There’s been a spate of studies in recent years pointing to a general trend of declining Western female happiness, and a concomitant rise in male happiness. Self-reported happiness levels tend to go up and down rather haphazardly, but a long-term decline since the feminist devolution seems to be happening. A 2009 study called ‘The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness‘ attempts to answer why women are unhappier today than they were in the halcyon days of the 1950s.
The lives of women in the United States have improved over the past 35 years by many objective measures, yet we show that measures of subjective well-being indicate that women’s happiness has declined both absolutely and relative to men. This decline in relative well-being is found across various datasets, measures of subjective well-being, demographic groups, and industrialized countries. Relative declines in female happiness have eroded a gender gap in happiness in which women in the 1970s reported higher subjective well-being than did men. These declines have continued and a new gender gap is emerging—one with higher subjective well-being for men.
[T]trends in self-reported subjective well-being indicate that happiness has shifted toward men and away from women. This shift holds across industrialized countries regardless of whether the aggregate trend in happiness for both genders is flat, rising, or falling. In all of these cases, we see happiness rebalancing to reflect greater hap- piness for men relative to women.
The suggested reasons the study authors give follows:
First, there may be other important socioeconomic forces that have made women worse off. A number of important macro trends have been documented: decreased social cohesion (Robert D. Putnam 2000), increased anxiety and neuroticism (Jean M. Twenge 2000), and increased household risk (Hacker 2006). While each of these trends have impacted men and women, it is possible for even apparently gender-neutral trends to have gender-biased impacts if men and women respond differently to these forces. For example, if women are more risk averse than men, then an increase in risk may lower women’s utility relative to that of men.
Thanks to the patented Heartiste Naughty Boy Translator™, we can decode the above passage for the layman:
“Diversity is making women more neurotic.”
The second possibility is that broad social shifts such as those brought on by the changing role of women in society fundamentally alter what measures of subjective well-being are capturing. Over time it is likely that women are aggregating satisfaction over an increasingly larger domain set. For example, life satisfaction may have previously meant “satisfaction at home” and has increasingly come to mean some combination of “satisfaction at home” and “satisfaction at work.” This averaging over many domains may lead to falling average satisfaction if it is difficult to achieve the same degree of satisfaction in multiple domains. One piece of evidence along these lines is that the correlation between happiness and marital happiness is lower for women who work compared with those who are stay at home wives, and the correlation has fallen over time for all women in our sample.
HNBT: “Women have too many goddamn expectations.”
Finally, the changes brought about through the women’s movement may have decreased women’s happiness. The increased opportunity to succeed in many dimensions may have led to an increased likelihood of believing that one’s life is not measuring up. Similarly, women may now compare their lives to a broader group, including men, and find their lives more likely to come up short in this assessment. Or women may simply find the complexity and increased pressure in their modern lives to have come at the cost of happiness.
HNBT: “Contrary to feminist boilerplate, women really don’t want to spend their lives in direct competition with men climbing the corporate ladder and getting pumped and dumped until their wombs crust over like a sun-baked lake bed.”
Hope this hurts the right people!
PS: Mangan’s covered this topic as well.
It’s the magazines, fortunately there is a brave legislator trying to do something about it. /sarcasm
http://www.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/2012/02/14/20120214arizona-bill-takes-aim-airbrushed-women-ads.html
Who needs Freedom of Speech if it could hurt some womans feelings?
For younger women: Although women biologically feel the need to pursue alpha men, riding the carousel takes it toll. News flash: women don’t like to be pumped and dumped.
For older women: Divorce wasn’t all it was cracked up to be. How come now that I am fifty and obese men don’t pursue me like try did when I was 20. Where dd all the good men go?
Well I can already see feminists plotting to make men’s life more miserable so that women can be relatively happier.
Your comment is both humorous and unsettling!
Falling off the pedestal hurts the tush.
What does diversity have to do with it? sloppy thinking.
1) Diversity -> less social cohesion -> greater fear that someone in the vicinity may be a criminal.
2) Women more risk averse than men.
Combine 1) and 2), and women’s happiness takes a bigger hit from increased diversity than men’s do.
Another reason, less PC but perhaps eve more important, is that “diversity” in America means an influx of people of lower social standing than native SWPLs, who are the demographic commissioning these studies to begin with. For men, that means hordes of young, poor, starry eyed, inferiority complex ridden immigrant girls ramrodded through public indoctrination institutions that in practice teach them little more than that being “liked” by someone as close as possible to an Abercrombie&Fitch SWPL is the high point of aspiration. Cue East Asian girls 20 years ago, Indians and Mexicanas/Latinas today. Pretty easy pickins, in other words. For women, it simply means an influx of men they have been taught are “below them”, and hence, due to hypergamy,, unattractive.
Similarly, women may now compare their lives to a broader group, including men
yeah, that’s true. Women now are able to see either on the internet or in TV how men are able to stand to pee. And that hurts, and hurts A LOT. You know, it is not only stand to pee, but being to aim and doing it anywhere.
LOL!
“Hope this hurts the right people!”
<3
Why are women less happy?
Short version: because they want want want that which does not exist in any known reality.
Here the reality: There is what women think we want and then there is what we actually do want, which is usually a mystery even to ourselves. Fun isn’t it?
I should stop posting while tired, “Here’s the reality . . .”
Good grief.
Which is one of the many reasons one has to wonder why they’re allowed to vote. Some more are in this video.
http://screen.yahoo.com/what-are-women-really-saying-28434359.html
Re: the tweet about virgins, you should put an NSFL tag so readers aren’t shocked by the gory pictures.
“One of the descriptions in this headline does not belong with the others. And that explains everything. http://t.co/SNJTSXvW 15 minutes ago”
Which one? Attractive?
Damaged whales with daddy (or other) issues the lot of them. I wonder if anyone finds anything to aspire to in these examples.
Amazing.
I’d nail the last one.
I am sorry Maya but “Lucy Richardson” is one virgin I would gladly relieve of that burden!
I demand a test… if that woman’s a virgin I’m Bonnie Prince Charlie… look at that smug/come hither look in her eye.
It’s curious that the women featured in the article exhibit all the qualities we’ve come to know of and love as ‘asexual’, yet this time the paper has decided to market them as ‘virgins’.
And look here, Maya: Please don’t let’s start about the differences between ‘asexuals’ and virgins. The only reason I’m posting this comment is because it makes me feel like a big shot, okay? Don’t take that away from me.
I actually couldn’t agree more with this.
Great post.
Slightly OT: Heartiste, I’d love to hear your arguments against Jenna. I can foresee her irritating you quite a bit.
http://www.ted.com/talks/jenna_mccarthy_what_you_don_t_know_about_marriage.html
She talks a bit about how romantic comedies actually make women more dissatisfied with their marriages precisely because they want that which doesn’t exist. Slightly relate able. There’s even a bit in there relating to your previous post on the Oscars. Fate?
Blah blah blah oppressive patriarchy blah blah blah misogynistic men blah blah blah male privilege blah blah blah sexism blah blah blah glass ceiling blah blah blah old boys network blah blah blah rape culture blah blah blah exploitation of women blah blah blah human trafficking blah blah blah female empowerment blah blah blah you’re just intimidated by strong independent women blah blah blah you probably have a small penis blah blah blah if you’re attracted to women younger than I am then you are a pedophile blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ad absurdum.
Thank you, professor.
Enlightening, empowering intervention.
“Finally, the changes brought about through the women’s movement may have decreased women’s happiness.”
