “Why should I care?”
And: “What do I lose/gain with the destruction of the family?”
And: “How do I make the best of it FOR ME?”.
And : “What’s the best way to turn it to my advantage?”
And : “How can I best exploit/fuck the government?”

Those are much more important than friggin family.

The family is a government scam: fuck it!
I mean: stop caring about that. Live your life to the fullest, be free. Shake off the mantle of slavery: the barn door has been open, cattle may now escape.
Why don’t you want to be free?
WHY?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 8
Rebel September 2, 2011 at 12:54

@ Oddsock:
Pussy power?
I like sex. But I never got down on my knees or rolled on my back to get it.

At worst, the five sisters always do a nice job. Always impeccable.
So where’s the power?
Sex is in the mind, that’s why so many jerk off in front of a screen.
And once relief is obtained, pussy has no more power.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 2
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 12:55

@ Rebel

In the 1970′s I had an acting teacher that was gay who said that. He said that the family and suburbs was a “wet dream”.

Oh, how right he was.

I agree, for me, from here on it’s:

What’s in it for me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2
Dalrock September 2, 2011 at 12:56

@Uncle Elmer

I notice the data are from “England and Wales” but does not include correlation with women’s proclivity to become whales with increasing age.

Please fix that discrepancy to an otherwise commendable essay.

I was going to include some recent pics of Sinéad O’Connor, but I figured some of the readers might have just eaten lunch.

AntZ September 2, 2011 at 13:18

“I notice the data are from “England and Wales” but does not include correlation with women’s proclivity to become whales with increasing age.”

I would like to see divorce rate by weight of the wife.

It is generally not too difficult to coax a woman into obesity. Women usually trend that way anyway. Just keep the pantry full of sweets and remember to always say “I love you no matter how you look”.

Once she degenerates into a paralysed tub of lard, chances are the husband can be certain that he will not lose his children, his liberty, his property, and his income. Of course, “servicing” the tub of lard will be a sacrifice, but it only needs to be done once per week, and it is better than the horror of family court.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 13:26

The myth that men divorce women for the younger model is just that. A myth. Men have fought and died for their women and children for 10,000 years. You only have to look at the older generation of my fathers era to see the it was rare for a man to dump his wife for a younger model.

Shere Hite claimed a 90%+ rate of divorce initiated by women. This was as long ago as 1989. She claimed that even when the man filed for divorce it was far more often the case the woman manipulated him into it.

US States where alimony and child support were altered to be far more fair saw their divorce rates fall like a stone.

Women divorce for money and status. Pure and simple. They are offered the opportunity to raise their financial and social status above the hapless husband by having all the family assets transferred to her and he being impoverished. MILLIONS of women take that offer, such as my wife.

They then try to land an even higher status male while the discarded husband is left to fend for himself being the victim of organised crime.

What these women seem not to realise is that the criminals then steal their ill gotten gains from the women as well and impoverish the women as well. The greatest predictor of impoverishment for a woman is to be a single mother. Yet millions of them are so stupid as to throw the husband out of the house for the false promise of short term gain.

I would lay the blame for the destructive nature of divorce about 90% at the feet of those women who break their marriage vows based on the promise of higher status via money and kids.

If women do not like that they can go to hell.

Marriage is over. Women killed it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 6
Uncle Elmer September 2, 2011 at 13:30

“Of course, “servicing” the tub of lard will be a sacrifice…”

That is really beyond the pale. Have you no decency, man?

Sex with a fat chick is like fuckin uphill.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 5
ahamkara September 2, 2011 at 13:38

What happened in 1984 in England and Wales that caused women under 24 to rush to the exits? Surely Geraldine Ferraro did not have that much of a global influence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 13:38

oddsock September 2, 2011 at 12:25
“Listen flower, try and keep in mind I am no different to many of the men you see on here ( apart from sheep )”

Oh..I don’t know about that Oddsock. We have a saying where I come from….

“I am from Wagga Wagga…where the men are men and the sheep are nervous”… ;-) .

Honest…that has been around for 30+ years that I know about. Because there are so many sheep in the Wagga Wagga area there are an awful lot of jokes about men and sheep!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 13:44

Speaking of whales…..if there is anyone how has NOT seen the whale that was my exes divorce lawyer feel free to take a look. Hardly any wonder bitches like this prey on women to divorce men to make their ill gotten gains. How much is this bitch of a whale going to hate men.

I mean…..not even Oddsock could touch this if she wore a sheep costume!!!! Any sheep is going to be better than this whale.

http://www.youtube.com/user/peternolan1109?feature=mhee

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5
Troll King September 2, 2011 at 13:47

You guys need to take a look at this, I posted it on the other thread about family court.

http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=18968

The costar from Two and A Half Men has full custody of his son but has to pay his deadbeat mother 8k a month due to the fact she doesn’t have a job and would lose her house, that he probably paid for, if she wasn’t getting the child support.

So much for CS being about the best interests of the child.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 13:59

OT but fun…

You ladies who say you support mens rights? Loren shows you how to get noticed….take most of your clothes off!

At 32 MILLION views…men in the MRA could do with THAT sort of publicity.

Women are taking their cloths off for Putin. Why no mens rights, eh?

Ladies? Bare all for mens rights!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWxTGJ3TK1U

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7
Avenger September 2, 2011 at 14:02

As you get into theolder groups there is less divorce because the husband who in general is older than the wife is already dead :o )

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Avenger September 2, 2011 at 14:09

@troll-John Cryer makes close to $600k per episode so I guess he doesn’t care to waste a lot of money paying lawyers over that $8k per month alimony payment. $8k is a small amount to him so I guess it’s like paying off some pest not to bother you, like giving some homeless tramp some change.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 14:09

or how about 22 million views for this…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvOucvTpKrE&feature=relmfu

Be nice for men to get THAT sort of “support”, eh?

