I. Gender Roles
Biologically, women are the critical link to the next generation. Animal breeders all know this, as does anyone who stops to think for a minute: one man can impregnate 10 women, but 10 men cannot get one woman any more pregnant than one can. So, for reproduction and perpetuation of the human race, women are essential, while men are expendable.
When it comes to civilization, on the other hand, men are essential, while women are expendable. If every male truck driver suddenly decided to stop working, kick back, and relax, the economy would collapse within hours. If every female truck driver did the same, the overall effect would be insignificant.
So, assuming we want both the human race and civilization to continue, men and women must both be encouraged to play their parts– or at least not _dis_couraged from doing so. Women need to have babies, and men need to build trades, professions, and careers to work and provide for them. Both these roles involve considerable challenges and take considerable effort.
Let’s look at these roles one at a time. If a woman wants children, from a purely medical standpoint, at what age should she try to get pregnant if she wishes to minimize the risk of infertility, complications of pregnancy, miscarriage, and birth defects? 17? 18? Let’s just say 21. At this age, she is in her physical prime, and best able to cope with the complex and demanding task of bearing and nurturing a small child.
Why, then, does our society teach a young woman that the route to happiness lies in postponing childbearing until her 30’s or beyond? Why do we tell her to waste her prime years for her most essential function in life on completely irrelevant pursuits? Suppose you were talking to a 12-year-old boy who expressed an ambition to be a professional baseball player. Would you advise him to go to college, study law or accounting, build a corporate career, and then take up baseball when in his 30’s? Of course not. If he is serious about sports, his prime age for this activity will be in his late teens and early 20’s, and it would make no sense to pursue a different career at such a point in his life. It would be far more reasonable to play baseball when in his 20’s, retire at 30, and then take up something else. And so it should be with women and childbearing.
By pointing out these obvious facts, I am not claiming that the only thing women are good for is having babies. But it is their only _essential_ function. They certainly can and do help humanity in other ways, and there may be some women whose contributions in other fields are impressive enough that they outweigh their failure to reproduce. But a society suffused with Special Snowflake Syndrome, which teaches that women in general are so talented that they should chase lofty ambitions at the expense of fulfilling their basic roles in life, is a society that is headed towards demographic and cultural demise.
Having babies, of course, is only part of the picture. Children have to be fed, clothed, protected, cared for and educated during their long periods of immaturity, and to fill these needs, the role of fathers is all-important. As the Elusive Wapiti has brilliantly pointed out, the one thing that men desire most deeply, and the ultimate motivation for them to work and produce wealth, is a durable bond with their own biological offspring. A man may never completely leave the “wild oats” stage, but family interests will generally grow and come to the fore as he moves into his late 20’s and early 30’s. At this point, hopefully, he has a fair amount of experience both in the ways of women and in the business world, and has acquired enough resources to support a wife and children.
Combining these ideas allows us to rediscover a paradigm that was well established in classical Greece: Men should generally marry at around age 30, women at around age 20.
II. The Woman’s Father
To introduce couples and promote fertile relationships, third parties and extended families, particularly women’s fathers, need to take a much more active role. While PUA types go on about how, deep down, a woman wants to be dominated and ravished, I submit that, deep down, a young girl wants to be protected and guided by her father into a successful marriage. The current model of sending her unsupervised to high school and college, leaving her to her own sexual devices, and hoping for the best, is a form of abandonment bordering on the criminal. And a man who consents to his unmarried daughter patronizing bars and clubs in search of hookups, or having sex with men unknown to him, is guilty of a gross dereliction of duty towards both his family and his civilization.
On the contrary, is it a father’s responsibility to solicit and cultivate the best suitors for his daughter, and this effort should begin many years in advance of her reaching a marriageable age. Like the boy who wants to play baseball, a girl needs to start no later than age 12 in planning for marriage and children, and she needs considerable help from her family in doing so.
Indeed, a straightforward application of red-pill wisdom shows that young women are simply not capable of making wise sexual choices on their own, and it is utterly unreasonable to expect them to do so. Again as understood by the ancient Greeks, women have a strong anti-civilizational bent. They will, if left on their own, reward the destroyers, rather than the creators, of civilization with their sexual favors, and in the process ruin themselves for better men and destroy their own prospects for a happy life.
To use a simple analogy: A patch of dirt, if left alone, will not continue to be bare ground– unattractive weeds will grow there. If I want it to look nice, I have to take an active role in planting and cultivating desirable plants, such as grass, thereby crowding out potential weeds. And so it is with women– they will inevitably have sex with someone, but their fathers need to make sure that that someone is a man who can and will provide for her and the resulting children.
Women also have “wild oats” urges, but for a woman, any indulgence of these desires must happen after, not before, she has children. She may then, hopefully after an amicable negotiation with the children’s father, join a different category of individual, but at the risk of devaluing her sexual brand.
We may call them, euphemistically, “free agents” — those women who neither have, nor have in prospect, a long term relationship with a man, but who engage in short term liaisons of various types. Much maligned in the manosphere, these “free agents” actually serve a vital purpose, by allowing younger men to gain sexual experience before marriage, and by serving as safety valves for men of all ages. The problem arises when the free agents try to transition to long term relationships or marriage– to “hop off the carousel” in Dalrock’s phrasing. In that case, especially when there is misrepresentation or concealment involved, a man can be misled into investing far more in the relationship than it is worth. As always in human relations, economics plays a central role.