Surprise surprise. Men keep on trucking though. I’ve always been able to be fairly happy, regardless of what was going on whereas women can get everything they ask for and be miserable.
Womyn want to be subjugated by a skilled, quality male.
Have you ever seen a dedicated submissive? They are the happiest, most content girls on the planet.
We cannot look at what womyn SAY they want, we must look at the actual cause/effect results. When they get what they say they want, the piss and moan and become unhaaaapy. Choice addiction is killing them too.
When they are well-disciplined and not allowed to exhibit ill behavior, and get punished when they do, and praised when they do right, they are OH so happy. Then if they get sexually dominated too, its ALL good.
I almost feel sorry for them, for buying the lies, and being so unable to hear the truth, and no one around to show them how things REALLY are, so they ride the cock carousel and become bankrupt souls, with no clue that “happiness” is even possible, or ever was.
Couldn’t have said it better. See my comment below.
1. Men are happier because (a) the alphas can get pussy without resorting to patriarchally enforced, time-consuming tactics like wooing or having some kind of stable job, and because (b) the omegas can now legally retreat into the largest available ocean of porn in the history of humankind.
2. Women are unhappier because they envisioned themselves having the same “freedoms” that traditional alpha males do (greater access to sex, admiration, power, meaningful careers, money, etc.), but now realize that, other than having greater sexual access, the majority of women are more akin to beta males than alpha males.
As someone once pointed out, when women talk power & equal rights, they are talking about being on par with the alpha males. They never counted on being part of the beta population when they joined the boys’ club.
“Have you ever seen a dedicated submissive? They are the happiest, most content girls on the planet.”
+1
This is exactly what I’ve noticed. Celebrity women are perfect examples. They always get married-then-divorced…They are never happy and tend to leave because they can (due to being independently wealthy and spoiled). In the old days, the women would jus the more thankful and they would cope with the inevitable turbulences that all relationships face eventually… This is why the dating world is pretty crappy for the average guy in America, England, Canada, etc…
Because nesting, commitment, monogamy, marriage, and children make women happy….and these are all the things feminists have been weeding out of our lives. Not to mention wages not keeping up with inflation, materialism, anomie, and prescription pill dependency.
Frankly I’m surprised that anyone embedded in the zeitgeist has any joys in their lives at all.
I’m glad you brought up nesting. One of my favorite things to do is small projects around my house. I know a lot of women who are like that.
Hi Lara. Me too! I especially like to salvage old thrifted furniture- I can sometimes sell it for a good profit too. There is something extremely rewarding about turning a house into a beautiful home and it makes me feel like I am contributing in a very special and feminine way….
If you’re somewhat SWPL-y and into decorating this blog might make you chuckle:
http://fuckyournoguchicoffeetable.tumblr.com/
Looking at the charts in the PDF it appears that women have been dramatically happier than men over the past 30 years and there was only one poll question where there seemed to be a trend in reverse directions. It almost seems that the point of this study was to conjure up sympathy for more fake female victimhood.
The data don’t seem to support the conclusions at all.
I think you need to take a second look.
What most women don’t consider is their very presence in the work force makes it impossible for men to support them. By putting their energy into their own careers versus men’s, they are essentially shooting themselves in the foot later on. At first it is you “get” to work, then it is you “have” to work. Its also the difference between your twenties and your thirties.
Under the current system, we (women) are subverting our natural intincts. We are not supposed to express that we “need” men. Needing a man is looked upon as a weakness instead of a natural occurance. And please note that I am not talking about needing men necessarily in a monetary sense, but needing them for their strenth, their perspective, their warmth, and a thousand other minutia that make them so yummy.
* above condensed from another post
In essence, women have to abdicate the thrown in order to find their happiness. All the cliches are true. You can have it all but not all at the same time. Money doesn’t buy happiness. If you think you can do everything better than a man, you’ll probably never have one. Oh, wait. I made that last one up.
* throne
But if women define their identity, self-worth, happiness with being with a man, then that’s a problem. I see what you’re saying, but it’s important for a woman’s identity to not be only that of the guy she’s with.
As for being in the workforce, many times women work because they have to right off the bat in order to support themselves before marriage (if they desire marriage and/or kids). And it’s nice to have some cash of your own to fall back on, especially in the case of divorce.
I agree with you. I think, like everything, there’s a fine line to walk.
I must disagree, Renee. I did not find my true identity, my best and most fulfilled self, until I met my husband. I commented on the matter below.
Working is not the inherently bad thing, sometimes it is necessary for survival, especially in the instances you mentioned. But a career alone cannot define a woman, even though some think that a fulfilling job can take the place of a woman’s natural role as a nurturer and provider for her husband and children.
I also think the idea of “work” with regard to women has been over-simplified to mean either a woman stays at home and has no income or works outside of the home for money, when in fact, women frequently worked for money from the home or part-time outside of the home. Educated women were editors or tutors, or did accounting for the family business. Rural and urban women could be found employed as cooks or laundresses, or in home-economy jobs that did not generate income but which halted the need to spend money outside of the home, i.e., canning and preserving food, sewing and mending clothing and household goods, or trading goods or services between neighbors. In more modern times this might mean making or at least saving money by doing cleaning services for other people, providing in-home daycare, gardening, cooking, or tutoring.
I think having your own identity before meeting a man is fine, but not crucial. Our identities are not constant anyway, and always could use a little more improvement. I’m a big fan of the idea of growing together as people. Growing alone works too, but together you gain skills and virtues you couldn’t have gained alone.
^ Like. The problem is when you get involved with someone who doesn’t want to grow. Or the conditions under which you fell in love alter dramatically- when one person’s growth surpasses the other. As in all things, the man should be the leader and help foster growth as a couple/family.
‘Rural and urban women could be found employed as cooks or laundresses,…’
‘In more modern times this might mean making or at least saving money by doing cleaning services for other people, providing in-home daycare, gardening, cooking, or tutoring.’
this seems like the worst of both worlds, being that it’s really the extension of more of the same for the stay-at-home mom, housework, except for cash compensation. which is only one, albeit big, source of the satisfaction of a job. but the informal bonds and interactions between me and my coworkers is my fondest memory from when i was working. many other woman probably find the stimulation and fun in an office environment infinitely more
interesting than what you suggest, if they _can_do something else.
my point is that if you must work for compensation, get out of your house and do it with other people around. it’ll be a tonic for your mental health.
i’m in a storytelling mood….way back in my extended family it was the practice to lease big brownstones in park slope and rent rooms out to boarders working in the brooklyn navy yard. the mom had to do all the cleaning for the tenants inc. their laundry. w/o a car, she had to do the grocery shopping and cooking for them as well as the family. family lore reported this work as exhausting and with no informal compensations such as chitchat with coworkers, having lunch with them, going out for drinks etc, iow just unrelieved drudgery. the dad of course, got the benefit of extra cash w/o worrying his wife would acquire any ‘outside interests’. she was way too tired for that. ah ha haha.
the next generation of girls had opportunities to do the same. their reaction–’no. HELL, no’. and so they went off to their not very lucrative jobs in the city bureaucracy since those were greatly to be preferred.
Working is not the inherently bad thing, sometimes it is necessary for survival, especially in the instances you mentioned. But a career alone cannot define a woman, even though some think that a fulfilling job can take the place of a woman’s natural role as a nurturer and provider for her husband and children.
I do think it’s possible for women to have no desire to be mothers or married at all and be satisfied with a career. Not all women are meant to be mothers, just like all men aren’t meant to be fathers. At the same time though, I don’t think it’s healthy for anyone to be solely defined by their career. There is more to a person than their occupation.