And this is hysterical…..just check this out…..the funny thing is that its real!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_stcgW8E4o&feature=relmfu

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 14:31

OT….
PS…where is the MRA Tron Girl?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MP_G6arpVI

Ok…so its Friday night. A bit of levity about publicizing MRA issues.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8
Rebel September 2, 2011 at 14:41

@P.A.N.

“Note, This is blocked into Australia. I am told this site will allow you to see it. http://www.hidemyass.com/

If it doesn’t, maybe it will work with IXQUICK. It does not take your ip address.
http://ixquick.com/do/metasearch.pl

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 14:42

OT.
You have to accept me as I am because I’m a wimminz and I am better than you….

By the way….I’m going to pay good money for a dress that is an optical illusion to make me look thinner but you can’t say anything about that otherwise I will callz you a wimminz hater…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2033104/Kate-Winslet-emphasises-curves-optical-illusion-Stella-McCartney-dress-Mildred-Pierce-premiere.html

Women get divorced less when they get old because they are as undoable as kate winslet.

Someone seems to not have told these women that, given a choice, a man will go for a younger and more beautiful woman. It does not matter what movies she has seen or even been in.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2033104/Kate-Winslet-emphasises-curves-optical-illusion-Stella-McCartney-dress-Mildred-Pierce-premiere.html

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 14:44

OT

Money equals power. While professors post with psuedonyms about laws removing constitutional rights for Femerican college students, left wing academics see the rise of China as the death of “academic freedom”.

Like there is such a thing as academic freedom….only if you agree with these professors are you allowed to speak on their campus, but they want free riegn to go and trash China, well, the Chinese are saying what we should say to feminst academia…screw you.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/09/01/can-us-colleges-defend-academic-freedom

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 14:46

OT…a 17 year old female jailed for 8 months? That is more than most women get for murder….certainly we are yet to see the first woman ACTUALLY incarcerated for 8 months for an FRA.

Gents. It#s official. An FRA is less important than a bottle of lucozaide. Feel free to tell women how disgusted you are about that.

Oh….yes…..it’s also more important than perjury, kidnapping, extortion, theft and child abuse. We all know women are so disgusting that they condone and support those crimes in the majority in the west….the evidence is no longer refutable.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2033045/Was-REALLY-worth-Doctors-daughter-looted-Poundland-bottle-Lucozade-jailed-8-months.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 5
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 2, 2011 at 15:06

OT…
mentally ill boy kills girl? Bring back the death penalty.

Grown woman napalms husband and burns him to death. Give her a medal.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2032971/Joshua-Davies-sentenced-14-years-prison-killing-Rebecca-Aylward.html

Western women are disgusting hypocrites in the main. And they have shown their colours so blatantly that even the likes of Jessica “the coward” Valenti is not willing to try and defend my claim western women are liars and hypocrites in the main.

The fema-nazi women read this blog. Let’s see if their hateful and deranged “princess” Jessica “the coward” Valenti is willing to explain why a women support the death penalty for a clearly mentally unstable BOY while supporting handing out awards and medals to an ADULT woman who murdered her husband in cold blood by learning how to create napalm and dousing him with it and burning him to death.

Can Jessica “the coward” Valenti explain this for us men? Eh?

Jessica “the coward” Valenti is exactly that. A coward. And that’s exactly what all fem-nazis are. Cowards. Liars. Hypocrites. Cowards.

I am not expecting one of them to debate me in my lifetime.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 6
zed September 2, 2011 at 15:51

Dalrock: “I can certainly understand why many men would decide marriage isn’t worth the risk. I don’t have any patience for those who would shame men into marriage, for example. But I don’t think we can so easily write marriage off entirely. Some men (like you) will go their own way, others (like me) will marry and have children. So far at least the latter group of men far outnumbers the former. Is the Spearhead only for men who have decided to go their own way? Marriage may not matter to you, but it matters to a huge number of men out there. I think they deserve better than for those men who aren’t married to simply chuckle and call them fools.”

Well, you are certainly doing your part to do that something better, Dalrock. Kudos to you – even if you don’t accomplish what you are out to accomplish.

What you have outlined above is a fundamental conflict in ways of viewing the world and dealing with trying to affect political changes. In most cases those conflicts are as intractable in trying to resolve as religious wars. The two sides might be characterized in an exaggerated fashion by those associated with the criminal justice system who take the stance “if you don’t want to do the time, then don’t do the crime” on one side, and those who would not allow any child to ride a bicycle without a helmet and elbow and knee pads on the other.

It is a very reasonable position to suggest to someone that the best way to avoid some major inherent risks in an activity is to avoid the activity – as the Canadian police officer warned women that they could do something to avoid being raped by not walking around dressed like sluts.

So, should all these men who want to get married and have children, but want to avoid all the risks to men of doing so, start to get together and organize “Family Court Slut Walks”?

To those of us who have spent decades trying to wake people up to the incredible social devastation caused by leftist ideologies – feminism being part of that – the guys who go ahead and give women the marriage they mostly want, and make it really true that “Women today CAN assume they can have marriage merely for the taking” are in effect scabs – strike-breakers. They are actively working against what some of us are trying to accomplish – so, no, they don’t deserve any accommodation from those of us trying to fight what they are making worse.

If all of them would drop off the face of the earth tomorrow, our job would get much easier.

Now, there are people for whom the thrill they get from smoking crack cocaine or marijuana is worth the risk that they take in order to do it. And then, there are people for whom it isn’t worth it. The people who know the risk, and go ahead and do it and get caught at it aren’t going to get any real useful advice on how to do something illegal but not suffer any consequences if they get caught, from those of us who avoid incarceration by avoiding the illegal activity. My advice to a guy caught in the family court system and a guy up on charges of smoking crack is the same – “if you don’t want to do the time, then don’t do the crime.”

Bill just posted several descriptions of what he went through for the crime of wanting to be a dad. Good for him. But, how many of those men who you refer to that want to have children would go ahead if they knew they would have to go through what Bill is going to spend 20+ years of his life going through? What would the odds be of having that happen that they would consider acceptable risk?