As for career women who are wives and/or mothers, I don’t know, personally I find it hard to juggle all of that. But I guess it depends on the occupation.
LOL yes; Cash of your own to fall back on-priceless.
Also like the ‘just happened’ tenor of divorce. Like it’s a random act ‘OOPSIE! I am divorced’
Women often spend a year planning their wedding. Its WAY more important to plan for a good divorce; it lasts longer.
Renee, you just encapsulated the entire grocery list of feminist rationalization… which (ahem) has led to women’s unhappiness.
Do not pass Go… do not collect $200.
Lol, how exactly? By working to have some cash of her own in the bank (especially if she’s living on her own)? Or not defining her entire self by the man she may be with (although I do understand Cranberry’s point about finding a more fulfilled and improved self when you find the right person).
“Why Is Women’s Happiness Declining?”
Who cares?
We have a winner.
Thread over!
Everyone should.
The ideological forces causing women’s unhappiness, i.e., liberalism and its handmaiden feminism, are proof that the fantasy ideology is a spectacular failure. When the SHTF, the cited studies might act as lodestars guiding us back to sanity.
No. There is no need for caring, or for studies. Turn your gimlet eye back to what social structures existed in the West for, say 500 years before the current fantasy economy was conjured up by a fiat currency and debt-based, inflation expansion.
Again, who cares? You are right in that it will all burn – and the fact of the matter is most women hold BS jobs that are unproductive, in fact are counter-productive. Government, regulatory agencies, lawyers, etc.
In a followup,
Q. What did researchers say were the top 10 inhibitors to a woman reaching orgasm?
A. Who cares?
Women are surpassing men in earning degrees at all levels of higher education. But if you read the “100 reasons NOT to go to grad school” (http://100rsns.blogspot.com/), you’ll see why this is a Pyrrhic victory.
If “success” equates to unhappiness, what’s the point?
“If “success” equates to unhappiness, what’s the point?”
Excellent question! Masters degree and married at twenty-two, dissatisfied and divorced at thirty, I had every”thing” that should make me happy, yet I was not. Why? Well, aside from a spouse with an addiction who was drinking away our money, unwilling to support me so I could be a full-time mom, I WAS TOO SUCCESSFUL! It is my belief that a couple will never be truly happy when the woman is “superior” to the man. This leads to an interesting dilemma. Find a man who isn’t threatened (very hard to find) OR reduce/hide your success/don’t seek that kind of success in the first place? I’d be VERY interested in hearing thoughts on that: the solution for women. It is obviously the topic on which I am most passionate.
Answer: You only have to settle if you can’t have the alpha male. Since that applies to 90% of women, they should be focusing on their #1 asset. Can you guess what that is?
Keeping their ass in shape?
Solution for women: marrying older well-established guys when they’re still young ripe and innocent.
Everything else is doomed to failure.
Already did that. Next solution? Maya and I are counting on you!
…and goes without saying – you need to pick your stock carefully. Learn to recognize potential in a man, and help him develop.
Also, there is no formula for success – some risk will always be there.
Good advice. Thank you, Vagabond. Yes, all too true that there is always a risk. Eventually, one hopes it will work out
“I’d be VERY interested in hearing thoughts on that: the solution for women. It is obviously the topic on which I am most passionate.”
Me too …
I’m very confused by your post; you had no income, yet he was drinking away your money? Your massive savings, maybe? Is that it?
So you divorced him because he failed to support your wish to lie around the house…oh, and he needed to pay your student loans, your car loan, your insurance, plus all the new expenses that baby brings? I’m not surprised he drank; I’m amazed he wasn’t riding the Horse, on the H train.
Sounds to me your life is exactly what you made it…not a bit of direction or planning, just a random series of choices with no thought and certainly no acceptance of your own responsibility.
Now you’re on the wrong side of 30 with at least one sea anchor dragging behind you – and you’re still searching for answers? Haven’t got a clue yet? Sweetcheeks, I doubt you ever will.
“Find a man who isn’t threatened by your job success…” Yes, again, it is the fault of the men; heh, you post is a rich vein of ore to be mined for what ails the ‘women’ of the West. Thanks for posting.
whoa… what do you know of geisha kate aside from what she chooses to share with us here. and yet here you are jumping all over her having made a lot of unsupported assumptions.
Thanks, carolyn. I can clear up the confusion and its going to have to be personal or else no one can offer any real help. And I would like to provide an alternate view for the men here to see, its not only them who can get hurt in a divorce.
Yes, we had income. We both had good jobs and made good money for our area. When you do make good money and you don’t understand why you can’t save any and you see the bill from the country club and you realize all those beer cans littering the entire garage are not just because he hasn’t picked up in a while but because he’s consuming large quantities of alcohol every day, you realize your money is being drunk away. And it become chrystal clear when he uses a golf club to smash someone’s face that you weren’t imagining anger issues.
Add to that you stuck beside him through a cancer that was most likely linked to the drinking, saw side effects occurr because he still drank on the medication he wasn’t supposed to, and still, despite a life-threatening disease (that I financially supported him through) would not give up drinking or even admit he had a problem, I decided I could no longer live in that climate. I tried to make it to the fifth year after his diagnosis, but I only made it four.
I didn’t have any student loans, I essentially came with a dowry and he left the marriage with 140K after I sold all my stakes in the family homestead.
I understand my responsibilites and how I, in some ways, may have contributed to his drinking. I con’t consider my daughter a “sea anchor” but it is true, many men have declined to be involved with me in part due to that. They don’t know how much fun she is
He COULD have supported me for a few years so I could have been a stay at home mome. The relationship was a hollow shell and, quite frankly, we are both healthier and happier apart. All I was was an extra paycheck to support his addiction. I haven’t ever even required him to pay the full amount of child support the law calculates so that he would not be starting over financially.
None of these were easy things to do, yet I did them, and he has even gone so far as to thank me for how I handled things after seeing what happened to his brother in his divorce.
All women are not the enemy and everybody has a story: one you might never imagine. Excuse typos- can’t see half the post.
Kate,
You’re a fine feminine woman, although you’re heading towards the wall at full velocity.
Don’t feel the need to justify yourself to the angriest guys. Your writings are sweet and feminine enough to grant you a witness chair at the back of our gentlemen’s club.
Aw, now that is very sweet and really makes my day. Let me just adjust the brakes on my rollerskates and see if I can’t slow down a bit
If that wall is brick, this is going to hurt!
Good Lord.
Well, accepted at face value you sure are a rarity. Did you overshoot in your choice of men, or was it just poor luck, then?
And as for your daughter – how fun she is isn’t at issue. The fact that she’s another man’s issue – is. Not many men want to raise another man’s get.
For some an interesting read, pick up The Red Queen by Ridley. Might shed some light on not where you’re wrong, but how your very perspective leads to the wrong avenue of inquiry.
Well, I have been called an urban legend
There’s more to the story, but that would really be pressing your faith in women’s moral fiber to the limit.
I was nineteen when we fell in love and he was much older, of course. I was more naive and headstrong than I am now: always believing and drawing out the best in people till they shock the hell out of me with who they really are.
Yes, I realize that
Of course, they wouldn’t really be raising her so much as being a role model as she is parented and provided for already by both of us.
I have heard of that book before, but I haven’t read it. Thank you for the suggestion. I will get it.
Come on now, give it a rest.