The strangest thing about this division of men’s attitudes about how to deal with family courts is that it is the strikebreakers going through their own Battle of Blair Mountain, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain) and the strikers and would-be union organizers who are walking through the whole mess relatively unscathed.

If the scabs won’t join us in applying pressure in a totally non-violent political way, what would lead them to expect that we would volunteer to get our heads busted along with theirs to defend their right to smoke crack?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 16:27

@ Zed

The union analogy is apt, in my opinion. I have spent many years as a union organizer, not professionally, as part of my union job, and the situation of men and women, feminism and the mrm is very much a union like situation. In this case two unions competing for attention and finance of the company, in this case the government, legislators and courts.

The fem union understands this and behaves accordingly. That’s why they hang on to the wage gap and are constantly rolling out new slogans and demands. That’s how you negotiate, it’s just business.

But men take it all personally, it’s not personal, but it is theatre and theatrics are required.

And I agree, married men are scabs to me. I could settle into a standard relationship and get married, I’m a very high paid professional (paid alot more since we unionized).

But it seems dishonest to enter into a fraud when I really feel differently.

I wish more men would realize that all men are affected by feminist oppression and that only by standing together will our son’s world be any better.

Perhaps if men of the last 3 generations hadn’t been asleep at the wheel, hadn’t been scabs, hadn’t gone for the “free love” pill and sold out all men (I’m talking to you Bill Clinton) we wouldn’t be in this mess right now.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
PeterTheGreat September 2, 2011 at 16:35

A story of women breaking down Islam –

An Arab Spring for Women: The Missing Story from the Middle East
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/04/29/an-arab-spring-for-women-the-missing-story-from-the-middle-east/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 16:35

Btw, there were definite sex overtones to why my group organized 15 years ago into a union.

My group, prior to our unionizing, was mainly male and were being out negotiated by unions. The unions were mainly female.

Since organizing into a labor union our income has increased by 30% in 10 years.

One of the hardest things to do was convince men to come together as a group. It was the females in our group that formed the core of solidarity.

But is was men that I could convince to walk the picket line. Men taking the risks, women reaping the benefits.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
Dalrock September 2, 2011 at 17:00

@zed

the guys who go ahead and give women the marriage they mostly want, and make it really true that “Women today CAN assume they can have marriage merely for the taking” are in effect scabs – strike-breakers. They are actively working against what some of us are trying to accomplish – so, no, they don’t deserve any accommodation from those of us trying to fight what they are making worse.

If all of them would drop off the face of the earth tomorrow, our job would get much easier.

I strongly disagree. The right reason men should avoid marriage is if they feel it isn’t to their advantage, not in a futile effort to punish womankind. If men as a collective had anywhere near the awareness and will required to pull off an effective strike, we would have the power to change misandrist laws extremely quickly (no strike needed). We don’t, so we won’t. Besides, who do you want raising the next generation of men and women (and voters) in the meantime? People like my wife and I, or single mothers?

Also, what would you say to a newcomer to the site who is already married. Get out scab, we don’t need your kind? Take a look at the census stats. Most men still marry.

Bill just posted several descriptions of what he went through for the crime of wanting to be a dad. Good for him. But, how many of those men who you refer to that want to have children would go ahead if they knew they would have to go through what Bill is going to spend 20+ years of his life going through? What would the odds be of having that happen that they would consider acceptable risk?

I’m all for educating men on the realities of the risk. This piece and several others are about just that. Men who are inclined to deny what is uncomfortable to confront need hard data. Even then it is an uphill battle, but solid data will help. I also think far too many men are marrying today. They don’t understand the risks and given the rates women are still able to marry far too many are given the honor.

There is another side to this; for those men who are planning on marrying, whose argument is more effective? MGTOWers argue never to marry. I suggest specific tests to determine whether cupcake really is worth the risk. I’m not saying my tests are perfect or even complete, but I honestly think my method is more likely to talk a clueless young man who is about to make a huge mistake out of doing so. He doesn’t have to give up his dream of marrying and having a family, but hopefully he will recognize that putting a ring on an alcoholic party girl’s finger won’t make her a wife. And unfortunately after opening his eyes and looking honestly at the choices available to him, many of them would then have to acknowledge that given the women available marriage 2.0 isn’t worth the risk.

This doesn’t mean you should change your argument, because you believe what you believe and I wouldn’t tell you to say anything else. But from a practical point of view, on the margins, I would say you and I at least have the same goal.

Rebel September 2, 2011 at 17:01

I just tumbled upon this video. Carlin expresses my own thoughts in a far better way I ever could:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f0GStBCeUU

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 17:21

I think pushing marriage on this site is like pushing heroine at an narcotics anonymous meeting.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Rocco September 2, 2011 at 17:28

And while we fiddle with marginal rules that might, could, if she’s in a good mood for the next 50 years lead to a stable marriage with the “type” we want raising our children, while we wanted to have children to raise them ourselves, the women continue to destablize the job market and now no one will have job security:

http://financiallyconsumed.com/wordpress/2011/08/30/she-is-the-man-now/

And, especially after reading this post, have to agree with the author that “Adaptive Man” is an oxymoron.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
zed September 2, 2011 at 18:00

I strongly disagree.

Of course you do, Dalrock. As I said above – “In most cases those conflicts are as intractable in trying to resolve as religious wars.” I’m not going to waste my time trying to argue a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Christian into changing their religion, nor am I going to do the same with someone who believes in marriage – faith is faith.

MGTOWers argue never to marry.

Some do, some don’t. If you have read the original articles which went with articulating the core ideas, there are 3 simple parts:
The goal is to instill masculinity in men, femininity in women, and work toward limited government.

There is nothing in there at all about marriage.

Because the philosophy is non-hierarchical and public domain (no one owns it) anyone can add any personal flavorings they like – the idea being that no sort of effective organized resistance has emerged from existing cultural institutions, so let’s try a decentralized approach.

A couple of names emerged from the WW II period which have become synonymous with failed strategies associated with a major political conflict – Chamberlain and Quisling. The Gender War so far has has multitudes of examples of people selling other people out, or the failed strategy of placation. As I look around me today I cannot view that either of them has any result except personal and social losses for the vast majority of people.

As John F. Kennedy said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable.” The question remains whether we have passed the point whether a peaceful revolution in the family structures of the western world is possible. I know that a lot of people no longer think it is.

The question of how warm and fuzzy to be when dealing with the question of marriage for unmarried men is one of those religious questions unlikely to be solved by argument. The Spearhead is decidedly short on warm-and-fuzzies – leaving that to bloggers like yourself. My personal – and extremely jaded – opinion is that about 80% of the married women who post on your site probably do a much better job of discouraging young men from the idea of marriage than what gets said here. I very seldom read anything that any of them write, and when I do I almost always regret it and walk away quite glad that I am not married to one of them.

Personally, I consider the fact that most men continue to get married in today’s family climate to be clear cut evidence that most men are dumber than doorknobs.

I’ve put in my 40 years and am not willing to hold anyone’s hand. If I see someone with a gun pointed at his foot with a finger on the trigger, I will say “bad idea”, and if he wants to argue with me and tell me it is a great idea – I am more than happy to let him discover the answer empirically.

Men seem to value the lessons that they bought and paid for a lot more than they value what is given to them for free.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 1
Vortac September 2, 2011 at 18:36

All this talk about marriage perhaps warrants repeating this old, but good video about how marriage is different for men and women.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Va-YTf5Caj8

If all women saw it, perhaps they would think twice before shaming men who don’t want to rush into marriage. Then again, perhaps not – shaming is such integral part of women’s behaviour, they would probably sooner stop breathing than shaming and blaming men for everything and anything.

But at least it could give some young men a moment’s pause and perspective to the whole issue of ‘marriage’.

- Vortac

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Robert September 2, 2011 at 19:35

Survivorman September 2, 2011 at 11:17
What we’re seeing here is an acknowledgment of the well-known fact that as women age, their Sexual Market Value decreases. So they have fewer options, stay married, and drown their sorrows in a quart or three of Haagen Dazs..

Sometime in the future; “Honey, does my butt look big?”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Herbal Essence September 2, 2011 at 21:35

On Marriage vs MGTOW: Obviously I think the latter option is the way to go. However, it is not without hardship. I used to be an affable, eccentric, funloving guy who set out to genuinely improve the lives of those around me. Now I am a cold, cynical, untrusting misanthrope who doesn’t give a shit about anyone. I used to be generous and empathetic with other people. Now it is extremely hard for me to care about anyone but myself. I’m not going to blame all that on taking the red pill. I’ve also had some huge disappointments over the last few years. But I really have to question whether my current state of mind is “better” than when I was open to people and relationships with women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
gender foreigner September 2, 2011 at 21:39

Dear Rocco September 2, 2011 at 16:35:

I’ve noticed the same pattern severely & serially. Men produce: women consume. Men sew: women reap. Men risk: women avoid. In Injury & Death: men at the front. In Safety: women at the front….
.
.
“But is was men that I could convince to walk the picket line. Men taking the risks, women reaping the benefits.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Jeb September 2, 2011 at 21:59

On Marriage vs MGTOW: Obviously I think the latter option is the way to go. However, it is not without hardship. I used to be an affable, eccentric, funloving guy who set out to genuinely improve the lives of those around me. Now I am a cold, cynical, untrusting misanthrope who doesn’t give a shit about anyone. I used to be generous and empathetic with other people. Now it is extremely hard for me to care about anyone but myself. I’m not going to blame all that on taking the red pill. I’ve also had some huge disappointments over the last few years. But I really have to question whether my current state of mind is “better” than when I was open to people and relationships with women. — Herbal Essence

This is an apt observation, HE, and one I struggle with myself.

Perhaps one of the reasons why the MRM has not really taken flight of its own is because it only focuses on the negatives of life.

An interesting development in the MRM would be that if men could start focusing as much attention on developing really good life-style habits for themselves, as they do on examining and criticizing the behaviours of women.

While it is inevitable that the MRM will focus its attention on women to a degree, and how their behaviour affects our lives, there is very little attention and research into how men can lead fulfilling, satisfying lives in a world of game and perpetual singledom. Men used to find lots of satisfaction in directing their children and then seeing them succeed. If the MRM truly wants to flourish, it has to find a way to substitute that with another philosophy of life. And yes, that goes for you divorced fathers too – you are not the number one concern of the MRM at all times, and after you are divorced, you too need other things to focus on.

It does not mean being a patsy, as for example, the knights of old were not patsies, but only offered their chivalry to those deserving of it.

I wish the MRM could start putting forth a “philosophy of life” that would appeal as an alternate lifestyle. I think about priests and monks who have forsaken sex and marital commitments for “something greater.” I sometimes wonder if there is some sort of “psychological key” in there that the MRM could adapt for the layman, as it seems that many of these men do lead lives that they are satisfied with. What is it psychologically that satisfies their lives, and is it adaptable to other areas?

Maybe we in the MRM should spend an “equal” amount of time studying “ourselves as males” as we do studying women. Then we might be able to find out what makes ourselves tick, and create a new “machine” that satisfies our lives.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0
gender foreigner September 2, 2011 at 22:12

Dear Dalrock on September 2, 2011:
.
.
“Note how aside from the very youngest age brackets, a woman in the UK’s likelihood of divorcing correlates strongly with her perceived ability to remarry. The UK under 20 and 20-24 age brackets are perplexing, because they defy conventional wisdom on very young marriage, the US data on early marriage divorce rates, as well as expectations based on the sexual marketplace. With this in mind, I suspect that women who marry that young in the UK are bucking the trend enough that they are a much more dedicated group regarding marriage.”
.
.
First comment: Great Article Big Time, Dalrock. I thank you very much for it.