You are trying to paint yourself as a good little martyr but you started the story in the middle.
YOU chose to spend the best years of your youth dating, and then marrying, an alcoholic.
He did not suddenly start drinking when you married him (unless you really are a headache).
This problem was there from the very beginning, and yet YOU chose to overlook it for your own selfish reasons. We will never know the reasons but we can all bet that they have to do with him being an older, wealthier alpha that made you feel ‘safe’ or some such tripe. That’s how anger issues are described BEFORE the divorce: “I love how I feel so protected by him.”
What’s more, even though you knew he was an alcoholic, you wanted to bring a child into this world with him. A child that very well may have been abused.
That was no matter to you. The quality of the father was just an afterthought. What really mattered is that you get to lay around fattening up like a sow and abandoning the career that your expensive masters degree got you, while he was left to pay all the bills by himself.
Drinking your money away? Maybe if you lived at the poverty line. It’s not even possible to drink more than about $1200 a month without killing yourself in pretty short order.
His escape into booze (likely to escape your incessant pressuring) was just a convenient excuse for you to shit on your marriage vows and add to the rotten US divorce stats.
You were completely irresponsible and negligent in your decisions.
Meanwhile I’m sure there were dozens of nicer guys with less money or less alpha, but you ignored all of them didn’t you.
You are exactly the woman that any astute reader of this blog would run far away from.
I will give it a rest. He was the first person I had a relationship with. He was not wealthy, but we did become successful within a few years. At one point I had vowed I would never have a child with him, but after the cancer, it seemed like something he really wanted. I hoped it would bring us together, as people often do. It did not. He left me alone in the hospital moments after she was born and told me I looked disgusting. I tell you these things not for sympathy. I don’t need it. I’m explaining what happened. I was/am not fat and was actually in better shape post baby. Lots of calorie burning in nursing. The book of GeishaKate’s life is currently closed.
*heartiste: thanks for choosing this important topic
I am not gonna judge YOU,sister! I feel bad for you,I hope things get better and you find happiness–I really do! Advice? Unfortunately I am fresh out at the moment! (PS:I am a mere beta,just come here to gawk at the alphas!)
Let’s put some reality on this.
Husband goes out to country club. Geisha nags him for going out again. Husband comes back, instead of greeting him nicely, she asks, “where were you, how come you’re late, you never go out with me, you don’t love me, blah blah blah”.
I guarantee you weren’t nearly as nice as you say you were. You most likely thought being “nice” was the absence of hateful comments towards him. When in reality, being nice to a significant other is treating them in a supportive way.
Guys, read this.
Yes, we had income. We both had good jobs and made good money for our area. When you do make good money and you don’t understand why you can’t save any and you see the bill from the country club and you realize all those beer cans littering the entire garage are not just because he hasn’t picked up in a while but because he’s consuming large quantities of alcohol every day, you realize your money is being drunk away. And it become chrystal clear when he uses a golf club to smash someone’s face that you weren’t imagining anger issues.
Add to that you stuck beside him through a cancer that was most likely linked to the drinking, saw side effects occurr because he still drank on the medication he wasn’t supposed to, and still, despite a life-threatening disease (that I financially supported him through) would not give up drinking or even admit he had a problem, I decided I could no longer live in that climate. I tried to make it to the fifth year after his diagnosis, but I only made it four.
Notice what she doesn’t say. She doesn’t say, I comforted him during his cancer. She doesn’t say, I was scared to lose my husband. She doesn’t say, I was miserable knowing he could die.
Her entire post revolves around money and blaming him. It’s so much easier to look better and correct when the blame lies with anyone but herself.
The truth is obvious to anyone looking at your post Geisha. You are the exact example of an unhappy woman, which is a woman who rejects her nurturing role and instead opts for the male role.
Going back to a recent post – women need and very much want masters, and there are so few men that know how to step up and fulfill that role. So we settle for men that make us moderately happy, knowing that we will never reach the pinnacle of womanhood through total submission.
Most women just recognize this unhappiness as an aching void, and not really understanding why, when they should be happy because they have everything, they still feel like they are missing something intangible.
So yes, my little piece here pretty must just restates that women want alphas, but I’m focusing a bit more specifically on mastery here.
It is not looking good in terms of us women finding our masters. It seems like mastery is something that should be passed on from father to son, and fathers are certainly not doing their job. I don’t know how many men without the fatherly example will come around to it on their own. If there is no hope for fathers, I can only hope that more men will stumble upon this blog.
[heartiste: the great unspoken truth is that modern women have unintentionally priced out the men who would be their masters.]
The idea of a “master” has been on my mind for days since reading that post. I would say my husband definitely fills that role, but not because he is bossy or controlling. Rather, it is for reasons A.B. Dada mentions: he is the master of himself, and is confident in his decisions and the reasoning for them. I cannot and will not argue with him, because what he says is right and for good reason. He is not infallible, but his decisions have never led us astray, financially or otherwise. I adore him for this and so many other reasons. In short, he makes me want to be a better woman, the best woman I can be, so I can stay in step with him morally and physically. What a precious gift.
While every man should read all of this blog’s postings regarding mastery and domination, I have a feeling too many would misinterpret mastery in the sense you have hinted at – as meaning to be bossy, controlling, or just plain mean. There’s a huge difference between being masterful and being just plain awful.
[heartiste: a woman has to tacitly assent to being controlled before a man can control her. usually this assent is in the form of undying love that compels her to please him whenever and wherever.]
If you have to try to explain the difference to a man, then that man probably doesn’t stand a chance at being your proper master.
You are lucky that your husband fulfills you in that way. We can not all be so lucky.
I had direct experience to compare a man’s master of himself to him trying to be the master of me.
The guy I dated for 6 years prior to meeting the Husband was not a master of himself, but he was controlling of me. I didn’t know at the time that what I wanted was someone in control that I could follow, not someone who directed my every step.
Maybe it’s illusion, by my husband does not make me feel controlled or commanded. He is rational and passionate and I am caught up in it. He doesn’t need to use force because his presence is force enough. I can’t explain it in any way that makes sense. His control comes from someplace natural and easy; the other guy’s sense of control was external and artificial, and always based on some social trend of what was needed to stay commercially competitive, rather than loyal to a core set of principles.
That’s where its at, cranberry. A man who has mastered himself, and possesses enough greatness to show love and mercy as well as traits of a King, is going to have all the success he wants in relating to women.
yes, there’s a difference between a guy who quietly dominates, i.e. that’s the program always running in the background, and one who insists on micromanaging every goddamn little thing.
the one is strong, the other insecure and shows it via control freakery.
good thing he and i are a good match aside from being a couple of bookish nerds. ahaha ha. i compensate for his lack of mechanical skills and he my lack of any sense regarding money. (anything beyond groceries he takes care of). i think it’s crucial that i respect him. he’s a smart guy who makes me laugh, whose faults are tolerable and easily compensated for by me.
but what if i was hooked up with an absolute *shlub*? who made me shudder if he walked in the room? who embarrassed me whenever he opened his mouth because he’s an idiot? i know women who are married to men like that and i can’t fathom how that works. different strokes for different folks i guess.
or are they just settling? some of the topics covered here on ch rarely got my attention before i started reading this blog. for instance, the existence of cuckoldry where the mom outsources the genes for her kids. i always regarded such women as morally abhorrent. and yet…never having been put in their situation should i judge so severely? they find themselves with nothing going for them except perhaps cunning, married to the aforementioned shlub, their male equal. do they do the disservice to their own flesh and blood by allowing the husband to father them? or do they look out for a man who’ll give those kids a head start through his better genes.
I know a woman who did just that, and up until recently i just assumed she was a skank. she chose one of my in-laws for dad material instead of her husband who, believe me, would inspire shuddering revulsion in the lowliest of women. she broke up my relative’s marriage when she sued for child support, which came as a surprise to both my relative and her husband. now, 17 years later, it looks as if the ‘skank’s’ low cunning served her well. the twins (yes,twins) are okay, having gotten their mom’s smartz and their dad’s looks.
yes, immoral for her treatment of her husband, but a win for the health of the species. sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.
ok, enough from me.
However you put it, it’s still a despicable act. She shouldn’t marry him in the first place.
Women like that are scum. And the poor guy should live and die alone, in his stinky appartment, rather than spending his hard-earned money on someone else’s spawn.
Yes, it’s good for the species, but do not even try to make it excusable.
Or wait… Just go ahead and forgive her. I forgot it’s war of the sexes out there.
‘it’s still a despicable act’
to be sure it is in her treatment of that man.
and yet…and yet. reading ch has caused me to question some of my unthinking moral assumptions, or at least see them as not so black and white or so binary. i’ve been …corrupted!!! so there.
but as ch has told us so many times, what’s good for the individual may not be good for society if _everyone_ did it. the story i’m relating shows both sexes can play at that game, that’s all.
If the shlub husband murdered the kids,well,abhorrent as that would be,it would be a form of rough justice,and I would surely like to be on the jury. You sound like a turd,making excuses fore this bitch. She surely shouldnt get child support!! Her shlub should have legal recourse against her–AND the kids! (That paper route I drove you around for–I want to be paid,muthafukka!!)
carolyn is right. That’s why I just said before not to be with a guy who doesn’t turn you on. Something to admire, some dominance – he doesn’t have to be a noisy bloke, just be a man who knows what he wants, like my guy.
You want to get fucked and have kids with the best kind of man, after all.
I want to look up to him in real life so I can look up to him when he is fucking me hard and feel secure and in my rightful place.
Another thing. I read an open letter on the net yesterday from a guy complaining about the several other guys who had fucked his missus over their marriage. I just thought, your fault for being such a dope. He finishes up by saying that he had been with a married woman himself once. Truth is that guys will try to pinch the other man’s woman. Beware.
Let’s not forget that many women intentionally remove fathers from their families ensuring that masterhood can’t exist in their families or be passed down to their sons.
Agreed. I wasn’t implying that women are blameless. But, I muse that if the man was truly masterful, the woman would not have been compelled to boot him from the family. If he was fulfilling his proper role and she still booted him, she would have to have been truly crazy. Or, I suppose the woman was actually a lesbian.
[heartiste: women’s compulsion to submissiveness resides on a spectrum, where at one end we have the rihannas and Os of the female sex, and at the other the bulldykes and rageful lawyercunts with higher T levels than most beta males. women as a sex are way more submissive than men, but among women, the intensity to submit varies. there are some women who will resist attempts at mastery by all but the most dominant men. and there are a few women who are just plain weird outliers who can’t stand the thought of a strong man.]
Thanks for the replies. I somehow stumbled on this blog a few years ago and consider myself lucky for having done so. You’re right – I hope you never win a blog award.
“But, I muse that if the man was truly masterful, the woman would not have been compelled to boot him from the family.”
EXACTLY.
I guess what Heartiste is saying is that a woman who boots a masterful man from the household was not properly matched in terms of where she lies on the “spectrum.” Initially it may have seemed like a decent match, but the fundamental mismatch became more apparent over time.
How many roads must a man walk down before you can call him a man….
It’s always a man’s fault for not meeting woman’s laundry list of expectations…isn’t it. Clearly woman is blameless and hypergamy does not exist.
I don’t know how the fuck women expect men to be master’s of themselves, when they text ex boyfriends behind your back. When they do seedy and contemptuous shit to see if they can get a man of slightly higher status or means.
Fuck the bullshit about men being masters. You cannot master someone who doesn’t want to submit and who isn’t content. You can only use and cast aside those that don’t appreciate.
Give me a break dude. I’ve fucked wives, girlfriends, sisters and friends girlfriends. It wasn’t about them needing a master, it was about them having no respect for their relationship and no appreciation for someone or something that treats them fair and equal. It was bread and butter female hypergamey. And the only thing that honestly stops the bullshit is “the wall” and father time.
What women want is the unease and anxiety. That is what creates the gina tingle and attraction and that is what gives them something to talk about and do in their boring lives.
Give them stability and reliability and they will piss it away 100% of the time for something that “could be better.”
Fly me to the moon on this “master” bullshit.
A+
It’s fun to be their master while they’re attached. But you better bolt before she does.
It’s all about timing.
A lot of fair points here… and besides, listening to Harpies Bizarre gushing above is starting to stink up this place like Oprah’s studio.
Yes, a lot of women do these things; but not all women do them. Submission only comes from respect and trust, in my experience.
Isn’t there some responsibility from men to choose the right women? If women are being blamed for choosing the wrong men, doesn’t that work in reverse? Its true you have to work to keep our interest, just as we have to work to keep yours.
One of my favorite quotations: “The very essence of romance is uncertainty” (Oscar Wilde).
“Its true you have to work to keep our interest, just as we have to work to keep yours. ”
True, but not entirely. Women are human beings. Men are human doings.
You simply have to be (in shape), and not be a bitch.
Men have to prove their value in many ways, all the time.
Besides, Oscar Wilde’s quote is .geared more towards women. Hamster needs excitement. Men need more certainty and are more comfortable with routine.
amen, brother
Well, maybe he got sick or overworked or something. Bye bye, master.
This Aussie Miss is pretty typical. I like dominant men. They make me moist so I want to please them in any way I can. I found a pretty good bloke and he keeps me in line pretty well. You just have to choose well. Girls, don’t waste your time on a guy who really doesn’t appeal to you.
And find out what he likes to see you in, and wear that kind of stuff. Screw Dolly and the other magazines. Ask HIM what he likes on girls, really likes a lot.
Who’s masterful all the fuckin’ time? Sometimes you want to get a cold beer and veg out in front of the TV,watching 2 1/2 Men. . With a go-to-sleep blow job. Zat too much to ask?
you and your ilk destroyed traditional fatherhood. cry away, now that it’s gone, but don’t blame men.
And I just wrote about how I didn’t find happiness or true utility until I became a wife and mother who stays home to raise the kids and tend the hearth.
I would add to the idea that women have too many expectations this paradox: women do not know what they want. I didn’t, but I’m recovering.
You are a lucky woman!
In my opinion, the greatest gift a man can give a woman is to give her the opportunity to truly be a mother.
+1
Usually what women want is too disturbing for them to think about or talk about in an honest fashion. They could know, but they are choosing not to know. I’ve had one female friend in my lifetime that I could speak with honestly about true desires. Speaking openly does not earn one many female friends!
Also, you should feel lucky that you find fulfillment as a mother and hearth tender. I would like to be a happy mother someday (don’t have any kids yet), but I think would have made a much happier mother in another century. There are already enough people reproducing on this planet. I like there to be some purpose to my actions.
yup. not for me the rat race trying to get ahead on the job, only to be thrown away like an old shoe by one’s corporate overlords years before SS kicks in. the guys’ lot is bad and getting worse. how can that scale besides the pleasure of watching your kids grow?