As per why females in the youngest age group have such low divorce rates most likely relates to the very same pattern of MOTIVATION which characterizes the whole discussion.

If the older and less babed-out a female gets, the less she is remarketable for marriage (because her options are lesser as a result), one would anticipate that BECAUSE ONE IS DEALING WITH THE SAME GENDER ANIMAL, THE FEMALE, that EXACTLY THE SAME MOTIVATION IS IN PLAY AS PER THE YOUNGER AGE COHORT.

The reason why the youngest cohort of female is less likely to take the divorce route with her husband most likely relates to her ABSENCE OF ECONOMIC OPTION ON HER OWN.

If she marries in her mid to late teens, she probably has little economic qualifications to employ for her own well being (she has grade 9, 10, 11 or 12 education–no economic skills per se there). As a result, if she were to divorce, most likely, she would be marrying herself to a minimum-wage job without benefits.

On the supply side, because her age cohort HAS THE HIGHEST AVAILABILITY OF UNATTACHED FEMALES IN IT, unmarried men would find it quite easy to start with an otherwise, “virgin” bride without baggage. Quite frankly, in her age cohort, the competition is just too steep and making it on her own is not an option.

What is more, the overall tendency is that the younger a woman marries, the more smaller is the age difference between the husband and wife. The older the woman marries, the greater is the age difference between husband and wife.

The above facts mean that a younger wife probably has a hamburger-flipping husband in the first place and that there is no payoff for divorce as there is nothing for her to steal. If a woman marries in the cohorts immediately above the youngest one, she most likely would be marrying a man a few years older than her who has greater future prospects and has performed the right first steps to put himself into that career path. Such means that in ten years, he will be much more worthwhile stealing from than the close-aged husband whose net present value is quite low.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Skeptik September 2, 2011 at 22:26

In response to – MGTOW isn’t going to work long term folks.
All it’s going to do is weed out smarter, wiser men from the gene pool in favor of the masses of dupes. (who are mostly dupes for genetic reasons.)
Then, with the smart out of the way, misandry will run rampant as never before. Note to creationists: You don’t have to believe in evolution to understand this. (but it helps) If you only believe in ‘micro evolution’ then you should have no trouble understanding this.

I agree for the short term as I think so many men are sexually addicted to women they’ll bend over backwards to get ‘married’ despite the apparent risk of being ass raped by the feminist divorce industry only a short phone call away.
But in the longer term with game psychology and the soon to be released non hormonal male birth control pill such sexual addiction won’t run the risk of pregnancy at least. False claims of rape are another matter.
But the point is I can see MGTOW and the marriage strike will become widespread norms. By that I mean I can see young men in future having period of sexual abstinence AND periods of sexual engagement with women, much more on their terms.
Jeese, just think of all that wailing baby rabies masses of unpokable blubbery self centered harridan western women are going to experience – unless someone (most likely a genius male) invents a pill to inoculate the symptoms.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Avenger September 2, 2011 at 23:14

Of course, “servicing” the tub of lard will be a sacrifice, but it only needs to be done once per week

Why do it at all? Just hire her out to freaky chubby chasers and let her earn her keep. All of that ice cream and jubk food gets expensive

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Jeb September 2, 2011 at 23:54

Lol! @ Avenger!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
E September 3, 2011 at 00:30

Dalrock

I can certainly understand why many men would decide marriage isn’t worth the risk. I don’t have any patience for those who would shame men into marriage, for example. But I don’t think we can so easily write marriage off entirely.

In boxing there is the “one-two combo” which is a quick jab followed by the more powerful cross.

part 1 – MGTOW is the jab. By convincing 20% of the male population to boycott marriage that completely shifts the market in favor of men.
part 2 – Next comes the cross. The majority 80% of the men who want to get married can swoop in and demand a fair agreement basically destroying marriage 2.0

That is the strategy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2
Will September 3, 2011 at 00:38

Zed said “My personal – and extremely jaded – opinion is that about 80% of the married women who post on your site probably do a much better job of discouraging young men from the idea of marriage than what gets said here. I very seldom read anything that any of them write, and when I do I almost always regret it and walk away quite glad that I am not married to one of them. ”

Zed, Some of the female commenters on Dalrocks site are not too “thrilled” at the commentary on the Spearhead either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10
PaulM September 3, 2011 at 01:24

The interesting bit is the gradual decline during the 90s.

Theory 1: economic downturn. They stay married when economic times are bad. Marriage is all about security.

Theory 2: women who shouldn’t marry arent getting married.

Theory 3: men are noticing how bad a deal marriage is. It’s getting harder for a woman to trade up. That is: websites like this are a result of the social change, not.a cause of it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Michael September 3, 2011 at 02:44

This is about the fourth time in recorded history MGTOW has been employe by men. Every time its needed it comes to the forefront conducts repairs and the machine keeps rolling.

Its like the political cartoon of”The end is Near.” Everyone drives by the prophet and flips him off, then his compadre says “Perhaps we should just tell them the bridge is out.”

The bridge is out fellas drive on or take the fork. Choose well.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
mghowuk September 3, 2011 at 02:51

@dalrock
unmarried men can avoid losing custody by ending any relationship at pregnancy. He can avoid domestic violence and its restraining orders by not buying property. He can avoid child support (outside the u.s) by simply not paying. He can greatly reduce false rape accusations (and the other three problems) by leaving the west.
Whilst there are no guarantees doing these things,as i have done reduces your chances of imprisonment,slavery to close to zero.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Maaldweb September 3, 2011 at 03:23

The statistics don’t take into account the muslim population which marries at an early age and does not divorce. The anomaly of the low divorce rate at the lowest age bracket can be attributed to that.