” For example, George A. Akerlof, Janet L. Yellen, and Michael L. Katz (1996) argue that sexual freedom offered by the birth control pill may have benefited men by increasing the pressure on women to have sex outside of marriage and reducing their bargaining power over a shotgun marriage in the face of an unwanted pregnancy”
That’s copied from the PDF. So is the argument that birth control became oppressive instead of promoting freedom the way feminists make it out to be? The pill “pressured” women into having sex outside of marriage? Wow…
When the pill was discovered feminists were against it for similar reasons. They believed that it will degrade women to sex toys or something like that.
it’s a good thing that never transpired.
Wow, I heard of that too. That men invented the pill because they thought it would lead to lots of free sex, and it was actually women who supressed women’s sexuality under patriarchy (to get more out of it…).
Not enough of the right people producing.
More choice means less happiness.
At least according to Barry Schwartz . . .
I remember reading something on a site about this study.
It said in actuality, it wasn’t that more women are becoming unhappy, but it’s that in the past most women considered themselves “very happy”, and now more women say that they’re just “happy”. Not sure if you can call that becoming unhappy.
Then again, I found this particular study a few years ago and unfortunately I have yet to find it again….
Another thing I found was an article that also dealt with the “Paradox” study:
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/14/opinion/oe-ehrenreich14
Take what you will from it….Not sure how I feel about it yet myself.
Easily explained by noting that what women say they want, what women think they want, and what women actually need can be expressed as a Venn diagram with three non-overlapping circles.
The value of this blog (and others like it) is that it teaches men to ignore what women say and learn how to give them what they really need.
Fifty years ago women who were happy said they were happy.
Now women don’t dare say they’re happy because they’ve been told all their lives they are oppressed, victimized, and subjugated. They’re supposed to be unhappy, so that’s what they say.
The reason why women were so damned happy in the 50s was because of the explosion of household appliances that made the domestic tasks easier. Women prior to the 40s had a backbreaking life doing laundry by hand, washing dishes by hand, sweeping and beating the carpets, etc. On top of that, television was relatively new and the programming was actually crisp and funny.
Anybody who was miserable in the 50s wanted to be miserable.
Yes, in the 50s, those Mississippi Negroes swinging by their necks from trees wanted to be miserable.
But really, the 50s were the golden age of for beta males.
Look at old NASA control room footage. Those NASA engineers in short-sleeved white shirts, ties, buzz cuts and glasses were heroes to America. I bet at least 90% of them had a thin, pretty, adoring wife at home who serviced them, raised their kids, and didn’t fuck around like today’s cows.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/dunwoody-day-care-killing-trial-begins-georgia-engineer/story?id=15760051
You saw hubby’s face? Pure obvious beta.
And betas shall have no mercy.
Yes, in the 50s, those Mississippi Negroes swinging by their necks from trees wanted to be miserable.
Who cares?
Jew-on-Jew crime? What is the world coming to?
Anon,
Wow—I think your analysis is 180 degrees out. I believe these guys had more “Alpha” in their little finger then even the best PUA today. Consider, the man sitting in that room had most likely served in WW2: landing at Normandy or Anzio, sailing across the freezing cold waters of the Atlantic in a convoy, or flying dozens of bombing raids over Germany and Japan. These guys managed to beat the Axis powers in four years (note: our generation has been chasing a bunch of rag-ass renegades around the Middle East for 10 years without result). Then they return home, get accepted into a college, major in a technical discipline, and then work their way into a room where they have men’s lives and a nation’s pride riding in the balance. These were tough, sharp guys who didn’t shrink from a challenge, or sit around gazing at their belly button and wondering if their actions that day were going to be perceived as “masculine”, etc. Does that sound “beta” to you? I think you are making a big error in judgement based on appearances…. Please remember what Momma said about judging a book by it’s cover. In this case, she was right.
A video from Xtranormal on just such…
“Hope this hurts the right people!”
It will in due time. Right now, they are cushioned in a soft, forgiving ball of you-go-girl propaganda and beta-orbiter adoration. One day, though, that fluffy layer of protection will fail, and their minds will be exposed to the harsh reality of what they have done with their lives.
They will cry, and they will scream, and it will fall on deaf ears. The free ride will be over.
“Give me a reason to help you now, ma’am. That’s right. Let me be clear here: What’s in it for me?”
Never thought i’d see it, but it turns out the right wing Christians have seen the Heartsie Light! Un-freaking-believable. Check out this article on “the cost of delaying marriage” published by the ubber conservative “Focus on the Family.” It denouces feminism as a product of ignorance and thrashes women for pissing away their most “attractive” years fucking alphas. When i read the full article i couldn’t stop laughing and thinking about what this blog has been saying for four years now.
My god….the lord really does save. Check out this excerpt. Un-god-damn-believable considering the source. e.
“The sensible, decent, not-bad-looking men a woman rejected at 24 because she wasn’t ready to settle down all seem to have gotten off at other stations.”
http://www.boundless.org/2005/articles/a0001135.cfm
“And this is the revelation that greets the woman who has made almost a religion out of her personal autonomy. She finds out, on the cusp of 30, that independence is not all it’s cracked up to be. “Seen from the outside, my life is the model of modern female independence,” wrote Katie Roiphe in a 1997 article for Esquire entitled “The Independent Woman (and Other Lies).” “I live alone, pay my own bills, and fix my stereo when it breaks down. But it sometimes seems like my independence is in part an elaborately constructed façade that hides a more traditional feminine desire to be protected and provided for: I admitted this once to my mother, an ardent 70s feminist … and she was shocked …. I rushed to reassure her that I wouldn’t dream of giving up my career, and it’s true that I wouldn’t.”
Unfortunately, this is a bit of wisdom that almost always arrives too late. The drawbacks of the independent life, which dawned upon Roiphe in her late 20s, are not so readily apparent to a woman in her early 20s. And how can they be? When a woman is young and reasonably attractive, men will pass through her life with the regularity of subway trains; even when the platform is empty, she’ll expect another to be coming along soon. No woman in her right mind would want to commit herself to marriage so early. Time stretches luxuriously out before her. Her body is still silent on the question of children. She’ll be aware, too, of the risk of divorce today, and may tell herself how important it is to be exposed to a wide variety of men before deciding upon just one. When dating a man, she’ll be constantly alert to the possibilities of others. Even if she falls in love with someone, she may ultimately put him off because she feels just “too young” for anything “serious.” Mentally, she has postponed all these critical questions to some arbitrary, older age.
But if a woman remains single until her age creeps up past 30, she may find herself tapping at her watch and staring down the now mysteriously empty tunnel, wondering if there hasn’t been a derailment or accident somewhere along the line. When a train does finally pull in, it is filled with misfits and crazy men — like a New York City subway car after hours; immature, elusive Peter Pans who won’t commit themselves to a second cup of coffee, let along a second date; neurotic bachelors with strange habits; sexual predators who hit on every woman they meet; newly divorced men taking pleasure wherever they can; embittered, scorned men who still feel vengeful toward their last girlfriend; men who are too preoccupied with their careers to think about anyone else from one week to the next; men who are simply too weak, or odd, to have attracted any other woman’s interest. The sensible, decent, not-bad-looking men a woman rejected at 24 because she wasn’t ready to settle down all seem to have gotten off at other stations.
Scrolling to the bottom, it appears to be an excerpt from a book first published in 1999. The excerpt itself was first republished in 2005. Don’t think old can take credit for the thoughts in that one.
Yeah, the (female) author of that article was lambasted for suggesting that a useless paper-pushing corporate gig is anything less than the key to a woman’s self-actualization. As LeBon said, whoever supplies the crowd with lies is their master; whoever tells them the truth is their victim.
The bank I use hires mostly attractive women. Not that I have a problem with that, but they are all such angry, unhappy bitches. They make good money, and every year the bank promotes most of these women to a bigger and better paying job. Yet they remain the same miserable, un-smiling, pissy faced women year after year.
Do they genuinely do well or do they get some preferential treatment?
Not saying that this has anything to do with their happiness, just curious about the prevalence of high-T careerist women.
ahha we are going to have a field day on this one:
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/01/10549926-calif-teacher-resigns-after-leaving-family-for-student
Directive & Guidance = female happiness. A beta cannot provide that. How else do we explain this — oh my god he’s so old, she’s too innocent –class of thought that has infested western culture since post WWII.
The real question is at which point will it turn, the tables flip, and you become the minority when you marry, it becomes acceptable if not praise-able for men to marry or LTR down in age. Clearly it has started, but when will it be prevalent in the schools of thought that are now suppressed by feminism and the American education system.
he’s not alpha. alpha would be if he banged this girl (and some classmates) on the side while his wife knowingly turned a blind eye or even defended his actions with rationalizations only the female mind is capable of generating.
no…this guy, who is gonna get reamed in divorce court and then dumped by this girl when she realizes his knowledge of malware removal and firmware flashing doesn’t translate well into mastery of the female psyche, is merely youngpussystruck.
‘Do we make everyone else happy or do we follow our hearts?
come on.
The furor over this is so hypocritical. I guess the phrase “two consenting adults” only justifies unnatural arrangements.
I have the luxury of knowing hundreds of single women of a wide age range. From early 20s all the way to mid 40s. It’s incredible how most of the maxims we see here can be repeatdely observed. Even by observing their facebook pages, you can see the uncaring flakiness of the early 20s girls, the demanding big egos and checklists of the mid 20s – early 30s career girls and the declining SMV of the late 30s early 40s girls (think pictures of cats and lots of messages stating how chocolate is better than a man etc).
It is clear that most of these girls are unhappy. It may not be obvious to the naked eye but with the right “lens” and knoweldge, you can decipher and see that deep down, there is a large gaping hole in their lives. An unhappiness that will never be filled by yoga classes, girl’s night outs and a thousand pump and dumps, regardless of how much the feminists have brainwashed everyone to believe that women and men are affected the same way from having lots of sexual partners…
I sometimes feel bad for the oldest ones. Their options seem few and they probably know that they wasted their lives and pushed away men that are a hundred times better than what’s available for them today. They try to boost themselves up with worthless activities and accomplishments which I know full well does nothing for them but kill time. Victims of the very feminist beliefs that were supposed to save them.
“…getting pumped and dumped until their wombs crust over like a sun-baked lake bed.”
That made me laugh out loud so hard that my cube neighbors were asking me what was so funny.
How in the world do you think up this stuff?
Men are the wandering sex. Women used to have close social groups including friends and family. Its uprooted when they leave for college and uprooted in pursuit of careers. Every woman I have known has needed a social support. How can moving a thousand miles away make them happy?
Haven’t read all the comments, but I’m surprised you didn’t mention obesity. You recently had a link in your Twitter feed about a study finding women fatter than their husbands are less happy than women skinnier than their husbands. It’s fair to say a lot more women are in the first boat than decades before.
We all know that fatties often have major mental issues…
[heartiste: good point. obesity might be the number one reason for women’s declining happiness. well, white women’s anyhow.]
The word “barren” should come back into common usage.
Its actually very simple, it is pointless telling the modern woman what should make her happy, it is vital to demonstrate what will make her happy.
Obesity is NOT the problem. It is the unrealistic expectations of magazines to expect that people look the way they did before the food pyramid changed in the 70s and told everyone to eat wheat (and suddenly everyone got fat) and the .00000000000000000000000001 per cent of the population that are anorexic that pose the largest existential threat.
Hahahaha. Sorry, I tried saying that with a straight face.
I would argue that the problem is a more fundamental one, going to how men and women evolved and how today’s culture teaches women, from the time they are children, to be something that they not only do not want, but biologically goes against what they need. The pair-bond is a fundamental one, and is based on a very simple biological difference between men and women. Men are stronger, faster, meaner, and more adept at hunting, killing, hauling, building, etc. Women are smaller, softer, gentler with increased attention to detail, so they are better for such things as finding specific types of berries, gathering, and taking care of children. Their bodies evolved for that – men’s evolved to be able to do everything else.
Men have drive ambition, a need to move – women want to nest, and have a man take care of them but contribute in their way to the home. In the early part of the 20th century and before that, the division of labor was based on this, and women were happy – except for those few that were either too ugly, too fat, or otherwise unattractive so no man wanted them. (The feminists.)
Today, women still want what they have always wanted, but it is harder and harder to find. Very few men can afford to have a wife stay home and raise children. Yet that is what women have always wanted and still want. The younger ones seem to want it more than others who were indoctrinated into what feminists wanted them to believe. So you have women who want one thing, being told that’s bad, they shouldn’t want that – they shouldn’t want a man who is strong, financially secure, and who will take care of them – yet that is what they find attractive, and crave. So they are more and more unhappy as they see they cannot have what they want on a fundamental level.
I’m old enough to not care about what is politically correct. The biggest reason women are unhappy is most will not admit what they want, even to themselves, so they make everyone around them unhappy because they are unhappy. The few who do, tend to be in relationships with a strong male who is the head (dominant) so she can be submissive and let him worry about things, and they are happy. Of course, the older generation screwed that up by teaching men to *not* be what women want, and instead to try to be more like women, while women were taught to be more like men. The men who say – “Bullsh*t!” and do what they want, have their pick of women who still want to have sex with the strong dominant male (every woman wants this no matter what BS they may spout), and the men who don’t cast off what they are taught spend their days lamenting how women don’t know what they want – rather than looking at the world and seeing what every woman is telling them… Heck, they are screaming it in their actions – although never in their words…
Very well said Doc. I agree 100%
Haven’t read the comments as yet, here are some of my thoughts as of a couple months ago. Triggered by reading this (and other) blogs, definitely some words from those blogs added into there – any shallowness is mine:
————————————
Imagining themselves as the object of attention and lust is deeply erotic to women and the higher status the man the more erotic validation it provides. When society changes to raise women’s status in comparison with the men around them, their opportunity to fulfill their erotic needs declines. Their happiness decreases.
A higher-status man’s attention is directly related to a given female’s desirability. If he is the kind of man who can have any female he wants, then the woman he chooses must be intensely desired by a great many men. His attention fuels narcissistic fantasies, and therefore triggers erotic feelings in the woman who receives it. (Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.)
Couple this with Sperm Wars: high status = high genetic value = high desirability = high chance of infidelity or desertion = high number of “ordinary” men bringing up children not their own or being deserted yet still having to pay as though they were still married.
Couple this with My Secret Garden (and Forbidden Flowers): are women having to fantasize more with intercourse? Their “ordinary” husband is of such similar (or lower) status that they cannot feel sufficiently erotic during sex.
Men become cuckoo’s, trying to impregnate other men’s women.
Men become rationally less inclined to marry, because divorce-theft is becoming common.
Women become less happy because they “can’t find any good men” or “men aren’t willing to commit” or they have to share the few high-status men that they do find.