Politically Correct statistics which don’t take into account race, ethnicity and culture are pointless and misleading in general.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
oddsock September 3, 2011 at 03:44

You see guys, the problem is ours. We just need to learn to trust the women in our lives. Don’t worry, if they lie, our judges and laws will protect you.

Below is the link to the article and an email sent to Angryharry over at his website.

Still want to get married son ?

“No Choice I was prompted to send this email after one of the latest links you posted; about a woman who stole her ex-husband’s sperm by forging his signature (of course the misandrist courts considered this “simulating his signature”!) and was able to claim £100,000 off him even though he didn’t even have sex with her to conceive the child – he had NO say, no choice, in the matter! It’s absolutely insane! How can this be allowed to happen?”

“Woman had two children after secretly taking ex-husband’s frozen sperm
A father was forced to pay his ex-wife £100,000 so she can raise two children she conceived without his consent after secretly taking his frozen sperm.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8544783/Woman-had-two-children-after-secretly-taking-ex-husbands-frozen-sperm.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
oddsock September 3, 2011 at 03:48

Gotta add this bit from the court ruling.

“She added that a court ruled it was a simulation rather than a forged signature.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
Rocco September 3, 2011 at 06:18

@ Micheal

What are the other 3 times in recorded history that men went mgtow?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Rebel September 3, 2011 at 08:02

“Maaldweb September 3, 2011 at 03:23
The statistics don’t take into account the muslim population which marries at an early age and does not divorce. The anomaly of the low divorce rate at the lowest age bracket can be attributed to that.

Politically Correct statistics which don’t take into account race, ethnicity and culture are pointless and misleading in general.”

You see, guys, they are the ones who will people the earth.

I read in the Pravda that Moscow is being islamized rather quickly.
Already, Europe is almost done and our turn is probably next.

Islam is the fastest growing religion, while Christianity is the fastest shrinking.

Do the calculation.

The inevitable is at the door.

The final combat will take place between them and the feminists.

Mark my words.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Bob September 3, 2011 at 08:19

“Western women are disgusting hypocrites in the main. ”
True. This week I watched a show where peoples was calling to talk about a case of child abuse (pedophilia) by a female teacher who taked place for many years. Every female who called to the TV station had telle the same thing. It’s not the samething when it’s a female than when it’s a male. You must not call Her a pedophile she loved the boys. She not really abused the boys she loved them. She must not be punished, males abuse are violent and deserve to be jail but not Her. Blah blah blah. I was disgusted to death by those females pro-pedophile point of view. By their blatant sexism and feminism. Most women are really disgusting peoples.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
Avenger September 3, 2011 at 08:35

Rebel, there have always been Muslims in Russia and the number of muslims in Europe is still small. If there are muslims for example in Germany they are mostly from secular places like Turkey. The US not only has muslims but an invasion in the southwest of mestizos who are retaking territory lost in the Mexican war. Then you have a 12% population of left over slaves who have pretty much ruined all US cities and for the most part, for whatever reason, can not compete with Caucasians which causes a lot of frustration that leads to mindless violence. Europe will control immigration now that they’re waking up but I’m not sure if the US has the will to do the same. Eventurally they’ll be a backlash against all of this and feminism because there’s a lot of animosity brewing below the surface but it may be too late to recover fully.

If you do not believe in your own stock enough to wish to see the stock kept up then you are not good Americans, you are not patriots; and…I for one shall not mourn your extinction, and in such event I shall welcome the advent of a new race that will take your place, because you will have shown that you are not fit to cumber the ground.

—Teddy Roosevelt

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
POD September 3, 2011 at 08:53

I have to admit, had men been wise to recognize the evil litany of feminism , it could have been nipped right in the bud.

There is still a way to restrict divorce : don’t marry non-virgins. It was expected until 50 years ago that one’s wife be a virgin and the husband be the first and last man in her life. Adultery was sufficient ground for divorce without alimony. Back then divorce was rare too.

Now that men themselves has such loose values that they accept wives who’ve slept around more than they have, it’s pretty easy for women to divorce and re-marry over and over since no checks are placed upon them. If men flatly refused to entertain the thought of marrying a non-virgin, you could put an end to the bulk of divorces straightaway.

The problem isn’t that women are evil (they certainly are), but that men let them be evil and still get away unscathed, unharmed and unaccountable for being evil, and even unwittingly encouraged women to be evil. The kind of evil women get away with not even a slap on the wrist, for which men would pay dearly – is because men have been too lenient on women.

How then, can we make a majority who lives by the principle of bros before ho’s ?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3
Avenger September 3, 2011 at 09:00

POD-if you believe that females were any more virginal 50 yrs. ago at marriage then you are deluded.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 11
oddsock September 3, 2011 at 09:18

POD, Avenger.

Perhaps it’s because we don’t exist ?

Men do not exist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZAuqkqxk9A

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
POD September 3, 2011 at 09:20

@Avenger

Are you saying majority of women prior to 1960 were promiscuous ? I think it was not so, in the era when parents kept a tab on kids, marriages were arranged and tomfoolery was frowned upon. I’d say that’s hard to believe – it would mean one more way men have been conned by women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5
POD September 3, 2011 at 09:22

Oddsock,

“Men do not exist”

Yes, that’s a painful realization I had in my teens – that I’m a figment of my own imagination.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Avenger September 3, 2011 at 09:59

POD-the majority of females today are not promiscuous. When I was at college a LONG time ago only 10% of females were still virgins when they graduated, today it’s 20%. Besides, many females today marry at an older age or don’t marry at all so the idea that they should all be virgins is silly. And POD don’t judge the entire world by the quaint little notions of your obviously prole background. I’m sick of hearing about “tyraditional values” that never really ever existed outside of Hollywood censored films. Females have always done what they wanted no matter how much punishment was inflicted upon them. The only time that females will refrain from behaving in a certain way is when it is thought of as unfashionable or lower class (females are very class conscious and don’t want to be thought of as at the bottom) otherwise they all do what other females do. If men really wanted virgins and there was some negative effect on females who weren’t virgins then a lot more females would be virgins but men want females to have sex with them so they are not encouraging virginity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6
Rocco September 3, 2011 at 10:01

@ Oddsock and POD

What you both don’t realize is that your only figments of my imagination.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Avenger September 3, 2011 at 10:01

oldsock, perhaps it’s just you and your sheep that don’t exist to a normal female

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Rocco September 3, 2011 at 10:05

@ Keyster

Here is the director of public policy for the AAUW holding court describing the great feminist victory of changing the attitude on college campus that you can just ignore a raped college women:

“In many ways, there is a new sheriff in town,” says Lisa Maatz, director of public policy at the American Association of University Women in Washington.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2011/0902/Feds-warn-colleges-handle-sexual-assault-reports-properly

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Robert September 3, 2011 at 10:17

Rebel September 3, 2011 at 08:02

I’d like to hear what atheists and agnostics have to say about the rise of islam.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Robert September 3, 2011 at 10:19

Feminists are no match for islam.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
POD September 3, 2011 at 10:29

@Robert :

I beg to differ. Women (feminists, whatever) has drilled and embedded itself into every culture, religion that exists.

What are the markers of misandry ?
Male burden in supporting women – check
Genital mutilation – check
Higher penalties for men – check

Sure, compared to rest of the world, women aren’t as free under Islam but they are actively drilling to that end. Women’s groups are in place mustering whatever support they can. Some are even involved in public discourse on re-interpreted Quran quotes that are more pro-feminist. And the global sisterhood is already getting the feminised governments of the western world to declare war on the mid-east, liberate them, install democracy and enforce ‘equality’. And it’s mostly western Christian males dying for the Muslim women’s freedom, and the western male paying for the war.

I’d day, it’s Islam that needs to watch out. Women are the most dangerous, parasitic virus nature has in its arsenal. There are some fungi that control the nervous system of their host – look up zombie snails. These parasites drive the host to their own destruction. Women are the human equivalent.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Robert September 3, 2011 at 10:33

POD September 3, 2011 at 08:53

Feminists consider the “deflowering” of a virgin female to be an act of violence. It is as if they believe female consentual lust/need for sexual intercourse is an act of violence even if the male “deflowering” the consenting virgin has licked her ass and eaten miles of her shit to earn “the privilege” of ” deflowering” her. This is considered to be truth even if she has “slammed” the anally virgin male up the ass (coercefully) with a huge strap on dildo.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Robert September 3, 2011 at 10:35

POD September 3, 2011 at 10:29
@Robert :

I beg to differ. Women (feminists, whatever) has drilled and embedded itself into every culture, religion that exists.

What are the markers of misandry ?
Male burden in supporting women – check
Genital mutilation – check
Higher penalties for men – check

I bet the men of islam are aware of the things you have mentioned.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Robert September 3, 2011 at 10:39

Young boys under the guidancr of islam are taught, according to the quran, the nature of women. Islam has existed longer than America.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Robert September 3, 2011 at 10:40

guidancr should be guidance

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
POD September 3, 2011 at 10:43

@Robert :

“I bet the men of islam are aware of the things you have mentioned.”

Are they ? The same things in a much harsher degree are enforced on the western males, and the inaction/lack of protest indicates most men are support or are indifferent to their own slavery. And this is the same set that is or supposed to be the most evolved/aware/intelligent men when segregated by race.
If they are aware , why does it still persist ? My analysis leads me to believe that most men are in denial.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
MWPeak September 3, 2011 at 11:28

The right reason men should avoid marriage is if they feel it isn’t to their advantage, not in a futile effort to punish womankind.

The real struggle for men is the modern culture of feminism, which functions to put women at an advantage and men at a disavantage. Marriage 1.0, while imperfect, at least had the potential to be advantageous to both men and women. Now, men must labor for their own advantage, often against the avantage of women under feminism.

It’s ugly, to be sure.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
Freedomrider77 September 3, 2011 at 19:08

Anthropologist Helen Fisher states that Americans tended to divorce between the second and third year of marriage, for example. Interestingly, this corresponds with the normal duration of intense, early stage, romantic love — often about 18 months to 3 years. Indeed, in a 2007 Harris poll, 47% of American respondents said they would depart an unhappy marriage when the romance wore off, unless they had conceived a child. Women in hunting and gathering societies breastfeed around the clock, eat a low-fat diet and get a lot of exercise — habits that tend to inhibit ovulation. As a result, they regularly space their children about four years apart. Thus, the modern duration of many marriages—about four years—conforms to the traditional period of human birth spacing, four years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Robert September 3, 2011 at 19:49

POD September 3, 2011 at 10:43

Of course many of them are in denial while others choose to remain silent. Imagine hearing of/ reading about men being whipped in public and the MSM flock to get footage of it to spin, then show the world.

It is my understanding sharia law does not exclude men from punishment or death, yet the MSM never reports this to the world.

Maybe they do get footage and discreetly ship it to feminist subscribers ( porn for feminists).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Michael September 3, 2011 at 21:24

Well. You’ve got the Jewish prophets. The buhda. The Christian monks after the western empire fell. And the rise of Islam after the Justinian plague.

Everyone of those tidbits in history are an MGTOW moment and what came out of it. Read the history you’ll see the parallel. Protestant reform comes in at a close second as well as the marxian. Shift in the late 20th century.

Too short for a history lesson hear.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Michael September 4, 2011 at 01:13

Late 19th century

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Maaldweb September 4, 2011 at 05:01

@Avenger

you wrote: “there have always been Muslims in Russia”

Yes but they have cataclysmic birth ratios, with muslim women having from 6 to 10 children whilst slavic women having a birth ratio of 1.4 children. More importantly Russia and particularly the slavic areas (west of the Urals) are being flooded with muslim immigrants from ex-soviet republics at an alarming rate.

you wrote: “and the number of muslims in Europe is still small.”