Women are no longer objects of lust and passion. They are now competitors, rivals and colleagues. Their erotic value has diminished – this makes them unhappy and they do not know why. Their chances to “feel like a woman” have dropped. Their hypergamous and erotic needs are left unfulfilled by their “equal” husbands and boyfriends.
———————————-
So basically in my view it comes down to too many perks for women. They can pick up a degree easy, they can pick up a man easy, and after they’ve ridden 100+ men they can easily find a clueless schlub to keep them in the manner to which they want to become accustomed. Plus having a “little bit on the side” which their clueless schlub will probably forgive them for – if he ever finds out about it.
This makes their heads swell to the point where they’re too good for the average guy, thus cannot find “the one” to fulfill them. They’re spoiled brats, and I for one cannot be arsed with a spoiled brat.
Spare the rod and spoil the bitch.
Very well written sir.
The reason women are so unhappy is because they have choice. Give a woman choice, and she will demand the world, and even then, she won’t be satisfied. The decline began when women were given the vote.
The cynical bagel-eating Obama re-election team would seem to be making the case for getting rid of womens suffrage. The idea of making access to “contraception” and abortion an issue,when its not,to influence the dummies to vote for Obama,even tho he is an utter failure,would suggest they think women are stupoid and easy to manipulate.
I think it can all be explained (albeit indirectly) here:
http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm
This is completely off topic but I thought this should be shared. More men raped in the US than women.
“For 2008, for example, the government had previously tallied 935 confirmed instances of sexual abuse. After asking around, and performing some calculations, the Justice Department came up with a new number: 216,000. That’s 216,000 victims, not instances. These victims are often assaulted multiple times over the course of the year. The Justice Department now seems to be saying that prison rape accounted for the majority of all rapes committed in the US in 2008, likely making the United States the first country in the history of the world to count more rapes for men than for women.”
http://nplusonemag.com/raise-the-crime-rate
Re your women’s history of emotion tweet:
Steve Sailer gives this book a positive review:
“I look at an unexpected topic by reviewing historian Susan J. Matt’s thought-provoking book Homesickness. Matt is working in the subfield of “history of emotions,” which was invented by French historians around 1940 and is proving an excellent field for female scholars.”
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2011/10/homesickness-american-history.html
Are you going to address the rebuttal offered your esteemed and indefatigable opponent, Hugo Schwyzer:
http://jezebel.com/5889669/only-assholes-say-you-wont-sleep-with-them-unless-theyre-assholes
I’m pretty sure that changes in female attitudes of self-fulfillment are heavily concomitant to the africanization of Western Society.
Here in New Orleans, every friggin’ time you look up from your computer screen you see another mud shark female with a male member of the protected gene-pool polluting race. It is fully affligeant, as they say in the old country.
Women – white women – fully fail to understand the menace that is their sisters’ athenian role in the anti-racism crusades.
I did meet one however last night, a solid 7.0, I could barely believe my eyes when she did not pack it up and run when I told her that during the 400 years of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, of some thirteen million blacks imported into the New World, i.e. North and South America, only a tiny fraction – as in fewer than 400,000 – were actually brought into the United States. The vast majority of trans-Atlantic slave trade Africans – some 11 million – wound up in Brazil, which today is home to more blacks than any country outside Africa.
In the absence of strong patriarchal mores and legislation, the modern white female’s failure to see through the myth of superior black sexual desirability will be another nail in the coffin of Western Civilization.
Sincerely,
– Arturo
crimesofthetimes.com
And what’s it with these white girls who do the African booty-shake dance? It’s ugly. It’s the most unfeminine thing I’ve ever seen in my life. And girls think that’s sexy? They have no idea.
Most. Delusional. Article. Ever:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2108377/Meet-new-breed-women-prime-happy-virgins.html
Had to thank you for the link…could not read more than a few paragraphs as I am not convinced the article isn’t a parody; it is that delusional.
Looking at the photos of the women profiled, I felt nothing but great sadness and pity, as though a billion wasted lives cried out at once, and then were silenced.
OT: Solid alpha award? 41-yr-old teacher dumps his wife and kids for a hot 18-yr-old student.
http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/teacher-leaves-wife-kids-high-school-student-225300504.html
“Jordan, a quiet, fragile-seeming young woman, who looks closer to 15 than 18 years in age, gazed up at her former teacher, a man that looks every bit his 41 years, and said, “He’s more than just a lover.”
well played!
PIMP. Look at the look on her face as she gazes up at him.
And the author of the article – Piper – is so butthurt:
“If this all sounds suspicious to you”
and
“It must be particularly hard for Hooker’s 17 year old daughter”
and
“Jordan, a quiet, fragile-seeming young woman, who looks closer to 15 than 18 years in age, gazed up at her former teacher, a man that looks every bit his 41 years”
and
“Desperate for her child, Tammie has”
I love how the description is slanted ninety degrees to cast the guy as a decrepit pedophile. And people wonder why blogging is killing the mainstream media.
OT: Looks like the Feminists are really ramping up their guns against PUAs:
http://jezebel.com/5889669/only-assholes-say-you-wont-sleep-with-them-unless-theyre-assholes
Can’t wait until the PUA community starts to get treated like criminals.
“Imagining themselves as the object of attention and lust is deeply erotic to women and the higher status the man the more erotic validation it provides. When society changes to raise women’s status in comparison with the men around them, their opportunity to fulfill their erotic needs declines. Their happiness decreases. ”
Excellent comment. The big point: society has been inverted by the Elites.
This is payback for World War II essentially. These are people who believe in revenge. Northern European WASPS, as MacDonald says, are not “vengeful” people generally. But this new elite most certainly is.
This is “soft genocide” occuring in the West. It was orchestrated and planned. The lesson is that – take Christianity away from the masses, take religion and God, and this what happens – societal breakdown, hypergamy, once pure “God fearing” Christian woman sluttified.
To be replaced, very soon at a theatre near you, with a cold Darwinism. Yes – the elites believe in Darwinism, because they themselves have basically won the genetic roll of the dice.
Rest assured, the elites in power do NOT really believe in female empowerment, liberalism, multiculti. This was a ruse to overturn society. All of these people will be shut down, and shut off very shortly.
Public enemy #1 is the heterosexual white male. Note how all other people who are NOT heterosexual white males have been essentially turned against us.
Once the elite gets a firm grip — once the Western economies are collapsed, the dollar is collapsed, no one can make a living, one world government police state is firmly established (within next 10 years?) — a new phase we move into.
The elites are actually CONSERVATIVE. They are actually strongly right-wing at heart. But following Machiavelli, they are posing as the exact opposite. Trust me these people could not care less about feminism, global warming, racism.
It is all a ruse people. They are the biggest racists going – they are the “special ones” and everyone else is cattle.
What is the answer, what do we do? The answer: This blog, for starters. The hysterical Great Books for Men! And the sphere of Sailer, Derbyshire, MacDonald, Gene Expression, etc. etc
The nightmare of these lunatics are informed people who see exactly what is going on, and continue to talk about it.
All hail Heartiste!
Why should I fucking care?
Nobody but me worries about MY fucking happiness.
But the holy vagina life-support systems get a damned “Stop-the-press” treatment.
Isn´t worrying about complaining bitches, ah, uhm, BETA?
Grim reality. Women are brood mares designed to breed and raise offspring. They are not designed to be hookers for handbags, hookers for social status (sorority girls), lawyers, etc… none of this is female nature.
Women’s happiness declining….. blah blah blah…..
Men give giant, collective shoulder shrug in response…
what does SWPL mean?