Muslim immigrants from Asia and Africa keep coming to Europe and the judaised socialist and “conservative” EU governments still accept them and subsidise their invasion and occupation of European lands with welfare benefits, support programs etc. Muslims in Europe simply make more children than the natives and although they have experienced some birth decline the last years that won’t change much since native european birth rates are still even lower. Unfortunately demographics is the game of the last man standing. Both groups will go down but native europeans will go extinct first.

You wrote: “If there are muslims for example in Germany they are mostly from secular places like Turkey.”

This is plainly wrong. Muslim Turks in Germany are more islamised than Turks in Turkey. In fact it was the rapid secularisation of Turkey and the opposition to Islam by the Kemalist elites that brought large numbers of fondamentalist muslim Turks to Germany. These Turks felt threatened by the anti-islamic attitude of the Kemalists and sought a haven to Germany.
There is another aspect of this puzzling issue, because the Turkish state itselft promoted Islam in Germany among turkish immigrants in order to keep the turkish identity of the turkish immigrants and eventually use them as a political leverage. And that was taking place while in Turkey the burkah was banned in public buildings and universities.

And besides Turkey is fastly turning into an islamic country and is severing its ties with Kemalism. Not that the latter was any great deal either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Observer September 4, 2011 at 05:12

Well, here’s a glimpse at the bottom of that bell curve:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/02/buzz-aldrin-divorce_n_946866.html

This thing is somehow thinking her life will be better without Buzz Aldrin?!

Maybe she wants to go back to her home planet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Michael September 4, 2011 at 05:43

Should say the rise of Mameluke and selejuq Turks who eventually established the Caliphate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer September 4, 2011 at 09:25

You may enjoy this article Dalrock :

Is marriage for white people?

The last few decades have witnessed a steep decline in African-American unions. An expert explains why he’s worried

http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/09/04/marriage_and_race_interview/index.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Napoleon September 4, 2011 at 19:59

Unless you are willing to fight the government to the death when it tries to steal and redistribute your wealth and material possessions, then getting married anyway is a useless and inane form of protest. In fact you are not protesting anything, you are just serving as fodder for the current misandrist system and helping the status quo to stay intact. I don’t understand these people that say not getting married or being an ex-pat is giving up. No, it is the only effective way to deal with the current situation.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
BeijaFlor September 5, 2011 at 07:56

@ Uncle Elmer September 2, 2011 at 11:05
“this might evoke outcries of racism and accusations of Moby Dickism, otherwise known as White Male Priveledge.”

Pardon me, I meant to say White Whale Priveledge.

Hot debate. What do you think? (up) 17 (down)7

I’ll tell you the truth, Uncle Elmer, I got a kick out of this one; yes, I downvoted, but only to fix it further in its “hot topic” status.

White Whale Privilege is one of the cornerstones of modern Femocracy. I’m not in a position to dick-tate any changes at this time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Angelguy September 5, 2011 at 11:11

I don’t think it matters much what age a woman gets married, as long as they have the law on their side, they will always have the upper advantage.

One other thing, by the time a man who has never been married reaches 40, his interest in it dwindles.
Any man who gets married is taking a huge risk, regardless if the woman in her twenties or forties.
Angelguy

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 September 17, 2011 at 07:58

Zed,

If I see someone with a gun pointed at his foot with a finger on the trigger, I will say “bad idea”, and if he wants to argue with me and tell me it is a great idea – I am more than happy to let him discover the answer empirically.

Excellent! This is now one of my all-time favorite quotes. I may even use it as part of my e-mail signature block.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Schooner July 13, 2012 at 07:54

I have never seen such a large group of pathetic, whiney men in my entire life. This thread reads like the minutes of a first wives club.

As for comments on “the family”. If you live in society, own a business, enjoy scientific/medical progress you better give a f$&@ about the family as kids who grow up in a good one are likely to be better citizens and students.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Hollie January 29, 2014 at 05:05

Woman divorced twice before twenty here- any indication it may be because the men we marry at that age haven’t gotten all of their wild oats out? On my third and very happy marriage now (7 years later) and I wisely chose an older man who had gotten bored with being alone all the time.

I will also note that marrying that young is foolish- you don’t really know anyone at that age since they don’t really even know who they are! My first marriage was like this- high school sweetheart- just gradually fell apart because we weren’t who we thought we were (he’s still my bestie) The second was a rebound went too far who magically disappeared (thank goodness)

I think there are a lot of women who get married just to BE married. They are tired of looking, and so they marry for the wrong reasons. This third marriage happened quite by accident- and that might be why it works. I don’t want to be someone’s everything; that’s too much pressure. I don’t care to change anyone either. We happened to meet online whilst trying to scratch some biological itches (if you get my drift) and found out we could be friends and partners as well.

Anyhow, sorry for the lengthy response, but I understand men being bitter- I’ve seen many a woman tear a man’s heart out his anus after emptying his bank account and drive off in the car he bought her with a sleezebag she just met at the bar(one year after she swore to love him until death) I have 3 sons now and this terrifies me. I am probably going to recommend against marriage with them!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
pete February 4, 2014 at 15:22

Heres a thought, who cares? Western Society and the 1st world countries following their paths partake in gluttony and narcissism. It’s a natural byproduct of their increasing wealth and evil selfishness. Let the degenerates ruin their lives, who said they deserve better? Probably only themselves, because of their sense of entitlement.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Alex June 9, 2014 at 05:12

One important thing you left out is why they get divorced. Also you blame women for the divorces but don’t answer the question why. Most women I know who got divorce were beaten or cheated on, but they filed the paper work not their husbands. To be honest I’ve only met one woman who left her husband just because she didn’t want to be married anymore. A lot of times the men will leave but they won’t file they leave that to the wife, or soon to be ex-wife. Which explains why so many men in some countries won’t even pay child support they simply don’t care, what a piece of paper says. Not all men of course but it does exist. Next time you write an article look at both sides before you judge one sex to harshly.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: